Master Index of Archived Threads


Go Get Mark Texiera

Centerfield Oct 16 2008 10:26 AM

I've been thinking about it, and I think signing Texiera will be the key to success not only next year, but for several years down the road. The Mets were decent offensively this year, but they got better than expected production from Delgado. I loved what he did in the second half, but I'm skeptical about him staying at the level next year. With Texiera, not only can the expect to duplicate those numbers in 2009, but they can expect them to be even better (.962 OPS vs. Delgado's .871). Plus Texiera is young, only 28, and plays good defense. I would think Delgado would have some value considering the year he had, and you'd think an American League team would want to take a flyer on him. At $12 million for the next year, I would think that it's a reasonable enough salary and short enough commitment that something of value could be brought back. Ideally he could be traded for bullpen help. This would drastically help the team without bumping the payroll significantly, especially if Texiera is willing to backload some salary. He is a young, all-around player going into the prime of his career. To me, he makes a lot more sense than Manny or even Sabathia. Long-term, you'd have Reyes, Church, Wright, Beltran and Texiera all locked up for the next few years. It wouldn't take a whole lot to build around that core.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 10:28 AM

Complete no-trade clause for Delgado.

Centerfield Oct 16 2008 10:32 AM

You've said this to me before. I think a few of Adam Rubin's articles have said Delgado can be traded. Plus, if you remember, nothing in his contract barred him from being traded to the Mets. He had the right, if I remember, to demand a trade, but he did not exercise that. No 10 and 5 rights either. GET TEXIERA.

metirish Oct 16 2008 10:33 AM

All options will be pursued by Minaya , just how hard he would go on Tex is the question.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2008 10:39 AM

AG/DC wrote: Complete no-trade clause for Delgado. Not true! A no-trade clause was what the Mets offered him when he was a free-agent but he took Florida's $$ and lack of trade protection instead. I like the idea of getting Texiera and trading Delgado, even if both situations are longshots. I think the Mets shoulda traded for Texiera before the Braves did for goodness sakes.

Frayed Knot Oct 16 2008 10:41 AM

AG/DC wrote: Complete no-trade clause for Delgado. No he doesn't. That's how he got here in the first place.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 10:52 AM

]No he doesn't. That's how he got here in the first place. Thanks, yeah, I was sentient at the time. I'm also aware enough to realize that he's capable of waiving the rights he negotiated into his contract. I'm only stating that it's there, as per Cot's Baseball Contracts.

Rockin' Doc Oct 16 2008 10:54 AM

From what I have read, Delgado had a complete no trade claus as part of his 2001-2004 deal. His free agent contract of 1/27/05 with the Marlins does not contain the same no trade protection from what I have been able to find online. * *I can't attest to how accurate this information is however.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 11:00 AM

You're right. I read down the bullets without realizing that they switched to the old contract. The man is moveable.

metirish Oct 16 2008 11:04 AM

Minaya has stated that Delgado will be back if that means anything.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 11:11 AM

Well, he'll certanly have his option picked up.

metirish Oct 16 2008 11:13 AM

AG/DC wrote: Well, he'll certanly have his option picked up. True , my bad as there is a difference to what I meant.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 11:30 AM

Yeah, but I was like, dead wrong.

metsmarathon Oct 16 2008 11:36 AM

unless we're talking closer, i'd like to think that delgado is worth more than just bullpen help. that said, i'd be more than happy with an arrangement that gives delgado to some al team, and in return we get, say, jj putz (if he's going to be healthy next year), or perhaps eric bedard (which might be me dreaming)

Frayed Knot Oct 16 2008 12:21 PM

Delgado as trade-bait is going to be an interesting topic. Most of the rest of the team is either; - untouchable (or virtually so): Reyes, Wright, Beltran, Santana - or not likely to bring you much: everyone else Delgado is like the king of the in-between guys, not off-limits but somewhat valuable: Church, Pelfrey, Maine might fit in there too but those guys are going to be harder to replace. The only cold water I'll throw on the Teixeira idea (ei both before and after the x) is that I'm reluctant to hand out mega-contracts ($$ and length) to 1st basemen just because it's the easiest place to find a decent caretaker either within the system (Carp?, Murphy?, Evans?) or via a cheap-ish outsider. Good player, I'm just not sure that's the first place I want to spend my allowance.

metsmarathon Oct 16 2008 12:33 PM

texiera would've been our most productive player last year, using WARP. 10.0 to wright's 9.6 and beltran's 9.3 his 30 win shares put him 3 behind beltran's 33, and just ahead of wright's (and reyes') 29

Centerfield Oct 16 2008 01:07 PM

Using a cheap inside solution, or a cheap outsider is not likely to get you the production that Texiera will. Going cheap a first base will mean you have to fill that void in another position...and other positions may not be as easily filled as first base. To me, it makes all the sense in the world. A multi-year deal to Texiera certainly makes more sense than long-term contracts to an aging Manny Ramirez, or less complete players like Pat Burrell or Adam Dunn.

sharpie Oct 16 2008 01:15 PM

O'course we would be competing against Yankees and Angels and maybe Orioles throwing big hard chunks of money at him.

metirish Oct 16 2008 01:21 PM

We've competed against them before and walked away with the man , plus Minaya has a good relationship with Boras. I expect Jeff to be showing Tex the delights of the NY Metropolitan area soon.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2008 01:22 PM

I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should.

Centerfield Oct 16 2008 01:28 PM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should. This is what worries me. I fear that Omar will put too much stock into Delgado's second half and go into the winter with the mindset that "We are set at first base" not recognizing that first-half Delgado is just as likely to return as second-half Delgado. The double-whammy there might be that Omar counts on Delgado's resurgence as a middle of the lineup force for next year and short-changes left field.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2008 01:29 PM

I think it will be more like. Omar: I'd like to get Texiera. Jeff: $$ Omar: But... Jeff: $$!!!

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 01:31 PM

Centerfield wrote: ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should. This is what worries me. I fear that Omar will put too much stock into Delgado's second half and go into the winter with the mindset that "We are set at first base" not recognizing that first-half Delgado is just as likely to return as second-half Delgado. The double-whammy there might be that Omar counts on Delgado's resurgence as a middle of the lineup force for next year and short-changes left field. What do you think they will do, on the offensive end?

metirish Oct 16 2008 01:33 PM

I think Tony Bernazard will be a crucial voice in this , if he stays with the Mets then I think he will be the voice advocating for a Texiera and not letting Minya do what CF thinks he will do.

Centerfield Oct 16 2008 01:38 PM

AG/DC wrote: ="Centerfield"] ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should. This is what worries me. I fear that Omar will put too much stock into Delgado's second half and go into the winter with the mindset that "We are set at first base" not recognizing that first-half Delgado is just as likely to return as second-half Delgado. The double-whammy there might be that Omar counts on Delgado's resurgence as a middle of the lineup force for next year and short-changes left field. What do you think they will do, on the offensive end? I don't know if I would go as far as to say it's likely, but I can see the Mets overvaluing a guy like Orlando Hudson because he's "gritty". I can see them using precious free agent dollars on a guy who is good at a lot of things, but great at none. His career OPS is under .800. I can see them eating Castillo's contract to get this done. I worry that they will count on Delgado to repeat his 2008 performance and rely on Daniel Murphy for left field.

Gwreck Oct 16 2008 02:01 PM

I think the money spent on Texieria is better spent on starting pitching. Unless money is no object, in which case I'll take Sabathia and Texieria both.

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 02:05 PM

C.C. Takeabathia scares the pants off of me. I see paying for seven years and getting two. How about Sheets and Dunn.

metsguyinmichigan Oct 16 2008 02:18 PM

AG/DC wrote: C.C. Takeabathia scares the pants off of me. I see paying for seven years and getting two. How about Sheets and Dunn. I don't know about Dunn -- when will we know how Citi plays as a hitters/pitchers park -- but I agree totally about Sabathia. He may be filthy now, but the really heavy guys don't last too long, unless they are named "Ruth."

Vic Sage Oct 16 2008 03:41 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2008 03:52 PM

CF is, as almost always, correct. Delgado is a tradeable commodity, and Texiera is the best offensive player on the market (of all the players who aren't a 37-year old Manny Ramirez, looking for a 7 year deal). He's also a great defensive 1bman, for whatever that's worth. I have little confidence on either Murphy or Delgado repeating their 2nd half performances, so requiring them BOTH to do so for the offense to work scares the crap out of me. I have similar fears of Sheets and Sabathia. And F-Rod's peripherals are in decline. Trade Delgado for a decent #3-#4 SPer; dump all other expendable salaries for nothing (Castillo, Anderson, Castro, etc), play Murphy at 2b, and sign Texiera, Dunn and Fuentes.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 16 2008 03:45 PM

Vic Sage wrote: Trade Delgado for a decent #3-#4 SPer; dump all other expendable salaries for nothing (Castillo, Anderson, Castillo, etc), play Murphy at 2b, and sign Texiera, Dunn and Fuentes. That sounds like a decent plan. (Not the only option, of course, but a pretty good one.) Only problem is it would leave the Mets still needing one more starter, (remember, they have to replace Pedro and they have to either replace or re-sign Perez) unless you think Niese is ready to step up.

Vic Sage Oct 16 2008 03:51 PM

If you've got Santana, Maine, and a decent #3 for Delgado, you can sign a retread as a #4 (like a Randy Wolf), and have open tryouts amongst all hands for the 5th slot. I think the Mets have enough AAAA players and prospects-on-the-cusp to find a servicable 5th starter.

metsmarathon Oct 16 2008 04:27 PM

psst... pelfrey...

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 04:43 PM

I know, right? I think he's just trying to motivate Pelfrey. And, honestly, he's like the third would-be GM to look like a misinformed jerkface in this thread. Line starts after me.

Vic Sage Oct 16 2008 09:04 PM

DOH!! geez. Grimm's comment threw me. 1. Santana 2. Pelfrey 3. Maine 4. ___ (via Delgado trade) 5. ___ (via system or FA)

DocTee Oct 16 2008 09:09 PM

WATP: Jose Reyes for Jake Peavy and Khalil Greene

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 09:17 PM

Greene is not my cup at all.

Gwreck Oct 16 2008 09:17 PM

Vic Sage wrote: 4. ___ (via Delgado trade) Any thoughts as to who? ]5. ___ (via system or FA) Via system? Not an option. Via FA? Tons of options.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2008 09:31 PM

Gwreck wrote: 5. ___ (via system or FA) Via system? Not an option.

Is there a good reason not to nudge Niese+ into this role a la Pelfrey 07?

IOW, sign a few vet innings eaters to hold down the fort/do long relief, while Niese gets a start at Buffalo then bring him along (or not) in the early summer?

AG/DC Oct 16 2008 09:40 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 17 2008 05:49 AM

Niese, Vargas, Parnell are your prime contenders. Dark horses are Sal Aguilar, Tobi Stoner (of your Peoria Saguaros), and Jose Sanchez. Michael Antonini is kicking his way up the food chain and so is Dylan Gee, but neither will get a serious lookie. How viable opening up the fifth slot to a rookie is may depend on how excellent the new guy is.

Gwreck Oct 16 2008 10:11 PM

Niese struck me as needing a half season at Norfolk in '08. I suppose we can find some veterans to eat the innings while we wait for him but I don't particularly like that plan. I guess Vargas or Parnell could step up but counting on them from the start seems like a bad idea.

Centerfield Oct 17 2008 07:31 AM

We also have Jason Vargas returning from surgery. I'd throw Heilman into the mix too. See if he can start and get himself out of this rut.

AG/DC Oct 17 2008 07:35 AM

I totally said Vargas.

Centerfield Oct 17 2008 07:48 AM

You did. We're tied.

Vic Sage Oct 17 2008 10:04 AM

Gwreck wrote: ="Vic Sage"]4. ___ (via Delgado trade) Any thoughts as to who? ]5. ___ (via system or FA) Via system? Not an option. Via FA? Tons of options. as for Delgado, you would think there are some AL teams that need his potential sock. Oakland's got nothig going on at 1b, nor does Cleveland, and both have some pitching to spare. Toronto, too, for that matter. But if Billy Beane has lost confidence in Street to close, or if they don't think Ziegler's the answer either, i'd take either one as part of a deal. And i think the kind of FA you look to get to fill a 5th slot in the rotation is alot different than pursuing a Sabatha, or somebody like that, so i'm not overly concerned as to whether you go after a bottom of the order inning eater thru FA or thru the system. I'm ok with Santana-Pelfrey-Maine as our top 3 guys. I'd rather invest money in an everyday player under age 30, who is more likely to stay healthy and be productive, then tie up even MORE money (above what we're giving to Santana) in fragile arms. I think Delgado made himself a commodity thru a strong 2nd half. Lets capitalize on it now, rather than risk him repeating that trick.

smg58 Oct 17 2008 01:44 PM

The A's aren't in a position where trading for one year of a player in his late thirties would be prudent. The Indians might be moving V-Mart to first, so I wouldn't assume they're looking at first base just yet. (Ironically, Ryan Garko was moved off of catcher because Martinez was in his way, and now he's likely to lose first base to him as well. Given how he finished the season, I think Garko's a good buy low candidate -- provided he's willing/able to catch again.) You would need to find a genuine contender who has Delgado's equivalent major league worth at a position or positions where they can spare it, along with a need for a 1B or DH. That might not be so easy. I suppose you could deal him for prospects, but that would mean taking on a significant payroll increase at a position you already had covered without addressing a need. And while we're on the subject of prospects, we have two first basemen in our system coming off solid years at AA, one of whom also spent a significant amount of time at the big-league level. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that one of them could replace Delgado in 2010.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 17 2008 01:50 PM

That's what could make this tricky. If Carp and/or Evans are legit, then the Mets can save that Texieria money, have Delgado keep the spot warm in 2009 and then give way to one of the young guys in 2010. But if neither of them works out, then the Mets have passed on a chance to lock up the position for a number of years with a proven player like Texieria. The odds are probably very much against either Evans or Carp producing like Texieria, especially in 2010. The way I would play this is I'd renew Delgado, and then see if signing Texieria is possible. If he's signed, then you deal Delgado. If not, then you at least have a guy in place for 2009, and 2010 (and beyond) can be addressed later.

AG/DC Oct 17 2008 02:06 PM

smg58 wrote: The A's aren't in a position where trading for one year of a player in his late thirties would be prudent. Dont they go for short-term vet sluggger types often enough to suggest otherwise --- Piazza, Thomas (twice), Sweeney, even Shannon Stewart. Daric Barton gave them nothing at first last year. Delgado costs $12 mills. How much of that do the Mets have to assume before the Oaks are willing to bite?

smg58 Oct 17 2008 02:21 PM

AG/DC wrote: ="smg58"]The A's aren't in a position where trading for one year of a player in his late thirties would be prudent. Dont they go for short-term vet sluggger types often enough to suggest otherwise --- Piazza, Thomas (twice), Sweeney, even Shannon Stewart. Daric Barton gave them nothing at first last year. Delgado costs $12 mills. How much of that do the Mets have to assume before the Oaks are willing to bite? Thomas was signed twice on the very cheap. Piazza was a free agent. Sweeney got a minor league deal. Stewart cost them a million. They were all free agents, and outside of Piazza, very highly discounted.

Centerfield Oct 17 2008 02:34 PM

Talent like Texiera's doesn't come around every year. Using free-agent money wisely means recognizing these opportunities and taking advantage of them. Teams who fail to do this can end up giving big money contracts to incomplete players simply because they are the best free agents available that year. This is why Carlos Lee got the money he got. Same with Barry Zito, to a lesser extent Johnny Damon. You don't want your organization to be in a position where they have to get better when the free-agent pool is lukewarm. On the other hand, guys like Beltran or Vlad Guerrero are superstars with complete games. When they come free, you have to jump at them because you don't know what will be available in years to come. Passing on Texiera this year means hoping, I would say unrealistically, that Delgado/Evans/Carp give you middle of the order production. Or having to find that production somewhere else, say leftfield. None of the leftfield options are as good as Texiera. We have no idea what will be available next year...meaning we could end up in a spot where we don't have the luxury of signing a great player entering his prime. If Delgado hadn't bounced back, the Mets would have paid him $4 million to walk away and pursued Texiera. They would have been foolish not to. Delgado's resurgence is an unexpected benefit to them. Pick up his option, if you have to eat $4 million to get something back for him, consider it found money and make the best of it.

AG/DC Oct 17 2008 02:49 PM

Centerfield wrote: Talent like Texiera's doesn't come around every year. I think it almost always does these days.

metsmarathon Oct 17 2008 04:09 PM

who was the big free agent last year? i cant remember... was there one? oe. right.... arod... i don't think he proves edgy's point tho, due to his age and the wackiness of his brief free agency.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 17 2008 04:14 PM

There may be one or two big free agents each year, but there's no guarantee that they'll play the position your team most needs to fill.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 17 2008 04:30 PM

Last year's free agents, as selected by metsmarathon: http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7745&start=0

AG/DC Oct 17 2008 05:07 PM

Yeah, last year wasn't a great crop. I'll still stick with my guns. While I understand the vulnerability at first, I think the position our team most needs to fill are second and corner outfield and the bullpen and back of the rotation.

smg58 Oct 18 2008 10:53 AM

Centerfield wrote: Passing on Texiera this year means hoping, I would say unrealistically, that Delgado/Evans/Carp give you middle of the order production. Or having to find that production somewhere else, say leftfield. None of the leftfield options are as good as Texiera. That's absolutely true, but you won't need a superstar to upgrade the outfield from last year. I'd like a good righthanded bat or two in the outfield for security, but it's also possible that a healthy Ryan Church and a full year of Daniel Murphy will suffice. Nor will you need an elite hitter to upgrade second base; the difference in OPS+ this year between Orlando Hudson and Luis Castillo, for example, was bigger than the difference between Teixeira and Delgado. And the defensive upgrade would be bigger as well. Also keep in mind that the Mets tied for second in the NL in runs. They scored as many runs as the Phillies, despite the much less generous home park. Offense didn't beat them. You could upgrade the offense a little bit by adding Teixeira, but you could upgrade the pitching a lot with the same money.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 18 2008 10:56 AM

The way I see it, getting Texiera would give us a jump on our 2010 shopping, which is fine. But to address 2009, we need two starting pitchers, a bunch of relievers, and answers to second base and left field.

Vic Sage Oct 19 2008 05:04 PM

you could fill all those holes, and it won't matter if Delgado reverts to his 1st half form next season. We were a .500 team with his bat in the middle of the lineup, and it wasn't until he started hitting that it got turned around. I think that his hot 2nd half is just the thing we need to SELL HIGH on him, and fill the slot with an all-star under 30. Then, you fill the lf/2b/#5 starter/bullpen holes, with the delgado trade, other trades, FAs, and the system. but i don't want to go into next season NEEDING carlos to repeat his 2nd half for a full season for the offense to work. Certainly the BP was primarily to blame for coming up short, but BPs are always a crap shoot and generally a bad place to spend money, whereas if Carlos had a full season, instead of only 1/2 of one, we may have had a much bigger cushion going into that final week. Maybe we'd still blow it and maybe we wouldn't have. Carlos has given us an asset that is dealable, and i'd rather deal him than count on him. If Carp and/or Evans prove they can hit AAA pitching (which i don't think they've done yet), that gives us more assets, and Evans can play LF. But counting on Delgado next year, and a prospect 2 years from now, while Texiera is currently on the market for nothing more than $$, is, IMO, completely nutsy.

Gwreck Oct 19 2008 05:10 PM

I think Delgado's trade value is being generally overestimated. He'll only have 1 year on the contract; He'll be 37 next year; His up-and-down 2007 and crappy first half of 2008 are not secrets. I don't think we can count on getting anything special for him. It's not necessarily an argument against Texieria, but worth considering. Especially if $$$ is no object, or presumed to be.

Vic Sage Oct 19 2008 09:07 PM

Gwreck wrote: I think Delgado's trade value is being generally overestimated. He'll only have 1 year on the contract; He'll be 37 next year; His up-and-down 2007 and crappy first half of 2008 are not secrets. I don't think we can count on getting anything special for him. It's not necessarily an argument against Texieria, but worth considering. Especially if $$$ is no object, or presumed to be. first of all, $$$ is always an object. secondly, we don't need to get anything special for him, just a competent 4th starter. If we can move his $12m contract for a guy who can give us league average numbers and around 200 IP, we can pursue Texiera, play Murphy at either LF or 2b, patch the other slot and pursue BP help (ie, Fuentes).

Frayed Knot Oct 19 2008 09:11 PM

The fact that Delgado's only on a 1-year contract makes him more attractive to a number of teams (or at least attractive to more teams) since the risk is less.

Gwreck Oct 19 2008 10:14 PM

Vic Sage wrote: first of all, $$$ is always an object. Well, in that case, it's a little less than "nutsy" to consider options other than Texiera, no? I agree that Texiera is the best possible option, but if the Mets have limited $$$$, they have to consider other places to use it (ie. a #2 or #3 starting pitcher).

AG/DC Oct 20 2008 05:43 AM

Well, Centerfield's plan is to acquire more pitching by trading the guy Texiera replaces. It also seems some others are at least somewhat satismafied with the notion of Maine and Pelfrey or Pelfrey and Maine as their second- and third-best starters.

Gwreck Oct 20 2008 10:19 AM

AG/DC wrote: Well, Centerfield's plan is to acquire more pitching by trading the guy Texiera replaces. It also seems some others are at least somewhat satismafied with the notion of Maine and Pelfrey or Pelfrey and Maine as their second- and third-best starters. I know. I just happen to think the first point is over-optimistic and disagree with the second point.

AG/DC Oct 20 2008 10:24 AM

Can anybody find a similar player to Delgado with a a similar contract to see what such an animal fetches?

AG/DC Oct 20 2008 10:31 AM

How about Fred McGriff in 2001? The Rays traded him near the deadline to the Cubs for Manuel Aybar and PtBNL Jason Smith. Some particulars are off (deadline deal, lesser salary) but that didn't fetch what Vic might have hoped --- a journeyman reliever at the end of his run and a punchless utility man.

Gwreck Oct 20 2008 10:33 AM

Jim Thome went from the Phillies to the White Sox in November 2005. Player and contract are similar ($14 million/year) but there were 3 years remaining on the contract and the Phillies had to eat half the money. He returned Aaron Rowand and two minor pitching prospects.

AG/DC Oct 20 2008 10:35 AM

That would be more like it.

Centerfield Oct 20 2008 12:18 PM

When you build a team, I think it works better to think about filling in slots in the lineup first, and then try to fit them at different positions. That's why I believe it's too simplistic to say "we need a 2nd baseman, and left-fielder". Such an approach shows a tremendous lack of creativity. The way the lineup stands now, we are solid at slots 1, 3 and 4. (Reyes, Wright, Beltran). Everyone else is a question mark. If Delgado returns, we should expect him to be nothing more than a #6 hitter. It would be nice if he repeated his second-half surge, but it is without a doubt, a gamble. That leaves us relying on Church and Murphy. That's a lot of question marks to have in your first 6. I think for the Mets offense to improve in 2009, you need another middle-of-the lineup type guy. If you look for a second baseman or a leftfielder to bat in the middle of the lineup, the candidates out there scream "bad contract down the road". Burrell has been up and down and is a poor fielder. Manny is old. Adam Dunn is probably the best candidate, but his average is low, plays poor defense, and there have been questions about his heart. Orlando Hudson has an OPS in the low 800's. On the other hand, Texiera is a legitimate superstar heading into his best years. If free agent dollars are to be spent, it would be foolish to ignore the best player on the market. Now, if we had a Reyes or Wright playing first base, it wouldn't be a good fit. But the guy we have slotted in right now is old, signed for one year, and makes a lot of money. Fortunately, his second half gives him trade value. And makes him moveable. I would love to get productive players back. But if we do nothing but move his salary, that's fine too. Let's assume the price difference between Texiera and Delgado is $6 million ($12 for Delgado, $18 for Tex...it might even be less if Tex agrees to backload his deal). That still leaves $20 million or so to upgrade your other positions even if you get nothing back for Delgado. Now your lineup looks like this: 1. Reyes 2. Church/Murphy 3. Wright 4. Texiera 5. Beltran 6. LEFTFIELDER 7. Church/Murphy 8. Schneider Yes, you've used up $6 million, but now your middle of the lineup is solid, and the leftfielder/second baseman you want to sign can bat towards then end of the lineup. You've also addressed a need for the coming years with the type of player you want to lock up, rather than being forced to take what is available later.

Edgy DC Nov 01 2008 07:21 AM

AG/DC wrote: Yeah, last year wasn't a great crop. I'll still stick with my guns. While I understand the vulnerability at first, I think the position our team most needs to fill are second and corner outfield and the bullpen and back of the rotation. Last year also gave us Torii Hunter, Aaron Rowand, Jorge Posada, and Mariano Rivera. Sombebody thought Andruw Jones was a star, also.