A sentimental team for 2013
Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Feb 09, 2013 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
I don’t remember many details of this story. It was sometime during the 2008 season, and my old friend Donnie Collins was finally getting out of Scranton for a day to see a game at Yankee Stadium. It was the last year for the old place, Donnie hadn’t been to a game there in a while, and he was excited about watching a baseball game that had nothing to do with work. He wouldn’t have to write a thing. It would be nothing at all like the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees games we’d both covered.
So Donnie got to the park, and the Yankees starting pitcher was … Dan Giese, the same guy Donnie and I had covered through five different seasons beginning with the years when Scranton was a Phillies affiliate.
Not exactly the escape-from-reality that Donnie had in mind, but I can’t imagine it bothered him much. Giese was an awe-shucks guy who’d gotten to the big leagues by pitching very well for a long, long time until someone gave him a chance. If you’re in this business, you can’t help rooting for a guy like that. Might rip him in the paper when he pitches poorly, but you’re happy for him when things work out.
Here’s what I liked about Aryeh’s post this morning: The stories. When his file came in at roughly 2,000 words, I groaned. Blog posts creak under the weight of that much writing. I just finished writing a pretty lengthy feature story for the paper, and I was told it had to be below 2,000 words to fit. I certainly didn’t think 2,000 words of sentimental all-stars would be a fun read.
But it was. Because the post had personality, and it had personal connections, and those two things matter in this game. Seeing an otherwise forgettable player hit a memorable home run matters. Sharing a connection with a player, no matter how insignificant, matters.
As I’ve written several times, that’s the reason I think this Yankees team — even though it wasn’t exciting to see it put together — might be a lot of fun to watch. There’s something enjoyable about familiar faces that have already created a connection.
Associated Press photo
repost:
If I was handing out a contract to a player, let’s use Cano as an example, I would put in there a proviso that says if he’s busted for PEDs then the following year becomes a team option year, with a buyout of 1/10th the AAV of the contract. If the team picks up the option, then all future years are locked in.
You put the time limit in there so that you don’t have a situation where he’s suspended this year and then 3 years down the road when his game slips you can void the contract saying “we were contemplating this from the day he was suspended.”
This doesn’t have to be collectively bargained, teams put in different options with different provisions all the time, this would be similar to that.
The only player who doesn’t sign such a provision is one who is afraid of being busted for steroids anyway – so if Cano were to say “hell no” then Hal and Cash and Levine would know that there’s a strong likelihood of Cano being on steroids.
Practically every Dominican is going to defend Presinal. I don’t know that it means we should worry about Cano, more than you would any player with his build. Cano’s father is not a small man, so I don’t know that Cano needs to be using anything.
trade proposal:
Yankees get Dom Brown
Phillies get David Adams
Phillies get a mid level prospect who may or may not be a future MLB 3b; Yankees get a former prospect who may or may not be a future MLB OF.
You cannot inster clauses into contracts that violate the CBA.
A steroid “out” clause would make sense, but it aint legal.
Adams for Brown makes some sense, but I’m more interested in a Granderson/Henter Pence trade. Also a deal that could well help both teams in terms of balancing lineups, has negligible financial impact and both guys are potential FA.
86w183 February 9th, 2013 at 12:31 pm
You cannot inster clauses into contracts that violate the CBA.
A steroid “out” clause would make sense, but it aint legal.
————————–
This.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn…..id=3942011
“Presinal worked with Rodriguez and approximately 20 other Dominican stars, including Albert Pujols, Adrian Beltre, Ortiz, Perez and Alou, in early February in Boca Chica, a small town about 30 minutes from Santo Domingo. He ran the players through numerous drills and administered massages to several of them before and after the workouts.”
I’m not sure there’s anything in the CBA that this would expressly violate.
I would like to deal Granderson too – maybe that could be a separate thing. Or you could expand the deal – where the Phillies get Granderson and a prospect in addition to Adams and the Yankees get Carlos Ruiz along with Dom Brown.
I saw a Dan Giese start as well. He got lit up by the Mets. It was a very hot day game. Might have been a make up game.
Not sure he makes my All-Sentimental team though.
btw Jeers, saw your reply late on the Gate 2 Tragedy. Thanks, concur.
///
Time for hockey
I’m not sure there’s anything in the CBA that this would expressly violate.
***********************************************************
Of course there is. The drug testing punishments are limited to what was collectively bargained. Individual contract clauses that go beyond those punishments would be disallowed.
I wish that wasn’t the case. An option to void the contract for any drug suspension would be the most effective deterrent yet.
“An option to void the contract for any drug suspension would be the most effective deterrent yet.”
As long as someone thinks a player can perform, another team will sign them. Look at Melky.
That’s fine, but my point is if a team could get out of a multi year deal it would certainly be a great disincentive to the player taking a chance on a PED.
the higher the IQ of the conversation the more moral ambiguity there is with PEDS.
it’s not an easy topic.
there’s a kind of PED use that is clearly cheating and unhealthy for the users.
the problem is that all PEDS are harmful and may even be helpful to living a longer more productive life.
athletes take risks that the average person takes. for example , the simple act of batting puts a player in a life and death situation. it doesn’t happen often, but it happens. post concussion syndrome is very real. why do players like cervelli keep rolling the dice with it?
so it’s not just if something is unhealthy that it’s banned. eye glasses are an obvious performance enhancement. so why are they allowed? it could be said they just restore eyesight to normal and they are good for people. i agree. what about a PED that did the same thing?
there have to be PEDS that are good for people. if so they should be allowed. the problem is no one knows the good ones from the bad ones.another problem is that major league baseball seems complicit in letting bad PEDS become rampant in their sport. so no one trusts selig or anyone else in the game to make the judgements necessary.
for now it’s one big mess with no end in sight.
rather: “the problem is that all PEDS are not harmful”
@PeteAbe
#RedSox OF prospect Bryce Brentz shot himself in the leg while cleaning a handgun a few weeks ago. Not on ST roster as a result.
–
lol
“There are precious few at ease with moral ambiguities, and so we act as if they don’t exist.”
- Wicked, the Musical (sung by the Wizard)
I agree – one big mess, no end in sight.
As a fan, I’d be all for including PED clauses in contracts. The MLBPA would naturally fight any such proposal and would likely prevail. The players are really committing fraud against the fans and teams when they use.
Under Chip’s scenario, I could see players rolling the dice and using until they get the big contract. Then when they get the big contract, they stop using rather than risk a contract out. Until MLB ties PED use to the potential to lose contracts, some players will continue to take the chance. They are ultimately playing for money, even though that can be a hard concept for fans to swallow.
And Keith Law reports Brentz is 3 1 shot in MLB
# 1 shot… kinda screws up the joke
I would still throw it out there – if the union wants to fight it let them – that’s a PR fight the owners will win.
randy, I found your 1:13 post intelligently nuanced. Thank you.
or teams could just offer players 1 year deals.
pat February 9th, 2013 at 1:57 pm
or teams could just offer players 1 year deals.
———————-
That would be collusion
Collusion would be all teams agreeing to only offer 1 year deals. Individual teams can decide on the length of deals they are willing to gamble on.
Toronto gave Melky a 2 year deal even after knowing his history. Teams get to decide their own level of risk aversion and for some people that could be 1 year deals.
Individual owners can decide to limit contracts as they see fit, but they cannot put things into the contract that violate the CBA. It wouldn’t be a “fight with the union” the deal would be thrown out by the Commissioner’s office.
That’s assuming some idiot player/agent agreed to it. Its a non-issue.
Would I prefer a player to stop using once they have a long tern deal to avoid voiding it or one who continues to use to try to live up to it?
The only player who doesn’t sign such a provision is one who is afraid of being busted for steroids anyway – so if Cano were to say “hell no” then Hal and Cash and Levine would know that there’s a strong likelihood of Cano being on steroids.
——–
No agent would ever let a high profile player like Cano sign such a contract.
Regardless of whether Cano uses steroids it sets a dangerous precedent. Further a player like Cano who will presumably have plenty of other offers on the table would never agree to a completely untested contract clause and the uncertainty that brings when he can just go somewhere else to get paid.
Now, you want to compensate players for signing such a clause that’s a different story.
But no player or agent is agreeing to that for free.
pat February 9th, 2013 at 2:10 pm
Collusion would be all teams agreeing to only offer 1 year deals. Individual teams can decide on the length of deals they are willing to gamble on.
Toronto gave Melky a 2 year deal even after knowing his history. Teams get to decide their own level of risk aversion and for some people that could be 1 year deals.
—————–
I agree but in some cases teams are signing players to contracts under false pretenses.
What I would like to see in the next CBA is a provision that teams can void contracts for players who are suspended for PED use; however if you sign a player to a contract who has already been suspended once for PED use and he gets suspended again, the team is still on the hook for the entire contract.
That way teams have an out, but if they sign a known steroid guy then it’s at their own risk.
Randy,
I too think your PED post well thought out. It is nowhere nearly as clear as some perceive.
Nick, I found your 1:48 post intelligently nuanced. Thank you
You’re welcome, Tar.
What I would like to see in the next CBA is a provision that teams can void contracts for players who are suspended for PED use; however if you sign a player to a contract who has already been suspended once for PED use and he gets suspended again, the team is still on the hook for the entire contract.
That way teams have an out, but if they sign a known steroid guy then it’s at their own risk.
*************************************************************************
Huzzah!
Does A Rod have a character clause in his contract by which, if it’s proven A-Rod used PEDS again (a felony crime in the US), they can void?