Frayed Knot

Well cutting him loose and then re-signing him on the open market is a way to do that and this agreement appears to make doing that easier by eliminating the cut-off point where teams not offering arbitration could no longer talk to their former player. The 20% rule would still remain (I presume) for teams retaining their own guy w/o ever exposing him to outside bidding.

that Billy Buckner couldn't make the play He had to beat Mookie to the base but he wasn't gonna win the race So let this be a sign to you 'bout the game you've known for all these years ...

Nothing too exciting here (is there ever?) C Yunir Garcia C Sandy Martinez C Kelly Stinnett 1B Tagg Bozied 1B Jose Offerman 2B Enrique Cruz 3B Edgardo Alfonzo SS Chris Basak OF Elvis Cruz OF Jacob Cruz OF Rashad Eldridge OF Jonel Pacheco OF Jorge Padilla RHP Rafael Cova RHP Kevin Deaton RHP Bryan Edwards RHP Tim Lavigne RHP Marcelo Perez RHP Miguel Pinango RHP Orlando Roman RHP Lino Urdaneta RHP William Vazquez RHP Brandon Wilson RHP Mitch Wylie LHP Rich Rundles FAs from all teams

Saying that a player had surgery for "tennis elbow" isn't very descriptive.

Nymr83 wrote: they get the 30 million back if they cant reah a deal, or at least thats my understanding. Correct.

]The posting fee might go as high as $30 million. Boras is his agent, so I think he'll get close to, if not more than, the $15/yr deal Scott got for Chan Ho Park. He might sign for 4 years. The posting fee is one thing since you've got to top the other bids in order to even get in the game. But the per/year salary is something else. It's tough to figure that it'll get up to $15mil because pitcher & agent would have no way of playing one team off against another. The winning team could simply say no, get their posting fee back and move on to 'Plan B'. The only way of getting the team to up their offer is to threaten to play in Japan one more year and do it all over again next year when he'd be a true FA - but if they thought that was a better strategy then they wouldn't be trying to make the move now.

Well, considering that none of us has seen more than a few WBC innings from him it's kinda tough to answer that question. But Callis from BA - who's not a scout himself but certainly talks to many of them about exactly this sort of thing - says "without hesitation" that he'd take Matsuzaka "over Zito or Schmidt or any other pitcher who will be on the free-agent market this offseason". So if the money is the same ...

Baseball America's Jim Callis weighs in: The bottom line is that Matsuzaka has a lively 90-96 mph fastball, a plus-plus slider, a splitter and a changeup. He has dominated in Japan and he dominated in the World Baseball Classic, where he was the MVP. In eight years in Japan, he has led the Pacific League in strikeouts four times, victories three times, ERA twice and won the Sawamura Award (the Japanese Cy Young Award) once. ... He's also 26, so he should have a lot of pitching ahead of him. Without hesitation, I would take Matsuzaka over Zito or Schmidt or any other pitcher who will be on the free-agent market this offseason. Similarly, if Matsuzaka does come over, he has to rank as the game's best pitching prospect. His stuff is in the same class as Philip Hughes (Yankees) or Homer Bailey (Reds), and he has proven himself at a higher level. It could cost $20 million to $30 million to win the rights to negotiate with Matsuzaka and at least twice that to sign him. Every big-budget team is expected to at least explore that possibility, and he's worth more to a club that doesn't already have a Japanese star because of the new revenue it could generate from Japanese TV and advertising rights. It's just a guess, but I could see him winding up with the Rangers, who need pitching in the worst way and never have been afraid to spend exorbitantly on Scott Boras clients.

[u:uz8r82o2]Baseball Prospectus[/u:uz8r82o2] checks out some Hawaii League progress: 1B Mike Carp, North Shore Honu (Hawaii Winter League, Mets) Carp had a very good year in the High-A Florida State League, batting .287/.379/.450 for St. Lucie. Not eye-popping numbers, but after considering the league, scout appreciation for his size and pretty swing, the fact that Carp just turned 20 at the end of June, and his hitting ten home runs in his final 41 games, things start to look a little rosier. Carp's winter season in Hawaii started with a 0-for-10 run, but he's batting .400 since, and .286/.405/.457 overall. Making it as a first baseman is the toughest road for any position player prospect, as there's no flexibility defensively if things turn sour, but Carp is on roll--one he hopes to continue next year in Double-A.

Finally got around to hacking mine off Friday night ... hack being the operative word here. One thing I discovered in the year or two since I last had a beard full-time was that the trimmer I had used back then was no longer working (I had been shaping this one along the cheekbones & neck but not for length so I hadn't noticed the trimmer's death). I wound up needing to attack it with a pair of scissors for a while in order to get in down to a length a razor could handle. That sucker grew a lot faster & bushier in just 3 weeks than I had remembered ... also a lot whiter. So, if nothing else, the timing of it all spared me from a bunch of comments at the extended family outing I was at over the weekend.

]If the draft were to go away, what's to stop the Yankees from hoarding minor league talent over the next decade? One answer would be to look at the present distribution of all this un-draftable int'l talent and see if it's concentrated onto a select few teams. I think it's clear that that's not at all the case. Even the small handful of high-priced talent that came fully matured and ready-made from Japan or Cuba has have spotty track records at best and, as I said before, the smaller revenue clubs are quite willing to pass up those big budget items and would prefer to do without the "help" being offered them in the form of internationalizing the draft.

Rogers leaves after 8 with a 3-0 lead. Todd Jones gets the first two outs quickly ... then coughs up 4 straight baserunners ... before getting Y.F. Molina to ground out with the bases loaded 3-1 is your final, 1-1 is the series.

Meanwhile, Kenny Rogers is in the midst of dealing a 3rd straight playoff gem - he's 1-hitting the Cards thru 7 - which is 3 more than some thought he had in him.

Coupla things: * MLB wants to eliminate tying draft picks to FA rules so it can 'de-link' the draft from coming under the scrutiny of the player's association. As long as picks are tied in somehow to player compensation, the PA gets a say in how the draft is conducted. * Bonus money for most picks are already subject to some sort of "slotting" arrangements. There's nothing mandatory and exceptions are made but few picks are able to determine their draft positions. * Those favoring the inclusion of Int'l players in the amateur draft often do so in the name of smaller-market teams, but it's those same SM-teams who are quite adamant about not wanting your "help". They see those undraftable territories as prime real estate that can be ripe for a team with a bit of entreprenurial know-how. With a draft, there'd be no incentive to go into those countries, beat the bushes for un-tapped talent, and build acadamies to teach them if there is then only a 1-in-30 chance of getting these players you uncover. Sure, there are teams who will miss out on the occasional high-ticket Int'l player, but the smaller teams are willing to pass on the supposed quality (most haven't worked anyway) in favor of getting the quantity. Many think that including Puerto Rico in the draft (late '80s) helped turn off the flow of talent from that island for similar reasons

]Can we put the AL is better than the NL myth to bed now? No, because the AL beat the NL during interleague this year at rates roughly equivelent to Johnson beating Goldwater. The outcome of this series - and especially one game from the series - shouldn't be used to either erase what's gone on all season. That said, there are various over-generalizations that are going on with various fan and media types on this subject. One is this assumption that this lop-sidedness has been true for years. It hasn't; prior to this season, it was the NL which held a slight edge over the first 9 years of IL play. Another is treating the WS (or, even worse, All-Star games) as a true measure of league strength. Not only does this takes the idea a 'small sample' to an extreme but it's also just one team vs another. In-season IL play is so much better because it's ~240 games/year and pits the good, bad & ugly from each league against each other.

What BP has been saying (at least some pieces I've seen) is that Chavez 'this year' has been cumulatively better than what Cliff had been providing (again, this season) so that Cliff being mostly unavailable for the playoffs was pretty much a good thing for the Mets. I don't think they're trying to claim that a swap like that has always, and will always, be so positive.

="seawolf17"]According to today's Newsday, it's $14.5 million on the team option, $7 (or $8, I don't recall) million on the player option. The buyout is $3 million. So worst case, he gets only $3 million from the Mets. Remember that Glavine agreed to a restructuring of his deal which reduced his salary by $3mil for this past year. So essentially the $3mil buyout is a way to give that money back if he chooses NOT to sign here again. If he does strike a deal that $3mil will, in effect, be part of the contract (so the $14.5 which seems so high is really "only" $11.5) Even still, that team option seems high and the player option kind of low. What this always sounded like to me was that the two sides purposely placed the options at the extremes of where his '07 salary might fall and what I suspect will happen is that, if Glavine decides to stay, the two sides will likely agree to a number that's somewhere between those two points.

KC wrote: I'm glad to see so many rally behind Willie here, I thought he took too much heat last year a bunch of times for a first year manager on this board. I agree. It always seemed to me, probably due to his MFY roots and lack of a managerial track record, that some peeps tended to assume a kind of general dim-wittedness from him rather than starting from a more neutral POV - putting Willie in the position of needing to prove otherwise before he was accepted.

Yeah, I guess you're right. I was thinking that NOT bunting leads to more big innings because, by not giving away an out, you increase the odds of getting those eternally successful innings where a 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th runs are tacked on because you still have the out to play with that you didn't give away earlier, and that those kind of innings would be pretty much irrelevent to this scenario since the game would end with run #3. But, you're right, to get to that 4th, 5th, etc run, you'd have already reached the magic 3rd run. So we pretty much stay at: * Less than 2 runs (Loss): NO Bunt = 57.8%; Successful Bunt = 59.0%; UNsuccessful Bunt = 73.5% * Exactly 2 runs (Tie): NO Bunt = 16.5%; Succ Bunt = 21.8%; UNsucc Bunt = 11.0% * 3 or More (Win): No Bunt = 25.6%; Succ Bunt = 19.2%; UNsucc Bunt = 15.4% In any case, these numbers are generic (MLB 1999-2001) and would rise and fall due to specific conditions. Theoretically at least, they'd be even higher with hitters like Reyes, LoDuca & Beltran due up, but they would do so for all options.

Rechecking the numbers I posted in the leadoff post on this thread, the edge shifts more towards the favor of bunting than I originally posted The higher odds I showed of scoring [u:2d33a85028]'2 or More' by NOT bunting[/u:2d33a85028] is somewhat skewed because it includes the higher odds of the team having BIG innings - like 4 runs or more - which, in this case, wouldn't happen. What you really want to look at is the odds of scoring [u:2d33a85028]exactly 2 or 3 runs[/u:2d33a85028] to either tie or win the game. 1st & 2nd/0 outs: 2 runs = 16.5%, 3 runs = 12.7%, Total = 29.2% 2nd & 3rd/1 out: 2 runs = 21.8%, 3 runs = 10.1%, Total = 31.9% So you do a decent job at increasing the odds of tying the game, somewhat reduce the odds of winning it outright, and slightly increase the total odds of doing either. Now that 1st case takes the starting point into consideration, meaning that it includes those cases where teams both bunted AND didn't bunt. The 2nd assumes that your bunt attempt would have been successful - something that doesn't always happen. Then the question for those opting for the bunt becomes WHO you would have sent up? - Woodward? maybe ... Anyone ever seen him try? - A-Hernandez? I've already heard many declare that he's a good bunter although I seem to recall him looking bad the only time I saw him. I think it's often just assumed that all speedy, MI-types can bunt, but any answer is probably based on a small sample. - a pitcher, most likely Glavine Other factors weighing in FOR a bunt: - Wet field and the possibility that the defense screws up the play thus loading the base w/0 outs. - decent speed at 2nd (Val), good speed at 1st (Endy) AGAINST: - Good fielders at 3rd and behind the plate (the fielders of many bunts) - replacing Cliff with any of the above virtually SCREAMS to the Cards that the bunt is on, making it easier for them to defense.

Carlos Lee warning: He's fat, slow, and a really bad fielder. And when you consider that he was basically an out-of-shape DH-type while still in his 20's (just turned 30 this past summer) and that any FA contract is going to take him towards age 35, I'd be very wary of dishing out big bucks contracts to him if I'm an NL team.

And now that our season's over (moment of silence) ... it's never too early to start contemplating this year's rankings project!! Going to be an interesting year to analyze. Hitters should dominate the top of the list over the pitchers. But a lot of good 'partial-year' guys - Duaner, Nady, Mota, Perez, El Duque, and even Pedro for that matter - have to be balanced among some full-season guys who didn't contribute all that much like Franco, Woodward & Castro For any newbies who haven't seen this before and want to participate; - we rank the top 30 2006 Mets as far as their contributions to this season: ranked from the best (30) down to least (1) although, with 49 different 2006 Mets, there'll be 19 players who are going to wind up even below the guy in 30th place - Participation isn't mandatory (nothing is around here) but you can submit your own list or just critique the submissions of others. We eventually come up with some sort of consensus from everything submitted. - participants are free to choose any method you want to come up with your answer; from strict statistical analysis to pure gut reaction to anywhere in between ... just be prepared to defend and explain your choices, or even adjust them if swayed by the arguments of others - post-season performance SHOULD be considered in your list, although to what degree is your choice - and, in case you haven't figured it out already, the results of this will combine with the other years to contribute to the order of players who accompany your posting totals (see; 'Rankings for Dummies' thread) The roster of choices: [u:bubz5o8r]Position Players (22) Sorted by Plate Appearances[/u:bubz5o8r]: Reyes - Wright - Delgado - Beltran - LoDuca Valentin - Chavez - Floyd - Nady - Woodward Milledge - Franco - Castro - Matsui - Green Tucker - A Hernandez - Marrero - Ledee - DeFelice Stinnett - Diaz [u:bubz5o8r]Pitchers (27) Sorted by Innings Pitched[/u:bubz5o8r]: Glavine - Trachsel - Martinez - OHernandez - Maine Heliman - Oliver - Wagner - Bradford - Feliciano Sanchez - Soler - Bell - Bannister - Perez Williams - Julio - Pelfrey - Zambrano - RHernandez Mota - Lima - Gonzalez - Ring - Owens Fortunado - Humber

I'm going to feel like rolfing every time I see Yadier Molina from now on.

DocTee wrote: N-D should NOT be a starter. AGREED!! Met fans may tend to fall in love with guys like him for all the over-achieving/underdog reasons, but they also need to realize that he hit 4 HRs in nearly 400 plate appearances which just isn't going to cut it as a full-time corner OFer EVEN IF he doesn't suddenly change back into a pumpkin. I like the hell out of Cliff and it would truly suck if that K-looking was his last AB in a NYM uniform, but him as a once and future Met will be a tough sell. First, he has to prove he's not only healthy but also that he has a reasonable chance of remaining so. At that point, he'd almost certainly have to accept a reduced rate/1-year deal to stay here with only vague promises of playing time ... and, if he truly is demonstrably healthy and ready to go, someone else will almost certainly give him a better/longer offer which we should be very leery to match.

I haven't decided yet. Sometimes I just start watching these things hoping for nothing more than a good series to evolve and I unconsciously find myself pulling for one side over the other. Prolly leaning towards the Tiggers. I'll usually root for the NL team but; - I have trouble rooting for 83-win teams to wear the crown - Detroit could "use this one" a lot more than StL - getting a bit sick of the Cards and LaRussa always coming up short [bad thought]FOX is going to play up the LaRussa/Leyland friendship, mentor/student thing until we're all sick of both of them. They were so all over Leyland as the cuddly story during the '97 WS (was that FOX back then?) that they almost forgot to mention that there were actual players on his team doing hitting and pitching stuff[/bad thought]