Dan Gould

I can only hope this forces the Yankees to 8 years but either way, he'll be in pinstripes. This whole "just give me six years and I'll stay in Texas" is such a pile of BS. If he wants to stay in Texas, really wanted to stay in Texas, he'd negotiate with Texas, get their best offer, and accept it with some statement about how he respects the Yankees but Texas captured his heart last season and he wants to bring a championship there. But the fact is that he is like any other player who reaches free agency, he wants that extra year, and the one after that, and as much money as he can get. Werth is unlikely to sniff the playoffs anytime soon, think he cares?

Sad news; I only knew him for his warbling and for holding a glass of tea while he fell into a pool but reading the obit gives an appreciation for what he did on the field before he went into the booth.

Aren't we missing a piece of evidence here? The announcement is about the signing. They haven't said anything about ticket increases (and I'm pretty sure the Nationals have among the lowest ticket prices in the majors). Why is it "WAY too much money for players"? Did Werth pull out a gun and demand that ridiculous contract? (Ridiculous due to its length and who is getting it - an OK player on the wrong side of 30, not to the general principle of players getting what they can in an open market.) The reality that Timmy is too blind to see is that concessions and parking and ticket prices are a fraction of the money that MLB makes. Contracts started rising in large part because of the money MLB started making from cable networks buying rights to national broadcasts. Then there is the fact that certain teams like Boston and New York own the cable stations that broadcast the team's games - a huge money-maker that has everything to do with money available for salaries (note that NY, Boston and the Mets are usually the top three for payroll and each own their broadcast partners) and nothing to do with concessions or tickets or parking. The fact is that MLB has swimming in cash ever since it recovered from the '94 strike. Why on earth shouldn't the players get their share? That's what I can't figure out - Timmy is such a strong Democrat and proud member of the CA Teacher's Union and yet he has no brotherly love for fellow union members, if they end up making huge salaries. Maybe its the combination of collectively-bargained rights like minimum salaries, arbitration and free agency after six years with the operation of a free market when players reach free agency. Or maybe its good old Democratic knee-jerk hatred/resentment of the wealthy. Whatever it is, Timmy doesn't have a clue.

Boston still has too many pitching question marks, from every member of the bullpen outside of Bard to Beckett and Lackey in the rotation, to be favorites.

Thanks Eric that was just what I was hoping someone could do. I had seen his spray chart for Petco and figured about a dozen fly outs would fly out of Fenway. Whatever the mix of increased HRs and 2Bs the guy is sure to rake at Fenway. Didn't I see that he Slugged over .900 when hitting to LF? My god, he should slug about .300 points higher playing half his game at Fenway when he goes with the pitch. On top of that, its not like he doesn't have pull power, too. Lots of games at the Little League Field in the Bronx, Camden Yards and Toronto, all of which play well for lefties who pull the ball.

I was wondering if this could still get done, simply because Heyman was on top of this story all along - well, at least today's events - and he had last tweeted that there was still a chance at least for a trade without an extension in hand. I also read that Gonzales was scheduled to get on a plane this afternoon - did he do that? Did he stick it out while they kept talking? It sounds like they don't have a deal in place but know they can get one, and then it does make sense to not announce a deal until after opening day, since the luxury tax is predicated on opening day payroll. If they are giving him a big bonus to bring up his 6 million dollar 2011 salary, that would otherwise have an impact on the luxury tax. I did see that Gammons reported that the fourth player isn't a significant piece, which helps lay to rest my concern that the Red Sox were giving up the kid from LSU that they drafted and signed late last year (draftees can't be traded before the following June, so my fear was that he was included but it wouldn't be announced until they could trade him).

There's a post at the NBC Baseball blog arguing that the Red Sox are right to back out, that they can get Gonzalez in a year and keep their prospects. Fucking stupid, if that is Theo's theory, and the proof is in Werth's senseless contract: There is always the risk of some poorly run team over-bidding to get someone like Adrian Gonzalez. If this was Theo, and not John Henry, then he deserves to be run out of town on a rail. Gonzalez is there for the taking, no one competing for his services, and they couldn't get a deal done. Unless its turned out that Gonzalez thinks he's worth A-Rod or Pujols money, then this is totally the fault of a penny-wise and pound-foolish front office. And if anyone thinks Carl Crawford is going to be any cheaper than Jason Werth ... I mean no rational person, given a choice between the two, goes for Jason Werth. Crawford hits, runs, plays defense and has shown some power. Werth is a nice player - and a couple of years older, too. Now when Beltre's price goes up, Sox fans can say hello to their new starting 3B. Its their old backup SS: Jed Lowrie. Fucking makes me want to puke. :bad:

How about Parenting for Dummies (so she can give it to her parents) or a session or two with a counselor?

Papelbon has been on a one year contract all along because he previously refused long-term offers due to his inflated sense of himself and his belief that he must make a Rivera-like salary. Too bad he's had two down seasons in a row just as he reaches free agency after 2011. He desperately needs to have a much better season or he isn't going to be setting the market for closers a year from now, or at least he won't be making 15 million a year. As for Gonzalez, I am tired of trolling for information. I assume things will be sorted out by tonight whether the deal is dead, approved without an extension in place, or whether they just needed extra time. MLB has granted up to 72 hours for negotiation, why would this be so limited? There is no reason for the Red Sox to go this long pursuing Gonzalez and then, with no other teams bidding, can't reach an agreement. They suddenly go cheap when their dream hitter is in their grasp? On the other hand, Gonzalez should prefer that a deal be struck even without an extension, as another season in San Diego does nothing for his perceived value, but a season knocking balls over and through the Monster only makes him more marketable in 2011 (see Beltre, Adrian). But with no assurance of having him locked up, they can't give up so much, which could make it tough for San Diego to make the trade.

Wait a minute - that sounds awfully close to the definition of "hack". We need Alex's astute eye/ear for hackery - hope he sees this. Time to pull out some KD, for sure.

Which no one has to look at it if they don't care to look.

Assuming they reach agreement on a contract extension, Gonzalez is just a start and I don't see where Crawford or Werth are as big a help for the money they will command and their ages (especially if Crawford wants 8 years - let the Yankees give it to him). What I like about this deal is that with Gonzalez signed, Anthony Rizzo would be blocked anyway - even though he could turn into the next great young slugging 1B in the majors - and the third prospect, while #6 in the system, seems like an Ellsbury without any pop at all. So they are giving up Kelly, who is the #1 prospect they've got but seemed to me like a guy who might turn out to be an Ian Kennedy, no overpowering weapon to survive in the AL East, but probably good enough to do well in the no-DH league. So that's a fine trade from my perspective, so long as the PTBNL isn't that really impressive kid from LSU who tumbled to Boston in the draft due to injury and signability issues, then dominated the Cape Cod league before coming to terms. He seemed to have more obvious potential than Kelly, so he better not be the fourth piece, as far as I am concerned. As for Werth and Crawford, first off this team needs bullpen help more than offensive help (especially with Gonzalez on board and Pedroia and Youk unlikely to suffer such fluke injuries again) and on top of that, one of the few joys of watching them in 2010 was seeing the sparks of potential greatness in kids like Ryan Kalish and Josh Reddick. I see no reason to overpay for Werth or Crawford when you've got kids like that knocking on the door.

Wrong. From Merriam-Webster:

Now he's achieved "modestly talented hack actor" status, huh? I guess that's progress. The reality is that he wasn't cast in Airplane! because he was ever considered a 'hack' of any sort. He was cast because he had a level of 'recognition' as the kind of actor typically cast in the kind of movie that ZAZ were spoofing. You don't have to think he was funny, but Leslie Nielsen was never a hack actor of any kind.

So Alex is a professional. An extremely arrogant one. He could have said "I never thought Nielsen was much of a talent, it was the writing that made those movies." But no, he instead labelled him a "hack actor" who, being blessed with late-career success, became so deluded as to believe that he had comic chops and wasn't still a pathetic hack. So to get back to Leslie Nielsen's foreskin, maybe Alex is funnier. But like Milton Berle only pulling out enough to beat the other guy, Leslie Nielsen wouldn't need to pull out much to beat the likes of Alex, who got hired by some jerkwater comedy group and thinks he's become an expert on recognizing who is a hack and who has skills.

I'm not saying that he wasn't aware that he was being cast in comedies, but rather that he thought he was being cast in comedies because of his brilliant comedic skills. I mean, it sure seemed to me that once he cottoned to the idea that he was a comedian, his mugging became unbearable. Oh, and Lloyd Bridges WAS funny. Did you ever see his turn on "Seinfeld"? No, what is sad is that an amateur like you is taking hacks at someone like Leslie Nielsen. "For some reason he kept getting cast in comedies"? Give me a fucking break. I'm not an amateur anymore, Dan. I get PAID to be funny these days. You ain't a professional if you don't know the difference between a "comedian" and a "comic actor" and I would say that if you magically doubled your comic skills it wouldn't equal the comic skills contained in Leslie Nielsen's foreskin. Seriously denigrating the man's skills shows appalling ignorance.

Sorry Jon but it was a mere five days ago that someone else repeated that same untrue statement.

Occam's Razor tells you the answer.

How many times do I have to point out that A-Rod opted out of his contract and the Yankees signed him as a free agent after the 2007 season? From Cot's Baseball Contracts: Texas pays NOTHING to A-Rod at all, and only paid $3 million a year in deferred compensation the past three seasons, which, being deferred, are not part of the $27 million salary in 2008 or the $32 million salary in 2009 or 2010. And its done now. Ever dollar A-Rod earns is from the Yankees.

None of them excite me though I guess that if they signed Crawford I could manage to convince myself its an exciting addition (especially since Ellsbury is likely to be gone fairly soon). But I have a sneaky suspicion/hope that the big splash will be getting Adrian Gonzalez from San Diego. Everyone would forget Beltre leaving with Gonzalez and Youk manning the corners, and they'd finally do something about missing out on Mrs. Leigh Teixeira.

The obvious failure here is by Jeter and his advisers accepting a ten year contract leaving him a free agent heading into his age-37 season. A little foresight would have recognized that a six or seven year deal would have left him looking for another contract at an age when his skill erosion would have still been presumed instead of demonstrable. Another seven-year, big money deal and he makes the same money over time without all the agita, because the second contract would have been one where fans knew he was signed beyond his useful playing days and would only worry about how many years beyond. Now they are worried that any contract length consists entirely of not-very-useful decline years.

No, what is sad is that an amateur like you is taking hacks at someone like Leslie Nielsen. "For some reason he kept getting cast in comedies"? Give me a fucking break.

:party:

Actually I believe the story was that as a candidate, Clinton did an MTV interview and having been told that his favorite musician was Thelonious Monk, the interviewer was said to have screamed at her assistant, "find out who The Loneliest Monk is!" BTW, that interviewer was Kennedy, far from a babe and also known to be a Republican, so that must explain it. Anyway ... very funny stuff, and sometimes unexpectedly perceptive:

Thanks, GA. Last night I stumbled across some Nat Simpkins recordings that definitely intrigue me so this gives me a chance to hear full cuts first rather than making a decision based on 30-second samples. Looks like Bluejay records, which is co-owned by Nat and Cecil Brooks III, has gone all-digital. They released no less than five volumes of Nat's band captured live back in March but they aren't listed on the website and Amazon only offers them as downloads. I decided to go with these two tracks: "Chain Gang" off of Volume 2 and "Shake it Mama" off of Volume 1. And then I went for Cryin Time by Henri Smith off of this Bluejay release. Sounds really good - I am going to have to go for some of these new releases.