FOX Sports - Burrell to Rays...2 years/$16m...

[bebopdeluxe]

A great value at that price...probably half of what he would have gotten in arbitration with the Phils.

His history as a DH is pretty bad, though...something like a .150 BA...

I wish him well.

(Thanks for the clarification, Skates)

[Skates]

Most guys adapt better to being a DH once they do it regularly.  Good deal for the Rays (not the Jays I believe).

[Derek Bodner]

Unbelievable.

We got an equally sucky fielder with a career OPS against lefties .200 points lower, who's 4 years older, we lost a first round pick to get him, and we signed him to a longer deal for more money per.

Regardless of the decision to offer arb to Burrell (we've had that discussion before), rushing to sign Ibanez before the market was set turns out to be a mistake, and deciding that Ibanez (with everything he entails, including the higher salary for more years, older, left handed, and losing a draft pick) is a better option over Burrell are the type of mistakes that come back to haunt you.  When Ibanez is 39, making $11 million on this team, preventing them from getting quality players to fill holes, and we're sitting here with no 1st round draft pick, it's going to look really bad.

especially when a better option could have been had for less years and less money without the loss of a draft pick.

This organization has wanted burrell gone for 4 years.  Now they've got their wish.

[bebopdeluxe]

dabods:

You are killing me.

I love how when this all started, you and jem didn't give a fuck about giving Burrell $16 million for one year (which is what he would have gotten in arbitration, in all likelihood).  Now, you rip the Phillies for giving Ibanez $10.5 mil a year "before the market was set"...and how do you know that the Phils would have gotten Ibanez for less than $10.5 million/year?  The Cubs gave Bradley $10 million a year for 3 years - to play RF (runners will be going from 1st to 3rd all day long on him).

Priceless.

While I probably would have been OK with the Phillies signing Burrell to the deal that the Rays did (and have to deal with the defensive liabilities that Tampa won't have to deal with), it is clear that they were ready to move on from the Pat Burrell era, and I don't have a big problem with it.

Somehow, I have a feeling that we will be seeing statistical updates in 2009.

[tk76-]

Compare this to the deal the Phillies, who let Burrell walk without offering him arbitration, gave Raul Iba?ez: one extra year at a marginal cost of $14 million as well as the loss of their first-round draft pick, for a player four years older and worse defensively. It also resets the market for this type of player (all bat, little or no glove, no speed) to something more reflective of the supply (deep, with Adam Dunn and Jason Giambi still available) and demand (shallow), which would indicate that Ibanez's deal will continue to stand out as high in dollars and years for a player who was not the best in his class this winter.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3811793&name=law_keith

I'm sure it's tough for Burrell to take a huge pay cut despite coming off a pretty good season. Same goes for Giambi (who made $21 million last year) and the rest of them (Raul Ibanez notwithstanding).

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3811762&name=Neyer_Rob

[Derek Bodner]

I love how when this all started, you and jem didn't give a fuck about giving Burrell $16 million for one year (which is what he would have gotten in arbitration, in all likelihood).  Now, you rip the Phillies for giving Ibanez $10.5 mil a year "before the market was set"...and how do you know that the Phils would have gotten Ibanez for less than $10.5 million/year?  The Cubs gave Bradley $10 million a year for 3 years - to play RF (runners will be going from 1st to 3rd all day long on him).

1) I said the Phillies should have offered arb to all 4 players.  Burrell was just one of my complaints.
2) You have no idea what arb would have yielded for Burrell.  Current market positions (and contracts free agents have already signed this year) are taken into account.
3) Burrell at 1 year/16 million (even going worst case) is far better and far less of a risk than Ibanez at 3 years, 11 million.   That extra $5 million this year is nothing compared to that $22 million we're going to owe that 37 and 38 year old left fielder
4) Even throwing away all the arbitration, the Phillies could have not offered Burrell arbitration and still re-signed him.  Burrell to Ibanez is a downgrade, a worse fit, a worse contract, and the loss of a top pick for a guy who will be 37 next year, which was the point of this thread.

You can dance around the arbitration argument all you want.  We've argued that, and it's pointless to continue doing so.  The fact of the matter, the known truth, is that the Phillies thought Ibanez was worth an extra year, an extra $14 million, and a first round draft pick.

That the Phillies could have pursued either, and they chose the 4 year older, left handed hitting, just as bad defensively, guy who cost them a first round draft pick guy, who cost 1 extra year and $14 million.

And that, IMO, was a very bad course of action.

You can sit here and continue arguing arbitration, lord knows we haven't beaten that one to death yet.  That, IMO, is simply sidestepping how steep of a price this organization paid to downgrade talent and get a worse fit.  That should be the crux of this debate, not a "what would have happened if they offered Burrell arbitration" debate we've had in the past.

What a horrid, horrid turn of events.

[Derek Bodner]

In its simplest form, this argument boils down to this:
after the 2009 season, the Rays will owe Burrell $8 million.  They'll have all their draft picks.  Burrell will be 33.
The Phillies will owe Ibanez $22 million.  We'll have lost a first round draft pick.  Ibanez will be 37.


Which situation would you rather be in?

I think the Rays made the better choice.  Significantly.  And that's not even considering team needs (we'll now not only have a defensive liability in left field, but we'll also have one who historically doesn't hit left handed pitching.  yay!).

I guess I can look at this optimistically.  Not only did we save a couple of million by not offering Burrell arb (only to immediately throw away 14 million more to Ibanez than Burrell got), but we also got to save the salary of that wretched first round draft pick!  Go Phillies ownership group!

[bebopdeluxe]

dabods:

1) The Phillies did not save "a couple" of million...they saved $5-6 million;

2) According to at least two ESPN writers, the arbitrator does not take into account the current market environment...it will be interesting to see what the MLBPA does if a guy goes into arbitration with great numbers and gets a pay cut over their 2008 salary (we'll see about that soon enough)...

To be honest, I really don't know if Ibanez is a downgrade...he has been awfully productive in a pitcher's park.  We talked before about Burrell's penchant for going cold for two-three months at a time - frankly, I was tired of it, and it looks like the Phillies were as well.  Even if guys like Rollins or Utley have periods where they don't produce at the plate, they still give you GG-caliber defense at up-the-middle positions, they don't require a defensive substitution, and they don't clog up the basepaths when they do get on base.

Obviously, the Phillies believe that Ibanez is an upgrade over Burrell.  We'll see if they were right.