Frayed Knot

Vic Sage wrote: absolutely, its a factor. But it shouldn't necessarily be the deciding factor. No, but among the factors - and I think what the Mets may be leaking is that the money it'll take to sign Bourn isn't worth the draft pick PLUS the money and PLUS the years considering the team ins't exactly in a one-player-away kind of situation and Bourn isn't exactly that guy. Of course it's also hard to know if that's the truth or not, it may just be posturing. The other thing that throws a wrench into the works here is that where you pick now determines how much money you have to sign all your picks for next year. The slots determine your total pool of money (go over and you pay either in lux tax and/or future picks) so while the newer lower amount should be commensurate with the new slots, the fact that there's not a cap ("suggested" or otherwise) on any one pick means that the lower overall amount does make it tougher to shift and/or spread out the money among the picks.

Vic Sage wrote: ... the difference between a 1st and 2nd round pick really shouldn't stop us from signing Bourn The difference between #11 and maybe #60-ish should be significant enough to at least enter into the decision making process.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is where the new rules are killing Bourn. In years past, he could always sign a one-year contract and then try free agency again the following year. But now, with the potential loss of a draft pick, that one-year deal is less attractive to may clubs. Well in the past guys like Bourn still still required compensation under the right circumstances. The rules set out in this most recent CBA actually toned down the number of players who are subject to compensation (restricting it to only the handful of "best" FAs that year) and maybe that's part of why Bourn (and Kyle Lohse) are still on the market at this late date: the relative scarcity of players whose signing means ceding a draft pick makes them stand out more than before. Only about six to eight players this year were subject to this version of the rule; in earlier seasons it was often double and triple that amount. Signing Bourn without the assurance they will not lose their first round pick reminds me of those police dramas in which the cops tell a perp that if he testifies against his cohorts, he MIGHT get a reduced sentence. Then when he tells all, they tell him it wasn't possible. That's why the Mets want to get a ruling on this "loophole" first before going ahead - but I don't think that's going to happen.

Lefty Specialist wrote: I though he'd be the sleeper in the Pagan trade. I think he was Sandy's main target in the Pagan deal with Torres being intended as merely a place-keeper until something better came along. Had some good years, just not in 2012.

Any others that we know of aside from Vida and Ichiro?

metirish wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: I liked all the close-up shots during the blackout of a befuddled Roger Goodell looking helpless to deal with the situation. Oh wait, this wasn't baseball & Selig, it's the NFL so that turned out to be the one time when the cameras were seemingly unable to find the commish. I bet this is true too, I can't remember one shot of him during the whole debacle. And while it's certainly possible that Goodell was 'below decks' somewhere at the time and truly unable to be on camera, I think it's much more probable that the network, being wary of doing anything that could possibly be construed as offensive towards 'The Shield', simply chose not to show him at a time that wasn't going to paint him in the best light.

I liked all the close-up shots during the blackout of a befuddled Roger Goodell looking helpless to deal with the situation. Oh wait, this wasn't baseball & Selig, it's the NFL so that turned out to be the one time when the cameras were seemingly unable to find the commish.

Kevin Millwood's 16-year/7-team career comes to an end. I guess you could call his a somewhat erratic career - although one that ends with a 169-152 record and a 4.11 ERA through much of a hitters' era. He reportedly wanted a job for 2013 only if either Atlanta or Tampa would bite but neither were interested.

For a time there 'Vida Blue' was the answer to a number of trivia questions, to the point where there was a sort of mantra among trivia buffs that if you didn't know the answer to something then it was best to just guess Vida Blue. Stuff like: 'Last switch hitter to win the MVP' was one of the favorites. (like youngest CY, it was true at the time but has since been updated). I worked briefly a whole bunch of years ago with a guy who had been a Vida Blue fan solely on the basis that he shared the distinction of having the last name of Blue (funny how Green, Black, White, and Brown are quite common as last names while all other colors are virtually unheard of). He then went on to explain that the story behind his name involved his father, a first generation Jewish New Yorker named Isadora Bluestein, simply shortening the family name in an attempt to spare his children future discrimination following his being kept out of both the NYC fire & police departments despite scoring very highly on the tests.

Ashie62 wrote: No love for Abreu as a one year caretaker? What they really need is a RH stick with good glove & range, preferably with the ability to play CF. Abreu can still get on base but otherwise fails on all three counts.

There's some truth to this, but just because the studio has no faith in it (or the Oscar voters, screw them) doesn't mean you can't get good stuff. Isn't this exactly the time for studios to be taking chances on what could be the next big writer/director/etc? Sure, not everything released at this time of year is junk. But the calendar doesn't bode well for especially those flicks with big names or big themes. So you'd think that stuff like Renner in HANSEL & GRETEL would probably be fit more in the summer season if the studio had more faith in it, and the new Pacino/Walken/Arkin starts with one, and maybe two, strikes against it when you see it dumped out on Feb 1st. The other telltale sign is the note in your local newspaper saying: this movie was not screened for reviewers prior to release. In those cases the studio is essentially hiding things and hoping to get at least one decent weekend out of the box office before the reviewers have a chance to savage it and throw cold water on any potential ticket buyers.

We should make a poll on when Byrd gets suspended for PEDs

Travis Hafner signing completed, will DH vs RHPs at least. Was briefly a monster hitter--led MLB in OPS in 2006 and OPS+ in '04 & '06--but has been oft-injured since, not getting as many as 400 ABs since 2007. Had just 219 ABs last year; still takes his walks, has a bit of punch when he does hit (40% of hits in 2012 for XBx), and then there's the whole LHB in YSIII thing where he can't help but mis-hit a handful out of the stadium. Is a .186 hitter in 43 post-season ABs so I'm sure some MFY fans will see that as a fatal flaw before he ever suits up. Turns 36 in June so maybe they're looking get younger after all.

I've seen very few movies so far in February. The problem with those released at this time of year is that they often suck almost be definition. Released too late to be eligible for the 2012 Oscars, not thought worthy enough to save for the summer season, and so early in 2013 that they'll be forgotten by the time the next award season comes around. February movies are the rough equivalent of new TV shows which are slated immediately for Friday nights; you know the studio has little or no faith in it.

Yeah, given the choice of Rauch or Ramy-Ramy or Valverde at similar money, I'd probably take them in that order.

D'Backs apparently believe in Martin Prado as a major 'get' in this trade cuz they've inked him to a four-year deal thru 2016. He could have been a FA after 2013 otherwise.

Yup, this list anyway. I suspect Flores might get himself onto the back end of some lists this winter - but certainly all our top guys this year came via the trade route. Of course one could also argue that had Santana & Gee not gone out at virtually the same time then Harvey wouldn't have been called up so early and so he'd be near the top of the prospect pile heading into this season. Such are the fickle nature of these lists. FWIW, John Sickels ranked the Mets as having the 12th best system this year although admitting at the same time that he finds such ordinal lists to be of dubious help at best.

Joel Sherman talks today about how the Yanx are "privately thrilled" over these latest ARod stories and will use it to explore ways to get out from under his contract. He admits that the chances of them succeeding at that remains "a hail Mary" but the reasons for them not to at least try are diminishing. There are five years remaining on the deal and the Yanx have pretty much resolved themselves to the fact that they're going to release him at some point before the end of the deal and eat part of the cash. Year one (2013) is already clocking in at somewhere between half shot and fully shot between the hip recovery and now a possible suspension so there's certainly a temptation to fight for as much of the middle three years as possible. Suing him for fraud or some such tactic isn't likely to succeed but maybe the threat of it starts negotiations towards some sort of buy-out. Besides, what's legal action or other public handbag swinging going to do, poison the relationship between him and the club, or the fans, or his teammates? I think the cows are already out of that barn.

MFS62 wrote: Rim shot. Later At least that line didn't go totally unnoticed. When you start throwing in pop culture references that are nearing 70 years old it's always a danger.

The first of the Top-100 lists are out with Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com revealing his: Noah Syndergaard #29 Zack Wheeler #8 Travis d'Arnaud #6 I'm surprised to see d'Arnaud up [u:22ymud9l]THAT[/u:22ymud9l] high. I was expecting maybe high-teens/lower-20s No other NYMs in top 100

I believe that Johnson's original wrist problem was brought on by a HBP. Subsequent ones may not have been but wrists, once weakened, seem to be susceptible to future problems. I saw where Jayson Werth was quoted in the last day or two as saying that, despite his reasonably good second half last season following his broken wrist, it was still sore & weak often and he expects it to be better this coming year. (not sure but he may have also said that he's in the best shape of his life) The biggie for Nick Johnson was his broken femur and that was a fielding injury. It's got to be a pretty big whack to break an adult's femur particularly that of a thick-legged athlete like Johnson.

Ashie62 wrote: With the hip surgery and other Swirling Arod issues I am considering the possibility that Arod has played his last MLB game. I seriously doubt that. I'm just shocked, SHOCKED! that ARod's story of doing PEDs only up until he started with his current team may not turn out to be 100% accurate.

Relief PitchersSigned To Minor League Contract And Invited To Spring Training =#FF8000]58 =#0000FF]Scott Atchison DoB: 3/29/1976 I think this guy once played for both Topeka and Santa Fe.

Ceetar wrote: It's interesting, you'd think protecting that pick would be against the spirit of the rule. The Pirates didn't finish with the 10 worst records. Except that it's tough to argue that that was the spirit of the rule when the previous CBA (2007-2011) specifically exempted compensatory yet the wording specifically did NOT exempt those picks in this current one. It also doesn't help the Mets case that they apparently didn't bring this up in November but rather only recently once they saw Bourn in their sights. Plus where were they when the change in the ruling was being adopted? And even if they did object at the time they were out-voted.

MFS62 wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Sherman brings up the Boras favorite of the 'opt-out' deal where Bourn could sign for three with an escape clause after one, so if he plays poorly he has the comfort of a guaranteed deal, or he gets to bail and do this FA thing all over again next year if he has a good 2013. I could see the Mets agreeing to that if the dollar numbers aren't crazy. Why would they agree to that kind of deal? If he plays badly they're stuck with him? Weren't the long term contracts for unproductive players part of what got them into the current situation? The idea would be that a contract with an opt-out would be an enticement for the Bourn/Boras camp to accept a shorter term deal than what they want. The Mets aren't agreeing to a five-year contract no matter what clauses you throw in there, but a three-year under the right terms could be acceptable and if it takes an opt-out clause to get them there well then maybe they agree. If he sucks well then three years is easier to swallow than five and they'd still have a quick and defensively superior CF. If he's good then the worst that happens is that it was like he signed a one-year deal to fill the team's biggest hole and maybe they even get a future draft pick out of the whole thing.