Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40

Thread: Furcal??

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,124

    Furcal??

    Per MLBTRADERUMORS

    A's, Giants Battling For Furcal
    By Tim Dierkes [November 17 at 1:26pm CST]
    Mychael Urban of MLB.com talked to Rafael Furcal's agent Paul Kinzer this morning. Kinzer says six teams have contacted him about Furcal since free agency opened Friday. The A's have yet to make an offer, but Kinzer's comments imply that the Giants might have. Both teams have very strong interest in the 31 year-old shortstop, who could sign before the winter meetings. When asked about the reported four-year, $40MM demand for Furcal, Kinzer said it was in the ballpark.

    It's hard to peg the other four suitors, but the Cubs, Blue Jays, and Orioles are possibilities. The Cardinals may be out, while the Royals, Tigers, and Dodgers may balk at the salary or term. Presumably the Braves are backing off given the state of the Jake Peavy talks.
    @#$% my @#$%^*&

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,124

    Re: Furcal??

    If all it costs for Furcal is 4 years at 10 mill a year, I would be in.

    You'd have your good defensive SS for the next four years, who has a + bat. To have that position solidified with the youth that is coming up through the system could only be a good thing.

    Plus, his contract would be coming up right around the time when another SS could be ready from the farm system and probably right around where his performance will start to trail off.
    @#$% my @#$%^*&

  4. #3
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,805

    Re: Furcal??

    Furcal has not been healthy for a while. 4 years is a lot of years for a guy with back problems. If there were guarantees that he would be healthy all four years or at least three of the four, than yes. However, I think it is more likely that he not be healthy for at least two of those four years.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,127

    Re: Furcal??

    I have been cool to the prospect of FA signings in this market. This could be the exception. IMO the Reds have one true SS prospect in Cozart. He is probably 2011 at best. Also, it remains to be seen if his dramatic offensive improvement in his second year a low A will continue as he moves up. Valaika is intriguing as reports seem to have his defensive range improving. His bat may be sufficient to offset average defense. It is more likely that BP will be traded than moved to SS. Thus, SS remains somewhat of a question mark.

    If Furcal is anything like the numbers he has put up in the past, $10M is a steal. You get defense, average, base stealing, and a little pop as well. As noted by others the gamble is his health. Most people thought he would stay in LA. When teams part way with good players, it is usually because of salary demands. The fact that the Dodgers seemed to have dropped out at this price arouses suspicion. IIRC he did not play well in the NLCS.

    I would make an offer for two years and two option years with relatively high buyouts. That would limit the downside risk for the Reds if he could not play. If Furcal is confident in his ability to play well, he might feel that such a contract is not a gamble for him.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,124

    Re: Furcal??

    I dunno, he really only missed a ton of time last year. Two years ago he played in 138 games and only missed time due to a sprained ankle.

    Other than that he really doesn't have too much of an injury history.

    I'd take the chance.
    Last edited by schmidty622; 11-17-2008 at 03:08 PM.
    @#$% my @#$%^*&

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    3,598

    Re: Furcal??

    No thanks, let someone else make that mistake.
    I was in the ORG once, best 6 months of my life.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    619

    Re: Furcal??

    OK, guys...we have a shortstop under contract that has been injured. No one will take that contract. And we don't have the money to pay a guy 6 million to sit on the bench. I know Gonzo is a question mark, but we won't know anything until ST.

    And buy the way, I watched Furcal play here in Atlanta for his first contract, and I wouldn't spend a starters contract on him even if we had the money. He's got to be one of the most overrated guys in the league.

  9. #8
    Member Emin3mShady07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Lake Orion, MI
    Posts
    454

    Re: Furcal??

    Quote Originally Posted by Red in Atl View Post
    OK, guys...we have a shortstop under contract that has been injured. No one will take that contract. And we don't have the money to pay a guy 6 million to sit on the bench. I know Gonzo is a question mark, but we won't know anything until ST.

    And buy the way, I watched Furcal play here in Atlanta for his first contract, and I wouldn't spend a starters contract on him even if we had the money. He's got to be one of the most overrated guys in the league.
    I don't understand how you can say that Furcal is so overrated, at least pertaining to the Reds Needs. According to the fielding bible, Furcal was +36 plays during the 2005-2007 seasons (he was hurt in 2008, so I do not think his fielding numbers this year are indicitive of his overall skill), which translates to +27 runs over your average SS. Furcal was also +35 plays from 2004-2006, so his 2007 defensive season had to have been +1 play better than his 2004 defensive season, which to me shows that he is not really aging that badly yet. so on average, Furcal saves nine runs a year over the average SS. Jeff Keppinger was -14 plays this year in limited action, so he was at least 10.5 runs below the league average. Adding in just defense alone for Furcal would save the reds about 20 runs per year, if not more. Furcal has a pretty low major league OPS at .764, but that isn't terrible for a major league SS, and that number is significantly dragged down by an uncharacteristically unproductive 2007 at the plate. Also, Furcal is faster than keppinger so he would probably created a few runs from his legs because he is usually a pretty successful basestealer. If Keppinger was able to produce an .800 OPS (.375/.425) which is in line with his minor league career norms, he would created roughly 95.5 runs (using 600 ABs and OBP x Slug x AB) while furcal would create roughly 87 runs. This would mean that Furcal, adding in baserunning, is about 15 runs better than Jeff Keppinger and IMO worth the $10 MIl/year contract especially considering the Reds are expected to be able to make a serious run in 2010 and Gonzalez's contract would be off of the books by then.

    http://www.fieldingbible.com/
    http://thebaseballcube.com/players/F...l-Furcal.shtml
    http://thebaseballcube.com/players/K...eppinger.shtml
    Baseball is not necessarily an obsessive-compulsive disorder, like washing your hands 100 times a day, but it's beginning to seem that way. We're reaching the point where you can be a truly dedicated, state-of-the-art fan or you can have a life. Take your pick. ~Thomas Boswell

    Having a life is overrated.

  10. #9
    Member Mitri's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    492

    Re: Furcal??

    No thanks.

    I'd rather the team go the cheaper route and take a chance on Greene via trade. Or stay put, see how the first half of the year pans out, and make a move later in the season.

    Honestly, I'd like to see Janish get one last chance this Spring.

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,127

    Re: Furcal??

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitri View Post
    No thanks.

    I'd rather the team go the cheaper route and take a chance on Greene via trade. Or stay put, see how the first half of the year pans out, and make a move later in the season.

    Honestly, I'd like to see Janish get one last chance this Spring.
    Please not Greene. We'd be doing the Padres a favor by simply taking his $6.5M contract off their books. Much better to stay with Gonzo. I too would like to see Janish get another shot.

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Milford, Clifton
    Posts
    1,585

    Re: Furcal??

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitri View Post
    No thanks.

    I'd rather the team go the cheaper route and take a chance on Greene via trade. Or stay put, see how the first half of the year pans out, and make a move later in the season.

    Honestly, I'd like to see Janish get one last chance this Spring.
    WJ said no on Greene.
    Follow me on twitter @EricLilly7

  13. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    1,154

    Re: Furcal??

    Quote Originally Posted by NorrisHopper30 View Post
    WJ said no on Greene.
    I know the Reds owe Gonzo some money, but I'm more than a little uncomfortable putting any confidence in the thought that he will be able to play this year. He may not be healthy and, at the very least, that will affect his production both in the field and at the plate. Even though he is under contract, the Reds may find themselves scrambling to fill a very important hole if they wait until spring training to see if this guy is able to do the job. He wasn't overly impressive when he was healthy...why think he will be better now? If a good shortstop is available for a reasonable price...you have to consider it, don't you?

  14. #13
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,873

    Re: Furcal??

    Quote Originally Posted by Emin3mShady07 View Post
    This would mean that Furcal, adding in baserunning, is about 15 runs better than Jeff Keppinger and IMO worth the $10 MIl/year
    15 runs is worth $10 million? Anyway, Keppinger isn't as bad defensively as last year showed.

  15. #14
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,873

    Re: Furcal??

    We need a stop-gap at SS because Valaika will be ready for 2010 and that's exactly what we've got in Gonzalez. I'm not worried about the injury, it was a broken bone, not ligament or tendon damage.

    You sign Furcal and at the end of next year everybody will feel the same way about it as they do now about Cordero.

  16. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,018

    Re: Furcal??

    Don't waste money on Furcal or Greene. Save that money for other positions or for future free agent signings since there isn't a surplus of targets this year.

    If Gonzalez is not healthy, Janish is a very good option defensively and Keppinger/Hairston aren't bad offensive options (assuming Kepp puts up better numbers once his knee completely heals).


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25