Guillen debacle

by CKel on Feb 5, 2008 6:09 PM PST Comment 17 comments

Looking back on the Guillen deal, it was clear that nobody liked not offering arbitration. It really made zero sense. One of the consensus theories was that the front office didn't want to deal with Guillen and his attitude, should he be stuck behind Adam Jones this year.

That being said, if they really wanted Erik Bedard, it was obvious any package would start with Adam Jones. If the team had been that intent on getting Bedard (judging by the reported package were sending, they were), wouldn't they want to prepare for his absence beforehand, rather then waiting and picking up Brad Wilkerson off the scrap heap? Even if Guillen turned it down, there's the draft pick.

With all the recent Bedard developments, this Guillen nontender is looking worse and worse.

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It was pretty stupid

by Jeff on Feb 5, 2008 6:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Not to mention no draft pick

by Fett42 on Feb 5, 2008 6:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Not to beat a dead horse

It just all the sudden came to me when we were making some projections. We're losing some runs from Guillen to Wilkerson, but any regression from Ichiro, Vidro, Ibanez, whoever can kinda be cancelled out by Sexson and Lopez bouncing back. Plus, swapping Ho/Weaver for Bedard/Silva is huge.

So I just thought, eliminate the drop from Guillen to Wilk, and we're a much, much improved team.

by CKel on Feb 5, 2008 6:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

What exactly qualifies...

as a "comeback" from Richie?

.240 with 30 HR's as opposed to last year?

"Why don't you have a seat right there"

by coachk05 on Feb 5, 2008 11:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not making me cry at night is all I ask for.

by Robert on Feb 6, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The tragic thing about this diary...

Is that the title could refer to two things-- the Jose Guillen debacle we are talking about, or the Carlos Guillen "trade" a few years ago.

Nice job franchise, nice job.

by edgar is good on Feb 5, 2008 6:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Maybe in a few years

we can hire Ozzie Guillen as manager and then have THREE debacles to refer to!

I'm Gomez and I write about many things.

by Gomez on Feb 5, 2008 6:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

"tragedy" seems to be a recurring theme

by CKel on Feb 5, 2008 6:56 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

or

Bavasi was factoring in Bedard's salary trying to estimate what he'd have in available budget to make the deal happen... and taking the chance on having Guillen get an arby deal equal to what he got from KC would have put the M's overbudget if they made the moves they wanted to make.

yeah it was dumb not offering him arby... but I don't know the inner workings of the budget but there could be a logical explanation of why Bavasi couldn't take the chance.

by MfaninAlaska on Feb 5, 2008 8:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Exactly right

Bavasi wanted Guillen back, but just did not want to risk Guillen accepting and getting $10+ million in arbitration.

by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 9:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course

Bedard + Guillen @ 1/10 is better than Bedard + Wilkerson @ 1/~2.5.

by Trev on Feb 5, 2008 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That may be true

but Bavasi had no room in the budget after blowing $12 million on Carlos Silva.

by G_ on Feb 5, 2008 10:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The bigger problem though

is that BB seemed to totally misjudge Guillen's market value. We were worried about him signing a 1yr/$10m deal when he'd already said he wanted a 3 year deal, and then signed a 3/36 deal with the Royals immediately.

There was simply no way in hell he'd stay in Seattle on that 1 year deal, and Bavasi should've known that.

by marc w on Feb 6, 2008 8:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That also may be true

But the risk of Guillen pulling a Bret Boone and actually accepting arbitration was higher than generally acknowledged.

According to multiple media reports, the Royals were the only team with serious interest in Guillen after the PED story broke. Guillen then sat on the Royals' offer for ten days, accepting only after learning that the M's had declined to offer arbitration. If Guillen was going to reject arbitration no matter what happened, why did Guillen wait those extra days to see if the M's would offer arbitration before accepting the Royals' offer?

Guillen may have taken the Royals' offer anyway, but he wanted to find out if arbitration was an option before accepting a bigger money deal with a non-contender.

by G_ on Feb 6, 2008 9:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Being on a 'contender'

Somehow I doubt Guillen was ever really tempted. Dude's over 30, made it clear he wanted a long-term deal, etc. etc.
Maybe he wasn't thrilled about 3 years in KC, but thinking he would seriously consider coming back to seattle for 1 year for less money seems about as likely as thinking that he made this decision based on the school system, local property values, or the fact that he's closer to his childhood home in the DR.

by marc w on Feb 7, 2008 2:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yet he still waited to find out if arb was offered

so he was at least considering it.

In arbitration, he could have received close to the $12 million that he would make in 2008 (or at least ask for that much). Like Bret Boone did, he could then use the leverage of arbitration to try to negotiate a multi-year deal. Or he could play out the year and become a free agent at a time when he is no longer the PED poster boy.

I do not doubt that Guillen likely would have accepted the Royals offer, but there was more than a nominal risk that he would accept arbitration.

by G_ on Feb 7, 2008 8:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Bavasi has never had to go to arbitration

with a player, according to a recent news article I was reading. I think he really wants to avoid arbitration at all costs... It sounds like a brutal process and no GM wants to be in the position of trashing a player you want on your team. I think he knew Guillen was capable of getting a 3/36 deal and let him walk away rather than risk an unpleasant situation.

All that said... I think the Royals will regret their contract in the end.

by johnbai on Feb 6, 2008 3:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs