Comments on: Your trade deadline winners and losers

By: bgrant

bgrant — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 16:03:16 +0000

Minor correction: Nathan gets paid the same amount regardless of injury, but the Twins insured the contract and only have to pay 50% of the yearly salary if he is injured the full season. Assuming he comes back next year they are obligated to pay his full salary in 2011.
Regarding the non-tendering: The Twins will likely retain Capps next season no matter what the financial cost, if for no other reason than for PR. That arb contract for Capps next season might be an albatross, and certainly a big part of the reason the Nats were eager to move him for a sizable return from the Twins. Fantastic deal for Rizzo.

By: Jimee Johnson

Jimee Johnson — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 12:44:11 +0000

You can thank the embodiment of death, aka the Republican party, for this. Republicans JUST voted down extra payments to take care of first responders to the 9/11 terrorist act. Blame Republicans for these warped priorities.

By: Jimee Johnson

Jimee Johnson — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 12:41:27 +0000

You ought to know, but as a Red Sox fan, it is understandable that you overlook THE FACT that Boston has had the second highest payroll in baseball, and that the gap between them and the Yankees declined by another half million in 2010. What Red Sox fans don’t like to admit is that the Yankees get winners, while the Sox….get losers!

By: snowbum

snowbum — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 11:33:18 +0000

The Twins have had two pitchers go through Tommy John surgery recently, and neither was effective there first season back. They made this move wanting a closer for this year and next year. Also, they didn’t pay Nathan that much this year, it is in his contract that if he is unable to pitch, he gets paid less. Also, stop with the overvalued the save stat, it wasn’t just the save stat, it was also needing Rauch to go back to being a setup man.

By: lowleadman

lowleadman — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 10:31:42 +0000

Baseball need a salary cap if it ever hopes to be taken seriously like football. I find it a boring, one sided game played by the rich. Some day you will all wake up and wonder why a jerk like A-Rod can make $250,000 a game or some such nonsensical amount, and some of you will respond that he makes that much money because he can hit the ball. Then, sit back and let that really soak into you mind. Our warped priorities have caused this to happen. We care more for the A-rods of the world than the firemen who save our lives and homes or the cops who risk their lives daily and they will never sniff this kind of money. It’s sad, really.

By: TominNH

TominNH — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:57:42 +0000

It must be fun to try and buy a World Series every year!! But, I gotta wonder how the Yankees feel about paying A-Rod $27M/yr when he’s not in the top 10 in any offensive catageory! Could this guy be a creation of the ‘roids era?
Yeah, Im a Ed Sox Fan!! LOL

By: D.J. Short

D.J. Short — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:29:08 +0000

Thanks for the quote. I haven’t seen that, so my apologies. I think it’s worth mentioning that they’ll also be paying Nathan 11.25M again next season. Assuming Capps makes around $6M, that’s an awful lot of money to commit to two relievers, even for a large market team. Then again, we don’t know when Nathan will be ready to actually pitch again.

By: Final Countdown

Final Countdown — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:03:41 +0000

Bill Smith said: “To give him [Ramos] up, having that second year of control for Capps was a critical piece.”

By: ThePoopsburghStealers

ThePoopsburghStealers — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:34:19 +0000

What about the Reds…as losers. They are relying on “Kay” Automatic Out Bruce, Drew Strikeout Stubbs, and Uh-oh Cordero.

By: D.J. Short

D.J. Short — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:27:06 +0000

Respectfully disagree, sir.
It’s actually non-tender, not a DFA. They would just choose to not offer him a contract.

By: Bill@TDS

Bill@TDS — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:21:30 +0000

Again: no chance at all they DFA him. Won’t happen.

By: D.J. Short

D.J. Short — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:15:25 +0000

Actually, I do downgrade them further for that. Capps could make somewhere around $6 million in arbitration next season. As such, I’d be very surprised if he’s back with the Twins. It’s possible a team could really like Capps and try to trade for him, fully aware of the salary he’ll make, but I doubt it.

By: Bill@TDS

Bill@TDS — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:04:35 +0000

I totally agree that the Ramos-for-Capps trade was insane, but this makes it sound like you further downgrade the Twins for DFAing Capps after the season…a move which would be even MORE insane and which there is absolutely zero chance they will make. No offense intended, but that’s easily the silliest thing I’ve ever read on this excellent site.

By: quint

quint — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:08:08 +0000

I never got how the Astros return for Oswalt was poor, but were saved by getting Wallace – it took 6 seconds to trade Gose for Wallace, its almost as if that was already planned.
Their return for Oswalt includes Wallace and doesn’t include Gose.
Still probably should have gotten more, but it isn’t bad and then saved, its an overall assessment.
Padres are a big winner in my book.
I also don’t think the Rays are losers – I think it was always going to happen they were not going to be able to add, payroll is high and they need to keep their prospects to replace Crawford and Pena at seasons end. They have a bunch of good prospects that could help if needed down the stretch – they will be just fine and make additions that way.