From
Jon Heyman:
Things appear to be heating up in the Mark Teixeira talks, and baseball people believe now that Teixeira will have a new team before Christmas.
The Angels' decision Sunday to drop out of the derby seems to have crystallized things for Teixeira, the 28-year-old first base star who's choosing between the Red Sox, Nationals and Orioles, and perhaps the Yankees. The likely deal is expected to be for close to $180 million, though the final figure depends upon which team Teixeira selects.
Meanwhile, the Red Sox's archrival, the Yankees, remain the wild card. It was uncertain Monday night whether the Yankees have jumped back into the bidding, although they did spend the weekend considering whether they should try to make room on their payroll for the star first baseman.
The Yankees remain interested in Teixeira but have payroll considerations after spending $243.5 million on frontline pitchers CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett, and they apparently want to keep any deal at only slightly more than the $161 million given to Sabathia.
If the Yankees were afraid of giving him an eight-year deal I could accept that, eight years is a long time, even for a 28 year old. But if it's not the length of the deal that scares the Yankees then there is no good reason why they shouldn't sign him. Money shouldn't be an issue, especially not $19 million. Is there really
that big of a difference between $180 million and $161 million to the New York Yankees?
8 Comments:
I hope this is not true.
I will be happy to see the sox get him.. leaving the door wide open for Manny
Be careful what you wish for.
Yeah I don't really get Heyman's comment. If the Yanks pass due to the number of years, fine. if they pass due to not wanting to pay 20 million a year, fine. But if they're willing to go 8 years, and they're willing to go slightly over 20 million a year, is 1-2 million more per year seriously a deal breaker?
Goldman's article today is an excellent read concerning the Manny vs. Tex question:
As to the quality of the two players, I've heard a lot about how Manny has "that thing" and Teixeira doesn't. This is pure Willy Wonka imagination. Ramirez is the better hitter, it is true. Here are the raw numbers for the last five years:
Stat Ramirez Teixeira
G 720 758
AB 2606 2885
R 485 500
H 807 852
2B 179 194
3B 4 8
HR 180 177
RBI 585 592
BB 420 398
K 561 574
AVG .310 .295
OBP .408 .386
SLG .585 .552
If you rate Ramirez solely on his American League numbers, before his torrid Los Angeles phase, which is extremely, extremely unlikely to be repeated, his rates drop to .303/.401/.573, still better than Teixeira's, but not dramatically so. Even if you compare them on the numbers above, filtering the defensive difference between the two is enough to moot the offensive discrepancy. Put Teixeira in Fenway Park and he likely picks up a few points in batting average as well, and his advantage in doubles will increase.
It's difficult to see what the conflict is about. The Yankees need another bat, they need to improve the defense, and they need younger players. Teixeira is all three. Ramirez meets just one of those criteria, and due to his age and his unreliable nature, we don't know how long he will meet it. There are two gambles here. The smaller is signing Ramirez. The larger is signing Ramirez and thereby enabling Teixeira to go to their division rivals. Doing nothing at all will not suffice.
I agree 100%. The Yanks can make it work with Manny - he wold be huge offensive upgrade. But Tex is a much, much better fit, both short and long term. Esp. if taking Manny means Tex goes to Boston.
The problem with Tex is that I personally feel he would be a liability in contract years 5-8. Additionally, when we have an aging infield with an older A-Rod and Jeter, one of them may be a good fit for 1B, and with a past-his-prime Teixeira signed for those 6th, 7th, and 8th years, the infield is going to be in some serious trouble.
It just kills the teams flexibility down the line. Manny provides better offense, and will only need a 2-3 year commitment, not to mention around $100M less that can be spent on potential free agents next off season (when we'll probably need 2 outfielders).
I've said it before - I'd be thrilled if they got Teixeira... but I do see the Yankees reasoning if they don't sign him, and I also see long term issues that could crop up when you sign ANY player to an 8 year deal, especially a guy who's 29 or so.
I just don't know if I'm big on the concept of putting all your eggs in one basket, and they already did that with A-Rod. To do it again a year later with a big 8 year deal to a player who's never played in New York, and who's already reached his prime just worries me. Who knows if this guy will get his money and not be motivated to be the team-first guy? From all the talk, we've heard little to nothing about a desire to win, and he's been reported to be on board with the Boras plan till the end... and the Boras plan is money before all else. If he's even considering playing at "home" for Baltimore or Washington, I question his desire to win, and how he'll react after a September slump in the middle of a pennant race that will be nothing at all like the cakewalk the Angels had with their huge lead this season.
Like I said - I'd be happy we got him because he's a great player, but I have lots of reservations and I think those are the lines the Yankees are thinking along as well.
Jeter won't be able to hit well enough for 1B, or corner outfield for that matter. He will need to retire, plain and simple.
And isn't it bizarre to be worried about Tex's 5-8 years -- all of which will be at a younger age than Manny is now! The much bigger risk on long contracts come from pitchers. IOW, Tex contract at 8 years would be much safer, wise choice than those of CC and AJ - and even Manny if the Yanks are follish to give him 3 years.
"Jeter won't be able to hit well enough for 1B, or corner outfield for that matter. He will need to retire, plain and simple."
Ok, you go ahead and be the one to tell him. While that's a nice "fantasyland" scenario, Jeter is going to be playing for the Yankees for a long time. I personally don't mind having him stick around a bit longer than he should (like a Cal Ripken Jr, for example) for what he's already done for the franchise.
"And isn't it bizarre to be worried about Tex's 5-8 years -- all of which will be at a younger age than Manny is now!"
It's not bizarre at all. Manny has established he can maintain a high level of performance past what is considered "prime" baseball age. Three years is not such a commitment in terms of either years or money that it would kill you if he broke dwon - which he probably won't because he never has.
"IOW, Tex contract at 8 years would be much safer, wise choice than those of CC and AJ - and even Manny if the Yanks are follish to give him 3 years."
I agree with you on AJ, but pitching contracts have the potential to pay off way more than hitter contracts. If you look at all the classic Yankee championship teams since the 90s, they had one biggest factor in common: Clutch starting pitching. Not "big name" hitters, but quality starters like Wells, El Duque, Cone, Key, etc. These guys pitched lights out when they needed to, and everyone else chipped in. You need to build a team around pitching, which means taking greater risks. Paying Tex $180M+ and foregoing getting any pitchers, and you might as well pack it in... if not during the regular season, then when the postseason rolls around.
Signing Manny isn't optimal, but it's a lower risk, higher short term reward, lower money move. The long term of Teixeira is very much up in the air, as is his makeup. We just don't know if he'll start breaking down (like MANY players do) in their early 30s, whereas Manny has shown a certain longevity that makes a short term contract very low risk.
Four years from now, do we want a $30M Teixeira salary preventing us from signing another big name pitcher? Look at the team right now... people are suggesting things like trading Matsui or Damon just so shave $10M off this years payroll to afford another player. If Teixeira was 25, I'd do it. At almost 29, meaning the contrat takes him through the most precarious and break-down prone age of 30-36, I don't know if I'd make that big of a commitment.
3 years is eternity for a 37 year old baseball player, even if he is named Manny.
Also, I did not offer an either/or re: Tex or pitching. I was just presenting relative risks. (The downside potential is actually much greater on a CC, for instance, even if the upside is great.) We got our pitching, so that isn't the issue.
The issue is our defense is so bad it could make even good pitching average, and our defense will only get worse fast. Tex is young and will not be old even near end of contract, and he is a Gold Glover with a lethal bat. The opportunity to lock him up for a baseball generation makes all the sense in the world.
And so does Manny for 1-2 years max, fwiw, as a fall-back option. But 3 years is as likely 2 years too many as not. And I'd say it is as likely 2 years too many as Tex would be 2-3 years too many.
Post a Comment