![]() |
|
|
| |
« Peavy Trade Talks Begin | Main | Offseason Outlook: New York Mets »
Eddie Bajek at Detroit Tigers Thoughts just posted his projected Elias rankings for American League relievers.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e201053586055c970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Elias Rankings - AL Relievers:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


|
|
Wouldnt it be smart for the yanks to decline Martes option than offer him Arbitration. Than offer Abreu arbitration. Than you sign two other Type As (CC and Tex) and you got your picks back. I hope I didnt say anything dumb because Im not too knowledgable about the rules about Type A/ Type B free agents.
Posted by: yankfan1 | October 13, 2008 at 05:46 PM
You only get those picks if:
(1) Both players reject arbitration - with Marte I don't believe that's a slam dunk
and
(2) Your players sign will a top 15 team.
If Marte and Abreu sign with the Reds (as an example) you won't receive first round compensation. You will receive other picks - just not the signing teams 1st pick.
Posted by: bjsguess | October 13, 2008 at 05:59 PM
*with - not will ...
Posted by: bjsguess | October 13, 2008 at 06:00 PM
"I hope I didnt say anything dumb because Im not too knowledgable about the rules about Type A/ Type B free agents"
Aside from using than when you meant then?
Posted by: tdischino | October 13, 2008 at 06:26 PM
It would be smart for the Yankees to decline his option - then offer him arbitration. If he accepts the yanks can most def get him for less like 3-5 and if not we get 2 1st/supp picks. Win-Win just like Abreu's deal. im a happy camper
Posted by: CorShep | October 13, 2008 at 07:25 PM
But why not keep Marte and get production out of him this year, then offer him arbitration next year? Even considering his one really bad appearance with the Yankees, his numbers are good enough this year to not have to be completely amazing in 2009 to keep his Type A status.
Not to mention you can get a hell of a lot better than some draft picks by trading the guy midseason, if they choose to go that route.
I fully believe the Yankees will keep Marte. They've coveted him ever since they traded him away for Enrique Wilson. It's also been said plenty of times that the Nady and Marte move was not only for 2008, but for 2009 as well.
Posted by: AndrewYF | October 13, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Not sure what the best move would be re: Marte. In the "bird in the hand" category, he is projecting to be a type A, and that could fall to a type B after '09 if he doesn't throw well. Jeremy Affeldt is a type B, younger, and has put up really good numbers in a pitcher's park.
So, would you want Affeldt on maybe a 3 year deal plus the 2 draft picks, or Marte on a 1 year deal and gamble that he pitches well enough in '09?
Posted by: dproc0219 | October 13, 2008 at 11:36 PM
"(1) Both players reject arbitration - with Marte I don't believe that's a slam dunk
and
(2) Your players sign will a top 15 team. "
You are probably right bjsguess. If the Yankees offer Marte arbitration, Marte is not going to find a 6Mil contract for next year and probably accept arbitration in hopes of having a better season like he probably will in '09 after getting used to the AL hitters.
The Yankees can afford the salary and he is a good pitcher that just had a bad year.
The scary pitchers to offer arbitration to me in the AL for arbitration that might possibly be offered it are (and please Yankee fans don't hammer me for this)
Mike Mussina
Jon Garland
Paul Byrd
NL pitchers not completed yet, but some more scary looking ones there also, like Eric Gagne that once again, someone may actually sign...
Paul Byrd
Posted by: johns | October 14, 2008 at 12:20 AM
I'm just praying someone will take Garland off our hands. I'm pretty sure there is a team out there who will offer multiple years but if Garland liked his time in LA I could see him accepting arbitration.
I'd put the odds at 50/50 that Marte accepts arbitration if offered. Wouldn't be the worst thing for the Yankees. Same with I-Rod. Yanks will run a huge risk if they offer him arb.
Posted by: bjsguess | October 14, 2008 at 12:23 AM
doesnt pudge have more pride than accept a backup role? not for all that money? guess not.. yea.. prolly dont offer him arb unless there's some sort of agreement.. which i doubt.
offer Marte and Abreu arbitration.. keeping Marte wouldnt be bad, 2 picks for leaving would be awesome.. Abreu could def. pull some multi yr deal somewhere..
Isnt the top-15 team thing reversed?
Posted by: dapoktan | October 14, 2008 at 05:17 AM
Garland won't accept arbitration. If he does, he likely takes a paycut because of just how exposed he was this year. There will be a team out there that gives him a multi year deal
As for Oliver, it is a pretty interesting conundrum. His time with the Angels has really showcased his ideal role, but it has also made him a bit too valuable in the Elias system for his own good.
Posted by: AA | October 14, 2008 at 05:26 AM
"Garland won't accept arbitration. If he does, he likely takes a paycut because of just how exposed he was this year."
Was Garland really exposed all that much this year or was he more or less what he's always been? I would guess that your exposure to Garland this year is what made you realize he's not a great pitcher, not that everyone else finally figured him out at the same time. Garland is going to get paid well for being a mediocre pitcher, heck he's been paid well for quite awhile now for being a mediocre pitcher. Most everyone pretty much already knew what he was all about.
Posted by: pageian | October 14, 2008 at 09:45 AM
Garland did exactly what's expected of him, it was the years when he won 18 games that were flukes. He a solid 4 starter that can eat innings, plain and simple.
Posted by: scribbletone | October 14, 2008 at 12:47 PM
"Was Garland really exposed all that much this year or was he more or less what he's always been? I would guess that your exposure to Garland this year is what made you realize he's not a great pitcher, not that everyone else finally figured him out at the same time."
The exposure came more in the fact that he pitched in a much more pitcher-friendly park and had his worst season as a regular, despite the fact that he should be in his prime. What mystifies me about this guy is that he can throw 95 but hasn't K'd 100 batters in 2 years.
"Garland did exactly what's expected of him, it was the years when he won 18 games that were flukes. He a solid 4 starter that can eat innings, plain and simple."
But he is paid like a solid number 3 starter.
Posted by: AA | October 14, 2008 at 02:02 PM
"But he is paid like a solid number 3 starter."
Because he won 18 games..
Posted by: scribbletone | October 14, 2008 at 05:35 PM
"Isnt the top-15 team thing reversed?"
I think he meant the teams with the 15 best records (the top teams) rather than the teams with the top 15 (protected) picks (the bad teams).
Posted by: kosmo @ www.ObservingCasually.com | October 17, 2008 at 08:24 AM