Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Thursday, December 09, 2004

Diamondbacks - Signed Glaus

Arizona Diamondbacks - Signed 3B Troy Glaus to a 4-year, $45 million contract.

Wow, I’m speechless.  I’ve always liked Troy Glaus, but this is what you might pay for a healthy Troy Glaus, one with no questions about his position status, and a Troy Glaus that’s fielding the hot corner like he did earlier in his career before shoulder and knee problems dropped his defensive stats like a rock.  This is not what I would pay for a 1B that hits like Troy Glaus and results in Hillenbrand, a poor defensive 3B, returning to 3B and Tracy, a decent offensive 3B, becoming a mediocre RF.  If the Diamondbacks are willing to pay $11 million a year for a player with such serious question marks, I think Magglio Ordonez is just as good a risk and a better fit for the team.  Hell, why not pay 3 or 4 million more and get into the Pedro hunt?  Or give Nomar a bigger 1-year offer than the Cubs were willing to give him - I’d rather have Nomar for 1 year at 13 than Glaus for 4 at 45.  If I’m Jeff Moorad, I’m rolling myself a Harry Rag and putting myself to bed.

Glaus, Troy - 2005 ZiPS Projection (28)
————————————————————————————-
AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
————————————————————————————-
391 68 101 20 1 21 65 66 92   6 .258 .369 .476

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:09 PM | 129 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Mirabelli Dictu (Chris McClinch) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:31 PM (#1008419)
I'm shocked. This is terrible, this signing. It's a bad amount of money to pay for a Troy Glaus with serious question marks, and it's a worse amount of money to pay for the added benefit of moving three players out of position.
   2. Jeff K. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:33 PM (#1008423)
I've always liked Troy Glaus, but this is what you might pay for a healthy Troy Glaus, one with no questions about his position status, and a Troy Glaus that's fielding the hot corner like he did earlier in his career before shoulder and knee problems dropped his defensive stats like a rock.

Dan nails it with this line. This is completely out of line.
   3. JH (in DC) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:40 PM (#1008438)
I think I saw that Hillenbrand was going to be non-tendered, meaning Glaus will play first and that the D'Backs are officially out of the Sexson race.

Found it....bottom of Gammons' 12-6 column.
   4. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:40 PM (#1008441)
If anyone picked this, then they are a genius.
   5. RickG Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:44 PM (#1008447)
Where...

Where is the money coming from?

Do they realize they actually...Oh, Wait, brainstorm.... RJ and Glaus to...someone...package deal, sign and trade? That's the only theory I have.
   6. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:48 PM (#1008458)
Again, I think AZ should have traded Randy Johnson for the best value out there and moved on. But if the team wanted to spend $40+m over 4 years on an injury prone 1Bman, I couldn't care less whether they spent it on Sexson or Glaus.

I have no idea what AZ will do with Shea. My guess is AZ will attempt to trade him and if they fail, non-tender him. Then again, Joe Jr. in his mania may easily offer a deal to Shea, resulting in Tracy being moved to RF in a platoon with Hairston.

Yup, AZ will move its 3Bman and 2Bman to RF to make room for a mediocre SS and an injury prone 3Bman. It's a shock this franchise hasn't won the WS since 2001.
   7. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:48 PM (#1008459)
They can't trade Glaus for six months.
   8. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:51 PM (#1008468)
That's OK, Larry. By the summer trading deadline, it'll be RJ and Glaus to NYY for Vazquez, Giambi, seventeen prospects and $80M in cash.
   9. Mr. Imperial Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:55 PM (#1008477)
This is amazing. Have we seen a big-name signing yet that could be considered fair-market value? It seems like everyone is overpaying - or are we all just undervaluing?
   10. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:56 PM (#1008479)
If anyone picked this, then they are a genius.

I picked this (in the free agent contest thing), though if asked I wouldn't have said $11M/yr.

*pats self on back*

Wile E. Coyote.... Super Genius. Yes, I like the sound of that.
   11. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 04:56 PM (#1008480)
This is amazing. Have we seen a big-name signing yet that could be considered fair-market value? It seems like everyone is overpaying - or are we all just undervaluing?

The Nomar signing was probably fair-market, though had he not specifically stated he'd be willing to accept one year to prove he was healthy, it never would have happened.
   12. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:00 PM (#1008486)
I picked this (in the free agent contest thing), though if asked I wouldn't have said $11M/yr.

Just tried to check the spreadsheet, to no avail, hence the post.

UCCF, you are a genius. I thought Arizona, would be the last team to splash out big bucks for a FA, this off season.
   13. The Other Kurt Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:05 PM (#1008497)
IMHO, this is probably the worst contract we've seen this off-season.

Benson is a couple million high, Wright is a big injury risk, but this! This is the only one so far which realy has the possibilty of becoming a true "albatross" around the team's neck. I hope it works out for them, but damn. It could hurt bad.
   14. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:06 PM (#1008499)
You heard it here first: Hillenbrand for Josh Fogg, even-up.
   15. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:06 PM (#1008502)
And no, I don't think it's a good idea; I'm just playing Cassandra.
   16. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:07 PM (#1008506)
Who's in charge of player personnel? Moorad or Garagiola?
   17. Darren Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:08 PM (#1008508)
For this kind of money, they could have had Drew in RF and not have to rearrange their defense. Bad, bad deal.
   18. caspian88 Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:09 PM (#1008513)
ou heard it here first: Hillenbrand for Josh Fogg, even-up.

Please, please...

Is Arizona trying to beat Detroit? Oh well, I'm happy.
   19. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:13 PM (#1008521)
For this kind of money, they could have had Drew in RF and not have to rearrange their defense.

But Drew has a long, troubling injury history!

Oh, wait . . . .
   20. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:17 PM (#1008531)
Hehe. Who needs Drew in RF when you can have Finley in CF?

Sexson will probably get about the same deal for the Mets.
   21. Rob Base Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:25 PM (#1008551)
Delgado is licking his chops right now. Ridiculous.
   22. philly Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:28 PM (#1008561)
Any chance that Moorad was Glaus' agent?

Just a very bizarre deal.
   23. RP Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:29 PM (#1008563)
I was hoping the Orioles would get Delgado for $10-11 million, which would be a great price IMO. But I guess that's unlikely.
   24. RP Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:33 PM (#1008574)
I was hoping the Orioles would get Delgado for $10-11 million, which would be a great price IMO. But I guess that's unlikely.
   25. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:34 PM (#1008575)
IMO, this makes Delgado's tag about $13M/year over 4 years.

And Sexson will command similar salary from the Mets.

If Glaus would agree to move to 1B right away, I'd be happier.
   26. Mattbert Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:41 PM (#1008592)
I love you, Bill Mueller.
   27. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:44 PM (#1008600)
By the way, imagine these contracts:

Delgado, 4 years, $55M, to Seattle
Sexson, 4 years, $45M to the Mets

Are those contracts better/worse?
   28. Guarded By Monkeys Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:44 PM (#1008602)
This is amazing. Have we seen a big-name signing yet that could be considered fair-market value? It seems like everyone is overpaying - or are we all just undervaluing?

The White Sox signed Jermaine Dye this morning for 2 years/$9 million with a $6 million option for year number 3 or a $1.5 million buyout. That seems about right, no?
   29. schuey Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:49 PM (#1008614)
every baseball writer for the last 5 years has been saying Arizona has major problems with deferred salary, 2 years ago Bud Selig hinted it and another club were hours from babkruptcy, they unload Schilling and try to Johnson. Now they sign Glaus for 4 years $45 million?? WTF????
   30. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:51 PM (#1008621)
By the way, imagine these contracts:

Delgado, 4 years, $55M, to Seattle
Sexson, 4 years, $45M to the Mets

Are those contracts better/worse?


The Delgado contract would be better, the Sexson contract about the same (marginally worse, perhaps).

Delgado is a better player and less of an injury risk than Glaus. Seattle is also in a somewhat better position to compete than Arizona.

The Sexson contract is worse, because he's not as good as Delgado and doesn't offer the possibility of playing third base as does Glaus. He would, however, fill a mammoth hole for the Mets at 1B, so getting him would benefit the team enormously. They're probably in about the same position as Seattle competitively. So overall, it's about a wash compared to Glaus.

Delgado would be the relative bargain of the three.
   31. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:52 PM (#1008624)
babkruptcy schmabkruptcy.
   32. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 05:56 PM (#1008633)
I would have loved to have seen a major league franchise in bankruptcy court, where the judge, and creditors, would get to see all the financials. It would be obvious almost from the moment of the filing that it was patently frivolous, and that the assets of the franchise -- every one of them, from the Yankees to the Expos -- far outstrip its debts.

The only real issue would be the amount of sanctions the court would impose for the abuse of the bankruptcy laws.
   33. George Brett Barberie Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:00 PM (#1008642)
I read this morning that the Jays valued Delgado at 6 million per year and offered a 2 yr. 12 million dollar contract as their intitial and only offer. There was no counter offer because the agent considered it way too low. It strikes me as low too but I love the idea of carefully establishing value on a player and holding the line.
   34. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:05 PM (#1008650)
I read this morning that the Jays valued Delgado at 6 million per year and offered a 2 yr. 12 million dollar contract as their intitial and only offer.

With all due respect to J.P., that is a ridiculous offer. I agree with the concept of establishing a value you think a player has and holding the line there, but that's not an example of it. That offer is an example of a low-ball offer that tells the player, "Thanks for the memories, but we have no serious interest in signing you."

If I was Delgado's agent, I wouldn't have countered, either, mostly because I'd have been too busy laughing my ass off to respond.
   35. Pingu Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:05 PM (#1008653)
I read this morning that the Jays valued Delgado at 6 million per year and offered a 2 yr. 12 million dollar contract as their intitial and only offer. There was no counter offer because the agent considered it way too low. It strikes me as low too but I love the idea of carefully establishing value on a player and holding the line.

If true, the Blue Jays need to re-examine how they establish value on a player. Why bother?
   36. Steve Treder Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:08 PM (#1008660)
I would have loved to have seen a major league franchise in bankruptcy court, where the judge, and creditors, would get to see all the financials. It would be obvious almost from the moment of the filing that it was patently frivolous, and that the assets of the franchise -- every one of them, from the Yankees to the Expos -- far outstrip its debts.

The only real issue would be the amount of sanctions the court would impose for the abuse of the bankruptcy laws.


Absolutely.

MLB franchises have been crying poor for decades. The fact that only two in the modern history of the sport -- the Philadelphia Phillies in 1942, and the Seattle Pilots in 1969 -- have actually filed for bankruptcy is a pretty good indicator not only that they're very rarely as bad off as they would like us to believe, but also that they have good reason to keep their books private.
   37. CONservative governMENt Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:08 PM (#1008661)
The newish stadium will prevent it but I otherwise think AZ would be a perfect contraction partner for Tampa. Horrible ownership and management, complete fiscal irresponsibility, lame fanbase (local papers giving fans instructions on when to cheer during the World Series). It's a shame legitimate baseball towns like Minneapolis get tortured while those locales dumb enough to pay for a stadium are thus given a free pass.
   38. Women's Lib is Ms.Guided Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:12 PM (#1008669)
The fact that only two in the modern history of the sport -- the Philadelphia Phillies in 1942, and the Seattle Pilots in 1969 -- have actually filed for bankruptcy

Do you know the amount of sanctions the court imposed on these teams for their abuse of the bankruptcy laws?
   39. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:12 PM (#1008671)
I'd love to see new management in AZ. And I agree that most of the fans there are pretty lame. That being said, I cry no tears for crappy owners like the owner of the Twins. Whatever, screw him.
   40. The Ghost of Archi Cianfrocco Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:12 PM (#1008673)
There were a few moments last year when I felt bad for Arizona fans.

They had a good team, got great performances from players no one expected and had a WS far before anyone thought it was possible. Then all the bad contracts caught up with them and those fans suffered a huge drop-off because the front office acted with total disregard for sanity (fiscal or otherwise.) Schilling left town and now Randy was on his way out.

With this signing, and no stories of a mob with torches and pitchforks at the BOB, I rid myself of any sympathy.

Who in the world was AZ bidding against for Glaus? Was anyone, ANYONE, even hinting at 4 years with this guy? AZ will be insanely lucky if Glaus plays more than half the contract at 3B and doesn't play it like Butch Hobson during the floating bone-chips years.

I dig that a lot of people are saying primates complain about these signings flat out given we don't have all the angles. However, I defy someone to come up with a scenario of "intangibles" that doesn't involve blackmail photos and the like that forced AZ into this deal.

4/45... for that much money why not take a run at Beltre? At least spend the money on a kid who has the better chance of being a star while he's wearing your uniform!
   41. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:13 PM (#1008675)
I agree with your assessment, Sam M. Delgado will wind up yielding the best marginal win to dollar ratio of the three.

As for relative value... I believe possible that teams that ultimately sign the premier free agents (Delgado, Pedro) may find relative bargains due to supply/demand market interactions. Every time a Lieber or Wright signs a bloated contract, that's one less potential suitor for Pedro. When the music stops, Delgado may find that only a couple of teams still have the need and cash for his services, leaving him to have to settle for a contract not that much more than Glaus'.

While it may be true that Delgado is 30% (or whatever) more valuable than Glaus, that doesn't translate in a free market to his salary being 30% more than Glaus'. It should, but if we are correct in our consensus opinion that Glaus is overvalued, then the market responds by relatively *undervaluing* the superior player, not by overvaluing the superior player to the same degree as the inferior player. In other words, a market inefficiency (if that's truly what Glaus' contract represents) is corrected only by another inefficiency in the opposite, not same, direction. Therefore, IMHO guys like Pedro, Delgado, and Renteria will likely prove to be the bargains of this year's free agent market.
   42. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:16 PM (#1008681)
Do you know the amount of sanctions the court imposed on these teams for their abuse of the bankruptcy laws?

Those teams, in those eras, are not at all comparable to today. The valuation of sports franchises today, their income-generating capacity, makes them (from a financial POV) pretty much an entirely different business than the 1942 Phillies or even the 1969 Pilots. I certainly wasn't suggesting that no franchise ever could have had a legit bankruptcy claim, or even that none will ever have one in the future. My point was only that none of them could in the current economic landscape.
   43. Women's Lib is Ms.Guided Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:17 PM (#1008683)
That being said, I cry no tears for crappy owners like the owner of the Twins. Whatever, screw him.

The owner is part of the problem in Minnesota (campaigning to be contracted). I feel bad for their fans, who actually like baseball.
   44. Gromit45 Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:18 PM (#1008688)
Forget steroid testing!

Obviously, a lot of GMs needed to be tested this year for SBT (Stupid Baseball Transaction)!
   45. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:20 PM (#1008692)
I feel bad for their fans, who actually like baseball.

The vast majority of fans IN Arizona are applauding the Glaus signing. They'll cheer even more when the team signs Ortiz, Finley, Clayton, Dellucci, etc. I am in the minority of wanting to rebuild (maybe because I don't live in AZ anymore). Those fans want AZ to do it the way the Yankees are doing it--and the ownership in AZ wants to imitate the Yankees too. If they can find the money (despite deferred payments and all that crap) to do it, more to them.
   46. Kelly Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:41 PM (#1008736)
I do not know why Arizona would want Glaus for this kind of money and contract length, but I do think it is important to remember that Arizona was terrible last year and is likely to be terrible over the next few years, even if it was a well run organization. As such, how do you get a good player without over paying? The only mitigating factor in Arizona's favor is the location -- many player live in Arizona and probably value playing at home and not needing two residences.
   47. Benny Distefano's Mitt Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:47 PM (#1008746)
Glaus is still young and could still have his peak years in front of him, but his health and inability to play 3B make him just another grossly overpaid 1B.

Glaus is certainly worth a gamble, but not a $45-million one. Good for him, bad for DBacks.
   48. GregQ Posted: December 09, 2004 at 06:56 PM (#1008761)
I wonder how much this seasons higher than expected free agency signings have to do with the fact that Major League Baseball is no longer sharing bidding information, or whatever they were sharing, between teams?
   49. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 09, 2004 at 07:09 PM (#1008793)
I couldn't care less if this is good for Arizona; I'm happy for Troy Glaus. I really hope he can stay healthy, because he's quite a player when he's on.

I think that ZiPS is low, btw. I had him at 248/354/499, but that's in Angels Stadium, so I think the BOB will put those numbers up a notch.
   50. Matt Welch Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:06 PM (#1008947)
Amen, Black Hawk. Bonus points that he can't hurt his former team.
   51. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:08 PM (#1008953)
Bonus points that he can't hurt his former team.

I guess you're discounting the possibility of an Arizona-California World Series?
   52. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:12 PM (#1008963)
I just listened to the press conference on mlb.com announcing Troy's signing. He insists that his right shoulder is fine and that he'll play 3B next year. We'll see. I certainly hope he stays healthy there for the next four years. Don't know what happens to Tracy, unfortunately. And I also think that the zips is low, especially at the BOB for 81 games. We'll also see. Finally, the D-backs said that they would welcome Sexson back if he accepted arbitration. I'd actually be tickled to death if both Glaus and Sexson played in AZ in 2005.
   53. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:12 PM (#1008964)
I guess you're discounting the possibility of an Arizona-California World Series?

What time would those games start? 10PM, eastern?
   54. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:23 PM (#1008982)
the D-backs said that they would welcome Sexson back if he accepted arbitration.

Sayin' ain't the same as meanin'. If Sexson says yes, Moorad will poop his pants. And Garagiola's too, while he's at it.
   55. Kurt Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:23 PM (#1008983)
If true, the Blue Jays need to re-examine how they establish value on a player. Why bother?

I don't quite agree. It's possible that Delgado's "real value" is $6 million to the Jays and the analysis is correct.

The real "why bother" is, why bother actually making that offer? It just makes the team look bad. The usual piffle about "going in a different direction, thanks for the memories" seems like a much better course to take.
   56. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:29 PM (#1008997)
Sayin' ain't the same as meanin'. If Sexson says yes, Moorad will poop his pants. And Garagiola's too, while he's at it.

The question is, from happiness or from misery?

I think AZ will be fine if Sexson returned in 05.
   57. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:31 PM (#1009004)
I don't quite agree. It's possible that Delgado's "real value" is $6 million to the Jays and the analysis is correct.

Now remember, this is the same Blue Jay team that two months ago signed Frank Catalanotto to an extension that will pay him $2.7M in 2005 and 2006. You aren't suspicious of an analysis that concludes that Delgado is worth only twice as much as Catalanotto?
   58. Larry Bowa Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:34 PM (#1009010)
I love you, Bill Mueller.

I am still laughing at that line.

Theo Epstein is, no doubt, laughing at Mr. Moorad.

Ladies and Gentlemen... please welcome The Worst Contract of the 2004 Offseason.
   59. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:37 PM (#1009017)
Ladies and Gentlemen... please welcome The Worst Contract of the 2004 Offseason.

Eh, Larry, this might be a case of premature ejaculation.

Just wait for the Mets to dole out $55M over 5 years for Sexson.
   60. Craig in MN Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:39 PM (#1009025)
Glaus's ZIPS predictions are almost identical to Koskie's. I know Koskie is 4 years older, but Koskie seems cheap at half the price, at least in the short term.
   61. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:42 PM (#1009032)
Just wait for the Mets to dole out $55M over 5 years for Sexson.

Now, come on. I've been relatively nice to the Diamondbacks on this one, levski. Not nearly as critical as some others, anyway.

Why pick on the Mets, when you could just as easily use this retort:

I don't know, Larry. $21 million for three years of Jaret Wright is pretty bad, too.

- or -

Just wait for the Yankees to give $22 million for three years of Eric Milton.

I mean, it's much more fun to zing the Yankees, isn't it?

(Seriously, no way they go five years for Sexson. They might overpay for four. Frankly, I remain convinced he's going to end up in Seattle.)
   62. Dr. Vaux Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:47 PM (#1009046)
Anyhow, the "market correction" is a thing of the past,,which helps those clubs willing to pay these prices, like the Yankees (though they aren't paying them for the right guys), Red Sox, Angels, possibly... I really don't know who. The teams who are giving out these ridiculous deals so far, Arizona... Washington... San Francisco... those aren't teams I'd have expected to be doing it, but it can't help the Braves, White Sox, and other teams that won't do it.

I'm just ranting aimlessly, of course, but I like to know what's going on, and right now I've got no idea.
   63. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 09, 2004 at 08:51 PM (#1009057)
I mean, it's much more fun to zing the Yankees, isn't it?

Not really. Its monopoly money to them, whereas its real cash for the Mets and the other 28 MLB teams.
   64. Chris Dial Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:02 PM (#1009083)
I don't believe it is anything but monopoly money for any of them (wrt ability to pay, rather than a willingness to pay - see Pohlad, Carl).
   65. Imperabo Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:37 PM (#1009141)
I agree with everyone else. Glaus has only had one season that justifies this kind of money, and he's 28 now. I don't want to think about how much my Dodgers are going to have to pay Beltre.
   66. Old Matt Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:41 PM (#1009155)
The Mets just got ######.

###### up the ass.
   67. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:49 PM (#1009168)
Sorry, Sam. I was just comparing 1B men. OK, how about this:

Just wait for the Mariners to dole out $55m/5 yrs for Sexson.
   68. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:50 PM (#1009170)
And I have given up saying anything bad about the Yankees. Why bother?

It's like insulting a fat woman for being fat.
   69. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:51 PM (#1009171)
At least everyone is talking now about how the DBacks have inflated the market with this deal, and not about how the Mets did it with Benson.
   70. Gainsay Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:56 PM (#1009182)
My vote for worst contract goes to Dustin Hermanson, 2 years ~ $5 million. It's not for as much money, but it seems to have no upside. If Glaus is healthy (big if) this contract could wind up be decent.

As far as the "market correction" goes, I think a lot of teams just have more money to spend this year as many of the bad contracts from 5 years ago are off the books now. Does anybody have yearly tallies for how much cash has come off the books total? This could just be a case of a lot teams having spending money for the first time in years.
   71. deb Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:57 PM (#1009186)
I don't think this is a bad signing, maybe they overpaid, but the way he hit the ball even when hurt was amazing plus if he is healthy he is above average defense.

But the problem I see is the manager will be stupid and not sit Glaus on carpet. He can't play on that artificial stuff and needs to ride the pine when the team is playing on it. So with that I predict he will get hurt the 2nd game the Snakes plays Minnesota.
   72. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:59 PM (#1009192)
he will get hurt the 2nd game the Snakes plays Minnesota.

When is that happening? Game 2 of the 2006 WS?
   73. The Polish Sausage Racer Posted: December 09, 2004 at 09:59 PM (#1009194)
So, Dan, I've been wondering, when you put these Zips projections on these transactions, are they corrected for switching leagues and stadiums? Or in other words is this the projection for Glaus with the Angels or the DBacks?
   74. deb Posted: December 09, 2004 at 10:22 PM (#1009266)
[psst, levski go look at the Snakes schedule, their interleague games include the Twins.]
   75. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 10:25 PM (#1009279)
deb, thanks. i actually knew that, i was just being facetious.

glaus doesn't need astro turf to blow out his shoulder.

watch him do it in spring training.
   76. The Original SJ Posted: December 09, 2004 at 10:31 PM (#1009295)
Will insurance cover the whole deal?
   77. Joshemy Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:05 PM (#1009364)
Whee... Delgado/Sexson will now get more money! Yay!
   78. 1k5v3L Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:10 PM (#1009369)
Anaheim used the money saved on Glaus to make a run at Finley. Rosenthal at foxsports.com reporting that ANA will sign Finley, 2 years, 10 million per year. I think this may mean they've given up on Beltran and may focus on starting pitching instead. (see dugout for link)
   79. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:22 PM (#1009396)
Rosenthal at foxsports.com reporting that ANA will sign Finley, 2 years, 10 million per year.

That's a joke, right? Are we talking about Steve Finley? Ten million a year for Steve Finley? I mean, he's a good player and all, but I'd have never guessed he'd command that kind of a payday.

That has to be good news for the Yankees. I really felt the Angels were going to be the real competition for Beltran.
   80. Mikαεl Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:31 PM (#1009414)
Rosenthal at foxsports.com reporting that ANA will sign Finley, 2 years, 10 million per year.

####.

The twin keys to the Yankees blowing the offseason are

1) signing Milton
2) not signing Beltran

Beltran would practically guarantee another 100-win season for the Yankees. He's that big an upgrade.

I sure hope kevin's right about the Astros. Or that Rosenthal's wrong about the Angels - tough to imagine -5,000 UZR Finley in the Angels outfield.
   81. Sam M. Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:31 PM (#1009416)
There's still the Astros and now Boras is going to want 18 mil from the Yankees or no soap.

I'm not so sure the Astros are a legitimate suitor. If they are, then you're right. But I think the Angels were the one team that might have fought it out with the Yankees in dollars, driving up the price in a way I doubt Drayton would be willing to do.

We shall see. Despite what's happening in the $7-10 million range, I still suspect the limited number of teams who can go past $15 million will make that the de facto ceiling for the elite names.
   82. cassius44 Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:39 PM (#1009433)
<<sigh>>

As I gaze out my office window at the BOB, several things run through my mind:

1. God, I hope he's healthy.

2. He did hit 7 HR in 100 AB after the injury, which is 7 HR more than Richie Sexson's hit in the same span. Richie was asking for similar dollars, if not more -- and he'll prolly get it.

3. I also would prefer a strategy of rebuilding to a strategy of reloading. Reloading w/ what? If we get rid of RJ, we've got exactly one decent starting pitcher (Brandon Webb). Assuming Glaus is healthy, our second best offensive player is 37 and coming off elbow surgery. And the players we're considering "reloading" w/ are retreads like Royce Clayton, Russ Ortiz and Shawn Estes. Better to save our money and spend it on something good.

4. Our best prospects (i.e., the guys like Carlos Quentin, Conor Jackson, and Sergio Santos) are not that far away. I'd be willing to wait a year (if it takes that long) before we plug guys like that into the lineup. In the meantime, trade RJ for some longterm help in the [cue flashing neon sign] >> PITCHING
!!! << department, where we need the most help.

5. Not all Arizona fans are morons, thank you. Like most of the rest of you, they want to know the management of the teams they support make an effort. I think Diamondbacks' management is trying, but they underestimate our willingness to wait out a rebuilding period. Implement a sound strategy based on player development and grounded in fiscal responsibility and we'll support you. That's what this organization should have done from the start.

6. Thank goodness I didn't drop the $150 it woulda cost for a Sexson jersey.
   83. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:56 PM (#1009465)
Anaheim used the money saved on Glaus to make a run at Finley.

This has to be a sick ####### joke. I'd rather have Glaus play center than Finley.
   84. The Artist Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:57 PM (#1009466)

That's a joke, right? Are we talking about Steve Finley? Ten million a year for Steve Finley? I mean, he's a good player and all, but I'd have never guessed he'd command that kind of a payday.

That has to be good news for the Yankees. I really felt the Angels were going to be the real competition for Beltran.


Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sabean doesnt like any of those $10 million players...

Why on earth wouldnt Anaheim sign a 1b and move Erstard to where he has value ? A Delgado perhaps /
   85. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 10, 2004 at 12:08 AM (#1009488)
Why on earth wouldnt Anaheim sign a 1b and move Erstard to where he has value ? A Delgado perhaps /

Because of Casey Kotchman.

Kotchman, as we all know, needs more time in AAA. He only hit .372 in the PCL last year. It makes perfect sense to put a 40-year old left fielder in center and your Gold Glove CF at 1B while your 1B prospect tries to master minor league pitching.
   86. deb Posted: December 10, 2004 at 12:12 AM (#1009494)
Why on earth wouldnt Anaheim sign a 1b and move Erstard to where he has value ? A Delgado perhaps

Erstad ain't gonna move back to center. He wears a brace on his leg and just can't run out there and the brace would break everytime he leaves his feet.
   87. 1k5v3L Posted: December 10, 2004 at 12:26 AM (#1009518)
Sorry, Black Hawk, no joke. Thanks for saving AZ.

By preventing Joe Jr from giving Fins $9M/year.

cassius44, I hope I didn't offend you.
   88. J. Cross Posted: December 10, 2004 at 12:30 AM (#1009533)
That's a joke, right? Are we talking about Steve Finley? Ten million a year for Steve Finley? I mean, he's a good player and all...

well, it must be a joke. It's absolutely absurd. Steve Finley isn't even that a good player. UZR has him as brutal defensively and ZiPS predicts a massive dropoff: 235/.303/.394 !!! He can't possibly be that bad, right? The guys is 40. In fairness I should add that the projection is a Dodger and he shoudl hit better in Anaheim.

I think that's too ridiculous to happen.
   89. Erik, Pinch-Commenter Posted: December 10, 2004 at 01:48 AM (#1009741)
As an Angel fan I'm about ready to #### my pants right now, if all these rumors combine and all become true, then this will suck just as much as the Vlad signing rocked, actually it will suck way more than signing Vlad rocked.

I've really been trying hard to give Stoneman the benifit of the doubt,a s he never QUITE does soemthing so stupid that he proves he's an idiot and he occationally follows it up with smart moves, but I'm getting really worried.

The Glaus signing was for too many years / too much money for a guy that has that much risk but as is typical with Glaus, people are looking at his upside. If he's healthy he'll play solid D at third and put up huge numbers at the plate. A common theory among Angel fans is that the teams aggressive style has hurt Glaus much more than any other player and prevented his growth (what other players have their best year around age 24/25?). This will be a good chance to study that effect. Glaus is the type of player capable of putting up a .400/.600 season so I think this signing has a chance to work out for the DBacks. Also the team needs to at least show that it has some interest in winning to the fans or no one will show up.
   90. cassius44 Posted: December 10, 2004 at 02:29 AM (#1009816)
cassius44, I hope I didn't offend you.

That's alright, man. Just fighting the popular misperception that all Arizona fans are weak. I've encountered the type of fan to which you refer, but I can attest that at least some of us are legit.

Here's to 50 HR for Glaus in '05!
   91. Barca Posted: December 10, 2004 at 04:03 AM (#1009996)
"Why on earth wouldnt Anaheim sign a 1b and move Erstard to where he has value ? A Delgado perhaps /

Because of Casey Kotchman."

And Morales.
But that just gives them more reasons to move Erstad to CF.
   92. 1k5v3L Posted: December 10, 2004 at 04:05 AM (#1010005)
but I can attest that at least some of us are legit.

I know we are.
   93. shoewizard Posted: December 10, 2004 at 04:17 AM (#1010044)
I am surprised everyone is missing the boat on the d backs numbers. I posted this several days ago. Just substitute Glaus for Nomar and Russ Ortiz for Radke.
But the numbers make sense, the D Backs payroll will still be about 70 million next year, with RJ on the team. More on my Glaus thoughts later.

============================================================
What would you say if I told you that I figured out a way that the D Backs could keep RJ, keep payroll under 70 million, which is about what it was last year, AND be competitive in 2005? You would say I was on drugs.

But keep in mind, the D Backs have alot of fairly high priced free agents whose salary is coming off the books. Sexson, Mantei, Bautista, Colbrun, Baerga, Reynolds, Sparks all combined to make 25 million last year and none of them are coming back.

So here is what I have in mind:

Starting Pitching:
1.) RJ, 16,000,000
2.) Webb 1,500,000 (I can't remember exactly what he gets this year, that is an estimate. If anyone knows his exact deal, please respond)
3.) Brad Radke 9,500,000 I think this is the guy we should sign and 9 million for 3 years might get it done. He was offered 23 million for 3 years by the Twins (7.7 mil per year) We would be overpaying a little bit, but he is 200+ innings with great control, something we need badly.
4.) Casey Fossum: OK, give the kid another chance. 500,000
5.) Fill the 5th spot with a kid, Gonzalez, Nippert, whoever is doing better, league minimum 350,000.

TOP 5 Starters: 27.35 Million

Bullpen: Keep Aquino, Valverde, Koplove and Villareal. combined they do not make more than 2 million. We need a couple of lefty relievers, and guys we had last year were pretty bad. (Randolph and Choate) Gosling has some promise but has not shown too much yet. We have kids in the minors who might be able to step in. But we may need to go out and sign or trade for a decent lefty reliever. Even if we do that, the bullpen is not going to cost us over 5 million. Probably more like 3 or 4. I'll just use 4 for the sake of arguement.

Bullpen 4 million

Total for pitching staff: Approx 31.35 Million

Catching: We have Koyie Hill and Chris Snyder penciled in. They both can hit some, and we also have Robbie Hammock on the 40 man roster, who can play any where.

These guys are all making league minimum. Just say 1.1 million total

Infield:
1b- Keep Hillenbrand. He will probably get about 4 million in arbitration.
2b- Have a 3 way battle in spring between Cintron, Hairston and Kata for the starter. But keep all 3. They all will make less than 500,000, so you are talking about 1.2 million for the 3 of them.
SS- Nomar Garciaparra: He was offered 8 million plus incentives from the Cubs. Offer him 10 million for a one year deal. It's worth a shot that he will stay healthy if only signed for one year. He would be a big bat, and a bug name with "cache". If it works out, we can try to sign him next year to a long term deal.
3b- Chad Tracy: Stick with this kid. 500,000

Infield 15.7 Million

Outfield:
LF- Gonzo 12,000,000
Cf- Terrero: 350,000 Play the kid. He is a legit 5 tool guy and showing better plate discipline in the Dominican Winter League. Maybe he can turn into something special. Won't know unless you really give him a shot
RF- Sign Jermaine Dye or Richard Hildago for 6 million
I would prefer Hildago. More upside.

Bench: Connor Jackson, Josh Kroeger 350 each, total 700,000

Outfield 19 .05 million

Total 67.2 Million

That would still give the team 2-3 million to play with, which if I was in charge, and could go all the way up to 70 million, I would put into the bullpen.

Lineup then would look like this

Terrero CF
Hairston 2b (my choice)
Nomar ss
Gonzo LF
Hildago RF
Hillenbrand 1b
Tracy 3b
Hill C

Rotation:
Johnson
Radke
Webb
Fossum
?

Closer: Valverde or Aquino
Set Up: Villareal, Koplove, unidentified lefty.

Then, after 2005, we either let Randy Walk, and free up 16 million, and go after Tim Hudson or Jason Schmidt, or sign Randy to another 2 years for less money if he still looks like he can keep going. If we can't resign Nomar, we still have 10 million left over to go after a hitter off the FA market after 2005 as well.

Now isnt this alot better than wasting money on guys like Royce Clayton, Shawn Estes, Tony Batista, etc etc etc??
   94. shoewizard Posted: December 10, 2004 at 04:36 AM (#1010074)
I dont think the risk on glaus is as great as people are saying here.

The biggest risk is that long term, his rotator cuff can't take the throws, and he ends up at first base, and we are overpaying a couple of million for a first baseman.

The guy played 158 games a year for 4 years before the rotator cuff injury, so if the surgery corrected that problem, (as much as can be) there is no reason to think he cannot return to durability.

He was hot as hell before the injury, and even came back in September and hit 7 homers in 90 at bats, then he went 4 for 11 with a couple of homers in the playoffs.

I know he does not hit for hight average, but he walks alot, hits alot of homers, he should be the type of player that is well regarded around here.

Yes, D Backs overpaid a couple of million a year. What were they supposed to do? They have to get SOMEONE in here. And if you look at my numbers in the previous post, while not exact, they are pretty close. The payroll won't be increasing this year, even if they sign ortiz to 9 million a year.

So what is the big problem?

I think Glaus will have a good career in Bank one ballpark, I really do.
   95. Sam M. Posted: December 10, 2004 at 05:07 AM (#1010150)
Thanks, D'Backs.

Mets Cornered By the Market

From the article:

The Arizona Diamondbacks signed Troy Glaus to a four-year, $45-million contract yesterday, blowing up the free-agent market for corner infielders. The deal will certainly impact the Mets' desire to fill their first-base void with either Carlos Delgado or Richie Sexson. . . .

One major-league official sympathetic to the Mets' needs called the Glaus contract "a joke."

"He has spent virtually one year on the disabled list in the past two years," the official said, "and gets a huge contract."


Can you say $50 million for Sexson or Delgado? I knew you could . . . .
   96. Robert S. Posted: December 10, 2004 at 05:10 AM (#1010156)
So what is the big problem?

None of these acquisitions gets the team to a World Series or makes them better in the long-term.

This is ownership signing names to appear competitive with no regard for the actual value or the team's actual needs. This is Garagiola paying for past performance and bidding against himself again (Bell, Williams). This is Kendrick continuing his feud with Colangelo, rather than build a real baseball team.
   97. Larry Bowa Posted: December 10, 2004 at 05:27 AM (#1010190)
Dear Mr. Garagiola,

Repeat after me: "Would you like fries with that?"

No. Try again. "Would you LIKE fries with that?"

You're still not getting it. Put a little oomph into it. "Would YOU like FRIES with THAT?"

There you go! Now you have it. Consider yourself prepped for your next career.

Your pal,
Larry
   98. shoewizard Posted: December 10, 2004 at 05:47 AM (#1010219)
Well, I am not going to argue an uphill battle here.
It is just my opinion that Glaus will be productive and earn his 45 million, or close to it, in his 4 years in Arizona.

One thing you guys are forgetting is he was having alot of trouble with his eyes, and then he got the lasik surgery, and that really had alot to do with his hot start last year.

Based on what I saw in September and October, I am really not that worried about his shoulder.

Does one signing get us back to the world series? No. Does two, (i.e. getting Ortiz) No. But if these two guys join the team, and they perform to expectations, ( mine, not yours ha ha) and the young players improve, who knows how good they can be.

The bottom line here is the team will still keep payroll around 70 million, they are still bringing in young players and giving them playing time, and they are trying to add some good veterans.

I just don't see this as negatively as everyone else. I really think Glaus will be good in Arizona, certainly better than ZIPS projects.
   99. Sam M. Posted: December 10, 2004 at 05:50 AM (#1010225)
The bottom line here is the team will still keep payroll around 70 million, they are still bringing in young players and giving them playing time, and they are trying to add some good veterans.

But if they're paying Glaus and Ortiz an average of $19 million a year between them, do you honestly think that signing them was the best use of that amount of money, shoewizard? I get your point about the total payroll, and trying to improve within the context of that amount. But you still want them to do it in the most efficient, intelligent way -- and it just doesn't seem to me these deals meet that test.
   100. shoewizard Posted: December 10, 2004 at 06:09 AM (#1010255)
But if they're paying Glaus and Ortiz an average of $19 million a year between them, do you honestly think that signing them was the best use of that amount of money, shoewizard? I get your point about the total payroll, and trying to improve within the context of that amount. But you still want them to do it in the most efficient, intelligent way -- and it just doesn't seem to me these deals meet that test.

Sometimes you do what you can. Does it occur to you that many free agents , when contacted by the d backs, say "thanks, but no thanks, not interested in going there" Are there better players to sign?, sure maybe. But be specific. Who should they have signed, and for how much? And would that free agent talk to them?

Sure, maybe JD Drew would have been a better signing than glaus. How do you know they did not call Drew's agent and he said JD was not interested in Arizona?

I was hoping they would sign Brad Radke or Matt Clement. He was mentioned as a guy that the d backs had interest in in the local papers. But nothing happened there. Why? I don't know. But guys were not beating down the door to come here.

Obviously we don't have the best front office in the world. (Understatement of the year I guess).
That doesnt mean everything they do is wrong.

Sexson is a much bigger risk than Glaus. And maybe Delgado has no interest in coming here, or would have cost more than 11 per year anyway. Who knows.

It is easy to sit here on the boards and criticize this,but some of the criticism does not seem to be taking into account all factors. Not the least of which is almost every free agent we look at is going to ask for 10% more from us than they would from any other team right now, so you can't look at everything in terms of how much of a contract they offered, becaus they are going to have to overpay no matter what.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
danielj
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.9869 seconds
66 querie(s) executed