K-Rod traded to Milwaukee per Jon Heyman

[Judge Jude]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/sports/baseball/mets-traded-rodriguez-because-of-money-not-manpower.html?_r=1&ref=sports

that story suggests K-Rod fired his agent, who never submitted the list of 10 teams K-Rod could turn down.
The switch to Boras meant the Mets had to bail out fast - and might also mean the Brewers and Boras will be having some conversations....

[Hornsby]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/sp...r=1&ref=sports

that story suggests K-Rod fired his agent, who never submitted the list of 10 teams K-Rod could turn down.
The switch to Boras meant the Mets had to bail out fast - and might also mean the Brewers and Boras will be having some conversations....

They'll be pretty one sided "conversations" since the Brewers doubtless have no plans for K-Rod next season. Boras has no big stick in this situation, and K-Rod can't afford to sully his reputation any more than it already is if he want's a good deal next season. I suspect that the Brewers are simply going to use him as an 8th inning guy, tell Boras to pound sand, and move down the road in the 2012 season.

[Judge Jude]

So the Brewers think it's a good idea to both acquire K-Rod and then announce that both he and Axford will "close some games and set up some games?"

Do they think K-Rod and Boras will not be keeping score?

The Brewers are taking a huge risk if they think they can lie about the closing usage, and mature K-Rod will shrug and take it like a man once he realizes he's been duped. Playing with fire in that case.....

[YourPalChrisMal]

So the Brewers think it's a good idea to both acquire K-Rod and then announce that both he and Axford will "close some games and set up some games?"

Do they think K-Rod and Boras will not be keeping score?

The Brewers are taking a huge risk if they think they can lie about the closing usage, and mature K-Rod will shrug and take it like a man once he realizes he's been duped. Playing with fire in that case.....

How much $$$ are the Brewers on the hook for in this deal? Just wondering if it's a minimal amount, and K-Rod becomes more of a head-ache then he's worth, could they just flat-out release him at some point? Maybe that's the safety net in this plan. He's making $11.5M this year. We're half way thru the year, so he's already been paid $5.75M. The Mets kicked in $5M in this deal, right? So essentially, K-Rod is only costing the Brewers $750,000 + the two PTBN which will probably be no one of significance. Seems like almost a no lose for Brewers. He either helps them on their terms, or they could just cut him and they'd only be out $750K and 2 players they probably didn't care about anyway.

[Bodhizefa]

How much $$$ are the Brewers on the hook for in this deal? Just wondering if it's a minimal amount, and K-Rod becomes more of a head-ache then he's worth, could they just flat-out release him at some point? Maybe that's the safety net in this plan. He's making $11.5M this year. We're half way thru the year, so he's already been paid $5.75M. The Mets kicked in $5M in this deal, right? So essentially, K-Rod is only costing the Brewers $750,000 + the two PTBN which will probably be no one of significance. Seems like almost a no lose for Brewers. He either helps them on their terms, or they could just cut him and they'd only be out $750K and 2 players they probably didn't care about anyway.

They have to pay his guaranteed $3.5 million buyout at the end of the season. So they are on the hook for a decent amount of coin here.

I believe the "shared" time will be, at best for K-Rod, a 75/25 split in favor of Axford. K-Rod's certainly worth holding onto at this point in most leagues after that announcement. But again, there is no way the Brewers let this option vest.

Jude, I feel like maybe you're making this whole thing out to be bigger than it is. The Brewers hold almost all the power in this situation. In the end, K-Rod has to do what they want him to do. Teams have press releases and give away information to the media all the time that they turn their back on as soon as a week or even a day later. It happens. I'm sure this situation has some fluidity with it, and it's in the Brewers' best interest to leave their options open if and when the Central race goes down to the wire and K-Rod's option is no longer in danger of kicking in. But overall, you're damned right they're going to keep K-Rod in a secondary closer capacity/set-up capacity. He won't get the lion's share of saves and the Brewers don't owe him that either. He has to deal with that and perform well or it's his ass on the line when it comes time for a new contract this off-season.

[Wahoo]

Depending on the wording of K-Rod's contract, and precedents, neither of which I have any information on, I could see K-Rod having arguments based on the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. I think these legal arguments would have been much stronger against the Mets had they removed him from the closers role he had performed well. He probably had a reasonable expectation to be able to continue to be the Mets' closer subject to injury or bad performance. I think his argument is weaker, though not completely gone, given the trade to a team with a closer who is also performing well. He knew that based on his contract he could be traded. He knew or should have known that he could be traded to a team with a closer, in which case his arguments based on good faith and fair dealing much weaker. The good faith and fair dealing argument now is probably only along the lines of it was assumed that he would be given an opportunity to achieve the games finished milestone.

[revo]

I just don't see it.

Making this trade and handing the job to a 39 year old Izzy makes no sense to me. I could actually see the Mets moving Izzy at the trade deadline.

Build towards next year - see what you got with either Parnell or Beato.

I think it'll be Izzy as well. What's the difference if they give the job to Parnell now or hold an open competition in spring training? Either way, we all know the Mets will not be signing a closer, so it'll have to be someone in their pen. Will giving Parnell a shot now do anything for his confidence next year? I'm not sure. I think he'll get some chances, but perhaps Alderson also thought he wasn't losing much by turning to Izzy, who needs just 7 saves for 300 in his career, over K-Rod.

[revo]

Depending on the wording of K-Rod's contract, and precedents, neither of which I have any information on, I could see K-Rod having arguments based on the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. I think these legal arguments would have been much stronger against the Mets had they removed him from the closers role he had performed well. He probably had a reasonable expectation to be able to continue to be the Mets' closer subject to injury or bad performance. I think his argument is weaker, though not completely gone, given the trade to a team with a closer who is also performing well. He knew that based on his contract he could be traded. He knew or should have known that he could be traded to a team with a closer, in which case his arguments based on good faith and fair dealing much weaker. The good faith and fair dealing argument now is probably only along the lines of it was assumed that he would be given an opportunity to achieve the games finished milestone.

Agreed. Add in the fact Axford's stats are better than K-Rod's, and would K-Rod really have much of a case if the MLBPA pressed it? There's been plenty of closers traded mid-season becoming another team's set-up guy: Kerry Wood & Octavio Dotel last year, for example.

[Hammer]

I think it'll be Izzy as well. What's the difference if they give the job to Parnell now or hold an open competition in spring training? Either way, we all know the Mets will not be signing a closer, so it'll have to be someone in their pen. Will giving Parnell a shot now do anything for his confidence next year? I'm not sure. I think he'll get some chances, but perhaps Alderson also thought he wasn't losing much by turning to Izzy, who needs just 7 saves for 300 in his career, over K-Rod.

the difference is Parnell will be with the Mets for awhile and Izzy has trade value right now and is doubtful to be back next year.

[YourPalChrisMal]

the difference is Parnell will be with the Mets for awhile and Izzy has trade value right now and is doubtful to be back next year.

I could see Izzy being back with the Mets next year. He obviously loves it there, and seems to understand his worth at this point in his career. He wouldn't cost a lot. Thinking like a MLB team and not a Fantasy owner, having both of them isn't the worse thing in the world. (...says the owner of Isringhausen.)

[cardboardbox]

the difference is Parnell will be with the Mets for awhile and Izzy has trade value right now and is doubtful to be back next year.

this.

Best to see if Parnell can do the job now rather than next year.

[schlesinj]

I could see Izzy being back with the Mets next year. He obviously loves it there, and seems to understand his worth at this point in his career. He wouldn't cost a lot. Thinking like a MLB team and not a Fantasy owner, having both of them isn't the worse thing in the world. (...says the owner of Isringhausen.)

You are wrong says an owner of Parnell and Beato.

[YourPalChrisMal]

You are wrong says an owner of Parnell and Beato.

My reliever could beat up your reliever.

[jackmadden]

The correct answer is all 3!

http://www.closernews.com/2011/07/izzy-parnell-beato-to-close-for-mets.html

[Judge Jude]

It hasn't been "all 3" since those Reds Nasty Boys 20 yrs ago - Dibble, Myers and Charlton

and these 3 ain't that