Sheets to Oakland

Dave · January 26, 2010 at 10:58 am · Filed Under Mariners 

The A’s have signed Ben Sheets to a reported $10 million contract for 2010, with incentives that could push his salary up even further if he pitches well. He obviously impressed teams at his outing last week, and his stock increased pretty dramatically.

Given the price, I’m glad the Mariners passed. This a huge buyer’s market, with significant quality talents sitting around looking for jobs. The M’s can spend the rest of their money in better ways.

Comments

60 Responses to “Sheets to Oakland”

  1. LefebvreBelebvre on January 26th, 2010 11:10 am

    Bedard!

  2. thr33niL on January 26th, 2010 11:12 am

    Agreed. 10 milion is just the A’s being desperate since they missed out on every other player they went after. I doubt Sheets makes it past the deadline with the A’s.

  3. Paul B on January 26th, 2010 11:15 am

    Or a starter in a trade.

    Assuming Bedard is too much of a risk, and Washburn is too much meh.

  4. profmac on January 26th, 2010 11:20 am

    Who would give us the biggest bang for our buck? And, have you laid out a proposal of what you, Dave, would do if you were the GM at this point? I’m curious as to exactly what moves you’d like to see.

  5. CCW on January 26th, 2010 11:21 am

    The A’s are better than a lot of people think. They’re making a bit of a back-door run at the division, with defense to rival the M’s, and potentially some very good pitching.

  6. Justin on January 26th, 2010 11:21 am

    Considering the layout of the AL West, if Sheets turns out to be great and worth his 10 million, it’s not going to be enough to push the A’s into playoff contention- if anything, it evens the playing field a bit a could help the Mariner’s be the dominate force in West. If Sheets had to go anywhere in the AL West, I’m glad it was Oakland.

  7. leon0112 on January 26th, 2010 11:27 am

    Let’s see. Cliff Lee for $7 million or Ben Sheets for $10 million. Z is the new Billy Beane.

  8. Briggstar on January 26th, 2010 11:41 am

    Z is the new Billy Beane.

    I think the buzz around baseball does bear that out (although the 2010 season will have a lot to say about the Legend of Z).

    Interestingly, amongst current GM’s, he is both the oldest and the least experienced. I wonder how much that’s helped him in trade negotiations?

  9. Chris_From_Bothell on January 26th, 2010 11:43 am

    Justin beat me to it – next best thing to Not Mariners is Not Texas. And the price wasn’t right.

    I don’t want anything to do with Bedard; his upside isn’t near what Sheets’ is.

  10. Mustard on January 26th, 2010 11:44 am

    Is there a reasonable chance that the M’s offer Bedard a one year incentive contract? What is Chien Ming Wang’s availibility? Last I read he was preparing for a May return.

  11. Bip on January 26th, 2010 11:45 am

    It’s not exactly fair to compare Lee at $7M and Sheets at $10M. For one, Sheets cost no prospects to Oakland and Lee cost us three… I think it’s a nice upside risk for the A’s. The injury risk is the play. If he’s healthy, $10M is a solid deal.

  12. amnizu on January 26th, 2010 11:46 am

    I am okay with the M’s passing on this. Seems like 10mil is a pretty big risk here, not sure if Sheets would put up the 2.0 to 2.5+ WAR needed to really justify it.

    Also, there is still a chance at a deadline deal for Sheets if he pitches well and the A’s are out of contention. You got to figure that the A’s are thinking half season rental with prospect(s) coming back at the trade deadline.

  13. eponymous coward on January 26th, 2010 11:46 am

    I’d be partial to Chien-Ming Wang, myself.

  14. ChrisK on January 26th, 2010 11:48 am

    Let’s see. Cliff Lee for $7 million or Ben Sheets for $10 million.

    Actually it’s Lee for $7 million + Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez.

  15. amnizu on January 26th, 2010 11:51 am

    I thought Lee was 9 mil due to him winning the Cy Young? Regardless, Lee at 9mil + prospects is still a heck of a deal.

  16. PouxBear on January 26th, 2010 11:52 am

    Now that Sheets is off the table I expect Jack to react swiftly and bring in a starter that: A) no one saw coming, and B) is better than Sheets, just like he did when he “missed” on Harden and had to “settle” for Lee.

  17. wsm on January 26th, 2010 11:54 am

    Assuming the M’s had $10 million to spend, I’d take Sheets and Tui over any other SP/RH Bat combo available on the open market. If the team spends $10 million on any combination of players left on the market, they’ve overpaid.

    Of course, there’s always trades…

  18. pogicory1 on January 26th, 2010 11:56 am

    I’d be partial to Chien-Ming Wang, myself.

    I am not entirely sold on Wang. He was solid two years ago but coming off of this past injury I am leary about how much he can bring to the team. I do like the fact that he is a groundballer.

  19. wsm on January 26th, 2010 11:57 am

    Enough about Wang and Bedard. They’re fine 6th starter options, but by the time you get through 2-3 months of Fister/Vargas before those guys are healthy the team’s playoff chances could be done.

  20. Greeff on January 26th, 2010 11:57 am

    hmmm the Angels got a little worse and the A’s and Rangers a bit better. along with the M’s great offseason this should be a nice race in the AL west.

  21. eponymous coward on January 26th, 2010 12:08 pm

    The difference between 2 months of a 1 WAR starter and 4 months of a 3 WAR starter and 6 months of a 3 WAR starter is LESS than one WAR (2 1/3 WAR vs. 3). If the Mariners playoff chances are going to be done in by having a rotation of King Felix, Cliff Lee, RRS, Snell and (pick one) of Vargas/Olson/Fister/French/Petit for a month or two, they never really had a chance anyway.

    Right now, the only guy on the market with anything close to a proven track record of healthy mediocrity (as opposed to injured brilliance) are the Brett Tomkos and Jarrod Washburns of the world- and to be honest, Luke French might turn into a cheaper version of Jarrod Washburn by the end of 2010.

  22. Mekias on January 26th, 2010 12:22 pm

    I’m not surprised that we didn’t go 10 million guaranteed with Sheets. For what it’s worth, I think there’s a good chance that he ends up over-performing that contract but it’s hard to ignore the risks. I would have given 7.5 mill with 2.5 more in incentives. Maybe Sheets only cared about the guaranteed money though.

    Edited to add: Heyman says that the deal is 10 mill PLUS 3.5 in incentives. Now I’m really not surprised we let him go. Isn’t that like 1/3 of Oakland’s payroll?

    I’m a little disappointed that it feels like we’re one good player away from a legit playoff & world series run but we’re unwilling to go that little extra to finish this thing off. I just wish I knew whether Jack Z had his hands tied or not by budgetary constraints. Maybe after spending all that money in 2008 and failing miserably then cutting payroll in 2009 and having a winning season, the ownership is unwilling to open the pocketbook again and might even be trying to cut the budget further. We just don’t know.

  23. Spider Jerusalem on January 26th, 2010 12:26 pm

    Enough about Wang and Bedard. They’re fine 6th starter options, but by the time you get through 2-3 months of Fister/Vargas before those guys are healthy the team’s playoff chances could be done.

    You sure? Wang is set to throw off a mound in the next week or so according to his agent, and by all accounts he’s ahead of schedule in his rehab.

    There’s a good chance he’s ready at or near the beginning of the season.

  24. Bilbo on January 26th, 2010 12:27 pm

    It truly amazes me how many people would pass on this deal because of price especially on a one year deal. For one, we have no idea what the M’s budget is this year. (We do know that the M’s budget is elastic in that they have more money to spend while still being profitable if they want to.)
    Even if this was the last $10m in the budget, then this is a fine place to spend it cuz you can’t take it with you (the Ms don’t roll over payroll yr/yr).
    I hope Z has another rabbit up his sleave because the AL West just became a four team race.

  25. ManifestDestiny on January 26th, 2010 12:43 pm

    Actually it’s Lee for $7 million + Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez

    Actually it’s Cliff Lee+2 draft picks for $7mil+Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez

  26. Pete Livengood on January 26th, 2010 12:45 pm

    I liked the idea of Sheets a lot, but I wouldn’t pay $10M for him. There are still some interesting names out there. Other than health (which the Mariners are in a better position to judge that pretty much anybody), Bedard has probably the best upside of anybody left in free agency. If you don’t want to wait for him to get healthy (though I disagree with the assessment that the M’s will struggle with their gaggle of 5th-starter-substitutes until he is – early season usually has plenty of opportunities to skip your 5th starter, and the shear number of candidates increases the chance that one or more of them will be useful for a short period) and want a durable innings-eater, go after somebody like Jon Garland, or maybe Washburn. Pedro and Smoltz are out there, for those who want to try to capture (old) lightning in a bottle. Or maybe two of any of these.

    Not to mention, Zduriecik has already shown how creative he can be on the trade front. There was simply no need to overpay for Sheets, even (or maybe even especially) to keep him away from an AL West competitor.

  27. Briggstar on January 26th, 2010 12:48 pm

    Actually it’s Cliff Lee+2 draft picks for $7mil+Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez

    You already had me at Cliff Lee, but damn!

  28. ima-zeliever on January 26th, 2010 12:49 pm

    Dave,

    Would Z and Wak ever platoon a rotation spot to take advantages of splits or help a player not ready for a full time rotation spot either do to injury or experience.

    Thanks.

  29. Pete Livengood on January 26th, 2010 1:00 pm

    And, BTW, to those who said Bedard has nothing like the upside of Sheets:

    Both Bedard and Sheets are separated from their best seasons by injury-filled seasons. But Bedard at peak (5.4 WAR in ’7, 5.0 WAR in ’06, despite not getting to 200 IP in either of those years) is pretty comparable to Sheets. Sheets has only topped 5 WAR once, back in ’04 (8.0 WAR in 237 IP). His absolute upside, assuming full recovery and health, is higher than Bedard’s, for sure – but Bedard is nothing to sneeze at, and as I said before, the Mariners are in a better position to assess his health than any team. And he’ll come FAR cheaper than what Sheets just got.

    Give me Garland and Bedard for the price Sheets just got alone. Or even one of them.

  30. joser on January 26th, 2010 1:04 pm

    I’d give better than even odds* Sheets isn’t still pitching for Oakland in August — either because he’s injured, or because a non-contending Oakland flipped him for prospects at the deadline (almost certainly not to Seattle though — I can’t see Beane doing an in-division deal during the season, and I can’t see Seattle giving up prospects to Oakland either).

    * I rescind these odds if Oakland makes one or more other major moves, like signing Damon, that turn them into less of a dark horse than they are now.

    Oakland is almost as good a choice as Seattle for a pitcher looking to reestablish his value — almost as much a pitcher’s park with a decent OF defense (though not up to DTFT standards), so the M’s would’ve had to do significantly better than that offer to land him — and the Oakland deal is already more than what they were willing to pay to outbid Texas for Harden. There’s a lot of lost opportunity to do other things with that money. Especially if Zduriencik thinks he has other options, and he almost certainly does.

    It’s true that the team as assembled, assuming it plays up to our expectations, may be at the point on the win curve vs the other AL West contenders that overpaying for wins is now justified, but overpaying to the point where you’re completely tapped out is unlikely to be a good strategy. There are still options out there, and not all of them are free agents. You want to retain the the freedom to add payroll at the trade deadline as well, especially if the M’s are in a tight pennant race all summer.

    If anything this deal makes me sorrier that the M’s didn’t snatch Harden away from Texas (in addition to Lee), since he cost less.

    I’m a little disappointed that it feels like we’re one good player away from a legit playoff & world series run but we’re unwilling to go that little extra to finish this thing off.

    Why are you assuming the M’s are finished with their offseason? And actually, they’re still more than one player away (potential 4th OF / RH bat Xavier Nady just signed with the Cubs for $5M, for example). Which is why dumping that much into one risky player is probably a bad move, win curve or not.

  31. shortbus on January 26th, 2010 1:05 pm

    If we do Bedard aren’t we better off trying to get him on a heavily incentive-laden deal for two years, than on a less incentive-laden one year deal? It seems to me that he’s more likely to be really productive in 2011 seeing as you know he’s going to give you nothing until June of 2010.

  32. Mekias on January 26th, 2010 1:14 pm

    Why are you assuming the M’s are finished with their offseason? And actually, they’re still more than one player away (potential 4th OF / RH bat Xavier Nady just signed with the Cubs for $5M, for example). Which is why dumping that much into one risky player is probably a bad move, win curve or not.

    Let’s put it this way. I don’t like any of the free agents left out there. I would have rather risked 10-11 mill on Sheets than give 5-8 mill on a mediocre player. Of course we don’t know if he wuold have even accepted 10-11 mill since Oakland’s offering 10-13.5 mill. Everyone says to have faith in Z but he’s not infallible a I can’t help but feel that his hands are being tied in some way.

  33. kg on January 26th, 2010 1:14 pm

    Mariners don’t have much money left.
    Jim Street says even Nady($3.3M)is too expensive.
    Drayer also have heard the budget will be less this year than last.
    It’ll be a tough season for M’s.

  34. eponymous coward on January 26th, 2010 1:15 pm

    My problem with Bedard’s upside potential is his history shows he doesn’t pitch late in the season- and in this division (especially since Oakland doesn’t look like they are rolling over and playing dead), it may come down to September and October.

  35. Mike Snow on January 26th, 2010 1:20 pm

    I think the hope is that if Bedard doesn’t start the season, maybe he can finish it for once.

  36. Briggstar on January 26th, 2010 1:24 pm

    @Livengood: once again, hear hear!

    @eponymous: doesn’t a healthy-shouldered Bedard beginning 2-3 months into the season change that?

    Right now, the Mariners rotation looks to be Felix, Clifford, Hyphen, Snell, Fister/Vargas to start the season (barring any surprises in Spring Training), with the #4 and 5 starters eating up innings and soaking up valuable experience.

    Sign Bedard for $4Mil or so for 1-2 years plus incentives and ease him into the rotation early summer.

    See what Saunders, Carp and Moore bring to the table offensively and for the time being save the extra cash (if any) for a trade package netting that middle of the order bopper everyone’s clamoring for…assuming we are buyers at that point.

    I also think Wang and Pedro are very intriguing, especially as your #3 or #4 SP. Without knowing the budget (which Jack Z kind of bristled about at the end of Cliff Lee’s press conference), any of these are speculative at best though.

  37. Rulo Montero on January 26th, 2010 1:26 pm

    It seems like the Sheets and Nady signings really pushed the panic button on some people… I think we should wait and see whats under Z sleeves, the FO can still can sign, trade or even give a chance to someone like Saunders, I think we all can agree that 10 mil + incentives was too much for Sheets, only time will tell if this was a good signing by the A’s, he might get hurt as soon as he starts throwing on a regular basis.

  38. Pete Livengood on January 26th, 2010 1:45 pm

    @Briggstar: the feeling’s mutual! I didn’t mention Wang (but should have), although I think he is also a health risk (albeit a lesser one than Bedard, though Bedard pitched better through injury than Wang did last season). Garland I like only if he doesn’t ask too much $$ – he has value as a durable innings-eater, but he’s not that special (though Safeco and our defense will help him). Whoever you like, the point is, there are still multiple decent options for #3-#5 types still out there. No reason for panic that you couldn’t get a guy who didn’t pitch at all last season for $10M to potentially as much as $13.5M.

    @ e.c. I know all too well what Bedard’s downside is. But that’s why he’ll come in at something like $3M-$6M, I’d guess. All of these guys remaining represent a health risk (except maybe Garland, but hey, he’s still a pitcher). Sheets has been hurt as much as Bedard, really. I agree with those who say (hope?) that by starting the season later, Bedard should have a better chance to finish it. But really, who knows, with any of these guys?

  39. diderot on January 26th, 2010 1:48 pm

    Somehow, the thought of Sheets at $10m+ seems like something that would make a lot of sense to Bill Bavasi.
    As others have pointed out, Bedard not only has the highest ceiling of anyone left on the free agent market, but in terms of value (salary), I’m guessing he’ll be even more attractive. I believe he wants to give Seattle some return on our considerable investment in prospects.
    I would look at his signing as a pre-baked midseason acquisition…but one that doesn’t cost us anything in terms of players.

  40. DRFelix on January 26th, 2010 1:55 pm

    For $10M+ Incentives?!

    That’s a Bavasi risk to me, except for Beane has a plan behind his move. He’s not expecting to pay Sheets all that money, instead flip him for pospects to add to his farm system. And the team that takes him ends up paying all the additional incentives, because incentives will end up kicking in during the 2nd half the more he plays. It’s a risk for Beane, because he’s counting on Sheets not getting injured. BUT, you can bet the A’s will be cautious with him, so he makes it to a June/July trade. With the idea of flipping Sheets, which we all know Beane loves to sign players with upside with the intent to flip him, you have to agree that the risk to the A’s is pretty minimal.

  41. loveMeSomeStats on January 26th, 2010 2:01 pm

    Mariners don’t have much money left.
    Jim Street says even Nady($3.3M)is too expensive.
    Drayer also have heard the budget will be less this year than last.

    Why should we believe this exactly? Zduriencik is on record (see Cliff Lee introduction video) saying “no one! no one!” can calculate what the M’s payroll is. And now, suddenly we have Drayer saying the budget will be less?

  42. JH on January 26th, 2010 2:07 pm

    Actually it’s Cliff Lee+2 draft picks for $7mil+Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez

    Actually it’s Cliff Lee + 2 draft picks for $7 million + the signing bonuses of 2 draft picks in the #16-40 range (likely ~2.5 million unless they break slot) + Aumont/Gillies/Ramirez, with the qualifier that neither Lee departing through free agency or earning a Type A label are 100% guaranteed.

  43. DRFelix on January 26th, 2010 2:19 pm

    Whats interesting to me about all of this is that since Friday we’ve been hearing Nats news and TB news on Willingham/Crawford/Pena on the trading block now.

    A “lot” of talk about the TB payroll budget being over their alloted amount, and concerns with not having the funds to sign any of their players hitting FA next offseason (Crawford/Pena).

    An interesting side note, is that back in October there was a lot of talk that TB was planning on moving Zobrist from 2B to the OF. This would mean 2 things:

    1) Crawford “could” then be traded with Zobrist filling in at LF.
    2) They would need a 2B to replace the Zobrist move to LF. NONE of the 2B options in FA will be anywhere near Jose Lopez’s $2.3M salary. PLUS Lopez has 25 HR power for Seattle, and should increase the HRs in TB. TB is always looking for CHEAP power.

    I know last weekend everyone was discussing a Willingham for Lopez swap, but now that Sheets and his $10M contract is off the market, I can see the Z Man working hard on some type of TB deal. Don’t see how Seattle can pull off a blockbuster with both Crawford & Pena involved, but Crawford for LF would be more than doable (high OBP, high BA, LHB, 14-18 HR pop, and lightening spped, oh did I forget great D?).

  44. just a fan on January 26th, 2010 2:30 pm

    As much as I wanted Sheets, I was more hoping we could out-incentive teams because, hey, if he pitches those 200 innings that gets him to MOST millions, that’d be pretty great for our division prospects (or a sad “if you’d told me Felix, Lee and Sheets would pitch great and the M’s would win only 83 games, I’d have said your crazy!”).

    That being said, now I guess it’s time for Zduriencik to blow us away again in some even better way. It’s been like, a month or so.

  45. ChrisK on January 26th, 2010 2:32 pm

    Isn’t Jim Street basically Pocket Lint 2.0?

  46. Bip on January 26th, 2010 3:14 pm

    I’m leaning toward what Dave said last week on the podcast. Trade Lopez and a prospect (or two) for Francisco Liriano. Big upside, cost effective and leaves room for us to work towards a solid RH bat. Tui would get some PT (I would assume) and we could step up for a big bat like Dye.

  47. Briggstar on January 26th, 2010 3:21 pm
  48. sp_da_man on January 26th, 2010 3:22 pm

    Tweet from Ken_Rosenthal – Garland: One year, $5.3M with #Padres- $4.7M plus $600,000 buyout on $6.75M mutual option for 2011.

    I guess if I’m a free agent pitcher & there’s not much of a market I might as well choose a pitchers park like Petco.

  49. Briggstar on January 26th, 2010 3:38 pm

    I meant to add more on Dye. With the current team, I cannot see us having any use for another DH type (Dye, Thome, etc.) who has limited defensive value.

    If anything, Johnny Damon is still a decent all-round option, but like Sheets, his asking price may not meet the realities of the current market. Plus, how many outfielders can we really pack into the roster?

    ps: Dye was my fantasy team’s darkhorse MVP in 2008, so I do have some love for the guy, just not in real life.

  50. thr33niL on January 26th, 2010 3:46 pm

    The chips are starting to fall. Sheets is gone so everyone else is rushing for leftovers. The Padres just signed Garland.

  51. Pete Livengood on January 26th, 2010 4:56 pm

    Though I am on record above saying I would have liked Garland, let me note that I also qualified that as “but not for too much $$” and let me add to the record: $5.3M (if Rosenthal is right) is more than I would have spent for Garland. Not a whole lot more, but…enough.

  52. Marinersmanjk on January 26th, 2010 6:37 pm

    Okay, this has been a good day. Sheets and Garland are gone which we didn’t want anyway, and that will make Washburn look great and he’l hopefully get snapped up. This really points towards a trade for a starting SP to fill our hole.

  53. joser on January 26th, 2010 7:22 pm

    If anything, Johnny Damon is still a decent all-round option, but like Sheets, his asking price may not meet the realities of the current market. Plus, how many outfielders can we really pack into the roster?

    Damon has said in the past he’d be open to playing 1B, and a LF/1B combo is almost exactly what the M’s need for that 25th spot. Dave thinks he might come cheap (or at least less than the value he delivers).

    The problems with Damon from the M’s standpoint are:
    (1) He’s got a terrible arm
    (2) He’s a LH hitter
    (3) He’s expensive

    The first isn’t a problem at 1B but would be in Safeco’s spacious LF (in Fenway’s friendly confines Manny once famously cut off one of Damon’s throws before it left the outfield). The second would be an asset in isolation (he has a swing suited to Safeco) but under current circumstances is a big problem since his entire role would be to platoon with Bradley and Kotchman, which doesn’t work when they’re LH hitters too. The third is a killer: though he may be willing to accept both a reduced role and a paycut, he probably would still cost more than the M’s are willing to pay.

    So he’s both a bad fit and expensive: not a good combo.

  54. joser on January 26th, 2010 7:31 pm

    Okay, this has been a good day. Sheets and Garland are gone which we didn’t want anyway,

    Sheets probably isn’t enough to make the A’s competitive on his own (unless they catch lighting in a bottle with some of their kids, or make some more smart signings), but he does make them better. And if the A’s fall out of it and flip him for prospects at the deadline, this may pay off for them in the future too. While there’s a chance he’ll do more damage to the Angels and Rangers than he’ll do to the M’s, that’s a risky bet. I’m glad he didn’t end up at either of those teams, but the division race just got tighter all the same. I’m a little relieved the M’s aren’t rolling the dice with Sheets, but I’d rather have had him go to someone outside the AL West, and preferably outside the AL entirely.

  55. Marinersmanjk on January 26th, 2010 8:16 pm

    Dave, do you think there is still any possibility of the Lopez for Liriano trade you speculated about earlier? It would make sense for the pitching point of view, but it puts a void in second unless we can sign hudson. Felipe Lopez doesn’t sound like a solid fit seeing how inconsistent he’s been.

  56. Miles on January 26th, 2010 8:23 pm

    How do the A’s look if they sign Damon and Branyan?

  57. henryv on January 26th, 2010 8:59 pm

    How do the A’s look if they sign Damon and Branyan?

    Potentially dangerous if their team can stay healthy, which is a big freaking “if”.

  58. Mariners2620 on January 26th, 2010 9:00 pm

    Damon is a possibility because they are just spending money to spend it right now, but I doubt they bring in Branyan. Regardless of what happens, we NEED to get another pitcher for the three hole. I don’t see a scenario where we get anyone as good or better then Sheets as some have been vying for, but we definitely need to get someone. That someone shall not be Jarrod Washburn either. I honestly don’t know where we are going to get this pitcher, but the only pitcher that I can see us trading for is a Liriano, Harang, or Arroyo. I would like Harang as most would, but it takes two teams to make a trade. I am actually fine with leaving the offense as is, but I doubt that it will stay the same. At least one other acquisition or trade to help out the offense. We really do need to add on another pitcher who is better then our current plethora of number 5 starters.

  59. Catherwood on January 26th, 2010 10:12 pm

    Dave, do you think there is still any possibility of the Lopez for Liriano trade you speculated about earlier? It would make sense for the pitching point of view, but it puts a void in second unless we can sign hudson.

    I think others have suggested that if we trade Lopez, then Figgins would move over to 2B and Tui would come up to play 3B. I don’t think I’d regard either of those assignments as a “void”.

  60. halflink123 on February 4th, 2010 6:29 pm

    ARE YOU SERIOUS? I’d take a healthy Ben Sheets for $10M anyday. Whether someone else could be had for less (i.e. Cliff Lee) is really beside the point; Sheets is a legitimate number 1 starter, and if healthy can give a team 200+ innings and 250+ K’s. If he’s not healthy, well, it’s a one year deal, no serious harm done.

    Sheets has a chance to be the ace of the A’s rotation; it’s an awesome, though I hate this phrase I will use it: relatively low-risk signing.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.