WCSox

I have a friend from Colombia, and she's told me that it's absolutely rampant with corruption. She can't even send a package via regular postal service to her family because it'll get stolen by their postal service once it arrives in the country. O-Cab needs to move his family to the U.S.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 07:53 AM) You're the only one claiming he was still going to play 2-3 times a week. From what I read, they told him he was going to be benched "indefinitely." Now honestly, when was the last time you heard of a manager telling a player that? He didn't say "Look, Frank, you're really struggling, Stairs is hitting pretty well, I'm going to get him some more ab's for now because we aren't scoring runs." The manager, who also got in a fist fight with Ted Lilly, tells Frank "you're going to be benched, and it could be indefinitely." Are you kidding me? I don't see any other way you could possibly read into the situation. I agree with you here. They way they handled this situation is completely unprofessional. If you want to cut a guy, fine. But don't give a bullcrap "lack of production" excuse based on 60 at-bats. As I understand it, what they did was completely legal within the terms of the CBA. And Frank DID sign the contract, so he shouldn't "expect" that $10 million option because he's Frank Thomas. But, honestly, if you were running a business where you wanted to attract free-agent talent, why in the hell would you treat a high-profile employee this way? It's just stupid. If they didn't want Frank around in 2009, they could've just told him up-front and released him before the season started. It would've cost them the exact same amount of money and they wouldn't look like a bunch of lying assholios. If I'm a free agent, there's no way in hell I sign with the Jays after this and some of the other crap that has happened under Ricciardi's watch.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 10:55 PM) If they were honest about the situation, I would take less of an issue with it, although it still would bother me. Instead, they're lying to everyone, and especially to Frank, saying it has to do with the play of the team. Who was the last first ballot Hall of Famer, who has produced at a solid rate the past two seasons, that was told he would be benched "indefinitely" after a sample size of just 60 at bats? That just doesn't happen. It's bs, and everyone knows it. It's all about the money. Well-said. Frank signed the contract, so nobody's feeling sorry for him or anything. But the Jays are lying their asses off about their motives.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 05:12 PM) Its a cute story, it still doesn't answer the question as to how stinking up the joint earns you at bats and earns you a $10 million option just because you were an MVP 14 years ago....Frank has been bad lately "Stinking up the joint" based on 60 at-bats? Coming from somebody who uses the "small sample size" argument all of the time, that's pretty funny. Frank didn't exactly "stink up the joint" in Toronto or Oakland and has a history of bad Aprils in years where he was a legitimate MVP candidate.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 10:04 AM) Cabrera makes the lineup much stroner and is a legitimate captain on the field. I love Jon, but the move was worth it, especially when you consider it is much more likely for Cabrera to garner type A compensation than Jon. Plus the reality is the Sox had a bigger hole at SS than they did in the rotation (although I'm still not ready to call our rotation amazing, but I've enjoyed what I've seen thus far, aside from Buehrle). I thought it was a bad move, after Floyd and Contreras were overwhelmingly bad in '07, and Danks didn't look like a legitimate #3 or #4. I'll gladly take Juan at SS over below-average pitching in the #3 slot. But so far, Kenny looks like a genius. He must've had a ton of faith in Floyd and Danks.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 09:40 AM) They knew Rolen's situation when they acquired him. It's hardly a wake-up call when it's exactly what you expect. Did they *know* that Rolen would start the year on the DL? If they did, picking up Rolen's contract was also an incredibly stupid move on their part. And given his declined production and inability to stay healthy over the past few years, it was a stupid move regardless. Ricciardi is an idiot. I wouldn't have picked up the $35 million or so left on Rolen's contract in the off-season or signed Ryan to that ridiculous deal, so I never would've felt compelled to do it. Why couldn't Ricciardi have told Frank this past winter that they were releasing him because his 2009 option would've gotten in the way of Rolen's salary? Wouldn't that have been a little more professional than telling a guy that he was being benched "indefinitely" because of a "lack of production" 60 at-bats into the season? It would've cost them exactly the same amount of money and not dragged their organization's reputation through the mud. They're not going to be a $100 million team for much longer. They're trying to buy their way into the playoffs and are failing miserably. They don't have the fan support/broadcast revenue to be a perpetual Top 10 payroll team if they're not competitive.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 08:40 AM) I said it was an annoying thought. I didn't say, "let's go back in time." Seriously, the snippy little remarks are just flying around Soxtalk these days, and you are definitely not helping things. If I wanted a PMS board, I'd go to it, but let's just talk baseball here ok? You need to relax, son. My comment was made in jest.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 08:55 AM) My point with the Glaus-Rolen trade was that they were still spending money, making big commitments, just this offseason. It's strange that they'd be trying to cut salary for the future and still take on such a big contract (when they could have just let Glaus walk after this year). No, it's not strange at all. You can't just keep spending, spending, and spending on high-priced veterans and free agents without dumping SOME salary at some point. Dumping an aging player doesn't necessarily mean that you're about to hold a firesale. It's simply operating within a budget. The Jays aren't exactly the Yankees or Red Sox in terms of financial resources, yet their payroll this year is $97 million. Do you honestly think that they can sustain that payroll while mired in third place in a city in Canada wit attendance in the bottom half of the league over each of the past few years? The fact that they still owe Rolen over $30 million through 2010 and that he hasn't had a single major-league at-bat for them yet may have been a wake-up call. He and Frank ALONE would've cost them $22 million next year. Would you want two declining/injury-prone players taking up that much of your payroll? I sure wouldn't.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 08:22 AM) No, I do get your point. You aren't saying they're cheap, but you are saying that they know they won't win this year, so they're cutting back (and in the process, hurting their chances to win now) to make a push later. But that makes no sense. Everything they've been doing is actually paying off. Rios has developed into an excellent player. Burnett has actually pitched quite well, he's healthy (well, mostly -- that nail thing), and that contract turned out to be good value with the way sp contracts have gone. McGowan and Marcum have both developed very well. Ryan's finally back, and Halladay doesn't have too many great years left. Just this offseason, they swapped Glaus for Rolen, when Rolen had 3 years (big years) left on his deal. But now, the season begins, they're playing well, and suddenly Ricciardi changes his mind completely and decides that it'll never work, let's plan for the future? It's just not a reasonable story. Everything they've done for years has been building to this point and shows that they want to win now. Again, I'm not saying they made the right choice. But to say they're knowingly hurting their chances just to slash such a small amount of payroll doesn't fit with anything that team has been doing for years, all the way up to the start of the season. I'm not sure how over-paying for Burnett and Ryan, and then dealing for an aging and constantly-injured Rolen, who is under contract for two more years and $24 million more than Glaus has "paid off." I don't think that Rolen has even played yet this year. Maybe they're not cutting back to make a pusher later. Who knows. But it's pretty obvious that they dumped Frank and kept Stairs for purely financial reasons, and that the "performance" excuse was a massive load of crap. If I had to guess, I'd think that they now realize how stupid they were to offer so much money to players who can't stay healthy and want to create some more financial flexibility next year.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 09:27 AM) I wasn't saying trade for him... that ship has sailed. Maybe don't give him away at the end of 2007 and work out an extension. So your time machine is in working order? Awesome. Can I borrow it next week?

Unfortunately, we would have to give something up to acquire him. I'd rather stick with Uribe/Ramirez/Richar and keep that prospect.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 08:53 AM) its hard to believe that Kenny Lofton is the 493rd best HR hitter of all-time. Or that Mike Cameron ranks 216th. Chicago must not have had enough steroids dealers back in the late '90s.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 06:05 AM) I say $5 mil because the option is for $10 mil. So they could have paid him $10 mil more for two years of production. OK, I see what you're saying. More likely the latter. Nobody can use the first 60 at-bats of the season to determine a player's performance over the rest of the season. But if it were Frank's mouth, I don't see why the Jays didn't call him on it publicly. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, and therefore it would be a lot more believable than the excuse that they gave. Stairs' numbers last year were barely better than Frank's. His numbers the year before were inferior to what Frank put up in Oakland. Given that Stairs is even older than Frank (by a few months) and that he's basically a washed-up journeyman, I don't see the compelling reason for favoring him over Frank. Actually, I do see the reason: The Jays are only paying Stairs a combined total $3.25 million over '08 and '09. You think that may have had something to do with their decision??? Again, you're not getting my point. I'm not saying that the Jays are a bunch of cheapskates. They very may well spend the $10 million they're not paying Frank next year on somebody else. (Remember the Sox dumping Carlos Lee's salary prior to the '05 season, and then spending the money saved elsewhere?) Then again, their dumping of Frank for Matt Stairs' paltry contract suggests that they might be curbing their wild spending.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 20, 2008 -> 04:38 PM) I'm not saying they made the right decision, only that it's pretty silly to think they wouldn't pay $5 mil per year for someone they thought would help. It may be a moot point, but I believe that they owed him $8 million for this season. They Jays never could've rationally THOUGHT that Frank batting below the Mendoza Line THREE WEEKS INTO THE SEASON meant that he was "useless" to them. Especially after putting up 26 HRs and an .850+ OPS last year. That would be like the Sox releasing Paulie, who has been sucking ass just as badly at the plate so far this year. The rationale is completely freaking retarded, especially for a player who has a long history of slow starts. The only other reason you release a player three weeks into the season is behavioral issues. And despite that being a much more believable excuse (given Frank's past), the Jays front office are using the ridiculous performance-based-on-60-at-bats line. If Frank was still putting up Juan Uribe numbers in late June, then the Jays releasing him based on "performance" due to age/diminished skills would've been justified. But doing so right now means only one thing: They don't want to pay him the $10 million that they'd automatically owe him next year if he got those extra 300-some at-bats this season. They want him off the books next year so that they can spend elsewhere. Releasing Frank isn't necessarily "being cheap." It's added payroll flexibility for younger players next year. And I'm sure that they Jays will take advantage of this, given their history for over-paying for free agents. Agreed that whether or not the Jays THINK that they can compete this year is up for debate. However, their actions - kicking a still-productive HOF DH to the curb three weeks into the season - suggest that they're not terribly serious about it. Perhaps they're now beginning to realize how stupid some of their signings over the past few years have been, and they're trying to cut bait. I'm not saying that Frank and his mouth didn't contribute to his downfall in Toronto. For all I know, it very well may have. But that's not what the Jays are telling us. And while they certainly do have the right to do what they did, I'm all for Frank calling them on it. I just wish that he would've complained to the MLBPA, rather than the media.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Apr 20, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) Toronto isn't a cheapskate team. They paid big money for Ryan, Burnett, Wells. All the more reason to dump a 40-year-old DH before they owe him $10 million next year. They already know that they're not going to make the playoffs this year with the Red Sox and Yankees in their division, so why not retool now and have $10 million available for somebody else next year? And they're basing that decision on three months of at-bats? I suppose that the 26 homers and .857 OPS that he put up last year doesn't count. Using that logic, the Sox should dump Paulie, who has also been hitting like crap in the same small sample size of at-bats. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Frank didn't get along with certain people in the organization. But their use of the "lack of production" excuse three freaking weeks into the season is nothing short of bullcrap. Their "indefinite" benching of him is also a complete sleaze move.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 20, 2008 -> 10:12 AM) I absolutely believe they decided to take the hit this year to avoid taking the hit next year. They have a lot of salaries rising next year, AJ Burnett can opt out of his deal after this season, they just signed Alexis Rios to an extension, and they have some young players in Lind and Snider they think they can use next season. Whether they actually "huddled" up and decided to intentionally try and piss off Frank so they would have an excuse to release him, I'm not sure. But Frank's temper is well documented throughout baseball, he is a first-ballot Hall of Fame player, and he has produced the last two years when no one thought he would. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to foresee that Frank would react this way at the news of being benched indefinitely, especially given the vesting option he has for next year. Again, this is an organization that has had trouble with 4 players now in the last 2 years. It's not surprising at all that this move comes from them. The more I think about this, the more I'm beginning to agree with you. Telling a hitter that you're benching him "indefinitely" is completely unprofessional. It's difficult to say if they wanted to weasel out of his $10 million option or if they just wanted his bad attitude out of the clubhouse, but you don't tell a still-relatively-productive future HOFer that he's being benched "indefinitely" three weeks into the season for a lack of production. This remark by Vernon Wells is very telling... And if there was a problem with Frank's attitude, it's really odd that they don't say so (as it wouldn't be the first time)... I call BS. This is a salary dump/youth movement ploy. Frank's attitude may have played into it as well, but this certainly gives their mediocre team that doesn't really have a shot this year time to develop younger players. I hope the embarrassment was worth the $2 million they saved. Unfortunately, Frank decided to shoot off his mouth to the media, rather than file a complaint with the MLBPA.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 20, 2008 -> 09:45 AM) I bet you the Mariners go after him. I agree. Their offense sucks and there's been a lot of talk about them going after Bonds.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 20, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) Frank's legendary pouting got him unemployed. Kudos to the Blue Jays for cutting his ass. No one is bigger than the team. For those of you who think,"poor Frank", the Blue Jays are still on the hook to pay him to do nothing or play for another team looking for a crybaby DH. The team made a stand. Putting up with Frank's BS would have just cost them more problems down the road. Now he'll be someone else's problem, but you know one thing, if he outperforms what he's being paid, he will moan. If he gets his butt sat down because he's stinking up the joint, he will moan. He will cry about his paycheck until the day he's no longer playing, and even then he may do some more moaning. Just hit the ball and shut your mouth. Evidently, Frank didn't want to be there anymore, or they called his bluff, per ESPN: Blue Jays general manager J.P. Ricciardi told ESPN's Peter Gammons that the release of Thomas was "by mutual consent. He doesn't want to be here if he's not going to play much, and we don't want him to be unhappy. He handled it with class, and I appreciate that." I like Frank, but much of the above is true. He has a history of this crap. It speaks volumes that the Jays would release a future-HOF DH three weeks into the season and pay him several million ($8 million?) to sit at home on his couch. Things must've gotten ugly over there. And from what I've read in these posts, it probably wasn't just Frank acting like a jerk.

QUOTE (Hawkfan @ Apr 19, 2008 -> 02:48 PM) hes gonna need to turn up the heat a little if hes only throwin the fastball and the curve. I like the cutter alot but i just don't want to see him try to become a finesse pitcher. Rick Vaughn style. However, if he can throw 4 pitches with location and the fastball is hitting 95, i could care less. I just haven't seen the fastball go above 93, and i've seen comcast exaggerate the speed before, so it could be 90 I'm concerned about this as well. Bobby has done well over the past two years because he can locate a hook and slider now. But he's lost a good 4-5 mph off of his fastball since '05. If he can stay around the mid-'90s, he'll continue to be very effective. But if he drops down another 4-5 mph, he's in trouble. I like Jenks a lot, but I would be hesitant to give him a long-term deal. I don't feel confident that he'll be the same pitcher 3 years from now.

QUOTE (DonnyDevito @ Apr 18, 2008 -> 10:30 AM) The Cubs at #2...are you kidding me? Pie is playing like a bust and they are without Soriano. The Cubs don't have near the defense or pitching that the White Sox have right now but to their credit they are one of the best hitting teams in MLB while the White Sox are one of the worst. ESPN cares more about ratings than accuracy, which is why they're constantly sucking off the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Cubs.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Apr 19, 2008 -> 09:29 AM) Getting back to the distance of Thome's HR. For what it's worth some mention in a news report was 500 ft??!! I suppose one could plot out a possible distance if they knew enough physics and math and were real good with numbers, etc. I know I ain't. The homer was estimated at 418 feet, but White Sox players thought it would have gone much farther had it missed the catwalk. Thome said it was one of his longest homers. I agree that it probably went a little further than that. Maybe not 500 ft. since it was hit pretty high, but maybe 430 or 440.

QUOTE (shipps @ Apr 19, 2008 -> 06:53 AM) You are underrating Thome's presence in the lineup and the talent that he still has.While overrating Swisher as a power hitter in a lineup.Swisher is so much more valuable the way we are using him now which has forced him to take a better approach at the plate.Iam not sure of his SO rate so far but it has to be far lower than his career numbers. +1 Even when Thome's struggling, he still commands a ton of respect (and walks) and can change a game pretty quickly. If Thome is on your roster, you start him 130+ times a season.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 18, 2008 -> 12:52 PM) The problem for Longoria is its like insurance, The only way he wins is if something bad happens to hiim. If he plays to his potential he lost a lot of money. Basically he paid up front to reduce his risk. Apparently it's gotten to the point where pro athletes are being paid so obscenely that guaranteed financial security for the rest of their lives is worth giving up $30 million or so.

Yeah, whatever happened to Collins? He was on Fox Sports Chicago back in the late '90s.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 18, 2008 -> 01:15 PM) My brother's been around Longoria for the past year or so, and one thing he doesn't lack is confidence. Very few athletes who make it to the pros have confidence issues.