Sandy: Your analysis is interesting but it does leave out that the cupboard seems to be pretty full right now. The M's are ripe for some of those young guys to soon whac .800 in the bigs. I've always questioned Z'a ability to judge/acquire MLB FA's (Kotchman, Bradley, Figgins, egad) but not his ability to fill he larder with young guys. Let's give him that.
Doc: I still think the Prince issue is the 6 years teams want to offer and the 8 that Boras thinks he'll get. 10 came and went with the Pujols signing.
DaddyO: The M's are still a business, and like any other business they must be convinced that shelling out $160M (I still think that is the top $ for the M's) will bring in that much more in revenue. All the guys that I know that own businesses, be it multiple restaurants or logging companies or consulting operations or medical clinics (as examples) still make business decisions on what kind of return is generated. I want Fielder, too, but my desire is generated by emotion. Front offices don't generally work that way.
Spec: Right on! Boras is losing this game of Liar's Poker (one of the great books ever, BTW) with Z. I don't think the issue is whether some other team is going to outbid the M's but how much Boras/Fielder are willing to give another team a discount.
All: I refuse to believe that the the Angels have somehow guaranteed that the M's can not compete if they don't sign Fielder. Man, that's the Boras message right now. If you're going to preach that, you may as well get a chunk of Boras' percentage. If we don't sign Fielder then one of the young throwers will get traded for a bat. It won't be Felix, because his 230 innings are 80 more than any young guy would be able to replace AND because you trade a young guy to take advantage of Felix's presence.
We'll make a move soon, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is a surprise.
moe
Add new comment
1