jackie hayes

Rotoworld reports that the Cards will "likely" offer arbitration -- could just be speculation, but I'm betting that they do (they have money, and the difference isn't that great, $1 or 2 mil). And I definitely wouldn't discount the Cubs that quickly, unless they sign Nomar, in which case they don't sign him anyway. If we sign him, I think he's a solid piece. But it cuts down on payroll flexibility -- at $10 mil, probably too much. He's very good, but that just seems excessive for our payroll. I think Uribe is a better option if the bidding is around there. But at least I have confidence he'll be an asset, unlike Vizquel.

He's got to be worried now. How long can Vinny possibly play? And then he'd have to actually make a decision....

The main issue is, it's hard to say what kind of anabolic steroid use is "proper" for perfectly healthy, athletic young men. No (honest) physician would ever prescribe these drugs for them. Any use constitutes abuse. And there are serious side effects, even for legitimate uses. Here's an article on one such use, which mentions some possible side effects ("higher cholesterol, sterility, shrinking of the testicles, and liver cancer").

I don't know about this -- I think if the club were really more optimistic about his knee, they may not try to sign him (maybe b/c of Boras), but they wouldn't downtalk his health either. Then you can offer arbitration and get 2 very high picks out of the deal. I think they'd risk the pr hit for the picks, b/c most Sox fans don't think Maggs is worth as much as he's gunning for (Tejada/Vlad money), even w/o the injury.

What makes this site great is that people are not banned just for being called trolls by enough people, or the 'right' people. Sometimes you have to tolerate people who are really obvious. He does follow the rules... Why do y'all keep responding when he posts? C'mon, do you really think anyone's going to think you agree w/ him? His first post in any thread, it's like a roulette wheel. Just make it entertainment -- try to guess if it's going to be "Oh yeah, Jaret Wright is good" or "Oh yeah, Polanco is good" or "Oh yeah, KW is going to make this team competitive" (always with the rolling eye thingy at the end). It could be a thread about a new Polish sausage vendor at the Cell, it doesn't matter. It's just a matter of time. Anthrax, nothing you say is revolutionary. Lots of people here think Wright isn't good enough, or Polanco won't help, or KW should be fired, or Podsednik is fantabulous. It's not the message, noone gives a f, it HAS been said before. It's the way you do it. You try to hijack every goddamned thread, you're just egging for a fight. Stop that and you'll get respect. I don't think you care, so I'm not getting involved w/ you. Don't let him ruin every thread. You don't need an ignore feature to ignore someone.

And really -- the Indians might just be one starter away. The Twins could well lose Koskie and Radke (and Guzman). And they'll start w/o Kubel. The Indians could have Sabathia, Lee, Clement, and Westbrook in their rotation. That, plus a dangerous lineup (Hafner, Lawton, Sizemore, Martinez, Peralta/Phillips, and maybe a resurgent Boone), is real trouble. More trouble than the Twins, even with Santana.

He just keeps screwing up his hummers, doesn't he?

That was a LONG time ago. No need for consolations. Just trying to be accurate -- he was pretty dedicated to his (ugh) Twins.

Maybe they'll vote an even more accomodationist party into power now...

Yeah, one part of my family is not very interested in sports, except for one person (who passed away). I don't know if they'd notice the whole thing w/o stories by 20/20 and programs like that. You're right, no real news to anyone who frequents this site, but these reports are still useful.

That she injected herself in front of him. I don't think the show is a waste of time. Not everyone reads the sports page closely -- a show like this reaches people, surprises people, that wouldn't otherwise notice the story. A truly PUBLIC reaction requires outrage by these people as well, those who follow it only lightly, or only know people who follow and treasure athletics as a wonderful, respectable part of society.

Nothing really. Apparently he only dealt personally w/ the track stars and Anderson.

Absolutely -- Giambi never said that Anderson called these steroids, just "alternatives" to steroids. But Bonds claims, essentially, that he is just a flat-out moron and didn't realize what this stuff was.

After touching on football, it gets to baseball. Conte claims that steroid problems are at least as great there as any sport, ridicules the testing procedure. (No argument here.) Bonds can drop his whole f***ing anger routine. He makes almost $20 mil a year, he's an asshole, and he's been juiced for years. Okay, he WAS a great player. But Barry, you've got s*** on Josh Gibson. But I have to say, no new info in this report. They're using the "Kill Bill" theme -- too good a film to tarnish w/ this pretty lightweight report.

Starts w/ Marion Jones. I don't trust Conte, nor Jones. It's going to be mostly speculation on Bonds, Conte claims he doesn't know what Anderson did. Seems academic at this point.

I'm watching, anyone else? (How lame am I, on a Friday night, yeah...) I imagine most of the juicy details have already been leaked, but hey... "If everybody's doing it..." Hurt may have something to say about that comment.

"I have no counter-argument, you win" would have been more effective.

I absolutely agree w/ what you said about the starting rotation. But almost all the fa starting pitchers are still available. Why the rush to sign one immediately? Especially when it'll cost more upfront, I'm content to wait.

No, clearly we'll have to outbid other teams to sign him anyway. But to get him to sign immediately, we'd have to put up an offer significantly higher than he thinks he's going to get. O/w he'll wait it out. Would you be willing to sign him for (say) $7 mil+ a year for 3 years? Or do you think he'd agree to something less than that?

Every effort or every dollar? B/c Jaret Wright's not going to sign post haste unless we offer a surprisingly big contract. He'll wait at least to get offers from the M's, Yanks, whoever his agent is talking to. So what kind of offer would you be willing to make to get him in a Sox uniform immediately?

Exactly. Sheffield and Bonds deserve less sympathy, IMO, than Giambi. At least Giambi has admitted he knew what it was. The other 2 are just full of it. Anderson probably never said 'Here's this steroid I want you to try' to ANY of these athletes. Here's how Giambi puts it acc to the SF Chronicle: Sheffield and Bonds are just lying, they knew damn well, just like Giambi did. But b/c the word was never used, they think they're clear.

I'm not arguing too hard about the contract, b/c I think Renteria's a good shot to recover from this past season, but in principle, still, never overpay for anyone. Whether or not $9 mil, $10 mil is overpaying, I'm not sure. As for the WS hit, though, for me it's still just 1 ab. Craig Counsell had some big abs in the postseason too, and he can play small ball, bunt, steal, etc. Noone wants him on the SS. Anyway, I don't want to take this any further. I just object to saying a player's good b/c he's a winner, b/c it shuts down all debate. How is someone supposed to answer that if they disagree? I don't like winners, or he's not a winner? The first is absurd, the second sounds silly b/c his team won. I want arguments with more meat on the bone, that's all. I'm through. I don't want to be seen as anti-Renteria, b/c I'm absolutely not.

As I said, I think he's a good player. But if coming through "more than not" is a characteristic of a winner, wouldn't it show up in the stats? As for overpaying, it eats away at your ability to sign other players. You may have a good player, but in baseball more than in basketball, you really have to worry about concentrating your resources too much.

So a winner is someone who plays small ball and has good clutch stats. Then let's say that, instead of winner -- everyone loves a "winner", but I don't like small ball. (That said, I like Renteria b/c he's a flat out good player -- hitting and fielding. $9 mil sounds steep, though, makes me a little queasy.) Btw, I don't know anything about his personality, but what is the evidence that Renteria is clutch? Looking at his splits last year, he seems to be about the same w/ RISP as w/o, and his "late & close" stats were bad. Over 3 yrs, w/ RISP seems about the same as w/o, maybe a bit better, but his late & close stats are below his overall averages.

So is a winner a player who's on winning teams a lot (Enrique Wilson), or someone who's a good clubhouse guy and a hard worker (Jose Valentin), or both (in which case noone on the Sox is a winner)?