Plan B

[Gom]

I've been Jacko's daddy for longer than ORS could dream of. Glad to see someone picking up the slack while I was gone.

[JimEdHOF2009]

Berkman is the guy I would like to see in Fenway. His swing from the left-side is tailor-made to pepper the Monster. Though he is no Youkilis at 1st, he can hold his own and play 2 OF positions in a pinch. I cannot even fathom the carnage a lineup with Berkman (inserted between Papi and Youks) could produce. Berkman is also a gamer and would fit nicely in the Sox clubhouse. And yes Jax, Berkman is a better hitter than Tex has ever been or will be.

[Dipre]

I've been Jacko's daddy for longer than ORS could dream of. Glad to see someone picking up the slack while I was gone.

 

Welcome back, and if what you say is true, then ORS did a fine job picking up said slack, lol.

[BSN07]

I've been Jacko's daddy for longer than ORS could dream of. Glad to see someone picking up the slack while I was gone.

 

What's up man? Hows the tan?LOL

[ORS]

I've been Jacko's daddy for longer than ORS could dream of. Glad to see someone picking up the slack while I was gone.

Bitch, please. I've been running Jacko through the ringer since before you ever found this place.

 

Join dates:

 

Me - 6/16/05

Jacko (aka TheRivernator) - 1/27/06

You - 8/21/06

 

So, STFU noob!

[BSN07]

Bitch, please. I've been running Jacko through the ringer since before you ever found this place.

 

Join dates:

 

Me - 6/16/05

Jacko (aka TheRivernator) - 1/27/06

You - 8/21/06

 

So, STFU noob!

 

http://i670.photobucket.com/albums/vv63/CreamyDelight_photo/owned_2.gif

[TheKilo]

For those who want to brush up on their Talksox history:

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/general-off-topic-chat/8253-jacksonianmarch-rivernator.html

[BSN07]

For those who want to brush up on their Talksox history:

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/general-off-topic-chat/8253-jacksonianmarch-rivernator.html

 

Classic stuff.

[26 to 6]

In that thread it seems jacko denied being a med student, and I guess claimed to be a businessman or something. But now isn't it common knowledge around here that he's a doctor? Something smells fishy.

 

 

....oh wait, he fessed up later in the thread.

 

That was hilarious I can't believe i never came across that thread.

 

Now all I have to say is, despite him being an improved poster since coming back as jacko, he should still be banned. Rules is rules, and he broke them. BAN THE f***ER!!!

..na i'm j/p, it's moot at this point.

[Dojji]

I'm a firm believer that a guy should not be punished forever for past mistakes. For some reason. Just FWIW.

[jacksonianmarch]

Berkman is the guy I would like to see in Fenway. His swing from the left-side is tailor-made to pepper the Monster. Though he is no Youkilis at 1st' date=' he can hold his own and play 2 OF positions in a pinch. I cannot even fathom the carnage a lineup with Berkman (inserted between Papi and Youks) could produce. Berkman is also a gamer and would fit nicely in the Sox clubhouse. And yes Jax, Berkman is a better hitter than Tex has ever been or will be.[/quote']

 

I think the question would be, would Berkman at 33 be a better player going forward than Teixeira would be at 29? There's no question that Berkman's offensive numbers through his career are better. But lets look at the last 4 yrs, shall we...

 

Tex OPS

2005- .954

2006- .885

2007- .963

2008- .962

 

Total- .551 SLG .386 OBP .937OPS

 

Berkman OPS

2005- .935

2006- 1.041

2007- .896

2008- .987

 

SLG .556 OBP .407 OPS .963OPS

 

And over the last 2 seasons, Tex's OPS was .963 while Berkman's was .941. So, while you certainly could say that Berkman's career offensive numbers are significantly better than Tex's (by 54 points of OPS), the gap over the past 4 yrs is closing and the trend over the last 2 yrs shows Tex being the better player. Factor in the age difference (Tex turns 29 in April, Berkman turns 33 in February) and the significant upgrade in defense that Tex offers, and it would be hard to say that, going forward, Berkman would be more valuable than Teixeira. And if you wish to go further, over the next 4 yrs, I expect Tex to have significantly better offensive numbers as well.

[example1]

I think the question would be, would Berkman at 33 be a better player going forward than Teixeira would be at 29? There's no question that Berkman's offensive numbers through his career are better. But lets look at the last 4 yrs, shall we...

 

Tex OPS

2005- .954

2006- .885

2007- .963

2008- .962

 

Total- .551 SLG .386 OBP .937OPS

 

Berkman OPS

2005- .935

2006- 1.041

2007- .896

2008- .987

 

SLG .556 OBP .407 OPS .963OPS

 

And over the last 2 seasons, Tex's OPS was .963 while Berkman's was .941. So, while you certainly could say that Berkman's career offensive numbers are significantly better than Tex's (by 54 points of OPS), the gap over the past 4 yrs is closing and the trend over the last 2 yrs shows Tex being the better player. Factor in the age difference (Tex turns 29 in April, Berkman turns 33 in February) and the significant upgrade in defense that Tex offers, and it would be hard to say that, going forward, Berkman would be more valuable than Teixeira. And if you wish to go further, over the next 4 yrs, I expect Tex to have significantly better offensive numbers as well.

 

 

Factor in the $9m more a year (or whatever it is) that Teixeira costs it seems like even a diminished Berkman is more valuable to just about any club than Teixeira is. Maybe that's just me, but that extra half-win that Teixeira may give you per-year probably isn't worth the huge amount.

 

That's not to diminish Teixeira, I just think its important to take cost into account when you talk about "valuable". "Value" should be relative to "cost"... at least in most worlds.

[jacksonianmarch]

As always my friend, when talking about big market clubs, the cash goes out the window

[Paradisecity]

I think the question would be, would Berkman at 33 be a better player going forward than Teixeira would be at 29? There's no question that Berkman's offensive numbers through his career are better. But lets look at the last 4 yrs, shall we...

 

Tex OPS

2005- .954

2006- .885

2007- .963

2008- .962

 

Total- .551 SLG .386 OBP .937OPS

 

Berkman OPS

2005- .935

2006- 1.041

2007- .896

2008- .987

 

SLG .556 OBP .407 OPS .963OPS

 

And over the last 2 seasons, Tex's OPS was .963 while Berkman's was .941. So, while you certainly could say that Berkman's career offensive numbers are significantly better than Tex's (by 54 points of OPS), the gap over the past 4 yrs is closing and the trend over the last 2 yrs shows Tex being the better player. Factor in the age difference (Tex turns 29 in April, Berkman turns 33 in February) and the significant upgrade in defense that Tex offers, and it would be hard to say that, going forward, Berkman would be more valuable than Teixeira. And if you wish to go further, over the next 4 yrs, I expect Tex to have significantly better offensive numbers as well.

 

 

If you are going to look at age you need to look at contract length. I believe Berkman's is up until 2011, which makes his age much less of a factor. He would be a Red Sox less than 3 years, given no extension as part of the deal. His age is a red herring. It is actually an advantage over Teixeira because is he LESS risky by being under contract for fewer years (not to mention about half the dollars).

[jacksonianmarch]

Not necessarily. At least with Teixeira, you are locking up prime yrs. With Berkman, you are locked into his age 33, 34 and 35 yrs right off the bat without getting the benefit of his age 29-32 yrs. I do agree that the back end of the yankee deal is worse than that of any Berkman deal. But the yankees arent paying for Tex for what they think he can do as a 37 yr old. They're paying him for what he can do through the next 3-4 yrs of his prime and likely the last 3-4 yrs of above average play

[Dojji]

33, 34, and 35 aren't exactly 41, 42 and 43. First basemen in particular tend to age reasonably well. I think the advantage of the shorter term deal focuses on the worst case scenario -- if Teixeira gets so badly injured that his performance is affected or he can't play at all, the Yankees are completely screwed. If the Sox acquire Berkman, or just going off the Youk's contract. the Sox are still screwed but to a lesser degree.

[Paradisecity]

MJ- your argument is that a 29 year old Teixeira is better than a 33 year old Berkman, though the numbers don't back you up. So you are using his age. If they had the same length deals, or even close, you might have a point. But they are vastly different deals, the player proving he can hit at 32, and having only 3 years left on his deal. I don't think your argument holds much water.

[jacksonianmarch]

PC, Tex has improved his performance over the last 3 yrs. He has closed the gap over the past 4 yrs and over the past 2 yrs he's been the better offensive and defensive player. I am saying that, right now, the better bet going forward is the younger player who has passed the elder player in performance over the past 2 seasons.

 

For me, I take into account the yrs rather than the money. Both our teams really dont need to care about the money, just the amount of time they are buying. I do agree that Berkman on a 3 yr deal has much more flexibility and is the lesser commitment should something go horribly wrong. But at the same time, you are talking about a player who is still putting up top 10 offensive numbers but is slipping from his incredibly high standard.

 

That being said, my point is, over the next 3 yrs, which would be Tex's prime and Berkman's slide from his prime, who will have the better offensive numbers? I think Tex will. Throw in his defense and he's a more valuable player

[Paradisecity]

Thats not a bad argument.

 

Here's a question for you.

 

If you were the red sox and you could either have Mark Teixeira for 8 years at 180 Million

 

or Berkman for 3 , Plus Smoltz, Penny, Baldelli, and Saito, for 1 with an extra 13 million per year for 7 years and and extra 23 for 5 to have the flexibility to sign players later rather than be locked in

 

For close to the same price ( I am assuming since we are hypothesizing that Lance is a salary dump we will give up a little talent but under par of fair trade, so this would be the only cost in excess of Teixeira's contract)

 

Which would you want?

[TheKilo]

As always my friend' date=' when talking about big market clubs, the cash goes out the window[/quote']

 

Apparently, especially when you ask your city for more money to finish your stadium after spending over $400 million in FA signings.

[26 to 6]

Apparently' date=' especially when you ask your city for more money to finish your stadium after spending over $400 million in FA signings.[/quote']

Jesus Christ give it a rest already.

[jacksonianmarch]

Thats not a bad argument.

 

Here's a question for you.

 

If you were the red sox and you could either have Mark Teixeira for 8 years at 180 Million

 

or Berkman for 3 , Plus Smoltz, Penny, Baldelli, and Saito, for 1 with an extra 13 million per year for 7 years and and extra 23 for 5 to have the flexibility to sign players later rather than be locked in

 

For close to the same price ( I am assuming since we are hypothesizing that Lance is a salary dump we will give up a little talent but under par of fair trade, so this would be the only cost in excess of Teixeira's contract)

 

Which would you want?

 

 

depends on what you'd have to give up for Berkman

[TheKilo]

Jesus Christ give it a rest already.

 

I will when a Yankee fan gives me a proper defense of this spending in this economic climate instead of "it's a business!!!"

 

Seems like an awfully poor managed business to me if you miss budget on the stadium by as much as they did.

[example1]

As always my friend' date=' when talking about big market clubs, the cash goes out the window[/quote']

 

No it doesn't. That's only true in your dilusional world. Everywhere else the difference between 12m a year and 24 million a year is still DOUBLE. For you it is just extra coin that Scrooge McDuck would otherwise be swimming through. At no point does it become advantageous for a team to start throwing money out the window, no matter how much money that team has. Sorry you can't see that, but its true.

[jacksonianmarch]

You keep counting those pennies example, one day Theo might have enough to buy a shiny new franchise pleayer for your team. Cause he whiffed on this one.

[ORS]

I wouldn't harp on them for being over budget, but the public funding in light of their lavish spending should draw criticism.

 

Stadiums get fasttracked in construction. Here's an example. I worked on the Fresno St. Bulldogs arena in 2002. We started building with 50% complete plans. Structure gets reengineered, mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems get reworked, etc., etc. It typically adds money to the bottom line. I didn't stay to the end because I moved 'cross country, so I can't tell you the magnitude of changes, but being 50% over is not out of this world (depending on how complete the plans were at the start of construction).

[example1]

You keep counting those pennies example' date=' one day Theo might have enough to buy a shiny new franchise pleayer for your team. Cause he whiffed on this one.[/quote']

 

Even if he had purchased Teixeira, their spending would be FAR below what the Yankees spend.

 

We can agree to disagree. I think I showed pretty convincingly in the "smoltz" thread, that AJ Burnett is the worst deal (given prior performance) among all of the top-paid pitchers in baseball, including guys like Hampton and Zito, etc., when you look at cost per marginal win. It was in direct response to your points comparing Burnett and Beckett.

 

Take it for what it's worth. I just don't think the Yankees spend their money wisely, and I think that people who defend that with "well, they HAVE a lot of money, so who cares how they spend it?" are defending a stupid venture.

 

Why would we need to have Theo spend the money to make up part of the difference when we get guys like Youk and Pedroia for tremendous deals? I wanted Teixeira, but unless he gets you a championship your team will look stupid.

 

A-Rod, arguibly the best player in the history of the game, has played for the Yankees in

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

 

and the Yankees have ZERO championships during that time, and ZERO world series appearances. Let's see what Teixeira can contribute to that. So far, I have yet to believe that the Yankee model of spending money is in any way something to be replicated. You think it is, apparently. You think it is THE WAY that teams should spend money.

 

A lot of poeple here complain about the Sox not dropping huge bucks as some sign that they don't 'love' their fans, but they have a great team and will be in good shape moving forward. They have a lot to be proud of and your petty jabs at their spending habits don't mean squat since your team has recently been the "Waterworld" of MLB franchises.

[Keeper]

You keep counting those pennies example' date=' one day Theo might have enough to buy a shiny new franchise pleayer for your team. Cause he whiffed on this one.[/quote']

 

Not really. The Yankees have had an excellent offseason. They now look great on paper. You'll recall the Tigers also looked great on paper at the start of last season.

 

They finished 5th in the AL Central.

 

Not saying the Yankees will finish last. Just saying don't get ahead of yourself.

 

And adding to what example said, Teixeira was supposed to help get the Angels over the hump. How did that work out again?

[italstallianion]

I'm pretty sure that I have as many World Series titles as Tex, Sabathia and A-rod combined...

[italstallianion]

And even then Burnett was just on the team (03 Marlins), but only had 4 starts before missing the year with Tommy John Surgery while with Florida.