Outshined_One

At first I thought Brady Clark could be a decent stopgap if the Cubs picked him up for a B-level prospect, but then I looked at his numbers last year. Egad.

I can play a competent LF. That'd make me good for about $125,000.

I can see the arguments in favor of privatizing a player's salary, but I honestly don't think it's feasible. There are simply too many problems that could come up under this system. For one, how private should it be? Part of the importance of this system is that it makes everything highly visible. Player's contracts are easily accessible for the public and any authoritative bodies who would have an interest in their contracts. Moreover, the players themselves know what everyone else makes. Let's say David Wright hits free agency next offseason. He's going to want fair market value for his services, meaning that he'll want to be paid comparably to other guys at his position who put up similar production. He'll also want similar merchandising rights, incentives, bonuses, and so on. If he has no access to these contracts, the teams he bargains with will be in an unfair position. So, why not only let teams, players, and agents know about contract numbers? Well, the more people who know about this stuff, the harder it will be to keep under wraps. It'll be pretty freakin' obvious that teams like the Royals won't be spending as much money as the Red Sox or Yankees. "Inside sources" will be happy to give out contract information to sources like ESPN since fans will always be clamoring for this stuff. There's also the matter of accountability to the fans. We as fans invest a lot of money into their products. You can make the argument that we deserve to know how our money is being spent. These players would not be getting paid millions upon millions of dollars if it were not for us, much less might not even be playing baseball. If they are not performing up to our expectations and our dollars, we can hold them accountable accordingly. Heck, more than that, it makes teams accountable to their fans. It's bad faith for teams to claim to be competitive and spending money when in fact they aren't spending squat on their team. Again, we spend money on our teams; we should know that teams aren't pocketing it all for themselves. At least with this level of visibility, teams have to answer to their fans. So, that's some of the flip side of that argument.

Remember how, coming into the last offseason, Jerome Williams seemed to have a spot "locked down"? I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

Hendry's edging closer and closer to "Drunk Guy on eBay" status these days...

Buehrle's contracts is up after this year, to boot.

I think he's stocking up to make a threeway trade for A-Rod. I don't see the Yankees letting go of A-Rod unless they get some one like Cabrera, Willis, Bay, or some comparable hotshot young player in return. I don't think the White Sox have anyone who fits the bill.

I'll believe it when I see it.

I can't wait for Bill Plaschke to write another love letter column. It's been too long since I've laughed that hard.

I can't complain about it. He could be useful and this team didn't exactly have much pop off the bench coming into the offseason.

Yep, he's pretty much the best young pitcher the Astros have right now (although some people argue Troy Patton is better, but whatever).

So the deal was Floyd & Gonzo for Garcia?

Is it me or would the Reds be a good trade partner for Penny? I could see them shipping Dunn off for him. Then again, it depends on how Ned Colletti feels about the situation...

Do they have wireless internet at hospitals these days? Maybe Jim's on his laptop... :-k

HOORAY!

Oh man. :shock: Here's hoping it's nothing serious.

4/$70m for Zito? Hmmmmmmmmmm...

From the looks of it, they have very little tied up in contracts in 2007/2008. They could probably afford it. Possibly, but Dunn wouldn't be under Pittsburgh's control for long. The rest of his contract: 2007 - $10.5m 2008 (Team Option) - $13m or a $500,00 buyout I'm firmly in the Pro-Dunn camp, but why Pittsburgh would do a Dunn for Duke trade straight up escapes me. I can't see Cincy throwing any worthwhile prospects into this deal and Pittsburgh would only have Dunn for two years, maximum. I also have trouble seeing a Jones for Duke swamp for similar reasons, although I think the Cubs have better pitching prospects to throw at Pittsburgh and more money to sweeten the pot.

They can't trade Pelfrey until January 2007, since they only signed him earlier this year. So, this particular deal might not happen for another month at the very earliest.

Why would the Pirates ask for Dunn in exchange for Duke when Dunn is owed a pretty substantial amount of money over the next few years? The Reds don't exactly have the budget to pick up a whole lot of Dunn's contract at the moment, iirc. I could see it if they were asking for Denorfia and prospects, but Dunn? Really?

Aw geez, not this crap again.

In other words, this deal will happen in the next 24 hours. ;)

Congrats to Ryno! Hey, that'd be a really fun Q&A session to have! :D

Single-A manager... obviously if that's the big news, then the choice is not going to be someone like Hector Villanueva. How dare you defame the name of one of the all-time greats!!!!! :evil:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Seriously, has the market come to this?