Light the Hot Stove fires

[Angola!]

Man, when was the last time the Royals were this busy? Now they've signed Dotel to a 1-year, $5 million deal with incentives that could make it worth $7 million.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/redSox/?p=779

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Man, when was the last time the Royals were this busy? Now they've signed Dotel to a 1-year, $5 million deal with incentives that could make it worth $7 million.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/redSox/?p=779

This one I like alot more.

 

[Angola!]

Man, when was the last time the Royals were this busy? Now they've signed Dotel to a 1-year, $5 million deal with incentives that could make it worth $7 million.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/redSox/?p=779

This one I like alot more.

Agreed. Plus it keeps him away from the Red Sox. So now they will either have to trade Wily Mo Pena or Crisp, or overpay for Gagne.

 

[BYH]

Man, when was the last time the Royals were this busy? Now they've signed Dotel to a 1-year, $5 million deal with incentives that could make it worth $7 million.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/redSox/?p=779

Probably the last time they paid big money for a closer. *pause for dramatic effect* MARK DAVIS!!!!

 

[Sea Bass]

Lefty closers are very iffy

No more iffy than righties.

Yes they are, with lineups stacked with righties.

Billy Wagner was able to get by, when he would hit 100 and throw strikes.

B.J. Ryan has seemed to do OK as did Randy Myers and Norm Charlton. John Franco - who never could hit 100 - had a nice career.

All I'm saying is your statement is way too stereotypical. On the flip side, then righty hitters should be iffy (especially in the late innings) since the majority of pitchers are righties.

Why are middle-inning left-handers one-batter pitchers?

Because the odds are that the righties will hammer him.

Are there no right-handed one-batter pitchers?

 

[Angola!]

Lefty closers are very iffy

No more iffy than righties.

Yes they are, with lineups stacked with righties.

Billy Wagner was able to get by, when he would hit 100 and throw strikes.

B.J. Ryan has seemed to do OK as did Randy Myers and Norm Charlton. John Franco - who never could hit 100 - had a nice career.

All I'm saying is your statement is way too stereotypical. On the flip side, then righty hitters should be iffy (especially in the late innings) since the majority of pitchers are righties.

Why are middle-inning left-handers one-batter pitchers?

Because the odds are that the righties will hammer him.

Are there no right-handed one-batter pitchers?

Chad Bradford was with the Red Sox.

 

[lantaur]

Baseball Digest is reporting the Giants and Bonds have agreed on a one-year deal worth $16 million.

http://www.baseballdigestdaily.com/blog/2006/12/bonds-returning-to-bay.html

Based on the contracts received by other players, is Bonds "worth" $16 million (in his present condition)? I guess the Giants figure to reap some reward with the HR chase.

 

[BYH]

Lefty closers are very iffy

No more iffy than righties.

Yes they are, with lineups stacked with righties.

Billy Wagner was able to get by, when he would hit 100 and throw strikes.

B.J. Ryan has seemed to do OK as did Randy Myers and Norm Charlton. John Franco - who never could hit 100 - had a nice career.

All I'm saying is your statement is way too stereotypical. On the flip side, then righty hitters should be iffy (especially in the late innings) since the majority of pitchers are righties.

Why are middle-inning left-handers one-batter pitchers?

Because the odds are that the righties will hammer him.

Are there no right-handed one-batter pitchers?

Chad Bradford was with the Red Sox.

Don't forget Steve Reed and Jeff Nelson.

 

[Angola!]

Lefty closers are very iffy

No more iffy than righties.

Yes they are, with lineups stacked with righties.

Billy Wagner was able to get by, when he would hit 100 and throw strikes.

B.J. Ryan has seemed to do OK as did Randy Myers and Norm Charlton. John Franco - who never could hit 100 - had a nice career.

All I'm saying is your statement is way too stereotypical. On the flip side, then righty hitters should be iffy (especially in the late innings) since the majority of pitchers are righties.

Why are middle-inning left-handers one-batter pitchers?

Because the odds are that the righties will hammer him.

Are there no right-handed one-batter pitchers?

Chad Bradford was with the Red Sox.

Don't forget Steve Reed and Jeff Nelson.

Initially I was thinking Nelson went more than a batter, but even in his heyday with the Yankees, they would bring in Stanton to face the lefties. So, I salute you to remembering the greatest frisbee slider ever and my hero for punching some schmuck in the bullpen at Fenway.

 

[outofplace]

And the Lilly signing is the worst deal of the winter. This hour, at least.

I think the Meche deal trumps it. At least Lilly stays healthy and is a lefty. Meche has always been one of those guys that is supposed to be really good and then sucks because of injuries. If the Royals are going to make a big splash, why do it for a oft-injured pitcher?

I agree. Today's worst deal of the winter. Gary Matthews Jr. isn't even in the conversation anymore.

Fortunately, this shuts up the football-humping sycophants who cry about baseball's unbalanced economics. There's nothing to cry about when the coupon-clipping Royals can go 5/$55 million on Gil freakin Meche.

And how many players do the Yankees have who are making more money than that?

Or the Cubs, for that matter?

Of course, you have to trot out that same argument any time a small-market franchise does something stupid with its money.

Well. That wasn't very nice.

Actually, isn't the reverse true? Everytime some big market team does something stupid with its money we hear about how awful and unfair baseball is?

And maybe the Cubs and Yankees have more players making $11 mil per than the Royals. They also got BETTER players making $11 mil per.

Now run along, Browns-Steelers is on. Viva la parity!!!

How is that not nice? You do seem to jump at any excuse to start that argument..again. And you still refuse to acknowledge the difference between how much money an owner has and how much revenue a team brings in.

Steinbrenner can spend like crazy without going outside his team's revenue. That is something most of the teams in baseball cannot do because they don't have the revenue stream and never could have it no matter how much they win. You just aren't going to make money on a team in Kansas City like you can in with a team in New York. Ever.

And what the heck does Steeler-Browns have to do with parity? It's not like the Steelers still have a realistic shot at the playoffs at 6-7.

If I wasn't a Steelers fan, I wouldn't have watched a minute of that game.

 

[lantaur]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-os1207,0,5794685.story?coll=bal-sports-baseball

Supposedly the Orioles offered Jason Schmidt more money ($1 million more; three years, $48M) than he got from the Dodgers.

Another great offseason for the O's continues! Argh.

 

[BYH]

How is that not nice? You do seem to jump at any excuse to start that argument..again. And you still refuse to acknowledge the difference between how much money an owner has and how much revenue a team brings in.

Steinbrenner can spend like crazy without going outside his team's revenue. That is something most of the teams in baseball cannot do because they don't have the revenue stream and never could have it no matter how much they win. You just aren't going to make money on a team in Kansas City like you can in with a team in New York. Ever.

And what the heck does Steeler-Browns have to do with parity? It's not like the Steelers still have a realistic shot at the playoffs at 6-7.

If I wasn't a Steelers fan, I wouldn't have watched a minute of that game.

First of all, I note you didn't answer my theory that the reverse is true...when big market teams blow money on the Gil Meches of the world, it's an example of how the sport is falling to heck in a handbasket.

Secondly, owning a team is the most capitalistic thing I can think of. You've made enough money to buy the team, forking spend to keep it competitive. I'm willing to bet that until the last four years, David Glass had more money at his disposal than George Steinbrenner.

And the fact the Royals have suddenly found $62 million to spend on two injury-prone pitchers proves, once and for all, that all this bullshirt about teams being unable to afford to compete is just that: Bullshirt. They've all got the money. Some just need three 100-loss seasons in a span of four years to be inspired to spend it.