Tuesday Morning Rockpile:

by Rox Girl on Jan 22, 2008 7:44 AM MST in Rockpile Comment 22 comments

Ken Rosenthal has a couple of Rockies tidbits, including news that the team and Holliday are progressing in talks on a longer contract. I've said before that I'm on the fence about this, but Holliday is less likely to turn into a sour deal long term than just about anybody else on the team, so I can't say I'm opposed to it either.

Eric Hinske appears close to signing with the D-backs to fill in Chad Tracy's role until Tracy returns from last season's surgery. After that? I don't know, there will have to be decisions made, but this definitely helps the Snakes' depth in the interim. I don't like that. Also, for the rest of you Av's fans, there's a note that Foppa might be coming back. Woot!

0 recs | Comment 22 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great Article on Holliday

in the Denver Post today from Renck. Holliday comes across as driven, yet humble. He seems more and more like the kinda guy you'd want your kid to look up to, and have a poster of, or a jersey of. Which is refreshing in todays age of greedy spoiled self-centered BLEEP. He alludes to having (wanting?) a goal to hit .400 for a season.

Also one of his concerns in a long term deal is how the Rockies handle Garrett Atkins this next off-season. With Ian Stewart in the wings...someone will be forced out. Will it be Atkins? Holliday? Helton or Stewart himself?

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_8040143

2006 TIME magazine "Person of the Year"

by Redhawk on Jan 22, 2008 8:21 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

I might be a pessimistic jerk...

But I just can't shake the feeling that he's just paying us all a bit of lip service and waiting for free agency to roll around for a big payday.

I like the guy though so I seriously hope I'm wrong.

by belt on Jan 22, 2008 8:52 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure

Holliday is just paying lip service, I actually think he likes Denver and Colorado...but if he didn't he couldn't very well say it.

I like Holliday. I hope he stays long term. I think he's a MVP type player, and there just not that many superstars out there. But that said, I think the Rockies chances of doing that and re-signing him long term...are like 20% (a month ago I'd have said the chance was zero-zip-zilch-nada). I don't think the numbers work. Holliday's age at FA, the Rockies total payroll, the amount Holliday would command on the open market, just don't add up to keeping him long term.

2006 TIME magazine "Person of the Year"

by Redhawk on Jan 22, 2008 9:53 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I was going to mention

that Holliday thinks that Atkins' fate will affect his own. I know the two are very close friends and if Atkins goes elsewhere, Holliday may be less inclined to stay with the team for the long haul.

Get Demented :: Gang Gridiron.

by Silverblood on Jan 22, 2008 9:47 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

The Ironic part

is if the Rockies KEEP Atkins, there may not be 1) enough money for both Holliday and Garrett 2) enough positions to play both with Stewart in the wings.

Keeping Garrett makes it harder to keep Holliday. But not keeping Garrett makes Holliday want to go?....

2006 TIME magazine "Person of the Year"

by Redhawk on Jan 22, 2008 9:57 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

Irony's a bytch.

Get Demented :: Gang Gridiron.

by Silverblood on Jan 22, 2008 11:01 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I just don't see...

how we keep Atkins and Holliday and Helton. Too much money, and Atkins shouldn't be playing third. I love the guy, but he's a butcher in the field. And obviously, Helton is going nowhere. So I'd really like a trade of Atkins, perhaps after next year, as everyone says Stewart is great defensively.

"I want to live forever or die trying" Yossarian in "Catch-22"

by Dieb on Jan 22, 2008 3:30 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure about a long-term Holliday deal?

I know that Purple Row is often very defensive of the Rockies ownership group and their decisions, but come on...

All a statement like that really says is, "He's probably leaving and I can't feel good about that decision, but I don't want to publicly criticize it".

Say the Rockies or whatever team signs Matt for a 7 year 140 million dollar deal and he only plays for 4 1/2 years at or around his current level. It would still be worth it.

Make no mistake about, the Rockies can afford Holliday. Whether they want to pay him is a different story.

But don't try to sell the idea that one can statistically or philosophically justify letting a player of his caliber walk away.

by jasontheuncatchable on Jan 22, 2008 3:58 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

How/Why the Rockies might not be able to afford

If the Rockies have a payroll of say $80 million (which would be about 40% jump from the from last years $ 55 million payroll), and that would be slightly higher then league average payroll around the league.

Your first baseman will make 17 million, If Holliday re-signs @ $20 million a year you now have $ 43 Million for the remaining 23 players. Cook makes almost $10 million so we are at about 33 million left for 22 players OR ONLY $ 1.5 million per player.

These aren't exact numbers by any means, just wide ballpark (pun intended) to show how quickly major contracts eat up payroll. We aren't the Yankees, Red Sox or Cubs...there is only so much money to go around

2006 TIME magazine "Person of the Year"

by Redhawk on Jan 22, 2008 4:27 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

They might be able to afford Holliday, but they are going to have to give a hell of a lot up to keep him from the bigger market teams. It all comes down to whether Holliday really wants to stay in Colorado or if he's just biding his time until pay day. You make it sound like the Rockies can swing that kind of contract without blinking and that most definitely isn't the case. If the Rockies are going to have to match the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, or whoever else dollar for dollar, I'm not so sure he's worth it either.

by belt on Jan 22, 2008 4:33 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Huh?

>>> I know that Purple Row is often very defensive of the Rockies ownership group and their decisions, but come on...

Were you here last April and May, when we were voting on the best signs to bring to Coors to protest the Monforts' management of the team, begging them to sell to Kroenke? Purple Row is anything BUT a shill for the Monforts.

I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a poster here who dislikes Holliday and wants to see him leave, and if/when he does leave for greener pastures, Purple Row would act much the same way as the rest of the Colorado fanbase would - sad and angry. Do the Rockies have the money to afford a long-term Holliday deal? Kind of. They have enough to offer him if he wants to stay here. There are other teams that can offer much more than the Rockies, and if Holliday wants to listen to those offers, he will find them rather appealing. The management realizes how huge of an impact Holliday has on the fanbase and how much of a big name he is; they aren't going to just let him walk away because they don't "want" to pay him. In the end, it's all going to rest on Matt and Boras.

by oo_nrb on Jan 22, 2008 5:49 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

oh boy...

I don't know where I begin with this. I've always been on the fence about Holliday. Actually, let me take that back, for a long time I was dead set opposed to signing him long term because it's just basically a poor baseball idea to commit the bulk of your team's resources on relatively replaceable corner players. Before 2007 Holliday was merely a very good player, now he's one of baseball's best, but even so there's enough of a difference between the numbers he puts up at Coors and those he puts up on the road to make a lot of people question this. I don't anymore, I really think he's great but the issue becomes how long he can stay that way. Four years? Fine, see if he'll accept a four year contract. I can tell you it's not going to happen. Five? I think you're pushing it, he'll be 33 at that point, and comparable players tend to drop off dramatically in production by that point in their careers if not before. Even then, despite what he says in the linked article, I don't know if he accepts unless you throw in the sixth year, which you can bet will be over $20 million, and now you're talking about taking up at least a fifth of our 2013 payroll to somebody who isn't likely to exceed the production Brad Hawpe gave us last season. I really don't think it's hard to justify walking away if that's what it comes down to. In fact, it's a lot more difficult justifying signing him to what he's going to get and it's a testament to his abilities and personality that the team's even considering it.

I mean it about being on the fence here, and I think I'm still leaning in the "don't do it" camp. Convince me that this won't hamper us like the Helton deal has, and I might reconsider, but right now I'm not swayed.

by Rox Girl on Jan 22, 2008 6:39 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I can't see it

Colorado is a one star contract team. We have Helton until 2011 and by then there will be three/four years left on Tulo's deal and it might be worth while to extend his contract at that time.

I just don't see how we sign Holliday. I say we try to get him to extend his current deal to 4 years with a mutual option. If he won't take it, then we can say we tried and deal him next winter or keep him and take the two picks.

The other day on one of the threads, someone noted, and I'm paraphrasing, that we have built a pipeline and if we keep having quality drafts and foreign FA signings, we should be able to continuly bring in quality young talent to replace aging stars.

We won't be able to have multiple aging stars like the big teams on the coasts.

TGFPR!!

by jlot10 on Jan 22, 2008 7:41 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Helton

Although we'd probably get basically nothing in return if we wanted to dump his whole salary, Helton's definitely still tradeable. We could also dump half of it and get something halfway mediocre in return. The Yankees and Mets will both be in the market for one during the course of the next couple years. Add the Red Sox to that list if Lowell gets hurt. It's not a foregone conclusion that we'll have to pay out the whole deal.

rockies in october.

by LarryB303 on Jan 23, 2008 4:42 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

Helton probably isn't tradable anymore, due to the combination of our pennant run and his no-trade clause.

I've been in this game a hundred years, but I see new ways to lose I never knew existed before. - Casey Stengel

by Behrens on Jan 23, 2008 4:59 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Call a duck a duck

Not Holliday, the Rockies. We're a midmarket team, period. We'll never have the luxury of taking a chance on a long-term (>4 years) contract on an older player, at least not unless we're willing to bet the franchise on it. Six years may make sense sometimes on a 23-year old with HOF potential, but almost never on a 28-year old, even someone as talented as #5. Would he take four years, or even five? Why should he, when other teams with the payroll space to do so will eagerly offer him the extra years? And, there's personal pride. Nobody likes to be told they're on a downhill slide at the tender age of 33, especially a world-class athlete. Barring injury, he's gonna look for someone to pay him to play the game he loves for as long as possible, at a salary that reflects his considerable (though by then, perhaps declining) skills. I'd do the same thing. Then again, I still think I look like I did when I was 25.

by hobgoblin on Jan 22, 2008 8:11 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Fans vs. Baseball Facts of Life

Seems to me that what all the thisway/thatway talk boils down to is this:

As fans, we all want Holliday around forever, a one-team Hall of Famer, who will go down in fan lore as one of the greatest hitters and nicest guys to ever grace our Field of Dreams.

Understanding the Baseball Facts of Life, we know that the business of baseball seldom allows this to happen. It sucks, maybe, and it sure ain't right, but that's how things go in this contract-driven world.

The Monforts are no favorites of mine to be sure. Despite the recent signings, and last year's success, I remain skeptical of their "plan".

As a fan, I love Matt, but I love Tulo more. The seamhead side of me thinks Tulo's contract is a safer hedge than 6 years and millions and millions of dollars for Matt.

I'd rather go looking for left fielder with some pop in 2 years, than looking for a franchise SS.

There's an old Rolling Stones song that comes to mind, but in the interest of rolling eyeballs everywhere, I'll refrain from quoting it.

2007 NL Champions, baby!

by rockhead on Jan 22, 2008 8:22 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Rolling Stones song?

Brown Sugar?

2006 TIME magazine "Person of the Year"

by Redhawk on Jan 22, 2008 10:36 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll ramble in...

I'm going on my gut. I work in a stat-driven universe day-to-day where the numbers blow up in your face as often as they prove you right.

I read the Renck article. Either Holliday's BS is so thick and rich he believes it himself or he is the real deal. My gut says real deal.

But he hired Boras? He just wants Yankees money, right? I think he's smart and knows he's good but see above, I don't think Matt thinks he's A-Rod. He's got contract demands but he won't pull a gun on anyone.

Something like a six-year deal is possible. Atkins is a factor and baseball-wise we might have to move Atkins for Stewart - IF Stewart actually proves he can hit in the majors. If this thing turns on a guaranteed spot for Atkins forever then all bets are off.

There's no guaranteed sure-fire way to prove whether or not Holliday will decline slowly or swiftly or what sort of numbers he will be putting up at 34. No way to prove he won't get even better. I know this, the drive we see from Matt today is the drive we'll see then. The leadership? That, too. Does that justify the money? If we were only talking about a great guy that we want our kids to admire, then, no. But if you believe that you can't just plug another set of numbers into a uniform, if you believe that there is not another apple ripening on the tree, just ready to be plucked down when he's ready, if you believe that there are a handful or special players out there that are worth the extra money, that will keep producing, if you might have a Hall of Famer on your team, then my answer is yes.

But look at Todd Helton's boat anchor of a contract, that's all the proof you need not to see this movie again and again, OK? Well $16 million's a lot of money to tie up in one guy. But who'd replace him? Is a free agent out there who hits for average like Todd or plays defense like Todd and drives in runs like Todd and carried this team like Todd has? Would he cost less? Is Koshansky ready? Ha! Was Shealy?

If worst case, Matt Holliday is not worth the whole $20 million in VORP and PECOTA and whatever statistically models you use - and most of you have me on these, I'm comfortable admitting that I'm not on your level there - then that would not be the most crippling loss ever if you had to gamble. Keep in mind, also, that that's $20M in 2008 dollars in 2015. (assuming a deal was done this year.)

Would the Montfort's do it? They've been cheap and they're crazy Born Again nutjobs who probably spent too much time in the slaughterhouse. But, they are not a faceless corporation. They love the game as much as anyone in Colorado. Nobody but Oprah has an endless supply of money. They'll never throw money around like the Cubs or Mets do, unwisely. But they've made some smart moves and have put money down when it needed to be put down and I'll bet if it's close, they'll make the deal.

I hope so anyway. I hope so.

by Since1993 on Jan 23, 2008 1:33 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Matt should go...

It just makes sense for him to leave and sign for big money once he hits the Free Agent market. He's making $10-13 mill per year in Colorado, but could earn $20+ back east which is nearly double what he could make here. That type of contract would not only make him set for life, but his son and future grandchildren. It's hard to pass on that.

The fan in me would like to see him hang around, nobody wants to root for a team like the Oakland A's, that has new faces every year because the Dan Haren's are being traded every offseason. I like Holliday and by the time he hits FA, Helton's money will be off the books so the Monforts could afford him. However it doesn't make sense to sign a 33 year old to a long contract, and it doesn't make sense for a 33 year year old to turn down a monster contract.

There's only one Rocktober!!

by Charlie77 on Jan 23, 2008 11:25 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Spring Training TV broadcasts?

Last season FSN had around 15 spring training games I think - has anyone heard anything about what games they'll be doing this year?

by avsfan4ever33 on Jan 22, 2008 4:06 PM MST reply actions 0 recs

'08 Divisional Racce

Saw a breakdown of the 2008 Padres here. And you can vote on an NL West winner at the end. Seems like a ton of Padre homers have gotten to this poll 1st! haha I voted Rox baby!!

http://mlbfleecefactor.com/2008/01/22/2008-san-diego-padres-a-call-to-arms/

by ET90210 on Jan 23, 2008 5:00 AM MST reply actions 0 recs