+ Reply to Thread
Results 136 to 150 of 239
11-02-2006 04:34 PM #136Originally Posted by davearm
11-02-2006 04:38 PM #137
No, he's not Beltre - but he's an example of the danger inherent in players who post anomalous contract years.
Not so much a comparison to Beltre as an analogy to highlight the inherent risk.
11-02-2006 04:39 PM #138Originally Posted by Lucky Jim
11-02-2006 04:43 PM #139Plus Member Since 04/04
Originally Posted by italianstallion
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
I don't think he's going to be a worthless player like Beltre is now, but I do think he will be right around his career averages, which is about what Beltre reverted to.
Signing Soriano will net you a guy with a terrible OBP, low .800s OPS, and about 30 HR and 30 SB with a marginal to bad success rate. Theres a lot of value to a player like that, a whole lot. But not a 6/$96M contract type of value. 4/$48M would be appropriate, but twice that is crazy for us.
He makes more sense for Philadelphia, becuase he could be the one piece that puts them over the top. He is not in our case. We need at least two players of his calibre to have a chance at the playoffs. You make your huge FA splash when you can deal with the almost assured possibility of him not being nearly worth the contract in the last year or two because he will get you to the playoffs in the first couple.
Unless Angelos is willing to go to $110-120M payroll, signing Soriano now will likely prevent us from being serious contenders over the course of his contract, because we won't have the money to bring in the piece that puts us over the top, or to retain our commodoties which will be growing in cost very shortly, like Bedard, Cabrera, and Roberts.
If we sign him and he is the superstar that we're paying for, you have a chance to compete, but if he's what he actually is, which is a very good, borderline AS player, he won't make us a winner and will likely handicap the organization.
11-02-2006 05:07 PM #140Originally Posted by Mackus
That is the essence of where I disagree. The Orioles already conduct business as though they are already a handicapped franchise. Moreover, Soriano will get more than he deserves, but guess what, that's going to happen every year. Things go up, (well everything except our payroll).
This team can afford to take some risks on good players. They can't afford to sit around and hope for another buyer's market comes along in some future year or hope all of our prospects develop(they won't).
The last time there was a buyers market, they blew it by not getting VLad and DLee when they had the chance. The funny thing is I distinctly remember people calling Vlad a "bad risk" for 6 years because of the effects of his "violent swing" on his back. Instead we signed Raffy,but hey, he was cheaper and only required a one year commitment, an all too familar refrain
I'm in agreement with SG on this one, ***** or get off the pot.
11-02-2006 05:08 PM #141Originally Posted by KstateBird
I don't believe that he just got lucky and pitchers threw him more balls than in previous seasons. I think it more likely indicates a shift in his approach to the plate to take more pitches.
I still don't think he's worth the price or that he will post a 900 OPS consistently, but I think you could expect and OBP in the .340-.350 range and an OPS of .850+ for at least the first 3 years of whatever deal he gets.
11-02-2006 05:10 PM #142Originally Posted by Lucky Jim
This is the question we must ask ourselves. If you REALLY think we can win with Miggy, Spend the money, knowing there will be a drop off in whomever we sign to a long term deal.
If we don't think we can win in the next two years with Miggy, then why the hell hang on to him. Move him while he still has great value.
Last edited by osfan83; 11-02-2006 at 05:18 PM.
11-02-2006 05:10 PM #143Originally Posted by Mackus
11-02-2006 05:32 PM #144Board National League Analyst
Originally Posted by KstateBird
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
I would certainly agree that the Royals' approach with Huber has been nothing short of mystifying. The guy's been totally mishandled despite showing a lot of promise.
That said, I'm not ready to assume that they're giving him away for less than market value.
11-02-2006 05:43 PM #145
Sorry, didn't mean unfamiliar so much as just not quite fully informed (which is an unfair critique from me, because I'm smack dab in the middle of royals territory).
Shealy is viewed as more of a stopgap for them (who has the upside to become more) while they are waiting for Butler (who at this point, will only be able to DH) and Gordon (who they seem split 50/50 on whether he will end up at 3rd or 1st) to be ready.
This time last year, Teahen was on his way out and could have been had for a song, now he is viewed as one of cornerstones for the franchise to build around along with DeJesus.
If the Royals weren't so thin on pitching, there'd be a lot to like about their potential ballclub in the not too distant future. I'd definitely trade Flanagan and even Duquette for Drayton Moore. But he'd never work for PA.
But Huber is more than just blocked or the odd man out. Not to knock Shealy, but if Huber were really a guy that the Royals were high on, would a guy who hit 7 HRs in 200 ABs and posted a .780 OPS really be "blocking" him?
Last edited by KstateBird; 11-02-2006 at 05:49 PM.
11-02-2006 05:47 PM #146Originally Posted by davearm
Last edited by KstateBird; 11-02-2006 at 06:13 PM.
11-02-2006 05:49 PM #147Originally Posted by KstateBird
Exactly. Dave is overvalueing Huber.
11-02-2006 06:01 PM #148Originally Posted by RZNJ
Are Liz or Olson getting Loney? No, of course not. Votto? Probably not.
But they can get those guys, the ones who need pitching and who have other guys blocking them.
11-02-2006 06:15 PM #149Board National League Analyst
Originally Posted by RZNJ
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
The two sites I just checked had Huber either right in front of, or right behind Hayden Penn in their rankings. :shrug:
11-02-2006 06:30 PM #150Originally Posted by davearm
Anyway, I think Liz or Olson gets him.