Rumors: Kelly Johnson, Randy Winn?
Kelly Johnson would be cool.
about 2 years ago
sergey606
79 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Yuck
I hope neither of these rumors are true. They’re nice players, but neither brings what the team needs positionally right now.
Give me Capps and Garko, in that order. Perfect fit, each of them.
Capps: 2 yr/5M
Garko: 1 yr/(something small)M
by Counsellmember on Dec 14, 2009 10:40 PM EST reply actions
Randy Winn can play LF and CF?
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 15, 2009 12:21 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah
But we’ve already got five outfielders on the roster, right?
"I can just see it: Post 'Intervention? Why would I need an intervention?' And then he'd +1 himself."
Yeah
Winn would make a GREAT sixth outfielder. I truely believe that.
by Counsellmember on Dec 15, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
I'll take Winn over Eric Byrnes.
He always plays well at Chase, he’s a high-OBP guy, (which is what we need more of) and he’s got some speed. I’m guessing a bunch of his flyouts at Phone Company Park turn into HRs at Chase.
Besides, CoJack isn’t just an OF.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 15, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
Difference is...
those guys are on the team already. Is Winn so much better that you would pay him to come to AZ and then pay others to sit on the bench?
If so, how much would you pay?
by Counsellmember on Dec 15, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
Byrnes’ contract is sunk cost.
After being traded to the Giants and signing an extension, Winn made $5 million in 2006, $5 million in 2007, $8.875 million in 2008 and a ridiculous (San Fran gives out a lot of really stupid contracts) $9.6 million in 2009.
Over the last two years, Eric Byrnes has made $6.7 million and $11.7 million.
Byrnes is already slated to make $11.7 million next season. Since I highly doubt we’ll be able to trade him, let’s consider that part of next year’s payroll no matter what.
Since signing with San Francisco, Winn has had OPS+’s of 84, 104, 105, and 75. Byrnes, over the same period, has hit for 96, 103, 62, and 67. Winn’s career OPS+ is 99, while Byrnes’ is 94, but Byrnes, for his career, bats 104 at Chase, while Winn hits for 155.
Would I take Randy Winn for $9.6 million? Hell no. Would I take him for $5 million and gamble that he’ll have a bounceback year? Hell yeah.
Even ignoring their career #‘s at Chase, let’s say each player will perform at their average OPS+ over the past 4 seasons. For Byrnes, this is 82. For Winn, this is 92.
Am I willing to pay $11.7 million for an OPS+ of 82 in LF? No, but I’ll have to. Am I willing to pay $16.7 million for an OPS+ of 92 in LF? Well, it’s looking a LITTLE easier to swallow when you look at it like that. But I’d bet Winn has a better year than that.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
In all fairness...
Byrnes hasn’t had that many PAs at Chase. ;)
I get what you’re saying, and I agree that the money we own Byrnes is spent. It shouldn’t affect what the best decision is for the team going forward.
But Byrnes is the 5th outfielder at the present moment. To play Winn, you’re also sitting Parra, Gillespie and Allen (because I assume Conor goes to 1st). Winn is 34 years old and IMO should not be taking bats away from our younger players to possibly squeeze a tiny bit more production.
I would much rather take that 5M and get a set-up man or 1b; spots on the roster that have a bigger gap to improve from.
by Counsellmember on Dec 15, 2009 6:48 PM EST up reply actions
If you can find a 1B for $5M
that has a career OPS+ at Chase Field of 155, be my guest.
If we play the young guys, that makes next year a semi-rebuilding year. I think the Scherzer-Schlereth trade makes it clear that we’re trying to compete.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
OPS+ of 155?
That is impressive, no doubt. Although they come in 155 AB, a fairly small sample size. Lets look at more:
Winn:
Career OPS+: 99
Career URZ/150 LF: 3.0
Age: 34
Conor:
Career OPS+: 100
Career URZ/150 LF: -.5
Age: 27
Parra:
Career OPS+: 85
CareeURZ/150: 3.2
Age: 22
Byrnes:
Career OPS+: 94
Career URZ/150: 5.6
Age: 32
I love the Chase split. However, I think we get more return of 5M by replacing Leo Rosales than one fo these guys.
by Counsellmember on Dec 16, 2009 1:17 AM EST up reply actions
I know, I know.
It’s a small sample size.
But it DID support my argument, so I used it. ;-)
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
Small sample size
And he did it while facing Diamondbacks pitching, so…. =)
"I can just see it: Post 'Intervention? Why would I need an intervention?' And then he'd +1 himself."
More like
Nick Johnson, 6 months, $12M, w/ 1 1/2 years free room and board on DL.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
c'mon now
don’t be scared to take some risk. Nick had 574 PA last year. His upside is sooo good considering the available options. His OBP (.426 last year!) single handedly makes the team respectable in that department.
And any time he does spend on the DL is a chance for Allen to get ABs. I like the fit.
by Counsellmember on Dec 17, 2009 6:11 PM EST up reply actions
You're trying to argue
That the time he spends hurt when we’re paying him is just a “chance for Allen to get ABs”??? If you want Allen to get ABs, don’t sign Johnson.
And I am scared to take risk with this team because we want to win this year and already have risk in Webb, Kennedy to a lesser extent, and slight dependence on rebound years from CY, Drew, and Snyder. If I was an AL team who could sign him for two or even three years as a DH to limit his injury risk, then awesome, I take on that .426 OBP, slot him second in the batting order, and watch the runs scored pile up. Heck, he’d be PERFECT for the Yankees (who are starting to get into the bidding – so look out). But not for a team who is going to try to rely on him as a 1B AND hope he stays injury-free. Those aren’t very likely to remain mutually-exclusive.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
re: Allen
My point concerning Allen is that he is a ready back-up, but not ready to take the position hmself. His presence makes us exactly what you say a bidder for Johnson should be; a team who will not “rely on him as a 1B AND hope he stays injury-free”.
When healthy he would totally transform our offense. I don’t see any other FA player we can afford that does this.
Furthermore, injury is a risk for all players. At least with Johnson, we know the production will be there when he is healthy. The same cannot be said about other members of our team. So why not balance the risk between health risks and production risks. Think of it in terms of draft prospects; some high ceiling high risk players (johnson) and low ceiling low risk players (CY).
by Counsellmember on Dec 17, 2009 7:08 PM EST up reply actions
If you think a guy is a backup
Then you don’t plan on having to have him start from injury… I think we would absolutely be counting on Johnson to be a 1B. We need a platoon guy for Allen who could cover Allen’s deficiencies all year, not cover up his abilities temporarily and then expose all of his deficiencies the moment he goes down.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 18, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions
Still dont like
platooning someone like Allen. If we never let him see lefties, he won’t improve.
I’d rather have in AAA, and call him up in the event of injury to a more offensive regular. It doesn’t put all the pressure on him to be the team’s only hope at a very important position.
But, it looks like NY is going to get him on a one year anyway. A platoon may be the best we can do.
by Counsellmember on Dec 18, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
I'm undecided on this.
In the PCL, Allen will see more lefties.
But, of course, they’ll be the kind of lefty pitchers that are relegated to the PCL.
So I’m not sure if he’s really learning anything.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
I think the Scherzer trade
says we’re trying to win now. So if Allen isn’t ready, he should go down. And if he’s only ready to hit righties, so be it.
We can’t afford to have him learn on the job.
Agreed.
If that means in a year when Webb is gone and we possibly deal Drew to avoid arbitration costs (and, scarily enough, his probable replacement Abreu is into his arbitration too, although at a MUCH cheaper cost because of his injury and minor-league year…) and have EB go away, we de-platoon Allen so he can start hitting lefties (or attempting to) and start planning ahead for the 2013-2014-or-so years, then so be it.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
Something tells me
Winn will cost a lot less than $5M, since he had such a poor year and is old. I’d take the gamble for $1-2M or so considering the possible upgrade and ability to then go out and get ourselves a good bullpen arm (please not Capps though, high competition leads to high prices – good news is we don’t want to go two years).
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 5:50 PM EST up reply actions
Possible upgrade minimal
I just dont see this possible upgrade. He’s the oldest option, and is pretty average across the board for his career. Is that the improvement we need for our offense?
What I do see is that we have 7 guys fighting for 2 positions (2nd/LF). Why is the club looking at more guys to jam in there? If one was head and shoulders above the rest I’d be good with it, but neither Kelly Johnson nor Randy Winn is a lock to be better than in-house guys. I think it’s just as likely that they are at the bottom of the list a year from now.
Why split this 5-7M we have to spend. Go get one guy that has a chance of actually making a difference on this team next year.
by Counsellmember on Dec 17, 2009 6:07 PM EST up reply actions
I think
Winn over Byrnes is a huge upgrade. Byrnes is finished, injuries have completely depleted his value. As Skins noted, he’s a sunk cost. You’re paying him $12M this year and then washing your hands of him. We have around $7M, but that doesn’t mean that we need to overpay one guy because we feel he’s a “difference-maker.” Unless we can get Adrian Beltre at that price, which seems unlikely because of Scott Boras, I don’t see anybody who I’m inclined to spend all of that money on.
The 2B jam isn’t necessarily as significant as you note, because even though we have Abreu, Ryal, Roberts, and Ojeda competing to start there, Roberts can play 2B and 3B, and Ojeda will be our backup SS/2B/3B defensive option. Heck, Abreu could back up any of those spots as well if he doesn’t win the job. So that means we’ll probably have all but one of those guys on the Opening Day Roster in ’10, and there will likely be an open competition between Ryal and Abreu for who stays on the roster, with my bet being that Ryal is gone before Opening Day due to age (although if balls explode off of his bat in Spring Training, you have to make room for him).
To agree with you on one point, I’ve said I don’t like KJ because he sucks defensively and doesn’t appear to be a definite improvement over the 2B options, but perhaps we’re thinking what the Pirates appear to be thinking as well and want to move him to the OF, and think he’s an improvement there? I dono. I don’t like KJ because I think he wants too much money.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
Some differences of opinion
I’m not as sure Byrnes is finished. He had two major injuries; hamstring and broken hand. The first is a nagging injury, but a handful of stolen bases last year shows that it’s probably OK now. The second is a freak injury that should not be counted against his future performance…much. His defense is also the best of the group, although very few people are willing to go with the data on that one because they dislike the acrobatics.
What’s the harm of letting him fight for the job? That was when he was at his best in the past; contract year.
As for 2nd, Im glad we agree KJ is not much to get excited about. However, it does look to me like we’ve got four guys battling for the position. Surely, at least one of them will stay on as a backup for ss and 3rd, but those are spot starts. Why pay money to bring in yet another guy to try out? We’ve only got so many innings in ST to chose from the group we have.
Are you happy having Allen as our lone guy at 1st and having no clear 8th inning pitcher?
by Counsellmember on Dec 17, 2009 7:20 PM EST up reply actions
I want
A cheap, RHB platoon-mate for Allen who will stay healthy and has some power (I like Gomes, Garko works) and another bullpen arm (not a fan of Capps because of the market he’s built up, Chan Ho Park could be a steal).
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 18, 2009 1:39 AM EST up reply actions
In all seriousness
do you think we can afford Gomes/Garko, Park and Winn with the remaining budget?
At this point, I agree about Capps. It doesn’t look like he’ll be the “steal” he should be as a non-tendered player.
by Counsellmember on Dec 18, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
Capps = no.
Too much league interest = overrated.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
And overrated = expensive.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
+1
To this and the preceding.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 2:08 AM EST up reply actions
Well,
Gomes was non-tendered despite the fact that he was going to make about $1.5M in arbitration. Park was also not offered arbitration (for whatever possible reasons they may be). Winn is a low-cost guy since he came off such a bad year. We could do it, but we’d have way too many pieces on the major-league roster and would have to trim some space.
My thoughts: Park could replace Rosales as a bullpen arm and serve as the set-up man for us. Gomes’ addition would have to result in the trading of Ryan Roberts and/or Rusty Ryal, but honestly I don’t see us getting much more out of either of them. Winn means Byrnes gets let go or Gillespie stays banished in AAA until an injury happens.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 2:08 AM EST up reply actions
It seems that things on the Park front are very quiet. I’d love to see us target him.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
Agreed.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 19, 2009 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
I thought
the latest rumors were that Park and the Phillies were “far apart” in their figures.
I have not been viewing him as a bargain…yet. Perhaps he’ll freak out February 15th.
by Counsellmember on Dec 19, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions
Well,
If they’d have offered arb, that wouldn’t be an issue. His starter/reliever splits make it worth a possible investment. He can rely solely on his two best pitches, his fastball and change, when out of the ‘pen to dominate, but has to mix in his fringier tertiary-pitches when trying to start. So as long as you pay him like a reliever and keep him as a reliever, it’s worth the cost.
’09 Park as reliever: 38 G, 50.0 IP, 2.52 ERA, 52:16 (3.25:1) K:BB ratio, 9.4 K/9, 2.9 BB/9, 1.18 WHIP.
’09 Park as starter: 7 GS, 33.1 IP, 7.29 ERA, 21:17 (1.24:1) K:BB ratio, 5.7 K/9, 4.59 BB/9, 1.74 WHIP.
And only a .14 BABIP spike as a starter.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 11:50 PM EST up reply actions
We might
But it seems we’re dead set on Johnson, which I don’t understand.
Maybe this means we’re looking to play Roberts in left and CJ at first? That might not be a bad idea. You know, provided Roberts’ defense in left and Johnson’s at second will be good.
Hmmm....
that would certainly explain it…. puts RyRo, Johnson, and Jackson all in the lineup when a lefty starts?
Allen to Jackson is a step down at 1B defensively, though.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 19, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
That seems
Like too much of a downgrade defensively. If we’re going to do that, just put Augie at 2B.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 11:51 PM EST up reply actions
Or Abreu...
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 11:51 PM EST up reply actions
for no good reason
i’ve always hated randy winn.
like a tornado hitting a jelly bean factory on Halloween.
Well, this is the Snakepit
Hating Randy Winn is practically the official religion.
"I can just see it: Post 'Intervention? Why would I need an intervention?' And then he'd +1 himself."
No, there's plenty of good reason.
He DESTROYS us. That’s why he’s the root of all evil.
Of course, if he signed with us, he’d no longer be the root of all evil.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 15, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
Well yeah, Capps would be nice
But there’s a rumor that like 7 teams are looking at him. I’m guessing the ones that can pay him more money.
"Twin-headed infinite swirling vortex of grotesque suckitude known as Tony Clark and Eric Byrnes"
he's also looking multi-year
I wonder how many teams will offer him 2 years. I think it’s a good investment, at a price of 5M or so. Qualls is a FA next year and it would give us a ready option if we wanted it.
by Counsellmember on Dec 15, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions
Eww
I don’t want to give him two years. And I certainly wouldn’t want to depend on him closing. I’ll take Vasquez or even Gutierrez in ‘11 ahead of Capps. Good news is that the organization doesn’t want to give him two years either.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 5:51 PM EST up reply actions
apparently
more like 9 teams are looking at capps
"Twin-headed infinite swirling vortex of grotesque suckitude known as Tony Clark and Eric Byrnes"
how many players are we going to take fliers on? i can see taking a chance on kennedy, who at least has some potential upside to offset losing max, but winn and kelly johnson coming off down years? i don’t see it, plus having augie is more valuable in my opinion. either of these deals get done and we’re just making moves for the sake of making moves.
"Have a take and do not suck or you will get run." - Jim Rome
I like Winn
But agreed, taking a flier on Kelly Johnson just means we have to move a guy we already have under contract and from whom we know what we’re getting. I don’t see how Johnson makes much sense.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 5:51 PM EST up reply actions
If Winn can be had at cheap enough costs
I love the idea. Dump Byrnes and upgrade for a million or so. Hope that his old-man skills come back, especially at Chase. Kelly Johnson, on the other hand, I don’t care for. We have too many 2B as it is, why sign another one and have to trade Ojeda? Especially since Ojeda’s so good defensively and Johnson is so bad defensively? Not something I’m a fan of at all.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 17, 2009 5:53 PM EST reply actions
good point
there’s at least some upside in dumping Byrnes and taking a shot with Winn with his #‘s at Chase, even if it doesn’t pan out.
dammit, Piecoro is reporting there’s an offer out to K. Johnson.
"Have a take and do not suck or you will get run." - Jim Rome
Maybe it's for
the veteran minimum.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
$2M
It’s a lot to pay for an upside shot at a decent, sort-of proven starting 2B. Not a fan of this offer.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 19, 2009 2:09 AM EST up reply actions
It seems that the FO really doesn’t like Ryal/Roberts very much and doesn’t have as much confidence in Abreu being ready yet. Too bad. I like that trio.
"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8
I like that trio too,
but I’m not sure that one or more of them are ready to start on an everyday basis, either. Especially if we’re trying to compete now.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 19, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions
Incidentally,
there’ll be no Eric Byrnes for Milton Bradley trade. Bradley was traded to Seattle for Carlos Silva. (In a trade that looks pointless at best for the Cubs, and terrible at worst)
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
i love the M's FO
can’t wait to see the heist they pull off for first base
"Twin-headed infinite swirling vortex of grotesque suckitude known as Tony Clark and Eric Byrnes"
It'll probably be
Russell Branyan for like $4M. Where else does he have to go? Everybody looking for a 1B appears to be looking everywhere but Branyan. Giants haven’t taken a whiff at him. We’re looking for a RHB 1B. I don’t see how Seattle gets outbid when there’s nobody there to outbid them.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 20, 2009 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
Aren't
the Giants going after Garko?
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
by DbacksSkins on Dec 20, 2009 12:42 AM EST up reply actions
A little
They were in the NJ hunt before the Yankees provided the perfect fit for him. They’ll probably step up their pursuit of Garko a little now. But nobody is in on Branyan, and I don’t get it. Sure, he’s not going to repeat ‘09, but he’s a major-league everyday 1B…
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 21, 2009 12:25 AM EST up reply actions
Rumors not about Kelly Johnson
I’m putting this here just because it seems like a rumors thread.
I’ve been wondering about the Valverde situation lately. “The experts” are all saying that the only teams without closers don’t have the money to pay him, and that he might need to come down from the 8-10M mark he was shooting for.
Add that to the report that AZ inquired about him early in the off-season, and I think we could have a great use of the remianing 6-7M in our coffers. Big Potato closing and Qualls setting up is a very quality back end.
The draft pick is a legitamate concern. However. it would be a second rounder and we would have a chance (depending on the risk of offering him arb the next year) of getting back a 1st and supplemental a year from now; not a bad trade-off.
Latest update from Nick P on Valverde
The Diamondbacks remain interested in bringing him back — at their price, of course. A scenario the Diamondbacks would consider: Offering him a one-year deal at a lower base salary than what he’s seeking — say, $5 million — along with a promise not to offer him arbitration after 2010. That way, he could have another go at the free-agent market next year, unencumbered by draft pick compensation. No idea if Valverde would go for that.
- Link
"Win, or die" -- Marquise de Merteuil
by Jim McLennan on Dec 24, 2009 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
thanks for the link
hmmm,
howabout 5M and no promise about arbitration next year. But you get to close and we’ll come up with a less silly nickname to call you. At least, to your face.
by Counsellmember on Dec 24, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
But if we get him
We’re likely to throw in that no arbitration clause that mentioned in that link. So that means we lose the pick for one year of Valverde. Which seems shady at best. If the Orioles got Gonzalez for 2 yrs, $12M, and no no-arb clause, we should be able to get a better deal than having to completely waste draft picks for a one-year gig. I’d try to go for the exact same contract as Gonzalez got.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 25, 2009 10:10 PM EST up reply actions
agree
the no-arb claus would be a deal-breaker for me, unless at a vastly reduced price.
I could possibly go for the Gonzalez contract. But I’d rather sign him on a one year if there was any way to do it. Can we put in a claus that states Valvede won’t accept an arbitration offer next year? I’d give him 10M for that contract, easily.
by Counsellmember on Dec 26, 2009 2:29 AM EST up reply actions
But he has no reason to do that...
And we can’t do it because we don’t have $10M. Why not go two years? If we really think Valverde is the answer $6M is affordable next year because EB’s deal goes away. Even though it admittedly dooms us to having to deal some guys next winter because of arb raises (Qualls, Drew, Reynolds, CoJack, EJ). Then again, Webb will be coming off the books as well, although I’d rather not think of that occurrence right now…
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 26, 2009 4:51 AM EST up reply actions
Because he'd close
I don’t think it’s a realistic option, but the draw for Papa Grande is that he’d be closing for us. I think that is the ace in the hole the dbacks hold; his best offers are probably coming from places where he’d be setting up.
And you pointed out my fear of a two year contract; putting us in a bind for next year when multiple arbitrations come up. However, I would not be flatly opposed to it. I think there is a money/year combination that would make me happy.
by Counsellmember on Dec 26, 2009 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Well...
I’d say getting Howry at $2-3M was definitely a better choice than Valverde at $7M with whatever clauses that were put in and a loss of a draft pick. We have flexibility to get KJ and possibly a Garko-type bat at 1B. If we up KJ to $2.5M I think we get him, so that’s $4.5-5.5M spent from our $7-7.5M left. I think we could find a way to get a 1B to platoon with Allen for about that.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 27, 2009 4:13 AM EST up reply actions
I agree howry is really looking like a wise idea.
by BattleMoses on Dec 27, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
Yep
I’m comforatble with Howry over Valverde. I’d rather have Papa Grande, but of course it’s not my money we’re spending. :)
by Counsellmember on Dec 27, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
Howry =
much better deal for the money, IMO.
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
Well,
With an ERA consistently in the 3’s, he can’t blow too many.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 27, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
Well
Either we’ll have to extend our budget, which I don’t like the sound of because we need to make sure we can keep growing it to keep Upton here, which isn’t worth getting Valverde, or we’ll have to bring him here on $2-3M, which seems unlikely…
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 28, 2009 12:39 AM EST up reply actions
Unless
We’re ditching the idea of KJ or a bat for Valverde, which I also don’t like.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 28, 2009 12:39 AM EST up reply actions
Wait a second....
you’re now supportive of the Dbacks getting KJ?
"The existence of flamethrowers is proof that someone, somewhere, said to himself, 'I want to set those people over there on fire, but I don't feel like walking over there to do it.'"
Yeah
I’ve been discussing it with paqs. KJ makes the lineup fit a lot nicer because we can have him second (assuming a rebound, which projections mostly believe will occur) and Jackson first moving Drew back to sixth. Either him or Delgado, who makes more sense to me because a) we replace Allen, rather than Abreu/Roberts, which is probably a weaker offensive spot for now, as Allen could use just a tad more polish and b) Delgado actually could slot fourth, Montero second, so we have better LHB/RHB slotting.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 29, 2009 3:08 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
