jackie hayes

This statement applies exactly to what KW did. I don't think this is even close to collusion.

The Rockies were interested in him, that's a sure sign that he's affordable. Just don't count on him too much. It's not a bad idea -- maybe he's the next Dan Kolb.

So this year -- who should they bring in? And is there any limit on how much they should be willing to pay them?

But that's a much different issue than not being willing to sign any free agents -- I agree with you that replacing Grilli in the rotation should be a high priority. But the push for Omar shows that they are willing to sign free agents, even if I think the priorities are mixed up. (And who knows, perhaps they do put pitching first -- there's nothing wrong with fixing one hole through fa, the other through trade, as long as they both get fixed.)

He didn't say it was "always a bad idea" to sign fa, nothing even close.

Okay, so is it "collusion" just when someone is nontendered? B/c then the club is saying that the player is not worth what he'll get in arbitration, suggesting to other clubs that he's not worth that much, etc. Collusion better mean a secret agreement, not a one-sided public announcement. Boras would scream about collusion if he thought it was there, but even he defended KW on the radio.

I think Kenny Lofton was an above average starter, even if it didn't work out as well as we all hoped. I don't get the point. It's not fair to say that the Sox should be signing people w/o giving ANY details on which people, how much, etc. What exactly is KW doing wrong this offseason? Should he sign Beltran to a $100 mil contract? Should he have topped the offer for Vizquel? Or should he just sign anyone at any price? I mean, pointing out that we could have signed Jason Schmidt -- yeah, well, and Womack and Bonds and it wouldn't have taken much to grab Johan Santana a little while ago... And a million other players. What mistakes are being made now?

I don't see why we would want him. His era obviously was horrible last season. And this isn't purely a Coors field effect -- he gives up a ton of walks, and his era away from Coors was over 6. That's exactly what we should be trying to get away from (the walks especially).

He's arbitration eligible, he made about $1.8 mil last season.

Not sure if he's the best option, but...one good year? Each of his last 3 years has been pretty good.

I don't know the details of Williamson's recovery, but from what I read he may be ready towards the end of next year. I know it's no sure thing, but I still like the idea of signing him to a 2-year deal (kind of a Lieber-style deal), if he'd be game for it. He's an awfully good pitcher, and even those couple months would be easily worth minimum annual salary. He'd be on the 60-day dl, so he wouldn't take up a roster spot, and you'd have a second closer-calibre pitcher, for insurance and for 2006.

Agreed. He'd have to blow the doors off in spring training to even be considered. Drew would be great, but that's a fantasy. I'm happy having Everett out there, just keep him away from center.

It takes a lot to get our attendance above 30,000. It seems like we have to be within 2 games of first, playing a rival or popular team, and it has to be late in the season. If we pulled that many everyday until we were basically eliminated, we'd have a LOT higher totals.

John Grilli??? All I'm saying is be accurate. Honestly, I agree w/ you that ticket prices are getting out of hand. (I haven't been to a game that I myself had to pay full price for in years, just for money reasons. Although, to be fair, I don't really think there's any simple solution.) I'm just saying, the Sox have really put a decent product (always competitive and interesting to watch -- though putting it as coldly as possible) on the field for more than 10 years now. That's far from a team that "sucks". To be fair, you HAVE to consider attendance numbers, which leave a lot to be desired.

C'mon -- the worst the Sox have been in many years is mediocre. We haven't sucked in quite a while.

If they're playing hardball (giggle) on Shields over Randy Johnson, I wouldn't hold your breath when we're talking about Konerko.

Some Dems decided that one embarrassing loss isn't quite enough. Hillary would get destroyed.

Looking at your sig, I'm kinda surprised you're not overjoyed...

Well, the Rotoworld/BH piece suggests Williamson could be out all of next year, or he could be ready to pitch (ie, finished w/ rehab) in 9 or 10 months, meaning he could be ready at the end of the 2005 season. IMO that's a good risk for the Sox. You're not going to get a better reliever, cheaper, than Williamson on a 2-year deal.

IIRC, he's arbitration eligible. I'm pretty sure that was mentioned in a number of the articles about the Garcia trade. At the time, it was a given that he would get nontendered. I can't agree that he's good trade bait. He made almost $1.5 million this year, and he's had a miserable ML career. For a budget team like the Pirates, you can get that production for a lot less.

Okay, I was thinking it was Willis's intro of "our baseball insider". I'm out of town, so I don't listen to MJ&H.

Thanks, I've been looking for something like this. The way he pitched at the end of the season, maybe he should have left the elbow as-is. (J/k) Is it absurd to think the Sox could sign him to a Lieber-type deal, 2 years, low salary in the first year, middle low-range (but all guaranteed) in the 2nd year? The Sox have always been interested in him, and he could conceivably be ready to pitch at the end of 2005 (if the article's right).

What about Ron Villone? Mariners want to resign him, though.

Is it a sure thing that Williamson's out next year? I can't find anything definite.

Now THAT would be exciting!