EVIL~! alkeiper

Goodenow conferring with Levitt on that propaganda piece would be a waste of time. The Players' Union does not have access to the full financial records... Forbes Magazine, again, is an inpedendant source. Why shouldn't I trust them over a report produced by individuals who have a vested interest in the findings of the report? It is very easy to fudge a report like this, and anyone in accounting can tell you that you can make the numbers say just about whatever you want. So while criticising those greedy players, I am supposed to feel sympathetic to owners who own entire arenas and multiple franchises? Poor babies.

Not quite. Moneyball is a book about the financial dealings of the Oakland Athletics, an MLB team. Basically, with arbitration, if you feel a player will make too much, you can decline to offer a new contract, thus releasing him.

Especially if it's Green Bay in December.

They could start by reading "Moneyball." It is simple. You pay guys what they are worth, and cut them otherwise. If indeed 15% of the teams are dictating salaries, then releasing players would drive down the cost of arbitration, by demonstrating that they indeed are not worth that much. Can you alter the system? Of course. But these owners want to fuck over the players in the process. I remember the MLB strike of 1994, and this has the exact same structure. The owners are hell bent on a hard salary cap, and won't budge. The players won't go for a hard cap, because it would dramatically decrease their salaries, and give total control of compensation to the owners. This strike is going to drag on, and down the line, some court is going to rule that the owners did not bargain in good faith. They need to make concessions too. That's a laugh. Forbes does not pull numbers out of thin air. Their studies are well grounded, and they were absolutely right about MLB. And why not? Guys that make $500,000 a year can be easily replaced by other guys at that level. Talent in sports works like a pyramid. Guys that are paid millions are paid that because there are not many players at their level. Branch Rickey said that superstars don't kill you. It's the price of mediocracy. The superstars deserve their pay. It's the mid-level guys who kill you. The problem is, the Hockey News is probably frequented by hardcore fans, who would watch hockey no matter who plays. I doubt their numbers could fill arenas. And I don't see how replacement players would work when the AHL is still playing. You would have some good players, sure, but the majority of replacement players are players too untalented to make the NHL otherwise. You would have 30 teams resembling the Charlotte Bobcats.

If that's the true Lidle, I'm all for it. But he posted over a 5.00 ERA in his 55 previous starts, and his HR rate was abysmal in Cincy. His K rate was never great, nor was it during his limited success in Philly.

In all seriousness, we enjoyed tremendous success running live AIM chats during the MLB playoffs. It's worth a shot for live wrestling programming.

Ok, I thought you meant that there were three better players, not three that placed better in the balloting.

Three of those were from his own team Sheffield, Matsui and ? Please don't say Jeter.

He did? Ah shit. Ok, he was the best defender at third base this season.

A-Rod wasn't as valuable as his numbers suggest. He was, well, there for most of the year. I'd also say a good five to seven of his homeruns were pointless tacks ons. Not if you look at the right stats. His clutch hitting was nonexistant, but he got on base a fair amount of times, stole 28 of 32 (a very high percentage), and scored alot of runs. Plus, he won the Gold Glove at third base, adding value with his defense.

This is one of those signings that makes me question my sanity. $3 Million for a pitcher barely above replacement level? It is bad enough the Phillies actually gave up prospects for him. Using the Salary Calculator from The Hardball Times, here is how they view today's signings by net value, using this year's Win Shares and next year's salaries. This is adjusted after salaries, so a player rating $0 would be worth exactly what he's paid... Christian Guzman, MON $939,505 Vinny Castilla, MON $149,893 Cory Lidle, PHI ($2,107,905) The Expos got their players for close to market value. Nicely done. The Phillies paid out the ass for a barely adequate starter. Not quite so nicely done. Good moves for the Expos, btw. They received little if any production from SS and 3B, and these moves should improve the club at those spots.

I'll never understand the Ortiz love. He's not particularly good against lefties (the Washburn homer nonewithstanding), and he is a DH. Manny Ramirez beats him at just about every facet of the game. The only advantage Ortiz has is nine RBIs, and he has those thanks to having Manny bat in front of him. By and large, the voters got this right. You could have picked Vlad, Gary Sheffield, Johan Santana or Manny Ramirez, and have a good argument for any of them. Personally, I thought Santana deserved the award. But Vlad is a fine choice. Nice to see playing for a 100+ win team didn't improve A-Rod's standing with the voters. You can't tell me there were 13 better players in the league this year. What is the excuse this time?

The latter. The NHL is a hurt business right now. But from my experience, when a business cuts costs, they may improve their bottom line, but they are doing little to improve the overall health of their establishment. They need to worry about improving themselves on the revenue end. Cutting expenses may help in the short term, but not in the long run. Not that the players should not make any concessions. Just remember the owners have a vested interest in making conditions appear as dire as possible.

Keep it civil guys.

Yeah. "His lack of hustle was maddening at times" was my favorite quote of the season. How can someone steal 40 bases without hustling?

He got two votes, and there are two Philly writers in the voting. Sounds pretty straightforward.

I don't expect him to come close to winning. But they couldn't even identify Abreu as more valuable than Jim Thome.

I can't speak for hockey, but baseball has a system in place that alleviates most problems with revenue disparity. Teams retain the services of their players for 6-7 years. Figure that most players debut at 23-24, and reach their peak at 27-30. The vast majority of players have their best seasons BEFORE free agency. Which means there is a limit as to how far any team can dominate, without the services of a good farm system. Moreover, teams that sign free agents often lose draft picks, which give your team more opportunities to develop those cheap young stars. Keep a mechanism like that in place, and the competitive balance problem shrinks. Sure, some big markets teams will spend, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. The NHL needs strong franchises which will draw fan interest. With the 16 team playoffs, most teams have a legitimate chance to compete.

You've got to wonder sometimes. Abreu hit .300, hit 30 home runs, stole 40 bases (at an 88% success rate), drew 127 walks, garnered 105 RBIs, and hit into only 5 double plays the entire season. J.D. Drew finished six for a similar performance. Seriously, do voters even know he exists?

Edgar could still crush left handed hitters. Used properly, he could remain productive as a platoon DH/pinch hitter. But that's an extremely niche market, and I think he got out when the time was right.

Competitive balance in football has little to do with the salary cap. In my view, two things are chiefly responsible... 1. The schedule. 16 games allows for wide deviations from actual talent in the standings. In addition, the NFL adjusts its schedule to create the artificial appearance of competitive balance. 2. Non-guaranteed contracts. Parity in MLB would be greater if teams could simply cut their non-productive players each season. But that is not a fair and just system. Nonsense. Fans and owners were complaining about the New York teams buying championships all the way back in the 1920s. The dominant New York Yankee teams from 1949-64 were chiefly the result of the Yankees buying amateur players. The only reason the Yankees faded in the 1980s was because they spent money as stupidly as humanly possible. You'll notice the Mets were dominant in the same period until they did the exact same thing. And being in New York isn't exactly helping the Mets now. The Yankees aren't successful because of New York. They are successful because they built an image. People misunderstand collusion. It wasn't just a market adjustment. It was the utter refusal to furnish offers to any free agents. Players can cry collusion all they want, but it doesn't mean anything unless there is actual proof. Ideally, both sides will find some middle ground here. But the owners have problems that extend far beyond player salaries. Ideally, both sides will work together to grow the sport, because increasing revenues would settle matters fairly quickly. Personally, I think the owners are very narrow-sighted on this issue. Even if they get their salary cap, it won't help hockey.

Edgar Martinez? Martinez doesn't meet point one. In Martinez's last year, in which he considered himself not good enough to continue playing, he still outhit Omar Vizquel.

I am not suggesting the Yankees should sign Eric Milton at all costs. They should sign him if the price is reasonable. Why should they sign him? What on earth does he offer this team than any other pitcher doesn't? Like I have stated a thousand times before, he is a pitcher whose traits are well suited to Yankee Stadium. As for what he offers over other pitchers, I don't know if you noticed, but the Yankees pitching tended to blow at times last year. Even if he does not improve his 2004 ERA, he still represents a marked improvement for the Yankee pitching staff.

I am not suggesting the Yankees should sign Eric Milton at all costs. They should sign him if the price is reasonable.

A bad night for the heavyweight division. John Ruiz, the most boring fighter on the planet, keeps chugging along. No one gives a shit about this guy. Chris Byrd and Jameel McCline emerge with no solid winner, or championship contender for that matter. This division sorely needs another Tyson-type to plow through it.