Source: #Indians out on Willingham. #MLB
Ken Rosenthal via Twitter.
5 months ago
afh4
34 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Not sure if I’m elated or saddened by this. Guess it’ll all depend on what he get’s and from whom.
Fear the Fedora.
by MooneysRebellion on Dec 13, 2011 3:28 PM EST reply actions
ESPN has the Tribe as the 2nd most benefited team with a Fielder signing (likelihood of playoffs jumps from 31% to 59%). If every fan who went to a game donated $5 to the “Prince Fielder” fund next year, that might cover enough of his salary to take it out of the “when pigs fly” category and move it up to the “when hell freezes over” category (and with climate change, this might occur sooner!).
As for Willingham, I’m disappointed, but at the same time the years/money were probably too high anyway.
I can’t be the only one disappointed by the fact that Antonetti has been so openly against Pujols and Fielder (with comments like “we’re in on all non-Fielder bats”) … we should be in on them, albeit with 1-3 year offers.
That’s the same as saying we’re not in on them.
by Brick. on Dec 13, 2011 11:57 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Oh I think I found the article you were referencing. It’s a insiders only article and an insider I most certainly am not, but I do see that it is in fact a contribution article from our good friend Dan Szymborski of Baseball Think Factory so there is a good chance that there is actual consideration for player value in this evaluation as opposed to the typical ESPN reliance on basing improvements on the level of hype said player has surrounding himself.
It is what you assume it is.
it’s also just a one-season assessment, for what likely will be a six-year deal at least.
Thanks for reading!
Yeah, in this case, it’s a one-season assessment since I was primarily looking at the Rangers here and their biggest need is in the short-term, given that they’re a team that can win now. While I certainly wouldn’t give Fielder a blank check if I’m in the Rangers, the main point of the article is that the Angels additions have changed the competitive environment in the AL West – it’s not some kind of hype thing that the Rangers need to match, but the wins on the field they have to worry about.
While the Giants and Indians and a few others come out very slightly ahead of the Rangers in this particular measure (error ranges are obviously very high as we’re obviously being very speculative, so they’re essentially the same), but I focused on Rangers simply because it’s the most realistic and they’ve been actually linked to Fielder. For the other teams linked to Fielder, the Cubs were down in the middle of the list and the O’s and M’s were down at the very bottom (the latter two simply have too many additional problems to get the same kind of boost that a team in the 78-85 win range could get).
Long-term, I filed Fielder’s long-term projections, so they’ll be up on ESPN as soon as he signs (Darvish as well).
by D.Szymborski on Dec 14, 2011 12:03 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, the implied thesis here is that if you’re going to pay silly money for a top-tier free agent — which is the only way to get one — then it makes the most sense for a team that is speculating the least regarding future contention, i.e., one highly likely to contend in the imminent season. And that is the Rangers, not the Indians or Cubs.
Indians not entirely out of Willingham chase, but still no official offer on table. Tribe’s finances are tight, so might not be realistic.
He may be overlooking that the Indians can offer a deal that’s low in 2012 but competitive in total value for 2012-2014.
Willingham’s bat a perfect fit but defensive fit was not good.
Shapiro tweeted this in response to a person asking about the Indians not signing Willingham. Looks like the Tribe is out if Shapiro is saying this publicly.
by Buckeye Brad on Dec 13, 2011 5:16 PM EST up reply actions
Kind of sounds like they’re hot under the collar. Not sure Indians fans want to see the “brain trust” trot Brantley out at first after all. Major league hitters, please.
Just for starters, LaPorta needs to ask Jesus how to hit a curveball.
by Jay on Dec 13, 2011 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Do you think it should be illegal to consider Brantley at 1base in winter meetings?
Isn’t that like considering Wade Boggs as a relief option during winter meetings?
If you’re saying Brantley as a first baseman is an act of violence, I agree.
If you’re saying loosening the wallet for a first baseman is an act of violence, I gots ta disagree. I can’t stand listening to management consider complicated backup plans when we don’t have first-time quality at the position. We have two routes to get a quality player: free agency and the trade market. We’re out of depth, so who do we trade? Then again, Willingham sure did strike out a lot last year.
At what point does the shine wear off of the media. The Indians are in the ‘chase’ one minute, and the next minute they’re out. Don’t they know the financials by now ?? If they KNEW the Tribe couldn’t afford this (whoever started it), how on earth could they ever be in the ‘chase’ in the 1st place. And when you don’t even put an offer on the table, how does this qualify as ‘in it’ ?? Confused
Of course they have a grasp on their financial situation, what they have little grasp on, at least immediately, is the financial situation of the free agent. They can put their finger on the pulse of the situation and judge fair market value and they can find a range where that player will fit given their skill set and judge how much risk they might want to take, also based off the skill set. Then, as they converse with the agent/player and get a grasp on other offers that might be coming in, the situation starts to clarify itself and the decision whether to make an offer or not as well as how much it might be and for how long is eventually made. All of that, is the chase. It doesn’t happen in one day, it is a process and the longer a team stays in “the chase”, likely, the closer that team and the agent/player are, number wise. This isn’t Macy’s, you don’t necessarily know you can’t afford someone’s services until you enter the process. Unless their last name is Pujols or Fielder, of course.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
Assuming we don’t make a play on Beltran, what level of interest, if any, should Cleveland have in JD Drew?
I thought about this on my way to work this morning, and assuming its a $1-2mil plus incentives type deal, I think it makes sense. Although, as with all the other options discussed so far, it is far from “thrilling”.
Fear the Fedora.
by MooneysRebellion on Dec 14, 2011 8:23 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
on FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Bryce Harper’s triple against Halladay keys Nats win, Dodgers roar back
- Heather Nabozny of Tigers, Nicole Sherry of Orioles: Women groundskeepers in MLB
- 10 notable team reps for MLB’s upcoming draft
- Rays’ gladiator helmets: Fernando Rodney, Joel Peralta do as Romans do (VIDEO)
- Rickie Weeks forgets number of outs, passes up chance for inning-ending double play (VIDEO)
