Ibanez Signs with Philadelphia
...for $30M over 3 years.
3 thoughts:
1 - Burrell is in play.
2 - If anyone thought the Indians (or anyone) could get either Burrell or Dunn for under $10M/year, they're nuts.
3 - Why did the Phillies let a younger, faster, better-defending version of Ibanez walk in order to sign..Ibanez?
about 3 years ago
jakesinger777
58 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
In answer to #3, I’d guess it is because Burrell made around $14 million last year and will be asking for a package in excess of $10 million a year (and probably for more years). I don’t think Ibanez is a good signing either, but I can see why they might be worried about Burrell’s asking price.
Another thought – don’t want to post another fanshot – 5 years, $82M for AJ Burnett with the Yankees.
That means that in 2013 the Yankees will be paying 36 year-old Burnett and 33 year-old Sabathia a combined $39.5M. Roughly.
That is absurd. In the words of one of my good, yankee-fan friends (pardon the oxymoron): “It’s really hard to root for them, but I do it anyways”.
Hello jakesinger777,
I could be incorrect, but I think most consider Burrell to be a poor defender; I’d think most would think Ibanez is actually the better defender, or at worst, is equal to Burrell, but Burrell is almost assuredly not better than Ibanez in the OF. Plus, also recall that Ibanez played RF for a number of years with Seattle and KC; Burrell, to my knowledge, has never played RF and is barely passable in LF. If not for the NL, Burrell would most likely be a DH.
Regarding the Yankees, they are the epitome of what is wrong with the baseball financial market today – heck, the whole economy is struggling and they’re spending money like it’s going out of style or grows on trees. Unbelieveable. And their fans wonder why so many people root AGAINST them?!
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
It’s not absurd – they have the money. It may be imprudent, and it’s certainly not a choice that the Indians could make, but the Yankees have so much money from TV and their new stadium, that they will hardly feel these contracts if they should go bad.
by woodsmeister on Dec 12, 2008 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
The glut is still out there.
Tier 1: Dunn, Burrell, Bradley, Abreu, Manny, with Dye available on the trade front.
Tier 2: Garret Anderson, Juan Rivera, and Jim Edmonds.
The Indians should take advantage of the market if it will offer a middle-of-the-order bat at a reasonable cost on a one year deal. If somebody wants to build their market value and try again next winter, Cleveland’s more attractive than Cincinnati, Washington, Baltimore, and Seattle. Only the Dodgers, Cubs, Rays, and Angels are arguably the more attractive destinations, and that’s not a given. If the opportunity isn’t there, I’d start the season with the status quo and see what’s available come June/July.
by xrickx on Dec 12, 2008 5:31 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, shouldn’t that be Tier 3 or 4?
The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay
by Buckeye Brad on Dec 12, 2008 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
The one year deal is the hard part. Out of those I could only see Bradley and Abreu possibly accepting a 1 year deal. Bradley is probably out due to his bad attitude. That just leaves Abreu. I’d take him for $10M for 1 year.
Not sure that Burrell is a better defender. Plus/Minus has Ibanez has been 41 runs below average the last three years, which is atrocious, but not to be outdone, Burrell has been 73 runs below average over the same period. According to +/-, Burrell was the worst defensive player in baseball in 2006-08. Most of the other metrics confirm that Ibanez while being a really bad defensive player is not as bad as Burrell.
So you’re saying Philly wanted a defensive upgrade to Burrell? Good for them!
by world dictator on Dec 12, 2008 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
Hello ClarkM,
Sorry about not seeing your post before I wrote mine – I agree with you wholeheartedly that Burrell is NOT a better defender than Ibanez. In fact, Burrell was often lifted late in games because of his poor defense. And as mentioned above, he only plays LF, whereas Ibanez has played a good number of games in RF.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Burrell is worse.
But that’s kind of like saying… I don’t know. E5 is worse than Bandini.
Steel Nick
Very false
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Dec 12, 2008 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
This seems like a terrible signing and, if reflective of the market for OF, means Cleveland will not be getting near an free agent OFer
Which makes the decision to move Gutz all that more curious.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
the decision to move Gutz was motivated by what we have within our system, not what the market for OFers is (I think). over the next two years, the following OFers could make their debuts in Cleveland: Crowe, Laporta, Brantley, Weglarz. That’s a lot of talent that has a chance of forcing its way somewhere.
Really? I thought part of the rationale behind moving Gutz was increasing our OF roster flexibility and opening up a clearer pathway for Brantley and LaPorta.
And I mean, we traded our part-time/backup/whatever OF for an amazing bullpen addition and a near ML ready 2nd baseman. How can you not do that?
by world dictator on Dec 12, 2008 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed. There seems to be a little too much pessimism around Brantley and LaPorta in particular. I think people are reading too much into his struggles after the trade (which was also an extremely small SS.) LaPorta in my view is one solid month from being a solid contributor in the majors.
I agree about LaPorta; look what he had to endure after he arrived here (please correct me if I miss something or if I have something incorrect – thanks!):
- Has to adjust to a new organization
- He and his fiancee are moving into a new home
- His grandfather passes away (I think that’s correct; my apologies if I’m wrong here – I’m doing this from memory).
- He is selected to the Olympic team, necessitating a long trip to China against players he’s not familiar with.
- He gets hit in the head (possibly on purpose – not sure) while playing for Team USA.
Those are a lot of factors to deal with, even for a top prospect like LaPorta. I’m willing to give him a pass and start fresh. Unless all that, and especially the hit in the head, has eliminated or erased his previous ability, he likely will be fine. Personally, I’d give him a few months in AAA just to allow him to catch his breath and let him get into a good flow at a level he hasn’t been at before (AAA); if he totally destroys the International League within the first 1-2 months, I might consider moving up that timetable, but I don’t think it’d be bad if he spent 3 months down there if need be and then bring him up in the 2nd half, provided he’s ready.
I’d consider Brantley on a similar timetable, though looking for different results obviously (good BB/K ratio, high BA & OBP, high SB%, high 2Bs, etc.), and if he’s doing well, bring him up in the second half as well.
Having Francisco on the roster and his being considered for the LF job is the main reason why the Indians DON’T have to pay such high prices for a OFer with question marks (Dunn, Abreu, Burrell, etc.), not have to rely on 35-YO Dellucci hopefully finding himself after not having a great offensive season since 2005, and not have to consider rushing LaPorta or Brantley up here before they are ready. Something for the Anti-Ben crowd to think about before ripping him again.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
I think that indeed LaPorta will be darn good. I just think they’re gonna be too careful with him.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
The other thing to consider is, that while he’s not terribly young by baseball standards, last year was his first full year in professional baseball since he played all 4 years in college. I think they’ll give him some time, but as you imply, I hope they don’t wait long if he’s ripping it up in Columbus.
Starting to wonder if Luis Valbuena isn’t really, really ridiculously valuable.
by fleerdon on Dec 12, 2008 7:42 PM EST up reply actions
Backed into this conclusion, actually. Taking a look around, in terms of available plus outfield defenders who hit right handed, if Gutz wasn’t the only show in town, he was something close to it. Add to that he’s been a long-time target of the Mariners’ new management, and I’m left with the thought that whatever we got for him must reflect the fact that he’s a pretty rare breed right now.
And, really, we got paid with a viable, inexpensive middle infielder, when there are basically no viable, inexpensive middle infielders to be had. The way I see it, this was an exchange of rare commodities. Frank for Valbuena was the deal, and Joe Smith was the restocking fee. “Omar, the Indians would take Valbuena, but they want some help for 2009 if they’re giving up Gutierrez.” “Oh yeah? I’ve got just the thing.”
As a meaningless side note, since we’ve now traded both Andrew Brown and Franklin Gutierrez for second basemen, it’s kind of like the real trade was Milton Bradley for Barfield, Valbuena, and Smith. Remembering that we were trading M.B. come hell or high water, that’s not the worst return.
by fleerdon on Dec 13, 2008 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
Except that it’s really M.B. + K.K. for those three players. It’s a pretty lousy return, but Valbuena has a decent chance to emerge eventually as the best player in the group.
True nuff, just forgot about the Kouzster.
Still sucks. I’d love to know what we could have gotten for Bradley had we not made that move under duress.
by fleerdon on Dec 13, 2008 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
Possibly more in hindsight, but not one bit more at the time. Shapiro had several teams bidding — how many teams could use a true CF who can really mash, even in late March? — and it was felt at the time that the Dodgers paid a somewhat steep price.
Note the title of the BA writeup: Dodgers win Bradley sweepstakes.
At the time I was convinced Gutz was the next Vlad
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Dec 14, 2008 12:18 AM EST up reply actions
Weren’t we talking to the Mets first? I’ve misplaced the account of the event timeline, but hadn’t we asked about Joe Smith?
The Mariners might have made it clear to their negotiating parter that they wanted a CF, and that they had Gutierrez in mind. Mets wanted Putz most of all, and I suspect that they did the most work to put this thing together.
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
Hoynes’ article in the PD this morning (I think it was Hoynes) suggests there was some talk of a deal involving Putz for Gutierrez plus — but the Mariners wanted a top prospect (it may have been more complex than this — I don’t recall). Anyway, he seems to think that that fell apart, but the Mets went after Putz and didn’t have the CF the Mariners wanted — hence Gutierrez’ inclusion in the deal. Something like that.
I think timing is an influence here, just because Ibanez got this money, doesn’t mean that other players are going to get more money, supply and demand is much stronger an indicator than one bad contract. As xrickx mentions above there is a glut of OF/1B (throwing Giambi in the mix) that aren’t markedly better than each other and only so many teams in need of these players.
Why did the Phillies let a younger, faster, better-defending version of Ibanez walk
Burrell isn’t faster than anyone. Dude is ridiculously slow.
+1 – Burrell doesn’t have good range at all; that’s why he was often replaced late in games.
In fact, despite the age difference, it’s likely Ibanez is FASTER than Burrell – Burrell would be a DH (and would have been for a few years at least) if he wasn’t in the NL. Ibanez was a solid OFer at one time, though has declined of late. Still, there’s no question in my mind that Ibanez is better than Burrell in the OF.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Can someone please post a video of Ibanez throwing a ball straight into the OF grass? Great stuff!
by JulioBernazard on Dec 13, 2008 1:06 AM EST up reply actions
Burrell looks like he is standing still and letting the earth’s rotation provide the impression of movement
It’s not that he runs bad routes, it’s just that the earth isn’t always heading in the right direction
Boy you were really gung-ho bout that joke, eh?
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Dec 13, 2008 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
If you’re the Brewers, don’t you trade Fielder now and sign a player like Dunn to a relatively cheap deal?
Even with the depressed free agency market I think Fielder is good enough to still have a lot of value on the trade market. (Maybe you wait until the trade deadline to deal Fielder and then move Dunn to 1st)
Or if you want to get crazy, I wonder if San Diego would entertain a deal centered around Fielder and Peavy.
Of course they have Adrian Gonzales at 1B, but given the way the Peavy market is shaping, it might be easier to trade Gonzales who is young, cheap, and under team control for several seasons. Could be a good alternative to teams who can’t still can’t afford a 1B or don’t want to sign a 34 year old to a 2-3 year deal.
I’m just throwing out some creative ideas for fun.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
