2006-2007 Hot Stove Thread

[Matthew]

Yeah, but I'm not talking about fans, I'm talking about professional writers entrusted with deciding who gets in and who doesn't.

So am I, that's all they wrote about when Blyleven's name was mentioned and they still do. Blyleven's not alone, there's a ton of great players from the 70s & 80s who get overlooked; case in point, Al Oliver. Great player, great line-drive hitter but it's like he never player the game.

[Dan Gould]

Yeah, but I'm not talking about fans, I'm talking about professional writers entrusted with deciding who gets in and who doesn't.

So am I, that's all they wrote about when Blyleven's name was mentioned and they still do. Blyleven's not alone, there's a ton of great players from the 70s & 80s who get overlooked; case in point, Al Oliver. Great player, great line-drive hitter but it's like he never player the game.

Hey, a guy with 2800 hits barely got 5.5% to stay on the ballot (Harold Baines)!

[Chalupa]

http://www.springtrainingonline.com/featur...rting_dates.htm

[Matthew]

Report that the SF Giants are thinking of voiding Bonds' contract. What a fiasco this year is going to be for baseball as Bonds breaks the HR record. What a fitting way for the Bud Selig Era to come to a close.

Bonds' leaked results could handcuff Giants

Henry Schulman, Chronicle Staff Writer

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Six weeks after he reached a tentative deal to return to San Francisco for a 15th season, Barry Bonds remains a non-Giant.

He has no contract. He is not on the 40-man roster, and his one-year, $15.8 million agreement has not been formalized in a letter of agreement submitted to Major League Baseball and the Players Association.

Now, less than four weeks before pitchers and catchers report to spring training, there are questions about whether the team wants that agreement filed.

The Giants have discussed walking away from the Bonds deal, according to people familiar with their thinking, because of the myriad difficulties in finalizing a contract.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported the Giants put the brakes on negotiations and quoted an unnamed lawyer on the Bonds side as speculating the Giants might want to back out of the deal following the fallout from last week's revelation that Bonds failed an amphetamine test and initially blamed it on a substance he took from teammate Mark Sweeney's locker.

In an interview Wednesday, general manager Brian Sabean declined to address the Times story or whether he is exploring alternatives to signing Bonds. Sabean merely reiterated the club's official position, saying, "The player is unsigned and contract issues remain unresolved. That hasn't changed."

Ironically, the leaked drug test that embarrassed Bonds last week might be his best insurance policy for staying with the Giants in 2007.

According to multiple industry sources, the Giants cannot use the failed drug test to walk away from the contract because legally they should not have received the confidential information. Even if the Giants decided to nullify the deal for other reasons, Bonds could argue in a grievance that the drug test was the real cause and win a judgment.

Moreover, one lawyer who works in the industry but is not connected to Bonds or the Giants said if the deal crumbles, Bonds might have a strong case against MLB or the union for sabotaging it if he can prove one or the other leaked the positive amphetamine test.

On the other hand, Bonds' case might be weakened because he and the Giants did not submit a letter of agreement to MLB and the union when they reached financial terms, which would have made it binding. The Giants say that was Bonds' choice, because he wanted certain contract issues settled first.

The Giants and Bonds struck their tentative agreement Dec. 7. Bonds' agent, Jeff Borris, who declined comment Wednesday, had predicted it would take weeks to complete the language.

According to a source familiar with the events, there were negotiations as recently as last week. The source said Bonds attended a daylong meeting at Borris' Southern California office, with Giants officials on speaker phone, and that a Major League Baseball official was present to discuss security for Bonds and his family as he pursues the career home-run record.

The Chronicle has reported that Bonds wanted security issues addressed in his contract.

The Giants' principal demands reportedly center on Bonds' conformity to team rules and restricting clubhouse access to his associates.

Unclear is whether the Giants are pursuing language allowing them to dock Bonds' pay for time he might have to spend in court if he is indicted for perjury in the BALCO steroids case.

Giants officials have downplayed that angle, but agents for other players the Giants brought on board this winter said the team presented them with contract language dealing with time spent in court. Some speculated it was created for Bonds but included in all proposed contracts for the sake of uniformity.

The agents balked at the language, which is one reason none of the nine free agents who signed letters of agreement with the Giants has signed his contract.

The Giants have rescinded the language, and Sabean said the issue of unsigned contracts was a technicality blown out of proportion in a published report last week.

"As a matter of fact," Sabean said, "out of 198 free agents that have come under letter of agreement, only 21 contracts have been approved in baseball, which means the contract language and terms have been signed, sealed and delivered and reported to the union."

Although Barry Zito, Rich Aurilia, Dave Roberts, Steve Kline, Pedro Feliz, Ray Durham, Bengie Molina, Russ Ortiz and Ryan Klesko have not signed contracts, terms of their deals have been reported officially and the players were placed on the Giants' 40-man roster. They are considered signed players, and even if there is haggling over contract language, their deals are binding.

Bonds is not legally considered a signed player, and spring training is just around the bend. But he sounds as though he expects to be playing somewhere in 2007.

Bonds, in the Dominican Republic for Juan Marichal's golf tournament, told the Associated Press on Wednesday, "I'm sure I'm going to break the (home-run) record this year."

E-mail Henry Schulman at hschulman@sfchronicle.com.

Edited January 18, 2007 by Matthew

[BERIGAN]

Well, I don't know if you all heard about this, but there was a trade the other day, that didn't involve the Yankees or Red Sox! The braves traded Adam LaRoche to the Pirates for Closer Mike Gonzalez. Now, with Rafael Soriano and Wickman, the braves have 3 closers, which must mean we have a really good pen now.(After having the worst in baseball for much of last year)

I am a bit concerned about losing LaRoche. Once he started to play every day,(Bobby Cox loves platooning) he was on fire. Hit .323 after the all star break. I can't find the stat right now, but I think he was 3rd in Slugging in the NL from July on.....When Andruw Jones walks at the end of 2007, it looks like we will have a very weak offense. Which has many Braves fans wondering if we will flip Soriano or Gonzalez for say a left fielder, or future Center fielder. Anyone hear any rumors with their teams? We have heard on and off about Rocco Baldelli, but they want a young, starter with success in the Majors, like Chuck James, but the Braves really, really don't want to trade a young cheap Glavine like starter.

[Dan Gould]

That trade was originally reported (about a month ago) as being a three way with the Yankees. Since as you say you have three closers now, isn't it possible you'll flip Gonzales for Melky Cabrera? Would help (excellent arm for the pen) and hurt (no Melky, Bernie becomes the fourth outfielder) the Yanks, seems to me.

I know your GM hates Boras with a passion, and the Braves can never win a bidding war, but Andruw was quoted today as saying he very much wants to finish his career in Atlanta. Is he the type of guy to accept a below-market offer?

[BERIGAN]

That trade was originally reported (about a month ago) as being a three way with the Yankees. Since as you say you have three closers now, isn't it possible you'll flip Gonzales for Melky Cabrera? Would help (excellent arm for the pen) and hurt (no Melky, Bernie becomes the fourth outfielder) the Yanks, seems to me.

I know your GM hates Boras with a passion, and the Braves can never win a bidding war, but Andruw was quoted today as saying he very much wants to finish his career in Atlanta. Is he the type of guy to accept a below-market offer?

Dan, the rumors have been around for like you said, a month. Cabrera makes sense for us(Wonder why the Yankees didn't want LaRoche, he would hit a lot of homers in that park)and the Yankees would be using him as a 4th outfielder for at least 2 years, wouldn't they? If the 3 arms stay healthy, one of them would be quite a bargaining chip during the season....Braves couldn't get squat when they really needed one last year.

And every GM should hate Boras! Actually, Andruw pushed Boras aside during negotiations the last time, and Andruw and (With help from his Dad) signed a below market offer. I just can't see him doing that again.

[Dan Gould]

The Yanks were never interested in Laroche, as far as I know. Their target was always getting Gonzales. As far as Melky goes, if they don't pick up Abreu's option, the Yanks will need a new outfielder after this year.

As for Andruw, to me, the fact that he pushed Boras aside and took a below market deal once, and now says that he wants to stay, says that he'll take a reasonable offer from the Braves to stay. I'd love to see him taking aim at the Monster but I suspect he'll end up staying.

[BERIGAN]

A longtime baseball man, Vern Ruhle has died....

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2738152

[Matthew]

I see where J.D. Drew has officially signed with the Red Sox -- good luck with Mr. Cruise Control....

[Dan Gould]

I see where J.D. Drew has officially signed with the Red Sox -- good luck with Mr. Cruise Control....

At least the team has significant out-clauses: If he misses significant time due to an injury related directly to the shoulder issues that team doctors identified, the last two years of the deal can be cancelled. Same with the last year, if he misses time in the fourth year. Of course, that only covers us on this aspect of his health; any other reason that he goes down (and yes, I know that he will) and they're stuck with that inflated contract.

The way I've come to look at it is that when healthy, he is an improvement defensively (especially since he can play CF too), in OBP and SLG, over Trot (who was going to get hurt and miss time anyway given his last three years). When he gets hurt, more time for Wily Mo. We've also got some strong OF candidates who are knocking at the door, or will be by 2008, although none of them have the potential to hit behind Papi and Manny.

Even more important than his health may be how the fans react to his apparent indifference. If they can manage not to run him out of town in the first two months, may be he settles in and produces.

Yeah, I know, I'm putting lipstick on a pig. Its a shitty deal, especially when there was no other team bidding for his services, and you still give him five years. I just gotta hope for the best.

[Matthew]

Like I said before: Lucky if he plays one hundred game any season. He'll milk that shoulder for all it's worth. Early sign of trouble -- kept out of spring training, excuse being: "The shoulder just doesn't feel right, but I'll be ready for the regular season." Then for the regular season: "The weather's too cold, I can't get loose."

BTW, spring training can't come soon enough; tired of football/basketball.

[Dan Gould]

Like I said before: Lucky if he plays one hundred game any season. He'll milk that shoulder for all it's worth. Early sign of trouble -- kept out of spring training, excuse being: "The shoulder just doesn't feel right, but I'll be ready for the regular season." Then for the regular season: "The weather's too cold, I can't get loose."

I can't believe that's what he'll say/do. What's to stop them from disabling him and then attempting to cancel the last two years of the deal?

[chris olivarez]

I imagine that the honeymoon between Drew and BoSox fans will be short lived.

[Dan Gould]

Just when I thought the Hot Stove League was over,

Rockies Discussing Trade of Helton to Red Sox

WTF????

Why the hell would Theo even consider taking on the contract of a soon-to-be 33 year old who has 6 years and 90 million dollars coming to him? The worst contract in the majors, and Theo is even considering it? The only way it works is if the Rockies take about 60 million, and even then, what are you going to get when this guy is 37 or 38 or 39? And where does he play? I want Youks on my team (and why would you move him) so I'd have to guess that they'd move him to third and ship Lowell out (who only has one year left anyway).

Now, having said that, I've just looked at Helton's career numbers, and they are somewhat eye-popping. .333 career BA, .430 career OBP, .593 career slugging, only one year in his career that he's struck out more than a hundred times. But how much of that is the Rockies effect? Looking at his splits, of course all of his offensive numbers are lower on the road, though he still has a lifetime BA of .294 and an OBP of .393. But then there's the clear fact that he's in the decline phase, with no 100 RBI season since 2003, and last year saw his lowest SLG% of his career.

The only way this works is if Colorado takes a massive amount of salary and we give up virtually nothing in return. And even then I'll be hating this guy when he's 35 and cursing Theo for making the deal.

[Matthew]

Has there been any player that has put up major number after leaving the Rockies? Dan, think of a left-handed Dante Bichette.

[T.D.]

Maybe the Moneyball number crunchers for the Red Sox forgot to include a "Coors Field" dummy variable in their regression analyses...

I don't put much credence in the rumor. It looks like Boston is assuming the Yankees' long-time media role as rumored destination for all white elephant contracts.

[Dan Gould]

Has there been any player that has put up major number after leaving the Rockies? Dan, think of a left-handed Dante Bichette.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

The Sox already enjoyed that sight:

In 107 games in 2001, Bichette had 12 homers, a .286 BA, .325 OBP and was through after that year.

[Dan Gould]

There's obviously some juice to this story as Foxsports.com is reporting that Hansen is the cornerstone of what is being offered (or what the Rockies are asking). Also suggests that Lowell could be shipped to San Diego for bullpen help, which makes it more palatable in that Lowell is probably gone after this season anyway. But with Gonzo gone, putting Youks at third really weakens the left side significantly. Youks is a solid defender but he isn't Lowell. Lugo and Youk means more groundballs get through and more errors.

As far as Matthew's point goes, I've thought a little more about that. First thing to remember is that Helton is a totally different ballplayer than Bischette, so your drop-off should not be nearly as much. Another thing is that Bischette came to Boston at the absolute end of his career (he was 37) while Helton is 33. So the potential for some level of performance still exists. Heck, and this may be the reason that they are talking with the Rockies, Helton's OPS this year, which was down significantly, was still higher than Youk's. So potentially you still are improving the team's first base production, even if he'll never attain the level of prime-era Helton.

I also hear that he's had back issues for a while, but I don't get that, because until the last two seasons, he consistently played 150+ games every single year, and the reduction in the last two is only into the mid 140s.

One other positive factor is that he's guaranteed 90 million over the next six years, but you're obligated to have him on the roster (or pay him) for only 5. That 90 million includes a 4 million dollar buyout for the sixth season (or its a 23 million dollar option). So at least he wouldn't be taking up roster space quite so far into his late 30s, and the buyout will probably be downright cheap when average salaries are 3 million this year, and the buyout is six years away.

I still don't like it overall, but maybe Helton also offers some protection for Drew? I mean, with his batting eye, you could definitely put him in behind Manny when Drew gets hurt. Maybe I'd like this deal more if we land real bullpen talent for Lowell ...

Edited January 27, 2007 by Dan Gould

[T.D.]

Yes, Gammons is also pimping this deal at espn.com, so I should have taken it more seriously. I don't pay up for "ESPN Insider", so dunno what Peter's saying.

[Dan Gould]

Yes, Gammons is also pimping this deal at espn.com, so I should have taken it more seriously. I don't pay up for "ESPN Insider", so dunno what Peter's saying.

Well here is what Buster Olney is saying (got this from the MLB Red Sox discussion board):

The Red Sox are engaged in trade talks with the Colorado Rockies about Todd Helton, reports Troy Renck, with no deal imminent at this point. But you could see why this would make sense for each side.

In response to the Denver Post story, a major league source indicated Saturday morning that the conversations between the Red Sox and Rockies actually opened last fall, and that at time, one of the sides felt that there could be an acceptable framework in the early talks to make a deal. Any trade may have to include pitcher Matt Clement, from the Red Sox perspective. It could be that the completion of the J.D. Drew deal will now reignite talks, given that the Red Sox have a clearer sense of their financial obligations.

For the Rockies, this would be an opportunity to move Helton's contract, and as owner Charlie Monfort told the Denver Post this week, it is very difficult to operate in a situation in which one player absorbs such a large part of the payroll. If they could get the Red Sox to eat a lot of Helton's deal and save themselves somewhere in the range of $8 million to $10 million a year, they would have much more flexibility.

And the Rockies have to be concerned with the decreasing production of the 33-year-old Helton. Over the last four years, his slugging percentage has dropped from .630 to .620 to .534 to .476.

For financial superpower Boston, however, Helton could be an extraordinary find, even at high cost. He is a Gold Glove-caliber first baseman, having won that award three times, and he would complement their offense perfectly, with his ability to hit doubles, draw walks and drive up pitch counts; he is considered to be among the best two-strike hitters in baseball. Last season, in what was regarded as a subpar offensive season for Helton, he drew 91 walks, struck out just 64 times, registered a .404 on-base percentage, and averaged 3.93 pitches per plate appearance.

"His swing is not a power swing," said one National League talent evaluator. "And he hasn't been healthy. Our team was able to pound the he|| out of him last year, pitch him inside, much better than you used to. It'll be interesting to see how healthy he is, and he needs to come back, if he's going to take a serious run at Cooperstown." (Helton has 286 career homers, 996 RBI, 1,700 career hits, nine straight seasons of averages better than .300).

"He's a line-drive-type hitter, and for the kind of money Colorado is paying him, they need power."

The Red Sox do not. They've got the power hitters. They would covet Helton's on-base percentage, his quality at-bats, his defense, especially if they were paying him only $8 million to $10 million a year.

We don't yet know what the composition of a Helton-Red Sox trade would be. It would make sense for the Rockies to ask for Kevin Youkilis in return, and on the other hand, the Red Sox have attempted repeatedly, since last summer, to engage other teams in conversation about third baseman Mike Lowell. The Rockies would probably prefer pitching, as Troy writes in his piece.

Perhaps the Red Sox would insist upon the inclusion of Lowell in the deal, and then the Rockies -- who don't need a third baseman -- might spin Lowell off to another team. We'll see.

The guess here is that the Red Sox would want to retain Youkilis and play him at third, because he's younger than Lowell and because he generates such tough at-bats. Conceivably, then, this could be the Boston lineup for this season, if they got Todd Helton and moved out Lowell:

SS Julio Lugo

1B Helton

DH David Ortiz

LF Manny Ramirez

RF Drew

3B Youkilis

C Jason Varitek

CF Coco Crisp

2B Dustin Pedroia

The middle of the Red Sox lineup -- from Helton in the No. 2 spot, to Youkilis in the No. 6 spot -- would chew up starting pitchers the way the Yankees' lineup does -- from lead-off hitter Johnny Damon to No. 8 hitter Robinson Cano. A trade for Helton could make the Red Sox lineup equal, in potency, to that of the Yankees, and maybe better, depending on how good A-Rod is in 2007 (A great A-Rod makes the Yankees' lineup extraordinary, while an inconsistent A-Rod changes things).

The money will be the key to the trade talks, of course. Helton's salary for each of the next four seasons is $16.6 million, and he'll make $19.1 million in 2011, with a $4 million buyout of a $23 million club option for 2012. His deal is regarded by some executives as baseball's worst contract, because it was so heavily backloaded, and because Helton's salary will be so high even as he nears his 40th birthday. The Red Sox will want the Rockies to absorb a lot of Helton's contract, the way the Angels wanted Colorado to, when that deal was discussed earlier in the off-season.

Helton also has a full no-trade clause, but may welcome an opportunity to play for a perennial contender. He has said repeatedly that if the team came to him under the premise that the best thing for the organization would be to trade Helton, he would listen earnestly; having talked with him about his situation two springs ago, I think he would approve a deal.

Clearly Olney likes this deal a lot more than I do. I'm beginning to wonder if its possible this will go down, with Theo deciding to do something that's in the team's interest now but not worrying about the long-term consequence. This is why: Even with Drew, the Sox lineup isn't up to the standards of the Yanks. As Olney says, Helton to Youk is a pitcher's nightmare (even more so if Crisp has a bounce-back season) so maybe they want one more impact bat.

I have to say though that if this deal happens, I have to believe they are going to pass on Clemens, and as I've said before, Clemens fixes the problems in the Yankee rotation - you can't let him go there. I still say he's the piece that would blow the Yankee rotation away, both for our having him and for their not having him.

[T.D.]

Thanks! I goofed: it was Olney (whose stuff I usually like) rather than Gammons pimping the trade @ ESPN. I'm not sure about the trade either, but the wacky salary inflation this off-season has left me even more baffled than usual...

[Matthew]

The middle of the Red Sox lineup -- from Helton in the No. 2 spot, to Youkilis in the No. 6 spot -- would chew up starting pitchers the way the Yankees' lineup does -- from lead-off hitter Johnny Damon to No. 8 hitter Robinson Cano. A trade for Helton could make the Red Sox lineup equal, in potency, to that of the Yankees, and maybe better, depending on how good A-Rod is in 2007 (A great A-Rod makes the Yankees' lineup extraordinary, while an inconsistent A-Rod changes things).

Drew & Helton would be two big question marks in my mind. Helton is on the downside of a very good career; a lot of those doubles were because of the big field at Coors. He has no speed, and his glove is a little overrated -- only three GG's, the sportswriters usually keep giving those out to a person forever; look at Greg Maddux. And Drew, well, JD is JD .

[Dan Gould]

The middle of the Red Sox lineup -- from Helton in the No. 2 spot, to Youkilis in the No. 6 spot -- would chew up starting pitchers the way the Yankees' lineup does -- from lead-off hitter Johnny Damon to No. 8 hitter Robinson Cano. A trade for Helton could make the Red Sox lineup equal, in potency, to that of the Yankees, and maybe better, depending on how good A-Rod is in 2007 (A great A-Rod makes the Yankees' lineup extraordinary, while an inconsistent A-Rod changes things).

Drew & Helton would be two big question marks in my mind. Helton is on the downside of a very good career; a lot of those doubles were because of the big field at Coors.

I'm not certain of that. His hit chart at MLB shows that he's mostly a pull hitter (all of his homers at Coors were to RF, most of his doubles, too). But remember that Fenway has a huge right centerfield gap, an enormous amount of acreage to hit a line drive double into. What's more disconcerting is that being a pull hitter, he isn't likely to come to Fenway and use the Monster. Drew is less of a pull hitter and he ought to use the Monster effectively - when he plays.

Again its going to come down to how much Colorado gives up and what they get in talent. If it were a total salary dump, I'd be more agreeable. Someone on the sonsofsamhorn site pointed out that the Sox have a lot of money coming off the books soon, and with young, cost-controlled pitchers coming in, there can be flexibility to handle an oversized contract. Of course I don't really think this is the right oversized contract.

Meantime, the Boston writers are picking up on this, and the consensus is that the Sox aren't hot for Helton, they're happy with the lineup, and that its up to Colorado to make it worth their while or to bring in a third team to make things work out. So I'm glad they're playing hard to get, as opposed to their drunken sorority girl come-ons to Drew.

[BERIGAN]

Has there been any player that has put up major number after leaving the Rockies? Dan, think of a left-handed Dante Bichette.

Andres Galarraga for one. After hitting 41HR's, driving in 141 RBI's and hitting .318 in 1997 for the Rockies(At the age of 36) he joined the Braves in 1998 and hit 44HR's, drove in 121, and hit .305. And to further defy the odds, after missing a complete season for Cancer treatment, he came back at the age of 39 to hit 28 HR's and drive in 100 and hit over .300 again. You'd think a story like that would warrant a made for TV movie at least....

Edited January 28, 2007 by BERIGAN