Network News

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

Teixeira Watch, Day ... Whatever

In the absence of Teixeira News, we bring you Teixeira Speculation. Almost the same thing.

Randy Youngman, a columnist for the Orange County Register, doesn't believe Teixeira will end up with the Angels ... but he doesn't see him landing with the Nats or the Team-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named either. It's a short item in a laundry list column, so here are the money graphs:

Knowing agent Scott Boras' affinity for the big stage, I'm guessing Teixeira's headline-grabbing signing will be announced during baseball's winter meetings Dec. 8-11 in Las Vegas. What better place for the rich to get richer?
But I don't think it will be with the Angels. If he were going to re-sign in Anaheim, I think it already would have happened. Just a gut feeling. Even the people I talk to in the organization don't seem optimistic.
Teixeira would be ridiculed if he signed with perpetual losers such as the Baltimore Orioles or Washington Nationals, so my guess is he'll sign with the Boston Red Sox.

The Boston Globe has a nice summation of the Teixeira chase in its "Buzz" blog, including a few words of interest for Nats fans.

And Danny Knobler at cbssportsline.com mentions "scary" money from the Nats.

By Tracee Hamilton  |  November 24, 2008; 8:30 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Shots At the Breeze... With Ryan Zimmerman
Next: Willingham Thinks He'll Play OF With Nats

Comments

"Teixeira would be ridiculed if he signed with perpetual losers such as the Baltimore Orioles or Washington Nationals, so my guess is he'll sign with the Boston Red Sox."

I hope they rip apart anaheims minor league system and have bud selig in charge of the team for a couple of years and see how perpetually the angels lose.

Posted by: theredskin | November 24, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Scary money?

From what I have seen from the Nats officials, they are very tight lipped about contracts and money. So who is actually doing the blabbing to the reporter? As long as "officials" are unnamed then it could just be a Boras plant making fake offers in the hot stove arena. I kind of like the Yanks way of dealing at this point--make one huge offer and let it sit on the table with a deadline attached.

Posted by: driley | November 24, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

This article just seems like a another addition to a long list of barely researched, not referenced, none quote wonders that keeps the hacks working through the winter.

I think Tracee's "...whatever" title sums it up rather nicely.

Posted by: soundbloke | November 24, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Isn't it a bit early in the Nats' life to call them "perpetual" losers?

I mean c'mon...

Posted by: rossfeldman | November 24, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

$200M over 10 years...

Nice and splashy, but I can't help but wonder what if we spent that SAME amount of money on prospects and on the draft.

May take a little longer, but in the end I'm betting the final product will be better.

Let the Yank Mes, the h'Os and the Retread Sox spend themselves into bankruptcy.

Posted by: DesertNat | November 24, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Desertnat:

Well said sir! I think the question is, why not do both though. Texeria will generate a lot of money is I think the theory. But frankly I agree with you. That money is no way to build a franchise. Unless you are the Marlins and trade him next year!

Posted by: soundbloke | November 24, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

"$200M over 10 years...Nice and splashy, but I can't help but wonder what if we spent that SAME amount of money on prospects and on the draft."

We still can. $20 million a year for Tex still leaves the Nats $30+ million a year less than the Braves and Phillies. Plenty for prospects, draft picks, and even a high priced free agent pitcher.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | November 24, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

I second PB's comment, which doesn't happen often. The Nats have PLENTY of money to spend and other teams do not.

Posted by: Section506 | November 24, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

It's not the money that worries me, it's the effect on the other 24 members of the clubhouse. You'd have 15 Players under $2M per year, 5 more between $2-$5M, maybe 4 between $5-$9M, and then 1 at $20M. That puts a lot of pressure on the 1 guy to lead on the field, in the clubhouse, at practice, at club functions, etc.... I'm not saying that Tex isn't up to it, but 10 years is a long time to bet on it.

I want him on the team too, but 10 years at $20 is a bit of a risk. Especially if you can get Dunn for $60M or even Burrell (why can't Burrell play 1B?) for $40M. (Are those realistic numbers?) Ther not as good as Tex, but they could help.

BTW, name the big free agents playing on the 2 teams that went to the Workd Series this year. For the Phillies? None. For the Rays? None. Both had signed spare parts: Feliz, Iwamura, etc....

Posted by: natbisquit | November 24, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone seriously believe the Nats have any shot at signing Teixeira? Why is this still making news?

Posted by: tboss | November 24, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

The only thing scary on the sportline link was Knobler's mug shot.

The Tex watch is still making news because Teixeira hasn't signed with anyone yet silly.

Posted by: LosDoceOcho | November 24, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

The thing about Teixeira is that he's nearly a perfect fit with the Nats. The only downside is that we have Nick Johnson under contract, and he's pretty much not tradeable.

I think this might be one case where "The Plan" doesn't address a particular contingency: The Nats are not "one player away", yet there seems to be almost no other meaningful way to fill the hole at 1B. The trade route is a possibility, but the Nats really don't have the depth of prospects yet that would make a trade palatable and relatively inexpensive, talent-wise... though if anyone can be creative there, it would be Bowden.

The fact that there may be some credible media reports that don't completely discount the Nats implies to me that their chances are (slightly) better than you would imagine. I think that a lot of baseball minds would just assume out of hand that the Nats offer would not be credible, even at a market price... So I assume that means that these reporters have heard something... But the only place I've seen it reported firsthand was with Ladson... So I am not jumping all over that as a credible report.

Fingers crossed...

Posted by: wigi | November 24, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Let's not forget that, if we've learned one thing, it's that big-name sportswriters and analysts are usually behind the curve, not in front of it. I don't know why this has become the case, perhaps because you can make a better career out of spouting conventional wisdom and being wrong like everyone else than by ricking a bold prediction, but I don't think anyone can argue that there's much bold prediction going on anywhere in sports-media.

Posted by: Section506 | November 24, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

OT, but how about snatching this guy from the Cubs in the Rule V draft? A former highly-regarded prospect that could, at the very least, be a lefty out of the pen, with significant upside beyond that:

Donald Veal | Stats | Organization – Chicago (N)
6-4 / 230 | Age – 24 | LHP | B/T – L/L | Drafted – 2005 (R2) | Prima CC (AZ)
After a tumultuous 2008 offseason during which Veal attended to personal matters, Veal continued to miss bats and walk batters in 2008. He has an imposing presence on the mound, and keeps hitters off-balance with a deceptive delivery that includes a high leg kick and hidden arm slot. Veal is an excellent Rule 5 target, so long as the drafting team is willing to finally do what Chicago refused – move Veal to the pen. The mid-rotation upside of Veal and big arm has provided the Cubs too much to dream on, and as a result they have done Veal the disservice of not putting him in the best position to succeed. Out of the stretch, his motion is much more controlled and the results are stunning. Out of the wind-up, Veal posted a 2.06 WHIP, including 6.09 BB/9 and a .310 BAA. From the stretch, however, batters hit just .236 against him, and he dropped his BB/9 rate to 3.84. His strikeout rate dips by 1.5 SO/9, but it’s an easy tradeoff. Veal could potentially be an effective lefty-reliever right now, and should be on the short-list for any team. He could top-out as a lefty set-up man or multi-inning swing man, though he would work best as a lefty-specialist where could take full advantage of his L/R splits (.221 BAA vs. LH / .290 BAA vs. RH in 2008).

Posted by: BobLHead | November 24, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

make that "ACCURATE bold prediction" and I'm in.

And will you, Wigi, and BobL please quit injecting sense into an otherwise perfectly good blog? You're making the rest of look bad.

*****
but I don't think anyone can argue that there's much bold prediction going on anywhere in sports-media.

Posted by: Section506 | November 24, 2008 1:23 PM

Posted by: CEvansJr | November 24, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I, like everyone else, would like a defintion of "scary money."

Exactly who would find the total frightening? My hunch is that a $200M offer from the Nats is more likely to induce fear in the Lerners than anyone else.

Here's my put-up-or-shut-up challenge: If the Nats sign Tex, I'll buy an authentic Nats jersey. That's like a $250 mail-in rebate!

Or a 0.000125% discount!!

Posted by: JohninMpls | November 24, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Yeah. The speculation about Tex does absolutely nothing bit annoy fans and drive up value. We keep getting quotes from people "familiar with the organisation", which I'm pretty sure just means 'guy who works for Boras'. It's all so vague and only serves the players agent. I can't wait until Tex sign and we can all move on to pointless and hypothetical speculation about Adam Dunn.

Posted by: soundbloke | November 24, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Another potential Rule V guy (the draft is December 7, which believe it or not, is coming up fast):

Daniel Mayora | Stats | Organization – Colorado
5-11 / 160 | Age – 23 | 2B | B/T – R/R | Signed – 2003 | Venezuela
Mayora finds himself as a Rule 5 draftee more as a result of the middle-infield depth in the Rockies’s system than because of any short-coming of his own. The diminutive second-baseman started his career as a shortstop and slid over to second after the Rockies brought in high-ceiling prospects Chris Nelson and Hector Gomez in 2004. Mayora handled the switch with little trouble, displaying shortstop-quality range to both sides and a solid arm. He also showed no trouble handling the double-play pivots from the other side. Offensively, Mayora continues to be very solid but not eye-popping, posting a career Minor League line of 297/261/441 through HiA. While he shows the potential for above-average pop for a middle-infielder, he would be best served to stick with a gap-to-gap power approach, which keeps his swing short and increases his ability to consistently square-up. His strikezone command is improving but still a work-in-progress. The Rockies may have done him a disservice by not challenging him at AA, though the sheer number of SS/2B in the Colorado system was bound to produce Rule 5 casualties, eventually. The biggest hurdle for any team selecting Mayora will be jumping him from HiA to the Majors, though defensively he should be able to hold his own. For a team willing to be patient with his likely below-average 2009 production, Mayora could provide above-average second base defense or average shortstop defense in the future, paired with average offensive production.

###########

OK, I know we already have too many MIs, but the point is, this guy is younger and has more upside than the AG or Hernandez, and besides, evidently the Rox have a glut of MIs in the minors blocking this guy, and thus should be in position to settle for something in a trade if we decide we need to stash him in the minors.

Posted by: BobLHead | November 24, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

$700bn + $700bn = scary money

Posted by: BobLHead | November 24, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Yep, a few hundred million dollars here, a few hundred million dollars there, and pretty soon you're talking about some serious money.

And when are they putting a profits cap on the team owners? Or a price cap on the tickets?

Posted by: CEvansJr | November 24, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

"Scary money" has been kept in the safe far too long without seeing the light of day. Money needs to breathe.

Posted by: jctichen | November 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Tex is definitely a long shot to sign with the Nats, but it is within the realm of possibility. There probably is/will be an offer from the Nats and it probably is/will be close to 10 for $200m. I think the big question is whether or not he can be convinced of what some of us (including myself) believe - that this is a team a year or two away from serious competition, and that for at least four or five of the years he is here they would have a shot at a pennant and that history would show it was more or less HIS team. I think a sell job is in order, and I think that (plus a lot of money) is how you get this done.

Posted by: ajtrue78 | November 24, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I still think we have a better chance f getting Tex at a higher yearly number for a shorter duration. that way he will be eleible for another massive payout while he is still young enough to get a 5-6 year deal. Say 5 years at $25M and then he could sign a 5-6 year at $30M at the age of 34. Some player/Team options might work to give both sides safety/upside.

Posted by: NatsWin | November 24, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Love Veal, BobL. Not the dinner, the pitcher (OK, the dinner too). Good use of the top pick for rule 5. Can definitely have him work with St Claire, throw a little mop up, and see if he can grow into a bigger role. The Soria route. Is he related to Bob (Veal not LHead)?

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | November 24, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Renteria signed with the giants 2 years 18 mill.

Posted by: Baseball95der26 | November 24, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

The suggestion that Texeira is demanding some sort of premium to lay for a losing squad like the Nats seems to me to be ill-conceived, if true. If Texeira would be interested in playing for a winner, and would also be interested in playing for the Nats, demanding the Nats pay millions to get him is self-defeating. If he's even considering playing here, he shouldn't be insisting the Nats break the bank to sign him. That would leave them with that much less money to invest in other players. If winning is important to him, then it's stupid to ask losing teams to pay extra for his services.

Posted by: fischy | November 24, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Hey, folks. Had my head down for a while there, but I've just caught up on old NJ (going back to the end of the season -- it was fun reading that old stuff) and can maybe join in now.

Bob, I'm a fan of both the pitcher and the dinner. It'd be plenty easy to toss aside one of our existing relievers to make room for him. I like the second baseperson's OBP over several years, but I'm leery of the jump straight from high-A ball. Would certainly be a risk. Of course, as we all know, our beloved Nats need to take some risks.

Anyway, I've been enjoying the hot-stove talk I've read so far and can't wait for some real news. I'm excited to see what plodding right-handed outfielder we pick up next.

Posted by: Scooter_ | November 24, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

OK, so what would they have to sell him on, specifically?
1) the pitching is here, or coming soon.
Tough to see that, unless they sign Lowe, or Burnett, or somebody else who can be taken seriously.

2) the defense is much better.
They need a really good 2nd baseman, and a reasonable improvement from Milledge in center, and the non-starters in the field.
At least. And some help holding runners. Or a secret velcro spot near second that the Nats can discreetly avoid, but would stop a runner sliding in, just short of the bag.

3) the team would have a contender-worthy offense for the next few years, with him in it.
Odd, considering 2007, but I believe this, IF -- Willingham, Milledge, and Dukes can be counted on for, say, 425 games, and 55-60 home runs, and 200 RBI between them; Zimm, Guzzie, and Flores are at least as good as 2007; whoever starts at 2nd can reliably clear the pitcher's spot; and they all stay reasonably healthy. And they quit running into outs on the bases every other inning fer crying out loud. Where are they going?? What are they thinking??

*********
Tex is definitely a long shot to sign with the Nats, but it is within the realm of possibility. There probably is/will be an offer from the Nats and it probably is/will be close to 10 for $200m. I think the big question is whether or not he can be convinced of what some of us (including myself) believe - that this is a team a year or two away from serious competition, and that for at least four or five of the years he is here they would have a shot at a pennant and that history would show it was more or less HIS team. I think a sell job is in order, and I think that (plus a lot of money) is how you get this done.

Posted by: ajtrue78 | November 24, 2008 3:28 PM

Posted by: CEvansJr | November 24, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

The Velcro(R) idea has merit and should be investigated.

Posted by: Scooter_ | November 24, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Let me say this, there's no salary cap in baseball. The Lerners have decided to run the Nats like a small market team in a major market. Our payroll should be at least 80 million. We should have room to make a run at a 28 year old All-Star who fills multiple needs. I dont think we'll get him, but signing him makes sense.

Posted by: BillyBeane | November 24, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Guzman 6
Milledge 8
Zimmerman 5
Texiera 3
Dukes 9
Willingham 7
Flores 2
What 4
pitcher 1

Not that it matters much in late November, but Willie Harris is the only 2nd baseman on the depth chart at the moment. FWIW

Posted by: CEvansJr | November 24, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

anybody else notice the "New Post" posts stopped when the new sign-in thing started?

Posted by: CEvansJr | November 24, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

By which he means to say ... new post.

Posted by: Scooter_ | November 24, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company