Elbows

Johan Santana was scratched from his first spring training tuneup because of a sore elbow yesterday. Jerry Manual said it was no big deal and that he has a history of elbow soreness this time of year.

Johan had knee surgery this fall which seems completely unrelated but maybe it isn't:

Santana, who had arthroscopic surgery Oct. 1 on torn cartilage in his left knee, didn’t think the tightness in his elbow was related to rushing back from the knee surgery too soon, but rather from overuse early in camp.

“I’ve been throwing bullpens here every other day, and I don’t think I’ve ever done that in the past,” Santana said. “The reason why is because we wanted to test my knee and make sure everything is fine, throwing every other day off the mound.”

He's thrown more pitches than he usually does at this point and because of that he's now feeling soreness. He had surgery on his knee not his elbow, but extending your self more than you normally do to test your knee could hurt your elbow, no? It's likely to be nothing that rest can't fully heal but it's still not something to just completely set aside. I'm no expert in pitcher injuries, but elbow soreness often equals Tommy John.

A basic fantasy baseball strategy is to not draft pitchers in the first few rounds, and this is a reason why. If Hanley Ramirez skips 2 games because his quad is bothering him no one cares and you take him 1st or 2nd. When a pitcher skips a turn with elbow soreness I figure more bad news could await. Even if Johan slips to you in the 2nd round do you really want to draft him?

Manny Being Annoying

I kind of feel like an idiot saying Manny was definitely going to sign the Dodgers offer now that he rejected it. But as Rob Neyer helped point out in his Friday Filberts, it seems as though a lot of the Dodgers offer was deferred money. So the Dodgers offered $25m with $10m paid in 2011 and 2012 and $5m in 2013. Boras and Manny simply asked for the $25m upfront. So, it still seems inevitable that they will come to some agreement. I can't see anyone topping the Dodgers offer. I can only see them being fed up with Manny and other teams sneaking in with lower proposals than what the Dodgers offered as we inch closer to opening day.

You think the Phillies would rather have Raul Ibanez for $30m 3 years or Manny $25m one year?

Igawa Sucks

It's laughable to think how the Yankees signed Kei Igawa to try and match the Red Sox getting Dice-K. I'll argue Dice-K isn't nearly as good as he's perceived but even Sydney Ponson holds his own against Igawa. But at least Kei was always good in Japan and has that to fall back on right? Pete Abraham posted today about why Kei isn't involved in the WBC for Japan:

The WBC is a huge deal in Japan. Reportedly tens of thousands of people showed up to watch their national team practice about 10 days ago. They’ve been getting ready for three weeks and it would hardly be a surprise if they defend their title.

Meanwhile Kei Igawa toils away here for the Yankees, unwanted and unloved. He’ll probably be in the Scranton rotation.

One of the Japanese reporters in Tampa covering Hideki Matsui was asked why Igawa was not considered for the WBC roster. He searched for the right words.

“They think … he is not so good,” the man said.

I'm sorry but that's pathetic. Not on the reporter, just how Igawa's star (if he ever had one) has fallen. About 2.5 years ago Igawa was considered one of the better pitchers in Japan, and now he can't even make the Japanese WBC roster. A Japanese reporter isn't going to want to embarass his own country mate let alonea teammate of the man he's covering (Matsui), and the best he could say was that? That's pretty harsh.

Manny to LA (almost)

Manny has a 2 year $45m offer from the Dodgers on the table. From what I've heard the first year is $25m guaranteed and the next year is a player option. If the economy turns around Manny can peace LA and get a bigger deal if he could. If it doesn't or if he has an off year he can accept the 1 year $20m option. This sounds pretty fair to me, Manny isn't going to get a 4 year $100m deal that he wants. He's actually not going to get anything more than this offer, how much longer can the Dodgers negotiate with him and Boras before enough is enough. I'm 90% sure he'll accept this which is a lot but not as much as some Dodger ticket salesmen.

Manny isn't worth $25m when you factor in his inept fielding, but Manny is likely the difference between the playoffs or not for the Dodgers. In that case, even if his value is closer to $15-20m the difference between the postseason or no postseason is worth the extra few million for LA to give to Manny. It's similar reasoning to why the Royals have made some really questionable signings. Jose Guillen may help a team like the Royals win 72 games instead of 70 games, but either way they aren't sniffing the playoffs. It's hard to argue with teams overspending slightly when it's a matter of playing baseball in October.

But then I think about the Abreu contract. Manny Ramirez is a much better hitter than Abreu, but is he worth $20m more? I would tend to say of course not but last year Manny's war was 6.5 valued at $29.4m, and Abreu's was 1.5 valued at $6.8m. Abreu had a slightly down year and Manny a year he's unlikely to repeat, but the numbers don't lie.

Spring is in the Air

Spring Training has officially started, I am pretty excited. I know the spring stats don't mean anything but you really can't help analyzing what's going on as if each at bat or inning pitched has some significance. For instance, today I watched Phil Hughes pitch 2 innings of hitless baseball giving up one walk and striking out 2, and I say to myself Hughes can really be good this year. It's likely that if he gave up 4 runs in one inning while working on a new pitch that would be better than a perfect performance but you really can't help yourself.

With that said enjoy the spring games and do your best to not put any stock into what you see. Last year Cano had a great spring and we thought he'd finally start off the year well, clearly that wasn't the case. I imagine Cano will have a similar spring this year and Jayson Stark or Buster Olney will tell you how he's primed for a comeback. He very well may be, it's hard not to improve off his year last year, but it won't be because of his 80 meaningless spring at bats.

Come Back With My Show! I Mean MVP!

The steroids era has improved many a baseball players career. I need not say any more about that, think we can all agree. With that improvement came money, but often it also included some hardware, some MVPs. ESPN's Rick Reilly has decided to give back those MVPs to the rightful owners:

Let's start by bringing former Red Sox Mike Greenwell up to the podium. Greenie lost the 1988 AL MVP to Jose Canseco, who admitted in his book, "Juiced," that he cheated worse than Rosie Ruiz that year to win it. Canseco even told Howard Stern that Greenwell, now a high school coach in Fort Myers, Fla., "should stop by the house" to pick up the award. No need, Mike! Here it is. Should look sweet on the mantel.

"Man," Greenwell said when I called him. "I guess I'll just say it's been a long time coming. I even remember telling Jose once, 'Man, I'd love to have your power.' And he said, 'Come to Miami and I'll hook you up!' But I never did."

And why not?

"My wife and I were trying to have a baby and she basically said if I went on steroids, she'd kill me." Now he's got two boys. Healthy ones.

It's hard to call a guy like Jose Canseco sincere but you have to say he doesn't seem half bad right? I guess he looks as good as a man could after admitting cheated more than usual for his 1988 MVP.

And here's yours from 2001, Luis Gonzalez, after you finished behind The Barry Bonds Pharmacy. We won't even mention the home run title you would've won that year.

Now, for the man of the night. I have a U-Haul of hardware here for Jose Alberto Pujols Alcántara of the St. Louis Cardinals. You already have two MVPs, Albert, and you're about to get three more, since Barry Bonds ripped you off worse than Bernie Madoff to win the award from 2002 to 2004. You hit .335 and averaged 41 bombs those years and yet you finished second behind the clearly creaming Bonds in '02 and '03, and third behind Bonds and Adrian Beltre in '04. We're throwing out Beltre since, while he denies ever using PEDs, he fell off the face of the planet once baseball put in stricter steroid suspensions in 2005. If he wasn't cheating, I'm the Queen Mother. And this is history we're making here. It gives you five MVPs, and nobody else in baseball history now has more than three.

I think it's a great idea in general to go back in time and see who got screwed out of awards because the voters don't really get it right a lot of the time. And I think it's interesting to do it based on how steroids affected the results. But can we really know for sure who did not use? Are we really fixing up the MVP award when we take it from Bonds and give it to Luis Gonzalez? If you want to take away Adrian Beltre's votes because of suspicion how could you confidently give an award to Luis Gonzalez? Adrian Beltre's spike was his 25 age season in a contract year in the first year of testing in 2004. Luis Gonzalez's spike was in 2001 at 33 years old, possibly at the peak of steroid use.

I know Reilly is more about having a good time with this, and I'm all for anything that gives Albert more respect, but I was annoyed at how he took away Beltre's accomplishments while rewarding Luis Gonzalez. We will really never know who was and who wasn't on the juice. If all 104 names come out we will know more people who did use, but we still can't find proof of who didn't so all we have left is hope, hope that players we like and think are clean keep that reputation, maybe even if they weren't. So that's one thing Rick Reilly and I could definitely agree on "Just don't let us down on this thing, Albert. You know what we're talking about."

Halladays May Come Early This Year

Spring Training games haven't even started and in just the last couple of days there has been a flutter of Roy Halladay trade talk. Want proof?

CBS Sports has mentioned it.

ESPN talked about it here.

The New York Post wondered if he would be this years Sabathia.

John Heyman speculates he may be a trade candidate.

The Blue Jays play in a terrifying division and unless Travis Snider is Albert Pujols rookie good, everyone stays healthy, and they have some luck, they aren't going to get into the playoffs anytime soon. Add on the fact that the economy is shall we say dece, and the Blue Jays haven't been great at the gate since the Joe Carter years, it makes sense why they would entertain the idea of rebuilding, and that would seem to start with trading Halladay.

However, even a rebuilding team could afford to keep Halladay around as he's just filthy good, but Vernon Wells presents a problem. One of those links above mentioned that Wells was shopped this offseason. I wonder why. He only signed a 7 year $126m deal in 2008. Wells was pretty solid last year but hurt and was truly horrendous in 2007. If he were a free agent today he'd be looking at a 2 year deal. Something similar to what Andruw Jones signed last year following a disappointing season, but less than the contract he got (2/$36m), and instead the Blue Jays have to pay him over $100m over the next 6 years. I don't have a clue who would trade for that contract in general, let alone in this economic climate. Hmm Abreu for $5m or Wells for $100m?

Wells has all the talent in the world, but he's not even remotely close to a consistent player. His wOBA the since 2002: .327, .386, .350, .335, .382, .306, .357. He more or less goes from average to a little above average, occasionally throwing in a great season or a really bad one in. You don't know what you're going to get. If a team wants to unload and rebuild, they are going to want to trade the overpaid outfielder over the underpaid paid staff ace.

According to Riccardi he can never say never but it's not likely as of now that they trade Halladay. Wells on the other hand he clearly wants to trade, but I can't see any reasonable takers, unless they were packaged together as more of a salary dump than a prospect heist. Even then it's highly unlikely.

There is one intriguing scenario though: The Yankees obtained Alex Rodriguez from the Rangers who actually agreed to pay $80m of what remained on his contract. If the Blue Jays consider Wells a somewhat sunk cost and agree to partially pay some of the remaining contract, and pair him with Halladay, is it reasonable that the Yankees would bite? They could trade back Matsui who is off the books next year, Swisher who is reasonably priced, and a combination of prospects, maybe Hughes and Austin Jackson who they say is a year away from the majors. That's a lot to give, but it gives the Yankees a Center Fielder and a proven AL East pitcher. I am all for Joba starting, but if the rotation looked like Sabathia, Halladay, Burnett, Wang, Pettitte, I'd gladly let Joba pitch in the pen as Mariano's replacement. I know this is highly unlikely, but it's pretty exciting to speculate.

Realistically the Jays have to consider Wells as a terrible unmoveable contract they will be forced to live with Halladay as a guy that would net a slew of prospects in a second. These are the likely contenders for Halladay as I see fit, if he were to be placed on the market:

Mets: They didn't give up much for Johan, it would certainly serve them well to give up whatever is left for Halladay strenghening a top heavy rotation.

Braves: The Braves have 2 top 5 prospects and 2 other top guys that they traded for Teixeira. They have produced a ton of talent and will continue to do so. If they are sniffing the playoffs they have what would be necessary to get Halladay.

A's: Trading for Holliday who will be a free agent next year was an un-A's move, why not another? They have the farm to do it if necessary and it would definitely give them the division over the Angels

Red Sox: The Yankees didn't trade for Johan because they figured CC would be available. Did the Sox not sign CC because they figured Halladay could be available?

Cardinals: Albert Pujols carries this team on his back quite literally, he needs some help if they want a chance.

I don't think Halladay will be traded, but I also don't think the Jays will be that good, so you never know. Teams will surely think more highly of their prosepcts during the financial times we face this year, but Roy is Roy, he'll command a lot and teams will be biting for the chance to get him, that is if he's made available.

Baseball America Top 100

After talking about the under the radar youngins, we might as well get back to the guys on the radar, BAs top 100 Prospects.

Wieters #1, and Price #2 is going to be standard everywhere, any list that doesn't have that is just trying to be cool.

The Marlins have 3 top 20 prospects, all hitters, pretty impressive. With that known, it's hard for them to not do "Marlins type moves" then. Why keep Mike Jacobs when you have Logan Morrison a 1b ranked 18th, or keep Josh Willingham when you have Mike Stanton an outfielder ranked 16? The Marlins .

Other thoughts: the Braves have a top heavy farm with 2 top 5 guys. The Rangers have guys sprinkled all over the list in all positions, by most accounts they have the best farm in the league. The Rays have a ridiculous amount of good prospects for a division winner, and the Red Sox have nice young talent as well. It's nice to see some Pirates and Royals prospects too, maybe the futures of such historically rich baseball cities are bright after all.

Under the Radar Guns

Before every season you inevitably get loads and loads of preview stuff, often about young players. It's usually good stuff but let's face it, everyone knew about Joba Chamberlain last year and everyone knows about David Price this year. So what about those young pitchers who are flying under the radar?

None of the pitchers they name are going to sound too familiar, or really get you excited but that is kind of the point. Aaron Laffey, Jeff Niemann, Jason Hammel, and Dana Eveland are all pitchers on likely good teams, and they all figure to have a chance to contribute this year.

The fact that the Rays have two guys on this list (Niemann and Hammel) and neither figures to start this year really illustrates how deep their pitching is. Both could be put into the bullpen, or be traded for a piece for a midseason run, in this case they mention the Pirates as a team to monitor Rays.

I love the reading all the preseason stuff, but it's refreshing to read a write-up about players who have been overlooked by most other sources.

The Big Hurt(ing)

The always great MLBTR points out an interview Ken Rosenthal had with Frank Thomas:

Frank Thomas cannot believe it.

He is healthy, an offensive force who likely is headed to the Hall of Fame.

And he cannot get a job.
...

I just don't get it. In my eyes, I know I can go out and hit 35 to 40 home runs, drive in 120 runs. That's the way I feel."

Thomas, who lives in Las Vegas, says he has been working out for five straight months; his 2008 season ended on Aug. 29 due to a right quadriceps injury.

It's ok for Thomas to feel he can still be productive, I can't imagine athletes have successful careers by being modest and doubtful, but he really shouldn't be too surprised here. Bobby Abreu got a 1 year $5m after asking for 3 years $45m. Thomas got a 2 year $18m deal from the Blue Jays after a truly great year on the A's in 2006. In 2007, according to Fangraphs, he was worth $9.9m and outplayed the first year of the deal, but last year he was only worth $1m.

If Abreu got about 10% of what he wanted, then maybe we could assume Thomas (compared to his last deal) could ask for 1 year deal for about $2m. If Thomas is asking for more than that, it should be the GMs who are surprised, but if he's only asking for a cheap 1 year deal, should he still be available?

Thomas obviously can only DH in the AL, so half the teams are automatically out of it. I have the time, maybe you do, might as well go through each team and see if there is a fit:

AL East
Orioles: Getting Pie puts Luke Scott at DH, and 1b is locked up by another DH Huff, no fit
Rays: They signed Burrell this year. You could argue Thomas would be a better more cost efficient signing, but they can't go back, no fit
Yankees: Damon, Nady, Swisher, Matsui, Posada can't play everyday, no fit
Blue Jays: I think Thomas burned that bridge last year, no fit
Red Sox: I believe Bib Papi is doing a decent enough job there, no fit

AL Central
Indians: Their money is tied to Hafner
Royals: If they were smart Billy Butler would be given the job outright, and they haven't really made any smart moves this offseason, except the Greinke extension. Jacobs, Butler, Gload, Shealy, they're just loaded with 1b/DH, no fit
Twins: I think we have a winner, oh wait they signed Jason Kubel to a 2 year $7m deal, no dice
Tigers: I don't think Sheffield is going anywhere, although his mouth is, no deal
White Sox: I haven't kept up with Thomas and GM Ken Williams relationship with one another, but I don't think it's gonna happen, no fit

AL West
Angels: Vlad, Abreu, Rivera, Matthews Jr. Hunter is already crowded, no fit
A's: They tried Thomas last year after he was released from Toronto, it could work if something falls apart mid season as they are familiar with him, but Giambi is cemented there for now, no fit
Mariners: Jeff Clement has to play somewhere, but it could work, they don't really have a 1b.
Rangers: Chris Davis and Blalock have to play with Young now at 3b, no fit

Out of all the teams in the AL only one, the Seattle Mariners, has a reasonable spot for Thomas and it's not even close to a no brainer either. That's not to say that Thomas isn't a better option than other club's Dh's but a team like the Twins can't afford to keep Kubel for $7m and Thomas. Rosenthal mentions how teams now are going for more cost effective young players, but after looking at this it seems more like teams don't have room as of now. The few teams that had a DH spot available have filled it.

I like Thomas, he's been a sensational hitter who's career is way better than he ever gets credit for. He's one of the few (maybe the only?) power hitter of the 90s that we really know for sure did not use steroids, and he still put up stats better than anyone else, in his good years. I have no doubt that he can still hit but his estimations of 40 HR 120 RBI are let's say a little high considering that would require 600 plate appearances, and he has not proven to be consistently healthy the last 5 years. I'm not sure how the Big Hurt has been contacting teams; if he expects to start somewhere then he's somewhat disillusioned, if he's just asking for a chance to play then he may a reason to be upset. However, at this point in the offseason we have already seen how the economic climate has effected the free agent market, it's hard for me to be surprised any more, I don't think Frank should be either.

UDATE: The Kid (Griffey) just signed with the Mariners, taking away the only team that had a spot for The Big Hurt. The deal is 1 year $2m guaranteed with incentives. It is a nice story and I'll root for Griffey to do well but let's not fool ourselves, he's no longer a great hitter. He's more or less average when healthy and can't be counted on to be healthy. He had only 18 dingers in 490 ABs last year playing in Cinci and Chicago, both hitters parks. He's also a pretty horrendous fielder now although fans used to Ibanez may not notice. I'll say he goes .250/.350/.430 with 12 homers in 250 abs, helping the Mariners win 74 games instead of 73.

Finally, a Lesson Learned

From the ESPN Spring Training Blog:

Gary Sheffield is taking a new approach as he enters his 21st season in the majors: He wants to cut back on controversial remarks.

The Detroit Tigers designated hitter was true to his word Tuesday. He declined comment before the team's first full-squad workout.

A year ago, Sheffield criticized his former agent, Scott Boras. The slugger said he would have more to say when a dispute between them was settled. An arbitrator decided in October that Sheffield owed Boras $550,000 for eliminating a 2004 option that allowed him to become a free agent.

Sheffield is one homer from reaching No. 500.

It has only taken 21 years for Sheffield to learn he should cut back on his controversial remarks? I think the line was at 33 years.

Does this mean Torre didn't really favor white players?

Sheffield has had a truly outstanding career that was probably overlooked for years but now he won't get any respect with the steroid implications, pretty similar to Palmeiro in that regard. He may not have called everyone a racist quite like the Sheff, but he loved to poke his finger (at Congress) and talk about that little pill.

"I take batting practice, I take fielding practice, I take Viagra"

In case you were wondering, the entire point of this was to get to the Viagra commercial

HanRam Hitting The Weights

Tim Kurkjian reports that Hanley Ramirez has put on 25 pounds of muscle in hopes to bat 3rd this season for the Marlins.

Judging by some pictures, I'd say he's telling the truth:


The new strong 225 lb Hanley on the left, and the old weak hitting 200 lb Hanley on the right

Like I said, his reasoning behind the muscle gain is to bat 3rd:

As good as Ramirez is, he wants to get better, and wants to get the Marlins to the playoffs. So he announced this spring that he wanted to hit third in the order, not leadoff, to drive in more runs.

"I want to drive in more runs, and help our team win,'' Ramirez said. "I've got to change my approach. Me, Uggla and [third baseman Jorge] Cantu, we've got to drive in more runs.''

It's all about creating runs, not necessarily driving them in. It's not a bad thing for Hanley to put on muscle as I don't doubt it will make Hanley a stronger hitter, but more RBI do not equal more wins. If Hanley, Uggla, and Cantu bat 3/4/5 needing to drive in more runs like Hanley says, who will bat in front of them? When Hanley bats first the Marlins best hitter gets the most plate appearances, if Hanley bats 3rd and say Cameron Maybin bats 1st, I don't think it will help the Marlins, even if Hanley sets a career high in RBI. In a perfect world Hanley could bat 3rd with a competent hitters ahead of him leading off and in the 2 hole, but so far it doesn't look like the Marlins roster merits that change.

The Steelers Cheated!!!!

Well, they definitely had an edge to get through injuries helping them to win the Super Bowl...

Andy Pettitte used to come back from injuries, and that has proven to be a common reason for using steroids.

So how is it that players that go through platelet-rich plasma therapy are celebrated, but those who use steroids hated?

Dr. Neal ElAttrache, the Los Angeles Dodgers’ team physician, used platelet-rich plasma therapy in July on a partially torn ulnar collateral ligament in the throwing elbow of pitcher Takashi Saito. Surgery would have ended Mr. Saito’s season and shelved him for about 10 to 14 months; he instead returned to pitch in the September pennant race without pain.

Roger Clemens could have used a little HGH here a little Steroid there to recover from injuries and people call for his head. But Saito gets blood injected into an infected area and no harm no foul. Well maybe it's because steroids is putting a foreign substance into your system and this is different:

Platelet-rich plasma is derived by placing a small amount of the patient’s blood in a filtration system or centrifuge that rotates at high speed, separating red blood cells from the platelets that release proteins and other particles involved in the body’s self-healing process, doctors said. A teaspoon or two of the remaining substance is then injected into the damaged area. The high concentration of platelets — from 3 to 10 times that of normal blood — often catalyzes the growth of new soft-tissue or bone cells. Because the substance is injected where blood would rarely go otherwise, it can deliver the healing instincts of platelets without triggering the clotting response for which platelets are typically known.

I can't speak for everyone, but anything that goes into a centrifuge and then into my body, is more or less a foreign substance. Steroids enable you to work out harder and recover from injuries, this process essentially does one job of steroids but better. I'm not saying steroids should be legal and these types of surgeries illegal. I'm saying we shouldn't be so shocked at steroid use or think of the users as villains while players continuously look for ways to get stronger and heal quicker, the same thing they looked for in steroids.

Baseball All Star Weekend

The NBA all-star game is only good if by chance the game is within reach in the end. Only then you are able to see the games greats all on the same court, actually trying. But the actual all star game is probably the least exciting aspect of the all star weekend. I'd argue that the baseball all star game is generally better because pitchers can pitch 100%, and hitters hit 100%. Runners won't plow into the catcher going home (unless you're Pete Rose) or hustle to go from 1st to 3rd with as much regularity, but the matchup between pitcher and hitter is more like actual baseball than any part of the NBA all star game is like actual basketball.

However, I feel that's irrelevant because the NBA all star weekend is infinitely better than baseballs. The home run derby is occasionally great, as we saw Josh Hamilton last year, but beyond that what is there? Baseball shouldn't stop with just the home run derby, the NBA didn't stop with the dunk contest (kryptonite will always win by the way, congrats Nate!). The NHL has the fastest skater, a shootout competition, the hardest shot, and a breakaway challenge. The NBA has the rookie/sophomore game, a pg skills competition, 3pt shootout, and the dunk contest. The MLB needs to adopt more events like other sports have. Here are some ideas they should strongly consider:

• Best Double-play Competition- have several double play combinations field grounders for the fastest time
• Fastest 1st to 3rd/Fastest stolen base- home to first wouldn't work since lefties have an edge. But wouldn't it be great seeing Carlos Gomez and Jose Reyes running their fastest?
• Best Catcher Arm- Have catchers compete in throwing out base runners
• Best Outfield Arm- So is Vlad's gun really the best? Let's find out who's the best at throwing out runners at 3rd base from right field.
• Fastest pitch- I would love to see this but I realize it could do a lot of damage to a pitchers arm. Who wouldn't want to see Zumaya try to clock one at 100+ mph?
  
• Quickest Pickoff Move- not really that exciting but it's an idea.
• Pitching Accuracy- Have targets that a pitcher needs to nail on the corners.
• Best Bunters- have hitters do there best to bunt it as close down the line as they can.
  

What's the reasoning behind not trying to do some of this? I realize they aren't all great ideas, and that they wouldn't all pass, but some of them would have to, and fans would like to see it. I don't care about the futures game sorry, having 3-4 of these events before the home run derby, like the NBA does on all star Saturday, makes too much sense not to try it out.

If baseball wants to move on from steroids and all the talk about home runs, they should focus on these skills that have gotten lost in the shuffle. Tell kids it's not all about the home runs, that going first to third, or picking off a base runner, or defense, or hitting your spots as a pitcher are just as integral to winning...while they wait to watch for the home run derby. There are so many unique attributes that certain players have, beyond slugging batting practice pitches in to the stands, that it's such a waste not to showcase them as part of the all star festivities. This brings baseball back to its roots, and gives appreciation to the entire game, not just the stars and dingers.

Also as an added bonus, the extra players in these events would be used in case the all star game goes into extra innings. So the pitchers that compete in fastest throw could be used if the game keeps going. Brad Lidge shouldn't warm up 5 different times in a game and David Wright should never have to worry about pitching. Players won't have to play out of position or pitch in situations they wouldn't normally find themselves. This lowers the injury risk, and allows managers to play everyone without worrying that it may go into the nth inning.

By adding events like these into the baseball all star weekend the MLB can showcase the clean players that do the little things in a time where our stars keeping falling in steroid scandals, create an insurance policy to keep the all star game in control, and probably most importantly make more money.

Loosey Goosey

We all know Arod had an odd word choice in his interview with Peter Gammons, I figured I'd comment a little more on that word: loosey-goosey.

To start here are some definitions:

Courtesy of the Merriam Webster online dictionary:

Notably loose or relaxed: not tense
"A loosey-goosey attitude"

TheFreeDictionary.com:
Visibly relaxed or loose; not tense

Dictionary.reference.com:
Relaxed; calm; unperturbed
"Despite the pressure, he was loosey-goosey throughout the game"

Arod used the adjective loosey-goosey to describe the clubhouse culture way back in 2001-2003, when he used steroids. I've heard that phrase being used maybe twice, once by a kid in kindergarten and probably another time in some nursery rhyme (which rhymes by the way), probably around the same age. You wouldn't really use it in a serious emotional interview where you are admitting to the world how you used a "banned substance".

Saying that the culture was loose would have been totally acceptable and sufficient, there is absolutely no reason to add on the y-goosey to that. I doubt anyone watching the interview would have had this exchange in their head:

Arod: "The culture was different back then, it was real loose"
Person: "He's trying to tell me that it was a different culture back then, but I just don't get it"
Arod: "It was, how can I sum it up better, very loosey-goosey, sometimes clubhouses are loosey and sometimes they are goosey, but very rarely do those come together in a perfect storm to form a loosey-goosey culture where anything goes"
Person: "Ahh now I get it, I completely forgive Arod!"

So it was obviously a bad word choice. On second thought look at that last definition used in a sentence, "despite the pressure, he was loosey-goosey throughout the game". Maybe we shouldn't poke fun at Arod, I think he was on to something here, loosey-goosey is used around sports all the time to describe an athlete's performance and demeanor. There was immense pressure in Texas for Arod to play for his record setting contract, but the loose-goosey culture enabled him to use a banned substance, that for the life of him he can't remember but Selena Roberts could tell you exactly, and fight through it. I mean everyone knows that the pressures of playing in New York are teensy-weensy (hyphenated words are extremely underrated and underused) compared to those of Texas. These online dictionaries could really benefit by using Arod's loosey-goosey use as an example of the word.

Seriously now, I think we all can agree there were some major holes in Arod's interview, and although I have bashed him a lot for it I think it's now time to stop and thank him for using the word loosey-goosey. He's bringing back a great word into our vernacular and I'll laugh at any simple joke that uses the word loosey-goosey for at least the next 6 months. Baseball players may now be tainted, the records not considered legitimate, but you have to look on the bright side, at least we have loosey-goosey.

Just for the record, loosey-goosey isn't even on this site's spellchecker.

Mantle v. Mays

I'm not going to get into this argument now, but Fangraphs was talking about their tried and true graphs today, so I figured I'd play around with some, and thought this was pretty interesting, comparing Mantle and Mays' wOBA (courtesy obviously of Fangraphs):




Everyone has their opinions on the two of them, and most of the time it's concluded that Mays was the better player. He certainly played a lot longer and was no slouch in those extra years. But the argument for Mantle, that at his best he was better, definitely holds true when you look at the graph. Mantle has about 5 seasons that are all better or at least as good as Mays' best seasons. With Mays you knew you were going to get MVP caliber years, year in year out, Mantle was less consistent, but his high years were above MVP caliber, they're all time great caliber.

Screw it this is too interesting to pass up, who do you think is the better player, Mays or Mantle? Do you rate based on longevity and consistency, or according to their peak? Keep in mind Mantle wasn't just a flash in the pan, but also that Mays missed time early in his career for the war. I'll put up a poll, so please vote, and give your take in the comments section, then I'll give my take.

PEDs or WMDs, I No Longer Care

I'm going to go on record as stating I hardly care anymore about this 'who did what' steroids thing. 'Intelligence' was wrong about WMDs in Iraq, and it doesn't seem like we have a good grasp on PEDs here in baseball. I'm sure the Bush Administration regrets going into Iraq because of faulty 'intelligence', I imagine baseball may regret a wild goose chase about steroid use in their sport. It's just no longer worth it.

There was a dead ball era, there is now a steroids era, in our minds or in our spread sheets we'll adjust the stats accordingly. Sure, it'd be nice if some of this was cleaned up, if the 103 names left from that supposed anonymous testing came out, but I no longer think it's worth all the trouble. If I was a clean player and my records are now tainted maybe I would think differently, but I'd be one of hundreds of players who stood silent for a decade, hard to complain now, too little too late. Why is Roy Oswalt running his mouth about steroids affecting his wins now, when Clemens brought them to a World Series? I'll gladly shove my foot in my mouth if it comes out Clemens was clean, but seriously Roy?

So we thought there were WMDs in Iraq and it has resulted in a war way longer than we ever expected, I fear if baseball comes down too hard on this they may start a war in their sport. The list of names are supposed to be anonymous, and although I'd be incredibly interested in seeing them, forcing them to come out may completely destroy the relationship between baseball and the Union, maybe ultimately baseball in general. I can't knowingly let my kid stay out passed his curfew then one day punish him for all the times he stayed out in the past. It's the same idea here. I can start punishing players for doing it now, but the past is the past. Baseball messed up, let's move on or we'll get stuck seeing it on the news every night.

Is Renteria Really That Bad?

Jayson Stark had a interesting piece summarizing some offseason story lines by polling 15 baseball sages, as he calls them. One thing struck me about the Worst Free Agent Signings segment though:

1. Edgar Renteria, Giants (2 years, $18.5 million)
2. Kyle Farnsworth, Royals (2 years, $9.5 million)
3. Adam Dunn, Nationals (2 years, $20 million)

There was nothing -- nothing -- in this poll that our panelists agreed on more thunderously than how out of line they thought the Renteria deal was with the rest of the market. One NL exec got so worked up, he even voted for this deal twice. Why? Here's just a sampling of the vociferous opinions: "The only thing more in decline than his three-year drop in homers and RBIs is his range." … "Probably should have gotten a third of that money." … And this succinct review: "That guy's done."

The fact that Renteria is on this list doesn't necessarily surprise me, but the comments do. Is he really this bad as they say? Fangraphs valued him at $6.5m last year, $17.4m in 2007, and $13.5m in 2006. So 2 years $18.5m doesn't seem hard to achieve now does it? Just a slight improvement and $9m a year looks like a more than reasonable amount.

Well his range must be terrible, so let's look at his defense: In 2007 his UZR/150 was -4.4, last year it was -0.8. So although his range isn't great, slightly below average, the fact he was better this year than last year must mean his range can't be dropping that dramatically like they say, right?

Renteria has always been better in the NL, he was bad on the Red Sox in 2005 and had solid years on the Braves in 2006 and 2007 in the NL. Renteria has a career BABIP of .323 and last year his was .294. So if Renteria stays the same defensively, has his BABIP go back to his career normal, and goes to the league where he feels more comfortable it seems as though it will be really easy for Renteria to exceed his contract. Renteria is not a great player, but there is a lot of evidence to suggest he'll bounce back a little next year. The Giants signed Renteria where even if he doesn't improve (even though he should) they still won't get ripped off, he won't affect their long term plans, and he improves the team this year for a shot to win in a bad division.

This same poll, the one that had everyone in agreement that Renteria was the worst signing, ranked the Giants offseason as the third most successful in the National League. Jeremy Affeldt, Bob Howry, and Randy Johnson were all good signgings, but according to these baseball guys that were polled how can 2 relievers and a 45 year old starter be enough to counteract the worst free agent signing in the league (Renteria) in order to be considered a great offseason? That just doesn't make sense. If the Renteria signing was sooooo bad, wouldn't it mean the Giants have had a bad offseason, not the opposite?

The point is that the Giants actually have had a great offseason, not in spite of the Renteria signing, but because of it. He's another low risk, medium size reward (like the pitchers they have signed) that has allowed the Giants to have a chance to be successful this year while simultaneously building for the future. Sabean has not proven to be a great GM recently by allowing his team to completely rely on Bonds and get to this point, but you have to give him credit now for turning it around even if it's a little late. The other point is that you shouldn't put too much stock into these polls. They are interesting and fun but are virtually meaningless and they often contradict themselves like they did here.

Fantasy Baseball Season

It's not quite baseball season yet, as players still are heading to their spring training facilities, or are dealing with the media at their homes because they are arguably the greatest baseball talent ever and they just admitted to steroid use, either way it's officially Fantasy Baseball Season. I imagine a pretty funny youtube video could be made about this, copying the Wedding Crashers scene. Baseball starts in March, but Fantasy Baseball starts in February when people start to mock draft, organize various lists, and set draft times. With that said here is a list of some key draft pointers and overall strategies that I use, and basically everyone else uses, but whatever here you go:

• Saves are saves are saves are saves are saves...there is no category '1-2-3 closer innings', only saves. It doesn't matter how they get it done, so long as they get the save. Yea good closers can help your era, whip, and strikeouts, but it doesn't help to have J.J. Putz on the DL. There are plenty of setup men to get late in the draft to help you out in those categories, they come up every year like Jose Arredondo, and closers do as well, Gregg, Torres, Sherrill, Rauch, you get the point.
• Catchers are a really bad position, I wouldn't really worry about getting a good one. Catcher is a very shallow position, but that doesn't mean you should draft one high. Chase Utley is really an amazing hitter and fantasy hitter, and he plays 2b, so that's why he is a top pick. Joe Mauer doesn't hit any homeruns or steal, Brian McCann doesn't get any runs, Russell Matin doesn't actually do one thing all that well. You reach for the guys at weak positions that actually put up great stats, catchers don't do that, at least the ones playing now.
  
• Power/Speed combos are clearly the best. There isn't much else I need to say here, kill two birds with one stone. Nobody wants Juan Pierre to take up an outfield slot when that's a position you get your power from.
  
• Don't draft DHs high, or fill up your utility position early. Sometimes early in the draft it's easy to convince yourself to get that 2nd 1b because you have the utlity slot open, but you shouldn't handicap yourself that early. Use your util slot as a way to snag someone late in the draft that fell. You don't want your utility slot full when there is really a late round steal available that you can't draft because he won't start.
  
• Keep track of closer situations. This is basically the first thing I said, but closers change a lot, keep track of struggling ones and pick up the guys next in line.
• Pick up the young studs. Every year there are players that come up from the minors and do well. Not every year does Ryan Braun come along, or Evan Longoria, but you get the point, don't pass them up (if you have the room), you never know what you can get.
• Don't give up on players you drafted too early. I drafted Morneau in one league during his MVP season because I thought he could have a breakout year, and he did, just not on my team. If you drafted a guy because you felt good about him, don't judge him off of 80 April at bats.
• Don't forget about the vets. It's great to keep track of the rookies, but don't forget about the veterans. It's cool to have Jay Bruce, but it's better to have Aubry Huff's line, really take a look
• Pick up hot pitchers. I believe it's proven pitchers actually have hot streaks, where hitters are kind of just random. Don't pass up guys like Ryan Dempster that I did last year because, he's Ryan Dempster and he can't possibly pitch this well, well he did.
• Don't draft pitchers early. Pitchers are one pitch away from ending their career, hitters not so much. Johan Santana will most likely be worth a first round pick, but he's also more likely than Ryan Braun to end his season in April.
• Take the risk in the 15th, not the 5th. You won't hurt yourself by drafting safe in the 5th, you can hurt yourself taking a big risk in the 5th.
• Most importantly, have a plan. It's really hard to successfully draft just going on a whim. Have an idea where you want to get certain players or positions. Don't be surprised when the rush of closers occurs or when John Buck is the only catcher left. Chances are you won't be stupid enough to have a retarded plan, follow it and you should be fine

That's about it. Expect some more fantasy posts coming up, maybe some sleepers, more advanced strategy, or whatever else. If there's anything you guys want to hear, just let me know.

Reggie Cleveland All-Stars

One of Bill Simmons best moments was the Reggie Cleveland All-Stars, players who's names make you think they are from a different race or ethnicity. One player on that team of note for today is Reggie Willits. He's not a great player and in 2008 was really bad in limited time last year, but with Abreu to the Angels will he even sniff the majors?

His UZR thanks to fangraphs pegs him as below average at CF (although not bad enough where he should never play the position), and above average in LF. He batted only .194 last year in 136 plate appearances, but still had a .321 OBP. In 2007 he batted .293/.391/.344 going 27/35 in stolen bases.

There is some definite value to be had here. CHONE predicts him to be .265/.368/.355, Bill James as .282/.383/.330. Also according to CHONE if he plays average defense he's worth .8 wins above replacement and $3.5m. Willits doesn't do a lot of things well, but he can adequetly catch the ball and get on base at a really nice rate. I also imagine he could be had for in a trade very easily. If given ample playing time I see no reason why he couldn't help out a team and be a successful leadoff hitter. People applauded the Angels for getting Abreu and realizing the value of OBP, but they have Willits just sitting there, a mini OBP machine as a 5th outfielder. I think it's only a matter of time before a team picks him up on the cheap, it's just too bad for Billy Beane that Oakland is in the same division as the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

Dunn Deal

Jim Bowden continues his trend of acquiring his former players from his days as GM in Cincinnati, now signing Adam Dunn to a 2 year $20m deal. It's hard to fault him for the signing, a team like the Nats who are really terrible need some light, and since Dunn's price dropped dramatically it makes sense for them to attempt a splash in the market.

Now Dunn is a better player than Abreu but is he worth $15m more? Maybe a better question is if Abreu worth $15m less? Dunn (Nats), Abreu (Angels), and Burrell (Rays) are all better than Raul Ibanez (Phillies), and all are cheaper, and all are tied up for less years. It's safe to say here that the Phillies are the only losers, while the other teams are all winners. Not huge winners, but they all got great hitters at a fraction of the cost.

With that said where will Dunn play? Most likely 1b where the Nats still have Dimitri Young (lost cause) and Nick Johnson (could still be good, great obp when healthy). But there is no room in the outfield with Josh Willingham (acquired from Florida), Lastings Millege, Austin Kearns, and Elijah Dukes. This is similar to the Angels scenario except that the Nats have absolutely no shot at winning anything this year. They have a plethora of Lf/Rf/1b/Dh, easily the most replaceable positions, yet they went for Dunn.

It's the same story as Abreu, he'll help the team by a few wins, but those wins may be meaningless, and at the expense of someone's playing time. Millege and Dukes have to play, they're too young and talented not too. It looks like Willingham will be knocked out, unless he learns how to catch again. And they traded for Willingham like I said , so why exactly did they do that? I'm not of the opinion that Scott Olsen is going to be a difference maker.

Jim Bowden isn't afraid to shake things up, so I guess you have to applaud him for that, but how can I say this, he's not really exactly good at his job. Millege and Dukes may end up being great players, and all the credit goes to Bowden for picking them up on the cheap, but by the time they are that way (if they get to that point) I have a feeling a new GM is going to be the one figuring out how to win with them.

BABIP Bull Shit

Is BABIP really full of crap?

I don't know or pretend to know too much about all statistics but I'm pretty sure BABIP isn't totall BS. The writer is right that normal BABIPs are around .290-.300, but he suggests hitters can't sustain higher BABIPS and that is false. The type of hitter you are determines if you can sustain a higher than average BABIP. A player like Ichiro will get a ton of infield hits and make singles out of what other players would have as outs. The point is then that when a hitter outperforms his personal BABIP you can expect him to regress to his mean.

Along those same lines, many are pointing to BABIP as proof that Mike Aviles will fall off this season. His .359 was seventh among big leaguers with 400 or more plate appearances last year.

Who knows. Maybe they'll be right, and Aviles will turn into a pumpkin this year. But I'm not as willing to go cause-and-effect with this.

Mike Aviles has played one year and his BABIP was .359. We can't really say for sure that he can't sustain that BABIP but he's not likely too so it's then safe to say he will regress this year. For what it's worth in over 1000 at bats in AAA, Aviles' BABIP was around .300-.310 so it sure seems as though .359 is not likely to occur again.

Mellinger goes on to show a couple of what in his mind were good reasons, as to why BABIP isn't about luck:

You know who had the best BABIP in baseball last year? Milton Bradley. Had a pretty great year, too, and just happens to be a hell of a hitter.

Know who was dead last (min. 400 plate appearances)? Kenji Johjima, not exactly our generation's Johnny Bench.

Justin Duchscherer had the best BABIP among pitchers with at least 100 innings pitched, and he had an All-Star season where he walked 2.16 per nine innings and held opposing batters to a .211 average. Pretty good.

Kevin Millwood had the worst BABIP, and no coincidence that he was just a terrible all-around pitcher last year.

Is it just me or is this actually evidence for BABIP? Duchscherer had a great year because he was lucky, his BABIP was too low to sustain. Hitters can often sustain their BABIPs because the kind of hitters they are, pitchers face so many different hitters its less likely that they sustain it. Greg Maddux is one of the most consistent pitchers of all time, yet listen to these BABIPs: In 1998 his was .282, in 1999 .334, and then in 2000 it was .286. How can his BABIP change that much in 3 years if no luck was involved?

Milton Bradley is a great hitter, especially when healthy, but last year his BABIP was .396, and in 2007 it was .329. Could that be part of the reason why he was so good last year, and better than he's ever been before? I'd say so. In an effort to show how BABIP is skill, this guy has basically given evidence why it does involve luck. In doing so he named a slew of players who have career averages inline with their career BABIPs. This one example really shows the luck aspect:

9. Chipper Jones. Career batting average: .310. Career BABIP: .323. Comment: BABIPed .251 in that terrible 2004 season. Next-lowest was .289 as a rookie, and he peaked at .388 last year

I suppose he's trying to say in 2004 Chipper was a worse hitter for whatever reason, therefore his BABIP was poor. But what it really shows was 2004 was an unlucky season for Chipper due to the low BABIP, so when he hi .296 in 2005 on a .302 BABIP nobody was surprised. It seems as though he maybe thinks baseball players skills change from year to year. How is that possible? The idea of BABIP being luck, that pitchers can't control where the batter will hit it, may seem hard to grasp, but I imagine it's easier than thinking a players skill set could change so dramatically year to year.

Players have a baseline BABIP, over all the at bats or innings in their career they have come to expect a certain BABIP. It's when they deviate from that baseline where we talk about luck. Hitters can sustain higher than average BABIPs but not higher than there average BABIPs. Magglio Ordonez has a career average of .312, and a BABIP of .320, does that mean his BABIPs are all skill? No. In 2007 he batted an absurd .363, hit BABIP was an absurd .385. Magglio is a great hitter, but when he bats .363 you have to question why, and when you look at his BABIP you can find the answer.

Some eople make BABIP out to mean that baseball is all about luck, it's actually far from it. But you can't be naive to think that it's all about skill. There are 9 guys on the diamond trying to get the ball but sometimes it lands in a spot where nobody is. And sometimes that happens more often than it should, effecting either the hitter or pitcher both positively or negatively.

Seems Final, Abreu to Angels

The deal is for 1 year $5m with incentives. That is, give or take 3 years and $43m, exactly what Abreu wanted this offseason.

Aging, in this case 35, outfielders that would be better of dhing really have had it hard this year. I don't want to say the Angels know what they're doing this offseason necessarily, but at some point the price was going to be too low not to get a guy like Abreu.

Abreu has his faults like I said before (can't field, wrong side of 30, declining obp skills) but he can still hit and $5m is basically what 1 win costs, and Abreu is sure to give you at least that, most likely double or more.

The Angels now have Abreu, Vlad, Gary Matthews Jr., Juan Rivera, and Torii Hunter in their outfield. Hunter is cemented at center, but he's hardly the fielder he used to be with UZR in the negatives the last 3 years. Abreu, Vlad, Matthews Jr., and Rivera all will fight for corner outfield spots and DH duty. There is also Brandon Wood who has kind of been around for a while but is still young and needs to play if the Angels want to see what he can do. So yea Abreu is a good signing, he can't hurt the Angels, and if he bats over Rivera or Matthews Jr. he'll help a bit, but he's not a significant upgrade. They upgraded the easiest position to upgrade, and a position of strength. Don't let this fool you as anything equal to what they've lost in free agency, it's not even close.

Who Woulda Knew?

File this in the Wow category. Apparently Roberto Alomar being sued for having full blown AIDS and continuing to have unprotected sex, knowingly. I would imagine if this illness was a cause for Alomar to basically randomly suck on the Mets in 2002, that by now everyone would be aware of it. But it seems as though it's new news to everyone.

The shocking claim was leveled by Ilya Dall, 31, who said she lived with the ex-Met for three years and watched in horror as his health worsened.

In papers filed in state and federal court, Dall said Alomar finally got tested in January 2006 while suffering from a cough, fatigue and shingles.

I can't even being to imagine how hard it would be to live with HIV, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that people who find out they have it wouldn't want it to be known, especially if you are a celebrity. If all this is true, although Alomar was getting older and entering his decline phase, it would seem pretty clear it was the reason for his rapid decline, especially considering this:

In 2004, Dall says she noticed cold sores in his mouth. In 2005, after a physical exam ordered by the Tampa Bay Rays, he was diagnosed with thrombocytopenia purpura, a blood disorder sometimes linked to HIV, she claims.

Could the Mets try to get Alex Escobar back considering they might have obtained damaged goods? Also if this lady was suspicious why would she have unprotected sex? It's a good question to ask anyone, but especially if your suspicious and you could assume the guy your with has been around the block, in Puerto Rico.

Not that this is a funny matter, but I did chuckle at this last part:

Considered one of baseball's greatest second basemen, Alomar stirred controversy in 1996 by spitting in the face of umpire John Hirshbeck.

The incident prompted fellow ump Al Clark to say, "If I were John, I'd insist that Robbie Alomar take an AIDS test."

HIV has never been transmitted through saliva, however, and last night Hirschbeck said he had no concerns about his safety - or hard feelings from their on-field run-in.

This isn't 1981, we should know more about AIDS than that. It seems kind of pathetic that Hirschbeck has to say he had no concerns about his safety in regards to Alomar and AIDS in 2009. Remember Karl Malone who was afraid of playing with Magic Johnson? At least that was 15 years ago, but he's still a douche.

Back to Alomar, he was an outstanding second basement, one of the best ever. I briefly mentioned him when talking about Jeff Kent. Both are in my mind Hall of Famers. Again, if this is all true and it affected his play (not unlike Gehrig, although a completely different illness) he would have had an even more impressive resume, 3000 hits probably a sure thing. Here's to hoping he gets better and that the voters don't hold that against him when the time comes for the Hall.

Steroids Work, We Have Statistical Proof!!!!

At least according to Pete Abraham.

Now I love Pete's blog with the insider access to the Yankees, but he's not an analyst. I'm not worthy of that title necessarily either, but this is just terrible evidence that steroids helped Arod's statistics:

A-Rod from 2001-2003: 161.7 games, 52 homers, 131.7 RBI and a .615 slugging percentage.

A-Rod’s other seasons: 149.2 games, 39.2 homers, 119 RBI and a .574 slugging percentage.

Arod played in the prime years of his career in Texas in a ball park that vastly favors hitters. He then moved to the Yankees to a park that hurts right handed batters. You don't need to be a smart to realize it, and you don't need to be a statistician to show you the stats. Arod's OPS+, which is park adjusted, in 2001, 2002, and 2003 are160, 158 and 147. Since then they've been 131, 173, 134, 177, 150. So he hasn't been as consistent, but his better years are far better than they were on Texas.

On Fangraphs, in 2002 and 2003, Arod posted win values of 9.9 and 9.1, since then he's been at 6.9, 9.5, 5.0, 9.3, 6.3. A lot of his value on Texas was based on him playing a harder position at shortstop, and playing it very well. Since he's come to the Yankees he's basically been an average 3b, maybe slightly below. I haven't heard anyone use steroids to help their fielding, but since Arod has left Texas he's actually had better seasons hitting. If he really hasn't used steroids since, this is pretty good evidence it doesn't always work, but then there's always this guy.

You really can't say enough how important context is. This isn't about finding complicated formulas to evaluate players, it's about thinking about more than just a few numbers. Did Randy Johnson use steroids when we went to the National League? Was Preston Wilson on the juice when he had 141 rbi on Colorado after having 65 the year before? The park, league, and team you play on have a huge influence on your performance, this isn't VORP or wOBP or EqA Pete, it's simply context and next time please keep it in mind.

Will Manny Play in the Spring?

He only has a matter of weeks to sign before spring training begins. I'm sure his workouts are more meaningful than a few split squad games against a few Scott Ericksons and Ed Yarnalls but it'll still be pretty odd if he's not on a team before that.

With no basis for this I have a hunch Manny could sign tomorrow for a non embarrassing figure, but he's going to wait it out because at this point I don't think it's going to hurt him any longer. It may hurt, and I'll presume it has hurt other players though i.e. Bobby Abreu. Manny was going to set the marketplace for all hit no glove left fielders, and his waiting has led to two things.

1) Teams who signed all hit no field players before Manny probably overspent. Raul Ibanez got a 3 year deal because he was the first to sign before teams waited this one out. If the Phillies waited until now, would ANYONE have signed Ibanez? I doubt it. Pat Burrel also signed for a 2 year deal, and although that's not really overpaying it is when you compare it to...

2) Bobby Abreu, who has gotten F*cked. He wanted a 3 year deal and now he's looking at a one year deal. Yea Burrell isn't ripoff, far from it, but if the Rays waited Burrell and Abreu could have been options for just one year. If you signed early you basically got a pretty good deal, if you haven't well you are looking to play for one year to help your stock in hopes the economic climate is better this time next year. Adam Dunn is also waiting, and he's better than Burrell and Abreu, and easily Ibanez.

My loyal readers have voted, all 4 of them, and 3/4 said Manny will go to LA, 1/4 said the Yankees. I'm still sticking to my post, he's going to San Fran. I could try to keep track of all the Manny rumors but at this point they're so volatile it's useless. When he signs I will comment.

One last bit about Abreu. Today on Mike'd Up, I caught Franseca talking about Abreu. He said he's a decent outfielder, with a good arm, and that he's deathly afraid of the wall. While I agree his arm is good and he's afraid of the wall, at this point we should stop sugar coating his fielding, it's horrid. How could you also say that he's afraid of the wall but a decent fielder? He's a DH.

He then went on to say that basically Abreu is a .300 avg .400 obp 100 runs and 100 rbi player every year. When the Yankees obtained Abreu that was the player he was, and he was probably one of the more underrated players in baseball having walked 100+ times 8 straight years from 1999-2006. Abreu has changed now and I'd say he's among the more overrated players, he's a .290 .370 onbase guy with the reputation of a .310/.420 guy. He's still a solid hitter but while the announcers still talk about him as a great player, surprised by the fact he's still available, the general managers have realized his downward trend. To give him credit, Mike did say he's not going to lead your lineup, but I cringed at the fact he said he's an auto 100 runs and rbi. If the Nationals sign Abreu, can they pencil him in for 100 rbi? Damon and Jeter hitting ahead of him on base about 37% of the time, with the greatest hitter in the AL behind him have nothing to do with his counting stats?

Tejada They Come Tejada They Fall

Miguel Tejada was traded to the Astros from the Orioles the day before the Mitchell Report came out saying he used steroids. And now he's charged with lying to congress about steroid use. And there's also that little thing how he's two years older than anyone thought. I'm sorry but I find this kind of funny. I mean I feel bad for the guy but he's done it to himself. I find it most funny for the Astros. How much does this suck for them? You trade for a guy you think will anchor your shortstop position and get you to the next level only to find out he used steroids, he's 2 years older, and now that he could go to jail? Adam Everett is looking pretty good now I bet.

There was a point in time where Tejada entered the discussion of best shortstops with Arod, Nomar, and Jeter. In fact Tejada was aruably better than Jeter for a brief period and Nomar was on his way to being injured every year. Well, we all now know he did it while on steroids and 2 years older than we thought.

Tejada posted an ops+ of only 92 last year, with a .283/.318/.415 line. I mean even Christian Guzman was significantly better than Tejada. Remember when Tejada was a first round pick in fantasy? Now he's borderline top 15 of just short stops.

Apology Accepted?

We all have seen Arod's apology in his interview with Peter Gammons, now what do we make of it?

I'm glad that Arod took the route that Pettitte and Giambi took. Arod actually took a more detailed path than those two. Giambi never said what he was sorry for and Andy Pettitte said that he used twice to come back from an injury. Maybe that is the truth, but it's hard to believe that Clemens' best friend and long time teammate would have only tried it twice. I admire him for admitting he at least did use, but I can't completely believe he only used those times. He could easily have been telling the truth, and I don't entirely doubt it, it's just that it seems hard to fully believe him.

Arod on the other hand admitted using steroids for a 3 year period, at the very least. Now that's pretty hefty. It's hard to believe anyone totally in these situations, but admitting to using steroids for 3 years isn't trying to candy coat the issue. If Arod pulled a Giambi we would see though it, if he pulled a Pettitte and said he used steroids twice, we would see through it. Do we see though an admission of 3 years? I'll take Arod's words that he used steroids from 2001-2003 on Texas, his reasoning being that he was trying to live up to the contract. Arod was also on a team that was oozing with steroids. Pudge Rodriguez, Juan Gonzalez, Rafael Palmeiro, and 16 other Rangers named in the Mitchell report.

I am happy Arod did this, and I believe he only used during those years but I still wish he said more during the interview. He couldn't name the substance that he used? If Arod names precisely the steroid(s) he used would we think any less of him at this point? He admitted to it, so not saying what he used can't help his cause. This is just way too bizarre. Also, I don't know about you, but talking about a loosey goosey culture way back about say um5 years ago once again seems pretty odd. Loosey Goosey alone is a weird phrase to use in a serious interview and is probably even weirder as reasons to use an illegal substance. Eventhough I believe that Arod only used for those years, I was struck how he said "that's pretty accurate" when Gammons stated that he used in 2001, 2002, and 2003. If Arod is going to admit to this he should be very accurate. What does pretty accurate even mean? Is it 2000-2004 but 2001-2003 is close enough? Or are we dissecting each word too carefully?

Arod stopped using steroids only when there was testing, if we take him at his word. He couldn't even stop using when everyone knew there would be anonymous testing. So can we really believe his word that he stopped because he thought it was stupid? I don't think so. In Arod's defense it seems pretty clear that he didn't need steroids, which makes this even more disappointing. In his rookie year as a 20 year old shortstop Arod had his 2nd highest wOBA of his career. In 2005 and 2007 he had his other 2 top seasons according to wOBA. So Arod on steroids hitting in Texas didn't even help him produce his best years. But the point is, Arod would still be using, like any other person who used, if there was no testing. I can't believe that it's a mere coincidence that he decided enough is enough at the same time baseball introduced a testing policy.

Arod should have said steroids were readily available and he like many others decided to use it to get an edge, knowing for sure that he couldn't get caught. To my knowledge nobody has really said that yet. Arod admits to looking for an edge to help the pressures when he signed with Texas, why can't he admit the fact he knew he wouldn't get tested? Arod didn't have all that much time to settle this all out, so maybe there is more too come, but at this point although I'm happy he's taken a step in the right direction in dealing with all of this, I'm disappointed the step isn't quite as large as I wished.

P.S. Did anyone notice the frosted tips are gone, and that his lips failed to turn blue? That has to be a good sign.

Where Have You Gone Joe DiMaggio?

Going to the candidate's debate.
Laugh about it, shout about it
When you've got to choose
Every way you look at this you lose.

Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio,
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson.
Jotting Joe has left and gone away

Paul Simon was an admitted Mickey Mantle fan, but he chose to put in Joe DiMaggio in the lyric for a reason. Forget the fact DiMaggio just falls off the tongue much nicer than Mickey Mantle, Joe D was the last of his kind. Mantle partied, drank, cheated on his wife and was by no means a role model. DiMaggio was faithful to even Ms. Monroe, he was a war veteran, and an overall total class act as far as I'm concerned. We can argue their on field accomplishments all we want, and most likely come to the conclusion that Mantle, with all his faults, was the better player, but today that almost seems irrelevant.

With news that Arod did steroids (as I'm sure you've heard countless times in the last 48 hours) it's safe to say there is now officially a presumptuous steroid blanket over all of baseball. We could pin point the users like Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, etc. but Arod seemed like one of the good ones. He was a bad husband and bad in the postseason, but at least he didn't use steroids. Right? Wrong. We booed Bonds' breaking of Aaron's record but we took solace based on knowing that in the back of our minds we only had to wait a few years for Arod, and his clean record, to take the record back. I would have, probably foolishly, bet anything that Arod didn't use, he clearly had no reason to use, and finding out he did can we assume now that anyone is/was clean? I'm not saying it's right to assume, but at this point I couldn't complain if people started to.

I guess in sports we all want heroes and we want them to be perfect, especially during the rough spots. So I think in light of the Arod mess that Paul Simon was on to something with Joe DiMaggio, he's among the last of our heroes, at least in the sports world. Maybe if he played in another era it would be different. If Jim Bouton played in the 40s on the Yankees and published Ball Four, maybe we'd find out stuff we never would want to know about the Yankee Clipper. The point though is that DiMaggio stayed out of the public's eye, if he played today he wouldn't even have that luxury, but from what I know it's safe to assume he'd still shine through.

Joe DiMaggio was our quiet hero. He played hard, played through injuries, and possibly most importantly, played for that one kid in the upper deck seeing him for the first or last time. It's because of that he became the most popular player, best player, on the best team. Arod has his priorities all wrong. He's the best player on what should be the best team, but all he cares about is being the most popular. I guess I can't speak for the man, but I doubt anyone saw Joe DiMaggio tanning shirtless in Central Park. Alex Rodriguez went after a 50 year old Madonna, almost 20 years his senior, way past her expiration date. DiMaggio married a near prime Monroe, 10 years his junior.

So I'll do my best to answer Paul Simon's question, where have you gone Joe DiMaggio? I'm not entirely sure, but the closest thing I can see right now plays right next to Arod, Derek Jeter. That's pretty fitting now knowing that Jeter stole a DiMaggio sign from the old stadium. In many ways I'd say the Arod Jeter scenario mimics the DiMaggio Mantle one. It may all be for naught considering Mantle carried a Yankee dynasty of his alone, and the fact that Jeter and Arod have played together for more than one season but there are some similarities.

• Jeter was the star of the championship Yankees when Arod came in as the better player, yet Arod changed positions.
• DiMaggio was the star of the Yankees and even though DiMaggio was a shadow of his former self, when Mantle came up he moved to RF
• DiMaggio dated the hotty of the time Marylin Monroe, Jeter dated all the hotties- Jessica Biel, Mariah Carey, Vanessa Minnillo, Miss Universe, Scarlett Johannson.
• DiMaggio's private life was just that, private.
  
• Mantle's vices were all heard in Ball Four.

Yea it's not perfect but it's worth noting/recapping. Today we set ourselves up to be continuously disappointed by our stars. We can't turn our lonely eyes to guys like Arod, Aroid, RoidRod, Roidriguez, or whatever clever roid flavored nickname you have for him, they'll just let us down. If we choose to turn our eyes to someone, we have to carefully choose, and at this point you could do a lot worse than turning to Jeter.

I have long pointed out the faults associated with Jeter, and maybe I have a Jeter hater tag on me, although I'd like to say I'm a Jeter realist. I won't take back anything I've said, and in many instances Jeter is overrated, but times like these you really appreciate the players like Jeter.

Now where does Arod go from here? I have no clue what he'll do. History will tell us that he'll try to make everyone happy and keep his image clean, but everyone would see right through Arod, business as usual. His only out is to come completely clean. Say everything. Tell exactly where he got it, and why he tried it. Tell everyone he has 9 years left on his contract, and that in the next 9 years he'll prove he doesn't need steroids to be the best. He has to pull some sort of Tim Tebow type press conference. We've accepted Giambi and Pettitte's apologies for the most part after they came clean, I'd play that percentage if I was Arod.

What about the Hall of Fame. I'm not going to assume that people will refuse to vote anyone who has gotten caught for steroids, but if they do well then Arod has zero chance. But, I think Barry Bonds was a Hall of Famer before he used, so he deserves to be in the Hall. Arod is the same way. There were 104 positive tests that were supposed to be anonymous. Who's to say that there aren't 10 other potential Hall of Famers in those tests that failed. Those names have to come out, it's not fair that their slates remain clean and Arod's isn't when none of the names should have been made public. Someone messed up big here, and although Arod is deserving of a big hit to his reputation, maybe even a knockout, there are 103 other players who should help take the hit as well.

I really wish Arod didn't use steroids, but I can't say I wish he didn't get caught. I think it's best this did come out because in the end I think more will continue to come out, hopefully the other 103 names. Steroids in baseball hasn't hurt the game yet so I doubt it will now. Making everything known about steroid use in baseball public is the only shot we have at getting some closure, but until then we'll have to turn our lonely eyes to Derek Jeter.