Frayed Knot

In addition to the injury/derailed career thing, what I'll remember about Johnson is how completely opposite he was in virtually every respect from his uncle Larry Bowa. Big vs small; lefty vs righty; slow vs quick; calm vs fuckin' maniac; patience vs kinetic energy; corner guy vs short-stop; power vs singles, and that's all before you get to the whole value being tied up in his bat against the supposedly gritty/non-boxscore value of uncle Larry.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Yeah, but that's just another voice going, "HEY! You can't do this because... just, because!" Sure, but one thought is that if the players want it ('It' meaning the rules interpreted to protect the worst 10 teams not the first 10 picks), the Mets want it, and the majority of other teams at least don't strongly object to it then baseball could see this as a win-win-win situation and change the wording both for this season and the future before it actually affects anyone. But this is all getting ahead of ourselves here. Both Joel Sherman and Baseball America used the term "long-shot" in the last 24 hours to describe a Bourn-to-Mets scenario. The Mets certainly won't go after him until this draft pick question is resolved and won't do it at all if it's not resolved in their favor; IOW, if it involves a draft pick they aren't signing him. And even if everything falls into place there are still those minor details of money and years coupled with a big heaping pile of Boras on the side. The Mets reportedly want to top out at three years while Boras, not surprisingly, insists that there are five years deals to be had even as ST is just around the corner. 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.

The contest foul-up story is apparently true, although Deadspin's "reporting" skills sound a bit thin on the whole police escort thing. Besides, the best Francesa/Super Bowl week story is always going to be the one year when he got to the host city, decided that the accommodations weren't up to his standards and so he immediately threw a hissy fit and went straight back home. He did the whole week from the FAN studios while Mad Dog went solo at the site.

And I certainly didn't mean to set this up as a Bobby vs Steve contest because, in that case, all but Bobby's most fervent detractors would back him on that one. But, still, Bobby was evil personified in the minds of a number of NYM fans so, if we're going to get ahead of ourselves here and start talking about a potential second term, it doesn't hurt to remember that such a move would hardly be universally lauded.

Well, the player's association is and they are lending a voice to this.

Vic Sage wrote: I think fans were largely in support of BV right up to his firing You clearly have forgotten the vitriol aimed at Bobby from fans via the conduits of the MoFo and WFAN. EVERY loss was his fault and most of the wins were judged to be in spite of him rather than because of. Of course it's always tough to determine percentages of popular support, at least without the benefits of sophisticated polling and such, so whether that was merely a loud minority is impossible to know. But suffice to say there's hardly a consensus on these things.

Back to the original question in this thread: there doesn't appear to be much if any ambiguity in the wording in the CBA. A Club that signs one Qualified Free Agent who is subject to compensation shall forfeit its highest available selection in the next Rule 4 Draft. A Club that signs more than one Qualified Free Agent subject to compensation shall forfeit its highest remaining selection in the next Rule 4 Draft for each additional Qualified Free Agent it signs. Notwithstanding the above, a Club shall not be required to forfeit a selection in the top ten of the first round of the Rule 4 Draft, and its highest available selection shall be deemed its first selection following the tenth selection of the first round.� Note that it doesn't exempt picks based on how that top-10 pick was obtained (via the previous year's record or via failure to sign a player in the previous draft) even though the compensation rules for prior draft set-ups DID note that distinction. So the remaining argument seems to be not what the rules say -- they say the Mets WILL have to forfeit pick #11 if they want to sign Bourn -- but whether this change was actually the intent of the powers at be when they made them. It would seem odd, in my mind, to rule in the Mets' favor here simply because they don't like where they wound up and they suddenly think Bourn might be at an attractive price (after all, they weren't screaming about being screwed in November when many thought his price would be much higher/longer). The thing they do have going for them really is that there wouldn't really be any losers if MLB does allow the change. Under the new rules (which clearly WERE intentional) Atlanta no longer gets the specific pick of the team that signs him, they get awarded a compensation "sandwich" pick regardless of who signs him. The Met pick simply "disappears" (and their budget adjusted accordingly) if/when they sign Bourn; the only question remains whether it'll be pick #11 or their 2nd round choice. Other teams will benefit slightly if things remain as they are and the Mets cough up the 11th pick because each of the slots after them will move up one slot: the 12th pick becomes the 11th, 13th becomes 12th, etc. The same chain reaction would happen if they win this appeal and have to forfeit their 2nd round pick instead although the jump from say 55 to 54 is not quite as dramatic as 15 to 14 so there could be some teams that would fight against this - notably those with picks in the teens. On the other hand maybe some of them will find themselves in the same situation in a year or two and, if nothing else, a decision here would clear up the question for future drafts. Also the MLBPA is supporting the Mets in this seeing as how it'll bring one more team into the pool for Bourn and, in effect, reduce the drag on his signing.

Lefty's point is overstated in that there certainly was never any consensus among NYM fans that Bobby had to go. But at the same time what those of us who are Bobby fans have to remember is that BV had a huge number of detractors even when things were going well back in '99 or '00, and then even more later on. Nor do I think, even though I kind of brought it up, that this move makes him a manager in waiting. I said that it's only natural that someone will bring it up at some point due to Terry being on the last year of a deal and particularly so if the season is heading south somewhere prior to September. Is this "doofus move" of getting Bobby in the TV studio some kind of Wilponian plan to stir up such speculation? I tend to doubt it. They've always claimed that there's a wall between the team and the network. Now maybe that's not entirely true although the appearance of independence is a helluva lot thicker than the paper-thin barrier that exists between YES & their MFY overlords. So even if Fred does have final veto power that he simply didn't use here that's not the same as saying he engineered the whole thing. For the record, I don't think this is step one leading to Bobby II. Maybe if he doesn't blow up any bridges over the next nine months or so and Terry is not retained at the end of the season BV will be one of those considered for the post, I dunno. It was always tough to get a reading on how he and the Wilpon's parted back a decade ago now or whether Sandy really has the autonomy to hire his own guy regardless of potential objections. And, yeah, the Boston experience, while certainly not all BV's fault, isn't going to add to the odds he gets re-hired.

If nothing else his presence (even if only on TV from the midtown studio) is going to plant the idea in peeps' heads and from there it's not a long step to some media-mind speculating during the first five-game losing streak.

I don't really think there were good things about being on that Mets team. I'm not even sure the Mets fans were as great as they were cracked up to be. I just remember they liked to boo. I believe both Cliff Floyd and Mike Cameron were know to utter that same comment from time to time.

Edgy MD wrote: Black dudes can't catch a break in the hustle department. BJ, at least, doesn't deserve to catch any breaks. He earned his rep.

I like the move because it increases by one the variations of the ways NYM players spell that name Shaun Marcum Shawon Dunston Sean Green Shawn Green It may have even pushed it ahead of Jeremy/Geremi/Jeromy

Ashie62 wrote: Upton to Braves for 5 players highlighted by Martin Prado and P Wilson Delgado Randall Delgado actually. Doesn't seem like a great haul to me. John Sickels analyzes the prospects here and tends to agree.

TransMonk wrote: And while the logic of the Mets pick getting bumped doesn't mean they were any better than 10th worst is perfectly sound, I doubt that MLB budges. I don't think "budging" is the issue here. I'm sure this contingency was nailed down during the CBA which created the new compensation rules (that's why they pay all those lawyers). Either it was written to protect the first ten picks regardless of whether they are "earned" in the previous season or leftover from last year, or they are intended for worst ten 2012 records only meaning that the Mets pick is protected. I'm pretty sure the answer is the former rather than the latter but, either way, I highly doubt it's something MLB has to rule on here.

Having played his entire major league career (all 25 games and 40 innings of it) before he turned 19 y/o and out of the game entirely by age 24, Bethke used the prospect of having his whole life ahead of him to leave his native Nebraska behind and head for the oil rigs of the Gulf Coast. He found the paychecks rewarding and the work dangerous enough to feed the adrenaline rush of his shortened athletic life, but took that attitude a bit too far and before long had lost the gig due to too many incidents during his off-time spent in the bars of Mobile, Biloxi, and New Orleans. Still not yet thirty and looking to start again, Bethke drifted into commercial real estate sales where he finally found his niche. His success was boosted by his talents as a story-teller based mainly on tales from his previous two careers. His favorite for closing a deal was the one where he claimed to have met the songwriter Bob Crewe on a particularly wild night down in old New Orleans and was in fact the guy who had a fling with a hooker named Creole Lady Marmalade and therefore the was the real-life subject of the song. So what ever became of Brent Gaff?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Yeah, he's cheap-- he also comes with some serious cost. And it's not just because he like to yell slurs at homeless people and has the BMI of a dying Kirby Puckett (although each of these things is true). But at least he doesn't have a family history of diabetes. Oh wait! Otherwise, agreed on all accounts. It's not a bad gamble providing they aren't committed to starting him on a regular basis and I can't believe they'd stick to that no matter how many sweet things Amaro whispered in his agent's ear. Charlie Manual may play the dumb bumpkin on TV but I don't think he is one. And, yeah, Sandy may just win this waiting game with Hairston after all.

I like the catcher's total non-reaction, as if he sees bats flying at umps like once an inning or something. It's not a bad gamble for the Phils w/Young: 750K w/incentives that could go up to 3.5mil and a likely power increase considering the stadium he's headed to. Probably not where the former 1/1 draft pick expected to be entering his age 27 season and his fourth organization. Alas, a couple of on & off field incidents plus a few seasons of sub-.300 OBAs coupled with mediocre power, a bad glove and Ryan Howard-esque speed will do that to you.

Farmer Ted wrote: 25, 39, or 55? I think he's 55 at this point, or maybe even a bit older.

Several times Pedro has gone away but has yet to play for another MLB team during those absences. Perpetual Pedro indeed. I just hope his winter league team didn't over-use him. Maybe that's something we should check with Cashman about.

Speaking of which, we need some Ralph stories about Stan.

Ceetar wrote: Should I be watching Elementary? I've been giving it a try but, like Vic said, it's pretty much eh. It's essentially the Holmes story as filtered through 'HOUSE' -- which, when you consider that HOUSE was itself a re-ordered Sherlock Holmes, kind of brings it around full circle. Problem is that in the attempt to model this version of Sherlock Holmes on Greg House (right down to the self-centered obnoxiousness and the constant unshaven look) they've exaggerated the weak parts the earlier show while not hitting the high notes. Like if you think House pulled conclusions out of his ass wait'll you see this guy; but yet the show doesn't have near the humor of the early years in HOUSE.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Uh oh... watch out for Mr. InBetween! You just don't mess with Mr. In-Between

Pool A: Japan - China - Cuba - Brazil Pool B: Korea - Netherlands - Taipei - Australia Pool C: Venezuela - Puerto Rico - Dominican Republic - Spain Pool D: USA - Mexico - Italy - Canada USA Roster Mark Teixeira -- 1B -- Yankees Brandon Phillips 2B Reds Jimmy Rollins SS Phillies David Wright 3B Mets Joe Mauer C Twins Ryan Braun LF Brewers Adam Jones CF Orioles Giancarlo Stanton RF Marlins Ben Zobrist INF Rays Willie Bloomquist INF D-backs Shane Victorino OF Red Sox Jonathan Lucroy C Brewers J.P. Arencibia C Blue Jays R.A. Dickey SP Blue Jays Ryan Vogelsong SP Giants Derek Holland SP Rangers Kris Medlen SP Braves Craig Kimbrel RP Braves Heath Bell RP D-backs Chris Perez RP Indians Vinnie Pestano RP Indians Luke Gregerson RP Padres Glen Perkins RP Twins Steve Cishek RP Marlins Jeremy Affeldt RP Giants Tim Collins RP Royals Mitchell Boggs RP Cardinals And it's good timing for the Yanx that Jeter, ARod & Mariano don't have to fake injuries this year.

As in, over-the-top by John Goodman standards.

Denzel Washington is a really good pilot. He also has some really big problems. Co-stars include Don Cheadle in an understated role as the pilot union's lawyer, and John Goodman in an over-the-top role as Denzel's wild, running-buddy.