Baines3 Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 My thinking is put ARod at 3rd, Crede at SS and deal Uribe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 24, 2006 -> 06:28 PM) I don't understand why you are tossing in what the Yanks may do. maybe because ARod is a Yankee and they are the ones trading him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(whitesox1976 @ Oct 24, 2006 -> 10:46 PM) My thinking is put ARod at 3rd, Crede at SS and deal Uribe. Crede at 3B = Elite defensively ARod at SS = Above average defensively Crede at SS = ??? ARod at 3B = Brutal defensively Which combination makes the most sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baines3 Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Mainly because I would hate to see Crede go. Actually I think we need pitching more then we need Arod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDylan Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(whitesox1976 @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 12:03 AM) Mainly because I would hate to see Crede go. Actually I think we need pitching more then we need Arod. We do. But A-Rod is A-Rod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 12:02 AM) ARod at SS = Above average defensively There's no debating that A-Rod was a good defensive SS in the past. He was even a fine defensive 3B initially. However, he's added body mass, specifically to his legs, and his defensive range has declined dramatically. (Plus he got a case of the yips this year) I'm not so sure that he would return to be even a league average defensive shortstop if moved there in '07. I think any conversation regarding Rodriguez returning to short has to question the defense that he'll bring to the position on a team that has only one starter with an above average strikeout rate, or a strikeout rate that's not trending downward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 The curse of A Rod and his staggering post season BA? No thx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 01:20 AM) The curse of A Rod and his staggering post season BA? No thx. What's wrong with .280 6 16 .362/.485/.847 in 150 PAs? It's not outstanding, but it's far from horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubba Philips Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 01:34 AM) What's wrong with .280 6 16 .362/.485/.847 in 150 PAs? It's not outstanding, but it's far from horrible. I think ARod numbers would improve if he was playing for the Sox.. I can see especially at our ball park a possible increase in his home run and RBI total. Being away from the tensions of the New YOrk media into the best fan base in MLB would help his fielding somewhat.. ARod can play a decent third base Uribe is better ss than Jeter which if Juan can get out of his legal troubles ARod will be better defensively. This whole thread the discussion of the money Freddie in the trade. The Litmus Test may well hinge on how the Yankees Doctors view Crede's back. not how joe and Boras see it. Steinbrenner spends a lot of money on his team and for some reason I think he wants them healthy. I'll miss Joe if he goes but if ARod has a good year playing for us I will find ways of dealing with the loss of good old Joe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 24, 2006 -> 10:46 PM) maybe because ARod is a Yankee and they are the ones trading him? And that has what to do with the money being paid by the Rangers which is whay the question was to start with... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 04:55 AM) And that has what to do with the money being paid by the Rangers which is whay the question was to start with... Good Morning With ARod, its all about the money and his huge contract. If, as some have theorized, the Rangers are required to pay whomever has ARod, and not necessarily the Yankees, then the Yankees have to package ARod + $28.4 million. If the Rangers are paying the Yankees, and the Yankees are free to offer less than that dollar amount, there is more flexibility for the Yankees to toss in talent (doubtful) or accept someone with a bad contract and the money could be lower. I could see negotiations where the dollar amount may be $26 mil with player A or $29 mil with player B. Making moving ARod a tad easier. As I mentioned earlier, it probably will not make a difference, it's one of those technicalities. My guess is the Yankees may have to add some of their money to the Ranger money to make it happen. Another reason I believe the team is obligated to pay the other team would be in the event of a career ending injury or retirement. I normally couldn't care less about a players contract, but this time of year, with no Sox baseball being played, it's all about trades and money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 It's no theory, it's the facts. The $67 million from the Rangers follows him. It's got nothing to do with the Yankees. http://www.easttennessean.com/media/storag...ttennessean.com http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/base...kees/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 07:56 AM) It's no theory, it's the facts. The $67 million from the Rangers follows him. It's got nothing to do with the Yankees. http://www.easttennessean.com/media/storag...ttennessean.com http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/base...kees/index.html I am getting errors on both of those links. The link I posted from SI states the money is paid to the Yankees. Doesn't really matter, I can see baseball handling the money different with Alex than other players. The contract is the reason why the Rangers had such a difficult time moving him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Sigh.... http://www.easttennessean.com/media/storag...ttennessean.com http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/base...kees/index.html And this is from the link you provided.. He is owed, in effect, $66.6 million by New York over the last four seasons of his record $252 million, 10-year contract. Rodriguez receives $95 million, with the Yankees getting $28.4 million from Texas to offset part of that. It's clear as day in black and white so exactly what part of the money comming from the Rangers do you not understand...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 08:40 AM) Sigh.... http://www.easttennessean.com/media/storag...ttennessean.com http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/base...kees/index.html And this is from the link you provided.. He is owed, in effect, $66.6 million by New York over the last four seasons of his record $252 million, 10-year contract. Rodriguez receives $95 million, with the Yankees getting $28.4 million from Texas to offset part of that. It's clear as day in black and white so exactly what part of the money comming from the Rangers do you not understand...? Steff, I love the sigh . . . I was thinking the same thing when I saw you replied. I don't understand if the Yankees are legally bound to send every penny with the contract or if they have some flexibility in sending less if that's what is in both teams best interest. A couple people believe that *all* that money *has* to follow the contract. I was just wondering if that is accurate, and why that language would be in there. I don't see where the Yankees are legally bound to pass on that money, which was my one and only point. And as I have mentioned numerous times, it is a very minor thing. More a technicality and an interesting nuance in baseball's biggest contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 08:56 AM) Steff, I love the sigh . . . I was thinking the same thing when I saw you replied. I don't understand if the Yankees are legally bound to send every penny with the contract or if they have some flexibility in sending less if that's what is in both teams best interest. A couple people believe that *all* that money *has* to follow the contract. I was just wondering if that is accurate, and why that language would be in there. I don't see where the Yankees are legally bound to pass on that money, which was my one and only point. And as I have mentioned numerous times, it is a very minor thing. More a technicality and an interesting nuance in baseball's biggest contract. Perhaps if you read the links provided, by yourself no less, you would. In any event. All done. I'm gonna stick with the facts on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:02 AM) Perhaps if you read the links provided, by yourself no less, you would. In any event. All done. I'm gonna stick with the facts on this one. All of the links mention the Rangers paying the Yankees, nowhere is it mentioned that if the Yankees trade him, that the money they are receiving, has to follow the contract. If I missed it in my careful reading of each link, then you are a better reader than me. Until I see a quote otherwise, I'll stand by my interpretation of the facts that the Yankees are free to include as little or as much cash into any ARod deal as both teams agree on. And Steff, you are never done. You'll either extract your revenge here or in another thread. I look forward to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:08 AM) All of the links mention the Rangers paying the Yankees, nowhere is it mentioned that if the Yankees trade him, that the money they are receiving, has to follow the contract. If I missed it in my careful reading of each link, then you are a better reader than me. Until I see a quote otherwise, I'll stand by my interpretation of the facts that the Yankees are free to include as little or as much cash into any ARod deal as both teams agree on. And Steff, you are never done. You'll either extract your revenge here or in another thread. I look forward to it. So if the Yanks trade him they KEEP the money?? They don't have to give it to ARod? Are you f***ing kidding me? And no, I couldn't be done with this glowing opportunity to point out some stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:12 AM) So if the Yanks trade him they KEEP the money?? They don't have to give it to ARod? Are you f***ing kidding me? And no, I couldn't be done with this glowing opportunity to point out some stupidity. Two different issues. Two different trades. Show me where I ever said that Alex would not receive his full contract? LOL, of course ARod receives his entire contract from the team that is employing him. If the Yankees trade him, the new team pays him. We all know that whomever he gets traded to will want cash along with ARod. The amount that the Yankees choose to include will be negotiated between those two teams. The Yankees are not obligated to send the exact amount or more of the Ranger money. The Yankees may, for example, only send $25 million and not the full $26.4 million remaining. The Yankees will continue to receive the Ranger money no matter what the Yankees do with ARod. Are you saying if the Yankees trade Alex that the Rangers don't have to pay the Yankees anymore? Remember the deal was for players and money. The players that went in the deal don't have to follow, why should the money? Let's make this simple. The Yankees are currently 100% responsible to make certain that Alex gets his money. Agree? They are receiving payments from the Rangers to compensate tem in part for that contract. Agree? The next team will also be 100% responsibile for Alex's contract. Agree? They will also, in all likelyhood be receiving money from the Yankees as part of the deal. Agree? The Yankees, IMHO, can send as little or as much as both teams agree on. Agree? The Rangers will continue to send payments to the Yankees. Agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:12 AM) So if the Yanks trade him they KEEP the money?? They don't have to give it to ARod? Are you f***ing kidding me? And no, I couldn't be done with this glowing opportunity to point out some stupidity. That has been a bone of contention in other trades. I know I have read other deals where just because a team got sent money in a trade, they were not obligated to send it on the next team if that player was again traded. It seems like that was something that came up in the Vazquez deal, but I can't remember now for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:30 AM) Two different issues. Two different trades. Show me where I ever said that Alex would not receive his full contract? LOL, of course ARod receives his entire contract from the team that is employing him. If the Yankees trade him, the new team pays him. We all know that whomever he gets traded to will want cash along with ARod. The amount that the Yankees choose to include will be negotiated between those two teams. The Yankees are not obligated to send the exact amount or more of the Ranger money. The Yankees may, for example, only send $25 million and not the full $26.4 million remaining. So if some very stupid team wanted ARod and no money from the Yanks, then yes, the Yankees would continue to receive the money from the Rangers. Remember the deal was for players and money. The players that went in the deal don't have to follow, why should the money? Absolutely 2 different issues. Why you are trying to combine them is beyond me. The money follows the player. A contract was signed. Texas agreed to pay a part of it. Alex will get it. What the Yanks do with the part THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE for has nothing to do with what TEXAS is responsible for as stated in the link YOU provided as well as the 2 I provided. Good grief.. :wall And to comment on your question "Show me where I ever said that Alex would not receive his full contract?" from above: QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:08 AM) All of the links mention the Rangers paying the Yankees, nowhere is it mentioned that if the Yankees trade him, that the money they are receiving, has to follow the contract. So despite 3 links provided IN this thread stating that Texas is responsible for $67 million of the initial contract... you somehow still think NY can opt to not pass it along to him. Somehow if the Yanks trade him the deal is off...? Is that what you are attempting to imply...? Regoddamndiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Texas is responsible to the Yankees for those payments. The Yankees are responsible to pay Alex. The next team will be responsible to pay Alex. Rangers send money to Yankees >> Yankees send money to new team. The amounts can be different. That is all I have said. How is that so hard to understand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:30 AM) Let's make this simple. The Yankees are currently 100% responsible to make certain that Alex gets his money. Agree? They are receiving payments from the Rangers to compensate tem in part for that contract. Agree? The next team will also be 100% responsibile for Alex's contract. Agree? They will also, in all likelyhood be receiving money from the Yankees as part of the deal. Agree? The Yankees, IMHO, can send as little or as much as both teams agree on. Agree? The Rangers will continue to send payments to the Yankees. Agree? No Yes No No For the REMAINDER of the money owed to Alex, yes. If he ramains a Yankee, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 12:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There's no debating that A-Rod was a good defensive SS in the past. He was even a fine defensive 3B initially. However, he's added body mass, specifically to his legs, and his defensive range has declined dramatically. (Plus he got a case of the yips this year) I'm not so sure that he would return to be even a league average defensive shortstop if moved there in '07. I think any conversation regarding Rodriguez returning to short has to question the defense that he'll bring to the position on a team that has only one starter with an above average strikeout rate, or a strikeout rate that's not trending downward. He was one of the best short stops in the game. Adding body mass might slow him down a step or two, but he certainly wouldn't become a below average fielder because of it. In my opinion, he won't be above average but as I said he won't be below average either. Considering his bat, being average in the field is entirely acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 25, 2006 -> 09:47 AM) No Yes No No For the REMAINDER of the money owed to Alex, yes. If he ramains a Yankee, yes. If the Yankees are not responsible for 100% of the contract then why are the Rangers sending the money to the Yankees? Wouldn't they be sending it directly to Alex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.