View Full Version : Rumored Manny for A-Rod (merged threads)
Wolf Hopper
12-01-2003, 12:37 PM
Peter Gammons, in his recent ESPN.com column, made mention of an effort to trade Manny Ramirez for Alex Rodriguez.
In real life - meaning you include contractual obligations - if your Boston, do you make this trade? If you're Texas, do you make it? Why on both?
sweaver
12-01-2003, 12:46 PM
If I'm Boston, I do it today. If I'm Texas, not so much.
Considering the relative value of the two as well as the projected value, I'd rather have A-Rod, even at the salary difference. And if I have to figure out a way to play both Rodriguez and Garciaparra, well, that's a nice problem to have.
That's a great question Wolf. There's three things to consider:
1) Rangers: They realize that winning with all of that monet tied up in ARod is slim. If they can move Arod (the whole contract) for Manny, they free themselves up of aomething like a total of 70 million dollars. They can then go after a cople of front line starteers, plus, they'll still have one of the best clean-up hitters in baseball... in Manny.
2) Red Sox: All indications are that Nomar is gunning for a west coast team after the 2004 season. so why not move him to the Angels or Padres, for some top level prospect, or whatever they need for their offense / pitching? (Who would the Angels/Padres want to move?)
so... moving Nomar opens up a spot for Arod, as well as opening up some financial flexibility with the Manny trade for ARod.
3) Red Sox Again: Their is growing sentiment that the Red Sox feel that their window of opportunity with the core team is fast narrowing, so I believe that they have a "let's go for broke attitude."
All in all, I say that yes, the Red Sox and Rangers make this trade, as it will help both teams.
Jim Rice
12-01-2003, 12:53 PM
If I'm Boston, I do it today. If I'm Texas, not so much.
Considering the relative value of the two as well as the projected value, I'd rather have A-Rod, even at the salary difference. And if I have to figure out a way to play both Rodriguez and Garciaparra, well, that's a nice problem to have.
Ditto. Boston should do it in a heartbeat and worry about the Nomar ramifications later (deal him away or move him to 3B with Mueller taking over 2B seem the only real options). I would need to know more about their finances before I could speak for Texas, but it's hard to imagine that Hart couldn't use that extra $80-$90 million over the next few years.
Wolf Hopper
12-01-2003, 01:31 PM
Manny's deal:
2004 — $20.5 million, of which $4 million deferred
2005 — $20 million, of which $4 million deferred
2006 — $19 million, of which $4 million deferred
2007 — $18 million, of which $4 million deferred
2008 — $20 million, of which $4 million deferred
2009 — $20 million (team option)
2010 — $20 million (team option)
A-Rod's deal:
2004 — $21 million, of which $3 million deferred
2005 — $25 million, of which $4 million deferred
2006 — $25 million, of which $4 million deferred
2007 — $27 million, of which $4 million deferred
2008 — $27 million, of which $3 million deferred
2009 — $27 million, of which $3 million deferred
2010 — $27 million, of which $3 million deferred
A-Rod may terminate contract after 2007, 2008 or 2009 seasons
Deferred money accrues interest at 3% annually and is paid as follows:
2011 — $5 million plus accrued interest
2012 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2013 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2014 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2015 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2016 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2017 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2018 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2019 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2020 — $3 million plus accrued interest
So, Manny has about $98 mill due - plus a buyout cost.
A-Rod has about $179 mill due - plus the interest on the deferred money.
A-Rod plays the game hard, plays great D at a vital spot. He gives good PR but is a PITA in the clubhouse, trying to run the team himself.
Manny is a terrible defender, doesn't play hard, and is a bit of a PR and clubhouse nightmare.
But, $80 mill saved, minimum, over 7 years, is a lot of money.
If I'm Texas, I have to consider this deal. If I'm Boston, it all depends on how much money I really have to spend on players.
KCBOOMER
12-01-2003, 01:46 PM
Manny's contract run for another 5 years at $20M, $20M, $19M, $18M, and $20M with a teams option in 2009 and 2010 at $20M per year. So through 2008 Manny is guaranteed $97M. Rodriguez is locked in through 2010 for a total of $183M!!!!
It seems to me the Rangers should leap on this. They then could unload Ramirez by picking up half his salary and have tons of money left over. Like $15M a year. That you can do something with. Also they would be out from under after 2008.
The Red Sox have to realize if they take Rodriguez they are on the hook through 2010 (two more years than the Rangers would be with Ramirez) for $183M. If ARod goes sour they are royally screwed.
The upside for the Sox is that ARod will be 28 versus Manny's 32. ARod is the vastly superior defensive player. The last three years ARod has played 20+ games a season more than Manny.
It just looks to me like the Sox ought to see what it will take to sign Nomar to a 4-5 year deal and then compare that to a ARod for Manny deal.
My question is... will the Red sox lose significant offensive power if they were to lose BOTH Manny and Nomar? Even with ARod being on their team?
JamesI
12-01-2003, 01:54 PM
If I'm the Red Sox I do this in a heartbeat and never look back.
If I'm the Rangers I probably do this as it does lessen contractual obligations, but I really consider it first.
huskerdru
12-01-2003, 02:23 PM
If I'm the Red Sox I do this in a heartbeat and never look back.
If I'm the Rangers I probably do this as it does lessen contractual obligations, but I really consider it first.
Yep. If I'm Theo Epstein, I do this deal before anyone realizes what's happening. Texas - heck yeah!! What's one more clubhouse cancer?? ;) That aside, the reduced contractual obligation (presumably affording the opportunity to acquire more pitching talent) is a big plus.
pwdennis
12-01-2003, 03:42 PM
If I'm the Red Sox I make the deal. If I'm Texas, I really can't see where this improves the team although it helps some monetarily
RedSeat
12-01-2003, 06:09 PM
If I'm the Red Sox I do NOT do this deal because it really isn't about A-Rod for Manny. It becomes A-Rod and someone else replacing Manny and Nomar. All three guys are among the elite hitters in the game. And I'd prefer to have two of the three. The $5M - $9M extra per year that A-Rod costs would make it difficult to get another elite player.
Ytown Tribe fan
12-01-2003, 06:47 PM
It makes sense for Boston in a monetary sense too, since they would be trading Manny (and his salary) for A-Rod (and HIS salary); but also they would trade Nomar (and his salary) to some team for a bunch of great prospects (and their meager current salaries).
Would saving on Manny's and Nomar's salaries combined offset A-Rod's salary? Considering what Nomar will likely be making should Boston re-sign him to a long-term contract, yes.
Would A-Rod and a bunch of hot prospects (plus probably an established player) improve Boston over Manny and Nomar? Probably not right away -- depends on who they get for left field. Long term? Could be.
To me, the big question is: who will take Nomar and what will they give up for him?
hmrsf
12-01-2003, 07:47 PM
I can't see why Boston would make this trade. If they wish for financer flexibility, why would they be interested in the most ridiculous salary in all of baseball?
Nomar has said from day one that he wishes to finish his career in Boston. I see no reason to believe otherwise.
Arod can not replace Manny and Nomar. Neither are a problem in the clubhouse. Manny may be a strange but his team mates have no issues with him.
If Manny was not picked up on waivers, he will be on the opening day rooster......if it was a perfect world.
http://www.kjbaseball.com/hitter_comparison.php?player_one=5132&player_two=5275
This graph compares Manny and Arod. Arod is not worth 5 mil more. I'll keep my Manny. :cool: and my Nomar! :D
TGwynn19
12-01-2003, 07:57 PM
Ummm, why can't Nomah DH? So what if you piss him off. He's gone next year anyway. He'd still have to produce at the plate to rack in the $$$ as a FA.
TimmyB
12-01-2003, 08:25 PM
Mixed feelings on this one...
1) Publically, Nomar has always indicated he wants to finish up in Boston. I've never read a quote attributed to him that says he wants to go west.
2) If fiscal sanity is a goal here, then aquiring A-Rod's contract is not the answer.
3) A-Rod is quite a ballplayer.
4) Manny is also quite a ballplayer, but, needs to be... well... understood. (And is older than Rodriguez, as noted above.)
5) Nomar is quite a ballplayer, though, not quite as productive as A-Rod, one figures you could purchase/develop the difference with difference in $$$.
6) Gaining A-Rod for Manny, plus whatever you would gain in trade for Nomar is intriguing, but, why lose Garciaparra? If he really wants him to stay in Boston, shuffle the infield as suggested by JR.
TimmyB's bottom line -- I could live with a straight up Manny for A-Rod; ideally keeping Nomar in the mix.
TGwynn19
12-01-2003, 08:30 PM
Just a thought. Let's say this trade did get done. Would A-Rod accept a move to 2B or 3B while Nomah is in Boston to 'prove' he is a team player and not just greedy. Could be a media relations coup, no?
JamesI
12-01-2003, 08:32 PM
Just a thought. Let's say this trade did get done. Would A-Rod accept a move to 2B or 3B while Nomah is in Boston to 'prove' he is a team player and not just greedy. Could be a media relations coup, no?
He might, but ARod is the better defensive shortstop (Boston fans may now attack me for this statement).
I think Nomar looks real good as a third baseman for Boston though...
hmrsf
12-01-2003, 08:35 PM
Arod is the better short stop. He is best played in Texas. :D
Manny's deal:
Deferred money accrues interest at 3% annually and is paid as follows:
2011 — $5 million plus accrued interest
2012 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2013 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2014 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2015 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2016 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2017 — $4 million plus accrued interest
2018 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2019 — $3 million plus accrued interest
2020 — $3 million plus accrued interest
The deferred numbers don't quite add up - what you have for ARod deferred in the active part of his contract don't seem to equal the numbers in the 2010-2020 part unless those numbers actually INCLUDE the interest as opposed to those numbers PLUS interest.
It makes a fair amount of difference. It changes the value over 8 years to be 70 Mil but that's LESS whatever Ramirez earns after the team, in theory declines the option years. If we equalize 2004-2010 assuming that the team picks up the option for Manny or he earns something comparable - it's a $42 million dollar difference. Admittedly 42 million dollars - $6 million a year.
The deferred thing has various effects - Ramirez has almost as much deferred and how much and how long really will speak to it's real value. the relatively nominal 20-24 amount deferred could actually be better (Roidriguez's loan to his team of 24 nets him 36 over 17 years - not a bad investment for a team - it would take very little in terms of interest for manny's deferement to me worth much more for him) - much better for Ramirez if you take into account the possibility that he migh have more money deferred (almost certain unless he fades in to nothing by 2008 - possible, he'll be 35 going into that season.
Trading Arod to beantown - from a non-money baseball sense makes no sense unless you get a shortstop back - or know that you can get one. In a money ball aspect Manny probable becomes better. He comes off the books much earlier, his deferred money is likely as bad, but it fairly likely they can flip Manny for a SS and something and leave the deferred money to someone else. They have a number of reasons to believe in that strategy - Teixeira, Blalock, Young, A host of young outfielders and etc. It makes some sense for Texas. They rid themselves of their last big salary block - for a relatively immediate salary boost, they can transition their outfielders for a year if they desire. and they can almost certainly flip Ramirez at a favourable rate after a bit of home town Texas Ballpark cooking. Manny is by no means the player that ARod is is...but in this context Ramirez might not be so bad.
It works for the Red Sox too - they are borrowing millions of dollars from Arod at a pretty good rate. They leverage their upcoming big contract negotiation into the ground, and they can certainly flip Nomar for something in the same ballpark as Manny at a much lower rate and a combined rate that will leave them....well in the black as always. Plus what would ARod do in that park? And if the deferred money is better structured with ARod, that 'real difference' of 9, 7, 7, 7 starting in 2007 (!) Doesn't look that important in comparison with the 1.5 over the next 2 years (total) and 7.5 (total - 2.5 per year) until 2007. Essentially they are paying utility player price for ARod above Manny until 2006 - or...well Junior Spivey money if you take into consderation 2006.
Good deal for both - good match....IMHO
Wolf Hopper
12-01-2003, 10:17 PM
Elmo - here's where I got the salary data, FWIW:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/mlbfs02.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/mlbfs41.htm
Elmo - here's where I got the salary data, FWIW:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/mlbfs02.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/mlbfs41.htm
Thanks -cool - still wondering how Ramirez' is broken down - when he gets his referred, at what interest and all that - the ARod stuff still doesn't add up though. it seems to include the interest, but perhpas I have that wrong.
manny tortolero
12-02-2003, 10:11 PM
Is really for the Red Sox a priority to replace Nomar by ARod right now? Manny's salary looks as a burden easier to dump than if they hooked in the monstrous ARod's contract.
And ARod will be playing SS at the same level in the next three or four years?
At the end they can wait until 2004 midseason to move Nomar if they tanked in the season.
Schilling's signing, yes that is a good move for them. But they don't need ARod.
Manuel
huskerdru
12-03-2003, 08:44 AM
Is really for the Red Sox a priority to replace Nomar by ARod right now? Manny's salary looks as a burden easier to dump than if they hooked in the monstrous ARod's contract.
And ARod will be playing SS at the same level in the next three or four years?
At the end they can wait until 2004 midseason to move Nomar if they tanked in the season.
Schilling's signing, yes that is a good move for them. But they don't need ARod.
Manuel
That's a good question! I think the prevailing sentiment in Beantown is that Nomar is gone after next season anyway. I've gotta think Theo has a potential deal on the backburner that sends Nomar somewhere so that they get something for him. Does Boston have Mueller signed through next season? If so, there's no need to move either Nomar or A-Rod to 3B. Move Nomar to 2B if they keep him.
WiredTiger
12-04-2003, 12:41 PM
Assuming everyone stays relatively healthy I think I would take Arod and his contract over Manny and his contract.
For the first five years after the trade the Red Sox would owe Arod 125 Million while the Rangers would owe Manny 97.5 million. Arod is the better bargain in this scenerio.
After Manny's contract is done you still have to pay Arod 54 Million over the next two years but he'll still be 33 and 34 years old and should be a productive player.
Unless salaries make a correction again and continue to go downward then Arod won't be too overpaid in 2009 and 2010.
I think knowing the histories of each player, what position they play and the ages of each player Arod is the better choice.
Wolf Hopper
12-05-2003, 12:03 AM
My local cable sports show says tonight that a report in a Texas papers says Texas would do this deal now - if the Sox agree to take on some of Manny's money in the deal as well.
TimmyB
12-05-2003, 08:31 AM
My local cable sports show says tonight that a report in a Texas papers says Texas would do this deal now - if the Sox agree to take on some of Manny's money in the deal as well.
I saw a similar report. Insane.
gyb13
12-05-2003, 11:14 AM
can either team really go wrong by agreeing to this?
LargeBill
12-07-2003, 08:35 PM
can either team really go wrong by agreeing to this?
Yes, either (or both) teams can go wrong with this deal. Just as both signings were tremendous risks when inked. Either player could experience a down swing in performance as they age. Shortstops in particular are not known for aging well. Manny has had recurring hamstring problems. These are just two of many contracts that could look very ugly in a year or so (Giambi, Glavine, Thome). Teams are getting very leary of long term contracts especially as insurance companies are refusing to cover beyond three years.
gyb13
12-07-2003, 11:16 PM
right, but i wouldn't say the risk is greater for one team or the other. it just boils down to which player you'd rather have
pathogan
12-09-2003, 01:00 PM
... in a heartbeat if Im the sox...They have the dough,manny is one foot on the banana peel away from being el grande loco,plus that body looks like it takes way too much hard living...tell Nomar to play nice or pack up...
qtlaw
12-09-2003, 09:22 PM
No doubt. A-Rod is head and shoulders above Nomar or Manny. The guy is both a gold glove and a silver slugger and just entering his prime.
BurnFactor
12-15-2003, 08:55 PM
ESPN.com states that the A-Rod to Boston talks are heating up, while Peter Gammons is reporting it is done.A-Rod to Boston (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1687013).
A Red Sox fan site, largely believed to be the best out there, Boston Dirt Dogs (http://www.bostondirtdogs.com) says that it is 100%. He has yet to be wrong on anything (the only thing he has been wrong on in the past was a possible Sauerbeck to Cubs. However, the rumor turned out to be valid. He said it would happen, it never did. However, it was supposed to.) and has very good sources. He reports it is 100% done, while reporting previously that it was 95 and 99 percent done.
SABRJoe
12-16-2003, 02:21 AM
Great site, always reliable....first to break Foulke and Schilling (BEFORE ESPN, Fox, etc.)
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/
tyruschen
12-16-2003, 02:53 AM
He reports it is 100% done, while reporting previously that it was 95 and 99 percent done.
I think it's not reasonable to say it is 95% done or so. It's only DONE or NOT. If they make up their decisions, it's done. Then there're only technical questions. Personally I like this deal. It really makes Bosox better. (thought it costs)
tyruschen
12-16-2003, 03:02 AM
I have a quetiosn: what is "It's Just Down to Union Do's and Don'ts"??
Wolf Hopper
12-16-2003, 07:46 AM
Another report of it being just about done: http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-arod163586363dec16,0,3726317.story
Wolf Hopper
12-16-2003, 07:49 AM
I have a quetiosn: what is "It's Just Down to Union Do's and Don'ts"??
The MLB Player's Association (MLBPA) has rules about contracts and how they can be restructured. Since A-Rod has to restructure his contract (in order for Boston to afford him) the MLBPA wants to make sure nothing is done against their rules - specfically, lower the value of the contract in the restructuring.
NJYANKEE
12-16-2003, 08:03 AM
This would be a great deal for Boston. Although, will Arod and whomever they trade Nomar for = the production of Manny and Nomar? They may actually lose offense in this deal (not that they don't have enough anyway). What can you say though - if you can get Arod it's a no brainer.
OaktownTribeFan
12-16-2003, 01:44 PM
Jayson Stark reports that momentum for a 3-way deal is picking up:
And the trading of Garciaparra could expand into a three-way blockbuster in which the Red Sox would get one of the Dodgers' starting pitchers -- most likely Odalis Perez -- then spin him elsewhere for a left fielder to replace Ramirez.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1687013
Interesting.
hmrsf
12-16-2003, 04:07 PM
Great site, always reliable....first to break Foulke and Schilling (BEFORE ESPN, Fox, etc.)
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/
My heart sank when I pulled this up.I have been ill for 2 days..... :(
TimmyB
12-16-2003, 05:13 PM
I still don't get this. Add one superstar (okay, arguably a "super-duperstar") and subtract two superstars.
Theo hasn't done us wrong yet and the Boston Globe reports there's more to come...
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2003/12/16/replacement_possibilities/
As a minor aside, my wife was in Boston during the season two years ago for a conference. She saw Nomar in a bar/restaurant and passed on to me how much he was loved and seemed to love being loved. I just really gotta wonder how much the loss in goodwill, plus anything else, these potential trades will cost the team.
If nothing else, A-Rod would be walking into a very-hard-to-win situation. What if he has an off year? What if he gets hurt? What if Nomar and/or Manny go very public and very bitter? A-Rod seems to have little to win individually moving to the AL East (except a ring, and that's really a team thing) and a lot to lose (persona-wise) by doing this.
TimmyB and hmrsf and others can correct me, but my impression (already buttressed by earlier posts) is that Nomar is loved in Boston.
hmrsf
12-16-2003, 08:03 PM
Nomar is loved by the people, but you would not know it by reading the papers lately.
I am not happy about this. :(
TimmyB
12-16-2003, 08:23 PM
Nomar is loved by the people, but you would not know it by reading the papers lately.
I am not happy about this. :(
Yes and yes.
(The Boston press is not a particularly good barometer of fan's feelings.)
Rajah
12-16-2003, 11:08 PM
Kevin Millar was just on Sportscenter. He said quite simply that he'd rather have ARod on the Sox than Ramirez and Garciaparra, and that he thinks that ARod will be throwing him the ball from short when he's playing first next year.
pwdennis
12-17-2003, 01:29 AM
Let's see
Manny is a hot dog whose production seems to be declining and is an indifferent fielder
Nomar has never regained the power stroke he had before the wrist injury nor has his OBP held up
A-Rod is two years younger than Nomar and is a consistant power threat. If Bostom gets anything worthwhile for Nomar I think this would be a useful set of deals
JamesI
12-17-2003, 04:32 AM
I agree with Pw.
As much as I would love to see Nomar spend his career in Boston (I'm biased towards players who do spend their whole career with one team. Too rare for a superstar to do it these days), if I were Boston I'd do this in a heartbeat.
ARod will more than make up for Manny's production.
They can find a left fielder.
satchel
12-17-2003, 08:07 AM
Kevin Millar was just on Sportscenter. He said quite simply that he'd rather have ARod on the Sox than Ramirez and Garciaparra, and that he thinks that ARod will be throwing him the ball from short when he's playing first next year.
I hope for Millar's sake that the trade(s) happen, in that case - otherwise he won't find himself such a clubhouse favorite next year.
I can't get my mind around this proposed series of moves. The Red Sox should stand pat and try to win it all this year, with Nomar and Manny. I don't understand the logic of trying to make these moves.
Rajah
12-17-2003, 09:20 AM
I hope for Millar's sake that the trade(s) happen, in that case - otherwise he won't find himself such a clubhouse favorite next year.
I can't get my mind around this proposed series of moves. The Red Sox should stand pat and try to win it all this year, with Nomar and Manny. I don't understand the logic of trying to make these moves.
Now there are reports in Chicago that Nomar will be traded to the White Sox for Magglio. Is ARod + Magglio > Nomar + Ramirez? I'm inclined to think so.
In addition, thats probably the only trade the Sox could do with Maggs that would convince me to head on down to the south side to watch a game next year. Anyone else and the Sox lose my money.
RedSeat
12-17-2003, 09:31 AM
Is ARod + Magglio > Nomar + Ramirez? I'm inclined to think so.
I think it might be, but I know that $39M > $32M. Would you rather have Nomar + Manny + $7M to spend elsewhere?
I still don't like the deal. Manny and A-Rod are going nowhere else. Play out 2004 with a team that looks better than the team that lost game 7 of the ALCS. If you can't sign Nomar, explore the trade then, and use Nomar's money for a leftfielder (Mags?). Teams with high payrolls can afford to let free agents walk, because they're left with the money to sign someone else. I've never been one to complain about letting players go "for nothing".
Rajah
12-17-2003, 09:40 AM
I think it might be, but I know that $39M > $32M. Would you rather have Nomar + Manny + $7M to spend elsewhere?
I still don't like the deal. Manny and A-Rod are going nowhere else. Play out 2004 with a team that looks better than the team that lost game 7 of the ALCS. If you can't sign Nomar, explore the trade then, and use Nomar's money for a leftfielder (Mags?). Teams with high payrolls can afford to let free agents walk, because they're left with the money to sign someone else. I've never been one to complain about letting players go "for nothing".
Looks to me like the Red Sox are going for it at any cost. This doesn't feel like money is an issue. They've already added Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke. The writers in Chicago are pretty upset that the Cubs aren't going for it and trying to become players in the ARod sweepstakes (or the now signed Tejada, or Nomar, or IRod, etc.).
If you're going for it at any cost, you might as well go hog wild and build that fantasy team.
Where does the Red Sox payroll end up? $160 million? More? Less?
gyb13
12-17-2003, 12:01 PM
AMERICAN LEAGUE 2003
RCAA RCAA
2 Manny Ramirez 59
3 Alex Rodriguez 53
7 Magglio Ordonez 39
T21 Nomar Garciaparra 26 59+26 = 85
53+39 = 92
adv bosox
if you factor in defense, i think the gap only widens
Rajah
12-17-2003, 03:08 PM
AMERICAN LEAGUE 2003
RCAA RCAA
2 Manny Ramirez 59
3 Alex Rodriguez 53
7 Magglio Ordonez 39
T21 Nomar Garciaparra 26 59+26 = 85
53+39 = 92
adv bosox
if you factor in defense, i think the gap only widens
As I suspected. I'm gonna miss Maggs. Every Sox game that I have ever attended (2, both last season) involved Maggs goin yard. And the stadium goes nuts when he comes to the plate: "oohh - weee - oohh Maaagglliioo"
Boston, I hope you realize what a special player you may be getting. And Nomar won't even be on the south side if this trade goes thru. He's being delivered to LA. I guess I won't be checking out the "upgrades" to sox park this year.
Word is now that the players union is nixing the trade. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1688755
I assume I am not alone in thinking that the union has no business telling a player what to do with his own contract or contract renegotiation. I understand the idea behind the PA rule, but the reality seems silly, IMO.
The players union is not nixing the trade. They nixed ARod reconstructing his contract, which hurts the trades chances, but in no way outright prevents the trade from happening.
Rajah
12-17-2003, 09:36 PM
I figure the trade will happen. I'm willing to bet that Bud will approve the trade, which means it will go to Das. I think that when the owners, the players (involved), and all agree on the trade, then its gonna be hard for the union to win.
from AP:
"Commissioner Bud Selig set a 5 p.m. Thursday deadline for the trade to be completed. He might also go against the union and approve the restructuring, likely forcing the matter to arbitration."
JamesI
12-17-2003, 09:42 PM
If ARod approves the restructuing, what right does the union have to overrule it? IF he wants to play in Boston, and that is important to him, is it important enough to take 2 million less salary?
Had ARod accepted say, 200 million to go to Boston in 2000 instead of 252 to go to Texas, the union would have no power to say a word. The same should apply now.
Rajah
12-17-2003, 09:43 PM
If ARod approves the restructuing, what right does the union have to overrule it? IF he wants to play in Boston, and that is important to him, is it important enough to take 2 million less salary?
Had ARod accepted say, 200 million to go to Boston in 2000 instead of 252 to go to Texas, the union would have no power to say a word. The same should apply now.
The union would have had stern words with alex
cubfan33
12-17-2003, 11:16 PM
The Union has the right, per the CBA, to enforce the wording agreed to. For legal reasons, I can't quote that here, but the CBA is available from several sources, including Doug Pappas' blog.
Bud is forcing this to arbitration, unless the Union backs down. Anyone thinking Fehr et all will do so? Expedited basis with Shyam Das ... not sure how long that will be, but you know I'm ALL over this one.
JamesI
12-17-2003, 11:16 PM
The union would have had stern words with alex
Yes. But doesn't playing where you would be happy have value?
Rajah
12-18-2003, 09:43 AM
Yes. But doesn't playing where you would be happy have value?
Sure it does. Greg Maddux turned down a bigger offer from the Yankees when he originally came to Atlanta. The union was not exactly pleased, but Greg had the right to accept whichever contract he wanted. Apparently, this is a different case since Alex is already under contract. I'm sure Alex could approve it, but it would somehow do a disservice to the union, and thus to Alex's fellow players. Obviously, we don't know what the restructured contract would look like, but whatever it is, apparently it will set a precedent the union does not like.
TimmyB
12-18-2003, 09:57 AM
While I'm still up-in-the-air about this trade the arrogance of this union is really giving the idiocy of the owners a run for it's money.
RichG
12-18-2003, 01:58 PM
While I'm still up-in-the-air about this trade the arrogance of this union is really giving the idiocy of the owners a run for it's money.
Where's the arrogance? The union seems to be taking the stance that the proposed change isn't within the CBA's guidelines. Perhaps the union doesn't want a precedent set.
Look at it from the other perspective: Bending the rules for one player (Arod) could affect all the other members. It might be in one player's) (Arod's) best interests but it might not be in the others'.
I personally believe the deal will go through
TimmyB
12-18-2003, 03:40 PM
Where's the arrogance? The union seems to be taking the stance that the proposed change isn't within the CBA's guidelines. Perhaps the union doesn't want a precedent set.
Look at it from the other perspective: Bending the rules for one player (Arod) could affect all the other members. It might be in one player's) (Arod's) best interests but it might not be in the others'.
I personally believe the deal will go through
Where's the arrogance? The union has a long history of putting top dollar ahead of player's other wishes.
rico_p
12-18-2003, 04:02 PM
Where's the arrogance? The union has a long history of putting top dollar ahead of player's other wishes.
It might be onerous, but is that really arrogant? I think the union's point is that in this one case, the player's wishes are to take less money, but it sets a precedent that the rules can be broken if the player agrees to break them. The union is probably not as worried about an extra few million bucks for A-Rod, but for a case in the future where a player could be either tricked (not all players are what you might call brilliant), or induced into agreeing to bend the rules in a way that could be harmful.
It might seem ridiculous for the union to stand in the way of this trade based on something as meaningless as a little more or less money for a guy who's making more than he can spend in multiple lifetimes, but it does set a precedent and send a message.
Rajah
12-18-2003, 07:14 PM
Its over...for now.
Where's the arrogance? The union has a long history of putting top dollar ahead of player's other wishes.
The union is in the same position as many unions, their job and the legal basis for their existence is to negotiate collectively for all the employees within a certain industry/shop/what have you. A union CAN'T in a technical sense countenance a give back on a negotiated contract for an individual player to accomplish what management wants (even if the player is agreeable).
If we put in slightly different terms it's obvious. If a union agrees to such an individual arrangement, then management can use that fact to extract concessions from all workers.
If a worker in a factory for example, told his employer he'd be happy to work in a certain job without a collectively bargained safety plan. The union would have to nix the deal, because it would open up the possibility that workers would start competing with each other to do such give backs to management to either gain a job, or in the long term of course to keep their jobs - because Ted over in toilet clean-up would love your position and he's wiolling to do it without the safety issues.
That ARod can't be replaced in that sense doesn't alter the fact that once a union agree to such things, they have essentially told management and their clients that ANY benefit or salary collectively bargained can be individually negotiated and so you'd have lower salaried players competing with one another between the hammer and anvil of management saying, well so and so could play second string catch for us at less than the ML minimum, so if you want the job you'll have to accept that.
The statements about 'more moeny than they can spend in their lifetime' is a canard, These owners have more money than they can spend in their lifetime too - the players PRODUCE this money, are they not entitled to it? Darn straight they are.
hmrsf
12-18-2003, 07:58 PM
Larry says.......we don't need no stinkin' Arods! ;)
http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/bos/news/bos_press_release.jsp?ymd=20031218&content_id=620794&vkey=pr_bos&fext=.jsp&c_id=bos
All I can say is Phewww. There comes a point where all you can do is walk away.
Wolf Hopper
12-18-2003, 08:33 PM
"The proposed trade between the Boston Red Sox and the Texas Rangers is dead. The Players Association's intransigence and the arbitrary nature of its action are responsible for the deal's demise today. Reports that negotiations are continuing and shall continue are inaccurate.
"Once again we want to thank the many people who worked so diligently and in good faith in an effort to consummate this transaction."
Sometimes, I think, Larry just loves to get the last word. That, and he likes to show off his thesaurus.
"Intransigence."
That's as ridiculous as Aristophanes.................
Sometimes, I think, Larry just loves to get the last word. That, and he likes to show off his thesaurus.
"Intransigence."
That's as ridiculous as Aristophanes.................
LOL - but hey, Larry's and Co's bid for the sox wasn't the best one and our little buddy found a way to make it happen - good thing Larry is paying his dues =)
Joseph
12-18-2003, 08:50 PM
Larry says.......we don't need no stinkin' Arods! ;)
http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/bos/news/bos_press_release.jsp?ymd=20031218&content_id=620794&vkey=pr_bos&fext=.jsp&c_id=bos
All I can say is Phewww. There comes a point where all you can do is walk away.
Even if the trade is over (espn is reporting varying accounts and Gammons says it will still happen) the damage has been done. Nomar has seen how quickly the red sox nation (as well as his own teammates) can turn on him, the sox manegment is scorned by both sides (one for not completing the trade, and the other for attempting it in the first place). As for Manny, I cna't see him having a very good time in Boston next year after his actions this offseason. The thing that made last years sox so fun to watch, the chemestry, is gone whatever the outcome of the trade.
Ytown Tribe fan
12-18-2003, 08:59 PM
I think the deal being called off is fine, but I'm sure I'm in the minority.
Look -- how many times has a player whined and wheedled right after signing a huge contract because another players signed a huger one the next day? And the owners say, "you signed it, you deal with it."
Well, Tom Hicks is an idiot. And he may be stuck with his idiotic A-Rod contract. He can deal with it.
It may be the best thing to happen to baseball since before 1987.
As for Manny, I cna't see him having a very good time in Boston next year after his actions this offseason. .
I tell ya, I live in the Washington Heights section of upper Manhattan where Manny grew up. He's kind of a shy guy, with some limitations in terms of English language skills and some of his diffidence and offishness which is attributed to attitude is, I think somewhat more about his comfort levels - and Boston is not a particularly racially tolerant place (see Dee Brown or the shameful way in which Jim Rice was treated).
I wonder how much of this 'manny being manny' behaviour is really about that and the press reactions (the Boston press is not exactly moderate on any Sox issues). I wonder what his career path would be like if he came to the Yankees and played in a more accepting community, his home and walking distance from Yankee stadium.
That said, it is awfully hard to bruit about a trade like this and then NOT move the player in question. He's a heckuva hitter, he'd look awfully good in a lot of different uniforms. Dollars to donuts the guy would PLAY for Francona (by the way, I picked Francona as the Sox Manager back in the WS - just to pat me on the back)
manny tortolero
12-18-2003, 09:01 PM
Please correct me if I am wrong but I understand that part of the trade, as was pictured by the media, includes Boston taking part of the salary of Manny by 5 millions in the next three years, additionally to ARod's money.
But if with the simple swaping of these two players, without any other consideration, Texas is reducing almost 60 millions in the long term, then, why add that complication to the trade that makes imperative the reestructure of ARod's contract if Boston takes him?
I think that Texas is losing a golden opportunity. And ARod will be a heavy heavy weight in the future if additionally he remains as Ranger and can not attract fans to the park because is not more the favorite of the team.
Now is a loss-loss situation for them if they can not do the trade. Manny could be a salary burden too, but by less money each year than ARod and by less time. This financial reestructure should be for mid term opportunity to be a contender and not thinking in the next season budget.
I think the deal being called off is fine, but I'm sure I'm in the minority.
Look -- how many times has a player whined and wheedled right after signing a huge contract because another players signed a huger one the next day? And the owners say, "you signed it, you deal with it."
Well, Tom Hicks is an idiot. And he may be stuck with his idiotic A-Rod contract. He can deal with it.
It may be the best thing to happen to baseball since before 1987.
Joe Sheehan at BP wrote a bit about Mark Fidrych in Detroit. It wasn't his point to talk about this particular issue, but basically he said that a moderate estimate for the increased attendence when the Bird was pitching was something like 15-22 thousand fans. That's an additional 5-1/2 mil in the average fan dollars of that time. Fidrych made nothing like that of course. He was an extraordinarily good investment.
Now what about ARod? If Arod is paid 15 mil more than his replacement (a pretty fair estimate given the deferements and such that lower his contract value considerably) he needs to generate about 2650 extra fans per home date (assuming $70 per fan - which includes average ticket and concession as well as various media values) to pay for that contract (he actually doesn't have to make that number - but that's the worst case scenario). Does he? Almost certainly. No pitching, no IRod, injured Juangone and aging Palmeiro, Chan ho and such. What is ARod's attendence factor......I'd guess 7 thousand for that team. But if it is even half that, ARod is the best money Tom Hicks ever spent.
On a competing team, ARod has less value, people pay largely to see good teams, so a Jason Giambi on the Yankees has a fairly marginal value in terms of attendence - they'll sell out anyway. But not so in Texas.
One of the reasons the deal did make sense was ARod DOES have a baseball value for the Sox and one that might help them get over the top (Ha-Ha that's a little joke from a Sox fan....the Sox will never win, although we will always maintain they just need.......schilling and ARod to beat the Yanks). And they have no economic problems. The Salary stuff for Texas really does help since the Teixeira's youngs and such are poised to create an exciting and good team....Manny's contract ain't great but there is some flexibility it would give. (there are some things in his contract that are WORSE than ARod's)
hmrsf
12-18-2003, 09:23 PM
Boston benefits from not making this trade.
Nomar is a professional. He will be fine and play out his contract. He may even have a career year as many players do in a contract year.
Manny is so laid back, little troubles him.
Arod is going to have a tougher time going back and playing in Texas.
If the Sox stand pat......you are looking at one happy girl. :bounce:
He may even have a career year as many players do in a contract year.
No Particular evidence supports that theory....although some players do obviously re-dedicate themselves (see Javy Lopez). Nomar couldn't do more to prepare himself than he already does. He's a good player and as long as I don't have to watch his plate fidgetting, he's a tremendously fun player to watch.
JamesI
12-18-2003, 09:40 PM
According to Peter Gammons, he still thinks this goes through this weekend...
hmrsf
12-18-2003, 09:41 PM
[QUOTE=hmrsf] He may even have a career year as many players do in a contract year.
No Particular evidence supports that theory....although some players do obviously re-dedicate themselves (see Javy Lopez). Nomar couldn't do more to prepare himself than he already does. He's a good player and as long as I don't have to watch his plate fidgetting, he's a tremendously fun player to watch.
I love his plate fidgeting, toe tapping, glove adjusting touch the helmet back to the wrist band ready to swing.
I just think it is silly to think Nomar will be anything but professional. He knows only one way to play, and that is hard.
Nomar will not have to worry about the press. Schilling does enough talking for everyone. ;)
BTW, Millar wants to play with Arod. Enjoy Texas cowboy!
No problems in Boston. :cool:
I just think it is silly to think Nomar will be anything but professional. He knows only one way to play, and that is hard.
That's different than having a 'career year' of course, but I quite agree otherwise. As far as fidgetting goes - can we send you a Mike Hargrove tape =)
Rajah
12-18-2003, 10:20 PM
Now what about ARod? If Arod is paid 15 mil more than his replacement (a pretty fair estimate given the deferements and such that lower his contract value considerably) he needs to generate about 2650 extra fans per home date (assuming $70 per fan - which includes average ticket and concession as well as various media values) to pay for that contract (he actually doesn't have to make that number - but that's the worst case scenario). Does he? Almost certainly. No pitching, no IRod, injured Juangone and aging Palmeiro, Chan ho and such. What is ARod's attendence factor......I'd guess 7 thousand for that team. But if it is even half that, ARod is the best money Tom Hicks ever spent.
On a competing team, ARod has less value, people pay largely to see good teams, so a Jason Giambi on the Yankees has a fairly marginal value in terms of attendence - they'll sell out anyway. But not so in Texas.
One of the reasons the deal did make sense was ARod DOES have a baseball value for the Sox and one that might help them get over the top (Ha-Ha that's a little joke from a Sox fan....the Sox will never win, although we will always maintain they just need.......schilling and ARod to beat the Yanks). And they have no economic problems. The Salary stuff for Texas really does help since the Teixeira's youngs and such are poised to create an exciting and good team....Manny's contract ain't great but there is some flexibility it would give. (there are some things in his contract that are WORSE than ARod's)
I've been arguing this since ARod signed. No one seems to accept this simple fact. ARod is worth every penny and then some. But thats ignoring ARod's other value. How about increased ratings for Rangers games? Hicks can charge FoxSports more for Rangers broadcasts. Hicks owns a bunch of land surrounding the Ballpark. If he can increase traffic around the Ballpark, the value of that land rises as it becomes more desirable to locate businesses there.
Of course, the ultimate way to give attendance a solid boost is to win. The Rangers have seriously failed in this regard. And this is a team that has $75 million to spend on the 24 members of ARod's supporting cast.
hmrsf
12-18-2003, 10:44 PM
That's different than having a 'career year' of course, but I quite agree otherwise. As far as fidgetting goes - can we send you a Mike Hargrove tape =)
Nomar will be 2 full years post surgical. He was doing very well this season until he had the flu. He never fully recoved. Around 9/5 he went down hill.(Maybe he should have sat out a week or so like Manny did.)
I have a feeling he will have a huge season next year if not a career year.
Wolf Hopper
12-18-2003, 10:45 PM
According to Peter Gammons, he still thinks this goes through this weekend...
Me too.
I remember one winter, over 10 years ago, we had snow forever on the roads, along with TONS of salt. My car was white from the salt and road grime. Covered. Every inch. For weeks.
Finally, we had a run of nice days and all the snow melted - and everyone, like me, wanted to get their car washed.
I went to the local car wash and the line was at least 30 cars long - spilling into the street and down the road. Screw it. I needed that car wash and I got on line.
45 minutes went by and I moved maybe 100 feet. Then another 30 minutes went by, and I was still far from being near to the car wash.
I was thinking "This is insane. I have to get out of here." And, I thought about banging out a U-ie and going home. Then, I thought to myself "If I do that, then the last hour plus was a total loss. If I've waited this long and already made a serious investment of time, it would be stupid not to get this done - no matter what it takes."
This trade is the same way. Too many people have worked on it for too long with a ton of effort for it to die at this point. Human nature says they will not let all that be tossed, having come this far, IMHO.
rico_p
12-18-2003, 11:03 PM
Nomar is a professional. He will be fine and play out his contract. He may even have a career year as many players do in a contract year.
I wonder now if the argument that Nomar will play out his contract and then leave as a free agent, while the Sox get nothing for him, has now become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Whether Nomar's a professional or not, there's still a good chance he'll be on his way after 2004. Then the Sox are stuck without Nomar, and no A-Rod around to lessen that blow.
As much as I didn't want this deal to go through, the way things played out might be worse.
Also, nice analogy about the car wash, WolfHopper.
Fatwater Fewl
12-19-2003, 02:22 AM
I think that Joe Sheehan (http://premium.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2490) has written the most sensible and coherent analysis that I 've seen of the union's involvement in this. I'm not going to quote Sheehan (because I'm not exactly sure what the fair use standard is and I have no desire to involve NetShrine in anything remotely resembling copyright infringement) but he's basically making the point that the union is simply doing their job by standing firm on the wording of the CBA. And that by standing firm on the letter of agreement they are defending the spirit of it.
Don't forget, folks, it was not very long ago at all that players had very few rights at all. For the majority of the history of organized baseball the owners had the upper hand in contract issues through the reserve clause. Almost all leverage in negotiating contracts was held by the owners.
The players have made up quite a bit of ground in that area in the last 30 years. The union has gained negotiating leverage for them. As a result, the players have more freedom to choose where they'd like to play, and a larger portion of baseball's revenue has found its way into the players pockets.
But. But. But. But the owners remain businessmen and they will continue to poke and prod and pry in search of weakness and attempt to get every edge they can. That's the way they do business. That's the way they've always done business. The union cannot afford to get soft even, perhaps especially, in a case like this, or they could see all the gains they have made erode very quickly.
All of that said. I think this trade will still be made. But it will be made in a way that gives up none of the union's hard-earned ground.
I think that [URL=http://and a larger portion of baseball's revenue has found its way into the players pockets.
But please note that since collusion, the percentage of revenue that finds its way to player's pockets has not increased in any real sense, while various expenses, including disbursements to owners, have increased as a percentage of revenues. The real 'cost' explosion has been in non-player expenses, not salaries.
I have a feeling he will have a huge season next year if not a career year.
He could, of course, but he'll be 31 in July....the percentages are not good that he'll have a 'career' year. But a 'normal' year for Ramon-backwards is a pretty useful one.
His 98, 99 and 00 years were awfully good - but they look like his 'career' years - OBP well above what his minor league record (admittedly short) would indicate, and his last two years resemble what his 'true' level is in my opinion - which is awfully good. I'll sign on for .310, 110rbi's, 40-50 2b's, efficient basestealing and 190 hits from a good fielding shortstop anyday - it ain't ARod, but then...what is.
huskerdru
12-19-2003, 09:56 AM
Don't know if anyone else saw this, but I find it more than a little intriguing what the three principals in this deal said yesterday:
Lucchino - The deal's dead
Hicks - we think the deal can still be done
Epstein - no comment
Does this strike anyone else as a little orchestrated? I, too, think the deal goes down this weekend.
Don't know if anyone else saw this, but I find it more than a little intriguing what the three principals in this deal said yesterday:
Lucchino - The deal's dead
Hicks - we think the deal can still be done
Epstein - no comment
Does this strike anyone else as a little orchestrated? I, too, think the deal goes down this weekend.
Three principals?????? ARod is a Principal, Hicks is a Principal, Epstein and Lucchino are NOT principals.
Let's get this straight. Arod and the ownership are principals...Orza and Selig are principals in terms of their say on things.
I'm uncertain, but isn't Heisenberg a principle? ;)
huskerdru
12-19-2003, 11:24 AM
Three principals?????? ARod is a Principal, Hicks is a Principal, Epstein and Lucchino are NOT principals.
Let's get this straight. Arod and the ownership are principals...Orza and Selig are principals in terms of their say on things.
I suppose I could have said "three OF the principals," or even "three of the key stakeholders," or perhaps "three gentlemen involved in some way, direct or indirect, in the potential A-Rod/Manny deal." Principalness aside, my point was that I suspected that both sides are jointly working the media by sending contradictory messages, which I think is legitimate regardless of who is a principal.
On the issue of principality, what's your point, and how does it relate to my earlier post?? Are you essentially saying that Epstein and Lucchino, not being principals, really have no bearing on the whole deal? If that's the case, I disagree, but am curious either way...
Don't know if anyone else saw this, but I find it more than a little intriguing what the three principals in this deal said yesterday:
Lucchino - The deal's dead
Hicks - we think the deal can still be done
Epstein - no comment
Does this strike anyone else as a little orchestrated? I, too, think the deal goes down this weekend.
Husker....this is what you posted...I don't want to argue, but you said Lucchino, Hicks and Epstein were 'principals' and that was your point. meaning these are the decision makers and the people who decide.
they have input of course, but they are not the principals..not in the sense you mean nor in the real sense.
gyb13
12-19-2003, 11:56 AM
hmm..are we just discussing semantics here?
huskerdru
12-19-2003, 12:31 PM
hmm..are we just discussing semantics here?
I think we are. I'm cavilling now, too, but my point was not that Theo and Larry are "principals" - again, I conceded that you could replace "principals" with any of a number of different terms without affecting my point, which is that there appeared (to me) to be a concerted effort by both sides in the deal to send a number of mixed messages to the media, perhaps simply to turn the spotlight down a bit and do more negotiating under the radar. Whether Epstein and Lucchino are or are not principals is really immaterial to this...
I think we are. I'm cavilling now, too, but my point was not that Theo and Larry are "principals" - again, I conceded that you could replace "principals" with any of a number of different terms without affecting my point, which is that there appeared (to me) to be a concerted effort by both sides in the deal to send a number of mixed messages to the media, perhaps simply to turn the spotlight down a bit and do more negotiating under the radar. Whether Epstein and Lucchino are or are not principals is really immaterial to this...
No biggy - I objected to principals in the sense that it is the 'principals' who make the decisions, and the others are sources. Lucchino and Epstein are secondary to Henry....Boras to ARod. It's really between Henry and ARod - Lucchino and Epstein are closer to the principals then Gammons....but not the principals. I think it's dead, but not because the people mentioned said so.
I guess we have to Say Orza is a principal too...he has a 'final' say....
TimmyB
12-22-2003, 01:11 PM
Surprise, surprise... new deadline. Stay tuned...
Rajah
12-22-2003, 04:02 PM
Surprise, surprise... new deadline. Stay tuned...
guh. Obviously Mr. Hicks wants it done. His "deadlines" have become meaningless.
Ok. Is it sick that I'm interested enough in this that I'm sitting in front of the computer (partly working, partly lurking) to see if this comes off ... any second now ... while my family makes xmas cookies?
In my defense, I'll say that my aversion to cookie making is well known for two decades now, and that I'm never even invited to the, err ..., event.
KCBOOMER
12-23-2003, 05:28 PM
They say it is dead for now.
TimmyB
12-23-2003, 05:41 PM
What a mess... :rolleyes:
huskerdru
12-24-2003, 12:51 PM
No biggy - I objected to principals in the sense that it is the 'principals' who make the decisions, and the others are sources. Lucchino and Epstein are secondary to Henry....Boras to ARod. It's really between Henry and ARod - Lucchino and Epstein are closer to the principals then Gammons....but not the principals. I think it's dead, but not because the people mentioned said so.
I guess we have to Say Orza is a principal too...he has a 'final' say....
Point well taken. I'm always a fan of precision in communication! I think you're right that Orza is one of the principals now...not sure if that's a good thing??
TimmyB
12-24-2003, 02:52 PM
Is it safe to say that this trade is truly dead only when Boston begins to seriously negotiate with Nomar?
tyruschen
01-20-2004, 10:40 PM
Rotoword reports:
According to ESPNews, the Alex Rodriguez deal could be back on again. The Red Sox and Rangers are likely to talk in New York this week.
The MLBPA and the Rangers' demands for cash still could stand in the way of Boston's attempts to complete the deal, but it appears that the Red Sox will make one final run at him. Whether the Nomar Garciaparra-for-Magglio Ordonez deal is still on the table is another question that will have to be answered.
And the report from ESPN said both sides denied it:(sure they will)
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1713598
nyy26wc
01-20-2004, 10:54 PM
When the last time this trade was declared dead, my reaction is it's just as dead as Griffey to the Reds deal is as dead as Jim Bowden insisted it was.
I still think that, sometime before the season starts, just when we least expect it, the trade will be completed.
tyruschen
01-20-2004, 11:02 PM
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/2003/images/a-lert.gif
I really love theses guys' creativity.:)
manny tortolero
01-20-2004, 11:27 PM
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/2003/images/a-lert.gif
I really love theses guys' creativity.:)
Thanks for this web page reference, is great.
KCBOOMER
01-21-2004, 12:05 AM
It is truly the deal that refuses to die. It will be interesting to see who gives in to get this done, the Sox, the Rangers or the Union.
gyb13
01-21-2004, 12:13 AM
It will be interesting to see who gives inthe French :p
JamesI
01-21-2004, 12:14 AM
Just do it already!
News Flash!!!!
Tom Hicks has set a deadline of Thursday at 5PM
George W. Bush cites this as the 'unfinished business' in his state of the union speech.
Bud Selig has set a deadline of Thrusday at 3PM
John Henry says there have been no discussions
Democrats reply to W that this is just so much Nigerian Uranium
Larry Lucchino says it would be premature to comment
Pete Rose lays 3-2 against
And somewhere, Dan Duquette is smiling.......
cubfan33
01-21-2004, 07:16 AM
I'm with Lee on this (and so many other issues.) I think it will happen, but I'm starting to think it will be a deadline deal. The Red Sox will be right in it, of course, and make this big deal to 'push them over the top.' I think we'll see some sort of Red Sox-Rangers/Red Sox-White Sox/White Sox-Angels mix-n-match with Nomar, Magglio, and Erstad or Anderson.
gyb13
01-21-2004, 11:40 AM
hmm...deadline deals are harder to predict at this point - it'll depend on where these clubs are in their respective races
nyy26wc
01-21-2004, 12:45 PM
hmm...deadline deals are harder to predict at this point - it'll depend on where these clubs are in their respective races
Harder to predict, sure.
But, let's give ourselves an opportunity to look stupid by making some. I'm going to start a new thread on that.
nyy26wc
01-21-2004, 12:49 PM
The new thread is at http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/showthread.php?t=13492
TimmyB
02-18-2004, 02:57 PM
Is it safe to say that this trade is truly dead only when Boston begins to seriously negotiate with Nomar?
Nope.
But, it is safe to say this deal is dead. ;)
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.