Comments on: Why Red Sox should not sign Mark Teixeira

By: KingOfTheBritons

KingOfTheBritons — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:20:05 +0000

There is nothing in the Sox system that nears what we would get out of Tex in his prime. Sign him now, or we’ll be chasing the Jermaine Dyes of the world over the next couple of years. And remember, Lars Anderson is just a prospect – there’s no crystal ball…

By: Sam K

Sam K — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 04:38:29 +0000

I stand corrected. I looked only at Tex’s left/right splits for 2008, which do exhibit a marked difference (100 points of SLG in favor of the left side). But over the course of Teixeira’s career, actually, he seems to show no tendency.
Which doesn’t change the fact that he’ll be hitting lefty most of the time — and into Fenway’s cavernous RF. Bay, at least, is a righty, hitting towards the Monster.
Anyway, I don’t have anything else to add to this discussion. Let it die. I want a FA pitcher, but I can live with Bucholz or Bowden fighting for the 5th spot. And if that means we have money burning a hole in our pocket, then let the FO sign Teixeira. If they feel it’s best, they know better than I do what our chances are of moving Lowell, and how much of his contract we can afford to absorb.

By: M.A.G

M.A.G — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 15:57:50 +0000

Completely agree with you, Sam K. Apparently there is many people whithout class who simply don’t want to hear anything but their own opinions. For me, the only “idiots” here are the ones who resort to insults and childish rantings, because apparently don’t have the maturity or the intellectual capacity for using reason.

By: flapjack21

flapjack21 — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 14:07:25 +0000

Tex has power from both sides. slugging% is virtually dead-even from both sides, and homeruns per at-bat are very close (certainly too close to say he’s more powerful from one side vs. the other).
Excellent post, Zelda Zonk… and great name, btw. :)

By: Sam K

Sam K — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:20:24 +0000

Now see, this is exactly what I’m complaining about. A guy calls me an idiot for suggesting that Tex and Bay are similar in ability level, but clearly the numbers back me up, so I’m dealing with someone who spews a lot of bile but really hasn’t sat down and done any homework. And most of the people screaming that we need to Tex if we’re to remain competitive next year are exactly this sort of fan. Not all, but most.
Protection is a fallacy. Numbers are numbers. And by the numbers, Tex and Bay are equally capable of protecting Papi.
Bay hit 9 homeruns in 50 games with Boston and that’s a problem to you? Over the course of a full season, that’s 29 or 30 homeruns. This is bad?
And speaking of park factors, let’s not forget that all of Tex’s power comes from the left side, and Fenway is a NIGHTMARE for most lefty power hitters. Even Fenway wasn’t enough to kill Papi’s great power years, but that’s credit to Papi and not indicative of your average lefty’s success in Boston. Fenway is a good singles and doubles park for lefties, good for overall offense, but bad for power. Betcha Tex can’t top 30 homers in a Red Sox uniform. Fenway is a far cry from Arlington. So tell me again how Bay isn’t worthy of hitting behind Papi but Teixeira is.

By: Zelda Zonk

Zelda Zonk — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 01:34:42 +0000

The excuse that Teixeira is only a “minor upgrade” is forgetting that we were only a “minor” bit of scoring away from going to the WS again this year. We don’t need a player to give us +5 wins in the regular season as much as a player to give us +1 win in the post season.
The Yankees and the Rays are both going to be good next year. Making the post season isn’t even a given. A minor upgrade at any position could mean the difference between making the playoffs and watching from the ranch.
As far as “blocking Lars” goes, 2010 is a long way away. I don’t want to play next year without improving our offense, because we’re putting the eggs into the basket of an unproven, soon-to-be rookie first-baseman of questionable defensive skills.
Add to that we don’t know how Lowell will respond, and even if he does come back strong, he’s getting up there in age. Even if you expect he will return to form, you can’t expect he’ll be strong for more than another year. Teixeira’s contract goes beyond Lowell’s playability. It also provides insurance against Ortiz’ age and/or injury-related slide.
As has also been pointed out, the Sox have a lot of money coming off the books and have money to spend. If not Tex, then who? Both Sabathia AND Burnett/Sheets? Not likely. Put some money into an offensive upgrade, get a frontline starter, and trade Lugo and a pitcher for a new catcher. If we can get Varitek for one year, bonus. If we have to pay him for two years, to tutor a new catcher and then move to the bench to ‘coach,’ so be it. He’s earned it.

By: Hal Wyatt

Hal Wyatt — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 19:41:06 +0000

New here, and read all 94 posts even #88 — is this site monitored?)….a couple points:
1. The comparison of Tex to Manny is pointless, both in their production and their contracts. Manny’s $20M/yr. was signed in ‘99 — Tex would be cheap at that price now. And while he’s not the hitter Manny was in his prime, he’s the best out there. And he’s really, really good.
2. We have no assurance that Lowell or Ortiz will return to their previous forms, though at their ages, coming off injuries, it’s a decent bet they won’t. And we won’t really know until May. Do you want to wait until May to find out if your 4-5 hitters are what they were two years ago?
3. Many pointed out how inept we were offensively vs. Tampa, but forget how bad we were for the months of June and July — WITH Manny. The bottom of the order was completely useless, and we’re talking about having all those same guys back.
4. You win with run differential — the difference between what you score and what you give up. Back in 2002-2004, we scored like crazy and gave up plenty. Now we give up few and don’t score nearly as much, because we got away from the high-OBP formula we used back then to pressure pitchers.
I’d like Teixeira because he takes pressure off lots of people — Ortiz; Youk as a cleanup hitter; Lowell, Drew, Bay — but more important, OUR PITCHING STAFF. Until Ellsbury shows he can get on base (remember ‘08?), I’d rather load the lineup with the high-OBP guys in front of Tex:
Youk 3B
Pedroia 2B
Drew RF
Tex 1B
Ortiz DH
Bay LF
Lowrie SS
Catcher
Ellsbury CF
Keep Lowell, get him healthy, rotate him with the other corner guys — trade him after he proves he’s healthy. Or, if it works out, keep him and actually have a guy on the bench who can hit.
We owe it to this pitching staff to get a lineup that can win games when they’re not their best.

By: Gerry

Gerry — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 18:18:13 +0000

With the addition of a Kelly Shoppach, Salty, Tea, Monte, whomever, the Sox offense, already powerful, gets even more formidable, even without Teix. I agree with MAG that this is a top priority.
It’s the process of bringing this new catcher aboard that worries me. Giving up either Buchholz, Bowden or Masterson for a catcher will simply require an expensive FA arm to replace him, which sounds pretty dumb at all levels of consideration.
If Teix signs with the Red Sox, I would prefer that Mike stays and works his way back gradually, keeping his bat, if not permanently, then until his trade value is higher.
However, Mike + cash or lower prospect may also be the best route to one of those catchers. If, then, signing Teix is the key to a promising young catcher without giving up one of our promising young arms, then signing Teix improves the Sox in two positions (catching and pitching) and his gold glove and big bat are bonuses.

By: Big Black

Big Black — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 16:41:02 +0000

“Mark Teixeira is a great player, and should the Red Sox feel it in their best interest to sign him, I am sure I will enjoy his production over the next decade. I just don’t think we should sign him.”
Since when did you start playing for the Red Sox, and what position do you play? I can’t stand it when fans address the team as “we”. You do not play, coach or manage this team, so please use “they” instead of “we”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 03:46:00 +0000

Even if we paid all of lugo’s contract and sent additional money, the chances of getting a “very good prospect” for him is nearly zero.
Also most of your article seems predicated on some pretty big assumpions. Lowell won’t even be ready to start the year, AND he’s not a very good hitter, AND who knows how his hip injury affects his defense long term?
If you think we can get a “very good prospect” for lugo, surely we can get an entire legion of grade-A prospects for lowell.
And I’m sure david ortiz is no done, but it is an extreme stretch to say even if david ortiz is not currently “done” that it is a lock we re-sign him in 010. Sluggers his size tend to decline sharply in their mid-30s, where papi will be nestled by the time his deal expires. If we were the yankees we would overpay in terms of money and years to keep him, but the sox are smarter than that. They will want to pay him according to his skills at the time of the deal, not his past accomplishments. He will probably want more and likely bounce.
One man’s theory.