A prediction

Predictions

Sheets signs a deal shorter than Millwood’s but with the same innings-based vesting option, with the Rangers.

Lowe signs with the Red Sox.

Lowe deals for one of our catchers.

Probably all in that order.

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Dec 19, 2008 11:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Lowe signs with the red sox

as their GM?

by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Dec 19, 2008 11:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha!

Red Sox deal for one of our catchers.

I’m finishing up a huge huge project this week. Gah…

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Dec 19, 2008 11:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Sheets deal I'd be kicking around

2/30

An option for the first year, that vests at 300 IP over the life of the contract, which increases with every 20 IP.

So basically.

300 IP: 15M for 2011
320: 16
340: 17
360: 18
380: 19
400: 20 (if he throws an average of 200 IP a year the first two years, he’s a steal at 20M)

Along with other incentives based on performance that could, assuming that he’s healthy and stays dominant, make him a very wealthy man.

by venturafearsnolan on Dec 19, 2008 11:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

there is no such thing

as a player who represents a steal at $20M. Perhaps decent value, but not a steal.

by clark on Dec 19, 2008 12:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why

Would you say that?

by brettgardner on Dec 19, 2008 7:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not even A-Rod in his prime?

Or Bonds in his late 30s, or Pujols now?

by coolrangersfan on Dec 19, 2008 7:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

At that much money, you aren’t talking about a guy who is a steal. Maybe if A-Rod in his prime was also able to pitch like Pedro Martinez in his prime, that could be considered a steal. IMO, a steal is someone who was worth something like 2-3 times as much as they were actually getting paid.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Dec 19, 2008 9:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm?

You don’t think Arod is worth 60 million?

by brettgardner on Dec 19, 2008 9:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Is this a serious question?

Hell no.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Dec 19, 2008 10:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

Then you have a very warped sense of worth, I think. I’ve got to think he generates 60 mil in his sleep.

by brettgardner on Dec 19, 2008 10:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Then why isn't he paid $60m?

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 10:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Because

He earns, and presumably generates, more than that. I don’t understand your question.

by brettgardner on Dec 19, 2008 10:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh

I see. You all were talking per year.

I retract everything and I’m in the process of shoving my shoe up my ass.

by brettgardner on Dec 19, 2008 10:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

heh

I was confused as well…this explains things a bit

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 10:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ditto

Good to know you aren’t crazy.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Dec 20, 2008 11:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Good luck to whoever gets him

I just don’t think he will ever be the best 1B in the game. He pretty much has to be to earn that money.

In terms of VORP amongst ML1B, this is where he has ranked the last 5 years.

2008 11
2007 15
2006 7
2005 4
2004 6

He’s a good player. He’s no He’s no Albert Pujols, and no where close to a $200 million player though. Whoever signs that contract will likely regret it almost as much as the Yankees with Giambi.

Nolan Ryan is the Greatest Pitcher ever, because Google says so.

"BTW I’m officially welching ab03. Yeah I planned too all along, but I figured I’d try to get off the hook with double or nothing first."- Sharky

by DJCahill on Dec 19, 2008 11:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Teix

Yes he’s good, but i agree he’s not in that tier of arod or pujols when it comes to thinking of players more deserving of the 200mil.

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Dec 19, 2008 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Eh

Suitors for Teixeira have to compete with his hometown teams, both of them, who are willing to pay for more than his offensive steadiness. They want to market his face to high heaven.

Anaheim just want the offensive steadiness. And need it. They’re big losers here.

Boston fields a better team than the Angels, so they probably have some advantage.

I can see Boston’s current stance being very real, though. Maybe Tex winds up in Baltimore…

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Dec 19, 2008 11:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Teixeira will follow the money, period.

Unless offers are ~~very~~ close, I don’t believe that a team fielding a better team will affect where he signs.

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Dec 19, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

He’s a typical Boras client. There will be no hometown discounts. If he gets in a situation that is crappy for him, he will whine about it and try to force a trade.

Nolan Ryan is the Greatest Pitcher ever, because Google says so.

"BTW I’m officially welching ab03. Yeah I planned too all along, but I figured I’d try to get off the hook with double or nothing first."- Sharky

by DJCahill on Dec 19, 2008 11:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tex was our Union Rep.

the guy has to go where the money is. he’s a big union dude and these contracts all end up being market setters. something he has an interest in.

mormons stole me and held me against my will with Oklahoma beer and 12+ hour work days.

by Jayslick on Dec 19, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hometown discount

Who’s offering a hometown discount type contract?

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Dec 19, 2008 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Contract

I think he ends up with a near 200mil deal, I think the point was that he just isn’t worth that kind of contract.
However to a team like washington or baltimore he would be worth the advertisement and publicity alone

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Dec 19, 2008 11:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see how me pays for himself like that.

Rough math I know, but 8/200 works out to 25M a year. Assuming the average butt in the seat is worth maybe $75 with add the goodies rolled in, he’d have to bring in 333k more fans per season to pay for himself.

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

didnt say hed pay for himself

but he would be worth it for publicity and increased interest.
not that i’m saying its a good idea either.

"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

by rentz on Dec 19, 2008 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

I think he’s the type of good player who is worth pursuing like the Rangers and Orioles did with Palmeiro and Clark in the ‘90s. He’s a solid middle-of-the-order bat who is reliable (you know what you’re going to get). He’s a solid defender. But he’s not the best in baseball at his position, which is the most loaded in baseball at the moment. I could see 8 years / 160, but really only if your team was on the cusp of winning big. But more money doesn’t make sense to me. 200 million is stupid

by JBImaknee on Dec 19, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I really, really hope the Nats have that kind of money to spend

by robert_d_wilfong on Dec 19, 2008 11:43 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'm telling you man, it's the O's.

Teixeira will not allow himself to suffer the same doom Rodriguez did.

His No. 2 option in terms of dough is his hometown team. It’s a perfect match.

by oc on Dec 19, 2008 11:46 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah I think the O's win out as well...

That would really screw the Angels…

No Tex, no Lowell available, and Manny likely to go to LAD…

by laxtonto on Dec 19, 2008 11:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Will Carroll...

…on his facebook says Tex to the Angels, but if and only if his source is correct about a “ridiculous” number. He must have heard over $200 mil. Yow.

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Dec 19, 2008 11:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Then you can't look at his profile.

And thus, you can’t see the message. That’s why I didn’t post a link and why the link is facebook.com. For your convenience, I cut and pasted his message below.

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Dec 19, 2008 12:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, "outrageous" not "ridiculous"

But here is his message, in full:

Will is hearing Teixeira to Angels, but to be true, a good source’s outrageous number has to be right.

My Music Blog

by FuturePants on Dec 19, 2008 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I always wonder if guys like Teix or Arod ...

or MY ever consider what effects their huge contract might have on their new team’s ability to bring in other FA talent. It seems like, if winning a championship is really your goal, that you would think hard about tempering your contract demands so as not to handcuff your new team’s ability to afford the other talent necessary to win a title. Does it really make a huge difference if Teix makes $22m per year as opposed to, say $17m per year? Depending on the team that signs him, that extra $5m per year in the budget might help get another player that increases your chances of winning a championship. Would it really be a huge financial burden on MY to make $12m per season instead of $16m? It sounds like that extra $4m in our tiny budget might help bring in Ben Sheets, which probably makes us better.

I understand and appreciate the argument that owners shouldn’t be so cheap or stupid as to handicap themselves with big contracts, but it just strikes me as a little insincere when a player says they want to win a championship and then insists on an inflated salary that hampers the team’s ability to add other quality pieces.

by Athos on Dec 19, 2008 12:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

$5m over $17m

That’s 29% — so yeah it does make a difference. Would you turn down an extra 30% pay if someone was willing to just hand it to you?

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 12:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, not at my salary range ...but what more does the extra $5M but a guy

but what more does the extra $5M buy a guy who can already afford anything with the first $17M??

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 12:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think that's irrelevant

30% is 30%. Think of what $5m could do for a charity. I’m not saying that’s what Tex is going to do — but to say there’s no use for any extra money is ridiculous.

Also, to be clear — I support every worker (baseball player or not) in getting the highest paying job they can. I don’t think there are very many people in this world that would just flat refuse a 30% pay increase.

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, that's the problem...

What would keep a guy from doing what everyone else would do?

It’s obvious to me (and most people, IMO) that these guys don’t NEED to grab every last million they can. But, why not if it’s out there?

I can WISH they were more altruistic than the average Joe, since they hardly need the money, but unless someone takes a stand and says “I’ll take less if the owner will lower ticket prices”, it will never happen.

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 1:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Because of the vast difference in the amount of money involved ...

I don’t think your percentage comparison is the right way to look at the question. For most people, a 30% pay increase probably means the difference between living in debt and living in the black. For a guy that is set up to get annual 8-figure salaries, the loss of 30% isn’t going to change their quality of life.

Obviously, the players push for ever higher salaries from year to year. That’s certainly normal human behavior to maximize your income. I’m not trying to impugn their character, but it doesn’t look to me like they really think their goals all the way through. Interestingly, the question I’ve posed seems to never be asked of the player by the press. I would just be interested to learn if such a thing really factors into their decisions when they are negotiating a new contract. It certainly doesn’t appear to.

by Athos on Dec 19, 2008 4:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand what you're saying

I just don’t think any person would actually turn down an extra 30% on top of any salary if it’s actually on the table.

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Granted.

I think the big contracts we’ve been discussing more or less prove that.

by Athos on Dec 19, 2008 6:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

There are some that would

but they are never the one’s that would ever have that offered for one reason or another.

By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw

by Gdawg on Dec 19, 2008 7:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's the question

If you gifted the owner $5MM, do you really think the owner would spend that on the team or pocket it?

What you’re talking about has happened. I think Gretzky took less money, I remember a QB renogotiating his contract to let the team sign someone else, and Tony Gwynn fired his agent and negotiated his own contract (granted, that’s because all he cared about was staying in SD).

One thing is the Player’s Union has a pretty strong hand in things.

Nothing pithy here. Please move long.

by WyoRanger on Dec 19, 2008 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You raise a valid point, of course.

If a player is to be “generous” in order to allow his team to maximize its talent, then you would expect the owner to spend the savings on improving that talent.

It is probably a moot point considering that their always seem to be teams willing to way outspend other clubs to get certain players, which naturally forces contracts ever higher—the Yankees are, of course, the primary example of this.

But I wonder sometimes if a player is happy where they come up, as MY apparently is, and wants to win a title, as MY apparently does, knowing he’s playing for a small-budget (rightly or wrongly) team, does helping the team’s ability to sign other talent by taking a little less factor into their demands? I think we can agree that MY’s contract does not contain a hometown discount and that he certainly would not beat that contract on the open market. So, on the surface, it would appear that his desire to maximize an already sizeable income far outweighed his desire to help his small-budget team sign other talent to complement his own. Given what a super competitive guy MY is, I don’t think he’s lying when he says he wants to win. So I think the answer is that he simply neglected to consider the effect his contract would have on the overall budget when making his salary demands.

I don’t really mean to single MY out here, but his situation is a brilliant example of the overall point I’m trying to make.

by Athos on Dec 19, 2008 4:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OT -- For the love of god

http://www.star-telegram.com/743/story/1103997.html

Wrap. It. Up.

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 12:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

idiocracy

Wait 'til the year after next

by NothinG on Dec 19, 2008 12:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That shit pisses me off...

My wife and I have been trying to have a child for 2 years now. My daughter is almost 9 (not mine by birth, but I’ve raised her since she was 2 years old). The fact that some of these idiots think they have to populate the world on their own and I can’t even have 1 more child so I can experience things from day one drives me up a wall.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Dec 19, 2008 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not only that

But the J-names are ridiculous. It’s not clever anymore — it’s just stupid.

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Dec 19, 2008 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So

Since you and your wife are unable to have children, they should stop? I’m not sure what the reasoning is here. Since I, as a Ranger fan, have never experienced a world series victory, the Phillies should stop playing?

I am sorry you and your wife are having trouble conceiving but these folks take care of their kids financially on their own with no government help, why is that yours, mine or anyone’s concern ?

by BEW on Dec 19, 2008 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

dont know that he was

citing his own difficulties as a reason their constant reproduction is wrong. it seemed more like a parenthetical comment explaining why it makes him particularly angry.

i do think there is a solid case to be made condemning the moral affront of having 18 children. sure they can take care of the kids as a self-sustaining unit and there doesnt appear to be any direct harm to the community at large, but deontologically its wrong; if everybody had 18 children our over-population problem, severe as it already is, would be exacerbated tremendously. we have a responsibility to be good stewards of our planet and the arrogance that its ethically permissible to bring that many souls into this world makes me angry and would make me even angrier if i was in slc’s shoes.

its like paying your taxes. if one or two people dont do it, there really isnt a very substantial harm. but its still wrong, precisely because if everyone acted as those one or two rebels did we would be in a world of shit and chaos.

by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Dec 19, 2008 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Show me the parent that can pay enough attention to all 18 kids...

and I’ll agree with BEW. But common sense says those kids will suffer at some point.

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I havent watched enough of the show to know everything about their family

but from the few little snippets I have seen, they seem to do a lot with their kids. They seem to have little if any TV in their life and since the Dad has made some investments and is around the house a lot, I would be willing to bet they spend as much time around their kids as a lot of parents who drop their kids off at day care in the morning and pick them up in the afternoon and as soon as they walk in the house TV’s are clicked on.

Dont get me wrong, I think its a weird lifestyle and not one that I would choose. I have just noticed that the older I get the less judgemental I get about other’s lifestyles. But thats just me.

by BEW on Dec 19, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Pretty much the opposite for me, I must admit

Almost 50 now, and pretty much have an opinion about everything. Keep it to myself most of the time, but not afraid to call out the things that really grind my gears.

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 2:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You know

What really grinds my gears? This Lindsay Lohan. Lindsay Lohan with all those little outfits, jumping around there on stage, half-naked with your little outfits. Ya know? You’re a… You’re out there jumping around and I’m just sitting here with my beer. So, what am I supposed to do? What you want? You know, are we gonna go out? Is that what you’re trying to – why why are you leaping around there, throwing those things all up in my, over there in my face? What do you want, Lindsay? Tell me what you want? Well, I’ll tell you what you want, you want nothing. You want nothing. All right? Because we all know that no woman anywhere wants to have sex with anyone, and to titillate us with any thoughts otherwise is – is just bogus.

"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky

by RCCook on Dec 19, 2008 6:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly...

Plus I believe there is far more that parents need to do than just take care of your kids financially. When you have 18 kids you can’t possibly do everything that needs to be done for your kids. The arrogance of these people is amazing.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Dec 19, 2008 1:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The chaffeur duties for soccer games and parties alone would kill me...

by bking on Dec 19, 2008 1:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you know who it is tough on?

the teenagers who are getting old enough to drive. When mom and dad are taking care of the 1 year old, 2 year old and 4 year olds, who do you think will be responsbile for taking the 6 year old, 8 year old, and 9 year old to their after school thigns? That’s right, the 16 year old, 17 year old and 18 year old.

Wow… I only typed 9 ages there and it seems chaotic. Can’t even fathom how there would be 9 more of them.

by JBImaknee on Dec 19, 2008 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm right there with you.

We had extreme difficulty having children. I was practicing a great deal of criminal law at the time and the thing that angered me was when I would be appointed to represent guys that had five or six kids with five or six different women and weren’t paying a dime in child support. That is a frustrating thing to see.

On the fertility front, we were eventually able to resolve our problem, and if you have any questions or anything, shoot me an e-mail at edrichardson52@gmail.com. Maybe some of the info we picked up in our own experience might be helpful to you and your wife.

by Athos on Dec 19, 2008 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I appreciate it...

There is nothing worse than a dead-beat dad. I can imagine how difficult that had to be for you.

I’m in finances and see people everyday who are struggling to make ends meet and still have a kid every year. Of course it’s more extreme now living in Utah where it seems nearly every family has at least 5 or 6 kids. There are many large families that do ok of course, but I also see some that can barely take care of the kids they have and they keep having more, it’s frustrating. We have a couple families right now that can’t make their payments and they are having the LDS church do it for them, and of course the wives are pregnant with child number 4 or 5. That would probably be my equivalent to what you had to go through when defending the dead-beat fathers. It sucks, but hopefully I’ll get lucky here shortly and the animosity will subside a little.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Dec 19, 2008 9:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tex is not worth $200M

Whoever makes that mistake will be kicking themselves for a very long time. He isn’t the difference maker that can get you over the top. He’s a good hitter, and he’s good defensively. He’s by no means the best hitter or even in their same category. The man is a second half player, or at least he is getting that reputation. Hit over 40 HRs, what, like 5 years ago. And, he has an attitude. That’s why he and boras get along.

Wait 'til the year after next

by NothinG on Dec 19, 2008 12:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes

Keep getting rid of these $20 million per year guys with bad attitudes who aren’t really that great and bring in Sheffield and his $14 per, with one of the worst attitudes in baseball, old, can’t play defense anymore, and can’t hold the jock of anybody currently on this team.

I’m not a big Teix fan, but he is closer to the top tier than he is the average player. I don’t care how much any of them make anymore, because it really is all relative.

Who would you rather have? Tex at $22 or MY at $16?

I know my answer, but it has nothing to do with saving $6 million per. This would actually be a question of true talent vs. what a player means to a club. Pulling 4 or 5 mil away from MY’s contract isn’ t getting Sheets in here, or preventing the Rangers from getting Sheets. If they want him, they will make it happen.

Less than 20 years ago, we got Ryan because McClane went cheap on him. That’s a big deal back then, and we were only talking about the 1-1.5 milion dollar range. Correct me if I’m wrong, but back in the day, wasn’t Scott Fletcher was the Rangers’ first $1 million dollar player? That was money well spent, but think about what that means in today’s dollars.

All these good players getting $20 million plus per year all have attitudes. You can poke holes in certain aspects of their games, but the only way their defense, offense or value to a team is diminished is when you assign dollar amounts to them.

Believe me, I really don’t like the ARods, Manny’s, Teix’s, etc. of the world, but saying they aren’t the ones deserving of the highest pay, for what they bring to the table, is a bit over the top. Who should be the highest paid players? The guys with great attitudes but a little short on talent?

Actually, just ignore this post. I don’t expect a response and can’t remember what fired me up in the first place, but I’m just too lazy to delete it.

I miss 1989. I miss 1996. Please make me miss another season in 2008.

by Chaim Witz on Dec 19, 2008 12:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Prediction

I will not give a shit when Mark Teixeira signs his new contract, whomever he signs with, beyond the fact that maybe it’ll get the ball rolling on some other important things like Ben Sheets or Clay Buchholz.

"I´d like to apologize in advance for anything that I may say or do that could be construed as offensive as I slowly go NUTS."

by lonestarJon on Dec 19, 2008 1:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

could be wrong

but i don’t think he’ll get that much. Bad move for a team if they give it to him.

"Never go with a hippie to a second location."

by jcAustin on Dec 19, 2008 1:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

speaking of predictions

What is the before/afeter date of JD’s December trade?

Mitch Moreland - Rangers 2009 Minor League Player of the Year

by RangerMad on Dec 19, 2008 1:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tex Sucks

I still hate him and I still dont think he is a great baseball player…certainly not worth this kind of crazy money.

I personally kind of want the angels to sign him since i think they sign Manny if they dont sign tex, and quite frankly….manny scares me a lot more than tex does

by Horns130 on Dec 19, 2008 2:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

So...

Let’s say the Halos lose out on Teix (I still think he ends up with the BoSox), who is the Angels backup plan for 1B? Are they going to stick Morales, Quinlan, or Rivera there? I don’t think they would go with any of those guys at 1B.

My point is would they have any interest in Blalock to play 1B? Trades within the division are a little tricky, but they have plenty of guys the Rangers would be interested in. What would they give up for a LH 1B with some pop in his bat when healthy. If the Halos want to make a run at another WS they will need a better 1B option than what they have now,

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Dec 19, 2008 3:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps they're looking at other trade options for 1B

like Chad Tracy, Mark Teahen, and Garrett Atkins. Tracy and Teahen are LH’ed as well, while Atkins isn’t but he could fit into the cleanup role quite easily. Atkins also offers the versatility to play 3B if they decide to move Figgins to LF to replace Anderson.

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather straps."
- Emo Phillips

by Rangerchick on Dec 19, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs