Agent claims Bay is 'moving on'
in [Boston Red Sox]
|
From: McDuck on 13 Dec 2009 20:05 On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:23:45 -0800 (PST), BTT <BTTalbot2003(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> Also...when was the Red Sox last offer? �The numbers don't seem as if they >> have changed. �If there is another offer they need to top...is it just the 5 >> million difference offered by the Mets? �That hardly seems like a serious >> effort by them. �Why would the Sox offer another year if no one else will?- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >I think that you're right--it's the fifth (or sixth, etc.) year that's >the sticking point. >Maybe Theo is gun-shy after giving JD 5years--the longest of Theo's >tenure (?). > Yes, what I saw was 6 years from the Mets, but all unreliable. I understand the RS being nervous about long contracts. I would not go over 5 years for Bay and would be v. reluctant to go over 4. But the long contract with Drew has worked well for the RS so far (2 years to go, I believe). The first year was clearly a disappointment, but the RS were not going to get him for less than a year <g>. The last two years he's played good defense with an OPS over .900, which is v. good. The worry --- a legitimate worry --- was that Drew would not be able to produce due to injury. He missed time in 2008, with only 109 games and 368 ABs. But he was pretty good in 2009, which is the first year of what could conceivably be the "long" part of his contract. No iron man, but 137 games and 452 ABs. I think, so far, the deal for Drew has been a positive.
From: Gary on 13 Dec 2009 21:29 On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:23:45 -0800 (PST), BTT <BTTalbot2003(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >I think that you're right--it's the fifth (or sixth, etc.) year that's >the sticking point. >Maybe Theo is gun-shy after giving JD 5years--the longest of Theo's >tenure (?). I don''t think he is at all
From: Pearly Soames on 13 Dec 2009 23:18 S/B 954RR wrote: > > > "CalC" <calcarpenter1(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > >> >> He'll get 5/75 from at least 2 other teams...hands down. > > That'll be a busy schedule for him. He's trying to break Ripken's record in fewer seasons.
From: CalC on 13 Dec 2009 23:22 On Dec 13, 11:18 pm, Pearly Soames <tom.champa...(a)charter.net> wrote: > S/B 954RR wrote: > > > "CalC" <calcarpent...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > >> He'll get 5/75 from at least 2 other teams...hands down. > > > That'll be a busy schedule for him. > > He's trying to break Ripken's record in fewer seasons. Mets and Angels and he goes to Anaheim. We can choose to overpay for a much riskier proposition in Holiday or mail it in for 2010.
From: Dano on 14 Dec 2009 00:24
"CalC" <calcarpenter1(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:057275e6-2981-4ad2-bef7-4e6d293a5fbe(a)c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... On Dec 13, 11:18 pm, Pearly Soames <tom.champa...(a)charter.net> wrote: > S/B 954RR wrote: > > > "CalC" <calcarpent...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > >> He'll get 5/75 from at least 2 other teams...hands down. > > > That'll be a busy schedule for him. > > He's trying to break Ripken's record in fewer seasons. Mets and Angels and he goes to Anaheim. We can choose to overpay for a much riskier proposition in Holiday or mail it in for 2010. ---------------------------------------------------------- That's the plan. Mail it in. Give up now. Rebuild. Play the kids. Yeah right. That's the plan. Look at the track record of this ownership and management. Horrible right? They just don't know how to win or put a competitive team on the field. Right? Is THAT the proposition you're trying to put forth here? |