Rosenthal on Teixeira, Sox
by Randy Booth on Dec 14, 2008 3:15 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintFOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal has the latest with Mark Teixeira and the Red Sox:
The Nats will not outbid the Red Sox by that amount for Teixeira. The Yankees are at least on the periphery. And the Angels announced Friday that they have made Teixeira an eight-year offer, perhaps to demonstrate the seriousness of their intentions at a time when their chances appear to be diminishing.
The Nats have offered Teixeira $160 million for eight years, according to The Washington Post. The Red Sox might not be at eight years and might not be at $20 million per season. The Yankees' interest could be sincere or it could be a ruse by the team and/or Boras.
As one general manager said, "There is a lot of bluffing going on trying to get the Red Sox to go higher."
This is what it seems like to me. The Red Sox have been so quiet because I think they're trying to stick to their guns as long as possible. And, perhaps, when it's close and they might not be in the lead, that's when Theo & Crew will open up the pay check, swoop in and grab Teixeira ... or that's what I hope.
150 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I just can't see us sitting this one out
Sure, he isn’t a number one priority, but we still should sign him. F’n good hitter.
Well, I will appreciate for you to keep my zingers out of your mouth!
Pretty much.
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/
Teixeira
is the best 1B or 3B FA to be available in the next 3 years. Only other options are Prince Fielder and Aramis Ramirez. Neither I am too excited about.
For some reason I get the feeling that Boras is orchestrating everything and some of the offers might not be exactly what they seem.
7 years probably gets the Red Sox Teix, 6 might do it, if the $25 million a year was a true rumor. Its very obvious Teix does not want to play in LA, or he would of taken the 8/160 offer. LAA is probably still around to force up the Sox’s offer.
Tex
A 1B not named Pujols in not worth 25 mil a year even for 1 year. Come on guys, if this were Pujols we are talking about, I would go more than 25 mil, but as good as Tex is, we are overrrating him. His career OPS+ is a mere 3 points more than Bay’s (and Bay played the bulk of his career in a severe containment park for RHB). While a great fielder, he is not a substantial improvement over Youk. By signing him, we move Youk to 3rd where he is a bit of a butcher, while losing Lowell who is an excellent defensive 3b. Further, we block Lars, who is looking like an offensive threat that could surpass Tex (can anyone here name ANY player who played at least 40 games in AA at 20 years old with an OPS of 960 who did not pan out?) So basically:
1)we mess with our defense
2)we do so at our biggest depth position of 1b (Youk/Lars)
3)and we overpay to do so
I do think that our offense would be better for the next 2 years with Tex but not so dramatically if Lowell is healthy. In fact, it would be interesting to see what would come of a offensive/defensive net runs plus analysis. We would overpay for a 1b that we don’t really need till he is 37. That is what the Yankees do.
If we could get something of value back for Lowell I might change my mind, but I doubt we could.
Yes, but in 6-8 years when the contract ends, $25mil per year could be the value of a player on Drew's level.
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/
Okay, that would be an inflation rate that has never been seen in history before.
And you realize that for this situation only, that would be a GOOD thing? That means that we’d be paying unbelievably far below market value for the commodity. Please learn economics.
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/
it was me being a smart ass. if our dollar is not worth anything, none of us will give a damn about baseball.
by matzushocka45 on Dec 14, 2008 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, true.
I apologize for being a smartass towards you for being a smartass. Accepted?
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/
no i hate you. go to hell after u jump off a bridge.
by matzushocka45 on Dec 14, 2008 4:55 PM EST up reply actions
Okay.
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/
Whoooooooooooo........... SPLAT!!! Crackling....
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/
Wow, that sucked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D17_MF_314k
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/
What about moving Tex to 3B?
Even in a small sample size of 32 games, Tex put up a FP% 0.001 less than Lowell.
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/
Youk was only like 0.010 worse.
But that’s not the best stat, and neither have played a ton of games there.
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/
Youk has played far more.
He has played 3B primarily throughout his minor league career. He was our backup 3B behind Mueller, and only recently converted to 1B. He could go back, no problem.
I meant at the Major League level.
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/
Teix
is the best available FA, there is nothing else out there coming to their FA year. While the Red Sox do not need Teix in 09, they will need him in 2010+.
1) Teix is a fantastic defender and I am sure Youk can re-learn 3B.
2) Lars Anderson is a prospect. Anyone here willing to risk their house on Lars being better than Teixeira? You do not rely on prospect when projecting positions.
3) The market says different.
Fact is Lowell and Papi had injuries and signing Teix insures that the Red Sox will not have a similar situation to 08, plus it keeps him away from NY and Anaheim who will have to fight over Prince Fielder in 2010.
I say sign him and worry about the little things latter.
These are not little things...
Signing someone for 8 years at that rate when you don’t need them is a risk, and the Sox do not have an endless supply of cash. What you say regarding Lars is true, but for a prospect, he is a blue chip hitting prospect, and that is much more predictable than ptiching in the minors. I ask again, find someone even with the limited time in the minors that Anderson has had that had numbers like that and turned out to be a bust. Now, what doesn’t make sense:
1)Tex is a fantastic defender at the least important fielding position on the field (save maybe LF). It makes our defense worse, period.
2)I agree, but you miss the point-we aleady have a 1b in Youk and have Lars in the waiting.
3)How do you know what the market says? Has Tex signed? Basically teams will always overpay if put in a hole. The Halos HAVE to sign Tex-they bet Kotchman on it, so losing Tex is losing Tex+Kotchman.
If you build a good team, don’t worry about what stupid things other teams do. All Tex did for the Halos was get them a single win against a very beatup Sox team. You are suggesting that we follow the path of the Yankees and overstock a position with expensive long term signings when, in this case, we don’t need it. Further, we have positional flexibility, Lowrie and Youk can play 3rd if need be, etc, so guessing what will be available down the road is dumb. Lastly, getting Tex or not does not gaurentee anything, although I agree it gives us a deeper offensive team.
If we do sign Tex, I think we will have a heck of a team. I just don’`t think it is the logical thing to do.
I really think, no matter what happens with Teix, Lars isn’t going anywhere. They will find room for Lars, if need be…
I agree
Lars could replace Papi for example. My point still stands-we would be paying 25mill for basically a switch hitting Jason Bay 1b where we have no need.
The Jason Bay Comp
Obviously the numbers are similar career-wise, but Teix had his worst year his rookie year. Since then he has been constantly improving and put up his best two years in the last two years. Bay, on the other hand was looking incredibly good until he put up an OPS+ of 93 in 2007, his age 28 year. That was, and still is, a major red flag. Tex has nothing of the sort on his record.
Correct
To a degree. The (1) rookie year is not so important statistically, and it looks like 2007 was an anomaly for Bay. On the other hand, Tex has put up his best numbers in terms of OBP in the last 2 years. But this was in a suspicious manner-his split last year was dramatically in favor of Anaheim, and if you ask Atlanta fans, they were a bit disappointed in his bat. My point was not that he is Bay, but closer than you might think. I do think he will have excellent # in Fenway.
I think there is a good case for Tex to be made based on age (now) and the fact he is a switch hitter which we need. And he is an excellent player and hitter. But his is not so young (29 at the start of next year). He certainly will not be young at the end of a silly long contract. And our aging issue is not a first base.
good points buzzy
but i have to disagree with you. I am not in favor of signing Teix to over stock or even to keep a player away from rivals. These are bonuses. The main reason to sign Teix is bc he is the best 1b/3b option on the FA market in the next 3 years.
So we keep Lowell, fine no problem with that, but you are taking more of a gamble by not signing Teix than if you do.
Whats the major problems if you sign Teix?
Money? ok np there, we just unloaded Schilling at 10 Mil and Manny at 20 Mill. So even with Jason Bay’s contract, we should have $24 million to spend. Plus figuring Manny signed in 2000 I really do not see why a 7 year/22-25 million a year contract is so crazy.
Position? Teix is the best FA 1B available, he plays his position extremely well and he is a switch hitter to help Papi out in the middle of the order.
Trading Lowell? Trust me, someone will take Mike Lowell, that will not be a problem.
If you do not sign Teix:
You give an all star caliber 1B to one of two rivals and you will see him in the playoffs for the next 8 years.
If Mike Lowell or Papi do not recover you are still without a major bat in your lineup and will have to trade during the season to get someone. You will waste prospects to find someone to fill Lowell’s or Papi’s spot and he will not be even close to the level of Teix.
In 2010 the Sox will have to outbid the Yankees for Prince Fielder who will probably want to go to MFY to hang with his friends Cameron and CC.
Not signing Teix to a deal that is comparable to what we paid Manny is the foolish move. We won 2 WS with Manny’s overpriced contract.
Money is nothing in the MLB and prospects are just prospects. All Star 1Bs only come around once in a decade.
The Sox will keep all their prospects and have a great player on our team…who cares what he costs.
+1
There is a lot more risk in signing him, than not signing him. We have a chance to get one of the best bats in the league through the prime of his career. If we don’t sign him, we are relying on aging bats, and then an unproven prospect.
"There is a lot more risk in signing him, than not signing him."
Did you mean to reverse that? You’re point makes it sound like we are taking a risk by not signing…
How about Carlos Pena for not panning out?
At age 22 he put up an OPS of .944 in AA then .949 the next year. He has turned out to be a really good player, but not until his age 29 season. He was truly a “can’t miss”, but went on to put up OBP’s of .316, .331, .338, .325 through his age 27 season, only to be signed to a minor league contract the next year by the Sox. He didn’t help the team that he came up with too much, and didn’t really pan out till he was 30. I can’t wait until Lars is 30.
PS: I’m sure there are others that we just never hear of.
There is a big
difference between 20 and 22 in AA. Big. I am sure you find a fair number of 22 year olds in AA who have good stats and washout.
Home growing and then keeping them!
II personally like the model the Rays used, and back further the Miami Marlin team. That strategy being getting young talent into their farm system and then bringing them up. For the smaller franchises, it results in one or two good years, but then these small market teams cannot afford to keep what they grew and trusted. Now, the Red Sox have followed this model with Paps and Padroia and others, and unlike the small market teams, the Sox CAN afford to keep the young talent that they have fostered.
This is the model I prefer to follow and use rather than spend inordinate amounts on unknown, and usually older prospects from other systems. This grow your own process takes enormous scouting capabilities and patients, but down the road once the basics are in place, it will lead to greatness year in and year out as long as the Sox stay a rich team. Being rich they can afford such a more predictable and rewarding strategy.
So that's why NG is always crazy.
He enjoys the homegrown [read: better} stuff. Alright, now to read on past the bold.
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/
Enormous patients you say?
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/
Could'nt you post this more distant in time from dinnertime?
by NG on Dec 14, 2008 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
Eat less then.
It’s only 4. Geez.
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/
Also, just click where it says the title of the comment in bold.
It minimizes the rest of the comment. It’s how we deal with your craziness.
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/
So this is basically COMPLETELY unrelated to the post.
But a good comment, none the less. A mix of primarily this and a little Yankee-like spending [read: TEX] is prolly best.
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/
It's related because
a team has only so much money. If the Sox blow huge amounts on free agents, they may then not have enough to get the farm prospects they want, and they may not then have enough to keep these prospects when they turn to Padroia-like gold!
by NG on Dec 14, 2008 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
The Sox
were paying Manny Ramirez 20 million during the time Paps, Pedroia, Lowrie, Ellsbury and Masterson came up.
We seem to forget that the Red Sox were spending money as well as building a farm system and young players.
Why is Manny’s $20 million ok but Teix’s $22-25 Million not ok?
Esp. when Manny's contract at the time would be the equivalent of, like, a $30mil per year contract now.
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/
We do not know what they had to let go by/?
Only the front office knows. There is NOt an unlimited amount of money, and I doubt many of us here know what the scouts know. Even the quality and number of scouts may not be enough because of Manny-like drags on the finances of the system.
I stand strongly behind my original post thought. Go home-grown young and then keep them!
by NG on Dec 14, 2008 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
Well, according to this Boston Magazine article from 2006:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/the_50_wealthiest_bostonians/
John Henry is worth around $840mil, but this was during a troubling time for his firm. He purchased half of Roush Racing last year though, so I would assume his value is safe and has gone up. He, and the rest of the owners of the Sox, should easily be able to pay the employees and still make a profit off the extremely spendy fanbase.
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/
Not to mention
how much cash the Sox are getting from taking over Japan a country who is baseball obsessed and spend money.
Red Sox have plenty of money. If they wanted to they could of signed CC, Burnett and Teixeira and been fine.
The Sox should
Move Fenway to Tokyo by helicopter, where the economy isn’t so bad. Of course, then it will be more than a five-minute walk for me to get to the stadium… (jealous?)
Screw you.
It’d be like 5 weeks for me, running as often as possible.
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/
Manny's $20 million
Was not okay. It was overpay, as his defense was hurting us in the outfield. I think it’s significant that the Sox moved Manny + Hansen + Moss for 1.3 years of Jason Bay, who is not as good a hitter. They could have stuck with him and picked up his 2009 and 2010 options for $20 million each.
"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.
Before the current regime
That was Duquette. The current regime is smarter than that. The regime that signed Manny did not build a particularly deep farm system, and that was at a time when the Sox were drafting higher. Most long term free agent signings (the 8-10 year ones) are failures. Manny’s was not, but that does not mean vastly overpaying at a position you don’t need is a good idea. Ask Cashman. And it not as if the Sox had an MVP caliber LF and a superstar LF in the making in the minors (as we do now at 1b) at the time Manny was signed.
If the Sox really needed a 1b (like the Angels do) I would sign Tex. It just doesnt make sense. For example, what are the Sox going to do with Lowell?
Wishful thinking
no team is going to take someone at 33/34 making 12 Mil. coming off surgery due to his performance in ST. Furthmore, that would be waiting really really long just to see if you actually could deal him. When he is not dealt, that is a nother headache all together. The whole Tex signing thing just reminds me of 12 year old stratomatic GM-ing. It costs a bunch where you have no need for marginal improvement with a boatload of logistical headaches.
Yes, but Lowell, when healthy, is one of the best 3Bs in the league. There will definitely be takers.
?
there will? First list all of the teams that will/can pay 12Mil for a 3b. Now list all of those teams than need a 3b. Of those, list the teams that would wait until a month before the season starts to do so for a 35 year old 3b coming off surgery. My guess is there will not be takers. At least the risk is high that there will not be any.
I disagree.
First of all, you have to expect the red sox to eat a good portion of his remaining salary- I’m thinking over 50% of it. That makes your first list much larger, and as a result the second list larger too.
As for the third list, there are teams that will live with their current 3B, but Lowell would be a huge upgrade.
I’ll throw the Phillies out there as an example. At this point, they’re going to start a less-than-spectacular Pedro Feliz at third. However, once they see that Lowell can play, they probably would be willing to part with a guy or two to get Mikey at a reduced salary, don’t you think?
Perhaps.
But it is a risk to guess that someone will take him after you already signed Tex. Philly would be as good a bet as any place. We would get nothing in return, and have to pay, as you say.
Yes it is a risk.
But the risk is the possibility of having too many legit players at one position.
The risk of not signing, is having Lowell get injured, and letting Lowrie play third and Lugo play short. I think any sane person would rather take the first risk.
So
you would sign an very good (but not stellar) 1b for 8 years to avert the risk that somehow a relatively straighforward surgery goes wrong and limits Lowell’s awesome mobility?
Well, yeah!
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/
Is anyone stellar?
If Teix is not stellar, then only Pujols is stellar. The guys is in his prime and has been one of the best players in the league the last tow years.
Berkman?
He’s also better than Teix.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
I think
there really is a large gap between Pujols and the rest. Tex is similar to a bunch of others (Berkman, Youk, and maybe even Morneau if we don’t buy the bad defense rap). My feeling is that at such a position, it is fair to say that there really is only one stellar guy. I do still hold to the Bay comparison-offensively it is not that far off, and there a number of these types.
You hold the Bay comp as a huge negative,
What do you think he will earn as a free agent? More than JD Drew, right? Bay will earn near-Teixeira money, especially if he has another good year and puts 2007 out of everyone’s minds.
If Bay earns $18-20+ million
the Sox can’t afford Bay and Teixeira.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
I'm confused
that’s part of my point. He will have to earn approx what Teixeira earns because he performed like Teixeira. That’s a lot of cash. The other point was not to say it is a negative, but when put in the perspective of a comparison w/Bay it becomes clear that at least from the standpoint of hitting, it is not so uncommon to find. It is not Manny or Pujols-esque. Remember just how big this contract is purported to be-in the range of ARod numbers, which is too much.
A-Rod's contract is up at $30 mil per with incentives
I am not in favor of that for Tex, but $20 would work. Jason Bay is not an easy player to find. It is hard to get elite hitters, especially ones in their primes. These guys are not available very often. Period.
If the rumors are true
Teix will get between $22-27 million. I think that’s too much.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe just Boras talk-
the talk is now above 25M by some reports. Who knows who to believe, but if Tex goes for this per year it is too much.
By VORP
they are similar. Tex is better, but not by so much.
So, if Teix signs for $20 mil a year
He’ll cost the Sox a minimum of $26 million a year for the first two years, assuming the Sox eat only 50% of Lowell’s contract. However, every team will know the Sox must move Lowell. They’ll likely want the Sox to pick up more than half.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 14, 2008 9:54 PM EST up reply actions
We have the perfect match up wit Cleveland and Lowell. They will eat him up if we take on $$ from his contract.
by matzushocka45 on Dec 14, 2008 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
26 or so mil for Tex ...
will mean the Sox have 20% of their payroll tied up at 1B if their team payroll is around $130 million.
As Buzzy said, Lowell will be hard to move at any price. No team will touch him until they see what he can do in Spring Training. The Sox don’t have unlimited money. Here’s how Teix and Lowell match-up over the last three years:
Teixeira: .298 AVG/.393 OBP/.541 SLG
Lowell: .297 AVG/.353 OBP/.481 SLG
Sure, Teix has been better. But I don’t think he has been $8 million in salary, plus half of Lowell’s salary better. Also, Lowell’s numbers factor in last year when he was injured.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 14, 2008 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
I think
the problem with just sticking with Mike Lowell and letting Teix sign elsewhere is 1) Lowell is in his mid 30s and not getting any younger and 2) there is no one close to Teix available in 2010, 2011 or 2012.
Like
Russell Martin iwho is a FA in 2 years…and others. What we need is obviously a 1b and not a catcher like Martin.
Oh wait-
and Pujols is likely available in 2011 too. Hmmm, yeah he and Tex are about the same, not. The way this team was built for success was not by making moves like this. Theo has never once signed a check like this (eg 8 years/160+). You really think signing another 1b for 8 years (when he is already 29 at the start of they year) is a good idea when his comparables are similar to a guy who was hitting 6th in our lineup last year (behind the injured Lowell) makes a ton of sense? Welcome to the Minaya school of GMing.
Ok-that is unfair. In reality I am a bit torn about Tex. It will strengthen the team in the short run at probably too much expense and limit flexibility in the future. It is not stupid but…
by Buzzy on Dec 15, 2008 8:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 9:00 AM EST up reply actions
"The way this team was built for success was not by making moves like this"
You make it sound like we didn’t have a $20m FA clean-up hitter for the last 8 years.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Yes
but as repeatedly pointed out, that is completely atypical for this team. Unlike the Yankees, we have never before or since done that with a position player, and for good reason. First, that is what got the Yankees into a big mess. Second, lists of such long term signings show clearly that success is very unlikely (Manny was the exception not the rule, I think that list was posted here several months back). Now factor in the fact that it is for a guy playing a position we already have well represented; a guy who will limit both payroll and positional flexibility; a guy who has a career OPS+ identical to our 6th place hitter, and who, when factoring in defense and offense together is not a stark upgrade over having Lowell for next year, all for 8/160+…
Manny was signed by Duquette, not Theo
Teixeira is not as good a hitter as Manny—especially when Manny was acquired.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 10:39 PM EST up reply actions
"not a strong upgrade over Lowell"
I couldn’t disagree more. Your own statements about how difficult it’ll be to trade Lowell undermine your point – he’s an unknown quantity next year. I bet, he’ll probably be pretty good, but I doubt he’ll be at 2007 level.
Moreover, Lowell’s single best OPS+ was 128. In 2007 it was 124. Tex has a career OPS+ of 134. In the last two season’s he was 150 and 151. HUGE upgrade over Lowell. He’d be a monster in Fenway.
And maybe Manny was the exception to a rule (along with Drew…), but he also carried us for 8 seasons. Some exception…
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Geez
And how many “wins” does a delta OPS+ of 25 gain a team (that is not even counting the defensive slide)? I hardly think you even know. I totally stand by the statement, it is not a stark difference.
You really miss the point about the dificulty in dealing Lowell. It is not he is such a health question from our standpoint, it is that it compounds the reasons by which other teams will hold the Sox hostage. I will bet that it will make it much more likely that not only will we have to pick up substantial salary, but we will have to give up additional prospects (as in the Manny/Bay case). If you doubt that, and think some smart GM like Shipiro will just “take” him because they need a 3b…
Drew’s contract is 5 years, with opt-outs for health by the Sox. To equate this with the type of contract we are discussing for Tex actually undermines your point. It is very bad math on your end.
Your last point is compleley irrational. It is a fact that it is the exception (it has been documented and discussed on this very site). So because Manny “carried” us (whatever that means) we should sign a completely different player to this kind of contract where the need is clearly and objectively minimal? That also does nto make sense.
For the last time, Tex is a very good player, but I fully agree with Drug’s last post-he is an expensive luxury. A part of me will be happy if the Sox sign him, but it is really hard to justify logically in a long term planning sense given the Sox player make-up.
You are silly.
No one is going to hold us hostage over Lowell. We wouldn’t be able to get “fair value” for him, but we can definitely get rid of him. Worst case scenario, we have an overpaid back-up 1b/3b. We’re certainly not going to eat prospects to dump him.
How many wins does having Tex in the middle of our lineup give us, versus Lowell hitting 7th? I’ll go out on a limb and say 5.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Why?
No one held us hostage over Manny at the trade deadline? That’s why it had to be a 3 way trade where we paid 20 mil AND paid prospects to another team? That is why the trade fell through with FLA too. The way this “trade” will work will include a salary pickup + and exchange of unequal talent in prospects.
5 wins? How do you evaluate that? If we take WS (a flawed stat for sure). Tex in a near career year is plus 4 wins over the 2006 (not 2007) Lowell. That is not taking into account the minus in wins From defense, which is likely 1-2 wins. So 5 seems like much, more likely 2/3. I suppose in such a division that’s important, but it seems like a lot to pay for the contract and the headaches down the road.
And thanks for calling me silly.
Manny held us hostage.
Tex will make people around him better.
I know there’s the school of thought that says it doesn’t matter who hits in front of or behind other players, but I think it’s mistaken.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Not
really sure what you mean. The team decided that he needed to go, and tried to make the best of it. The same is true with Lowell, although I agree he is a really different case.
In retrospect, perhaps you are right on two fronts. First, it is possible that with a significant salary pickup we could give him away. My concern is that the Sox will be dealing from a position of total weakness, not unlike the trading deadline. We could keep him too as you say, but it risks a morale problem whereby a very popular player sits and is not so happy about it.
According to Fangraphs
Teix is worth about 5 wins over replacement. So, I’m guessing here, he’s worth about 2-3 wins over Lowell which would be valued at $8-15 mil over Lowell.
In a trade
… and tried to get him to restructure his contract. It would have been an awful trade, as Jon Lester was the prospect to be sent to Texas along with Manny.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
Ya but
even with the restructure, he still would’ve been $20m+ per year, or $150+ over seven years.
Point is, Theo isn’t cost-averse, if he likes what he’s getting.
That would’ve been an awful trade, indeed.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
I have no problem keeping Lowell as a bench player if we are going to get stuck eating a lot of his contract.
And we will get stuck with it, so I say why not.
by matzushocka45 on Dec 16, 2008 7:27 AM EST up reply actions
Teix is a very good player
But. the Sox were number two in the AL in run scoring last years with an injured Papi, Lowell, Drew, etc. There is absolutely no reason Papi and Lowell won’t bounce back. Anderson will be ready by 2010/2011, when Lowell’s contract is up.
$20 million is too much to pay for a 1B. The Sox don’t have unlimited money, and the economy is tanking. Also, I think that Lowell won’t be easy to move. The Sox will have to dump him, eat most of his contract, and get nothing in return.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 7:21 AM EST up reply actions
If you believe Lowell will be hard to move in Spring Training due to health concerns, then that’s the exact reason we need to invest in Tex.
If all the GM’s needing a 3B solution have concern over Lowell, Theo should as well, and does I’m sure. I do not want to go into this season with a Kotsay like stop gap solution. The difference in us winning the ALCS and losing the ALCS was our run production from 1B, created by Lowell being injured and Youk shifting to third.
If Lowell is in that lineup, we win the series. Sox left ton’s on runners on base…no thanks to a gamble on hoping Lowell is healthy and everything is “A-ok” if we do not get Tex.
by matzushocka45 on Dec 15, 2008 7:29 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Lowell will be hard to move because every team will have the Sox over a barrel, knowing he has to be moved. They may ask for another player to be included and make the Sox pick up 50-75% of the contract.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 8:59 AM EST up reply actions
No
It is not that Lowell will not be healthy (he actually should), it is that any smart GM would not take him given all of the factors (eg age,contract and surgery). One could expect him to be fine, but a GM can play the fact that he just had surgery into another reason to have the Sox pick up the contract, etc.
Yeah, let's base our model on the Marlins and Rays!
These are teams that put in many TERRIBLE years in order to get a few winning years. Yes, we have to develop young talent and retain it, but that is only good enough to have a few good years every decade. We also have to subsidize the home-grown talent with free agent signings. We can underpay our home grown talent and pay FA market price for FA’s.
Without the fiscal advantage we wouldn’t have won those World Series. Whether its Manny, Pedro, Damon, Drew, Schilling, the list goes on. We need young talent, but we also have to spend on the right FA’s.
Yes
but many other teams suck for a long time and do not build a team like the Rays (KC for example). The Rays were built as much by smart pickups as high draft picks. Navarro, Bartlett, Pena, Aki, Gross, Hinske, Balfour, Wheeler, Howell, Bradford, Kazmir, Garza were all smart trades or FAs anyone could have had. Friedman is very smart. The Sox have had success in the past doing the same thing-Millar, Damon, Mueller, Ortiz etc were those kind of guys. A smart team does that, and rarely, if ever, writes a check like 8/160+ for a 1b.
But my point is that
The rays model only results in playoff runs every few years. The Sox can avoid this by signing known quantities. We should spend big money on guys that we know will play well. We should avoid stupid contracts that carry big risk like Lugo, Renteria, Clement etc., and save money that way.
PS: we signed Damon as a FA by outbidding other teams and making a significant (at the time) investment in him.
Don't you
think you should wait and see how things pan out for the Rays in the next few years before saying that? despite their payroll issues, they are primed for a long run. Their system is stocked and key players are locked up.
The Rays approach is basically the A's system circa 2000.
Stockpile arms, sign your talented young positional guys to long-term contracts. Eventually the Rays (like the A’s before them) won’t be able to afford their better players, and they’ll have to start over. The Sox don’t really have that option.
Though I have been very impressed with Friedman.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
As much as people love Beane
the Rays are better set up than the As were. Part of that is the trend of locking up guys like for even longer terms, part of that is an unparalleled depth in the farm, and part of that is absolute fleecing of other teams (Kazmir, Garza, Bartlett…). But it is true that the model cannot be sustained forever.
Years has?
I think it’s not really an offer yet, just a “in principle” mention. As in “agreed, in principle, to a contract…”
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/
Hmm... how about career instead.
Not sure I’d like to have a 50 year old Tex playing for us.
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/
Um... he's 28.
28+20 is 48, which is close to 50.
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/
Happens best to us.
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/
Rob Neyer on Teix, Lowell, etc.
For those of you who don’t know Neyer, he is a former Bill James assistant who is a writer for ESPN. This is from today’s chat:
Dan (South Africa): Hey Rob, Whats going on with Tex, are we gonna see some action this week. If he and Smoltz are added to the Red Sox, do they become the best team in the division, or would they need another veteran starter signing like Derek Lowe?
Rob Neyer: (12:40 PM ET ) I believe he winds up with the Red Sox or the Angels. I just can’t figure out what happens to Mike Lowell if it’s the Red Sox. And I think the Sox are the best team in the division already.
I think Neyer’s take is interesting not because he agrees with me, but because I think too many Sox fans forget how good this team is already. The Sox don’t have to react to every move the MFY make. Boston has a well-constructed team that has a lot of payroll flexibility. The farm is well-stocked, and the future looks bright. There really isn’t a need for Teixeira.
As Buzzy noted, if Teixeira stays in LA, the Angels aren’t improved. A beat up Sox team took them out in 4 games. They need to re-sign him to remain one of the better teams in the AL. The MFY are still a longshot to get him, especially if the 8 year/$160 million offer is real.
Boston is already a very good team (the best or second-best team depending on one’s take). Offensively Boston is fine, even without Teix . I think too many Sox fans are acting as if Ortiz is finished. Even hurt, Papi was productive last year. Ortiz had the highest OPS with runners in scoring postition (minimum 150 PA). He was 5th in AVG and 2nd in OBP. Overall, Ortiz hit .336 AVG/.447 OBP/.680 SLG with runners in scoring position. He is far from done.
Ortiz, Youk, Pedroia, Drew, Lowell, and Bay are very productive hitters. Ellsbury and Lowrie were good minor league hitters, and should improve. The only position the Sox must improve is at catcher.
Teix is an expensive luxury. The Sox will be fine without him.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 15, 2008 1:50 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
I rec this. This team is still very good, with or without Mark Teixeira.
by Randy Booth on Dec 16, 2008 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
One question, though:
If we don’t sign Teix, what happens with Lars? Obviously the door opens for him, but in 2010? Lowell is still under contract then, so do we still try and get rid of him? Or is that when Ortiz may be over the hill?
Lars
Lars may well be ready in 2010, but he will only be 22. In some sense I worry more about what will happen to Lars if we DO sign Tex. If it happens that Papi has more than 2 years left in him, then what? Lars at that stage will be wasting his time in the minors. This was one of my original points about how this move risks flexibility ans creates some real potential headaches (Lowell, Lars, Youk at 3rd).
Risking flexibility isn't bad...
if you have all-star players at the positions without flexibility. Its not a problem if Lars can’t fit because Teix, Youk and Ortiz are all raking.
Hey Buzzy
(This in response to this “It’s not a school of thought, it is what looking at the stats generally say,” that thread was too hard to read.)
Stats don’t “say” anything, it’s how we interpret them based on our understanding of the environment.
Having Manny made the people around him better. Pitcher’s pitch to the guys in front of him knowing Many would be coming up. SImilarly, having Manny on base 38-40% of the time made the likelihood of the guys hitting behind him driving in a run that much higher.
Anyways, Theo’s got more stats than you, and he wants Tex. I’m with Theo.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
He wanted Lugo too
:-)
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 11:28 AM EST up reply actions
Here
they show that, generally speaking, there is an effect, but it is not what you think. See:
http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2008/08/manny-ortiz-and-protection/
Of course if your point is that having more quality hitters in a lineup is a good thing, and leads to more runs, of course it is.
Basically however I still stand by my main points:
1)Tex is a great player but the overall win increase over Lowell when defense and offense is factored in is marginal (a few wins, when the plus/minus from random effects as measured by, say, the difference between actual and pythag record is of the same magnitude).
2)The move is very costly, more so when factoring in a potential Lowell salary dump.
3)Such a 1b is not worth “A-rod” money; his career OPS+ is significantly lower than such a player, and he plays 1b. I am hoping if he is signed it is not at 25Mil.
4)He really kills flexibility. What happens with Lars, who projects to be ready in about 1 year? What happens with Papi in NL games? What do we do with Lowell? Since Bay is a similar hitter, and could easily put up a similar offensive year to Tex next year, what does that say about how much we foot for him if we want to when the time comes?
5)Why not make a run for Pujols in 2011? By then we will know about Lars much more, and Pujols is a far far superior player to Tex.
6)The emotional ones, which really should not be counted here: Are you happy with stiffing Lowell, who plays hurt and took a discount to stay? Do we want to make Yankee-like signings? Tex also “seems” like a prototypical Boras mercenary- I guy always auditioning for a contract. It seems like the path to a rather bloodless team, but hey.
We should really keep in mind that when our team does not win, we do not have to panic and respond to other teams making ill-advised long term signings. I like Theo, but he has made his share of mistakes (Lugo, maybe Drew, Bard…). I doubt this one will be a bust, but I also doubt we will look back at it and say it was a great move. He might have the stats, but not ones that would change my mind on this.
by Buzzy on Dec 16, 2008 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
+1
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
1. Lowell’s D will take a hit. He’s 35 and coming off hip surgery. He’ll still be very good, but I don’t see any GGs. On the whole, I think the D will be a wash, leaving Tex’s offense as a net gain.
2. Since last winter, we’ve cut Manny’s $20m, Tek’s $12 (?), Curt’s $8, Coco’s whatever Coco was making, Timlin’s $4, plus hopefully half of Lugo makes, while adding Bay’s $8m and only giving Pedroia a significant raise. We can afford Tex.
3. I too hope he isn’t $25m. I see him around $20-22, which is more Jeteresque ("driven"). I definitely think Tex is “worth” at least $5m more than Drew.
4. Worry about Lars when Lars gets here. The kid is nuts with the bat, but it’s not like he’s Steve Garvey around 1B. We’ll likely let Papi walk, and if we don’t re-sign Bay we’ll have a nice big hole in LF. There’s two spots for him right there.
5. In 2011, Pujols will be “31” and probably demanding a ten-year contract at $30m plus. Yes, he’s the best hitter on the planet, but I worry about “41” year old power hitter with a history of nagging injuries in the post-Mitchell Report era.
6. The emotional argument is I think the strongest one. Lowell is a pro, and I’ve got mad respect for him for taking a cut to stay with the Sox. But business is business. Moreover, signing really good players at their market rate is not Yankee-like. It’s baseball.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Worry about Lars when Lars gets here. The kid is nuts with the bat, but it’s not like he’s Steve Garvey around 1B. We’ll likely let Papi walk, and if we don’t re-sign Bay we’ll have a nice big hole in LF. There’s two spots for him right there.
Here, here! A lot of OTM’ers are going batty over Lars Anderson and he’s just a kid. Give him time to season. Prospects are not sure things and it’s possible that he’ll bust.
"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.
The Cards will lock up Pujols before he hits FA. Guaranteed. If not he will be at least $30mil per and worth it.
And if they don't lock him up
Then mid-way through 2010, they’ll trade him to someone who can, asking for the stars and moon. And they’ll get it.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Disagree
obviously. See how happy you are with Youk at 3rd next year then make that claim. BTW 3b defense is much more stable than you think, it is not nearly as mobility based as SS or OF. Even the +4 WS is close to a wash, really.
“But business is business. Moreover, signing really good players at their market rate is not Yankee-like. It’s baseball.”
I know you can’t mean that-is Zito worth his contract? That is “market rate.” If it’s baseball, it is not typical Theo baseball, since he has never done so before. It is Cashman baseball.
Zito was stupid.
Bad deal at the time. The Giants blew everyone out of the water (they had to, to get him on their crappy team) when everyone knew Zito was losing it.
Youk has been a solid 3b in infrequent duty there. He’s a good athlete (despite the “bad body”), given regular time there he will only improve.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Woo! After an hour and a half, Mazz answered my question in his chat today:
1:24
[Comment From Randy]
What happens to Lars Anderson if Mark Teixeira is signed? Will the club wait for either Lowell or Ortiz to work their way out? I can’t imagine they would trade a player like Anderson.
1:26
Tony Massarotti: I suspect that Anderson stays as a replacement for Ortiz, who has two years remaining on his current deal. Again, if Teixeira ends up here, Lowell is the more likely to be traded as Ortiz has right to veto any trade
That’s what Mazz thinks…
You and Mazz seem pretty tight
:-)
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 16, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
