EVIL~! alkeiper

Craig Wilson IS a good hitter. Mike Piazza was a tremendous asset at catcher, and maybe the third best catcher of all time. The home runs are a weakness. That doesn't change the fact that his strikeout rates are tremendous. His career ERA is 52% above the league average. He had a 1.29 ERA last season. He has tremendous numbers. Honestly, how many relievers are better? He's not as good as Rivera or Gagne, but he's above the Percival, Urbina, etc. class of closers. Looking past the idea that I don't buy the clutch player phenominon. Of course, every reliever is going to have his hiccups. Benitez was unfortunate to have his worst moments in important games. He's had fantastic series as well. In 1999, he pitched nine postseason innings, allowing only one earned run. My endorsement of Benitez has NOTHING to do with the save statistic. I abhor it. I simply think Benitez at his best is a sominating closer. I don't buy into the proven closer theory. A good pitcher is a good pitcher. You take a guy who can strike batters out without issuing too many walks, and I'll stick him in the closer role any day. Benitez blew only four saves last year, and two of those came without allowing an earned run.

On the plus side, the Marlins will receive several draft picks in return for Pavano and Benitez.

Scott Boras is appearing on MLB.com radio in this hour. For those who can't catch it, it will doubtless be available in the archives.

I think it would be a mistake for the Red Sox to acquire Johnson. They shouldn't think short-term at this point, and Fenway is not a good park for lefties anyway. On an unrelated note, I was surprised to find that Tim Wakefield can jump to #3 on the Red Sox all time wins list with just a 10 win season.

I must've missed when Al handed partial dictatorship over to you It was via Private Message, about a month ago.

Quote of the day... http://www.yesnetwork.com/yankees/news.asp?news_id=739

Benitez is a very good reliever when he keeps the ball in the park. Pac Bell is a good place for him to pitch, and considering the Giants' bullpen last season, they needed to make this move.

I don't think you can really compare Ozzie to Sandberg. Ozzie wasn't just a flashy shortstop. He got to EVERYTHING in his direction. Sandberg was a nice fielder, but no one compares to Ozzie in the field. I do think Sandberg deserves the Hall. While the Mattingly Yankees never won a pennant, they did win two division titles, and twice won ninety games. Mattingly is hurt because had a very short peak.

The current veterans' committee consists of the current class of Hall of Famers. They are given a ballot, and 75% is needed for induction. They vote every two years.

On the subject of closers, it's sad how Dan Quisenberry was every bit as dominant as the top candidates, and he almost never enters a Hall of Fame discussion.

Interesting to note Jeff King and Jeff Blauser on that list, neither of whom made the ballot. Those also eligible but not on the ballot include Brian McRae, Mike Macfarlane, Kirk Manwaring, Paul Sorrento, Dale Sveum, Mark Portugal, and Mel Rojas. I am very surprised by the exclusion of Portugal. Usually topping 100 wins at least gets you on the ballot.

It's amazing how a man can play in the majors for seventeen seasons, and have so few HOF accomplishments. Even Jim Abbott scores higher on the HOF Monitor.

You can't expect any big signings before the Winter Meetings in December. Rest assured that there are alot of free agent and trade offers floating around, but the GMs don't go running to the press every time they've placed a phone call. A good 75% of rumors are bunk, and never amount to anything.

Depends on how they work the committee. The current veterans' committee is unlikely to ever elect anyone.

Jim Abbott is a questionable ballot choice. He barely meets the eligibility requirements, and was never selected to an All-Star team. All he has going for him is an 18 win season. I'll review all the candidates later on, but for now I'll register my support of Bert Blyleven. 287 career wins. 3,701 strikeouts, which was third when he retired (now fifth). 5-1 record in postseason play. Two world series championships. A career ERA 18% better than the league average. And he played most of his career on bad teams. Had he pitched for better teams, he would have easily crossed 300 wins.

MLB.com has released the HOF ballot for this year.... http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/news/mlb...s_mlb&fext=.jsp The inductees are announced sometime in January. I plan on writing on my choices laster, but for now here's a list of the candidates, sorted by Win Shares... Wade Boggs Ryne Sandberg Andre Dawson Bert Blyleven Dave Parker Alan Trammell Dale Murphy Tommy John Chili Davis Jim Rice Steve Garvey Dave Concepcion Tony Phillips Don Mattingly Darryl Strawberry Jack Morris Willie McGee Goose Gossage Lee Smith Mark Langston Terry Steinbach Bruce Sutter Tom Candiotti Jeff Montgomery Otis Nixon Jack McDowell Jim Abbott Relievers will always struggle to accumulate value, so take Sutter, Lee, Gossage, and Montgomery's rankings in context.

Perhaps. The problem is that AS is bringing up Milton AGAIN without adding anything to the topic or conversation. This is a discussion forum, not one member's personal bitchfest.

Oh for god sakes. Seriously, grow up.

When I'm playing baseball games, I have the problem that since I know too much, I assume things about players that the designers do not account for.

I considered Gilbert, but I have limited knowledge of the origins, and I wasn't sure how much of a hand he had, or if he was just a popular star brought to main event cards. ECW had a TON of guys like that in the early days, when cards featured stars such as Abdullah the Butcher, Stan Hansen, Kevin Sullivan, the Original Sheik, and King Kong Bundy. Ultimately, I simple felt he wasn't around long enough. Probably because like Raven, the Dudley Boys have displayed staying power that lasts beyond ECW. The Public Enemy were useless away from ECW. Just my opinion, and that comes without having seen the dvd.

Let's see... 1. Raven ECW's top heel for a long period of time. Generally the greatest and most enduring character ECW produced. 2. Sabu People forget that back in 1994, Sabu was the biggest name in indy wrestling history, and could almost match any wrestler in the big 2 in terms of name value. His frequent trips to ECW contributed greatly to their popularity, and one could argue that his style set the tone for ECW's in ring product. 3. Terry Funk Added a great deal of prestige to ECW. 4. Rob Van Dam Probably the most popular wrestler in ECW history. Still popular today despite not being given much of a chance post-ECW. 5. Tommy Dreamer The face of ECW. 6. The Dudley Boys 7. Taz 8. Shane Douglas 9. Cactus Jack 10. The Sandman 11. The Public Enemy 12. Mikey Whipwreck 13. Eddie Guerrero/Dean Malenko (Dual entry. Their matches added more to ECW beyond simply a blood and guts promotion. Their names are forever linked as rivals because of their series in 1995.) 14. Al Snow 15. Rhino 16. 911 17. Steve Corino 18. Jerry Lynn 19. Rey Misterio Jr. 20. The Eliminators

I wouldn't rip that apart. Lee was generally a wise general who chose the love of his state over the love of his country. Similar to our founding fathers, except Lee wound up on the losing side.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?i...tory?id=1932968 Looks like the deal is official. Oakland lands a solid catcher for spare parts. Pittsburgh gets raped up the arse. Some of my favorite portions of the article... $5 Million a year. That's nice. The problem is, they still need a catcher. There's no way you replace a .390+ OBP AND fill the spot at catcher for just $5 Million. Feelings about A-Rod aside, Texas did not take the savings and splurge on pitching. If they did, they would've won the West. Texas won because their pitching ceased to suck, and Teixeira and Blalock blossomed into all-star caliber players. So the Pirates lose the best catcher in franchise history for a pair of average lefties. Nice.

How do you think Freddy Adu would do in the English premier league? Poorly, simply because its nearly impossible for a 15 year old to compete at the highest level of any sport, save gymnastics/figure skating. Maybe when he reaches 18-20 or so, he could compete. He does have the potential to become one of the world's best, in my view.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines sport as... And a few others. So really, that category can be defined as sport as well. And yes, through technicalities we can define alot of other things as sports. But usually I think of sports as competitive endeavours that require skill. You can quibble a little over interpretations, but I don't think any of us are willing to shift our positions on the matter.