The Official 2010 Hot Stove Thread.

[a700hitter]

The available Molina who is a FA is definitely on the back end of his career' date=' and saw a pretty sharp decline in thrown out base-runners.[/quote']He is a fat tank of an old man, but he is still better than Gregg Zaun. He's probably still better than Salty.

[a700hitter]

The Mets might take less prospects for Reyes if we agree to take Beltran as a throw in.

[Dojji]

Worth considering, but i'm not as excited about Reyes as I used to be, and the Mets still have no one to replace him, so I still don't see this getting done.

[BSN07]

That and would the Red Sox want to pay for an extension? I'm pretty sure if the trade for someone it won't be a SS. With Scuataro/Lowrie this season and Lowrie/Iglesias going forward, I think the SS position may actually be stabilizing.

[Dipre]

There are a couple things i keep reading that make no sense (to me):

 

1) How is Crawford a better fit than either Dunn/Werth if he's going to command superstar money when he's not a superstar. Both Werth and Dunn are better overall hitters than Crawford, and both significantly cheaper. In fact, from the link a700 posted, Werth's looking for 15 mill, and Crawford's going to get 20 per to steal a couple more bases, even though speed is the first thing that's going to go from his game. Ellsbury can do basically everything Crawford can do for a fraction of the cost, and while i agree that having both of them would be awesome, it wouldn't be as awesome with Crawford making 20 per.

 

2) God, no on AJ *******. Olivo and Martin (Doiji's hard-on for him notwithstanding) seem like better options.

 

3) Downs? No thanks. Type A and offered arb. There are other relievers who could get it done without surrendering draft picks.

 

4) Puma sounds nice on a one-year deal.

 

Please don't pay Carl Crawford 20 million dollars:

 

Dipre's dream off-season: Werth/ Crawford (17 per or less), Dunn/Puma, Olivo/Martin/Varitek , Feliciano, Sherrill, Putz, Balfour.

[Palodios]

Let's pass judgements on what these players will be paid, instead of what they want. Crawford will probably get an extra year based on defense, but I don't think it'll be a huge difference otherwise. Jeter isn't getting his 200 million afterall.

[a700hitter]

There are a couple things i keep reading that make no sense (to me):

 

1) How is Crawford a better fit than either Dunn/Werth if he's going to command superstar money when he's not a superstar. Both Werth and Dunn are better overall hitters than Crawford, and both significantly cheaper. In fact, from the link a700 posted, Werth's looking for 15 mill, and Crawford's going to get 20 per to steal a couple more bases, even though speed is the first thing that's going to go from his game. Ellsbury can do basically everything Crawford can do for a fraction of the cost, and while i agree that having both of them would be awesome, it wouldn't be as awesome with Crawford making 20 per.

 

2) God, no on AJ *******. Olivo and Martin (Doiji's hard-on for him notwithstanding) seem like better options.

 

3) Downs? No thanks. Type A and offered arb. There are other relievers who could get it done without surrendering draft picks.

 

4) Puma sounds nice on a one-year deal.

 

Please don't pay Carl Crawford 20 million dollars:

 

Dipre's dream off-season: Werth/ Crawford (17 per or less), Dunn/Puma, Olivo/Martin/Varitek , Feliciano, Sherrill, Putz, Balfour.

Why do you care so much if Crawford gets 20 million if that is what MLB excecs think he is worth? It's not like that $5 million extra for him will send the Sox to financial ruin. Heck, they have thrown away tens of millions on bad contracts in recent years and it didn't financially cripple them, e.g. Lugo, Renteria, and to a lesser extent Lowell and Dice K. I could understand if the Sox were to pay $5 million more per year than the next highest offer, because they would be setting the market. I'm not sure why you would be upset if they get him for market price. The guy is tremendous offensive weapon.

[Dipre]

Let's pass judgements on what these players will be paid' date=' instead of what they want. Crawford will probably get an extra year based on defense, but I don't think it'll be a huge difference otherwise. Jeter isn't getting his 200 million afterall.[/quote']

 

I think you're being unrealistic by both using the Jeter comparison (it makes no sense because they are absolutely different situations) and the fact that Crawford has all the leverage (based on past contracts, age and performance) to wait out the contract he wants. In fact, the Angels have already stated they'd be willing to spend 100 million plus on him:

 

Angels Prepared to Make Run at Crawford

 

Thursday, November 11, 2010

 

The Los Angeles Times reports free agent outfielder Carl Crawford will be the Angels primary focus this offseason.

Owner Arte Moreno never has stared down the Yankees or Red Sox in a bidding war for a free agent. However, if Torii Hunter is correct, the Angels' owner will have to do just that in order to sign Crawford this winter.

 

Hunter, who speaks regularly with Crawford, said on Wednesday that he expected the Angels and Red Sox would be the finalists to sign him.

 

"The Yankees are not going to go after him," Hunter said. "They've got Cliff Lee. Boston might be the team.

 

"I think Boston and the Angels, that will be the bidding war."

 

The Angels are prepared to make the left fielder the first $100-million player in club history. Hunter said he anticipated Moreno would soon make a recruiting visit to Crawford's Texas home.

 

"In the near future, I think Arte and all the guys will take a trip and go see the guy," Hunter said.

 

Hunter said Crawford's flashy on-field style contrasted with a "down-to-earth" and "low-key" off-field persona that would play well in Anaheim, particularly after nine years under the sparsely peopled dome in Tampa Bay.

 

"We've got the weather, the sun shining, and 40,000 fans every night, win or lose," Hunter said. "When you get off turf, this is where you want to be.

 

"He's been saying great things about Anaheim. He needs to go through the process and take his visits. That's what I encouraged him to do. If he comes out here and takes a visit, we're going to win him over."

 

http://www.csnphilly.com/11/11/10/Angels-Prepared-to-Make-Run-at-Crawford/landing_word_baseball.html?blockID=350345&feedID=7420

 

This is not stuff i'm pulling out of my ass, but an analysis made after seeing the stance of the Angels, who are prepared to go into a bidding war for Crawford, so how, under that scenario, you propose he gets less than the 20 million he seeks?

[Palodios]

I'm not proposing Crawford gets less. I'm proposing Werth gets more. I read a report that he wanted 7 years.

[Dipre]

Why do you care so much if Crawford gets 20 million if that is what MLB excecs think he is worth? It's not like that $5 million extra for him will send the Sox to financial ruin. Heck' date=' they have thrown away tens of millions on bad contracts in recent years and it didn't financially cripple them, e.g. Lugo, Renteria, and to a lesser extent Lowell and Dice K. I could understand if the Sox were to pay $5 million more per year than the next highest offer, because they would be setting the market. I'm not sure why you would be upset if they get him for market price. The guy is tremendous offensive weapon.[/quote']

 

Two main reasons:

 

1) His market price is not 20 million.

 

2) The Red Sox have a budget limit, and fiscally irresponsible contracts like Lugo and Renteria have indeed been the deciding factor about some later acquisitions that would have probably sent the team over luxury tax.

 

I've said it before and i'll say it again: It's not about the player i'm "excited" to see, but about the player that makes sense on a financial, need and "fit" sense.

 

Funny thing is, that if they blow their load on Crawford and he declines, you'll be the first in line to call the FO out on "such a horrible acquisition". I'm just sayin'.

 

Hey, keep pining for Crawford at 20 per if you want, that is , after all, your opinion, and at this point, we can just agree to disagree, specially since our preferences have absolutely no weight on the FO's final decisions on who to sign. But i stand by the fact that you're overvaluing the player because you "like" him.

[a700hitter]

Two main reasons:

 

1) His market price is not 20 million.

 

2) The Red Sox have a budget limit, and fiscally irresponsible contracts like Lugo and Renteria have indeed been the deciding factor about some later acquisitions that would have probably sent the team over luxury tax.

 

I've said it before and i'll say it again: It's not about the player i'm "excited" to see, but about the player that makes sense on a financial, need and "fit" sense.

 

Funny thing is, that if they blow their load on Crawford and he declines, you'll be the first in line to call the FO out on "such a horrible acquisition". I'm just sayin'.

This isn't directed at "no one in particular"? What did you tell me about making assumptions? Let's keep it to the issues and not your perception of what my emotional reaction would be if he didn't work out. BTW: If it didn't work out, it would be the FO that would be accountable, not some fans on a message board. Of course if he were to suck, we'd notice. Are we supposed to pretend that it worked out if he clearly bombs? I don't even understand where you are going with that one.

 

Hey' date=' keep pining for Crawford at 20 per if you want, that is , after all, your opinion, and at this point, we can just agree to disagree, specially since our preferences have absolutely no weight on the FO's final decisions on who to sign. But i stand by the fact that you're overvaluing the player because you "like" him.[/quote']If more than one team is willing to pay him $20 million per year, that is his market value. You are an attorney. FMV is established by what an arms length buyer is willing to pay for something. Baseball execs are sophisticated buyers. They are not going to intentionally pay more for the guy than what they think he is worth to their franchises.

[ORS]

Why do you care so much if Crawford gets 20 million if that is what MLB excecs think he is worth? It's not like that $5 million extra for him will send the Sox to financial ruin. Heck' date=' they have thrown away tens of millions on bad contracts in recent years and it didn't financially cripple them, e.g. Lugo, Renteria, and to a lesser extent Lowell and Dice K. I could understand if the Sox were to pay $5 million more per year than the next highest offer, because they would be setting the market. I'm not sure why you would be upset if they get him for market price. The guy is tremendous offensive weapon.[/quote']

But, statistically, he's not more of an offensive weapon than Werth and Dunn. He's not. You keep throwing this out there like there's some collosal offensive difference that they'd be missing out on if they went for the other option. He's more exciting, because he's fast, but in terms of productivity, he's not better. He just cracked 7.0 in RC/G this past season. Werth and Dunn have been doing that for years.

 

If they can get Werth for less AAV and years, this is the smart move. Like it or not, they will have a budget, and money saved here can be used to help the other deficient areas of the team.

[a700hitter]

But' date=' statistically, he's not more of an offensive weapon than Werth and Dunn. He's not. You keep throwing this out there like there's some collosal offensive difference that they'd be missing out on if they went for the other option. He's more exciting, because he's fast, but in terms of productivity, he's not better. He just cracked 7.0 in RC/G this past season. Werth and Dunn have been doing that for years.[/quote']... and the market place will determine their relative values.

[Dipre]

But, statistically, he's not more of an offensive weapon than Werth and Dunn. He's not. You keep throwing this out there like there's some collosal offensive difference that they'd be missing out on if they went for the other option. He's more exciting, because he's fast, but in terms of productivity, he's not better. He just cracked 7.0 in RC/G this past season. Werth and Dunn have been doing that for years.

 

If they can get Werth for less AAV and years, this is the smart move. Like it or not, they will have a budget, and money saved here can be used to help the other deficient areas of the team.

 

 

This.

 

And the fact that one team is willing to overpay for a player's production (like it or not, they use statistics to compile a player's actual value) doesn't mean that's his actual value. As an attorney, you should that if someone is willing to pay 10 dollars for 3 dollar pound of chicken, that's idiocy, and doesn't represent the chicken's market value.

 

And stop acting butthurt about the other post that i said was not directed at you, a disclaimer i did not make in this post because it was clearly directed at you a700.

[ORS]

... and the market place will determine their relative values.

I've asked before, and I'll ask again. Do you believe their contracts are evidence of being more talented?

[a700hitter]

I've asked before' date=' and I'll ask again. Do you believe their contracts are evidence of being more talented?[/quote']I think they establish market value. They have different talents.

[ORS]

I think they establish market value. They have different talents.

Ok, because before when I brought up the fact that there isn't much statistical evidence to support your claim of a wide gap in talent, you brought up the fact that you believe Crawford will receive much more money on the market.

 

I don't disagree that he will. However, that point felt like a non sequitor to me. How they are valued doesn't always correlate to the more productive player.

[a700hitter]

This.

 

And the fact that one team is willing to overpay for a player's production (like it or not, they use statistics to compile a player's actual value) doesn't mean that's his actual value. As an attorney, you should that if someone is willing to pay 10 dollars for 3 dollar pound of chicken, that's idiocy, and doesn't represent the chicken's market value.

Baseball exces are sophisticated businessmen. If two or more of them would pay $20 million for him that would establish his FMV in any court in the U.S.

 

And stop acting butthurt about the other post that i said was not directed at you' date=' a disclaimer i did not make in this post because it was clearly directed at you a700.[/quote']Not butthurt. Did you not see the wink. After the wink, I asked you to keep the discussion to the issues, not your perceptions of how I might react. That part was serious. I am sensing that you are getting pissy. Are you?

[Dipre]

Your. Point. Is. Wrong. Talent and payday do not always correlate.

 

Also, the problem here is that it's funny how you're really quick to play the victim card. If you want to keep it baseball, then let's keep it baseball, however, you shouldn't be surprised if people call you out on your "win now at any price, f*** later" mentality, because you've always exhibited it proudly. Overpaying by five million for a guy means not upgrading in areas of need for the team. And as i said before, it's easy to call out the FO for making fiscally irresponsible decisions later while pining for them to make it now. Can't have it both ways.

[Palodios]

As an attorney' date=' you should that if someone is willing to pay 10 dollars for 3 dollar pound of chicken, that's idiocy, and doesn't represent the chicken's market value.[/quote']

 

There are only two chickens in a town with 32 villagers. Everyone needs to eat, its just a matter of who is the most desperate.

[Spudboy]

I'm not sure what's more entertaining. This thread, or Sarah Paiin?

[a700hitter]

Ok, because before when I brought up the fact that there isn't much statistical evidence to support your claim of a wide gap in talent, you brought up the fact that you believe Crawford will receive much more money on the market.

 

I don't disagree that he will. However, that point felt like a non sequitor to me. How they are valued doesn't always correlate to the more productive player.

Different talents have different values. Crawford's set of talents are more unique making them more valuable in my opinion. We'll have to see how it plays out.

[a700hitter]

Your. Point. Is. Wrong. Talent and payday do not always correlate.

 

Also, the problem here is that it's funny how you're really quick to play the victim card. If you want to keep it baseball, then let's keep it baseball, however, you shouldn't be surprised if people call you out on your "win now at any price, f*** later" mentality, because you've always exhibited it proudly. Overpaying by five million for a guy means not upgrading in areas of need for the team. And as i said before, it's easy to call out the FO for making fiscally irresponsible decisions later while pining for them to make it now. Can't have it both ways.

Victim card? I asked you, if you were getting pissy? If you want to talk about your perception of my mentality or how I will react in the future, I'm not interested in that. I simply asked you why you would be upset if the Sox paid Crawford his fair market value. You said that he is not worth $20 million. Neither of us establishes the market for players. The GMs do that. They are knowledgeable business men.

 

If Crawford has 2 offers on the table for $20 million per year and before he signs one of the contracts he gets run over by a drunk Bill Gates permanently crippling him, the court would most assuredly grant him a judgment for $20 million per year, because that is his value as established by the market place. They will not take into consideration that Bill James thinks he is worth far less. That's the way market value is determined. I'm sorry if you don't like that answer, but that's how it works. The marketplace determines value. We shall see how they value Crawford relative to Werth.

[a700hitter]

I'm not sure what's more entertaining. This thread' date=' or Sarah Paiin?[/quote']I have to go with Sarah Palin stunning halibut with a club.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

I'm not sure what's more entertaining. This thread' date=' or Sarah Paiin?[/quote']

 

This thread by miles!

 

I have to go with Sarah Palin stunning halibut with a club.

 

You should be ashamed!

[a700hitter]

This thread by miles!

 

 

 

You should be ashamed!

You're right. I underestimate myself sometimes.

[alphilip77]

Fear the beard.....

 

 

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Jayson-Werth-beard.png

 

Jayson Werth to the Sox in 2011.

[a700hitter]

Fear the beard.....

 

 

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Jayson-Werth-beard.png

 

Jayson Werth to the Sox in 2011.

We can only hope.

[GoBruins2011]

So I see Torialba signed with Texas.

[Spudboy]

I have to go with Sarah Palin stunning halibut with a club.