Should the A's be pursuing Teixeira?
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 9:18 AM PST
137 comments
So, this morning's news is that the Slegna have apparently succumbed to temptation, collapsed on their previous reluctance to go above 6 or 7 years, and made an 8-year, $160 million offer to Mark Teixeira.
Even before this news, I was starting to think thnat the A's should be going after Teixeira; now, I'm leaning even more strongly toward that position.
My relatively disordered, composed-in-the-midst-of-rinsing-diapers argument after the jump ...
Given that:
- As andeux said earlier this week, Teixeira is "as good a long-term health and performance bet as you’ll ever find on the free agent market" (safer, to be sure, than Furcal, who doesn't want to seem to play in Oakland anyway)
- The principal suitors are now once again our direct rival in the division, who will benefit greatly at our direct expense with Teixeira on their roster for the foreseeable future (and the reverse of that)
- The A's, even in this recession, should have cash available
- Holliday is either going to get much more expensive (if he hits well in the offense-depressing Coliseum; and due to the alleged new emphasis on defense and well-rounded players by MLB execs) or prove to be a bust and not worth extending; there's also virtually no reason whatsoever for Holliday to give the A's any sort of discount, or for him to even bother negotiating with the A's before he hits FA next winter
- The A's <i>already have Holliday for '09</i>--they have his relatively certain production, and they have his relatively certain trade/draft-pick value if they decide not to keep him beyond '09; the Teixeira-or-Holliday dilemma isn't a pure either-or A-B; it's A <i>plus</i> B and then the fruits of selling B. It's only A or B if the A's <i>choose</i> to not pursue Teixeira
- Beane seems to perceive that the A's have a narrow, immediate window of competitiveness in '09, and then have to play a waiting game for prospects to develop in '11 and beyond; the time is, as grover argues below in his Staturday non-rant, now
- None of the A's first-base options project anywhere near Teixeira in the short- and medium-term horizons; by the time he's blocking anyone, the market will likely have caught up to his contract, rendering him tradeable
- The A's have to proceed with their competitive plan <i>regardless</i> of the stadium situation: unless Beane wants to go the Full Marlin, the payroll will have to increase, and you might as well drop the extra cash for the risk mitigation
- Signing--or even making a good-faith, competitive, late-game offer to him--would go a long way toward grover's argument about positioning the team as "competitive" in the eyes of Randy Johnson (and, perhaps, Furcal)
- Finally, even if the A's don't sign him, jumping in with a big offer at this stage could force the Slegna (or the Sux) even higher with their bids; any extra dollars Beane would force them to spend would be dollars unavailable for the rest of their roster
That last point is really the crux of my argument; at this point, I think it's probably a fait accompli that Teixeira signs with the Angels; let's make sure they pay as dear as possible a price.
0 recs |
137 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Like the Spandau Ballet
None of the A’s first-base options project anywhere near Teixeira in the short- and medium-term horizons; by the time he’s blocking anyone, the market will likely have caught up to his contract, rendering him tradeable
This much is true. And this is exactly what I would do if it were my decsion to make and I’d probably do it sometime after year three or a particularly supberb season when a great prospect package could be exchanged. I doubt the Athletics will go this route, though. 1B is not too tough of a fill and incremental production can be made elsewhere. The angle about hurting the Angels through driving up the bid sounds interesting, though.
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 13, 2008 9:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
No, I don't think the A's will do it, either
I really don’t think Beane starts negotiations with someone unless he’s serious about reaching a deal; and I suspect that his relatively low offer to Furcal (and waiting around for Randy Johnson) is due to Crywolffisher giving him a lower ‘09 budget than they’d promised a few months ago.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 9:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and, yes, ~3y would be my timetable for trading Teixeira
We’d get his best peak years, but he’d still be young and reliable enough for another team to get a fair amount of production value out him.
Heck, I’d even front-load the contract to make it more likely. I still don’t understand why at least the more cash-flush teams don’t front-load their player contracts.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 9:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
time value of money
back loading is essentially an interest free loan
ask an actuarial about this
Cust is the new Jaha.
by johnjahafanclub on Dec 13, 2008 12:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, but if you could get the same PV, it doesn't matter.
I think it’s that players like the sound of the big total value. CC just signed a $161M contract. That sounds better than a $152M contract with the same PV.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Financial genius and pretty fair pitcher.
He can hit too.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not as flexible as his cousin, Jake PVC, though
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 5:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Overpriced allstar
He already has a 160/8 on the table and its still going up. Tex is very good but not great and plays first. I do like what I am seeing on his quest for the big contract. Whoever signs him will have their payroll tied up in him for years to come. If its the Angels that would be great. Think about it. About 1/6th of their payroll in 1 player. No money available when their starters reach free agency.
by Arcman on Dec 13, 2008 9:45 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I thought California had some law about contracts
that limit them to 7 years? Wouldn’t the 8th year have to have some player opt-out clause?
"God doesn't pay attention to your cute little hypotheticals." -- Jeff from LL
by oblique on Dec 13, 2008 9:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
no
we’ve discussed this before, but the CBA makes MLB exempt from that.
"I'll make a list for the record. These people should be trusted: Sal, andeux, rfloh, danny...and no one else. Certainly not me. And even extra super-certainly not NSJ."
by notsellingjeans on Dec 13, 2008 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I voted yes.
He’s as “sure bet” as any FA can be. He plays first base and a darn good first base. He would make the A’s the favorites in the AL West in 2009 and will still be in the middle of the order when the next crop of young players comes up. He’ll cost $20+ per year. BUT think of it this way. Superstar contracts only go up. So it’s entirely possible that some above average first baseman will be getting $20 million in 2012. Yet, we’ll still be paying our superstar 1B $20 million per year. So the contract only looks outrageous for the first couple of years.
I say we do it.
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
by brenarlo on Dec 13, 2008 9:55 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
"Superstar contracts only go up"
My real estate friend and others kept telling me the same thing a couple years ago about the housing market. “It is a safe investment” , “You can’t lose”, “Home prices will continue to go up”
Well, guess what? They didn’t and in fact they did the opposite. In this economy I would say it is a bad investment to give those large long term contracts.
I think that Wolfe and Beane are doing the right thing by not offering the large guaranteed contracts.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Dec 14, 2008 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bad markets are the best possible time to lock up assets
as the Yankees are doing quite nicely as we speak…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 14, 2008 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You mean by drastically overpaying for Burnett?
Or signing an OMFG-sized contract for CC?
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Dec 15, 2008 8:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't overpay for either of those guys
They paid market rate for Burnett and below market for Sabathia.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 15, 2008 11:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Jesus....!!!!!!!!
You can’t be serious……
by mrod on Dec 17, 2008 11:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Superstar contracts only go up."
Until they start going down. I remember hearing the same think when someone once told me that housing is a no-lose investment proposition. Sure, long term, housing prices ONLY go up….until….
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 13, 2008 10:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
They'll go up 8 of 10 years....
The trend is always up.
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
by brenarlo on Dec 13, 2008 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So is population growth [perhaps there's some correlation]...until...
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 13, 2008 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
until superstar baseball players OVERPOPULATE THE EARTH AND RUN AMOK!
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
please remember
to spay or neuter your superstar baseball players.
I see a deranged rabbit, on fire, cowering away from a vagina. I await the results of the Rorschaschererer. -Nico
by Leopold Bloom on Dec 13, 2008 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
QOTM
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
seconded, enthusiastically
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 2:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so you've noticed Comcast's strange new newspaper ad campaign?
"Don't be an ass!" --Bill King
by batgirl on Dec 13, 2008 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As supply of superstar baseball players goes up...
…salaries will go down. That’s the good news Of course, wouldn’t this just dillute the stock superstars and, if so, what would make one superstar incrementally better than the next? IOW, wouldn’t many of these superstars become just mediorce in a relative comparison? Although it sure would be nice to have the luxury of placing some superstars in the 7-9 positions of the batting order.
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 13, 2008 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No
You give him 8 years, he gets injured/other and your franchise is done for the next 7 years. I don’t care how much of a “sure bet” he is, committing all that money to 1 player it’s not the way to go. We don’t have the flexibility for that
Clear its radiance shine...
by ATarHeel on Dec 13, 2008 10:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
no no no
it’s just not money well spent at this time when there are other holes to fill…
and in response to this:
As andeux said earlier this week, Teixeira is “as good a long-term health and performance bet as you’ll ever find on the free agent market” (safer, to be sure, than Furcal, who doesn’t want to seem to play in Oakland anyway)
This talk about Furcal not wanting to go to the A’s, that’s just ridiculous. While it might be true, him rejecting our deal does not support that claim whatsoever. this is a business where there are no allegiances, and we as A’s fans are taking it personally that he isn’t jumping at the first chance to be in Oakland.
If I was offered a deal that was considerably less than I think I can get, I’m going to wait. It’s human instinct. and I’m sure Angels fans feel the same way about Tex, but we’ve all got to realize it’s a business where the most attractive offer will prevail, especially for a guy like Furcal. When he signed his last contract with the Dodgers, he said something to the effect of “they gave me the most money, so I was most interested, and so were they”.
by stranahanahan on Dec 13, 2008 10:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, the pity party re Furcal is getting a little old
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 13, 2008 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
right, and 4/36 is probably worse for furcal than 2/25.
i mean really, its eleven million more, but its also two years more! if the a’s and dodgers pay furcal 25 over the first two years, then the a’s pay 11 mil more for the next two, thats 5.5 per season, way under the rate that the dodgers would be paying. now, long term deals do come with slight discounts and short term deals, esp a dodgers proposal, is going to be higher average salary, but a starting offer of 4/40 should have been on the table before we start to get but hurt about furcal spurning us.
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 13, 2008 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's worse if he's healthy. Since he rejected it he may think he's healthy. Which means we can
increase the bid. If he had accepted, that would have been bad news.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or he just thought he could get more...regardless of injury
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 14, 2008 1:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No.
Even with all this cash flexibility, the A’s have a pretty limited budget. To succeed, they have to develop from within and fill in undeveloped spots with their cash.
Over the next 8 years—which is the minimum it seems it will take to sign Teix—the 1B spot seems like one of the last places they need to fill in. Everyone knows about Jack Cust and his awesomeness at DH. And everyone seems to know that the team has two pretty good 1B/DH prospects who will be starting next year in AA.
But the A’s also have this guy who used to be a pretty good prospect, Daric Barton. he was terrible last year—one of the worst players in baseball. But there’s still a lot of reasons to like him.
First, he rated as a very good defensive 1B in every metric I’ve seen. Not as good as Teix, but solidly above average.
Second, he should develop into a pretty good hitter. He has a 99 OPS+ in 607 PA in his major league career, which is just a touch below MLB average for all hitters. Looking at all active players, 33 of them have had at least 400 PA through age 22 with an OPS+ between 90 and 110. Among those 33 players, Barton’s 99 OPS+ ranks 13th.
Cnt Player OPS+ PA From To Ages G
——————————-————-——————- +——
1 B.J. Upton 110 914 2004 2007 19-22 224
2 Barry Bonds 110 1095 1986 1987 21-22 263
3 Prince Fielder 109 710 2005 2006 21-22 196
4 Eric Chavez 109 1019 1998 2000 20-22 284
5 Andruw Jones 107 1890 1996 1999 19-22 505
6 Nick Markakis 106 542 2006 2006 22-22 147
7 Robinson Cano 106 551 2005 2005 22-22 132
8 Hank Blalock 106 787 2002 2003 21-22 192
9 Michael Barrett 102 496 1998 1999 21-22 134
10 Troy Tulowitzki 101 790 2006 2007 21-22 180
11 Jason Kendall 101 471 1996 1996 22-22 130
12 Shawn Green 100 445 1993 1995 20-22 138
13 Daric Barton 99 607 2007 2008 21-22 158
14 Rocco Baldelli 99 1249 2003 2004 21-22 292
15 Wily Mo Pena 99 563 2002 2004 20-22 203
16 Adrian Beltre 99 1918 1998 2001 19-22 493
17 Carlos Beltran 99 786 1998 1999 21-22 170
18 Derek Jeter 99 705 1995 1996 21-22 172
19 Jeff Francoeur 98 960 2005 2006 21-22 232
20 Sean Burroughs 98 784 2002 2003 21-22 209
21 Jim Thome 98 427 1991 1993 20-22 114
22 Rafael Furcal 97 542 2000 2000 22-22 131
23 Derrek Lee 97 576 1997 1998 21-22 163
24 Jay Bruce 96 452 2008 2008 21-21 108
25 Billy Butler 96 838 2007 2008 21-22 216
26 Delmon Young 96 1435 2006 2008 20-22 344
27 Ivan Rodriguez 96 1666 1991 1994 19-22 447
28 Justin Upton 95 569 2007 2008 19-20 151
29 Gary Sheffield 95 1244 1988 1991 19-22 294
30 Asdrubal Cabrera 92 604 2007 2008 21-22 159
31 Jimmy Rollins 91 775 2000 2001 21-22 172
32 Melky Cabrera 90 1155 2005 2007 20-22 286
33 Carl Crawford 90 1611 2002 2004 20-22 366
That’s a pretty damn impressive bunch of players to be grouped with, and Barton doesn’t embarrass himself in the comparison. His OPS+ also underrates his offense a bit, as he’s more OBP-heavy than most.
In short, if you can hit at major league average in a decent sample size at a young age, you’re probably going to develop into a good hitter.
by Danny on Dec 13, 2008 11:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Barton will be a very good MLB player but he isn't there right now
and the A’s have a chance to compete this year. Barton can’t be the reason you don’t sign one of the best hitters in all of baseball, especially if his signing directly dents the Angel’s strength (but that can’t be the only reason why you’d sign him).
by NateHST on Dec 13, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The question is, with Oakland's current rotation
are they a good bet to compete? A lot has to roll right, from Duke’s health to Gio/Braden/Eveland’s progress.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, if they could sign Teix for 1 year
But they likely won’t be able to sign him for fewer than 7-8 years, so Barton’s potential development has to be a significant factor.
Barton’s a pretty valuable asset, and he’d lose a lot of value if the A’s signed Teix. I think that money would be much better spent in other areas—like SP, RP, SS, 3B, CF.
by Danny on Dec 13, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But if you have Tex,
flipping Barton in a package to get a good SS or 3B or CF solution becomes pretty easy.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It does?
First, we’d be selling low on Barton given his poor 2008. Second, prospect for prospect (or very young MLBer) trades rarely go down. Third, the A’s would have very little leverage in trading Barton with Teix around.
If the A’s are going to spend a bunch of money, I don’t think it should be on one of the few positions where they not only have a pretty good young player at already—but also have 2 pretty good prospects on the way.
by Danny on Dec 13, 2008 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's why you send Barton back to AAA to learn 3B!
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You don't have to package Barton for a prospect
You can package him to get anyone. He becomes expendable and I think that while his value is lower than it would have been had he performed well in 2008, it’s not that low due to his age and scouting projections.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
welcome to the bandwagon!
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Um... I was joking.
Barton to 3B isn’t going to work.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 2:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
shouldn't that be singular?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 5:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Similiar lousy service
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 5:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Crap! Typo in the punch line
{sigh}
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Because given the nature of the previous exchange, it’s sort of funny. And what’s up with the crap in the punch bowel?
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 13, 2008 9:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking of moving Duke to 3rd and Barton to starting pitcher
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Dec 14, 2008 9:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree entirely
Even if the A’s didn’t have potentially good players on the horizon, is it wise to tie up such a large percentage of the team’s payroll in the position that’s easiest to fill? If Teixiera were still playing third base, I would be in favor of maximum pursuit. As a first baseman, no.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Dec 13, 2008 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I voted no because of Barton as well.
I’d rather go all out to sign Holliday, discount or no discount.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 1:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My sentiments exactly WC
please see below, sir….
by mrod on Dec 13, 2008 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks for the knowledge drop
www.punditpolitics.com - Political IQ Tests, Pundit Blog, News and Opinion.
by ChadGod on Dec 13, 2008 7:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I like Tex and the A's could make him an offer, but
I still would rather the A’s try to keep Holliday one way or the other. I just have a feeling……………
by mrod on Dec 13, 2008 11:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
the A's would have to top the Slegna offer of 8 years at $20 per year
I’m not sure even the Sux will do that
by OaklandSi on Dec 13, 2008 11:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Come on, Nationals -
It’s the face of your franchise, dudes!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't let the Orioles get their grubby hands on him!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 1:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if we sign tex, it's two times the wins added swing
since not only do we add wins, but we subtract them from the angels. other than this, i don’t think i’d want to sign tex. 1b is one of the easiest positions to fill in MLB. you don’t think there will be another good 1b on the market sometime in the near future? or that we can’t find a pretty good 1b in our system (helllllooo chris carter)? tex is good, but that kind of long term deal is a huge risk if he goes down with injury or declines.
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 13, 2008 11:30 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
agreed
1b is easy to fill we have more pressing concerns
Cust is the new Jaha.
by johnjahafanclub on Dec 13, 2008 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
forget teixiera
just sign all 20 nontenders spread out the risk..now thats moneyball!!!
by Asfan4ever723 on Dec 13, 2008 11:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I voted Yes with the intent to sign
It’s not going to happen but the idea makes me drool.
I believe the A’s can afford to carry a $20 million contract now and in the future. Like I argued here it will take some maneuvering down the road but nothing too traumatic.
Signing Tex now would be the sure thing in comparison to possibly signing Holliday a year from now.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 11:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I should add
If the A’s did jump into the fray I’d expect the Angels to bump their offer. Pretty soon the Angels would reach a level the A’s couldn’t follow.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
which is fine by me, then the angles have to pay more!
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 13, 2008 12:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True dat -
Why not offer 8/22 figuring you either get your Holliday-type centerpiece in Teixeira and steal him away from the Angels, or you force the Angels to pay more than 2million more a year to keep him?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that will end up hurting us just as much in the future
if the slegna are forced to pay teix 8 at 22 per, that sets the starting point for negotiations for all players of his caliber which ends up hurting us because we have to pay more for any other big-name FA that comes on the market. The more Teix signs for this year = the more we will have to pay Holliday to re-sign.
by diehardoaklandfan22 on Dec 13, 2008 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's one or the other in my opinion.
I’ll say it again and every time…….I WOULD RATHER THE A’S SIGN MATT FREEKING HOLLIDAY TO A LONG TERM EXTENSION RIGHT FREEKING NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by mrod on Dec 13, 2008 4:57 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
why on earth would Holliday agree to do that?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 5:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
because the market could SUCK next year
They're called RUNS for a reason.
by connie mack on Dec 14, 2008 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and, here's what I like about it ...
We have Teixeira + Holliday in the lineup for (at least half of) ’09 and we get the fruits of whatever transaction in which Holliday goes away.
Personally, I don’t at all understand anyone arguing to not sign Teixeira, but to pursue signing Holliday next year.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why? Holliday plays a more desirable position.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 2:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And RF. It's more flexibility.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 3:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday is reportedly not a good choice for RF
because of a weak arm
by OaklandSi on Dec 13, 2008 3:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, but you can switch Cunningam or Buck around then. The point is that 1B are
limited to 1B and corner OF can often cover 2 positions. Holliday could back up in CF as well.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i'm not sure he can, actually
I understand your point, and I’d agree if Holliday was seen as more versatile in the outfield.
Teixera, on the other hand, is a gold glove first baseman, besides having proven to hit for power in both leagues.
by OaklandSi on Dec 13, 2008 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe it's that Barton, Doolittle and Carter
are more promising than the equivalent corner OFers we’ll be seeing in the next few years.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because Holliday is better at baseball?
Typically that’s considered a good thing.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 13, 2008 7:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
is his marginal value vs Teixeira greater than what we'd get for him in trade/draft?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 14, 2008 6:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have him at roughly a win a year better, so yes
7 wins at the end of the scarcity curve is worth a hell of a lot more than 5 or 6 in the middle of it.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 14, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But is a Tex in the hand worth more than a Holliday in the bush?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 14, 2008 7:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i would love if we had him...
but not for that much money and especially not for 8 years!
by chrisgatling on Dec 13, 2008 12:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
chris gatling used to be my neighbor when he played for Golden State
I actually played ball with him for about 10 minutes when i was about 8 or 9…
by stranahanahan on Dec 13, 2008 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No
I don’t mean to be disrespectful to monkeyball, but this really strikes me as untenable as those “we should trade for a-rod he is good” posts. Wrapping up that much payroll for as long as Teixeira is demanding is just not smart business for a team like the A’s. Future flexibility, being able to lock down the better younger players through their arby years, having enough scratch to keep the farm system fueled— these things are more important to me than signing an admittedly excellent player to a gigantic long-term contract.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Dec 13, 2008 1:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
speaking as the author of numerous posts advocating for the acquisition of A-Rod, no offense taken
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 2:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't you and devo really push that idea last time A-Rod hit FA?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 13, 2008 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd have agreed with them. Trouble is he gave the Yankees a hometown discount.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unless there was a real chance to trade him mid-contract
Then you maintain the flexibility. If the contract is too big, that becomes harder but OTOH he won’t be a 10-5 player until the end of his 5th season with you.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And if you can't have flexibility you have one of the 20 best players of all time
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
probably maybe
I also had a longstanding blockbuster trade proposal with the Yankees involving Chavvy, A-Rod, Kotsay, and Kendall. That actually made a smidgen of sense.
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 13, 2008 5:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Except the Yankees would never have done it for any four A's players in 2004-7
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 6:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Foot, meet mouth
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Dec 13, 2008 7:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you got it all wrong
sign dunn to 3 yr, 45 mill, trade barton/crosby/casilla to indians for peralta. that way dunn will be gone or near gone by the time carter/doolittle arrive
that's gold jerry, gold!!!
by 9Custs on Dec 13, 2008 3:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That team will have LOUSY infield defense
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's coming
from someone who’s name is 9Custs. We know their ideal situation.
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Dec 13, 2008 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
whose*
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Dec 13, 2008 4:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I guarantee you this:
if the angels don’t get Teixeira and there are more than 2 teams legitimately willing to pay market value for Dunn or Burrell, Reagins will freak and throw money at one of the two, my guess it will be Dunn. He’s going to see a contract of closer to $20 MM/year if this scenario plays out…
by stranahanahan on Dec 13, 2008 3:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dear god let this situation be true please
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 3:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It won't be
Don’t get your hopes up.
I’m also failing to see what the Indians are supposed to gain about trading one of their better young players for a package of a bust, a head case and a prospect coming off a horrible season.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 13, 2008 7:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Voted just to piss off the Angels.
IF he produces to an acceptable level through the contract, its a solid signing and he’s worth the big money. He’s easily worth 20-25MM/yr at his current performance level, but I wouldn’t want to be paying him that at age 35+. Especially since he’s a first baseman.
However, that’s the kind of risk that has the capability of crippling a team like the A’s.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 3:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
However, the A's entering the bidding just for the sake of pissing off the Angels is a good thing.
Just to get the price higher so them stupid slegnA can’t sign him.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 3:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If we do sign Tex
then Holliday is sure to go after the 2009 season, and the Angels may very well be a serious suitor for him.
Say something funny.
by muffinpryde on Dec 13, 2008 4:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Then we will all definitely fucking die!!!!!!!!!!!!
by mrod on Dec 13, 2008 5:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t like dying.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Dec 13, 2008 5:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Have you tried it?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No to Tex
Any chance on teaching Copeland 1st Base? Maybe that’s why they picked him up in the Rule 5 Draft?
by A'sfansince1970 on Dec 13, 2008 5:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why would they ever do that?
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
by Helloooo 1st on Dec 13, 2008 6:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Versatility
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 13, 2008 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We already have a first baseman who can't hit
Just kidding, Daric.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Dec 13, 2008 7:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
why stop there, teach him short as well?
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 14, 2008 1:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
my ideal 2009 lineup (yeah yeah)
1. Buck-rf
2. Furcal-ss
3.Dunn-1b
4.Holliday-lf
5.Cust-dh
6.Chavez-3b
7.Suzuki-C
8.Sweeney-cf
9.Ellis-2b
sp- Duchshererererer
sp-R. Johnson
sp- Galager
sp-Gonzalez
sp-eveland
bullpen is set in my opinion
that's gold jerry, gold!!!
by 9Custs on Dec 13, 2008 6:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think R. Johnson will sign with the Giants
I fear we’re a lot of guys’ second choice.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 13, 2008 7:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
many teams aren't even third choices
by OaklandSi on Dec 13, 2008 7:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is that you, Cindi?
I'll send you a postcard from Space Mountain. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Dec 14, 2008 6:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My name is Joe Morgan....
and I can say this thread is ridiculous and I didn’t even read it.
by capper3 on Dec 14, 2008 1:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Unrelated, sorry
But if a Contra Costa Times subscriber could help me out, I’d love it. I had an article in today’s paper about St. Mary’s basketball, but I’m nowhere near the Bay Area now. Could someone kindly fill me in about if it printed (or just online) and if it did, how deep into the sports section? Thanks.
by JLaff on Dec 14, 2008 9:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
I don’t know if anyone is worth an eight-year commitment. Plus, he becomes untradeable (well, difficult to trade, anyway) after five years, because he’ll have 10 and 5 status.
I really like Teix, but that’s a lot of years.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Dec 14, 2008 9:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
No one is worth an eight year commitment
Of course I’ve been divorced seven times so maybe I’m not the best person to ask.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 14, 2008 10:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't realize you could marry/divorce goats
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 14, 2008 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What did you think I was,
a baaaaaaaaachelor?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 14, 2008 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just moved back to Cali
I had no idea which propositions had passed.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 14, 2008 2:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, there was this proposition to try to narrowly
define marriage as being “between a man and a human” – obviously I voted against it.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 14, 2008 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fortunately there are more goats than Nicos, so it passed
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Dec 15, 2008 8:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Goats with Votes?
I thought that organization was a hoax.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 15, 2008 8:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope. Paul writes that the Yankees are locking up...
…great deals while the assets are in the midst of a bad market. Because you just know that the Sabathia contract after year number six is going to look like a screaming genuis play [thinks of Kevin Brown, Chris Carpenter, Mike Hampton, etc.]
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 14, 2008 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just curious: do you really, honestly, think the Yankees give a shit?
This is a team that just wrote off a four-year deal to Carl Pavano for $40 million, zero production, without batting an eye. And still made the playoffs 3 out of those 4 years.
They’re hiring him for his first 3 or 4 years. The rest of it is just paying the piper.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 14, 2008 1:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
CC can opt out after three years anyway
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 14, 2008 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Yankees giving a shit? Not really.
The expectations of the Yankees by their fans and that organization as an empire — media empire — is much different than Oakland’s franchise. The Yankees, their market, and all the factors within that market create a much different scenario. The Yankees can actually afford to eat bad years on contracts. Can the Athletics? Maybe it’s time to stop pretending that the two teams, as businesses, are playing on the same field.
by LowcountryJoe on Dec 14, 2008 3:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They're not playing on the same field???
I really don’t get baseball. :-(
-Cindi
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Dec 14, 2008 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sabathia has better mechanics than those three you mention anyway
he is less of an injury risk and has a solid solid career. if there is one player you should be putting money on in this FA market, it’s probably Sabathia. It’s a much better deal than, say, Kerry Wood (it is highly unlikely he plays enough to be a 2 WAR reliever, thus justifying his 10mil/season contract) or AJ Burnett (NO WAY he stays healthy).
"I'm on hold for now"- Bobby Crosby
by DyeLongJustice on Dec 14, 2008 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i fogot about...
Smoltz/Penny/Mulder. Add them to RJ and Duke and theres ur rotation!!
that's gold jerry, gold!!!
by 9Custs on Dec 14, 2008 3:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
