metirish

] EXTENDING PETERSON: Pitching coach Rick Peterson, who never doubted he'd return to the Mets, has a new multi-year contract with the club, according to a team insider. I like that...

I like Henderson as a choice...still I'm sticking with Hojo...

] sports nut: The stadium scene. Free Agency Follies Why are baseball GMs making so many stupid deals? By Seth Mnookin Posted Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2006, at 5:32 PM ET In 2002, Red Sox owner John Henry and GM-to-be Theo Epstein half-jokingly pleaded with Michael Lewis to ditch a book he was working on. Lewis' tome would detail the stubborn inanity of baseball executives who relied on the often-incorrect wisdom of lifelong baseball insiders. Henry and Epstein told Lewis that if he laid bare the advantages of teams that sought out market inefficiencies when gauging players' worth, those advantages would evaporate. But as this offseason has once again demonstrated, the Red Sox execs had no reason to worry about Moneyball. There are just as many mind-bogglingly stupid deals as ever. Exhibit A: the five-year, $44-million contract the Los Angeles Dodgers gave to 29-year-old Juan Pierre, a player with a notable lack of both power and patience. Then there's the five-year, $50-million contract the Angels bestowed upon 32-year-old Gary Matthews Jr., a career .263 hitter. Granted, Mathews did hit .313 last year, but that was 38 points better than he'd ever done previously. Assuming that's evidence of a new level of talent as opposed to a one-year blip is exactly the opposite of what a smart executive should do. Those are just the most egregious examples in an offseason full of inexplicable long-term contracts. So, what's going on here? Wasn't this supposed to be baseball's Age of Enlightenment, an era in which savvy GMs knew which players to sign and which to avoid? Here are three explanations for this year's spending spree. Revenue sharing. Four years ago, Major League Baseball increased the amount of money transferred from higher-revenue teams to lower-revenue ones. As part of 2002's labor agreement, teams were required to share 34 percent of local revenue rather than the previous 20 percent. As a result, teams like the Minnesota Twins and the Milwaukee Brewers now have enough money to sign their precocious superstars to multiyear deals before they accumulate the service time necessary to declare free agency. The Twins' Johan Santana and the Brewers' Ben Sheets are both locked up until 2008, when they'll be 29 and 30 years old respectively. Albert Pujols (who's still only 26) is signed through 2010�for about $3 million less per year than the Cubs recently agreed to pay 30-year-old Alfonso Soriano (for the next eight years). If Santana, Sheets, and Pujols hadn't signed long-term deals after the 2004 season, all three would have hit the open market this year. Free-agent classes like the one we saw in 2003�when once and future MVPs Miguel Tejada and Vladimir Guerrero were available�could very well be a thing of the past. If that's the case, GMs desperate to unload their disposable income on proven major leaguers will have few options outside of over-the-hill, overpriced free agents. The mirage of parity. In the last seven years, seven different teams have won the World Series. This sequence has given owners and GMs the sense that they're perpetually one move away from winning it all. But it's harder to crash the playoff party than it seems: In those seven years, 30 percent of major league teams�the Yankees, Braves, Cardinals, A's, Twins, Angels, Astros, Giants, and Red Sox�have snatched up 71 percent of the playoff spots. Winning takes patient planning; blindly throwing money at free agents like Juan Pierre and Gary Matthews Jr. does not count as planning. In 2000, the year before the Rangers offered Alex Rodriguez $100 million more than the next highest bidder, Texas finished last in the American League West. They finished last the three years he was with the team, as well. The baseball world's echo chamber. The 24-hour news cycle is just as much a reality in sports as it is in politics. This fosters an instant-gratification mind-set that makes executives, journalists, and fans only too happy to overlook the long-term consequences of multiyear deals. Mets GM Omar Minaya was lauded for signing Pedro Martinez (before the 2005 season) and Billy Wagner (before the 2006 season) to four-year deals, even though the likelihood that either pitcher will be worth anything close to his salary at the tail end of his contract is minuscule. Martinez will miss somewhere between a quarter and five-eighths of the time in which he'll be cashing Mets paychecks. In his first year in New York, Wagner allowed more baserunners per inning then he has since 2000. Imagine what he'll look like in 2009. You could argue�as many baseball executives have�that the game's cash surplus gives teams no choice but to overpay for the available talent. But all the money in the world doesn't change the fact that there are only 25 spots on a major league roster. An overpaid veteran with declining skills and a long-term contract often blocks a future star coming up through the ranks. Last year, Dodgers rookie outfielder Andre Ethier had a higher batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage than Juan Pierre, all for a salary around $300,000. Even Alfonso Soriano, whose $136 million deal is the fifth largest in baseball history, will create a logjam in the Cubs outfield, forcing them to jettison, bench, or trade a prospect with lots of potential. So, what's a savvy baseball executive with an overstuffed wallet and a dearth of attractive options to do? One choice is to take a flyer on an old or injury-prone player like Moises Alou or Kerry Wood. Another is to take a big gamble on a young foreign star, as Boston is doing with Daisuke Matsuzaka. But those all-in opportunities are both rare and risky. If weaker free-agent classes do become the norm, teams that want to crash the postseason party should resist the urge to spend, say, more than $25 million for three years' worth of a below-average starter like Adam Eaton. Instead, they should devote more of their resources to player development. The model of this approach is the Tigers, who resisted trading away their up-and-coming stars even during a five-year stretch in which they went 307-502. Last year, Detroit relied on Zach Miner (24), Jeremy Bonderman (23), Justin Verlander (23), and Joel Zumaya (21) to anchor a pitching staff that led the team to the pennant. But the team that's playing today's market better than anyone is�no joke�the Yankees. After years of binging on overpaid veterans, the Bronx Bombers have developed a sudden fondness for developing and acquiring young players. Cy Young runner-up Chien-Ming Wang was a rookie in 2005. Catalysts Robinson Cano and Melky Cabrera are 24 and 22. And the Bombers executed one of the better trades of the offseason when they picked up a trio of hard-throwing pitching prospects in return for 38-year-old Gary Sheffield, to whom the Yankees owed $13 million for the 2007 season. The team that gave up those prospects? The Detroit Tigers.

From Newsday... ] The Mets are considering Rickey Henderson and Gerald Williams as first-base coaches, replacing Manny Acta. Sandy Alomar will move to third base. Daily News ] HELLO HOJO: Howard Johnson is the heavy favorite to be named to the Mets' coaching staff, succeeding Manny Acta, who was named Nationals manager. Randolph indicated he was close to a hire, and that Sandy Alomar Sr. would shift from first base to third base.

From Newsday ] Notes & quotes: Randolph expressed disappointment over finishing second to Joe Girardi in the NL Manager of the Year balloting. "I'm just totally dumbfounded on how it works, obviously," Randolph said. "If we start trying to figure out what the criteria is and why people vote for what they vote for and what they see, that's not my concern. I feel like we deserved it." ...

Frayed Knot wrote: 68 BBs over 137 IPs is not a few walks. Looks like we got us an untamed colt. But it also sounds like he could be real good once broken in. can't wait for Peterson to ride him...go Rick go...

Thank you Theo...boy genius to man fool..

Fuck,I love him already....

SteveJRogers wrote: ="Johnny Dickshot"] Burgos was the Royals closer last year Not saying much though = Well at least very few people saw him close out games..will be different in NY...

Never heard of him...where does he fit in the pen,what do we know about him.....yeah Bannister is not a huge loss,still a starter for a pen guy,he better be good.

] Because black and retro unis/caps appeal to hip-hop wannabes who wouldn't know the first thing about the team who's logos they are wearing I have a black Mets Uni..Martinez....I am not a hip-hop wannabe...and I think I know a bit about the sport..Steve you just keep beating the horse..it used to be amazing but not anymore.

A full report.... http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/2000-03attendance.htm

Lugo had a terrible time after being traded to the LA..and this is his reward?..

WOW...more years than we thought and more money?...

SteveJRogers wrote: I think thats more of a reflection of the "New Ballpark Spike" rather than interest in the Phils. Philly still hasn't come back since 1994, despite being in the scrum of things in recent years. There was more attention paid to the Eagles than there were to the Phillies, where in New York, that will never happen. I think Ryan Howard might be getting some people to the park,nothing like a hown grown slugger who by all accounts is not a bollox but a decent guy.

That Drew deal is nuts....he's not that good is he?

MFS62 wrote: If all else fails, Boras will go back to the Rangers owner who spends like a teenager at the mall with daddy's credit card. Scott, who's your (sugar) daddy? Later Well not to defend Boras but I imagine that's why Zito hired him,to get the biggest contract possible....

Yes,the player option would bring the deal to $75 million,throw in some other clauses like,win a Cy Young and get an extra $2 million,I think Omar can get creative and he seems quite persausive so I think Zito is coming..

Here's what I think,5 years at $60 million with an attainable player option for a sixth year,of course Hicks might just blow everyone away....

soupcan wrote: Gosh that's a lot of money. Hmmmm, if I'm Barry Zito do I take all the money I can and lock myself into a team that hasn't sniffed the playoffs in years and probably won't any time soon even with me or do I take less money and maybe less years to play for a better team in a better market (which would give me additional financial opportunities)? Either way I'm gonna be filthy rich and my kids and grandkids will be set for life. What's the difference gonna be - maybe $10-$20 million from one offer to the other? Wow, $10-$20 million is a LOT of money to turn down and maybe I could be the guy that is able to take that not-so-good team to the playoffs. Tough choice. From the "buzz" blog on ESPN.... ]� While Texas and Seattle have been mentioned as potential landing spots for Barry Zito, there's rampant skepticism in Orlando that Zito would sign with either club. But it's a great way for Scott Boras to help drive up Zito's price with the Mets.

Funny how things always seem to get misinterpreted.

Has he signed with Oakland?..isn't our guy Mark Healey at the meetings?,should be reporting back to us....

We can expect a team in Baghdad by 2012....

Iraq is Seligs fault. ] By MURRAY CHASS Published: December 5, 2006 Bud Selig likes to refer to himself as a student of history, and in retrospect, the commissioner could have been part of history, a major part, having nothing to do with attendance records or wild cards. Not that he knew it then, in the mid-1990s, but Selig could have altered the course of recent history. If only he had given the nod to George W. Bush when Bush, then the managing partner of the Texas Rangers, let it be known that he was interested in assuming the vacant office of baseball commissioner. That was before Bush entered politics and became the governor of Texas. Selig had said he was not aware that Bush wanted to be commissioner, but plenty of other people in baseball ownership knew it, and Selig has always been in constant contact with owners and knows all. But Bush waited and waited for a signal from Selig, who as the head of the Major League Baseball executive council was the acting commissioner after the ouster of Fay Vincent from the office in September 1992. Finally, Bush could wait no longer. The Texas Republican Party wanted him to run for governor and needed an answer. Hearing nothing from Selig, Bush ran for governor and won. The rest is history. Selig didn�t say yes because he was planning to be commissioner himself, his protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. This is not a new story. But it is worth retelling because Selig last week said for the first time publicly that he planned to retire when his contract expires in three years. He had previously said it privately, explaining that his wife, Sue, was urging him to retire. Chances are that if not for the wishes of Sue Selig, her husband, health permitting, would remain commissioner as long as the owners wanted him to. The owners would probably want him to be commissioner as long as he wanted, as well they should. Baseball has flourished under Selig, with industry revenue reaching a record $5.2 billion this year, attendance at a record high of more than 76 million and labor peace with the players in place for another five years. Steroids zealots criticize Selig for doing nothing about steroids use for too long. But no one else made a case against it either, including those of us who watched players get mind-bogglingly bigger and wrote nothing about it. Not everything is perfect, though, and before he departs, Selig may want to devote some attention to the problematic issues. He could start with the decline in television ratings for the World Series. Despite the attendance record this year, the World Series between St. Louis and Detroit drew the lowest television ratings ever. Those ratings have to be viewed in the context of television ratings generally; the ratings of even the most popular programming have declined. But baseball cares about ratings as much as Fox and would like to see them higher. When M.L.B. and Fox were struggling with disappointing ratings for the All-Star Game, they came up with a novel way of dealing with them. Baseball created a link between the All-Star Game and home-field advantage for the World Series. The team from the league that won the All-Star Game would get to play Games 1, 2, 6 and 7 at home. With the All-Star Game taking on greater meaning, baseball and Fox figured, fans would more readily watch the game. How, then, could they induce more fans to watch the World Series? The rating for the most recent World Series was 10.1. That won�t do. Time to develop a reason that would make the World Series more compelling to watch. In an effort to inspire baseball to attack this problem, herewith are a few ideas: � Instead of assigning the game two years ahead, base home-field advantage for the All-Star Game on the outcome of the previous year�s World Series. If the All-Star Game, an exhibition game, is important enough to determine a critical component of the subsequent World Series, a championship event, home-field advantage for the All-Star Game should be important enough to be based on a legitimate event. � With baseball having increasing interest in opening the season in foreign countries, make the loser of the World Series open the next season in Japan. Baseball likes the idea of playing games in Japan, but the players who have to play them don�t like traveling that distance. As much as players want to win World Series rings, they may be even more passionate about wanting to stay home the next March, and that passion would be reflected in their play. Fans would notice and become more interested in World Series games. � Have fans predict the outcome of the World Series via the Internet, and give fans who pick the winning team two tickets to a game of their choice the following season. Fans would watch the games as if they had placed a bet on them. Ratings would rise. Imaginative minds in baseball and television could undoubtedly come up with other, perhaps better ideas. After all, they did create the All-Star link to the World Series. Just look at the ratings that concept has produced. The year before the plan took effect, 2002, Fox�s telecast of the All-Star Game drew a 9.5 rating. The first year of the link, 2003, the rating was 9.5. The ratings then went to 8.8 and 8.1. But then came this year�s game, and the rating soared to 9.4, nearly matching the rating for the last prelink game. It�s obvious the commissioner and his creativity team knew what they were doing. Now, before Selig leaves, they have another task. I�m confident they�ll be up to it. Next Article in Sports (10 of 17) �

Several reports have the Rangers offering Zito 6 years at over $100 million.