Prev: AdjOPS team totals thru 10/3/09
Next: when was the last time you were at a pro game?
From: Dano on 12 Oct 2009 17:41
BTT wrote:
> On Oct 12, 4:07 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> BTT wrote:
>>> On Oct 12, 1:53 am, Giovanni Wassen <exta...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> RN wrote:
>>>>> keep paps and bay away from the yankees.
>>
>>>> Why would the Yankees want Paps? Paps isn't very likely to enjoy a
>>>> season or two in the setup role for Mo.
>>
>>>> --
>>> Closer insurance, and to stick it to the Sox? They can afford to do
>>> it.
>>
>> Why is anyone even talking about Paps to TEE? Couple of years before
>> they need worry about that. If Pap goes anywhere next year it will
>> be in a trade. It sure won't be to the MFY.
>
> I must be missing something. Cot's says that Paps is "signed through
> 2009"; the Red Sox media
> guide says the same. Are they leaving out that he's still under Red
> Sox control?
>

Yes. They can and will offer arbitration, and probably work something out.
As I understand it, they have him under contractual control for a couple of
more years. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will chime in with details.


From: Tristan daCunha on 12 Oct 2009 17:30
Hey Dano; Just curious....does your Mom like the MFY?

From: Gary on 12 Oct 2009 18:49
>http://vodyo.com/graboid-laptop-video-speeds-ahead/On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:32:53 -0700 (PDT), PETER SHORTS <petershrts(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Oct 12, 5:03 pm, BTT <BTTalbot2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 4:07 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > BTT wrote:
>> > > On Oct 12, 1:53 am, Giovanni Wassen <exta...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> RN wrote:
>> > >>> keep paps and bay away from the yankees.
>>
>> > >> Why would the Yankees want Paps? Paps isn't very likely to enjoy a
>> > >> season or two in the setup role for Mo.
>>
>> > >> --
>> > > Closer insurance, and to stick it to the Sox? They can afford to do
>> > > it.
>>
>> > Why is anyone even talking about Paps to TEE? Couple of years before they
>> > need worry about that. If Pap goes anywhere next year it will be in a
>> > trade. It sure won't be to the MFY.
>>
>> I must be missing something. Cot's says that Paps is "signed through
>> 2009"; the Red Sox media
>> guide says the same. Are they leaving out that he's still under Red
>> Sox control?
>>
>> BTT
>> STILL IN SHOCK!!
>
>he gets arbitration, but he's not currently signed. he'll be signed
>for another year after he goes through the arbitration process, unless
>the sox agree to a contract before arbitration, which is likely.


Papelbon has two more arbitration eligible years remaining.
From: wayback1918 on 12 Oct 2009 18:55
On Oct 12, 5:32 pm, PETER SHORTS <petersh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Oct 12, 5:03 pm, BTT <BTTalbot2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 12, 4:07 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > BTT wrote:
> > > > On Oct 12, 1:53 am, Giovanni Wassen <exta...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> RN wrote:
> > > >>> keep paps and bay away from the yankees.
>
> > > >> Why would the Yankees want Paps? Paps isn't very likely to enjoy a
> > > >> season or two in the setup role for Mo.
>
> > > >> --
> > > > Closer insurance, and to stick it to the Sox? They can afford to do
> > > > it.
>
> > > Why is anyone even talking about Paps to TEE?  Couple of years before they
> > > need worry about that.  If Pap goes anywhere next year it will be in a
> > > trade.  It sure won't be to the MFY.
>
> > I must be missing something. Cot's says that Paps is "signed through
> > 2009"; the Red Sox media
> > guide says the same. Are they leaving out that he's still under Red
> > Sox control?
>
> > BTT
> > STILL IN SHOCK!!
>
> he gets arbitration, but he's not currently signed.  he'll be signed
> for another year after he goes through the arbitration process, unless
> the sox agree to a contract before arbitration, which is likely.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Papelbon is Red Sox property (with arbitration rights) until afeter
2011
From: PETER SHORTS on 12 Oct 2009 19:17
On Oct 12, 6:49 pm, Gary <golfera...(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> >http://vodyo.com/graboid-laptop-video-speeds-ahead/OnMon, 12 Oct 2009 14:32:53 -0700 (PDT), PETER SHORTS <petersh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Oct 12, 5:03 pm, BTT <BTTalbot2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Oct 12, 4:07 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > BTT wrote:
> >> > > On Oct 12, 1:53 am, Giovanni Wassen <exta...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> RN wrote:
> >> > >>> keep paps and bay away from the yankees.
>
> >> > >> Why would the Yankees want Paps? Paps isn't very likely to enjoy a
> >> > >> season or two in the setup role for Mo.
>
> >> > >> --
> >> > > Closer insurance, and to stick it to the Sox? They can afford to do
> >> > > it.
>
> >> > Why is anyone even talking about Paps to TEE? Couple of years before they
> >> > need worry about that. If Pap goes anywhere next year it will be in a
> >> > trade. It sure won't be to the MFY.
>
> >> I must be missing something. Cot's says that Paps is "signed through
> >> 2009"; the Red Sox media
> >> guide says the same. Are they leaving out that he's still under Red
> >> Sox control?
>
> >> BTT
> >> STILL IN SHOCK!!
>
> >he gets arbitration, but he's not currently signed. he'll be signed
> >for another year after he goes through the arbitration process, unless
> >the sox agree to a contract before arbitration, which is likely.
>
> Papelbon has two more arbitration eligible years remaining.

right, but it's a series of one-year contracts, if the sox don't sign
him outside of arbitration. if he were to go through arbitration,
he'd signed for another year, and then he'd have to go through it
again.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: AdjOPS team totals thru 10/3/09
Next: when was the last time you were at a pro game?