A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Well the first thing first is going to be getting Epstein's situation is settled. That said:

    Youkilis' trade status IMHO depends on what happens with Ortiz. Youk becomes IMO part of a DH rotation if Big Papi's $$$ demands/market value is too high. Worse yet with the hip bursitus and the MacMillian revilatiions he is a stock down trade guy.

    And I think the odds of Ortiz being resigned are at 5-50 at best. It is all gut but I think the big fella has worn on the management over time and concerns about decline and the fact that Ortiz has become a "personality" whose name on the back of jersey is bigger than the one on the front may make him a quiet change to the club's personality make-up. To me this may be the "biggest" move of the off season, with a whole series of other moves being more quiet in nature, as was the case was Mueller, Millar, Ortiz, Walker and Giambi were all added after the 2002 season. It is BTW what Epstein has always done best.

    Now as much as it makes us perhaps a little uneasy or even ill, much is going to staked in rebounds from Lackey and Crawford. Too much money tied up there and even if the RS had the pockets to eat it, the FA market won't fill their placeholders and their trade value is almost zero.

    Too much of the 3 year plan counted on those guys and guys in the minors emerging faster than they have.

    One way to go maybe what the NYY ended up having to do when Lee scorned them for Philly. Collect some "lower risk" guys and hope they deliver along with hoping the core 3 plus Lackey are solid.

    The other half of course will be to have a deep bullpen and that is always best done by getting a volume of guys in down cycles and hoping 50% have the rebounds that relievers so often do as their arms feel better. Spending bigger dollars almost never works in the middle of the BP. The list for every team is so long. Epstein long avoided this but his 2011 additions of Wheeler and Jenks are poster children for the high risk low reward nature of those type of signings.

    I'd love to see the RS get more athletic at SS but fear that what we have in the way of middle IF's with Scutaro being the pre-emptive guy for the most PT come April is the best patch while the RS wait to see if Iggy can get a MLB bat to go with his MLB ready glove.

    A RH OFer better than Mac will be a priority but the market sure stinks in terms of FAs. JOsh Willingham being a Type A FA is all we have to know about that.

    If the RS come to the conclusion that it is time to rebuild, "he who I ignore"s dream may come true. Not asset on this team is in a better position to move for quality prospects two to three years away from being MLB ready than Jacoby Ellsbury. Beckett is another valuable chip to acquire poettial futures.

    But do we really see the RS trying to scale back NESN revenue expectations for mutliple years? Hard for me to imagine.




     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I know I'm in the minority here, but I think Ellsbury is the key off-season trade.  Our salary issues will be with us for years - we won't have the money to extend Ellsbury (if he had any interest at all in staying) and he is coming off what could very well turn out to be the best season of his career.  He's valuable enough right now to get two cheap, very good pitchers in return.  Say Bumgarner & Romo from SF or Tommy Hanson & Jonny Venters from Atlanta.  

    The Sox can offense can with-stand the loss - both Kalish & Reddick can play a serviceable CF, and Grady Sizemore would be a good gamble on a one-year incentive laden deal.  And I would love to see the Sox go all out for Yu Darvish - re-vive the Japanese fan base, and sign maybe the best FA pitcher available for under $10m/year on the CBT.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxnsl. Show maxnsl's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    If you spend a lot of time on the lineup for 2012 you are wasting your time, it doesnt matter. Pitching is the only thing that matters and we have almost none. Our ace right now is Clay B and who knows how he will be in 2012. Our number 2 is Aceves and next is Lester. After these 3 we have nothing. I would rather see minor leagurers in the rotation than Beckett or Lackey. I dont know what you do with them but i would put them in the pen until they show something, if they do. All spring training they are going to get bombed and we will hear how their stuff is good but they are working on something . we got problems right here in River City. Anybody want Wilson after the other night? Now if we have to waste time on everyday players my feeling is we keep Ag,Pedey, Scute, Lowrie, Aviles, Youk, Lavrnaway, Salty,CC, Els, Reddick. I love Papi but we need a place for Youk(3rd is not the place) plus Im tired of watching DOrtiz trot down to first. By the way i would lay down the law to AG about running things out as well. Paps has to go,rather have a pretty good closer than a 15 million dollar closer. Plus we dont need guys who only care about money, it never works out in the long run.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    I know I'm in the minority here, but I think Ellsbury is the key off-season trade.  Our salary issues will be with us for years - we won't have the money to extend Ellsbury (if he had any interest at all in staying) and he is coming off what could very well turn out to be the best season of his career.  He's valuable enough right now to get two cheap, very good pitchers in return.  Say Bumgarner & Romo from SF or Tommy Hanson & Jonny Venters from Atlanta.   The Sox can offense can with-stand the loss - both Kalish & Reddick can play a serviceable CF, and Grady Sizemore would be a good gamble on a one-year incentive laden deal.  And I would love to see the Sox go all out for Yu Darvish - re-vive the Japanese fan base, and sign maybe the best FA pitcher available for under $10m/year on the CBT.
    Posted by slomag
    The only reason to trade Ellsbury IMO is step backwards and rebuild. His future cost is not relevant. He is not a CBT issue in 2012. With all due respect nobody is giving up quality MLB proven pitching for Ellsbury. He is too far into the arbitration years now and his agent is an alligator.

    Kalish is not ready to replace him and sadly Reddick over a longer sample set doing look ready to replace the ghost of JD Drew.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxPatsCelts1988. Show SoxPatsCelts1988's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]I know I'm in the minority here, but I think Ellsbury is the key off-season trade.  Our salary issues will be with us for years - we won't have the money to extend Ellsbury (if he had any interest at all in staying) and he is coming off what could very well turn out to be the best season of his career.  He's valuable enough right now to get two cheap, very good pitchers in return.  Say Bumgarner & Romo from SF or Tommy Hanson & Jonny Venters from Atlanta.   The Sox can offense can with-stand the loss - both Kalish & Reddick can play a serviceable CF, and Grady Sizemore would be a good gamble on a one-year incentive laden deal.  And I would love to see the Sox go all out for Yu Darvish - re-vive the Japanese fan base, and sign maybe the best FA pitcher available for under $10m/year on the CBT.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    NO MORE JAPANESE PITCHERS!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Next year seems so faraway, but there is a lot to be done. Big decisions need to be made:
    1) Re-sign Papi?
    2) Re-sign Paps?
    3) Options for Scutaro, Wheeler and Miller?
    4) Arb raises?
    5) Wake and Vtek?
    6) Trades?
    7) Free Agents?
    8) Injuries and conditioning?
    9) Coaching?
    10) Young kids stepping up?

    moon I agree but would put the coaching up a few notches.

    Not sure if I was alone here but, for the games that I could see here in NYC toward the end of the season,  I saw some pretty woeful baserunning (or no baserunning at all from home to 1B) and a marked lack of plate discipline (which gave away some games, IMO).  That's on the coaches and Theo, to be sure.

    And batting Lavarnway 5th? Huh? Sure, the game before he had two dingers, but the opposing pitchers pretty much figured him out in a hurry.  And he lacked experienced, which he will get and we'll be glad to see, so long as Gary Tuck can insulate him from that bizarre clubhouse ethos. 

    Sadly, Tito made some pretty odd decisions in Sept., but he probably had one foot out the door anyway.  For all that, I still like Tito, even as he exited as a broken man.  Sad to see.

    Oh, and one more thing to your list of needs.  The sports hernia aside, I am afraid of Youk's hip turning into the second coming of Mike Lowell.  No guarantees that it will happen, but it is worrisome to me. Should we be looking for a new 3B?

    Seems like something that Youk wants.  In August sometime, he suggested that he might want to play somewhere other than Boston - my first hint that something was amiss in the clubhouse, but thought Tito had it covered.  Wrong again, I was.

    Final thought:  I will scratch my head for quite awhile before I come to a resolution about how much fight was in this club going into Sept.  Last year, they were a scrappy bunch.  Asking them to tap into that reserve of resolve was perhaps a bit too much to ask.  It shouldn't have been.

    I really want to talk about the beer in the clubhouse, too.  I have an idea about the identity of the ringleader for that bit of business.  But I've digressed too much as it is.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Was that horse hoofs I hear outside?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]


    Our hidden cameras spotted the intrepid Mr. harness on his way to the track...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl6MHgh1vFQ

    Cool
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Is it possible to make the Cubs take Lackey if they want to hire Theo?  I'm serious.  Hold the Cubs hostage, take Lackey, or we block the move.
    If we trade Youk, how do you guys think Aramis Ramirez would fit into our lineup.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    This is the Realistic thread right? Here is my take:

    1) NWIFH they trade Ellsbury this year and the first 2 words are "No Way"

    2) We are not going into rebuilding mode...we are in win now mode every year.

    3) Youk to Cincy has like a 1% chance, as I would think Moon would agree. There are no rumblings. Rolen doesn't look like he is retiring as he had shoulder surgery and is under contract for $6.5 mil. If he retires he loses $6.5 mil and Rolen has shown over the years to be a business man. Word is he is recovering well. His numbers last year were affected by him trying to play through it. No way Youk is playing 1st for the Reds and why would the Reds want a guy we are thinking can't play 3rd for us reliably? And pay up to $12 mil for him on top of Rolen's salary unless we put in some cash and since we need a 3rd baseman badly why would we trade Youk unless we are pretty sure he's done. Didn't we make the Agon trade specifically to move Youk to 3rd and now we are bailing? And then the Reds would need a closer also. I don't get that one at all.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Couple of thoughts:

    One of the great "downsides" of Boston is how every sound bite is over analyzed and how roasted guys get by the media when the won't talk.

    Youk answered a question about playing his whole career in Boston. He said he'd love to but if he did not, playing in Cinncy in his hometown would be great. This is just another flavor of "Manny wants to be a NYY". No matter how often guys see the way that stuff spins, they are in danger of giving an innocent answer that twists into a very differnt context IMO.

    The questions bout Youk's durability are fair. The aftermath of the MacMillian article though may be over blown. It sure sounds like to me that Youkilis probably was trying to be "leader" but his interpersonal skills made things worse. I wouldn't be surprised to see him shopped but his contract makes even his health risks long term less frightening than the fact that Crawford doesn't seem to have a EKG and a CT Scan on Lackey might discover a lot of loose wiring. 

    It is water under the bridge now but asking an under manned offense to scratch out 4-5 runs a night to steal wins in 2010 was a bit less of hill to climb than asking the offense to score 8-9 a night to scratch out a win.

    How some of the guys in that room acquitted themselves during that challenge OTOH is something that they'll have to live with. How they react to it will be telling.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    i do not hold out a lot of hope for $$$ swap trade with Lackey. The most likely suspects are the Cubs and for all of Lackey's downside, Zambrano is a even bigger headache. And I happen to think Lackey's chances of rebounding are greater than Zito's.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    The best way to move Lackey is with 2 teams wanting to dump salary. Angels for Vernon Wells, SF for Zito..., for Zambrano...that sort of deal. Zambrano looks to be a clubhouse issue potentially according to reports. Zito is horrible. If LAckey would be welcomed back a deal for Wells might be possible.

    We do not know who is the problem in the clubhouse but starting pitchers drinking beer in the clubhouse has only a few options and it would seem likely to be one of the long term contract guys right? Who is new? It seems likely that one of the guys getting cleared out might be Lackey. Especially after putting up the worst numbers of any starting pitcher in baseball.

     
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Lackey's peripheral numbers are not as bad as his ERA...etc. But he will be tough to move, no question. Ideally we build value in him again and then move him. Theo's normal method.

    In "Money Ball", Beane moved Jeremy Giambi in like 24 hours after a clubhouse isse. Giambi went on to play for several more teams. I don't get how these guys get another job after getting such a bad rep but it apparently happens. Other teams will be wary of picking up some Redsox players.

    When looking at clubhouse issues, what changed this year. Is it the new players, or some of them? The culture changed. What happened? It would be interesting to really know as it affects all their decisions.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from colmark15. Show colmark15's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Re-sign: Ortiz, Pap
    Exercise Option: Scutaro
    Let walk: Wake, Tek (offer coaching position), Drew, Bedard, Albers, Wheeler
    Trade: Youk, Lackey
    Players through trades: Youk + etc. FOR Michael Young (doubt they would but you never know),
    OR
    Youk + etc. FOR David Wright
    Lackey + $$$$ off FOR a team set of silly-putty and 7 Bic pen caps
    Sign: RF Josh Willingham (right-handed power, solid OBP, sort of almost fits a Trot Nixon mold)
    SP Mark Buehrle
    RP Joel Zumaya
    RP Micah Owings

    That gives us

    Position:
    C: Salty
    1B: Gonzalez
    2B: Pedroia
    SS: Scutaro
    3B: Young/Wright/Aviles
    LF: Crawford
    CF: Ellsbury
    RF: Willingham

    Rotation:
    1. Beckett
    2. Lester
    3. Buchholz
    4. Buehrle
    5. Aceves (He wants it, deserves it, and at the 5 spot you could do a lot worse)

    Relief:
    C: Pap
    SU: Bard
    MR: Zumaya
    MR: Jenks
    MR: Morales
    LR: Owings (SP 6)
    LR: Doubront (SP 7)

    Bench:
    C Lavarnway
    IF Aviles
    IF Lowrie
    OF Reddick
    OF DMac

    Obviously, The Wright/Young trade is the most unrealistic thing in here, and if it went down, it would affect what I listed in some way.  But hey, I'm just kinda throwing an idea out there.  I really do think Willingham would be good for the ball club.  I believe that a RH bat would be huge, and even though he can be injury prone, we have DMac/Reddick on the bench.  I like Zumaya, and Owings would be an inexpensive risk (he can hit too!).  Didn't realy get too in depth money wise so this whole thing may be too expensive lol.  But again, just throwing out ideas.   


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : The only reason to trade Ellsbury IMO is step backwards and rebuild. His future cost is not relevant. He is not a CBT issue in 2012. With all due respect nobody is giving up quality MLB proven pitching for Ellsbury. He is too far into the arbitration years now and his agent is an alligator. Kalish is not ready to replace him and sadly Reddick over a longer sample set doing look ready to replace the ghost of JD Drew.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    I disagree with you regarding Ellsbury - for most teams the most pressing need is pitching, but for the Giants and Braves it's offense.  If you put yourself in their shoes, how do you expect to get better in 2012?  Your choices are to either pay through the nose for mediocre free agents, or trade some of your strength to compensate for your weakness.  The Giants actually already proved willing to do so, by trading their best pitching prospcts for 2 months of Carlos Beltran.  Don't you think they would be willing to listen for 2 years of Jacoby Ellsbury?  

    Reddick was a victim of his early success - just because he was streaky doesn't mean he went from being great to being terrible.  He finished the year batting .280 with a 109 OPS+.  That means in his first year in the big leagues, he was better than most big league hitters - that's something he can very well build on - the rest of the offense can carry the Sox if he and Kalish (and Sizemore) all struggle.  If it doesn't look like anybody is stepping forward, they can address it at the break.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I agree that offering Tek arb might well end up in him taking it, but that money is not guaranteed as I understand it and we can cut him at any time. He'd be better off in some ways signing a contract with someone else if it came to that. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that is how it works. When we offered him $10 mil earlier, he turned that arb offer down and ended up getting a lot less 2-3 years ago.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : NO MORE JAPANESE PITCHERS!
    Posted by SoxPatsCelts1988[/QUOTE]

    He's half Iranian, if that makes a difference.  I'm not sure which half includes his right arm, though.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]i do not hold out a lot of hope for $$$ swap trade with Lackey. The most likely suspects are the Cubs and for all of Lackey's downside, Zambrano is a even bigger headache. And I happen to think Lackey's chances of rebounding are greater than Zito's.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Zambrano is just a 1 year headache though ($18M)/Soriano ($18M x 3).
    Zito is basically $46M/2 years counting buyout.
    J. Bay is basically $35M/2 counting buyout/Santana $55M/2 counting buyout.

    There are other salary dumps out there as well. The idea is that maybe a change of scenery can bring about some change for the good for both sides.

    Our possible dumps:
    Lackey is about $46M/3.
    Crawford is about $20M x 6.
    Youk is $12M/1 with $13M for 2013 with $1M buyout.
    Dice-K is $10M.
    Jenks is $6M/1.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Boom I agree with you on both the Ellsbury point and that the RS will not say uncle yet to their quest to be an uber-team.

    I still think they aren't going to swap Lackey in a garbage for garbage trade. Zambrano does not look to be clubhouse issue BTW he is. He is an issue in the dugout. Lackey is a model citizen in comparison.

    The drinking in the clubhouse is a sensational story but in context it was just a punctuation point to the truculant behavior that was the "reward" Terry got for trusting men to act like grown men. It is not a moment that needs to rectified by retribution.

    The next leader will have much tougher rules about what latitude his players have and if the players cross those lines there will be fines. I would not be shocked to a shake up in the make up of the "internal leadership" amongst the players (for sure if Tek retires or is not resigned) and things like kangaroo courts established.

    It probably was going to be harder Francona to change those things and if we believe him, he thought as much. Pure speculation but if there is one guy in that room that would have the hardest time with this paradigm shift it would Ortiz IMO.

    The clubhouse will clean itself without a major overhaul, Tito's departure insured that. I think most of the work will focus on the talent on the field not the personalities.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Guys, I'm still staggering under all the news at year's end.  I would like to chime in on some of the topics above.

    1/ Youk is my favorite player but Moon was right.  He's getting injured at 3rd.  I would explore all trade options.  If Papi goes and no trade benefits RS, then Youk becomes DH and super sub.

    2/ Wake and Tek go.  We need to get younger.

    3/ Get ready.  I want Theo and brass to approach Paps and talk him into starting for the good of RS.  Our starting pitching immediately becomes more respectable.  Bard becomes closer or we find someone to take that role.

    4/ I agree with all here who want to explore all trades to make this team better.  It may be impossible to extremely difficult, but explore those trades suggested to get rid of Lackey and CC.  Someone said earlier that Angels had been interested in CC?  If these trades don't materialize, then new staff makes these two priority work in ST.

    5/ Lavarnway takes Tek's role and plus some DH's first half of year and if he comes along, then he becomes #1 catcher as year progresses.

    6/Keep Scut another year.  He was a dirt dog at end of year with Pedey and Ells.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Boom I agree with you on both the Ellsbury point and that the RS will not say uncle yet to their quest to be an uber-team. I still think they aren't going to swap Lackey in a garbage for garbage trade. Zambrano does not look to be clubhouse issue BTW he is. He is an issue in the dugout. Lackey is a model citizen in comparison. The drinking in the clubhouse is a sensational story but in context it was just a punctuation point to the truculant behavior that was the "reward" Terry got for trusting men to act like grown men. It is not a moment that needs to rectified by retribution. The next leader will have much tougher rules about what latitude his players have and if the players cross those lines there will be fines. I would not be shocked to a shake up in the make up of the "internal leadership" amongst the players (for sure if Tek retires or is not resigned) and things like kangaroo courts established. It probably was going to be harder Francona to change those things and if we believe him, he thought as much. Pure speculation but if there is one guy in that room that would have the hardest time with this paradigm shift it would Ortiz IMO. The clubhouse will clean itself without a major overhaul, Tito's departure insured that. I think most of the work will focus on the talent on the field not the personalities.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    I completely agree Katz!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Zambrano is just a 1 year headache though ($18M)/Soriano ($18M x 3). Zito is basically $46M/2 years counting buyout. J. Bay is basically $35M/2 counting buyout/Santana $55M/2 counting buyout. There are other salary dumps out there as well. The idea is that maybe a change of scenery can bring about some change for the good for both sides. Our possible dumps: Lackey is about $46M/3. Crawford is about $20M x 6. Youk is $12M/1 with $13M for 2013 with $1M buyout. Dice-K is $10M. Jenks is $6M/1.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE] I never looked at Zambrano's vesting option before and now see that yes the exposure is limited to one year. Still, the issues with Zambrano run very deep. I know the Cubs rather not eat that last $18M but why not rather than take on $45.75 for Lackey? The Cubs could probably eat $15M and get a second tier prospect or two, assuming that Zambrano with his full trade clause approved.

    BTW how did Kevin Youkilis become a salary dump?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Any thoughts on Fielder? It would seem that he is the elephant in the room, along with Pujols. I would think the Yanks would strongly consider that move with him at DH. Imagine that lineup!

    If we let Ortiz go for 2 picks, Fielder would seem to be a better bet going forward for the next 4-5 years. I suspect that the hitting numbers in Milwaukee are a little inflated but the guy has serious pop for sure, as well as average and OBP. Close to a 1,000 OPS. He's only 27 and his numbers have been consistently good.
     
    If we let Ortiz go and sign Fielder we net one pick. He apparently wants to still play in the field though but he is a serious bat. Probably worth $17-19 mil to me, even as a DH. And he may not get that. Only a limited amount of teams will be spending that kind of cash and he is worth it according to the numbers. He can step in and play first if needed and he puts up monster numbers.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Imagine if Lavarnway works out at catcher and hits well and we add Fielder. A murderer's row of hitters, 1-9.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]I agree that offering Tek arb might well end up in him taking it, but that money is not guaranteed as I understand it and we can cut him at any time. He'd be better off in some ways signing a contract with someone else if it came to that. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that is how it works. When we offered him $10 mil earlier, he turned that arb offer down and ended up getting a lot less 2-3 years ago.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]He could be cut by May 31st I believe with the contract prorated. After 2008 his agent actually thought he'd do better in FA than arbitration. $10M was always the assumed value of an award but no offers were ever made because Tek declined arbitartion based on his agent's advice.

    Tek's goals are probably very different at 39 going 40. I think the RS should treat the whole situation with Varitek with some level of respect, whether they plan to make him an offer or not as I think about this. If he is "offered" arbitration it should be with the understanding they (the RS) need to go in another direction.

    There are some arguments for moving on from Tek and there will be impassioned arguments on this thread I am sure why he should be retained as a back-up too.

    While I don't think the tenure of either Tek or Wake should dictate what the RS do, it certainly should dictate how they do it IMO.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share