Matthias wrote:First, I don't know how you can count on Crawford. I might be wrong, but I think his contract is up in the next year of so (including options)? Maybe the Rays bust their bank to resign him, but based upon past history, I doubt it.
Crawford's contract has options for 2009 and 2010.
What past history is that?
Signing Crawford to a long term deal? Signing Rocco to a long deal? Signing Pena to a long deal? Signing Longoria to a long Deal? Signing Shields to a long deal?
You get the point. I am pretty sure the Rays have never let someone go from here that went on to be anything more than average and most just to be terrible. Did the Rays not sign some people, yea, but those guys didn't need long term deals.
Pogo is right, the Rays do have those as option years, and they are working as we speak on an extension for CC
Most of those contracts just bought out arbitration years. The D-Rays have never had anyone good that hit free agency. So of course they are not going to have anyone have any leave that was good.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude wrote:Most of those contracts just bought out arbitration years. The D-Rays have never had anyone good that hit free agency. So of course they are not going to have anyone have any leave that was good.
Right that was my point. The guys they have traded away instead of signing to longer deals when they were close to FA: Huff, Lugo, etc. have done nothing since leaving here and that is why they were not signed to longer deals or kept on the team
thedude wrote:Most of those contracts just bought out arbitration years. The D-Rays have never had anyone good that hit free agency. So of course they are not going to have anyone have any leave that was good.
Right that was my point. The guys they have traded away instead of signing to longer deals when they were close to FA: Huff, Lugo, etc. have done nothing since leaving here and that is why they were not signed to longer deals or kept on the team
The DFO has more success than failures with it's dealings, that's for sure. deerayfan, as you know I have been critical about giving up the ghost on players-i.e., Josh and Elijah, (every time Josh crushes a ball I wince and think what an outfield we'd have with Josh, Carl and BJ)...The jury is still out on Delmon...
I applauded Madden's efforts last year in spite of the outcry for his head, and on balance, the DFO gets an A. You don't go from last to first without some bumps in the road.
Who would have thought we'd be having this discussion three years ago...
Matthias wrote:First, I don't know how you can count on Crawford. I might be wrong, but I think his contract is up in the next year of so (including options)? Maybe the Rays bust their bank to resign him, but based upon past history, I doubt it.
What past history is that?
Signing Crawford to a long term deal? Signing Rocco to a long deal? Signing Pena to a long deal? Signing Longoria to a long Deal? Signing Shields to a long deal?
You get the point. I am pretty sure the Rays have never let someone go from here that went on to be anything more than average and most just to be terrible. Did the Rays not sign some people, yea, but those guys didn't need long term deals.
Pogo is right, the Rays do have those as option years, and they are working as we speak on an extension for CC
Most of those contracts just bought out arbitration years. The D-Rays have never had anyone good that hit free agency. So of course they are not going to have anyone have any leave that was good.
Bingo. It's one thing to make a long-term commitment on salaries that are pre-arbirtation/arbitration years. It's quite another to pay free agency dollars to top talent such as Crawford. In the open market, my guess is Craw-daddy is $14MM/yr+ and I don't see the Rays paying that.
The past history I was referring to is....
* Opening Day payrolls for 25-man roster (salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses): o 2008: $43,745,597 o 2007: $24,123,500 o 2006: $35,417,967 o 2005: $29,679,067 o 2004: $29,556,667 o 2003: $19,630,000 o 2002: $34,380,000 o 2001: $56,980,000 o 2000: $64,400,000
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias wrote:The past history I was referring to is....
* Opening Day payrolls for 25-man roster (salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses): o 2008: $43,745,597 o 2007: $24,123,500 o 2006: $35,417,967 o 2005: $29,679,067 o 2004: $29,556,667 o 2003: $19,630,000 o 2002: $34,380,000 o 2001: $56,980,000 o 2000: $64,400,000
Previous ownership, which is something everyone forgets.
Crawford is in talks for an extension, he will stay here
Pena, Wheeler, and Percy were not to buy out ARB and FA years
nsulham wrote:With that said though I'd love to see them reach that point, and the same goes for the O's and to a lesser extent the Jays who are on the cusp themselves, because I'm tired of hearing all the experts and pundits claim that whoever wins the East (be it Yankees or Red Sox recently) is tainted because they "beat up" on the Rays and O's, and to a lesser extent the Jays, although mweir will proudly (and gladly) tell you how badly the Jays have owned the Sox the last few years
You haven't read a lot of my posts concerning the Toronto Blue Jays organization lately, have you?
Matthias wrote:The past history I was referring to is....
* Opening Day payrolls for 25-man roster (salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses): o 2008: $43,745,597 o 2007: $24,123,500 o 2006: $35,417,967 o 2005: $29,679,067 o 2004: $29,556,667 o 2003: $19,630,000 o 2002: $34,380,000 o 2001: $56,980,000 o 2000: $64,400,000
Previous ownership, which is something everyone forgets.
Crawford is in talks for an extension, he will stay here
Pena, Wheeler, and Percy were not to buy out ARB and FA years
Only Pena was on your original list. And his contract bought out 2 arbitration years plus 1 FA year.
And neither of these are major contracts in line with Crawford... Wheeler 3 yrs / $10.5MM Percival 2 yrs / $8MM
If you think that Rays ownership is going to do things differently and show a real commitment to the team by keeping Crawford around, then ok. You definitely follow the franchise as close as anyone. But there isn't anything apparent in their past dealings to make it obvious to an outsider for you to fly off the handle for.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias wrote:Bingo. It's one thing to make a long-term commitment on salaries that are pre-arbirtation/arbitration years. It's quite another to pay free agency dollars to top talent such as Crawford. In the open market, my guess is Craw-daddy is $14MM/yr+ and I don't see the Rays paying that.
Exactly. Tampa has never had a player like Crawford in the history of their franchise. Ever. Huff was not as good as Crawford, and by the time he was eligible for free agency he had fallen off the face of the earth. It is easy to say the Rays have never let a star go if they have never been in that position. All they have done is buy out arbitration and maybe a year or two of free agency to guys who are not even arbitration eligible. BTW that is pretty risky move, just look at what happened with Rocco, and if the guy stays healthy you don't even save that much money.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by thedude » Sat May 03, 2008 12:16 pm 
