Bob Levey - Getty Images
9 months ago: HOUSTON - AUGUST 07: Prince Fielder #28 of the Milwaukee Brewers hits a two run home run to left field in the first inning off pitcher Bud Norris of the Houston Astros at Minute Maid Park on August 7, 2011 in Houston, Texas. (Photo by Bob Levey/Getty Images)
In case you didn't listen to Texas Rangers' team president Nolan Ryan's comments about the mystery surrounding Prince Fielder's actual asking price or didn't read about the Hall of Fame pitcher's comments in the Washington Times, Washington Post or at ESPNDallas.com, here's what Mr. Ryan had to say yesterday in an interview with Galloway and Company on 103.3 FM ESPN Radio in Dallas about the game Scott Boras and his 27-year-old client are playing while trying to find the slugger a new home. Asked just how big a contract the first baseman and his agent were looking for, Ryan said it wasn't clear...

Nolan Ryan: "Well, you know, that's hard to say, because they have never made a proposal to us, what I would call a firm proposal. They talk in generalities and numbers and other people's contracts and so you can speculate what it is, but until they sit down and say, 'Look this is what it's going to take,' and, you know, one time they're talking eight years, one time they're talking ten years, one time they're talking a contract bigger than Ryan Howard's with Philadelphia (5-years/$135). So, you look at those numbers and you say, well, you know, they want a bigger contract than that, you're talking up in the $200 million-range."
"You look at it and you try to find ways, creative ways, that might give them a comfort level that they might be willing to come here," the Rangers' president said, "and if they had a clause where they could get out of the contract at some point in time if they felt like that's what they wanted to do, and so until you sit down and really start working on those things [you don't] really know what you're talking about and what kind of creativity could be developed."
MLB.com's Bill Ladson wrote last week in an article entitled, "Nationals still in running to land free-agent Fielder", that an, "... industry source believes that the Nationals want to give Fielder a six- or seven-year deal," but won't go to ten, so there's likely no eight or nine-year offers out there either if the left-handed hitting power bat hasn't yet accepted a deal, right? Or maybe the seven-year veteran who's gone to the postseason in two of the last four seasons doesn't want to go somewhere the team can't contend immediately? If the Nats, rumored to be the front runners, have the best offer on the table and Fielder hasn't yet taken it, does that suggest he doesn't really want to play in D.C as some suggested last week? Not necessarily.
• [cue FLASHBACK SOUND EFFECT]
WhooshFlashbackReve TFX2140
Before the Nats signed their last big middle-of-the-order bat, the speculation was that they were one of the likely destinations for then-29-year-old free agent OF/1B Adam Dunn. The powerful left-handed slugger was looking for a multi-year deal but couldn't find one, finally settling for a 2-year/$20M dollar deal from the Nats, but not until February 11th, long after he'd expected to find a home. Right before Dunn signed in D.C., ESPN.com's Jayson Stark, in an article entitled, ""Many ways for Series to become Super", wrote that Dunn and his agent were waiting to see if the Los Angeles Dodgers were interested, and though the Nationals remained, "... Dunn's most aggressive suitor," according to his sources, Mr. Stark wrote that the source said, "'If he (Dunn) wanted to be in Washington, he'd already be there.'"
Twelve days later Dunn was a Washington National. "'The opportunities [as a free agent] weren't exactly what I wanted them to be," Dunn told MLB.com's Bill Ladson at the time in an article entitled, "Nats sign Dunn to two-year, $20M deal", confirming in a way ESPN's Mr. Stark's report that the slugger was exploring all possible options before taking the one that offered him what he really wanted, a chance to remain in the National League and avoid becoming a part-time DH, plus, Dunn told MLB.com's Mr. Ladson, "'I get a chance and hopefully turn the program around.'"
If the Texas Rangers, thought to be the last viable option for a long-term deal, won't meet Boras and Fielder's demands, will the big first baseman settle for the best deal on the table? Are the Nationals at 6-7 years and however many dollars they're willing to give the best available option? MLB.com's Bill Ladson's sources had the Marlins, Rangers and Nats as three teams still involved in the bidding. After CBSSports.com's Jon Heyman mentioned the Baltimore Orioles as a possible Fielder suitor in an MLB Network appearance last week, MASNSports.com's Roch Kubatko (@MASNRoch) wrote on Twitter today that O's were at least entertaining the idea of pursuing Fielder, at least according to GM Dan Duquette. Some in LA hope the Dodgers might still get involved...
Are Fielder and Boras just waiting until every possibility is exhausted? Once they've explored all of their options will the Washington Nationals have the best offer on the table? Will Prince Fielder follow in Adam Dunn's footsteps and become the next new Hondo-esque hero of the nation's capital's baseball fans, or will he sign with Texas giving D.C. baseball fans who want a big middle-of-the-order bat another reason to hate the Rangers? FOXSports.com's Jon Morosi (@JonMorosi) tweeted last week that "Sources say Rangers unlikely to outbid #Nationals for Prince Fielder," but he noted that, "... as I wrote earlier this week, Texas has surprised us before." The Nats and D.C. GM Mike Rizzo have surprised folks before too...
0 recs | 39 comments
This is one strange Hot Stove season.
I’d be comfortable with giving the big man 5 or 6 years. 7 years I’d be a little antsy but say OK. More than that I’d worry. The week after Christmas I had a premonition that the Nats would sign him for either 5/130 or 6/155. 7/175 would be the absolute limit, and I’d probably be wondering just when his knees would give out. Mine started giving me trouble at 36, but I weigh about a hundred pounds less and am the same height. Are there any of these linemen in the 300-350 range lasting into their mid thirties? I don’t follow football that closely. Pro wrassler Dusty Rhodes, whose game was scripted but physically demanding, was able to do flying dropkicks until he was 40 or so. Cecil’s weight seemed to be mostly in his belly, and I don’t see that as much with Prince. Anyway, I’d just like to see this come to a conclusion and see another major league outfielder (Ankiel, maybe) on the team. I’m ready for Spring Training.
mstomper - January 21, 2012
I use to type in Google search
a month ago when I had the day off and was so excited to hear the Lerners met with him and id search all day Prince to the Nats or Prince Fielder or check tweeter and keep hitting refresh every 5mins..not anymore worn outt big time..I just want this to be over so we can see if he makes a smart decision to come here and can’t wait for spring training..gut feeling says he comes 6-7 year deal $150-165 mil with incentives to earn more..I hope sincerely that,he does chose to sign here..he would benefit well not only by joining the Nats but his numbers will go up. *toast to hopefully seeing breaking news Prince to Nationals!!!!!!
Sportzxpert - January 21, 2012 via Android app
If only they'd give Zim an extension to distract us for a moment...
Patrick Reddington - January 21, 2012
If there's nothing else news-wise .....
…. we should make our own. Occupy the Nats Front Office!!!
DaRube - January 22, 2012
Prince is holding out for us or some team to bite on that 8 years 200 mil deal
holding firm at tops 7 year 175 mil deal to get him to Our NATions Capital is playing it right GO NATS !!!!
eltacoman - January 21, 2012
As long as there's an opt-out at 5-6, I'd sign Prince for 7/$175, and I'd be surprised if someone offered more...
Patrick Reddington - January 21, 2012
This is one of the times where I wish there was some collusion among owners – at least a collusion of common sense. It’s late in the offseason, there are only a handful of teams in the running here so there really ought to be no reason to give Prince Fielder some crazy 8, 9 or 10-year deal.
What bugs me about this is whatever happened to free agency being also about intangeables like where a player actually wants to play?
Take Prince Fielder, here’s a guy who after being drafted 10 years ago spent three and a half seasons being told where to go at a moment’s notice as he bounced around who knows where in the minors. Then he has to spend the next six and a half seasons in Milwaukee, which regardless of how great or not living in Milwaukee might be, it’s not something he had any say in.
So here he is at 27 years old having made $35 million so far, which is much more than anyone ought to ever really need. He’s stinking rich. Good for him. So if I was him, finally having a say in his life after 10 years with no control, this decision would be all about what I wanted out of my life.
Is the DH something he may see himself needing or not, so does he care whether he plays in the AL or NL? Is artificial turf something he’d consider (in the case of my Toronto Blue Jays)? Is a domed stadium something that appeals to him? Does he want a warm climate or not? Does he want to be close to home or somewhere else in the States?
I’ve been a baseball fan for 25 years and it just seems to me that 15-20 years ago, even after the end of collusion, you’d hear a lot more discussion about these kinds of intangibles in terms of where a free agent might decide to sign. What did the player as a person (and importantly with his family) actually want for where he was going to live and work?
Of course, these guys are hyper-competitive athletes so where they think they can win is of utmost importance too, or so you’d think. And you can’t blame them for wanting to cash in big if the money’s there, which is also another level on which these guys compete for bragging rights. But it just seems the balance is all out of whack, and it’s almost exclusively about the money now.
I hope the money makes these guys happy, because if it was me and I was already rich, it’s much more about the other things that would make me happy or not on a daily basis, in finally having a say in my life again, rather than just wringing up as many dollar signs as possible on the next check.
Anyway that’s my rant against free agency these days, but it’s nothing particular to Fielder just happened to stumble across this article as I was Googling to see if any news on him. I doubt Toronto has a chance at Fielder, so here’s hoping the Nationals land him, so he can stay out of the AL and hopefully help take your club to the next level. Ah the Expos, sigh.
jabalong - January 22, 2012
Seems a particularly bad time for Fielder to have reached free agency...
In that very few teams would be able to afford him in any year and this year even less options are available with most of the really big spenders out of the running for him as far as anyone anywhere has reported. Have to think he’s looking for the most money (since you can’t play for ever and this is the one big chance a talent like this gets to really cash in) and a place that’s good for the family, close to home, etc., I don’t blame him at all for waiting to get the best possible deal he can get and making sure it’s where he wants to be even if he’s choosing from an unusually limited amount of options.
And another great example of someone being limited when he finally gets a chance at free agency is Dunn. Just wanted to stay in NL and keep playing, only had the Nats offering in ’09, and had to finally take an offer from the AL last time and had everything fall apart.
thanks for the comment. I miss Expos/Blue Jays games…
Patrick Reddington - January 22, 2012
There's an interesting article
in today’s NY Times where Tyler Kepner suggests Fielder’s “uniqueness” has restricted his market. Of course, he also suggests that Texas will end up signing him…
jbg2772 - January 22, 2012
It's the same as it ever was.
Some guys go where they want, others follow the money. In either case the point is that in a free society, a man has a right to sell his services to whomever he wishes. Prior to free agency, baseball players had no such right. Even today they don’t — they have a union agreement that allows them very limited windows of opportunity to experience a free market for their services.
rarumberger - January 22, 2012 via Android app
The Title of This Article Reminds Me of an Old Song............
…….“I was looking back to see if you were looking back at me, to see if I was looking back to see if you were looking back at me…….you were cute as you could be, standing looking back at me, and it was plain to see that I’d enjoy your company!”
Well, I’d certainly say that Nats fans would very much enjoy Prince Fielder’s company in Nats Park.
sullyzz - January 21, 2012
I Guess Another One Also Comes To Mind.....
……I want you, to want me, I need you, to need me, I’d love you, to love me, I’m begging you, to beg me"
Wonder who will eventually be doing the begging in the Fielder sweepstakes?
sullyzz - January 21, 2012
Second one was in my head...
And it also happens to be the title I used before Dunn made his decision back in a Feb 09 article.
Patrick Reddington - January 21, 2012
That flasback sound is ugly
This seems more appropriate.
short_shifter - January 21, 2012
On the Dunn comparison
For the record, i am 50/50 on the guy. Too many ‘ifs’ for long term, too much talent on the team or coming up that will need $$$ to keep here in the next 2-5 years. Also the complimentary free agents clubs need to compete.
So, If he isn’t finding the deal he wants out there right now; would he think strongly about an offer such as, 2 years 50 mil with a 3rd year player option for 15-17 mil. He gets his large money guaranteed for 2 seasons. Has a fall back with the player option if he gets hurt, doesn’t like the market or wants to stay for a different reason for a year. Rizzo gets to extend Zim (now) who’s contract would end then and have options with extending young players on the team or staying with Prince.
Can’t see it happening, but its a thought…
RepConsul - January 22, 2012
I think
Fielder is actually in better health than he appears. Not many players can appear in 162 games a year at his stature and still hit pretty well. I think he would be safe in a 7 year deal for 35hrs/100rbi/.280 a year. I don’t know why big name free agents try to avoid DC? They are a program looking to get aggressive and improve and they have a still relatively new ball park with cool uniforms.
dasox313 - January 22, 2012
I think he'll stay as healthy as the next guy
But I’m still not convinced he’ll average over 5 WAR per year over that contract, and he wants to be paid like it. It’s all about the money.
dc Roach - January 22, 2012
Well yes, but
Not many people are ever worth all the money on their long term contract. By the way negotiations seem to be going between players and the nationals, they may have to sacrifice those couple of years if they do want to bring him in. Even if he is not producing 5 WAR seasons, he will producing 3 WAR seasons, which is still good, albeit not worth that money later in the contract.
dasox313 - January 22, 2012
its a mcbomination.
karreemofwheat - January 22, 2012
One thing I've never seen discussed in the blogs ...
… is the question of legacy. Is Fielder HoF-bound on the basis of his career so far? If not, what does he still need to prove, and where can he best prove it? Where does he stand the best chance of breaking single-season and career records? Texas is considered more of a hitters park than Nats park, which addresses single season possibilities. But length of contract talks to the career stats question. Is Fielder even a records-breaking style of player?
As I think of Pudge scrambling, trying to find a place, any place, where he can get the opportunity to join the 3000-club, I envision Fielder 8 years from now also looking for a way to put up a few last notches.
DaRube - January 22, 2012
If it's true that the Rays are looking to deal Upton for a SS,
is it possible that we’ll be dealing for him? Of course that would take away our top leadoff candidate, but presuming Fielder isn’t signed it would make it easy to move Morse to first when Harper comes up. Whatever happens there are complications; it’s just a matter of whether they are good or bad ones.
mstomper - January 22, 2012
Upton would solve the lead off problem
Desmond career OBP:.304
Upton career OBP: .342
Move Espinosa to SS, start Lombardozzi at 2B, and use DeRosa there in a pinch, or sign a guy like Carlos Guillen if you’re not confident using DeRosa there.
Problem solved.
Only way I’d do it is if the Nats could do a trade-and-sign and lock Upton up to an extension.
Willl - January 22, 2012
Guillen's even less a solution of confidence than DeRosa
He hasn’t been able to stay healthy the past couple of years, and the Tigers played him mostly in the OF or DH when he was healthy (even given their struggles at 2B). I’d stay far away from Guillen.
jbg2772 - January 22, 2012
+1
Expos 4ever - January 22, 2012
That's not true at all
Guillen played 16 games at DH and 4 in LF in 2010. Every other game he started (76) was at 2B between 2010 and 2011.
That aside, I’m not trying to say Guillen is a great option. I just quickly went through the remaining free agents, and given the available options, Guillen jumped out as a plausible solution. Perhaps you’d prefer Wily Aybar, Jeff Keppinger, Aaron Miles or Ryan Theriot, whatever makes you more comfortable. My point was that Lombardozzi should be given the job to lose. Whoever backs him up is just a contingency plan, and shouldn’t get many ABs beyond occasional PHs.
Willl - January 22, 2012
What I get for trying to rely on my memory
Thanks for the fix.
jbg2772 - January 22, 2012
What has Lombardozzi done to show he should have the job to lose?
The Herndon Kid - January 22, 2012 via mobile
+1
And I like the guy!
d_c_guy - January 22, 2012
A .310/.354/.408 line in AAA at age 22
That should at least give cause for serious consideration.
But this is all under the hypothetical scenario in which the Nationals trade Desmond for Upton. Assuming that happened, who else would you stick at SS/2B?
Willl - January 22, 2012
Truthfully I would make sure there is a veteran option because Lombo is very likely a career utility player.
Truthfully I think Werth is the CF as soon as Harper is ready this summer.
The Herndon Kid - January 22, 2012 via mobile
bit harsh
There is plenty of people here that think we haven’t given Bernadina enough ABs to have a chance at a starting job in the Nats OF (I am not one of them). While I think Lombo needs work – I think you’d want to give him a decent shot at the majors before writing him off as a career utility. Not that he might end up there – just that he has a long way to go before we ‘Harris’ him.
Mezza - January 22, 2012
I would love to be wrong and am not writing him off
JusT stating what I think the answer is going to be on him.
The Herndon Kid - January 22, 2012 via mobile
Sickels refers to Lombardozzi
As the position player version of Tom Milone … gets dissed all through the minors and all he does is put up decent numbers and keep advancing
d_c_guy - January 22, 2012
I'd love to have a better than average bench option, and someone...
…who can push both Desi and Espi and fill in when able. Tricky trying it with a rookie though.
Patrick Reddington - January 22, 2012
This is, of course, assuming
That the Rays would be willing to part with a player like Upton for a player like Desmond, which, let’s honest, is doubtful. Even as a Nats fan, I’m sure it would take more than a shortstop averaging 1.3 WAR, a .302 OBP, and 28 errors per full season played to trade for Upton, whose worst full season (2.4 WAR in 2009) was almost twice as valuable as Desmond’s best, especially keeping in mind that’s the only year Upton has posted a WAR under 4. I’d think it would take considerable more than Desmond straight up—or even packaged—to land Upton, despite the short time remaining on his contract. The trade simply wouldn’t be that beneficial to the Rays, unless they think that Desmond is going to improve drastically in value in the coming years while Upton—only a year older—will stagnate.
Armless Penguin - January 22, 2012
Fair points
Perhaps Desmond for Upton straight up isn’t possible, and no one is arguing Desmond is a better player, but for the cash-strapped Rays, Desmond’s 4 years of team control probably look very appealing. Conversely, Upton is on his last (and costliest- $7mil) year of control, so it’s really 4 years of Desmond for one of Upton. Looking at it that way, it’s makes more sense.
However, the Rays have Hak-Ju Lee coming up through the system, so the might not be looking for a long-term fix at SS.
Willl - January 22, 2012
Desmond has been improving on defense
Many players make a lot of errors in their first full season. Desmond had 34. He cut that down to 23 in his 2nd season, which is a good trend. He is learning when it’s better to hold onto the ball than to throw the ball away while trying to make a spectacular play.
His hitting also improved significantly in the 2nd half of last season, especially in the final months.
No one can predict for certain how he will hit and field in 2012, but there are good signs that he will continue to make progress. If so, he could be a decent SS and leadoff hitter for the Nats.
Potomac Fan - January 23, 2012
6 years and what ever...........
should be the most so we can get rid of both “Prince and the Pauper” at the same time…..
artistfork - January 22, 2012
This guy
is saying deals done at 8 years https://twitter.com/#!/MLBInsideNews/status/161297046131843072 but Bowden is saying no
pgchris - January 23, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Federal Baseball to post a comment.