PDA

View Full Version : Minneapolis: Wigginton seeking deal in excess of 3 years, $17.5 million



Mainspark
12-17-2008, 10:31 AM
Per Rotoworld: According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the Twins likely won't be in the running for Ty Wigginton because they believe his asking price is too high.

Non-tendered last week by the Astros, Wigginton is reportedly seeking a bigger contract than the three-year, $17.5 million deal signed by Casey Blake. Minnesota backed away from the Blake bidding and the newspaper notes that the Twins "have had little to no dialogue with Wigginton's agent."

Krusty
12-17-2008, 10:34 AM
I think there are better options for the Reds' bucks if that is what Wiggington is seeking.

fearofpopvol1
12-17-2008, 10:34 AM
Time to rule out this option.

pahster
12-17-2008, 10:36 AM
I don't think six or seven million per season is out of the question for a player like Wiggington.

REDREAD
12-17-2008, 10:58 AM
I don't think six or seven million per season is out of the question for a player like Wiggington.

Agreed, and I don't think it's entirely unreasonable. Don't think it's the best fit for the Reds, but the guy has a good point about being paid around what Blake got.

RedEye
12-17-2008, 10:59 AM
Heck, the Reds gave A-Gon $6 million per year, so I can see them giving Wiggy a similar offer. I kinda hope they don't though.

The_jbh
12-17-2008, 10:59 AM
I don't think it is worth it for us, especially considering we'd have to move EE to LF to accommodate

Heath
12-17-2008, 11:02 AM
I think Wiggington has landed here -

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news_img/5154/5154.jpg

flyer85
12-17-2008, 11:06 AM
Wiggington may be a decent player with some positional versatility but he is not a difference maker(which is what the Reds need if they hope to contend in 2009).

lollipopcurve
12-17-2008, 11:07 AM
the Reds gave A-Gon $6 million per year

Gonzalez got 3 years, 14 million

3/17 is way too much for Wiggy, given what the team has in the pipeline for 3B/LF.

Chip R
12-17-2008, 11:12 AM
What about 2 years for the same money?

BuckeyeRedleg
12-17-2008, 11:18 AM
Serious question for those that like Wiggington and not Rivera (I'm neutral on both). Other than position aren't they pretty much the same offensively?

Wiggington is 9 months older, so they are relatively the same age.

Wiggington's career....270/.330/.460/.790
Rivera's career...........284/.331/.468/.799

Both take a walk at a similar rate. Both have nearly the same OB% and SLG%.

Just curious, because, I've read a lot on this board about how horrible a Rivera signing would be and I have read more positive than anything on a Wiggington signing. Is it just because Wiggington can play 3B (moving EE to LF)?

Because, unless Wiggington is way better defensively than EE, it doesn't look like much of a difference between Wiggington and EE out there or EE and Rivera as far as production on offense.

Will M
12-17-2008, 11:19 AM
for him to want what Blake got is entirely reasonable. he is a guy who can play 3B++ and averages ~23 home runs a year. he is a solid player.

marcshoe
12-17-2008, 11:20 AM
Serious question for those that like Wiggington and not Rivera (I'm neutral on both). Other than position aren't they pretty much the same offensively?

Wiggington is 9 months older, so they are relatively the same age.

Wiggington's career....270/.330/.460/.790
Rivera's career...........284/.331/.468/.799

Both take a walk at a similar rate. Both have nearly the same OB% and SLG%.

Just curious, because, I've read a lot on this board about how horrible a Rivera signing would be and I have read more positive than anything on a Wiggington signing. Is it just because Wiggington can play 3B (moving EE to LF)?

Because, unless Wiggington is way better defensively than EE, it doesn't look like much of a difference between Wiggington and EE out there or EE and Rivera as far as production on offense.


I think it has to do with the numbers each of them have put up the last couple of seasons. Wigginton seems to have figured it out; Rivera's been down.

I don't think either's really the solution, fwiw.

pahster
12-17-2008, 11:23 AM
Serious question for those that like Wiggington and not Rivera (I'm neutral on both). Other than position aren't they pretty much the same offensively?

Wiggington is 9 months older, so they are relatively the same age.

Wiggington's career....270/.330/.460/.790
Rivera's career...........284/.331/.468/.799

Both take a walk at a similar rate. Both have nearly the same OB% and SLG%.

Just curious, because, I've read a lot on this board about how horrible a Rivera signing would be and I have read more positive than anything on a Wiggington signing. Is it just because Wiggington can play 3B (moving EE to LF)?

Because, unless Wiggington is way better defensively than EE, it doesn't look like much of a difference between Wiggington and EE out there or EE and Rivera as far as production on offense.

Wiggington can play 3B; Rivera can play LF. So Wiggington is better relative to his peers than is Rivera.

pahster
12-17-2008, 11:23 AM
Agreed, and I don't think it's entirely unreasonable. Don't think it's the best fit for the Reds, but the guy has a good point about being paid around what Blake got.

Yeah, he's probably not a good fit for the Reds given the players who will be coming up in the next year or so, which is unfortunate.

RedlegJake
12-17-2008, 04:11 PM
I still like him. At that price I'd grab him, plug him in at third, and look to deal EE if possible or slot him in left. Then I'd stick Wiggs in the lineup every day and let him hit. He's worth the money with the numbers he has but if he really took off it'd be a super bargain - either way he'd be anything from not too hard to trade to a great trading chip so I don't see him being an albatross the reds couldn't move later on.

Johnny Footstool
12-17-2008, 05:02 PM
I think it has to do with the numbers each of them have put up the last couple of seasons. Wigginton seems to have figured it out; Rivera's been down.

I don't think either's really the solution, fwiw.

Rivera's been down due to injury and a crowded Angels outfield. That's why he'll sign a lot cheaper than Wiggginton.

red-in-la
12-17-2008, 06:55 PM
I still like him. At that price I'd grab him, plug him in at third, and look to deal EE if possible or slot him in left. Then I'd stick Wiggs in the lineup every day and let him hit. He's worth the money with the numbers he has but if he really took off it'd be a super bargain - either way he'd be anything from not too hard to trade to a great trading chip so I don't see him being an albatross the reds couldn't move later on.

Exactly! You aren't going to get a pitcher for that money, so why not get better defensively?

I think of Tony Perez when I hear EdwinE, so of course, emotionally I want him to move from 3B to 1B. That puts Votto in LF. I am OK with that.

corkedbat
12-17-2008, 07:24 PM
I'd be more interested in Wiggingron if I got a can't-pass offer on EdE and I wanted 2B options as well as OF depth and a bat off the bench.

Will M
12-21-2008, 02:23 PM
little blurb from the Boston Globe:

" Ty Wigginton, INF, free agent - A market is developing for him among four teams - the Reds, Indians, Pirates, and Giants. Cincinnati would like him as a super sub, in the outfield as well. "

Blitz Dorsey
12-21-2008, 02:52 PM
Well, I'm sure other teams will use that against the Reds. "They want you as a 'super sub.' We want you as an everyday player."

If the money is the same, he will take the gig as the everyday player.

VR
12-21-2008, 03:24 PM
Joe Randa redux

RedEye
12-21-2008, 03:43 PM
Joe Randa redux

Except younger and much more versatile. So not really.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-21-2008, 04:00 PM
I'm sure playing 81 games in GABP will be enticing.

At this point, I'd say the chances of landing him are better than 50%.

VR
12-21-2008, 04:11 PM
Except younger and much more versatile. So not really.

Versatility, Ty Wiggington? Really?

Compare stats....they are eerily similar. Reds drew a career year from Randa, not a good approach to have to hope for those out of your players.

At that price, bleh.

RedEye
12-21-2008, 04:16 PM
Versatility, Ty Wiggington? Really?

Compare stats....they are eerily similar. Reds drew a career year from Randa, not a good approach to have to hope for those out of your players.

At that price, bleh.

I can see your comparison of statistics, but the Reds had Randa for his age 35 season. They would have Wiggy for his age 31 season. This may not seem like much of a difference, but I think it is safe to say they are on two different sides of their prime years.

Wiggy is actually surprisingly versatile; he can also play 2B and the OF, and maybe even some 1B.

I agree, the price is rather steep... but I think Ty Wigginton, given the situation of this roster right now, might actually be a solid pick up for the team in 2009.

VR
12-21-2008, 04:20 PM
I can see your comparison of statistics, but the Reds had Randa for his age 35 season. They would have Wiggy for his age 31 season. This may not seem like much of a difference, but I think it is safe to say they are on two different sides of their prime years.

Wiggy is actually surprisingly versatile; he can also play 2B and the OF, and maybe even some 1B.

I agree, the price is rather steep... but I think Ty Wigginton, given the situation of this roster right now, might actually be a solid pick up for the team in 2009.

Could be an ok pickup....but at best he produces what EE has....let's get a legit LF

KoryMac5
12-21-2008, 04:59 PM
If the Reds wouldn't go three years on Rivera, I doubt Walt will want anything to do with Wigginton for three years. Looks like the FO is hoping to get a guy on the cheap for no more than two years.

RedEye
12-21-2008, 06:29 PM
Could be an ok pickup....but at best he produces what EE has....let's get a legit LF

I'm just not sure there are that many "legit" options available. They all have warts to my mind. Burrell is no better than Dunn and just as expensive. Bradley is an offensive force but a huge health question mark both mentally and physically. Baldelli could be nifty but is also unproven and risky. Everyone else worth discussing would require a trade of valuable parts of the team's future.

Wigginton isn't flashy, but he's a good complementary piece that can be had at a decent price. He can either start or back up at a number of positions. Combined with a signing of one of the injury prone players with upside (Bradley or Baldelli) he might just make a lot of sense for this team in 2009. He also gives them some added flexibility for 2010 or 2011 as the club decides what to do when Frazier and Valaika are broken in at the major league level. Those guys have talent, but they aren't guaranteed major league players. It might be nice to have a proven vet to shoulder the load if one of them busts.

Will M
12-21-2008, 08:16 PM
I'm just not sure there are that many "legit" options available. They all have warts to my mind. Burrell is no better than Dunn and just as expensive. Bradley is an offensive force but a huge health question mark both mentally and physically. Baldelli could be nifty but is also unproven and risky. Everyone else worth discussing would require a trade of valuable parts of the team's future.

Wigginton isn't flashy, but he's a good complementary piece that can be had at a decent price. He can either start or back up at a number of positions. Combined with a signing of one of the injury prone players with upside (Bradley or Baldelli) he might just make a lot of sense for this team in 2009. He also gives them some added flexibility for 2010 or 2011 as the club decides what to do when Frazier and Valaika are broken in at the major league level. Those guys have talent, but they aren't guaranteed major league players. It might be nice to have a proven vet to shoulder the load if one of them busts.

Wiggington costs less in terms of money than Dye/Burrell/Bradley.
Wigginton costs the Reds nothing in terms of talent or draft picks.
Wiggington hits ~23 homers a year.
He can play more than one position.

If the Reds were to sign Wiggington & Baldelli I would be happy.
If the Reds were to sign Wiggington & Baldelli then trade for a real SS I would be thrilled.

RedEye
12-21-2008, 08:41 PM
If the Reds were to sign Wiggington & Baldelli then trade for a real SS I would be thrilled.

Absolutely! I agree 100%.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-21-2008, 08:47 PM
Absolutely! I agree 100%.

I'm down with that as well.

remdog
12-22-2008, 03:36 AM
Personally, I think the Reds should sign Wigginton to a ten year contract.

Yeah, after about four years he won't be worth squat but he'll certainly be a great 'space filler' until 2019 when that draft class from '15 finally arrives to make the Reds contenders.

By doing it that way, any of us that are still around here won't have to go through this annual debate about whether or not the Reds should actually try to win the whole damn thing at some point! :p:

Rem

RedEye
12-22-2008, 09:06 AM
Personally, I think the Reds should sign Wigginton to a ten year contract.


I've always sort of secretly thought that Wigginton would one day be called the Jamie Moyer of hitting. Let's give him that chance!

sonny
12-22-2008, 11:26 AM
I say sign Wiggy to a one year deal at 1 million, BUT give him unlimited use of two (2) leather recliners in the locker room. He can't say no to that!