Rafael Furcal a Diamondback in 2006? Nomar?

by Otacon on Aug 15, 2005 7:20 PM EDT

Here is an article from Rotoworld.com about possbile destinations of the "weak" 2005 free agent class. The signing doesn't seem possbile but is still an intresting read:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/column.asp?sport=MLB&column=14&articleid=1076

Highly unlikely in my opinion on Furcal but a suprise the author would name the D'backs as the winner. He probably didn't take into account the teams finances. The front office says they want to put a good team on the field and are willing to spend the money. But they have signed 3 players to lenghty contracts(Glaus, Green, and Ortiz) and have 2 draftees who wanted(in Uptons case wants) 5 million plus to sign. So, I bet they are hesitant to spend even more. Especially since the "not rebuilding but re-load" team they put togheter is currently 55-63. The draftees also happen to be listed as shortstops. The only way I see it happening is if they trade Vazquez and we want some pitching in return if we part with him.

Nomar on the other hand is someone I would take a gamble on. He isn't going to demand a lot of money or at least shouldn't. Not many teams will be asking for his services. Lastly, he is going to have a 1-2 year contract tops. Granted he is not the future HOF'er he used to be and the possiblility of injury is there. However, the worse he can do is be a little bit better than Clayton.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nomar might work...

I think signing Furcal to a long-term deal would be a mistake, especially with Drew likely ready around 2007 [though I note Drew hasn't played in the past week due to a strained quad]. Of course, Drew could probably be shifted to second base if necessary. But then, what about Justin Upton...if he signs for us. Okay, it's wrong to rely on prospects, but it's equally wrong to assume they'll fail.

Certainly, it doesn't look as if Sergio Santos - our long-touted shortstop of the future - is going to be the 2006 answer. He's only hitting .242 in Tucson, with a K/BB ratio of 93:32. He also leads the club in errors, with 23 in 111 games. Maybe, instead, we should look at giving Andy Green - hitting .343 this year - more than a cup of coffee in the majors?

However, the way Clayton is hitting, I can very easily see the D'backs renewing his contract for another year. He has actually hit very well in the second half, and is now ahead of Counsell for the season, and closing in on Gonzo. However, the memory of his ugly April (.227) and May (.232) are hard to wash away.

by Jim McLennan on Aug 16, 2005 3:57 PM EDT reply actions

Nomar

Fits into the "but he's cheap" category that I feel has burned the Dbacks in the past. A torn groin is a mess, he wasn't playing great beforehand, and gives me much more pause than Drew's strained quad in AA ball. If Cintron and/or Tracy are trade bait, there could be better options, or if they (along with Vazquez, if he's still worth anything) land us pitching, then I'd much rather stick with Clayton, who we know is inadequate, than put hopes in Nomar and find out he's inadequate. I remember Andy Green hit well when he was up, but don't remember much of his fielding.
Start with starting pitching, and then figure out which not-top-caliber shortstop we're going to have based on what we find.

by andrewinnewyork on Aug 16, 2005 11:14 PM EDT reply actions

You have a point

Pitching is certainly a bigger priority, but your memory is playing tricks with regard to Green's performance last time he was up. In 46 games, he only hit .202 with 1 home run and 4 RBIs, after batting .327 in Tucson. I think the key issue would be how cheap Nomar would be, and we'd better have a back-up plan - which might be where Andy Green comes in?

by Jim McLennan on Aug 17, 2005 3:05 PM EDT reply actions

Green

It was the HR in his second game that I guess stayed with me more than it should. After that I figure was about when catching the start of a radio broadcast at 10pm for the worst team in baseball started to feel less than worth it.

The strategy this year of boosting the defense in the infield and damn the consequences has not been successful (yes, Clayton has only 9 errors, compared to Cintron's 15 at short and 2 at third, but it hasn't been overwhelming).

I guess my thoughts are that if you are not going to buy every free agent, a la the yankees or red sox, you are going to have holes. Between having holes in starting pitching or in middle infield hitting, I'd take the latter every time. If we throw Clayton/Cintron/Green out there and they hit for .225-.250 so be it. I suppose if Nomar costs next to nothing he's a worthwhile risk, but risk he cerainly is.

by andrewinnewyork on Aug 17, 2005 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Firebrand of the American League

Agrees Furcal may end up here: "the Diamondbacks will be in the market for a shortstop and will have the most money to burn out of all candidates."

by Jim McLennan on Aug 17, 2005 6:53 PM EDT reply actions

Why do they have

"money to burn"? Why do they want to burn it if they do?

This is going to tie into the GM search -- do they want someone who finds inexpensive talent to plug holes and then puts out a couple of superstars to make sure the team can compete, or throws money after people whose best days are behind them (or who, like Russ Ortiz, never had days that were really all that great).

by andrewinnewyork on Aug 18, 2005 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions