Jehrico

You should let him know that yesterday's game put his OPS since coming to us at 1.007.

That guy is going to die at a young age of a heart attack.

Makes sense. Giles would be a bench player at best in Boston. Boston is sneaky. They did this just to block the Rays, knowing that Giles had them on his no-trade list. Didn't matter. Tampa Bay is on the list of teams he could block a trade to. So if Boston doesn't put a claim on Giles, and TB did, I doubt Giles would have accepted a trade to TB. Boston apparently felt it wasn't worth the chance. Giles also gave a hometown discount when he signed with SD. His family is there, and he doesn't want to move them. If he wants to put his family over the quality of his teammates, then good for him.

They waived him to trade him. In part because they can get something good for him now and in part because they'd rather his salary (and $3.5+M next year) off the books. If they weren't intending on trading with the Rays, they could just pull him back. Remember, players from both teams have to clear waivers. So anyone attractive and cheap on the 40-man from the Rays doesn't have much of a chance making it through. First, I'm surprised that Bradford cleared all of the way to TB. Solid late pickup for them. Second, would the Rays players have to clear waivers to Baltimore (not that there is that many teams they'd have to clear first...)? I thought a player had to clear waivers in order to be eligible for the post season with his new team, not for the trade to happen. Baltimore obviously isn't concerned with making the post season this year.

I hope you're not implying that he should get in simply because he pitched well in a dramatic postseason game. No, but I think he's implying that said game will hold far more weight with the people who get a vote than it should.

I would say great news, but if you read a little further, the article still says Fox sucks.

I think that's likely, considering they know he has previously expressed a lack of interest in ever playing there. He went to SD as cheaply as he did (at the time) for a reason, he wanted to be in that area. I don't think he'll change his mind and go to Boston. With that said, if he does decide to enforce his no trade clause, then SD has to pull him back, right? Then if they try to put him on waivers again, it would be unrevocable. If Boston claimed him again, can he refuse without retiring? SD wouldn't technically be trading him, so his no trade clause would be irrelevant, right? It's probably a moot point, SD wouldn't put him on unrevocable waivers and get nothing for him. I think that when another team claims someone on waivers, it's still considered a "trade" whether or not the team gets anything for it. If his no trade clause would apply now when Boston puts in a claim why wouldn't it apply then when Boston puts in a claim. After all, any trade in August is just a swap of guys who are on or have already cleared waivers. My guess is that if a scenario like this happened, Boston would have bought the rights to a player who had no obligation to play for them, and would be sitting on his butt somewhere in SD. However, Boston is probably going to be able to figure out whether or not Giles would actually refuse to play for them by just phoning his agent, and then wouldn't make the claim, unless they really wanted him not to play for Tampa. Because the first claim leads to either a trade or a revocation of waivers. The second claim isn't a trade and can't be revoked. The Pads aren't violating his no trade clause by releasing him the second waiver round.

One big problem with the steroids/breaking the law/cheating and the Hall argument is definition. What exactly constitutes a steroid? HGH isn't steroids. So do you call anything that has any kind of chemical impact? What about ephedra use in the 90s? McGwire was caught red handed with Andro, which wasn't illegal at the time. If you put a blanket statement against anything that can be injected or injested that enhances performance to catch all of that, then crap, anyone who ever drank a red bull should be kept out. Where exactly do you draw that hard line? The still-unregulated supplement market has really created a huge blurred line that's hard to define. I'm curious to see what happens with Sammy. You could say there was no evidence he ever cheated on one hand, but then the haters could come back with the broken bat. That never kept Perry or Niekro out of the HOF though. There's going to be some double standards applied over the next 5-10 years.

I think that's likely, considering they know he has previously expressed a lack of interest in ever playing there. He went to SD as cheaply as he did (at the time) for a reason, he wanted to be in that area. I don't think he'll change his mind and go to Boston. With that said, if he does decide to enforce his no trade clause, then SD has to pull him back, right? Then if they try to put him on waivers again, it would be unrevocable. If Boston claimed him again, can he refuse without retiring? SD wouldn't technically be trading him, so his no trade clause would be irrelevant, right? It's probably a moot point, SD wouldn't put him on unrevocable waivers and get nothing for him.

Why were the Orioles trying to waive Bradford? The PTBNL part makes me think they were exposing him without originally intending on shipping him to TB, unless the Rays have a pretty good prospect on the DL right now. Considering how anxious the Yanks and a few other teams are for relief pitching, I'm amazed he made it to the Rays. This one doesn't quite make sense to me.

Not that I think you're wrong, but that doesn't diminish what it means about what Mariano has done. There's been plenty of unhittable relievers that have come and gone that never broke that list. Saying that a reliever is better as a reliever than Pedro was as a starter is a hell of a compliment. Regardless of the standings on that list, I don't think anyone will ever confuse Mariano as being more valuable than Pedro was to his teams.

Marmol wasn't a good starter at all because he doesn't have a good third pitch. That's why he was converted into a reliever. You can be a dominant reliever with two good pitches, as Marmol proves. marmol was a good starter in the minors that time has likely passed, obviously, but the reason marmol wasn't a success as a starter in the majors go way beyond the lack of a third pitch No, not really. He struggled as a starter as a rookie, that doesn't mean he would never have become a good starter. His change is passable, his control/pitch count would have needed work. You may be right (I'd call his change up as mediocre at best, and that's maybe a little generous), but the perception of not having three major league pitches in the front office most certainly was the deciding factor in him converting into a reliever when he went down after those initial struggles. Had he had a better change than what he does, I think his chances of sticking as a starter three years ago would have been considerably higher.

If Soriano justifies his salary for hte rest of his contract, he'll be a shoe in. But that's not going to happen. He might if inflation keeps boosting contract costs in the market over the next 6 years at the rate it has been the last couple of years. Not really. Inflation isnt' going to make an $18m salary acceptable for anything less than superstar performance. Giambi is in the last year of what was a mega contract signed in 2001, time hasn't made his $21m salary this year look any less than it looked back then. There were a couple of years of deflation since 2001 too though, so the relative value of Giambi's contract has flattened out. In the final year of Soriano's contract, it's not unforeseeable that $18 mil then could be worth about $12 now. With some good luck and health, I don't think it's impossible that Soriano could play at that level. I think it's more likely he wont' than he will, but I don't think it's that highly unlikely though.

those are the 3 I was thinking as well. are viewers dumb enough to pick Jeter? Sweet Jesus, I hope not. Please please no. I'll set 5-1 odds that say they are. I also bet Paul O'Neill would be an honorable mention if they list any.

If Soriano justifies his salary for hte rest of his contract, he'll be a shoe in. But that's not going to happen. He might if inflation keeps boosting contract costs in the market over the next 6 years at the rate it has been the last couple of years.

If he fell far enough that the BoSox got the claim, we should be able to trump that since we're in the same league, right?

Soriano's HOF monitor index as used by BR is 75.5 (100 is a likely HOFer), so he needs several more productive years to up that. It's not a given at this point, but if he performs well enough to justify his salary for the rest of his contract, then he's got a pretty darned good shot. Aramis is sitting at 41, so he's got to do alot more than Fonzie, and he's only two and a half years younger.

Marmol wasn't a good starter at all because he doesn't have a good third pitch. That's why he was converted into a reliever. You can be a dominant reliever with two good pitches, as Marmol proves. marmol was a good starter in the minors that time has likely passed, obviously, but the reason marmol wasn't a success as a starter in the majors go way beyond the lack of a third pitch No, not really.

Marmol wasn't a good starter at all because he doesn't have a good third pitch. That's why he was converted into a reliever. You can be a dominant reliever with two good pitches, as Marmol proves.

It's kind of amazing that we are on pace to be around a 95 win team considering the total implosion our #2 pitcher pulled this year. If you told me that Hill was going to go away early in the year and never go back before the season started, I wouldn't believe we'd be looking like a 95+ win team.

Now THERE is an overrated Cardinal. Good lord. what's funny is that so many people call him overrated that now he's become very underrated. he saved about 1 run every 10 games with his defense, which is pretty damn awesome. he didn't have much power or hit for a great average, but he did draw a lot of walks and didn't strike out much. he bunted really well, was a great baserunner and situational hitter. you have to do a hell of a lot of things right to be a legitimate hall of famer with an 87 OPS+, but ozzie smith did all those things right. No one is saying Smith sucked...but for a franchise with as many titles as St Louis, someone like Smith shouldn't be in your top three of all time. Maybe barely cracking your top 10, but certainly not in the top 3.

Doesn't this cross the line just a little bit? Tell me you don't need me to post in green...

After putting up his best month in over a year last month, all we can say is "he's not a bad #5." Any regular starter with job security should have us saying something alot better than that after putting up their best month in over a year. There's also the aforementioned frustration that we don't know exactly what we have in Marshall, as we've never given him an extensive, deserved look because of Marquis. FTW, he put up a 3.81 era last month.

I say again, someone needs to pull a Tonya Harding on Bobby Howry. Even if it was already 1 September, I don't want him on my 40 man.

Is it bad that I hope he fails miserably, as I'm sure most predict he will?