I was a bit shocked to see Brian Roberts' demands for a deal.
While I do think he is a fine player -- by the time he's done with the contract he wants, the second baseman will be in his decline phase. I was frankly surprised to even see that he and his agent were negotiating with the team and that dialogue was still open.
Does anyone think that he may be holding a gun to the team's head to get more money because he's the one the premier faces of the franchise and wants to be compensated for it? Again, I thought he would be traded --- however, does it show that winning isn't paramount for him like I thought?
I would think the Orioles would want to keep Brian on the team; however, wouldn't the prudent thing to do is trade him to a contender and get young talent to help the rebuilding process?
Baseball is a business, and now it seems like Brian Roberts and his agent is treating it as such.
Read The Full Article:
http://oriolepost.blogspot.com/2009/01/brian-roberts-art-of-deal.html
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo! ”31 in 31″ - The 1970’s - Card #24Don Baylor - 1971 Topps - #709Don Baylor defines what a power hitter is. Known for driving the ball out of the ballpark farther than most of his teammates or competitors, Baylor was a big draw in the game during the 1970’s and 80’s. As a major [...]
Read The Full Article:
http://bapple2286.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/31-in-31-the-1970s-card-24/
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!From a report from the Red Sox site:
John Smoltz's days with the Braves appear to be over. Multiple sources have confirmed that the veteran hurler will officially sign with the Red Sox within the next two days.
A Major League source who was in contact with Smoltz on Wednesday night said the 41-year-old right-hander will be calling the Braves on Thursday morning to tell them that he has decided to sign with the Red Sox.
Smoltz began calling many of his teammates late Wednesday night to say goodbye and inform him of his decision.
I am beside myself with frustration. This has got to be the writing on the wall for the Braves 2009 season. If Smoltz doesn't even want to hang with the team, then there must be a growing notion among many in baseball that we won't be able to compete this year. Please tell me this is about Smoltz trying for another ring and not about money:
The Red Sox have been aggressively pursuing Smoltz over the past month and it appears they were able to land him with guaranteed $5.5 million contract that includes incentives that could increase his 2009 earnings to $10 million.
According to the Major League source, the incentives offered by the Red Sox were "more attainable" than the ones provided by the Braves.
Multiple sources have said the Braves were offering slightly more than $2 million guaranteed and performance-based incentives that could have increased Smoltz's earnings to approximately $7 million.
I really don't know what to think right now.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Since Jon Daniels was named Texas Rangers GM in October of 2005, the team has amassed a record of 236-245. His past trades with other Major League teams have netted the Rangers big club such luminaries as Brad Wilkerson, Terrmel Sledge, Adam Eaton,[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/01/what_now_in_whi.php
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!From Ken Davidoff:
Andy Pettitte is extremely unhappy with how his negotiations have gone with the Yankees, and the lefthander might be softening on his opposition to rejoining the Astros.
What once seemed a fait accompli - Pettitte returning to the Yankees for a 12th season in pinstripes - now appears increasingly in jeopardy, although the two sides continue to communicate and they ultimately rank as each other's first choice.
The 36-year-old's grievances with the Yankees feature, most prominently, these three sentiments, according to people familiar with his thinking:Let's go one by one, shall we?
1. Pettitte believes that the Yankees should display more appreciation for all that he has done for them.
2. While the Yankees are asking that Pettitte take a pay cut, the team clearly is not hurting financially, given its large investments in Teixeira, CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett.
3. Pettitte thinks that his 2008 season wasn't as bad as the Yankees are making it out to be.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Dominican Winter League
- Melky Cabrera (Aguilas) went 2-for-4 with two double and a run scored. He's hitting .371 in the DWL playoffs.
- Juan Miranda (Licey) went 0-for-2. He's now hitting .267 in the DWL playoffs.
Puerto Rican Winter League
- Jonathan Albaladejo (Mayaguez) pitched one scoreless inning with one strikeout.
Venezuelan Winter League
- Edwar Gonzalez (Lara) played but did not have an official at-bat.
Here's a full list of Yankees playing in the Venezuelan, Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Dominican winter leagues:
Dominican Winter League: Robinson Cano and Wady Rufino are playing for Estrellas de Oriente. Melky Cabrera and Wilkins Arias are playing for Aguilas Cibaenas. Abraham Almonte is playing for Leones del Escogido. And Juan Mirana and Amaury Sanit are playing for Tigres del Licey.
Mexican Pacific League: Ramiro Pena and Jorge Vasquez are playing for Tomateros de Culiacan. And Walter Ibarra is on Naranjeros de Hermosillo.
Puerto Rican Winter League: Ian Kennedy and Jonathan Albaladejo are on Indios de Mayaguez. And Bernie Williams will play for Gigantes de Carolina.
Venezuelan Winter League: Francisco Cervelli, Edwar Gonzalez and Carlos Mendoza are playing for Cardenales de Lara. And Edgar Soto and Luis Nunez are on Aguilas del Zulia.
You can check out all of their Winter Ball stats here.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
I said I would not mention “you-know-who” again so all I can say is that the door of opportunity is closing and Ned will probably move another direction, very soon.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!The Milton Bradley signing is expected to become official on Thursday after he passes a physical. When Bradley is officially announced he could end up sporting a very familiar number. As every day passes the Cubs may be getting closer to resolving their ownership situation. Once the new owners are in place Jim Hendry will know exactly what he has to work with to fill out his roster for the upcoming season.
The Cubs appear to be focusing on adding another starter to the mix and reports from the mainstream media on Wednesday and Thursday morning were rampant with speculation. Names from Tim Redding to Derek Lowe to Andy Pettitte to Ben Sheets made their way into the Chicago papers.
Most feel Jim Hendry will make another run at Jake Peavy, including the Sun-Times. Gordon Wittenmyer's report made headlines on Wednesday and reached all the way to the left coast. Jon Heyman spoke with Padres' CEO Sandy Alderson about Peavy and was told, "At some point here the window (for a trade) will close and we've got to say, 'Pack it up'. At this point, the likelihood is that he'll be with us on Opening Day"
The Orioles and Brian Roberts made few headlines of their own Wednesday. Bruce Levine reported earlier in the week that Roberts is not happy in Baltimore and will not sign an extension with the Orioles. Reports from Ken Rosenthal indicated there is a "growing possibility" that Roberts will be traded and "the Orioles might have already waited too long to move him" on Wednesday.
According to a report from the Baltimore Sun, the Orioles and Roberts have discussed a contract extension but the two sides are far apart. Andy MacPhail is offering $10 million a year, while Roberts figures to make a lot more on the open market next winter. Andy MacPhail said "he has not had any trade talks involving Roberts for at least a month" on Wednesday.
Here is the rest from the mill and Joey Gathright on XM Radio....
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!There was a very scary incident recently involving a teenage boy in my community. He was alone waiting to be picked up during early evening hours and was approached by a male adult predator who attempted to get the boy in the car. The boy refused, ran away and hid until his parent arrived at the scheduled time.
The most common and understandable reaction to this is, 'I'll never leave my kids alone again.' I disagree. I think it is a mistake to parent in such a way as to try and eliminate every possible danger, especially for teenage kids. I believe in reasonable, not total precautions.
The hidden dangers of being overprotected can never compare to being abducted, but they are occur often and have a price as well. Lack of confidence, lack of initiative, lack of street smarts etc.
Here's an example of reasonable vs total precautions. For the sake of this example, we are talking about teenagers. Not leaving a child alone in a secluded or abandoned area is a reasonable precaution. Not leaving them alone in a normal residential area with people and traffic is a total precaution. When are teenage kids supposed to develop street smarts and coping skills? They can't read a book to get those abilities and we can't talk it into him. They will not magically get those powers when they turns 18, or do we plan to shelter them into their 20's? The self-confidence has to be encouraged and nurtured in them during the teenage years. Should parenting be based on extremely rare and cataclysmic possibilities?
I believe that it is a disservice to totally shelter a teenage child, but not as much as abandoning one, obviously. From a parenting perspective, the intentions are polar opposites. But isn't the goal to avoid harming the child, not sparing the parents feelings or guilt? To send a child unprepared to deal with things, even dangerous things, into high school, college and adulthood is not doing them any favors.
In this incident, the boy stood up to the predator by refusing to get in the car and then running away. I worry that the type of kids who have been excessively sheltered may not have it in them to refuse in the first place. I would be devastated if something like that ever happened to any child I know. But my goal as a parent is to see that they, like the boy in the incident, they have the wherewithal to refuse and run away, not that they never possibly find himself themselves in danger.
The fear of course with saying something like that out loud, let alone writing it down, is that the unthinkable would actually happen to a child in that person's life. At which point, the possible sheltering concerns I mentioned, become secondary. At which point we would trade all other possible ill effects from 'totally protective' parenting for an unharmed child. But is that right? Should we talk, write and parent so as to not be culpable in any way possible should evil come into our lives? I don't believe that's what my Catholic faith teaches. Our faith teaches us to not be afraid. It is very difficult to practice that with all the possible dangers which surround our kids and us. But when it comes to our kids, when and how do we show them, how and why we are unafraid?
I know there are dissenting views on this, I welcome your comments.
Read The Full Article:
http://www.2thinkgood.com/2009/01/parenting-and-safety.html
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!He may be retired, but that hasn't stopped him thinking about HR #300:
"Oh yeah, sure," Salmon said. "I still have the dream, about once a month, about putting the uniform back on.He'll be with the team as a guest instructor during spring training, but he wants to stay home and raise his kids with his wife; who could blame him? He might become a full-time instructor for the Angels at some point in the future, he said."Then I stop and think, how am I going to do this? Injuries were the big part of why I stopped."
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
Powered by blogdig.net