Printable View
A.J. Burnett lives in Maryland and is considering signing with the O's - at the very least, he has said he wouldn't veto the idea. Very early yet. However, allow me a brief moment of religion.
Dear Lord,
Please. Please, please, pleeeeease.
Signed, the-oriole-with-a-caret-on-the-end, Amen. :cool:
So you want a 15 million dollar injury machine?
Wouldn't you rather have Derek Lowe?
D-Lowe wants to go back to Boston.Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
Edit:
I suppose a cite would have been a bit more polite...
Lowe wants to return to Red Sox
Good pick up if it is for 2 years @ 10 million a season.Over that price/length then the Sox should back off due age & make up concerns.Quote:
Originally Posted by StreetMedic
And, unfortunately, methinks he's another Boras guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Boras is killing professional baseball with the contracts he has these guys sign.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreetMedic
As said it is Boras the AGENT of Lowe & thus it is Lowe's decision - if he wants to return to the Sox THEN the price is arbitrary.It is obvious that he "could" get 15/20 million (per season) elsewhereQuote:
Derek Lowe is putting Boston first on his list of preferred destinations now that he's a free agent.
Lowe told this reporter that while money is important, he wants to go to a quality organization committed to winning, and no organization, in his mind, fits that description better than Boston.
Funnily though Boras has had a "decent" relationship,overall,with the Sox (see Dice-K & Drew contracts)
Derek Lowe has "make up concerns"? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Lowe's easily going to get at least 4 years at at least $12 million per.
Again HGM you read what you want.... Yes he did have "make up" concerns & that is ONE of the reasons he was NOT resigned by the Sox post 04,if you remember (mood swings/loss of confidence are "make up" concerns) & no one has ARGUED that he couldn't get more but at this point in his career & at THIRTY FIVE giving him a 4 year deal is a risk that Boston should not endeavour.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Lowe's own comments concerning 2004 & his role:
Quote:
"I was the 10th pitcher on the staff going into the (Angels) series," Lowe said. "The only reason I got into Game 3 was because I was the last guy standing."
I don't know what you're talking about with this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
1) I've never heard of any make-up concerns about Lowe, which is why I asked.
2) And I also was just simply stating that there's no way Lowe would sign for 2 years/$20 mil, and I know that you weren't implying anything beyond that that's all you'd give for him and that you don't think that Boston should give him more than that.
Lowe was criticized to be "moody",self centred,unreliable & worst of all "not a big time " pitcher leading to demotion to pen duties in '03 & '04Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Quote:
Known for incredible talent, at times questionable mental makeup, and a knack for having the highest highs and lowest lows a player can find on a baseball field, Derek Lowe
thus my original Post & again IF he wants to play for the Sox then 10 million per season seems fair.;)
If Lowe has a questionable mental makeup, it indeed isn't showing itself over the past few seasons, particularly late in the season and in the playoffs. Perhaps he's "over it?" It's kind of like the argument about the "psyche" of the Rays in another thread (except this actually has some sort of backing). If it doesn't show itself in the numbers, it's fairly moot.
That said, I'd be hesitant to offer a pitcher of his age a deal longer than 3 years. I think the biggest concern with Lowe would be that his age (He will be at or near 40 by the time his coming contract is up) might prevent him from repeating the numbers which will earn him the deal he's about to get, thus making the deal a "bad deal."
Lowe wasn't demoted to pen duties in either season, although he did in the playoffs pitch out of the pen in 3 games over the course of both those years, although he also started in the playoffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
I'm not sure why or how he got a "not a big time pitcher" label, considering he was a very successful closer and a good postseason record.
Moody and self-centered, maybe, I don't know the guy. But frankly, anything claiming he was unreliable or "not a big time pitcher" is bunk to me, because what actually has happened completely contradicts that.
I don't remember all the details, but Derek Lowe got caught doing the humpty with a Fox Sports reporter shortly after he moved to LA. Both of them were married at the time, but not to each other.
and?Quote:
Originally Posted by beerchaser
you're asking me? Like I said, I don't remember all the details, and I don't feel like going to look.Quote:
Originally Posted by etothep
Was just curious what it had to do with his being a free agent? I'm gonna go out on a limb & say he isn't the only big name bball player to cheat on his wifeQuote:
Originally Posted by beerchaser
was she a hot reporter? if so, good for him.
Yay! I hope they bring him back! He was awesome!
that'd be a very long limb. There have been plenty who have done that. But it does add to the "character issues" surrounding Lowe. Makes no difference to me though, I'd be fine with it if he decides to come back to LA at a reasonable price, but from what I've heard I don't think that's going to happen. The Dodgers will have to find pitching elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by etothep
Dude, I really don't know if I'd be getting all hot and bothered over Burnett. He pitched through the pain this year because he knew money was on the line. In past years, at every little twinge (and with the number if arm surgeries he's already had, he feels twinges A LOT) he shuts himself down. I wouldn't be too eager to grab Burnett.Quote:
Originally Posted by oriole^
So...what...the owners who agree to these contracts are somehow forced in to it? Nope, they sign these stupid deals of their own free will. Blame idiot GMs and owners for caving in or signing ridiculous contracts.Quote:
Originally Posted by phightinphils
No, blame the fans for giving the owners the money, thereby allowing players to ask for more money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
It really pains me every time this topic comes up. It's pretty damn simple. If the players weren't being given ridiculous amounts of money, that money would just simply be in the pockets of the owners. The players are just getting their share of the ridiculous profits that WE, THE FANS, provide.
It's not ruining professional baseball. It's a sign that professional baseball is thriving.
I do agree with you, Houston. I just think that, if you want to blame someone for a stupid contract signing, you blame the GM or owner who agreed to it, not the agent. If the owner/GM doesn't agree to a deal, THERE IS NO DEAL.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
That's what it comes down to for me. If every team in baseball would have told Alex Rodriguez and Scott Boras to take a hike when he asked for a quarter of a billion dollars eight years ago, they would have lowered their demands, but Tom Hicks said yes. There's no hypnosis or trickery there... GM's and owners have the right to say "thanks but no thanks". I NEVER fault the players for going where the money is, because in any other profession on earth, somebody would be questioned or criticized for not taking the pay increase. I don't know anybody here that would turn down more money for less money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Sure, you have "hometown" players (who were brought up through the farm system, not who actually grew up in the city) say that they want to spend their career with the team, but all players say that. It's good, positive PR. They shouldn't say anything else! Then when they're free agents, every destination is "one at the top of their list". In those cases, when they turn their back on their "hometown" team for one that offered a larger contract, I understand people get upset, but that's the reality of it. Players put themselves (and their families) first, and usually at the top of the list is the team that offers the most money.
Yep, very good point. Professional sports is the only profession where I've ever heard of people being criticized for wanting to earn more. I guess it's because most sports fans are "average Joes" and it's hard to comprehend the amount of money athletes make, but still, it's basically hypocrisy, as most people know damn well that if presented with the opportunity to make $100+ million, they'd fall all over themselves trying to take it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BINGLEBOP
Um no---- executives of some Banks (& companies) are being criticized today for their earnings/pay level & "golden parachute" clauses,eg AIG & their "spa" outing.:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
But in general your point is correct :p
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
there she is if you guys want to see herCode:http://www.fanunity.com/carolyn-hughes/