Way To Go, Jack
Rumors everywhere suggest that Nick Johnson's on the verge of signing a one-year deal with the Yankees, worth something like $6m or so. Johnson's .402 career OBP and status as a high-reward player whose risk diminishes his cost had made him a candidate to end up in Seattle from the beginning of the offseason, but now - as with Rich Harden - it appears we're looking elsewhere despite the player in question signing a pretty cheap deal.
That sarcastic "way to go" doesn't stem from frustration that we're missing out. I agree with Dave on this one - when we all freaked out over Harden, Z turned around and landed Cliff Lee for pennies (albeit shiny pennies, not those nasty ass ugly corroded pennies), so it's safe to say the front office has earned the benefit of the doubt on these matters. If they didn't want to meet Johnson's entirely reasonable demands, it's probably because they have something else in mind, something equivalent or better.
Rather, it stems from the fact that Z has set our standards too high. A week ago, none of us had any idea what he was going to do to address the starting rotation. We were clueless, and though most of us didn't put much stock in the Doug Davis or Jarrod Washburn rumors that were floating around, we didn't know what to think. Then Jack got one of the best pitchers in baseball for a low low price. So what's the consensus reaction now that we've missed on Nick Johnson? "Guess they must be hot after Adrian Gonzalez." "They've been talking to Milwaukee. What about Prince Fielder?"
The Cliff Lee trade has caused people to start looking for other Cliff Lee trades. And one of my favorite things about the Cliff Lee trade - one of the reasons it earned such a glowing reception - is that it came completely out of nowhere and blew away out expectations. Now that people's expectations are raised, they're talking about all the big names, and that makes it considerably more difficult to be taken by surprise. More difficult to be taken by surprise, and more likely to be unmoved. "We only got Mat Gamel?" "We gave up how much for Gonzalez?"
Good going, Jack. Due to the awesomeness of your most recent acquisition, you've all but guaranteed that whatever you do next is going to be seen as a decent deal at best and a letdown at worst. On a 1-10 scale of transaction perfection where 10 is trading a PTBNL for Albert Pujols, 2 is trading Ichiro for a knife that you use to stab Chone Figgins, and 1 is the Carlos Silva deal, you've set expectations around a 9, and that's about as high as any realistic deal can go. Because of your own doings, we're going to be next to impossible to impress. Which means you're going to have to be really creative if you want to keep raising your stock.
Of course, I've said that before.
88 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If nothing else it's exciting
We can guess all day about what he’s going to do and who he’s going to sign and at the end of the day something comes up out of nowhere.
In that case we need to evaluate Jack Zduriencik by counting stats rather than rate stats
Another deal which is positive for the Mariners but not Cliff lee amazing should continue to increase his awesomeness, not decrease it.
Nick Johnson
is filling Damon’s old role. Does this lower Damon’s asking price? Is he a decent option for DH?
Damon's price would have to come way way down
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 17, 2009 7:03 PM PST up reply actions
I always thought the whole concept of "asking price" was stupid.
The market price is what matters. I don’t give a fuck if Miguel Olivo wants $65/4, it’s irrelevant, completely irrelevant. He’s going to get what the highest bidder values him at and that’s all. I wish it would stop getting reported… Asking price means nothing unless your name is Manny Ramirez.
by lailaihei on Dec 17, 2009 7:18 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
hypothetically speaking,
would you go for 1yr/$7mil? I like the fit at DH.
way too expensive
he was asking for $13 mil/yr and the Yankees offered something like $10 mil. Don’t see that coming down to the $7 range. Even if he ends up signing somewhere for about what the Yankees offered.
by Snuffleupagus on Dec 17, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah it's going to take another 4-5 weeks before the premium outfielders get scared about
the Ryan Churches of the world taking their positions and start talking sense.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:02 PM PST up reply actions
On the other hand, who else might be a suitor for his services?
The Mets? The Cardinals, if they miss out on Holliday?
If someone has $13M to spend on their OF, they’re going to target one of the marquee FA’s on the market. Damon has seriously overestimated his value.
Boras
that’s a Boras number. I’m sure he’ll sign something like 2/20 or less in the end.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:04 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't be shocked if the contract was even sweeter.
There just aren’t that many teams right now that need help in the OF, that are also buying.
Also Ryan Church
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:18 PM PST up reply actions
Church if you want to buy low, Saunders if you want to trade with the M's, Bay and Holliday if you want to be a big spender, and then there's the whole LAA-Atlanta Rivera potential deal.
There ain’t no room for Damon.
I brought up Church because he's basically the same hitter
and a much better defender. There is no reason at all to sign Damon as long as Church is unsigned.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:29 PM PST up reply actions
This is kind of the George Lucas syndrome.
You make a couple of awesome moves and then everything else feels like Howard the Duck.
On the other hand, as far as Lucas goes.
Everything else was Howard the Duck.
It makes me wonder.
Do you think that maybe Jack Z does not feel the same about very risky and injury-prone players as both USSM and LL seem to? Perhaps Jack Z feels that it is better to have a lower ceiling player man a position in comparison to having a person that has shown great upside but has a very big injury risk associated with their name at the same position.
I know many of us thought we were in the chase for Harden, but did we really hear anything substantial regarding us pursuing Harden, or was it just media speculation? Could this be a reason why we have not yet signed Branyan? Is it possible that he did not pursue Johnson hard because of this same reason? This is a very interesting question that I would love to see someone bring up at the USSM event in January (alas I was at work and thus missed out on the opportunity to go myself).
Or I could be completely off base and it could really just be that he has something incredible up his sleeves.
We were in on Harden
And we were in on Johnson.
by davidcameron on Dec 17, 2009 7:50 PM PST up reply actions
And apparently, according to Baker, we're in on Bay.
Though Geoff does seem to get into a huff for no reason, since he admits that the M’s aren’t going to be paying $15 million a year for him… and it would be a pretty boneheaded move for Bay to turn down 4/60 from Boston and end up with whatever/less money from Seattle, so I guess Geoff Baker is upset that USSM authors and commenters assume Bay’s not an idiot when it comes to rumors floating around about who the M’s want to sign.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 17, 2009 8:00 PM PST up reply actions
Or the Mets' rumored 65-70M offer
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:04 PM PST up reply actions
Well, same point.
Sure, if Zduriencik uses his Jedi mind powers to get Bay to sign here for 2/20 when other teams are offering 4/60-65, or Bay wants to give a ridiculous hometown discount that makes him a reasonable signing, of COURSE he’ll be interested. Heck, Richie Sexson, who’s the poster child for “worst case aging scenario for RH slugger”, was a 3-4 WAR player his first two years in Seattle.
The point of the “smell test” is pretty simple logic. I know there have been some decent hometown discounts in the past (Griffey being the prime example of that), but the haircut Bay would have to take coming to Seattle would be pretty extreme. GMZ is trying to pick up UNDERVALUED assets. Bay isn’t bloody likely to be one.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 17, 2009 8:15 PM PST up reply actions
My prediction
Is the Mets get Bay at 14 mil a year by continually bidding against themselves…
by Ballard Erik on Dec 17, 2009 8:20 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah I didn't mean to nit pick
I was just pointing out that the offers on the table for Bay have been reported by very reputable sources and have been both consistent in value and the tendencies of the organizations they’re coming from. How can you write paragraph after paragraph about getting him here for the right money when he’s being offered literally three times that?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:34 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, I know that we showed interest in both of them.
However, hasn’t Jack Z shown interest in pretty much everyone decent with a pulse this offseason? I know Jack Z and crew are incredibly good at talent evaluation, so if Nick Johnson’s projected FA value is 9 mil as you stated in your offseason plan, why did he not get a contract for that?
Now I know that there are other reasons for players to join teams, but historically players have gone to where they have been offered the most money. In Rich Harden’s case it is easier to understand potential non-money issues playing a role, because his contract was pretty close to what you and others projected his market value to be, but it seems that Nick Johnson is getting 3-4 million dollars less than what many projected his value to be on the market. If Jack really wanted Nick Johnson (and this is definitely speculation right here since we don’t know what happened with any contract negotiations) one would think that he would have offered a contract for that couple million more and lured him to Seattle.
I certainly don’t mean to argue with you, it is just an interesting trend that I want to keep an eye on (and again, a question I would love to hear asked at the event).
They know the market better than we do
It is quite possible that they view Johnson as worth $7 or $8 million in abstract, but not when compared to their other options.
by davidcameron on Dec 17, 2009 8:14 PM PST up reply actions
Good point.
I didn’t really think about Z having a different marker set on the price of talent available. Perhaps he feels that there are enough 1B/DH options available similar to Johnson that makes spending $7 or $8 million an overpay.
Yep
That’s what’s going on here, I think. They’d have gone harder after Rich Harden if they didn’t think Cliff Lee was available. And they’d probably have gone harder after Nick Johnson if they didn’t think Guy They Haven’t Acquired Yet wasn’t available.
This is a really serious buyer’s market.
by davidcameron on Dec 17, 2009 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
Russell Branyan is a little busy now but still would like to take the time to say hello

De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:51 PM PST up reply actions
His cousin is black? Huh.
And while ‘man’ can be gender-neutral in this case I think mailwoman is more appropriate.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions
I think the point is that Zduriencik never really wants a name
he really wants a certain kind of player. He decides what that is worth, and looks for where he can get him. His first season, he wanted a glove-first CF with upside in his bat, and went to the Rays about Fernando Perez. The Rays either said no way or asked too much. So he robbed the Mets and Indians instead.
Same thing probably happened with Johnson. Don’t be upset that our GM doesn’t get into bidding wars for players. be happy. That’s what Bavasi did.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:40 PM PST up reply actions
By no means am I upset at the lack of a bidding war
The perceived value of Johnson was more than what his final contract ended at. I was never a big fan of us getting Nick Johnson, even though he does have good upside, just because I personally feel that the injury risk outweighs the potential. My question was one asking whether or not Z values injury prone players less than LL/USSM, not one asking why we did not get in a bidding war for someone.
Johnson's career is on its last legs
and they’re not sturdy legs at that. It may be the M’s had a similar offer but he’d rather take his perceived better chances of winning a ring by signing with the Yankees. The opportunity to be a full-time DH may play into that as well, in terms of making sure he’s not sitting on the DL when the postseason rolls around. Z has a preference for flexibility, and Johnson would be expected to play 1B — the team already has one LH benchwarmer as it is.
I agree with almost everything in your post
but how do you figure that Johnson’s career is on its last legs? He did break one of his once but you can’t fault him for that any more than you can fault Endy Chaves for tearing his ACL.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:00 PM PST up reply actions
Chavez Tearing his ACL was betancourts fault
Blame has to go somewhere right?
by Marinerfanjake on Dec 17, 2009 9:06 PM PST up reply actions
It was almost the same play
you can blame NJ’s leg on Kearns (or Vidro if you like, he was in on it too).
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:10 PM PST up reply actions
Not knowing how to take a walk
wasn’t Betancourt’s fault either, yet he kept making the team worse by doing it.
by wandergeist on Dec 18, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
I meant "last legs"
in the sense that he’s now 31 with a long injury history (fluke-y or not). Every contract he takes from now on could be his last.
by wandergeist on Dec 18, 2009 10:59 AM PST up reply actions
I guess it's not hard to imagine that a good player stuck on the Nationals and Marlins for the length of his career
would perhaps agree to play in NY for something less than others are offering. All the same, I’ve wanted him here for so long and I can’t help but feel some AHngst seeing him sign such a sweetheart deal with the fucking Yankees. Do they really need any breaks?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:07 PM PST reply actions
Nick Johnson certainly has breaks
At least one in his femur
Forgot about that.
But they won’t love him like we would have. Anyway it’s cool I want Branyan back and Bradley for OF/DH.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 8:46 PM PST up reply actions
So the Mariners basically have more money to spend this offseason than any other team.
And it’s a gigantic buyer’s market… Does this put us in an excellent position to get Holliday on a long-term, low-money deal?
What does low money mean to you?
If bay is being offered 4/65 I’m sure Holliday will get at least that.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:05 PM PST up reply actions
Well, by my calculations, a "fair" contract for Holliday is about $130/6.
But I think in this market he could be had for a lot less. He’ll still probably demand 6 years, but I think the price could get driven down to $100 or maybe lower.
Really?
I estimated his WAR to be 5.5, 5.25, 5, 4.75, 4.5, 4 over the next 6 years. $4.5 million per win… and there ya go.
Matt Holliday is an absolute all-star player.
That's not how you calculate the value of a long term contract.
The team gets some sort of discount for guaranteeing six years. He’s not signing six one-year deals.
No, you didn't.
Those are about what you should project for Holliday. A fair contract for six years would be around $110M
Yeah, I guess once you figure in injury risk etc...
So a fair contract is about $110-115, and maybe we could get him for $95?
Totally
However, 130/8 is entirely reasonable.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:41 PM PST up reply actions
I was teasing
the Cardinals, whom Poochie likes, were rumored to have offered Holliday a 128/8 contract. The rumor was probably untrue.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 18, 2009 7:57 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe Jack Zduriencik is going to be like Ichiro...200+ hits every season.
Maybe many of those hits will be infield singles, but now and then something bigger. Cliff Lee was definitely more than an infield single. Stay loose Mr. Z, infield singles work too. The M’s are finally in very good hands.
What about Jorge Cantu?
He’s making about $1mm or so and could play 1st base or 3rd base. He provides 15-25 homerun power to the lineup. He had a line of .289/.345/.443 last year with 16 Homers and 100 rbis. In 2008 he had 29 Homeruns with 95 rbis and a line of .277/.327/.481.
The Guy is 28 years old next season compared to a 31 year old Johnson and would no doubt help the run-producing offense.
Yeah he sounded pissed and sad at the same time
Hopefully he doesn’t hate us.
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 17, 2009 9:49 PM PST up reply actions
We own him now
he’ll get excited when we tell him to get excited.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 17, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions
I don't blame him, actually.
Cliff Lee was initially traded to a contender (Phillies) and pitches in the playoff and even pitched in the World Series. He gets set on pitching another year and possibly beyond in a Phillies uniform only to essentially be booted in favor of Roy Halladay and traded to a team he probably didn’t think much of.
He’s going to need some time to get adjusted. Paging Mr. Griffey….
We shouldn't guess Z
The sample is growing. This guy is GOOD. (Theo + Beane + Schuerholz) / 3. I will go that far. He is equal to Theo or Beane or Schuerholz, and is a lot like a combination of the three, probably in that order. I WISH I could go to the USSM meet.
- WORK!!!!!!!!
by chrisisasavage on Dec 17, 2009 10:10 PM PST reply actions
failed
That was 4 pound sines, note 1. As in the word f@!k
by chrisisasavage on Dec 17, 2009 10:11 PM PST up reply actions
The Damon/Bay rumors are now over.
I’m looking for a trade with the Padres for their 1b guy. We lose our last free swinger (Loafie), our SP/RP (Morrow), and our cheap but unproven LFd (Saunders). I trust this trade and I trust Jack, although I wish it didn’t include Saunders.
I'm not sure why San Diego would want Lopez, as he's only under contract for 2 years and they're nowhere close to .500 until 2012
Adrian Gonzalez is gonna command a King’s ransom because of his $5m/y salary in 2010 and 2011 (though I’d still LOVE LOVE LOVE to get him)

by 














