Tex or AJ

[LookinUp]

Belkast is about to make the message board explode.

IMO, I'd sign Tex for more than most here and likely more than the market requires. I would sign Burnett for about 50% of what the market will likely require. I just don't trust the guy. My answer is Tex.

[Satyr3206]

This is all well and good but ticket sales are basically set by the time OD starts.

Most of the sales are through season tickets.

They may have added some more in walk up as the season goes along but season tickets are always the difference.

You get roughly the same amount of walk up every year and group sales are pretty much always the same as well.

So, we got the spike in attendance was after the 71-91 season and because of the signings, season tickets went up that year I am sure.

So how many season ticket packages do they have to sell to break even on Tex signing?

[lovetoaster]

Truthfully I don't think it is a matter of one or the other. PGA is getting older and wants a winner ASAP. I believe the vaults will be wide open for the next couple of years.

This is what I like to hear! Just do it intelligently. But with MacPhail, I do not have as much concern about that as I would have had in previous years.

[Belkast]

BTW.. I'm not saying that we fill every need with a free agent. That won't happen. I do think we will look to sign 2 or 3 free agents and look to trade for other needs.

[ChaosLex]

BTW.. I'm not saying that we fill every need with a free agent. That won't happen. I do think we will look to sign 2 or 3 free agents and look to trade for other needs.

As long as Tex is one of those free agents, I'm good to go.

[Sports Guy]

So how many season ticket packages do they have to sell to break even on Tex signing?

Depends on what he signs for.

But, if you figure the average price of a ticket is around $25 and if we saw a similar increase to what we saw after signing Miggy, that would bring in around 7 million or probably somewhere around 30-45% of Tex's salary in 2009.

[geschinger]

If the O's plan on building a contender, then yes. It's probably worth more than that.

If they're going to tack him onto a 72-win team and hope for the best, then no. Almost no free agent is worth it in that scenario.

For me whether or not he's worth it depends on the total payroll. There are many ways to build a winner but the way that seems least likely to succeed IMO is if you have 20-30% of payroll tied up in a single player. I'm not sure we can have success long term if say we signed Tex to an 8 year $160m contract if Angelos approves an 8 year/$800m budget.

It's something I haven't looked at closely but I can't think of many teams with that kind of % of payroll tied up in one player but there may be examples. If we go to $125m payroll, then I definately think we could be successful spending 20+m a year on one player.

It all comes down to what kind of budget MacPhail is given as to whether or not that kind of commitment to Tex makes sense. There is no doubt that even in the AL East a team can be successful with a ~100m payroll. (assuming that the Yankees reign things in and don't significantly increase from where they are at now and the Red Sox stay in the same area they are currently in) It just takes a different approach - one that forgoes the 20+% of resources players.

[Sports Guy]

For me whether or not he's worth it depends on the total payroll. There are many ways to build a winner but the way that seems least likely to succeed IMO is if you have 20-30% of payroll tied up in a single player. I'm not sure we can have success long term if say we signed Tex to an 8 year $160m contract if Angelos approves an 8 year/$800m budget.

It's something I haven't looked at closely but I can't think of many teams with that kind of % of payroll tied up in one player but there may be examples. If we go to $125m payroll, then I definately think we could be successful spending 20+m a year on one player.

It all comes down to what kind of budget MacPhail is given as to whether or not that kind of commitment to Tex makes sense. There is no doubt that even in the AL East a team can be successful with a ~100m payroll. (assuming that the Yankees reign things in and don't significantly increase from where they are at now and the Red Sox stay in the same area they are currently in) It just takes a different approach - one that forgoes the 20+% of resources players.

And this is why we need to move guys like Huff for cheap, ML ready players.

If you hold onto them in hopes of a draft pick, then you just keep putting things off.

So, to supplement the loss of vet players and to wait on the young guys, you sign more FAs and get burned that way.

I have no doubt you can contend with an 80 million dollar payroll...Adding Tex to that and making it 100 million gives you an even better chance.

[Belkast]

And this is why we need to move guys like Huff for cheap, ML ready players.

If you hold onto them in hopes of a draft pick, then you just keep putting things off.

So, to supplement the loss of vet players and to wait on the young guys, you sign more FAs and get burned that way.

I have no doubt you can contend with an 80 million dollar payroll...Adding Tex to that and making it 100 million gives you an even better chance.

Let me ask you. If we were able to move Mora would you be okay with Huff as the everyday 3rd baseman?

[tywright]

Let me ask you. If we were able to move Mora would you be okay with Huff as the everyday 3rd baseman?

For 2009? Yes

2010- Hell no

[Sports Guy]

Let me ask you. If we were able to move Mora would you be okay with Huff as the everyday 3rd baseman?

Sure...I would like to trade both of them though and I would suspect that Huff gets us more than Mora.

So really, I want to trade the one that gets us the most but I would much prefer the idea of moving Mora.

If we could deal MelMo for Jason Donald and move Huff to third, that would be great.

Either way, I think the goal should be to deal AT LEAST 2 of Mora, Huff and Ramon this offseason...That is a lot of payroll off the books.

[geschinger]

And this is why we need to move guys like Huff for cheap, ML ready players.

If you hold onto them in hopes of a draft pick, then you just keep putting things off.

So, to supplement the loss of vet players and to wait on the young guys, you sign more FAs and get burned that way.

I have no doubt you can contend with an 80 million dollar payroll...Adding Tex to that and making it 100 million gives you an even better chance.

Ease my mind in that regard... Are there any examples... teams that you know of that have had success over a period of time with a player consuming 20-30% of payroll resources? Or are you thinking we could do something that hasn't really been successful for anyone else?

[Belkast]

Sure...I would like to trade both of them though and I would suspect that Huff gets us more than Mora.

So really, I want to trade the one that gets us the most but I would much prefer the idea of moving Mora.

If we could deal MelMo for Jason Donald and move Huff to third, that would be great.

Either way, I think the goal should be to deal AT LEAST 2 of Mora, Huff and Ramon this offseason...That is a lot of payroll off the books.

I don't know if the return for Huff would be what AM would be looking for. With the year Huff had I think we would be looking for a Tejada return. I don't think that would happen. I would be alright with Huff especially if we are looking to win sooner rather than later.

[JTrea81]

If we could deal MelMo for Jason Donald and move Huff to third, that would be great.

BTW Donald is a Boras client, so I just thought I'd throw that out there...

[Satyr3206]

Ease my mind in that regard... Are there any examples... teams that you know of that have had success over a period of time with a player consuming 20-30% of payroll resources? Or are you thinking we could do something that hasn't really been successful for anyone else?

If Markakis and Roberts were signed to extensions with the intent of signing Tex, then Teixeira wouldn't be 20-30% of payroll.