The Red Sox loading for what passes for bear in 2011

Leave a comment

Could the Red Sox be biding their time this offseason and waiting to score big in the 2010-2011 offseason? MLB.com’s Ian Browne — and payroll math — suggests so.  After noting the blah free agent class this year, Browne writes:

. . . if you fast forward to next year at this time, general manager Theo
Epstein and his crew of assistants will be in a far more enviable spot,
one that could land them major stars who may have the impact that the
Yankees felt from CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira and A.J. Burnett en route
to a 2009 World Series championship . . . When you add up the 2010 salaries of David Ortiz ($12.5 million), Mike
Lowell ($12 million), Josh Beckett ($12 million), Victor Martinez ($7
million), Jason Varitek ($3 million) and Julio Lugo (the Red Sox owe
their former shortstop $9 million in ’10), that leaves a potential $55
million that will come off the books.

So who’s available next year? Joe Mauer, Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Lance Berkman, Carlos Pena,
Carl Crawford, Halladay, Brandon Webb, Jayson Werth and Cliff Lee.

Um, well, that’s no Teixeira and Sabathia, is it?  I mean, Mauer is probably going to sign in Minnesota, right?  Jeter and Rivera are old and would never go to Boston anyway. Berkman ain’t young. Pena is not an impact player for a team like Boston. Crawford is nice but has likely peaked, as have Werth and Cliff Lee, in all likelihood. Halladay, maybe. Webb, maybe, if he recovers from injury. But none of those guys are game changers.

Nice theory, I guess. And of course, payroll flexibility is always a good thing. But it strikes me that if the Sox are going to make a splash, it’s going to be via trades, not signings.

Jake Peavy is having a bad go of things right now

SAN FRANCISCO, CA - MAY 25: Jake Peavy #22 of the San Francisco Giants pitches against the San Diego Padres during the first inning at AT&T Park on May 25, 2016 in San Francisco, California.  (Photo by Jason O. Watson/Getty Images)
Getty Images
2 Comments

Veteran hurler Jake Peavy has not signed with a team. It’s not because he’s not still capable of being a useful pitcher — he’s well-regarded and someone would likely take a late-career chance on him — and it’s not because he no longer wishes to play. Rather, it’s because a bunch of bad things have happened in his personal life lately.

As Jerry Crasnick of ESPN reports, last year Peavy lost millions in an investment scam and spent much of the 2016 season distracted, dealing with investigations and depositions and all of the awfulness that accompanied it. Then, when the season ended, Peavy went home and was greeted with divorce papers. He has spent the offseason trying to find a new normal for himself and for his four sons.

Pitching is taking a backseat now, but Peavy plans to pitch again. Here’s hoping that things get sorted to the point where he can carry through with those plans.

The AT&T Park mortgage is paid off

att park getty
Getty Images
7 Comments

This is fun: The San Francisco Giants recently made their last payment on the $170 million, 20-year loan they obtained to finance the construction of AT&T Park. The joint is now officially paid for.

The Giants, unlike most other teams which moved into new stadiums in the past 25 years or so, did not rely on direct public financing. They tried to get it for years, of course, but when the voters, the city of San Francisco and the State of California said no, they decided to pay for it themselves. They ended up with one of baseball’s best-loved and most beautiful parks and, contrary to what the owners who desperately seek public funds will have you believe, they were not harmed competitively speaking. Indeed, rumor has it that they have won three World Series, four pennants and have made the playoffs seven times since moving into the place in 2000. They sell out routinely now too and the Giants are one of the richest teams in the sport.

Now, to be clear, the Giants are not — contrary to what some people will tell you — some Randian example of self-reliance. They did not receive direct public money to build the park, but they did get a lot of breaks. The park sits on city-owned property in what has become some of the most valuable real estate in the country. If the city had held on to that land and realized its appreciation, they could flip it to developers for far more than the revenue generated by baseball. Or, heaven forfend, use it for some other public good. The Giants likewise received some heavy tax abatements, got some extraordinarily beneficial infrastructure upgrades and require some heavy city services to operate their business. All sports stadiums, even the ones privately constructed, represent tradeoffs for the public.

Still, AT&T Park represents a better model than most sports facilities do. I mean, ask how St. Louis feels about still paying for the place the Rams used to call home before taking off for California. Ask how taxpayers in Atlanta and Arlington, Texas feel about paying for their second stadium in roughly the same time the Giants have paid off their first.