Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Lakers Should Trade Andrew Bynum So He Doesn't Go To Waste

Sometimes the Chuckster is right.

Clifton Phifer left a lot of money on the table to re-join the Phils. 5x ~$20MM contract to wear maroon again.

over 1 year ago Tony_bernazard_tiny JulioBernazard 81 comments 0 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Let's Go Tribe

News and Notes: April 29, 2012

Apr 2012 by Ryan - 3 comments

Transactions: Indians Sign Kotchman

Feb 2012 by Ryan - 84 comments

The New CBA

Nov 2011 by afh4 - 18 comments

Game 131: Indians 2, Athletics 1

Aug 2011 by Ryan - 108 comments

Comments

Display:

If someone offered me $100 million to live in the same city as Vetri, and the Fu Wah on Baltimore and 47th that makes the tofu hoagies, I would certainly accept his or her offer.

Vetri every night!

From, Ben

by bentausig on Dec 14, 2010 12:34 AM EST reply actions  

Like it, mostly because it stiffs the Yankees…it should also be noted that jay was right as well in regards to the whole dialogue of players taking the biggest contract under union/agent pressure

by The Grimace on Dec 14, 2010 12:38 AM EST reply actions  

Should have written about this earlier today when it would have seemed prophetic, but … the interesting thing is that despite the Yankees’ immense resources, the Phillies are in the better competitive situation for the next 3-5 years. They face the Mets, not the Red Sox, and the Red Sox are building a 100-win team. The Yankees rotation is a mess that isn’t quite fixed by adding Cliff Lee, while the Phillies have one of the best rotations even without Lee. Rays vs. Marlins, that’s a wash. The Phillies are simply the better organization right now.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 12:54 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

It should be fun to watch, even with the loss of Werth (which they were smart not to overpay for him) they are still stacked on offense and that pitching is just sick.

by The Grimace on Dec 14, 2010 1:18 AM EST up reply actions  

It’s the same amount per year as the other offers (23 million) but yes he did take less years.

In the new Geico commercial, Marte sings "Let me be myself" on Wedge's front lawn (with the cavemen).

by V-Mart Shopper on Dec 14, 2010 1:19 AM EST reply actions  

I’ve seen reports that the Yankees offered 22M and the Phillies offered 24M — 154M total vs. 120M total. Still, it’s a huge amount to leave on the table, and no team wants to pay 34M for a pitcher’s sixth and seventh seasons, no matter who it is.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 1:34 AM EST up reply actions  

That is one hell of a starting rotation.

"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter

by Denver Tribe Fan on Dec 14, 2010 1:20 AM EST reply actions  

Was just going to say that.

The Once and Future King

by FlaGators on Dec 14, 2010 8:27 AM EST up reply actions  

We’ll find out in a week that he took less because he has a Versus TV deal lined up for “The CP.Oswalt Show”

HOW ARE THE FOUR OF THEM GOING TO COEXIST?

Moved from swan pool terrace (swan) to fresh restaurant (dolphin).

by westbrook on Dec 14, 2010 1:29 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

Best thing about this, it means Cliff won’t be tainted when we sign him for 2016

by The Grimace on Dec 14, 2010 1:37 AM EST reply actions  

Think he’ll be a reclamation project by then?

by c9kay32 on Dec 14, 2010 1:41 AM EST up reply actions  

Nah, nice veteran addition to a playoff contender

by The Grimace on Dec 14, 2010 2:00 AM EST up reply actions  

Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees.

I’m bored. This is boring.

by xrickx on Dec 14, 2010 1:50 AM EST reply actions   2 recs

Seeing the Yanks rebuffed is fresh and interesting.

by JulioBernazard on Dec 14, 2010 8:09 AM EST up reply actions  

It is. But I agree with xrickx.

The Once and Future King

by FlaGators on Dec 14, 2010 8:27 AM EST up reply actions  

It’s a pretty good deal for him. He can take public transit to the ballpark any day he likes, and he doesn’t have to play in New York.

by jhon on Dec 14, 2010 2:25 AM EST reply actions  

Don’t you mean he has to play in New York less often?

by FredOx on Dec 14, 2010 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Shoot, what do you think?

by jhon on Dec 14, 2010 5:43 PM EST up reply actions  

So its not always about the money? Or at least, the most money?

by DixonCayne on Dec 14, 2010 6:24 AM EST reply actions  

Hmm. Guess not.

In the new Geico commercial, Marte sings "Let me be myself" on Wedge's front lawn (with the cavemen).

by V-Mart Shopper on Dec 14, 2010 6:53 PM EST up reply actions  

I’m eagerly awaiting the typical Yankees panic move where they sign Pavano to a 60 million dollar deal and sell the farm for Greinke.

by Toxicadam on Dec 14, 2010 7:39 AM EST reply actions  

I’ve heard many reports that the Yankees won’t go after Grienke because they don’t think he would cope well with all the pressure of playing in New York with his history of depression and social anxiety.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 14, 2010 1:54 PM EST up reply actions  

I think what you’ve heard mostly is much speculation, not actual “reports” of a fact.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 2:13 PM EST up reply actions  

Of course, and that’s true about every “report” we hear from writers and reporters concerning possibly trades and signings and other such topics so I thought it was obvious.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 14, 2010 2:44 PM EST up reply actions  

No. There is a difference between a report and unsourced speculation. Most of the “reports” you’re citing are no different than you or me just writing it off the top of our heads. That’s not a report.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions  

The possibility of trading for Kansas City Royals ace Zack Greinke has been discussed, although one of the Yankees insiders said it was highly unlikely the team would risk trading any of their high-level prospects for a pitcher with a well-documented history of social anxiety disorders.

Yanks’ Plan B after Cliff Lee is patience

by hyphens on Dec 14, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Zack ain’t man enough to play in the Apple.

by odradek on Dec 18, 2010 3:03 PM EST up reply actions  

It is, frankly, unlikely that any club “will risk trading any of their high-level prospects for a pitcher with a well-documented history of social anxiety disorders.” The club that does is not going to be one known for prudence in such matters.

by Jay on Dec 19, 2010 2:01 AM EST up reply actions  

In theory, yes. But I suspect this is just spin that came after it became clear Greinke wasn’t going to pitch in the Bronx. I don’t know where this “well-documented history of social anxiety disorders” stuff comes from. He missed a lot of time a few years ago, but it seems to be well under control now.

by odradek on Dec 21, 2010 10:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes, that’s why it’s called “history.”

by Jay on Dec 22, 2010 12:59 AM EST up reply actions  

But it seems like it’s hauled out at every opportunity. He has those mental issues, of course. If it’s history it’s in the past, yet it is treated as an issue today. I suspect he doesn’t feel comfortable playing in certain cities, and this is not prima facie evidence of a mental disorder.

by odradek on Dec 22, 2010 11:07 PM EST up reply actions  

I think we are mainly talking about his market value, however, and not his actual mental state. I think even you would agree it’s a risk factor that would have to show up on an actuarial chart at least in some small way. Question is, how do the 29 GMs feel about it? How deep are all the stigmas about mental illness in that specific, tiny population? And who worries about being the GM who trades away the farm for a guy with “a history” who then melts down?

by Jay on Dec 23, 2010 12:21 AM EST up reply actions  

You’re probably right—there must be an actuarial risk attached. But there is also a prurience attached to it, a most likely unjustified stigma that media can’t stop from repeating. Obviously, I don’t know the details of his case, but I’d bet he has a better chance at having a significant future than Jim Eisenreich did. But he’ll always be branded as mental, which is unfair.

by odradek on Dec 23, 2010 10:19 AM EST up reply actions  

The real comp isn’t a guy like Eisenreich, it’s Cliff Lee. If Greinke sustains/rebounds over the next two seasons, we’ll see if he gets nine-figure offers.

by Jay on Dec 23, 2010 1:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes, that’s true. Granted that it’s ridiculous to give anyone a nine-figure contract, but I’d say he’s as good a bet as anybody else—his mental history notwithstanding.

by odradek on Dec 24, 2010 10:56 AM EST up reply actions  

He most likely suffers from clinical depression as well, which never goes away.

by emd2k3 on Dec 24, 2010 1:50 PM EST up reply actions  

I’m betting plenty of successful big league players were depressives. Big Ed Delehanty?

by odradek on Dec 24, 2010 7:58 PM EST up reply actions  

He may or may not be a depressive, but he sure is crazy.

by odradek on Dec 25, 2010 11:40 AM EST up reply actions  

The reports I’ve heard were people saying they talked to someone in the Yankees organization. Now, I know that doesn’t mean it’s authentic, but it’s certainly more than just someone blogging at home.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 14, 2010 11:02 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t think Chuck was right. The argument always seemed to hinge on a hometown discount. This is Lee taking marginally less to go to a more competitive situation.

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 8:12 AM EST via mobile reply actions  

I disagree. The discount wasn’t in the money, it was in the years. That’s huge.

Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile

by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Dec 14, 2010 9:41 AM EST up reply actions  

Meh. Halladay gave up more, by leaps and bounds. Lee’s decision doesn’t strike me as unusual.

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 10:03 AM EST up reply actions  

I was floored by Halladay’s as well. So yeah, maybe it’s me.

Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile

by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Dec 14, 2010 1:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Halladay’s was more extreme, no doubt.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 2:13 PM EST up reply actions  

Have to disagree. Leaving $30 million on the table is leaving $30 million on the table.

The Phillies are in a better competitive situation, but it’s not a massive difference.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 2:14 PM EST up reply actions  

How much did Halladay leave on the table? How about Roy Oswalt?

Is this really all that exceptional?

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

I think Halladay and Lee are exceptional in that they left money on the table to GO to a specific team rather than to stay with their current organization, teammates and fans. Oswalt, Zambrano and many others have left plenty of money on the table to extend their careers with their current teams, but this is different.

I think there can be almost no doubt that Halladay would have gotten offered at least $160 million. He left $100 million on the table in my view.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 3:18 PM EST up reply actions  

But Lee, because of the way the teams he’d played for had moved him like a hot potatoe, never had a chance to do what Oswalt and Zambrano did. I mean, isn’t this the deal Lee would’ve given Philadelphia if he’d just stayed?

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 3:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Probably, but then Philly wouldn’t recieve all those shiny new minor leaguers in the Mariners deal.

Our best players wear suits.

by mauichuck on Dec 14, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Those guys stunk. And it cost Philly a bunch of money, more than likely.

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 9:05 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Perhaps Lee would have given Philly the same deal, or even better, but even that would be unusual (the under-market part) as he’d only just arrived.

Regardless, he was not re-upping with his longtime club. He was returning to a club where he once spent three months. Do you really not see the distinction?

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 10:54 PM EST up reply actions  

The difference is obvious but Lee is so unusual in the extreme movement he’s undergone. I suppose what I’m trying to say is that if you’ve never had a hometime club seriously approach you, is it so odd to invent one?

What’s stranger, to me, is why he insisted on bringing his talents to market at all.

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 11:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

I don’t understand. As opposed to doing what?

And yes, as unique as Lee’s two-year journey has been, I still say it’s entirely odd to invent a hometown club.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 11:31 PM EST up reply actions  

As opposed to getting this kind of deal with Philadelphia or Texas without hitting FA. Maybe this sort of deal wasn’t on the table.

by afh4 on Dec 15, 2010 12:13 AM EST up reply actions  

Philadelphia essentially got a better offer from Halladay and decided they couldn’t wait to see how the Lee negotiations turned out.

He was only with Texas for three months, and I think you would find that for a star player to re-up in the final three months of his contract is pretty unusual — even if he wasn’t just traded.

by Jay on Dec 15, 2010 7:28 AM EST up reply actions  

I think you’re also overlooking that he did make all the teams set a market for him, even if he didn’t take the top offer. He gets Philly to 120M by driving the Rangers to six years and almost seven.

by Jay on Dec 15, 2010 7:29 AM EST up reply actions  

I suppose. The fact that he essentially initiated negotiations with Philadelphia is an additional odd wrinkle.

by afh4 on Dec 15, 2010 8:39 AM EST up reply actions  

Don’t think I was arguing for a “home town discount”. My point was this: Cliff Lee – for a number of reasons – would never sign with the Yankees. I figured it’d be the Rangers because 1) they just got a huge influx of TV money 2) it was closest to the Lee family home 3) the Rangers look like they’ll be competitive for awhile. But the Phillies? Why would they go out and sign a FA for a hunnert plus megabucks after they traded him for a bag of beans? Gotta admit I never saw that part comin’.

And if there’s anything to learn from this little bit of drama it’s this: never let you’re loutish fans near a potential free agent’ family. It can come back to haunt you.

Our best players wear suits.

by mauichuck on Dec 14, 2010 8:58 PM EST up reply actions  

There’s a pretty good chance, actually, that the Rangers will not be perennial contenders, but more like the small-market club that gets a nice shot once in a while. It’s unusually shrewd for a player to have that kind of insight, or for his agent to care.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 10:52 PM EST up reply actions  

This does strike me as a competitive decision more than anything.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 15, 2010 9:30 AM EST up reply actions  

While we think of them as a small-market club, there is a lot of money to be taken advantage of there. I think there is some potential for them to operate more like the big boys.

by 7foot3 on Dec 15, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Like who, Houston?

by Jay on Dec 15, 2010 6:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Like San Francisco or the White Sox. Like the Indians could have been if the Westbrook and Hafner contracts didn’t kill them.

by 7foot3 on Dec 15, 2010 6:57 PM EST up reply actions  

The Giants were 23 games under .500 for the five seasons prior to this one. They finished in 3rd place three times, in 4th once and in 5th once.

The White Sox have been a few games over .500, but they’ve finished in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd again and 4th in the past five seasons. In a relatively weak division, they haven’t broken 90 wins since 2005.

So honestly, what the hell are you talking about?

by Jay on Dec 15, 2010 8:53 PM EST up reply actions  

Spending. I didn’t say the White Sox and Giants spent smartly. But if a team with a pretty smart management could consistently have a payroll around 10th, like the Rangers could do, that’s going to produce results better than a nice shot once in a while.

by 7foot3 on Dec 19, 2010 12:44 PM EST up reply actions  

It would be helpful if there were examples of this.

by Jay on Dec 19, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Money makes GMs dumb.

by afh4 on Dec 26, 2010 8:31 PM EST up reply actions  

How convoluted are we to enjoy that Lee left that much money on the table simply because we hate the Yankees? And that he signed with a different higher payroll team only adds to our sense of despair over the plight of all things MLB.

Ye damned whale!

by elsandito on Dec 14, 2010 8:24 AM EST reply actions  

Yeah, I don’t find this fun or exciting.

I bet Halladay’s pissed.

by afh4 on Dec 14, 2010 8:25 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Wrestling with Cholly in the dugout must be worth quite a bit to The Phifer.

by JulioBernazard on Dec 14, 2010 9:01 AM EST up reply actions  

Five years for $107.5m, with a $12.5m sixth-year buyout and a $27.5m sixth-year vesting option

So that is really a 5-year $120m deal. And that 6th year option is really $15m.

by APV on Dec 14, 2010 8:59 AM EST reply actions  

The union can live with that, being that he did just set the record for AAV for a pitcher, unless you count Roger Clemens’ pro-rated 2007 deal.

by xrickx on Dec 14, 2010 9:52 AM EST up reply actions  

So I guess, per that LGT tweet, how much would the expected returns differ between Greinke and Carmona and should we try and take advantage?

by cheech99 on Dec 14, 2010 9:26 AM EST reply actions  

It only takes one bidder to have a sweet deal, but there are reportedly a few interesting arms available that compare to or trump Carmona in reality or perception (Greinke, Garza, Shields).

The Yankees aren’t going to deal Hughes to get a pitcher, not one like Carmona at least. And even then, Hughes is himself three years from free agency, so it would only provide Cleveland with a little bit of cost savings and it would require Cleveland and New York to believe they are getting back the better pitcher.

Carmona’s GB-ways fit in Texas, but is Derek Holland worth the risk as a cernterpiece? Martin Perez?

by xrickx on Dec 14, 2010 10:02 AM EST up reply actions  

dude who this a couple years ago must be thrilled.

You are reading my signature.

by rolub on Dec 14, 2010 9:38 AM EST reply actions  

This kind of article is why I hate the Yankees, even though the Yankees don’t have anything to do with writing it.

by xrickx on Dec 14, 2010 10:05 AM EST reply actions  

Also repeats the lie that A-Rod’s contract kept the Rangers from being competitive.

by Jay on Dec 14, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Constantly updated Indians news, lots of in-depth analysis, live in-game discussions — and more fanatical and thoughtful Indians fans than every other web site combined.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Indians70sicon_small
Youkilis for Pure Rage
Avatard_new_small
Indians by the Numbers — #36
Topps1978-332f_small
Historical Timeline
427px-nap_lajoie_1913_small
Pick 6 Discussion
Topps1978-332f_small
Indians by the Numbers — #35
Avatard_new_small
Indians by the Numbers — #34
Small
Indians 2012 Player At Bat Music
Etat_small
Tribe Observations - 15 games In
Draft_lens6670022module54040272photo_1251768414louissockalexisicon4b_small
LGT, in the belly of the beast.
Tribe_cap_small
LGT Safeco Field Meet Up?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Featured Poll

Poll
Will Matt LaPorta be on the opening day roster?
Yes
59 votes
No
140 votes

199 votes | Poll has closed

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

2012 MLB Power Rankings - May 21st
Kerry Wood hangs 'em up
I did not like Cleveland Municipal Stadium. Like it? How could anyone like...
Garko gets another shot
Broadcaster Rankings (Radio): 30-21
Indians at Fenway don't drink beer; they watch TV.
Michael Brantley: A Studious 4-for-5 Night
Damon Makes His Case for HOF
Casey Blake to Retire
To longtoss, or not to longtoss

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

427px-nap_lajoie_1913_small Ryan

Dosequisman_small Jay

Editors

3444ant_black_small APV

47b8dd28b3127cceb64839d9746800000026102bauwjrq3za_small afh4