I love Agent Ned
Shortly after the Milwaukee Brewers finalized a trade for reigning American League Cy Young Award winner CC Sabathia on Monday, the Daily News learned that sometime in the days leading up to that deal, Dodgers owner Frank McCourt nixed a trade that would have brought Sabathia to Los Angeles, along with Indians third baseman Casey Blake and utility man Jamey Carroll.
McCourt's reason was financial, according to multiple industry sources. But that is a charge McCourt flatly denied.
"It's just totally false," he said. "The players didn't match up, and that's just the way it was."
All three players are potential free agents in the fall, although Carroll's contract includes a club option for next season. The 2008 base salaries of Sabathia ($9 million), Blake ($6.1 million) and Carroll ($2.15 million) total $17.25 million, a figure that drops to somewhere between $8 million and $9 million with more than half the season already gone.
Carroll also has a $150,000 buyout on his $2.5 million option for 2009.
It is unclear which players the Dodgers would have given up to acquire the trio. But with the defending AL Central champion Indians presently in last place and holding out little hope of getting back into contention, it is a reasonable assumption that package would have consisted of young players not making much more than the major-league minimum of $390,000.
"Trades are complicated, and (the Indians) weren't just going to give us three
Advertisement
players," McCourt said. "They were asking for something in return. The point being that in this deal, the give and the get just didn't match up."
Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti declined to confirm any part of the report.
"Trades are complex," Colletti said. "There is no one ingredient that goes into making a trade, and really, there is no one ingredient that goes into not making a trade. As far as the McCourts are concerned, I don't think anybody in this organization doubts that they are in it to win. For proof of that, all you have to do is look at the investment they have made in the stadium and in the baseball team."
McCourt also denied that the decision to kill the trade was his alone.
"Ned and I were on the same page," he said.
So first there's the thought that maybe Colletti might have screwed up the Dodgers chances at getting CC or that he would have given up too much.
And there have also been rumors that the Dodgers are interested in Jack Wilson, and would even give up Matt Kemp for him. Obviously a deal like that seems ludicrous. But it also looks like Colletti might finally be ready to break up some of the Dodgers valuable prospects. I for one, hope that McCourt doesn't catch on for a long time!
Under a more competent GM they probably would have run away with the division a long time ago, and no to mention spent so much money on has been veterans and impeded the development of their talented youngsters. Viva Colletti!
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
0 recs |
87
comments
Comments
What a Crazy Pair
I deeply enjoy how Colletti reads from the McCourt-approved script, then blows kisses at his owner’s ass in the press.
May they both be on this same page for years to come.
by Moggeee on Jul 8, 2008 1:24 AM PDT 0 recs
Has there ever been a team with more albatrosses?
I mean, sure, we’ve got Zito, but they’ve got Jones, Pierre, and Schmidt (I swear I’m missing someone too) eating up gigantic chunks of payroll, all signed after Ned went over there. It’s kind of amazing.
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
by hairball on
Jul 8, 2008 9:19 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Nomar?
Broxton and Penny suck too.
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
by delorean on
Jul 8, 2008 9:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Broxton is pretty good, he’s just having a tough year and he’s from their minors anyways. Penny was actually acquired by DePo and had been good outside of this year.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
Jul 8, 2008 9:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
fuck those guys
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
by delorean on
Jul 8, 2008 11:01 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I heard they were commies...
...and that they like to destroy kids sand castles for fun.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
Jul 8, 2008 11:26 AM PDT
up
0 recs
and kick small dogs, and beat defensless kittens…
by tyrannoman on
Jul 8, 2008 2:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
He was probably thinking of Nomar
and i’m pretty sure there was a Fanshot about this already
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
by delorean on
Jul 8, 2008 9:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
109
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com and on it I make jokes about things.
by groug on
Jul 8, 2008 9:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
are they still paying for Kevin Brown?
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 10:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
we can laugh all we want at their incompetence, but they moved into a first place tie last night, and we’re closer to last than we are to first. If they’re incompetent, what are we??
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on Jul 8, 2008 6:25 AM PDT 0 recs
We're obviously terrible too
But we’re in the midst of our “blow it up season” and had zero expectations. The Dodgers saw themselves as contenders, and even if they are in first place, they’re a game below .500. We’re outplaying our expectations greatly and they’re underplaying theirs.
by hammystyle on
Jul 8, 2008 7:45 AM PDT
up
0 recs
very true, but don’t you think Giants’ management is conning us with this rebuilding?? Omar, Ray, Randy, Molina, Richie, etc. That’s rebuilding to you?? I think this rebuilding label is more of a way to convince us not to be mad at them because they suck, and because they failed to bring back their best and most popular player. That being said, the Giants’ have money and should really never be in a rebuilding mode. Their philosophy should be that if they built a bad ballclub they need to dig a little deeper into their pockets to fix the problem. The only thing I like about this present mode of rebuilding is that they are now competing for and signing foreign players, and drafting without fears of signability.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 8, 2008 7:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
yeah
we really need more free-agents like Kenny Lofton, that’s what would put this club over the top. I think the Yankees have proven that letting money flow from their pockets does not a championship club make. There were no top free agents this offseason (minus A-Rod, but we all knew that would be ridiculous money), so Sabean made the right move by making no moves.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 8:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
you’re really exaggerating to disprove my point here. You’re not spending money and greatly increasing the payroll when you sign Kenny Lofton. There were certain guys out there that might have helped, there was even one guy out there named A.Rod for a brief time, and alot of people thought the Giants would be the team to ante up and sign him. Hmm, the team is 5 games out. You think ARod at third base instead of Jose Castillo might have them a little closer??
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 8, 2008 8:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
A-Rod signed a 10 year/$275M contract with the Yankees. You’re basically saying that we should have offered 300M to get him. That is the exact opposite of how I think we should build the team.
I think they’ve done a nice balance job with the young guys this year. Some think they’re not playing them enough, but I think we’re balancing that with putting them in positions to succeed and not fail. So no, I don’t feel conned at all. I wish Burris would play more, and I’ve got my fingers crossed that they do move Durham and Winn to give Denker and Schierholtz a shot this year. In general though, I’ve been really pleased.
by hammystyle on
Jul 8, 2008 9:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You're okay with ponying up $300 million for A-Rod
...alongside Zito’s contract? That would really, really strap them financially, especially if A-Rod doesn’t make himself worth $30 million in years 8-10 of his contract, which is more likely than not.
Who else are these “certain guys” that could have helped make this team an immediate contender? I think what they’re doing is much more reasonable-give the kids some significant playing time to see if they have the possibility of being regular players, and fill in Durham and Aurilia for now-since they’re on the books for the next year or two, they may as well play them. Once the vets are off the books and they have determined what homegrown kids could fill roster spots as regulars, then they’ll have some money to throw at a few free agents to fill the spots they need. Right now, if they were to fill their holes via free agency, they’d have to find 6 good free agents (assuming Molina and Rowand don’t need replacing at the moment) because at this point they have no ready regulars among the kids.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 11:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
"They May as well play them"
If they are not going to trade them, then no – they may as well not play them because there is ultimately zero point.
Just because you pay them doesn’t mean you have to play them. Every AB taken by a veteran this year is one taken away from a young player.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 11:09 AM PDT
up
0 recs
But inevitably...
the kids will struggle or they won’t pan out. At that point, I think you may as well play Durham and Aurilia, just to keep the team going for a bit. I’m not saying every time a kid goes into a slump you should bench him, nor do I think they should play them no matter what. If they look overmatched, then they may need some down time or a trip back to Fresno. This is where Aurilia and Durham are valuable—they can play in their place during those times.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 11:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Except
No one has really been that over matched except Bocock, Yet they are all still sitting on the bench biding their time.
If you bring up guy A and give him half a season and he isn’t able to play, then bring up guy B. Don’t just throw Veteran A in there for the fuck of it.
But bringing up guy A, giving him 60 sporadic AB’s and then deciding he can’t hit and sending him back down again is a total waste of time.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Apparently you haven't noticed Vizquel's season thus far
He looks completely overmatched!
Or did you mean just of the younger guys?
I agree with you about the sporadic at bats and riding the pine. But I do think Rich Aurilia particularly has some value as a bench guy who can play all infield positions and occasionally come up with a big hit. He shouldn’t be starting regularly, and he doesn’t tend to anyway, but he definitely has value to this team or most other teams.
Meanwhile, Durham is playing very well and justifying his constant play time. He’s hitting the ball regularly, he’s getting on base… He’s not the problem. What’s a problem is that the younger guys aren’t getting any at bats because of him. He should probably be priority #1 to move. While it might hurt the team this year (which suprises the ever-loving hell out of me), it will definitely give the younger guys a chance to show their worth.
Meanwhile, Vizquel is less than worthless. And God bless him, I love Omar! In a hetero, guy love kind of way… But he can’t hit jack anymore.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on
Jul 8, 2008 12:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I think it could be argued
that Velez was overmatched. Bowker, at times, looks overmatched as well, but I’m not saying he should sit.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 12:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Velez hit 4 triples and 6 doubles in his limited time. (127 PAs)
In fact, he is currently tied for 8th place in all of baseball in triples after only playing in 41 games this season – not bad ;)
IMO, it is really hard to say he was over matched. He certainly struggled at the plate – but it wasn’t as if he was hopeless up there. He only struck out ~ 15% of the time, which is well below Rowand’s career clip of 19%, for example. Velez k% is/was in the top third of all ML players, so I don’t think that was really a huge problem for him.
I don’t think that really qualifies as over matched.
Bocock's 37% K rate suggests over matched to me.
I also don’t think you can describe a guy who leads his team (even if it’s the Giants) in HR’s as “over matched” at the plate.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Ooops, weird auto format
but I guess that works
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I guess if you look at K rate he doesn't seem too bad
I was looking more at the .207/.244/.322/.566. Seems pretty ugly to me. Plus he needs to learn how to run the bases.
And yeah, Bowker’s doing well. However he does have his 2 or 3 K days where he looks miserable. Then of course he comes back the next day and goes 2 for 4 with a HR. That’s why I think it’s pretty worthwhile to let him keep playing, he adjusts pretty well.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 1:04 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Overmatched, to me
Means a guy looks hopeless at the plate. Velez didn’t (usually).
He made a lot of outs, but often they were on balls driven hard to the outfield, etc. I wouldn’t call that hopeless.
Bowker K’s a fair amount, but I find it very hard to say a guy who is batting .278/.319/.463 after 70 games is “over matched”. Bowker’s BABIP is starting to catch up to his xBABIP, and as a result his production is improving (just as I and several others predicted earlier this season). I’m very impressed with him so far. He is basically exceeding every “goal” we set for our young players this season – so I am very happy with his production.
He is also only K’ing @ 20%, which is not great but is in the top half of qualified ML players.
So I think over matched is certainly the wrong way to describe him.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 1:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Yeah I conceded Bowker to you
At least I tried to make it sound that way.
We shall see if Velez is destined for the bigs with the new callup. I predict more of the crappy baserunning and sub- .250/.300 performance. I hope he proves me wrong.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 1:56 PM PDT
up
0 recs
And how do you know
that the kids won’t pan out without actually playing them? Are you going to decide that a player won’t pan out based on 100 PA? 200 PA?
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 2:56 PM PDT
up
0 recs
sigh
This is why I try not to enter arguments. People tend to exaggerate my points.
I’m not saying every time a kid goes into a slump you should bench him
I thought I was pretty clear with that statement, but I’ll reiterate it. If you want to keep the team interesting, you can’t necessarily play every young player through their slump. It often helps for them to take an extended rest or even just a day or two off. This is where I think Durham/Aurilia are valuable.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 3:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Here's the problem
A-Rod doesn’t make himself worth $30 million in years 8-10 of his contract, which is more likely than not.
If you want your players to be worth their annual salary in EVERY year of their contracts, you can pretty much not sign ANY FA. VERY few FA players are going to be worth their salary in the last couple years of their contract.
Unless you are willing to accept a player being worth his contract over the duration of his contract, ie ARod being worth $275M, regardless of how the worth is distributed, you might as well just not sign any FA.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 8, 2008 2:55 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If years 8-10 are a writeoff...
...then you’re essentially getting 7 years at $39M per year. Is he really worth that?
The All-Father is now a Giant!
by EliminateMe on
Jul 8, 2008 3:13 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Probably not
My point isn’t that ARod should have been signed for whatever crazy sum he would have wanted.
My point is that if you’re looking at signing an FA, you need to look at the total value of the contract, whether the total value he gives you for the duration of the contract is going to be worth the total salary you are paying him, not whether he can be worth his salary in every year.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 9, 2008 6:06 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Seems like a slight difference between a player being worth $30 million each year for three years versus a guy being worth say… $10 mil per year for three years. Wouldn’t you say?
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on
Jul 8, 2008 3:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
thank you
exactly what I was going to write
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 8, 2008 3:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
And if the guy,
in this case ARod, is worth say $50M for the first 3 years, $30M for the remainder years, and then only $10M for the last 3 years, would you sign him?
If not, then you might as well forget about signing any FA. Like it or not, as long as the current 6 years of control is in place, the reality with signing FAs is that you are going to write off a year or 2 at the end of a contract.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on
Jul 9, 2008 6:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Two words
Fiscal responsibility.
Personally, I think A-Rod is worth a whole mess of money. But if I were the GM, I don’t think I could justify signing someone to a 30mil a year contract after just signing a crappy pitcher to an 18mil a year long term contract. It might ultimately be worth it, but I wouldn’t do it.
And you’re right, you might as well forget about signing any FA. Personally, I think it’s a better strategy to develop from within your own organization so you’re not having to overpay for so many free agents.
It’s a personal opinion, though. You don’t have to agree.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on
Jul 9, 2008 9:49 AM PDT
up
0 recs
don't forget
you are also counting on the FA market to catch up quite a bit in ten years. $25 mil per will probably buy you the equilivient of Carlos Lee by then.
by tyrannoman on
Jul 8, 2008 3:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs
You make a good point. The free agent market is pretty crappy these days, and to rely on a GM to find the few gems that are out there is pretty much impossible for an elite GM, let alone the one we have. I actually like our long term plan as well, I just wish our short term plan yielded a better ballclub. Like I said before, I wouldn’t have a problem if we were sucking with the kids everyday, but we’re sucking right now with the veterans.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 9, 2008 8:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Someone (I can’t remember who) brought up a good point about Bochy playing the vets when Sabean keeps bringing up kids. I really can’t argue with playing Richie or Durham right now, though. They are both producing. I do think its time to gracefully move Omar out of the starting lineup. I don’t think you do it all at once, but cut back his starts, and find him the bench.
Then trade Durham and Winn quick.
by tyrannoman on
Jul 9, 2008 10:06 AM PDT
up
0 recs
This year for the ML club
was/is about finding guys who will be part of the next good team. Going into the season, I think most of us agreed that finding 1-2 guys from the heap we have would be satisfactory, anything more than that would be great.
So far we have Lewis, Bowker and Sanchez as the non-blue chippers standing out, then there’s Lincecum blowing up this year, I mean, we knew he’d be good, but damn. Oh, and don’t forget about Romo and Hinshaw.
So yeah, this has been a successful season for us, IMO.
by Viliphied on
Jul 8, 2008 8:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What I'd like to see for the rest of the season
Trade Winn!!! If you can get rid of Durham and Aurilia too, great. Get Schierholtz up here, get Denker regular ABs (here or in Fresno) and get Burriss more time at short (and against some RHP too prz)
by Viliphied on
Jul 8, 2008 8:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I’d say Wilson is a non-blue-chipper who’s standing out.
2008 Giants: Scrappy! Scrappy! Joy! Joy!
by Goofus on
Jul 8, 2008 3:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The only young players we get to see
Are playing in positions where there is no veteran option. That is not rebuilding, that is filling in the gaps.
I am yet to be convinced that this team is rebuilding. The trade deadline will tell us.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 8, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
exactly. I head Jason Stark this morning and he said only six teams are in sell mode right now, and the Giants were NOT one of the teams he mentioned. On August 1 when you see the same old names on Bochy’s lineup card, try not to be surprised. The Giants’ should literally have dumped them all by now if they were in a true rebuilding mode. We’re 90 games into the season already. Just how long do you have to showcase somebody?? The best thing for this franchise in the long run should have been to dump these guys on Opening Day and gotten nothing in return for them. We would have already had 90 games to evaluate Nate, Velez, Denker, Burriss and the rest of them. As FF just pointed out, the only reason you have seen Lewis and Bowker this year is because Roberts got hurt and they literally had nobody for first base against right handed pitching.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 8, 2008 8:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
keep in mind
that Jayson Stark is generally full of it.
you can't block the Bocock
by oldjacket on
Jul 8, 2008 9:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Sabean has already gone on record
to say that Molina and Winn will not be moved this year. So it goes downhill from there. There will be no Schierholtz coming up to play RF this year, and the team will be one more year closer to having no Molina successor either (notwithstanding the Sandoval elevation and the Posey negotiations). They can talk all they want about moving Durham, Aurilia, and Vizquel, and perhaps Roberts, but Molina and Winn have most of the value right now to contending teams. In order to move the second group, we would need to package them with our pitching, and that may be another short-sighted move.
Sabean thinks they can contend this year, and that will stop any housecleaning of consequence.
Meet my three little friends: Timmy, Dirty, and Cain
by Buck Henry on
Jul 8, 2008 9:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
i agree with nearly everything here
but i just can’t bring myself to believe that anyone, even that inbred halfwit idiot Brian Sabean, thinks the Giants can contend. There’s just no way that anyone with one eye and half a brain thinks that.
Billy Hayes: His job is better than yours.
by delorean on
Jul 8, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I have yet to hear Sabean say that the Giants’ are contenders. The only time he was quoted as saying that, he said afterwards that he had to answer the question that way because he couldn’t very well say that they’re awful. Bochy on the other hand, has said it several times. That’s why I say they’re not on the same page. Sabean will continue to bring Bochy younger guys, and Bochy will continue to not play them.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 8, 2008 11:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Interesting take on Bochy vs. Sabean
I think you may have something there
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
by hairball on
Jul 8, 2008 2:44 PM PDT
up
0 recs
that is an interesting point. When asked about being 5 games back (or whatever it was at the time) by Ralph & Tom, Sabean responded with “let’s get to .500 first, then we’ll talk about the division” which I though was the perfect answer.
by tyrannoman on
Jul 8, 2008 2:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
rebuilding???
nah, it’s called… what was it? oh, yeah, a transition year.
the front office spent the offseason pissing down our necks and telling us it was raining. i still don’t know what that means, but my football coach used to say it all the time.
Bengie Molina: stretching doubles into singles since 1998.
by jasomack on
Jul 8, 2008 7:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Bochy
anyone see Dave Roberts at Fresno last night?? Three for three with a double, triple and homerun. You think Bochy isn’t going to bench Lewis at least a couple of times a week when Roberts gets here?? And if Roberts plays a key role in some unimportant win, he’s actually going to think it was worth it.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jul 9, 2008 8:17 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You're exactly right, I'm afraid.
Bochy just said Velez will be the pinch-hitter/runner de jour. I think this means Roberts starting quite often.
Proud pappa of....STEVE HOLM!!
by UnleashTheGore on
Jul 9, 2008 8:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Or it could mean that Roberts will come off the DL and Velez will be sent back down. I think it’s a little early for so much doom & gloom. If Roberts is the fourth OF and PH/PR guy I’m okay with that.
by tyrannoman on
Jul 9, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
If that is the case
Then that is a fucking retarded move. Send a guy down so you can bring a guy up to ride the pine for a week, only to send him down again?
Sadly, that would not surprise me.
In my mind, I hope Sabean was impressed w/ Velez’s slash @ Fresno, and thought he needed another look.
Bochy deciding not to play him is likely somewhat out of Sabean’s control.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 9, 2008 10:11 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I guess I’m assuming that Roberts will spend at least two weeks on his rehab assignment. I’m far from excited to see Roberts back in any form other than baserunning coach, but I just dont’ see the Giants’ DFA-ing him.
I agree. I’m sure they discuss, but Sabean has long said the the manager has complete control over the lineup.
by tyrannoman on
Jul 9, 2008 10:19 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Roberts
Said he would back one week after the all star break, so I guess you are right.
Point still stands, however.
The evidence is starting to accumulate for the “Sabean keeps giving him young players, but Boch just won’t play ‘em” theory.
Who’s idea was that at first, anyway? I’m starting to really like it.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on
Jul 9, 2008 10:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Oh man
Then Lewis would have to play against lefties. And since Lewis sucks against lefties, he’ll be benched against righties for “not producing.” And we’ll have that veterantastic outfield we so desperately want!
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com and on it I make jokes about things.
by groug on
Jul 9, 2008 11:32 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Loyalty
He haz itz
Adopted brother of the AnVil / GIANTSPACE™ returns!
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 8, 2008 7:44 AM PDT 0 recs
Notice the ring is on his left hand
Obviously this means he’s married to the Giants.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
by JRPhillips on
Jul 8, 2008 9:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Normally in the spy business, engraving your secret decoder ring with the logo of who you’re secretly working for is considered foolish, but this the Dodgers we’re dealing with.
2008 Giants: Scrappy! Scrappy! Joy! Joy!
by Goofus on
Jul 8, 2008 9:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Secret Double Agent Ned
Hide in plain sight!
Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!
by Lyle on
Jul 9, 2008 2:32 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't see what the big deal is...
He was only offering Kershaw, Loney, Kemp, and Billingsly. Those guys are bums. McCourt should have signed off on that deal.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
by camwoody on Jul 8, 2008 10:08 AM PDT 0 recs
Ned seems pretty determined to deal Kemp and Ethier
they just don’t know what they have down there in la la land.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
by nostocksjustbonds on
Jul 8, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Kemp is not the player you think he is and Ethier is the kind of player that will be traded a couple of times before his career is over.
by wilriv21 on
Jul 8, 2008 11:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs


