Frayed Knot

1980RANKINGSPOINTSPLAYER30Lee Mazzilli28Steve Henderson28Pat Zachry27Jeff Reardon26Joel Youngblood25Claudell Washington25Mark Bomback24Neil Allen21Doug Flynn21Craig Swan20Ray Burris19John Stearns18Mike Jorgensen17Frank Tavares16Eliot Maddox15Pete Falcone15Tom Hausman12Alex Trevino12Dyar Miller11Jose Morales10Hubie Brooks9Mookie Wilson8Wally Backman7Ed Glynn6Roy Lee Jackson5John Pacella4Bill Almon3Dan Norman2Ron Hodges1Mike Scott

Assume that yours is correct.

Boston - and prolly the Cubs - want him as a SS which was supposedly his preference. Either he really likes the old hometown (born in the D.R. but rised in NYC, I was at a Met/Astro game when he played w/them and he had a big 'ol rooting section right near us) or the Mets are blowing other offers out of the water.

1979RANKINGSPOINTSPLAYER30Lee Mazzilli29Craig Swan28Joel Youngblood27Steve Henderson26Neil Allen25John Stearns24Pete Falcone23Skip Lockwood22Doug Flynn21Frank Tavares20Tom Hausman19Richie Hebner18Willie Montenez17Kevin Kobel16Andy Hassler15Doc Ellis14Eliot Maddox13Alex Trevino12Ed Glynn11Dale Murray10Ed Kranepool9Dan Norman8Mike Scott7Pat Zachry6Jesse Orosco5Juan Berenguer4Jeff Reardon3Ron Hodges2Dwight Bernard1Kelvin Chapman

Dammit, I told youse guys he'd find us!! Ummm, no new addy.

I agree that the Durham deal was good, but it looks at odds next to the one for Roberts. Durham = 2 x $7 .. 2Bman, plays pretty much every day, had 63 XBHs!! (26 HRs), comes off a season w/.293/.360/.538, probably declining glove & speed skills 35 y/o last week Roberts = 3 x $6 ... a mostly corner OFer (some CF) w/33 XBHs (2 HRs), near identical (non-SLG) stats .293/.360/.393, still real good speed (49 of 55 SBs) 35 y/o in May I like that first deal a whole lot more than the second. Roberts has been a patch-in player for years at this point (SF will be 5th team since '01) so I'm at a loss to figure the need to lock him up to nearly age 38. Aurilia too I could take or leave but, as mentioned, not sure where he's playing or how he rates a 2-year deal.

You also need a wee bit of perspective here. The example (and a theoretical one at that) that KC is talking about involves a scenario where Pedro might decide that he can't come back from a fairly serious injury & surgery. I agree that the odds against that are real long but that's still the length of a Piazza HR away from suggesting that Glavine c/should have done the same back when he was hitting a rough patch for part of a season 4 years back while trying to adjust to the new Questec/K-Zone. Kinda similar to the one where you were likening Seaver/Koos/Ryan to Humber/Pelfrey/Bannister and Hook/Craig to Pedro/Glavine. Analogy by gross exaggeration doesn't always make the point stronger. In any case, it turns out that Glavine is NOT going to be making the kind of "Ace" money that his detractors feared (might be half to 2/3 of what Zito/Schmidt get) nor is the deal the kind of lengthy one that makes teams reluctant to pull the plug if/when he bombs.

This book is now out (as of like yesterday) in paperback as: [u:f4a311a312]Pedro, Carlos (and Carlos) and Omar[/u:f4a311a312] doing a common paperback thing and adding onto the original with a new chapter or three on whatever updates that have occured since the hardcover's publication.

Mets offer arbitration to relievers Roberto Hernandez & Guillermo Mota, chose NOT to offer to Cliff Floyd & Chris Woodward. Robo (type A) has been linked to signing w/Cleveland so this sounds like a way to steal draft picks Mota (type is an interesting choice. He was making some $3mil last season so any NYM offer would have to be within 80% of that. Seems to me that if they do want him back they'd be better off negotiating a new settlement that would take his mixed (at best) results over the last 2 years into consideration as well as the fact that he's going to miss some 30% of the upcoming season. No surpirse on Cliff since they'd risk the possibility of locking themselves into a semi-expensive one-year deal for a player they've already replaced. No surprise either on Woodward. None of the lists I saw mentioned Bradford - although it seems like they were dealing with [u:920fe18641]remaining[/u:920fe18641] FAs only. As a Type-A FA I assume they did the seemingly automatic thing and took the free draft picks just as I assume the Giants did the same thing with Alou.

It's the same thing. Credit the $3mil buyout at the beginning and it's $10.5 for year 1 and then $6 with incentives up to $10 for year 2 Or, the way I put it, it's $7.5 for year 1, then $9 w/incentives up to $13 for the 2nd year. Or just a straight $10.5 for one year if the option isn't triggered. So, however you want to look at it, the Mets are paying him somewhere between $7.5 to $17.5mil more than they would have had they opted not to sign him at all because even kicking him to the curb would have cost them the $3mil they owed him for his '06 giveback.

Just to create a sub-topic away from the ongoing arguments in the other thread: From the espn link: Glavine's deal calls for a $7.5 million salary next year and contains a $9 million player option for 2008 that would become guaranteed if he pitches 160 innings next season, when he will be 41. The price of the option would increase by $1 million for each additional 10 innings up to a maximum price of $13 million. If the option isn't exercised, he gets a $3 million buyout. Glavine has the right to decline the option if it becomes guaranteed. He also gets a full no-trade clause. A couple of ways to look at this if you're really humg up on how much he's being paid for all this: 1) it's $7.5mil for this coming season plus another $3mil eventually whether he pitches in '08 or not. That $3mil is essentially a payback of the money that Glavine gave back to the Mets in '06 to be returned as deferred payment. 2) If Glavine pitches well and triggers the option (either by choice or min IPs) as well as reaches all the incentives, it becomes a 2-year deal for as much as $20.5 Glavine was doing the phone-interview tour late this afternoon (on FAN radio & SNY TV and maybe others) which I caught part of; - said he had talked to Cox and his agent to Schurholz but no offer had been made and not sure if one would have been eventually - isn't committed yet to calling this his final year (obviously w/the option) but implied that if things go well this season (ie. gets #300 and team wins WS) it would make it easy to ride off into the sunset after '07. Of course he'd be potentially leaving some money on the table if he did. - it sounded as if he came to NY thinking it would be for the length of the deal and no more. Now he probably also thought he'd have #300 by this point so it would be easy to either retire or go back to Atlanta, but he added that he grew to like it here after not expecting to consider it beyond the orignial deal. Then added the usual stuff about really liking the team and Omar & Jeff W. ... yyybbb.

It shouldn't. You can't, on the one hand, claim that teams don't drop players with big salaries and then dismiss it when an example comes by showing that they do. Matsui was kept on for two+ years on account of various reasons; injuries, a hope that his ship would right itself (he showed glimpses of it the 1st year), a lack of suitable alternatives. Of course contract terms factor into decisions, but when Valentin took over the job last year (weeks after fans were calling for HIM to be dumped) the Mets quickly ate nearly $8mil on Kaz's final year rather than keep him in there after a better replacement was apparent. Similar to the way the team did with Cedeno (2 yrs & ~ $10mil), Ordonez ($6-ish) and Bonilla (also ~ $6) just to name 4 examples from one team over the last few years.

* 4 4-team divisions: HATE IT!!!! Not only are there too few in-division games and other stuff already mentioned, but with no Wild card there'd be almost no pennant races left. Look at the current NFL; with still almost 1/3 of their season to go most of the divisions are already in the bag and the "extra" teams are the only races left. Think about having that scenario for 50 or so games. Making the divisions so small reduces the odds of ever having 2 good teams in any one division and the lopsided in/out of division ratio makes it likely that you'll eventually have a sub-.500 winner. I also ain't wild about expanding at this point, particularly if its only purpose is to make some kind of pretty-looking realignment plan.

"This one time in Glavine camp ... "

The Glavine camp is apparently saying decision by Monday.

1978RANKINGSPOINTSPLAYER30John Stearns29Lee Mazzilli28Craig Swan27Willie Montenez26Pat Zachry25Steve Henderson24Kevin Kobel23Joel Youngblood22Skip Lockwood21Eliot Maddox20Jerry Koosman19Dale Murray18Len Randle17Tim Foli16Mardie Cornejo15Doug Flynn14Nino Espinosa13Bobby Valentine12Mike Bruhert11Bob Myrick10Bruce Boisclair9Ron Hodges8Ed Kranepool7Tom Hasuman6Dwight Bernard5Dan Norman4Tom Grieve3Ken Henderson2Sergio Ferrer1Paul Siebert

]and we've got enough young arms who proven they're ready for a full shot at a starting role to acquire another Heilman, Kazmir, Humber in exchange for Glavine. 1) We get draft picks for Glavine only if we offer - and he subsequently declines - arbitration. I suspect (although don't know) that there may be an existing agreement where they won't offer arb (not an uncommon side deal). IOW, losing him does not equal automatic top picks. 2) Even if we do recieve picks and he winds up signing w/Atlanta, the picks are more likely to be in the mid-30s to mid-50s range overall*. Still nice picks to have but a far cry from the Kazmir, Pelfrey, Humber, Heilman territory which were all top 20 picks (15th, 9th, 3rd & 18th I believe) and very unlikely to produce the same caliber of player. * (Braves finished in the bottom half of all teams meaning that their 1st round pick is protected from being lost. We'd instead get their 2nd round pick -- or maybe 3rd if they sign someone else; see the 'Bradford' thread for more explanation -- in addition to the 'sandwich' pick.)

So I'm going to assume - unless I hear from you otherwise - that everything posted so far is accurate.I'll continue to post these a couple per day so just check them as they come.

1977RANKINGSPOINTSPLAYER30Len Randle29Steve Henderson28Jerry Koosman27John Milner26John Stearns25Nino Espinosa24Lee Mazzilli23Tom Seaver22Bruce Boisclair21Ed Kranepool20Mike Vail19Skip Lockwood18Jon Matlack17Joel Youngblood16Roy Staiger15Felix Millan14Pat Zachry13Dave Kingman12Jerry Grote11Bud Harrelson10Craig Swan9Ron Hodges8Bob Myrick7Bob Apodaca6Doug Flynn5Mike Phillips4Bobby Valentine3Leo Foster2Joe Torre1Rick Baldwin

Just when you think the conversation can't possibly get any dumber ... and then along comes Jones

Well Balt can't lose their 1st round pick because they're a bottom-half club, and someone other team must have lost a higher ranked FA to the O's so they'll get the 2nd rounder. The kicker is that we'll also get a "sandwich" pick - an extra pick between rounds 1 & 2 (prolly #35 or so) - which will be a whole lot higher than the 3rd rounder (prolly around #80-something)

Well, throwing Pedro, Zito & El Duque into the mix makes the scenario a whole lot different than the orignial statement of wanting to go with a rotation made up strictly of those 5 untested pitchers (Bannister, Humber, Pelfrey, Perez, Maine). No one is saying not to give any of all of them a shot, only that a rotation where the majority have [u:4a34e9cef7]less than 100 ML IPs combined[/u:4a34e9cef7] isn't a recipe for success. And the problem w/saying that saving Glavine money for someone else is that someone else halfway decent is likely to cost in the range as Glavine. Lilly & Meche, for instance, are being talked about in the 4x$10 range. I'm open to alternatives, I just don't think that the simply swapping him for Mr. N. E. Body is automatically a net plus.

Except that you know it won't be a pleasant call.

cooby wrote: ... Hey, maybe if I vote for Fran, I would get a call from him! If Fran gets in on account of your vote you're gonna get a call from me!

="iramets"]I'd have been comfortable going into the 2007 season with a rotation of Maine and Perez and Bannister and Pelfrey and Humber You do realize that this backs are absolutely ready for prime-time 'win now' offense with 5 unproven, or barely proven, hurlers with even worse in reserve don't you? ALL spent time in the minors this year and several in various rehabs (injuries: they're not just for seniors anymore) and they totaled just 32 starts this season (approx the amount ONE pitcher should have) and only Perez had any coming into the year. Specifically: - Maine has part of one good season under his belt and can scarely be considered a sure thing - Bannister was injured most of the season and has just 6 ML starts under his belt while giving up 1.5 baserunners/inning - Humber has never started an ML game in his life (2 IP) is coming off major surgery and probably won't be ready for the full-time innings required of a year-long regular starter - Pelfrey had 4 ML starts with mixed effectiveness (at which point he lost the spot) in what was his first year as a pro at any level - and Perez blew hot & cold w/streaks of wildness while searching for the form that once made him exciting 3 sesons ago I'm all for giving "the kids" shots too. But depending on a whole crop of them to man your staff is a helluva lot more risky than giving a 1-year deal to a future HoF pitcher who's never been injured and is coming off a good season. The White House press corps hot on the trail of a scandal has fewer questions than the above crew.