Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Some Movement... But Not on Teixeira

Things are happening here at the winter meetings, but not on the front all of us are watching closest.

Some nuggets:

*The Mets have all but wrapped up their deal for closer Francisco Rodriguez. The contract will be for three years and around $37 million, with a vesting option based on appearances that could kick it past $50 million.

*There is rumbling that the Giants are preparing to enter the CC Sabathia sweepstakes, which could set up a fascinating dynamic: How close to the Yankees' offer (six years, $140 million) would the Giants have to get to land Sabathia? Clearly, Sabathia, a Bay Area native, would love the opportunity to pitch in his backyard. But would he leave, say, $40 million on the table to do so? Would you?

*The Orioles are believed to be close to completing a trade with the Reds that would send catcher Ramon Cincinnati and bring super-utility man Ryan Freel to Baltimore. This would open the door for the Orioles to give the catcher's job to uber-prospect Matt Wieters, although they might still sign a low-cost veteran to split time with the kid.

*The Red Sox are making a big push for right-hander A.J. Burnett.

By Dave Sheinin  |  December 9, 2008; 4:37 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Loose Ends, Day 1
Next: More Details on Mets-Rodriguez Deal


so, which team is closer to winning, Giants or Nats? If there is "no way" that Tex is signing with the Nats because they aren't ready to win right now, how can anyone then say that the Giants have a shot of landing Sabathia using the same criteria (he's a local boy and might consider a discount to play closer to home)?

Posted by: erocks33 | December 9, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Well, CC has expressed his longing to play on the west coast and has left probably an unmatchable offer linger for a couple of weeks. Thus, the suggestion he'd take a discount to go to the Dodgers, LAA, or SF.

Tex has given no indication that he wants anything other than the most money, and is reported to have a preference for a contender. But I still give the Nats and maybe the Os a shot if they put up the $$.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 9, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse


We don't know how big a deal it is for Teixeira to play close to his childhood home. It is clearly something that Sabathia wants.

... and if it is a big deal, the O's could make the argument that they are the team to sign with, compared to the Nats.

Fortunately, more intangibles favors the Nats.

Posted by: wigi | December 9, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Yes, but all I've heard is that the union would not stand for Tex taking less money to play closer to home (if that's what he wanted), so I can't see how the union would allow CC to do the same to play in his backyard.

Posted by: erocks33 | December 9, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

If SF can cobble together a 5-yr+, $135M+/- offer, they might be in the hunt; I really think that Sabathia wants to avoid the media circus of NY.

Posted by: BinM | December 9, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Wigi - Sad to agree, but Teixeira looks at this as a business opportunity that could come down to the highest bidder, unless he's teased by a couple of opt-outs spread across the length of the deal.

Posted by: BinM | December 9, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

@erocks: It's not necessarily total money, but can be more about $M/year. Say Team A offers a 27-yr-old player a flat $100M guaranteed over 10 years; Team B offers the same player $70M guaranteed over say, 7 years, including options (opt-outs, vested, player or club) - which contract would be better in the players' or Unions' mind?

Posted by: BinM | December 9, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company