tgk

For real....Grace really [expletive] himself on the field? LOL. I was painting my mom's utility room and heard the whole show. Even the part where a Cardinal fan called in to complain the they talked to Wood and not Carpenter or Wainwright. Patrick diplomatically said that they were at the Cub's camp. I would have had to point out the fact that the Cards train in Florida, but DP restained himself. Basically, Wood said the Grace was trying to pass gas and got a little more than he bargained for. Even went so far as to say it was "running down his leg." There's a lovely mental image.Then he had to lead off the next inning so he basically played 1.5 innings before he could get to the club house. They played the interview for Grace when they had him on later and he laughed and confirmed the story. Patrick asked Grace for a story on Wood and Grace said one time Wood was crusing on the mound, then went into one of his famous stretches where he couldn't find the plate one inning. Grace said he went to the mound and told Wood, "Do you see those two girls I left passes for over behind the dugout? The sooner you get these guys out we can go take care of business with them." Wood proceed to strike the guy out one and crusied throught the rest of the game. He also told one about Maddux. Said Maddux was on the mound one time and grabbed his groin after throwing a pitch. He went to check on him and Maddux said "Gracie, stand in front of me." Grace asks if Maddux is allright and then he realizes that Maddux's problem is that he is experiencing a hightened state of arousal. Grace says, "Man, you must really love to pitch."

I posted the link because it was Cubs related and seemed appropriate to the thread. And, on it's face, it is true. IF the Cubs do nothing else, it is a waste of money. However, what is left out are the facts that (A) the cubs have money to spend and (B) they have a well publicized goal of adding 2-3 quality starting pitchers. It's kind of like the argument I heard after Boston won the Matsuzaka bid where some clever sports writer added up an All-Star staff that was making less money. Technically true, but totally irrelevant because none of those other pitchers were available and if they were they would be making a heck of a lot more money than the salary used for the comparison.

Along those line, there was an interesting paragraph in Buster Olney's blog today: The Orioles had a busy day, writes Jeff Zrebiec, signing four players, including backup catcher Paul Bako. The Orioles have spent about $45 million this offseason, in bullpen help, and the Cubs have spent about $240 million -- and there is really no question that toward the end goal of making the team better for 2007, Baltimore has, so far, made more progress, because the O's have improved their pitching. They had a serious bullpen hole and they've worked to fill it. (The Cubs did well in addressing their bullpen issues last year, but all the money spent on offense will be wasted in 2007 if the team doesn't fundamentally improve its starting pitching.) http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2679636&name=olney_buster&CMP=ILC-INHEAD On that happy note I'll just say this. Pitching is such a crap shoot that I'm glad I'm not making the decision.

According to ESPN, the Yankees and mets were both interested. I'm hoping that the Yankee's were unhappy about losing out Matsuzaka and decided they weren't going to be beaten again.

I live in Kentucky and although I've heard Murph criticized often, I've never actually listened. I thought the constant criticism was potentially overkill. I was mistaken. How this man has a job is beyond me. He literally sounds drunk, he is asking terrible questions, making assumptions as fact and trying to bait McDonough and when he does ask a legititmate question he has to phrase it in such a way that he gets a zinger into the question. I guess I'll make it through the interview, but I won't listen again.

Per ESPN.com http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2662062 The Giants, in the market for a center fielder, are moving along in discussions with Juan Pierre, the National League leader with 204 hits last season. The word in Naples is that Pierre could get a deal for three years and about $30 million -- if not from San Francisco, then somebody else One bonus to him being a type B, the signing team doesn't lose a pick so it won't be one of those "okay, we've agreed on a deal now lets wait until the arbitration deadline passes to sign it" type things.

I thought Westbrook was a strong candidate to become a Hendry target. 3 straight years of 200+ innings, and below average to very good effectiveness during those innings. I don't believe he's a free agent until after 2008, but he'll make a lot in arbitration following this season. And I'm deathly afraid he'd trade Matt Murton for Westbrook then sign Carlos Lee. He said the Cubs would be trading young bull pen arms for Westbrook which "was the one commodity they had to trade." Also said Lilly was looking for 4/36.

Didn't the Red Sox owner call the Yankees "the Evil Empire" because they could buy whatever they wanted? Looks like they have gone over to the dark side. *Edited because my wife is teacher and she'd be quite unhappy with my omission.

Maybe like we discussed they are going to low ball Mat on the contract offer and not care if he doesn't take it, since at least he is not going to the yanks... I could see the Blue Jays doing that, but not Boston. If they win the bid, they'll sign him.

More speculation from Buster Olney on his insider blog: We have thought all along that Tom Hicks would be the wild card in the Daisuke Matsuzaka bidding, and a source tells Jan Hubbard that the Rangers' bid may have been for almost $30 million. One bit of speculation heard yesterday -- and it was nothing more than speculation -- was that maybe Boston had made an enormous bid, in the range of $45 million. :shock: http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?name=olney_buster#20061110

Not to jump into that middle of an argument, because both sides seem pretty entrenched here, but I thought I answer your question about Lee. I remember right after Lee broke his wrist Peter Gammons was on Mike and Mike and they were talking about what a blow it was to the Cubs and Lee and Gammons said that right after Lee had signed he was asked why he did it when he could have had a huge payday in the offseason. His answer, which I remember because it was incredibly ironic, was something like "Hey, I might break my wrist this year too." Round 'bout point is this. If Lee had an off year or injury it would negatively affect his potential earnings as a free agent. If Ramirez did, all he had to was keep his contract. Sosa had the same deal a few years ago, but when it came time for him to exercise his opt out clause he didn't. Why? Because he knew he would have made less money. Ramirez was in a no lose situation. If he has a great year and his value goes up, he opts out. If not, he's guaranteed $22 million dollars over two years. And his agent is just as capable of forecasting the strength of the free agent class as Hendry is. The incentive for Hendry to redo the contract is just as strong for Ramirez not to. It's not that a GM is powerless, but the way baseball is set up the organization has all the power at the start of the player's career and it gradually slides the other way. First-third year players have no power, they play for what the organization tells them to, or they don't play. The player gets a little bit of power with arbitration, which some leverage to get more money up front in exchange for delaying free agency. Once the play hits free agency, the power has shifted. The slide is completed when the player gets his no-trade protection (either through a clause in the contract or 10/5 rights.) At this point the only real leverage a team has over a player is the fear of the unknown. Ramirez didn't have any unknowns. Hendry has made some good moves and some bad ones. I'll give him credit where it's due and hold his feet to the fire when warrented. But if it is true that Ramirez had No-Trade protection, there was probably nothing he could do save get Ramirez stinking drunk and ask for his autograph.

just going to post that. The day that the ridiculous sleeveless monstrosities are out of baseball, will be awesome. ". . . We wear Caps and Sleeves at this level son. . ." - Lou Brown I love that movie!

From ESPN Insider Rumor Central: . . .Brian Cashman has a potential deal in place if he wishes to pull the trigger, an official from another American League team told Newsday. But Cashman isn't quite ready to make a trade. A person familiar with the team's plans said "there is no urgency" to the process. The Yankees seem inclined to wait at least a little longer with the hope that the market for Sheffield improves. The Cubs and Phillies are believed to be among the most aggressive teams in pursuit of Sheffield, who is set to make $13 million in the final season of his contract in 2007, with at least $4.5 million deferred. The Yankees have until Sunday night to officially pick up Sheffield's option, and they are expected to do so shortly after agreeing to a trade, according to the newspaper. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/rumors

It looks clear to me and makes a lot of sense. I don't like lack of hustle, but if he produces, I can live with it. I'd hate for this offseason's theme to turn into "I decided I like guys who hustle." I understand the sentiment, but I can't help but think that is absolutely the wrong way to do things. Look, I love Aramis' production, but if you hire a manager to make him happy the guy has no chance. This is from an article on Jim Leyland that I saw on ESPN the other day. I think it's in this weeks magazine. It's a good article about his career but one quote jumped into my head when I read this thread. If you hire someone to placate Ramirez, they'll have lost the team before they walk in the door. Hire the best manager you can, negotiate in good faith with Ramirez and offer him a fair to plus contract. If he still chooses to leave, so be it. But choosing manager that is most likely to allow Ramirez to "loaf" on occasion is a recipe for disaster (IMHO)

Working now. :oops: See, it worked fine for me yesterday so I thought they must have just changed it. You know, give 'em a day to try it then slap the fee. I must have just signed in before they changed the page yesterday. #-o Where I got confused is the "current subscribers" link says "MLB-TV Subscribers" so I never clicked it. Oh well, it's working now. Not my team, but at least it's something to do at work. By the way, Minnesota's announcers aren't very entertaining.