Fish4Life Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Dec. 13 -- The veteran slugger was once a target of Kansas City, but is apparently out of the Royals' picture. Sanders, 38, is looking for a three-year deal but the Royals won't offer more than two. An ESPN.com report said the Marlins are one of many teams interested in Sanders, while the Cardinals, Twins and Mariners are also reportedly in the mix. Toronto's Globe and Mail has reported that the Blue Jays may be pursuing the free agent. Well the royals are out of it, but there one thing that pops out to me. He wants a 3 yr deal!! There is no way that the Fish would give him a 3 yr deal... THat just my opinion... What you guys think? Keep going after Sanders or make a bigger push at Gathwright? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamrock Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Little chance that we offer him more than 2 years, and I think even that makes little sense in context of our rebuilding phase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishfan79 Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 can I vote neither? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSwift25 Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 A 2 year deal with an evenly distributed $5/$5 split just means that we'd pay about $2.5 million for whatever prospects he'd be traded for at the deadline. Let me say this, if we hand out any free-agent deal worth more than $5 million, I'm am going to be beyond pissed because that easily would have paid for Looie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotcorner Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 I don't even see us offering a 2-year deal for Sanders. He's an okay player as a stopgap, but probably not worth sinking a lot of money into. I'd be fine with him for a one-year rental I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyggyMarlin Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 If we're going youth why bring in Sanders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skully Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 If we're going youth why bring in Sanders? I don't think the team's goal is to go with this complete "Youth movement." They had to get rid of payroll, and unfortunately, our entire starting lineup was filled with guys that made a good chunk of change... Now that the payroll has been purged, the Marlins are going to look into bringing some veterans into the mix. I wouldn't be surprised to see them trade for Gathright and still get Sanders. That wouldn't be a bad outfield (Sanders, Gathright, and Hermida). However, as I've said before, Sanders is always on winning teams. There is no way he ends up signing down here. Unless he wants to start playing the role of mentor to these young guys. But signings like bringing Moehler and Lenny Harris back, show that the Marlins are willing to mix some veterans in, as long as they don't have to pay them too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rapp/Laettnerfanatic Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Does anybody recall the "second great purge" we just had? Hell no we cant afford Reggie Sanders. And if so where did this money all of a sudden come from? Cause Im sure if we sign a "ryan mcquire" type vetern player, we will then have sunk so far below into the red that anything we see will be red. Cause we just might fall off the edge of the world if make a free agent signing! :banghead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish4Life Posted December 14, 2005 Author Share Posted December 14, 2005 A 2 year deal with an evenly distributed $5/$5 split just means that we'd pay about $2.5 million for whatever prospects he'd be traded for at the deadline. Let me say this, if we hand out any free-agent deal worth more than $5 million, I'm am going to be beyond pissed because that easily would have paid for Looie. I agree, with that cash would could have saved Looie.. I dont see up picking up Sanders at all... I would rather see gathright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHarrington Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Little chance that we offer him more than 2 years, and I think even that makes little sense in context of our rebuilding phase. I agree it doesnt make sense given our plans , better to let a young guy have some playing time to get some experience instead of playing Sanders who is a nice player but at 40 yrs old in two years doesnt fit into our long term plans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotcorner Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 from the Herald today: CHATTER ? Speaking at Jim Mandich's Dolphins Touchdown Club luncheon Tuesday, Marlins manager Joe Girardi reiterated he knew payroll would drop drastically without a new stadium. ''A lot of small-market teams don't want to rebuild completely, and what happens [often] is you don't ever get to the peak, and you stay in the middle. I don't want to stay in the middle. A lot of these kids will turn out to be great players.'' . . . Girardi said the Marlins want to sign a veteran left fielder and likely will play Josh Willingham at catcher, not in the outfield. might coincide with the Reggie Sanders talk... dunno. Who else is out there? Preston Wilson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsprt05 Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 TODD HOLLANDSWORTH BABY!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlins2003 Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 TODD HOLLANDSWORTH BABY!!! Been there. done that. No thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.