If they knew that Burrell wanted to go, it's an absolutely insanely stupid move not to have offered him arbitration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
Printable View
If they knew that Burrell wanted to go, it's an absolutely insanely stupid move not to have offered him arbitration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
They are the defending world series champions...they must do something right
I knew somebody was going to say this.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
But, they have a new GM now, and while their new GM was a prominent front office figure in building the World Series team, this is still his first GM job and he very well may turn out to be a lousy GM, even if he was a good front office advisor.
At any rate, even if they still have the same GM, having won the World Series doesn't mean that they're incapable of making bad moves. Winning the World Series doesn't mean that every move you made leading up to that win was good, nor does it mean that every move you make immediately after that win will be good.
and maybe they didnt want HIM back and were afraid if they offerd arb. he would accept and we would have a "Maddux issue"
Maddux was offerd arbitration a long time ago (I think 98) and he accepted it when they idnt want him to. The braves ahd every intention of resigning him but think back then if u didnt offer arb. you could not negotiate until may or something liek that. I think i remember reading about it with the whole Clemens retire unretire crep
If he accepted, than they have a solid player back for one year. Instead, they get no compensation for him, resign a player that has provided basically the same exact value as Burrell, except that he's 5 years older and thus much more likely to fall off a cliff, to a 3 year deal, AND give up their first round draft pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
I am not at all saying it was a good stratagy im just saying maybe that was the motivation. maybe THEY wanted HIM gone for some reason. The same reason the Jets cut Kevin Mawae. couild have been a clubhouse problem even tho a good player.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...lick-chimes-in
Quote:
According to former Phillies GM Pat Gillick, this [that Ibanez could have been had for less] might not be true. While hanging around Clearwater, the Phillies home for Spring Training, Gillick remarked that the Cubs had a strong interest in Ibanez and were pushing pretty hard. Lou Piniella and Ibanez shared a solid relationship dating back to Sweet Lou’s managerial tenure in Seattle and was extremely high on the left-handed left-fielder.
The Cubs desired a left-handed outfielder and apparently Ibanez topped their list. If this is true, then the Phillies acted similarly to the Braves with Derek Lowe.
Even if they felt that Ibanez would get signed before they could get him I still think they should have walked away from it or at least not 3 years. Oh well though I'll enjoy our pick this year :p
Yeah. They should've let the Cubs signed him.Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
Riiight...you won't be saying that when he hits .295, 28, 110 this year.
Yes, I will, because Bobby Abreu, Pat Burrell, and Adam Dunn are all better players and got ridiculously cheaper contracts (and didn't cost draft picks too!).Quote:
Originally Posted by skudplayr
As HGM already pointed out there are other players who bring the same/better offensive value all while being cheaper, younger and on a shorter contract.Quote:
Originally Posted by skudplayr
Even if he produces like that this year what are the odds he does it the next year and the year after? Not to mention watching him in the OF makes one wish for the sweet embrace of eye cancer and cancels out much of the offensive value he brings.
Heh. Stealing lines from Lookout Landing, I see, eh? :) Don't worry, I won't tell! ;) :pQuote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
I thought it was a good one :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Coach Owens
Just don't claim credit for it! I'm sure it took a bit for Jeff to think that one up. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by 200tang