LA Angels: Our only competition for Teixeira

[geschinger]

In all seriousness, what does it really matter to you (or anyone on here for that matter) whether the Orioles were to give him an extra year at 20 mil. I could care less if Angelos goes 8 years 200 mil as long as he gets him.

In a vacuum I'd agree... But in the context of the team payroll it can be huge... Assuming there is a limit to payroll if you overextend for one of your assets you will likely have to cut back somewhere else. If signing Teix eats up too much of the team's resources then maybe it means they have to consider trading Wieters or Gutrhie or whomever when their salaries spike w/arbitration etc... If Angelos were to come out tomorrow and say that he's committed to a $125m payroll I'd be a lot more comfortable throwing an extra 20m at Teix than I would be if the payroll is going to max out at 80-90m.

[Sports Guy]

In a vacuum I'd agree... But in the context of the team payroll it can be huge... Assuming there is a limit to payroll if you overextend for one of your assets you will likely have to cut back somewhere else. If signing Teix eats up too much of the team's resources then maybe it means they have to consider trading Wieters or Gutrhie or whomever when their salaries spike w/arbitration etc... If Angelos were to come out tomorrow and say that he's committed to a $125m payroll I'd be a lot more comfortable throwing an extra 20m at Teix than I would be if the payroll is going to max out at 80-90m.

It still goes back to how do you spend the rest of the money.

[geschinger]

It still goes back to how do you spend the rest of the money.

True, but if payroll is going to be in the 80-90m range and you have one guy at 20+m and a couple of other players making 10+m your margin for error is so razor thin that it becomes awfully difficult compared to if say you are at $125m.

[frankpembleton]

In a vacuum I'd agree... But in the context of the team payroll it can be huge... Assuming there is a limit to payroll if you overextend for one of your assets you will likely have to cut back somewhere else. If signing Teix eats up too much of the team's resources then maybe it means they have to consider trading Wieters or Gutrhie or whomever when their salaries spike w/arbitration etc... If Angelos were to come out tomorrow and say that he's committed to a $125m payroll I'd be a lot more comfortable throwing an extra 20m at Teix than I would be if the payroll is going to max out at 80-90m.

I understand that and agree with you. I'm advocating no other free agent activity other than this and possibly signing Burnett. The Orioles don't seem to do anything right in free agency. I want them to go after the one sure thing, even if it means doing nothing else. Let trades and the farm system take care of the rest. How much money have we spent per yer over the last 5 years? Does anyone know?

[baltfan]

I am, depending on how badly we can fleece Kenny Williams.

Yeah, because the Diamondbacks and Rangers did such a good job of fleecing Kenny Williams.

Kenny Williams is not the greatest GM but he also isn't a patsy. The guy has guts. And it is a mistake to think that you are going to fleece him. Beane has been fleeced more often than Williams

[Sports Guy]

True, but if payroll is going to be in the 80-90m range and you have one guy at 20+m and a couple of other players making 10+m your margin for error is so razor thin that it becomes awfully difficult compared to if say you are at $125m.

This is partially true....Again, it depends on how you are spending that money.

Are you paying out 40 million for 3 BP arms? 10 million for a 4th OFer? 10-12 million for a mediocre starter?

I believe you can contend with a 60-80 million dollar payroll...All you are doing is adding Tex to that.

I agree that spending more would make it easier but doing intelligent things like trading guys one year too early instead of one year too late, signing your young talent cheaply and things like that allow you to spend a lot on a player and still remain competitive.

[geschinger]

I agree that spending more would make it easier but doing intelligent things like trading guys one year too early instead of one year too late, signing your young talent cheaply and things like that allow you to spend a lot on a player and still remain competitive.

I agree it is possible, just a lot harder with a lot less margin for error when 25% of the resources are tied up in 4% of the roster.

[Sports Guy]

I agree it is possible, just a lot harder with a lot less margin for error when 25% of the resources are tied up in 4% of the roster.

Let's try this another way.

Tell me what you would have rather had this past season with our payroll of around 65-70 million?

Payton- 4.5

Baez- 4.5

Walker- 4.5

Millar- 2.7

Gibbons- 5ish million

Let's say it is those 5 or Tex, Montanez, 2 cheap relievers(JJ types) and a Jon Knott-esque platoon guy.

Same money spent...Which do you prefer? The group we had or the group led by Tex?

[geschinger]

Let's try this another way.

Tell me what you would have rather had this past season with our payroll of around 65-70 million?

Payton- 4.5

Baez- 4.5

Walker- 4.5

Millar- 2.7

Gibbons- 5ish million

Let's say it is those 5 or Tex, Montanez, 2 cheap relievers(JJ types) and a Jon Knott-esque platoon guy.

Same money spent...Which do you prefer? The group we had or the group led by Tex?

Of course I'd prefer the group led by Teix... But that isn't the question to be asking unless we're signing Teix for only one or two years. If the payroll ceiling isn't going to shoot past $100m do you want Teix if it means possibly being forced to trade a Wieters, Guthrie, Adam Jones, --insert name here of player who might be due a big raise in arbitration--

[Mike B]

I'll believe the Yankees are out of it when he signs elsewhere.

You did read where Boras had to eliminate teams from the bidding because there were "too many to negotiate with, right?"

I agree with you on the Yankees, if they do not spend on 2 or 3 starters they could swoop in and sign Tex. They could do it even if tey sign all 3 starters (AJ,CC and Lowe.)

As for what Boras says, ignore it. If his lips are moving there is an excellent chance that he is lying.

[Sports Guy]

Of course I'd prefer the group led by Teix... But that isn't the question to be asking unless we're signing Teix for only one or two years. If the payroll ceiling isn't going to shoot past $100m do you want Teix if it means possibly being forced to trade a Wieters, Guthrie, Adam Jones, --insert name here of player who might be due a big raise in arbitration--

There is no reason for this to be the case...an extra few million a year can't stop these type of things unless you let it happen.

First of all, those guys should be signed before it gets to that point anyway.

Secondly, even if you don't sign them, 3 million a year more for Tex than you want to pay shouldn't prevent you from keeping them....it is the money that you spend on the 3-12 million dollar FAs that will keep you from that.

[geschinger]

There is no reason for this to be the case...an extra few million a year can't stop these type of things unless you let it happen.

First of all, those guys should be signed before it gets to that point anyway.

Secondly, even if you don't sign them, 3 million a year more for Tex than you want to pay shouldn't prevent you from keeping them....it is the money that you spend on the 3-12 million dollar FAs that will keep you from that.

Sure it can if you have an $80m payroll and $40m is tied up between Teix, Roberts and Markakis... $40m to be allocated among 21 other guys is real tough if you have several high quality arb eligible players in the mix. It might mean the funds aren't available to sign everyone you might have otherwise.

[Sports Guy]

Sure it can if you have an $80m payroll and $40m is tied up between Teix, Roberts and Markakis... $40m to be allocated among 21 other guys is real tough if you have several high quality arb eligible players in the mix. It might mean the funds aren't available to sign everyone you might have otherwise.

First of all, Markakis will not be making around 10 million until 2011.

Secondly, BRob isn't signed yet and I don't think we should.

BRob is an example of what i was saying...you don't give out foolish contracts.

[Hank Scorpio]

I agree with you on the Yankees, if they do not spend on 2 or 3 starters they could swoop in and sign Tex. They could do it even if tey sign all 3 starters (AJ,CC and Lowe.)

As for what Boras says, ignore it. If his lips are moving there is an excellent chance that he is lying.

Why wouldn't a bunch of teams be interested in Teixeira is my point, I guess... moreso than believing what Boras is spouting.

[The Rick]

There is no reason for this to be the case...an extra few million a year can't stop these type of things unless you let it happen.

First of all, those guys should be signed before it gets to that point anyway.

Secondly, even if you don't sign them, 3 million a year more for Tex than you want to pay shouldn't prevent you from keeping them....it is the money that you spend on the 3-12 million dollar FAs that will keep you from that.

By the time those players are eligible for arbitration, shouldn't we be good enough to spend more on payroll anyway? The idea behind Teix is for us to contend quicker, putting butts in the seats, and ultimately raising the payroll.