Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

"Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #106 by birdwatcher55 » December 29th, 2011, 2:32 pm

ofahn wrote:Before anyone in Baltimore starts getting fitted for Fielder jerseys and learning recipes for tofu burgers, think three moves ahead in this chess game.

First, don't believe ANYTHING that Scott Boras says publicly about his clients . At this point in the game and with the market as limited as it is Boras and Fielder ARE considering a 3/80 - 85M contract or perhaps a 6/155 - 165M with a three year opt out clause. Their problem is that the teams that might sign him to that kind of contract are not what they're looking for - a contender. The bad news for Orioles' fans (if you think that signing Fielder is a good move) is that we would be low on any list of teams that Boras and Fielder would be willing to accept on those terms.

If they're planning on going back on the market in three years they would want a contender's home park where Fielder's numbers would be big. Toronto and Washington both have parks that would benefit Fielder and they are both potential contenders. Of course, Camden Yards would be perfect for his left handed bat but Boras knows we don't have enough in our farm system to make us a contender. If the market completely collapses he might falls into our laps but fans should accept that he will be a three year sideshow while we are rebuilding. I'm not sure I see that as progress. Particularly if Angelos pays Fielder out of money that should be used for the draft and international signings.

I think I now better understand the dilemma that women have when they're eying bad boys across the bar. It might seem like a good idea now but they will almost certainly regret it later.


I would not put Prince in the "bad boy across the bar" category. He has been a good, productive hitter during his career and is a much feared figure in a lineup. Maybe a three year "sideshow" is what this franchise needs - sending a signal to other top stars that Baltimore is in the business to win. I'm all for spending on the draft and international signings but I'm also all in for resesitating this franchise, which has been dormant for years. Yes we need creative thinking, solid drafting and good scouting but we also need a dash of star power to get the Orioles in flight again. IMHO getting Fielder in here for 3 years minimum would be a big start in that direction, giving fans a reason to hope again and sending a signal to other top free agents that Baltimore is back. Just my two cents 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #107 by ofahn » December 29th, 2011, 3:31 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:I would not put Prince in the "bad boy across the bar" category.


I'm not questioning Fielder's character. Just his franchise killing contract demands.

birdwatcher55 wrote:IMHO getting Fielder in here for 3 years minimum would be a big start in that direction, giving fans a reason to hope again and sending a signal to other top free agents that Baltimore is back.


To me that kind of "throw a bone to the fans" move would signal the beginning of the final death spiral of this franchise. I just see that as a way of selling tickets while the FO sings the same old tired song about how they're waiting for the farm system to develop players despite the fact that they're not committing the necessary (read that EVERY blinken nickel permitted) resources necessary to develop ENOUGH players to make this team a consistent contender.

You build a winner through an abundant farm system and crafty trading. The best way to destroy a franchise is to sign premier "free" agents. Tracy Ringolsby has a story on Fox Sports detailing the disasters that long term, big money contracts have been for teams. Before you look at his partial list below ask yourself which current or past contract for more than five years or 50M you would take on right now.

Alex Rodriguez, 10-year, $275 million deal with the New York Yankees before 2008: He has played in fewer than 140 games in each of the first four years of the deal, only 99 games last season, and there are growing concerns about a position for Rodriguez in the next six years.

Todd Helton, nine-year, $141.5 million deal with Colorado that took effect in 2003: After hitting 25 or more home runs in each of his first seven full big-league seasons, Helton has hit 20 home runs only once in the seven years since. He has been limited to fewer than 125 games in three of the past four.

Alfonso Soriano, eight-year, $136 million deal with the Chicago Cubs before 2007: In the past three years, Soriano has hit .248 with only 70 home runs, 222 RBI and 16 stolen bases.

Jayson Werth, seven-year, $126 million deal with Washington before 2011: He responded by hitting .232 last season. But, then, what did the Nationals expect? Werth had never been more than a complementary part in his career and never has enjoyed a 100 RBI season.

Jason Giambi, seven-year, $120 million deal with Yankees before 2002: He spent the full seven years in the Bronx and was productive, but he hit .253 or lower in five of those seven seasons, including .208 in 2004. His .260 average in pinstripes was 51 points lower than what he hit in his six full seasons in Oakland before he moved to the Yankees.

Jim Thome, seven-year, $95 million deal with Philadelphia before 2003: As strong a personality as Thome is in the clubhouse, the Phillies dealt him to the Chicago White Sox after three years. Time had taken a toll on Thome, who no longer could handle the grind of playing in the field.

Carlos Lee, six-year, $100 million deal with Houston before 2007: A DH in the National League, Lee has been a defensive nightmare, even in the tiny left field at Minute Maid Park, and has epitomized the demise of the Astros in his self-centered world.

Miguel Tejada, six-year, $72 million deal with Baltimore before 2004: His defense was so shaky that the Orioles were willing to eat enough of the contract after four years that they were able to unload him on the budget-conscious Astros.

Call it the Wayne Garland factor. Teams do seem to have learned to avoid getting tied up in lengthy deals with pitchers. Only three of the 27 most recent deals of six or more years have gone to pitchers, and they have each carried a warning sign.

CC Sabathia provided more than the Yankees could have expected in the first three years of the seven-year, $161 deal he signed after the 2008 season, going 59-23 with a 3.18 ERA. There is a catch, however, Sabathia’s deal included an opt-out clause, which he exercised, and was able to turn into a five-year revision that increased the value of his eight-year commitment to the Yankees to a $181 million payday.

At least Sabathia produced for his pay.

Mike Hampton signed an eight-year, $121 million deal with the Rockies after the 2000 season, which at the time was the biggest contract ever given a pitcher. The left-hander was 42-39 in the final seven years of that deal. He pouted his way out of Colorado after two years, having gone 21-28 and losing 26 of his final 38 decisions. Besides eating a bulk of the contract, the Rockies also had to part with center fielder Juan Pierre to get rid of Hampton.

Barry Zito is heading into the final year of his seven-year, $126 million deal with San Francisco. He is 43-61 with a 4.55 ERA in his six years with the Giants after going 102-63 with a 3.55 ERA 6 1/2 seasons with Oakland.


As I understand it, your idea is to overpay for Fielder so that other players would allow us to overpay for them, too. You know, like Carl Crawford. That contract looks like a winner. How about John Lackey? How much of his contract do you think that Boston would eat to move him? Or maybe A J Burnett. How much of his contract do you think that the Yankees would eat to move him? Do you think that the Angels won't regret the absurd Pujols contract or that the Marlins won't rue the day they "won" the Reyes sweepstakes?

The reason that there are so few desirable "free" agents on the market each year is that teams sign those players they think are worth keeping to contracts they see as a fair value. The players they see as "addition by subtraction" due to their contract demands or their personalities are allowed to become "free" agents. THOSE are the guys I understand you want us to over pay. Can you not see the fallacy in that?

I understand your frustration after 14 years of losing and your desire to see a winner ASAP; however, there aren't any shortcuts. Again, you build a winner through an abundant farm system and crafty trading. Even the Yankees, who have more money than God's banker, built their dynasty ten years ago out of their farm system. At a minimum Jeter and Rivera from that group are going to the HOF so they had some pretty good talent to build from

What really scares me is that Angelos might actually do what you're suggesting, except he would stop there. Add a big name to sell tickets and improve the ratings on his TV network. Remember, he makes money on the Orioles AND the Nationals games as a result of the deal he made with MLB to allow the Nats to move to Washington. Heck, the fact that the Nats are about to have a winner by doing it the right way (player development and strategic trades) puts money in ole Peter's pocket.

I can only hope that Buck Showalter will insist on a proper rebuild. If Dan Duquette comes to him with the news that they are going to sign Fielder I would hope the conversation would go like this:

DD - Buck, we've signed Fielder for three years.
BS - Dan, are you going to be able to spend what's necessary for us to add the talent necessary to support him?
DD - Sorry, Peter feels this will be all that's necessary to be a winner.
BS - Oh, come on Dan, you know we have too many holes and nothing in our system to fill them this year or next.
DD - Look, Buck, I agree but Peter won't give me anymore money so this is going to be it for a while.
BS - Alright Dan, I understand that your hands are tied. I'm going back to my office to call Peter and tell him I quit. I can't build a winner like this.

Think that scenario is impossible? The only part I see as even a bit of a stretch is the "I quit" part.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/albe ... off-122811
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4414
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #108 by birdwatcher55 » December 30th, 2011, 12:26 pm

And five of those teams you mentioned have seen the World Series in the past 10 years. As an organization you need to take calculated gambles and while those deals haven't always worked out or been productive, those organizations have not been afraid to pull the trigger on moves to improve their franchises. If Angelos was tossing "bones" to his fan base we would all have beem long dead and buried. My key point: when you have a young, productive talent like Fielder sitting on the open market and you have an obvious MOO need, you really owe it to yourself as an organization and your long suffering fans to make move. This is not Carlos Lee II, or some 33 year old guy whose good years are behind him. We're talking about a prime time hitter who is just hitting his prime. This seems like a no-brainer to me but then again, if spending big bucks on Cuban defectors with no MLB experience is your thing, then God Bless you and your franchise 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #109 by birdwatcher55 » December 30th, 2011, 12:28 pm

ofahn wrote:
birdwatcher55 wrote:I would not put Prince in the "bad boy across the bar" category.


I'm not questioning Fielder's character. Just his franchise killing contract demands.

birdwatcher55 wrote:IMHO getting Fielder in here for 3 years minimum would be a big start in that direction, giving fans a reason to hope again and sending a signal to other top free agents that Baltimore is back.


To me that kind of "throw a bone to the fans" move would signal the beginning of the final death spiral of this franchise. I just see that as a way of selling tickets while the FO sings the same old tired song about how they're waiting for the farm system to develop players despite the fact that they're not committing the necessary (read that EVERY blinken nickel permitted) resources necessary to develop ENOUGH players to make this team a consistent contender.

You build a winner through an abundant farm system and crafty trading. The best way to destroy a franchise is to sign premier "free" agents. Tracy Ringolsby has a story on Fox Sports detailing the disasters that long term, big money contracts have been for teams. Before you look at his partial list below ask yourself which current or past contract for more than five years or 50M you would take on right now.

Alex Rodriguez, 10-year, $275 million deal with the New York Yankees before 2008: He has played in fewer than 140 games in each of the first four years of the deal, only 99 games last season, and there are growing concerns about a position for Rodriguez in the next six years.

Todd Helton, nine-year, $141.5 million deal with Colorado that took effect in 2003: After hitting 25 or more home runs in each of his first seven full big-league seasons, Helton has hit 20 home runs only once in the seven years since. He has been limited to fewer than 125 games in three of the past four.

Alfonso Soriano, eight-year, $136 million deal with the Chicago Cubs before 2007: In the past three years, Soriano has hit .248 with only 70 home runs, 222 RBI and 16 stolen bases.

Jayson Werth, seven-year, $126 million deal with Washington before 2011: He responded by hitting .232 last season. But, then, what did the Nationals expect? Werth had never been more than a complementary part in his career and never has enjoyed a 100 RBI season.

Jason Giambi, seven-year, $120 million deal with Yankees before 2002: He spent the full seven years in the Bronx and was productive, but he hit .253 or lower in five of those seven seasons, including .208 in 2004. His .260 average in pinstripes was 51 points lower than what he hit in his six full seasons in Oakland before he moved to the Yankees.

Jim Thome, seven-year, $95 million deal with Philadelphia before 2003: As strong a personality as Thome is in the clubhouse, the Phillies dealt him to the Chicago White Sox after three years. Time had taken a toll on Thome, who no longer could handle the grind of playing in the field.

Carlos Lee, six-year, $100 million deal with Houston before 2007: A DH in the National League, Lee has been a defensive nightmare, even in the tiny left field at Minute Maid Park, and has epitomized the demise of the Astros in his self-centered world.

Miguel Tejada, six-year, $72 million deal with Baltimore before 2004: His defense was so shaky that the Orioles were willing to eat enough of the contract after four years that they were able to unload him on the budget-conscious Astros.

Call it the Wayne Garland factor. Teams do seem to have learned to avoid getting tied up in lengthy deals with pitchers. Only three of the 27 most recent deals of six or more years have gone to pitchers, and they have each carried a warning sign.

CC Sabathia provided more than the Yankees could have expected in the first three years of the seven-year, $161 deal he signed after the 2008 season, going 59-23 with a 3.18 ERA. There is a catch, however, Sabathia’s deal included an opt-out clause, which he exercised, and was able to turn into a five-year revision that increased the value of his eight-year commitment to the Yankees to a $181 million payday.

At least Sabathia produced for his pay.

Mike Hampton signed an eight-year, $121 million deal with the Rockies after the 2000 season, which at the time was the biggest contract ever given a pitcher. The left-hander was 42-39 in the final seven years of that deal. He pouted his way out of Colorado after two years, having gone 21-28 and losing 26 of his final 38 decisions. Besides eating a bulk of the contract, the Rockies also had to part with center fielder Juan Pierre to get rid of Hampton.

Barry Zito is heading into the final year of his seven-year, $126 million deal with San Francisco. He is 43-61 with a 4.55 ERA in his six years with the Giants after going 102-63 with a 3.55 ERA 6 1/2 seasons with Oakland.


As I understand it, your idea is to overpay for Fielder so that other players would allow us to overpay for them, too. You know, like Carl Crawford. That contract looks like a winner. How about John Lackey? How much of his contract do you think that Boston would eat to move him? Or maybe A J Burnett. How much of his contract do you think that the Yankees would eat to move him? Do you think that the Angels won't regret the absurd Pujols contract or that the Marlins won't rue the day they "won" the Reyes sweepstakes?

The reason that there are so few desirable "free" agents on the market each year is that teams sign those players they think are worth keeping to contracts they see as a fair value. The players they see as "addition by subtraction" due to their contract demands or their personalities are allowed to become "free" agents. THOSE are the guys I understand you want us to over pay. Can you not see the fallacy in that?

I understand your frustration after 14 years of losing and your desire to see a winner ASAP; however, there aren't any shortcuts. Again, you build a winner through an abundant farm system and crafty trading. Even the Yankees, who have more money than God's banker, built their dynasty ten years ago out of their farm system. At a minimum Jeter and Rivera from that group are going to the HOF so they had some pretty good talent to build from

What really scares me is that Angelos might actually do what you're suggesting, except he would stop there. Add a big name to sell tickets and improve the ratings on his TV network. Remember, he makes money on the Orioles AND the Nationals games as a result of the deal he made with MLB to allow the Nats to move to Washington. Heck, the fact that the Nats are about to have a winner by doing it the right way (player development and strategic trades) puts money in ole Peter's pocket.

I can only hope that Buck Showalter will insist on a proper rebuild. If Dan Duquette comes to him with the news that they are going to sign Fielder I would hope the conversation would go like this:

DD - Buck, we've signed Fielder for three years.
BS - Dan, are you going to be able to spend what's necessary for us to add the talent necessary to support him?
DD - Sorry, Peter feels this will be all that's necessary to be a winner.
BS - Oh, come on Dan, you know we have too many holes and nothing in our system to fill them this year or next.
DD - Look, Buck, I agree but Peter won't give me anymore money so this is going to be it for a while.
BS - Alright Dan, I understand that your hands are tied. I'm going back to my office to call Peter and tell him I quit. I can't build a winner like this.

Think that scenario is impossible? The only part I see as even a bit of a stretch is the "I quit" part.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/albe ... off-122811


And five of those teams you mentioned have seen the World Series in the past 10 years. As an organization you need to take calculated gambles and while those deals haven't always worked out or been productive, those organizations have not been afraid to pull the trigger on moves to improve their franchises. If Angelos was tossing "bones" to his fan base we would all have beem long dead and buried. My key point: when you have a young, productive talent like Fielder sitting on the open market and you have an obvious MOO need, you really owe it to yourself as an organization and your long suffering fans to make this move. This is not Carlos Lee II, or some 33 year old guy whose good years are behind him. We're talking about a prime time hitter who is just hitting his prime. This seems like a no-brainer to me but then again, if spending big bucks on Cuban defectors with no MLB experience is your thing, then God Bless you and your franchise 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #110 by ofahn » December 30th, 2011, 1:17 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:This seems like a no-brainer to me


Of that I have NO doubt..........................
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4414
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #111 by birdwatcher55 » December 30th, 2011, 2:40 pm

ofahn wrote:
birdwatcher55 wrote:This seems like a no-brainer to me


Of that I have NO doubt..........................

Typical moron response :lol:
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #112 by ofahn » December 30th, 2011, 4:07 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:
ofahn wrote:
birdwatcher55 wrote:This seems like a no-brainer to me


Of that I have NO doubt..........................

Typical moron response :lol:


SIGH!!! Shaking head. SIGH!!!
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4414
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #113 by birdwatcher55 » January 3rd, 2012, 8:38 pm

Fielder set to sign with Nats. I guess this puts this thread to rest LOL 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #114 by Tucker Blair » January 3rd, 2012, 10:10 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:Fielder set to sign with Nats. I guess this puts this thread to rest LOL 8-)


I have not seen that anywhere. I honestly doubt he is even close to signing at this point.

A lot of cards need to fall still.
User avatar
Tucker Blair
Orioles Nation Staff
Executive Editor
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: October 2011
Location: Elkridge, MD
Reputation Score: 45

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #115 by ofahn » January 3rd, 2012, 10:49 pm

When the Cubs dropped out it became Washington almost by default. If you think about it it's almost everything Fielder wants. The Nats are a young team, ready to contend with a productive farm system in a park he should do well in. And Lerner has been willing to spend money if he thought it would make a difference. He doesn't even have to change leagues.

Unless some team is willing to offer "Stupid Pujols Money" my guess is he ends up a Senator for something in the area of 7/180M with a three year opt out.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4414
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #116 by birdwatcher55 » January 4th, 2012, 12:26 pm

It seems like Boras is dragging his feet?? What is he waiting for?? For the Yankees to get involved?? 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #117 by ofahn » January 4th, 2012, 12:36 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:It seems like Boras is dragging his feet?? What is he waiting for?? For the Yankees to get involved??


Perhaps he's hoping the Nationals will start bidding against themselves. I think Ted Lerner learned something about Boras when he got taken to the cleaners last fall in the Werth negotiations.

If the Nats offer 7/180M and hold fast there they will almost certainly "win" the Fielder sweepstakes. The Mariners might have to go 9/230M to be considered because their park and winning potential is much less favorable to a player that wants to join a winner since, regardless of the contract amount, Boras will insist on an opt out clause after the third year.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4414
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #118 by birdwatcher55 » January 12th, 2012, 1:32 pm

Lerner is getting involved according to The Post. I suspect a deal is at hand 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #119 by Matt P » January 14th, 2012, 2:47 am

I heard on ESPN radio on my way home from work tonight that the Rangers were getting involved.

Either way, Nationals or Rangers, no chance he winds up an Orioles player.
Matt P
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: October 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Reputation Score: 37

Re: "Orioles interest in Prince Fielder is Angelos secret mandate"

PostPost #120 by birdwatcher55 » January 14th, 2012, 9:54 am

Yes I would agree, Matt 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11


PreviousNext

Return to Baltimore Orioles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron