Frayed Knot

Ceetar wrote: I wasn't talking QOs, more about Fowler and say Heyward. It seems weird to specifically have an opt-out only in the most competitive free agent class. It feels like something is up. Opt-outs are found among the top FAs contracts because they're the ones who can swing them in negotiations and they tend to see them as a win-win. If they continue to perform at an upper level then they get to go FA again, and if not they still have the original guaranteed money from the original deal. It's like no-trade clauses; EVERY player would like one but only the best positioned in negotiations get one. As far as the floor/ceiling stuff goes, the clubs are never going to agree to a floor (and certainly not one which start at the current average) and will point to recent history like Houston's where a floor wouldn't have allowed them to break down in order to (successfully) build up again (or it would certainly make such a route much tougher and longer). The NFL works with a floor/hard-ceiling system but they need to there because so few meaningful players ever get to the FA stage. Also, the players are currently pursuing a lawsuit because they claim **SURPRISE** that the owners are underreporting revenue and therefore the cheating the players out of their share.

So if they are making proportionally less the solution for them would be fewer rules not more. Salary caps, even if accompanied by floors, exist for the sole purpose of limiting salaries and guaranteeing owner profits (despite what the ESPN crowd will try and tell you about promoting 'parity') so the players certainly don't want to go that route. The things most likely to change in a future CBA would be adjustments to revenue sharing and/or a change in FA compensation -- both of which are designed to act as a drag on overall payroll -- although FA compensation has been getting reduced in recent years so it's tough to point to that as a culprit. The whole idea of the signing team losing a draft pick in addition to the losing team gaining one was based on limiting how many players one team (read: rich teams) could sign in a given year, but that's more of an out-dated concept in this rev-sharing era. The bottom line is that, no, I don't think players rejecting QO's is part of some strategy based on the idea that they're betting on conditions being different in a year or two. After all, you could accept a QO and still be a FA next year too. I think Desmond simply picked a bad year to have a bad year and has effectively bet on himself twice in the last three years and lost out both times. But that's the nature of a free market and those things will continue to happen in a freer market as well. As for Fowler & Baltimore: I don't know what the hell happened there. He rejects $15.8/1-year to go for $33/3 and then rejects that for $8/1 all to wind up back where he started?!?!??

Edgy MD wrote: Every year, there's somebody totally and utterly scrod by rejecting that QO. Desmond doing it on top of having rejected that long-term deal suggests he's got nobody to blame but the man in the mirror. But memories of the long-term offer are probably what led to his faith that that a bigger deal would be out there for him. I think that, like the pre-bust housing market, there has been a perception among players that salaries were destined to always move in only one direction to the point where every contract offered now should be turned down because it's almost certainly to be trumped by a new one if you just wait until next week/month/year, so guarantees be damned and betting on yourself was a virtual no-lose move.

Ceetar wrote: You don't think the players union is aware that league revenue is increasing at a greater rate than player salaries? That's gotta be up there near the top of their concern list. I have no idea if that's even accurate. But even if so, players' salaries are limited now only by their ability to negotiate, I have no idea why they'd also want to tie it to a percentage of something they can't control.

I was just glad to see that someone was able to do all the legwork and convince both Lady Gaga and Dave Grohl to go in front of a camera.

Frayed Knot wrote: Ian Desmond to Texas on a one-year deal. Another guy settling for a deal about half of the QO he rejected. And now it turns out that Desmond has signed with the Rangers to be their full-time LF. So Ian, other than your rejection of the long-term offer (7/$115 ?) two years ago, then the $15.8 mil QO this winter, and now losing your position, how's it going?

Vic Sage wrote: i watched WD afterwards. Meaning at 2 in the morning.

Ian Desmond to Texas on a one-year deal. Another guy settling for a deal about half of the QO he rejected.

Looks like it’s either to be THE REVENANT or SPOTLIGHT. I’m of the mind that SPOTLIGHT is going to win — moral story, great cast, etc. while opinions on REVENANT probably vary too much for some voters, plus that director won last year — but maybe part of that is wishful thinking on my part. THE BIG SHORT was more clever fun than *great* picture. MAD MAX gets honored simply by being a non-traditional Oscar movie that gets nominated. ROOM & BROOKLYN weren’t seen enough, and THE MARTIAN & BRIDGE OF SPIES are a cut below in quality. Leo, on the other hand, is the lockiest lock that ever locked to get his acting Oscar this year. On-screen suffering is maybe second only to playing handicapped as sure-fire Oscar bait. Actress sounds like it’s going to Larson for ROOM, unless the oldies who don’t see any black movies want to give a nod to the veteran Rampling because she’s closer to their age. Supporting Actor: I’m afraid this will go to Stallone for the sort-of ‘Lifetime Achievement’ thing, although ideally actors get those for recognition of a lengthy and varied body of work rather than just playing the same character for the 19th time. All of the others deserve it more in any order you’d like to pick but ‘deserve’, in this world, ain’t got nuthin’ to do with it. If he does win it would be nice if (unlike at the Golden Globes) he acknowledges that Michael B. Jordan was actually in the picture during this year of ‘Black Roles Matter’ or whatever the hashtag of the moment is. Supporting Actress: Traditionally the toughest call of all the major categories. I’ll say Winslet for STEVE JOBS over McAdams or Mara, plus Alicia Vikander who may have gotten the right nom for the wrong movie (DANISH GIRL vs EX MACHINA) Adapted Screenplay: Probably BIG SHORT for turning a complicated non-movie topic into some watchable, although this could be THE MARTIAN's big moment. Original Screenplay: SPOTLIGHT

Part of this stems from a Davidoff column he did a few weeks back, and has done before, where he lists guys who he thinks may be either 'Over-Rated' or 'Over-Hated'. Here it is: http://nypost.com/2015/12/29/baseballs-overrated-and-over-hated-attractions-in-2015/ -- Not the greatest column idea in the world but nothing harmful, just typical off-season filler type stuff. Now I don't know if he picked up the supposed Duda hate from hearing it elsewhere or if the other columns I've seen* picked it up from him, but it seems a bit out of proportion either way. Right now it seems like one of those things that just grown on itself, a bit like the guy who penned the 'Eagles Suck' column knowing the kind of blow-back he'd get by doing so just one day after Glenn Frey's death which then gave him the juice for the follow-up 'I'm the most hated guy on earth right now' column the following day. * I recently read a prospect article from a national writer which talked about how Met fans can't wait until Dominic Smith gets here because of how much they don't like Lucas Duda.

What's old is new again: The Slide Rule [fimg=400:1uenxifd]http://sliderulemuseum.com/SR_Class/Figure0_SR_Parts_med.jpg[/fimg:1uenxifd]

I always thought that specifically exempting the neighborhood play from review was always going to be problematic and would cause a clash sooner or later (although didn't know it would be this quickly) as the whole concept of 'limited' replay is a bit like trying to stay only slightly pregnant.

Even prior to this piece I had seen several national articles referring to Duda as an especially unpopular Met. I don't see it or get it, although it's may just be one of those things that starts with a single mention somewhere then is copied by others who assume that the initial reference means that it's a universally agreed upon fact.

Ceetar wrote: there's no formula, but I'm sure the players are aware they're getting less and less of the pie. Really? Even if nothing actually happens, I suspect the issue will get raised meaning it might be in the owner's best interest if that number starts heading in the order direction for the NEXT negotiation. I think the LAST thing the players want is to introduce is the concept of a percentage of revenue as a basis for their pay.

Unlike the NFL or NBA or NHL, there is no "slice of the pie" formula in baseball; no percentage that is designated strictly for the players. Fowler, like every other FA, is simply going to make whatever he can in his next negotiations. I think it's obvious that he erred in rejecting the QO since that's where he wound up anyway and for half the price and it's not like the mutual option he got for '17 makes up for it. I don't know what happened between him and Baltimore -- it seems like HE backed out but it's not clear.

Lefty Specialist wrote: Dexter Fowler goes BACK to the Cubs, leaving the Orioles flummoxed. WOW!! Not only did he spurn the O's, but he did so by giving up a 3/$33 contract for 1 year @ $8 plus a mutual option for 2017 at 9 mil. And the kicker is that Fowler loses nearly $8 million because he turned down the Cubs QO to begin with. Now I suppose one could argue that he's betting on himself by keeping the possibility to be a FA next season (and perhaps w/o the QO restrictions) but that's a helluva bet. The Cubs, meanwhile, made room for Fowler (both in the OF and much of it on the payroll) by dealing Chris Coghlan and his $4.8 mil salary to Oakland for spare 25 y/o pitcher Aaron Brooks. P.S. - Fowler's agent is blasting the media and the Orioles for publicizing the Baltimore deal before it was ever done. Heyman was the original reporter of the news.

We also shouldn't ignore this little tweak that goes along with the new sliding rules: [u:bua39y87]Also reviewable will be “neighborhood play” calls, which previously were exempted from replay review[/u:bua39y87]. Already there are grumblings that this is going to cause as many collisions and problems as it solves. Remember that the Tejada play was reviewed and reversed because the umps not only determined that Ruben's foot was a solid 1/2 inch from the base but also ruled that the play as it unfolded didn't qualify for the now-discarded neighborhood exemption (gee, the replay rule turning at least as much on supposition as on actual evidence ... who could have seen THAT coming?). Well now none of that matters as any and all so-called neighborhood plays are subject to review. So I now have no idea how that exact same play gets ruled on if it happens this coming season. Utley (auto-correct keeps changing this to 'Outlay') should be ruled out due to interference plus I assume this also gives the umps the option to rule the batter/runner out also just as in an illegal out-of-baselines slide (pre-existing rule 6.01). How that conflicts with the evidence that Tejada never actually touches the base is anyone's guess since theoretically both managers could challenge different aspects of the same play at the same base and the replay prove each of them right. Does one rule supersede the other? Maybe since nobody can be safe at 2nd via this new rule and the batter/runner is ruled out at 1st via the old one, they'll work out a compromise by giving the Dodgers two outs but put Utley at 3rd instead. Or maybe they get four outs the next inning, who knows.

Ashie62 wrote: How do NFL games go three hours to the minute? I do not know. They don't. NFL games are longer, on average, than MLB games (with college games lasting longer still).

I don't believe NBC was breaking news no matter which car/truck it was - those crap magazine shows rarely do. They were just taking an existing news story and demonstrating how easily such an explosion/fire could be reproduced before likely deciding that it would have been boring for their audience if the vehicle didn't actually blow up. So they rig the demo so as to 'prove' to their viewers that it's virtually a guaranteed occurrence and then pretend to have no knowledge of what the (biased) outside consultant was doing if and when it all gets exposed.

Announced with the same press release with the 'Utley Rule', MLB has issued additional 'Pace of Game' initiatives: - manager and/or pitching coach visits to the mound will be limited to 30 seconds. I'm not sure they typically go much longer than that now and this does nothing to cap the number of visits or of catcher/infielder drop-bys. The other thing I'd like to see is an elimination of the incoming reliever warm-ups (or at least a cut back from eight pitches on top of his pen work) but perhaps the reliever union objected. - the between innings clock, which was newly installed last season, will be tweaked down by 20 seconds so as to more conform to the allotted commercial time. That time is 2:05 for local telecasts and 2:25 for national games (FOX Saturdays & ESPN Sunday night) but the timer that was put up on the scoreboard for the umps to monitor was set to 2:25 & 2:45 so there was still some dead time after the station came back from its break but prior to the first pitch being thrown. This should cut back on that gap although I suspect it's also going to result in a fair number of missed first pitches in an inning as stations try and jam as much ad time as possible into those 125 seconds, but I guess we'll see.

The part about being able to remain on the base: "slides on potential double plays will require runners to make a bona fide attempt to reach [u:2ihftng8]and remain on the base[/u:2ihftng8]" is the biggest change here. Utley simply being in a position where he could have touched the base was what allowed him to get away with his slide last October but this new wording will prevent that sort of late slide so it ups the burden on the runner; 'take-out' slides will now have to resemble regular slides where the fielder just happens to be in the way.

d'Kong76 wrote: Wasn't the Pinto the car that had a few poorly placed bolts that would go through the gas tank when hit from behind just right? Particularly when in front of NBC cameras.

Baseball Prospectus has their Mets prospect list out and there's a lot of good stuff there. First of all the individual player profiles are out from behind the pay-wall this year - such as this one for #2 Amed Rosario 2. Amed Rosario, SS DOB: 11/20/1995 Height/Weight: 6’2” 170 lbs. Bats/Throws: R/R Drafted/Acquired: Signed July 2012 out of the Dominican Republic by the New York Mets for $1.75 million. Previous Ranking(s): #4 (Org), #78 (overall) 2015 Stats: .253/.302/.329; 0 HR, 13 SB in 427 PA between High-A St. Lucie and Double-A Binghamton Future Tools: 60 glove, 60 arm, 50 run, 50 hit Role: 55—Above-average regular at shortstop Amed Rosario is a good example of the folly of trying to project 16-year-old shortstops (and they are all 16-year-old shortstops). When the Mets signed Rosario for a bit under two million dollars in the summer of 2012, scouts raved about his offensive potential, but worried that he might grow off of shortstop. The name Wilmer Flores was invoked as a comp (who himself was famously compared to Miguel Cabrera shortly after he signed). Rosario was already merely an average runner in Kingsport in 2013 at 17, and looked very raw defensively (as you might expect for every 17-year-old shortstop, well, other than the one ranked right below him). Since then though, Rosario has improved by leaps and bounds in the field, and hasn't really filled out as expected. Rosario is still far from a finished project, but he now looks like a good bet to be an everyday shortstop, and potentially an above-average one. Rosario's bat hasn't seen the same gains as his glove so far as a professional. The Mets have given him a series of aggressive assignments over the past three seasons, but 2015 was by far his stiffest test. He was the youngest player in the Florida State League, and had only played a week or so of full-season ball prior to this past season. He was over-matched for much of the season. Rosario has tinkered with his swing mechanics since he first landed stateside. In rookie ball he had one of the oddest swing paths you'll see, tracing a full circle with his hands as he loaded the swing, and his complex mechanics often left his upper and lower halves out of sync. Since then he has added strength and simplified his load, relying on his strong, quick wrists to generate some gap power. He has some feel for contact, but has struggled with spin from the more advanced arms he has faced. As long as the glove continues to improve, the Mets may keep moving him up the organizational ladder, but it will continue to be tough to get a read on the ultimate offensive ceiling. It is unlikely he will grow into much more than fringe-average raw, and the approach and swing will likely limit how playable it is in games, but the defensive tools should be enough to carry Rosario to a major league role not that dissimilar from “good Alcides Escobar” seasons. Bret Sayre’s Fantasy Take: Well, as you’ll see as you read through this list, it’s not the best system for fantasy value. Rosario was a candidate for the Dynasty 101 this year, but just hasn’t shown enough with the bat yet to get there. He can still reach that low-five-category contributor status that his tools hint at, but he just may not be as interesting in fantasy leagues at peak than we thought at this time last year. Major league ETA: 2018 The overall list itself skews quite young, something that's to be expected from an org that made a number of promotions recently and then thinned things out a bit further with to feed last season's stretch run. LHP Steven Matz SS Amed Rosario SS/2B Luis Carpio SS Gavin Cecchini 1B Dominic Smith OF Brandon Nimmo OF Desmond Lindsay RF Wuilmer Becerra RHP Robert Gsellman C Ali Sanchez But it also seems to reflect a preference here for tools over more immediate readiness, all of which results in a list that includes three players with (Gulp!) 1997 birthdays!!! Shit, I think there were some here who were discussing NYM baseball over the internet at that time. They also tack on five additional players who they dub as "interesting", give an 25-and-under Top-10 list (regardless of prospect status), plus give an overall review of the state of the system itself and of the front office.

At some point during the season a hard liner is going to be hit right back through the box at him prompting some wise-ass announcer (probably Howie) to yell: Look Out Below!!!

Frayed Knot wrote: Yovani Gallardo to the Orioles for 3 years. The O's are apparently contemplating the findings in Gallardo's physical before OK'ing the whole thing. So with the free time they had while waiting around for the final decision there, they signed Dexter Fowler to a 3-year deal.