Helton Trade Talks Confirmed..... - Page 3

Rankal · January 28th, 2007, 11:59 PM

The simple fact is this:

The Rockies dished out the cash to Helton because they expected to have a high average, high home run, high RBI hitting machine for the length of the contract. Then (and no accusations here, just noticing a trend) the steroid scandal hits all of baseball, and Helton can barely fathom 20 HR's a year. And with every dismal Helton year, we have a new health excuse.

Helton is not worth what he's being paid. Plain and simple.

The Rockies have realized that the only way to save money on Helton is to eat up a good portion of his money as a "loss" and hope someone is silly enough to take him and the other half of his salary. Much like we did with Hampton and Walker (both who, arguably, have struggled to achieve any consistent success after they left).

Does it make a lot of sense? No. Is it going to really do much for the Rockies? It frees up a position slot and, in theory, the ability to sign some of these new, young core guys (Holliday, Atkins, Hawpe, Cook, etc.).

Everyone is claiming the Rockies made a mistake in dealing Jennings. Considering Jennings had stated he was going to test free agency, the Rockies were most likely going to be outbid on him if he had another great year. Might as well get something for nothing. Did they jump the gun by doing it in the off season and not at July when someone is in dire need of pitching? Probably. But what if Jennings went back to the Jason Jennings prior to 2006? Wouldn't get as much in return, unless someone NEEDED pitching so badly that they'd be willing to split with a lot of great talent for, what would then be considered, a #3/#4 starter.

The Rockies just find themselves in bad situations that they create, and the only way to remedy them is to bite the bullet.

Chalk it up to poor ownership and poor front office management.

Roxpert · January 29th, 2007, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rankal

The simple fact is this:

Helton is not worth what he's being paid. Plain and simple.

Chalk it up to poor ownership and poor front office management.

It's not as simple as that. While Helton certainly isn't worth $90.1 million over the next 5 years, the gap between market value for someone like Helton and his contract is shrinking, thanks to the explosion of free agent salaries this offseason. So, the notion is that this gap could close further if we held onto Todd one more year. He may just have a bounce-back season, and one more year of his contract would be off the books. His contract is looking like less of a liability given the explosion of salaries, so if Helton improves in 2007, his contract may actually look rational to some GMs, making it possible to trade him for real value next December.

Read the column by Ken Rosenthal, which spells out much of this....

FOX Sports - MLB - Is moving Helton right for the Rockies?

BTW, I think it's obvious that ownership and the FO made egregious mistakes in 2000/01, which they are still paying for and trying to fix.

Heltonfan · January 29th, 2007, 04:54 PM

The latest from the Post:

Quote:

Boston would be assuming more of Helton's contract than originally believed, with the Rockies subsidizing $36.6 million of the remaining $90.1 million - not almost half as often mentioned-- and just $20 million after this season, according to a major league source with direct knowledge of the negotiations.

That would leave the Red Sox to pay Helton $53.5 million over six years, a commitment that so far has prevented them from also parting with either Hansen, Delcarmen or Double-A center fielder Jacoby Ellsbury.

Lowell and Tavarez are still in the deal, of course, which means that even in this version, we'd only be saving $41 million.

However, it's a little more interesting than that. Note that the difference between the $36.6 million figure and the $20 million post-'07 is $16.6 million: Helton's '07 salary. Which means that we'd be taking on $12 million in salary ((Lowell + Tavarez) this year, a year when we're not going to contend (despite Monfort's rhetoric), but from 2008-11, we'd be saving an average of $13.4 million a year. Which is more than enough to acquire some real talent, and probably more than Helton would be worth to us in those years.

In other words, if we acknowledge '07 as a lost season regardless of whether Helton stays or goes, and if the financial hit in '07 doesn't cut into our budget for '08 and beyond, this actually looks pretty reasonable. I'm starting to regain a little optimism here, but we shall see...

Roxpert · January 29th, 2007, 04:59 PM

If Lowell and Taverez are still in the deal, the writer clearly should have pointed out that we are offsetting Boston's expense by taking payment "in kind" rather than in cash. And he also erred in stating the timeframe of six years....since it's 5 years and the 2012 option would be bought out.

Thus, I believe it reduces the report's credibility.

mets2k · February 1st, 2007, 02:53 AM

The Orioles asked the Rockies about Todd Helton several weeks ago, but talks went nowhere, according to the Washington Post.

We're taking this directly from the Post: The Orioles lost interest because the Rockies wanted Baltimore to pay a significant portion of the $90 million owed to the first baseman. Dan O'Dowd then informed Mike Flanagan that water is wet and that there is no Easter Bunny. His beliefs shaken to the core, Flanagan took a leave of absence and was last seen in a rural West Virginia market stocking up on condensed milk and chicken and stars soup.

Source: Washington Post

mets2k · February 4th, 2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

The Denver Post reports that Todd Helton has told the Rockies he is prepared to veto all future trades for the next five years.

Could such a statement motivate the Rockies to do the deal with the Red Sox without getting a quality prospect in addition to Mike Lowell and Julian Tavarez? Talks are dead now, but they could be revisited if that's the Rockies' desire.

Source: Denver Post

WOW

Roxpert · February 4th, 2007, 05:02 PM

That second quoted paragraph was not in the link, and apparently added by you. But you raise a good point: If Helton is "threatening" to veto all future trades, is he trying to force a trade at this time? Interesting gambit by Helton, if so.

hiaspire · February 23rd, 2007, 11:00 AM

SI.com - Writers - Jon Heyman: Incident could ignite Manny trade talks - Friday February 23, 2007 12:07PM

I doubt it from both sides and Helton isn't going to want to put up with continuing dialog, but just wanted to post this speculation with Manny's delay in reaching camp again. If Helton really was getting a little excited about going to the Red Sox and being in the playoffs, revisiting it at some point might not be such a bad idea to him if they can finally get it worked out.

I'd probably be for some kind of Helton/Manny swap, although I think you give up a ton of attitude/leadership/accountability for wackiness/nonsense/massive-RBIs, but I don't think the BoSox are respecting Helton's value enough in any kind of possible transaction to make it worthwhile. If Helton goes, he's got to bring value back. Anyway... here's the quote in the article:

Quote:

...what if this latest incident sparks another round of Ramirez trade talks?

At Ramirez's behest, the Red Sox talked about trading Ramirez to at least five teams this winter -- the Rockies, Dodgers, Angels, Giants and Mariners -- and a couple of those teams surely are keeping an eye on the latest craziness involving perhaps the greatest right-handed hitter in the game. The most intriguing of those clubs might be the Rockies, who twice this winter engaged in trades talks with Boston regarding Todd Helton. Once they involved Ramirez, and once they didn't.

While the Rockies and Red Sox failed to meet Helton's own deadline to make a deal, some people in baseball believe there's a chance talks involving Helton could be resurrected. One reason for that is the belief that Helton, who like Ramirez has veto powers over trades, still would like to go to the Red Sox. (Before setting the deadline, he gave the OK for the Rockies to seek a trade to Boston.)

TheIncredibleRox · February 23rd, 2007, 11:41 AM

I just can't picture Manny accepting a trade here. He's a big-city boy to the core. He'd end up in NY, LA, LAA, maybe San Fran, or somewhere along those lines. He doesn't strike me as the Denver type.

And that's even before he considers going to a basement dweller...

February 4th, 2007, 05:02 PM	#37 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	That second quoted paragraph was not in the link, and apparently added by you. But you raise a good point: If Helton is "threatening" to veto all future trades, is he trying to force a trade at this time? Interesting gambit by Helton, if so. Last edited by Roxpert; February 4th, 2007 at 05:05 PM.

January 28th, 2007, 11:59 PM	#31 (permalink)
Rankal Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 84	The simple fact is this: The Rockies dished out the cash to Helton because they expected to have a high average, high home run, high RBI hitting machine for the length of the contract. Then (and no accusations here, just noticing a trend) the steroid scandal hits all of baseball, and Helton can barely fathom 20 HR's a year. And with every dismal Helton year, we have a new health excuse. Helton is not worth what he's being paid. Plain and simple. The Rockies have realized that the only way to save money on Helton is to eat up a good portion of his money as a "loss" and hope someone is silly enough to take him and the other half of his salary. Much like we did with Hampton and Walker (both who, arguably, have struggled to achieve any consistent success after they left). Does it make a lot of sense? No. Is it going to really do much for the Rockies? It frees up a position slot and, in theory, the ability to sign some of these new, young core guys (Holliday, Atkins, Hawpe, Cook, etc.). Everyone is claiming the Rockies made a mistake in dealing Jennings. Considering Jennings had stated he was going to test free agency, the Rockies were most likely going to be outbid on him if he had another great year. Might as well get something for nothing. Did they jump the gun by doing it in the off season and not at July when someone is in dire need of pitching? Probably. But what if Jennings went back to the Jason Jennings prior to 2006? Wouldn't get as much in return, unless someone NEEDED pitching so badly that they'd be willing to split with a lot of great talent for, what would then be considered, a #3/#4 starter. The Rockies just find themselves in bad situations that they create, and the only way to remedy them is to bite the bullet. Chalk it up to poor ownership and poor front office management.

January 29th, 2007, 04:59 PM	#34 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	If Lowell and Taverez are still in the deal, the writer clearly should have pointed out that we are offsetting Boston's expense by taking payment "in kind" rather than in cash. And he also erred in stating the timeframe of six years....since it's 5 years and the 2012 option would be bought out. Thus, I believe it reduces the report's credibility.

February 1st, 2007, 02:53 AM	#35 (permalink)
mets2k Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Posts: 429	The Orioles asked the Rockies about Todd Helton several weeks ago, but talks went nowhere, according to the Washington Post. We're taking this directly from the Post: The Orioles lost interest because the Rockies wanted Baltimore to pay a significant portion of the $90 million owed to the first baseman. Dan O'Dowd then informed Mike Flanagan that water is wet and that there is no Easter Bunny. His beliefs shaken to the core, Flanagan took a leave of absence and was last seen in a rural West Virginia market stocking up on condensed milk and chicken and stars soup. Source: Washington Post

February 23rd, 2007, 11:41 AM	#39 (permalink)
TheIncredibleRox Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 322	I just can't picture Manny accepting a trade here. He's a big-city boy to the core. He'd end up in NY, LA, LAA, maybe San Fran, or somewhere along those lines. He doesn't strike me as the Denver type. And that's even before he considers going to a basement dweller...