Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

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

    Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Michael Bourn has agreed to a four-year, $48MM deal with the Indians, according to Jon Heyman of CBS Sports. The contract contains a $12MM vesting option for a fifth year  (Twitter links). The option vests if Bourn reaches 550 plate appearances in the final season of his contract, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports (on Twitter). Bourn is represented by Scott Boras.

    Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#pFEtv2bYSPDX27Zi.99

    Wow I was expecting him to go to the Mets sooner or later kind of suprised about the team he went to and the ammount of money he made I thought he'd get something like 4/60
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Wow!

    I'm not too high on Bourn, and losing the draft pick hurts, but I think I'd rather have Bourn for $48M/4 than SV for $39M/3. He just turned 30 and and has been above his career OPS in 3 of the last 4 years. (2012 was his best at .739)

    SV just turned 32 and has been below his career OPS in 2 of the last 3 years, although his career high of .847 was in 2011.

    Close call.

    I never expected the Indians to do this.

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

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Wow!

    I'm not too high on Bourn, and losing the draft pick hurts, but I think I'd rather have Bourn for $48M/4 than SV for $39M/3. He just turned 30 and and has been above his career OPS in 3 of the last 4 years. (2012 was his best at .739)

    SV just turned 32 and has been below his career OPS in 2 of the last 3 years, although his career high of .847 was in 2011.

    Close call.

    I never expected the Indians to do this.




    I thought the same exact thing I would of rather maybe paid 3/40 or 4/48 for Bourn then 3/39 for Victirino.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    They got the final prize. Francona has a team that could win it all and Cleveland has done a great job this off-season, picking up some very good players.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Alibiike's comment:

    They got the final prize. Francona has a team that could win it all and Cleveland has done a great job this off-season, picking up some very good players.



    It could turn out be the boo bee prize

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

     

    Did the Indians Organization borrow money from Francona?  LOL

    All of a sudden, the Indians can afford to sign free agents such as Swisher and Bourn. 

    Anyway, a good signing for the Indians. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

     

    Did the Indians Organization borrow money from Francona?  LOL

    All of a sudden, the Indians can afford to sign free agents such as Swisher and Bourn. 

    Anyway, a good signing for the Indians. 




    they got a manager with 2 WS wins. gotta get him some talent so he can go for #3.. that's exactly what they did too.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Sorry, I doubt the Indians will be serious contenders this year.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Brantley, Bourn, Swisher, and Stubbs on the bench I guess.  I know Stubbs was plenty bad last year, but I thought they'd give him a shot.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    I guess this gives the Indians a new"Bourn Identity".

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to mrmojo1120's comment:

    I guess this gives the Indians a new"Bourn Identity".




    lame :p

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to mrmojo1120's comment:

     

    I guess this gives the Indians a new"Bourn Identity".

     




    lame :p

     

    Yeah, it was.



     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Man, is type A compensation the kiss of death or what? It does make retaining Ellsbury a lot more likely though if he has a great year. If a team is going to lose a pick to sign a guy you might as well lop off 15 mil in his contract right from the start. It is incredible what #1 picks are worth now. Probably 12 mil plus I would estimate.

    And yes, I do realize that if he is worth a #1 pick the sox could potentially gain one if he left but it could also be a #2 in some scenarios and I think the Sox want to build an optimal team configuration to peak in 2-3 years. To have a strong core by that time, integrating the young talent they have coming up. I agree Ellsbury probably walks but it isn't a slam dunk decision. Top talent is difficult to obtain by any means any more.

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

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Wow!

    I'm not too high on Bourn, and losing the draft pick hurts, but I think I'd rather have Bourn for $48M/4 than SV for $39M/3. He just turned 30 and and has been above his career OPS in 3 of the last 4 years. (2012 was his best at .739)

    SV just turned 32 and has been below his career OPS in 2 of the last 3 years, although his career high of .847 was in 2011.

    Close call.

    I never expected the Indians to do this.



    Smart move by Cleveland.

     

    This only costs them a third round pick as their first round is protected and they lost their second round pick when they signed Swisher.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    Wow!

    I'm not too high on Bourn, and losing the draft pick hurts, but I think I'd rather have Bourn for $48M/4 than SV for $39M/3. He just turned 30 and and has been above his career OPS in 3 of the last 4 years. (2012 was his best at .739)

    SV just turned 32 and has been below his career OPS in 2 of the last 3 years, although his career high of .847 was in 2011.

    Close call.

    I never expected the Indians to do this.

     



    Smart move by Cleveland.

     

     

    This only costs them a third round pick as their first round is protected and they lost their second round pick when they signed Swisher.



    Had we signed him, we'd have lost only our 2nd rounder.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    Brantley, Bourn, Swisher, and Stubbs on the bench I guess.  I know Stubbs was plenty bad last year, but I thought they'd give him a shot.



    Or Brantley,  Bourn and Stubbs in the OF with Swisher at 1B and Mark Reynolds at either 3B or DH...

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to notin's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    Wow!

    I'm not too high on Bourn, and losing the draft pick hurts, but I think I'd rather have Bourn for $48M/4 than SV for $39M/3. He just turned 30 and and has been above his career OPS in 3 of the last 4 years. (2012 was his best at .739)

    SV just turned 32 and has been below his career OPS in 2 of the last 3 years, although his career high of .847 was in 2011.

    Close call.

    I never expected the Indians to do this.

     



    Smart move by Cleveland.

     

     

    This only costs them a third round pick as their first round is protected and they lost their second round pick when they signed Swisher.

     



    Had we signed him, we'd have lost only our 2nd rounder.

     

     



    But the third round slot money figures to be substantially less than the second round money.  Cleveland already surrendered their second round pick.

     

     

    This actually helps Boston as Cleveland picks in front of them but should be avoiding tough players to sign.

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    Bourn: "Mr. Boras, how come you did not give me a 5-year, $75 million like the Braves gave Upton?"

    Boras: "I guess I am human after all."    LOL

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    I guess this means the Tribe won't be counting on Grady Sizemore. :-)

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    Man, is type A compensation the kiss of death or what? It does make retaining Ellsbury a lot more likely though if he has a great year. If a team is going to lose a pick to sign a guy you might as well lop off 15 mil in his contract right from the start. It is incredible what #1 picks are worth now. Probably 12 mil plus I would estimate.

    And yes, I do realize that if he is worth a #1 pick the sox could potentially gain one if he left but it could also be a #2 in some scenarios and I think the Sox want to build an optimal team configuration to peak in 2-3 years. To have a strong core by that time, integrating the young talent they have coming up. I agree Ellsbury probably walks but it isn't a slam dunk decision. Top talent is difficult to obtain by any means any more.




    i don't think the pick actually transfers from team to team. i believe it is dissolved and the comp team gets a sammitch pick.

    but you have a point, i don't think it will be a deterrent if he goes 2011 this year. teams will more easily surrender their pick if they think they are getting a perennial MVP. if he has a great-solid season (like bourne) then teams will be gunshy to give up their pick on a chance.
     But either way, it definitely puts the sox in the forefront to land the contract.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    I don't think teams mind losing the pick as much as they mind losing the corresponding slot money.  First round picks can be valued as high as 30% of a team's overall budget...

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    The Red Sox avoided Bourn. Unfortunately, they signed cast off in decline Shane to a wheelchair contract. That's how you pay over 150 million a year and don't win any playoff games.



    So, are you saying we should have signed Bourn?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Indians to Sign Michael Bourn

    In response to Alibiike's comment:

    They got the final prize. Francona has a team that could win it all and Cleveland has done a great job this off-season, picking up some very good players.



    With a rotation of Myers, Ubaldo, Masterson, Bauer and whoever?  No , that team is going nowhere.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share