In this economy, is the Holliday deal...
Tom
I'm having a real problem with this.
Thoughts?
Tom
CardsFan
"Tom" <drs...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20f33fa5-3051-4cd0...@s3g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
Mr. Holliday was fortunate in a couple respects. He played well for the
Cardinals (except for that one fly ball) after coming over from Oakland, and
he went into free agency in a year where there were few other options for
the Cardinals to consider.
I'm not going to make any comment about baseball salaries. There are CEOs
in America who get paid ridiculous amounts of money and are utter failures.
I hope Mr. Holliday will commit himself to working his tail off for the next
seven years to earn his money. If he shows any inclination to coast or dog
it, the fans should let him hear about it.
AJM
CardsFan
"DG" <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote in message
news:71a9k5dsdp2ujs0ll...@4ax.com...
> "CardsFan" wrote:
>>
>>"Tom" <drs...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:20f33fa5-3051-4cd0...@s3g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
>>> ...smart? Or even moral?
>>>
>>> I'm having a real problem with this.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>
>>Mr. Holliday was fortunate in a couple respects. He played well for the
>>Cardinals (except for that one fly ball) after coming over from Oakland,
>>and
>>he went into free agency in a year where there were few other options for
>>the Cardinals to consider.
>
>
> available?
It remains to be seen, but I wouldn't say waste. Waste is what the Cubs did
with Milton Bradley.
> His career numbers were elevated by playing in Colorado.
His OPS+ in his time with the Cards was 168, the highest of his career.
Yes, it was a fairly brief period of time, but Holliday sure appears to me
to be a top-notch hitter and at least a capable fielder.
>>I'm not going to make any comment about baseball salaries. There are CEOs
>>in America who get paid ridiculous amounts of money and are utter
>>failures.
>>I hope Mr. Holliday will commit himself to working his tail off for the
>>next
>>seven years to earn his money. If he shows any inclination to coast or
>>dog
>>it, the fans should let him hear about it.
>
>
> This contract is terrible. One end of a season is no reason to give
> him that much for that long. There will be numerous opportunities to
> pick up players for a fraction of this contract. Bad move...
Hey, I don't like the contract either, mostly because it is fully
guaranteed. Five years should have been plenty. The website says they've
committed $80M so far next year, so they have some room to pay Mr. Pujols
better than Mr. Holliday. They should renegotiate Pujols' contract.
What I'm most worried about next year is who will be the closer. I don't
see Franklin in that role again.
AJM
Dima
> see Franklin in that role again.
>
> AJM
Motte? Who else?
CardsFan
"Dima" <mail....@beer-co.ca> wrote in message
news:hi2d6r$l5t$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
How about Hawksworth?
AJM
Dima
CardsFan
He's less than a year younger than Motte. Certainly not the power pitcher
Motte is, but I think he has real potential. I suppose McClellan could be
considered as well.
AJM
Ka-POP!
Lots of $ and a long time, to be sure. I think he's probably "worth" it
(note the quotation marks) in the short term - 4 to 5 years. But this is
not a short term deal. Sure, a few players do excel into their late
30's/early 40's. I hope he's one who does. If not, well... contracts are
not always cast in stone these days and there might be ways around the
latter years.
I have to wonder if there was any real bidding which drove the price so
high or if this was just Holliday's (or, rather, Boras') price and StL
decided to pony up. The deal will, of course, also necessitate a raise
for Pujols in the near future. And people will make noise about whether
the team will be able to afford pitching. But this isn't your average
"small market" team. After all, it's not like the Royals can perennially
draw 3.5 million fans through the gates.
At any rate, the Cardinals are a better team with him than without him.
So I'm not disgusted with the deal by any means.
Karl
LidsvilleNine
> "Tom" <drso...@aol.com> wrote in message
I agree, but everytime any other Cardinal player showed signs of
laziness, this group was all over displeased fans and fully behind
that player.
LidsvilleNine
Maybe they can get Ian Hunter.
HankC
I agree with Karl. It's a good deal in 2010, it may not loook so good
in 2015.
It certainly helps with the revolving doors in the outfield.
I'd like to see some up-the-middle stability at SS, 2B and CF and hope
Ryan, Schumaker and Rasmus stay for a while...
Happy New Year!
HankC
Ka-POP!
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "Ka-POP!" <ka...@mediacombb.net> wrote in message
>> perennially draw 3.5 million fans through the gates.
>
> 3.343,243 to be exact, down 2.6% from 2008.
> 3,432,917 in 2008; and their peak in 2007 with 3,552,180.
> Only one other time did they get to 3.5 mil. and that was in
> 2005: 3,538,988.
>
It was an off-the-cuff estimate not intended to be accurate to the
second, third, or fourth decimal point. Perhaps I should have said "over
3 mil" or "nearly 3.5 mil" or something similar. But, sheesh, I think my
point stands.
>
>> At any rate, the Cardinals are a better team with him than without
>> him. So I'm not disgusted with the deal by any means.
>
> Neither am I, but I thought the team would get to bargain Boras
> down to $16 or 16.5 mil/year instead of $17.1 for whatever number of
> years the contract ran. Holliday got at least $4.2 mil. more in total
> than I figured he would.
>
>
Since my last post I have learned that the deal in question includes a
deferred amount to be made up in future payments to Holliday every July
until 2039 (?!) which will bring the short-term single season cost down
to around 15 mil. (Note the amount may be 15.x mil, just to stave off
any picayune corrections.) Perhaps that makes it a bit more palatable?
Karl