Burrell to the Rays with a 2 year, $16 million contract
Hmmm...maybe all of you Dunn fanatics were better at gauging the market than I was
about 3 years ago
millionairesrow
83 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Agreed. I don’t pay close attention to other teams FA maneuverings, but did the Phillies have any serious discussions with Burrell before signing Ibanez to that 3/$30 deal?
by millionairesrow on Jan 5, 2009 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
Pat Burrell is a jack….wait, he signed with the Rays?
by Ryan on Jan 5, 2009 3:49 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
get used to it. there are a lot of FA’s out there that will sign for steals as this drags on. i have a sneaking feeling we will make a TrotNixonTypeSigning out of nowhere when shapiro looks around and sees all the clearance merchandise still on the shelves towards the end of spring training.
Matt at fangraphs made the point that DeRosa has been more valuable than Bradley the last three years, all things considered.
Earlier fangraphs pointed out that Bradley was more valuable than Burrell.
by world dictator on Jan 5, 2009 11:31 PM EST up reply actions
I had never heard of fangraphs until about a month ago. I love that site. It’s quickly becoming a favorite of mine.
on new years eve, one of the highlights of my night was when some 19-year-old kid started talking about BABIP and then when i asked if he read fangraphs, he said “of course its the best baseball website there is.”
let’s just say my new year’s eve was AWESOME.
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Jan 6, 2009 4:57 PM EST up reply actions
I always feel awkward citing BABIP in actual conversation. Not because I’m embarrassed but because I never know whether to say “B. A. B. I. P.” or “ba-bip.” It sounds funny either way.
Steel Nick
Speaking of BABIP. Is there a good “primer” on the stat?
I sort of get it, but I’m still confused about certain aspects like what’s considered an average range, what’s considered lucky or unlucky, and how does LD% affect it.
by world dictator on Jan 6, 2009 5:55 PM EST up reply actions
i always go with B A B I P
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Jan 6, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
I thought Ibanez was pretty bad himself. Maybe not Burrell bad, but still quite terrible.
The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay
I thought everyone had seen them.
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/ and scroll down. On the left you’ll see a part of the sidebar that says, “Raul Ibanez takes pride in his defense.” Watch “Lawn Dart” several times.
Steel Nick
I applaud you for not slowing down the entire page again.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
oh my god i want this deal
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Jan 5, 2009 4:29 PM EST reply actions
my reaction too. Is there any doubt that this is a great deal for the Rays and would have been for the Indians?
Well, we have sort of the higher-risk, higher-reward version of this deal.
by Jay on Jan 5, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
I think it’s only a good deal for us if three or four of our current players and prospects don’t pan out at all this year. If he was a reasonable outfield option, maybe I could see it, but we don’t need a 1B/DH that bad.
by Jay on Jan 5, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
and remember, he only cost you a few million $s more
by APV on Jan 5, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
from Klaw
Compare this to the deal the Phillies, who let Burrell walk without offering him arbitration, gave Raul Ibañez: one extra year at a marginal cost of $14 million as well as the loss of their first-round draft pick, for a player four years older and worse defensively.
Dellucci. Can we sell his ability to platoon with Ibanez and get Cole Hamels in return?
by Ryan Kelsey on Jan 5, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Good deal for the Rays.
But this deal doesn’t validate the “Dunn fanatics” arguing that we could’ve afforded/signed Dunn.
Dunn is the best player among the 1B/OF glut of players. With both Bradley and Ibanez getting 3yrs/$30, Dunn is likely to get at least $12 mil per year if he signs a multiyear deal.
Considering the fact that we never had $20 million to begin with this offseason, Dunn even at $10 mil per year was always out of our range after we signed Wood.
I think you have a problem by assuming we had a certain amount of money to spend. Shapiro has made it clear that we spend when the opportunities present themselves. I doubt there was or is a hard number of what we will or will not spend. Sure, there is some sort of maximum that Dolan has, but I don’t think it went anything like:
Shap: “How much can I add to payroll?”
Dolan: “15 M”
Shap: “Ok”
I think Dunn would be a great signing for 15M for 4 years. I think it would be a smart move for the INdians now, and I think it would have been before we signed Wood and DeRosa. Is it less likely after those moves? yes. But are you saying if Dunn’s agent asked Shap if he would take a 2 year 18M deal on done right now, Shapiro would be totally hamstrung? The Burrell deal shows that a 8-11M for 2-3 years is very possible for a Dunn-type. It does validate this type of thinking. Ibanez signing was a bad one. Maybe Bradley’s deal means that Dunn has the possibility to get 12M, but then again, Dunn’s first choice was the Cubs, and it seems pretty clear they aren’t going to sign him- another team off the Dunn market.
That leaves who in the running? Washington, Boston, Dodgers, maybe Baltimore? Dunn is also just part of a group that those teams are looking at like Manny and Abreu.
The problem with our debates is that you’re arguing with hope and imagination instead of facts or numbers, or analysis based on either of the two.
Shapiro explictly stated after the Derosa trade that the lionshare of our resources have been allocated and we would have to move payroll before adding on any additional payroll.
Wood’s $10 mil + Derosa’s $5.5 mil = $16 mil.
Even if I’m generous and agree that Dunn will sign for $10 mil per year that’s still $20 mil when you add in Wood’s contract.
$20 mil > $16 mil.
End of discussion.
Of course you could engage in idle speculation like “what if Shapiro did…” or “What if Dolan did…”. “What if Dunn agreed to..” but that’s all it would be. 100% speculation based on no facts whatsoever.
by world dictator on Jan 5, 2009 10:08 PM EST up reply actions
According to Hoynes in his original article reporting the Derosa trade opening day payroll will be between $75-79 million.
Castro, in his report of the trade, says that to add another impact player the Indians will have to trade away a contract or two.
This is the same article Shapiro is quoted saying the same thing. Shapiro also notes we never had enough money to sign a FA starter unless that was our primary move.
by world dictator on Jan 5, 2009 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
the facts I’m working with are things like Burrell’s contract and the current market for someone like Dunn. Much of our conversation was before DeRosa’s contract. 20 M in free agent contracts is a lot, but I stand by the idea that Shapiro and Dolan would have done it if the opportunity was right.
Your problem is reading into canned quotes from Shapiro as the bible. Maybe I’m saying “what if” a lot, but the bottom line is half that what if is fact (the team-friendly market this season for power hitting 1B/DH/Corner OF types) and the other half is based on an area that there is no hard knowledge about (what Dolan and Shapiro have as far as a hard ceiling for payroll and under what circumstances that would be adjusted).
Really, I don’t know what your arguing. I’ve always said I like the idea of Dunn. I think he can be had for a reasonable price. And I think the Indians would be foolish to ignore the excess of those types of players, matching up with a need on the major league team. Are you saying such a move is simply unlikely? Ok. whatever. Impossible? I’d challenge you. I guess you are saying its somewhere inbetween- an area filled with “what ifs”.
Your problem is reading into canned quotes from listening and believing what Shapiro says instead of making up your own set of facts. as the bible.
There, fixed.
by world dictator on Jan 6, 2009 3:31 AM EST up reply actions
Hmm…the preview button published my post?
by world dictator on Jan 6, 2009 3:36 AM EST up reply actions
Your problem is listening and believing what Shapiro says instead of making up your own set of facts.
There, fixed.
by world dictator on Jan 6, 2009 3:35 AM EST up reply actions
Well, in particular, the fixation on Dunn (or similar) when it’s very clear that the next priority on the list is a starter. If they were going to make a “special circumstances” exception in the budget, it would be for the right starter, not the right hitter.
by Jay on Jan 6, 2009 7:58 AM EST up reply actions
“But this deal doesn’t validate the "Dunn fanatics" arguing that we could’ve afforded/signed Dunn.”
WD – I was trying to point out that the market seems to be more in line with what some of those who were saying a Dunn signing was feasible, compared to what I originally thought the market would be going into the offseason. I’m surprised a guy like Burrell only received a 2 year deal, I thought going into this offseason that he would get a 3 year deal. I think our resources are pretty much tapped at this point, and that, not only for monetary reasons (we also have a glut of guys on the ML cusp who can play similar positions), we will not be pursuing Dunn.
by millionairesrow on Jan 6, 2009 8:57 AM EST up reply actions
this-
The logic of the Dunn idea from the start was that his skills might get undervalued by the market. Also, the free agent market was saturated with similar players. Also, the economy may lead to lower salary prices generally. Also, Shapiro seems to value guys with high OBP and tends to jump on unique opportunities, regardless of what has been publicly said or generally assumed.
That we ended up using our resources towards other interesting and value-maximizing pickups like DeRosa and Wood does not mean that Dunn would have been impossible or a bad idea.
I’m still very interested to see what Dunn’s contract finally looks like. And how apparent the need for a power hitting upgrade is for 1B/DH/LF for the Indians.
Just because you refuse to admit you were wrong, doesn’t change the fact that you are.
Our Adam Dunn discussion is over.
by world dictator on Jan 6, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions
I continue not to know what the hell you are talking about. the “Dunn fanatics”, to the extent I fall into this category, have only said that his signing would be beneficial because of his reduced cost from market factors and because he fit some needs for our team. I fail to see how any of this has changed because of Wood, DeRosa, Burrell, Bradley, etc. Yet, anytime something happens to one of the semi-related factors of the Indians potential to sign Dunn, you find it necessary to somehow make it mean that you were right all the long that it was impossible to sign Dunn. It’s not like I (or anyone else started this conversation by saying burrell’s deal made it a sure thing that dunn would be signed for dirt. You mentioned Dunn in this thread first, you started wrote accusatory post to “Dunn fanatics”, in response to nobody, in some weird attempt to preempt any link between Dunn and Burrell while inviting someone to disagree with you. Maybe I was foolish to fall for your little game.
If/when Dunn gets signed for anything under 4years/15M, I will say that it was a good deal for that team. Potentially a great deal. I think he is a fascinating player in a fascinating market, providing teams with an opportunity for great value.
Whatever. Your desire to be right has eclipsed anything interesting, from a baseball point of view, for this discussion.
If you want to be taken seriously, don’t use the “you’re wrong, and the discussion is over” line.
I agree that this has been beaten to death, but let’s just see what Dunn ends up signing for, how he performs for the length of the contract, how the Indians do without him over those seasons and how we could have expected them to do with him. And then we can celebrate with a big I-told-you-so thread in 2013.
by cleveland teamer on Jan 7, 2009 9:56 AM EST up reply actions
I have a hard time listening to advice on being taken serious by someone with the name “cleveland teamer”. (Not meant to be a personal attack just saying.)
Besides, Dunn’s future production level is completely irrelevant.
by world dictator on Jan 7, 2009 10:42 AM EST up reply actions
Screen names are completely irrelevant. It’s fine (and necessary in this case) to declare a topic to be dead, but not when you insist on taking one last swipe at your opposition. I am only now entering the dead argument to point that out. Clearly I am just falling for your bait though, and here I am continuing the argument!!
You’re right that we probably never would have seriously considered signing Dunn. But the good point that others have made is that we as fans would hope that the front office has some budget flexibility in cases where a player who would improve the team can be had at a good value. In other words: going a couple million dollars over the predetermined budget ($20m, we THINK?) for the right deal could be smart. I haven’t seen any proof that ownership would or would not do this, but maybe I missed something.
Dunn’s future production is irrelevant to whether Cleveland could have signed him, but it is much more interesting to consider whether a signing would be a good decision, rather than simply possible.
by cleveland teamer on Jan 7, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Actually, when you jumped into the discussion that restarted it to the extent that its been restarted. I let Dayton have the last word like I’m going to let you have the last word after this post.
Dunn’s future production is irrelevant to whether Cleveland could have signed him, but it is much more interesting to consider whether a signing would be a good decision, rather than simply possible.
Okay here’s is what this Dunn conversation boils down to. You and Daytonn think Dunn would be a good signing. SO DO I. So do 95% of the people on this site. This argument was never about whether Dunn is a good player or whether his contract will be of good value.
In fact I stated several times, I hope Shapiro reads LGT and signs Dunn just to spite my emphatic stance that he can’t afford to.That’s crow I’d love to eat. I’d much rather be wrong with Dunn on our team than right without Dunn on our team.
The only argument I’ve ever made regarding Dunn is that, based on everything the front office has said directly and indirectly, we couldn’t afford to sign Dunn after signing Wood with our current budget.
After Shapiro added $7 mil in post Wood payroll he said “we can’t add anymore payroll without moving current payroll”.
So unless you or Dayton believes Dunn would’ve signed for $7 million I think my original point seems to be true.
Like I said before, bargain and affordability are two different concepts.
by world dictator on Jan 7, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
As the site mod, I am giving myself the last word.
W.D. and D.D. … you guys are done talking about this.
I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with either of you.
I’m not saying one of you or the other was or wasn’t over the line.
I am saying … this is over, right now.
Don’t even reply to this to say “okay.”
Jocketty had some interesting comments re: Burrell.
Looks like the Reds were in early when the price tag was, in Jocketty’s words, twice where it ended up. Sucks that they never got back in, I guess, but more than that , interesting how the market is collapsing.
nice insight, andrew. the baldelli angle is an interesting one, too, isn’t it?
The Reds remain interested in free agent Rocco Baldelli, and held talks with his agent – Casey Close – over the weekend.
“We understand what his limitations are, we think, and have to decide,” Jocketty said. “He’ll have to decide if it’s something he’s interested in. He might decide to stay in the American League so he can DH. It’s a unique situation and we’ll have to be cautious.”
if baldelli has now actually been accurately diagnosed (by the Cleveland Clinic, no less) might he be on the indians’ radar? would he be a good fit, in place of benfran, or is the money (if any room remains in the budget) best used elswhere? not quite a TrotNixonTypeSigning, but …
drop, market, drop!
I don’t think Baldelli, even if he comes at 4 mil a year or so, is worth the marginal upgrade over Francisco. I think you can probably pencil Baldelli in for a 110 OPS, which is probably out of Francisco’s reach, but I also think you can’t expect him to play more than a hundred games in the OF, meaning you have to keep BFran.
I dunno. I’m not super against cutting Marte for Baldelli but I think the Baldelli market is probably realistically around 5 million or so. He has the potential to be a Looch signing; if he can’t play the OF he’s an anchor.
yeah, i still occasionally find myself falling prey to the allure of the shiny new toys, but you’ve put it in good perspective. i just sense that shapiro is lurking, waiting for a commodity to become a bargain, and then he’ll spring.
I work with Pete and Wendy Pratt the parents of Michelle Pratt. What’s this gotta do with anything you ask? Well it seems the the former Ms Pratt is now Mrs. Pat Burrell. I congratulated Pete on his son-in-law’s new position in Florida today at ~1515 local time – that’s 2015 on the East Coast and Pete was completely unaware of his families good fortune. BTW, jhon, Pete tells me that Pat met Michelle when Pat was in ST and Michelle was tending bar in Clearwater. Damn good thing that Pat didn’t take your sage advice about “bar girls”.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
is google image correct?
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
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
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise,’ featuring the Miami Marlins
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
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.
