In light of yesterday's report the Orioles have dropped out of the race for Mark Teixeira, Andy MacPhail went on the defensive, telling Dan Connolly of the Baltimore Sun that he's not yet given up:"We have indicated before that we have flexibility," Orioles president Andy MacPhail said yesterday. "I don't think anyone expects [Teixeira's agent, Scott Boras] to lean over and accept the first proposal."MacPhail wouldn't disclose details of his initial offer, but by all accounts the Orioles low-balled Teixeira in hopes he'd accept a discount to play for his hometown team. Predictably, that strategy doesn't appear to be working, especially since the O's are believed to have offered seven years while everybody else is talking about eight.
[...] "If they came back to us and told us what it would take and we thought that it made sense for us, then, yes" the original offer could be altered, MacPhail said.
Whether MacPhail can make his offer more competitive remains to be seen, but it looks like Boston has set the bar -- two general managers negotiating with Boras confirmed to Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe that the Red Sox have the highest offer on the table.
The Yankees could throw a wrench into everyone's plans if they decide to jump into the mix, but Newsday cites a team source who says they're "monitoring the situation" before deciding if they want to get involved. "We may not make an offer. If the money gets too rich, then we won't," the source said. You know the economy is getting rough if the Yankees are concerned about spending too much money.

















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-18-2008 @ 4:09PM
scoper said...
It's amazing how everybody buys into the "lowball" theory when one offer is reported at 7 yrs and $150M as opposed to 8 and $160M. The "lowball" offer is actually the higher annual figure -- and you'd think the guy would be worth more than $10M for the extra year. I don't get it. He's probably going to get more than $160M, but not likely more than 8 years, but the contract should be weighed on annual salary, not the total.
Reply