Jump to content

Uribe Re-signed


DBAHO
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(The Critic @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:11 AM)
I appreciate the passion but don't understand the freakout.

They really had no choice if they didn't trade for another SS.

There was no viable in-house alternative.

Its become obvious they really didnt have a choice. It dissapoints me that we couldnt work out a trade for someone like Furcal though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 296
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(The Critic @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:11 AM)
I appreciate the passion but don't understand the freakout.

They really had no choice if they didn't trade for another SS.

There was no viable in-house alternative.

Yeah, ok. I'd rather have anyone on this team than Juan Uribe. He has eaten himself to worthless and I just can't handle another 162 with him as our SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:09 AM)
according to espn 1000

im going to kill myself.

 

The other options were giving up minor league talent like Sweeney for someone like Jack Wilson (and his horrific contract) or Adam Everett.

 

Picking up Uribe's option doesn't improve the team in 2008, but it doesn't make the team worse for the future. It's one year. And the Sox could still move him in a trade if they can find a better SS. It's not a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 09:18 AM)
Because so many teams are going to knock down his door and woo him with cash, right? I'll bet the market is dying for a guy like Juan Uribe!

IF the Vizquel deal set the market for weak hitting shortstops, then yes, it would appear that there was actually more money out there for Uribe as a FA than what his option said we would pay him, and so we'd have had to buy him out to pay him more than his option called for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(thomsonmi @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 09:20 AM)
The Score and Fox Sports also confirming.

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7418304

$4.5 million for one year. We did actually decline and renegotiate, saving $500,000.

If that's the case...can he still be used as trade material? What are the rules for trades if you renegotiate a player's options? If you sign a guy as a FA you can't trade him until the middle of the next season, does anyone know what rule applies here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 10:47 AM)
I'm shocked at the lack of speculation around Furcal. He really seems as perfect a fit as Toby Hall was when the Dodgers released him.

 

I assume they know something we don't.

$13 million for 2008 probably has everything to do with it. He's not exactly 100% physically right now. After the season it was determined he didn't need ankle surgery, but trading for him now would be a huge gamble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well, that's fine. For the amount it would have cost to bring in a replacement who's not significantly better, I'm fine with this. This likely means no Eckstein, which is definitely a positive. We can definitely succeed with Uribe in the lineup as long as we upgrade in LF/CF (assuming Fields is at 3rd).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 05:26 PM)
$13 million for 2008 probably has everything to do with it. He's not exactly 100% physically right now. After the season it was determined he didn't need ankle surgery, but trading for him now would be a huge gamble.

 

And I think he's another person who wouldn't be surprising if his name comes up in a few weeks as part of a certain "investigation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(thomsonmi @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:20 AM)
The Score and Fox Sports also confirming.

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7418304

$4.5 million for one year. We did actually decline and renegotiate, saving $500,000.

Well if they declined the option then they'd have to pay him his $300K buyout so they saved $200K if this is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:15 AM)
Yeah, ok. I'd rather have anyone on this team than Juan Uribe. He has eaten himself to worthless and I just can't handle another 162 with him as our SS.

I understand and agree with that, I just don't see anyone on the FA market who'd come cheaper and provide a considerable enough upgrade.

If the Sox aren't trading for a shortstop there was no other choice but to bring him back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 12:30 PM)
Well if they declined the option then they'd have to pay him his $300K buyout so they saved $200K if this is true.

 

 

I dont think they did decline it did they? It appears it was just a re-negotiated deal.

 

At any rate, i'm fine with this. Outside of a trade there really werent many FA SS's we could have taken to improve much and they would have costed more money. Unfortunately, there really wasnt a better option for us at SS for 2008. IMO, KW made the right move here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Markbilliards @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 09:33 AM)
I'm just disappointed because this probably means we're signing Hunter for a billion dollars. I really wanted Owens to get a shot.

That's actually still possible...if the Crede trade discussions come somehow to fruition. The lineup with Hunter still needs a leadoff hitter unless you think Danny can handle that job, and we know what kind of guy Ozzie likes at that spot in his order. And while I don't like the money and years, it's hard to think that a 3b/LF/CF/RF of Fields/Owens/Hunter/Dye is not going to be more productive both offensively and defensively than a set of Crede/Fields/Owens/Dye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we should all keep in mind that this may end up meaning absolutely nothing. The team now has Uribe locked in for $4.5M for 2008, and I'd suspect they are still looking to deal. Uribe is the backup plan. He may or may not be the starting SS. So in other words, we still know nothing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF. What is the point of this move and what the hell is the point of the 500K difference between the option and new deal. All KW and OZ do is preach how we need to stray away from all or nothing hitters with high K rates and low OBPs. That’s exactly what Uribe is so why the hell are you bringing him back, he’s a detriment to our lineup. This move makes no sense unless its actually to make Uribe the new Cintron and have him play backup INF while the team goes after a better producing SS. Uribe is the exact opposite of the type of player this team has been after, he strikes out a ton, doesn’t walk, has a terrible batting average, declining power numbers, doesn’t make productive outs & sacrifices, and isn’t very fast. SO WHY THE HELL IS HE BACK????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:35 AM)
Also keep in mind the division in which he was putting up those numbers, the worst in the game. His last 2 years in the American league were less than impressive and a .350 OBP only means so much when you can't do ANYTHING else. He doesn't even steal bases.

 

If the Sox do sign Eckstein they better have a good backup plan because he's starting to hit the DL for large chunks of games at a time. He missed about 40 games in '06 and about 2 full months last year. Watching Andy Gonzalez man SS for all of June and July is going to be unbearable.

Those are 100% my main two concerns. I do think that it is getting silly how much better the AL is than the NL. The gulf is as wide as it's ever been in MLB. (and probably in the NFL with AFC vs. NFC as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 09:44 AM)
I think we should all keep in mind that this may end up meaning absolutely nothing. The team now has Uribe locked in for $4.5M for 2008, and I'd suspect they are still looking to deal. Uribe is the backup plan. He may or may not be the starting SS. So in other words, we still know nothing.

Has anyone answered my question yet as to whether or not any sort of trade prohibition, as one would get with a free agent, applies for a player who's option you decline but who's contract you renegotiate before the FA period starts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 7, 2007 -> 11:47 AM)
Has anyone answered my question yet as to whether or not any sort of trade prohibition, as one would get with a free agent, applies for a player who's option you decline but who's contract you renegotiate before the FA period starts?

I'm afraid I don't know. I bet someone here does, but I'm not that guy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...