Over the Monster: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: MLB Hot Stove: blogging the rumors, trades, signings Bar-right-arrows



Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency

For the first time ever, Curt Schilling is a free agent:

Filing for free agency is weird. I never knew or thought about how it happened. Representing myself I rounded up the legal details and figured out exactly how it works. For the next 15 days I can speak with other teams, and they can contact me, but no details can be discussed. They can only express interest. For the next 15 days the team that remains my first choice, the Sox, have exclusive rights. I guess I'll find out how closely teams follow rules ...

It'll be interesting to see how Schilling handles all of the negotiations. I wonder if Theo Epstein & Co. will approach the deal differently considering Schilling is representing himself. I don't think the Sox will low-ball him, but I don't think they'll be especially wowing him either.

What does everyone think? Will the Red Sox re-sign Schilling? Answer the poll and leave a comment!

Poll
Will the Sox re-sign Schilling?
Yes
42 votes
No
65 votes

107 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 59 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
If its the $13mil figure mentioned before, I reckon we will sign him.  He'll give us 160-170 innings, take the load off Buchholz and Lester and give Dice-K a chance to be flexible between 5 and 6 days.  Its smart to have 6 starters at this stage and for the price I reckon its good value.

by sydneysox on Oct 31, 2007 9:03 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I was really surprised he'd never been a free agent before---did he always just get arbitrated and traded and extended and traded and extended again?  Really bizarre considering the length of his career.

You gotta love having another guy who just comes up big over and over in the playoffs, even if he's not a frontline starter during the regular season.  And keeping Schilling around as injury insurance, hilarious as it sounds, makes a certain amount of sense---assuming that Wakefield and Schilling alternate their respective stints on the DL.  

Money-wise, I can't imagine anyone's giving Schilling $13 million.  He's got a great career behind him but I don't know anyone who believes he's got a really good season in front of him.  Another 9-10 wins, ERA around 4.25, and the sentimental value of him retiring with his Sox on, I would value at $8-9M.  

Tony the Pony

by Tony the pony on Nov 1, 2007 6:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I don't think the Sox will sign him at the start of free agency, but at the same time, I wouldn't be surprised if they offered him arbitration.  When the choice is a single year of a 41-year-old Schilling or a couple of first round draft picks, the team may figure that it'll come out ahead if they get the draft picks.  Of course, if Schilling accepts arbitration, the team may be "stuck" with him.  Not that that's a bad thing.

by argo0 on Oct 31, 2007 11:18 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Considering he put up two straight years of sub-4 ERAs (3.97, 3.87), I assume he'd be a type A. I'll look for some documentation, however.

by 0157H7 on Nov 1, 2007 12:27 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Schilling is a type A free agent, as I guessed. Source:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/al/2007-10-31-elias-rankings-complete_N.htm

So is Mike Lowell. Timlin is a type B.

by 0157H7 on Nov 1, 2007 12:49 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I read Gagne is an A, also. That means if we lose all three, we'll have a lot of quality draft picks coming our way.

by Randy Booth on Nov 1, 2007 7:34 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
B, I think. Sadly.
Bottom 9th B:1 S:0 O:0 With Bill Mueller batting, Dave Roberts steals (1) 2nd base.

by britsoxfan on Nov 1, 2007 8:06 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yup, confirmed
here.
Bottom 9th B:1 S:0 O:0 With Bill Mueller batting, Dave Roberts steals (1) 2nd base.

by britsoxfan on Nov 1, 2007 8:15 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
What if we lose Schilling, Lugo, Manny, Wake, Timlin, Crisp
and we keep Lowell at third, get A-Rod at short, Ellsbury at Center, and pick up arms and a Right fielder?

by dereau on Nov 1, 2007 1:07 AM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
The only part about that which appears a little difficult to me (besides the A-Rod signing) is trading away Lugo.  He is coming off a down year, and wont have as much value.

by redsoxrocko on Nov 1, 2007 1:55 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Manny is around for at least one more year - at $20 mill I don't see the Sox moving him, or really wanting to.  After 2008, it's the Sox option.  I'm guessing he would be overpriced at that point, unless he has a monster year next year.  If he has another extended absence due to injury, that would probably be it.

by RickD on Nov 1, 2007 12:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Roger Clemens school of denial.
Those who support signing Schilling are in the Roger Clemens school of aging denial.  Folks, life is what it is, and getting old and decrepit is part of that equation.  Maybe Clemens and Schilling believe they are exempt from these natural rules, but they are not.  Move on, cultivate from within, and go young and cheap!  The man is not worth a great salary anymore because like Clemens, he is too old to be reliably good very often, IMHO.

by NG on Nov 1, 2007 9:01 AM EDT   0 recs

Re: The Roger Clemens school of denial.
Clemens pitched well into his 40s.  Not a great example.

Of course, Clemens still had the heater well into his 40s.  Schilling is already losing his.  

Schilling is a very smart pitcher and I think he'll pitch well next year, wherever he is.

by RickD on Nov 1, 2007 12:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Lets do this
  1. Re-sign Schilling.
  2. Do Not re-sign Lowell
As a result 2008 rotation:
  1. Beckett
  2. Dice-K
  3. Schilling
  4. Lester
  5. Wake (Tavarez's option picked up,emergency starter)
Trade: Buchholz, Crisp, Hansen, and 2 other prospects and/ or Delcarmen

for
Miggy Cabrera

2008 Off-season:

Sign Santana or Sabathia

Wake me

by Matzushocka on Nov 1, 2007 2:04 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Lets do this
Buchholz is someone I do not to see traded. He's looking to be potentially a dominant pitcher that will rank as one of the better pitchers in the league, and is currently league-ready. Dominant SPs are hard to come by.

by Realistic on Nov 1, 2007 2:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Lets do this
The only problem is I think the MFY will trade Hughes or Joba in an attempt to get Miggy or Santana before opening day. Either that, or they will overpay for Lowell. I would rather not trade Buchholz, but I think its him or Jacoby that will be required in any deal for a major player. If I am the FO I would fight the urge to trade for Santana if he became available, and hope to sign him after the season, unless an extension window was granted. Id love to see Miggy in a Sox uniform, hes one of my faves.

by Matzushocka on Nov 1, 2007 3:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sub Lester for Clay
ad I'd do it. Though I doubt the Marlins would.

I LOVE Miggy's bat, but I worry about his "bad body." He's barely a 3b now, and he'll be a 27 year old DH in a couple years.

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 1, 2007 3:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Sub Lester for Clay
Eh, slide him over to 1B and Youk back to 3B. It's not the worst idea...
Bottom 9th B:1 S:0 O:0 With Bill Mueller batting, Dave Roberts steals (1) 2nd base.

by britsoxfan on Nov 1, 2007 5:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Lets do this
Even though he will be the most demanded player this year or next, the Sox should go after Santana for the most obvious reason: Fenway Park and Lefties don't mix, it is a very difficult park for starting lefties, which is why the Sox will have only one lefty on their starting rotation...

Bucholz is too good to be traded... Lester will be traded before Bucholz...

by superferret on Nov 3, 2007 2:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
If Buchholz is not in a package for Santana or Miggy C. the Sox will not get either.  Just like the Yanks will not get either if Hughs or Chamberlain are not in the package.

There are too many teams, err.. the Dodgers and Angels, with top talent willing to deal for both.

My opinion - Miggy is going to LA. One team will get Miggy the other will sign A-Rod.

Clay Buchholz is most likely "not in trade talks" like Joba Chamberlain, which, probably in the long run, is smart.

Sox will not resign Schilling unless he is willing to take a Wakefield type contract, mainly bc he really is not worth the money any longer and also the Sox are LOADED with young arms that need innings. It would make much more sense to find someone who can fill in the rotation but can also work out of the pen, like Tavarez.

Again, I know I keep repeating myself, but A-Rod should not be an option for the Sox.  The guy is cancer.

Look at A-Rod's stats v. Miggy C. over the past three years. Who would you rather have?

Everyone is trying to find a way to NOT pay A-Rod, now with Miggy being on the market, the Marlins will ask for whatever they want and they will probably get it.  

There is a reason why everyone hates A-Rod.  A potential Miggy trade just took someone off the market and probably made their lives much easier knowing they wont have to waste $30 million a year on a clubhouse cancer.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 1, 2007 4:01 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Anyone want to take the over/under on Schilling going to play for the MFY if they offer him a boat load of $$$ ? I have some thoughts that he may do just that.  I keep hearing all these teams do not want A-Rod, but its all BS, someone is going to give him 300-350 million. I am predicting the MFY or the Giants.

by Matzushocka on Nov 1, 2007 4:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Angels most definately do not want A-Rod.  Right now its a matter of Arte giving in to public pressure. Lots of people are scared what Vladdy's reaction will be to A-Rod signing a 300 million deal in Anaheim.  They would be better off dumping some of their talent and getting Miggy.

If we are setting up a pool, I am going with the Mets.  A-Rod wants the attention and David Wright is good guy and would probably move over to 2nd or the OF for A-Rod's ego.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 1, 2007 6:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Both LA teams are loaded with major-league ready talent, and have high payrolls. They definitely could be in the running for Santana, Miguel Cabrera, and A-Rod. That said, I think the Angels front office are more likely to target Lowell than A-Rod. Last offseason they needed a top-flight slugger; instead, they picked up Shea Hillenbrand and Gary Matthews Jr. They've whiffed in pursuit of Konerko, Soriano, and others, and happily fielded teams of rookies. They seem to view acquiring a top slugger as a luxury rather than a need. I don't see them showing Boras the money for A-Rod.

If you're arguing for Miggy C over A-Rod, I'm not sure stats are the most favorable way to compare them.
05
Cabrera: .323, .385, .561, 33 HR
A-Rod: .321, .421, .610, 48 HR
06
C: .339, .430, .568, 26 HR
A: .290, .392, .523, 35 HR
07
C: .320, .401, .565, 34 HR
A: .314, .422, .645, 54 HR

by 0157H7 on Nov 1, 2007 4:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Naw, my argument was Cabrera would be a very solid 2nd choice for half the price and none of the club house problems.  Also, I think Miggy has more RBIs than A-Rod in those 3 years.

The Angels fans think Arte is going to make a move on Lowell as well, so you might have nailed that one.  To think, if the Angels had just bucked up and paid Carlos Lee, they would not be looking for  third baseman.

I don't know maybe I am being naive but I still think if the Sox give Lowell a "fair" offer, he stays.  Chemistry and playing in a place where you could run for Mayor and probably win can be more important than maximum $$$.

Miggy does complicate things for both A-Rod and Lowell.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 1, 2007 6:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I see. I agree Miggy would be a solid second choice; he'd probably put up great numbers in the AL, though there might be an adjustment period (or not; Lowell did better here).

Lowell may well stay, assuming Theo wants him (and not Miggy or A-Rod). I think he can definitely get more years from another team, but Lowell has reasons to remain in Boston. The fans have really taken to him, he hits better in Fenway than on the road, he seems to like the team.

by 0157H7 on Nov 1, 2007 10:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Miggy would have to get in shape to play in Boston though.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 5:10 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
***BTW I know Schill says he won't play there. But we will see.

by Matzushocka on Nov 1, 2007 4:17 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I don't see it happening.

Let's not forget a few things: (some are obvious)

  1. He's not only 40, but an injured 40.  (DL List in June 07, if you'll recall).  What happens if he gets injured again in '08?  
  2. His fastball is gone.  87 is not a fastball.  That may do in the NL, but this is the AL East.
  3. Being a smart, finesse pitcher is good, but once teams have him figured out, his outings will be shorter, and more frequently so.  That ultimately puts more pressure on the bullpen.  
  4. Based on my #3 reasons, I wouldn't want the Sox to get to August or September 2008 and begin to look back on the season and wonder "What if we'd have let him go?"  That creates an unnecessary animosity.
I'll be sad to see Schilling go - he's been very inspirational and a good team leader.  But I think his service to the Red Sox has seen it's best.
BC14

by BC14 on Nov 1, 2007 6:32 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
By the way, regarding my last comment (above):

I believe in the philosophy that a ballplayer either gets better or he gets worse, but he never stays the same.

The question that I think should be on Theo's mind is:  "Will Curt get better in 2008, or will he get worse?"  

Based on the better/worse/never stay the same philosophy, I think the answer to that question is clear.

BC14

by BC14 on Nov 1, 2007 6:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
If you use that philosophy I would say that Beckett has a chance to be better (+), honestly with our lineup Beckett should win 21-23 games.

Mastuzaka (+), I'm a HUGE Dice-K guy, he is a tough SOB and he just needed time to figure out this game v. Japanese league.  Trust me Dice will be HUGE in 08'.  18-19 wins

Lester (+) Again, I am loving this guy. If that game in Colorado showed Sox fans anything, it showed us that we do not need to waste money on FA Starters, he is a solid 2 or 3. 15-18 wins

Wake (-), lets be honest, he won 17 this year, thats not happening again. 13 wins hopefully

Schilling (-), he is trying to prove what he can do, not what he has done.  I love the heart, but that might not be enough. probably 10 wins max., if he stays healthy.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 5:18 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I agree with all of your + and - on that list.
BC14

by BC14 on Nov 2, 2007 1:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I am a little baffled by this "never been a free agent thing."

Does anyone else remember when we signed Schil?  Curt expressed an interest... Theo went to his house for Thanksgiving... they worked out some numbers, and he came on board without the help or advice of an agent...

What is that, if it isn't a free agent?

by JoseBlow on Nov 1, 2007 8:58 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
He was traded to the Sox following the 2003 season.
BC14

by BC14 on Nov 1, 2007 9:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
... and they worked out the extension and dropping of the no-trade over a Turkey dinner, which might be why you're confused Jose.
Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 1, 2007 10:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How about the original Miggy?
What would it take for the O's to trade him? I think he could make a good 3b...
Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 1, 2007 11:04 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
Could try asking someone at Camdenchat.com. They need better production at every position (except 1st and 2nd starters, 2B, SS, and RF). One match would be:
Miguel Tejada for John W. Henry (Peter Angelos designated for assignment).

In seriousness, I think they'd ask for something like Buchholz, Jed Lowrie, and a lower level prospect. Maybe substitute Lester, Youks, Pedroia or Bowden for Buchholz. They need to acquire a lot of talent to compete in the future.

by 0157H7 on Nov 1, 2007 11:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
Really, you think he would cost that much?

Good article on Tejada here. The reporter offers this in regard to his trade value.

Before the 2006 trade deadline, the Orioles nearly moved him to the Angels for pitcher Ervin Santana and infielder Erick Aybar, and then to the Houston Astros for a package that included ace Roy Oswalt...

Two baseball executives said the Orioles could probably land one or two high-ceiling prospects. However, they doubted that Tejada could fetch a top-of-the-rotation pitcher or a proven young bat.

I'm not exactly sure how to interpret the last sentence. Because in my book, Buchholz has a good shot at becoming a top-of-rotation type, and Ellsbury is already a proven young hitter. Or at least as proven as one can be after 90-odd at bats.

I wonder if we could get it done without either of them.

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 2, 2007 2:09 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
Well, Tejada has lost some power but he's still a better offensive SS than many guys.

Buchholz and Ellsbury are awesome, but one good month in the bigs does not make them proven to other GMs. They'd be the start of negotiations, but it depends on overall interest in Tejada whether other prospects could become the centerpiece. The Orioles could probably find a couple teams interested in trading for him.

by 0157H7 on Nov 2, 2007 11:17 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
No thanks on Tejada. His name could also be spelled D-E-C-L-I-N-E. He peaked in 2004. Maybe he could rebound slightly, maybe to his '06 levels (126 OPS+, 37 2B, 24 HR), but that sounds a helluva lot like what Mike Lowell gave us this season, and he'd only cost money.

by Allen Chace on Nov 2, 2007 11:56 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
I agree Tejada is not the same man he once was.  O's missed a huge chance to unload him for talent.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 12:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
God Allen, you're so negative.

;p

He's worth kicking the tires on, maybe he's a decent "buy low" kind of guy.

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 2, 2007 12:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
That's not a very good "winking smiley face." How about this one -

;^)

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 2, 2007 12:45 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
I don't disagree with that. I just don't think it would end up being a "buy-low" situation.

by Allen Chace on Nov 2, 2007 2:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How about the original Miggy?
Maybe I'm misunderestimating the O's FO and their often-times logic-defying personnel moves. Or maybe I'm overestimating Angelos' desire to be out from under the $27-ish million owed to Miggy. Or maybe I'm getting a jump on hot-stove self-fellation because I don't see us getting Arod or Fat Miggy, and I put the odds on Lowell returning at 50/50.

Certainly, if we're competing against the LA teams prospect-wise, it wouldn't be a buy-low situation. But if one LA team ponies up for Arod, and the other puts together a package for Cabrera (I know, big "ifs", but that's my best guess for where they end up), I think we'd have as good a shot as anyone else to get him at a reasonable price.

Tejada's trade value has never been lower. He has flat-lined offensively over the last couple of years, he no longer has the range to play SS, and he's publicly declared that he's miserable playing for a terrible team. I imagine the O's would want to get out from under his contract, and from what I've read they've signaled that they're willing to eat some of his contract to move him. If he was almost traded for E. Santana and Aybar a year and a half ago (as the article above suggests), I think some variation on Crisp/Lowrie/Bowden could get it done.

Certainly, a shift to 3rd base would come with some hiccups. But stick him in Fenway with his buddies Manny and Papi, and he'd be reinvigorated. He'd hit a ton.

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 2, 2007 3:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

O-Miggy = Bad
This is the sort of thinking that got the Yankees into their current predicament with the highest payroll in baseball (by far), and scrapping to come up with decent pitching.
"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 2, 2007 1:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I think they should offer any prospect besides Buccholz or Ellsbury for Miggy. They might be able to get him for Crisp, Kottares, Bowden, and Delcarmen.

by gnick55 on Nov 2, 2007 12:30 AM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
If the Sox could get Miggy without moving Buchholz or Ellsbury and figuring that Lester is in the rotation permanently, I think they would make that move ASAP.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 12:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

TRADE THOUGHTS:
1) Do not trade Lester, or Buchholz

We have Beckett and Dice-K locked up for a few years, but after that where do we go? At this point, you can't count on Schilling or Wakefield in the rotation.

Having a rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Lester, and Buchholz in '09 (skipping '08) sounds pretty good to me.

Bowden and Masterson could be moved in the right trade, but Starting Pitching is the currency of the game right now.

The one thing we know about Free Agent pitchers is that their cost nearly always outpaces their worth. And trades are a tricky proposition at best.

2) Do not trade Jacoby Ellsbury

This kid is part of our future in the OF. He's hit well at every level, runs the bases well, and fields well. The only thing he doesn't really do is hit for power. How many established CFers would you rather have right now? Maybe 1 of 10 guys? 1 of 10 (from 30 teams) is pretty damn good for a kid just starting out his career.

I'd rather not trade Pedroia, either.

In fact, trading for established super-stars is not good business, in general. The Sox don't need to generate more interest in the team (we're slavish already), so it's all about cost vs. performance in the short-term and long-term.

The Sox made a good, even deal with the Marlins for Beckett. The Marlins got future super-star Hanley Ramirez, a future #3 in Anibal Sanchez, and the Sox got an ace the Marlins couldn't afford. I'm not even including Lowell in the debate, because he was a throw-in. As someone previously noted, it's extremely difficult to project future performance as a GM. People thought Lowell's bat speed had slowed to the point where he'd be ineffective.

The fact is, the Sox stole Beckett in a fire-sale for two top prospects, two high-ceiling kids, and not one established player. It hurt, but it was a fair deal. Trading away the farm for one player is not a good idea, and teams are going to try to screw the Sox because of our wealth of prospects.

If we could secure Miguel Cabrera for Crisp, Bowden, Place, and Wagner, I'd make that deal. But trading more than one of Lester, Buchholz, or Ellsbury would be a horrific mistake for the Sox.

If anything, the Sox should consider trading away some of their established superstars for emerging superstars-to-be. Although our lineup would be significantly diminished with the loss of a player like Manny (my personal favorite, btw), think of the potential returns a few years down the line. We have the pitching to still contend, even with a diminished line up.

Take a look at what studs like Troy Tulowitzski and Ryan Braun have done this year. Or, if you're a bigger history buff, the Sox are only where they are today because someone named Dan Duquette traded an established pitching star, Closer Heathcliff Slocumb, to Seattle for two kids named Jason Varitek and Derek Lowe. Need I go on?

Although Colorado seems to have its heart set on trading Atkins to play Ian Stewart, how about trying to pry Stewart away? Or Brandon Wood from the Angels. There are plenty of kids we could target for Coco Crisp and one medium-high prospect.

Keep a steady course, Theo.

"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 2, 2007 1:23 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
I think Ellsbury is "Off limits", think about the revenue that guy will bring the Sox.  Between Dice-K and Ellsbury the Sox can start printing money in the tunnels of Fenway.

BTW, A-Rod = $350 million to start negotiations.  Boras will not even talk to anyone who is unwilling to go $35mil/10 years.

Everyone still A-Rod is worth the money?

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 3:59 PM EDT   0 recs

That is insane
Who else can even come close to affording that, beyond the Yanks and the Sox?

That may even be out of the range for the Angels.

Maybe the Mets could afford him, and then trade us Wright for Buchholz.

Manny Ramirez is a bad man

by tommy.otm on Nov 2, 2007 4:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: That is insane
The 10yr/350mil was only the starting point for a Yankee extension, still insane, but not necessarily what it would cost for the Red Sox.

by gnick55 on Nov 2, 2007 5:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
   They already are printing money in the tunnels of Fenway. The  Yankees, the Sox and the Cubs are the crown jewels of baseball.  (once upon a time so were the Dodgers, but they decided to act like a dysfunctional small market team)

Sox can print money in Fenway if they had Florida Marlins/Tampa Bay Devil Rays payroll and AA skill team)

by superferret on Nov 3, 2007 2:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Dodgers could not decide if they wanted to be a Fox property or a baseball team.  I think new ownership is on the right course now.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 4, 2007 2:25 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Boras starting points are usually where he begins to add more money or more years.

As for who can pay him that, Sox, Yanks, W. Sox, Cubs, both LA teams, maybe the Mariners, Mets, possibly the Phillies or Braves.

Mike Lowell cannot get resigned fast enough.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 2, 2007 7:07 PM EDT   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
   The Dodgers can't afford A-Rod,The owner, Frank McCourt has everything pawned, including Dodger Stadium that he can't afford even paying the insurance on the contract.  I am guessing he will be selling the team in a couple years.  He basically bought the team with loans, (including a loan from MLB) and a big loan from Fox, who took over his main asset, land on the Boston Waterfront when he couldn't come up with a minor partner.  McCourt turned around and got another loan from BofA by using Dodger stadium as the asset.  McCourt doesn't have a Cable TV network to help with revenue like YES, NESN, (ditto with the Angels)  He basically paying off the interest of these loans for the next 25 years, let alone if he can ever payback these loans without selling the team or foreclosure.  He has little outside income besides the Dodgers.  He should had never ever been approved by MLB, and it was done for one reason: Murdoch.

  The only teams that can afford Boras's extortion attempts are the Red Sox, the Cubs, if they get to control of their TV rights or a Cable network in place when they are sold, the Yankees and the Mets.  All of them can take a couple years in the red to handle any huge contract by A-Rod.  

  What Boras doesn't understand, is that there are some incompetents in baseball, but not at the top clubs, unless the Dodgers are included in this.  I think Tom Hicks finally learned some sense, given there hasn't been any insane A-Rod contracts  since his signing.

by superferret on Nov 3, 2007 4:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Angels can afford A-Rod, they have blossomed into a large market team.  Orange county is MASSIVE.  LA is the Angels 2ndary market.  San Diego is a tertiary market, with some parts of northern Mexico as 4th.

Phillies and the Braves could afford A-Rod as well, but I doubt either would want to mortgage their properties for him.

White Sox definately can pay him if they wanted, there is a lot of money in Chicago sports franchises.

by SoxAcumen on Nov 4, 2007 2:29 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
 
  I agree the market is big, but the Angels don't have the revenue streams to get the maximum from  the market unlike the Yankees with YES and the Red Sox with NESN.  Angels have a good chance outdrawing the Dodgers, and Morteno is a better businessman with a much more money coming in from his advertising business than McCourt loan juggling and millions a year he is just paying on interest, (Morteno also doesn't have much debt connected to the Angels)  I do think A-Rod wants to stay in the AL, and Anaheim Stadium is a neutral park, in which A-Rod hit two massive home runs there this year in a game.  However, I don't think Morteno will comply with Boras's extortion demands, and not 10/350

  The Phillies don't have a space for A-Rod at this moment, and I don't see the Braves breaking the bank for him.  The team that is badly run, erratic and could do the deal to help with a stadium push are the Marlins.

  The White Sox seemed to be dumping contracts and over extended themselves with the Thome and Korneko deals in 2006. They aren't the Cubs in a sense of market share and broadcasting.  They also need a serious makeover right now, given both their hitting and pitching were awful in 2007.  However allegedly they do get along well with Boras.

  I still think when everyone calms down, like after Theo quit in 2005, A-Rod will sign with the Yankees again after some negotiating, probably a five year deal for 25 mil a year.  I just don't see any other team beating to Boras's front door to make a  huge deal, and I think the Angels are more interested in a DH who is cheaper like perhaps Bonds.

by superferret on Nov 4, 2007 1:53 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Schilling reflects on new-found Free Agency
Good analysis. The amount of money that A-Rod is looking for ($30+ million) doesn't jive with this market.

I think Scott Boras may have misread the market. Yes baseball revenue is soaring, yes FA salaries went high last year (Soriano, Carlos Lee). But A-Rod is looking at so much money for so many years that even the deep-pocketed teams (Red Sox, Angels, the Chicago and NY clubs) might balk at the cost.

To get the most value from A-Rod, a team needs empty seats in the ballpark and a television station that needs the higher ratings he might bring. He needs to fit into their long-term plans to compete, while not hampering their ability to retain talent / sign other FA components.

I'm not sure this perfect team exists. The closest match is the Orioles, who have a TV station and a ballpark with lots of empty seats. But signing him would likely hamstring their payroll, and keep them from resigning Bedard; plus they'd still need to ditch most of their current roster and rebuild their farm system. What's the point of getting a $30 million free agent if you can't compete for the first two or three years of his contract?

by 0157H7 on Nov 4, 2007 11:32 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the 2007 World Series Champions, the Boston Red Sox.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Redsoxlogo_small
Red Sox sign Dustin Pedroia to Extension
Redsoxlogo_small
Anderson #25 Prospect
Small
Jason Varitek and Paul Byrd Offered Arbitration
Miami_dolphin_flying_small
Josh Beckett
Derek_holland__18_small
Wes Littleton Traded to Boston
Life_is_brighter_after_guinness_small
The Sox acquire Wes Littleton from Texas
Small
Tazawa Scouting Report
Helmet_icon_small
Big Stuff: Catcher Situation
2160787714_e6e5c1dfd7_small
Varitek Talk
Curt_schilling_game_6_small
Boras has offers for Teixeira

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini