Dec
30

Monday Night Open Thread

By

Hopefully all of you had a great weekend and are still basking in the holiday downtime. I’ve always found this last week of the calendar year to be pretty relaxing, especially after all the stressful weeks leading up to the holidays. This is pretty much my favorite week of the offseason.

Anyway, here is your open thread for the night. There is no football game and none of the hockey or basketball locals are in action. You’re on your own for entertainment. Talk about whatever. Go nuts.

Categories : Open Thread

27 Comments»

  1. vicki says:

    no nfl game, but plenty of football. i’m trying to figure out a way both oregon and texas can lose.

    and omigod, 1998 was fun.

  2. Alkaline says:

    These dark winter nights are bleh. Where’s spring?

  3. CT Yankee says:

    So after the dust settles for Black Monday 2013, 4 (5 if you include yesterday) NFL coaches are unemployed. Quiet day, in my opinion.

    Had Shanny and Schiano getting axed. Frasier and Schwartz getting let go kinda surprised me.

    What say you guys?

    • Jorge Steinbrenner says:

      Shanny was an easy one. Really glad to see Schiano go. An asshole like that is the last thing the NFL needs right now.

      Somewhat surprised by Schwartz, but there’s a ton of talent on that team and falling apart like that probably deemed some sort of response.

      Glad to see Ryan staying. The team needs offensive talent, not a coaching change. Philbin would have been an interesting firing, both losing a shot at the playoffs and all the nonsense going on in that locker room. Don Shula’s probably still in decent physical shape…

  4. Jorge Steinbrenner says:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs.....-contract/

    So…..would you do it? Would you go even further, as is suggested in the comments section there?

    I have to admit some of it borders on batshit insane.

  5. nsalem says:

    if the total package price gets up over the 120 million dollarrange I wouldn’t blame the Yankees if they felt it wouldn’t be financially prudent to chase after Tanaka. From reports it seems like his upside is as an AS type solid #2 pitcher. It’s diificult to speculate on a downside but it must be acknowledged that pitchers such as Irabu, Contreras and Dice K came from foreign countries with similar expectations and came nowhere near whatwas expected of them. Spending over 140 on Tanaka (with posting) would make it the 6th most expensive signing in the history of baseball and if the money exceeds 150 million it would be the
    4th. I could see where someone may call this flawed or irrelevant logic. Nothing can change the fact though that giving someone this kind of money who has never performed here is a much higher risk tha someone who has already performed here.
    I think no matter who Tanaka signs with, the higher the Tanaka sweepstakes go, the more it benefits the Yankees. It wiould makle the risk of waiting for free agency much more worthwile for the likes of Price, Kershaw, Iwakuma and Shields. It seems logical that the spike in payments to top shelf FA’s would bring more of them into the market place. Because of the Yankees spending ability and the desiirability of the location this can only be a plus in the long run.
    I don’t think the question should be would you do it? I think the question is would you rather be paying a Tanaka age 25-31 or a Price age 30-37 or a Shields age 33-38 or a Kershaw ae 26-38???

    • forensic says:

      Spending over 140 on Tanaka (with posting) would make it the 6th most expensive signing in the history of baseball and if the money exceeds 150 million it would be the 4th.

      Huh? That’s not even close to true.

      • nsalem says:

        Woops I meant the signing of a pitching contract. If they spend over 140 unless I’m missing something
        I’ve got
        Verlander 180
        Felix 175
        CC 161
        Greinke 147
        Hamels 144
        So if it was 140 it would be 6th and 150 it would put him at 4th. I know that may be a little misleading because it is all going to change very soon and there may be s many 6 more handed out over that number in the next year or two. Apologies for the error. The main point I was trying to make is that any team giving Tanaka that kind of money would more than likely cause more top level players to take the risk of waiting for free agency, which would be beneficial to the Yankees. Do you agree with that?

        • forensic says:

          Ok, just pitcher’s contracts makes more sense.

          But, no, I don’t think it would really affect what other players choose to do. It’s not like teams are being conservative in how they spend in free agency now anyway, and I think players/agents are going to continue choosing to do things how they feel is best.

          • forensic says:

            Although I should say I don’t agree with adding the release fee to the contract and judging it like that. That’s not something you’re giving to the player, it’s just the cost of doing business.

            • nsalem says:

              Even at 120 million which seems pretty much a given at this point it would be among the top 12 or so (pitching) contracts. I’m just having a difficult time trying to believe that this is just an iincredible risk. I would imagine though that if this many teams ar willing to hand out these kind of contracysthat thesk is affordable. While lloking down the list of highest paid pitchers I saw Zito’s name in there. Though he only made it to league average in one of those 7 years, the Giants got two rings during his time there and the financial success the titles brught easily absorbed the bad contract.

              • Yanks20 says:

                When we are talking contracts and player salaries we need to stop throwing out terms like “in baseball history”. We all know that salaries have never gone down, so really you are saying for the past decade (or less).

                As for the risk…it’s an unknown for all teams so if we pay the 120 and he turns into a top 5 pitcher in MLB he is a steal. If he is Igawa he is a bust and somewhere in the middle he is probably worth his contract in today’s market. So all you are betting on is that he is not Igawa…worth the risk!

                • nsalem says:

                  So all you are betting on is that he is not Igawa…worth the risk!
                  Disagree. He could be much better than Igawa and still be a bust. Name me a Yankee SP pitcher who either came through the system or was obtained in a trade or though FA over the last decade that has been worth 6/120. Certainly not Brown, Weaver , Contreras,Pavano,Wright, Hughes,Kennedy AJ or any of the other names we have long forgotten have been worth it. All of them were better than Igawa but I don’t think any of them came near that value. Johnson was good for about 2 years but would not have merited a 6/120 deal at age 40. In my opinion CC is the only pitcher we have signed over the last decade who was worthy of 6/120. If the Yankees can afford to overpay they should definitely go for it.

                  • Yanks20 says:

                    Mike Mussina. signed for 6/88.5 in 2000 at the time avg. salary for a player was 1.99 mil. now it is 3.39 mil. So 6/120 would actually be a lower annual avg. value than signing someone in 2000 for 6/88 mil. This was my point about Tanaka, I think if he turned out to be a a Mike Mussina (not ace but damn good) the Yanks would take that every day and twice on Sunday!

                    Your point is noted tho…bust can be better than Igawa and still be a bust…I just think he’s worth the risk considering what else is available.

    • vicki says:

      short answer is kershaw, and it’s not close. i just don’t think he’ll be available.

      think of tanaka as a top prospect. let’s pay him for what we may get, rather than shields for what he already gave the rays and royals. (see fangraphs link above, re the valuation of prospects vis-a-vis tanaka)

      • forensic says:

        Yeah, Kershaw shouldn’t even be in that discussion since I don’t think anyone would choose another pitcher over him at any point in the next bunch of years.

        As for the others, it’s a tough choice between Tanaka and Price for me, but I’d certainly take them over Shields at that age.

      • nsalem says:

        Vicki Just gave the article a quick read. Good stuff, but Cameron stated “the days of paying players for past performance is over.” Doesn’t the Cano, Ellsbury and Choo contract serve as a direct contradiction to that statement?
        As far as Kershaw goes he just stated that he is intrugued by the free agent market. I think last summer he allegedly turned down the 300 million dollars because he didn’t want to look that farinto the future. However after seeing Cano getting paid $24 million at the age of 41 it has crossed atleast his agents mind that someone may offer his client $30 million to pitch at the same age?
        My first reaction to Levine’s statements regarding Trout the other week was that Levine was very naive thinking that Trout would ineterested in a “mere” 10 year contract.

  6. Erick says:

    One is a joke, the other is a dope. Take your pick. Randy lately has been sticking his foot in his mouth. Maybe…its time to cut him loose.

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.