Comments on: Update on CMW’s arbitration hearing

By: Ed

Ed — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:32:23 +0000

Taquito, Valverde is in his 2nd year of arbitration while Wang is in his first. Your salary gets compared to other players in the same arbitration year as you.

Last year Valverde made $2 million. So even if Wang loses, he’s making double what Valverde made in his first arbitration year. Wang will probably make more like $8 million next year, assuming this year is similar to the past two.

By: rover

rover — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:40:52 +0000

hmm, i believe this drug thing was viral. once enough players started use, it became almost imperative to the clean competition to begin use, just to level the playing field. doesn’t make it right, just makes it so. with millions of dollars at stake, and wanting your share you have to perform at a level or nearly so, that the top perform to. if they take PEDs what do you do?

By: taquito

taquito — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:38:02 +0000

Jose Valverde, the Astros closer, is going to get more money out of arbitration than Wang will. That’s just wrong.

Wang will get 4.0 million or 4.6 million.

Valverde will get 4.7 million or 6.2 million.

Valverde had a great year in 2007, no doubt. But the guy was terrible in 2006 and was banished to the minors at one point. Plus he pitches a low number of innings since he is a closer. How can he even be worth 4.7 million? He is totally going to lose his case. The Astros should have filed in the 3 million range, or low 4′s for Valverde.

MY guess is Valverde loses, and Wang wins. Yet Valverde still comes out with more money.

By: busta

busta — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:32:25 +0000

oh yah, idiot, how many wins did Kazmir have last 2 seasons?

wanger had 38. try to beat that.

By: YankeeJosh

YankeeJosh — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:23:48 +0000

I’m still surprised the Yankees let it get to this over a surprisingly small amount of money difference.

By: Yazman

Yazman — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:36:20 +0000

One piece of Roger’s testimony yesterday seemed contradictory, and I haven’t heard anyone pick up on it.

Roger said (paraphrasing):

-Andy misunderstood their original conversation about HGH (ok, it’s possible, and Andy even concludes this may well be the case)

-If Andy really thought Roger did HGH, they were close enough friends that Andy would have consulted with him about it. Roger made this point repeatedly.

BUT, Roger is saying Andy really DID think Roger did HGH (based on mishearing their original conversation).

So Roger seems to be saying that Andy thought Roger did HGH (because he misheard) and he did not think Roger did it (otherwise Andy would have consulted with him prior to doing HGH himself).

I thought Andy’s and Roger’s testimonies were surprisingly consistent, other than this point.

By: The Mighty C's

The Mighty C's — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:27:08 +0000

Wang should just pull a hamstring out of ST.

By: Rayblay

Rayblay — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:12:56 +0000

murphydog-
lol… pettitte and giambi can be the major representatives of this one
I really think this should be over already and we should get to some real baseball talk. How about
“where Yankees become champions”
?

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:05:38 +0000

From an article a few days ago (and I can’t find the link), Wang’s agent was quoted as saying they were seeking a long-term deal. The refusal to budge from the submitted figure was an attempt to get the Yanks to the table to discuss the longer deal.

By: murphydog

murphydog — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:03:38 +0000

Rayblay:

Yankee motto for 2008? How about: “Just say ‘No’ to drugs”