Letters to the Editor
-
They signed the One True God for 45 mil 3 years
The Machine; Mariano Rivera.
-
All Logical Except for One Thing
The Yankees were willing to give A-Rod a raise and made a generous initial offer to extend his contract prior to the opt out. Boras made a mistake. The Yanks took A-Rod back but for some $20,000,000 less than they originally offered to offset the money that the Yanks were getting from the Rangers. The Rangers are the big winners, A-Rod and Boras are losers in that they didn't maximize the contract while the Yanks are pretty much where they were before.
A-Rod is not the first to leave millions on the table - although to leave $20,000,000 for a couple of weeks of checking out the market is unprecendented. I remember when Nomar rejected a 4 years @ $15,000,000 per year extension from the Sox and decided to play out his contract year - 2004. He was traded mid-season and since then has played the last three seasons for $7,500,000 a year - not chump change but still half what the Sox offered.
-
God is on the decline
Rivera is not the same as old, and in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year I'd say he'll be a fraction of his old self. Still, I'd take him over everybody but Papelbon, considering for some reason guys like Hoffman and Wagner(Mets fan here)are considered great despite never coming through when needed the most.
-
Weird way of looking at it
KK writes:
"The Yankees don't need A-Fraud the choker, the argument goes, they need pitching. Well, if they let A-Fraud go, they're going to need even more pitching. That's how it works."
That's a funny way of looking at things. Obviously, the Yankees with A-Rod are a better team than a hypothetical Yankees team with all the same players except Lowell (or whoever) instead of A-Rod.
But the idea behind the argument you're referencing is that the money spent on A-Rod would be more efficiently spent on pitching. Of course, A-Rod = more runs. But do the added A-Rod runs exceed the runs against that you would save if you spent the money on a pitching upgrade? I don't know the answer to that, but that's the real question, isn't it?
-
Teams that scored second
What happens if we condition on "scoring second to tie the game at 1-1"? That takes all the blowouts out of consideration from your statistic.
I know, I'm a spoilsport. :)
-
Jason G.
Given that the Angels just traded an All-Star, Gold Glove shortstop plus cash to the White Sox for a starter with a 10-13 record in '07, it's reasonable to suggest that pitching is at much more of a premium now than big bats. And yes, Garland is probably a better pitcher than his 2007 numbers suggest, but
Aside from Johann Santana, there are simply no high-quality pitchers available right now (and as we speak, the Twins are trying to lock him up for 8 or 9 years), so prying one loose is going to take big bucks or lots of young talent. KK's point is a sound one.
-
A-Rod
Speaking as a Red Sox fan and a long-time A-Rod basher, I cannot believe that there were two writers who didn't vote for him as MVP this year. I don't care if Magglio Ordoñez is your next-door neighbor, washes your car for free, and is marrying your daughter... A-Rod was hands down the best player in either league this year, and if you vote for Ordoñez, you should have your vote revoked next year.
-
A Question About Who Gets to Vote for the MVP
First off, I agree with McSnee that given the dominance of A-Rod's numbers, and that the Yanks finished higher than Detroit, that it is fairly ridiculous that the two Michigan voters gave their top nod to the home town hero Magglio. Maybe understandable since A-Rod is not universally loved to say the least, but still ridiculous. But that aside, given that there are only 28 votes, how is it that 2 Detroit area writers get one? King, how exactly does one become a MLB MVP official voter? I could understand if a beat writer for each team gets a vote (equating to about the same number of overall votes)but as it stands now I have no idea who gets to play in this thing.
-
"why all the shouting?"
Because he made a big point of saying he was opting out of his Yankees contract. That's why there was shouting.
I agree with King's thoughts about the regular season being what really counts. But, not in New York. And at some point going 1-14 in the playoffs should matter.
The man slaughters baseball. Very fun to watch. And he's a train.
____
knock knock...
Barry Bonds
-
Yes but...
The Yankees are still signing a 32 year-old third-baseman to a ten year contract. They understand implicitly that they're paying double for a five-year contract, with any remaining production a hell of a bonus. Even Mike Schmidt, the greatest hitting third-baseman of all time, was primarily a first-baseman by age 35. (Plus I guess perhaps inflation will make his deal a bargain in the long run?)
-
Canseco
Says some A-Rod news could be on the horizon.
-
You can keep your A-Rod
No doubt he's a great player, and I hope he hits 800 HRs so that the all-time HR record is clean again.
But at less than half the price, I'll take Mike Lowell. Sure, he's likely to not be as good over the next 3 years that he was this year, but I still think he's a better value.
I generally don't place too much stock in players' post-season performance as an indicator of anything (small sample size), but I'll make an exception for A-Rod, as his Octobers are pretty consistently bad or mediocre, and he's so clearly a head case.
Finally, I can't get past how well Seattle and Texas did the year after he left each team. I am relieved he's staying with the Yankees; I feared what they could have done without him.
-
Salary Insanity
Two words that MLB needs to learn: Salary Cap
-
Carbrera for Garland
mcsnee said" Given that the Angels just traded an All-Star, Gold Glove shortstop plus cash to the White Sox for a starter with a 10-13 record in '07, it's reasonable to suggest that pitching is at much more of a premium now than big bats.
Whether ot not pitching is at more of a premium than hitting, I don't see how a trade of 33-year-old Orlando Cabrera (career OPS+ of 86, and it was only 95 in his "good year" this season) for Garland (a 28-year-old better-than-average starter--1.368 WHIP and 106 ERA+--ho's thrown over 200 innings the last four years) proves that point. I'll admit that I don't know about any contract issues here, but I would say that the White Sox blew this one, or at least that this move is somewhat desperate. (Juan Uribe is terrible, though, so that's something.)