Author Topic: Fielder  (Read 287237 times)

0 Members and 12 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline natsfan4evr

  • Posts: 6171
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1800 on: January 09, 2012, 01:50:03 pm »
a lot of people still seem to be expecting Morse to turn into a pumpkin... personally I'd feel a lot better about it if I knew we'd be playing him at first rather than shoe horning him back into left to make room for Buck Commander

Morse is legit...he just needed an opportunity to be a day-to-day player, and I'm glad we were the team to give him that.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1801 on: January 09, 2012, 01:53:44 pm »
The other side of the Werth deal is something that really hasn’t come up much since the signing, but is worth [sic] addressing in the midst of all of this.  No one was going to give Werth at his age near what the Nats did, especially length-wise and with a no-trade clause, a lopsided deal which greatly pleased Boras.  This was coming off of negotiations with Boras phenoms Strasburg and Harper, and I and others mused after those deals got done that a Boras-friendly quid pro quo bailout would be in the Nationals’ future as the price of getting two fair deals done.  Werth’s deal make more sense under that perspective, especially as the team sits on the sidelines while a player that fits the articulated team contention plan to a tee remains unsigned. 

Werth wasn't going to sign here unless he got that kind of a deal.  The Nats had zero leverage with any top tier free agents after a season where they won 69 games and were a whopping one year removed from back to back 100 loss seasons.

The extra year and $20 million was just the cost of doing business in that scenario.  The Nats aren't in the same turrible position any more.  If anything, the O's and M's would probably have to outbid the Nats by a year and $20 million for Prince to go to either one of those places.

Offline natspride

  • Posts: 109
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1802 on: January 09, 2012, 01:56:42 pm »
i'm still going to give it another year before judging the Werth deal.  Despite his crappy year, he solidified a position that has always troubled us

Werth plays left field but he's far from solidified it.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1803 on: January 09, 2012, 01:57:38 pm »
More bullcrap from unknown sources and no real news. yawn, wake me up when he signs with the Mariners or some other random bullcrap team.

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1804 on: January 09, 2012, 01:59:29 pm »
More bullcrap from unknown sources and no real news. yawn, wake me up when he signs with the Mariners or some other random bullcrap team.

Where?  I've been dying to read more bullcrap.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21927
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1805 on: January 09, 2012, 02:04:00 pm »
The other side of the Werth deal is something that really hasn’t come up much since the signing, but is worth [sic] addressing in the midst of all of this.  No one was going to give Werth at his age near what the Nats did, especially length-wise and with a no-trade clause, a lopsided deal which greatly pleased Boras.  This was coming off of negotiations with Boras phenoms Strasburg and Harper, and I and others mused after those deals got done that a Boras-friendly quid pro quo bailout would be in the Nationals’ future as the price of getting two fair deals done.  Werth’s deal make more sense under that perspective, especially as the team sits on the sidelines while a player that fits the articulated team contention plan to a tee remains unsigned. 
Aside from all the ethical violations you are talking about, I can't imagine an agent would sacrifice his relationship with two of his best young clients in order to get a better deal for another one. Harper and Strass aren't that stupid, and boras isn't the only voice they hear, if he advised an extension or free agency contract that is below what they deserve because of Werth, do you think they wouldn't figure it out?

Offline Rasta

  • Posts: 1515
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1806 on: January 09, 2012, 02:08:56 pm »
Fielder last year...

.299/.415/.566 - 38 HR/120 RBI - .981 OPS/164 OPS+

Morse

.303/.360/.550 - 31HR/95 RBI - .910 OPS/147 OPS+

Fielder probably had a lot more RBI opportunities with the offense in MIL.  Fielder's OBP over the last 3 years is over .400.   Fielder is also 2 years younger and has the proven track record. 

Offline imref

  • Posts: 47634
  • NG Nattitude?
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1807 on: January 09, 2012, 02:11:58 pm »
1B UZR/150: 2011

Morse: -8.2
Fielder: -5.2

I'm really surprised by this, I expected that Morse would have been the far better fielder.


Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1808 on: January 09, 2012, 02:15:21 pm »
1B UZR/150: 2011

Morse: -8.2
Fielder: -5.2

I'm really surprised by this, I expected that Morse would have been the far better fielder.



Why? Would Fielder be the better Morse?

Offline CatsEye

  • Posts: 1655
  • Very weird season -Creepy - What....
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1809 on: January 09, 2012, 02:19:34 pm »
Aside from all the ethical violations you are talking about, I can't imagine an agent would sacrifice his relationship with two of his best young clients in order to get a better deal for another one. Harper and Strass aren't that stupid, and boras isn't the only voice they hear, if he advised an extension or free agency contract that is below what they deserve because of Werth, do you think they wouldn't figure it out?

 Do you really thing it is that clean-cut in sports? Do you really believe there is not a form of "politics" in sports? Do you really believe that deals are not made that favor one player over another?   Would they (the players) figure it out if they were pawns for a bigger deal? That's like saying that the Montreal Expos got a fair deal from the Baseball Commis. and the other owners, on the splitting(split-out) of the team..........alledgedly.......  :shrug:

Offline Five Banners

  • Posts: 2406
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1810 on: January 09, 2012, 02:20:36 pm »
Aside from all the ethical violations you are talking about, I can't imagine an agent would sacrifice his relationship with two of his best young clients in order to get a better deal for another one. Harper and Strass aren't that stupid, and boras isn't the only voice they hear, if he advised an extension or free agency contract that is below what they deserve because of Werth, do you think they wouldn't figure it out?


Don't know where you got that Stras and Harper were taking below what's deserved; I'm talking about relationships between owners and agents and how things can manifest, something which even Boswell and other media people have pointed to and extrapolated on potential deals that made sense more for one side than the other, as in the almost unending speculation last year that Carlos Pena would end up here more because it was a Boras client fit than an upgrade for us.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1811 on: January 09, 2012, 02:21:09 pm »
Why? Would Fielder be the better Morse?

Exactly.  And what we need Prince to do is to change his first name to Center.  Then all boxes will have been checked this offseason.

Offline aspenbubba

  • Posts: 6104
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1812 on: January 09, 2012, 02:23:40 pm »
Werth wasn't going to sign here unless he got that kind of a deal.  The Nats had zero leverage with any top tier free agents after a season where they won 69 games and were a whopping one year removed from back to back 100 loss seasons.

The extra year and $20 million was just the cost of doing business in that scenario.  The Nats aren't in the same turrible position any more.  If anything, the O's and M's would probably have to outbid the Nats by a year and $20 million for Prince to go to either one of those places.

I said something similiar a year ago and amortized the higher cost of Weths' deal at something over a million more a year on what would have beeen the second highest offer he received. It was conjecture on my part as we never knew who the next highest bidder was or the amount. I think I said that if it didn't work it would affect future mega  FA contracts.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 47634
  • NG Nattitude?
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1813 on: January 09, 2012, 02:27:35 pm »

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1814 on: January 09, 2012, 02:31:46 pm »
Exactly.  And what we need Prince to do is to change his first name to Center.  Then all boxes will have been checked this offseason.

Almost.  Better to change his middle name to Center and his first to Leadoff.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1815 on: January 09, 2012, 02:37:07 pm »
More bullcrap from unknown sources and no real news. yawn, wake me up when he signs with the Mariners or some other random bullcrap team.

Again, you're showing a lot of concern in this thread for a guy who doens't care.

ASSCLOWN.

Offline MorseTheHorse

  • Posts: 3172
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1816 on: January 09, 2012, 02:48:49 pm »
Fielder last year...

.299/.415/.566 - 38 HR/120 RBI - .981 OPS/164 OPS+

Morse

.303/.360/.550 - 31HR/95 RBI - .910 OPS/147 OPS+

Fielder probably had a lot more RBI opportunities with the offense in MIL.  Fielder's OBP over the last 3 years is over .400.   Fielder is also 2 years younger and has the proven track record. 

Morse was intentionally walked 5 times last season to Fielder's 32.  This accounts for over half of the difference in OBP (if my math is correct?). 

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21927
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1817 on: January 09, 2012, 02:50:55 pm »
Do you really thing it is that clean-cut in sports? Do you really believe there is not a form of "politics" in sports? Do you really believe that deals are not made that favor one player over another?   Would they (the players) figure it out if they were pawns for a bigger deal? That's like saying that the Montreal Expos got a fair deal from the Baseball Commis. and the other owners, on the splitting(split-out) of the team..........alledgedly.......  :shrug:

Do you really think Boras risks his license and his livelihood over double dealing clients? I realize everyone likes to talk about how the lerners have some special relationship with him, and quid pro qou and all of that, but boras isn't an aau hustler, he's the best and most high profile (and most watched) agents in sports

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1818 on: January 09, 2012, 02:58:13 pm »
The sports-agent industry is infested with inherrent conflicts of interest.  Suppose for example that Fielder had been a free agent a year ago instead of this year. Boras would have been peddling both him and Werth to the Nats, knowing that he could unload only one of them on us.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21927
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1819 on: January 09, 2012, 03:02:55 pm »
The sports-agent industry is infested with inherrent conflicts of interest.  Suppose for example that Fielder had been a free agent a year ago instead of this year. Boras would have been peddling both him and Werth to the Nats, knowing that he could unload only one of them on us.

There is a huge difference between an inherent conflict and actually double dealing clients (i.e help me out on werth and I'll repay you when Strass or Harper is ready for free agency that Boz seems to imply). You could probably get away with it with minor leaguers and bench bats, but when it comes to the superstars that boras represents, that gets a lot harder, especially when loosing bids usually leak

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1820 on: January 09, 2012, 03:05:28 pm »
when it comes to the superstars that boras represents, that gets a lot harder, especially when loosing bids usually leak

But there are no losing bids for draft picks.


Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21927
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1821 on: January 09, 2012, 03:06:42 pm »
But there are no losing bids for draft picks.



Strass was already signed, and Harper didn't give them any bargain- besides a $126 million favor for a few million on a $10 million draft pick?

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1822 on: January 09, 2012, 03:55:59 pm »
Morse was intentionally walked 5 times last season to Fielder's 32.  This accounts for over half of the difference in OBP (if my math is correct?). 

Without having checked your math, since I'd probably just make it more wrong if it is wrong, this is an excellent point.

Having another good hitter in the lineup, whether it's LaRoche or Fielder, should help Morse maintain his offensive output.

Offline JMW IV

  • Posts: 11345
  • Name on the Front > Name on The Back
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1823 on: January 09, 2012, 03:58:56 pm »
I'd like to not have to pick between Fielder and Morse.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31839
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1824 on: January 09, 2012, 04:07:24 pm »
I'd like to not have to pick between Fielder and Morse.

This.