Papelbon: If not in Boston, then NY?

Heard yesterday on MLB on XM:

Jody McDonald: “If you couldn’t work out a contract with the Red Sox before free agency comes up and you eventually become a free agent (after the 2011 season), is the Bronx ever a possibility?”

Jonathan Papelbon: “Oh, of course. I mean, I think if we can’t come to an agreement on terms here in a Red Sox uniform, I mean, I think that’s pretty much the writing on the wall. If they can’t come to terms with you they’re letting you know that, ‘Hey you know what? We can go somewhere else.’ And I think it’s the same way on the other side, ‘Hey if ya’ll can’t come to an agreement with me then I can go somewhere else.’ Not only in the Bronx, but anywhere. I think anywhere is a possibility. You always have to keep that in the back of your mind because you can’t just be one-sided and think that, ‘Oh I’m going to be in a Red Sox uniform my entire career.’ Because nowadays that is very, very rare and hopefully we can because there’s no question I would love to stay in a Boston Red Sox uniform but I have to do what’s best for me and play in an atmosphere where I’m wanted and play on a team where I’m wanted and that’s all I can really say about that, you know?”

Sounds like a "I'll play for whoever pays me the money I want", but who knows... I still can't see Papelbon joining the Yanks. Then again...

Thanks to the good guys at XM for getting me that quote. Sorry, no audio, however.

A reasonable voice in Boston

Boy, after yesterday's whining, I was happy to read something refreshingly honest and reasonable from Tony Massarotti of the Boston Globe today. Of course, the Boston faithful are sick of hearing it, though.

Given the resources with which the Red Sox operate, we all know that they forever will have options, and Theo Epstein rarely fails to have an alternative plan for virtually every scenario. So long as the Sox have a big payroll and a productive farm system – kudos to the baseball operations department for this – they will have wherewithal to enhance the big-league roster with signings and trades. Still, given the amount of dead money the Sox now have on the roster -- Ortiz, Lugo and Drew will earn a combined average of $36 million per season, this year and next -- it now seems downright silly that the Sox may have lost out on Teixeira for as little as $2 million a year, especially when Teixeira would not have required a forfeiture of talent like that they sacrificed in, say, the Josh Beckett deal (Hanley Ramirez).

Many of us don’t regret the Beckett move and never will. But the point is that the Red Sox might have had Teixeira for nothing more than money, which now seems like an even better deal at a time when the Sox have some wasted money on their payroll.

Maybe Teix was never really interested in Boston other than as a stalking horse for the Yanks. Maybe he was sincerely torn. We'll never know, unless he shares his thoughts once his playing days are over.

But Mazz's comments are true; the only cost for a free agent is money (and a draft pick) and for a team with the financial prowess like Boston, falling $2M short given their other expenditures seemed shortsighted. True, the Yanks might have upped their offer again, but that's another thing we won't ever know for sure.

But, I'm happy to let this stuff pass under the bridge at this point. Whining doesn't help. Enough of the handwringing.

Sox fans, you guys are 6-0 against the Yanks so far this season after the 7-0 shutdown last night. Yet your beat writers are still obsessing about Teix as the 'one that got away'. Strange, no?

Lackey: It's GONNA be about the money

Oh yeah, this is gonna be fun.

Lackey has made it clear from the day he arrived in camp that he is keenly aware of where the market for premium starting pitchers has gone, having studied intently the signings of CC Sabathia (seven years, $161 million), A.J. Burnett (five years, $82.5 million) and Derek Lowe (four years, $60 million) over the winter.

Lackey considers himself a cut above Burnett -- and the numbers support that belief -- so it generally is believed he's seeking at least what Burnett drew from the Yankees.

Not that long ago I professed my love for and admiration of John Lackey. Some team is going to go hog wild for Lackey and give him a whopper of a contract. And it seems that it will be totally about the money, as it always is.

So was it all worth it?

It's a question that's not totally fair as things changed mightily since last Fall, but my question to Manny and Boras would be: "So was it all worth it?"

Manny, you soiled your reputation. You have been labeled as a quitter, a lockerroom wedge. Even your closest friends on the Sox finally couldn't handle it any longer and had to go to your GM to ask him to deal you. And the loyal RSN was thrilled to see you finally gone. Imagine that? The MVP of the tectonic plate-changing 2004 World Series RedSox...booed out of town.

Was it it worth doing for $5 million dollars? After earning $160m on the RedSox alone, was that extra $5m that important? Was it worth the criticism? Maybe he doesn't care. Maybe it's all that matters, getting the highest dollar amount he could each year.

In Jayson Stark's article, he details the final meeting between Manny & Boras along with Colletti, McCourt and Torre. One thing was obvious:

They also talked about the shenanigans Ramirez had pulled in Boston before he ever reached L.A. They talked about the damage he had done to his image. And they needed to know, they said, that there would be no encores of that act.

Ramirez gave his promise: no more stunts. No more problems. He knew how people outside Los Angeles felt about him, he said. And this was going to be his chance to rewrite that story and fix that damaged image.

Can you take Manny at his word? Me, either. I can't wait until he opts out this Fall and we get to do this again.

Finally: Manny a Dodger

Like it was ending any other way?

After multiple failed attempts, Ramirez and the Dodgers agreed to a two-year, $45 million deal on Tuesday.

Can we now move on?

Dodgers pull PR stunt on Boras

Trying to protect Manny from their fans totally and completely turning on him, the Dodgers released a statement putting the blame for the lack of progress at the feet of Boras.

LOS ANGELES -- The Dodgers today received a letter from Scott Boras, the agent for Manny Ramirez, rejecting the offer that the club made yesterday. This rejection is the fourth by the agent in the club’s attempts to sign Manny.

“We love Manny Ramirez,” said Dodgers Owner Frank McCourt, “And we want Manny back, but we feel we are negotiating against ourselves. When his agent finds those ‘serious offers’ from other clubs, we’ll be happy to re-start the negotiations.

“Even with an economy that has substantially eroded since last November, out of respect for Manny and his talents, we actually improved our offer.

“So now, we start from scratch.”

This was a PR stunt to help Manny save face ASSUMING he ends up with the Dodgers. Of course, the ultimate decision lies with Manny, NOT Boras. Manny has to do something he's been reluctant to do during his entire career: take responsibility for his actions.

This release calls the bluff of Boras. It also invites the Giants to recontact Boras and get creative. Maybe the Dodgers go up a bit, say 2/$50m. But what if the Giants do that first? Talk about a death blow... It'd be like the Yanks snatching Teix from Boston, though the difference being Boston didn't "need" Teix like either NL West team needs Manny. Whichever team lands Manny becomes the presumptive favorite in the NL West.

Pujols: "It's not about the money"

Well, we'll see, won't we (emphasis mine):

Cardinals owner Bill DeWitt liked what superstar Albert Pujols said upon arriving at camp about winning being more important than money to him when it comes to his next contract.

"I'm not going to lie to you: It's not about the money all the time," Pujols said when he got to spring training. "It's about being in a place to win and being in a position to win. If the Cardinals are willing to do that and put a team together every year like they have, I'm going to try to work everything out to stay in this town."
[...]
While both sides are tossing bouquets toward each other, the type of money it would take to execute a Pujols extension -- word is, he'd seek $25 million a year for 10 years -- would be almost unprecedented territory for a team outside one of the very major markets. So while extending Pujols is a possibility, it's certainly no sure thing. Considering Pujols' true market value and the Cardinals' prudent spending past, it's probably going to take some serious compromising on both sides to get it done.
[...]
At least DeWitt hopes money isn't what drives him.

Ya think? Can the Cardinals both build a winner around Pujols while simultaneously affording a $25m contract? Let's see that happen.

It's ALWAYS about the money. Just ask Teix, Sabathia, Burnett, Lowe, Manny, ARod, Zito...

Love me some Lackey

No, this is not another of the "Yanks should go get this guy" or "sign him at any cost" sort of rant. Just saying that John Lackey will be a free agent after this year and he's exactly the kind of pitcher I love to watch.

Quiet, intense, underrated, and efficient.

In an era when pitching is king—when isn't it?—Lackey has gone 58-30 with a 3.42 earned-run average the last four seasons. He has earned $17.5 million for that contribution, and checks in at $9 million this season.
[...]
Assuming Lackey has a solid 2009, it's hard to see him taking less than A.J. Burnett, who received $82.5 million over five years from the Yankees this winter.

He started last year on the DL and didn't reach 198 IP, the first time he missed that threshold since his rookie season in 2002. He's posted an ERA+ of at least 119 each of the last 4 years, including an amazing 151 in 2007. He averages about 0.8 K/IP and he doesn't walk a ton (hasn't had a WHIP over 1.3 in three seasons). Lackey's going to be 30 this season and likely in line for a nice 5 year offer if he can put up yet another solid season.

Some team is going to land themselves a stud. If the Angels can't get him to an extension, it will be a HUGE loss for them.

And yes, I'd LOVE to see him in pinstripes. So take that. Pffft.

Free agent reluctantly signs for most money

No, not our friend CC Sabathia. I'm talking about Adam Dunn. It's clearly obvious that he wanted to play anywhere else but in DC, but they offered the most guaranteed money in this bear market, thusly proving (once again) that it is about the money, stupid. Dunn could have taken less to play somewhere else but he is now resigned to spouting the new company line:

"The opportunities [as a free agent] weren't exactly what I wanted them to be, but I get a chance and hopefully turn the program around," Dunn said on the MLB Network. "I think it will be a better feel of accomplishment to help turn the program around than go [to a place] that is established."

Yeah, sure.

Abreu lands in the bargain bin

There were many, myself included, who were surprised when Cashman declined offering arbitration to Bobby Abreu back in December. I had (wrongfully) assumed that Cashman would do that, thinking Abreu would decline, looking for a multi-year deal. Cashman sure looks pretty smart today, doesn't he?

Angels got a steal:

Free agent outfielder Bobby Abreu and the Angels have an agreement on a one-year deal, SI.com has learned. The deal is worth a little more than $5 million and also includes incentives.
[...]
Abreu is the only player in major-league history with 200 home runs, 300 stolen bases, a .400 on-base percentage and a .300 batting average (Barry Bonds and Rickey Henderson hit the first three marks but don't have the .300 career batting average).

Some good Stark comments

Jayson Stark has his latest Rumblings out. As always, worth reading. Two topics that are worth focusing on: 1) The free agent market and 2) The Angels.

On the icy free agent market:

No more secrets: What happened on the Manny Ramirez front this week is the ultimate illustration of how this little wrinkle has worked all winter. The Dodgers make a new offer. Word of that offer leaks out. Then GMs from five different teams announce publicly they're not pursuing Manny -- an announcement that makes it much tougher for Scott Boras to play his time-honored Mystery Team game. Now for us reporters trying to cover the old Hot Stove circuit, this is fine. But as a business strategy, it's odd. Isn't it? As another veteran baseball man put it, "Most businesses do not want their competitors to know what they are doing. In this industry, every day a club makes some public pronouncement, so that all of its competitors will know exactly what they are doing." And remember, these teams are all supposed to be competing against each other.

I have found this interesting, too. No, it's not collusion but it's almost collusion against Boras. Stark landed a beefy quote that seems to put everything together:

"It's the perfect storm," said an official of one club. "You've got a lot of good players on the market. The rules [on offering arbitration and the calendar] have changed, so there's no pressure to get deals done the first week of January. Draft picks are at a premium now. The economy is horrible. And these agents misread it."

Add in the very real fact that some teams are legitimately teetering, financially, right now:

A high-ranking official of one AL team said: "Out of the 30 teams in the sport, 15 are scared to death by this economy. They're scared about ticket sales. They're scared that sponsorships are going to be cutting back. They're just scared."

_____________________________

On the Angels' bitterness:

Maybe it's me and my biases, but I read this and said aloud that the Angels' brain trust comes across as a wee bit too sensitive.

"Arte is ticked at Boras, and he's ticked at Teixeira," said one source. "They made one offer, and they never got a chance to make another. They were led to believe by Teixeira that he was really interested in being back there. But after they made their offer, they literally got no response. So they feel like they were lied to."

By the time the Angels knew Teixeira was signing elsewhere, it was already late December, and their Plan B (Sabathia) was also off the board. So they've wound up going through the winter without making a single addition to either their lineup or their rotation. Not quite what anybody envisioned when this offseason began.

They sat on their hurt and to me, that has been more detrimental than anything else. Aww, Teix spurned their advances, so rather than go be aggressive elsewhere, they have decided that they are taking their ball and going home. Waaaaa. This is a team that is a perennial contender but fading offensively. Vlad looks 45 going on a hip replacement. They have no proven power at 1B (Kendry Morales?) since Teix left and they traded Kotchman to get Teix. This is a team that should be looking at Manny or Abreu or even Dunn to help out that offense. The prices have come down (at least for the latter two). Dunn could play 1B or DH and lend instant 40 HR power and lineup protection to Vlad the Hobbler. Instead, they did nothing but stew in their own bitterness. At least they have Gary Matthews, Jr.'s contract to dull the pain.

Andruw declines Yanks NRI, accepts invite to buffet instead

I thought this would have been a reasonable low-cost risk: Bring Andruw Jones into camp as a non-roster invitee (non-guaranteed contract) and see what he can do. Let him duke it out with Melky and Gardner and see if he can recapture some of his past mojo, despite what the reports out of the Caribbean say (or say here).

But noooooooooooooooo:

...the Yankees had offered Jones a non-roster invitation to Spring Training, ostensibly to compete for the center-field job, but the proposal was rejected.
[...]
Jones is already promised nearly $16 million over the next six years from the Dodgers, but he is looking for the financial guarantee and roster stability of a Major League contract.

Yeah, good luck getting that, Andruw.

Baseball's "Bernie Madoff"

Jerry Crasnick has an interesting article about baseball's "Madoff", Scott Boras. It's a few days stale but other than needing a minor update on Oliver Perez, it's all factually intact. And worth reading, whether you hate Boras or simply don't like Boras.

As the game's most prominent agent and premier lightning rod, Boras has had a hectic winter even by his exacting standards. His public approval ratings hover somewhere in Dick Cheney territory. But contrary to the popular belief that he would be marginalized or lose his clout after Alex Rodriguez's celebrated end-around with the Yankees last winter, Boras' headline-generating potential remains unscathed.

Things peaked just before Christmas when Boras negotiated an eight-year, $180 million deal for first baseman Mark Teixeira with the Yankees. The process generated hard feelings in Boston and prompted The Boston Globe to write an editorial that equated dealing with Boras to investing in a Bernard Madoff "Ponzi scheme," but Teixeira walked away with the fourth-richest contract in MLB history.

The thing that I hate the most is that many (most?) writers and fans put the onus and burden on Boras, not the players he represents. These players are grown men, capable of making a decision. Yet, we seem to give these guys the chance to skate free behind the scenes while Boras takes the heat. If Teixeira wanted to accept less and land in Boston, he could have. Boras might be a conductor, but he isn't a puppeteer.

If Manny wants to take the Dodgers current offer, whatever it might be, all he has to do is tell Boras to accept it. Boras must do what his clients instruct. They can instruct him to get them the highest offer possible, but in the end, it's the player's responsibility to tell Boras where he wants to sign, whether or not it's actually for the highest dollar amount.

We tend to chastise the players who choose Boras as their representation. What's so wrong with taking the highest offer out there? I think all players want to play for a winner and win a title, but earning the most they can in the shortest time possible has gotta rank right up there with winning. Their talents have an "expiration date". We, the fans, want our players to WANT to play for our team for a fair wage. But when another team wants to pay them more, we are angry.

Tell ya something: If another company called me tomorrow and offered me a 50% or 500% raise, I'd be outta here in a blink. And so would you.

After all, it is about the money, ain't it?

Shaugnessy's review of the Sox off-season

Not sure what to make of this. Big Red rightly praises the Sox management for beating Boras in the Varitek negotiations, getting Pedroia and Youk signed for long term and adding some reclamation projects like Penny, Smoltz and Baldelli. But at the end of this off-season, will the Sox fans feel good when looking at the gazillions the Yanks tossed at CC, Burnett and (Sox prime desire) Teixeira?

We are a couple of weeks away from pitchers and catchers, and the Red Sox offseason is difficult to grade. Seems like the Boston brass has racked up a lot of "wins" in the player payroll column. The Sox beat Jason Varitek and Scott Boras to a pulp. They locked up Dustin Pedroia for ('scuse the expression) relatively short dough. They assured us that Youk is going to be here for a while. They took on reclamation projects - John Smoltz, Rocco Baldelli, Brad Penny - at safe prices. But is this prudent spending supposed to make fans feel better when the Yankees whip out almost a half-billion for Mark Teixeira, CC Sabathia, and A.J. Burnett? The AL East (except for Baltimore) is going to come at Boston with killer starting staffs this year and the Sox seem to have a lot of easy outs in their lineup, especially if J.D. Drew drags down the middle with his annual two months of flat-line production.

Quick Mets thought

Something (amongst many others) that I just don't understand, this time it's Mets-ish.

Why would the Mets offer the maddening/inconsistent Oliver Perez $12 million a year for three years when they could take that same money and add BOTH Randy Wolf (or Ben Sheets) and Bobby Abreu (or Adam Dunn) for close to the same AAV?

I have to believe you can get either hitter on a one year deal for about $8m or so and the pitchers for about $5m (plus incentives). Even if each cost $8m, the Mets would be getting two values on short term committments and solving two problems, not one.

The Mets could use another OF in addition to the starting pitcher. Why not bust that $12m nut into two and solve two problems rather than get back into bed with Perez? I don't get this. I'd MUCH rather have Wolf/Sheets and Abreu/Dunn than Perez. The Mets would be lauded as a great example of a team taking full advantage of the depressed market, getting two bargains for the price of one. And they'd STILL be well below their self-imposed luxury tax payroll threshold.

I don't get it. But then again, that's the Mets.

Solving the "who is 'scottboras.com'" riddle?

So who is that dastardly "scottboras.com" that Gammons was once complaining about? Well, if you believe Rich Lederer of the Baseball Analysts, it's none other than Jon Heyman of SI.com.

If you're wondering how Heyman got wind of the news before any of the Boston beat writers or columnists, be aware that he had Mark Teixeira going to the Yankees before anyone else and, according to his biography, also "broke the story of Barry Bonds going to the Giants in 1992...Alex Rodriguez going to the Yankees in 2004, A-Rod opting out of his $252-million contract in 2007 and Manny Ramirez going to the Dodgers in 2008."

Varitek. Teixeira. Manny. A-Rod 2x. Bonds, vintage 1992. Do you notice anything in common? Yes, all of these players are or were represented by Boras at the time of their signings. It is plainly obvious that Heyman, known among fellow writers as scottboras.com, is getting fed such stories by Scott himself, which is fine and dandy except there is more going on here than meets the eye.

You see, Boras throws Heyman a bone on a Tek or Tex signing but also uses him to spread rumors about the level of interest and terms in ongoing free agent negotiations to create a false sense of demand. Teams that fall for this trick wind up competing against themselves, which is exactly what Boras desires.

Rich goes on from there, analyzing seemingly every Heyman story, particularly the ones around Manny. Let's just say it isn't the kindest portrayal of the Heyman/Manny/Boras dryhumping reporting.

'Tek signs

The RSN turns its lonely eyes to you, Cap'n 'Tek, thereby creating a hole in their lineup for at least 2009. At least his intangibles mirror those of Jeter. Two aging warhorses, full of fury, signifying only declining productivity.

Yawn.

Quota reached: No Sheets, no Manny, no mas

Evidently the Yanks have hit their limit. No, not with regards to their payroll ceiling. Not with the amount of tax breaks they can get. Not with the number of luxury boxes sold.

Free agents, baby.

Try to follow, it's rather confusing and esoteric, but interesting nonetheless:

Under the rules, "if there are from 39 to 62 [Type A and B] players [during a given offseason], no team can sign more than three."
[...]
According to an unofficial list compiled by the Sports City Sports News Service, this year there were 63 Type A and Type B free agents -- 29 Type As and 34 of the Type B variety. A Type A player is one who's ranked among the top 20 percent of his group -- pitcher or position player. A Type B player is among the top 40 percent. The Elias Sports Bureau does the annual independent rankings.

"If there are more than 62 such players, the club quota shall be increased accordingly," the Basic Agreement also says.

"If there were more than 62 this year, we should have agreed on an increased quota," [Rob Manfred, Major League Baseball's executive vice president of labor relations] said. "We did not. I think if [the Yankees] were contemplating signing another Type A player, they would've read the agreement and asked us what we wanted to do. They would've said they wanted to sign a fourth player and we would've had to do something with the union."

Teams own Type A's do not count against this quota, however.

As far as the remaining Type A free agents and what their availability means:

"It's always been our position that if [a player] goes past the Draft, the compensation goes away," Manfred said, adding that it has never happened.

Remaining Type A free agents: Bobby Abreu, Orlando Cabrera, Juan Cruz, Adam Dunn, Orlando Hudson, Mike Mussina (retired), Oliver Perez, Ben Sheets and Jason Varitek.

If Cabrera and Cruz and Varitek (if he declines the Sox offer today) wait until June, they can join any team without that team having to offer a first round pick as compensation. We can all agree that it's preposterous that a middle reliever like Juan Cruz should never be saddled with a Type A designation. I can't see any team giving up their first round pick for a middle reliever, no matter how good he is.


UPDATE (11:50am, 1/30/09): This is making me dizzy. Now it seems the Yanks haven't come close to the quota.

10:44am: Brian Cashman told Peter Abraham the Yankees could sign up to eight Type A free agents if they wanted to.

10:05am: One reader asks a question I can't answer: if the quota is three Type A/Bs, how were the Giants able to sign Jeremy Affeldt (B), Bob Howry (A), Randy Johnson (B), Edgar Renteria (A), and Juan Uribe (B)? Does it only apply to Type A/Bs who were offered arbitration? Is the quota three of each type?

7:45am: Just wanted to add the info from a January 6th Nick Cafardo article, where he stated that this year's quota is nine Type A or B free agents. Everyone I'd spoken previously to believed the Yankees have not approached any quota. I know the CBA allows for more Type A/Bs to be signed if you lose them, and the Yankees lost Bobby Abreu and Mike Mussina. We attempted to tackle this in October and came away confused.

Still, Bloom talked to MLB's executive VP of labor relations Rob Manfred for his article and it seems highly unlikely that Manfred would be wrong. - Tim Dierkes

Lowered Expectations

Buster notes that some of the remaining free agents will have to lower their expectations if they want a contract this year, including former Yankee Bobby Abreu.

As recently as a week ago, the asking price on Bobby Abreu was said to be locked in place, a three-year deal for something in the neighborhood of $16 million a year. But those numbers were based on appraisals made before the motor companies got a bailout, before the Dow Jones Industrial Average shrunk to four digits.

In the past few days, Abreu -- like so many other veteran players -- has come to grips with the reality that the lush multiyear deal simply is not going to be there for him, and the All-Star who hit 20 homers and accumulated an on-base percentage of .371 this past season is said to be willing to take a one-year deal.

Sorta makes Cashman's decision not to offer him arbitration look good, doesn't it? Of course, at that time, Abreu might have declined it anyways. At the time, I thought the decision not to at least offer arbitration (and get the draft pick if he declined) was a mistake as I totally underestimated the way the market for a guy like Abreu would crater. I'm not alone.

Arbitration would have landed him that $16m he wanted. Signing him now might also get him that $16m, but it would take two years to earn it rather than one.

Bonus points for any MAD TV fans out there who appreciate the 2nd picture to the right

Pettitte to re-sign, finally?

According to Buster, it's imminent:

The New York Yankees and Andy Pettitte are close on a deal that will bring the veteran left-hander back for a year, Major League Baseball sources told Buster Olney on Monday.

The deal, sources told Olney, could be done as soon as Monday afternoon. It would pay Pettitte nearly $6 million, with incentives that could make it worth as much as $12 million.

I have NO idea what Sheets' MRI's look like and even if I had a peek at them, I couldn't read them. I have to trust that the Yanks' brass doesn't like what they showed. I know it'd be blasphemy to even utter this, but if Pettitte and Sheets were equal in terms of health risk, I'd rather have Sheets on a one year deal (with a team option for the 2nd).

Nonetheless, I am happy that Andy's coming back. It's only a shame that we had to run through so many walls, shed the tears and whatnot. Woulda, coulda, shoulda been done earlier.

Your 2009 Yanks rotation: Sabathia, Burnett, Wang, Pettitte, Joba/Hughes.


UPDATE: It's final. He's back.