RealGM

Modern_epic wrote:Edit: I should point out, also, that the list is about the players who will be seen as the most overpaid in sports soon, not who is currently the most overpaid.

Hoopstarr wrote:

Modern_epic wrote:Edit: I should point out, also, that the list is about the players who will be seen as the most overpaid in sports soon, not who is currently the most overpaid.

I know one team hot and heavy after Rios was the St. Louis Cardinals, before they added Matt Holliday from Oakland," said a National League executive.

And another American League team was in on the Rios chase, too.

"We made a good offer for him. It wasn't what we offered for Roy Halladay, but it was maybe half of that," said an AL scout. "Then they give him away and get zero players in return. How does that work?

Modern_epic wrote:Yeah, you knew that article was going to be wrong when it started by claiming the Sox were set in the outfield.

Were Alex Rios actually being paid superstar money, that article would be true. However, given that he is being paid good, maybe great, player money, it isn't close to true. His bat any year but this one (and this one isn't that bad), plus average D? That guy gets paid around $10 million a season in a depressed economy.

Also, I can't tell if you are trying to call Wells or Rios the most unclutch hitter in the jays lineup. If you meant Rios, it isn't true. If you mean Wells, it is true for this year, but only this year. Wells is certainly more overpaid, though.

Edit: I should point out, also, that the list is about the players who will be seen as the most overpaid in sports soon, not who is currently the most overpaid.

Schadenfreude wrote:Bob Elliott can be hit or miss, but this sounds somewhat legit:

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Baseball/MLB/ ... 6-sun.html

I know one team hot and heavy after Rios was the St. Louis Cardinals, before they added Matt Holliday from Oakland," said a National League executive.

And another American League team was in on the Rios chase, too.

"We made a good offer for him. It wasn't what we offered for Roy Halladay, but it was maybe half of that," said an AL scout. "Then they give him away and get zero players in return. How does that work?

So he might be overpaid, but there were at least three teams willing to take him on, and two willing to add value to do so.

It also suggests further (and some might disagree, that's fair) that the decision to let Rios go came from Rogers; JP thought he had value but didn't feel compelled to move him, but after the non-waiver deadline Rogers stepped in and forced his hand.

If so, there's a fair amount of blame to go around...JP for failing to read the internal tea leaves and being proactive before the mandate to cut salary got a little more desperate, and Rogers for mandating a panic move when we could have gotten a return at a later date.

Modern_epic wrote:If Wells had 75 RBIs instead of 50, assuming a random distribution of those RBIs, we would still be no where near the WC.

We have lost 1 out of 6 games played by one run. That means 4 of those games would have had an extra RBI by Wells. Assuming that we then win 50% of those now tied games, and you get two extra wins.

If you didn't know, we are 13.5 games back.

Kevin Willis wrote:

Modern_epic wrote:If Wells had 75 RBIs instead of 50, assuming a random distribution of those RBIs, we would still be no where near the WC.

We have lost 1 out of 6 games played by one run. That means 4 of those games would have had an extra RBI by Wells. Assuming that we then win 50% of those now tied games, and you get two extra wins.

If you didn't know, we are 13.5 games back.

Yes right now they are 13+ games back however they've played especially bad in the last couple of weeks. If you up Wells production around the time period of before the trade deadline (when they were still above .500) then yes they would still be fighting for the Wildcard spot. You can't hide the fact that Wells was supposed to be the main contributor to the team and his bad play has hurt the Raptors offense.