Monday, March 13, 2006

Let Them Eat Cake

Bully for Tony Tavares. It's rare that I'd say that, I know. Barry Svrluga writes about the Nats efforts to lock up their players, and the questions that surround that and the nebulous ownership situation.

Sez Tavares:
"If somebody doesn't like Brian Schneider's contract, they can trade him," Tavares said. "If somebody doesn't like Nick's contract, they can trade him. Would I recommend to anyone who comes here to do that? No, I would recommend against it. But it will be their team, and they can do what they want."


Barry talks to a few of the ownership groups:
"I have no problem with the contracts signed," one member of a potential ownership group said.

But another admitted that, given the fact that MLB and the D.C. Council agreed to terms on a lease for a new stadium last week and the naming of new ownership is the next step in the process, "I'm concerned about the timing. If you believe new owners are going to be named fairly soon, what's the rush?"

One member of a potential ownership group said that MLB should be concerned that when an owner is chosen, if that group disagrees with one or more of these deals, "They might ask for some sort of relief, or something back from the sale price. Who knows?"

Two and three should STFU. If either of them are having even the faintest of doubts about the Schneider or Johnson contract (and it's not necessarily clear that they do based on these quotes), they're not fit enough to be running this team.

  • The articles says that they're interested in extending Patterson and Cordero, even if they probably won't get to it til the end of the year. I have a hunch that they're going to regret not pushing the Patterson thing further this season. While he hasn't hit arbitration yet, he's going to have the kind of resume which will make him expensive very quickly.

  • 2 Comments:

    • Total guesses:
      1) Lerner - because they seem easygoing.
      2) Malek - because they seem to think they have a right to the team or that it's already theirs.
      3) Smulyan - because he seems litigious.

      Again, total guesses from an outsider perspective.

      By Blogger Scott M. Collins, at 3/14/2006 9:28 AM  

    • You could also read those quotes as warning shots about potential Guillen or Soriano deals -- the quotes don't sound like they're objecting to the deals per se, but rather to the idea that Bowden and Tavares have the potential to run amok. I'd certainly want some money back if they signed Guillen to a five-year deal.

      By Blogger Randolph, at 3/14/2006 9:50 AM  

    Post a Comment

    << Home