Sorry, But I'm With Angelos On This One
Morty Fied
I have to say that Angelos made the right decision here. The position
that he took that paying a player that pitches every fifth day 14M is
economic insanity makes a lot of sense to me. Sure Mussina is an
outstanding pitcher but is he really _that_good? If so, why didn't
Cleveland Chicago or the Red Sox made a more serious offer given their
serious need for a stud starter? The only reason the Yankees were able
to do it was because of their $100M TV contract.
How many pennants has Kevin Brown brought the Dodgers?
No doubt Mike will do well in NY given their bullpen and he can throw
his 7 innings and get out and nurse his assortment of nagging injuries.
I wonder how happy the Yankees will be in the fifth and sixth year of
his contract when he's making $17M per?
How long before Pettite and Riveria want new contracts along the lines
of Mussina's?
How much good would Mussina have been to the O's given the fact they are
rebuilding?
Would the run support plague that affected him last year continued into
this year and beyond??
If the O's were going to spend that much money I would much rather see
them throw in a couple more mill and get Rameriz or Rodregiez<sp>.
Given his durability and continued maturity Ponson may be a better
pitcher over the next few years if he can get some decent run support.
Although he may be another year away from being a top tier pitcher.
And yes it is a VERY scary thought having Mercedes and McElory as yor #2
and 3 starters. But who knows..There are 4 or 5 other starters that
could step up next year.
Hopefully Parrish can settle his brain down and take avantage of his
great stuff.
I think Spurgeon is ready now.Towers may also be close.
Flame away guys i know its coming!!
Ted
This was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as Angelos's crude
treatment of players and fans. It didn't have to happen for the good of the
team and it didn't have to happen this way.
Angelos is just another example of what is wrong with the city of Baltimore --
small-minded, crusty and stupid.
Q
YYYAss
>From: Mort...@webtv.net (Morty Fied)
>Date: 12/1/00 6:23 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <4721-3A...@storefull-268.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
>
>As much as I hated to see Mike go,almost as much as when the Colts left
>I have to say that Angelos made the right decision here. The position
>that he took that paying a player that pitches every fifth day 14M is
>economic insanity makes a lot of sense to me. Sure Mussina is an
>outstanding pitcher but is he really _that_good? If so, why didn't
>Cleveland Chicago or the Red Sox made a more serious offer given their
>serious need for a stud starter? The only reason the Yankees were able
>to do it was because of their $100M TV contract.
So sayeth Angelos...the same guy who supposedly lets InSydious Thrift operate
the club.
>
>How many pennants has Kevin Brown brought the Dodgers?
>
WebTV...a pox on us all. Last time I looked there were eight other guys on the
field behind Kevin Brown. A tired cliche'. How many dozen years has Brown been
with the Dodgers that they could win a pennant? Geesh.
>No doubt Mike will do well in NY given their bullpen and he can throw
>his 7 innings and get out and nurse his assortment of nagging injuries.
Bullshit. You are making this up and you know it. He was our most durable
pitcher for the last seven years - not to mention also being one of the very
best in ML baseball.
>I wonder how happy the Yankees will be in the fifth and sixth year of
>his contract when he's making $17M per?
I doubt they'll care having won so many WS in the previous seasons.
>How long before Pettite and Riveria want new contracts along the lines
>of Mussina's?
They'll cross that bridge when they come to it - not jump off of it like
Angelos.
>
>How much good would Mussina have been to the O's given the fact they are
>rebuilding?
>Would the run support plague that affected him last year continued into
>this year and beyond??
He would be as good as he always is. The quality of the team behind him is not
his responsibility. The run support will be worse because we no one to generate
any offense.
>
>If the O's were going to spend that much money I would much rather see
>them throw in a couple more mill and get Rameriz or Rodregiez<sp>.
>
>Given his durability and continued maturity Ponson may be a better
>pitcher over the next few years if he can get some decent run support.
>Although he may be another year away from being a top tier pitcher.
If Mussina was 36 I might buy that reasoning, but he's at his peak. Even a
slide wouldn't drop him to Ponson territory for a while yet.
>And yes it is a VERY scary thought having Mercedes and McElory as yor #2
>and 3 starters. But who knows..There are 4 or 5 other starters that
>could step up next year.
No different than a dozen other clubs with unproven youngsters. No sure things
anywhere in sight. The ONE we had is now wearing pinstripes.
Dan Szymborski
Mort...@webtv.net says...
> As much as I hated to see Mike go,almost as much as when the Colts left
> I have to say that Angelos made the right decision here. The position
> that he took that paying a player that pitches every fifth day 14M is
> economic insanity makes a lot of sense to me.
Given the marginal revenue product of a win, Mussina at 14 million
dollars is pretty close to break-even.
> Sure Mussina is an
> outstanding pitcher but is he really _that_good?
Yes. Stars are always worth the money. Every other player on the
Orioles is completely and easily replaceable.
> If so, why didn't
> Cleveland Chicago or the Red Sox made a more serious offer given their
> serious need for a stud starter?
How do we know we didn't? We already know that the Red Sox have offered
*Neagle* close to 11 million a year.
> The only reason the Yankees were able
> to do it was because of their $100M TV contract.
Any team could afford Mike Mussina, given the reasonably predictable
nature of revenue increases in MLB.
> How many pennants has Kevin Brown brought the Dodgers?
Irrelevant. This isn't basketball.
> No doubt Mike will do well in NY given their bullpen and he can throw
> his 7 innings and get out and nurse his assortment of nagging injuries.
> I wonder how happy the Yankees will be in the fifth and sixth year of
> his contract when he's making $17M per?
> How long before Pettite and Riveria want new contracts along the lines
> of Mussina's?
>
> How much good would Mussina have been to the O's given the fact they are
> rebuilding?
He's still likely to be better than any player in the Orioles
organization in 6 years.
There *is* no rebuilding. The farm system *still* consists essentially
of bad position players and pitchers with serious question marks. The
Orioles are apparently making long-term plans around Richard, Mora, and
Fordyce. The Orioles are seriously pursuing Wakefield and Gordon and a
few other pointless acquisitions.
Take the Pirates' "rebuilding" over the last 5 years. Take away Kendall,
Giles, Wilson, and Ramirez. Bingo. The Baltimore Orioles.
> Would the run support plague that affected him last year continued into
> this year and beyond??
>
> If the O's were going to spend that much money I would much rather see
> them throw in a couple more mill and get Rameriz or Rodregiez<sp>.
>
> Given his durability and continued maturity Ponson may be a better
> pitcher over the next few years if he can get some decent run support.
> Although he may be another year away from being a top tier pitcher.
> And yes it is a VERY scary thought having Mercedes and McElory as yor #2
> and 3 starters. But who knows..There are 4 or 5 other starters that
> could step up next year.
> Hopefully Parrish can settle his brain down and take avantage of his
> great stuff.
> I think Spurgeon is ready now.Towers may also be close.
>
> Flame away guys i know its coming!!
>
>
>
>
>
--
Dan Szymborski
Cze...@mindspring.com
"Experience is a revelation in the light of which we renounce our errors
of youth for those of age."
- Ambrose Bierce
Basil T
Dan Szymborski <Cze...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> There *is* no rebuilding. The farm system *still* consists
essentially
> of bad position players and pitchers with serious question marks. The
> Orioles are apparently making long-term plans around Richard, Mora,
and
> Fordyce. The Orioles are seriously pursuing Wakefield and Gordon and
a
> few other pointless acquisitions.
Actually, at this point, Wakefield might be an okay acquisition. With
Mussina gone and Erickson out, Ponson is the only pitcher who's showed
an ability to sustain a good chunk of innings (and I haven't checked his
PAP count, but insofar as you might buy into that, I bet his workload at
ages 22 and 23 have rated him pretty highly in the age-adjusted area the
last two years). Mercedes has not yet pitched enough MLB innings in a
single season to qualify for the ERA title.
At the least, Wakefield could pitch a sizable amount of innings at a
decent rate (his ERA+ the last 5 years is right around 100, although
admittedly '00 was his worst of the 5). Sort of a poor man's Erickson,
although not _that_ poor.
Aside from the "rebuilding" (to use your specific terminology) effort,
I'm concerned we'll actually have a viable starting five next year. What
if Mercedes goes down, or is ineffective. What if Ponson's arm blows
out. I'm guessing all of Spurgeon, Parrish, and Towers won't break
camp--and even if they did, I'm guessing two of the three would be back
in Rochester by June. McElroy? Heh. We might just need Rapp.
Anyway, it's likely we'll have to sign a FA just to fill a team. Hampton
and Neagle apparently are out of the picture (thankfully, I guess), and
I'm really hoping Appier prices himself out of the O's plans. Ashby too.
So, we'll likely get a second-tier or third-tier FA or two. That
leaves...Wakefield, Trachsel, Castillo, .... ah, I can't remember the
others. We could do worse than Wakefield (although I've heard he's
asking for $5M--yikes!).
Linton, Petey Smith, and the other members of Phi Sucka Sucka (Don
Wengert, Andrew Lorraine, Brad Woodall, lots of additional ex-Cubs) are
awaiting. Like Mr. T, they need work.
--
William "Basil" Tsimpris
btsi...@fec.gov
http://e-sports.com/authorhome.asp?User_ID=419&User_Name=Basil+Tsimpris
"Baseball grabs you early or not at all." --Dewayne Staats
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David Marc Nieporent
Ted <quix...@aol.comnojunk> claimed:
>I agree with you regarding Mussina's value, with one caveat.
>Angelos is just another example of what is wrong with the city of
>Baltimore -- small-minded, crusty and stupid.
There's some sort of major irony in combining those two sentences in one
post.
Anybody who thinks that the best pitcher in the league not named "Pedro"
isn't incredibly valuable doesn't get to call anybody stupid.
--
David M. Nieporent Roberto Petagine for the
niep...@alumni.princeton.edu Hall of Fame
imiss-ny
him on this.
Mary Kolencik
> How much good would Mussina have been to the O's given the fact they are
> rebuilding?
That's just it - they're not rebuilding. They're putzing around.
Morty Fied
decision here that needs to be talked about.
That is the situations with Erickson and Belle. He committed long term
contracts to these guys for big bucks and look what he faced with.
Erickson's out for another year at least and who knows whether he'll
ever be the same pitcher again. Belle may have a degenerative hip
condition which could possibly end his career over the next year or so.
That's close to 20 mill a year down the rathole. Signing Moose for
another 14M would essentially put you in a position given the above
circumstances above of paying 34M for a pitcher who pitches every 5
days.
Fordyce made a good point in his reaction to the Mussina signing
yesterday. He said in essence that Moose could go 21-0 and the O's lose
the rest of the games. Clearly that is an overstatement but it does lead
to the point that you can't afford to tie up too many resources to one
or two players and put a competitive team on the field with what's left.
There are a couple more points I'd like to make and it hurts me to say
both.
I think Moose's feelings were hurt by his perception that Angelos really
didn't want him or appreciate him or what he had done for the
organization over the past 10 years. I think that sense of hurt drove
him to the Yankees as a means of over stating that hurt and "sticking
it" to Angelos knowing how much he hates the Yankees.
I also think this played into Steinbrenner's decision to sign him to get
at Angelos for saying the Yankess have been "lucky" the last few
years.The Yanks would have won the division next year anyway and maybe
the series without Moose so what's the big deal. Just one more tough
pitcher for the opposition to deal with in a playoff situation.
Last but not least...This is strictly MO but..I don't think Mussina
was/is the same pitcher since he got nailed in the eye with that line
drive. While I admire his guts and guile for continuing to pitch
afterwards he just doesn't seem like the same pitcher since. It just
seemed like to_ me_ anyway that before the incident I had VERY high
expectations before he pitched a game.That is was almost a "lock".
I don't know but it seemed to me afterwards that he was sorta "feeling"
his way through a game. The same agressiveness wasn't there.
All that being said I still think Mike's a classy guy and I wish him
luck but its time to move on and hope for the best.
Dan Szymborski
Mort...@webtv.net says...
[...]
>
> Fordyce made a good point in his reaction to the Mussina signing
> yesterday. He said in essence that Moose could go 21-0 and the O's lose
> the rest of the games.
Personally, I find it completely hysterical that a mediocre 30 year-old
catcher who just signed a long-term deal can, with a straight face, imply
that signing Mike Mussina wouldn't help rebuild the franchise.
Catfish
a
> slide wouldn't drop him to Ponson territory for a while yet.
I agree fully. Mussina's pitching style is consistent with longevity. His
mechanics lessen stress on his shoulder and elbow, so he is a great bet to
make it through the contract without an arm blowout; he doesn't rely on an
overpowering fastball, so a velocity drop would not be fatal to his chances
either.
The real tragedy here is that Mussina was signable last off-season. That's
when Angelos needed to get it done. But he's such a shrewd negotiator, he
decided to give Moose a chance to lessen his value by falling flat on his
face.
How can you treat your franchise player like this. Make no mistake about
it, Moose was the franchise player. With a popgun offense, having him go
every 5th day at least gave you some hope, and something to build around.
Now, there is NO PLAYER ON THIS TEAM who qualifies as a franchise player.
Nobody who you can point to and say, "We'll build around him".
Angelos pulled this same routine with Raffy, and the suckling pigs of the
press bought into the "we don't want to block Pickering" line when Raffy got
away.
Now they print crap about the wisdom of long term contracts for pitchers.
In general, its true. But this guy was as low-risk as you are ever going to
get. Now, he may get hurt and prove me wrong, but risk/reward analysis
says you have to sign him. Last year for 12.5M, this spring for 13M, this
fall for 14.5M, take your pick, just get it done.
Finally, Angelos' bull about not giving one guy "Half of what I paid for
this franchise" gets passed along by the press without critical comment.
Albert got damn close to that amount, and the claim was "we had to keep the
Yankees from getting him".
Why is Moose different?
Angus McPuffin
<Cze...@mindspring.com> wrote:
-snip-
>> If so, why didn't
>> Cleveland Chicago or the Red Sox made a more serious offer given their
>> serious need for a stud starter?
>
> How do we know we didn't? We already know that the Red Sox have offered
> *Neagle* close to 11 million a year.
The rumor was that the BoSox actually offered Mussina a larger total
package than the Yankees. Not a big difference, to be sure, but more.
They also offered Neagle more than what he got to sign with the
Rockies.