the rangers should include cash with Millwood
Kevin Millwood/Vicente Padilla: The Rangers can only dream of moving Padilla, who is erratic and earning $23 million in 2008 and '09. Millwood, too, is expensive, but he could be perfect for a team such as the Yankees, who would value his stable presence in their rotation.
The Yankees remain deep in young pitching, and they've got two promising outfielders, Austin Jackson and Jose Tabata, at Class AA. As crazy as it might sound, the Rangers should include significant cash in a Millwood deal with the Yankees or another high-revenue team, enabling them to effectively buy prospects.
Millwood is earning $8.5 million this season, $11 million next season and $12 million in 2010, but his deal could be voided before '10 if he fails to meet certain innings thresholds.
0 recs |
32 comments
Comments
But, why would a high revenue team
be interested in “selling prospects” for cash?
The idea that Millwood is “expensive” is out of touch with the current market for starting pitchers.
by Randy Richardson on May 2, 2008 4:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No, the argument is that the Rangers
get more if they include cash. Say, the deal is Millwood for A and B, but the Rangers offer to eat some of the contract if the Yankees offer A, C (who is better than B), and D instead. Why do the Yankees do that? They don’t need money, so why would they give up extra or better prospects for money?
by Randy Richardson on May 2, 2008 6:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you a Yankees fan?
Why would we trade Millwood?
by mattrpav on May 2, 2008 4:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Millwood is expensive?
No. Barry Zito is expensive. Millwood is making around the same as guys like AJ Burnett, Jason Schmidt (ha), and Mark Buerhle
His average contract value is the 15th highest for starting pitchers. Considering that many of these guys have discounted values because they sign pre-free agency (and many great pitchers are on year-to-year contracts), Millwoods contract is not that expensive.
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/05/most-lucrative-contracts.html
by JBImaknee on May 2, 2008 4:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He's right
It does sound crazy.
Sounds more like what you would do with Padilla circa last season, if you were looking to move him (poor performance, significant contract). Dump the contract for little return or include cash to get some return in prospects. Given Padilla’s performance so far this year, I don’t see the need to be a “motivated seller”. Not sure Millwood was ever a fire-sale commodity, even with the diminished results of last season. Certainly not the case this season.
Not sure Tom Hicks would/should ever agree to another deal that involves sending a player AND cash to the Yankees. That whole “fool me twice” thing…
by mgb5 on May 2, 2008 4:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep
I have an idea:
The Rangers keep Millwood, keep the cash, and tell the Yankees to go f**k themselves.
How’s that for a trade offer? :)
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
by RCCook on May 2, 2008 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like it.
Also has the advantage that it doesn’t require any action or agreement on their part.
by mgb5 on May 2, 2008 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess his point is
that it would be worth it to the Rangers to throw in cash and Millwood for some of their prospects.
by SanDiegoKev on May 2, 2008 4:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why
trade him, and if we were to trade him, why throw in cash is our point.
Millwood is looking good so far this season, and his contract is very reasonable. If a team wants to make us an offer that makes us better in the long term, then we should take it. But we’re not going to pay the Yankees to take a good pitcher just to get a couple of their lower level prospects.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 2, 2008 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
We already made that mistake once with Arod.
by SanDiegoKev on May 2, 2008 5:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Millwood
Is he on pace to meet his innings incentive for the 2010 portion of the deal?
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on May 2, 2008 5:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He was a little below the rate required last year
The rate is 180 innings/year, either in 2007-9, 2008-9, or 2009 for the club option to disappear.
Basically, all he has to do is get 180 innings next year to void the club option and he’s fine. If he is injured next year for any real amount of time, the option will probably vest.
by JBImaknee on May 2, 2008 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not in favor
of buying prospects for cash, most prospects never pan out.
by SanDiegoKev on May 2, 2008 5:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I love buying prospects for cash
I just prefer to do it on the Latin Americans market and by going over slot in the draft, rather than by paying the Yanks to take our best pitcher.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 2, 2008 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
rigth
better value down there then over-blown, over-rated yankee prospects!
by SanDiegoKev on May 2, 2008 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotta love..
...the overvaluing of a yankees prospect… ah eastern bias i’ve missed thee
"Juan Pierre hit zero home runs last year. Mythical fairy creature David Eckstein hit three, for Chrissakes, and he swings a three-inch bat carved out of a candy cane." ~junior, FJM
by ivysafety39 on May 2, 2008 5:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Eastern bias
It went somewhere? When? Did I blink and miss it?
by mgb5 on May 2, 2008 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
the list of overrated guys goes on and on and on.
...and no, hughes is not on that list. but kennedy is!
Every loss is one step closer to the top of the draft in 2009!
by knockoutking on May 2, 2008 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a joke...
The Rangers will have no problem dealing either one of them if they want to, and they wouldn’t have to eat any of the contract.
For Rosenthal to say that shows he hasn’t been paying attention to how much starting pitchers are getting paid now and how well those two have pitched so far this year.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on May 2, 2008 5:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Could not agree more
and it is too early to talk about trading either one of those two. Who in the hell is going to pitch?
If a team have an ace prospect, that is major league ready, why would they trade them for an equal or less value, 30 something, pitcher.
That is not me in the photo, so relax.
by rldwb on May 2, 2008 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Never trade good pitchers
FROM the Rangers.
we’ve done enough of that.
I'd rather be Blind, Crippled, & Crazy...than listen to the irrelevant, puerile rants of...well, we all know their names.
by Clueless on May 2, 2008 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Rosenthal suggerts...
Ron Washington isn’t the one to blame:
“The logical replacement for Washington would be former Rangers and Reds manager Jerry Narron, who joined the team as a consultant shortly after the start of spring training. But Narron alone would make little difference; too many Rangers pitchers succeed only after they depart, and the current roster is a mess.
Daniels made several ill-advised trades early in his tenure. He told Washington to play designated hitter/first baseman Jason Botts, who has since been designated for assignment. And he is getting little return on the combined $7.6 million he spent last off-season on pitchers Jason Jennings, Eddie Guardado and Kaz Fukumori.”
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8094014/The-end-could-be-near-for-these-three-skippers
by SanDiegoKev on May 2, 2008 6:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't always agree with Rosenthal
but this time he’s right on target.
I'd rather be Blind, Crippled, & Crazy...than listen to the irrelevant, puerile rants of...well, we all know their names.
by Clueless on May 2, 2008 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what
I have been trying to say.
I love Miley Cyrus.
by miles on May 2, 2008 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think Milwoods salary will be prohibitive to moving him.
That being said, the rest is all about value. Its not like Milwood asnt goign to be avaliable at that point. Teams would be offering more prospects if Texas pays a portion of his salary.
The true question would be about the teams veiw on Latin American youths and the attrition rates involved with thes young kids. Do you take the salary saved by trading Milwood midseason and invest it into 3 or 4 decent LA prospects? Are they more valuable than 1 or 2 players at the A+ or AA level?
by laxtonto on May 2, 2008 8:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Rosenthal's Motives
Rosenthal is trying to fix the Yankees and doesn’t care about the effect on the other team. Its plain as day and there’s no reason to even debate his illogic.
by mcgee48c on May 3, 2008 10:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on May 3, 2008 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















