If you can add 1 person..

Bradley still missed 1/4th of the season last year, and his 126 games played was his highest total in four years. I'm all for signing a guy that had a monster year, but it would be great if he'd be able to stay healthy and play more than 140 games more than once in his entire career.

Games played by year:

2000: 42 (part of the season in minor leagues)
2001: 77 (part of the season in minor leagues)
2002: 98
2003: 101
2004: 141
2005: 75
2006: 96
2007: 61
2008: 126

I wouldn't mind Zaun as a guy who could help out with resting Tek. That's about it.

Do you think the Red Sox will re-sign Varitek then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BINGLEBOP

Bradley still missed 1/4th of the season last year, and his 126 games played was his highest total in four years. I'm all for signing a guy that had a monster year, but it would be great if he'd be able to stay healthy and play more than 140 games more than once in his entire career.

Games played by year:

2000: 42 (part of the season in minor leagues)
2001: 77 (part of the season in minor leagues)
2002: 98
2003: 101
2004: 141
2005: 75
2006: 96
2007: 61
2008: 126

---

which is why, despite his numbers he'll go cheap. it's low risk high reward type player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BINGLEBOP

Do you think the Red Sox will re-sign Varitek then?

---

no because he'll ask for too much money and probably get it somewhere. If he can't get the big dollars, the Sox will take him back because there are no other viable options that are better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Alot of those big long term deals actually have panned out for teams, specifically amongst the pitchers. I believe it was Houston who said quite a few months ago that deals longer than 3 years at more than 10 mil per were in most cases poor, or less than 50% were good in the end (something like that). Examination found just the opposite however, most of them do pan out. However the few that don't (hampton type) really hurt a team.

**edit...in fact it was ohms not houston who made the statement. We found at best it was one to one good to bad, deals longer than 4 years big dollar contracts. Its a big risk long term....many times it pays off, but in alot of occassions it does not.

---

Yea, it was me.

My real point is that the damage is too great when the deal isn't paying off. Very few players can maintain the level of performance over 7 to 10 years that would require signing them to a top 1% level contract. So, you might be getting a good deal for 2-3 years (better performance then you're paying for), but over the remaining 4-7 years of the contract the team is usually paying through the nose for much more average performance. Having those resources tied up for an average performance can definitely harm a team's ability to build and improve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pavelb1

And hit a wall in the 2007 playoffs and the beginning of 2008.

I see his arm falling off in 2009.

---

Having some bad games does not mean he "hit a wall." So, basically, he worked 240 innings in 2007, and thus sucked in the playoffs because of that workload, and than rested all winter, but come April, still sucked...and then, magically, come May 1, he went back to pitching like he did in the 2007 regular season?

Pitchers have bad games. Pitchers have strings of bad games. It doesn't always mean that anything's wrong with them. The entire body of evidence indicates that Sabathia is a very durable pitcher and able to handle relatively high workloads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BINGLEBOP

Do you think the Red Sox will re-sign Varitek then?

---

I'm hopeful. I still think it could work if Tek catches 100-110 game or so. I think he's done a lot of work and if you can cut his games some, he would be more effective.

For the Mets... I'd really, really like to say K-Rod, but looking seriously at our needs, it has to be Orlando Hudson

For the Phils, they really only need a outfielder because Burrell might end up leaving Philly. Who's our new outfielder?

Eric Hinske - He's not worth that much, has decent pop, and if he stuggles we got Geoff Genkins off the bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phillies999

For the Phils, they really only need a outfielder because Burrell might end up leaving Philly. Who's our new outfielder?

Eric Hinske - He's not worth that much, has decent pop, and if he stuggles we got Geoff Genkins off the bench.

---

If you're not improving you're regressing. The Phillies better do more than just replace Burrell if they want a chance to repeat. They could use another high level starting pitcher.