Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Magglio got what now?

Okay, a show of hands: who here was advocating the signing of Magglio Ordonez because he'd be cheap? There was more than one of you, that's for sure. And so as a follow up, what do you think of what Mags ended up getting?

Anything else going on out there? I hear some guy named Canseco wrote a book.
Make Your Own Roundup: February 7th | 78 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_Smirnoff - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:52 AM EST (#100) #
I am getting Boras to negotiate my next contract. I just gotta give the man a round of applause. He is more magician than agent at this point.
_Grand Funk Rail - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:59 AM EST (#101) #
Elliot's column today in the Sun is a joke.
_Marc - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:59 AM EST (#102) #
http://www.washnationals.blogspot.com
I'm glad to see the Tigers were "smart" enough to include an out clause on Magglio's contract... His knee must appear pretty sound for Boras to agree to that.

Canseco doesn't exactly have a lot of credibility... I think everything said in the book has to be taken with a HUGE grain of salt. He stands to make a lot more money by saying all those negative things he said about McGwire and Giambi and drumming up publicity for his book. I wouldn't be surprised if he got sued for libel or defamation... I mean Americans sue for everything, right? Uh oh, maybe that statement could get me sued...
_Lee - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 10:02 AM EST (#103) #
Okay, a show of hands: who here was advocating the signing of Magglio Ordonez because he'd be cheap? There was more than one of you, that's for sure.

I kind of suspected he would be far too expensive. That said, a contract worth a minimum 5 years/$75 million, that can become guaranteed for 7 years/$105 million based upon starts or plate appearances (levels he should have no trouble reaching if healthy), is a wee bit excessive. I guess I was right the other day, Detroit really WAS desperate. At least they can void the contract if he gets hurt again this season...
_Lee - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 10:06 AM EST (#104) #
Elliot's column today in the Sun is a joke.

Yep,pretty much nonsense, as usual. Still, it's a good sign that it took him THIS long to come up with a negative spin... ;-)
_The Original Ry - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 10:13 AM EST (#105) #
And Richard Griffin still hasn't told us how the payroll increase means J.P. Ricciardi eats little kittens for breakfast.
_Jeremy - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:16 AM EST (#106) #
Before Canseco writes a book, shouldn't he at least colour one first?
_Parker - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:17 AM EST (#107) #
Anyone else think there might be a connection between the NHL lockout and the fact that Mike Illich has been spending insane amounts of money on the Tigers over the last two seasons?

Maybe he figures by the time the lockout ends (I'll be happy if the 2006-07 season starts on time) the Red Wings' payroll should be pretty much depleted due to the retirements of all the greybeards.
_Jeremy - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:19 AM EST (#108) #
Above post was no more than a lame attempt at humour, in case anyone's nose gets out of joint.
_Parker - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:23 AM EST (#109) #
Illitch, I mean. Sort of ironic after all those worries about spelling Schoeneweis correctly. Yeesh.
_Prisoner of Ham - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:32 AM EST (#110) #
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2005/02/06/checkbook_adds_to_balance/
In a piece in the Boston Globe, running today (COMN) Ricciardi gives this quote:

"We've been a little like a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest."

I wanna know how come Boston papers get all the best quotes from this guy.
_Ducey - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:40 AM EST (#111) #
I don't follow the Tigers that much but on the face of it, there does not seem to be much of a plan in Detroit.

Between Higginson, Percival, Young, Vina and White they seem to be determined to field a lineup of average, middle aged, injury prone and expensive players. While I like IRod, his contract is so long and so much money is deferred that it is likely to come back and haunt them. Mag's contract just seems more of the same. There is no out clause if he plays like crap or hurts anything other than his knees (right?). For $60 million he can hide the pain for this year. The better plan would have been to give him a one year deal. If he didn't want it too bad.

On the rotation side it seems like they have been determined to throw rookies to the wolves. While some of them may turn out to be good (Bonderman), they will have used up all their cheap service time before they really start to excel.

It sounds like JP checked on Mags and then pulled out when he heard where the bidding was at. Thank goodness.
_Ducey - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:49 AM EST (#112) #
Here is what Canseco says of his book (from POH's link above):

"The bible of sports," is how he described it to Jeff Miller of the Orange County Register. "It will break records for a sports book. It will be a bestseller and not just here but all over the world. Japan. China. We're getting good reaction from all over. It will be the greatest sports book ever."
Named For Hank - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:54 AM EST (#113) #
PoH, maybe J.P. is less afraid that a comment like that will net a headline of RICCIARDI ADMITS SITUATION HOPELESS, UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING from the Boston papers.

And that Canseco quote is priceless. The man is a nut.
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:00 PM EST (#114) #
PoH, maybe J.P. is less afraid that a comment like that will net a headline of RICCIARDI ADMITS SITUATION HOPELESS, UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING from the Boston papers.

Or maybe WHITE JAYS BOSS MOCKS THE DIFFERENTLY ABLED.
Pistol - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:04 PM EST (#115) #
Anyone else think there might be a connection between the NHL lockout and the fact that Mike Illitch has been spending insane amounts of money on the Tigers over the last two seasons?

I wouldn't think so. My impression (perhaps incorrectly) is that the Red Wings are one of the more profitable franchises in the NHL and not one of the 'we're better off not playing' franchises.

In a piece in the Boston Globe

I was going to link that yesterday, but it seemed to cover everything that was already known, except the quote.
_Lee - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:12 PM EST (#116) #
"The bible of sports," is how he described it to Jeff Miller of the Orange County Register. "It will break records for a sports book. It will be a bestseller and not just here but all over the world. Japan. China. We're getting good reaction from all over. It will be the greatest sports book ever."

Not bloody likely, I think...
_Useless Tyler - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:30 PM EST (#117) #
This is honestly the first time I've been actively anticipating and hoping for a Richard Griffin column. I mean, we've gone for so very long without one you must expect he's writing up a big four-page exposť in the vein of the classic "jays are racists" article from months upon months back.

I for one can't take this much more of opening my beloved (har) Toronto Star to find nothing but hockey lockout, basketball, and your daily "interview with random canadian athlete".
_Braby21 - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:51 PM EST (#118) #
Since the visa quota for Canadians and others to work in the U.S. was reached last month, Major League Baseball officials have asked for proposals to run a rookie-class team either in British Columbia or in the New York Penn league. Co-op teams could be fielded in Hamilton, Welland and St. Catharines, with possibly a fourth in London's new Labatt Park.

Wow, sounds pretty cool, anyone think there's a chance at getting a team to play in London?
_Lee - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:54 PM EST (#119) #
Wow, sounds pretty cool, anyone think there's a chance at getting a team to play in London?

Braby, that would be great, but I doubt it. I used to go to practically every London Tigers game when they were here, and it would be great to have something like that back again...
_Parker - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:54 PM EST (#120) #
"The bible of sports," is how he described it to Jeff Miller of the Orange County Register. "It will break records for a sports book. It will be a bestseller and not just here but all over the world. Japan. China. We're getting good reaction from all over. It will be the greatest sports book ever."

Holy crap.

I used to think the guy was an idiot; now I think he's flat-out crazy.
_Lefty - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 12:58 PM EST (#121) #
OK, my guess, Richard Griffin is on pre spring training holiday.

I said this on budget announcement day and stand by it. Whether you an RG neutral or an RG basher, I think he and other nay sayer baseball journalists can share in some credit for the 40% increase in budget.

Holding an entities feet to the fire is one of the best things the media has the ability to do for its community.

All to often the media seems to only serve as a advertizing vihicle, full of fluff pieces and media releases.
Joe - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:12 PM EST (#122) #
http://me.woot.net
What am I missing? Elliott's article says, basically, "The winning Jays weren't built around free agents, and free agents won't come here until we start winning anyways." He's right. The only hope the Jays have is that the homegrown talent produces. That's been the case ever since Ricciardi took over. The extra money will just make it easier to hold on to that homegrown talent and/or add a few extra players when it's needed.
_Useless Tyler - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:14 PM EST (#123) #
http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/tor/news/tor_news.jsp?ymd=20050206&content_id=939929&vkey=news_tor&fext=.jsp
COMN for a new Fordin mailbag. Nothing particularly of interest except praising the new changes and explaining the lack of Magglio-signing.
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:25 PM EST (#124) #
What am I missing? Elliott's article says, basically, "The winning Jays weren't built around free agents, and free agents won't come here until we start winning anyways." He's right.

That he is. Unfortunately, the article is awash in contradictions as he spends the first part of it taking the piss out of the team for increasing the budget after it was too late to do any good. Maybe he had a neat little paragraph transitioning the two arguments that was left on the cutting room floor, but his track record precludes me from giving him the benefit of the doubt, especially since he's still beating his hobby horse about the Jays letting go of his favourite scouts.
Craig B - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:40 PM EST (#125) #
Elliott's article says, basically, "The winning Jays weren't built around free agents, and free agents won't come here until we start winning anyways." He's right. The only hope the Jays have is that the homegrown talent produces.

Correct on all points, Joe.

I think he and other nay sayer baseball journalists can share in some credit for the 40% increase in budget

Purely a business decision. I credit them with 0%. The increased budget isn't there to placate an angry public (let's face it - if the Griffins of the world were having an effect, the public would be angry, not indifferent); it's to build a winning team.
_G.T. - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:41 PM EST (#126) #
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/Sports/2005/02/07/923036-sun.html
That he is. Unfortunately, the article is awash in contradictions as he spends the first part of it taking the piss out of the team for increasing the budget after it was too late to do any good.

So, are you suggesting that it wasn't increased too late to do any good? What he's saying is not only correct, it's blatantly obvious:

"The added money for team payroll while not timed well for 2005, will help down the road"

(COMN for the article, BTW)

Elliot goes on to propose ways in which the increase can help the team field a better team this year. The "July swoop". He also says the Jays look like a fourth place team. Is that not realistic?

I, personally, fail to see how this article says anything that hasn't been said here, and I don't find the tone overly negative at all.

especially since he's still beating his hobby horse

I think the only "hobby horse" still being beaten is Elliott, and it's being beaten, as always, by Bauxites.
_Frank Markotich - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 01:59 PM EST (#127) #
Rich Harden, Eric Gagne, Justin Morneau, Corey Koskie, Jason Bay, Chris Reitsma, ...

All were drafted/signed pre-Ricciardi. Where the hell were our vaunted Canadian scouts on these guys? Did they submit bad reports, or worse, no reports at all? Or did they file good recommendations, but Ash (or in some cases maybe Gillick) decide they didn't wan't no stinkin' Canadians on the team?
_Lefty - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:09 PM EST (#128) #
Purely a business decision. I credit them with 0%. The increased budget isn't there to placate an angry public (let's face it - if the Griffins of the world were having an effect, the public would be angry, not indifferent); it's to build a winning team

While I don't disagree that it is a business decision, I would suggest that the suprise change in budget direction was on the basis of fan apathy and perhaps anger. But without doubt it is also because of the further convergence of Rogers Comm purchase of the Dome etc.

The team was not recieving favourable coverage. It was continually and perhaps rightfully bashing the Jays for fielding an inferior product. Season tickets and advert sales must have been sinking this offseason. The team needed to do something to gain the confidence of their market and try and mitigate the the poor public coverage the team was recieving.

This seems to have had some effect as evidenced by Elliot's rather positive piece today. I am sure that story will sell some tickets today and if I'm thinking about advertising Uncle Bob's Autobody on the jumdbotron this season I am more likely to view that as a positive business decision today rather than if the team did not increase the budget and if sports writers were garaunteed to continue devaluing the team and ensuring a continuing decline in its market.

Poor public perception convinced the PM to hand over his shipping company to his sons. If this issue was not in the public eye he would still be the beneficial owner.
_Daryn - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:11 PM EST (#129) #
Eliot does suggest that the best of the free agents left is Todd Hundley and Mo Vaughn or something

I don't know about that.. I see Ramiro Mendoza is available, I wonder if he'd sign for $4Mil??

What about Jeff Zimmerman, minor league deal???
Just thinking out loud
_Mick - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:16 PM EST (#130) #
Mendoza re-signed with the Yankees a couple of days ago, likely to the delight of Red Sox fans.
_Mick - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:17 PM EST (#131) #
Don't forget to check out the home team's media reaction:

Detroit News
Tigers reach 5-year, $75 million deal with Ordonez
"In our game, you go on track record, and he's been an All-Star and a .300 hitter who drives in well over 100 RBIs a year," Tigers manager Alan Trammell said last month after he and team officials met with Ordonez and his agent in Miami. The Chicago Cubs, Toronto and Texas backed out of talks recently and the New York Mets told Boras on Friday they were not prepared to move quickly and would first want to examine Ordonez. He made $14 million last year and the White Sox made no effort to re-sign him.

Impending arrival of Ordonez crowds Tigers' outfield; Higginson could be gone
The Tigers made such a commitment to Ordonez that no other team -- not just the Mets -- came close to competing with them for him. "When you have an owner (Mike Ilitch) that's committed to you and respects and believes in you, it really feels good," Ordonez told the Tribune on Sunday. "I don't think someone would sign me for seven years if my knee wasn't all right. That's one of the reasons I didn't sign back with Chicago."

Detroit Free Press
Ordonez passes physical, takes final swings at Sox
Asked about playing the Sox 19 times a year, Ordonez thumbed through a Tigers pocket schedule to find out when he'd first return. "April 29 for three games," he said. "That'll be exciting. I hope the fans know I did my best for them."

Heady negotiating nabs another injured star to heal wounded club
The Tigers' motto in the free-agent sweepstakes is pretty clear: Bring us your tired, your poor, your shaky vertebrae, your weakened meniscus. They are what they are, feasting on others' scraps. That's the penalty for more than a decade's worth of poor decision-making combined with dreadfully poor luck ... But championships are born from not fearing failure.

Pitch from Ilitch was big hit with new rightfielder Ordonez
It wasn't an easy agreement to reach. Someone with knowledge of the negotiations said a couple of days ago: "I think Dave Dombrowski probably wants to strangle Scott Boras about now." But the president/general manager and the agent worked through their differences -- as they did with Pudge last winter.
_Cristian - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:28 PM EST (#132) #
The 'Higginson could be gone' article doesn't mention the best possible decision the Tigers could make--moving Higginson to CF and cutting loose Alex Sanchez. Higginson, for all his failings, still gets on base at a decent clip, has some speed, and plays solid defence. If his defensive skills transfer into passable CF defence, he's light years ahead of Sanchez, who for all his speed, is not a good fielder.
_Braby21 - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:30 PM EST (#133) #
Wow, sounds pretty cool, anyone think there's a chance at getting a team to play in London?

Braby, that would be great, but I doubt it. I used to go to practically every London Tigers game when they were here, and it would be great to have something like that back again...


What you don't go watch the London Majors play in the IBL?
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:49 PM EST (#134) #
I think the only "hobby horse" still being beaten is Elliott, and it's being beaten, as always, by Bauxites.

Let's go back to the source, shall we? Elliott's contribution to his ongoing airing of grievances against Ricciardi is this particular gem, which he launches into without any introduction:

One of the reasons former Jays scout Billy Moore was let go was because he saw a Chicago Cubs minor-leaguer and graded him as a future first baseman without power.

He then proceeds to list Hinske's stats and compares him unfavourably to Delgado. There's nothing to argue with there.

But why is Elliott using this column to make the point, two months after the Jays and Delgado went their separate ways, and Hinske was shifted to first to make room for Koskie? One suspects that Bob has an ulterior motive here. Is it malign or benign? The question practically answers itself.

Why was Moore fired? The purpose of journalism, after all, is to make sense of a muddle of events. Elliott, as is his wont, simply frames events with his own one-size-fits-all perspective. Is there a story here? Did Ricciardi laugh at Moore after Hinske won rookie of the year and canned him for supposed incompetence? That would make an interesting story, but since Elliott doesn't write it, we can assume that it isn't true. So why was Moore fired? Since we can assume that Elliott's source is either Moore himself, or someone very close to him, you'd expect that Elliott would be able to spin a fairly interesting story regarding his departure. Instead, you get pure speculation dressed up in the guise of divinely inspired truth.

It would be one thing to surmise that Moore was let go because his talents were underappreciated by the Jays. If Elliott could demonstrate a record of success relative to his peers - after all, a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while - he might be able to build a case that the Jays made a serious mistake. But to state baldly, without bothering to cite any factual evidence, that he was fired because he dared to contradict the boss on his first major acquisition, is consistent with Elliott's usual brand of lazy, nonsensical journalism, which he uses primarily to settle personal scores.
Craig B - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:50 PM EST (#135) #
Where the hell were our vaunted Canadian scouts on these guys?

Busy giving Bob Elliott the "inside scoop", I presume.

It's no doubt one of the many reasons why the Canadian scouting department was one of the worst hit by J.P.'s cuts. Not only were those guys very poor performers as a group, there were way too many of them for what is, in production terms, a small area.
Craig B - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 02:52 PM EST (#136) #
Poor public perception convinced the PM to hand over his shipping company to his sons. If this issue was not in the public eye he would still be the beneficial owner

I'll restrain myself and simply point out that this is a really, really terrible analogy.
_mr predictor - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:11 PM EST (#137) #
NFH my hand is up. I had hoped the Jays could sign Mags for $6-7M, with incentives pushing it to $9-10M for ONE year. I assumed Mags would want a year to re-establish himself and get the big bucks.

Instead all he and Boras had to do was wait until the end of the signing season and capitalise on the Tigers' insecurities as other teams around them loaded up at the FA market.

I am so absolutely shocked by the numbers that Boras was able to extract. Even if Mags had been healthy and been his usual self (ie around 10th in the MVP vote, as a guess) I would never have imagined a long term contract at $15M.

Utter insanity.
_Ryan Lind - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:29 PM EST (#138) #
I'll bet Nomar wants a new agent.
_Ryan B. - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:32 PM EST (#139) #
With no trade getting worked out, Robby Hammock is now available on release waivers.
He'll probably be claimed, but if he isn't, he'll become a free agent on Tuesday.


Anyone else think Hammock would be nice insurence for the older Myers/Zaun platoon? Even if Qurioze is ready in June, Hammock would be a nice fit on the 40 man.
_Jacko - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:36 PM EST (#140) #
http://www.baseball-reference.com/o/ordonma01.shtml

Heady negotiating nabs another injured star to heal wounded club

Maybe the good experience they had with Pudge has made them think they can sign any "fragile" player and get away with it.

Unfortunately for the Tigers, herniated discs are a lot more common and easier to treat than bone marrow edema -- you don't have to go to Austria for some radical experimental treatment.

Also, I'm sure someone else has already pointed this out, but COMN for the baseball reference page for Ordonez.

(a) none of his comparables are true stars. No Mannys or Vlads in that group. If you're not getting a Vlad like player, why are you paying Vlad money?

(b) it looks like he peaked in 2002 at the age of 28.

If he gets through 2005 without a recurrence of his knee problems, and manages to remain relatively healthy, the Tigers will be on the hook for 105 MM over the next 7 years.

This contract may end up haunting them for years...

jc
_Lefty - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:40 PM EST (#141) #
Its ok Craig, you don't have to restrain yourself. Its just an analogy, a fairly high profile one but an analogy only. As well its just a difference in personal opinions, not a big deal.

How about the Gomery inquiry then, if the Conservatives simply wanked about the sponsorship deal in question period and the media did not pick up on it then the Liberals would have just skated.

Same with Arar, if Walkom (Star) and Judith O'Niell (Citizen) didn't bang on the governement, there would have been no positive public result. Well in fact in these two cases there might not be a positive public result yet, but the governements were forced to react to a public concern as presented by the media.

I think these are positive things.

No matter what the reason for increased budget, that is a positive result.
_Nicholas - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:41 PM EST (#142) #
Ryan B: Isn't the 40 man already full?? Who do you DFA for Hammock???
_Ryan Day - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 03:41 PM EST (#143) #
Why was Moore fired? The purpose of journalism, after all, is to make sense of a muddle of events. Elliott, as is his wont, simply frames events with his own one-size-fits-all perspective. Is there a story here?

More interestingly: When was Moore fired? Elliott doesn't even say. Was it when Ricciardi acquired Hinske? After Hinske won the ROY? Last week? I suspect it's a lot closer to the first two the latter, which suggests Elliott has no more motivation than saying "Nyah Nyah!"

I do find the "One of the reasons..." bit interesting, though. Really, what were the other reasons he was fired?
_The Original Ry - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 04:04 PM EST (#144) #
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam021007/mlb_tor-sun.html
COMN for an October 7, 2002 Bob Elliott column mentioning Moore's dismissal. From the article:

Moore, was one of the more successful Jays scouts. First as an area scout and then as western regional supervisor, the former Montreal Expos farmhand was responsible for the Jays drafting three future major leaguers: Shortstop Chris Woodward in the 54th round; second baseman Mike Young, in the sixth round, dealt to the Texas Rangers for Esteban Loaiza in 2000, and Jay Gibbons in the 14th round, claimed by the Baltimore Orioles in the Rule V draft two seasons ago.
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 04:40 PM EST (#145) #
So from that September, 2002 article we see that at that point in time Elliott had no particular axe to grind over Moore's dismissal. If he'd been fired because he was low on Hinske, Elliott should have dutifully reported that piece of news. Was he holding on to it because at the time it wouldn't have reflected well on Moore?

That's one of my fundamental issues with Elliott and the way he protects his favourite scouts. Sure, he's happy to point out the ones he got right - although in retrospect only Young looks to be a real find - but he never mentions all the players that the scouts missed on. As has been discussed in this thread today, all the Canadian scouts Elliott so sadly mourns have never found a single Canadian player of consequence. Doesn't that count for anything with him? Assuming there's any veracity to his claim today at all, he only trots out Moore's assessment of Hinske now that it looks prescient. Talk about picking your spots.
Mike Green - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 04:50 PM EST (#146) #
I have no idea whether Moore was a good, bad or average scout; however, finding any kind of major leaguer in the 54th round qualifies as a significant find.
_Ryan B. - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 05:18 PM EST (#147) #
Ryan B: Isn't the 40 man already full?? Who do you DFA for Hammock???

Huckaby or Walker. If I was GM it would be Walker, even if you have too many catchers.

I honestly belive Myers will get hurt/retire/be released before the season is over.
_Thaskins - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 05:32 PM EST (#148) #
http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
As a Blue Jay fan Iím happy the Tigers signed Maglio for all this money. This removes another team from bidding on players we may want in the future. Iíd also throw the Marlins into this category as well with their deal for Delgado. Itís amazing teams donít learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of other teams. The Tigers do not need to sign a 31 year old free agent to a 5-year deal. Doesnít matter how good he is. 5-year deals should be reserved for the good young talent as it comes up through the organization.
_Geoff - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 05:32 PM EST (#149) #
Neither Huckaby nor Walker are on the 40

   
21 Jason Arnold R/R 6-3 210 05/02/79
43 Miguel Batista R/R 6-1 195 02/19/71
49 Dave Bush R/R 6-2 210 11/09/79
39 Gustavo Chacin L/L 5-11 195 12/04/80
50 Vinnie Chulk R/R 6-2 195 12/19/78
54 Jason Frasor R/R 5-10 170 08/09/77
35 Chad Gaudin R/R 5-11 165 03/24/83
51 Ryan Glynn R/R 6-3 200 11/01/74
32 Roy Halladay R/R 6-6 225 05/14/77
44 Billy Koch R/R 6-3 220 12/14/74
22 Brandon League R/R 6-3 190 03/16/83
46 Kerry Ligtenberg R/R 6-2 220 05/11/71
31 Ted Lilly L/L 6-1 190 01/04/76
40 Dustin McGowan R/R 6-3 220 03/24/82
34 Justin Miller R/R 6-2 210 08/27/77
33 Vince Perkins L/R 6-5 220 09/27/81
26 Ismael Ramirez R/R 6-3 200 03/03/81
36 Francisco Rosario R/R 6-0 195 09/28/80
60 Scott Schoeneweis L/L 6-0 195 10/02/73
30 Justin Speier R/R 6-4 205 11/06/73
7 Josh Towers R/R 6-1 190 02/26/77

16 Guillermo Quiroz R/R 6-1 200 11/29/81
9 Gregg Zaun S/R 5-10 190 04/14/71

8 Russ Adams L/R 6-1 180 08/30/80
17 Eric Crozier L/L 6-4 200 08/11/78
25 John Hattig S/R 6-2 215 02/27/80
29 Shea Hillenbrand R/R 6-1 210 07/27/75
11 Eric Hinske L/R 6-2 235 08/05/77
1 Orlando Hudson S/R 6-0 185 12/12/77
47 Corey Koskie L/R 6-3 220 06/28/73
6 John McDonald R/R 5-11 175 09/24/74
4 Frank Menechino R/R 5-8 200 01/07/71
23 Raul Tablado R/R 6-2 195 03/03/82

27 Frank Catalanotto L/R 5-11 195 04/27/74
24 John-Ford Griffin L/L 6-2 215 11/19/79
18 Gabe Gross L/R 6-3 210 10/21/79
3 Reed Johnson R/R 5-10 180 12/08/76
19 Miguel Negron L/L 6-2 170 08/22/82
15 Alex Rios R/R 6-5 195 02/18/81
10 Vernon Wells R/R 6-1 225 12/08/78
_James - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 05:53 PM EST (#150) #
I'd say Ryan Glynn is the most likely member of that group to get DFA'd. But note that Myers isn't already on there, so they will have to DFA Glynn just to clear a spot for him or Huckaby,
_G.T. - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 06:25 PM EST (#151) #
Let's go back to the source, shall we? Elliott's contribution to his ongoing airing of grievances against Ricciardi is this particular gem, which he launches into without any introduction:

[snip]


Why is there any to think it was supposed to be connected to what came before it in the column (which I guess you don't seem to find negative anymore?), anymore than there's reason to think it's connected to this part of the source:

" Since the visa quota for Canadians and others to work in the U.S. was reached last month, [...]"

or this:

" Etobicoke reliever Robbie Findlay, of the TCU Horned Frogs, made the fifth annual SLAM! Canadian baseball team."

The column is only "awash in contradictions" to somebody who's looking for them...
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 06:45 PM EST (#152) #
G.T., I don't want to get into a pissing match with you. I've explained at length why I think Elliott's constant refrain regarding Ricciardi's ill-treatment of the scouting staff inherited from the Ash regime is tiresome and is consistently unaccompanied by any form of real analysis.

I continue to take issue with the primary focus of his column, not because of the insight (which is wholly unoriginal but not incorrect) but because of its tone. That the payroll boost came too late to make much of a difference this off-season is a correct, factual observation; that the best way for the Blue Jays to contend is to wait until they are a few pieces away is a good observation. But instead of making that simple point, Elliott begins his column with a condescending analogy suggesting that Rogers thinks the money will be spent but is too dim to understand that it might have been better to free the money up earlier.

These two points are not mutually exclusive - it is possible to blunder into the right strategy without realizing it. But Elliott doesn't try to say that the Jays' folly has a silver lining. Even he isn't dishonest enough to suggest that there isn't a plan here, so instead he has to settle for making snide remarks about the budget strategy.

If he thinks the Jays are pursuing the right strategy by marshalling their resources either until the trading deadline or next off-season, he should say so, and credit the team for going in the right direction. Instead, he wants to level a few snarky criticisms - which he conveniently puts in the first paragraph so everybody will read them, even if they can't be bothered to read all the way to the bottom to see who made the fifth annual SLAM! Canadian Baseball Team - while reserving for himself the right to say that he was right all along, should the Jays' strategy bear fruit. Maybe I'm giving him too credit as a writer here, but in this part of the column he cannot make up his mind about that point he's trying to make, and as a result he contradicts himself.
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 06:47 PM EST (#153) #
That last sentence should read "too much credit"
_Nicholas - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 07:29 PM EST (#154) #
Thaskins: I think the Ordonez contract is terrible for the Jays. Detroit bid against nobody and paid way too much. They think that is the only to get premier players to come to Detroit. I think the same will have to be done to get the premier to Toronto. If the money's close most players will go else where...
_Braby21 - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 08:14 PM EST (#155) #
Does anybody know if the Jays addressed the wall height problem? Their outfield walls are currently 10 feet tall. And after seeing VDubb's catch in Yankee stadium to rob A-Fraud, I feel that they should lower the walls a couple feet to allow for some exciting catches like that.
_Rob - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 08:30 PM EST (#156) #
I don't think the Jays did anything about the wall heights, although seeing Wells rob a few would be nice.

I'm still nervous about FieldTurf after what happened with Myers in Minnesota. I didn't see much else of this turf outside of that game, but I guess anything's better than playing on cement.
_G.T. - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 08:31 PM EST (#157) #
But instead of making that simple point, Elliott begins his column with a condescending analogy suggesting that Rogers thinks the money will be spent but is too dim to understand that it might have been better to free the money up earlier

I don't particularly want to get into a "pissing match" with you either, FS, but the way I see it, you have a notion that Elliott has an "agenda" behind every statement, and are interpreting everything he writes based on that notion.

"It's like the husband arriving home at 4:45 on Christmas Eve, handing over his bonus and telling his wife to "pick up something extra for the kids.

The added money for team payroll while not timed well for 2005, will help down the road "

I dunno... I thought that was kind of amusing, myself, and think it's a good analogy. (Presumably, the wife can "pick something up" for the kids after Christmas, and again note the phrase "will help down the road") There's absolutely no suggestion that the reason Rogers didn't give them the money was because they were too "dim" -- that's merely how you chose to interpret it!

I've explained at length why I think Elliott's constant refrain regarding Ricciardi's ill-treatment of the scouting staff inherited from the Ash regime is tiresome

Yes, and I'm explaining why I think these constant refrains regarding Elliott's agenda (from many posters) are tiresome. I came here the morning of the press conference, looking for positive comments about a positive announcement, and found that many people insisted on somehow turning it into an oppportunity to Griffin/Elliott-bash some more.

Do you folks not realize you're guilty of the very thing you're complaining about in Griffin/Elliott? Taking a good-news morning, and using it as an oppourtunity to complain?

It's entirely possible that I'm the only one who finds those complaints far more tiresome than seeing "GFO" at the end of a post, but I find the constant Griffin/Elliott-bashing as tired as the "LighterFluid" and "BBBatista"-type comments. YMMV.

What happened to the notion, after Griffin took the time to sit down with BB folks, that "we" were going to try to be more "respectful" to these people whose jobs are far more difficult than most of us would imagine?
_The Original Ry - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 08:38 PM EST (#158) #
I'm still nervous about FieldTurf after what happened with Myers in Minnesota. I didn't see much else of this turf outside of that game, but I guess anything's better than playing on cement.

Minnesota originally had another supplier for their turf, but they went belly-up shortly before they were supposed to install it. As a result, FieldTurf was brought in with very little lead time. There was enough time to install it before the season, but not enough for it to properly settle in. It was during that early period when you saw the injuries occur. Afterward the turf was fine.
_Lefty - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 08:50 PM EST (#159) #
GT, your spot on.

If all I wanted was positive propoganda I would get all my Blue Jays news at the official website.

Anyway, you and Four Seamer had a good debate, its up to folks reading your contribtions to decide what they believe themselves. Just as we all get to decide if there is any particular merit in this column or that column.

I for one really enjoying a bit of poking and prodding from whatever media I'm reading on any subject. This is something that we are sorely missing in society today.

Hopefully there remains room for disenting opinion or at very least that questions can be raised without the villification of the minority by the majority.
_Rob - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:01 PM EST (#160) #
My take on Elliott's article: he's right. Everything about it right. It doesn't help for 2005, it does help later on, the free agent crop is weak, the Jays look like a 4th-place team and they need homegrown players for success. That's everything we've discussed since the payroll was unveiled, and there's nothing wrong with that.

If he stopped there, he would have a good article. Nothing more, nothing less. But Bob Elliott mentions (again) the firing of one of his friends by saying, "Moore first saw Hinske as a first baseman without power and now Hinske's a first baseman without power." That doesn't really tell us anything.

Elliott's reputation as a Blue Jay beat reporter isn't the greatest, and his griping over the scouts being fired does get old, but his column (up until "RIGHT, AGAIN") is hardly a joke. If Jeff Blair wrote this "Jays-need-draft-picks-to-succeed" story, I would have no problem with it, and I will not complain about Elliott's main idea today.
_Tom L - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:43 PM EST (#161) #
Bob Elliot lost the little credibility he had left when he "guaranteed that Koskie would not sign with the Jays." He's about as reliable and accurate as a New York post gossip correspondent.
Mike Green - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 09:55 PM EST (#162) #
Personally, I give credit for the increased payroll to:

#140743 Posted 02/01/2004 10:09 AM by R Billie:

The White Sox execs' Q&A with fans appears to have been a complete train wreck.

Wow. If the Chicago fans think a $65M payroll is modest in the AL Central they should be glad they aren't following teams who are doing better on lower payrolls in much tougher divisions.

I think if the Jays got a $65M payroll from 2005 going forward every hard core fan in the city would be doing backflips

And, my back is indeed sore from all those backflips.:)
_Four Seamer - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 10:42 PM EST (#163) #
For the record, I think that if you go through the archives, you'll see very few if any instances where I take issue with a Bob Elliott column. When I was younger, I used to look forward to his columns, which I absolutely devoured every time they appeared. I learned a lot about baseball from Bob Elliott, and he obviously loves the game. Consequently, out of respect for that I don't like to criticize him and I almost always bite my tongue whenever his columns are debated in these parts.

Anyways, I've said my piece about today's column and I'm not going to rehash it.
_Braby21 - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 10:44 PM EST (#164) #
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=citadel-2_350363_325&prov=citadel&type=lgns
COMN for a good Q & A w/ Director of Player Development Dick Scott.
Dave Till - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:03 PM EST (#165) #
I read about all the fuss about Canseco's new book, and I wondered whether the Toronto public library was going to acquire it, so I searched the TPL web site for "Canseco, Jose". The new book wasn't there, but this was:

Strength Training for Baseball, by Canseco, Jose. Perigee Books, c1990.

That "whoop whoop" sound is your irony meter going off. :-)
_Lefty - Monday, February 07 2005 @ 11:51 PM EST (#166) #
Great link Braby21. Thanks.
Named For Hank - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 12:26 AM EST (#167) #
G.T., speaking for myself, personally, I keep trying to give Griffin a chance, and he keeps doing things like what he did just a couple of weeks ago, where he completely and totally mischaracterized the content of Chasing Steinbrenner, an entertaining and funny writeup of the '03 season from the points of view of the Jays and Red Sox. While the actual book is a shaggy collection of anecdotes, Griffin characterized it as a cheap rehash of Moneyball, which is decidedly is not.

It was very clear from the column that Griffin had either not read the book or was willing to completely disregard the reality of it (while pissing on the book) to make the point he was aiming for. Not fair, not good journalism, and in my opinion, totally indefensible, no matter what the Star sports editor wants to say about Griffin being an opinion columnist.

It's hard to treat someone as a human being when they'd try to sabotage the book sales of someone else through deceit. That's not something that ethical writers do.

Unsurprisingly, my letters to the Star's ombud and their sports editor were not answered.
_Caino - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 12:27 AM EST (#168) #
Ya Braby, you da man.
_Caino - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 12:45 AM EST (#169) #
""Unsurprisingly, my letters to the Star's ombud and their sports editor were not answered.""

I was going to call Prime Time Sports today and mention the same thing... Baseball, Hockey, Basketball... The only positive thing I ever read in that sports section is from that guy who watches T.V. for a living. Obviously he has little to complain about.

But I had to work, and got nervous so I didn't call. I plan to soon though.

Great article again though Braby. Someone should post this in tomorrow's thread for anybody who missed it.
_Thaskins - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 08:45 AM EST (#170) #
http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Nicholas: I think weíre looking at two separate sides to the signing. I think itís good as it eliminates another team from wildly bidding on players in the coming years. People donít want to come to Toronto or Detroit right now because both teams were awful last year. Had the Jays had an 80-win season last year I donít think attracting players to their market would be any more difficult than any other 80-win team. Because Detroit decided to overbid on a 30-something player when they havenít shown any ability to compete is their fault. I donít think our management will make the same mistake.
Pistol - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 09:19 AM EST (#171) #
COMN for a good Q & A w/ Director of Player Development Dick Scott.

Sounds like they want League in the bullpen and only used League as a starter to accumulate experience.
Pistol - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 09:20 AM EST (#172) #
fixed?
Pistol - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 09:21 AM EST (#173) #
italics go away
Mike Green - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 09:32 AM EST (#174) #
High-end artillery italics masher.
Craig B - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 10:31 AM EST (#175) #
How about the Gomery inquiry then, if the Conservatives simply wanked about the sponsorship deal in question period and the media did not pick up on it then the Liberals would have just skated.

Same with Arar, if Walkom (Star) and Judith O'Niell (Citizen) didn't bang on the governement, there would have been no positive public result. Well in fact in these two cases there might not be a positive public result yet, but the governements were forced to react to a public concern as presented by the media.


I'll just point out that Rogers is not a government and has nothing in common with a government and leave it at that.
_mr predictor - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 10:47 AM EST (#176) #
Thaskins, in theory your assertion that the Tigers now have less money to throw around is correct. In practice, for reasons I don't understand, it just doesn't work out that way. For example if we agree that the Tigers overpaid on the IRod contract in 2004, then you would assume they would not do it again. Wrong.

Another example would be the recent signings of Russ Ortiz and Kris Benson. In no way did those egregious overpayments help the Blue Jays. It was simply inflationary and caused our prime FA target, Matt Clement, to be priced out of our range. As a result our starting pitching is weaker.

To take it further (stretching here maybe) our inability to bolster our starting staff, because we were priced out of the market, probably led us to deal a pretty good prospect for Hillenbrand.
_Lee - Tuesday, February 08 2005 @ 11:01 AM EST (#177) #
Braby, that would be great, but I doubt it. I used to go to practically every London Tigers game when they were here, and it would be great to have something like that back again...

What you don't go watch the London Majors play in the IBL?


Yep, I do. I've been going to most of the Majors home games for as long as I can remeber :). I love the Majors, but having a minor league franchise to follow is a bit different, since you know that you are seeing at least a couple of players who are one day going to be big-league stars.
Make Your Own Roundup: February 7th | 78 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.