[外電] Y.Cespedes仍有機會撈到一紙大約
來源: http://goo.gl/gVuQPs By Ken Rosenthal.
內文:
又來精進自己的翻譯能力了!
By Ken Rosenthal
Jan 17, 2016 at 10:16a ET
I'm not buying the idea that free-agent outfielder Yoenis Cespedes
will settle for a one-, two- or three-year deal.
Three teams are known to be interested in Cespedes, according to
major-league sources -- the Mets, Braves and White Sox.
At least two others -- the Tigers and Angels -- have an obvious
need for a slugging outfielder. And surely additional teams are
monitoring Cespedes as well.
Put it all together, and what do you have?
A market.
Rosenthal並不認為Cespedes會簽下一紙三年以內的合約,市場上有許多球
隊仍對Cespedes有興趣包括了梅子,進擊的勇士,白襪,天使,老虎(其中
這兩隊更是缺乏了具有大棒的外野手),在自由市場內Cespedes現在仍是相
當搶手的。
Maybe not the robust market that Cespedes anticipated -- the Mets
and White Sox reportedly do not want to go beyond three years, the
Angels reportedly do not want to exceed the luxury-tax threshold,
etc.
But a market that still could end up with Cespedes getting four or
five years at $22 million or more per season, if not more.
根據報導,梅子跟白襪兩支球隊都不願意給Cespedes三年以上的合約,天使則是
不想要為了古巴人而跨越過了豪華稅的門檻。
For all the sky-is-falling talk regarding certain free agents,
only a handful of signings have failed to meet or exceed
expectations. Doesn't mean all will turn out well -- second
baseman Howie Kendrick, shortstop Ian Desmond and outfielders
Dexter Fowler and Justin Upton are among those players still
trying to overcome their qualifying offers and other issues.
Still, the pattern continued on Saturday, when first baseman Chris
Davis agreed to a seven-year, $161 million contract with the
Orioles (with a reported $42 million in deferrals), and right-
hander Ian Kennedy agreed to a five-year, $70 million deal with
the Royals.
有關於自由球員市場中,僅有少數的合約是沒辦法履行的。而這不代表所有
的結果都會是好的,Kendrick Desmond Folwer Upton仍需要面對QO補償及
其他問題。就在週日,C.Davis與金鶯簽下一紙7年161M的合約(當中有42
萬為延遲付款直到Davis51歲。),Ian Kennedy也跟皇家簽下5年70M的合
約。
Many in the industry believed that Davis' price would drop because
he had no other apparent bidders. Many believed that Kennedy would
struggle to get big money after rejecting the Padres' one-year, $
15.8 million qualifying offer. Well, both somehow managed to
escape the poorhouse -- and by quite a bit.
許多圈內人相信C.Davis的價格不會飆高的原因在於追逐他的球隊並不多,
而也有許多人認為Kennedy在拒絕教士的QO之後,對於簽下一份大合約是很
艱困的,然而不知怎麼地,兩個人就不知怎麼都拿到一紙數目不錯的合約,
是真的很不錯。
Cespedes, 30, is not without warts -- he is mercurial, his career
on-base percentage is .319, three teams traded him in a span of 12
months. Officials from multiple clubs tell me they are afraid to
commit big money to him long-term. Some fear he will decline. Some
fear he will lose motivation.
30歲的Cespedes並不是都沒有缺點,在一年之內他穿上了三套不同的制服,
不同球團的人告訴我,他們非常擔心給古巴人一份長約,原因在於,而立之
年的他在未來率退的幅度以及拿到長約後可能擺爛。
Still, Cespedes was the ultimate difference-maker for the Mets
after they acquired him from the Tigers, even if some of his
damage came against weaker clubs. His presence alone changes a
lineup. His defense in left field is outstanding. And he does not
come with the additional cost of a draft pick, at a time when GMs
protect picks as if they are their own children.
儘管如此,在與老虎交易來古巴人之後,他的確為梅子做出了貢獻,即使
Cespedes專挑弱隊下手,但在打線中擁有他仍是非常有影響的,在左外野的
防守根本無可挑剃得好,在GM們把選秀籤看得比自己小孩重要的同時,簽下
古巴人並不需要犧牲選秀籤。
Yes, the next free-agent class of outfielders is thin, but
Cespedes would return to the market at 31 and probably be saddled
with a qualifying offer, assuming the system does not change (a
good bet; the collective-bargaining agreement expires on Dec. 1,
and it's unlikely a new deal would be struck before the market
opened).
Something else to consider: Cespedes already has changed agents
once, leaving Wasserman for CAA/Roc Nation. He easily could switch
again if he signed a one-year deal, and CAA/Roc Nation would be
left without a long-term commission. It's in the agents' interests
to get Cespedes as many years as possible.
隔年的自由球員市場在外野手的選擇來說是沒有今年這麼優渥,到了那時古
巴人也已經31歲,同時還可能背負著有QO的條件,(有關CBA的修正),換
個角度來思考,古巴人已經換過一次經紀人了,假設古巴人只簽一年的合
約,在合約結束後他可以自由地選擇經紀人,而經紀公司則可能損失了長約
的佣金,這也是為什麼經紀公司會想擁有古巴人越久越好。
Upton, 28, might be a better candidate for a one-year deal, simply
because he is younger. But even Upton is probably a month away
from making such a concession. His market finally might become
clearer once Cespedes is off the board.
28歲的Upton是更適合簽下短約的選擇之一,因為他更年輕,而事實上Upton
可能要再等待一段時間,等到Cespedes被簽下後,Upton的行情將會更明
朗。
In the end, the date that a free agent signs is far less
meaningful than the dollars he receives. It's mid-January, and in
the past week alone, Kennedy got $70 million, Wei-Yin Chen $80
million and Chris Davis $161 million.
Why shouldn't Cespedes get $100 million, and maybe a good amount
more?
最後呢,在過去一個禮拜之內,Kenendy拿到70M,陳偉殷拿到80M,C.Davis
拿到161M,已經是一月中,沒有什麼比實質上拿到錢更重要了,古巴人何
不考慮拿個100M甚至更多呢?
快要開始準備春訓了,還是有幾位不錯的選手仍還在自由市場待價而沽。
古巴人到底會獎落誰家呢?個人覺得如果天使簽下去的話XD。
那美西應該會更加有趣!!!
版友們有什麼看法嗎? btw Ian Desmond之前沒跟國民簽下合約現在會不會很..
--
帥還不是被卒吃。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.42.44.144
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/MLB/M.1453122114.A.DA4.html
推
01/18 21:05, , 1F
01/18 21:05, 1F
推
01/18 21:12, , 2F
01/18 21:12, 2F
推
01/18 21:20, , 3F
01/18 21:20, 3F
→
01/18 21:21, , 4F
01/18 21:21, 4F
→
01/18 21:30, , 5F
01/18 21:30, 5F
推
01/18 21:39, , 6F
01/18 21:39, 6F
→
01/18 21:40, , 7F
01/18 21:40, 7F
推
01/18 21:56, , 8F
01/18 21:56, 8F
→
01/18 21:56, , 9F
01/18 21:56, 9F
推
01/18 22:08, , 10F
01/18 22:08, 10F
推
01/18 22:22, , 11F
01/18 22:22, 11F
※ 編輯: loveleexx (114.42.44.144), 01/18/2016 22:23:31
謝謝你的提醒 btw rosenthal剛剛寫的一篇文章又提到了太色人也有興趣啊!!
※ 編輯: loveleexx (114.42.44.144), 01/18/2016 22:25:52
→
01/18 22:27, , 12F
01/18 22:27, 12F
→
01/18 22:27, , 13F
01/18 22:27, 13F
推
01/18 22:27, , 14F
01/18 22:27, 14F
→
01/18 22:28, , 15F
01/18 22:28, 15F
推
01/18 22:37, , 16F
01/18 22:37, 16F
推
01/18 22:39, , 17F
01/18 22:39, 17F
推
01/18 22:40, , 18F
01/18 22:40, 18F
→
01/18 22:46, , 19F
01/18 22:46, 19F
推
01/18 22:49, , 20F
01/18 22:49, 20F
→
01/18 22:49, , 21F
01/18 22:49, 21F
推
01/18 22:53, , 22F
01/18 22:53, 22F
→
01/18 23:00, , 23F
01/18 23:00, 23F
推
01/18 23:08, , 24F
01/18 23:08, 24F
推
01/18 23:11, , 25F
01/18 23:11, 25F
→
01/18 23:12, , 26F
01/18 23:12, 26F
推
01/18 23:20, , 27F
01/18 23:20, 27F
推
01/19 00:57, , 28F
01/19 00:57, 28F
→
01/19 00:57, , 29F
01/19 00:57, 29F
推
01/19 01:11, , 30F
01/19 01:11, 30F
推
01/19 01:15, , 31F
01/19 01:15, 31F
→
01/19 01:56, , 32F
01/19 01:56, 32F
→
01/19 01:56, , 33F
01/19 01:56, 33F
→
01/19 01:58, , 34F
01/19 01:58, 34F
推
01/19 12:16, , 35F
01/19 12:16, 35F
推
01/19 12:44, , 36F
01/19 12:44, 36F
推
01/19 12:52, , 37F
01/19 12:52, 37F
推
01/19 14:34, , 38F
01/19 14:34, 38F
→
01/19 14:46, , 39F
01/19 14:46, 39F
推
01/19 18:37, , 40F
01/19 18:37, 40F
推
01/20 13:31, , 41F
01/20 13:31, 41F
→
01/20 13:32, , 42F
01/20 13:32, 42F