Frayed Knot

... well maybe not the toughest, but at least those who were recently labeled as "non-tender": Angels - Dallas McPherson, 3B A's - Kiko Calero, RHP; Jose Garcia, RHP Blue Jays - Josh Towers, RHP Mariners - John Parrish, LHP Orioles - Cory Doyne, RHP; Roberto Novoa, RHP Rangers - Nick Gorneault, OF; Akinori Otsuka, RHP Red Sox - Brendan Donnelly, RHP Royals - Emil Brown, OF Tigers - Chad Durbin, RHP Twins - Jason Tyner, OF White Sox - Andy Gonzalez, INF; Heath Phillips, LHP Yankees - T.J. Beam, RHP; Matt DeSalvo, RHP; Darrell Rasner, RHP; Bronson Sardinha, OF Astros - Adam Everett, SS Braves - Willie Harris, OF Brewers - Kevin Mench, OF; Matt Wise, RHP Cardinals - Aaron Miles, 2B Cubs - Mark Prior, RHP Dodgers - Mark Hendrickson, LHP Giants - Scott Munter, RHP Marlins - Miguel Olivo, C Mets - Johnny Estrada, C; Ben Johnson, OF; Juan Padilla, RHP Nationals - Nook Logan, OF; Mike O'Connor, LHP Padres - Jack Cassel, RHP; Morgan Ensberg, INF; Ryan Ketchner, LHP; Jason Lane, OF Pirates - Brad Eldred, 1B; Brian Rogers, RHP Reds - Jerry Gil, SS; Brad Salmon, RHP Rockies - Sean Barker, OF; Darren Clarke, RHP So all these guys are FAs at this point - a couple of which are interesting enough to be looked into. - The name Mark Prior certainly jumps out at you. - Otsuka was a decent reliever for a time. - Mensch as a RH bat off the bench?

Well ... he's still the same height he was earlier this year, but he did just sign a 5-year FA deal w/SF

The initial (and obviously small sample so far) reaction from Houston fans is that they don't like it one little bit -- especially, I guess, because SS isn't a yawning need of theirs so long as Everett is healthy again by April.

for a boatload (4 or 5) of prospects - including ... OF Luke Scott, RHP Matt Albers, LHP Troy Patton, 3B Mike Costanzo and perhaps another player, a person with knowledge of the talks has confirmed to the Houston Chronicle. Patton is the biggest prize as far as I can tell. Tejada is signed for another two years. Not sure if they intend to keep him at SS (where the defensively superior Adam Everett is recovering from whatever made him miss the 2nd half of last season) or maybe 3rd (where Ty Wigginton was playing last year) or something else.

MLB should be more interested in; - finding what kinds of organizational flaws (both league-wide and within individual teams) led them to miss and/or dismiss this issue for so long in the first place - continuing to improve the fractured mgmt/player relationship which kept testing from being on the bargaining table for so many years - and in working to stay on top of the testing/treatment programs as they move forward then in finding scapegoats and dishing dirt while pretending that this investigation puts the issue behind them.

This is hardly the first time GV has written about this subject. He tends to be a bit old-fashioned on these kinds of issues and is darn proud of it for the most part.

There's a lengthy preview (worth reading) over on ESPN.com by Howard Bryant - a guy who once wrote a book on steroids in sports, or steroids in baseball really since no one seems to care about its use anywhere else. Will Carroll at Baseball Prospectus gave a quickie take on it as well: The Mitchell Report has been delivered to the Office of the Commissioner. That is in line with things that I’ve been hearing about the release of the document, which many are targeting for Thursday. I’m hearing from various independent sources that press conferences are being arranged for the release, but that these will come on Friday. We’ll wait for MLB to make official announcements on these. The delivery of the final report can also start the clock on the leak of the document. Draft reports have been known to be in the hands of some writers for better than a month, with some versions focused on the ending recommendations and others as more of a chronology. It’s possible, even likely, that various versions will be ‘merged’ into the final document. Estimates on names - and let’s face it, the coverage and interest in this document is only in the names it will name, especially if they’re big names - go anywhere from a low of 40 to a high of 200. My guess? Just under 100. That number would indicate the the Mitchell Report did *not* have the Quest list that the government seized as part of the BALCO investigation, or at least did not publish it. (I’m told that Mitchell has called it “fruit of the poison tree” and argued against its inclusion.) Howard Bryant's breakdown of the document at ESPN is well worth reading. He’s absolutely right that trainers and conditioning coaches seemed to bear a stronger burden during the investigation, one that will likely be carried over to the final report. I’ll admit an affinity for them but they’re an easy target, one that many will wrongly think are replaceable. It’s a day that many have been waiting for and now it’s at hand. How dark a day or how bright the disinfecting sunlight is will be known soon. I agree with Carroll in that most of the interest around this will be in what names are named although personally that aspect has only a passing interest to me. After all, it's not like I'm going to treat players NOT on the report as if they've been proven clean. And, at the same time, I'm not going to automatically disown all those who are fingered since not only are there different degrees of guilt (something that's almost sure to get lost in all the breathless gossip) but it's going to be tough to publicly flog someone for competing in a legue where 20%?, 40%?, maybe 60% of his competitors were too. I don't want to sweep this whole thing under the rug, but I'm much more interested in the future of this topic than I am in trying to 'un-ring the bell' so to speak while pretending we can correct the past.

Edgy DC wrote: Is the title a reference to the Velvet Underground's "Heroin," in which Lou feels "just like Jesus' son"? If that was the inspiration it's not acknowledged as such in the flick.

Sure. That the Mets have been stringently minding their (bargaining) table manners doesn't look to be in question at this point. It just seems to be all the rage right now for various folks to use that fact as a jumping off point to explain all matters affecting the NYM farm system whether the cause-and-effect fits or not. Linking the inability to land Santana for instance (something which may or may not be true) because they haven't gone "over slot" since Pelfrey (two whole drafts!) is jamming a square peg into a round hole. The difference between the "star prospects" of the Met & Yankee systems right now is that the 3rd and 9th drafted Humber & Pelfrey haven't progressed as quickly or as well as the trio of Hughes, Chamberlain & Kennedy (2 mid-20s picks plus a 41st) - a condition which may be temporary btw and, even if not, is totally unrelated to who did or did not adhere to a bonus structure. Maybe the rocket-like rise of those picks was the result of better scouting & foresight on the Yanx' part or maybe it was just good fortune (or some combo of the two) but it's folly to imply that if only the Mets had chosen different players in the last two drafts (while not having 1st round picks) that those players would be on the same level and that that info was knowable at the time. 37 pitchers (including Kennedy & Chamberlain) were picked prior to Kevin Mulvey in his draft; is the implication that there were known aces still leftover that they should have grabbed instead but were simply unwilling to pay for? If so I'd like to know who those players were because no one seems willing or able to identify them, even with the benefit of two years of hindsight.

Mackey Sasser finally getting it together

I rented and saw this flick a couple years back although I don't remember what drew me to it at the time. I too thought the 'Sweet Pea' scene was hot I too didn't get the movie itself

metirish wrote: I think I understand this, my question is what are the penelties if any for a team that does not adhere to the signing bonus ceilings? None, except for dirty looks from Selig. ]And while I'm at it, "The Mets over-value their prospects" wasn't doing much for me either -- meaning as if the Mets were significantly different than other teams to warrant headlines explaining why trades aren't made I've never quite bought the notion that the famed NY media bias extends to prospects. If there's any place that a classic big league town it's NYC. Most of the outlets here have paid virtually no attention to the farm systems (beyond the occasional uber-prospect) until very recently. And it's not like the national media spends its time talking about minor league or amateur ball.

Not that I don't think there's some truth to this subject, given the Wilpons' friendship with Selig and Omar owing his big break to Uncle Bud and all. But a coupla problems: - this is really starting to take on the air of piling on. One source opines that the Mets have been "under-drafting" due to slavish devotion to the bonus numbers and then six more report the same thing in rapid succession as if the first one established it as confirmed fact. - mostly it sounds like an attempt to explain the widely reported "dearth of prospects" to nail BIG trades as repeated ad nauseum in recent weeks. That Humber got hurt and Pelfrey is (so far) not living up to his draft position and amateur promise is the main reason why there wasn't a not young'un or two to entice the likes of those holding pitchers in their deck. - that the last few NYM drafts have started with 45th or so pick (Mulvey) and the 60th-something (Smith) is another reason. Both have done well to date and to think those slots should have produced more in this time-frame ridiculously unrealistic. - I may be wrong on this but I don't remember any buzz amid the '06 draft saying, 'OMG, the Yanx were able to land those studs Kennedy & Chamberlain!!!' (I'm not even sure if either was an over-slot signing). That those two progressed faster and farther than anyone had a right to expect in their first full pro year is great for the Yanx but let's not act like that was pre-ordained, particularly from a team that was on something like a 1-for-14 streak in having 1st round picks even reach the major leagues. The Mets in the same time-frame saw top picks Wright, Heilman, Milledge, Kazmir, Pelfrey & Humber reach. - and finally I've STILL yet to hear even one name that the Mets c/should have drafted but passed on due to bonus demands. Maybe there's one or two out there but the critics sure seem to be keeping them a secret.

MFS62 wrote: There's a guy named Poe who broadcast for the Jacksonville team this past year ... and has already been in contact again with the Mets for this opening. If he gets it, I'll tell you my source. And if he doesn't will you speak of it 'nevermore'?

We're worried about Valadius, we feel he may crack under questioning.

Keep in mind also that you're already taking a catcher at ~$13mil/per who makes outs at a considerably greater rate than the departing Paul LoDuca. And while, yeah, the rest of his game is better all-around than PLD, he's no longer the power threat he once was as he went from a 3-season run of 87 HRs to just 28 over the last 3 (and looks smaller than he once did ... Hmmmmm!) So unless he's not only agreeing to only a conditional extension but also to one that pays him at around half the rate of the current one (for his likely to decline age 38 & 39 seasons) then I'm not even sure the conditional route is a great deal for the team that gets him. And while I don't object to Dontrelle I also don't think he should be treated as a #1, something he really only was for one season (2005)

]What's overlooked in the I-Rod deal is that the Mets would own his contract for only a little bit Not overlooked at all as it's specifically adressed above. And if he were gettable at only 1 year that would be a whole lot more palatable than if he were intent on forcing a 2 or 3 year extention out of it, especially since we already know he's not the player he once was.

Last [u:9835df6dd5]two[/u:9835df6dd5] years for Willis = IPs down, hits up, Ks down, BBs up, HRs allowed up, ERA up I'd fall considerably short of saying "Stud"

Register is a 25 y/o (next Spring) RHP who's been in AA Tulsa for the last two years.

And Dontrelle was lousy last year too. Also, Pudge has a no-trade clause which players in his spot frequently use to try to force extensions onto existing deals in order to sign off on a trade. As always, it'll all depend on the details.

Well it would depend on what the details of the deal are ... but do keep in mind that Pudge is a fraction of the defensive stalwart he was in years past and has racked up sub-.300 OBAs in two of the last three seasons. 2005-2007 K/BB = 275/46 and last year alone it was 96/9

I assume that the order for this thing is the same as next year's draft (minus any FA machinations) which would put the Mets in the 22nd slot. There's rarely a lot of 'buzz' to this thing and if there is it's generally at the very top. BA takes a look at those potential top guys which includes several recent top draft picks who haven't lived up to their amateur promise. They will also blog along w/the draft as it happens.

I think even referring to those at rumor sites like that one or say RotoWorld as "writers" is probably stretching things a bit. What I did hear (radio) was that the Mets had previously inquired about Dontrelle but were told he was unavailable and that even if he were they weren't about to deal him within the division. But the Tigers are under no such restrictions and so considered spinning him off after they completed the trade, including one where they could package him with a catcher for the back-stop starved Mets and get out from under the final year of Ivan the Catcher's contract. THAT, of course, is where the speculation (ie; making shit up) comes into play. The Tiggers would be stuck w/o a catcher if they dealt him so Schneider's name comes into play. The other names are just a case of rounding up the usual suspects that you can only get from "insider" sites like that one ... or from 90% of the people on the street.

Yowzers that's a lot of cash for a guy coming off a bad year!! So does he go to a corner spot or do they try to dump their last bad CF contract (Juan Pierre) on someone?

The lack of major movement at the winter meetings is most likely keeping some headline writers chomping at the bit in frustration. Just think of some of the possibilities: - If the Orioles ever succeed in getting rid of their top pitcher the 'Baltimore Sun' could alert readers with a banner reading; BYE-BYE BEDARD-IE - The city landing Oakland's top guy could scream out; WELCOME TO THE HAREN HOUSE - Omar completing the much-rumored deal for Orlando's half-brother would be greeted with; AND IT SHALL BE LIVAN - And whoever finally lands Johan Santana could lead with; OYE COME-ON DOWN OK, that's all I got.