A's Take Lead on Furcal
Their offer is said to be 4 years 40 Mil.. he is also said to be moving closer on where to sign..
This should be interesting to see what DM does now
EDIT - UPDATE : Joel Sherman of the New York Post says the Blue Jays have dropped out of the bidding for Furcal. He adds that Furcal prefers the A's the least but they are offering the most money.
EDIT - UPDATE : Yahoo's Tim Brown talked to Furcal's agent Paul Kinzer, who said his client will sign by Tuesday. He's mulling offers from the Dodgers, Royals, A's, and...a mystery team.
Does this mean the royals have an offer out ?
about 3 years ago
focs
157 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I hope GMDM backs away from the negotiating table because he has been getting butchered there so far this offseason. Furcal could be just another case of that and any dealing of Guillen might lead to him shipping one of our stud pitching prospects and the other team not eating enough do ray mi. I kinda wish GMDM wasn’t a born again so that we could blame his bad deals thus far on a drinking problem.
GMDM has pulled off some decent trades and aquisitions but so far this year he is struggling IMO. I don’t think he has done a good job of working within the adjustment of the actual FA market.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
So, how do you suppose this is working, anyway?
I think pretty much everyone agrees that the Royals are desperately trying to unload Guillen’s Contract. (I just keep imagining this little animated stack of paper hanging around with Jose being in the same general vicinity.) Also, everyone seems to agree that the only way the Royals could actually sign Furcal is by clearing Guillen’s Contract off the payroll. There appears to be a universal consensus that there’s no way Glass would simply pay Furcal’s deal ON TOP of what is owed to Guillen over the next two years.
SO, my question is, how is it exactly that Moore is “negotiating” with Kinzer? Is he submitting officially “contingent” offers (like you would put a new house when you’re still trying to sell your old one)? I assume from the tone of this article (as with the others) that Furcal has received an actual offer from Moore. Or has Moore (and CAN he) simply told Kinzer, “Hey, if we can get rid of Jose, then we’d go 3/33”?
If you’re Kinzer, would you even consider that a legitimate official contract proposal? You can’t advise your client to turn down a tangible offer from the A’s in the expectation/hope that another team will be able to trade another player first to make their “offer” an actual reality. What if the A’s withdrew their offer and went after Cabrera instead? And then the Royals just couldn’t end up trading Guillen?
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
I think that
there is something going on with Kinzer and DM.. i mean Furcal would take that deal immediately but he hasnt.. obviously they think DM is going to go above it.. thats why they are waiting..
Werd.
I'm sure Moore has said that if they make enough payroll room, they'd offer Furcal 4/40 or 4/44
That’s about all the Royals can do unless and until they trade Guillen.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but then...
how long does Furcal give the Royals to get that done? I know the A’s aren’t giving Furcal a hard deadline right now and saying sign by “X” date or else we’re moving on, but wouldn’t it come to that sooner rather than later? Assuming Furcal is waiting to see if Moore can unload Guillen’s Contract, and assuming Moore can actually do that and then offer Furcal what he’s looking for, then the A’s are going to have to move on to their Option B. If I were them, I wouldn’t want to limit myself too much in pursuing other options because Furcal was waiting on the Royals, who were waiting on someone else to take Guillen’s Contract.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
"how long does Furcal give the Royals to get that done?
Not long. He’s using the Royals and A’s to get more money out of the Dodgers, where he really wants to play. So far, it looks like he’s working. The A’s “final offer” of 4/36 has turned into 4/40. He’s hoping that this motivates the Dodgers to up their offer. We’ll see if the Dodgers move. If not, then I think he’ll take the A’s offer by the end of the week. The Royals are functionally out of the running.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
Can you link me
where
A. it says Furcal is waiting on the dodgers
and
B. where it says the royals are out of the running
oh wait thats just your opinion not supported by links or facts… good game
Werd.
I'm speculating based on the available information
Multiple sources say that Furcal really wants to stay with the Dodgers. Of course those reports could be wrong. And here is why I think the Royals are out of the running. First, the Royals can’t get Furcal without trading Guillen and the vast majority of his contract which looks to be nearly impossible. Second, even if the Royals move Guillen’s contract, they’d have to outbid the A’s and Dodgers, which looks difficult given how high the offer has gotten for him.
I’m sorry if I’m ruining your Furcal fantasy.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
Its not that.
i just hate how you get on peoples cases when they say something without facts or links then you go do it yourself..
No where does it say KC is out of the Furcal sweepstakes.. as a matter of fact I saw today that they are one of three teams still in it.. and thats a link that says it
Werd.
I thought it was clear that I was speculating
And I said the royals are “functionally out of the running.” And I explained I think that.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
Please
My speculation makes sense and fits the available facts. Tell me where I’m wrong; don’t just tell me that you want me to be wrong.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
Your wrong when you say
the royals are out of it.. because no where does it say that..
I agree it is highly unlikely but im not going to say shit that isnt true.. and isnt supported by anything
Werd.
How many times do I have to say that the Royals are functionally out of the running?
I’m not saying they have no interest or no shot. I’m saying that the obstacles in their path to Furcal makes it extremely unlikely they could get him. My opinion is supported by financial realities, the offers on the table and the reports about how Furcal wants to stay in LA. What do you have?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:16 PM EST up reply actions
I'm with NY on this one
As much as I’d like to have a sparky leadoff hitter that has a cannon at SS with Aviles at 2B, I don’t think we’re going to be able to do it. I REALLY hope we can!
It’s all about the money, not the game.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
If DM could unload Guillen
I don’t think he’d be opposed to bidding more than 4/40. But yes, it’s unlikely that the Royals will be able to unload Guillen in the next week or two. Still, Furcal to the Royals is not the impossibility that you seem to think it is.
Nothing is impossible
But if one attempts to look at this objectively, it is extremely unlikely. Can the Royals trade Guillen’s contract before he signs with another team? Would the Royals go to 4/44? Would other teams go to 4/44? If one did, would the Royals go higher than that? This is why the Royals signing Furcal is extremely unlikely.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:12 PM EST up reply actions
It's tough to argue
over whether an event has a 2% or a 10% likelihood of happening. I think if they can find a taker for Guillen, the Royals become the front runner. It’s unlikely that they’ll be able to move Guillen, and even if a market develops as the OF market thins, it will take a while to find a fit. As it stands, I think the longer it takes for Furcal to make a decision, the more that favors the Royals.
Obstacles in the Royals path to signing Furcal
1. Have to trade Guillen’s contract before Furcal signs elsewhere. That is extremely unlikely.
2. Have to outbid both the A’s and Furcal
3. Have to overcome the fact that Furcal prefers to stay in LA
This all adds up to a miniscule chance that the Royals get Furcal.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Haha, I guess you don't mind arguing
over 2% vs 10%. Small vs miniscule, who cares? When it doesn’t happen, everyone will be right.
by kcdc1 on Dec 15, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Except for those who predicted the Royals would sign Furcal
And there were more than a few. And, for the record, I don’t think the Royals have anywhere near a 10% chance of clearing all three of those hurdles. Quite frankly, even saying 10% sounds like wishcasting to me.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Reality is a bitch
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
I think
Furcal desperately wants to stay in LA. LA is lukewarm to bringing him back on anything more than a two year deal. So its a game of chicken at this point with both sides wanting the other to cave in. Furcal is trying to use the A’s and Royals to get LA to force its hand. LA is using Jack Wilson rumors to get Furcal to force his hand.
That’s not to say Furcal won’t end up signing in Oakland or KC, just that I think he’d probably prefer LA.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Who wouldn't...
given all the relevant factors? If I were a multi-millionaire, I guarantee I’d rather live and work in LA as compared to KC (especially as I walked out the door to 9 degrees this morning). Not to mention the Dodgers are already contenders and he’s obviously got a certain comfort level there.
Or, maybe he really does want to come to KC so he can hang out with his old Atlanta front office friends all the time. Drink some beers, work on each others’ cars, have barbecues at each others’ houses, have a weekly poker game, etc. (It kills me how this gets mentioned as a big motivator for a free agent.)
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
the kid who played her brother on Who's the Boss? wouldn't...
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
+1
Or, maybe he really does want to come to KC so he can hang out with his old Atlanta front office friends all the time.
Players hang out with front office staff all the time. I’m sure they are best buds. Players typically sign with a team because they like the GM. Furcal is practically a Royal already!
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
I mean HONESTLY...
has any player in the history of professional sports had a tangible, substantial relationship with a GM besides, “Thanks for the contract, now where’s my check, bitch?” Especially one who realizes that this is probably his last big contract, i.e. no point in schmoozing with the brass when you aren’t likely to get another big deal regardless of how nice a guy you are.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
It's more likely he'll come so Callaspo can be his designated driver
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
4/40 is about as high as I think it's safe to go on Furcal
and that’s pushing it, especially for the Royals, who will contend in 2010 at the most optimistic
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
I dunno
I think the hitting will be better. The starters will be about the same, overall, any Hoch improvement might be offset by Davies return to earth. Who knows with Banny.
I’m guessing the bullpen will be at least two wins worse, though.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 3:27 PM EST up reply actions
Contending in 2009 wouldn't be optimism
It would be very, very unrealistic…even with Furcal. 83 wins doesn’t get you into contention, or even particularly close. Right now, I think 2010 is possible, but requires a good deal of optimism.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 3:32 PM EST up reply actions
Statgeeks like those guys at Baseball Prospectus
They predicted something like 90 wins. Those looking at the numbers thought they’d be in serious contention and they were. No one looking at the numbers will think that about KC.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 3:35 PM EST up reply actions
that's why he's the Perfesser!
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
It's Kyle Fing Farnsworth
he’s every bit the relief ace that punk David Price pretended to be in the playoffs!
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Did you notice that the Nats signed Langerhans?
I know you had mentioned him a few times.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Urge to kill rising!
JD Martin is also a good minor league FA signing. Good work Bodes.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
suicide now
it least it wasn’t those d*mn mariners
Thanks, kcscoliny, I have to go gargle with Draino now
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think it's going to be interesting what Moore does now
He couldn’t afford Furcal before, and he can’t afford him now. A 4/40 offer from the Dodgers doesn’t change anything. I guess the “interesting” thing could be him trading Teahen and/or Buck to make payroll room for O. Cabrera.
The immoderate moderator
I think he wants to play for the Dodgers
But I think he wants to continue to play the A’s off the Dodgers with the Royals possibility mixed in there to squeeze as much money out of the Dodgers as possible. He knows the A’s and Dodgers really have nowhere else to go. There aren’t any other good SS options out there. So he can afford to wait at this point.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
I would say
The A’s would are better equiped though if they dont get him.. they still have Bobby Crosby.. and the dodgers have.. HU ? ? Berroa?
Werd.
A's would have alot of money wrapped up in the middle of the infield with this signing.
Crosby is getting 3.5M this year and 5.25M next and Mark Ellis is getting 5M this year and 5.5 next year. Combine that with Furcals 10-11 per and that is alot of money for a small market team like the A’s.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
yeah
but that Ellis deal is absolute-fing-lute STEAL.
-1 hitter + 1.5 defender +.25 2B = +.75 wins above average + 2.5 AL replacement level = 3.25 * 75% playing time = ~2.5 WAR player. This dude is every bit the player Hudson and Furcal is. His market value was 1/12.5, 2/23.5, 3/32.7. I hope he likes NoCal…
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
The A's, yes
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
Look at the positive said..
we havent heard much about furcal to the royals lately so that means the chances are better that he is coming here lol
Werd.
I love the sound of
“He prefers the A’s least, but they’re offering the most money.”
Like, that’s a gun to his head or something. The guy’s not going to get less than 8 million a year, for sure, and he already must have quite the mattress full of cash. He’s free to go where he wants, and he has no fear of starvation, nor has his family for, say, three generations at least (unless he’s investing with Fred Wilpon). But…but…they’re offering the most money!
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
I predict
Furcal signs with Oakland.
KC trades, DDJ, Carlos Rosa & Danny Duffy for Furcal, a pile of bricks and a ‘toolsy’ rookie baller named Angel Rico Pena.
Says Moore, “This trade will be graded years from now based on how well Pena is able to produce, and whether my new brick wall is still standing.”
by David Howards Legacy on Dec 15, 2008 3:56 PM EST reply actions
-1
For bringing back the awful, awful memory of Roberto Hernandez
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Though
Raffy signing with the A’s, and then us trading something oif decent value for Crosby is a likely outcome
I was gonna post that and deleted it on the basis I didnt want it to become true
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
By "decent" value...
I hope you mean “diddly-squat.” We’ve got enough corner IF/OF guys with the low OBP/decent power combo. I’d hate to trade for a regular SS who has a .306 lifetime OBP and little power.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 4:11 PM EST up reply actions
All this focus on Furcal
Is anyone pursuing O-Dawg? Even considering the lesser premium position and the forfeiture of a draft pick, I would rather have him for the same money than Furcal.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Think he'll get more than 4/40?
I have a hard time seeing that, but you may be right. If someone is foolish enough to pay a mediocre reliever like Kyle Farnsworth 2/9.5 anything is possible.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Cardinals maybe
but not the Yanks unless they trade Robinson Cano.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
I know..
just thinking that they might trade him.. since there has been talk about it in the past.
Werd.
And can he play SS?
Whatever happens, I want the end result of this middle IF situation to result in TPJ being booted off the roster. With O-Dog, that’s two 2B’s and still only one (unless you don’t think he’s a true) SS in Aviles.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
I don't have a problem
With TPJ as a backup. Or Callaspo can be your backup SS, he can play in a pinch.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
It's not a big problem
but I’d rather have Callaspo and roll the dice. TPJ’s just not good enough on defense to get above replacement level overall
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Isn't that okay for a backup though?
Are there that many reserve infielders who are even replacement level?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
maybe, if you're desparate
and that’s even assumiing that he always gets in at SS, which, if the 2B is the one who is hurt, means that Aviles moves over
There are a lot of guys who have that function, but when there are 1 WAR alternatives like Callaspo and/or German available, they just have a lot more utility — more than the short-term benefits of having TPJ’s glove out there.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Even if we're talking about having a guy who is merely replacement level as a utility IFer
(and I think a smart FO can do better than that)…then the Royals should get one who does at least one thing pretty well. TPJ doesn’t. I don’t think getting to balls outside of his zone is sufficient when his overall defense isn’t much of a plus. In short, the Royals can find a utility IFer who is genuinely good defensively and can’t really hit. That player would be significantly better than TPJ.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
You'd rather have Hudson for the same money as Furcal PLUS losing a draft pick?
He’s not worth that much more than Furcal. I’m not sure he’s worth anything more than Furcal. He might be, but he’s not worth the big money plus the draft pick. The Royals are most likely to contend a few years from now. I’d rather have that draft pick in the system then than a rapidly aging Hudson.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
+1 especially at a position
in which the Royals actually have depth.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
When does GMDM sign Marcus Giles to a minor league contract?
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Whenever he can throw 95 mph
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
HOLY SHIT!
Ding dong the Wicked Witch is dead!
I can finally take a legitimate interest in the Chiefs again!
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
Live footage from Kansas City...
for those not from/living in the area:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Jn8K8EA7-Q&feature=related
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
Feel free to discuss this in its fanshot
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
I have an idea what that offer is
“If we can trade Guillen, we’d give you a 4/44 contract.”
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
All it says is that Furcal is considering offers from teams including the Royals
I think the Royals “offer” is a contingent offer. Think that’s the best one on the table? Don’t get your hopes up.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 6:06 PM EST up reply actions
See, now you're blatantly...
trying to reverse jinx this situation.
But this is what I was talking about NY—you’re a lawyer, I’m a lawyer, and maybe we’re be the only ones truly interested in the mechanics of how this would work given the Guillen/payroll/contingency situation, but it seems important given this report. If Kinzer is saying there’s an offer from the Royals on the table, then to me it would be an actual contract offer that would bind the Royals to pay Furcal as long as he accepted.
Now, maybe that’s just agent-speak, and you’re right the Royals have an “offer” out to Furcal as far as the terms of a proposed, contingent deal, but not an actual, binding contract offer. There is a pretty big difference, though. I don’t know—I don’t really know how Major League contract/negotiations actually work.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
If Kinzer is saying there’s an offer from the Royals on the table, then to me it would be an actual contract offer that would bind the Royals to pay Furcal as long as he accepted.
While that’s possible, I want to direct you to a key clause in that sentence: “If Kinzer is saying…” If this information is coming from Furcal’s agent, you can guarantee the information is being spun to help his client. Kinzer could definitely take the discussions he’s had with the Royals and call those discussions an “offer” because it helps his client. The more offers on the table, the better it looks for his client. Kinzer wasn’t under oath. Agents can be relied on to tell the truth even less than GM’s.
There is a pretty big difference, though. I don’t know—I don’t really know how Major League contract/negotiations actually work.
Theoretically there could be a contingent offer on the table, but what I think is most likely is that the Royals have told Kinzer that if they can clear enough room in the payroll they’d be willing to sign Furcal for 4/44. Kinzer describes this as an “offer” to the media in the hopes that he an use the Royals as further leverage against the Dodgers.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
Like I said...
it could certainly just be agent-speak. BUT, it would be VERY interesting to know the following:
1. Have the Royals actually made a tangible, binding contract offer in that all Furcal has to do is sign? If they have, then I would think that it wouldn’t be contingent on trading Guillen. I’m not sure if the MLBPA or Kinzer, just using agent-common-sense (if such a thing exists), would allow such an offer to be presented and accepted. I mean, after all, what would happen if Furcal accepted with the contingency, and the Royals couldn’t trade Guillen? Does Furcal become a free agent again?
2. Given 1, then there would be two alternatives: Either (a) Glass has incredibly given Moore a bump of another $10-12M per in payroll for the next 3-4 years without a net (meaning a Guillen trade is not mandatory), or (b) Glass has granted Moore authority to sign Furcal BEFORE trading Guillen, but has ordered that a trade be made at all costs if Furcal is signed. If it’s the latter, then the Royals will have really put themselves behind the 8 ball to trade a player (or contract) in which there seems to be very little interest.
This is why I think the distinction is VERY important and very interesting. But we may never really know.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 6:33 PM EST up reply actions
1. I don’t think the Royals have made an “official” contingent offer. And if they did, there’s no way Kinzer and Furcal would accept it. The A’s 4/40 offer beats the hell out of that offer. Hell, their 4/36 offer is much better than the Royals “maybe.”
2. Given 1, then there would be two alternatives
You’re leaving out the most likely situation, which is that the Royals have no actual offer on the table for Furcal and that Kinzer is just spinning things to help his client.
It is possible that Glass has given Moore the freedom to sign Furcal before trading Guillen, but I doubt it. Both Moore and Glass know how difficult it would be to trade Guillen’s contract.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 6:38 PM EST up reply actions
Good lord
None of us have any proof of anything. There’s a quote from the player’s agent saying there are offers, including one from the Royals. Do you think that if an agent says something then it must be true? Do you think that he’s going to tell 100% of the truth 100% of the time? Or could he be describing his discussions with the Royals as an offer, when it wasn’t really an offer? Given the Royals payroll situation, that’s what makes the most sense. But if you want to continue to believe in your Furcal-to-the-Royals fairly tale, you go right ahead. You’re in for a rude awakening when he signs with another team.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 9:08 PM EST up reply actions
Deleting your posts would be fun too
…but I don’t do it. Restraint is a good thing.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah,
your Option 2b really means that we might as well just keep Guillen anyway because we’ll have to pay his full salary after the trade anyway.
You’re leaving out the most likely situation, which is that the Royals have no actual offer on the table for Furcal and that Kinzer is just spinning things to help his client.
I wasn’t necessarily leaving that option out. That last post assumed that a binding offer HAD been made. I was just trying to run through the possibilities if a binding offer was out there.
your Option 2b really means that we might as well just keep Guillen anyway because we’ll have to pay his full salary after the trade anyway.
There’s no reason why the Royals would necessarily be forced to keep Guillen if they went ahead and signed Furcal first. It would just make it even more difficult because most teams would assume (probably correctly) that they would be even MORE desperate to trade him than they were before the Furcal signing. Miracles can happen (it’s Christmas, after all)—Glass could have said what the hell and decided to bump payroll up by Furcal’s probable salary if they can get the deal done. They don’t have to issue a press release or have Dayton announce that sort of decision in an interview with Dutton. Granted, the chances of that actually being the case are well below the aforementioned 2%.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 15, 2008 8:56 PM EST up reply actions
What type of lawyer?
Cuz I want Santa to bring me a divorce for christmas!
Securities
Four practice areas I would never touch:
1) consumer bankruptcy;
2) criminal defense;
3) medical malpractice (either side);
and finally, and most emphatically:
4) divorce/family law.
Sorry.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 16, 2008 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
Furcal to make decision by Tuesday
Mulling offers by the A’s, Royals and Dodgers
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
I'm trying to decide
how I’ll feel if the Royals get him, but for 4/48 or something dumb like that. Because he is as good player… but, yikes, not that good. Or that healthy
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2008 6:37 PM EST up reply actions
yeah, that would be a bad contract
4/40 is a stretch. 4/44 is too much. 4/48 is way too much.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 15, 2008 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
I'll give the Royals $5 to help sign Furcal.
If everyone on this board did that, we’d come up to one million billion dollars. He’d be a Royal!
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
All in all
I’m fine NOT having Furcal and keeping Aviles at SS and Callaspo at 2B.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
ditto
I hope he signs with the A’s and he blows out his back Larry Bird style 2 weeks into the season. Nothing makes me happier than watching the A’s get saddled with a terrible contract. I’ve always hated the A’s watching guys like Carney Lansford, Dave Stewart and Walt Weiss back in the 80’s. UCK
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Could Furcal be the Andruw Jones of this year? Perhaps the trade we don't make will be the most important one.
Offer what you think is fair and then walk off. Don’t get caught overbidding for a player you may not need and who may be just another albatross like Sweeney or Guillen for years to come. IMO.
by Steve Hovley on Dec 15, 2008 9:03 PM EST up reply actions
I just have this feeling that
Moore is going to go Jose Guillen on this and give Furcal 10/$120. He’ll be the next Julio Franco.
There is no way Rafael Furcal ends up a Royal
Like, zero to none. No one is taking Guillen’s contract on and Glass isn’t opening his wallet. It’s amazing to me that this rumor garnered 100+ comments because it just ain’t happening folks.
Waiting for April.
by DC Royal on Dec 15, 2008 10:30 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Maybe this little Furcal fantasy nightmare will be over tomorrow
And we can all get on with our lives.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 16, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions
just to add a little fuel to the fire...
1. Does it have to be 4/40 for the Royals? If Furcal doesnt want to play for the A’s wouldn’t it be possible for him to accept a 4/36 or 4/34 deal to play for a diffrent team? Why does DMGM neccessarily HAVE to offer more than 4/40? Do you really think a million a year is going to matter that much?
2. The agent seems to think his client is going to sign tuesday…either that means that A) The best offer by far is on the table and they are just hammering out the details(incentives, things like hotel rooms, transportation, etc…) and he expects that to be done soon. OR B) The offer that his player wants is going to be feasible for the the team offering it tomorrow. IE, ROYALS TRADE GUILLEN ON TUESDAY AND INK FURCAL1
I hope its B, A is much more likely
I refuse to set up a signature....DAMMIT
Does it have to be 4/40 for the Royals?
I really think it would have to be 4/44 for the Royals. I don’t believe for a second that he’s eager to play for the Royals and would give them a discount.
Why does DMGM neccessarily HAVE to offer more than 4/40? Do you really think a million a year is going to matter that much?
Why would he take less to play for the Royals? The A’s have a decent shot to contend in 2009. The Royals do not. And do you think he’d rather live in KC than the San Francisco bay area?
The agent seems to think his client is going to sign tuesday…either that means
One real possibility that you didn’t cover is that this is just a ploy by the agent to try to get the Dodgers to up their offer. He pretends that a signing is about to happen to force the Dodgers to make a move (or at least find out that the Dodgers simply aren’t willing to push their offer up any higher).
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 16, 2008 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
By the way..
According to Ken Rosenthal.. the braves are the 4th team in the Furcal sweep stakes.. which makes no since to me since they have Yunel.. and it looks like every trade involving Yunel fell through so i dont understand.
Werd.
They have Yunel and Francoeur
for Greinke and Gordon waiting in the wings.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 16, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions
Don't say...
things like that.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 16, 2008 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
Down at the bottom......
The bottom of the article also states that major league sources have said that the Royals are out due to economic reasons….. I wonder if this is a bit premature?
Good observation. I didnt catch that.
Kinzer said last week that the A’s, Dodgers, Blue Jays and Royals were the four finalists for Furcal. The Blue Jays and Royals, however, are out of the running due to economic reasons, according to major-league sources. The Dodgers will not offer Furcal four years and maybe not even three
Lets just play they waiting game then
Werd.
The only way that this deal makes sense for the Braves is if they think they have a legit shot at Peavy, seeing as how Escobar is solid at short and Johnson is nothing to laugh at at 2B. I don’t see Furcal wanting to move to 2B, especially since he is so coveted as a SS. My gut is if the Braves pull this one off, they are also going to go hard after Peavy.
last i heard
A. The Braves are done pursuing peavy
B. Peavy isnt going anywhere this winter
Padres CEO Sandy Alderson said
“It’s likely Jake will be with us Opening Day. We said from the very beginning in connection with both of those possibilities that we would not make a trade unless it made baseball sense. We are no longer actively pursuing any trade for Jake, which is not to say someone won’t approach us.”
Werd.
yessir..
But as my friend was just telling me (who is a huge braves fan) he was just reading Obriens column and it said that he believes that they are going for furcal to trade him for peavy or for grienke .. now this guy is a very well involved source for the braves.. he talks to the players and hangs out with most.. now it would be interesting to see if the royals are willing to trade greinke for yunel and ______.
Werd.
Nevermind.....
I forgot Flowers got traded to the Sox in the Vasquez deal- you can tell my brain is fried from finals…. :(
Stupid economy!
So I can blame Bear Stearns for the Royals not getting Furcal?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 16, 2008 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
Furcal agrees to sign with Atlanta
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
He'll be a Royal by nightfall
all it will take is Greinke, Gordon, and DDJ
Francoeur will be coming, too
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 16, 2008 9:53 AM EST up reply actions
and this probably sets up
Greinke for Yunel Escobar + others
Don't Stop Believing!
Hopefully Franceour
Because I want to see just how low a team OBA can go
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 16, 2008 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
Ugh....
Greinke possibly leaving really depresses me. The Royals are doomed to suckage through bad moves by their GMs. I give up. My new favorite team is the Yankees. Now I won’t have to go through this crap every year.
that's worse
think of how it will feel when they just miss the World Series!
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 16, 2008 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
Trading Greinke wouldn't be a bad thing
If Moore acquired the right talent.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 16, 2008 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
Teixeira close to making a decision
I think we will stun the baseball world by nabbing him.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
