If you had to trade Zito

[iHATEdodgers]

I don't disagree one bit that both contracts were horrible, and mistakes. You just seem to think there's no way a big deal to Beltran would be a similar mistake. But it sounds like we agree more than we disagree, in that we both would be ok with Beltran for 3 years.

Time will tell...

3 years good. 6 years bad. I think we agree on that!

 

[tzill]

Obviously that bold part goes without saying. I was responding to this statement:

Please note that if we sign Fielder, or Reyes, or even Beltran, we will be having very similar conversations about what to do with their bloated contracts in 2-3 years.

As I said I do not think we would be having anywhere near this type of conversation if we sign Beltran, he would a tradeable commodity unlike Rowand or Zito - and most importantly in the meantime he would actually bring alot to the table.

Of course I was thinking more along the lines of 3 or 4 year deal. If it's more than that I'd probably pass too. I don't think he is going to get what some of y
ou think he's going to get. He had a decent year this season, not a $20 million year. He played a combined 145 games in 09 and 10. I don't think too many teams will be offering him a max 6 year deal. He definitely has some wear and tear and this ain't the steroid era any longer where you can extendyour career into your early 40's as easily.

I think we basically agree here. He probably won't get $20MM a year. But an AL team could very well give him 5/75 since he'd DH the last 2-3 years. Still, he might prefer to stay in the NL and 3/45 might get it done.

 

[tzill]

Ever again? Or just this year? Because any franchise that limits its free agent shopping to those willing to accept 3-year deals as a rule is not going be a team that wins on a consistent basis.

I don't know if that's true, but regardless I think it's quite possible to remain a contender without big FA acquisitions. I am not ruling out big contracts to our own players before they hit FA.

 

[tzill]

Ever again? Or just this year? Because any franchise that limits its free agent shopping to those willing to accept 3-year deals as a rule is not going be a team that wins on a consistent basis.

Second point: in order to offer a six year deal, a FA would need to still be in his 20s....not many of those hit FA and if they do, there are usually red flags (e.g. Fat Fielder). I think as a general rule we won't/shouldn't be offering long term deals to FAs in their 30s. It might occasionally work out, but mostly it's going to implode.