Please do not panic about Figgins not signing yet
It’s a weekend. The contract could be signed and waiting on him to wander up here and take a physical. The team might want a Monday morning press conference with all the brass up front and smiling. Maybe he wants a no-tickle clause in his contract. I don’t know.
But until we hear that it’s off, that the Angels called him at the last minute offering a 6-year deal or something, we should assume everything’s cool. Like Seattle. Holy mackeral is it cold out here. When the high is predicted to be below freezing. Maybe they’re waiting for the weather to get to something temperate before they fly Figgins to Seattle so they don’t freak him out.
Comments
24 Responses to “Please do not panic about Figgins not signing yet”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That is something I have been wondering: The Angels are rich and not stupid. They should know what they have in Figgins. I’d find it a little suspicious if they wouldn’t make him a competitive offer. If they don’t could it be that they know something we (and the M’s) don’t?
We’re not panicking. It’s just that the cold weather is appropriate for holiday traditions like caroling:
We wish you a merry Christmas.
Oh give us some figgy pudding.
We won’t go until we get some.
@vj:
What it means is that given his set of skills, the respective conditions of the teams, and the assessments of the front offices, the Mariners attach more value to him than do the Angels.
Even if you assumed both teams assessed his skills and aging identically, the Mariners would probably still make the larger offer because his skill set is more valuable to the Mariners right now than it is the Angels.
I thought “no-tickle” clauses were standard practice these days.
He’s certainly going to need one since Jr was signed again….
It’s OK if we lose him. We need a 3B with more power anyways.
KIDDING!
It might just be that the Ms now have better management than the Angeles.
I thought the line was they were waiting for Monday for Beltre to officially decline arbitration before wrapping this up.
Or maybe, that the Angels have Brandon Woods, no hole at 2B, and less concern about LF than we do?
Apparently they have made him an offer– of course, they also want to hang onto Lackey (or some say, trade up to Halliday), and have Gary Matthews hanging around their neck like the proverbial millstone…
Apparently they have made him an offer– of course, they also want to hang onto Lackey (or some say, trade up to Halliday), and have Gary Matthews hanging around their neck like the proverbial millstone…
I’m sure what you meant to say was like the proverbial SILVA.
I do not think the Angels management/ownership is stupid in the slightest. I think it is a mistake to think that way. They have put together a nice team and been competitive for many years.
I think it has more to do with the amount of money they Angels feel they can spend, compounded by the fact they have a youngster ready to take over that posistion for next to nothing. Also, they probably want to save money for Lackey. Just a guess.
Thanks for the thoughtful replies. I am unfamiliar with the Angels’ roster situation but that they seem to have a good replacement at 3B is certainly a factor that would reduce their willingness to spend on Figgins.
I was fine before, but after reading this entry I am a little concerned. Did I miss any rumor mongering?
It’s been discussed that their highest priority is Halladay and possibly Lackey plus trying to unload Matthews. They won’t be making a last minute push for Figgins. They save the salary and get the draft pick. Woods gets third for now but if the moves fall their way they could be in the soft market for an incentive laden three yr deal for Beltre. That would be a strange twist which could happen.
Nope, didn’t miss any rumors. It’s just that this signing has been discussed for days, then actually announced on a Seattle TV newscast but hasn’t actually happened yet. It’s a weekend still, relax. They’ll do it this week.
Even Pravda had a story about it on Dec. 4. And we all know that Pravda means “truth.”
Baker just tweeted Figgins was having his physical.
If the Angels aren’t looking for a replacement 3B, what does that do to the market for Beltre? His field shrinks to … Baltimore, Minnesota, San Francisco … ??
Yeah, the Angels have other fish to fry — in addition to Lackey and an unlikely run at Halladay (who apparently wants to go to a team that trains near his home in Florida, and has a no-trade clause to ensure it) — they also have a departing fan favorite in form of Vlad (however diminished he might be now, and however much I enjoy him as a player, I sure hope he’s no longer in the AL West next year). Their needs and priorities are not the same as the M’s, so it makes sense they might value the same player differently. If Tui had been playing 3B all last season in Tacoma, vacuuming up balls on the field and tearing the cover off it at the plate, would the M’s be making an offer to Figgins? Yet presumably their evaluation of Figgins as a player would be the same; only their needs would have changed.
Yeah, I was wondering if that could be a consideration as well — announcing his replacement before Beltre has even opted out has a certain disrespectful “don’t let the door hit you” air to it. And who knows, maybe the Figgins contract is contingent on Beltre not accepting. (Though I do love the idea of Beltre fielding 3B and Figgins playing 2B)
Speaking of Matthews, and Silva, they both make an appearance (one after the other!) on The Ten Worst Baseball Contracts of the 2000s over at Yahoo. It’s worth reading as an amuse bouche leading into the Winter Meetings: the decade may be almost over, but it’s quite possible at least one contract announced in the next few days will be a candidate for such a list in the future. And while we can certainly quibble with the rankings (and the inclusion of some at the expense of others) the article is entertaining and stat-nerd friendly; consider this passage regarding the very Mr Matthews:
As you would expect there are a lot of pitchers on the list — though number one came as something of a surprise to me, mostly because I’d completely forgotten him. But once you get past the usual suspects (Zito, Pavano, etc) what really struck me is how many are from the Dodgers — a team that I hadn’t previously thought of as being plagued by bad contracts this decade. I guess I just don’t pay enough attention to the NL, and the Dodgers have been fairly successful (albeit in a generally weak division) in spite of it, but for Dodger fans it almost sounds like their Bavasi era went on and on and on. Which puts their recent decision to not offer arbitration to anybody in a different light: apparently, dumb decisions aren’t quite as unusual there as I thought.
BTW, “chemistry” fans, this should make you happy.
Maybe the Rockies, who didn’t seem particularly happy with either Atkins or Stewart last year. Seems unlikely though; Beltre’s biggest potential suitor was the Phillies, of course, before that idea got Polanco’d.
It’s really a shame for Beltre that Mike Lowell is signed though next season: Adrian would have lots of fun hitting balls at (and over) the Monster, and playing daily for Boston would finally allow his defensive wizardry to get the adulation it deserves.
And speaking of panic, I sometimes wonder if M’s fans don’t all think they live here.
Hey remember, Cliff Corcoran? He’s the genius at SI whose analysis of the M’s offseason plans was:
Well, he’s back with his analysis of the “excellent move” the M’s made in signing Figgins. It’s actually not bad, inasmuch as his caveats are the things you would expect (aging, mostly) although he weirdly equates Beltre’s 2004 HR totals with Figgins 2009 walk rate (one was park-dependent and a clear blip, the other is not, and is part of a multi-year trend).
But he has no explanation of how a team that had no targets, nothing to build for, and nothing to gain by acquiring players is nevertheless doing an “excellent” job of doing just that.
(Yeah, I know: fish, barrel, shotgun. It’s still comical).
For those of you who decided to panic anyway, Baker just reported that Figgins will have his physical tomorrow and the deal will be official late tomorrow or early Tuesday.
Thanks Joser. I remember posting the original one and people were going crazzy over that article and rightfully so. Although I am still wondering why he is a job?