tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post5925078409653617115..comments2024-02-23T20:49:09.057-08:00Comments on obsessivegiantscompulsive: Burrell Follow-Up: Crasnick Musingsobsessivegiantscompulsivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-6475666350060881802006-11-12T10:38:00.000-08:002006-11-12T10:38:00.000-08:00Thanks for the compliment and the good thoughts!
...Thanks for the compliment and the good thoughts!<br /><br />Thanks for seeing my point, I haven't seen anyone agree as much as you so I wondered if I was out there, but it seems - and still seems - so plain to me.<br /><br />I guess some fans expect the worse, after the Giants traded for Hawkins and gave up Williams and Aardsma, when it appeared that we had the leverage over the Cubs in that situation, and they could be right but I took solace that the Giants hadn't even called the Phillies yet at that point.<br /><br />It's a risky play but we have nothing to lose, I think, because Burrell has the timer ticking on the Phils to do something if they want to save money to get someone they really want. If they pass up on this opportunity, they wait another year and $13M with what they feel is a suboptimal team. And when a player is clearly singled out as an "outsider" in this way, it can't help but affect his play in some way, meaning he'll be worth even less in trade later. <br /><br />And Burrell doesn't ever have to allow the team to trade him anywhere, so he can be there for the next two years, disgruntled but willing to play it out, and that's never a good situation for the clubhouse. I can see a scenario where he's mad at the team, mad at being sat down defensively, mad at being openly unwanted by the team even though he has a no-trade clause that protects him from being traded without his permission, except for teams he has named as OK (and I assume he can rescind those as well), mad that he isn't wanted as part of the team's exciting future with Utley, Howard, and the gaggle of young pitchers they have coming up, led by Brett Myers. He could, out of bitterness, just sit and collect his $26M with lackluster play, that would show the team.<br /><br />So the Giants need to play this out, to refrain from having to include any of our top prospects in the deal. And, as you say, not because they necessarily will be major leaguers, but because we cannot afford to take even that type of risk with the team we have right now, we have to protect the future, as dim as it may appear to be prospect-wise.obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-32865472261875505812006-11-10T09:49:00.000-08:002006-11-10T09:49:00.000-08:00First of all, I read your blog every time you post...First of all, I read your blog every time you post and just wanted to thank you and let you know i appreciate your thoughts.<br /><br />On this one in particular, I think you hit the nail on the head. The leverage in this situation had belonged to Mr. Burell and Mr. Burrell alone. With the statement that he would waive his no trade to come to SF, he has essentially passed some, not all, of that leverage to sabean and company. <br />I think it is very critical for us to try and reliniquish as little talent as possible to get this thing done. Obviously I think it is imperative for us to include Benitez in this deal, but I think it is even more imperative that we refrain from including Sanchez, Lowry, Anderson, Misch, Sadler, or Wilson. The names I have mentioned may not turn out to be bonafide major leaguers, but to waste them in a deal in which the counter party is essentailly looking for a salary dump would not only be overpaying in terms of real value, but even more so in terms of the opportunity cost of not being able to include any of them in an alternative deal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com