Mailbag: Melky, Soriano, Swisher, Felix, Garcia


Got seven questions for you this week, so consider this a jumbo-sized edition of the mailbag. Remember to use the Submit A Tip box in the sidebar to send us questions and whatnot.

(AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Countless people asked some variation of: Can/should the Yankees sign Melky Cabrera to a cheap one-year deal after the season following his suspension?

Sure, it’s worth exploring. Based on my last few days at MLBTR, the fans of the other 29 teams are wondering the same thing as well. I suppose the Yankees may have a leg up considering their history with Cabrera, plus the fact that his good buddy Robinson Cano plays here. Either way, I’m sure the club can make a competitive offer if they’re so inclined.

The real question is what kind of hitter do you expect him to be going forward? I don’t buy that testosterone alone turned him into an MVP caliber hitter, but I also don’t think this season’s performance — .346/.390/.516 (146 wRC+) — is a reasonable expectation going forward simply because I don’t believe anyone is a true talent .346 hitter. Not Melky, not Mike Trout, not Miguel Cabrera, not Derek Jeter. No one. If he’s more of a .310 hitter doing forward, that’s still really awesome and shouldn’t be considered a knock. If they can get him for one-year at like, $5-8M to shore up the outfield next season, sure that’s something they should seriously consider. Whether or not it’s actually realistic is another matter entirely.

Daniel asks: The Cubs are offering to turn Alfonso Soriano into a $3M/year player. Any interest in him as a RF solution next season?

This is an unequivocal no for me. Soriano is having a real nice .263/.320/.448 (112 wRC+) year with the bat, but he’s a 36-year-old one-dimensional player. If he’s not hitting homers, he has zero value. Soriano doesn’t walk, doesn’t hit for average, doesn’t steal bases anymore, and doesn’t play much defense either. He’s under contract through 2014 so you’re talking about a $6M commitment for a player that is basically a bad HR/FB% slump away from a forced retirement. Soriano would be like, my Plan F for right field next season.

Brett asks: Let’s say the Yankees don’t re-sign Nick Swisher this offseason and then think like you and let Cano walk after 2013. With Alex Rodriguez, Derek Jeter, Mark Teixeira, and Curtis Granderson (Yankees sign him after Cano leaves) all two years older and currently not even performing that well, as well as a black hole offensively at catcher, do you really think the Yankees lineup will be good enough?

I spy a nice free agent payday. (Jim McIsaac/Getty)

Well that’s the thing, why are we assuming catcher is a black hole? If they let Cano and Swisher walk, the Yankees will have the opportunity to turn over the second base, right field, catcher, and DH positions in the next two offseason. If you think A-Rod is resigned to being a DH down the line, then you can bring in a new body for third base. That four of the nine lineup spots they have to work with. Plenty of room to add some offensive punch.

Bill asks: So with Swisher all but assuredly leaving next year, what do you think the chances are he ends up in Boston? The team needs some pop in right field and they need a good clubhouse guy, with everything that is going on in Boston right now. Think this is a possibility?

Absolutely. If for whatever reason the Yankees had declined his option last offseason, I think the Red Sox would have been the first team to call Swisher’s agent. Pretty much every contending team in need of a bat — the Rangers, Dodgers, Braves, Tigers, Giants, Reds, etc. — figures to have some interest because he’s versatile (corner outfield or first base) and a switch-hitter. Swisher could go 0-for-October and he’ll still have plenty of suitors on the free agent market after the winter.

Sal asks: Do you think we’ll ever get to a point where teams start structuring contracts so that players are paid appropriately in their peak years but the contract dollars are “tapered” in the end years so that they don’t over pay for a players decline?

No, definitely not. I’m sure the club would love it, but I highly doubt the players and agents would. I think it’s pretty normal to want to make more money the older you get, which is why most multi-year contracts include some kind of year-to-year raise. Another part of this is that most GMs won’t be around to see the end of the multi-year contracts they hand out, specifically the big six and seven-year ones. What do I care if I saddle the next GM with a back contract when I could win right now and enhance my reputation? It’s a good idea, but I don’t think the players and agents would go for it.

I found this floating around on Twitter and have no idea where it originated, but props to you good sir (or madam).

Tucker asks: This is a bit of a hypothetical, but would the Yankees even have the pieces to acquire Felix Hernandez if he were made available? Could the Rangers swoop in and nab him instead?

No, I don’t believe the Yankees have the pieces to acquire any kind of high-end talent like that right now. Not unless they’re willing to dangle Cano and the other club really values him despite being a year away from free agency. The lack of impact, near-MLB ready prospect really hurts them here.

The Rangers could certainly jump in and make a great offer for Felix if they wanted — if you’re Seattle, don’t you have to listen if Texas offers Jurickson Profar and Mike Olt? I have to think that would at least get their attention. The Yankees can’t put together any kind of offer like that right now, so they’re handcuffed on the trade market. As much as I’d love to see him in pinstripes, there’s just no realistic trade scenario for Justin Upton at the moment.

Craig asks: Do you think Freddy Garcia is now (or should be) in the post-season rotation?  Even if Andy Pettitte comes back?  I think I’d rather take my chances with him than Ivan Nova or Phil Hughes.

Right now, with both CC Sabathia and Pettitte on the shelf, yes Freddy would definitely be in postseason rotation. I’d probably have him start Game Two behind Hiroki Kuroda in that scenario, which is … yikes. If Sabathia and Pettitte come back, I would use Freddy as the fourth starter and stick Phil Hughes in the bullpen for October. I don’t see how they could trust Nova in the postseason given his current performance, but he does have about six weeks to figure things out.

Assuming David Phelps is headed back to the bullpen at some point, I’d rank the potential playoff starters are Sabathia, Kuroda, Pettitte, Garcia, Hughes, Nova. Just remove players and bump everyone else up as needed due to injury. I don’t think it’s out of the question that Phelps pitches his way ahead of Nova in the pecking order, but I wouldn’t count on it. I think he’ll run out of innings before that happens.

Categories : Mailbag


  1. CP says:

    Sal asks: Do you think we’ll ever get to a point where teams start structuring contracts so that players are paid appropriately in their peak years but the contract dollars are “tapered” in the end years so that they don’t over pay for a players decline?

    A-Rod’s contract is somewhat like that. It peaked at $32M In 2009 and 2010, and is slowly declining now.

    • RetroRob says:

      To a player appropriately in their peak years, the CBA would need to be ripped up and thrown out. Allow Mike Trout to be a free-agent today and you’ll see a record-shattering contract. Bryce Harper would get a $200M deal even with a mediocre rookie campaign.

      Young players are underpaid and cheap; veteran players are expensive.

      • Laz says:

        Really is farfetched that Trout would ever repeat this year. Although it probably wouldn’t deter alot of GMs. Harper isn’t really having that bad of a year, Its just that the expectations were too high, he is only a teenager.

    • Laz says:

      It really doesn’t matter that much really. AAV for the Yanks mean it doesn’t help them on luxury tax. Sure if there was inflation it would help make it worth less at end, but thats not a situation in current economy. If the Yankees can get the player by overall frontloading a contract that might be something to look at. Major front load a contract instead of backload and that 20M compiled over 8 years is a big chunk change.

  2. thenamestsam says:

    With regards to Melky’s value it seems like if every fan is hoping their team can steal him for a 1 year deal in the $5-$8 million range that’s probably a pretty good indicator that his real market value is higher than that.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      I’d go two years on him. Why not? We can’t just automatically assume he’s going to turn into the Melky he was before we traded him. You have to imagine some of what we’ve seen is due to actually non-PED-induced improvement PLUS motivation to prove he can do it on his own. I wasn’t going to give him six figures, but I’d consider 2/18, or something like that.

      Where I admit that my FA proposal sucks is that I don’t trust in him enough to make him my sole RF option, but I’d consider bringing in a stronger fourth outfielder/platoon starter presence to hedge my bet there a bit. You have to imagine that, by middle of next year, you have a better idea as to what Zoilo could be.

      • thenamestsam says:

        Yeah I think 2/18 is probably more in line with what he’ll get. At 1/5, or something like that the risk-reward is completely skewed. It would be almost 100% upside for the team. If he goes back to sucking then you wasted a couple million dollars on your 4th outfielder relative to what it costs to fill that spot. No biggie. If he stays even 90% of the same guy you have an all-star for 5 million dollars on a 1 year deal. I think some team will offer 2 years.

        An interesting side question is whether Melky prefers a 1 year deal to any two year deal. Since he’s the only person who knows how long he has been taking PEDs what he decides will be an interesting signal to teams. If he prefers a 1 year deal that might indicate that he thinks most of his improvement was non-PED related and he just needs to show that for 1 year and hit the FA market again. If he prefers a 2 year deal it might raise red flags that he doesn’t think he can repeat his performance.

      • Mike HC says:

        I think you will see the same Melky next year as you have the past couple of years. Just like there is no difference with Ryan Braun.

        The real risk is that if he tests positive again he will be out for 100 games. Or I guess the biggest risk is if he suddenly decides to stop what he was doing, but I doubt it.

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          Is there any CBA language as to future suspensions and contract clauses?

          • Mike HC says:

            Good point. I don’t know. I guess any team can contract for that if they want, but doubt Melky or the Players Union would want to agree with a clause voiding the contract if a player gets a second suspension.

        • Steve (different one) says:

          Ryan Braun was a stud, maybe took something, and is still a stud.

          Melky was one of the worst players in baseball, definitely took something, and became a star.

          We had a pretty solid read on Braun before he supposedly did something, he was already great.

          Melky, we really have no idea what his true talent level is. Will he fall all the way back to 2010? I don’t think so. Is he likely to repeat 2012? I doubt it. Maybe 2011 Melky is what we should expect? That’s still a player I’d be interested in at the right price, but saying Braun “proves” he’ll be exactly the same seems a little tenuous to me.

          • YanksFanInBeantown says:

            How do we know that we’ve ever seen a clean Ryan Braun, though?

          • Laz says:

            There are alot of steroid users still in baseball allegedly. The problem with the newer steroids is that they leave the system fast. Your not going to catch most players unless they are juicing almost everyday. The guy that uses once a week will very rarely if ever get caught. And we don’t know players that only got caught once but not suspended.

    • Slugger27 says:

      i see your point but what the fans want and what he’s worth are 2 diff things. people on this site wanted to sign manny for 3/75 after 08

      • Robinson Tilapia says:

        Ramirez? That’s just plain crazy talk, even back then.

        • Slugger27 says:

          well…. agreed. tsjc was the main advocator, which is why it was blindly accepted, but yes, a horrendous idea, and not just in hindsight.

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            My desire for Manny in pinstripes was always just pure perversion (and, thankfully, it’s not even worth it for that reason anymore. Now Papi is a different story….), but perversion’s not worth THAT much, and wasn’t then either.

            I thought the dude was hilarious, but even he’d agree we’re fetishing him quite a bit here lately. Did you know that anything ever remotely said funny here is actually TSJC in disguise?

  3. Eddard says:

    Nobody here wants Melky. He’s not a .350 hitter without cheating. He wasn’t when he was here and he ain’t now. If he gets caught cheating again he’s gone for 100 games. Swisher and Cano need to be retained. Granderson will not be brought back. He’ll be getting old for a CF and he’s not even a good hitter anymore. Brett Gardner will take over CF and the defense will be much better for it.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      Your crystal ball needs to be chucked in the ocean.

      • Slugger27 says:

        what? why? do you disagree with anything he said? the only thing that was dumb was granderson “not even a good hitter anymore”

        i think the rest was pretty spot on.

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          That you agree with some of his opinions doesn’t mean he’s “spot on.” It means you agree with him.

          We have no idea of knowing what kind of hitter Melky Cabrera will be in 2013. It’s incredibly easy to predict that he won’t be a .350 hitter, but that’s not because of PED’s. That could probably even be said without them since, well, no one remains a .350 hitter. However, I think it’s just as unlikely that he suddenly turns back into the player he was when he was back with the Yankees what, three/four seasons ago?

          You agreeing with his saying “nobody wants Melky” must mean you think he speaks for everyone.

          We have no clue whether Granderson will be brought back. Anything comment that begins with “Granderson will not be brought back” is dumb to begin with because making that sort of absolute prediction for the future is silly. He can say, “I don’t think he’ll be brought back due to blah blah blah,” and sound fine but, hey, that would mean not having an opinion.

          If Eddard is so against cheating, why do I always feel cheated by reading his comments?

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            Not trying to jump on you there. Damn words on screens.

          • Slugger27 says:

            well, its a message board on the internet, i figured it went without saying that his stances are all opinions.

            honestly, most of the trolls on this site are my friends (mets fans trying to stir shit up), but eddard is one i dont know (unless one of my friends is being sneaky). i THINK hes a troll, but this one post didnt seem outlandish. hes not getting the benefit of the doubt from many on this board, and i imagine this exact same comment from a different person wouldnt have gotten a smartass reaction out of you.

            youre right, however, he shouldnt say “nobody here wants melky”, rather he should say “nobody here SHOULD want melky” … but again, it should be assumed all posts on here are opinions.

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              Now I’m interested in this whole “I know the trolls here and they’re Mets fans friends of mine” nugget you just threw out there.

              I agree with you that they’re opinions, but the “absolute” type stuff tends to absolve the person writing it as to why they feel that way.

              • Slugger27 says:

                2 college roommates of mine. theyre mets fans and post here to stir shit up. change their screen names CONSTANTLY. theyre not nearly as funny as they think they are, but one used to post as “bertha” back in the day because he said “it sounded like it would be a fat ugly chick” (and it does) and had a real good line after a twins playoff game a couple years ago.

                something about jeter signing a 4/100 contract in the offseason and him standing on his bed in tears singing “oh captain my captain”

                but as i said, most of their stuff is typical troll and pretty unfunny. trolls who i know arent them include eddard, rainbow connection, CJ, and a few others.

          • TomH says:

            Apropos “We have no clue whether Granderson will be brought back.” One of the questions to which Axisa responds begins “So with Swisher all but assuredly leaving next year….”

            How could such a departure be in the “all but assuredly” category? Because of the “austerity” budget? Has anyone seen a Cashman (or Swisher) comment to this effect? Is it based on some putative notion of common sense (“what we would do if we were GM or N. Swisher”)?

        • YanksFanInBeantown says:

          I think he’s disagreeing in advance for when Eddard starts to argue the exact opposite points in the next thread.

        • Cris Pengiucci says:

          The biggest problem with Eddard’s problem is that there are no timelines with it and very little substance in his reasoning. Granderson will almost certainly back next year (the team holds an option). Beyond that? Perhaps not, but Cashman did say the team was exploring extensions for both Granderson & Cano. There appears to be a lot wrong with his analysis.

          Personally, I agree that the Yankees should retain Swisher over Granderson (provided a reasonable contract can be worked out, say 3/33 or so) and also agree with re-signing Cano (again, depending on contract). I just don’t care for the complete lack of analysis from Eddard and the “absolutes” within his comments (“Nobody here wants Melky” as an example.).

    • jjyank says:

      We really have no idea how much of Melky’s 2012 was the testosterone or actual skill.

      • Mike HC says:

        Just my opinion … I’m guessing he always at the very least dabbled with it, but just got really serious about his training the year he started to work out with ARod.

        I don’t think it is as clear cut as saying, he wasn’t on it, and then he was on it.

        • jjyank says:

          Probably…but my point is we don’t really know what role this played in his current or past performance. I have no idea what to expect from Melky in 2013.

          • Mike HC says:

            Impossible to predict year to year. Will this discourage Melky from continuing what he was doing? Will it motivate him? Will he get injured, or just lose the zone he was in these past couple of years? Who knows.

            My guess is that we will see the same Melky from the past two years. Probably closer to last year than the tear he was on this year.

  4. Ed says:

    I think your answer on front loaded contracts is backwards. Yeah, it hurts to look at the 2008 payroll and see that you paid Giambi $22m for that, compared to the $8 you paid him in 2002. If you look at it instead as $120m spread over 2002-2008, it’s much better for the team.

    Time is a factor in the value of money. Money loses value over time due to inflation. Getting $10 today is more valuable than getting $1 a year for ten years. I can take that $10 today and invest it. Assuming I invest wisely, I’ll have 10 years worth of compound interest building up, making it worth substantially more than the 10 year payout would have been.

    The MLBPA will often declare a “present day value” of long term contracts, especially when deferred money is involved. That’s basically devaluing the contract to account for the money being spread out over time.

    • Pasta Stumbling Sojo says:

      Exactly right. The only reason a GM would prefer to pay a player more during his peak years and less in his decline years is so that fans can’t say “You’re paying a 38 year old $17 mill/year to hit .250??? Fire Cashman!!” But that’s not a good financial reason.

      If you want, you can consider CC’s contract to be something like $30 mill, $30 mill, $30 mill, $25 mill, $25 mill, $7 mill, $7 mill, $7 mill, except the Yankees deferred his early money to later years to save themselves some cash. That might make you feel better in 2016 when you consider him to only be making $7 mill rather than the $25 mill he will make. But it would be a terrible financial decision for the GM to actually do that.

      • Laz says:

        You have to wonder if a Cash could convince a player to take a front loaded contract to deal with the luxury tax problem.

    • jjyank says:

      Yeah, and I really only care about AAV for luxury tax purposes. It’s not my money, I don’t give a crap if a contract is backloaded.

    • A.D. says:

      Exactly you always want to backload, only reason you wouldn’t is specific cash-flow business purposes of a given team

  5. Blake says:

    I would definitely consider Melky on a one year deal….very little risk and even if he was somewhat a product of PEDs he still should have some lasting affects from that in 2013 (ethical…maybe not but we are trying to win games here). Wouldn’t do a multi year deal but I’d much rather sign Melky to a 1 year deal than Swisher to a 3 or 4 year deal…..could be a rather high reward for the minimal risk.

    Jack Z should absolutely call Jon Daniels this winter and make him tell him no for a Profar, Olt, Perez type package…..when you consider you’d be getting those 3 players plus saving 20 million a year in Felix’s salary that you can spend elsewhere it makes a lot of sense for Seattle…but they won’t do it because Felix is their draw right now….and they are stubbornly holding him.

    • Kosmo says:

      if Seattle has the good fortune of adding Hultzen, Paxton and ? in the next 2 years and Franklin at SS then you´re going to see a team spiraling up out of the mediocrity they´ve been in for years with King Felix leading the way.

      • Robinson Tilapia says:

        If they develop them correctly. Seattle sometimes looks like they are to young hitters what Baltimore is to young pitchers.

        It’s the salmon. Too fresh.

  6. Mrs. Peterson-Kekich says:

    Soriano’s defensive stats have actually been consistently quite strong, including this year.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      Screenname of the day right here.

    • Blake says:

      Whiich suggests that UZR etc aren’t the greatest.

      • Jim Is Bored says:


        You do realize it’s created by people watching the games, right?

        I don’t think it’s the greatest statistic either, but one example of a stat disagreeing with your pre-existing opinion is not a reason to invalidate the stat.

        If anything it means you should go back and watch the tape if you care that much, analyze it as much as the people who update UZR do, and then report back with your results.

        • Blake says:

          That’s exactly what I’m saying….UZR on it’s own for one season doesn’t mean a lot. You have to look at scouting and multiple years of data before you have an idea of how accurate it is…..I’m not saying it’s useless….just saying it’s not definitive in really any way.

          FWIW….I think Soriano has improved a bit defensively….but is still bad.

          • Jim Is Bored says:

            Well sure, UZR has been friendly towards Soriano since 2007 though. And scouts, from the reports I’ve seen, have given pretty mixed reviews.

            So it’s definitely possible UZR is right.

            I agree it’s flawed, I just meant you can’t use one player as an example of why it’s flawed.

            • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

              fwiw, DRS is much less enamored with Soriano’s defense.
              2009: -14
              2010: -14
              2011: -9
              2012: 2

              Both UZR and DRS seem to agree that he’s improved this season, and his defense may not be horrible, but I wouldn’t count on it being anywhere near as good as UZR says it is.

      • Slugger27 says:

        well no, theyre not the greatest, but its still the best we have.

    • Slugger27 says:

      agreed, mike must be looking at different data than i am. been pretty solid defensively overall in the outfield.

      • YanksFanInBeantown says:

        Maybe he’s eye-testing it. He doesn’t really use defensive stats from what I’ve seen

        • Slugger27 says:

          well, he does when it fits what hes saying.

          • Jim Is Bored says:

            Axisa is the only person in the history of the world to occasionally tailor data to his or her arguments.

            I’m sure you’ve never done it.

            • Slugger27 says:

              well, this would be ignoring data, as no data was presented, so analogyfail first and foremost.

              and 2nd, nobody is saying i have or havent, and if i did, id expect to get (rightfully) called out on it.

              • Jim Is Bored says:

                I was referring to your statement that he uses defensive stats when it fits his argument, which, I’m assuming is referring to all of his work, not just this article.

                • Slugger27 says:

                  right. ive read many articles on here that use defensive metrics to form an opinion on a player. granted, im sure joe and ben have written plenty of those as well, but on this site, theyve been prominent throughout the years.

          • YanksFanInBeantown says:

            I mean, he regularly says that he doesn’t use WAR because defensive stats still suck.

            • Slugger27 says:

              ive been reading this site for years and mike has mentioned WAR approximately a billion times. if this is a very new development, then my apologies, i had no idea he made a 180. hes even advocated swishers defense on here, which ironically, the metrics say is worse than sorianos.

              and really, its not even about mike. he says soriano “doesnt play much defense”, the metrics suggest otherwise. ill trust them, and you can trust mike if you want, as im sure hes been watching plenty of cubs games this year to provide a better, more accurate opinion than UZR and DRS.

              boy, you really cant say anything even slightly contrarian about mike or an article on here, can you? i see now why newcomers think its like a cult.

              • Jim Is Bored says:

                Did you see his response below? Are you only looking at fangraphs? There are other defensive metrics out there.

              • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                I’m not a sycophant, I just remember that Mike doesn’t like defensive stats because he’s pretty much the only Fangraphs guy that regularly says he doesn’t.

                • Slugger27 says:

                  the irony is that his answer below specifically cited defensive stats as a reason he formed his argument on soriano “sucks defensively”

                  look, lets just move on. im sorry i took part in the conversation.

                • RetroRob says:

                  I think that might be a distortion of what he thinks about defensive stats. Perhaps he just has questions about them (what reasonable fan doesn’t?), some more than others.

    • Mike Axisa says:

      UZR has been strong, but FRAA and DRS have him consistently negative in recent years. Based on that an the eye-test, I’m in the “he sucks defensively” camp.

  7. Erica says:

    That picture of King Felix is just flawless.

  8. Gonzo says:

    Just curious as to what everyone thinks. I’m sure almost everyone here will say no, but is there any way SF makes a qualifying offer to Melky?

    What if he is the playoff hero and WS MVP?

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      If I was SF, I would, but I’d imagine this “you left us high and dry when we needed you most” stuff would get in the way.

      He’s not playing in the playoffs. Slight brainfart there.

      • YanksFanInBeantown says:

        He’ll be eligible for Game 5 of the NLDS

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          50 games ends then? Sooner than I thought. Hadn’t pulled out the calculator then.

          I’d advocate the Yanks getting him even more now.

          • TomH says:

            The Yankees have suffered immense amounts of bad publicity because of PED’ed players. It’s hard to believe they would take a chance on yet another one.

        • RetroRob says:

          Since the minor league season will have been long over, he would be basically starting Spring Training in the postseason. I don’t see him playing at all.

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            Being that he’s one of their “best” players, though, it’s also definitely possible that he’s put out there, if they make it that far, to see whether he can immediately contribute.

  9. Blake says:

    Everyone uses defensive stats when it fits their argument….wasn’t that why there were invented :)

    • YanksFanInBeantown says:

      And luckily, they can be used for both sides of every argument because they all say something different!

  10. toad says:

    Do you think we’ll ever get to a point where teams start structuring contracts so that players are paid appropriately in their peak years but the contract dollars are “tapered” in the end years so that they don’t over pay for a players decline?

    May I point out for the umpteenth time that this matters not at all. What matters is the size of the contract (in present value terms) and the number of years it covers. If you sign a guy for three years at $30 million, say, it matters only slightly – due to interest – whether you pay him $10/yr or $5, $10, and then $15.

    You’re not buying a year at a time. You’re buying a three year package.

    The year-to-year payment schedule might matter in a trade, but even there the deal will be adjusted to allow for that schedule. If you trade the guy after two years you won’t get the same return if the other team has to pay him $15 as if they only have to pay $10.

    As interested as everyone is in understanding complex stats, and as much as they mock the older simpler ones, you’d think there would be some attempt to understand this basic point about player contracts.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      Because the use of advanced stats, and mocking of old ones, can often make the same tired arguments suddenly seem relevant.

  11. RetroRob says:

    In Bill’s question, he states that Swisher is all but assuredly leaving next year.

    He is? That’s no doubt news to Swisher and the Yankees. Swisher loves playing in NY and Cashman is a big Swisher fan. Generally in situations like that, they player doesn’t leave. Sorry Swish haters. He’s coming back.

    • Laz says:

      I’d love for swisher to come back on the right deal. 2-3 years 12-13M sure. But anything more than that is too much. Who else will they get? Cabrera is worse than swish, and hamilton will cost 20M per.

  12. Deep Thoughts says:

    It’s hard to emphasize enough how important Felix is to the Mariners in terms of maintaining interest and Safeco attendance. Besides diehards, promotional/group nights, and transplants to Seattle rooting for childhood teams when they visit, I have no idea who is going to games if Hernandez isn’t pitching.

    When they traded Ichiro they finally made it official that Felix is the sole face of the franchise. I wouldn’t believe he’d be likely to be traded even if he were younger and still under team control; the return he would fetch at his current age and contract (2/20ish thru 2014) isn’t likely to work out for what both the Mariners and a trading team would want.

    The Mariners are drowning in young kids with potential but I can’t see them trading pretty much their only established star major-leaguer.

    Didn’t know if you saw Dave Cameron’s article but it’s pretty much an open secret that they’re preparing Montero for 1B, as soon as this fall or as late as next Spring Training.


    • Laz says:

      And there lies the fact why Montero didn’t fit on the Yankees. He won’t move Teix, and DH is much easier to fill with production.

  13. Andy says:

    It is amazing that deals aren’t structured appropriately – I actually think it is the player that benefits from a front loaded contract – banks clearly understand the time value of money (i.e. $1 today is worth more than $1 a year from now), why can’t players?? Why do you think you get interest for putting your money in a savings bank? Because it is worth more now than it is later. Wake up and get out of the dark ages people!!

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.