RUMOR: Orioles offer Matt Holliday 8 years, $130M
by Stacey on Dec 30, 2009 2:22 PM EST
in News & Rumors
64 comments
From Tracy Ringolsby at Fox Sports:
[Matt] Holliday has indicated an interest if the term is reduced to seven years, the sources said, although agent Scott Boras remains focused on an eight-year, $160 million deal, similar to the one the Yankees gave Mark Teixeira a year ago.
Baltimore, meanwhile, did make an eight-year, $130 million offer to Holliday, and general manager Andy MacPhail did discuss the possibility of arranging a meeting between himself, Orioles owner Peter Angelos and Holliday in Austin, Tex., where Holliday is living in the offseason.
Boras was not available for comment and has declined requests to discuss negotiations.
Is this true? Hard to say. One thing I will say is that I've come around on the Orioles signing Holliday. I think I'm actually be in favor of it. But I would not be in favor of it for 8 years. 8 years is absurd.
More info as I hear it, although I'd imagine it wouldn't be anything more than maybe some local media (Roch?) responding. Even if it's true it's not like MacPhail or anyone will talk about it.
Update from Roch (3:07 p.m.):
Orioles president of baseball operations Andy MacPhail has denied a FOXSports report that the club made an eight-year, $130 million offer to free-agent outfielder Matt Holliday.
MacPhail said there's "no validity" to it. And he was adamant.
MacPhail and agent Scott Boras discussed Holliday once, during negotiations with free-agent closer Mike Gonzalez, but the Orioles weren't willing to meet his price.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Holliday's demands far exceed what the Orioles are willing to offer.
So there you go. 8 years doesn't seem up Andy's alley anyway.
0 recs |
64 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I hope we don't get him.
No sense in overpaying the guy when we have guys that are able to play left field. On top of that he wasn’t the most impressive AL hitter last year. If we spend that much money on a player I want a guaranteed 30+ HR and 100+ RBI’s. I just don’t think Holiday guarantees that.
I like the idea of Holliday
But like stated above, I’m not sure he worth that much when there’s Reimold, unless (which has been suggested hundreds of times on here) we move him 1B/DH. But if it takes that much to get him, considering that we’re signing him near the end of his prime (IMO).
Don't give up, don't ever give up. - Jim Valvano
by BaltimoreSportsFan on Dec 30, 2009 2:49 PM EST reply actions
Good
As much as I would like to see Holliday in our lineup; $130MM over 8 years could really cripple a franchise. And it’s a position that isnt really our top need.
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
Well
As others have said, I just don’t see the point in paying a guy THAT much money to play a position that’s the least of our worries…
"He's a gazelle." -Adam Jones on Nolan Reimold.
Since I was talking $100m for four for Holliday...
…I could live with an eight year deal at $130, since we’d be paying a pittance more for four more years. But I don’t love the implication – paying him for his decline seems quite foolish and a sign that our front office isn’t ahead of the curve.
BTW, I don’t make much of MacPhail’s denial – he has no incentive to be honest here.
I'm buying AM's denial
Signing Holliday now goes against everything he has done up to this point. Why change philosophies now? The timing on this would just be dumb, not to mention Holliday really struggled in the AL (for what thats worth).
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
also
I think that Andy would certainly deny making an offer and would never confirm or deny any dollar amounts. If that’s what he said I might think something is going on. But to come out and say there have been no negotiations since Mike Gonzalez was signed sounds pretty concrete to me.
Agreed
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
I don't really agree
The philosophy, as often articulated, has been “Grow the arms, buy the bats.” Further, MacPhail has shown a willingness to make this kind of outlay, if you consider the Teixeira offer legitimate.
What would go against everything he has done up to this point would be to trade prospects, particularly pitching prospects, for a slugger from another team. But everything he has said about buying the bats and the need for a right-handed slugger to bat fourth indicates that signing Holliday would be in agreement with the team philosophy.
Meanwhile, as I’ve written here before in fanposts, Holliday didn’t really struggle in Oakland, posting an OPS+ of 120 in less than a season. While that is below his usual production, the small sample and the fact that it was his first exposure to the AL lead me to believe he’s still a five win player in the AL.
He should revise it to
“Grow the arms, and then buy the bats.” Because that appears to be his plan. Tex’s offer was an attempt to come in second or third in that race in order to save face and not an attempt to land him. However if he did want to land a FA relatively soon he would have gone for Tex. Not pursuing Tex tells me that AM is content to wait until the arms are ready before he buys the bats.
Think about it, why should we forfeit the financial flexibility we just got back because there is a decent free agent? There will always be more free agents and if we wait until we are good before we get them, then their best years can coincide with our best years. It just makes more sense. Who cares if Holliday can add five or even ten wins to this team, because we still aren’t a .500 team with him, let alone a contender.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
The point would be
that there are no bats anywhere near as good as his hitting the FA market anytime soon. If you want to pick up 2 big bats within the next 2-3 years, at least one of them is probably going to have to be via trade. If you can obtain one now via FA, all it costs is money and you can retain all the talent you’d have had to give up in a trade. As long as he keeps hitting at a consistently high level for the next 3-4 years and then begins a gradual decline, he’s definitely worth having on the team now.
Thats not enough reason for me
I sorta view prospects as money (as cold as that may sound), because in theory you could sign more prospects instead of a FA and so if we spend the money now on more prospects we should be able to trade those prospects later for a piece that makes sense for us. Also, statistically speaking Holliday’s peak was at 27 and therefore he is already in decline. Yes he’ll still be a great player for 3-4 but i dont think it makes sense. I dont want a major FA signing until we’ve at least gotten to .500 and i think thats a couple years away still. I would rather us set up for a long-term return to prominance over the quickest return.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Not really true
It’s way too early to think about who’s going to be a FA after 2010, but there are several bats that are better than Holliday that are scheduled to be FA’s. Mauer comes to mind (not that that would be a position we will need). Lance Berkman is also coming up. I would be willing to bet there are a few others that are better than Holliday.
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions
I believe
Aramis Ramirez
Dunn
Pena
Crawford
are all players that could be FA’s next year as well, although Berkman has a team option that may get picked up.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Player Option
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:33 PM EST up reply actions
exactly
Unless he has a real off year then i doubt he exercises that option. He’d probably rather sign a long term deal.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
33
He’ll be 34 at the end of next season. Up there, but not completely worthless. Pujols is up in a year or two as well.
Who knows if these guys will be renewed or not. And who knows what player emerges over the next year or so. I just don’t think that it’s likely that there won’t be any quality FA’s avaialbe anytime soon. If you have the dollars, you can always buy some talent.
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions
Everytime we talk about Cassius Clay
someone white man got to bring up Rocky Marciano.
Don't let the sunshine fool ya. - Townes Van Zandt
Over my head
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
quote fail
I messed it up.
Everytime we talk about Joe Lewis some white man got to bring up Rocky Marciano. Joe Lewis was 138 year old when fought Rocky Marciano.
Coming to America.
Don't let the sunshine fool ya. - Townes Van Zandt
There will always be more free agents and if we wait until we are good before we get them, then their best years can coincide with our best years.
I see the opposite of this being true. IMO, there are very few free agents who are worth paying for at all.
I don’t see how Holliday hurts our financial flexibility – it requires other poor decisions to make such a contract a problem. I also think we should be able to play .500 ball if we’re not particularly unhealthy. What I think we do need is more talent, and I think that there are very few chances to truly add talent on the FA market. And Holliday is one of those few chances.
Then you still need that money to re-sign players. If in six years we are still paying Holliday $16 million a year then thats one less great player we can retain.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions
Yep
That’s why I was more willing to pay him $100m for four years than $130 for eight.
That said, I don’t believe we should be resigning most of our players. I’d let Roberts go when his deal ends, I’d let all the pitchers go, and I’d maybe even let Nick go. Jones could be worth keeping, as could Wieters. But I think that you should put your money into catchers, shortstops, and centerfielders primarily.
He'd most likely be underpaid the last few years though, right?
Don't let the sunshine fool ya. - Townes Van Zandt
Not really
He’ll be 30 this coming season, so even with inflation I’d expect that if he follows a normal aging curve, his value will start decreasing in three seasons.
How could it not hurt our financial flexibility???
If you are committing $16MM+ every year for the next 8 years, it would seem to me that would have to hurt your flexibility. Whether it would be a good investment or not is debatable, but this would have to have a major effect on future Oriole signings.
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Because absent any other signings...
…we still have a $50 million payroll for those eight seasons. Which leaves us with a lot of room.
My question I guess then is how many $15 million players do we anticipate needing? Because if Holliday isn’t a total bust, we’d still have tens of millions to spend.
Why would that mean it doesn't hurt our flexibility?
Whether we have a low payroll or not and have room to expand, adding a player for $180M over 8 is going to decrease your flexibility. You may still have $15M to play with if you sign him, but that gives you less flexibility than if you had $35M to play with.
I don’t know how many players we are going to need, I’m guessing a lot. And signing a player to that long of a deal, for that amount of money, for a position we probably have a lesser need feels like a mistake to me.
"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle
by BirdFanInPhilly on Dec 30, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
yes!
I agree. This would essentially be the MacPhail philosophy in motion. Buying bats. And this would be the right handed bat the organization has been looking for. 8 years is a little long, and I do wonder what the last 3 years of that contract might look like. But, honestly, this could work. MacPhail would be able to trade away Luke Scott, essentially proliferating the Tejada trade the same way he has with Bedard (Sherrill). Pie could focus more on spelling Jones in Centerfield, who seemingly needs a couple days off a month because his durability is in question, and spot in left. Reimold could man Left on days Holliday DHs, and possibly even learn a little first base if we don’t get a solution there.
This stuff cracks me up sometimes
All the he-said, she-said. Maybe I’m drawn to the hot stove season because you get all the same thrills that you do from being a political junkie, except the stakes are so much lower. If some schmuck on Fox Sports.com tells a blatant lie about the Orioles offering some obscene amount of money to Matt Holliday, it doesn’t matter. If some government dude gets on CNN and starts telling lies then we start invading countries.
Cry havoc and unleash the Esskay hot dogs of war! - The Wayward Oriole, Opening Day 2008
by Eat More Esskay on Dec 30, 2009 3:18 PM EST reply actions
It kinda reminds me
of celebrity gossip… but for sports. Not in content obviously, but there’s the rumors, the shocking announcements, the denials, the huge egos, the endless speculation. The political junkie stuff is a good comparison too.
I really would like the O's to sign Holliday
but when this is all over, I still think he ends up signing for 4 years, maybe 5, at 16-18 mil/yr. 16.25/yr over 8 years is a bit (insanely way too) much.
Imagine they did sign Holliday
does that mean Pie gets shown the door? If you shift Reimold to DH he’d still operate as a 4th OF I’d imagine. If they don’t get anyone else for 1B and put Luke there as the 1B/DH, Pie seems to be the odd man out. Unless they do get a viable 1B then I’d imagine it would make more sense to trade Luke.
Luke and Felix…sniff. My boys. I know the object is to get better but I love those two.
I still say you trade Reimold
I think that Reimold is the one with the most trade value and the one whose trade value most exceeds his actual value. If Pie was properly valued, then I’d trade him, but he’s a cheap viable CF with a chance to be a plus player. And Pie will have the most ongoing value to us because he can play CF if Jones goes down as well.
I think you trade Luke if you can get a good return for him in any case, but I think that you trade Reimold regardless. Of course, I also feel this way in part because I think Brandon Snyder is quite underrated and is going to be in the majors contributing very soon.
Trade Pie
As a center fielder, Pie will have far more value than Reimold. Doesn’t San Diego need help in center? Don’t they need help with their rotation? Sure seems like a match that could bring A-Gon to Charm City.
by mystery tramp on Dec 30, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
until proven otherwise...
i’d say “when” jones goes down as opposed to “if”!
"If they pitch to you, make them pay."
--Diamond Dave to the Phenom
by j.q. higgins on Dec 31, 2009 6:36 AM EST up reply actions
Enough with his AL "struggles"
He got off to a slow start but from may to mid-july when he was traded he hit
.299AVG .403OBP .883OPS in 271ABs and was still heating up as he went along. There was a 20 game adjustment period, big deal. And yes his slugging was low for a cleanup hitter but that was playing in Kaufman stadium which is a big pitchers park, I believe in Camden he would be back around 30 HRs and 40 2Bs.
You can have any opinion you like on the offer, but let’s give up this “he can’t play in the AL” non-sense.
Kaufman? Isn’t that the old SD park? I agree with you though…but I can’t think of Oakland’s park now.
Don't let the sunshine fool ya. - Townes Van Zandt
kaufman...
is the royals stadium. sd was jack murphy stadium.
"If they pitch to you, make them pay."
--Diamond Dave to the Phenom
by j.q. higgins on Dec 31, 2009 6:37 AM EST up reply actions
Ok i said AL
But i’m still concerned because for a lot of those years in Colorado he was a monster at Coors and not so good on the road. I still think theres some risk involved because of that.
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Dec 30, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
A thousand times no
Holliday will be 30 in January. An 8 year deal ends after his 37 year old season. I just finished reading a section of Baseball, Inside The Numbers, which discusses the folly of giving older players long term contracts that extend until they are pushing 40. See Mo Vaughn and many other examples.
The Texiera contract should not be held up as an example for the Orioles to emulate. The Yankees can afford to eat the second half of Texiera’s contract if his numbers decline precipitously with age. And, unless you are talking about Barry Bonds, all of these players decline with age. The Holliday contract would likely cripple us in the out years. Also, how much extra would Holliday give us that we can’t already get from Nolan Reimold or King Felix?
Matt Holliday is overrated.
He’s good, but seriously, fuck him if he wants $16MM a year.
"I'd like to do something. We all would here," he added. "As I've said before, you just don't want to do anything stupid that you're thinking in May, 'What in the God's green earth was I thinking about?'" - Andy MacPhail 12/8/09
Fuck off Boras.
Stop making shit up to drum up a market that isn’t there. Sign with St. Louis already and be done with it.
by O'sFan21 on Dec 30, 2009 5:44 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Boras is up to his old tricks again. I guess Tracey R is the new Jon Heyman.
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.
by birdman on Dec 30, 2009 5:45 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I don’t like how the fanposts are set up on the mobile site. Just arrange the fanposts by links instead of posting the entire damn post.
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.
by birdman on Dec 30, 2009 5:51 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I got one for Christmas
I think it came from the team store in York…
"I'd like to do something. We all would here," he added. "As I've said before, you just don't want to do anything stupid that you're thinking in May, 'What in the God's green earth was I thinking about?'" - Andy MacPhail 12/8/09
Scott Boras bullshit.
And at this point I don’t think anyone’s falling for it. I am for overpaying to get Holliday though. Just not for 8 years.
by Jonny Pops on Dec 30, 2009 10:44 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Camden Chat
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
SBNation.com Recent Stories
GAMETHREAD SPONSOR
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
