Don't Sign Mark Teixeira

by drabidea on Nov 17, 2008 4:03 PM EST Comment 12 comments

Now that I have everybodys attention, I want to preface that I am not totally against us signing him. I just feel there are much better options for the Red Sox.

If we sign Teixeira we are going to have a serious position crunch at 1B/3B/DH. Lets face we are going to have to get rid of someone. Right now that looks like it would have to be Mike Lowell. Call me biased because I am a huge Lowell fan, but it would be one of the biggest mistakes we could make trading him away. Lately we have had a trend of signing players for discounts because they want to win and they enjoy playing in Boston. Lowell is one of those players, he signed with us for 3 years when the Phillies offered him 4 years and more money. His reasoning for staying was that he enjoyed playing in Boston.

What kind of message would we send to our players by trading away a guy who took a discount for us, who is also one of our team leaders and has done everything we have asked of him? Are players going to want to sign for discounts? Is it going to ruin the team chemistry?

Second point. We will be dropping alot of bank to get Teixeira. Yeah I know we have the money, but we could spend it on other things. We could sign some of our young players to long term contracts (Youk, Pedroia, Lester). What happens in a couple years from now when we have too much money on the books and we can't resign these stud players we have groomed so well?

Third point. What about Lars Anderson? I know he is not fully developed but, this guy looks like a future Mark Teixeira. He has a great eye at the plate, gritty, good defensively. Most likely the worst we will get out of him is another Kevin Youkilis. Mike Lowell will come of the books in two years, and Lars will be MLB ready then.

After all this is said, I would not be pissed off if we sign Teixeira because well its Mark F***ing Teixeira. I just want everyone to realize what would have to happen in order for it to happen. Is it really worth all that? Who knows who will be available in two years as well?

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Just one quick point...

Tex’ is actually younger (28) than Youkilis (29). It’s hard to think that Youk’ is older, but it’s because he didn’t really break into the league as an everyday player until relativley recently, whereas Tex has been a mainstay in MLB since 2003.

by Red Peltic on Nov 17, 2008 5:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Lowell

I understand your point about it being kind of disrespectful to trade Lowell after he took the discount to stay in Boston, but $12.5 million is still a TON of money relative to everyone else in the world. And even in current baseball terms its probably a little bit more than he’s actually worth.

by Gnick on Nov 17, 2008 7:01 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Agreed

I’d feel bad about it, but you can’t argue that Mark Teixeira + Kevin Youkilis is a huge upgrade over Kevin Youkilis + Mike Lowell.

"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.

by SoxDevil on Nov 18, 2008 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lars

I figure by the time Lars is ready to be a full time player, Papi will be 35 years old (btw he turns 33 tomorrow), his contract will be up and he might not be worth putting in that DH spot every day. And as Teixeira ages, Lars can move into the 1B spot.

by BTLove on Nov 17, 2008 7:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Early Happy Birthday to Papi!

Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Nov 17, 2008 7:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Let me preface this by saying

That I’m a huge Mike Lowell fan. I’ll say, fake Joe Biden-like, that Mikey’s a great guy, a wonderful player, and a good hitter. But at the same time, he’s a ticking injury time bomb.

I don’t want to rely on Lowell being healthy next year. If that means signing Tex and moving Lowell, that’s fine with me. If that means finding a good hitter who could cover 1B, that’d be fine too. But relying on Lowell to cover 155 games at third strikes me as wishful thinking.

"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.

by 0157H7 on Nov 17, 2008 10:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Backloading Contracts

Let me first say that I agree with 0157H71345234095-210394821309485. (Seriously man what’s with the name. Every time I agree with you it’s like writing my social security number)
As much as I love Lowell, he is a risk as an everyday 3B. If he goes down, not signing Tex would be the biggest blunder since [fill in the blank].

Let’s just assume that we don’t sign Teixeira. We would have a lot of money sitting around with little to spend it on other than Derek Lowe.
Could we use this money to lock up our young stars? Furthermore, could we do extensions that have a very high value the first year or two and then go down as the years go on?
Hear me out. This would allow us to spend the money we have for 2009, and then give us more financial flexibility to sign free agents in the future. For example in stead of signing youk for 5 years, $37.5MM ($7.5MM AAV), we sign him for 5 years $37.5MM ($10, $8.5, $7, $6, $6). How would a player react to this type of offer?

by Schulz on Nov 18, 2008 3:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

P.S.

This is basically the opposite of backloading contracts- I should’ve called my post “Frontloading contracts.”

Backloaded contracts are difficult to trade in their later years. If for some reason we wanted to trade a player, it would be easier to do so, as we wouldn’t have to eat half of their salary.

by Schulz on Nov 18, 2008 3:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This would significantly raise the value of the contrace

$10 million now has a much higher present value than $10 million four years from now, so the player would love the opportunity to sign that kind of contract. In fact you probably would be able to offer him less overall if it were “front-loaded.” My guess is that teams are hesitant to do this because the luxury tax is expected to increase over the years, but in certain situations I could see it working for both sides.

Also, as Boras has said, agents want to get their guys the dough before Obama increases the income tax. 3.9% (which I think is the increase Obama is proposing for the highest tax bracket) is a lot of money if your making $10mil.

by BTLove on Nov 18, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hold-outs

Of course, if the player thinks that he’s getting shafted halfway through his contract he could make a big stink about it and hold out, a-la NFL players.

"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.

by SoxDevil on Nov 19, 2008 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If my handle gives you trouble

feel free to abbreviate it. E.coli, 015, or whatever you like. You can even call me “THAT GUY,” point and smirk, and I won’t take offense.

Handing out extensions to our young arbitration-eligible players, and upcoming free agents, would be a great idea. Sadly, many of them aren’t interested. Papelbon is out for the biggest payday, and won’t sign a below-market deal with us. I have the feeling that he’ll be menacing us in Pinstripes before long. IIRC, Youk and Pedroia are both interested in going year-to-year, so we’ll probably have to sign them at market value either before or when they hit free agency.

Jason Bay is the only guy I’ve heard is willing to talk contract extension with the Sox. He won’t be looking for a below market deal, but I think the FO would lock him up anyway. Jon Lester is another candidate for an extension, but I’m not sure what his goals are. Who knows about Lowrie or Ellsbury – either of them may or may not be interested in a deal.

"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.

by 0157H7 on Nov 18, 2008 8:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wasn't Pap looking for a long-term deal a couple years ago?

I seem to recall him talking about extensions, respect and whatnot after 2006, saying that he should set the standard for a closer’s payroll, and someone like Nathan or Putz opining that he should shut his trap.

Or maybe I dreamed it.

Manny ain't the only bad man.

by tommy.otm on Nov 18, 2008 9:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs