It’d be one thing if you’re getting Konerko for two years, but you’d be getting him for four. That doesn’t sound too appetizing for me, especially if Konerko experiences a sharp drop-off.

But personally, warning bells are going off if the White Sox are looking to move him. I mean, unless this signals that the White Sox are looking to rebuild (which isn’t a bad idea), I can’t see how unloading Konerko makes much sense (particularly if it’s straight-up for a Matsui or Damon).

So in that respect, I suppose the debate’s rather meaningless.

…and you can bash the Mitchell Report all you want (there are certainly lots of things wrong with it), but I’m not sure if I can read in Red Sox-bias. As far-fetched as it seems, there’s a better-than-even-money chance that Ortiz became the hitter he was without steroids. First, he was entering his peak years when he joined the Red Sox (and he’s still only in his early-30s), and second, his evolution as a hitter is attributed to the Red Sox fixing a hole in his swing. Personally, I can buy that. I’m not saying Ortiz isn’t on PEDs, or that there’s zero chance of it, (I don’t think I’d be more or less surprised if it turned out that Ortiz was or is on PEDs), but I don’t think he’s the sure-fire lock to be some Yankees fans hope him to be.

Yes, question whether it was a good idea for a man who has such ties to one of the organizations to lead the report: that’s certainly a valid question. But don’t try reading into the report for biases that might not actually be there. I think there are far more troubling aspects of the report (like it’s ease at publishing relatively weak allegations at players of all stripes and colors) than a supposed Red-Sox bias. Indeed, in light of the weak allegations, I’m actually *glad* there are so relatively-few people called out by name for using PEDs. The entire Red Sox roster could have gotten named in Mitchell’s report, but if it came with the same “evidence” the rest of the alleged users had levied against them, it wouldn’t really make a difference.

…and even if the evidence were fool-proof, let’s be honest, what purpose does it serve? What’s really more important here, the future integrity of the game of baseball–which doesn’t hinge *at all* on past PED users–or outing people who may or may not have used PEDs over the last two decades? Considering we could never have a full list of players who did or did not use PEDs over the last two decades, why even bother trying to investigate that facet of the scandal? That’s my problem with the Mitchell report, at the end of the day–I just don’t see what possible use it serves, except to further poison relations between labor and management. And that’s the absolute worst thing you can be doing when trying to fix the problem.

~No hablo ingles~ as per his lawyer,remember the senate hearings?