Teixeira a Yankee (8/$180 M)

[The Other 15]

Stop talking about the $10M. That's probably the last reason Boston is backing off. Read what Henry said, "After hearing about his other offers, however, it seems clear that we are not going to be a factor,...We all have limits," he wrote the AP on Wednesday. "Eight years is a very long time in baseball and everywhere else."

 

It's more about the extra money, AND 8 years, AND opt out clause, AND perks that Boras asks for. All terms that are heavily slanted to the players favor and leave the team with little flexibility.

 

My first thought was simply that Boston was calling Boras's bluff. He's notorious for getting the big money owners to bid against themselves. If they are saying Washington is offering X, we'd like you to match, why not back out?

 

I agree. Whenever you're uncomfortable with the terms (all of them, not just one), and are backing out, you're calling the other teams bluff. Hendry is calling Towers' bluff as well.

[The Other 15]

You'd think the A-Rod deal would bring some perspective. So far, he has lived up to his end (as far as production goes) of his contracts, yet can everyone fully agree that he's been twice or three times as good as the next players at his position? That's what his contract says. I love the argument that says that A-Rod brings in X amount of dollars in revenue to the team. I'm sure he does, however, I'm sure that the Yankees would have no trouble selling out seats, luxury boxes, team jerseys to fans, pink versions of team jerseys to gang bangers, building stadiums, paying other huge salaries, etc if A-Rod had stayed in Texas. The same applies to Boston and Teixeira. He'd be a good addition, but you need to think about the team first.

[reggiemiller rules]

Man if Tex is worth this much imagine what Pujols could get in the open market. I think that he could easily get 10/300.

[Derwood]

Man if Tex is worth this much imagine what Pujols could get in the open market. I think that he could easily get 10/300.

 

which is why St. Louis was smart to lock him up when they did

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You'd think the A-Rod deal would bring some perspective. So far, he has lived up to his end (as far as production goes) of his contracts, yet can everyone fully agree that he's been twice or three times as good as the next players at his position?

 

He doesn't have to be to be worth the contract. Players are on a bell curve, and there's only so many slots you can put them in.

 

You can't just buy three players who are 1/3 as good as A-Rod and get the same results, because you have to use up three slots to play them.

[The Other 15]

You'd think the A-Rod deal would bring some perspective. So far, he has lived up to his end (as far as production goes) of his contracts, yet can everyone fully agree that he's been twice or three times as good as the next players at his position?

 

He doesn't have to be to be worth the contract. Players are on a bell curve, and there's only so many slots you can put them in.

 

You can't just buy three players who are 1/3 as good as A-Rod and get the same results, because you have to use up three slots to play them.

 

Really? So, just for conversations sakes, you can't pay someone like Aramis $15 mil to play 3B and use $12M elsewhere to help your team? I understand the Yankees don't care and they won't be limited by his contract to address other needs, but it has to become more about the game and not just about a player. To that end, I applaud the Sox for passing on Teixeira if it's not on terms fair to both sides.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You'd think the A-Rod deal would bring some perspective. So far, he has lived up to his end (as far as production goes) of his contracts, yet can everyone fully agree that he's been twice or three times as good as the next players at his position?

 

He doesn't have to be to be worth the contract. Players are on a bell curve, and there's only so many slots you can put them in.

 

You can't just buy three players who are 1/3 as good as A-Rod and get the same results, because you have to use up three slots to play them.

 

Really? So, just for conversations sakes, you can't pay someone like Aramis $15 mil to play 3B and use $12M elsewhere to help your team? I understand the Yankees don't care and they won't be limited by his contract to address other needs, but it has to become more about the game and not just about a player. To that end, I applaud the Sox for passing on Teixeira if it's not on terms fair to both sides.

 

If you are doing a good job managing your team so that you don't have any gaping holes anywhere, you probably won't be able to find a 20-run upgrade anywhere for $12 million to make up for the difference between Rodriguez and Ramirez.

[The Other 15]

You'd think the A-Rod deal would bring some perspective. So far, he has lived up to his end (as far as production goes) of his contracts, yet can everyone fully agree that he's been twice or three times as good as the next players at his position?

 

He doesn't have to be to be worth the contract. Players are on a bell curve, and there's only so many slots you can put them in.

 

You can't just buy three players who are 1/3 as good as A-Rod and get the same results, because you have to use up three slots to play them.

 

Really? So, just for conversations sakes, you can't pay someone like Aramis $15 mil to play 3B and use $12M elsewhere to help your team? I understand the Yankees don't care and they won't be limited by his contract to address other needs, but it has to become more about the game and not just about a player. To that end, I applaud the Sox for passing on Teixeira if it's not on terms fair to both sides.

 

If you are doing a good job managing your team so that you don't have any gaping holes anywhere, you probably won't be able to find a 20-run upgrade anywhere for $12 million to make up for the difference between Rodriguez and Ramirez.

You can certainly find players that can help your team, no? Whats getting lost in this semantics argument is that there are other ways to spend $27 mil per year than just to shore up one position even if it is by A-Rod standards.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you are doing a good job managing your team so that you don't have any gaping holes anywhere, you probably won't be able to find a 20-run upgrade anywhere for $12 million to make up for the difference between Rodriguez and Ramirez.

You can certainly find players that can help your team, no? Whats getting lost in this semantics argument is that there are other ways to spend $27 mil per year than just to shore up one position even if it is by A-Rod standards.

 

Yes and no.

 

Spending money to improve your team isn't linear, because MLB baseball talent represents the far end of the bell curve. You really shouldn't have to spend much money to get roughly average players at every position.

 

So once you've filled out your roster with a complement of cheap, adequate players, you have extra money to spend on exceptional players. One A-Rod is worth at least as much as one A-Ram and your standard $12 million player in that regard.

 

If you have a bad team with a lot of gaping holes, then you are better of spreading the money around. But if you are a good team already, you are probably better off throwing it all at one concrete upgrade.

[The Other 15]

nm Edited December 19, 2008 by The Other 15%

[The Other 15]

If you are doing a good job managing your team so that you don't have any gaping holes anywhere, you probably won't be able to find a 20-run upgrade anywhere for $12 million to make up for the difference between Rodriguez and Ramirez.

You can certainly find players that can help your team, no? Whats getting lost in this semantics argument is that there are other ways to spend $27 mil per year than just to shore up one position even if it is by A-Rod standards.

 

Yes and no.

 

Spending money to improve your team isn't linear, because MLB baseball talent represents the far end of the bell curve. You really shouldn't have to spend much money to get roughly average players at every position.

 

So once you've filled out your roster with a complement of cheap, adequate players, you have extra money to spend on exceptional players. One A-Rod is worth at least as much as one A-Ram and your standard $12 million player in that regard.

 

If you have a bad team with a lot of gaping holes, then you are better of spreading the money around. But if you are a good team already, you are probably better off throwing it all at one concrete upgrade.

So once you've filled out your roster with a complement of cheap, adequate players,... That's not what we're talking about here. The Yanks spent money everywhere and A-Rods contract has not prevented them from adding talent. Yet, still, they fond themselves trialing two teams in their division.

 

But if you are a good team already, you are probably better off throwing it all at one concrete upgrade. Which brings me back to my original point that you'd think teams would have learned by Yanks/A-Rod example that that isn't necessarily true.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

That's not what we're talking about here. The Yanks spent money everywhere and A-Rods contract has not prevented them from adding talent. Yet, still, they fond themselves trialing two teams in their division.

 

Realistically, they weren't even the third best team in the division, the Blue Jays were better too.

 

They failed utterly at the "fill out your roster with cheap, adequate players" part.

 

Putting together a winning baseball team is still about more than how you spend your cash.

[The Other 15]

That's not what we're talking about here. The Yanks spent money everywhere and A-Rods contract has not prevented them from adding talent. Yet, still, they fond themselves trialing two teams in their division.

 

Realistically, they weren't even the third best team in the division, the Blue Jays were better too.

 

They failed utterly at the "fill out your roster with cheap, adequate players" part.

 

Putting together a winning baseball team is still about more than how you spend your cash.

Yeah, I agree that even the Jays were a much better team at the end of last year.

 

They failed utterly at the "fill out your roster with cheap, adequate players" part.

 

Cheap and adequate players may be the necessity for most franchises but we both know that it's not for the Yanks. They just need adequate players despite their price tag.

 

The bell curve you mentioned was not established on anything reasonable, it was established by a goof-ball owner that outbid himself by almost $10M per year. Then another goof-ball owner re-ups A-Rod for more money. They can afford him and that's the only curve that matters. It's not that ARod is so much better than anyone that he deserves to be paid double and triple more.

[cubweiser03]

ESPN bottom line says Boras seeks $195M. Boston and LA by their own admission are out. Who is he throwing that number at? Yeah i know Boras throws around crazy numbers and settles for less but in the past he threw those numbers out around mid november not mid december.

[Cubswin11]

ESPN bottom line says Boras seeks $195M. Boston and LA by their own admission are out. Who is he throwing that number at? Yeah i know Boras throws around crazy numbers and settles for less but in the past he threw those numbers out around mid november not mid december.

Obviously the reports could be wrong, but isn't the only team offering over 195 the Nats at 200? I don't know why he would want to play in Washington, that team is going nowhere fast. It's not like the offers from Bos/LA are that much lower, 175-185 range, and those teams should compete for most of the duration of his contract while the Nationals might only compete for a 2-3 years at best. The Orioles have a better chance of being a competing team in the AL East over the next 8-10 years than the Nats do in the NL East. I guess at the end of the day it all comes down to the $$$

[Clem Fandango]

Man if Tex is worth this much imagine what Pujols could get in the open market. I think that he could easily get 10/300.

 

which is why St. Louis was smart to lock him up when they did

 

It also appears to be the trend now with teams and their young budding superstar players. Longoria, Price, Hanley, Braun, Sizemore, etc. Lock them up early and buy out their arby years while they're still developing and reap their peak performance for super cheap. Of course it can always backfire and a player can turn out to be a dud, but it's not like the players mentioned came out of nowhere.

 

I really hope we do something similar with Geo sometime either in the middle or at the end of next season. Lock him up for the long term and for cheap.

 

And I think if Pujols hit the open market right now he'd make A-Rod's contract look like a bargain

[Cubswin11]

Man if Tex is worth this much imagine what Pujols could get in the open market. I think that he could easily get 10/300.

 

which is why St. Louis was smart to lock him up when they did

 

It also appears to be the trend now with teams and their young budding superstar players. Longoria, Price, Hanley, Braun, Sizemore, etc. Lock them up early and buy out their arby years while they're still developing and reap their peak performance for super cheap. Of course it can always backfire and a player can turn out to be a dud, but it's not like the players mentioned came out of nowhere.

 

I really hope we do something similar with Geo sometime either in the middle or at the end of next season. Lock him up for the long term and for cheap.

 

And I think if Pujols hit the open market right now he'd make A-Rod's contract look like a bargain

Pujols is only signed through 2011(option on 2011 but I would think that will be exercised or else it will be 2010). He is only going to be 31/32 when his current deal is up and with the economy likely to be much better/stable by then it's not out of the question he gets a 8+ years for $280+ million. A-Rod was around the same age when he signed his new deal so Pujols has a table setter to base his next deal off of and some team will likely sign him to a A-Rod type deal+ some.

[17 Seconds]

Stop talking about the $10M. That's probably the last reason Boston is backing off. Read what Henry said, "After hearing about his other offers, however, it seems clear that we are not going to be a factor,...We all have limits," he wrote the AP on Wednesday. "Eight years is a very long time in baseball and everywhere else."

 

It's more about the extra money, AND 8 years, AND opt out clause, AND perks that Boras asks for. All terms that are heavily slanted to the players favor and leave the team with little flexibility.

 

No, they're just bluffing. Boston isn't out of anything, they just aren't willing to go past what they've offered. I still say he ends up in Boston

[Old Style]

ESPN bottom line says Boras seeks $195M. Boston and LA by their own admission are out. Who is he throwing that number at? Yeah i know Boras throws around crazy numbers and settles for less but in the past he threw those numbers out around mid november not mid december.

Boras is a master at driving up prices to ridiculous amounts, no matter how legitimate they are. Even if his guy gets less than the numbers that are floated out there, they are still getting more than they normally would. He got Tom Hicks to bid up himself in the A-Rod negotiations. I hate Scott Boras, but he's pretty damn good at squeezing every penny out of his clients.

[17 Seconds]

ESPN bottom line says Boras seeks $195M. Boston and LA by their own admission are out. Who is he throwing that number at? Yeah i know Boras throws around crazy numbers and settles for less but in the past he threw those numbers out around mid november not mid december.

 

Boston and LA never said they're out

[BCVM22]

Sources have confirmed to Sons of Simmons, that the Boston Red Sox have agreed in principle to an eight-year deal with first basemen Mark Teixeira. Details are still sketchy at the moment, but it looks to be for around $170 Million dollars, not the $195 Million that agent Scott Boras was asking for.

 

http://sonsofsimmons.com/mlb/sources-red-sox-agree-in-principle-on-deal-with-mark-teixeira/2008/

 

I don't know what "Sons of Simmons" is, but if it's true, the Red Sox were playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers.

[Hall7810]

Nothing on SoSH about it.

[The Other 15]

It's up to Teix. If he wants to play on the east coast and be on a winner, he may have to take a page out of A-Rods book from last year and take Boras out of the mix. I can understand his interest in Washington and Baltiamore. Both are a stones throw from his home and both teams will pay him huge deals. The Sox might be pulling a Steinbrenner and forcing Teix to reign in his agent if he feels that the team he wants to be with is being driven away.

[Garwilly]

670 the score just reported he has agreed to a deal with the Yankees, FWIW

[Guest]

ESPN just listed that the Yankees agreed to a deal with Teixeira.