Originally Posted by Nomar
If we land Myers I think trading for Mourneau would be a smart move.
If we trade Lester, I don't see a point in trading any specs.Depends what he costs in specs.
Even if JBJ turns out to be a .255/.335/.375 #9 hitting CF with very fine D, given what he's going to cost us for his first 5 ML seasons, his cost/benefit is hugely above what I expect out of Ells here or elsewhere.
I still think Andrus is a great fit here. If as part of the deal we can clamp a 6 year extension to cover his late arb years on the guy, it would be very good. IMO he's worth more then Ellsbury in that scenario. Fine give them Iglesias + Wilson, or make it a 3 way for whatever Iglesias can bring Texas.
That's the sort of trade I want - for an actual proven young player.
Nats acquire Span, moving Harper and Werth to the corner OF's. They still have Morse who would shift over to 1B. Laroche's market just took a big hit.
Damn they gave up Meyer just for Span.
I mean, his injury history is no secret.
In the real world, whatever he makes will be HUGE, but let's suppose he plays 162 games, producing his career average in all respects:
now, thats a solid year indeed. but In my opinion that production warrants $15M/year IF a player regularly plays 145+ games/yr.
I'm sure Borass will push the salary envelope the best he can, but unless Ellsbury has another MVP-caliber season, I don't see him topping $15M/yr (which i still think is too much for the risk he brings).
Look what with Upton and Crawford and Werth and Bay got paid and wait to see what Bourns get and you see that Ellsbury going get a big deal and with Bradley I agree we can just get a fill in until he is ready and trade him at the meetings with the market suddenly with Spam traded lot smaller as Upton signed to.
Clearly if he repeated 2011 in 2012 and 2013, he'd be going for ~$25M per.
Only if we offer him a deal to lock in the draft pick and he can't get a good long term deal will he be back in Fenway.
You know how free agency works, 2011 will still be present next year, no matter what. Same with Hamilton, you could argue his 8 WAR season was an outlier, but people act like it's his typical performance-level.
Ellsbury only needs to have a "good" year in order to get paid. He'll surpass Upton easily. Question is if he gets something above the 140m of Crawford. Depends on next years numbers, but 100m is a lock if he doesn't get injured again.
I was talking Ellsbury exceeding Crawfords deal the day Crawford signed it, but his history has put that in doubt, if he missed another 50 games this year, he won't get > $20M.
Ellsbury got over his issues with leading off finally, but a guy with declining fielding and base running speed and doubles power sounds way too much like Crawford to me.
Whatever team signs him just means that's one less team we have to compete with for OF FA's. I'm done with him.
$5.1M (127 PA)
-$0.6M (84 PA)
$6.7M (323 PA)
Next September he'll be 30 years old. A six year contract for a brittle guy with an agent that insists he does not play through injuries entering his hitting decline at age ~34, and fielding and base running decline earlier? Plus he isn't a leader that anyone can tell. No.
Last edited by bagwell368; 11-30-2012 at 11:16 AM.
Well Bags, I am not arguing against you. But you brought up the 15m for 5 years and to be honest, that's something I'd do, but it's a moot point since Ellsbury will never sign such a deal. If worst comes worst, he takes a 1 year deal in order to boost his value. I just can't see it.
And I am with you, for 100m+ and 6+ years, you gotta let him go. We have our designated successor in the minors. Let's flow with it.