A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
https://gatewayredbirds.org/forum/
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/in ... ney_busterMatt Holliday gets to be where he wants to be, writes Joe Strauss. Bernie Miklasz wonders: Will Holliday hold his value throughout the length of the contract? Heard the same thing that Bernie writes about here: The Cardinals worked out the enormous extension not so much because they were concerned about another team matching their bid, but because Scott Boras has a history of having his clients sign one-year deals (before going back out on the market) rather than signing a long-term deal that didn't meet their expectations. This just happened with Adrian Beltre, who took a one-year deal with Boston rather than signing a three-year deal with Oakland. The bottom line: The Cardinals took a tremendous gamble -- risking their payroll flexibility for years to come in dealing with their pitching and with skill positions like short, second base and center field -- on a player they really, really like. We'll see how it turns out.
Thanks! I am glad someone national guys are finally realizing Boras was never going to let HOlliday sign a 5/75 deal despite no other teams being in on the bidding.Michael wrote:From Olney (linking Bernie):
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/in ... ney_busterMatt Holliday gets to be where he wants to be, writes Joe Strauss. Bernie Miklasz wonders: Will Holliday hold his value throughout the length of the contract? Heard the same thing that Bernie writes about here: The Cardinals worked out the enormous extension not so much because they were concerned about another team matching their bid, but because Scott Boras has a history of having his clients sign one-year deals (before going back out on the market) rather than signing a long-term deal that didn't meet their expectations. This just happened with Adrian Beltre, who took a one-year deal with Boston rather than signing a three-year deal with Oakland. The bottom line: The Cardinals took a tremendous gamble -- risking their payroll flexibility for years to come in dealing with their pitching and with skill positions like short, second base and center field -- on a player they really, really like. We'll see how it turns out.
That's exactly right. Anyone that felt that we were ignorantly bidding against ourselves and could have had him at a fraction of what we ended up paying doesn't have a real grasp of all the other potential outcomes. Or how much we obviously felt we needed this player.Michael wrote:From Olney (linking Bernie):
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/in ... ney_busterMatt Holliday gets to be where he wants to be, writes Joe Strauss. Bernie Miklasz wonders: Will Holliday hold his value throughout the length of the contract? Heard the same thing that Bernie writes about here: The Cardinals worked out the enormous extension not so much because they were concerned about another team matching their bid, but because Scott Boras has a history of having his clients sign one-year deals (before going back out on the market) rather than signing a long-term deal that didn't meet their expectations. This just happened with Adrian Beltre, who took a one-year deal with Boston rather than signing a three-year deal with Oakland. The bottom line: The Cardinals took a tremendous gamble -- risking their payroll flexibility for years to come in dealing with their pitching and with skill positions like short, second base and center field -- on a player they really, really like. We'll see how it turns out.