Tigers sign Prince - 9/214 - Heyman

[Guest]

Trying to think the last time a free agent the magnitude of Prince was still unsigned into the new year? Boras and Co must hate the current offers.

 

Problem is no American League teams really need him and he doesn't see himself as a DH. Boras will drag this out indefinitely, or until Prince says enough is enough, show me the money. Cubs are in the driver's seat here. I like having a GM/ Pres that is not over-matched by Boras.

Prince already stated he would DH when he first started talking about leaving the Brewers. I like the front office too.

 

Yes, he paid lip service to the DH question at the All-Star game, but only that he was "open to listening" I think was the quote. No way was he going to immediately eliminate half the potential market by saying no to DH. Fast-forward to the money and years he is looking for and he has all but eliminated himself as a DH candidate at this point.

Why do you say that?

[Conky]

Trying to think the last time a free agent the magnitude of Prince was still unsigned into the new year? Boras and Co must hate the current offers.

 

Problem is no American League teams really need him and he doesn't see himself as a DH. Boras will drag this out indefinitely, or until Prince says enough is enough, show me the money. Cubs are in the driver's seat here. I like having a GM/ Pres that is not over-matched by Boras.

Prince already stated he would DH when he first started talking about leaving the Brewers. I like the front office too.

 

Yes, he paid lip service to the DH question at the All-Star game, but only that he was "open to listening" I think was the quote. No way was he going to immediately eliminate half the potential market by saying no to DH. Fast-forward to the money and years he is looking for and he has all but eliminated himself as a DH candidate at this point.

Why do you say that?

 

Is there a team out there looking to sign a DH for 8-10 years or 25M per? My point is he is looking for a positional player type deal, not a DH friendly contract.

[Sammy Sofa]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

[toonsterwu]

Is that directed towards me, or the conversation going on? I only mentioned 10 years because I think that's the reason why the Fielder discussions will drag on, as Boras might view a 5-7 year deal as risky in terms of the fact that it might be tough for Fielder to get a 2nd solid contract in his mid-30's.

 

My guess is that he ends up signing for 7-8 years with a couple years of club options that may push it to 10, to allow Boras to sell that he got 10 years for his guy.

[Sammy Sofa]

No, it was in response to KingKonky.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I still wonder, whichever team that ends up landing him, if the final deal is going to be something that's ... creative. Perhaps an insanely high AAV on a short term deal to get him back on the market in his early 30's? Or perhaps some sort of long term deal that offers Prince an opt out early, but perhaps gives the team an ability to get out of the contract late based on performance. The biggest problem I see is that, from Boras' perspective, a shorter 5-7 year type of deal, makes little sense in that, it'll be hard for Prince to get that 2nd big contract, and thus, Boras is likely to push for as long a deal as possible, but from a team's perspective, that's just too risky. Hence, why I wonder if a short term high AAV might intrigue, or if an opt out for Prince early in a 5-7 year type of deal makes some sense.

 

Gut guess from the beginning has been the Nationals, but only if they clear some salary, and namely, through shedding Adam LaRoche's contract. Lannan's 4-5 million and Gorzelanny 2-3 million are tougher moves now that they thinned out their SP depth and need at least 1 of those guys, if not both. LaRoche's 8 million might be too much for some teams, though, considering the market. They'd probably have to eat some of the deal.

 

* As a side note, as a 1 year stopgap, if they eat some of the LaRoche deal and we give up a meaningless prospect, he'd be a fine option there if they decide against longer deals for FA's. That said, they are more likely to wait out the market and see if someone like Carlos Pena has to sign for 1 year, I think.

 

LaRoche would be an awful option at any price. If we're going with a 1 year option for a lost year just stick with LaHair. Any other option we acquire for 1st should at least be a possible option for the long term be it Fielder or audition someone like Lars Anderson, Anthony Rizzo, or Daric Barton depending on the price of each.

[Conky]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

[Sammy Sofa]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

[Conky]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

 

You are arguing semantics. Here's the thing. Positional players are generally worth more to baseball teams than designated hitters because they can do more stuff (play the field). Fielder and Boras are not, at this juncture, looking to settle for DH type money if they can get a team to pay for Fielder as an every day 1B. No one is saying inexplicably that he will not or can not be signed as a DH. You infer that. I do not imply it.

 

My point is that this is not how he is being currently marketed and not how they want him to be seen or signed. He will potentially make more money for more years if signed now as a positional player. Boras is working to get his client the most money and the best deal he can. That is his job. Fielder is on record as saying that he would "consider a move to DH" (the unwritten part being only if he is forced to do so). The reason he does not want to do this is because of the drop in price of a top tier 1B to that of a DH.

 

Fielder may very well end up signing somewhere as a DH. If that is the case, it will be because no one offered him the type of money they thought Fielder could command going into the off-season. Simply stated, we're not there yet and it would mean he then is getting paid far less than what he is asking for today.

[Rob]

There's a guy on the PSD forums who seems to have some degree of insider cred and he posted this:

 

Nothings close and Rizzo is still a target however Cubs have looked into acquiring several other MiLB 1B- Lars Anderson (Bos), Ryan Wheeler (Ari) and Chris Carter (Oak)... Also had at least exploratory conversations on Ike Davis, Justin Smoak and (surprise) Logan Morrison...

 

Not exactly a shocker, but I thought it was worth posting.

[toonsterwu]

I still wonder, whichever team that ends up landing him, if the final deal is going to be something that's ... creative. Perhaps an insanely high AAV on a short term deal to get him back on the market in his early 30's? Or perhaps some sort of long term deal that offers Prince an opt out early, but perhaps gives the team an ability to get out of the contract late based on performance. The biggest problem I see is that, from Boras' perspective, a shorter 5-7 year type of deal, makes little sense in that, it'll be hard for Prince to get that 2nd big contract, and thus, Boras is likely to push for as long a deal as possible, but from a team's perspective, that's just too risky. Hence, why I wonder if a short term high AAV might intrigue, or if an opt out for Prince early in a 5-7 year type of deal makes some sense.

 

Gut guess from the beginning has been the Nationals, but only if they clear some salary, and namely, through shedding Adam LaRoche's contract. Lannan's 4-5 million and Gorzelanny 2-3 million are tougher moves now that they thinned out their SP depth and need at least 1 of those guys, if not both. LaRoche's 8 million might be too much for some teams, though, considering the market. They'd probably have to eat some of the deal.

 

* As a side note, as a 1 year stopgap, if they eat some of the LaRoche deal and we give up a meaningless prospect, he'd be a fine option there if they decide against longer deals for FA's. That said, they are more likely to wait out the market and see if someone like Carlos Pena has to sign for 1 year, I think.

 

LaRoche would be an awful option at any price. If we're going with a 1 year option for a lost year just stick with LaHair. Any other option we acquire for 1st should at least be a possible option for the long term be it Fielder or audition someone like Lars Anderson, Anthony Rizzo, or Daric Barton depending on the price of each.

 

Eh, if it's a meaningless prospect and somewhere around 5-6 mil for the year, I'm okay with going with LaRoche because he's a plus defensive player at first who has always offered some pop. LaHair is still a bit of an unknown. I'd be fine trotting out LaHair as a stopgap, but I don't think LaRoche, on the cheap, for one year, is that bad.

[SouthSideRyan]

Toronto is not really at all farther from Florida than Chicago.

 

I'm sure there are a lot more direct flights to Chicago than there are to Toronto.

[Little Slide Rooter]

There's a guy on the PSD forums who seems to have some degree of insider cred and he posted this:

 

Nothings close and Rizzo is still a target however Cubs have looked into acquiring several other MiLB 1B- Lars Anderson (Bos), Ryan Wheeler (Ari) and Chris Carter (Oak)... Also had at least exploratory conversations on Ike Davis, Justin Smoak and (surprise) Logan Morrison...

 

Not exactly a shocker, but I thought it was worth posting.

 

Anderson and Rizzo probably make the most sense as they're both expendable to their respective teams. I'd love LoMo but he'd be a lot more costly, however if we did get him we could always move him to the outfield if something else came along. As for Chris Carter I think that Barton is a more likely target as Oakland appears close to giving up on him whereas they havnt even really started on Carter. I don't know much about Wheeler.

[biittner77]

Toronto is not really at all farther from Florida than Chicago.

 

I'm sure there are a lot more direct flights to Chicago than there are to Toronto.

 

Probably more of a hassle since it's a foreign country. Do you need a passport to go to Canada? There was a time when you didn't but that was before 9/11.

 

Seems like no one really wants to sign with Toronto but every FA that can flirts with them for leverage.

[davearm2]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

It's hilarious that you think Scott Boras sells elite FAs to MLB GMs the same way used car salesmen sell 10 year old Civics to HS dropouts.

[sneakypower]

except it's well known that's exactly how he operates

[Little Slide Rooter]

I still wonder, whichever team that ends up landing him, if the final deal is going to be something that's ... creative. Perhaps an insanely high AAV on a short term deal to get him back on the market in his early 30's? Or perhaps some sort of long term deal that offers Prince an opt out early, but perhaps gives the team an ability to get out of the contract late based on performance. The biggest problem I see is that, from Boras' perspective, a shorter 5-7 year type of deal, makes little sense in that, it'll be hard for Prince to get that 2nd big contract, and thus, Boras is likely to push for as long a deal as possible, but from a team's perspective, that's just too risky. Hence, why I wonder if a short term high AAV might intrigue, or if an opt out for Prince early in a 5-7 year type of deal makes some sense.

 

Gut guess from the beginning has been the Nationals, but only if they clear some salary, and namely, through shedding Adam LaRoche's contract. Lannan's 4-5 million and Gorzelanny 2-3 million are tougher moves now that they thinned out their SP depth and need at least 1 of those guys, if not both. LaRoche's 8 million might be too much for some teams, though, considering the market. They'd probably have to eat some of the deal.

 

* As a side note, as a 1 year stopgap, if they eat some of the LaRoche deal and we give up a meaningless prospect, he'd be a fine option there if they decide against longer deals for FA's. That said, they are more likely to wait out the market and see if someone like Carlos Pena has to sign for 1 year, I think.

 

LaRoche would be an awful option at any price. If we're going with a 1 year option for a lost year just stick with LaHair. Any other option we acquire for 1st should at least be a possible option for the long term be it Fielder or audition someone like Lars Anderson, Anthony Rizzo, or Daric Barton depending on the price of each.

 

Eh, if it's a meaningless prospect and somewhere around 5-6 mil for the year, I'm okay with going with LaRoche because he's a plus defensive player at first who has always offered some pop. LaHair is still a bit of an unknown. I'd be fine trotting out LaHair as a stopgap, but I don't think LaRoche, on the cheap, for one year, is that bad.

 

I'm not saying that LaHair is better than Laroche, just that if the plan is to punt the season, we need to go for one of those younger guys who at least could be part of the future. Acquiring Laroche would be pointless. He has no chance to be in the future plans and with the team as is he'd be of little to no use. It's not like he's a guy we could flip for a worthwhile prospect package in July.

[Guest]

It's hilarious that you think Scott Boras sells elite FAs to MLB GMs the same way used car salesmen sell 10 year old Civics to HS dropouts.

 

You don't know much about Scott Boras, do you?

[Sammy Sofa]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

 

You are arguing semantics. Here's the thing. Positional players are generally worth more to baseball teams than designated hitters because they can do more stuff (play the field). Fielder and Boras are not, at this juncture, looking to settle for DH type money if they can get a team to pay for Fielder as an every day 1B. No one is saying inexplicably that he will not or can not be signed as a DH. You infer that. I do not imply it.

 

My point is that this is not how he is being currently marketed and not how they want him to be seen or signed. He will potentially make more money for more years if signed now as a positional player. Boras is working to get his client the most money and the best deal he can. That is his job. Fielder is on record as saying that he would "consider a move to DH" (the unwritten part being only if he is forced to do so). The reason he does not want to do this is because of the drop in price of a top tier 1B to that of a DH.

 

Fielder may very well end up signing somewhere as a DH. If that is the case, it will be because no one offered him the type of money they thought Fielder could command going into the off-season. Simply stated, we're not there yet and it would mean he then is getting paid far less than what he is asking for today.

 

Wow.

[Sammy Sofa]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

It's hilarious that you think Scott Boras sells elite FAs to MLB GMs the same way used car salesmen sell 10 year old Civics to HS dropouts.

 

It's hilarious how you apparently think there's absolutely no history of Boras doing this.

[biittner77]

Wouldn't an AL team be more likely to give him a longer deal with the idea that he'd play 1st base for the first 4 years and then be able to move to DH if necessary down the road? I get that they don't pay a DH 20 million per but having that option would help justify overpaying in the short term to still get useful production down the road?

[Conky]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

 

You are arguing semantics. Here's the thing. Positional players are generally worth more to baseball teams than designated hitters because they can do more stuff (play the field). Fielder and Boras are not, at this juncture, looking to settle for DH type money if they can get a team to pay for Fielder as an every day 1B. No one is saying inexplicably that he will not or can not be signed as a DH. You infer that. I do not imply it.

 

My point is that this is not how he is being currently marketed and not how they want him to be seen or signed. He will potentially make more money for more years if signed now as a positional player. Boras is working to get his client the most money and the best deal he can. That is his job. Fielder is on record as saying that he would "consider a move to DH" (the unwritten part being only if he is forced to do so). The reason he does not want to do this is because of the drop in price of a top tier 1B to that of a DH.

 

Fielder may very well end up signing somewhere as a DH. If that is the case, it will be because no one offered him the type of money they thought Fielder could command going into the off-season. Simply stated, we're not there yet and it would mean he then is getting paid far less than what he is asking for today.

 

Wow.

 

Exactly my reaction. Apparently you need things explained in detail. Duly noted.

[davearm2]

Why do you keep talking about 8-10 years like that's a thing he was actually going to get? Boras/Fielder intentionally set the bar that high because they know whatever they end up signing will be less (or maybe 8 years at the most).

 

Because that is what they are asking for. It's called a negotiation. You your sarcastic self just said that they have set the bar. No one thinks he will actually get that Blogo. The discussion is about what Fielder wants, not what he will get.

 

They're setting the bar unreasonably high to make anything less seem reasonable. Remember how Pujols wanted $300 million to go with his 10 years? Big name FA's do this all the time, so inexplicably saying that Fielder has somehow eliminated himself from being signed as a DH because he and Boras want 10 years is nonsensical.

It's hilarious that you think Scott Boras sells elite FAs to MLB GMs the same way used car salesmen sell 10 year old Civics to HS dropouts.

 

It's hilarious how you apparently think there's absolutely no history of Boras doing this.

There you go again, making everything black and white.

 

Boras is obviously very aggressive in seeking top value for his clients, but he doesn't treat the GMs he's negotiating with like complete morons.

[javy knows my name]

Oh God, not again

[Rob]

There you go again, making everything black and white.

 

Boras is obviously very aggressive in seeking top value for his clients, but he doesn't treat the GMs he's negotiating with like complete morons.

 

There was an article a while back, I can't remember exactly what website it was on... but it detailed the dossiers that Boras creates for his clients. He makes these absurd, aggrandizing claims about players where he forecasts what they're on pace to do... even if it's an absurdly long ways away. If memory serves, there's a point in Prince Fielder's dossier pointed out what elite company he'll be in when he keeps up this pace through his age 37 season. The whole thing is kinda a running joke for most front offices in baseball, as most guys aren't dumb enough to buy into any of it. Yet Boras still distributes these dossiers every year... you know why?

 

It works. It works mostly because owners aren't as smart as the front offices they employ, and the George Steinbrenners of the world love to go over their GMs heads when they see a shiny new toy. Boras will do everything he can to make the sale, because more often than we might like to believe, decisions about who signs where aren't always as simple as "is he good enough to be worth that contract?".

 

Hey, who wants to bet davearm is gonna argue with me that owners can't be that stupid?