PDA

View Full Version : Red Sox out of Teixeira running



cincrazy
12-19-2008, 12:50 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AtBg1vKdNBH5ZZ32EMjAlL05nYcB?slug=ge-redsoxteixeira121808&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Boston Red Sox owner John W. Henry came out of a meeting Thursday night with free agent Mark Teixeira and his agent, Scott Boras, all but declaring that Boston was out of the running for the switch-hitting first baseman.

“We met with Mr. Teixeira and were very much impressed with him,” Henry wrote in an e-mail. “After hearing about his other offers, however, it seems clear that we are not going to be a factor.”


It was a stunning turnabout after it appeared the Red Sox had become the leaders in the chase for the 28-year-old slugger. Henry, CEO Larry Lucchino and general manager Theo Epstein traveled to Dallas for the meeting.

The Red Sox had an eight-year offer on the table in excess of $160 million. Sources close to the negotiations said it was less than the $184 million reported by Boston WCVB sportscaster Mike Lynch, who first reported that the meeting would take place. Boras is seeking a 10-year, $200 million deal, but a Red Sox executive said earlier that would be “ridiculous.”

The Los Angeles Angels, Baltimore Orioles and Washington Nationals also have made offers to Teixeira, but to date none of those offers are believed to be for more than eight years. Yankees general manager Brian Cashman also met with Teixeira earlier this month, but that was before the Yankees committed more than $240 million to sign pitchers CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett, so it appears unlikely they would make a grab for Teixeira as well.

Boras also represents free-agent catcher Jason Varitek, the Red Sox captain who declined an offer of salary arbitration from the team. Boston has not made another offer to Varitek since, though the sides continue to talk. A third Boras client, free-agent pitcher Derek Lowe, also is of interest to the Red Sox, but they have not made him an offer and are expected to do so only if he drops his price. Lowe is believed to be seeking a five-year deal in the $75 million range.

Teixeira, who turns 29 on April 11, has averaged more than 30 home runs and 100 RBIs in his six big-league seasons, while posting a .919 OPS and playing Gold Glove-caliber defense. The Red Sox envision him as a middle-of-the-lineup presence to offset last July’s departure of Manny Ramirez to the Dodgers. If Teixeira signs with the Red Sox, they would move All-Star Kevin Youkilis from first to third base while looking to trade third baseman Mike Lowell, the 2007 World Series MVP.

redsfan4445
12-19-2008, 12:56 AM
watch the Red Sox sign Dunn

Reds Nd2
12-19-2008, 01:09 AM
Boston Red Sox owner John W. Henry came out of a meeting Thursday night with free agent Mark Teixeira and his agent, Scott Boras, all but declaring that Boston was out of the running for the switch-hitting first baseman.

“We met with Mr. Teixeira and were very much impressed with him,” Henry wrote in an e-mail. “After hearing about his other offers, however, it seems clear that we are not going to be a factor.”

It was a stunning turnabout after it appeared the Red Sox had become the leaders in the chase for the 28-year-old slugger. Henry, CEO Larry Lucchino and general manager Theo Epstein traveled to Dallas for the meeting.

The Red Sox had an eight-year offer on the table in excess of $160 million. Sources close to the negotiations said it was less than the $184 million reported by Boston WCVB sportscaster Mike Lynch, who first reported that the meeting would take place. Boras is seeking a 10-year, $200 million deal, but a Red Sox executive said earlier that would be “ridiculous.”

Boston's front office would later be heard singing "we're gonna' party like it's 2003".

Jpup
12-19-2008, 01:38 AM
I hope the Yanks get him them. No one is going to give him 10 years though. I could see the Yanks giving him a deal much like CC's.

Jpup
12-19-2008, 01:39 AM
watch the Red Sox sign Dunn

That would be hard for me to take. Very hard. I could deal with anyone else signing him except for the Cubs or the Red Sox.

blumj
12-19-2008, 01:43 AM
An LA writer was just on ESPN news, he thinks the Angels upped their offer.

And I wouldn't worry too much about the Red Sox signing Dunn, I can't see where they'd play him.

Jpup
12-19-2008, 01:45 AM
An LA writer was just on ESPN news, he thinks the Angels upped their offer.

And I wouldn't worry too much about the Red Sox signing Dunn, I can't see where they'd play him.

that's true. They don't have room for him unless they trade someone. I would be glad to take Bay or Drew away from them though.

blumj
12-19-2008, 02:09 AM
that's true. They don't have room for him unless they trade someone. I would be glad to take Bay or Drew away from them though.
Now, there's a surprise, I'm not used to running into people who don't think Drew is semi-worthless.

lollipopcurve
12-19-2008, 08:19 AM
I'm hoping he goes to the O's. There's some excellent minor league talent pretty close to emerging there, so he could anchor a real renaissance in Baltimore.

PuffyPig
12-19-2008, 08:39 AM
that's true. They don't have room for him unless they trade someone. I would be glad to take Bay or Drew away from them though.

They would have to move Dunn to first.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 09:18 AM
But he doesn't want to play first. Oh, maybe that was just for the Reds.:rolleyes:

blumj
12-19-2008, 09:32 AM
The Red Sox seem to take 1st base defense pretty seriously compared to a lot of teams.

NJReds
12-19-2008, 10:54 AM
watch the Red Sox sign Dunn

I actually think Dunn would be a good fit for the Rays. The Sox might do it though, if they think that Ortiz won't be 100% healthy.

Matt700wlw
12-19-2008, 10:56 AM
Boras is going to end up screwing Big Tex out of a lot of money

RedsManRick
12-19-2008, 11:04 AM
This announcement reeks to me of the Sox calling Boras' bluff. The Sox know they have the top offer and that Boras is trying to get them to bid against an imaginary offer. It's been his MO for years. Teix is Boras' biggest fish since A-Rod and we all know how that played out.

HeatherC1212
12-19-2008, 11:17 AM
I'm hoping he goes to the O's. There's some excellent minor league talent pretty close to emerging there, so he could anchor a real renaissance in Baltimore.

I totally agree. He's also from that area so he could help get the people there excited about the Orioles team again. Baltimore has been struggling about as long as the Reds in recent years and their fans have suffered just as much as we have with the Reds, so it would be great to see that club start putting things back together again in time for that young talent to get to the big leagues. :thumbup:

BTW-The fans are going a little stir crazy at the Orioles board waiting for news about Tex's destination so I hope the guy makes his decision soon before they go totally nuts! It's a little hectic over there lately, LOL ;)

WVRed
12-19-2008, 11:30 AM
I totally agree. He's also from that area so he could help get the people there excited about the Orioles team again. Baltimore has been struggling about as long as the Reds in recent years and their fans have suffered just as much as we have with the Reds, so it would be great to see that club start putting things back together again in time for that young talent to get to the big leagues. :thumbup:

BTW-The fans are going a little stir crazy at the Orioles board waiting for news about Tex's destination so I hope the guy makes his decision soon before they go totally nuts! It's a little hectic over there lately, LOL ;)

When I was in Baltimore back in August the Orioles were playing the Yankees that weekend. I had never seen so many Yankee jerseys in all my life. People were traveling by the busload into the Inner Harbor.

I didn't go to Camden Yards that night, but I would venture to say the Yankee fans outweighed the Oriole fans.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 11:38 AM
I hope he signs with the O's. My favorite AL team needs to start getting back to its once proud tradition. The best ballpark in all of baseball, in my opinion.

flyer85
12-19-2008, 11:40 AM
Boras is going to end up screwing Big Tex out of a lot of moneymay happen but doesn't seem likely. One of the favorite tactics of Boras is to get a team to bid against itself, Boston refused to play that game. Personally I think Tex ends up in Boston.

HeatherC1212
12-19-2008, 12:04 PM
When I was in Baltimore back in August the Orioles were playing the Yankees that weekend. I had never seen so many Yankee jerseys in all my life. People were traveling by the busload into the Inner Harbor.

I didn't go to Camden Yards that night, but I would venture to say the Yankee fans outweighed the Oriole fans.

I went to an Orioles-Red Sox series back in the fall of 2007 and the O's fans were outnumbered by RS fans by a HUGE amount. :eek: It was kind of sad for me as an O's fan to see how few O's fans were there and I would love to see the fans come back to the Yard and to see the team be competitive again. They really do have one of the best stadiums in baseball. We took the tour when I was there and Camden Yards is pretty awesome! :)

Raisor
12-19-2008, 12:08 PM
Personally I think Tex ends up in Boston.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Dunn end up in Boston to play 1st. Theo is exactly the kind of GM that is going to appreciate Dunn's game, plus he'll be able to pick him up at a discount for nearly the same overall results.

Not saying it's going to happen, just sayin it's a real possibility.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 12:09 PM
But I didn't think he liked to play 1st?

Raisor
12-19-2008, 12:11 PM
But I didn't think he liked to play 1st?

He did for the Snakes.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 12:12 PM
Just the Reds he didn't want to play 1st for?

HeatherC1212
12-19-2008, 12:14 PM
But I didn't think he liked to play 1st?

Apparently when you're with a winning team, you do what you're asked to do. JMO of course. ;)

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 12:17 PM
Apparently when you're with a winning team, you do what you're asked to do. JMO of course. ;)

I think you're on to something there, Heather.:beerme:

Raisor
12-19-2008, 12:18 PM
Just the Reds he didn't want to play 1st for?

Only 108 times.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 12:21 PM
And apparently, not very happy about those.

Jpup
12-19-2008, 12:26 PM
Youk plays first base for Boston and they aren't going to move him for anybody other than Tiexeira.

blumj
12-19-2008, 12:27 PM
This announcement reeks to me of the Sox calling Boras' bluff. The Sox know they have the top offer and that Boras is trying to get them to bid against an imaginary offer. It's been his MO for years. Teix is Boras' biggest fish since A-Rod and we all know how that played out.

They don't have to know they've made the best offer, they just have to know they've already made the best offer they're willing to make, which they would obviously know. Whether the offer(s) Boras is trying to get them to bid against is real or imaginary doesn't matter.

blumj
12-19-2008, 12:33 PM
Youk plays first base for Boston and they aren't going to move him for anybody other than Tiexeira.
Not necessarily. But it would have to be someone they'd think it would be worth trading Mike Lowell, likely for little to no value, to make room for, and I don't see anyone available other than Teixeira who seems to fit that criteria.

Nugget
12-19-2008, 02:55 PM
Its also arguable whether Lowell is going to play full season next year anyway. The Red Sox have had trouble filling 1B when Youklis is at 3B with a rotation of Kotsay, Casey and Barker (?). They may go after Dunn as Ortiz is aging rather quickly and if Dunn was willing to go from 1B to DH as his career moves on then it may work out.

M2
12-19-2008, 05:02 PM
The Sox may need to find a replacement for Papi sooner rather than later. That guy got old fast last year.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 05:08 PM
Injuries to the hands or wrist are tough to come back from, especially when you start getting older. Ortiz is a DH only at this point. I think it is in Dunn's best interest to play a position for a while longer. He needs to keep moving. While DH may be a teams best bet for Dunn, I don't think it is in his best interest if he wants to play for a long time. I don't see him as having the drive to stay in shape if he doesn't play the field. Just my opinion.

MWM
12-19-2008, 09:00 PM
Youk plays first base for Boston and they aren't going to move him for anybody other than Tiexeira.

Randy, that's hearsay and more myth than anything else. You can't believe everything a few people who claim to be insiders say. My understanding is he was more than willing, and then DanO signed Hatteburg. I don't doubt that his preference was to stay in the OF, but everything I've heard is that he was working hard and was perfectly willing toplay 1B.

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 10:05 PM
I have never heard anything like that. Every indication was that he didn't want to play first base, and he surely didn't jump on it and try to make it work. I would say that there is much more "hearsay and myth" in what you posted than in what I posted.

MWM
12-19-2008, 10:06 PM
Every indication from who?

RANDY IN INDY
12-19-2008, 10:23 PM
At the time, Adam Dunn told the Reds that it was not his preference to play first base, at a time when they really could have benefited from the move. During that spring, he made it very clear that he wanted to be in left field and that he was not going to play first base. He could have been, and still could be, a serviceable first baseman if he would put in the work. He certainly didn't put in the work that spring which was very evident from the way he didn't play the position. If you butcher something long enough, you probably are going to get what you want. I guess it is easier to be a team player when you are shopping for a contract.

By the way, who are your sources?

SteelSD
12-19-2008, 10:58 PM
At the time, Adam Dunn told the Reds that it was not his preference to play first base, at a time when they really could have benefited from the move. During that spring, he made it very clear that he wanted to be in left field and that he was not going to play first base. He could have been, and still could be, a serviceable first baseman if he would put in the work. He certainly didn't put in the work that spring which was very evident from the way he didn't play the position. If you butcher something long enough, you probably are going to get what you want. I guess it is easier to be a team player when you are shopping for a contract.

Adam Dunn skipped the World Baseball Classic specifically to work on playing First Base that spring. While his preference may have been to stay in LF, he was certainly willing to put in the work to move to a new position for the team's benefit. He was willing and he did put in the work that spring. Had he not been willing to do the work, he had a ready-made viable excuse available (a prior commitment to play in the WBC). Yet he didn't use it and stayed back in an effort to help the team.

paintmered
12-19-2008, 11:02 PM
While I'm not going to ban Adam Dunn discussion, please keep it focused on the topic of this thread.

Invoking his name has been known to derail a thread or seventy.

M2
12-19-2008, 11:05 PM
Dunn played 1B that spring. He never refused to shift over to that position. IIRC, he preferred LF, but Dunn refusing to play 1B (something he's done 127 times in the majors) is one of those apocryphal tales, kind of like Barry Larking refusing to hit leadoff (something he did 402 times).

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2008, 09:50 AM
I don't remember any of that. Could it be another one of those apocryphal tales?

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 09:51 AM
If the Red Sox were to magically swoop in and sign Teixeira, they wouldn't blink an eye at moving Youk back to 3B, and having Teixeira play 1B.

As it stands right now, Lowell's hurt, so Youk would have to play 3B anyway, with Papi probably playing 1B.

So, if anything, signing Teixeira makes them much better on many levels, b/c you're replacing whoever is DHing with Papi, replacing Papi with Teixeira. DH bat gets better, 1B D gets better. It's a win win.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 09:53 AM
I don't remember any of that. Could it be another one of those apocryphal tales?

You don't remember that Dunn skipped the WBC and was working on 1B in ST until Hatteberg was signed late in ST?

IIRC, Dunn might have made some comments after Hatteberg was signed that he was happy about it, b/c it meant he didn't have to play 1B, but if he didn't want to work on 1B in ST, he easily could have played in the WBC since he was asked.

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2008, 09:53 AM
If I'm the Red Sox, I really would want Texeira. He does make them better on so many levels.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 09:57 AM
If I'm the Red Sox, I really would want Texeira. He does make them better on so many levels.

While I don't believe in perfect, Teixeira is a perfect fit/player for the Red Sox.

GG 1B. Dude can rake. By all accounts a great dude for the clubhouse.

Bringing him in means Papi might as well sell all his fielding gloves on eBay or something, or donate them to charity, b/c he'll make the transition into full Edgar Martinez mode, aka DH for the rest of his career.

Is Teixeira worth that ridiculous $200 over 10? Probably not, but I could see him getting North of $150 for 8, and IMO that's a deal the Red Sox should make.

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2008, 09:59 AM
I totally agree with that.

Spitball
12-20-2008, 10:09 AM
While I don't believe in perfect, Teixeira is a perfect fit/player for the Red Sox.

GG 1B. Dude can rake. By all accounts a great dude for the clubhouse.

Bringing him in means Papi might as well sell all his fielding gloves on eBay or something, or donate them to charity, b/c he'll make the transition into full Edgar Martinez mode, aka DH for the rest of his career.

Is Teixeira worth that ridiculous $200 over 10? Probably not, but I could see him getting North of $150 for 8, and IMO that's a deal the Red Sox should make.

This would create an interesting dilemma and controversy for the Red Sox in interleague and World Series play.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 10:18 AM
This would create an interesting dilemma and controversy for the Red Sox in interleague and World Series play.

Yet another reason why the Red Sox should sign Teixeira.

I love controversy, especially when it involves the Yankees or Red Sox.

And I wanna see how Tito handles benching Papi in interleague play... b/c Teixeira at this point compared to Papi offensively might be better and Marky Mark is light years better defensively than Papi.

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2008, 10:23 AM
While I don't believe in perfect, Teixeira is a perfect fit/player for the Red Sox.

GG 1B. Dude can rake. By all accounts a great dude for the clubhouse.

Bringing him in means Papi might as well sell all his fielding gloves on eBay or something, or donate them to charity, b/c he'll make the transition into full Edgar Martinez mode, aka DH for the rest of his career.

Is Teixeira worth that ridiculous $200 over 10? Probably not, but I could see him getting North of $150 for 8, and IMO that's a deal the Red Sox should make.

All I can remember was that he was not at all happy about being at first base, and that there were several comments that, while he was working out there, his heart was not in the move and that he was not really putting a lot into the position change. How hard he worked at it is arguable. For me, that is the difference between Dunn, and a guy like Albert Pujols. Pujols was not a natural first baseman but he worked his tail off to end up being one of the best at his position. Physically, I think Dunn could have been a better first baseman than left fielder. His body is much better suited for first. Big target, big stretch, and with a lot of work, could have become serviceable, maybe even, very good. That's all I'm going to say about Dunn's "attempt" at the position change. I think the events of the spring made Hatteburg necessity than extra part.

RANDY IN INDY
12-20-2008, 10:25 AM
Yet another reason why the Red Sox should sign Teixeira.

I love controversy, especially when it involves the Yankees or Red Sox.

And I wanna see how Tito handles benching Papi in interleague play... b/c Teixeira at this point compared to Papi offensively might be better and Marky Mark is light years better defensively than Papi.

While Papi will always be beloved in Boston, it probably wouldn't take Texeira long to win over the faithful.

blumj
12-20-2008, 10:51 AM
The latest rumors seem to indicate that Boras is shooting to exceed the AAV of Sabathia's contract, $23+M a year, and the Red Sox are unwilling to go any higher than their current offer, which is believed to be under $22M a year.

Spitball
12-20-2008, 11:46 AM
The latest rumors seem to indicate that Boras is shooting to exceed the AAV of Sabathia's contract, $23+M a year, and the Red Sox are unwilling to go any higher than their current offer, which is believed to be under $22M a year.

These numbers are just too uncomprehendable. I mean how much happier and secure am I going to be with $22 million than I am going to be with, say, $18 million?

westofyou
12-20-2008, 12:04 PM
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/baseball-insider/2008/12/teixeira.html


Teixeira

Plenty of Nationals fans are scratching their heads, wondering how the Teixeira Sweepstakes have been changed, if at all, by last night's e-mail-to-media from the Red Sox that they had been "outbid" by rivals for Teixeira and were no longer a factor in signing him.

Let me give my views, based on speaking with sources from multiple teams last evening and this morning, plus my own interpretation based on far too many years of following free agent negotiations.

First, let me note a quote from a famous agent in his 10 Rules of Negotiation. "Rule Three: Convince the other side that you have another offer...whether you do or not."

Agents lie. Not all, but plenty. It is widely assumed among baseball executives that Scott Boras negotiates based on non-existant "offers." Does he? That's not the point. It's now seen as part of his M.O. by teams like the Red Sox (who despise him). So, when dealing with Boras, some teams think that, when negotiations get really serious, you have to call his bluff.

Last night was probably the Red Sox calling Boras bluff. Only a few hours before Henry's e-mail, a Red Sox source told me that he thought the Teixeira signing would be done, by some team, within four days and by Monday at the latest. "That's what everybody thought," said an executive with another team in the Teixeira hunt. "Then, within a few hours, the Red Sox do a complete 180-degree reversal? That sounds like a ploy."

Remember, the Red Sox are the team that, supposedly, had a plane on the runway and told Dice-K to get on board or no deal. So bargaining brinksmanship is comfortable for them. Also, the Yankees backed down Boras and A-Rod so badly __after the infamous Alex Upstages the World Series incident__ that Rodriguez came back to the Yankees to negotiate without Boras, completely showing up his own agent. Boston was watching.

Another possibility, according to one of the teams involved, is that the Angels may have come flying in with a big offer. If you are wondering, "Don't the Red Sox, Angels, Nats, Orioles and perhaps Yankees know what the other teams are doing?" the answer is, "NO! That's the whole point." The teams don't talk to eachother. The player and agent play one team off against the others. And the media is used as a means for (often fake) leaks.

"When it comes to the other teams, we're in the dark...as always," said one key executive involved with Teixeira. "We've even been known to ask writers what they think."

Ironically, baseball free agent bidding wars are the one time in sports when 1) beat reporters may actually know more information than any one team and 2) those same reporters may be completely misinformed on key issues.

As for the Nationals chances of getting Teixeira, they probably haven't changed much. They are in the hunt and are dead earnest. But the Red Sox, believe it or not, are probably still the favorite at the very moment when they say, "We're out." That's just the hall-of-mirrors that is free agency.

What's changed? The Angels, after Raul Ibanez (their Plan B if they didn't get Teixeira) signed with the Phils, have probably become much more serious about Teixeira.

It's now widely seen as a three-way race with the Red Sox, desite what they say, in the lead with the new possibility that the Angels really have made the top offer. Chances are good that Boras says he has a 10-year contract __his original goal__ but that the Red Sox don't believe him. Teams have their little games, too, not just agents. For more than a month I've heard variations on, "The deal won't be for more than eight years." Now why would multiple teams feel the same way about that issue? Common sense? A 'wink' among teams?

As I posted last night, the Nationals should be developing all their post-Teixeira options because they are probably going to need them. But they shouldn't be paralyzed by Boras' notoriously lengthy timetable. If memory serves, he wanted a 10-year contract for Carlos Beltran and, finally, settled for a seven-year deal that wasn't finished until well into January.

Washington fans should enjoy the Hot Stove League. This is the first time in the city's history that the Nats or Senators have been part of it. When the old Sdenators were in town, there was no free agency yet. (Curt Flood played for them in '71.)

But don't have a heart attack every time there is "news." Because it usually isn't really "news" at all. It's the rumor and negotiation game. That's how, for example, ESPN can report last night that Boston is "close to signing Teixeira," then have Henry state flatly that the Red Sox are "not a factor" just a couple of hours later.

When it comes to free agency, lots of people know something. A few people know quite a bit. But nobody, except the player and his agent, have all the facts in their hands. The player never speaks. And when the agent does, you can believe every (other) word.

blumj
12-20-2008, 12:05 PM
These numbers are just too uncomprehendable. I mean how much happier and secure am I going to be with $22 million than I am going to be with, say, $18 million?

Professional athletes, sports agents, and pro sports teams' owners and management are the most competitive people on earth. It's not about happiness or security, it's about keeping score, like most of what these people do in their professional lives.

Big Klu
12-21-2008, 02:10 PM
All I can remember was that he was not at all happy about being at first base, and that there were several comments that, while he was working out there, his heart was not in the move and that he was not really putting a lot into the position change. How hard he worked at it is arguable. For me, that is the difference between Dunn, and a guy like Albert Pujols. Pujols was not a natural first baseman but he worked his tail off to end up being one of the best at his position. Physically, I think Dunn could have been a better first baseman than left fielder. His body is much better suited for first. Big target, big stretch, and with a lot of work, could have become serviceable, maybe even, very good. That's all I'm going to say about Dunn's "attempt" at the position change. I think the events of the spring made Hatteburg necessity than extra part.

That's kind of how I remembered it, too. Dunn was willing to move to 1B, but he certainly didn't seem very enthusiastic about it.

Raisor
12-21-2008, 02:15 PM
That's kind of how I remembered it, too. Dunn was willing to move to 1B, but he certainly didn't seem very enthusiastic about it.

unless you actually read his interviews leading up to the season.

After the WMP trade the Reds were talking about putting Tony Womack in LF until it was decided to move Dunn back and start Hatteberg.

May 21, 2006 Narron said that Dunn was a better fielder LF then WMP and that Hatteberg was a better fielder at first then Dunn.

At that time, Dunn announced that he was more comfortable in LF then at first.

lollipopcurve
12-21-2008, 02:28 PM
Teixeira is a perfect fit/player for the Red Sox.

He's a perfect fit for every team in the bidding. The Red Sox do not have a monopoly on fitting in great players.

MWM
12-21-2008, 02:31 PM
At that time, Dunn announced that he was more comfortable in LF then at first.

Yep, that's pretty much how it happened. Somehow it got twisted into a "he had a bad attitude about it" and "wasn't willing". When the truth was all he ever said was that he preferred to stay in left. Big deal.

savafan
12-21-2008, 08:01 PM
Angels withdraw offer to Teixeira

By Tim Brown, Yahoo! Sports 58 minutes ago

The Los Angeles Angels on Sunday afternoon withdrew their offer to free-agent slugger Mark Teixeira and do not intend to continue negotiations with his agent, according to a source close to the negotiations.

Believed to have offered about $160 million over eight seasons, the Angels became the second team in recent days to declare the price on Teixeira to be too steep. The Boston Red Sox reached a similar decision Thursday night after meeting with Teixeira and agent Scott Boras. Team owner John Henry issued a statement that concluded, “ … we are not going to be a factor,” though evidence suggests negotiations are not dead.

A source told Yahoo! Sports on Sunday that the Angels would not re-enter the bidding for Teixeira, whom they acquired from the Atlanta Braves at the trade deadline in July.

The Angels’ withdrawal would appear to narrow the field for the switch-hitting Teixeira to the Washington Nationals, Baltimore Orioles and, presumably, the Red Sox and New York Yankees. It is unknown if the Yankees have made an offer on Teixeira or if the Red Sox’s offer – believed to be in the neighborhood of $170 million over eight years – still stands.

The Nationals’ bid reportedly matched the Angels’. The Orioles reportedly were considering whether to add an eighth year to their offer.

Owner Arte Moreno for weeks had led the Angels’ negotiations and abruptly pulled out Sunday amid reports Boras was asking for more than $180 million over eight seasons.

The apparent loss of Teixeira is a big hit for the Angels, who had made him their No. 1 priority after again losing to the Red Sox in the American League Division Series. They’ll now turn their attention to signing closer Brian Fuentes and adding offense through a trade (Jermaine Dye, Paul Konerko) or free agency (Adam Dunn, Pat Burrell).

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ti-teixeira122108&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

M2
12-21-2008, 08:46 PM
Angels withdraw offer to Teixeira

Good for them. Teixeira isn't one of the 10 best players alive and I don't get why a team would pay him like he is.

savafan
12-21-2008, 09:01 PM
Good for them. Teixeira isn't one of the 10 best players alive and I don't get why a team would pay him like he is.

Because Scott Boras owns baseball.

MWM
12-21-2008, 09:53 PM
Good for them. Teixeira isn't one of the 10 best players alive and I don't get why a team would pay him like he is.

I've always thought the same thing. He's a very good player, but he's not in the same class as Manny, Papi, Arod, Pujols, Berkman, Utley, etc... I've always thought he was a touch over-hyped.

mth123
12-22-2008, 05:02 AM
That's kind of how I remembered it, too. Dunn was willing to move to 1B, but he certainly didn't seem very enthusiastic about it.

That's what I remember too, but I got that mostly from the radio IIRC and given Marty's feelings about Dunn ... I'm not sure what to think.

I do think Dunn's play at 1B had a lot to do with the Reds signing Hatte. Dunn was also a defensive upgrade over Pena in LF so the Hatte signing may have been a pure baseball move to upgrade the defense at 2 positions and not a result of Dunn not wanting to play there. Personally, I'd leave Dunn in LF and not take the hit to my IF defense. Otherwise, he'd be a DH.

GAC
12-22-2008, 05:57 AM
Good for them. Teixeira isn't one of the 10 best players alive and I don't get why a team would pay him like he is.


I've always thought the same thing. He's a very good player, but he's not in the same class as Manny, Papi, Arod, Pujols, Berkman, Utley, etc... I've always thought he was a touch over-hyped.

I thoroughly agree gentlemen. A good ballplayer, but way over-hyped IMO.

OnBaseMachine
12-22-2008, 05:26 PM
This is hilarious.

Sweep. Four Games. "See Ya."

My oh my, stakes are high for the Nats. Sure, they haven't yet gotten word on their $160 million potential investment, but while they wait, they're at least getting an equally hefty dose of, um, bravado.

Every month, Washington pitcher Collin Balester appears on a satellite radio show (MLB Home Plate, Sirius 210 and XM 175). It's called "Minors & Majors with Grant Paulsen." When Paulsen asked Ballester this week about his feelings if the Nationals sign Mark Teixeira, here's what Balester said...

"If that happens it's going to be a dream come true. That guy is a great player and if he comes to the nation's capitol, watch out, we're going to the World Series and we are winning it all. I'm calling it right now. We're playing four games in the World Series, sweep, see ya!"

(The small print on this item: For all the grandeur of Teixeira's first six seasons, he's never played for a team that has won a playoff series.)

In Teixeira news of a less bombastic proportions, it does indeed look like the Angels are out of the running for good. The team has confirmed it without hedging. As Buster Olney writes in his blog today, "It seems that the [Teixeira] game has played itself out, the last cards have been dealt, and now Teixeira is in position to make his decision."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/nationalsjournal/2008/12/sweep_four_games_see_ya.html

Always Red
12-22-2008, 07:44 PM
In Teixeira news of a less bombastic proportions, it does indeed look like the Angels are out of the running for good. The team has confirmed it without hedging. As Buster Olney writes in his blog today, "It seems that the [Teixeira] game has played itself out, the last cards have been dealt, and now Teixeira is in position to make his decision."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/nationalsjournal/2008/12/sweep_four_games_see_ya.html

Yeah, but Boras doesn't appear to want the Angels out as a bargaining chip quite yet...

Boras, Teixeira leave door open to Angels

http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/hot_stove/posts/34842-boras-teixeira-leave-door-open-to-angels




In response to the Angels' seemingly abrupt decision to drop out of the Mark Teixeira derby, agent Scott Boras issued a statement re-affirming that Teixeira's interest in the Angels and suggesting that the 28-year-old slugger hasn't quite closed the door on the Angels.

"Mark Teixeira enjoyed his time with the Angels and was an integral part of their success last season," Boras wrote in his statement. "His interest in returning to the club has been sincere, real and continues to be one of his earnest priorities throughout this off-season."

Boras' remark that his interest "continues'' suggests that Teixeira hasn't given up on the Angels. However, the Angels, in announcing that they were withdrawing their offer Sunday afternoon, stressed that they were also bowing out of the race for Teixeira. Their stance differed from the Red Sox, which cryptically suggested they weren't "going to be a factor,'' but appears to have remain interested in signing the star free agent.

Boras' statement in response to the Angels' announcement may have been triggered by a suggestion in an Internet report on Yahoo! that suggested Angels' owner Arte Moreno was dropping out over concerns he was being used and that Moreno was beginning to feel Teixeira didn't have a sincere interest in remaining an Angel.

Boras also wrote in his statement, "Clubs are very aware -- in particular the Angels -- participation in the free-agent process does not signal lack of interest in signing with the club. Case in point, the Angels signed two great free agent players who engaged in the mechanism, receiving and exchanging offers with multiple clubs, while negotiating with the Angels. Therefore, we are assuming that reasons other than Teixeira's interest in returning to the Angels were the driving factor."

The Angels are believed to have made an eight-year offer for in excess of $160 million. The Red Sox, Yankees, Nationals and Orioles are believed to be clubs remaining in the Teixeira sweepstakes.

Raisor
12-23-2008, 01:03 PM
MLBTRADErumors.com

10:28am: Buster Olney and Peter Gammons say Teixeira's decision is "seemingly imminent." The journalists say the Orioles' negotiations for Tex "appear dormant." They suggest the Yankees are lurking in case Boras offers Teixeira to them at a discount (or perhaps just to drive up the price for Boston).

flyer85
12-23-2008, 01:11 PM
MLBTRADErumors.com

10:28am: Buster Olney and Peter Gammons say Teixeira's decision is "seemingly imminent." The journalists say the Orioles' negotiations for Tex "appear dormant." They suggest the Yankees are lurking in case Boras offers Teixeira to them at a discount (or perhaps just to drive up the price for Boston).we've heard that for the last week. When Boras is satisfied he has squeezed the last penny then the dance will end.

flyer85
12-23-2008, 02:38 PM
or not


According to the Washington Times, "there will be an announcement today regarding the future of" Mark Teixeira and "there are strong indications that the Red Sox will announce that they have landed" him.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 04:23 PM
Rumor in NY is that Big Tex is a Yankee.

HeatherC1212
12-23-2008, 04:37 PM
Rumor in NY is that Big Tex is a Yankee.

...or a Red Sox if you believe the rumors out of Boston. I don't think anyone knows anything at this point. :eek:

penantboundreds
12-23-2008, 04:38 PM
ESPN is reporting TEX is a Yankee

WMR
12-23-2008, 04:40 PM
The Yankees have really outdone themselves this off-season.

Now they just need to sign Lowe and Manny.

Am I missing anyone else?

MLB payroll structure amongst the teams is a very unfunny joke.

HeatherC1212
12-23-2008, 04:42 PM
The Yankees have really outdone themselves this off-season.

Now they just need to sign Lowe and Manny.

Am I missing anyone else?

MLB payroll structure amongst the teams is a very unfunny joke.

No kidding if this is actually true. That's like a half a billion dollars they're adding if they did get Tex. Can we have a SALARY CAP PLEASE!?? :thumbdown

WMR
12-23-2008, 04:43 PM
No kidding if this is actually true. That's like a half a billion dollars they're adding if they did get Tex. Can we have a SALARY CAP PLEASE!?? :thumbdown

Oh it's very true. It's a done deal.

_Sir_Charles_
12-23-2008, 04:44 PM
LOL. 8 year deal worth 170 million. Good lord. CC, AJ AND Tex. That's downright criminal to have baseball allow that sort of thing to happen.

171 million for 7 years to CC Sabathia
170 million for 8 years to Mark Texieria
82.5 millon for 5 years to AJ Burnett

Add to that the ARod deal, the Jeter deal...I'm curious to see what their team payroll is now. Prior to these 3 signings they were already head & shoulders higher than any other team.

NDRed
12-23-2008, 04:44 PM
8 years for 180 million

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/12/23/teixeira/?cnn=yes

HeatherC1212
12-23-2008, 04:47 PM
8 years for 180 million

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/12/23/teixeira/?cnn=yes

Un-freakin-believable. :bang:

flyer85
12-23-2008, 04:48 PM
Un-freakin-believable. :bang:not really. They may not be done ... they may add Manny as well. :eek:

Jpup
12-23-2008, 04:52 PM
not really. They may not be done ... they may add Manny as well. :eek:

no, I would not think so. Manny Ramirez has to be fuming about this. He's going to have to go back to the Dodgers and hope they give him a 2 year deal.

It's a great signing for the Yankees. Even with this signing, I would expect that their payroll is not much different from 2008.

HeatherC1212
12-23-2008, 04:52 PM
not really. They may not be done ... they may add Manny as well. :eek:

That is totally crazy. :eek: The Yankees asked NY to build them a new stadium and then they throw THAT MUCH money around in contracts for the team?! Why didn't they just build their own stadium without asking for money in the first place?! Hopefully I have that stadium story right...I thought they needed help with building it but I could be wrong. Anyway, MLB desperately needs a salary cap and I'm honestly shocked by this because I didn't think they would spend that much more money (and I can't even imagine them getting yet another big time FA). This is insane. :eek:

Raisor
12-23-2008, 04:53 PM
Rockin,

Keep the high priced players in the AL East.

Jpup
12-23-2008, 04:54 PM
That is totally crazy. :eek: The Yankees asked NY to build them a new stadium and then they throw THAT MUCH money around in contracts for the team?! Why didn't they just build their own stadium without asking for money in the first place?! Hopefully I have that stadium story right...I thought they needed help with building it but I could be wrong. Anyway, MLB desperately needs a salary cap and I'm honestly shocked by this because I didn't think they would spend that much more money (and I can't even imagine them getting yet another big time FA). This is insane. :eek:

Their payroll is lower than it was last season or very close.

WMR
12-23-2008, 04:55 PM
I was a Rays fan before, but I'll REALLY be cheering when they kick that Yankee ass now.

The Yankees spending is just obnoxious.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 04:57 PM
Their payroll is lower than it was last season or very close.

I hate that excuse...the payroll is out of hand no matter what is was last season.

Everyone in NY is saying "They have $80MM coming off the books."

Big deal. Just because you were out of control last year doesn't make it right this year.

flyer85
12-23-2008, 04:59 PM
no, I would not think so. Manny Ramirez has to be fuming about this. He's going to have to go back to the Dodgers and hope they give him a 2 year deal.

It's a great signing for the Yankees. Even with this signing, I would expect that their payroll is not much different from 2008.IIRC, they had over 80M in expiring contracts. With the new stadium and all they have a bunch of coin left over.

MrCinatit
12-23-2008, 04:59 PM
Meh. The New York orgy of spending has not helped the team in recent years.
And as others have pointed out, during their glory run a decade ago, they did it with home-grown talent and wise trades.

As for a salary cap, I seriously doubt it. Yes, the present system has basically ruined the chance of many franchises' chances of being consistent contenders again (Reds, Royals, Pirates, Rangers, Florida - to name a few), but I have a feeling MLB thinks the revenue from stalwarts such as the Yankees, Redsox, Mets, Dodgers and Angels is about as good as it gets. And, I have a feeling that the guy who I think will take over for Bud will continue with that tradition. Remember, the motto of MLB is not "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"...it is "If it ain't broke enough, don't worry about it".

red-in-la
12-23-2008, 05:00 PM
Just wait until this trickles down into arbitration cases.

It is funny though, I think it might actually depress contract values for other players.

It is sinful that it is taking over a billion dollars in public funds to build the NY stadiums.

westofyou
12-23-2008, 05:00 PM
I'm always amused at how surprised people are about the Yankees money situation

If this makes you angry, what would you have felt in the 50's and early 60's? Or even the late 70's.

The Yankees have had the largest payroll since your grandpa's were kids (well most of you) the league eats that up, and the reason the Yankees even exist is because the AL wanted a presence in the city that is made of money.

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:02 PM
I find it hilarious that people blame the Yankees for making money and spending it on players.

flyer85
12-23-2008, 05:05 PM
I find it hilarious that people blame the Yankees for making money and spending it on players.and they still have piles o' cash of profit. It is what it is, no use whining about it.

bucksfan2
12-23-2008, 05:08 PM
and they still have piles o' cash of profit. It is what it is, no use whining about it.

Yet they just asked NY to fork over $100M+ in order to finish building their stadium. The Yankees spending like this makes me glad the Reds play in the National League.

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:10 PM
Yet they just asked NY to fork over $100M+ in order to finish building their stadium. The Yankees spending like this makes me glad the Reds play in the National League.

no, they asked for bonds that will be paid back.

Raisor
12-23-2008, 05:10 PM
Yet they just asked NY to fork over $100M+ in order to finish building their stadium. .

NY didn't have to say yes.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 05:11 PM
I find it hilarious that people blame the Yankees for making money and spending it on players.

The blame isn't on the Yankees...it's on MLB for letting this happen.

westofyou
12-23-2008, 05:13 PM
no, they asked for bonds that will be paid back.http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2716:the-anatomy-of-a-yankees-spending-spree&catid=29:articles-a-opinion&Itemid=41

New Yankee Stadium and Tax-Sheltering – The biggest catalyst for the spending involves how the latest CBA is structured as it pertains to new stadium development. Clubs may write off a portion of their revenue-sharing obligation by deducting bond payments and maintenance costs. By cutting those costs, at a 31 percent rate that is assigned the Yankees as part of the CBA, they are sheltering a sizable chunk of change. Granted, the Yankees pulled in more revenues in 2008 (the All-Star Game, along with interest in the final year of The House That Ruth Built), which may offset what ever tax sheltered revenues that new Yankee Stadium offered this year by way of the CBA (the latest revenue-sharing figures have not yet been released), but the Yankees will continue to use the CBA’s sheltering mechanism throughout 2009, a further incentive for the Bombers to go on the spending spree.

But, the biggest loophole for the Yankees involves the tax-exempt bonds issued to build new Yankee Stadium. Nearly all of the $967 million in bonds that have been issued are tax exempt. To add more salt to the taxpayers’ wounds, the club is looking for an additional $259 million in bonds, all tax-exempt, as well.

OnBaseMachine
12-23-2008, 05:13 PM
It's the Yankees money, they can spend as much as they want. As the Rays, Marlins, Twins, and A's have proven in the last decade, you don't need a huge payroll to win.

westofyou
12-23-2008, 05:15 PM
Yet they just asked NY to fork over $100M+ in order to finish building their stadium. The Yankees spending like this makes me glad the Reds play in the National League.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2008/12/20/2008-12-20_its_a_wonderful_lie.html


The Mets were originally allowed to raise $547 million in tax-exempt bonds, and have gone back to the city now for money they didn't take on the front end.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 05:15 PM
It's the Yankees money, they can spend as much as they want. As the Rays, Marlins, Twins, and A's have proven in the last decade, you don't need a huge payroll to win.

But it sure does help sustain success.

Highlifeman21
12-23-2008, 05:19 PM
So this will put the Yankees' payroll above $300 Million now, right?

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:19 PM
Let's be honest here. The Yankees are doing what they have to do to WIN. It's the same thing we all wish the Reds would do. The Reds are on vacation. They are waiting for the market to play out. ...the losing stops now.

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:20 PM
So this will put the Yankees' payroll above $300 Million now, right?

no. Just over 200.

RedLegSuperStar
12-23-2008, 05:21 PM
This is sickening! Baseball needs to put a cap on baseball. The Yankees have now went out and got the 3 best available Free Agents. I understand they have money and they are the Yankees but I feel that their should be a level playing field for all teams.

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:23 PM
This is sickening! Baseball needs to put a cap on baseball. The Yankees have now went out and got the 3 best available Free Agents. I understand they have money and they are the Yankees but I feel that their should be a level playing field for all teams.

I don't disagree with that, but the greedy owners will never make it happen. There are too many that would rather put the money in their pocket then spend it on the team.

westofyou
12-23-2008, 05:33 PM
This is sickening! Baseball needs to put a cap on baseball. The Yankees have now went out and got the 3 best available Free Agents. I understand they have money and they are the Yankees but I feel that their should be a level playing field for all teams.

When teams go belly up or the union breaks is when you'll see caps in leagues, until that or 20 years of a Yankee dynasty winning it all occurs you'll see nothing of the like.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 05:34 PM
Let's be honest here. The Yankees are doing what they have to do to WIN. It's the same thing we all wish the Reds would do. The Reds are on vacation. They are waiting for the market to play out. ...the losing stops now.

The problem is that if Cincy laid out $200MM like the Yankees did last year and didn't even make the playoffs, they would probably be on the road to bankruptcy.

The Yanks have a much larger margin for error.

Always Red
12-23-2008, 05:36 PM
When teams go belly up or the union breaks is when you'll see caps in leagues, until that or 20 years of a Yankee dynasty winning it all occurs you'll see nothing of the like.

I think you'd see more complaining if the Yankees weren't spending all that money. They're expected to- they make the most money, and they plow it right back into the product.

Seems unfair, but it's the American Way. A salary cap is more socialistic...

Jpup
12-23-2008, 05:37 PM
The problem is that if Cincy laid out $200MM like the Yankees did last year and didn't even make the playoffs, they would probably be on the road to bankruptcy.

The Yanks have a much larger margin for error.

I don't disagree with you.

If the Reds would spend their money wisely they would win and then make more money to pay more "good" players.

bucksfan2
12-23-2008, 05:39 PM
It's the Yankees money, they can spend as much as they want. As the Rays, Marlins, Twins, and A's have proven in the last decade, you don't need a huge payroll to win.

The Rays spent a decade of being awful and gaining high draft picks to build their team. The Twins have been good but failed to advance to a world series in over a decade. When was the last time the A's made the ALCS? The Marlins have really been the only success story but that has also come with a huge downside. They have two world series championships along with two subsequent fire sales. They have a fan base that have games with under 1000 in attendance. The Marlin's success has come at a very steep price.

Selig has created a huge economic imbalance in baseball today. Its the Yankees money so let them spend it they way they want. I have no quams about that but an entire generation of fans have adopted football as the national pastime instead of baseball. When the big cities are good its good for baseball's pocket book but how much longer can it last when you continue to turn people, especially kids, away from baseball.

Reds4Life
12-23-2008, 05:40 PM
If other teams could afford to spend that kind of money, don't think for one second they wouldn't do it. Love them or hate them, you have to admit, they put thier money where thier mouth is.

edabbs44
12-23-2008, 05:43 PM
I don't disagree with you.

If the Reds would spend their money wisely they would win and then make more money to pay more "good" players.

It's a little more difficult than that...NY has a built in fan base that provides them with revenue that a smaller market can only dream about. Not many cities can sell tix at the prices they are charging.

George Anderson
12-23-2008, 05:43 PM
If other teams could afford to spend that kind of money, don't think for one second they wouldn't do it. Love them or hate them, you have to admit, they put thier money where thier mouth is.

and people that get mad about teams like the Yankees spending money just need to get over it because it is not going to change anytime soon. The players union is very strong and as long as they do not want a salary cap then there will not be one.

Tom Servo
12-23-2008, 05:43 PM
Even with their additions I don't think the Yankees are necessarily better off than the Red Sox or Rays so it's not a huge deal to me.

WVRed
12-23-2008, 06:39 PM
and people that get mad about teams like the Yankees spending money just need to get over it because it is not going to change anytime soon. The players union is very strong and as long as they do not want a salary cap then there will not be one.

Then MLB needs to burn it to the ground. Once the CBA expires, no deal unless a salary cap is involved.

I would rather see MLB destroy itself through another strike than watch all of the larger market teams throwing out money like its candy.

WVRed
12-23-2008, 06:41 PM
Even with their additions I don't think the Yankees are necessarily better off than the Red Sox or Rays so it's not a huge deal to me.

I agree. The Yankees are throwing money to the wind and seeing what sticks. The Rays by far have the best future in baseball and even with the money being thrown out it's going to be an uphill climb to catch the Red Sox and Rays.

RFS62
12-23-2008, 06:41 PM
The product is Major League Baseball, not Yankee baseball.

How much money would they make without the rest of the league to play against?

Jpup
12-23-2008, 06:53 PM
So, the Yankees are just not supposed to spend money because no one else will?

Raisor
12-23-2008, 06:54 PM
I would rather see MLB destroy itself through another strike than watch all of the larger market teams throwing out money like its candy.


I like major league baseball, so no thanks for this.

Roy Tucker
12-23-2008, 06:54 PM
The Yanks are spending some serious coin here in the off-season. But they've done that since forever. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. An 8 year contract is a long time.

I did hear on the radio that the Yankees now have the 4 highest priced contracts in baseball.

blumj
12-23-2008, 07:02 PM
The Yanks are spending some serious coin here in the off-season. But they've done that since forever. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. An 8 year contract is a long time.

I did hear on the radio that the Yankees now have the 4 highest priced contracts in baseball.
A-Rod
Tex
CC
Jeter?
Who's next? Santana?

Jpup
12-23-2008, 07:05 PM
4 highest paid? I'm not sure if that's accurate.

blumj
12-23-2008, 07:17 PM
4 highest paid? I'm not sure if that's accurate.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/05/most-lucrative-contracts.html
Yep, it is. A-Rod, Jeter, Tex, Sabathia. Manny's $160M is done, so after Sabathia, it's Miguel Cabrera, Helton, then Santana.

RedLegSuperStar
12-23-2008, 07:34 PM
Wonder where Burnett stacks up on that list.

Reds Nd2
12-23-2008, 08:37 PM
When teams go belly up or the union breaks is when you'll see caps in leagues...

Just a thought, but a salary cap at the top would have to also include one at the bottom. The owners will never go for that. As for teams going belly up, teams can be relocated or failing that, contraction can be revisited again in 2011.

blumj
12-23-2008, 09:15 PM
Wonder where Burnett stacks up on that list.

Not in the top 25 for total contract value, 6th in AAV for starting pitchers. It looks like Bronson Arroyo might actually be 13th on that list at the moment, BTW.

remdog
12-23-2008, 11:20 PM
Out takes from the AP story:

"With Teixeira's deal, the Yankees have lavished $423.5 million on three new players, a figure dwarfing the economic might of the other 29 clubs. Just last Thursday, the Yankees completed agreements with two prized pitchers, giving CC Sabathia a $161 million, seven-year contract and A.J. Burnett an $82.5 million, five-year deal.

Preparing to move into their $1.3 billion ballpark, the Yankees will hold the four largest contracts in baseball as they try to win the World Series for the first time since 2000. Third baseman Alex Rodriguez has the sport's highest deal at $275 million over 10 years, and shortstop Derek Jeter is second at $189 million over 10 years.

Teixeira's agreement came just one day after the Yankees received a $26.9 million luxury tax bill for 2008, when their streak of 13 consecutive playoff appearances ended. But with the revenue from their new stadium, where tickets are priced at up to $2,500 per game, their appetite for free agents wasn't diminished."

Rem

Reds Nd2
12-23-2008, 11:53 PM
Teixeira's agreement came just one day after the Yankees received a $26.9 million luxury tax bill for 2008...

Rem

The Tigers also got hit with the luxury tax. Don't hear too many owners complaining about the luxury tax, when it trickels down to them.

Tom Servo
12-23-2008, 11:55 PM
The Yankees signed Kevin Cash to a minor league deal so we might as well give them the World Series crown right now. This is the move that's putting them over the top into the unreachable zone.

Krusty
12-24-2008, 12:04 AM
Out takes from the AP story:

"With Teixeira's deal, the Yankees have lavished $423.5 million on three new players, a figure dwarfing the economic might of the other 29 clubs. Just last Thursday, the Yankees completed agreements with two prized pitchers, giving CC Sabathia a $161 million, seven-year contract and A.J. Burnett an $82.5 million, five-year deal.

Preparing to move into their $1.3 billion ballpark, the Yankees will hold the four largest contracts in baseball as they try to win the World Series for the first time since 2000. Third baseman Alex Rodriguez has the sport's highest deal at $275 million over 10 years, and shortstop Derek Jeter is second at $189 million over 10 years.

Teixeira's agreement came just one day after the Yankees received a $26.9 million luxury tax bill for 2008, when their streak of 13 consecutive playoff appearances ended. But with the revenue from their new stadium, where tickets are priced at up to $2,500 per game, their appetite for free agents wasn't diminished."

Rem

Say hello to a salary cap once this Basic Agreement expires.

KoryMac5
12-24-2008, 12:12 AM
Say hello to a salary cap once this Basic Agreement expires.

There will never be a salary cap in baseball. The players union is too strong and will never be broken by the owners.

flyer85
12-24-2008, 12:15 AM
Say hello to a salary cap once this Basic Agreement expires.
not a snowballs chance in hell

flyer85
12-24-2008, 12:16 AM
There will never be a salary cap in baseball. The players union is too strong and will never be broken by the owners.and the big market clubs don't want one either

KronoRed
12-24-2008, 12:18 AM
There will never be a salary cap in baseball. The players union is too strong and will never be broken by the owners.

Indeed, and if small teams start declaring bankruptcy then all the better for the big market teams.

Reds Nd2
12-24-2008, 12:25 AM
and the big market clubs don't want one either

The small market clubs don't want one either.

Mario-Rijo
12-24-2008, 12:26 AM
There will never be a salary cap in baseball. The players union is too strong and will never be broken by the owners.

Someday it will be broken, just not by the owners. At some point the fans will break their backs when they have turned pro baseball into something of yesteryear. Unfortunately it won't matter anymore then.

RedsManRick
12-24-2008, 12:39 AM
The best collection of 25 players in baseball still would have a hard time winning the World Series more than every other year. The relatively narrow of distribution of talent throughout the league and the reality that, due to the draft and arbitration system, it's possible to build a very talented team on the cheap will sustain the status quo for a long time.

The reality is that MLB has never been a level playing field. Not 120 years ago, not 90, not 50, not 20 years ago, and not today. The real threat to the security of the fiscal system is when team values stop rising. That's when the small market team owners will revolt.

Krusty
12-24-2008, 12:41 AM
If the NHL can shut down their game for a season, who to say baseball owners won't do the same? Never say never.

WMR
12-24-2008, 12:43 AM
I had forgotten just how bad that Jeter contract is. Wow. Scary bad.

flyer85
12-24-2008, 12:46 AM
If the NHL can shut down their game for a season, who to say baseball owners won't do the same? Never say never.most of the teams(even the Yankees) are raking in the bucks. Why would they shut the game down? The NHL had reached the point where teams were losing money, MLB is nowhere near that.

Reds Nd2
12-24-2008, 12:48 AM
Someday it will be broken, just not by the owners. At some point the fans will break their backs when they have turned pro baseball into something of yesteryear. Unfortunately it won't matter anymore then.

The fans will never break the backs of the Players Association. The fans won't break the backs of the owners either. To think otherwise is just wishful thinking. Canceling a World Series didn't do the trick. Steroids didn't do the trick either. The fans keep coming back. It's baseball after all. The fans will always come back.

It's what we do.

Mario-Rijo
12-24-2008, 12:56 AM
The fans will never break the backs of the Players Association. The fans won't break the backs of the owners either. To think otherwise is just wishful thinking. Canceling a World Series didn't do the trick. Steroids didn't do the trick either. The fans keep coming back. It's baseball after all. The fans will always come back.

It's what we do.

Yeah it's what we do, not necc. what some will do one day long down the road. They will keep losing handfuls of fans who won't pass their passion for it down to their own children. It's a mighty long way off no doubt but someday I do think baseball will tap out.

M2
12-24-2008, 12:56 AM
The Yankees sign some player for money than he's worth and the Pavlovian dog response is Yankees bad/salary cap good/break the union. Most predictable thing in the universe.

Reds Nd2
12-24-2008, 01:02 AM
Yeah it's what we do, not necc. what some will do one day long down the road. They will keep losing handfuls of fans who won't pass their passion for it down to their own children. It's a mighty long way off no doubt but someday I do think baseball will tap out.

Yet attendance figures keep rising.

Mario-Rijo
12-24-2008, 01:03 AM
The Yankees sign some player for money than he's worth and the Pavlovian dog response is Yankees bad/salary cap good/break the union. Most predictable thing in the universe.

For money that he's worth? I don't think so and truthfully I doubt you do either, as a matter of fact I know you don't. That said I am not against the Yankees doing whatever they can. I like it in fact, they are doing what other teams should, probably just a tad crazier than they should. I just think that greed will ultimately destroy us all and baseball will be one of the 1st casualties of it.

Mario-Rijo
12-24-2008, 01:05 AM
Yet attendance figures keep rising.

Yeah and a lot of that is for all the wrong reasons. Bobbleheads, entertainment value etc. Not necc. because people love the game of baseball.

Reds Nd2
12-24-2008, 01:20 AM
Yeah and a lot of that is for all the wrong reasons. Bobbleheads, entertainment value etc. Not necc. because people love the game of baseball.

That's a lot of love for bobbleheads I guess.

Raisor
12-24-2008, 07:53 AM
If the NHL can shut down their game for a season, who to say baseball owners won't do the same? Never say never.


and that worked just so well for the NHL.

I want to see the best players playing.

GAC
12-24-2008, 08:34 AM
Didn't the Yanks just have to fork up around 27 mil in luxury tax?

Does anyone think they waited till after that was assessed before they signed Tex?

blumj
12-24-2008, 08:47 AM
Didn't the Yanks just have to fork up around 27 mil in luxury tax?

Does anyone think they waited till after that was assessed before they signed Tex?
Since there's no mystery as to how the luxury tax will be assessed, they would have known how much that would cost them long ago.

bucksfan2
12-24-2008, 09:24 AM
I was listening to ESPN radio this morning and Eric Kuselias and he made a good point. His point was the Yankees are able to spend whatever they want due to geography. It has nothing to do with ownership, development, gm's, etc. It strictly has to do with the size of the market they operate in. Its scary to think that the Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, and Angles can't compete with the Yankees.

On a side note the Tigers paid a luxury tax because the owner wants to rebuild downtown Detroit and doesn't care about losing money up front. Or at least that was Gammons take.

Ltlabner
12-24-2008, 09:27 AM
On a side note the Tigers paid a luxury tax because the owner wants to rebuild downtown Detroit and doesn't care about losing money up front.

I wouldn't think renting a couple of bulldozers would cost that much.

Jpup
12-24-2008, 09:33 AM
The Yankees payroll is 209 million for 2009. They had 88 million come off the books and have added 62 million. They have lowered their payroll by 26 million.

Cyclone792
12-24-2008, 09:37 AM
Frankly, as a Reds fan I could care less what the Yankees do. The Yankees have been doing this for 90 years so it's nothing new, and the only times the Yankee muscle affected the Reds was 1939 and 1961. Then the Reds went out and built their own dynasty and whipped the Yanks' tails in 1976.

If we have to worry about the Yankees once again then it'd be a good thing, because at that point we'd have an NL flag flying and a chance to beat them four times in seven tries for a World Championship.

I'd take that every single year, and so would every other person on this forum (you're lying if you say otherwise).

blumj
12-24-2008, 09:44 AM
The Yankees payroll is 209 million for 2009. They had 88 million come off the books and have added 62 million. They have lowered their payroll by 26 million.
I think you're missing some raises to players they had last season or for part of last season, like Cano, Marte, Nady, Wang. They're still under. It's also still December.

WMR
12-24-2008, 10:14 AM
I think you're missing some raises to players they had last season or for part of last season, like Cano, Marte, Nady, Wang. They're still under. It's also still December.

Yeah once they figure out all the raises due to arbitration and the like I doubt their payroll will be any lower than last season. Also, I think they'll sign another FA pitcher at least.

M2
12-24-2008, 10:37 AM
For money that he's worth? I don't think so and truthfully I doubt you do either, as a matter of fact I know you don't. That said I am not against the Yankees doing whatever they can. I like it in fact, they are doing what other teams should, probably just a tad crazier than they should. I just think that greed will ultimately destroy us all and baseball will be one of the 1st casualties of it.

Don't see how you'd "know" that seeing that I think Teixeira got overpaid by a good amount. In this very thread I made the case that he's not a top 10 position player and that he shouldn't be paid like he is.

That said, I don't begrudge a guy getting paid, but Teixeira's good, not great.

And greed has been destroying baseball since the game went professional.

westofyou
12-24-2008, 10:43 AM
And greed has been destroying baseball since the game went professional.



Professional baseball is on the wane. Salaries must come down or the interest of the public must be increased in some way.
Al Spalding

Roy Tucker
12-24-2008, 10:43 AM
The Yankees luxury tax is more than the Marlins' payroll.

blumj
12-24-2008, 10:57 AM
Don't see how you'd "know" that seeing that I think Teixeira got overpaid by a good amount. In this very thread I made the case that he's not a top 10 position player and that he shouldn't be paid like he is.

That said, I don't begrudge a guy getting paid, but Teixeira's good, not great.

And greed has been destroying baseball since the game went professional.
I think that exchange got confused by a typo. It seemed like you were saying Teixeira was worth it.

blumj
12-24-2008, 11:07 AM
Its scary to think that the Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, and Angles can't compete with the Yankees.

Except that at least some of them manage to, every year. They decided what the rules are, so they have to live by them, too. Winning December just means you're supposed to win October. That isn't as easy to live by as it sounds.

westofyou
12-24-2008, 11:12 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&sid=aew0QKinAX2c#


Dec. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Milwaukee Brewers owner Mark Attanasio said Major League Baseball may need to impose a salary cap to preserve competition after the New York Yankees spent $424 million to sign three players.

The Yankees agreed on an eight-year, $180 million deal with Mark Teixeira, according to a baseball official familiar with the contract, continuing to acquire the most expensive free- agents on the market before moving into a new $1.3 billion ballpark next season. New York signed former Cy Young Award winner CC Sabathia for seven years and $161 million, and got pitcher A.J. Burnett for five years and $82.5 million.

“At the rate the Yankees are going, I’m not sure anyone can compete with them,” Attanasio said in an e-mail. “Frankly, the sport might need a salary cap.”

Baseball is the only one of the major U.S. professional sports that operates without a salary cap, which sets a ceiling on payroll. The sport imposes a tax when teams surpass a payroll threshold and redistributes revenue from the highest-grossing teams like the Yankees to the clubs that produce the least revenue like Milwaukee.

The Yankees have exceeded the payroll limits every year since baseball began imposing a penalty in 2003 and has accounted for 90 percent of the money collected, the Associated Press reported. The methods baseball implements to curb spending isn’t working for the Yankees, Attanasio said.

Luxury Tax

“Obviously, the 34 percent they kick into the revenue- sharing pool and the luxury taxes don’t affect them one whit,” he said.

Major League Baseball spokesman Pat Courtney didn’t immediately return an e-mail for comment on Attanasio’s salary cap suggestion.

Yankees spokesman Michael Margolis declined to comment.

New York beat out the Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Angels, Washington Nationals and Baltimore Orioles for the services of Teixeira, a Gold Glove first baseman.

The Yankees also topped the Brewers in acquiring Sabathia. Milwaukee offered a five-year, $100 million deal for the left- hander before the Yankees began negotiations with a deal worth $40 million more.

“They are on a completely different economic playing field,” Attanasio said in a telephone interview. “I paid $220 million for my team; now they get three players for $420 million.”

According to Forbes magazine, 16 of the MLB 30 teams are worth less than what the Yankees paid for Teixeira, Sabathia and Burnett.

The Yankees began last season with a $209 million payroll, marking the 10th straight year they led the sport. The Florida Marlins had the lowest payroll at $22 million. The disparity is an issue, Attanasio said.

“At some point it gets to be absurd when a team has a $200 million payroll,” he said, adding that the Brewers won’t raise their $81 million payroll because of the recession.

westofyou
12-24-2008, 11:16 AM
http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2722:yankee-signings-of-teixeira-sabathia-and-burnett-move-salary-figures-to-cartoonish-levels&catid=29:articles-a-opinion&Itemid=41


Consider…

Next year, the three players signed will earn base salaries of:

A.J. Burnett: $16.5 million
C.C. Sabathia: $14 million
Mark Teixeira: $20 million
Total: $50.5 million

Signing Bonuses:

A.J. Burnett: (none known of as of publication)
C.C. Sabathia: $9 million
Mark Teixeira: $5 million
Total: $14 million

Base salary + Signing Bonuses = $64.5 million

Throw these all together, and:

* The base salary for Burnett, Sabathia, and Teixeira is more than the 2008 Opening Day total player payrolls of the Pirates ($48,689,783), Athletics ($47,967,126), Rays ($43,820,597), and Marlins ($21,811,500).
* If you throw in the signing bonuses you can add the Royals ($58,245,500), Twins ($56,932,766), and Nationals ($54,961,000) – seven clubs, or more than 23 percent of the league.
* With signing bonuses added to base salary, Teixeira ($25 million), and Sabathia ($23 million) will earn more than the entire 2008 Marlins Opening Day roster.
* Looking back at the total over the life of the three contracts, at $423.5 million, you could have paid for the second (Mets, at $137,793,376), third (Tigers, at $137,685,196), and fourth highest (Red Sox, at $133,390,035) Opening Day payrolls in 2008, and still had enough pocket change left to nearly add in all of the Marlins Opening Day player payroll ($21,811,500). Those four clubs had a total Opening Day player payroll of $430,680,107 for 2008.

But if you throw in other contracts of the Yankees, the figures get truly cartoonish:

* The Yankees now have four of the highest contracts in all of MLB (Alex Rodriguez has the largest in all of baseball at $275 million over 10 years, while Derek Jeter is second at $189 million over 9 years, on top of the Teixeira deal and Sabathia deals). Those four have combined contract totals of a staggering $805 million, or $205 million more than the cost of the Mets’ Citi Field.
* The total base salaries of A-Rod ($32 million), Jeter ($20 million), Teixeira ($20 million), and Sabathia ($14 million) for 2009 will be $86 million, or more than the Opening Day payrolls of more than half the league last year (Brewers, Indians, Giants, Reds, Padres, Rockies, Rangers, Orioles, Diamondbacks, Royals, Twins, Nationals, Pirates, Athletics, Rays, and Marlins).

mth123
12-24-2008, 11:41 AM
I know I'm probably the only one, but I don't see how spending all this money guarantees anything. In 2008 the Yankees missed the play-offs. How much did they really improve? Sabatthia is a great pitcher, but in 2008 Mike Mussina won 20 games and the Yankees won a bunch of his starts. Sabatthia is clearly better than Mussina, but even if he wins the Cy Young, is he really going to add many wins over last year when he is replacing a guy who won a bunch anyway?

Jason Giambi hit 32 HR with 96 RBI in 2008. Is Tex really going to make that much difference in the run differential replacing that (not mentioning the loss of Bobby Abreu). The defense at 1B is significantly improved, but that's the biggest upgrade here.

Burnett is the key. He could be the guy who deepens the rotation and really improves the team over 2008, but now that he has his deal, he could go back to being the guy who misses a ton of starts. I don't think these signings guarantee anything. I think what they have mostly done is guarantee that they don't drop off from a team that missed the play-offs anyway. I think they are improved, but I'm not sure how many incremental wins they've really purchased.

M2
12-24-2008, 01:14 PM
I know I'm probably the only one, but I don't see how spending all this money guarantees anything. In 2008 the Yankees missed the play-offs. How much did they really improve?

I'm with you. This Yankees club doesn't impress me much.

Also, missing amidst all the complaint is the detail that, at this moment, the Yankees are still below what their 2008 payroll was even though they have a new ballpark opening in 2009.

Screwball
12-24-2008, 02:23 PM
Buster Olney on Sportscenter just made a good point that I think has gotten lost in all this. Because the Yankees signed Teixeira, the Brewers no longer get the Yankees' first round pick in next year's draft. It will go to the Angels, which has those in the Brewers' organization pretty steamed, since they instead will get the Yanks' 2nd round pick (plus the supplemental pick, if I'm not mistaken).

I'm not sure about this, but I think because of all these big-time signings by New York, they won't make their first selection in next year's draft until the 32nd round, or thereabouts. ;)

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 05:28 PM
If the NHL can shut down their game for a season, who to say baseball owners won't do the same? Never say never.

Whatever happened to the NHL anyway?

Are they playing games yet?

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 05:30 PM
Didn't the Yanks just have to fork up around 27 mil in luxury tax?

Does anyone think they waited till after that was assessed before they signed Tex?

The luxury tax is based on 2008 salary figures. Marky Mark now impacts their 2009 salary figures.

And, with the new Yankee Stadium, the Yanks won't have to pay the luxury tax for awhile, but I can't remember the grace period due to the new digs.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 05:31 PM
I was listening to ESPN radio this morning and Eric Kuselias and he made a good point. His point was the Yankees are able to spend whatever they want due to geography. It has nothing to do with ownership, development, gm's, etc. It strictly has to do with the size of the market they operate in. Its scary to think that the Red Sox, Dodgers, Cubs, and Angles can't compete with the Yankees.

On a side note the Tigers paid a luxury tax because the owner wants to rebuild downtown Detroit and doesn't care about losing money up front. Or at least that was Gammons take.

Yeah, Gammons threw out a crazy figure to the tune of $30-$40 Mil per year the Tigers owner was willing to lose to rebuild downtown Detroit.

I was glad I was stopped in traffic when I heard that nonsense.

blumj
12-25-2008, 05:38 PM
The luxury tax is based on 2008 salary figures. Marky Mark now impacts their 2009 salary figures.

And, with the new Yankee Stadium, the Yanks won't have to pay the luxury tax for awhile, but I can't remember the grace period due to the new digs.

They'll still have to pay luxury tax. They get to deduct stadium expenses from their revenue sharing bill, though. Which is worse, since revenue sharing money goes to the teams and luxury tax just pays for MLB stuff.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 05:39 PM
They'll still have to pay luxury tax. They get to deduct stadium expenses from their revenue sharing bill, though. Which is worse, since revenue sharing money goes to the teams and luxury tax just pays for MLB stuff.

Ah, thank you.

I had heard a lot of conflicting reports re: the luxury tax and what the Yankees would have to pay in 2009.

GAC
12-26-2008, 05:44 AM
I'm with you. This Yankees club doesn't impress me much.

Spoken like a true arch-rival from Boston :lol:

[but I agree with you] ;)

The Yankees are what they are. That's why, to a lot of fans, it brings so much more joy when "Goliath" falls short.

blumj
12-26-2008, 09:06 AM
They do kind of impress me. But the Rays impress me, too.