Jamie Squire - Getty Images
7 months ago: ST LOUIS, MO - OCTOBER 14: Prince Fielder #28 of the Milwaukee Brewers looks on dejected from the dugout late in the game against the St. Louis Cardinals during Game Five of the National League Championship Series at Busch Stadium on October 14, 2011 in St Louis, Missouri. The Cardinals won 7-1. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)
In an appearance on 710AM ESPN in Seattle's "The Kevin Calabro Show" ESPN.com's Jerry Crasnick said he spoke to Scott Boras last week about all the clients of his that remained unsigned, with the super agent telling him, "... that a lot of teams are interested, he's dealing with ownership and it takes time," but as Mr. Crasnick said, "Certainly, for people who follow the industry and the game there's still some surprise that Prince Fielder remains unsigned." In the ESPN.com baseball writer's opinion, he said he got the sense that Seattle didn't want to get caught up in a bidding war for Fielder, and didn't see the Mariners as a good fit for several reasons. Mr. Crasnick (@jcrasnick) backed off some of what he'd Tweeted on Tuesday about reports of the Mariners' interest in the 27-year-old slugger being "overblown," but still expressed some doubt about the Pacific Northwest as a destination for the soon-to-be-former Brewer...
"I think if any of these teams, Seattle, the [Chicago] Cubs, Washington, Texas, Baltimore, Florida " Mr. Crasnick continued, "If any of these teams was an ideal fit for Prince, we wouldn' t be sitting here on January 10th trying to figure out where he's going to go." The Rangers could get involved if the Yu Darvish deal isn't worked out. "The buzz I'm sort of getting is that the Mariners' [interest] is a little overblown at this point," the ESPN writer said. "I think, Scott Boras has a great way of sort of getting out of these situations, but I have a hard time seeing him getting more than six or seven years, if someone pays him 10 years and $260 million dollars, God Bless Scott Boras."
In summing up his thoughts and predicting a final destination for Fielder, ESPN.com's Mr. Crasnick said, "If I had to guess, I think it's probably Washington. Could it be Texas? Maybe. I don't see Baltimore. I don't see Florida because they don't sign guys who have no-trade clauses. So right now, could it be the Cubs? Maybe, but only on their terms, right now it's still sort of a wide open landscape for the guy."
FOXSports.com's Jon Morosi (@jonmorosi) too wrote on Twitter this morning that the Yu Darvish negotiations with the Rangers will play a big role in deciding Fielder's future as many have suggested. "Source with knowledge of #Rangers finances doubts they invest in Yu Darvish AND Prince Fielder," Mr. Morosi wrote, "#Nats still viewed as favorite for Prince." CBSSports.com's Jon Heyman (@JonHeymanCBS) appears to agree, writing on Twitter within the last hour that he does, "... think long-awaited Fieder deal may wait 'til after Rangers/Darvish are done negotiating. Texas a team of interest here."
However, MLB.com's Bill Ladson writes this afternoon, in an article entitled, "Nationals unlikely to sign Prince at current price", that a baseball source is telling him that, "There is a "99 percent" chance that the Nationals will not sign free-agent first baseman Prince Fielder." The source tells the MLB.com Nats beat writer, "Fielder's price must come down in order for the team to think about acquiring his services."
Frontrunners in some reporter's sources, a 1% chance according to others and it may all depend on the fate of the Rangers' negotiations with the Nippon Ham Fighters' right-hander?
0 recs | 52 comments
IMTOPFR
RobBobS - January 11, 2012
WHATTT
NOO CMON MAN 99% CHANCE we don’t sign him ahhhhhhhhhhhh sml
Sportzxpert - January 11, 2012 via Android app
I hope
this is a negotiating plot to bring the price between $150-$180 mil 7-8 years..if we miss out il be extremely disappointed..r we still the favorite to sign him IF price comes down guys? should we fans forget him coming here now? ah suckks
Sportzxpert - January 11, 2012 via Android app
Ladson, the king of hyporbole
His sources say its not likley the nats will sign Fielder=99% to him
His sources say the nats like Detwiler=Lannan is off to somewhere else
Anyone remember Ladson and Dunn before we signed him?
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
How in the world can we trust what Ladson says?
He’s a mouth piece of the Nats and the Nats are trying to play the Boras game. It may work it may not. 99% of US citizens agree Ladson is clueless in Washington DC. 99 % of Nats fan believe in the hearts of hearts that this is going to take as long as the Rangers vs Yu deal gets done. No for something completely different a man with two b—- oh never mind.
Berndaddy - January 11, 2012
SSDD
Same Story, Different Day
Not to worry Patrick – I appreciate you gathering all of the (lack of) news that’s fit to print.
On Ladsen: “99% chance” the Nationals don’t sign Fielder is qualified by the subsequent “Fielder’s price must come down … the Nats are not willing to give Fielder anything close to the 10-year, $240 million contract the Angels gave first baseman Albert Pujols.” Translation: not really complicated – “when you come down a bit we’ll talk.” For this to truly constitute a 99% chance of Fielder going someplace else, you have to conclude that someone else is going to give Fielder a Pujols deal. If that was going to happen, it would have happened by now.
After Darvish is done (one way or the other) Fielder will happen pretty quickly IMHO. It will be effectively six or seven years; although it may officially be longer there are likely to be escape clauses for Fielder and for the team that signs him.
The reason that I’m skeptical that PF will end up with the Nationals is that if the $$ and terms to sign him gets down to the level that it makes sense for the Nationals, it may well bring the Blue Jays and Brewers back into play. Still, it’s something to obsess over in January’s dim, cold light.
d_c_guy - January 11, 2012
washingnats:
The #Nats are looking for bench help. Willie Harris could still be in the mix to re-join the club. #MLB
dc Roach - January 11, 2012
washingnats:
It’s less than 50 percent that RHP Todd Coffey returns to the club. #Nats #MLB
dc Roach - January 11, 2012
Ladson is ....
well, he’s Ladson. Accept a 100% margin of error on his predictions.
RobBobS - January 11, 2012
Prince updates
I wish I had the discipline to stop checking twitter and other outlets for news! This has now surpassed the Gary Williams replacement fiasco! But keep the news coming anyways Patrick thanks
DC_Reb - January 11, 2012 via iPhone app
Reality
I have to believe that someone in management gave Ladson the info he reported. It is a bad negotiating ploy, if that is what it was, to go public in this way. If they want to get Fielder, this kind of talk should have stayed private. Therefore, I conclude that the Nats have jumped out of the bidding unless Boros comes way down to a level that would be disappointing to Prince. The Nats are lowering the expectations of the fan base. My guess is that the Darvish deal falls through and he goes to Texas. The idea that he will go to Seattle, Baltimore or returns home to Milwaukee are silly. Maybe the Cubs will continue on with their tradition of buying high, but I doubt that one too.
JamesFan - January 11, 2012
I think his sources are not generally good ones
Since I believe that only Ted and possibly Mike are aware of how much they are willing to offer Fielder, and they sure as heck aren’t going to tell Ladson about it.
RobBobS - January 11, 2012
+1
Berndaddy - January 11, 2012
agree with the gist
but demur on the ID … I’d say Mark is steering the boat, Ted’s in his cabin resting peacefully and will only be disturbed/consulted for major course corrections
duff47 - January 11, 2012
Fair enough.
RobBobS - January 11, 2012
When it comes to negotions,
it seems that no one really knows anything. I’ve never thought the Nats’ chances of signing
Fielder were better than 50/50. If they don’t sign him and don’t sign at least a stopgap outfielder I’ll be disappointed; no one can say that there haven’t been any 4th outfielder types available. Surely they can do better than a Bernadina/Cameron platoon.
mstomper - January 11, 2012
sending a message?
Nationals:
Reporter @washingnats says Mike Rizzo and @Nationals continue to rely on Adam LaRoche playing 1B this year … atmlb.com/xSeKbD
dc Roach - January 11, 2012
It's just Ladson
Spewing “awesome defense” by LaRoche and why “he is the guy”. I won’t believe anything until Prince signs somewhere else.
Mattionals - January 11, 2012
it’s just an old Ladson article, randomly being shared by the official Nats twitter account
dc Roach - January 11, 2012
@washingnats
Is Ladson’s twitter and although he is the writer on the MLB page, he is not employed by the Washington Nationals. He is employed by MLB and the “official website” is actually run by MLB and NOT the Nationals organization itself. Therefore the twitter account is also NOT run by the Nationals organization and is similar to all the other speculation out there, just happens to be used by the beat writer employed by MLB for the Nats.
Not trying to come off pompous, but I just don’t believe what Ladson is saying is truth, I mean, we did get Dunn after all and he said we weren’t getting him. I think Ladson just doesn’t like power hitters and really is jazzed up on “Defense first” at EVERY position. He always seemed to side with Riggs on the handling of Morse, regardless that we all knew as fans that Morse was for real.
Mattionals - January 11, 2012
Is anyone anywhere suggesting that what Ladson says is the gospel truth or even very truthy at all?
In this case the twitter account “Nationals” (run by the Nats organization) sent a tweet which referenced an article “washingnats” (aka Ladson). I assume they have some deal in place where they try to occasionally plug their mlb.com beat writer, but I assume the organization would still get to pick what they tweet.
I merely suggested that the organization might be sending a message here.. whether to us or to Boras, I don’t know. It intrigues me. I am not suggesting that you listen to Ladson for your rumors, just that the organization appears to be digging in on the “we don’t NEED Fielder” position.
dc Roach - January 11, 2012
It's all negotiation
Boras floats the idea through Heyman and others that it’s going to take $200 million to sign Fielder. The Nationals counter by pretty clearly indicating that they are OK with someone else paying $200 million for Fielder. Given the market, especially if Darvish signs with the Rangers, I’d be shocked if Fielder got $200 million from someone, unless the Mariners or O’s step up to the “crappy team overpay” standard. Which would be dumb, but it could happen. And if it does, I’d fully support the Nationals for not making that dumb deal. I felt the same way about Darvish – I wanted him on the Nationals, but not at a net cost of $120 million or so.
d_c_guy - January 12, 2012
I missed the @Nationals
My mistake.
Mattionals - January 12, 2012
Useless Ladson article
Check.
This still comes down to Texas and Darvish.
Mattionals - January 11, 2012
In non Prince Fielder news
The expos connecting gained another member with the re-signing of Devin Ivany. If I am rembering right, Ivany, Desmond, Severino, Bernadina, and Bynum are the only expos guys left in the system
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
According to one Yahoo news...
FIELDER says that he’s 99% sure that he’s not coming to Washington. At least that’s what the title says. Then it goes onto how an anonymous source said so and blah, blah, blah.
One awful article.
ilikeburritos - January 11, 2012
And the link:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=sportsxchange-000532393_report-fielder-99-percent-sure-he-wont-be-going-to-nationals&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
ilikeburritos - January 11, 2012
The article only says the same thing as Ladson, it doesn't have any Prince quotes.
I have to say I am leaning against Prince because I am starting to move towards the Zim to 1B line of thinking. It frees 3B for Rendon and cuts down on wear and tear for Zim.
The Herndon Kid - January 11, 2012 via mobile
Agreed
That’s clearly much more in line with what appears to be the core team strategy (recruit-build-fill as absolutely necessary). I also think it’s going to prove to be the most effective winning strategy into the future.
duff47 - January 11, 2012
Why is everyone trying to move Zim for Rendon
I mean I love Rendon and all, but Zimm has HOF potential, and you dont mess with that
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
Has nothing to do with being down on Zim in any way at all
Has to do with team strategy. If Rendon turns out as expected he’s gotta have a position; 3rd seem to be his best. If he proves better at another position, so be it and adjust then. Meantime, Zim only moves across the diamond if Rendon works out, otherwise he stays put. (There’s also been the side comments about Zim’s throwing, which may or may not continue.)
Bringing on PF bollixes up those options. Given a core recruit-develop-fill strategy, better to await a great CF choice next FA season.
duff47 - January 11, 2012
But even if Rendon reaches his potenial
I find it hard to belive he will be better than Zim. You also dont move the best defenseive 3B in the game to first. Y’all gotta remember than Zim is still VERY young.
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
Can't move Zim to first...
He loses all his value there. His offensive numbers, while tops in the league among third baseman, do not stack up nearly as well against the top first baseman in the league. His wRC+ from 2009-2011 (132), is third in the league, behind only Kevin Youkilis and Evan Longoria. However, among first baseman, he would rank just 10th. Additionally, it’s not like we’re talking about a defensive dunce on par with Adam Dunn’s ineptitude in the outfield. Zim saved 42 runs above replacement (DRS) in the last three years, tied for sixth in the majors. By contrast, the best defensive first baseman in the league over that same stretch of time (Adrian Gonzalez) only saved 18 runs above replacement. To conclude, Zim’s eliteness lies in the skills he possesses at the position he plays. By moving him to first, we seriously diminish both his offensive and defensive value. In summation, MOVING ZIM TO FIRST IS A BAD IDEA!!!
Nationalpastime9 - January 11, 2012
He loses more value being on the DL. I am hopeful that moving him to first would reduce his injuries.
And having a huge bopper at first isn’t the only way to construct a lineup.
The Herndon Kid - January 11, 2012
I dont think that 1B could have helped any of Zims injuries
they all seem to have to do with swinging and baserunning
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
It's true that you don't need a big bopper at first to create a successful team...
What I’m saying is that in order for Zim to stay as valuable as possible, he needs to be at third. If he can play third at a Gold Glove-caliber level, then that’s where he needs to be. Once that isn’t the case, we can consider moving him (although ideally that would be far down the road … remember, he’s only 27.) And jeff550 is right, none of his injuries actually happened while he was playing third…
Nationalpastime9 - January 11, 2012
And if Rendon proves to be better or even just comparable to Zim in the "magic" numbers ...
your point is?
This whole conversation is premised on the PF issue. There is vastly more downside risk to a potential bad deal on PF relative to speculating how the Nats’ team strategy plays out or not.
duff47 - January 11, 2012
Than you get someone like King Felik in a trade for one of them
jeff550 - January 11, 2012
The odds aren't good that Rendon will be better than Zim...
Nationalpastime9 - January 11, 2012
The Nationals should be so lucky
Two 7 WAR players on the same team? And neither of them are Strasburg or Harper? Yowza.
d_c_guy - January 12, 2012
Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
RobBobS - January 12, 2012
But signing Prince eliminates any flexibility in how to deal with an aging or diminished Zim.
Remember, his defense was atrocious for a while last year after the oblique injury. If he keeps getting hurt then his capacity to play third may continue to go down. If I thought signing Prince guaranteed a trip or two to the playoffs, I would be on board. However I am just not convinced of that yet.
The Herndon Kid - January 11, 2012 via mobile
If he keeps getting hurt
He is of no use to the team. I love Zim and want him to play out his career in a Nats uni but if he spends more time on the DL then in the field we are better off signing someone like Fielder and replacing Zim when his contract expires.
Mattionals - January 11, 2012 via mobile
This is true of every player. No player is helpful if he can't play.
Therefore, you statement is contingent on the following being true:
1. Prince Fielder will not get injured or decline rapidly with age.
2. Ryan Zimmerman spends more time off the field than on over the course of his next contract, something that has never happened in a single season.
3. That Ryan Zimmerman could be replaced by options currently available.
Perhaps you should consider that over Fielder and Zimmerman’s career, Zimm is 6.8 fWAR ahead of Fielder. So, even though Zimmerman has 541 fewer PAs, Fielder would need to repeat his best season ever (6.4) with Zimm sitting out to pass him. All this to say, Ryan Zimmerman is a talent that you take the risk on. Especially since he has has had only two non-consecutive, non-related injuries.
chubias - January 11, 2012
LaRoche was more valuable when he got hurt last year
RobBobS - January 12, 2012
Only if you think that Morse would not have broken out as a left fielder.
chubias - January 12, 2012
this rings true… has anyone done a projection of runs scored (and defended) if Morse’s 2012 numbers remained the same while playing LF while LaRoche had a typical LaRoche year?
PerryMason - January 12, 2012
You do know that Morse was already slumping, and that his hitting actually improved when he went back out to the OF in September, right?
d_c_guy - January 12, 2012
So, by the same logic
I assert that his numbers will improve this year if he gets to play the whole year in the OF. After all, it clearly helped his hitting over the past two months of the season.d_c_guy - January 12, 2012
Hmm.
sarcasm font failRobBobS - January 12, 2012
I'm not sure why the font does thatd_c_guy - January 12, 2012
I'm not saying to not sign Zimm at all
The FoF should get whatever he is seeking in an extension and he will probably give a bit of a discount since the team originally promised, i think, that they would build a contender around him. We are so close to that and we all know he wants to play here forever so it’s just a matter of getting it done. Rendon seems to have the build for 2nd IMO, and could be something along the lines of Utley style defense with Uggla style power.
Mattionals - January 12, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Federal Baseball to post a comment.