Jan
26

Report: Nady reaches deal with the Cubs, Sheets with A’s

By

Update (1:58pm): Nady got $3.3M, plus another $2M in incentives. The base salary is a 50% pay cut.

11:00am: Via MLBTR, free agent outfielder Xavier Nady has agreed to a contract with the Cubs, ending his brief tenure in the Bronx. Nady still has to take a physical, which is no given considering he’s coming back from his second Tommy John surgery. The Yanks didn’t offer him arbitration because he would have probably accepted given his elbow, so they won’t get a draft pick even though he was a Type-B.

Nady hit .270-.319-.469 in close to 300 plate appearances with the Yankees, and was a potential left field option. Let’s see what the dollars are before everyone gets fussy.

Also, the A’s have signed Ben Sheets to a one-year, $8 million deal, though some sources say $10 mil. Rumor had it that Johnny Damon was their Plan B if they couldn’t land Sheets, so do the math.

Categories : Asides, Hot Stove League

157 Comments»

  1. Good for Nady. Wish him well.

    One less option off the board.

    • History Teacher says:

      I broke this story earlier, but my comments were removed :( I would have put it here, but there wasn’t a post yet. Sorry RAB.

      Seriously though… I’m a little bummed the Yanks didn’t give Nady another shot. Maybe they know more about his injury than us, but I thought he had a lot of upside. He was fun to watch hit.

      Sheets to the A’s is… pointless at best.

      • History Teacher says:

        Do you think this forces Damon to sign with the Yanks for less? Where else could he go? Boras is a fool with these negotiations. He shot himself in the foot by not taking the 2 year deal the Yanks offered earlier.

        • Phil McCracken says:

          I’m not so sure I’d call Boras a fool. Even after he overplayed his hand with ARod’s opt out and figured out there was no teams out there for Alex, he was still smart enough to figure out a plan to get ARod back with the Yankees.

          I’m sure he’ll do the same thing with Damon if he can’t find a team. Damon will do the “I always wanted to be with the Yankees and Boras and I aren’t talking anymore” routine and he’ll be back in left field.

        • Bo says:

          Boras a fool? Go back and check how much Damon has made in his career and tell us Boras is a fool. A-Rod too.

        • A.D. says:

          Boras isn’t a fool, but he isn’t a crafty negotiator (nor has he ever been), from what we see in the public eye.

          Boras makes his clients money with big comments, using the media, and making the GMs feel pressure to sign a player that isn’t necessarily there. Its a fairly blunt approach, that doesn’t work so well when

          1. the player isn’t that good
          or
          2. there’s lots of substitutes available.
          and
          3. many GMs have cracked down/been forced to get smarter with payroll.

          Boras’s classic tactics still work with the bigger ticket names, such as Matt Holliday this year, but he may need to re-invent himself for some of the aging vets such as Damon or Varitek.

        • pete says:

          it’s not so much that he’s a fool as much as it’s becoming rather evident that most GMs have caught on to his methods for extracting well above-market-value contracts for his clients. However, considering that those methods DID work for the majority of Boras’s clients for a loooonggggg time and are only just being recognized for what they truly are, it’s hard to call him a fool. He completely changed the (contract negotiating) game. Just because MLB front offices have started to counter his 20 year dominance doesn’t make him a fool.

      • Sheets to the A’s is… pointless at best.

        Trading Matt Holliday to the Cardinals for Brett Wallace says hello.

  2. Mussina fan says:

    im glad he signed. more chance to get back Damon on a drastically reduced price

  3. mryankee says:

    Ask and yee shall receive. I think this places Johnny Damon back in the fold.

    • How, exactly?

      The Cubs and Damon were never really suitors for one another. They never showed any tangible interest in him.

      This changes nothing, IMO.

      • steve (different one) says:

        yes, but the Sheets deal probably removes the A’s from the equation, no?

      • mryankee says:

        The A’S did and if you believe (olney) then Damon was the backup plan if they did not get Sheets.

      • Peter says:

        A’s did though as Damon was their plan B to Sheets.

        and seeing the A’s got sheets…this takes them out of the Damon sweepstakes.

        • If they were really in the Damon sweepstakes in the first place.

          Another team that was probably never in the Damon sweepstakes in the first place: The New York Yankees

          • Esteban says:

            C’mon, he had started out with lower demands and accepted the Yankees initial offers, he wouldn’t have signed? Or there were no original offers?

          • Peter says:

            how do you figure that?

            reported 2yr/$14Million offer handed to Damon early in the offseason says they were in the sweepstakes at some point.

            moveover a reported 1yr/$3-5million offer on the table right now to damon’s camp (the only known offer on the table) says the yankees are actually still in the sweepstakes.

            • reported 2yr/$14Million offer handed to Damon early in the offseason says they were in the sweepstakes at some point.

              If you offer a guy a 2/14 when he’s publicly demanding a 4/52, and then sign Nick Johnson rather than waiting and negotiating, and then pull that initial offer from the table as well… how serious do you think you really were in truly getting into the Damon sweepstakes?

              Calling our interest in Damon “halfhearted” or “lukewarm” would be generous, I’d say.

              • Peter says:

                you said “probably never in the Damon sweepstakes in the first place”

                thats completely false if they extended an offer to him…especially since it was the best offer he got all offseason.

                whether they were serious or not…they were still very much in the sweepstakes.

                • I guess this all depends on what our definition of “in” is.

                  /BillClinton’d

                  Seriously, though, this is a bit of a semantics game. I think you’re taking me a bit to literally; if that’s my fault I apologize.

                  I wasn’t trying to say we NEVER had ANY interest AT ALL in bringing back Damon. I’m merely saying, we were never going after him all that hardly.

                  Yes, we made an offer. We made it at the beginning of the free agency process. It was an offer FAR, FAR lower than Boras and Damon were looking for. We know Boras and Damon’s MO. It’s to wait out the process and never accept the initial below-market offer.

                  You’ll pardon me if I’m skeptical about our chances to land Johnny Damon on the offer we extended and then quickly withdrew after we found a younger, cheaper, better alternative. Offering a Boras client coming off a 4/52 contract a 2/14 contract in the very beginning of the FA process, with a short acceptance window… that’s practically a non-offer.

                  It was genuine and we would have loved for him to have accepted, but we had to know the chances of him accepting were slim. Which is why we quickly moved on.

          • radnom says:

            While I have my doubts on the sincerity of the A’s interest in Damon, I think it is a little much to claim the Yankees were never in on Damon in the first place.
            Regardless of their interest now, the Yankees have demonstrated very real interest in Damon (at various price points) multiple times this offseason.

            • We were “in” on Damon in a “we’re not really all that in on Damon” kind of way.

              • radnom says:


                We were “in” on Damon in a “we’re not really all that in on Damon” kind of way.

                Eh, that doesn’t describe making a $14 million dollar offer, which the Yankees almost certainly did.

                Unless you are claiming that the offer was purely for PR purposes, and Cashman knew Boras would turn it down, but that is a crazy stretch.

                The thing is, at one point in the offseason the Yankees threw down an offer guaranteeing Damon more money than they will be paying any other acquisition they got this offseason. Why are you trying so hard to make is seem like they wern’t interested?

                • radnom says:

                  Not to mention, allegedly asking his agent for a baseline number to present to management. For a team at its budget, that is as serious interest as they can have. An informal offer to consider going slightly overbudget if a deal can be worked out between both parties.

                  Honestly, the Yankees have shown far more interest in Damon than he has in them.

                • Unless you are claiming that the offer was purely for PR purposes, and Cashman knew Boras would turn it down, but that is a crazy stretch.

                  No.

                  It wasn’t an offere they KNEW Boras would turn down, nor was it PR.

                  It was leverage. It was us saying to Boras, “We’ll take Johnny back, but only at our price. Here’s our price. Whether or not it’s below your desired price is utterly irrelevant to us. This is our price, take it or leave it.

                  This price has an expiration date. We have other options we are pursuing to replace Johnny. If we sign one of those other options, this price disappears. There will be no negotiation. We are not wedded to Johnny Damon.

                  If we don’t hear from you, soon, saying you’ll take our price, we’re moving on. Have a lovely day.”

                  So, yes, we were interested in bringing back Johnny Damon. Our interest dramatically lessened when two things happened:

                  1) Johnny was reluctant to accept our significant price cut.
                  2) We replaced his production with Nick Johnson.

                • radnom says:

                  Ok, I never said you were claiming that and I agree with everything you just wrote.

                  It doesn’t jive with what you were repeating above, that they were never really interested in Damon. Before they signed Nick, they were willing to sign Damon for about $9 million more. You obviously agree, so I’m not sure why you would keep claiming that this interest was never real or serious.

                • radnom says:

                  You now…

                  So, yes, we were interested in bringing back Johnny Damon. Our interest dramatically lessened when two things happened

                  me twenty minutes ago, which you disagreed with..

                  Regardless of their interest now, the Yankees have demonstrated very real interest in Damon (at various price points) multiple times this offseason

                  Obviously, other acquisitions affected the interest in Damon, I’m just countering the claim that said interest was never there.

                • And I’m saying the preponderance of evidence doesn’t say the interest was NEVER there, just that the interest was minimal.

                  “The interest was minimal” is not incongruent with my original statement of “Another team that was probably never in the Damon sweepstakes in the first place: The New York Yankees”.

                  Emphasis mine.

    • X says:

      took the stadium tour the other day and all johnnys stuff was still in his locker.. actually one of the only players like this.. just sayen

      • king of fruitless hypotheticals says:

        if he’s not coming back, he should be paying a storage fee or something for that…this aint no charity mr. damon…

  4. jsbrendog officially approves signing Fernando Tatis says:

    what can the honestly accept out of the guy, nady, tho? i mean, this is uncharted territory and the cubs dont exactly have money to spare if he doesnt pan out

  5. A.D. says:

    And the Damon “sweepstakes” just got one smaller.

  6. mryankee says:

    Well nobody accused the Cubs of being a smart organization. Anyway who cares about them I think this moves pushes Johnny Damon closer to accepting whatever deal the Yankees offered him.

  7. Also, the A’s have signed Ben Sheets to a one-year, $8 million deal.

    Meaning they’ll spin him off for a prospect at the deadline.

    Let’s say… to the Dodgers for Chris Withrow. You heard it here first.

    • radnom says:

      Good all round move. If Sheets pans out they can land some nice talent for him from a contender with pitching injuries. Hell, if he pitches to his potential they might have a (really) outside shot of contending in the west this year.

  8. Angelo says:

    Sheets to the A’s. As long as he didnt sign on a competitive team or the AL East I wouldve been happy, unless that team was the Yankees of course.

    Good luck to Nady.

    One step closer to bringing back Damon I guess….maybe.

  9. Nady Nation says:

    /sheds tear.

    Does this require a handle change?

  10. mryankee says:

    I think its about tim JD saw the wriiting on the wall and accepted his fate.

  11. Peter says:

    i entered Wednesday in the Marc Carig ‘damon’ sweepstakes.

    I like my chances.

  12. AndrewYF says:

    So, the question stands, who would you rather have:

    Javier Vazquez
    or
    Sheets/Melky/Dunn/Viz?

    Tough question.

    • mryankee says:

      Melky and Dunn are very replaceable. Vizcaino might be something he is only 18 and never pitched full season. Oppenheimer is paid to find these types of pitchers so they should be able to replace him. I think Vazquez is an excellent nuber 3/4 and most teams a #2-I would match him up against Lackey any day.

      • AndrewYF says:

        The question, as it stands, is: are Melky, Dunn, and Vizcaino greater than the difference between Sheets and Vazquez?

        I guess we’ll have to find out.

        • John says:

          In fact it’s melky, dunn, vizcaino and 3.5MM since vasquez is paid 3.5MM more than Sheets if the reports are effective.

          • Angelo says:

            Yeah but Melky would have made up the difference with his pay raise. And I think Javy is making 10 mil this year. I should look it up but Im too lazy.

        • The question, as it stands, is: are Melky, Dunn, and Vizcaino greater than the difference between Sheets and Vazquez?

          The answer probably depends on the team.

          For a team like, say, the Mets, no; giving up Melky/Dunn/Vizcaino isn’t worth the security advantange of Vazquez over the upside of Sheets. For a team like the 2010 Yankees, yeah, it probably is.

          We don’t NEED another ace (which is Sheets’s ceiling), what we need is a workhorse who can be counted on to take the ball every fifth day. And what we gave up are pieces we either won’t miss or wouldn’t use anytime soon anyway.

          • Exactly.

            For the 2010 Yankees, Vazquez is the better of the “deal”.

            The team needs an innings horse to make sure we don’t have any more of this ridiculous rotation/bullpen shifting.

            For the As, as TJSC said before, they can spin off Sheets at the deadline turning him into possible useful pieces for the future. That would hopefully not be in the Yankees plan come July.

    • I’ll take the latter.

      It’s real close, though. You’re trading upside and future considerations (that may not pan out) for a great deal more present security and reliability. Vazquez isn’t as good as Sheets at his best, but Sheets may never be his best again, and he’s never been all that durable.

      Vazquez is the proverbial bird in the hand. (The one Nick Swisher didn’t kill with his stone, of course.)

    • A.D. says:

      I think at this point given the Yanks current roster construction you want the safer bet with Javy, they already have, talent wise, a couple top of the line arms with inconsistency, thus prefer the safer innings eater, who also is pretty damn good.

    • steve (different one) says:

      gotta throw 2 draft picks on the Javier side of the equation.

      i know it’s easy to count chickens before they hatch and all that, but i think Javy is pretty close to a lock for Type A status and getting offered arb.

    • Angelo says:

      You forgot to add 2 million dollars to having Sheets/Melky/Dunn/Viz. Well thats if there arent bonuses to Sheets’ contract.

      Well if Sheets is coming back at full strength, its hard to choose. Sheets is much more injury prone, while Javy has an excellent track record of health and can be signed up for 200 innings and 200 strike outs a year.

      Tough call, but even with the question marks around Sheets…I would choose Sheets/Melky/Dunn/Viz.

      If its Sheets or Javy, then Id choose Javy, but all the other players involved change that.

    • Thomas says:

      I’d go with Vazquez due to his durability. I think the security of 200 above average (or higher) innings outweighs the possibility of fantastic innings from Sheets. In the fourth starter slot, the Yankees need a reliable pitcher like Pettitte, since it is not unlikely to see Burnett get injured and/or Chamberlain have a very poor stretch.

      Additionally, the Yankees have the lineup to absorb the loss of Melky and the with their team (which is built to win now), the addition of Vazquez is worth the slight hit to the farm.

    • John says:

      Its just speculation but maybe even the difference in salaries between vasquez and sheets would have been enough to give the yanks the payroll flexibility needed to sign damon.

    • Bo says:

      Would be tougher if Melky wasnt a 4th OF, Dunn could throw strikes, Vizcaino was above short season ball and Sheets threw a baseball the past 15 months.

  13. bigpinklips says:

    The Giants want Damon.

    The Yokomuro Giants.

  14. Granderslam says:

    So that’s another suitor out on Damon. The A’s. At this point, I think Damon signs back with the Yankees. I just don’t see any other viable options for him at this point. And he’ll round out an absolutely devastating lineup for 2010.

  15. pat says:

    JD is really gonna look like a really big douche if he turns down the Yankees and takes a few million more to go sign with a bad team.

    • jsbrendog officially approves signing Fernando Tatis says:

      red sox dark horse at 1 for 5-7 mill? it was already said that they will look to replace ortiz if he starts slow, and drew will get injured and hti the dl for at least his usual 15 days, cameron is older, and ellsbury, well, he isnt that great offensively…

      • pat says:

        Very true, plus his t-rex arm and sheisty range wouldn’t be as much as a liability in their left field.

        • Angelo says:

          hah. I had a good laugh over that T-rex arm comment.

        • jsbrendog officially approves signing Fernando Tatis says:

          i mean, honestly, what do they do when drew has his annual injury, or if cameron finally realizes he is over 40? and when ortiz blows an they have to move martinez to dh and find a catcher, which will get expensive…i wonder why they havent been in on him esp now that he is prob gonna come off the discount rack

          • They promote Casey Kelly straight to the bigs. He plays CF on the days he doesn’t pitch complete game shutouts.

            Seriously, though, if they have injuries/struggles amongst the Drew/Cameron/Ellsbury/Hermida top four, they’d just roll with larger doses of Josh Reddick. And then they’d trade one of their two relief pitchers named Ramon Ramirez for Eric Hinske and call it a day.

            They’re not going to bring back Johnny. That’s not the organizational MO, and for good reason.

      • radnom says:

        They already have 2 full time DH’s and 4 OFs. Not to mention they are already pushing the luxury tax threshold. I don’t see it.

        • jsbrendog officially approves signing Fernando Tatis says:

          loweel and ortiz? yeah, great tandem.

          and who is thr 4th of, who am i missing, ive got ellsbury, cameron, drew…

          • jsbrendog officially approves signing Fernando Tatis says:

            forgot about hermida, right. meh well, i still think he makes sense for them if they can dump lowell

            • radnom says:

              Yes, Hermida.

              Perhaps if they can dump Lowell, but doing so will require them to eat almost all of his salary and doesn’t solve the luxury tax issue.

              If they can’t, then the roster just has no room for another OF/DH type.

      • Spaceman.Spiff says:

        Ellsbury, Bucholz package for Adrian Gonzalez, Red Sox swoop in on Damon for LF.

        C Victor Martinez
        1b Adrian Gonzalez
        2b Marco Scutaro
        3b Adrian Beltre/Kevin Youkilis
        SS Dustin Pedroia
        LF Johnny Damon
        CF Mike Cameron
        RF JD Drew
        DH Kevin Youkilis/David Ortiz

        Just kidding.

    • pat says:

      How about I say really a few more times. 0/2 for today.

    • Angelo says:

      To our bias that would be true.

    • JD is really gonna look like a really big douche if he turns down the Yankees and takes a few million more to go sign with a bad team.

      Why?

      More money >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less money

      I could see someone saying that Johnny is an idiot for not leaping at the 2/14 we offered him only to take, say, a 1/7 from the Royals now, but I don’t know how Johnny turning down a 1/4 or 1/5 from us NOW (if we’re actually offering that) to take a 1/7 from the Royals NOW makes him a “douche”.

      • pat says:

        but I don’t know how Johnny turning down a 1/4 or 1/5 from us NOW (if we’re actually offering that) to take a 1/7 from the Royals NOW makes him a “douche”.

        Maybe it’s just me. I’d rather have another (really good) chance at ring on my finger than an extra 2 or 3 million in the bank account, especially after making over 80 million in his career. TO me, that’s being a douche, taking some extra money and playing for a noncontender. It’s not like we’re offering him 1 yr 4 million and the Royals are offering 3 yrs 30 million. It’s a few drops in the bucket vs potentially being a champion again.

        • Maybe it’s just me. I’d rather have another (really good) chance at ring on my finger than an extra 2 or 3 million in the bank account, especially after making over 80 million in his career.

          Given that literally THOUSANDS of aging players have taken the contract that offers the most money rather than the contract that offers the best chance to win, and that most of those players are not “douches”, I’ll say it’s probably just you.

          It’s a few drops in the bucket vs potentially being a champion again.

          “A few million” is NEVER, EVER, EVER “a few drops in the bucket”. Not even to a multibillionare.

        • A.D. says:

          You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don’t consider a “douche” move to take more money, and potentially not play for a contender, he has 2 rings already, and he may very well want/feel he needs some more money to be fiscally sound for his future.

          Plus what real allegiance does Damon have to the Yanks? It’s not like he’s played in NY for 10 years, he signed a lucrative 4 year deal to play in NY and be snatched from their biggest rivals.

    • Bo says:

      taking a few million more makes him a “douche”?

      You know ballplayers loyalty is to their families first. i’d love to see how your wife reacted when you told her you were signing for 3 mill less someplace.

  16. Mike HC says:

    Thats too bad. He definitely seemed to be an option for the Yanks. Obviously not anymore.

    And Beane just loves those high upside, but low probability of success type guys. This way, if they have a good year, he looks like a genius.

  17. Bo says:

    Damon will be in LF for the Yankees. Where he should be. Gardner goes back to being what he should be. 4th OF.

  18. Regis says:

    Can’t get to 3,000 hits unless you are playing, Johnny D.
    Sure, the Yankees only want to pay you two million dollars but you can save a lot on car insurance by switching to Geico.

  19. T-Dubs says:

    I think the Yanks sign Damon by this time next week to a 1yr betwixt $5-7m. I’d wager on $5m.

  20. T-Dubs says:

    By the way, smart move by Sheets to sign this one year deal in an expansive ballpark. One year in that cavernous stadium, if he stays relatively healthy, should set him up for a nice multiyear contract from someone else next winter.

    • Good point.

      If Sheets can make it through the season healthy and display flashes of his old ace-brilliance, he could probably land a 3 or 4 year deal with an AAV north of 10M. Especially if some of the other aces, like Lee/Beckett/Webb/etc. sign extensions and don’t hit the market.

      Also, a team that may be interested in Sheets at a 3/30 next year if he demonstrates health and effectiveness: The New York Yankees

  21. Drew says:

    That’s a lot for money for Nady, especially since he can’t DH in the NL. I wonder how his arm will hold up.

  22. Rose says:

    MLBTR
    It’s worth nothing that Damon benefited greatly from the New Yankee Stadium, posting a .915 OPS at home and a .795 OPS on the road in 2009. Moving to Oakland on a one-year deal might not be the best move if he’s looking to boost his value for a potential payday after the 2010 season.

    This is exactly what I brought up a few weeks ago on here. Yes, more money is always better than less money. But would you rather take only a little bit more money to play in a gigantic stadium where you most likely won’t succeed nearly as much for when the inevitable offseason comes next year? Or do you take a little less money to play in a place where you’ve very recently showed success…so that when the offseason comes again next year…you have yet another year of durability…and can hope more teams are looking for cheaper alternatives (to Carl Crawford, etc).

  23. TopChuckie says:

    With Hairston and Nady off the board, and Dye hopefully not really an option, wouldn’t Damon be prudent to wait for Reed Johnson to sign somewhere? Doesn’t that swing the upper hand back into Damon’s favor? The Yanks will need an OF that can start for an extended period of time if Gardner flops. Hoffman can’t be the 4th OF and the next best full-time option.

  24. Doug says:

    Via Olney’s tweets (and reported by Mike on MLBTR), the A’s are still interested in signing Damon. It would be probably be in the $3M-$4M range, which would still be almost twice as much as the Yanks are willing to go with him.

    Just see his numbers being significantly worse playing in that big ballpark; that if he’s hoping to have a solid season and parlay that into bigger $ next offseason, not sure this is the right move for him.

  25. OUTFIELD OPTIONS says:

    Offer Damon 1 year @ 4mil, or 2 years @ 7mil. If he does not take it sign Reed Johnson for 1 year on the cheap….

  26. Peter says:

    I don’t see how Johnny Damon signing in Oakland makes sense for the player or the team. That ballpark would eat him alive. Both offensively and defensively.

    A’s already have Sweeney, rajai, coco, buck and cust…

    and noting that Johnny Damon’s worst year of his career came in Oakland (.256/.343/.363) how does it make sense for him to go back there in the later part of his career when he’s try to prove his worth?

  27. Pasqua says:

    The rationale is going to be fully explained in Billy Beane’s new book, I WANT YOUR PROSPECTS.

    • Pasqua says:

      Reply fai. This was intended to go to Peter’s comment.

    • Peter says:

      yeah..but this isn’t Matt Holliday. lol

      and this point in Damon’s career…if he goes to oakland and falls flat (which more then likely would be the case) it would be hard for Billy to find a deal that would net him any kinda of decent prospect.

      would it really be worth $5 million to get Damon to just ship him off for a lower end prospect come july?

  28. Rose says:

    Edited by RAB: Way off topic. Plus, we have a post coming on this.

  29. Hughesus Christo says:

    It always seemed like people were very critical of Nady until he got injured, at which point he became a valued member of the team. People couldn’t wait for his return. THEN this offseason people became even more appreciative, despite the major surgery and time off.

  30. pete says:

    people keep talking about park splits, but shouldn’t GMs be smart enough to know by now to look at home/road splits??? I can’t imagine anyone is expecting better than maybe an .815 OPS from JD this year, other than the yanks…If johnny comes back to new york i can hardly imagine he’d be delusional to do it to “set himself up” for a 3 year contract next season. I think this offseason and last offseason should convince most people that when you’re old, a career year with big home/away splits ain’t going to get you a big multiyear deal. period. GMs are getting smarter, players need to change their angles. They’re better off actually looking at the market, making a reasonable assessment and coming back to the team asking for 2 years at their november market-price. I.E. if Johnny came back after the WS and said “hey I’d like 2/$14″. Right now, it seems like prices only go down as the offseason progresses for these players. They need to learn to jump at those first “halfhearted” offers right away, because they often end up OVER their actual market worth.

    • Chip says:

      That’s hard to do when Boras is telling you that your absolute floor is probably 3/30 so he’s going to stick at 4/52 as long as possible.

  31. ggc says:

    I find it hard to believe they were willing to pay Nady more than Damon. MLBTR ( or via MLBTR) reporting that the Yankees would have paid Nady what he signed for but were not willing to pay $5 mil, while also saying they are only willing to pay $2 mil for Damon. If Damon isn’t worth breaking a $2 mil budget, even slightly, why would Nady? Nady?

  32. Mike R says:

    I don’t know how many drugs you’d have to take to give Ben Sheets 10 Million guaranteed with incentives. What a joke, I’m sorry I’d give that guy a base of 5 million guaranteed with incentives, anyone who even tries to make a case that he’s better than Pettite should be paid no attention, not to mention I’m pretty sure Pettite has less guaranteed money. A team especially like the A’s signing Sheets just makes me laugh, the guy did nothing in 2009 because of injury, sure he impressed people in a workout, but that doesn’t guarantee anything whatsoever. Good luck to the A’s, but signing Sheets to 10 million isn’t taking a gamble, it isn’t a good sign, it’s essentially a money sink for a pitcher who is clearly riddled with injuries and reminds me of our good buddy Carl Pavano.

  33. [...] possible (albeit unlikely) options in Xavier Nady and Ben Sheets signed elsewhere, and another more realistic option in Reed Johnson came off the board after they landed Winn. The [...]

  34. [...] Nady is headed to the Cubbies and Ben Sheets to the A’s. Nady was solid (when healthy) in his short time in pinstripes, but he’s coming off his [...]

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.