Offseason MLB rumors

[DonShula84]

Tracy would be a good fit imo (lefty bat too)but I'd like to have one Lefty starter on our team.....unless we're getting Zito.:D

Angels | Talking with Arizona about Tracy?
Tue, 5 Dec 2006 07:58:30 -0800
Mike Scarr, of Angels.MLB.com, reports the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim are reportedly talking with the Arizona Diamondbacks about the availability of 3B Chad Tracy. Rumored to be headed to Arizona is SP Joe Saunders.

The Times is saying the Angels are unwilling to trade pitching so I dont see how we're adding a bat this offseason unless something changes. Or Arte steps in.

 

[phunwin]

Zito is getting $17 mill.

The Rangers will give him 7 years. Which for a pitcher is a joke on every level. Only an idiot owner would do that.

The Mets will match the $17 mill, they just won't do 7 years and I don't blame them. They will do 4 or 5 years.


And if Pettite backs out on the Yanks..........Lilly will wind up in NY most likely. That is why Lilly's agent is keeping all the doors open. He is waiting for the Yanks to bust open the vault.

If Boras can get 7 years and $119M from the Rangers, then good for him. Minaya is too smart to match that. (I hope.)

Speaking of Zito, or at least his former team, Billy Beane's Lastings Milledge fetish continues: rumors of a Lastings Milledge for Joe Blanton swap have popped up, though it's just talk at this point.

Bannister for Burgos is a decent deal for the Mets. A lot of my fellow Mets fans are in love with Bannister, but the fact is, the guy was insanely lucky last year...well, apart from having what amounted to a season-ending injury. Pitchers with that kind of K/BB ratio seldom succeed. Burgos is the kind of pitcher the Mets have had some luck with: good stuff, high K rate but who hasn't quite put it together (the fact that the Royals couldn't develop a pitching prospect to save their lives probably has something to do with it).

I'll take a 22-year old who whiffs a batter per inning in the majors, over a junkballer with some mystical ability to pitch out of a jam any day. As for the Mets' starting pitching need, what they need is quality, not quantity. They've got plenty of able bodies. What they need is a top guy to tie it together. Assuming Glavine, Maine and Hernandez are set in the rotation, and further assuming they're planning to add a top-of-the-rotation starter (which Bannister is obviously not), they're looking at Oliver Perez, Mike Pelfrey and Philip Humber for one spot. Bannister was a longshot to get that fifth spot and probably would have fallen into the long relief role instead. And if they fail to add another starter, they're still looking at three guys for two spots. Maybe four if Dave Williams gets in the mix. And none of that accounts for Pedro coming back around June or July.

 

[phunwin]

Yeah everyone is getting overpaid this year.

And truthfully I have no problem with teams overpaying guys, hell if you have the money you may as well spend it, although some guys obviously arent worth overpaying for, and Drew is one of them

I disagree with the "if you have it, spend it" philosophy. In 2-3 years, the vast majority of these long-term contracts are going to be millstones on their team's payrolls. If ever there was a time for a GM to say "look boss, I know we're flush with cash, but let's sit this one out and wait for next year's market", this is it. This is a terrible free agent market, and yet it's the one of the two most lucrative in history. Bad combination, and it's going to lead to some teams doing panic selling at midseason or before next year's free agent market begins.

We've already seen four of the absolute worst contracts I've ever seen handed out: 5 years, $50M for Gary Matthews; 5 years, $45M for Juan Pierre; 8 years, $136M for Alfonso Soriano; and 5 years, $70M for JD Drew. There is absolutely no possible way to justify those contracts with any realistic combination of past performance and expected results. None. Only Drew stands the slightest chance living up to his deal, since it's an inability to stay healthy that makes him a crappy deal, rather than age (Soriano, who will be making $17 million a year at age 36...and still have three years to go on his deal), or innate suckitude (Matthews and Pierre). Add in the 3 years, $24M for Adam Eaton and Carlos Lee's 6 year, $100M deal isn't even among the five worst this offseason.

So basically, we have a flurry of contracts that virtually everyone agrees will turn out badly well before their expiration dates. Why would anyone jump feet-first into this market? Be patient, wait for the inevitable panic selling to clear payroll, and cash in then.

 

[FaninPatsyLand]

Yup, can't argue that one. I'm waiting for Damon to break his silence on this move.

I can! Drew is a better player than Damon.

Drew provided he's healthy (big question) is a better ballplayer than Johnny Damon. Damon had probably one very good FULL year during his 4 year tenure in Boston. He sucked in '05 down the stretch and didn't really contribute very much in our playoff run in '04. Hell, he even faded down the stretch for the Yankees last year. As much as everyone wants to jump on Drew for his prone-ness to injuries, Damon isn't exactly Mr. Durable either (granted he plays through them, but it severly limits his effectiveness).

Yes the Sox probably overspent for Drew, but I'd rather him at 14 than Nixon at 10 million or Lee at 17. He's an on-base machine and is statistically one of the most productive outfielders in the Majors. The guy is a very good ballplayer.

I love all the haters in this thread ripping the Sox.. its laughable.

 

[phunwin]

I can! Drew is a better player than Damon.

Drew provided he's healthy (big question) is a better ballplayer than Johnny Damon. Damon had probably one very good FULL year during his 4 year tenure in Boston. He sucked in '05 down the stretch and didn't really contribute very much in our playoff run in '04. Hell, he even faded down the stretch for the Yankees last year. As much as everyone wants to jump on Drew for his prone-ness to injuries, Damon isn't exactly Mr. Durable either (granted he plays through them, but it severly limits his effectiveness).

Yes the Sox probably overspent for Drew, but I'd rather him at 14 than Nixon at 10 million or Lee at 17. He's an on-base machine and is statistically one of the most productive outfielders in the Majors. The guy is a very good ballplayer.

I love all the haters in this thread ripping the Sox.. its laughable.

No one's hating; I'm indifferent toward the Red Sox. It's just a poor investment.

Drew is a very good ballplayer. If he plays 145 games a year or more, there's a decent chance he'll actually earn that money. But he's averaged 118 games played per season since he became a full-time player. He's never played more than 146 games, and has a bizarre tendency to miss huge chunks of every other season. (Check it out here.) He's 31 years old now; health tends to get worse, not better, with age.

 

[Chavez Ravine]

^JD Drew will drive you nuts and you'll sing a different tune 2 years from now.

 

[FaninPatsyLand]

No one's hating; I'm indifferent toward the Red Sox. It's just a poor investment.

Drew is a very good ballplayer. If he plays 145 games a year or more, there's a decent chance he'll actually earn that money. But he's averaged 118 games played per season since he became a full-time player. He's never played more than 146 games, and has a bizarre tendency to miss huge chunks of every other season. (Check it out here.) He's 31 years old now; health tends to get worse, not better, with age.

I'm not debating the injury questions. I understand the guy has had health issues, but why are people claiming Damon would have been a much better investment? Damon has faded down the stretch during each of the past 3 seasons (due to injuries). Drew is a better ballplayer than Damon..

At the very least they're a wash with the type of contracts each have and the type of players they are.. and I'd give the edge to Drew.

 

[FaninPatsyLand]

^JD Drew will drive you nuts and you'll sing a different tune 2 years from now.

And Damon or Nixon wouldn't have?

It's all well and good if you had a better investment in mind, but last time I checked, there's no Miguel Cabrera type player on the open market who can play right field.

 

[Chavez Ravine]

And Damon or Nixon wouldn't have?

It's all well and good if you had a better investment in mind, but last time I checked, there's no Miguel Cabrera type player on the open market who can play right field.

you may question Damon's ability by the end of that contract, but you won't question his heart.

With JD he'll sit out 10 games a year whether he's injured or not. In the field it appears as if he doesn't try and when he makes an out it appears as if he doesn't care.

Have fun with him, I just don't think it'll work out well.

 

[FinsNYanksFan13]

you may question Damon's ability by the end of that contract, but you won't question his heart.

With JD he'll sit out 10 games a year whether he's injured or not. In the field it appears as if he doesn't try and when he makes an out it appears as if he doesn't care.

Have fun with him, I just don't think it'll work out well.

In a small city, I think JD Drew would have been fine but in Boston, if he screws up their going to eat him alive. He's got to remember, these aren't Dodger fans who show up for the 4th inning and leave in the 7th, these aren't Braves fans who don't show, these aren't Cardinals fans who cheer you no matter what, these are Boston fans who will rip you at the drop of a dime. I don't think Drew is built for that!

 

[MikeO]

I love all the haters in this thread ripping the Sox.. its laughable.

Some Sox fans are ripping the Sox!!:shakeno:

And JD Drew is NOT a better player than Damon. I'm sorry he isn't! From 2000-2006 Damon has had 600+ at bats EVERY YEAR!! JD Drew has NEVER had 600 at bats ever in his career in a season. And only 500 at bats ONCE (518 in 2004)!!! Drew is always hurt and never plays!!

It's tough to be better than Damon when you never play!!


JD's Drews at bats
2006--494
2005--252
2004--518
2003--287
2002--424
2001--375
2000--407
1999--368

You are giving $70 mill to a guy who never plays!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[FinsNYanksFan13]

Some Sox fans are ripping the Sox!!:shakeno:

And JD Drew is NOT a better player than Damon. I'm sorry he isn't! From 2000-2006 Damon has had 600+ at bats EVERY YEAR!! JD Drew has NEVER had 600 at bats ever in his career in a season. And only 500 at bats ONCE (518 in 2004)!!! Drew is always hurt and never plays!!

It's tough to be better than Damon when you never play!!


JD's Drews at bats
2006--494
2005--252
2004--518
2003--287
2002--424
2001--375
2000--407
1999--368

You are giving $70 mill to a guy who never plays!!!!!!!!!!!

That was also a walk year!

 

[phunwin]

I'm not debating the injury questions. I understand the guy has had health issues, but why are people claiming Damon would have been a much better investment? Damon has faded down the stretch during each of the past 3 seasons (due to injuries). Drew is a better ballplayer than Damon..

At the very least they're a wash with the type of contracts each have and the type of players they are.. and I'd give the edge to Drew.

Well, if it makes you feel better about my POV, I'm trying to look at these contracts strictly for what they are. Alternatives for that $70M ranging from Johnny Damon to Mike Greenwell to just blowing all on hookers and coke, aren't a major factor in my evaluation. Damon's gone, he's been gone, and at this point, comparing him and Drew isn't terribly useful, since the market has dramatically inflated free agent prices. If Damon were a free agent today, he'd likely have gotten quite a bit more than the Yankees gave him.

All of this is a roundabout way of saying that I agree with you...to a point. IF Drew is healthy, he's a better player than Damon. And statistically, there shouldn't be much question about it. (I just don't think he will be healthy.)

 

[nyjunc]

I thought Sox fans said coco Crisp was better than damon?

 

[MikeO]

All I know is I wouldn't give $70 mill to a guy who will give you 400 at bats on a good year!

Who's better means nothing because if you don't play, you don't play!