kitekrazy

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 10:22 AM) You absolutely trade Jenks for prospects if the haul is right. It’s not out of the question to have a go with Hudson in a set-up role I'm not sure I would put much faith in that.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=113586589

BTW, read the comments on the article. If Howard wanted the ball then he shouldn't have hit it into the public. Try aiming for the bullpen or something I bet the ball she received is not the real one!! Don't worry, the gov't will tax the potential worth of the ball as income, although she's only 12, the gov't will find a way to get paid, basically forcing anyone to sell it. They did the same thing to the kid who caught the Bonds ball when he tried to keep it. The atty was interviewed on NPR and from what I understood the 12 yr old was there with her brother, also a minor. The spokes person came and escorted them to the back scene and gave her an autographed ball in exchange. She agreed. This atty independently contacted the parents of the girl and suggested to reclaim the ball because of its dollar worth. Like I said this is how I understood the interview. I dont think the girl cared one way or the other. I guess more detail is on www.npr.org.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 01:27 PM) It is also interesting that you've predicted this twelve year old is a spoiled b**** from those two hundred words. Again, that seems grossly unfair. You are correct. Way over the top.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 01:25 PM) The snippet said she went in alone. A twelve year old. A seventh grader. It was her and some players. Who do you think made the suggestion for the swap?? Do you really believe having a twelve year old negotiate the swap against a bunch of adults is fair? Yes. They do it with parents and teachers all of the time.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 12:01 PM) And in a bit of irony, while when it use to be a game, was also when we would have showed restraint before labeling a 12 year old as a spoiled b**** and predicting her life. That seems out of line and unfair. You are probably right. I see it as greed on her part. The ball is a part of history and that's why the organization wants it.

QUOTE (Pants Rowland @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 11:21 AM) I agree and assume that is why the Phil's were quick to acknowledge the mistake and give it back. It appears they didn't. A lawyer got involved.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 12:01 PM) And depending on his career, that ball, in twenty years, will probably be worth more than twenty bats he signs. That's the rub of the whole thing. People treat these as investments. When I was around 6 or 7, Billy Williams signed my glove. I showed it to my friends and used the glove what it was intended for. It wasn't, "I better put this in a vault and try to get all I can for it someday". I thought it was cool Billy Williams took the time to autograph my glove. You find a lot of famous people reluctant to sign autographs these days.

It's interesting how we interpret things differently on a snippet that's probably less than 200 words. Neither side did the right thing for the "good of the game". Plus we are filling in holes to the story. They already determined the other ball would be worth a lot less. Which one would be a more credible sale on Ebay?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 10:11 AM) Great job parenting. And I would guess a 200th HR ball is worth next to nothing. Can't imagine that an autographed bat from Ryan Howard would be worth any less than that ball. You know that girl has to be spoiled and will never turn out to be nothing but a b**** her whole life. I wonder what the attorney fees for that baseball are? Imagine if a person didn't demand anything in return.

A team that has 4 quality starters, why does everyone want to mess with that?

QUOTE (almagest @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 11:20 AM) I dunno. Players in other sports don't have guaranteed contracts and still do wacky things. Yes but the consequences are greater. Look at Pac Man Jones. He even messed up in Canada.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 11:25 AM) They had guaranteed contracts, but no one gave out multi year deals, there was not really a need before free agency. That was when players use to negotiate their own contracts.

QUOTE (GREEDY @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 09:39 AM) When Thome/Giambi/Johnson etc can be had for a fraction of that money. I wouldn't be too sure of that. Baseball hasn't run out of stupid spending. With the Cubs sale, that may have taken Hendry out of the picture. I wouldn't be shocked if Dye comes back as the DH. HE doesn't want to leave so maybe he take a hometown discount.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 02:50 AM) Where is the $10 million to sign Abreu going to come from? My guess is we are already starting off 2010 about $5-8 million in the red... Maybe J.R. needs to take a chance and go a little over the mystery budget everyone seems to know about.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 09:06 AM) He admits Jenks' value will be down, and earlier in the article he mentions that Jenks could be traded and still bring in useful pieces. I would agree with all that. Just as long as it's not for prospects. You still have to replace the set up guy. The worst scenario for that is Pena.

12-year-old girl sues Phils for HR ball ... and wins http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/1018389...ll-...-and-wins

QUOTE (whitesox901 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 12:00 AM) Beckham should win because he's out there every day. All the pitchers go out there a few times a week. If Beckham doesn't win the the ROY then its all a sham. IN the same respect, pitchers have less chance for success or failure.

I read comments that the game looked like the White Sox were playing on both sides. Squandered opportunities.

QUOTE (maki @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) while they made a great living and a lot of money back in the day it is nowhere near the exorbitant rate they are paid today to play a game for a living. the game is a business at this point, for better or worse. relying on men in their 20s is also a difficult thing to do. teams should honestly hire babysitters for problem players. let them do what they want, just make sure they use discretion, which none of them seem to understand. I don't think they had guaranteed contracts. I wonder if that were gone how much baseball would change.

QUOTE (maki @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 09:00 AM) Host from a Detroit station was on Mully and Handley this morning. They kept prodding him until he gave the names he heard for the Sox players that were out. Sources said Freddy and Pena, Freddy certainly could have been guessed and Pena may be out every night the way he pitches. Yep, I heard that. I heard the day before on B&B, that was the reason for getting rid of McCarthy and Anderson. I wouldn't miss Pena but I wonder if the organization will give him a pass for his so called talent we have yet to see.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 10:57 AM) So what is your source that knows what is so accurate as to be able to tell others what isn't accurate? No MLB team opens their book up to the public. Some are very good at crying "poor". I'm just stating that they might have to spend some more money if they want to better the team. Reinsdorf likes to threaten fans by saying "show up and we'll spend money". I doubt you would find anywhere in the marketing world, "buy our product and we promise to make it better".

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 11:18 PM) I am completely oblivious to the teams financial issues. You act on as if you are really "in the know". They don't give out that information and what is out there can be questioned as accurate.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 06:28 PM) If you want more power, you will need to break the bank - all signs point to us not doing that this offseason. Stranger things have happened. Let's see what happens. JR may shock us.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 08:18 PM) The organization seems to like rushing prospects now a days. Only because their previous projected top prospects suck when they make it to the majors.