batmagadanleadoff

Who wouldn't be sold on a catcher that hits like Darrell Porter?

"You can't talk to my mami that way!" Screaming match between K-Rod's mom and K-Rod's girlfriend's father in law triggers the beatdown: Excerpt: The one-sided fight began when Carlos Pe�a challenged Rodriguez's manhood and insulted his mother after the crazed closer began shouting about the latest Mets loss, police sources told the Daily News. "Stop acting like a baby," one source quoted Pe�a as telling the volatile Rodriguez inside a Citi Field lounge designated for players' families. "Man up, and play better." K-Rod's mother told Pe�a to keep his mouth shut, prompting a screaming match in Spanish between the pair, the source said. "You can't talk to my mami that way!" Rodriguez shouted before landing the first of many punches in the Wednesday night mismatch. The 6-feet, 195-pound hard-throwing righty pinned the defenseless Pe�a against a wall outside the Mets' clubhouse while raining blows on his head and face, prosecutors said. Stadium security, after hearing the 53-year-old's howls, yanked the four-time All-Star away, officials said. The beating occurred in full view of Pe�a's common-law wife, along with the children and girlfriends of other players. K-Rod left the ballpark in his white Lamborghini, returning 15 minutes later - only after a Mets employee reached him by cell phone. "He slapped his father-in-law around and then bolted," a police source said. "People were shouting after him, 'Hey, you can't leave,' but he got in his car and left...Dumb on and off the field, I guess."

According to this sports law blog the Mets converted K-Rod�s guaranteed contract to a non-guaranteed one �because of conduct in violation of the Uniform Player�s Contract�. (�UPC�) If this information is accurate, then we now know that the Mets will claim that K-Rod breached either section 7((1) or section 7((3) of the UPC. The two sections, which JCL cited in his earlier post about the Ponson case, read as follows: 7.( The Club may terminate this contract upon written notice to the Player (but only after requesting and obtaining waivers of this contract from all other Major League Clubs) if the Player shall at any time: (1) fail, refuse or neglect to conform his personal conduct to the standards of good citizenship and good sportsmanship or to keep himself in first-class physical condition or to obey the Club's training rules; or (3) fail, refuse or neglect to render his services hereunder or in any other manner materially breach this contract. According to these two provisions, the Mets can terminate K-Rod�s contract under either of two conditions: 1) that his conduct did not conform to good citizenship; or 2) that he failed to keep himself in first class physical condition. The Mets need not prove an injury in order to succeed on grounds of bad citizenship/sportsmanship. I still haven�t formed an opinion as to how this grievance will be resolved, but I�m disappointed with the reporting of the story. The press continues to report that based largely on the Lamarr Hoyt and Denny Neagle cases, the Mets chances of succeeding are remote to impossible. I don't necessarily disagree with that opinion, but I haven�t read anything persuasive from the press in support of its' virtually unanimous opinion. For example, the press cites the Hoyt arbitration as a powerful precedent in favor of K-Rod and against the Mets. Had the arbitrator in the Hoyt case ruled that a conviction for drug smuggling does not constitute bad behavior or bad citizenship, I might be convinced that the bad conduct prong of the Mets case against K-Rod is weak. It follows logically that if a drug smuggling conviction is not bad citizenship, then neither would punching out your girlfriend�s father. But the Hoyt arbitrator rendered his final decision without ever reaching that issue. The Hoyt arbitrator ruled that however one may characterize Hoyt�s conduct, it would be unfair for the Padres to benefit and to use Hoyt�s conduct as grounds to terminate his contract because the Padres themselves were to blame for causing Hoyt�s conduct in the first place. Thus, the media�s idea that baseball�s arbitrators have set a very high bar for what constitutes bad behavior has no support � or at least no support in the Hoyt decision. Likewise, the Neagle decision neither helps nor hurts the Mets or K-Rod because, technically, there is no such thing as a Neagle decision. The parties settled before the arbitrator ruled. Therefore, there is no Neagle decision, no Neagle ruling, and no Neagle precedent that the union might point to in order to claim an advantage in K-Rod�s case. As far as legal precedents are concerned, it�s as if the Neagle case never existed. Settlements are not precedents and are never binding on subsequent and different parties to a separate case involving similar issues. You don�t have to give your neighbor $100,000.00 for accidentally breaking his arm just because two years earlier, your uncle paid $100,000.00 to settle his own broken arm case. Settlements are not precedents, and are not even admissible evidence. Notably, on the day that the Rockies settled with Neagle, the pitcher was merely charged with committing a crime, but not convicted. With respect to the injury prong of the Mets� case against K-Rod, the Hoyt decision and Neagle case have little, if any, relevance. The Padres and Rockies were attempting to terminate their respective player contracts solely on the alleged bad behavior of their pitchers, and never claimed that their pitchers injured themselves while engaging in unauthorized conduct. And as mentioned, the Neagle case was settled. If anything, it would seem that history is on the Mets side, rather than on the side of K-Rod. Last week, a panel of arbitrators denied the Union's grievance on behalf of Shawn Chacon: his contract was successfully terminated by the Astros after Chacon punched out the Astro GM. While the Chacon case does not perfectly match the K-Rod case, it is the most factually similar arbitration to K-Rod's Case. Also, arbitrator Shyam Das, who headed the Chacon arbitration panel, was recently assigned to the K-Rod case. Finally, the sports law blog writes that the Mets actions against K-Rod are based on provisions of the UPC. However, the relevant provisions of the UPC (Section 7) address the team's right to terminate the contract. But in the K-Rod case, the Mets have not terminated the contract; instead the team has converted it to a non-guaranteed contract, presumably pursuant to a special covenant that is not a part of the UPC. If the blog's information is correct, then one possibility is that the convert clause penalty is triggered by the player's breach of section 7 of the UPC. Insofar as the New York Times reported that teams developed the �convert clause� in response to the decision in the Hoyt case, the Hoyt decision has no bearing on how that �convert clause� might be interpreted: if the �convert clause� did not exist at the time of the Hoyt decision, then arbitrator Nicolau could not have ruled on that specific clause.

Mets move into a tie with LA and can leapfrog Colorado and Florida tomorrow: I'm taking credit here. My theory is that the team reads the CPF and finally decided to put the ********** Frenchy on the bench for good against righties after reading about my boycott. Fuck you, Jeff Francoeur.

Who's on the hill for Pittsburgh: Satchel Paige?

Frayed Knot wrote: Well, I think he's making a safe assumption that a thumb ligament injury isn't going to be career ending. As far as the contract, he's opining on the seriousness (or not) of the assault and the fact that misdemeanors don't usually scuttle contracts. Why do you and Furlong assume that K-Rod's injury has to be career ending for the Mets to terminate the contract? Eating green M & M's could scuttle a contract if the parties contracted so.

And what about 42? Is 42 Ron Hodges and Butch Huskey and Mo Vaughn? And then, maybe, Jackie Robinson?

Frayed Knot wrote: Jack Furlong - sports legal guy - on Richard Neer's radio program this morning: [as close to word for word as I can remember] -- "Nothing I've heard leads me to think that there's any chance the Mets can negate the contract" ... "If this is not Francisco Rodriguez this is a summons in front of the lowest-level judge and 6 months probation" ... "this is the equivalent of a bar room fight without serious injury" He thinks they'll get away without paying him for the remainder of this season based on the injury but nothing more on contract violation. I don't know how anyone can opine as to whether K-Rod breached his contract, or what the penalty ought to be if it is ultimately determined that K-Rod did breach his contract, without knowing what's in his contract. Not only does Furlong not claim to have read K-Rod's contract, but he doesn't even know what the facts are, or how serious K-Rod's injury is. Furlong doesn't know when K-Rod will heal, or whether K-Rod will ever heal, or if he'll heal in part only, but with some permanent diminishment. I think that Furlong's comments are foolish, even if K-Rod's case is ultimately resolved exactly like Furlong predicts.

Here is a link to the current MLB Collective Bargaining Agreement ("CBA"). http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/cba_english.pdf A player contract consists of the standardized clauses (uniform contract -- attached as an exhibit to the CBA, Schedule A, page 210), as well as additional clauses ("special covenants") mutually agreed upon by the player and his team. The special covenants cannot be inconsistent with whatever rights are guaranteed in the CBA. A contract with special covenants must be approved by the Commissioner's office within 20 days after receipt for approval. If the union is dissatisfied with the Commissioner's approval of special covenants, it may file a grievance within 10 days of the Commissioner's approval. (Article IV, CBA). So, presumably, whatever is in K-Rod's contract has been approved and deemed consistent with the CBA. In any event, it would appear that the union has waived the defense of inconsistency with the CBA. So K-Rod's arbitrator can simply get on with determining whether or not K-Rod breached whatever clause triggers the Mets right to non-guarantee his contract

Frayed Knot wrote: But the union is going to cling to the 'sanctity of the contract' story .... The sanctity of the contract should mean that every single clause counts. The union can't pick and choose as to which clauses should be enforced and which ones shouldn't. It'd be real sweet if some insider could leak the relevant provisions of K-Rod's contract. Because we are so in the dark here.

You should do the Bucs bench. This way, we could read about more of your enemies. Two thumbs up.

I think that the arbitrator blamed the Padres for creating the conditions that caused Hoyt to break the law. Nicolau reasoned that if Hoyt received the proper medical attention and treatment that he ought to have received from his employer, he wouldn't have needed to smuggle the large quantities of Valium -- which he did to self-medicate himself rather than to distribute and sell. According to the decision, the Padres failed in their duties and responsibilities to Hoyt, and the team's failure caused Hoyt to resort to criminal conduct. Once the arbitrator decided that Hoyt's criminal conviction was largely caused by the Padres' indifference to Hoyt's medical condition, he could not then let the Padres use the conviction to get out from the contract.

dupe. see above post.

The LA Times reports on the decision in the Lamar Hoyt MLBPA grievance arbitration. It appears that the decision is not as broadly anti-management as the press claims; instead, the arbitrator's refusal to rule that Hoyt's drug conviction constituted a breach of the morals clause in his contract might be limited to the facts of the Hoyt case, with little applicability to the K-Rod case. Although the arbitrator ultimately ruled in favor of pitcher Hoyt and against the Padres, the arbitrator determined that the Padres were to blame for the pitcher's conduct; that the team neglected Hoyt's medical condition - an addiction to Valium -, and to the extent that the Padres did anything, incorrectly treated him as a cocaine abuser even though the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated that Hoyt suffered from a Valium addiction brought about by stress and a pitching related injury; that the pitcher obtained large amounts of Valium in order to self-medicate himself, implicitly because the Padres would not provide him with the proper medical treatment; that Hoyt never intended to distribute and sell the drugs, and that Valium is a legal drug when obtained with a prescription. The arbitrator sympathized with Hoyt who was entitled to, but did not receive, adequate medical help from his employer, the Padres, for a sleep disorder and Valium dependency all brought about from a pitching, (i.e., work-related) injury. Ueberroth, Padres Come Under Fire Arbitrator's Report Cites Mishandling of Hoyt Drug Case July 01, 1987|BILL PLASCHKE, Times Staff Writer SAN DIEGO � Arbitrator George Nicolau's recent decision to rescind the San Diego Padres' release of former Cy Young Award-winning pitcher LaMarr Hoyt--meanwhile reducing his one-year baseball suspension to 60 days--was based upon charges that, in Hoyt's case, the drug programs administered by the Padres and Commissioner Peter Ueberroth were misguided, inconsistent, and unfair. The 46-page confidential report, dated June 16 and obtained by The Times, painted a portrait not of a street drug user, but of a former star with a failing right arm and failing marriage whose biggest problem was the stress that kept him from sleeping. Nicolau, chairman of a New York arbitration panel, ruled that the 32-year-old Hoyt, whose troubles with tranquilizers culminated in a 38-day prison sentence last winter, was wrongly disciplined by the Padres as a substance abuser when, in fact, he was a medication misuser. The report said the Padres wrongly placed Hoyt under the league's toughest drug-offender policy--two strikes and you're out--when Hoyt's circumstances should have dictated otherwise. It claimed San Diego, which attempted to terminate Hoyt's three-year, $3.2-million contract two days after he entered jail Jan. 5, was "impervious to its share of the blame for the culminating events of Oct. 28," when Hoyt was arrested attempting to cross the border from Mexico to the United States with nearly 500 pills concealed in his trousers. More than 300 were Valium, the rest were muscle relaxants. "San Diego did not carefully weight all the facts as just cause requires," the report stated. "It simply decided, irrespective of the circumstances, that its unwritten policy, as interpreted by (Ex-Padre President Ballard) Smith, would prevail." The report cited several major Padre indiscretions, beginning seven months before Hoyt's arrest, in March of 1986, when they sent Hoyt to Hazelden, a Minnesota drug treatment center heavily funded by Padre owner Joan Kroc. Hazelden specializes in those who have problems with illegal drugs; Hoyt's only previous substance problems were with Valium, a legal drug when obtained by prescription for medical use. According to testimony, in a pre-spring training physical examination during that time, Hoyt had even admitted he was taking Valium and wanted to speak to a doctor about it. The Padres did not respond. After Hoyt spent the full 28 days at the Minnesota facility, San Diego psychiatrist Dr. Thomas Rodgers, who is cited throughout Nicolau's report, concluded Hazelden was the "wrong place" for him, and that the ensuing Hazelden report was "gross," "uniformed" and an "injustice." The Nicolau report also admonished snap judgments by Smith, who conceded in his testimony that it was an after-dinner discussion with a doctor friend that led him to believe Hoyt was on cocaine, and that he had no idea the problem involved a sleeping disorder. The report concluded: "There is not a sliver of evidence . . . that Hoyt used cocaine at any time during his major league career. Nor is there any evidence that he sold, distributed or facilitated the distribution of drugs of any kind." Nicolau also was critical of Ueberroth, charging that the commissioner did not follow precedent set by decisions involving the Kansas City problems of 1983 and the Pittsburgh drug trials of 1985. "An examination of their facts and holdings," wrote Nicolau of the two earlier cases, "fully demonstrated the unparalleled and unjustifiable severity of Hoyt's discipline." Nicolau admonished Ueberroth for not giving Hoyt an alternative to suspension or meeting with him face-to-face to discuss the matter, both options that were available to the players in the Pittsburgh trials. He also charged that Ueberroth did not recognize the precedent set by Bowie Kuhn, who agreed to review the year-long suspensions of Kansas City's Willie Wilson, Willie Aikens and Jerry Martin in 1983, eventually reinstating all three players. "Significant disparity of treatment also creates uncertainity in the administration . . . at a time when the need is for an integrated, consistent and rational system," Nicolau warned. Ueberroth would not comment on the report, saying through news director Rich Levin: "The commissioner's office does not make it a practice to comment on the decisions of arbitrators." There was also no comment from the Padre front office. Hoyt has refused comment since leaving jail. Nicolau's ruling was in response to two Players' Assn. grievances filed after the Padres waived Hoyt and after Ueberroth handed down his suspension. The ruling and accompanying report, based on 463 pages of testimony and released to club presidents by the owners' Player Relations Committee, not only made Hoyt $2.95 million richer (his contract minus the 60-day suspension) but has influenced three teams to seek his services. Hoyt's agent, Ron Shapiro, met with the Atlanta Braves on Monday, will meet with the Baltimore Orioles either today or Thursday, and will finish the week with a meeting with the Toronto Blue Jays. By the start of next week, although at a minor league level, Hoyt could be back in baseball. For a prorated amount of baseball's minimum $62,500 contract--a team will owe him just $31,250 if he signs at the All-Star Break, for example--teams are willing to take a chance on Hoyt. "We aren't fearful of helping people, as long as they know they must first help themselves," Baltimore General Manager Hank Peters said. "And there's no question but that the guy can pitch." "The guy is dominating," said Toronto General Manager Pat Gillick. "And do you know him?" According to Nicolau's report, neither the Padres nor major league baseball knew him and, worse yet, did not take the time to find out. With the Chicago White Sox in 1983, Hoyt won the Cy Young Award by going 24-10 with a 3.66 earned-run average. The next season, both his weight and ERA ballooned (260 pounds, 4.47) and in the winter of 1984 he was traded to the Padres. Despite a late-season diagnosis of rotator cuff tendinitis, he performed well in 1985, going 16-8 with a 3.47 ERA. By then, however, the problems already had started. According to Nicolau's report, psychiatrist Rodgers determined that the 30-year-old pitcher became "obsessed" with his sore arm. On Feb. 5, 1986, with Hoyt's sore arm persisting, the pitcher visited Dr. Samuel Shannon in Hoyt's hometown of Columbia, S.C. He had not seen Shannon in eight years, but confided in him about an impending divorce and "excess stress" and requested medication. Shannon warned him of the difficulties associated with the drug, then prescribed 24 Valium (no refills) and 24 other sleeping pills. Upon his return to San Diego, according to the report, Hoyt shared the pills with his wife, Sylvia, who also was under stress. The pills lasted five days. On Feb. 10, when prescriptions ran out, instead of going to a local physician, Hoyt drove the 17 miles to Tijuana, Mexico, to obtain more. When he tried to come home, Hoyt was detained at the San Ysidro border crossing by customs agents for possession of marijuana and Valium tablets and Quaaludes. The pills were disposed of without analysis, Hoyt paid a $600 fine and was released. But a U.S. Customs official called the Padres. A few days later, Smith, telling his staff to keep it quiet, met with Hoyt. According to Smith's testimony, he reiterated the club's policy of extending assistance to employees on an initial drug involvement, but ending employment upon a second involvement. He told Hoyt he had used his first and last chance. Eight days later, Hoyt was in trouble again. Shortly after midnight, he was stopped on a San Diego street by police after driving through a red light. Hoyt was arrested for possessing less than one ounce of marijuana and a switch-blade knife. He pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of public nuisance, was placed on three years' probation, and paid $375 in fines. But a U.S. Customs official called the Padres. A few days later, Smith, telling his staff to keep it quiet, met with Hoyt. According to Smith's testimony, he reiterated the club's policy of extending assistance to employees on an initial drug involvement, but ending employment upon a second involvement. He told Hoyt he had used his first and last chance. Eight days later, Hoyt was in trouble again. Shortly after midnight, he was stopped on a San Diego street by police after driving through a red light. Hoyt was arrested for possessing less than one ounce of marijuana and a switch-blade knife. He pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of public nuisance, was placed on three years' probation, and paid $375 in fines. It was after this that he was sent to Hazelden. He stayed there a month, returning to spring training on March 27. According to Nicolau's report, "There was no after-care program. By all accounts, Hoyt was left on his own." Then in a poor season, he went 8-11 with a 5.15 ERA. On Oct. 28, trying to walk back across the border from Mexico with 500 pills stuffed in his pants and socks. He was formally charged with possession of Valium tablets and propoxyphene, a painkiller. Through a plea-bargain, the charges were reduced from felonies to misdemeanors. Before sentencing, U.S. Magistrate Roger Curtis McKee examined a report completed by Rodgers, the psychiatrist. The report explained Hoyt's "intractable" insomnia due to recent stresses, and the compounding of the problems through the "aggressive, isolative and sometimes abusive treatment program" at Hazelden. Rodgers report determined that on Oct. 28 Hoyt was smuggling pills to "medically treat himself." The report contributed to a sentencing of 45 days, 15 days less than the minimum 60 days as foreseen in the plea-bargain. Yet Smith testified that he never shared the report, and obtained the opinion that Hoyt's problem was with cocaine after speaking with a doctor friend at a dinner. According to Nicolau: "Smith asked what conclusions could be drawn about a person who talked about a sleep disorder and had large quantities of Valium. His friend, who had treated players for cocaine abuse, told him, 'It was very common for people that were using cocaine to use large quantities of Valium in an effort to come down.' Hearing that, Smith decided there was no basis for distinguishing Hoyt's case." Smith was so convinced, according to testimony, that he did not read the court transcript in which Judge McKee reduced Hoyt's sentence because of the other factors. He had already made up his mind and, two days after the start of Hoyt's jail term, one week before the Padres would have to start paying LaMarr Hoyt for the 1987 season, they released him. http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-01/sports/sp-717_1_lamarr-hoyt Dallas Green [crossout]weighs[/crossout] weighed in on the Hoyt Arbitration decision: Excerpt: `I used to have enough faith in ballplayers that they had the right character . . . I just don`t know anymore,`` said Green. ``Every time we go to court, we get beat. In tough situations, it always looks like the player comes out scot-free. ``What LaMarr Hoyt did was illegal. I don`t care what any damn do-good doctor said. To try now to blame it on the Padres . . . here`s a guy who`s going to walk away with close to 3 million bucks. And I`ll guarantee you that if he pitches good, he`s going to ask for $3 million more from somebody. ``This business continues to be nuts. All these things go through my mind, and I don`t have the answers. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-07-03/sports/8702180899_1_lamarr-hoyt-drug-problem-drug-abuse

Will the sun rise tomorrow?

Misch - 3.5 Acosta - .75 Igarashi - .75 Carter - .75 Pagan - .5

At least they didn't get swept in a doubleheader.

Johan Santana's making his move on this year's elite pitchers .... Ryan Dempster cracks the top 20 ...... K-Rod still packs a mean wallop WAR RankPitcher/TeamWARIP/WAR1Josh Johnson/FLA6.125.412Roy Halladay/PHI5.732.463Adam Wainwright/STL5.631.494Ubaldo Jimenez/COL5.031.075Tim Hudson/ATL5.031.336Johan Santana/NYM4.438.867Livan Hernandez/WAS4.039.428Chris Carpenter/STL3.647.59Brett Myers/HOU3.544.8610Matt Cain/SF3.447.6511Mat Latos/SD3.240.5212Roy Oswalt/HOU-PHI3.246.3513Yovani Gallardo/MIL3.044.1114Cole Hamels/PHI3.048.6715Tim Lincecum/SF2.953.6816Barry Zito/SF2.954.1417Clayton Kershaw/LA2.853.6918Ted Lilly/CHIC-LAD2.552.0019Ryan Dempster/CHI2.562.9320Jaime Garcia/STL2.452.64.26K-Rod/NYM2.126.83.28R.A. Dickey/NYM2.148.57 updated through last night: WAR RankPitcher/TeamWARIP/WAR 1Josh Johnson/FLA5.727.852Roy Halladay/PHI5.732.463Tim Hudson/ATL5.529.944Adam Wainwright/STL5.532.065Ubaldo Jimenez/COL5.031.076Johan Santana/NYM4.438.867Livan Hernandez/WAS4.039.428Brett Myers/HOU3.843.169Chris Carpenter/STL3.548.8610Matt Cain/SF3.349.0911Cole Hamels/PHI3.346.6712Roy Oswalt/HOU-PHI3.246.3513Mat Latos/SD3.141.8314Yovani Gallardo/MIL3.046.4415Barry Zito/SF3.052.3316Tim Lincecum/SF2.953.6817Clayton Kershaw/LA2.853.6918R.A. Dickey/NYM2.642.69 19Ted Lilly/CHIC-LAD2.552.0020Ryan Dempster/CHI2.562.93.27K-Rod/NYM2.126.83 Updated through 8/18. No changes in the top 20. Santana drops to 7th. Lincecum clings. WAR RankPitcher/TeamWARIP/WAR1Josh Johnson/FLA6.027.782Roy Halladay/PHI6.032.173Tim Hudson/ATL5.630.654Adam Wainwright/STL5.632.745Ubaldo Jimenez/COL5.231.416Livan Hernandez/WAS4.338.297Johan Santana/NYM4.242.628Brett Myers/HOU3.943.859Chris Carpenter/STL3.452.0610Mat Latos/SD3.341.1111Clayton Kershaw/LA3.347.6812Matt Cain/SF3.350.9113Cole Hamels/PHI3.248.1314Roy Oswalt/HOU-PHI3.248.5415Barry Zito/SF3.054.0016Ted Lilly/CHIC-LAD2.946.9017Yovani Gallardo/MIL2.948.0518R.A. Dickey/NYM2.842.6219Ryan Dempster/CHI2.760.7420Tim Lincecum/SF2.563.73.27K-Rod/NYM2.127.30. 37Jonathon Niese/NYM1.873.89

I wish Frenchy would retire.

K-Rod's contract is relatively cheap once you adjust for inflation and the 35% a year in interest the Mets had written in stone from their investments with Madoff.