Lacey Cakes to LAD @ $17.1M/3 Years
Phew!
We dodged a bullet on this one.
about 1 year ago
KevinV
42 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Good for Casey. And good for the Tribe
by Roger Dorn on Dec 9, 2008 2:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It’s like that ex-girlfriend you used to drunken dial for fun at 2 AM got married. It’s best for everyone involved.
by RD74 on Dec 9, 2008 2:10 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
rec
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Dec 9, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Admidst all the hoopla of not signing Blake, has anyone thought about who is actually going to play third? It’s nice that this year was right year to be in the market for a closer, but not exactly a good one to be in the market for a third baseman.
by ClarkM on Dec 9, 2008 2:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
who is actually going to play third?
I Don’t Know?
by Logodaedalus on Dec 9, 2008 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I think the question has become “who plays second?” based on Peralta’s apparent success at third base in winter ball.
by woodsmeister on Dec 9, 2008 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hu does play second, problem solved.
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Dec 9, 2008 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with Hu is that he is a shortstop and we already have one of those. Why pay for a shortstop when all we need is a second baseman? Then again, Ned Colletti is an idiot.
by ClarkM on Dec 9, 2008 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“Why pay for a shortstop” ?
I know Dolan is cheap, but shouldn’t he pay the shortstop’s salary? Besides, I don’t think we could get a very good shortstop of the money a left fielder could pay him.
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Dec 9, 2008 5:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“of” = “for”
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Dec 9, 2008 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re playing Abbott to Logo’s and my Costello
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Dec 9, 2008 7:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m pretty sure Shapiro will take whatever affordable upgrade he can get whether they’re a 2nd baseman, 3rd baseman or Shortstop.
In this market, beggers can’t be choosers. Besides, this is why Shapiro likes versitile players. Players like Jed Lowrie :-)
by world dictator on Dec 9, 2008 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Starting to look like Chang Poole & Schmidt around here.
by Jay on Dec 9, 2008 6:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m leaning more and more to running barfield and marte up a flagpole and seeing if someone will salute. /insert Wood joke here/
by Brick. on Dec 9, 2008 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we should just buy Barfield and Marte some Cincinnati Reds underwear to wear under the Tribe uniforms. Maybe we could get a partial Brandon Philips effect for the ’09 season.
by ShawnK on Dec 10, 2008 10:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank God. Just not signing Casey is a sign of progress. Having Wood sign on the same day would be MOST excellent!
by mcrose on Dec 9, 2008 3:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, see, this has to stop. We are not making progress by not signing Blake. Blake is still better than Carroll or Barfield or Marte or whoever else we will have in our lineup. When/If we acquire an infielder better than Blake, then I’ll consider that move progress. As it is now, we have a worse lineup than we would if we paid Blake 3 yr/17 M. A very affordable rate.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 9, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think not committing 3 years and $17.1M for a player Blake’s age is good.
Besides, Carrol is similar to Blake offensively, minus the power. Carrol is a much better defender at 2b than Blake is at 3b too. Do you really think Blake’s power is worth the $? I don’t. Better to spend the money elsewhere.
Plus now Wedge can move on with his life and maybe, just maybe…learn to love again.
by KevinV on Dec 9, 2008 4:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Carroll is not similar to Blake offensively. Sure they have roughly the same OBP, but 100 points of SLG still means something, no? Taking away 20 HRs and that much power is harmful to the lineup. Much moreso than any defense upgrade you get by playing Carroll at second, moving Peralta and Cabrera. Is 20 HRs worth less than 6 M/year absolutely!!! Not to mention that Blake plays a good RF, average 1B and slightly below average 3B.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 9, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes his 100 point of SLG mean about 20HR. That is valuable and on the open market worth $6M.But I’d still rather not invest $17.1M for his age 35, 36 & 37 years.
Plus signing him locks in below average D at SS and 3B. You you need to consider the improvement at 2 defensive positions, maybe even 3 as Drub’s natural position is SS.
I don’t really care care much about his defensive skills beyond 3B. We have plenty of mediorcre corner OF’ers and 1B’s. No need to invest in an old one.
Better to spend that money to buy above average performance elsewhere, like Kerry Wood for example.
by KevinV on Dec 9, 2008 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sold that Peralta is below average at SS, although Cabrera is certainly an upgrade. I am also not sold that he will be all that much better than Blake at 3B. To say Carroll would be any sort of upgrade over Cabrera at 2B is just funny.
The better D at SS is blown away by 20 HRs. As for what happens in his 36 and 37 seasons. Maybe he is still the best 3B we have. Maybe he is a platoon or fill in or super sub or our best option at any of 5 positions (DH, 1B, 3B, RF, LF). Spending under 6 M for a guy that can do that is very safe money. And it certainly does not exclude a Wood deal, or two.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 9, 2008 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sold that he’s significantly below-average or even problematically below-average, but I am pretty sold that he’s a little below-average.
by Jay on Dec 9, 2008 6:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think spending $6M on a old utility player is a luxury we can afford.
As for what happens in his 36 and 37 seasons. Maybe he falls off a cliff as players tend to do in their late thirties. Do we want to be stuck with another Dellucci?
by KevinV on Dec 9, 2008 11:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dellucci hasn’t worked out, but it hasn’t really hurt us, has it? I mean we are out the money, but there was a chance Dellucci would have hit 30 bombs. He hasn’t blocked OF prospects, prevented us from signing someone else, has he? Its the cost of doing business. And he taught us about May Baseball.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 10, 2008 8:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
100 points of slugging is 20 HR instead of 10 doubles and 10 singles, over 500 at bats.
by Jay on Dec 9, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
so for the last two years of dellucci’s contract, you never called for his head? you don’t make a three year deal based on a one year need.
by Brick. on Dec 9, 2008 4:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
valid. I’m not saying that we should have signed him for 3 years. I’d much prefer a 2 year deal. Then again, a 3 year/17 M isn’t outrageous, we could have outrighted him after the 2nd year.
But my point is simply that we are not a better team for NOT signing a solid relatively cheap player who plays a position we have a need and has some good pop.
If you like someone else better than Blake, fine. But the rejoicing over his signing elsewhere while we still don’t have a better option is just silly.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 9, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you outright him after year 2, thats $8.5M a year. For Blake? No thanks.
You are right in that not signing him does not make us better.
It is the other players that Shapiro signs with that $17.1M that will make us better.
by KevinV on Dec 9, 2008 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a case where I really don’t care. Nothing against Blake, but its time to move on. And the “objective” difference between Casey and any/all alternatives just won’t be that great. We can get within spitting distance of average.
by mcrose on Dec 9, 2008 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The “time to move on” argument is not a good one. Not if he was the best player available. If we get within spitting distance of average, fine. But Carroll is not that. Nor is anything we have right now.
by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 9, 2008 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Can’t help it. I’m glad. Relieved. Moderately confident that it’ll work out for the best.
by mcrose on Dec 9, 2008 6:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Any idea why Andy seems to be played 1B in winter ball? Also, this Victor Diaz guy looks to be putting up some pretty good numbers and looks to be a FA. If only he played 3rd….
by supermarioelia on Dec 9, 2008 7:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
He played some last Spring. It gives him a better chance to be useful if he battles for that last roster spot. Unlike Barfield at 2nd, he’s already pretty good at his natural position.
I’d suggest getting Barfield some work in the OF, but he needs all the work at his natural position he can get. Barring a trade, I’d guess that Marte’s got the inside track on that last roster spot.
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
by jhon on Dec 9, 2008 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Somewhere in the PD I read that the Tribe wanted Barfield to play winter ball and he declined.
by odradek on Dec 9, 2008 11:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This has been discussed a few times in the last few days. Another report has it that he was afraid of re-injuring his finger.
But who cares, man, we’re signing Kerry Wood!
by Jay on Dec 9, 2008 11:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously. Do we even have a need for the other 24 players? Wood can make stick too, as I understand it.
by NickFantana on Dec 9, 2008 11:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But doesn’t this signing make everything else seem better, even our 3B (or 2B) “situation”?
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
by jhon on Dec 10, 2008 12:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course it does. Better team = better team.
by Jay on Dec 10, 2008 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely. That’s a brilliant formula.
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
by jhon on Dec 10, 2008 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
