Olney On Rodriguez, Blue Jays, Ausmus

Everyone’s talking about Alex Rodriguez these days, but some of the chatter out there can be misleading. ESPN.com’s Buster Olney works his way through some popular theories involving the slumping Yankees slugger, separating myth from reality. Here are Olney’s latest notes…

  • The Yankees will probably talk to the Marlins about a deal involving Rodriguez “just to get rid of an outdated superstar,” Olney writes. Mark Buehrle and Heath Bell could end up going from Miami to New York if the sides complete a trade. The Yankees and Marlins have had preliminary talks about a possible deal.
  • Olney suggests it’d be a clear sign that the Blue Jays don’t view John Farrell as their manager of the future if they’re willing to discuss sending him to the Red Sox. If the Blue Jays aren’t convinced Farrell is their man, they should complete a deal without haggling too much, Olney writes. The Red Sox have begun compensation talks with Toronto, Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe reported yesterday.
  • Brad Ausmus, a candidate for the managerial opening in Boston, did well in his interview, Olney reports.


29 Responses to Olney On Rodriguez, Blue Jays, Ausmus Leave a Reply

  1. Mike Mark Sopp 3 years ago

    If the Yankees do move A Rod, does Jeter move over to play third?

    • That could work out really well. Especially if Nunez can develop some sort of defensive skills. Jeter would do it if he believes it is best for the team.

      • CreativeMace 3 years ago

        What’s the appeal to Nunez? He seems to have a bad rep for defense and I haven’t seen any offensive stats to celebrate. Just curious.

        • Unless the Yanks can pull off a miracle and can find someone to play third he may have to be an everyday player. The guy puts the ball in play and has speed. He just doesn’t have too much pop at this stage in his career and he is god awful in the field.

    • andrewyf 3 years ago

      Nope. The Yankees would likely sign a stopgap, with an eye on giving over third to a guy like Corban Joseph, who hit very well in AAA this year.

  2. johnsmith4 3 years ago

    AA doesn’t owe Farrell a thing when dealing with this mess. After all, it started boiling over when Farrell just completed his first season with Toronto. It is difficult to believe Farrell never had a hand in this overt pressure being applied to Toronto and AA. I can understand people being selfish. But, Farrell has been too selfish.

    If I was in AA’s shoes, I would ensure there was a punitive element in the compensation. He has no duty or obligation to be fair to Farrell or Boston. Please don’t bring up situations of a staff member who was about to be “shown the door” as a precedent for compensation. Only situations involving “poaching” and “turn coats” should be considered.

    • withpower 3 years ago

      What boiled over last year? Was there a problem between Farrell and Toronto management?

      • johnsmith4 3 years ago

        Last year, Boston was trying to poach Farrell. Toronto management had to call a press conference announcing in spite of the rampant rumours, Farrell isn’t going anywhere.

  3. Dave Poaps 3 years ago

    What could Toronto realistically get in return for Farrell?

    • johnsmith4 3 years ago

      Hard to say. But, I doubt AA will consider token compensation. I suspect he will only be interested in something useful.

  4. I struggle to grasp Olney’s logic. If the Red Sox so badly want Farrell, why would the Jays convenience the Red Sox by not haggling? He’s an asset, regardless of whether or not the Jays view Farrell as their man going forward, and they’re not exactly just going to tell the Red Sox that they don’t want him.

    • Yeah, Olney is not thinking straight. The Blue Jays aren’t in a situation where trading Farrell is necessary or even a priority. The desire is rather coming from the Red Sox, and quite strongly and they reek of desperation after the nightmare season of Valentine. Therefore the Jays are in the drivers seat and can ask for the world. I expect AA to be asking for Clay Buchholz and a prospect or Ellsbury and a prospect right about now. Why not? If the Red Sox want Farrell bad enough they’ll agree, if not the Jays will just keep him and re-sign him. We are in a position where we can ask for the world, if we don’t get it, then it doesn’t matter.

      • Tko11 3 years ago

        If the Red Sox want Farrell badly they will give up Ellsbury AND a prospect? Are you crazy? Or Buchholz? Come on man even you know that has to be one of the worst proposals on MLBTR ever.

        • Yeah, I don’t expect it too, that is why I phrased it as “ask for the world” as that phrase designates, typically, asking for everything. However, the Jays are in the drivers seat here and if you aren’t aware, AA asked for Buchholz for Farrell last year, so I did not make that one up.

          Does that mean I believe the Red Sox will accept this deal? No, and they shouldn’t, but because the Jays have all of the control here, they need to ask for the biggest fish first, then work down. And if they get worked down too far, the Jays will just say no and re-sign Farrell. Can’t hurt making the big request first, that is how negotiating works, you don’t start by saying “give us your 10th best A level relief pitcher” then expecting to work your way up, right?

          • Tko11 3 years ago

            Why ask when you already know the answer? The Red Sox arent going to offer more simply because the Jays are asking “the world” for Farrell. Plus Im pretty sure that earlier their were talks that the Jays werent pleased with Farrell this past season. That doesnt really help their cause.

      • Slopeboy 3 years ago

        @Blacksheep

        You’re dreaming if you are expecting that kind of return for Farrell. Look at what Chicago got from the Marlins for Guillen and what the Cubs gave Boston for Theo Epstein. Both those guys have accomplishments to their resumes. This year’s injuries aside, Farrell has two years of undistinguished
        Managerial performance to show. That won’t get you those studs, regardless of how badly Boston may want him.

        • Tim Sproule 3 years ago

          They won’t get that for Farrell but that is what the Jays want so Farrell will be managing in Toronto next year.

        • I’m not, see my reply above, I am suggesting that is what the Jays should ask for first and work down from there. AA did ask for Buchholz last season though and was told no, but it can’t hurt to try again. I suspect in real life we’ll get widdled down but then you don’t start bargaining by asking for an A level relief pitcher, right?

        • johnsmith4 3 years ago

          Those guys were about to be shown the door when they left. In Farrell’s situation, Boston has been actively working to undermine his relationship with Toronto. I doubt Toronto let’s Boston off the hook for the role they have played.

    • johnsmith4 3 years ago

      Plus, Farrell and Toronto didn’t simply reach this point on there own. Boston played an active role in undermining the relationship.

    • APNDaveR 3 years ago

      I think the point he’s trying to make is that if they’re not sold on Farrell, they shouldn’t haggle to the point of driving the Red Sox towards one of their alternate candidates, as getting something for Farrell is better than getting nothing for him.

    • ice_hawk10 3 years ago

      exactly. more boston-centric reporting. since when do other teams listen on their assets while still setting a high price?

  5. johnsmith4 3 years ago

    AA doesn’t owe Farrell a thing when dealing with this mess. After all, it started boiling over when Farrell just completed his first season with Toronto. It is difficult to believe Farrell never had a hand in this overt pressure being applied to Toronto and AA. I can understand people being selfish. But, Farrell has been too selfish.

    If I was in AA’s shoes, I would ensure there was a punitive element in the compensation. He has no duty or obligation to be fair to Farrell or Boston. Please don’t bring up situations of a staff member who was about to be “shown the door” as a precedent for compensation. Only situations involving “poaching” and “turn coats” should be considered.

  6. dc21892 3 years ago

    Can we just get Hales interview over, come to realization that we can’t interview Farrell because the Jays want way more than he is worth or should be given up, and hire a manager? Ausmus please.

  7. sebalion 3 years ago

    sox are interested in farrell but the reason toronto cant expect much is because they want him gone too…..the sox have a plan b,c,d…. assuming Farell is plan a…..if toronto wants too much they will simply hire someone else and toronto will have gotten nowhere…i say this assuming the talk of his unpopularity in Toronto is true..which i admittedly dont know too much about…if they really are okay with Farrell then, they dont have to ask for less.

    • bjfan 3 years ago

      If Toronto really wants Farrell gone, he would be gone. Or if AA was really vindictive, he could wait until the Sox announce their new manager, and then let Farrell go. This situation was started last year by the Sox. It is them or at least their press, that started it up again., Toronto can ask for whatever they want. They are the sellers. As buyers the sox have every right to say no, but they have no right to tell Toronto what to ask. Simple as that.

      • ice_hawk10 3 years ago

        its crazy how the media has spun it to make it look like the jays and farrell are in a completely untenable situation. by most accounts he is well liked and respected by the important members of the organization, and there has been absolutely no evidence that the jays want him gone. they’ll listen, and set a high price, but its no different than how the diamondbacks have listened on justin upton (relative asset value notwithstanding).

  8. jigokusabre 3 years ago

    Please, please, PLEASE don’t get rid of Buehrle for A-Rod.

  9. Michael 3 years ago

    Brad Ausmus did well in his interview. Do we ever hear that so-and-so bombed in his interview for manager and was laughed out of the room?

Leave a Reply