Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted

Goddamnit this should have been a poll.

 

Oh well.

 

My limit is 8 years, 160 million dollars. Even then I don't feel supremely comfortable giving Teixeira that kind of money.

 

Under this ownership, the two biggest contracts given out were Drew's 5/70, and DiceK's 6/101 (:rolleyes:). At that point, it seemed like a lot of money.

 

I don't see them pushing the $200 million threshold. Double the largest contract they've ever given? Doesn't seem plausible, especially with the current economic scenario in this country.

 

If 8/160, playing on the east coast, and playing for a contender doesn't fit Teixeira's wants, I think you need to walk away.

Posted

Tough question.

 

8/184m with incentives for MVP, WS MVP, All-Star, gold gloves.

Two club options to make it 10 yrs if the club wants.

No no-trade clause (until 10/5 status)

 

Hope it doesn't take that much though.

Posted

I want to hear the reasoning behind someone choosing to draw the line at 200M, other than the quote a while ago that said something like, "the Sox would not be outbid, unless someone went with an offer of $200M or more."

 

I draw the line at 170M-180M. Don't get sucked into a bidding war. 170M-180M, (21M- 23M a year) the east coast, plus a chance to go to the playoffs every year should be more than enough.

 

I think anything past 8/$180M, you lose financial flexibility. Even with the payroll the Sox have, that is a lot to tie up on one guy for the next 8 years. I think he is an elite talent, but you have to draw the line somewhere. What I don't want them to be is reactionary based off of the CC and Burnett (supposed) signings. Play our game. It has worked like a charm. No way the O's or Nats go $200M, which is what I think is what it will take for them to pry Big Tex away from the Sox or Angels.

Posted
Goddamnit this should have been a poll.

 

Oh well.

 

My limit is 8 years, 160 million dollars. Even then I don't feel supremelt comfortable giving Teixeira that kind of money.

 

Under this ownership, the two biggest contracts given out were Drew's 5/70, and DiceK's 6/101 (:rolleyes:). At that point, it seemed like a lot of money.

 

I don't see them pushing the $200 million threshold. Double the largest contract they've ever given? Doesn't seem plausible, especially with the current economic scenario in this country.

 

If 8/160, playing on the east coast, and playing for a contender doesn't fit Teixeira's wants, I think you need to walk away.

 

I agree with this last part, and was inclined to say 8/160. However, I fear that if the Yankees land Teixeira, Burnett and CC then they will be the team we had hoped they wouldn't become.

 

The last few years we knew they spent the money, but we knew they had holes. If they fill those holes with actually GOOD pitching and an ACTUAL top 5 bat (not that pretend piece of s*** that Giambi is) then we could be looking up at them for the next 8 years, which I really don't want.

 

So I raise it about 3 million per year and think that ensure that the Sox are near the top of the league for awhile, which may save money by influencing players like Papelbon and Youkilis to stay in Boston because they will see the Sox as a winner. It's weird logic, but basically Teixeira should help ensure their superior club status for awhile, and that status might help them save money down the road in signing the good players that they have currently. Between Youkilis, Lester and Papelbon, I think competitiveness could save them 3 million a year.

Posted

Me too Coco's. Me too. And John Smoltz for, say, 9 mil. What the hell, we're paying Lugo, right?

 

I won't calm my anxiety until Teixeira is a Red Sox, at which point I will likely get quite excited by:

 

Ellsbury

Pedroia

Ortiz

He who shall not be named

Youkilis

Drew

Bay

 

hitting 1-7 for a number of years...

Posted
I don't buy it. Smells like a PR move.

 

"Hey look, we're trying to build a winner here!"

All I know is they have the offer on the table. If he were to accept it I doubt they turn around and say "on second thought that's a lot of money." We'll see though. What I do know is that that franchise needs to make a splash and do something. Aside from maybe 2006 when they had Soriano it's just like watching the Expos....just not in that cave called Olympic Stadium...and in different unifiorms. I think Teixeira, being a local product and a real good player would be just what that franchise needs to get on it's feet for the long term. He would sell jerseys, bring in revenue that would hopefully go back into the team and make them more competitive in the coming years. We'll see though.

Posted
Me too Coco's. Me too. And John Smoltz for, say, 9 mil. What the hell, we're paying Lugo, right?

 

I won't calm my anxiety until Teixeira is a Red Sox, at which point I will likely get quite excited by:

 

Ellsbury

Pedroia

Ortiz

He who shall not be named

Youkilis

Drew

Bay

 

hitting 1-7 for a number of years...

 

Ugh.

 

A lineup in which Jason f***ing Bay hits 7th is just sick.

Posted

Not to get too ahead of ourselves but I would put Ellsbury lower until he earns the ABs, and give more ABs to more productive players. For example:

Pedroia

Drew

Ortiz

Tex

Youk

Bay

Lowrie

Catcher

Ellsbury

 

Again though, let's not count the chickens.

Posted

I went to northern VA to see my dad for Thanksgiving. We got around to talking about the Nationals, and I suggested they may start to be players in the FA market due their public statements about fielding a competitive team. He said he'd expect to see pigs fly first.

 

The Lerner development group (Nats owners) are notorious in the DC market for not paying their contractors. He said it's gotten so bad that several prominent area contractors refuse to work with them. Here's how they do it....construction projects generally have retainage on progress payments. Suppose it's a $100M contract and you built 50% of it. That means you've applied for 50% progress payments, or $50M, however with 10% retainage, you've only been paid $45M. Over time the retainage reduces, and by the time you are doing the punch list (fixing s***), it's anywhere from 1-2.5%. You don't get final payment, say it's 1% so the final is $1M in our example, until the punch list is 100% complete to the satisfaction of the owner. The Lerner group is never satisfied. The punchlist is never complete, and they hold millions owed to their contractors through retainage.

 

Yeah, they could be players in the FA market. But, given that behavior in business, they could also be giving their fans lip service and only interested in raking in the revenue sharing money. We'll see what happens.

Posted
I went to northern VA to see my dad for Thanksgiving. We got around to talking about the Nationals, and I suggested they may start to be players in the FA market due their public statements about fielding a competitive team. He said he'd expect to see pigs fly first.

 

The Lerner development group (Nats owners) are notorious in the DC market for not paying their contractors. He said it's gotten so bad that several prominent area contractors refuse to work with them. Here's how they do it....construction projects generally have retainage on progress payments. Suppose it's a $100M contract and you built 50% of it. That means you've applied for 50% progress payments, or $50M, however with 10% retainage, you've only been paid $45M. Over time the retainage reduces, and by the time you are doing the punch list (fixing s***), it's anywhere from 1-2.5%. You don't get final payment, say it's 1% so the final is $1M in our example, until the punch list is 100% complete to the satisfaction of the owner. The Lerner group is never satisfied. The punchlist is never complete, and they hold millions owed to their contractors through retainage.

 

Yeah, they could be players in the FA market. But, given that behavior in business, they could also be giving their fans lip service and only interested in raking in the revenue sharing money. We'll see what happens.

 

Wow, that's some pretty good insight right there, and it further strengthens my suspicion that the Nationals bid is pure bull.

Posted
Looks like the yankees have entered the fray. I doubt they are true players in the market for Tex, but it would make some sense if you figure that even with Burnett, CC and Pettitte, they will still come in 22 mil or so under budget AND they have 56 million coming off the books after 09. Why not get the best guy now, move Swish to LF or RF and move Matsui, Damon or Nady in their walk yr
Posted
Not to get too ahead of ourselves but I would put Ellsbury lower until he earns the ABs, and give more ABs to more productive players. For example:

Pedroia

Drew

Ortiz

Tex

Youk

Bay

Lowrie

Catcher

Ellsbury

 

Again though, let's not count the chickens.

 

Most likely the catcher will be batting 9th for most of the early part of the year unless that catcher is named Jason Varitek. Maybe even then. If it's Kottaras though for example he'll be brought along as gently as possible.

 

I suspect our catching tandem will either be Tek-Kottaras or Kottaras-Cash/Brown.

Posted

Limit for Teixeira? What ever gets the job done. If I were the Sox FO, i would have no limit. Get it done. We have the money right now, use it. If we could overpay for Drew, we sure as hell should be able to do what ever it takes to get Tex.

Also, I agree that Ellbury needs to be in the bottom of the lineup, I like:

Pedroia

Drew

Ortiz

Tex

Bay

Youk

Lowrie

Tek

Ellsbury.

 

I like Bay in the 5 spot.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...