So glad we didn't sign Teixeira!

[Dojji]

Sorry, I had to say this, it's been on my chest since the big brouhaha about it back in 09 when I took a LOT of heat from opposing the signing.

 

Looks like it was the right decision in hindsight to oppose that contract. He had the one great year in 09 and then he's been pretty good but not $22M good the next 3 years, but he's been steadily declining every year since 09 -- and the Yankees have 3 more years at 22 mil to eat.

 

Now this probably doesn't hurt the Yankees very much, but it absolutely would have hurt us. Sometimes the Yankees just outright do us a favor.

 

There, I've said it, that's done, I'm over it, we can all move on now.

[SCM33]

If you were done with it, you wouldn't have brought it up 5 years later.

 

At the time, the right move was to sign Teixeira. Hindsight is a beautiful thing.

[Dojji]

You don't listen very well do you. I needed to say it, once, now I don't care anymore.

 

At the time, the right move was to limp along with Lowell until we signed Beltre. What we should have done was hold onto Beltre at the end of that year. With Youk full time at first maybe he lasts longer.

 

The huge encumbering contract for a player who's over 27 years old is rarely the right move.

[User Name]

Yet you were full-on against the Beltre signing remember? Attacking Beltre at every opportunity? Now "the right move was signing him". LOL

[Dojji]

Why do people constantly do this?

 

I outright opposed the signing of Beltre, and I was dead wrong, and admitted it at the time. By the end of that year I was all for re-upping him. It would have been the right move at the time, and certainly would have been right in retrospect. We ditched Beltre so that we could sign Adgon, and it was absolutely the wrong thing to do.

 

Some of you might be too personally insecure to admit when you took a wrong position. I go out on a limb so much that I can't afford that luxury.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Dojji

[User Name]

http://www.talksox.com/forum/threads/13370-How-long-can-we-keep-the-candle-lit-for-Beltre?highlight=beltre

 

Thread started by Dojji on 04-30-09 asking for Beltre to be benched, and exposing his dislike and "lack of trust" in Beltre. Now trying to justify his idea to not sign Teixeira (which was based on the idea that we had Lars Anderson the 20X ALL-STAR, NOT THE FACT THAT HE THOUGHT BELTRE WAS THE ANSWER) on Beltre being here.

 

This is comedy gold.

[a700hitter]

Theo made many many bad decisions that helped drag this team to the bottom of the standings. It's really irrelevant that some people here agreed with some of those moves. Completely meaningless.

[VA Sox Fan]

Not sure this needed it's own thread?

[Palodios]

Texeira has been declining for a while. But if you're 5 years through an 8 year contract, and the guy has anchored you through a World Series, has been healthy most of it, has given you three stellar years, and one solid one... why complain? He will continue to have good power and defense, and the Yankees have plenty of money to pay him.

[User Name]

Texeira has been declining for a while. But if you're 5 years through an 8 year contract, and the guy has anchored you through a World Series, has been healthy most of it, has given you three stellar years, and one solid one... why complain? He will continue to have good power and defense, and the Yankees have plenty of money to pay him.

 

Not only that, but OP's tooting his own horn when his alternative to Teixeira was Lars Anderson, who flamed out spectacularly. His proclaiming that he "thought we should have re-signed Beltre" is laughable revisionist history, since he didn't want Beltre in the first place and spent most of that season bashing him. Just wow.

[italstallianion]

Realistically speaking I don't think anyone is worth the length/money that Teixeira got. Especially at the age in which those contracts are given out.

 

Edit: With few exceptions.

[Palodios]

Not only that, but OP's tooting his own horn when his alternative to Teixeira was Lars Anderson, who flamed out spectacularly. His proclaiming that he "thought we should have re-signed Beltre" is laughable revisionist history, since he didn't want Beltre in the first place and spent most of that season bashing him. Just wow.

 

I also didn't want the Sox to re-sign Beltre, and it almost seems like it turned out to be an awful miss for Theo....

 

Until I remembered that the Sox got Jackey Bradley Jr. and Blake Swihart for compensation. That was the filthy draft class right before the bonus pool system, so the draft was loaded with very talented young players who didn't want to get paid less in the following year. Losing Beltre sucked, but if Bradley turns out to be what we hope, it will be a modest, but respectable move

[User Name]

To be honest i was all for the idea of letting Beltre go and moving Youk to third so they could trade for Gonzalez, and that ended up being a failure of massive proportions. But who knows, maybe not re-signing Beltre was the right call, given how much his production is boosted by Arlington.

[sk7326]

Beltre was a steal - helps to leave Safeco doesn't it. I get not signing him - though he is a HoF level 3B. Their plan made sense but when Youkilis' body broke down the 3B position became a hole. And when the injuries piled up in general, you get the "collapse" and then the 2012 disaster.

[SoxSport]

Letting Beltre go was a mistake. But the Rangers way overpaid for him at the time. Of course, it doesn't seem that way now. They lucked out.

Moving Youks back to 3B was a mistake. He wasn't able to handle it full time physically at that point.

[sk7326]

Not sure how much of an overpay it was ... it definitely was reflective of a sport that is starting to understand the value of defense and ballpark effects and not just batting average and RBIs. Elite defensive 3B whose bat more than justified it when you took out his horrid home park out of the equation. Red Sox paid him a little less, but I suspect it was quid pro quo. Red Sox did not want to tie up the position and Beltre needed a place where he could put up the counting stats for his reputation to be totally repaired.

[Lord Snow]

The Teixeira deal isn't looking great for the Yankees right now, but it was still a good signing by them. As another poster pointed out he helped them win a World Series in 2009 and has had decent production for the Yankees when healthy. When its all said and done it will never be viewed as a "bad" contract.

 

Most of the long contracts (6+ years) that get signed are not worth it for the team and I think we are going to see the frequency of them start to decline due to the Pujols deal, and A-Rod's latest contract. So few players ever come close to making their contract worthwhile.

[SCM33]

.....again, Teixeira was the right move at the time. He was a monster in his FA year. It didnt work out well for the Yanks, but at the time, he was the right move for the Sox. Again, hindsight is a beautiful thing.

[RedSoxNC84]

How about we get current and talk about how great it is that we didn't get Matt Garza? Anyone else see what happened saturday night?

[Palodios]

How about we get current and talk about how great it is that we didn't get Matt Garza? Anyone else see what happened saturday night?

 

So far he has pitched 7, 7.1 and 8 innings with the Rangers, totalling an ERA of 2.82. Still not worth Mike Olt, but it looks like the Rangers might be in good shape to catch Oakland.

[mvp 78]

How about we get current and talk about how great it is that we didn't get Matt Garza? Anyone else see what happened saturday night?

 

So a good reason not get someone is because of their poor bedside manner on Twitter?

[Bellhorn04]

It's hard not to enjoy seeing the Yankees get burned on some of these big contracts. They bent over for A-Rod's opt-out clause, then they agreed to let Sabathia have an opt-out clause of his own and now they're getting burned on that too.

 

Hardly even noticed is that in 2012-13 A. J. Burnett has given Pittsburgh 331 innings with a 3.21 ERA, while having 20 million of his 33 million salary paid by the Yankees.

[sk7326]

Most of these long term deals are bad ideas - but to win a bidding war, a team might accept that years 5-7 are worth it for the years 1-4. For the Yankees, flags fly forever - their free agent binge got them a title, so it worked in that sense. What did not work was desperately thin starting pitching. Burnett had been his whole career essentially a rich man's Felix Doubront, but behind Sabbathia there was a lot of "hope". And now with Sabbathia getting older, it looks doubly bad. Being the Yankees you expect some sort of turnover - how I don't know.

[marklmw]

Sorry, I had to say this, it's been on my chest since the big brouhaha about it back in 09 when I took a LOT of heat from opposing the signing.

 

Looks like it was the right decision in hindsight to oppose that contract. He had the one great year in 09 and then he's been pretty good but not $22M good the next 3 years, but he's been steadily declining every year since 09 -- and the Yankees have 3 more years at 22 mil to eat.

 

 

 

Now this probably doesn't hurt the Yankees very much, but it absolutely would have hurt us. Sometimes the Yankees just outright do us a favor.

 

There, I've said it, that's done, I'm over it, we can all move on now.

 

Great call ... you can learn a lot from bad deals. Teixeira's number also include playing in the most friendly ballpark in all of baseball for a left handed hitter. I think 3/4's of Jeters HR's have been to right field. Any deal longer than 5 years gets significantly greater with each year added.

[RedSoxNC84]

So far he has pitched 7, 7.1 and 8 innings with the Rangers, totalling an ERA of 2.82. Still not worth Mike Olt, but it looks like the Rangers might be in good shape to catch Oakland.

 

As long as they don't bunt the whole time...

 

 

 

So a good reason not get someone is because of their poor bedside manner on Twitter?

 

Well, not exactly.. It's one thing to complain, but to s*** talk another player's wife? I can imagine he's probably not a good clubhouse guy with that attitude..

 

I still think that Peavy was a better idea than Garza.

[italstallianion]

Not to mention Peavy cost Iglesias and 3 lottery tickets (highest ranked prospect was 36th) whereas Garza cost Olt, Edwards (two top ten prospects I believe), Grimm, and 1-2 PTBNL's, in which there is the potential another decent piece can be named a PTBNL.

[mvp 78]

Not to mention Peavy cost Iglesias and 3 lottery tickets (highest ranked prospect was 36th) whereas Garza cost Olt, Edwards (two top ten prospects I believe), Grimm, and 1-2 PTBNL's, in which there is the potential another decent piece can be named a PTBNL.

 

Plus Peavy is signed through 2014, while Garza isn't.

[italstallianion]

Plus Peavy is signed through 2014, while Garza isn't.

 

Plus Plus Peavy can turn into a 1st round draft pick while Garza can't.

[BornToRun]

Plus Plus Peavy can turn into a 1st round draft pick while Garza can't.

 

Plus Peavy isn't sporting some ungodly abomination on his chin that he thinks is facial hair.

[User Name]

And doesn't spit like a drunken sailor.