I've been reading rumors that the Red Sox signed Renteria for four years with a PLAN to trade him before the end of his contract. Considering the Sox farm system's strength in middle infielders, it's quite possible that the Sox felt that Edgar was a "safe" choice for 1 or 2 years, and then could be traded with relatively little pain when Hanley or Dustin was ready.
Anyway, I HAD to comment on this because I don't think that kind of signing makes much sense. And it reflects the misconception people have about the trade value of free agents.
A player signed as a Free Agent has, by definition, negative trade value. That is, if anyone else was willing to pay Renteria $10 million per year, then they they would have signed him as a Free Agent.
For example, let's say the Dodgers thought Renteria was worth $9 million per year for four years. Then, immediately after signing with the Red Sox for $40 million over 4 years, Edgar's value in a trade TO the Dodgers is NEGATIVE $4 million.
So you almost guarantee that you will have to eat some of his salary if you trade him. Unless of course he becomes a superstar after age 30 like, say, Barry Bonds. (As he's already earning 7 figures, he would REALLY need to turn it up to have any trade value).
That means signing him at "4-for-40" with a plan to trade him when Pedroia is ready, is a lot like signing him at something like "2-for-26". Not a good idea to spend that kind of money on any shortstop not named A-Rod or Miggy. I realize there wasn't much in the way of free agent shortstops. But for those kind of dollars, you're better off keeping Pedro, signing a replacement-level shortstop, and having money left over.
Clay
