Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:22 am

BY KEN DAVIDOFF | ken.davidoff@newsday.com
January 18, 2008

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets185542629jan18,0,1652355.story?track=rss

Fernando Martinez hasn't played above the Double-A level, but the Mets' young outfield prospect could be the key to acquiring Johan Santana from the Twins.

"I sense that [the Mets] have got a deal if Martinez is in it," an industry official familiar with Minnesota's trade discussions said. Of course, the Mets' package also would have to include some mix of outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitchers Deolis Guerra, Philip Humber and Kevin Mulvey. To date, the Mets have been reluctant to trade Martinez, since he is considered to have a high ceiling.

The Twins continue to hold discussions with the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets about Santana, but the Yankees appear set to move forward without the two-time Cy Young Award winner. Hank Steinbrenner has been convinced by his brother Hal and general manager Brian Cashman to not give up a package headed by Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera.

Tangentially, the Red Sox don't have a desperate need for Santana. As much as any other motivation, they're involved to make sure the Yankees don't get Santana at a bargain rate.

The Mets need Santana most of all, but they have the worst trading chips. Nevertheless, the Twins could change their approach, as the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported yesterday, and focus on players who could spend 2008 in the minors.

The Star-Tribune reported that Twins officials believe they will trade Santana before the start of spring training.

Martinez, 19, played in 60 games for Double-A Binghamton last year, hitting four homers and compiling an unimpressive .336 on-base percentage and .377 slugging percentage. In other words, he clearly needs more time in the minor leagues, unlike the Yankees' Hughes and Cabrera and Boston's Jon Lester and Jacoby Ellsbury.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:24 am

Not necessarily true. Kennedy's potential is a #2/3 starter but right now, he is a #4/5. Marquez potential is a #3, but right now he is a LR. There is a difference between ceiling and proximity. kennedy has nearly reached his ceiling. Marquez has not.

And hasn’t shown that he is going to. [Marquez] A K/9 rate of 5.45 with a BB/9 of 2.55 at the age of 22 shouldn’t stir up this much hysteria.

The way you break it down makes more sense, people need to be more precise in their evaluations. This is how a prospect gets hyped and people end up looking like fools.

Davey, no offense, but the only hysteria is coming from you. Someone said he could POTENTIALLY become a #3 starter and a couple Yankee fans agreed it was a theoretical possibility but that he wasn't there yet. You're the only one who really seems to have taken the whole thing very seriously.

And I like Kennedy and like we discussed, I agree that based on his strong control he's better than Marquez, but ceiling isn't the same as "who is better". Betances and Brackman have much higher ceilings than Kennedy, but clearly Kennedy is far, far more likely to reach his ceiling as well as being much closer. Marquez may very well have a CEILING around what Kennedy has, but I think Kennedy is more likely to reach that ceiling, and he's ready now.

I personally think Marquez was a bit overrated by some of those writers, but I also think he's being underrated by you. A couple of them like him as much as Kennedy, while you seem to imply the guy is total shit. I don't think either is the case, honestly.

Also going by the k/9 for only a single year of a minor leaguer is very unfair unless you're familiar with everything about that prospect, which you've admitted you aren't. From everything I've heard he was working on his curve and change, pitches he was still developing, which is going to effect numbers like that. If he was always at 5ish per 9 for his whole minor league career you'd have a very legitimate point, but he's not. His minor league career total (including this past season) is 6.78, not spectacular and if he was a strikeout pitcher, a cause for concern, but he isn't.

One also must take into account pitching style. Some pitchers are forced to set up hitters and put them away. Then there are the lucky ones who have such good stuff that they can pitch to contact and get a lot of outs. I can tell you on a pure stuff basis, a Kennedy Marquez comparison isnt even close. Marquez has the much better stuff. Plus sinker, 95mph 4 seamer, plus potential change and curve. But he doesnt get much credit because he uses that sinker to get early count outs on the ground a la CMW. You will be surprised when you see Marquez throw. He has some really awesome stuff. But his approach may best be managed as a swing man, kinda like Mendoza of yrs past.

Yankees unwilling to deal Hughes?

"I sense that [the Mets] have got a deal if Martinez is in it," an industry official familiar with Minnesota's trade discussions said. Of course, the Mets' package also would have to include some mix of outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitchers Deolis Guerra, Philip Humber and Kevin Mulvey. To date, the Mets have been reluctant to trade Martinez, since he is considered to have a high ceiling.

The Twins continue to hold discussions with the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets about Santana, but the Yankees appear set to move forward without the two-time Cy Young Award winner. Hank Steinbrenner has been convinced by his brother Hal and general manager Brian Cashman to not give up a package headed by Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera.

Davidoff

..MANG
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 9,877
Joined: June 10 06
From: Washington Heights
Member No.: 234

Because I look at him and ask myself, alright what does this kid do well? He is a sinkerball with other breaking/moving pitches used to induce groundballs and generally strikeout some batters.

His numbers are just very “mehh” to me.

In 2005, at the age of 20 in the Sally league he had a K/9 of 6.91 and a BB/9 of 3.94. Which is pretty good, it’s understandable for young arms to have control issues. He also had a pretty darn good FB/GB in 3.13. [140 IP]

In 2006, at the age of 21 in the Florida State League [A+] he improved his K/9 rate with a 8.02 and his BB/9 with a 2.83. His GB/FB dropped a tad with a 2.50. With these K and BB rates he looked promising. [92.0 IP]

In 2007, at the age of 22 in the Eastern League [AA] his K/9 and BB/9 regressed, 5.92 and 2.66 respectively, so did his GB/FB with a 1.93. [149.0 IP]

So basically what we have here is a guy that isn’t going to strikeout or walk a lot of people, he is going to pitch to contact [just about a hit per inning]. A lot of people mention that this is Wang’s MO as well, well to that I say, Wang is an anomaly. His sinker is so good he can get by with it, Marquez has to show that he has this ability OR start striking out a hell of a lot more people.

Tavarez
539 IP 485 HITS 113 BB 407 K 2.70 ERA 1.11 WHIP
H/9 - 8.10 BB/9 - 1.89 K/9 - 6.80

Marquez
458 IP 474 HITS 159 BB 345 K 3.40 ERA 1.38 WHIP
H/9 - 9.31 BB/9 - 3.12 K/9 - 6.78

What I did here is take Julian Tavarez’ minor league years [excluding his rehab stints etc] and compared them to Marquez’ career minor league numbers. Tavarez has him beat in ever category but they are essentially the same kind of pitcher. Contact pitchers who aren’t going to strikeout or walk many people.

Side note for a guy in Marquez who K’s people out at 6.78 per 9 he is going to have to get his walk numbers down to see mroe success.

I’ll side with what Riverhawk said. He has the potential to be a number 3 if a few things change but right now he is slotted for the bullpen or a spot starter/back end of the rotation guy.

Also true, I have a few questions.

Where does he sit with his four seamer, sinker, change and curveball? If he tops out at 95 with his four seamer, I guess it is safe to assume his sinker maxes out at 91-92.. Right?

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:30 am

Giants' offensive linemen won't wear sleeves

BY ANTHONY RIEBER | anthony.rieber@newsday.com
January 18, 2008

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/ny-spanthony185542293jan18,0,1333879.story

Rich Seubert knows exactly what the Giants are getting into Sunday.

The team's left guard is from Rozellville, Wis., about an hour and a half from Lambeau Field. He went to Packers games as a kid and says he can down six or seven bratwursts at a time. With mustard and sauerkraut, of course.

But - get this - he never was a Packers fan.

"Just because you grow up in Wisconsin doesn't mean you're a Packers fan," he said.

Who knew? And this one is really a shocker:

"I've never worn cheese on my head," he said.

Another thing Seubert won't be wearing Sunday are sleeves. The Giants' meaty offensive linemen have a pact, and not one of them is planning on breaking it despite the single-digit temperature expected for the NFC Championship Game against the Packers.

"You won't see an offensive lineman with sleeves," right guard Chris Snee said. "We have to be tough guys."

That they have been lately as the Giants have won a pair of playoff games on the road to get to within one victory of the Super Bowl. They face another stiff test this week against Pro Bowl defensive end Aaron Kampman and a defense that Tom Coughlin calls "very, very good ... their third-down defense is exceptional, and no team in the league has been over 50 percent on third down against them for an entire season. They are a stout front, their linebackers are very, very good, their corners are very aggressive players."

Green Bay held Seattle to 28 yards rushing and 200 yards of total offense in its 42-20 win over the Seahawks in the snow in the divisional round Saturday.

Said running back Brandon Jacobs: "I think the defensive line that we're going up against is maybe the best defensive line that we've played against this year. They're some big guys, and they're strong. You don't move them far."

The Giants' offensive line - Seubert and Snee at the guards, David Diehl and Kareem McKenzie at the tackles and Shaun O'Hara at center - has for the most part kept Eli Manning upright against the Bucs (one sack) and Cowboys (three) and opened enough holes for Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw.

The task of stopping Kampman first falls to McKenzie, who is nursing a sore ankle and was limited in Wednesday's practice. Kampman has 27½ sacks in the last two seasons, second in the NFL to Shawne Merriman of the Chargers. Coughlin said McKenzie, who was noticeably slowed against the Cowboys, can expect some help on his side.

"By protection, by formation, we do help when you have the great pass rushers on the outside on both sides, so some of that is all game plan regardless of whether a guy is 100 percent or not," Coughlin said. "We are playing against two or three good pass rushers again. Some things we will do, a lot of it just can be as much as another body spaced in there."

McKenzie, who said he is "fine," added: "It's a game where you've got to play your best ball. It's for the championship."

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:42 am

Steve Smith remembers Atari Bibgy's hit

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/2008/01/18/2008-01-18_steve_smith_remembers_atari_bibgys_hit.html

BY HANK GOLA
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Friday, January 18th 2008, 4:00 AM

Steve Smith figures the Packers owe him one, and he intends to collect Sunday at Lambeau Field.

It was Green Bay strong safety Atari Bibgy who laid a vicious hit on the rookie receiver in the second week of the season, fracturing his scapula (shoulder). A hamstring injury followed that recuperation, leaving Smith on the inactive list for 11 weeks.

"They're the reason why I was sitting down for six weeks until I hurt my hamstring," Smith said Thursday. "Bigby, the hard-hitting safety, is the one who got my shoulder, so I'm going to try to get up on him, get a nice little crack back or something, show him that I'm here."

Smith was running a slant pattern when Bigby caught him.

"It wasn't a cheap shot. It was a good hit. He just got me," he said. But since the Packers play a lot of man coverage, Smith said, "I'll be right there. I'll be right in his face. I'm not going to talk smack but I'm going to let my play do the talking."

Actually, Smith is almost happy enough just to be playing again after missing all the time and he has emerged at the right time as Eli Manning's third receiver. He finished last week's game with four catches for 44 yards, abusing Cowboys nickel back Jacques Reeves, including 22- and 11-yard catches — and drawing a key facemask penalty — on the whirlwind drive that tied the game just before the half.

"We always knew he was a baller," running back Brandon Jacobs sad of the team's second-round pick from Southern Cal.

Smith's production took off after an untimely drop against Buffalo in his second game back. He didn't just put it behind him. He learned from it.

"Just like I've dealt with other drops," Smith said. "I must have watched that about 100 times on TiVo. That forced me to get back to fundamentals, watching the ball into my hands. Those are the plays I want to look at, the bad plays. The tough ones are the ones that I want to see."

While it was tough to be sidelined, especially for a rookie who needs the experience, Smith said he never took his head out of the playbook or stopped asking Manning questions. He also fell under the tutelage of veteran Amani Toomer, a fellow Californian; Smith is a virtual clone in playing style and off-the-field demeanor.

"Yeah, I can definitely see the similarities in the way we approach things," Toomer said. "He is very easygoing but then when you get him on the field he is very intense. A lot of people ... don't understand the mentality and see (you) as a goof-off or aloof or something like that, but when he gets in the game he doesn't make any mistakes and always catches the ball."

"Oh yeah, just quiet guys from California," Smith said. "We're focused but we just don't take anything too seriously and that goes a long way. That's the way it is, by the beach, by the pool, man, hanging out."

And as competitors?

"Oh man, definitely, how we run routes, we want to catch the ball over the middle, make that catch," Smith said. "His toughness I see in myself. We want to win. One on ones, we feel like we want to win.”

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:46 am

Francona Discusses Red Sox Rotation

http://modernrooters.blogspot.com/

Red Sox manager Terry Francona fielded questions on Thursday at the Boston Baseball Writers' Assocation of America. And for those of you wondering about the Red Sox rotation in 2008, he answered almost every question you could have.

According to Francona, the Red Sox will begin their rotation with Josh Beckett and Daisuke Matsuzaka. Although, Matsuzaka's wife may be having a child while the Red Sox are in Japan, so Matsuzaka may not be able to pitch in the second game of the season. I think it would be a real shame if Matsuzaka can't make the trip to Japan. It would be exceptional to see him pitch in front of his fellow countrymen who idolize him so much.

The Red Sox will play three exhibition games after they come back from Japan. Those exhibition games will allow them to use their top two starters not only in the first two games of the season, but also the third and fourth game of the season. The number three, four and five pitchers for the Red Sox will pitch in the exhibition games.

Francona also talked about the back of his rotation. Wakefield will begin the season as the team's number four starter. And Lester and Buchholz will compete for the fifth spot in the rotation. Given pitching coach John Farrell's strong like of Jon Lester, I'd be surprised if he didn't start the season in the rotation. But both Lester and Buchholz do have minor innings concerns. Their total workload will likely be capped somewhere around 180 innings each.

It's good to have Clay Buchholz, considered by most to be the best pitching prospect in baseball, as a backup starter. He could likely provide some high quality replacement innings for any other pitcher in the organization who either struggles or gets injured. Even though I think it's likely that Buchholz will start the season outside of the Red Sox rotation, if he pitches anything like he did last year, I'm sure he'll find a way onto the roster.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:59 am

The Yankees also aren't giving up Tabata AND Jackson in any deal.... aka BOTH of their future OF.... our deal we have to give up BOTH, I realize Hughes is a big talent but hes worth more then Mulvey, Humber AND Guerra? I just don't buy it.

Melky Cabrera....718 OPS... considering Gomez hit 232 and is 2 years younger... and still posted a 592 OPS..... Melky Cabrera STANKS.

#5 wrote:
startheilman12 wrote:
To those who think Martinez is untradeable: What are your thoughts on Jose Tabata? He's the same age as Fernando and has performed comparably to Martinez so far in their minor league careers.

My thoughts are...he's a Yankee and has nothing to do with us.

Post of the Year!

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:01 am

Chien Ming Wang has his own Website

Ht to Peter of Journal News

http://web.40chienmingwang.com/index.jsp

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:04 am

# oston Dave January 17th, 2008 at 8:45 pm

that bobblehead is horrendous

go phil! love metallica
# Yankees Chick January 17th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

This is classic. I’m intimidated just looking at it, to be honest. He looks like he is either ready to strike a business deal with some hard-hitting corporation or pull out a tiny little James Bond gun and start shooting Russian spies at any moment.
# Jennifer - Save Phil Hughes! January 17th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

I can’t see Phil’s entire entry!! UGH!
# Boston Dave January 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pm

One thing I found interesting on Phil’s blog.

He seems to be either taking to NY, or he’s faking it… but he’s anti-NE Patriots and pro Giants.

why is this meaningful? he grew up a huge Red Sox fan. chances are he was a Pats fan as well.
# Rebecca--Optimist Prime--Save the Three Musketeers! January 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pm

Yeah, Pete, because we are just *so* bad ass.
# Jennifer - Save Phil Hughes! January 17th, 2008 at 8:51 pm

Boston I thought the same thing too. Laughing

I woudn’t care if he were a Pats fan, after all we all know Brady is a Yankee fan. Phil shouldn’t be afraid to tell us if he’s rooting for the Pats.
# Boston Dave January 17th, 2008 at 8:52 pm

Jennifer,

he did grow up in Cali, so he may just be a SD fan. But either way he is pulling for the GMen.
# Jennifer - Save Phil Hughes! January 17th, 2008 at 8:55 pm

That is true, but his father did manage to brain wash him into being a sox fan. Lucky for us we undid the brain washing.
# Rebecca--Optimist Prime--Save the Three Musketeers! January 17th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

jen: oh how I imagine his father is regretting that now…
# Yankees Chick January 17th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

I have always wondered about players that grow up a huge fan of the rival of the team that he ends up playing for, AND the players that end up playing for 2 rival teams (like damon). Do they 100% change their loyalties or is there a little bit of love left in their heart….
# Doreen January 17th, 2008 at 9:10 pm

Yankees Chick, I think it’s different from the inside looking out (player) versus the outside looking in (fan). I believe that while they are playing, they are only for the team that they play for. And then I think in situations like Damon’s or other players who move around a lot, it’s the team they play for, plus rooting for individual guys with whom they’ve become close. After they retire? Who knows?
# yanks-giants guy January 17th, 2008 at 9:14 pm

didnt manny grow up in manhattan?
# Yankees Chick January 17th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

Good point Doreen. I’d definitely agree that it’s after they retire (or move on to another team) that they re-evaluate whether their loyalties have shifted.
# Drew January 17th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

That goes on the list of all-time worst bobbleheads. It looks a bit like him, but in a suit?
# LA Yanks Fan January 17th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

My two suggestions would be:

Be Quick or Be Dead by Iron Maiden (starts out fast, Bruce lets out a scream, and much rocking ensues)

Born to Raise Hell by Motorhead with Ice-T and Whitfield Crane (on the Airheads soundtrack which is actually a great album. Up there with the Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels soundtrack as my favorite of all time.)
# Yanksrule57 January 17th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

A lot of bobblehaeds don’t look at all like the person they represent. I think this one looks a lot like CMW.
Very cool.

Re Hughes: Why do so many pitchers like to enter to heavy metal? I am not a metal fan at all but I do have “Enter Sandman” on my IPOD, it’s a great workout song.
# mel January 17th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

He looks so…menacing. Just needs the dangling cig…
# mel January 17th, 2008 at 9:46 pm

Phil doesn’t like the Pats, huh? Still respect him, even though he doesn’t know a thing about football. lol.
# Bill from NJ January 17th, 2008 at 9:47 pm

$105 for a bobblehead?

It also says it won’t ship from the warehouse for 6-8 WEEKS!
# YankeeJosh January 17th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

Gotta hand it to Hughes, he knows how to play to an audience. Not sure if he believes the football picks or not, but going with the New York football team and picking against the Boston team is a great way to earn points.

Heck, it works for me!
# Old Goat January 17th, 2008 at 9:57 pm

That is a lot of bangle for a bobble!

I would imagine that the players find that things are different from the inside of an organization. In the things that Damon has said and that Molina has said, I think the perception when on an opposing team is nothing like reality. I think they will remember the old teams favorably if they did well there, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the Yankees moved up in their hearts after playing for them. The rich history the Yankees have probably hits home with them.

I think of the various TV personalities on YES who were players who played for other teams as well as the Yankees. While its hard to tell sincerity, they seem to have very positive things to say about their Yankee periods.
# Old Yanks Fan January 17th, 2008 at 10:03 pm

I’m not sure I recognize it. Is that Wang’s ROAD uniform?
# Old Yanks Fan January 17th, 2008 at 10:10 pm

It’s gonna be cool to watch 2 icons in ARod and Jeter, but Joba and Phil are going to steal the hearts of Yankee fans.
We are like the 48 year childless couple that gives up, and BAM… they have twins! WE GOT KIDS NOW!

Did anyone see ‘Stuck On You’ about the twins attached at the hip? One’s a short order cook but the other wants to move to LA to become an actor. When the cook brother asks his brother what he’s ‘going to do in LA’ he brother tells him ‘you can be my stunt double…. ya know.. doing my difficult stunts so I don’t get hurt’.
# ct_chris January 17th, 2008 at 10:24 pm

I find it amusing that some of you think Phil is picking the Chargers or calling him anti-NE just to placate fans. Phil Hughes was born and raised in Southern Cal., so it doesn’t seem like a stretch for me to believe he honestly like to see the SD Chargers win.
# ghlu January 17th, 2008 at 11:39 pm

I wonder how long did it take to collect all those K clips on CMW’s website :-p
# G. Love January 18th, 2008 at 12:32 am

I’m getting misty eyed seeing Pete give Chow Yun Fat some indirect love on this blog.

He’s the Asian John Wayne.

If you love action movies and want to see a great film and don’t mind reading subtitles, rent The Killer by John Woo starring Chow Yun Fat. Badass.
# saucy January 18th, 2008 at 12:40 am

Pete, was that you that commented as lohudyanksblog? “Mighty Patriots”?

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:06 am

1. Peter Abraham January 18th, 2008 at 12:35 am

Thanks to Travis for posting. Good stuff.
2. Giuseppe Franco January 18th, 2008 at 12:40 am

Due to the innings-caps on the kids, I’ve been saying all winter that the Yanks are going to need Mussina more than the fans think.

Don’t be surprised if he makes 20-25 starts in 2008.
3. Rebecca--Optimist Prime--Save the Three Musketeers! January 18th, 2008 at 12:42 am

How do I chech his blog?

Travis–Excellent post, well worth the read. I cannot tell you how much the sound of ‘home grown rotation’ is making me faun…
4. Bronx Liaison January 18th, 2008 at 12:44 am

Very good points Travis.

Not to toot my own horn too much, but Clemens retained Bill Clinton’s lawyer for the upcoming Feb. congressional hearings:

http://bronx-bomberz.blogspot.com/2008/01/clemens-trades-lawyers-up.html
5. Bronx Liaison January 18th, 2008 at 12:47 am

The fact that Kennedy can hit the 200 innings plateau seems to get overlooked a lot. Good job highlighting that fact.

The damaging part of Hughes’ injuries were not just that he missed time in 2007, but it will force Phil to be capped in 2008 at a much greater limit than would have been planned had he pitched 150 innings last season.

Winter ball would have helped, but I agree with the Yankees just wanting to give Hughes time off so his body can fully recover from his injuries.
6. dan l January 18th, 2008 at 12:57 am

Let’s hope they let the kids pitch more than six innings per start! The more innings pitched per start the better chance to win. If the kids help the Yankees get there starters 2 more outs per start they will win 95 plus games.
7. NYhunter January 18th, 2008 at 1:13 am

Moose will pitch more than we would like… I think 20 starts from him at least…

Very well written, Travis! But you seems to forget Igawa. They might not let him rot in 3A for obvious reasons, and I don’t think he could be a reliever due to his poor command.

And I would like to see if Horne could handle set-up duty, because I don’t trust both Farnsworth and Hawkins! So, except Marquez, who is absolutely unknown facing big league hitters, we might have to hope Igawa to have amazing turnaround this season, to show why he was a top-notch starter back in Japan if Moose blow again…

PS: Although I don’t have high hope on Wang, he IS the only inning-eater in our rotation. We will have to have him pitching around 230 innings this season…
8. saucy January 18th, 2008 at 1:16 am

nice post.

i was wondering if they consider spring training at all when they consider innings totals for a year for a pitcher, particularly, for the younger guys. anyone know? or is spring training pitching so much less intense that they really don’t figure into the logic as much?
9. Whoever January 18th, 2008 at 1:23 am

Spring training is not included just like the playoffs isn’t. Those innings really have to do with balls pitched so it is going to happen in times that they will go into 7 innings. On another note, Mark Texeira signed a one year deal for 12.5 million now that is only good news for Cano (considering that the yankees don’t want to give him a long contract) he’ll probably get something around 10 million.
10. NYhunter January 18th, 2008 at 1:33 am

Cano is NOT gonna get 10 mil in his FIRST year of arbitration!

And for the real comparison, Huston Street just agreed with 3.3 mil today. This deal might have some implication with Wang. They both are in their 1st year of arbitration, although Wang is a “super 2″. Both have good records. The obvious difference is one is a starter and the other is a closer. Starter should have more value than closer…

So my guess is that Wang gets 3.5 mil…
11. NYhunter January 18th, 2008 at 1:34 am

And Cano gets 4 mil…
12. Bob January 18th, 2008 at 1:43 am

This has NEVER been done on the major league level, as far as I know, but the same thing could be accomplished by putting Mussina on a three-four innings substitute, three-day rest rotation. When he came in for Hughes and Chamberlain, he would enter the game in the fourth inning, for Kennedy in the fifth, and for Pettite and Wang in the seventh. He would end up pitching in 40 games, and about 120 innings. He would cut out about 30 innings a piece from the workload of Hughes and Chamberlain, and about 20 or so for Kennedy. All five starters would keep to their regular rotation schedule, rather than skipping starts throughout the season. Of course, this is all theoretical, because it is virtually impossible that all six would be totally healthy all season long, but it is, in my opinion, a fascinating way to keep all of them on a regular rotation AND cut the innings of those on limited duty.
13. Travis G. January 18th, 2008 at 1:43 am

thanks for the kind words.

3 quick things:
i know Igawa could be in the mix for spot starts or relief, but i had to cut about 2/3 of my unabridged piece - his mention was a victim of that.

by ‘former duo’, i’m referring to Hughes and Joba.

the innings limits are definitely dependent on pitches/ip also. that’s part of the reason Wang jumped 70 innings from 05 to 06. im sure Cash, Joe and Co. will allow the kids to pitch more and deeper into games if they maintain low pitch counts.

Pete, thanks for the opportunity!
14. Rebecca--Optimist Prime--Save the Three Musketeers! January 18th, 2008 at 1:46 am

I think Girardi said the Yankees would NOT use a six man rotation.

Am off to sleep, a pleasant evening all.
15. NYhunter January 18th, 2008 at 1:54 am

Thanks for clarifying, Travis… :-)

I really think that Igawa is gonna be very important to us since we have 3 kid starters and 1 old & ineffective guy this season, although I probably will have some mental and physical disorders everytime when he’s on the mound…
16. Evil Empire January 18th, 2008 at 2:06 am

thorough post, i didnt realize april could be a homegrown month. im excited to see all these new kids come through the system and work with a new manager and still have eiland as pitching coach. im hoping for some big things. buck foston.
17. GreenBeret7 January 18th, 2008 at 2:53 am

Bob
January 18th, 2008 at 1:43 am
“Mussina on a three-four innings substitute, three-day rest rotation. When he came in for Hughes and Chamberlain, he would enter the game in the fourth inning, for Kennedy in the fifth, and for Pettite and Wang in the seventh. He would end up pitching in 40 games, and about 120 innings. He would cut out about 30 innings”
=================================================
This makes very little sense. The idea is to reduce some of the innings, but increase their endurance in the game. Pitching starters for 4 innings does absolutely nothing to accomplish that. The idea of a modified 6 man rotation involving Hughes and Chamberlain, and on occassion, Kennedy or the other two starters is the only way to reduce innings while at the same time, building endurance. Mussina gets a fairly steady workload, while not overworking him. He can stay sharp by throwing some innings in relief on the rotations that he’s not scheduled to start. It will also lengthen the bullpen. You can expect Pettitte and possibly Wang to pitch a few times on their bullpen throw days, since their bullpen sessions those days simulate game situations.
18. iYankees January 18th, 2008 at 2:59 am

Nice stuff Travis. I’ve never really thought about this, but, if Moose can regain his 2006 form, I wouldn’t be opposed to him sliding into the final rotation spot. We can always utilize Kennedy as a long-man or maybe even a reliever? I haven’t really thought about it too much, but he could certainly excell in the role and then slot back into the rotation when Joba or Hughes hit their max (or if anything else occurs).
19. Tommy January 18th, 2008 at 4:33 am

You guys are totally overlookin Moose!
20. Alan January 18th, 2008 at 6:07 am

Mussina has spent his entire career as a front of the rotation starter with strict preparation routines. As a spot starter or possible long relief role changing things, can he do it ?
21. Wiggum Fan January 18th, 2008 at 6:24 am

Concerning the listing of Kennedy as number 3 due to his inning potential, that reminded me of something Neyer wrote years ago.

He said he thought that the “inning eaters” (for lack of a better term) should be broken up to allow for better bullpen rest.

Since he wrote that, and it might be about 3 - 5 years ago, I have never seen anyone study it.

That would make the 2008 rotation something like:
Wang
Pettitte
Joba
IPK
Hughes
Joba

If anyone has seen research that Neyer was talking about, please pass it along.
22. iYankees January 18th, 2008 at 6:26 am

I honestly think he was still sort of hindered by his earlier injury issue. His 2006 was actually very good (even his K’s were up there) and I, for whatever reason, just cannot believe that he is totally done for.

He did have his fastball moving around 89-91 though (maybe hitting 92, but rarely). Hopefully, if he can develop the strength necessary to pitch in that range for a full season, I still think he’s good enough to post some really solid figures.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:10 am

Keith Law can't go against his word now...

In mid 2007, both Marquez & Horne were organizational arms at best with only 88-92 mph fastballs according to that Clown.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:12 am

Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 2412

PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:41 pm Post subject: An article JMB'll really get behind. Reply with quote
If not Atkins, how about Zimmerman?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/01/17/bp.breakoutplayers/index.html

Joe Sheehan predicts the big breakout players of 08.

Quote:
Ryan Zimmerman: Zimmerman may seem like an odd choice for the list, given how well he's played in his first two full seasons. However, Zimmerman's raw stat lines have been held down by his home park, RFK Stadium, which just killed power, especially right-handed power. Zimmerman's home/road splits do not reflect this gap he's slugged .501 at RFK in his career, .435 on the road, but a guiding principle of performance analysis is that an individual's home/road splits, even over two years, do not mean that player isn't being affected by his home park. We know what RFK did to run scoring and power, and moving to a new park should enable Zimmerman to convert some of his doubles to home runs. Throw in development -- he's 23 this season -- and you have the recipe for a breakout. David Wright might well have been the most valuable player in the National League last season; Zimmerman will be a better player than Wright in 2008.

Melky's also due to break out and have a .500+ SLG season in the near future. The next Alex Rios.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:14 am

NFC predictions: Clean sweep for Green Bay

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=nfc&id=3199063

Jeffri Chadiha: Packers, 24-21

The Packers have had a magical quality about them all season, and that's not about to change.

Green Bay has plenty of offense with Pro Bowl quarterback Brett Favre and running back Ryan Grant. The Packers also have an aggressive defense that is built around a fast front seven and a secondary blessed with two Pro Bowl-caliber cornerbacks (Charles Woodson and Al Harris). If that's not enough, the Packers also get to play the Giants in what should be a frigid Lambeau Field.

That doesn't mean the Giants will wilt Sunday. They are 9-1 on the road this season for a reason. It just means that their compelling playoff run is about to end. They have too many injuries in the secondary, and you can bet Favre will take advantage of that.

John Clayton: Packers, 21-10

In Vegas terms, the Giants are playing with house money. They have exceeded expectations by winning two playoff games, so the pressure should be off. Tom Coughlin has proved he's the right coach for this franchise now that he has made himself more player-friendly. Eli Manning earned the confidence of his teammates by leading the team to road victories at Tampa Bay and Dallas.

But the Packers have one of the league's youngest rosters and they are having a blast. The fact that young players such as Greg Jennings and Ryan Grant can play so well in their first playoff games shows that this team is insulated from playoff pressure.

What could be the deciding factor? The Packers have more healthy receivers than the Giants have healthy cornerbacks, and Favre will take advantage of that.

Matt Mosley: Packers, 27-24

The Giants somehow survived against Tony Romo and an allegedly explosive offense by using backup cornerbacks. R.W. McQuarters and Corey Webster played well at times, but I don't like their chances against the Packers' receivers. It will be imperative for them to tackle well because Donald Driver, Greg Jennings and rookie James Jones have been outstanding after the catch.

Also, Brett Favre has an advantage over Eli Manning when it comes to playing in cold weather. Manning hasn't experienced anything close to 10-degree weather this season. In fact, the Giants haven't played a game when it has been below 36. Favre is 43-5 in games played at or below 34.

Favre gets rid of the ball so quickly that Giants defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo might not be able to rely as much on the blitz as usual. His best chance for creating pressure is to send players such as Justin Tuck (10 sacks) up the middle.

Len Pasquarelli: Packers, 27-23

As gallant as the battered New York secondary was in the divisional-round victory at Dallas, there won't be enough healthy bodies to cover all the Green Bay wideouts when the Packers spread the field. The Giants will hang in the game throughout, but the guess is that the Packers will make one more big play than does New York, and we'll predict it's Greg Jennings who makes it. In his resurgent season, when he has thrown the deep ball about as well as he ever has, Brett Favre gets one more shot at a second Super Bowl ring.

Mike Sando: Packers, 27-23

Eli Manning's sudden emergence as a heady game manager gives the New York Giants a chance to beat most teams and compete with the best.

The job gets tougher this week. Green Bay Packers cornerbacks Charles Woodson and Al Harris play as though they know officials won't call pass interference on every play, so they might as well rough up receivers. Manning might have a hard time exploiting that kind of coverage. The Packers will test his accuracy. The Giants should be able to run the ball, but they'll need more than that.

The Packers are fresher. Their offensive line isn't the most athletic, but Brett Favre gets rid of the ball before trouble arrives. His receivers and tight ends excel after the catch. The Giants probably won't win unless they can contain the run and force Favre into third-and-long situations. The Packers' guards aren't the best in pass protection, but Favre can overcome their deficiencies when armed with favorable down and distances. Green Bay should be able to spread out the Giants and find mismatches against a banged-up secondary.

The Giants appeared spent after beating the Cowboys. By kickoff in Green Bay, Wis., they will have traveled about 3,500 miles in little more than a week. They have the talent and resolve to pull the upset, but the odds are against them.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:21 am

Lowell living large
Series star enjoys his new celebrity
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2008/01/18/lowell_living_large/?page=1

There are perks to being World Series MVP, as Mike Lowell happily recounted yesterday.

"I got to shoot an ad today with Rene Russo," the Red Sox third baseman said before the Boston Baseball Writers dinner at the Westin Waterfront Hotel. "I don't think that if I went 1 for 17 in the Series I would have gotten the same chance."

Besides posing with the actress at Fenway Park for several hours - "It was awesome. I didn't have to do anything. Rene played a fan and did all the work" - Lowell is headed to the White House next week with manager Terry Francona for a dinner with President Bush. "Oh, yeah, the White House," Lowell said. "Pretty cool, but I don't think George Bush will be hugging me."

Lowell's light mood did not survive questioning about the Mitchell Report and this week's steroids-related hearings on Capitol Hill. He said he did not watch this week's proceedings, but has paid attention to the release of the Mitchell Report and its aftermath.

"I think like everyone else I was curious to see if they were going to name names," he said. "I thought it was going to be much more in-depth, much more complete. I'm not sure we got all that much closure. Maybe because there was all this hype, I thought there was going to be all this FBI stuff - this guy did this - and we didn't have that."

Asked if he was troubled that Roger Clemens, arguably the dominant pitcher of this generation, was accused of using performance-enhancing substances, Lowell said: "I think I'm going to reserve my judgment because he's actually come out pretty adamantly. His course of action has been to attack. If I was accused of something, I'd want to attack it right away, but now I kind of want to see how things play out."

Lowell said he would be willing to submit to a blood test for HGH, under one important condition: "It has to be 100 percent accurate, because if it's 99 percent accurate, there are going to be seven false positives in big league baseball, and what if those names are one of the major names? You've scarred that person's career for life. You can't come back and say, 'Sorry, we've made a mistake,' because you just destroyed that person's career.

"There's got to be 100 percent accuracy, and that's why [union executive director] Donald Fehr puts himself in position where he's responsible for the seven false positives, not the 693 that test OK. Because, God forbid, what if it was Cal Ripken, you know what I mean? Doesn't that put a big black mark on his career? That's where I think the union has to make sure the test is 100 percent, no chance of a false positive. Some people have said 90 percent [accuracy]. That's 70 [false positives]. That's three full rosters."Continued...

By Gordon Edes
Globe Staff / January 18, 2008

There are perks to being World Series MVP, as Mike Lowell happily recounted yesterday.

"I got to shoot an ad today with Rene Russo," the Red Sox third baseman said before the Boston Baseball Writers dinner at the Westin Waterfront Hotel. "I don't think that if I went 1 for 17 in the Series I would have gotten the same chance."

Besides posing with the actress at Fenway Park for several hours - "It was awesome. I didn't have to do anything. Rene played a fan and did all the work" - Lowell is headed to the White House next week with manager Terry Francona for a dinner with President Bush. "Oh, yeah, the White House," Lowell said. "Pretty cool, but I don't think George Bush will be hugging me."

Lowell's light mood did not survive questioning about the Mitchell Report and this week's steroids-related hearings on Capitol Hill. He said he did not watch this week's proceedings, but has paid attention to the release of the Mitchell Report and its aftermath.

"I think like everyone else I was curious to see if they were going to name names," he said. "I thought it was going to be much more in-depth, much more complete. I'm not sure we got all that much closure. Maybe because there was all this hype, I thought there was going to be all this FBI stuff - this guy did this - and we didn't have that."

Asked if he was troubled that Roger Clemens, arguably the dominant pitcher of this generation, was accused of using performance-enhancing substances, Lowell said: "I think I'm going to reserve my judgment because he's actually come out pretty adamantly. His course of action has been to attack. If I was accused of something, I'd want to attack it right away, but now I kind of want to see how things play out."

Lowell said he would be willing to submit to a blood test for HGH, under one important condition: "It has to be 100 percent accurate, because if it's 99 percent accurate, there are going to be seven false positives in big league baseball, and what if those names are one of the major names? You've scarred that person's career for life. You can't come back and say, 'Sorry, we've made a mistake,' because you just destroyed that person's career.

"There's got to be 100 percent accuracy, and that's why [union executive director] Donald Fehr puts himself in position where he's responsible for the seven false positives, not the 693 that test OK. Because, God forbid, what if it was Cal Ripken, you know what I mean? Doesn't that put a big black mark on his career? That's where I think the union has to make sure the test is 100 percent, no chance of a false positive. Some people have said 90 percent [accuracy]. That's 70 [false positives]. That's three full rosters."
Page 2 of 2 --

Another troubling aspect of the issue, beyond the hits the game is taking to its image, is what Lowell perceives as a double standard that exists for baseball relative to other sports.
more stories like this

"The only thing I think is unfair is that baseball players are put on a totally different stage," Lowell said.

"I don't know Shawne Merriman and I don't know Rodney Harrison, but nothing was made about [their suspensions]."

Merriman of the Chargers and Harrison of the Patriots both served four-game suspensions for using performance-enhancing substances.

"It was actually, 'Aw, man, they're missing four games.' Nothing was made about them," said Lowell. "That's where the coverage, I don't agree with it.

"The baseball thing is, the world is coming to an end. Shawne Merriman makes the Pro Bowl that year. Baseball players are put under a totally different microscope. I don't know if it's people think pro football players should take it because they're so big and strong, but when a baseball player does it, it's major news. When a football player does it, it's turn the page."

Lowell, whose signing to a four-year deal in November was perhaps the biggest offseason move the Sox made this winter, said the club's comparative lack of movement so far does not mean more moves are not in the offing. He rates the chance of the Twins trading Johan Santana "a 7," and endorsed the possibility of the ace lefthander coming to Boston. Such a deal remains a distinct possibility, and perhaps soon.

"He can't do anything but make the club better, I agree absolutely," Lowell said. "He's one of the elite, if not the elite, pitcher in the game. I don't think anyone gets worse adding Johan Santana. Most teams wouldn't want to face [Santana and incumbent ace Josh Beckett] in a series."

Lowell said he spoke with Beckett a couple of days ago by phone.

"He's great," Lowell said. "He's doing his thing in Texas, whatever it is he does. Whatever he did last offseason, I hope he does it this season."

Beckett does a good deal of deer hunting in the offseason. Lowell said the pitcher has invited him to join him, but he's always declined.

"If I go hunting with him, I think my wife [Bertica] will have a gun ready for me when I get home," he said. "She thinks we're killing Bambi every time. I don't think hunting is in my future. But she eats steak. She's not a vegan."

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:27 am

Ramirez brings work to Arizona
http://bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?&articleid=1067376&format=&page=1&listingType=sox#articleFull

Manny Ramirez is spending his winter for the first time in the desert southwest, joining Dustin Pedroia [stats] and Kevin Youkilis [stats] at the Athletes’ Performance Institute in Tempe, Ariz.

Pedroia said the climate was at least part of the reason why Ramirez wanted to go to API.

“He just said he kind of wanted to go the West Coast. He likes the weather,” said Pedroia at last night’s Boston Baseball Writers dinner at the Westin Waterfront Hotel. “He knew me and Youkilis were there, working out. We told him it’s a great place. He’s doing well, he looks great, he’s ready to go.”

Pedroia plans on continuing to train at API until Feb. 15. He said Ramirez works out with Youkilis and Minnesota’s Nick Punto and Eric Munson each week day.

“He’s excited and talks about going to Fort Myers every day,” Pedroia said. “I’ve never seen him in this good a shape. He’s on a mission.”

One of Pedroia’s workout partners is Orioles second baseman Brian Roberts, who was named for steroid usage in the Mitchell Report and later admitted it.

No go on Coco

Manager Terry Francona said he had not spoken with center fielder Coco Crisp [stats] this offseason but sent a couple of text messages. He acknowledged that Crisp, mentioned frequently as trade bait in the Johan Santana talks with Minnesota, could be going through an uncomfortable offseason.

That said, Francona was prepared to have him and Jacoby Ellsbury on the same team this coming season.

“If we have an outfield of J.D. Drew [stats], Ellsbury, Coco and Manny, that’s pretty impressive,” he said. “I’ve got no problem with that. I told (general manager) Theo (Epstein) that early on. The players may not be too thrilled with that.”

Lester shapes up

Jon Lester [stats] has gotten his weight up to 220 pounds, five pounds heavier than what he finished the season at. He reported to spring training under 200 pounds last year.

Lester, who began his throwing program Jan. 1, will end his cycle of three-month cancer checkups, stretching out the time between doctor visits to six months.

The lefty also said nobody in the organization called him with an update regarding the rumors circulating about his involvement in any Santana trade.

“No call is better than any call,” he said. “As long as I don’t get a call, I’ll just assume to show up to Fort Myers. Actually, I guess I’ll show up at Fort Myers anyways.”

Lowell wants proof

Mike Lowell voiced some concerns he had with the Mitchell Report, which he thought lacked enough “concrete proof.”

“I thought it was going to be more in-depth, much more complete. I don’t know if we got closure,” said Lowell, who said canceled checks are one thing but no one might ever know if a player received a shipment of steroids, then had a change of heart and decided not to go ahead.

As for Roger Clemens, Lowell said, “I’m going to reserve judgment. His course of action has been to attack it, so I want to see how it plays out.” . . .

Pitching coach John Farrell said pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka wanted to throw more in spring training so “he could be a little stronger at the start of the season.”

Matsuzaka and Hideki Okajima [stats] both began their throwing program on Dec. 15, earlier than most of the other pitchers.

At the podium

Award-winners included Cleveland general manager Mark Shapiro as Executive of the Year, Francona as Manager of the Year, Lester as the Tony Conigliaro Award winner, Pedroia as the Red Sox [team stats] and AL Rookie of the Year, Lowell as Red Sox MVP, Carlos Pena as New England Player of the Year and Lou Lucier as Ex-Red Sox player.

Also, Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz were Red Sox Minor League Players of the Year, Hideki Okajima the Unsung Hero, Youkilis the Jackie Jensen Award winner, Jonathan Papelbon [stats] the Fireman of the Year, Josh Beckett [stats] the Red Sox Pitcher of the Year and Alex Rodriguez the Ted Williams Award.

Chaz Scoggins of the Lowell Sun won the Dave O’Hara Award, Dick Berardino the Judge Emil Fuchs Award for long and meritorious service to baseball and the late Boston Globe writer Larry Whiteside received a special achievement award as did former Sox manager Joe Morgan on the 20th anniversary of “Morgan Magic.” Buchholz also got recognized for his no-hitter.
Read the Clubhouse Insider for the latest Red Sox news at bostonherald.com

Lester shapes up

http://bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?&articleid=1067376&format=&page=1&listingType=sox#articleFull

Jon Lester [stats] has gotten his weight up to 220 pounds, five pounds heavier than what he finished the season at. He reported to spring training under 200 pounds last year.

Lester, who began his throwing program Jan. 1, will end his cycle of three-month cancer checkups, stretching out the time between doctor visits to six months.

The lefty also said nobody in the organization called him with an update regarding the rumors circulating about his involvement in any Santana trade.

“No call is better than any call,” he said. “As long as I don’t get a call, I’ll just assume to show up to Fort Myers. Actually, I guess I’ll show up at Fort Myers anyways.”

The Twins also share the Florida city with the Sox during spring training.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:29 am

Keith Law: (2:18 PM ET ) I haven't looked at any #s yet, but I'd have to guess the Yanks are around 90-92 wins as is, 93-95 with Santana.

LOL if this were the case, only an idiot would trade for Santana to be able to wint he Yankees around 1 to 2 more games for 20+ million.

the Yankees if they stayed healthy would be a 100 win team with Santana

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:34 am

It’s time to tend to Tito
http://bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?&articleid=1067365&format=&page=1&listingType=sox#articleFull

This is how much things have changed for the Red Sox [team stats]: The players don’t leave, and the biggest question concerns keeping the manager rather than disposing of him.

Less than a month before the start of spring training, the reigning world champions were front and center last night during the annual Boston Baseball Writers Association dinner at the Westin Waterfront Hotel. Rarely (if ever) in their history have the Red Sox had an offseason as tranquil as this one, and any issues currently facing the team are relatively minor.

But here’s a question: Why hasn’t manager Terry Francona been signed to a contract extension yet?

“We’ve made no secret that it’s a goal of ours to extend Tito’s contract this offseason,” general manager Theo Epstein said. “He’s certainly earned it and we view him as a core, long-term member of the organization. Both sides have vowed to keep negotiations confidential to increase the chances of getting a deal done.”

Before we suggest there is a problem when, in fact, there isn’t one (yet), let’s take the patient stance here for a moment. It is only January. Opening Day is still more than two months away. The contractual situation of many managers frequently is addressed during spring training, when clubs don’t have to worry about negotiations with players.

Even Francona, at least publicly, doesn’t seem concerned.

“I think both parties are really interested in getting something done,” he said. “Other than that, it’s something we wish to keep private.”

Fair enough.

Still, it wasn’t too long ago that the Sox were in a similar position, with Epstein entering the final year of his contract following a World Series win. We didn’t think that was much of a concern, either. For whatever reason, the Sox subsequently strung out contract negotiations with their own general manager, leading to the one truly ugly incident under the current administration.

Theo-gate.

As things stand, Francona is under contract for 2008, but that’s not the point. The Sox need to address his deal now. If Francona is allowed to enter the year without an extension, the Red Sox will be undermining their own manager’s authority and setting him up to fail.

For the Red Sox, the problem is that Francona has all the leverage, and they know it. During Francona’s four years in Boston, he has been arguably the most successful manager in baseball. That means Francona deserves a bump from his current salary of $1.75 million to something more in the range of $4-5 million, the approximate salaries of the highest-paid managers in the game, like Joe Torre, Lou Piniella, Dusty Baker and Bobby Cox.

Only one of those men has won more World Series than Francona has.

This winter, like the one following the title win in 2004, Francona has received a truckload of offers for speaking engagements and appearances. After agreeing to so many then, he is generally declining them now. The offseason of 2004-05 was a winter of burnout for the Red Sox, who subsequently showed up for spring training feeling like the season had never ended.

Francona said of his choices this time around, “I wasn’t going to make the same mistake again.”

The point is, Francona is in demand more now than ever. The second World Series title changed his image and marketability almost as much as the first. Torre hasn’t won a World Series since 2000, but that didn’t stop the Los Angeles Dodgers from giving him almost $15 million for three years.

The real question is whether the Sox have been slow in getting around to Francona’s contract for no specific reason or whether they are delaying talks because they anticipate a potential fight.

After all, it’s not like the Red Sox [team stats] have had that much else to focus on this winter.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:37 am

Arrogant Little Midge Pedrioa says He wants to win more WS every year"

http://bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?&articleid=1067378&format=&page=1&listingType=sox#articleFull

“I didn’t know what the feeling was going to be like once we won the World Series, but you definitely want to do it again, you want more,” Pedroia said yesterday. “It was so exciting, so much fun, you want to do it every year. I know that’s kind of unrealistic, but we’re definitely going to give it our best shot.”

“Sometimes when I’m driving in my car by myself, I’ll think about how much fun the season was and what we all did together, but it’s mostly about getting ready for next year and trying to do it again,” said Pedroia, who led all rookies with a .317 batting average.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:40 am

Turning two
2B Pedroia eyes sophomore year

http://bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?&articleid=1067378&format=&page=1&listingType=sox#articleFull
Dustin Pedroia’s first major league season was about as sweet as it can get. The second baseman was named American League Rookie of the Year, and his team won the World Series.

The only thing he can rule out of 2008 and beyond is repeating as the best rookie. Everything else is still on the table.

“I didn’t know what the feeling was going to be like once we won the World Series, but you definitely want to do it again, you want more,” Pedroia said yesterday. “It was so exciting, so much fun, you want to do it every year. I know that’s kind of unrealistic, but we’re definitely going to give it our best shot.”

Pedroia, who received his award at last night’s annual Boston Baseball Writers Association dinner at the Westin Waterfront Hotel, lives in the Phoenix area. Outside of sharing the excitement of his season with his and his wife’s family, he has been working out with teammates Kevin Youkilis [stats] and Manny Ramirez [stats] at the Athletes’ Performance Institute in Tempe, Ariz.

He said there has been a moment or two when he can’t keep the thrill of the 2007 season from creeping into his everyday life.

“Sometimes when I’m driving in my car by myself, I’ll think about how much fun the season was and what we all did together, but it’s mostly about getting ready for next year and trying to do it again,” said Pedroia, who led all rookies with a .317 batting average.

Shortly after the season ended, Pedroia underwent surgery to remove a broken hamate bone in his left hand, which had bothered him late in the season. The cast was off by mid-November, and he said he is perfectly healthy.

“I’m good, I’m fine,” Pedroia said. “A week after I got my cast off, it felt fine. I did all the rehab and I’ve been hitting since the first of the year.”

Considering he played the final two months of the season with the broken hamate bone, it should come as little surprise that Pedroia would minimize its impact two months after all visible signs of the surgery had disappeared.

“No pain, man, that’s about it,” Pedroia said. “It’s pretty common, not a big deal. Once I got that thing out, I could feel it the first day.”

Pedroia is working out twice a day, six days a week with a group of major leaguers that includes Tampa Bay’s Carl Crawford, Baltimore’s Brian Roberts, the Los Angeles Dodgers’ Andre Ethier and Arizona’s Conor Jackson. Speed and agility are Pedroia’s focus.

“I’m kind of anchoring that” aspect of the workouts, he said jokingly.

His cribbage skills, which manager Terry Francona constantly mocks, are still poor, but he said his pingpong game has never been better.

Earlier yesterday, Pedroia addressed the Red Sox [team stats] rookies in town for the initiation program the team sponsors. He said the same program helped him with his adjustments to the major leagues, and 2007 was proof of that.

On the verge of his second full season, Pedroia looks, acts and sounds exactly like the kind of player he always has been - confident and exactly where he wants to be.

He does not want to change a thing.
“No, I’m just going to be who I am, not try to do too much,” he said about the coming season. “Play good defense, get on base and let those big guys drive me in, that’s all I can ask for.”
msilverman@bostonherald.com

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:45 am

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/sports/baseball/18baseball.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Roger Clemens Hires Top Washington Lawyer (LANNY BREUER)

By DUFF WILSON

Published: January 18, 2008

Roger Clemens has bolstered his legal team, hiring a powerhouse Washington lawyer, Lanny A. Breuer, who represented former President Bill Clinton during his impeachment hearings as well as numerous corporations that were the subject of Congressional investigations.

Rusty Hardin, Clemens?s Houston lawyer, said late Thursday that he had recruited Breuer to be his client?s ?local counsel? in Washington because of his expertise.

?We?d talked to him, and we?d just been waiting a day or two to check out conflicts,? Hardin said. ?He had no conflicts.?

Clemens, who has won seven Cy Young awards but now finds his legacy in jeopardy, is facing a Congressional investigation as the result of his challenge to the Mitchell report released last Dec. 13. The report, produced by former Senator George J. Mitchell, examined the connections between baseball and performance-enhancing drugs, and linked about 90 current and former players, including Clemens, to such drugs.

Breuer responded to an e-mail message Thursday night and confirmed he had been retained by Clemens. ?This is correct,? he wrote. ?This just happened.?

Asked to comment on Clemens?s situation, Breuer wrote, ?I?m honored to be joining Rusty Hardin in representing one of the greatest pitchers and athletes in history.?

Breuer, a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, is a partner in the Washington law firm of Covington and Burling and is a co-chairman of its white-collar defense and investigations practice group.

As a special White House counsel, he helped represent Clinton from 1997 to 1999 during independent-counsel and Congressional investigations, and the impeachment hearings.

Breuer specializes in Congressional investigations. He has represented the University of California in an investigation of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Moody?s Investor Service in the wake of Enron?s collapse, and Halliburton/KBR in a hearing conducted by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

That committee now wants to hear what Clemens has to say under oath about the accusations in the Mitchell report made by his former trainer, Brian McNamee. Clemens contends the accusations are false.

Richard D. Emery, a lawyer for McNamee, said of Breuer in a telephone interview, ?We welcome a rational voice entering the case on behalf of Clemens, and I would expect a marked and clear change in strategy quickly in order to protect his client from the obvious pitfalls of lying under oath or to federal officials.?

Emery added that the first thing Breuer should do ?is find out all the facts and adopt a strategy consistent with them, which would mean Roger Clemens would not testify. But we shall see how he proceeds.?

Lanny J. Davis, another prominent Washington lawyer, who worked with Breuer as White House counsel for Clinton, said bringing in Breuer was an excellent decision by Hardin and Clemens.

?I can?t think of a better lawyer in Washington to represent Mr. Clemens or anybody that needs help in the Congress or in the public arena than Lanny Breuer,? Davis said in a telephone interview. Davis, who said he had been following news reports about Clemens, said: ?I think Mr. Clemens has to be transparent and tell the truth, and I think that?s what Lanny Breuer is all about. I hope he told the truth to ?60 Minutes,? but if he didn?t, then he?s got to do it in front of Congress, and I think there?s no one better than Lanny Breuer to do that job.?

Davis said he had found Clemens believable in his recent ?60 Minutes? interview with Mike Wallace, in which Clemens acknowledged taking injections of vitamin B12 and the painkiller lidocaine from McNamee, but denied that McNamee injected him with steroids and human growth hormone, as McNamee told Mitchell?s investigators.

?But he?s going to have a much tougher set of cross-examiners than Mike Wallace was that night, to say the least,? Davis added in reference to Clemens?s House committee hearing, scheduled for Feb. 13. ?And as a former prosecutor and great litigator, Lanny will guide him on how to respond to tough cross-examination.?

Also on Thursday, the F.B.I. opened a preliminary investigation into statements that shortstop Miguel Tejada made to staff members of the same House committee in August 2005 in which he denied using steroids or knowing of other players who had used or talked about them.

The House committee had asked the Department of Justice to investigate Tejada after the Mitchell report contradicted denials that Tejada had made to its staff members.

Tejada had been interviewed in connection with a perjury investigation of Rafael Palmeiro, who had testified to the committee in March 2005 that he never used steroids. Not long afterward, Palmeiro tested positive.

Making false statements in a government matter is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Palmeiro was never charged with perjury because the panel could not prove he had taken steroids before his testimony. Now Tejada is under scrutiny.

In an interview published Thursday in Listin Diario, a Dominican newspaper, Tejada said he was ?clean.?

?My mind is calm, I feel good, without worries, because I know that my years in the big leagues have been done in a clean way,? he said.

The House committee is trying to set dates to interview Clemens; his former Yankees teammates Andy Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch; McNamee; and Kirk Radomski, a confessed steroids dealer with baseball players as clients. All are being asked to testify at the Feb. 13 hearing.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:46 am

....hearst article form ny daily news......................

The brief also questions the government's "selective disclosure," in giving the information to Mitchell - a private citizen working for MLB - without making it available to the public.

When Novitzky's December 2005 affidavit was initially made public in April, names of the players he implicated were blacked out. Hearst went to court in June asking that the complete affidavit be made public.

The U.S. Attorney's office in San Francisco and the Major League Baseball Players Association opposed the request, and in September U.S. District Judge Thomas C. Platt in Central Islip ruled there was no public right to the names, and cited the ongoing investigation.

The government unsealed the affidavid on Dec. 21, eight days after Mitchell's report on drug use in baseball was released. Earlier in the day, it unsealed another Novitzky affidavit in Arizona involving pitcher Jason Grimsley.

Hearst claims the government flip-flopped its argument that it needed to keep the names sealed to protect an ongoing investigation. "The government's sign-off on the report's disclosures, and its subsequent motion to unseal the names in the search warrant affidavit, casts serious doubt on whether there was ever a real threat of harm to an ongoing investigation or any other compelling government interest," the brief said.

Hearst also joined the MLBPA in asking the court to send the matter back to the district court because it did not give the union the chance to respond to the motion to unseal the affidavit and make the names of players public.

"The public's right of access cannot coexist with government efforts to limit or control disclosure of judicial records through means of selective disclosure," Hearst said.

.........................................................................

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball

Breuer will be keeping an eye on this one, as are lawmakers. it has a precedence at stake in regards to laize faire and the limit of governmental authority / jurisdiction. .

we should hear about an argument that the government favors the owners in the on-going investigation regarding the ani trust exemption and free agency, and that s why they pick and choose what to release to whom. That investigstion is pitting Selig and the owners vs the Players (hence the brief filed...players were not to be named as it might affect the anti-trust exemption battle) and the MLBPA.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:46 am

Bill Clinton was charged with perjury and obstruction. I would assume Roger is safe from getting into trouble. But the one who lies alot will end up taking the 5th, because he doesnt have immunity anymore. That means if Team Clemens can produce evidence to controvert the accusers original statements, then he will lose his immunity altogether and be wide open to prosecution.

The contest of jurisdiction has already been brought up...with a breif filed by th SF Chronicle and the Albany Times..HEARST CORP....that was fast, with no warning. and that is big.

They are questioning the government's inconsistencies between the grimsley's affadit and the mitchell report. The difference in turning over official govt documents to a private man, and then having that official list made public, soemthing SFchronicle couldnt make public as they were official docs....a good ol catch22

. . Why was Mitchell given names from the Grimsley affidavit??? A goverment official gave names to a private man investigating base ball. hearst goes onto to question the governments authority (or jurisdiction )in a private businesses investigation of itself.

http://www.nydailynews.com

if it is found that the govt does not have juridiction over this, a private investigation, than the accusers did not swear to tell the truth. Since the FBI, IRS, and FED. PORSECUTORS have no right to be involved, they should not be able to enforce prosecution for known false statements.
distributor should have been prosecuted to begin with, not the players. Now we see that the San Fransico Chronicle and Blbany Times are I am sure he will contest that the overnment's representatives given statements by the accusers had no legal jurisdiction to offer immunity, nor interact with a private businesses investigation process. NOTE 369 is all over the place in that report. As it reads on pg. 193 (145)

369 ....providing for criminal penalties for making knowingly false

statements in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States??

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:51 am

MORE SCRUTINY ON THE GOVT ROLE IN THIS

Hearst Corp. wants answers from government about Mitchell Report

BY TERI THOMPSON
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Friday, January 4th 2008, 9:59 PM

Unhappy with the alliance between prosecutors and a private steroids investigator, lawyers for the San Francisco Chronicle and the Albany Times Union filed a brief Friday asking the federal government to explain why it shared what it had deemed secret information with the man probing steroids in baseball.

Hearst Corp., the publishers of the Chronicle and the Times Union, said the government may have violated its own sealing order when it gave former Sen. Majority Leader George Mitchell permission to publish the names of players accused of using performance-enhancing drugs, and challenged the sincerity of the government's claim that continued sealing of the names was crucial to its ongoing investigation.

Hearst contends the names Mitchell received and released to the public on Dec. 21 were the same names in an affidavit produced by IRS Special Agent Jeff Novitzky that contained information about players' steroid use given to him by former clubhouse attendant Kirk Radomski. The brief also questions the government's "selective disclosure," in giving the information to Mitchell - a private citizen working for MLB - without making it available to the public.

When Novitzky's December 2005 affidavit was initially made public in April, names of the players he implicated were blacked out. Hearst went to court in June asking that the complete affidavit be made public.

The U.S. Attorney's office in San Francisco and the Major League Baseball Players Association opposed the request, and in September U.S. District Judge Thomas C. Platt in Central Islip ruled there was no public right to the names, and cited the ongoing investigation.

The government unsealed the affidavid on Dec. 21, eight days after Mitchell's report on drug use in baseball was released. Earlier in the day, it unsealed another Novitzky affidavit in Arizona involving pitcher Jason Grimsley.

Hearst claims the government flip-flopped its argument that it needed to keep the names sealed to protect an ongoing investigation. "The government's sign-off on the report's disclosures, and its subsequent motion to unseal the names in the search warrant affidavit, casts serious doubt on whether there was ever a real threat of harm to an ongoing investigation or any other compelling government interest," the brief said.

Hearst also joined the MLBPA in asking the court to send the matter back to the district court because it did not give the union the chance to respond to the motion to unseal the affidavit and make the names of players public.

"The public's right of access cannot coexist with government efforts to limit or control disclosure of judicial records through means of selective disclosure," Hearst said.

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:56 am

When the Red Sox acquired Mike Lowell, Boston Sports Radio WEEI's host John and Gerry Callahan spent days talking about how he's an obvious steroid user and probably washed up because of the new testing policy ( at the time). They have since never mentioned it because ( I think ) Lowell has produced and is a great clubhouse guy.

I think Lowell did steroids and that's why he's defending Clemens.

LOL okay. I think the players in general feel that what Mitchell, Selig, the govt, and the media is doing to the players is simply trying to embarrass them (which they are). I think they know how great Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds are and find it ridiculous what the media is doing....I believe them....the public and the media pretend like they know about steroids and how it affects players....We don't know a damn thing.

we can see how the chips are being stacked in the anti trust exemption battle. players are with players and selig, and the owners are in bed with the goverbment. its shocking, The Hearst Corp filed a bried for the governments disclosing information (names) to mitchell, a private man conducting a private investigation. and challenged that the government had no real resons to deny their f.i.o.a. when they were more than happy to disclose it to mitchell

whew...this is gonna get ugly

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:52 am

Buzz: F’Mart Still the Key to Santana

http://www.metsblog.com/2008/01/18/buzz-fmart-still-the-key-to-santana/#comments

Last week in the Star-Tribune, citing ‘people with knowledge of the discussions,’ Joe Christensen wrote that the Twins have told the Mets they can have Johan Santana if they add OF Fernando Martinez to their current offer of OF Carlos Gomez and RHPs Deolis Guerra, Kevin Mulvey and Phil Humber.

For what it’s worth, the following day in a poll for MetsBlog.com, when asked if the Mets should trade these five prospects for Santana, and sign him to a long-term deal, 78 percent said, “Yes.”

Today in Newsday, Ken Davidoff writes that Martinez could be ‘the key’ to acquiring Santana.

According to Davidoff, citing ‘an industry official familiar with Minnesota’s trade discussions,’ the Mets could have a deal if Martinez is included, assuming he is packaged with Gomez, Guerra, Humber and Mulvey.

…it’s like deja-vu all over again…i mean, what are the odds that davidoff and christensen are talking to the same guy…if you recall, the buzz in new york following christensen’s report was that it had essentially been aimed directly at the Bronx, in hopes that it would motivate the Yankees to get involved again…so, i’m thinking this is a second round of ammo…hopefully, it’s also the last…

Because, Davidoff also writes, “The Yankees appear set to move forward without the two-time Cy Young Award winner.”

…i’ll be honest, i catch buzz from all sorts of people, some who believe the Yankees are still in this, others who think they’ve moved on, others who think they’re interested only to the extent that the Red Sox are interested, and others who think they’re mounting a new proposal different from the Phil-Hughes centered package we have heard so much about since December…

…point is, i don’t trust them…i don’t trust the people who are filling my head with information i never report, and i don’t trust the Yankees…as far as i am concerned, i assume the worse, because, as a Mets fan, that is my nature when it comes to the Bronx…so, tell me they’re in it, tell me they’re out, i don’t care…as far as i am concerned, they’re only irrelevant when this story has reached a conclusion, which i certainly hope is sooner than later…

By the way, if you’re interested, at MetsGeek, Steve Hubbell and John Peterson do a ‘Point-Counterpoint” post regarding Santana, and whether the Mets should or should not acquire him.
Posted in Fernando Martinez, Johan Santana, Mets Rumors on January 18th, 2008
RSS 2.0 You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

RSS feed
24 Comments »
Comment by KnowItAll
2008-01-18 08:16:45

no brainer. santana is the best pitcher on the planet. trade fmart. i watched him play in bingo, and was underwhelmed (but he is young, whatever). however, i would prefer to keep geurra, who has gooden-like skils.
Log in to Reply
Comment by KnowItAll
2008-01-18 09:29:13

binghamton = bingo
Log in to Reply
Comment by Hit The Weights Zeile
2008-01-18 10:43:49

throw in fmart and heilman and ask for nathan back also.
(Comments wont nest below this level)
Log in to Reply

Comment by Vinnie
2008-01-18 08:23:49

I can be a reporter too.

According to an inside Yankee source who asked to remain nameless,

Our offer of Hughes, Marquez, and Cabrera still remains on the table. That is the best offer and the Twins would be stupid to take any other offer, especially the offer from the Red Sox. Hughes is destined for Yankee immortality so we really don’t want to trade him but we also don’t want the Red Sox to get any better because we can’t beat them as is. We want the Mets to get him because then we can just play the media by telling them that Santana is really not that good and we never really wanted him to begin with. I mean really how good can he be if they traded him for Gomes and Goerra and all the other shitty prospects from the Mets… I mean really the Mets.. Ha ha ha.. What a joke they are … Anyway if Santana was really that good he would be here with us the Yankees the greatest team in the History of teams.. 26.. ring a bell?.. 26 do you know what that means? Rings baby that’s right Rings.. Got Rings??? I did not think so. Mets please.. Santana he is going to blow his arm out putting on the Mets jersey at the news conference… His arm and asshole would turn to gold just by touching the plaques of The Babe and Joey D. We don’t want him anyways.. unless we get him and then he’ll be great.. You know what I mean.. hey.. We are the Yankees…

In other other news… Hank says that they never even put Hughes in an offer for Johan Santana.
Log in to Reply

Comment by calamityfrancis
2008-01-18 08:32:22

Omar HAS to make this offer. Get this done, it’s needed in the worst way, for all the reasons we’ve been talking about for the last couple of months.

DO IT!
Log in to Reply

Comment by gowrightgo
2008-01-18 08:59:43

I finally moved around and started reading some of the other blogs and sites located on the left and right of our comment screen here. Went to Metsgeek which had a good read on Santana vs staying with the youth movement. Both were well presented arguments.

I have to say…though I am in the camp of believing Santana has already peaked in his career and is slowly receding to being just very very good and not the best pitcher in the game…. the article did help me see the value of his acquisition. Mainly, the guy in favor of keeping him suggesting that in some way Santana saves us future dollars regardless of how much he signs for. Mets will not populate 3/5ths of their rotation in the coming years from their system regardless of how good we or I think the prospects are (Guerra, Mulvey, Humber, Pelfrey, etc). By signing Santana, we forgo having to sign some of the future scrubs like Lohse and Garcia and Livan to populate the future rotation. 1 Santana is better than all 3 of those guys combined anyway. It was an interesting angle and probably has some truth to it.

I am sure I am not in favor of dealing both Gomez and Fmart in the same deal and I think throwing in Guerra does almost nothing to help our chances of getting this deal done so I would pull him out. But I would consider giving up Heilman and or Rustich and Smith and Kunz (not all 3 but some combo of those young guys) to make this deal happen. I would also throw in a Gotay or another positional prospect other than gem outfielders.
Log in to Reply

Comment by anditsouttahere
2008-01-18 09:04:19

include fmart, remove guerra, then do it.
Log in to Reply
Comment by FBones24
2008-01-18 09:48:33

In total agreement…I’ve been saying this from the beginning. Trade F-Mart and Gomez but try to hold on to the pitchers, even if they are not as highly regarded.
Log in to Reply

Comment by JohnnyG
2008-01-18 09:09:21

An email i sent to Matt last week:

I am actually quite shocked that people have such a hang up when offering F-Mart with Gomez, but are more than willing to toss in Guerra without hesitation. Presently, F-Mart would be ranked as 1 and Guerra 1A prospect in terms of ceiling, but when you include the “ease of replacement” factor its not even close. Guerra has tons more value to the Mets than F-Mart. Just this season alone the Mets could have had their choice of T. Hunter, A. Jones, and A. Rowand which is a fair comparison for the level of OF F-Mart is projected to be (maybe even giving him too much credit). Show me who the Mets could have signed to replace Guerra, a projected #1/2 starter. NOBODY!

I don’t even flinch when offering both F-Mart and Gomez, but you would have to pry Guerra out of my dead hands to get him.
Log in to Reply
Comment by napes22
2008-01-18 09:55:45

It’s true, Guerra is a 6′5 young pitcher with tons of potential. He has the build to be great, and the stuff, we just need to wait and see if he has the talent to put it all together.
Log in to Reply

Comment by extrawhitemeat
2008-01-18 10:25:38

For a guy whose pitched 170 innings his entire life, still can’t throw an average curve ball, and is probably 3-4 years away from the majors… yeah.. you can have him…

Johan will have bout 2 more Cy Youngs on his shelf by the time Guerra is anything close to ML ready..

he hasn’t even thrown a 100 innings in a single season yet!
Log in to Reply

Comment by stickguy
2008-01-18 09:20:51

I liked the article, although I would probably side with Peterson if required to pick one.

The concept that I think was glossed over (it was mentioned early on as what you can do with a prospect) was trading them in the future.

They seemed to be using the logic that, since the 3 pitchers wouldn’t be in the rotation for the Mets together, trade them all for Santana. But, even if the Mets didn’t play them all, they could be used to fill holes in the future via trades.

And before I get flamed (again!), I am not saying that the Mets shouldn’t get Santana, just that you have to be careful how much talent is given up.

I personally think Guerra is someone that they should hold onto (for valid worth now vs. future “upside potential”), so if F mart goes in, he comes out.

More realistically, this deal would be Gomez and Mulvey, + 2/3 other prospects that were not Guerra or martinez.
Log in to Reply
Comment by napes22
2008-01-18 09:44:28

I agree. While both F-Mart and Guerra are young and somewhat raw, they are oozing with potential. These are the types of players you want to see through and give a chance - the risk equals the reward. If Guerra and F-Mart have a good year in the minors next year, their trade value goes up significantly, and we’ll need that trade value to get a decent 1B, catcher, or OF.

As for Mulvey/Humber, we know what they are capable of - Mulvey is slated as a 3, and Humber, unless he shows significant improvement this year, is a 4-5.
Log in to Reply

Comment by TRex23
2008-01-18 09:44:26

I really don’t want to include Martinez in a deal for Santana, but if we must, I wonder why we have not heard any discussions of the Mets asking for another player along with Santana if they are going to trade Martinez as well?

I would do the deal if the Mets could get a decent player in addition to Santana. New York native Joe Nathan would be a pipe dream (unless they throw in Gotay and probably Pelfrey as well), but what about any one of the following:

MIchael Cuddyer
Delmon Young

I mean, come on Omar and Smith — Get creative.
Log in to Reply
Comment by napes22
2008-01-18 09:54:23

As much as I would love to get either of those players, Minnesota won’t be trading them in this deal. Cuddyer is a former 1st round pick who is finally coming into his own, and Young cost them one of the top pitching prospects in all of baseball (Garza). If we could somehow pull Nathan into the deal I’d be thrill, but he’d probably cost even more.

I’m suprised that Minnesota has no interest in Gotay being that they have no 2B right now after trading Castillo. While he isn’t a star, he’s still very servicable (outside of his defense).
Log in to Reply

Comment by extrawhitemeat
2008-01-18 10:35:56

They gave up Garza for Delmon Young.. he’s not coming here… there could certainly be some wiggle room for a counter offer though..

The problem is.. the Twins see Gomez, F-mart, and Guerra as the keys to the deal because their ceilings are high.. but to get something immediate in return, they also want guys like Mulvey and Humber..

I would think Gotay could be worked in the deal as well as others have stated.
Log in to Reply

Comment by stickguy
2008-01-18 10:03:49

I was beating the Gotay drum in the past too. If the Twins want a ML ready young guy, he’s the most experienced name mentioned in the talks with any team.

If Johan does come to the mets, I would be shocked if it was the deal (G,G, M and H, with or without the 2nd M) always mentioned. The core might be the same (gomez and Mulvey), but I bet the other pieces could end up shuffling around, and maybe something more coming back.

So, maybe Smith asks for the big 5, Omar says no way, but starts throwoing out other options, etc.

And who knows what players Smith really wants.

Gomez, Mulvey, Humber and Gotay (and if needed, another tier B prospect) is a legitimate package. Especially for a team with serious offense issues!

These aren’t really far away prospects. All 4 could play in the majors this year (3 already have) and contribute now for the Twins, and they still have the future star (Gomez), although he might have some growing pains this year!

Gotay could probably take over right away at 3B and be a major upgrade, or just get him a D tutor and let him grow into 2B.
Log in to Reply

Comment by stickguy
2008-01-18 10:05:45

Anyway, assuming that Reyes or DW isn’t included (duh, I know!), if Omar can pull off a trade for Johan and still have Pelfrey, Martinez and Guerra in the system, then anyone else can go.
Log in to Reply
Comment by Xavier22
2008-01-18 10:23:48

I’d be surprised (and extremely pleased) if Omar managed to keep both Martinez AND Guerra in the Mets system in trading for Santana. I suspect one or both of them would need to be included in the package.
Log in to Reply

Comment by gowrightgo
2008-01-18 10:28:40

Matt Cerrone….
I noticed you policed this thread and cut out things that veered off of baseball. I don’t like it. Humor is an integral part of what seperates an interactive blog from things like picking up a newspaper and reading it. Please try to let us all know what your plan is for this site. If you are going to be spending time policing clean posts that veer away from all mets all the time…then I’d like to know since I can post my vanilla baseball comments and move on to having an actual discourse on other sites if necessary
Log in to Reply

Click here to cancel "reply".
Name
E-mail
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> in your comment.
« News: Dotel May Have Deal with White Sox Teixeira Signs One-Year Deal »

*

RedMagma Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:55 am

Point/Counterpoint: Johan Santana

http://www.metsgeek.com/articles/2008/01/18/pointcounterpoint-johan-santana/

Scribbled by: Steve Hubbell and John Peterson @ 12:00 am | Filed under: Articles

Can’t make up your mind about whether acquiring Johan Santana for a quintet of youngsters is a good move for the Mets? Neither can the MetsGeek staff. Writers Steve Hubbell and John Peterson recently had a little back-and-forth on the issue. Maybe their efforts to sway each other’s mind will help settle yours.

Steve Hubbell: “Baseball is the background music of my life,” George F. Will, the conservative columnist, famously mused. These may be the only honest words he ever uttered, but the sentiment behind them is profound. Whenever my own thoughts drift from urgent matters—work, family, politics, Snorg models, etc.—they invariably head toward loftier heights, notably the starting lineup and pitching rotation of the New York Mets.

I’m bracing myself, John, for the fusillade of sophisticated analytical factoids you’re about to launch in my direction, proving that Johan Santana is simply not worth the four or five Met prospects he may fetch. I know you’ll make a convincing case. But consider for a moment some subjective factors that, for me at least, tip the balance in favor of a deal for The Best Pitcher in Baseball (TBPiB).

Start with the sheer beauty of a well-configured starting rotation: intimidating at the top, solid and hearty in the middle, and laden with promise at the bottom, a masterpiece of balance and proportion, age and youth, wisdom and potential. Johan gives us that, and much more to boot. He’s a stopper who keeps everyone else in his place. Without him, what we’ve got is a train wreck preparing to happen. If Pedro goes down on Memorial Day, our “ace” becomes John Maine. Meanwhile, Kyle Lohse slides into the number four spot. A jet-lagged Phil Humber, fresh from engaging the mighty Round Rock Express, makes his 2008 debut and gives up six runs in two innings of work against the Fish. Eck.

Santana forestalls all of that ugliness. And think, John, of the exciting match-ups TBPiB makes possible: Cole Hamels vs. Johan Santana at the Mets home opener on April 8. Carlos Zambrano vs. Santana at Wrigley later that month. Santana/Peavy in June. Santana/Oswalt in August. Smoltz/Santana at Turner the final week of the year. Not all of those pairings will actually happen, of course, but the Wilpons can sell a ridiculous number of advance tickets—and advertising time—on the faint possibility that they might. I can’t tell you how many games I attended as a callow lad in 1969, yearning for a glimpse of Seaver or Koosman and enduring rough outings from Jim McAndrew and Don Cardwell (RIP) instead.

And here’s an argument you weren’t expecting: signing Johan could save the team some serious cash. Not overall, mind you, but in moderate amounts here and there, offsetting some of the cost of that contract. With an ace at the top, there’s no need to hand a multiyear, prospect-clogging deal to a journeyman like Lohse. When Pedro or Duque start feeling their advanced years, a cheap(er) flier on Freddy Garcia or Livan Hernandez will do nicely, thank you. That alone could save $24 million over three years (minus the newcomer’s paycheck, obviously— call it $18 million). And having Pelfrey slot in at #5 in the warmer months would be perfect for his development. That’s right—Johan could inaugurate a youth movement, just as you’d want it to happen: a low-pressure, midyear call-up to a club enjoying a healthy lead in the standings.

And that’s not all. The Mets are going to have to test the free agent pitching market next year anyway. If they try to secure Johan then, his price will have risen significantly. A passel of new bidders will see to that. Twenty percent is a reasonable inflationary projection (it’s been about that for elite pitchers over the past several years). In other words, $100 million today becomes $120 million next year, and so on. So we’ve “saved” something like 38 million bucks by signing him now.

But let’s not argue over money, shall we? Graver matters are at stake.

Such as the fate of Omar Minaya. The unspoken dynamic behind the Johan-a-thon is a dance of death between two rival GMs. Both Minaya and Bill Smith of the Twins fear that if they bungle this deal, they may be out of a job by Thanksgiving. And that should concern us deeply, John. A second-place, non-wildcard finish for the Mets in the National League East almost certainly spells the end of the Minaya era. I have nightmares about the kind of hack the Wilpons would settle on as a replacement. Maybe Jeff himself would like to give it a go.

It would be glorious to watch all of our young talent mature within the organization. But we may not have that luxury. For me, the only move more dangerous than dealing for Johan Santana is letting the opportunity slip by.

John Peterson: Steve, I won’t waste your time and energy with boring statistics, economic valuations and performance projections. I’m also too lazy and stupid to be able to do those things gracefully.

But subjective factors? Those I understand. Consider for yourself that Pedro Martinez, while old, is also one of best pitchers in baseball—ever—and he’s not exactly done. Is that not enough for you? I don’t want Santana coming in and being the big man. I want Pedro, El Duque, and the young ‘uns. You want to upset that delicate symmetry by trading everyone desirable for “The Best Pitcher in Baseball.” That’s just greedy.

Also consider that the Mets are competing for the right to be the team that gives out the largest contract ever bestowed upon a pitcher—ever. You write that if we secure him now, his price will be lower. I don’t think so. His price will be monstrous, as much as $25 million per year. For the right to be the team that pays this incredible sum, you want the Mets to hand out several of their absolute best prospects.

Three of those proposed prospects are pitchers: Deolis Guerra, Kevin Mulvey and Philip Humber. Yet you make the claim that “signing Johan could save the team some serious cash.” You’re right: I wasn’t expecting that argument, because it’s the complete opposite of the truth.

“With an ace at the top, there’s no need to hand out a multiyear, prospect-clogging deal to a journeyman like Lohse.” Prospect-clogging? What prospects? Furthermore, whom do you expect to take the places of Pedro and El Duque in future years? What if the Mets can’t resign Oliver Perez? By trading Guerra, Mulvey, and Humber, the organization will basically strip itself of every cheap, young starter with enough talent to grace the Mets’ rotation. Which means free agent starters at free agent prices.

No, Johan will not “inaugurate a youth movement.” He will make the Mets’ system weaker, which will exacerbate the organization’s contempt for young, cheap players, which will make the system weaker still, and so on. Watching “young talent mature within the organization” is not a “luxury;” it is a stark necessity.

The most glaring omission from all of these Santana discussions is an understanding of the incredible value of youth. Currently, baseball teams pay, on average, more than $4 million per marginal win (above replacement) for free agents. Think about how much more value-per-win the average player making the major league minimum (or slightly more) provides, and not just for one year, but for three years. After that, the young player enters arbitration-eligibility and provides three more years, still at considerably less-than-market value.

The Mets should not lightly cast off 24 below-market years for one single below-market year of Santana.

Yes, Johan Santana is very, very good, and he would make the Mets a better team. It’s also possible that at the extreme high-end of the market it is possible to sign a pitcher to a below-market contract. After all, no pitcher currently makes as much as $20 million per year. But we cannot just ignore the huge economic hit the Mets would take to get Santana on the roster for 2008.

Look at the other two teams bidding for his services. Both have massive payrolls, but still they understand the incredible benefit of having good young players under team control. It has been my suspicion for some time that neither team wants TBPiB; they just want the other team to bid too much. The Mets making the deal is a solution that is good for everyone—except the Mets.

Steve Hubbell: You know, John, I’ve always been a firm believer in the karma of baseball. If a team does certain things right, the Gods will reward it with riches beyond measure (usually expressed as Wins above Pythagenpat). Retaining and nurturing the best homegrown talent is one of those karma-friendly practices. And I defer to no man in the enjoyment I derive from watching the products of the Mets scouting and farm system thrive in the big leagues.

But the Diamond Gods don’t necessarily smile upon slavish homerism toward one’s own prospects. They place Opportunity in the path of the discerning GM and expect him to seize it when the time is right. And the time, by all that is Good and Holy, couldn’t be righter. Failure to pull the trigger on Santana-for-prospects, I fear, may doom the Mets to a non-playoff season in 2008 and possibly in 2009, as well.

Now, before you hurl your mousepad, John, let me grant that if the Mets luck out on the injury front, if they tap into hitherto undetected reserves of character and motivation, they may well make it to the playoffs without Johan. But with a fanbase that will treat every loss as a micro-armageddon, they’re in for a hair-raising ride, and so are we. After last season, I just don’t know if I can take it.

Here’s where we part company. Prospects offer two different kinds of value to a team: as future players and as a trading currency in the here and now. But those considerations are inseparable from one another. A player’s trade value rises and falls with his performance on minor- league fields and the likelihood of injury, factors that also determine his worth to his own team.

You argue that our package would offer “24 below-market years” for the Twins. That projection is literally insane, but I’ll let it pass for now. The promise of cheap production was no “glaring omission” from my calculations, it was implicit in them; it’s precisely why the Twins are considering our offer in the first place.

So what is the approximate value of the players currently on offer? Future performance is even harder to gauge than voter preferences in Nashua, Keene and Manchester. One thing we do know: surefire prospects have an annoying habit of misfiring. Ian Bladergroen, anyone? His departure in January of 2005 for Doug Mientkiewicz occasioned widespread lamentation and rending of garments. As did the exodus of Justin Huber, Matt Peterson, Gaby Hernandez and Yusmeiro Petit, and all those transactions turned out just fine for the Mets.

It’s quite possible that Kevin Mulvey and/or Deolis Guerra will never make a Major League start. Carlos Gomez may never advance beyond Endy Chavez. Phil Humber could settle in as an adequate number four. It’s also possible than one or another is destined for stardom. We just can’t say. But Johan is Johan.

What you’re forgetting, John, is that above all else, baseball is a spectacle. PT Barnum didn’t make a fortune by offering customers the ninth-largest elephant in the world, or several of central Connecticut’s more daring trapeze artists, or a troupe of promising young bearded ladies. No, he went for the biggest, the best, the baddest. He had impeccable judgment—and timing. A chance like Johan comes around once a generation. By all means, let’s hold onto our homegrown guys once the deal is done. But trust me, John: this is one trade the Baseball Gods will make sure we never regret.

John Peterson: Ah, that old canard: most prospects never amount to anything. But the big leagues keep on rolling somehow, nevertheless. Derogating any and all prospects by pointing to ones who didn’t work out is just pointless. Not that you did that, exactly, since Gaby Hernandez and Yusmeiro Petit are still legitimate prospects, and Justin Huber and Matt Peterson are still young and could still contribute significantly in the major leagues. I guess in New York, if they’re not a superstar right now, they’re nobody. A “fanbase that will treat every loss as a micro-armageddon”—there’s the rub. We have no patience. The city, the media, the fans, we all cry out, “Go get the best pitcher in baseball, no matter what the cost!”

What happens when the Mets don’t make the playoffs? That one, single, solitary below-market year of Santana will evaporate like so many drops of desert water. And the Twins will work on those 24 possible below-market years slowly and patiently. Philip Humber may only be a number four starter, right? Carlos Silva just signed a four-year, $48 million contract. That’s how much fourth starters cost on the open market. If Humber is even that good, the Twins will profit greatly. But he’s the least impressive prospect in the bunch.

Kevin Mulvey is likely to be a number three starter, and could be even better. Six more years there. The Mets are going to need some starters soon to fill the holes left by Pedro and El Duque, but with Mulvey gone the best option will be free agency. That’s more money. Deolis Guerra? He’s the best pitching prospect the Mets have. He could flame out, but he could be an ace as well. But hell, lets give up six more pre-free agency years for the privilege of adding The Best Pitcher in Baseball to The Baseball Circus, the New York Mess. The Show Must Go On, right?

Finally, as if three good young pitchers weren’t enough, let’s include our absolute top prospect, Fernando Martinez, a guy who held his own in AA as an 18-year old. But let’s not be slavish homers to our own prospects, right? Let’s allow other teams the huge economic benefit of having young players at far below the free market cost. Let’s allow them to develop the players, and we’ll just pay whatever price is necessary to sign them if they become stars.

This cavalier approach doesn’t bother me when it comes from the fans, who generally think about roster management like plug-and-play Lego pieces with no regard for contract status. But this has seemingly been the strategy of the New York Mets’ front office for years. I am not cool with that.

Sponsored content

Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez

Re: Mets can get Santana if they include Martinez