Thursday, November 08, 2007

Rumors-a-go-go

Lots of juicy speculation that'll never go anywhere....

  • The Nats want Carlos Gomez and Mike Pelfrey of the Mets.

    Sure. And I want Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds and Andruw Jones on my team. The Mets weren't willing to give either of them up for Cordero last year. And now Cordero's a year older, a year closer to FA, and more expensive. I can't see us really matching up there.

  • The Nats are still interested in Rocco Baldelli.

    With TB's glut of outfielders, he's an interesting candidate. He's battled seemingly hundreds of injuries -- from hamstrings to Tommy John surgery. He's still young (26) and he's under contract through 2011 on a weird multi-option deal:
    2008: 2.25MM
    2009: 6 million team option (4 MM buyout)
    2010: 8 million team option
    2011: 9 million team option

    If he's healthy, he's worth the money. But he's never healthy. But if he comes cheaply enough, he's the perfect kind of Bowden signing -- cheap, with nothing but upside.

  • The Nats are likely out of the running for Torrrriiii Hunter.

    Phew. As I've said, his bat is far inferior to many of the other CFers out there, and all his value is wrapped up on his defense, which is likely to slip because of his recent history of leg injuries. Let someone else suffer that contract.

  • The Nats ARE interested in Andruw Jones, but don't want the bidding to go crazy.

    That article indicates that the market for Jones isn't that strong, so there's a chance that the Nats could swoop in and wow him with a large deal, despite the evil Scott Boras looming in the background. Hopefully this is where Kasten's personal relationship with Jones trumps some of that. 5/$90 for Jones would be a steal.

  • The Nats are interested in younger pitching.

    This is typical rumor-mongering crap. Rosenthal says that then suggests two names (Mulvey, Slowey) without actually reporting that there's any interest in those two from either side. He's just pulling crap out of his ass like a blogger would. He also proffers (wanted to use that word in the blog for a while!) of Cliff Lee, the Indians lefty. One catch -- if the Nats were really interested in him, they could've had him mid-season for nothing, when the Indians placed him on waivers. I suppose they could still have interest, but I'm not sure what changed between now and then.

    (That's not to say that he'd be a terrible pickup, just that unless Cleveland's going to send cash, the Nats likely won't be interested)

    • posted by Chris Needham at 9:02 AM

    19 Comments:

    • Hopefully this is where Kasten's personal relationship with Jones trumps some of that. 5/$90 for Jones would be a steal.

      Hope you've got your asbestos underpants on cause all the Andruw haters are gonna flame you.

      But you are dead right on this one.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/08/2007 9:38 AM  

    • Personal relationship with Jones? You don't hear of a lot of Boras clients giving up the bumper pay day for a friendship.

      Cordero (+ untility player from Belliard/Church/Logan et al.) for Gomez and Pelfry. Sounds too good to be true. Which probably means it is.

      By Blogger Unknown, at 11/08/2007 9:51 AM  

    • Jones was a Boras client last time when Jones went around him and negotiated his last contract personally with Braves management.

      Also, Jones is NOT going to be Boras' highest priority this offseason. That COULD rub our BJ-loving CFer of the future the wrong way.

      (It could also mean that the negotiations for Jones drag LONG into the offseason, like into February)

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 9:53 AM  

    • lee was never available to the nats via waivers. he had options and, in fact, still has another one remaining that can be used in 2008 if necessary.

      no matter, i am pretty confident that cleveland is NOT sending cash along with lee in exchange for nats discards. lee is a 28 yr old lefty, 54-36 for his career who, prior to struggles last year, had won 14, 18 and 14 games in the 2004-2006 seasons. he's already been included in speculation as part of a deal to the marlins for cabrera.

      By Blogger DCPowerGator, at 11/08/2007 10:26 AM  

    • Bill -- He might have options, but after a certain number of professional years, you still need to clear waivers to be sent down. And in this case, his contract required it.

      Lee was on waivers in July last year, and the Nats passed.

      "Lee had two Minor League option years remaining. But because he was on a multiyear contract (the Indians gave him a three-year, $14 million extension last summer), he had to pass through waivers unclaimed before the Indians could send him down."

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 10:29 AM  

    • chris - thanks, very interesting, i (obviously) wasn't aware that a multi-year deal for players with options remaining (which is what the indians do for a lot of young players to buy out their arb and first few FA years) seems to negate their remaining options.

      one addtl thought, if he were claimed, the indians could still pull him back, right? maybe guys like that aren't routinely claimed b/c they know the team would pull him back and they might want to "slide" somebody down themselves?

      regardless, that's why you're the blogger and i'm the bloggee!!!

      By Blogger DCPowerGator, at 11/08/2007 10:37 AM  

    • No problem... those options rules are confusing as hell (as some of my older readers would be more than happy to point out!)

      I didn't know that about the multi-year deal. I assumed it was because of the amount of pro time he had -- he's been around forever.

      Lots of older players have options. Gary Sheffield, for example, probably has options. But the Tigers couldn't send him down if they wanted because he has enough experience to veto the move.

      I'm not sure if the waivers he was placed on would be revocable or not. If you had a gun to my head, I'd say they weren't.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 10:40 AM  

    • hmmm, not surprisingly, i'm more confused. i do know the cle MSM talks about lee's remaining option as a virtual certainty that, if he struggles again, he could be sent back down without any trouble. as opposed to a guy like andy marte, who will be out of options come spring 2008 and has to make the team or likely be lost via waivers. so there has to be a difference, i just can't figure out what it is.

      By Blogger DCPowerGator, at 11/08/2007 10:44 AM  

    • At this point, I'm almost positive that they couldn't send him down without his permission.

      "Also important to remember is that a player with at least five years of major league service (MLS) can refuse any assignment to the minor leagues, including an optional assignment."

      Depends on whether he's at five, I guess. Maybe that last trip to the minors was enough to keep him under?

      Also:
      "When the proposed assignment is with the right of recall by the assignor Club, waivers shall be required at all times if the date of assignment is three or more years after the date the player first reported to a Major League Club during a championship season."

      In other words, if it's been 3 years since he started, he has to clear waivers -- that's the rule that I was thinking of from above. Lee would almost certainly qualify under that.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 10:49 AM  

    • On Rocco Baldelli, "if he comes cheaply enough, he's the perfect kind of Bowden signing -- cheap, with nothing but upside."

      I'd like to see that happen, but I have to think we would have a better chance of prying away one of the Mets outfielders via trade with Minaya. There's been talk since before last season started of the D-Rays shopping Baldelli, and they always wanted way too much in return. Now maybe that this season has concluded those demands have come down, but by how much? I mean, if their front-office was too stupid to pull the trigger on trading him back then (when his value was much higher,) why should we expect them to be more realistic now?

      By Blogger HB3k, at 11/08/2007 10:49 AM  

    • Glad they are passing on Hunter; wish they would pass on Jones. Suprised they are not focusing on Aaron Rowand. He always give 110% and his career appears on the upswing as opposed to Hunter and Jones.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/08/2007 11:10 AM  

    • Rowand is older, slugs less, and is more injury prone.

      Not sure where his upside is. His upside is doing exactly what he did last year, which was a career year in a major hitter's park.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 11:11 AM  

    • So, in one sentence you're unsure where Rowand's upside is and then in the very next sentence you definitively tell us what it is. Perhaps as the inventor of StanSpeak you might want to focus a bit more clearly on how you express yourself in your own pronouncements, lest you eventually end up in some nasty pot-kettle-black situation. Y'think maybe?

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/08/2007 12:12 PM  

    • No, I'm quite sure where his upside is... that reference was meant in contrast to the poster saying that he's still got MORE upside.

      Thanks for reading! (Although thinking about the smell of your food still makes me want to vomit!)

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 11/08/2007 12:14 PM  

    • Also consider that Rowand won't have Utley and Howard taking pitchers' attention in the batting order. I think Jones is the way to go. He's got mega-upside, still plays good D according to Fielding Bible and would definitely help Zimmerman with protection. This will be the first sign whether the Nats are serious about improving.

      JT

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/08/2007 1:14 PM  

    • Tampa have always been a difficult trading parnter. They believe that they have to win in every trade! They will require to much in exchange for Baldelli and will instead take the draft choices in 2009. Remember,there is a reason why Tampa is always one of the 2 worse teams in MLB.

      Torri Hunter has already turned down 3yrs/$45M from Twins. He wants a 5 yr deal. Kasten won't offer a deal longer tha 3 yrs.

      Andruw Jones is a possibility since his poor year and injury rumors will hurt his value. A one year w/option or incentive contracts are an options. But, will he improve over his 2007 year or will he continue his poor performance? Is he injuried?

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/09/2007 7:51 AM  

    • Hey!

      Chris love the blog! Absolutely amazing. Don't reply but I check it out all the time.

      Maybe because I'm a long time Montreal Expo fan and was used to suffering and not having any money to spend but I wish they would leave the outfield alone. Church, Kearns, and Pena should be fine and that doesn't include Maxwell and Logan (who shouldn't be more than a 5th outfielder). Also, if Johnson comes back, we have Young who they've talked about shifting to LF (scary!!!!). For the money, the outfield should be OK for another year.

      Same thing with C. Why spend money when Flores should be able to take a majority of the starts after this year? A friend of mine used to pitch in the minors and he says that catchers are 'everything' to a pitcher. I know Schneider isn't as great as they say he is but he is still solid. Let the two be and pass the gauntlet on to Flores.

      If they are going to spend $ on free agents, I'd prefer it go to a pitcher. Someone who can eat innings, save the bullpen and mentor the younger guys.

      Again, maybe it's the Expos coming out in me, but keep throwing money into the minors.

      I find it interesting to hear people talk about budget and spending on players. I was so used to the Spos developing players and then seeing them move on, you just get used to it.

      Derwin

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/09/2007 10:33 AM  

    • Just had a look at Rosenthal's column where he states the National are maybe sort of going after Andruw.

      He also writes that Garrett Mock could be the number 3 starter for Washington in 2008. Scary. Does this mean that the Nats have given up on getting a quality starter or is he assuming all the $$$ available is going on the erstwhile Braves CF?

      Is there any chance of the Nats getting creative with their deep pitching reserves in AA to bring in some versatile depth to their hitting, like a Willie Bloomquist type? (Was going to mention Freel, but that's not going to happen)

      I would send this in to Bill Ladson but it would appear to mlb.com that only North Americans like baseball, so that's a no-go area to UK residents.

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11/09/2007 2:42 PM  

    • There are ed hardy shirts
      ,pretty ed hardy shirt for men, ed hardy womens in the ed hardy online store designed by ed hardy ,many cheap ed hardy shirt ,glasses,caps,trouers ed hardy shirts on sale ,
      You can go to edhardyshirts.com to have a look ,you may find one of ed hardy clothing fit for you
      http://straighthairgirl.blog126.fc2.com
      http://www.seriousblogging.com/crazygirlsshirts
      http://www.free-blog-site.com/iammyself
      http://d.hatena.ne.jp/hotfishing

      puma mens shoes
      nike air max ltd
      NIKE air shoes

      nike max ltd
      orange converse
      adidas shoes
      nike shoes
      puma shoes
      addidas shoes
      cheap converse shoes
      cheap nike shoes
      cheap puma shoes

      By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5/18/2009 5:16 AM  

    Post a Comment

    << Home