Here’s the latest from ESPN.com’s Jayson Stark:
- The Rays are still holding onto David Price unless and until an offer forces a move. “I’d say they’re kind of where they were all winter,” said a competing executive. “Yeah, they’d trade him. But you’ve got to make it so they can’t say no.”
- Though both sides explored the possibility, the Cardinals and Phillies did not match up on a potential Cliff Lee deal. With Philly seeking a “major prospect” in return, the Cards ultimately turned elsewhere and added Justin Masterson. While St. Louis seemed the best fit for a pre-deadline deal with Lee, Philadelphia still is looking to see if the lefty can be moved before August.
- The Red Sox are encountering some skepticism from trade partners that John Lackey will play for the league minimum rate next year, as provided by his contract. Of course, that provision makes up a huge portion of Lackey’s trade value, as he would not only contribute down the stretch in 2014 but looks like a very solid rotation piece at a replacement-level price for 2015.
- The Orioles seem to be focusing more on adding a reliever at this point than a starter, says Stark. Baltimore has been liked to Neal Cotts of the Rangers and Oliver Perez of the Diamondbacks, neither of whom is a pure LOOGY.
- In search of bullpen help, the Yankees have inquired into Joaquin Benoit of the Padres, James Russell of the Cubs, and Antonio Bastardo of the Phillies. The club has also checked on outfielders Marlon Byrd of the Phillies and Dayan Viciedo of the White Sox.
- The Blue Jays, Braves, and Royals are telling teams they cannot add significant payroll in a trade, though Kansas City could take on a starter who would slot in place of James Shields next year.
I think the fact that the Sox are shopping Lackey at all shows that they too have skepticism regarding Lackey’s willingness to play for the league minimum.
Ya, I was originally very skeptical of the Lackey will retire rumors but there are now multiple reports that Lackey is looking for an extension in any trade.
I have never been much of a Lackey fan and have always suspected that the option could be problematic. He’s not a cool dude.
See I’ve always liked Lackey, probably because the Angels got some great cheap season out of him, and I thought he would live up to the contract he agreed to. Recent reports have convinced me Lackey is seriously considering retiring if an extension does not replace that option. That certainly makes me like him less.
He’s old, rich, has 2 rings, and won’t get into the HOF. He’s got nothing left to prove. I personally wouldn’t really blame him for not wanting to take a paycut.
I understand the reasoning but Lackey agreed to that contact, he should fulfill his end of it despite having a legal way out of it.
I agree, but if he doesn’t want to play anymore I’d rather have him out of the clubhouse lest he return to Popeye’s.
This is what gets me irked about some players (all sports). He was out a yr w/ TJ and the year below was awful w/ 6.41 era. He obviously was hurt but collected his $31 mil but he’s not going to live up to the deal. Think he’s just posturing for the extension but annoying it comes to this. Like you said, he’s made a lot of money already.
This is what gets me irked about some players (all sports). He was out a yr w/ TJ and the year below was awful w/ 6.41 era. He obviously was hurt but collected his $31 mil but he’s not going to live up to the deal. Think he’s just posturing for the extension but annoying it comes to this. Like you said, he’s made a lot of money already.
You’re not alone on your opinion of “Big John”, Lackey’s a notoriously bad person who divorced his wife a few years ago while she was battling with breast cancer.
I think Lackey will play, because he can make more in 2016.
Hmmm, Yanks interested in both Viciedo & Danks. Sanchez maybe in the horizon for the ChiSox? Of course if the Sox are able to eat Danks salary.
Yankees won’t get Danks. Cashman wants a rental player like McCarthy, not a pitcher who’s owed a lot who is under contract till the end of 2016. He’s terrible and no one should bail the White Sox out of that contract.
Somebody will. If not now, next month.
If only the Jays could be owned by some multi-billion dollar corporation like Rogers, then they’d be able to spend on payroll!
Just an fyi, but the owner of a team has nothing to do with payroll parameters. It is based on the profits and income of every team in reality. The Jays made roughly 280 Million last year and payrolls for teams come in at around fifty percent of total gross income. That is 140 million payroll. On the other hand, Tampa made roughly 180 million, hence their 90 million payroll tops. If you believe owners take money from other sources for baseball, you would be wrong. Teams have minor leagues, doctors, insurance, stadium upkeep, etc that eats into the income above mlb payroll, so when teams say they are constrained, it means they don’t want to operate in red ink, which leads to bankruptcy. Everyone should know that. A profit margin must be maintained for those associated with the team. The front office don’t work for nothing, neither do all the employees of the Toronto Blue Jays.
Rogers makes a lot more then they let on off of the Blue Jays, unlike most teams their parent company owns the television network that the Jays play on, meaning they don’t have to pay for television rights and make 100% off of advertisements. When you own the entire market of baseball within a country you’re going to make a ton of money off of advertisements as you got 6 different stations (East, West, Ontario, Pacific, One, 360) playing 6 different ads.
If and when Rogers makes a big move, they’ll immediately get television ratings off of it due to increased fan interest, it would actually beneficial for them to spend money on a big move because they’d make money(T.V Ratings/Attendance) then if they don’t spend money.
This is exactly what we heard last year before the trades with the Mets and Marlins. A big move isn’t always a smart move.
Starting the season 10-21 isn’t a great way to get people to jump on your bandwagon. They still expected 1-2 million people tuning into every game during a August/September pennant race last year. Those numbers seem like a reality if they can maintain a winning record going forward this year.
They own the stadium and the TV networks that broadcast their games. Forgive me for not necessarily buying into the revenue stream argument. I’m not saying they should go sign some big name player in the off-season for $200 million, but to say they can’t take on any salary in trades (or the whole pass-the-hat stuff with Ervin Santana in the spring) is pathetic.
The Jays used to rake it in back when they were contending every year and packing the Dome with 4 million people per season. Funny how getting horrible attendance goes hand in hand with a team that has been irrelevant for two decades?
Just an fyi, but the owner of a team has nothing to do with payroll parameters. It is based on the profits and income of every team in reality. The Jays made roughly 280 Million last year and payrolls for teams come in at around fifty percent of total gross income. That is 140 million payroll. On the other hand, Tampa made roughly 180 million, hence their 90 million payroll tops. If you believe owners take money from other sources for baseball, you would be wrong. Teams have minor leagues, doctors, insurance, stadium upkeep, etc that eats into the income above mlb payroll, so when teams say they are constrained, it means they don’t want to operate in red ink, which leads to bankruptcy. Everyone should know that. A profit margin must be maintained for those associated with the team. The front office don’t work for nothing, neither do all the employees of the Toronto Blue Jays.
It’s not like this team hasn’t made the playoffs in 21 years, there’s always next year right?
Wondering how limited the Mariners are with payroll flexibility. I would love to see them send Walker, Franklin, Marlette, Wilson, and Fernandez to Tampa for Price.
Then, go get Kemp and Dunn…neither one should cost a lot in terms of prospects depending on the money involved.
Wait until Dunn is put on trade waivers. Someone will pick him up for their bench for the playoff run. Sox would let him go without getting something back.
I still remember the D-Backs trading for him when they were leading the division back in 2008, I still think that acquisition was the reason for their collapse as Dunn’s horrible defense likely cost them more runs then his bat made up for.
What is LOOGY mean in the way they spoke of Neal Cotta??