The word out here in Southern California is that the Angels will actively pursue A-Rod, so as to not get upstaged by the Dodgers' hiring of Joe Torre. Likewise, the word is that the Dodgers will pursue A-Rod, as the consensus is that a manager hiring of this caliber does no good unless the team around him is also improved.
I stand by my earlier post about the Angels not signing A-Rod. But signing someone to a $350M deal, even if it means alienating the rest of the roster and possibly losing out on your homegrown talent later on because there'll be no way to pay for them to re-sign? That's got DODGERS written all over it, man! Hell, they once signed Kevin Brown to baseball's first $100M contract. And look at how much good THAT did for them!
I predict the Dodgers sign A-Rod for an obscenely large contract. I also predict this means they'll be unable to re-sign James Loney and Andre Ethier down the line and they both end up having 40/40 seasons somewhere else. Sigh.
Originally posted by BoromirMarkI wouldn't consider Sheffield even CLOSE to A-Rod. Sheff speaks his mind, sure, but that doesn't equate to an ego in the slighest.
A-Rod has never purposely committed errors to get traded, or done near the complaining that Sheffield has done. In particularly, look at the terms under which Sheffield departed from the Brewers, Dodgers and Yankees. Say what you want about A-Rod, but he gives you maximum effort on the field all the time. The same is not true of Sheffield.
Like I said, if A-Rod (or anyone) produces, he won't have any problems with the fans or in the clubhouse. Fans' memories are short, and winning trumps chemistry.
"Teach children that they have great potential because they are human." -Warrior
I am amazed that the Commissioner of Baseball can call one of the teams within Major league baseball an aberration because he wishes them broken up and disbanded since they are a "small" market. Only "big market" teams can be good?