It's amazing to me that an organization that prides themselves on doing absolutely anything to win would sign Sexson over Bonds. Collusion? There's certainly a case to be made atleast.

I wouldn't say it's Sexson over Bonds. It's not like they had to choose one or the other.

That there may be a conspiracy keeping Bonds out of the game is entirely possible. And if there is, then the Yankees are just 1 of 30 teams pretending that Bonds couldn't help them.

As far as Sexson goes, he'll cost 200K for the balance of the season (if he sticks) and should help a team that is slugging below .400 vs LHP. There is no way that Sexson figures into the plans vs RHP, even with injuries to Damon and Matsui. If he does see playing time vs RHP, then the criticism should definitely be heaped on Cashman et al.

Both Sexson and Bonds are basically DH's at this point in their career. If they aren't playing there, they should be.

Sexson was acquired to boost an offense that's been struggling somewhat, which is what a Bonds signing would try to achieve.

So yes, this is exactly like taking Sexson over Bonds. And it doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at their respective '07 stats. I smell collusion.

No, it's not.  Sexson is signed at league minimum to be a 25th man, as a right-handed DH and pinch-hitter against LOOGies.  The Yankees (save for the Horace Clarke years) always kept one of these guys around, as did Earl Weaver. Bonds would be an everyday DH, and not be signed for the minimum.  If the Yanks signed him, they would have to figure out what to do with Giambi and Posada, both of whom are defensive liabilities now.

Bonds' agent also mentioned that he would be willing to play for league minimum.  Collusion?  Darn tootin'

Link that also mentions that it would be prorated and will also play for free and give the minimum to local charity...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/06/25/bonds.independent.league.ap/index.html

 

Maybe do a little bit more digging Mike...

I am not saying that it's not collusion (it wouldn't be the first time for the owners, and it won't be the last), but merely pointing out that Bonds and Sexson are not the same in terms of role.  The comparison would be between Frank Thomas and Bonds...

According to XM radio, quoting philly.com, the Phillies have obtained Joe Blanton from the A's for 3 minor leaguers.  Another Burnett door closes.

Looks like the Phillies are out of the A.J. Burnett sweepstakes, Rotoworld is reporting they have acquired Joe Blanton for three as-of-yet unnamed prospects.

I wonder if the Jays asking price for Burnett was too high, or if the Phils just decided they liked Blanton more.  Even through Jay-biased eyes, I think I'd have to prefer Burnett over Blanton, but I think Blanton has another year of arbitration left, while Burnett has the awkward contract situation.

Assuming he got either Carrasco or Marson here, props yet again to Billy Beane.  Their system is now absolutely loaded again, and the A's should be very competitive over the next couple of years.

Beane did not get Carrasco or Marson but apparently he did get Cardenas who is a very nice prospect (although apparently not a SS due to defensive issues).  This would have been a good trade for the Jays to make, in my view.

The A's have reportedly received shortstop Adrian Cardenas, pitcher Josh Outman and outfielder Matthew Spencer. Beane didn't get Carrasco, Marson or Donald if these reports are true, but Cardenas was the other shortstop the Jays were reportedly interested in for Burnett. He's in High-A and a couple of years younger than Donald. Outman's a left-handed starter at Double-A and he's the other good prospect in the deal. Spencer is an outfielder struggling in High-A and looks to be more of a throw-in.

Cardenas and Outman were ranked as the 2nd and 4th best prospect in the system at the beginning of the year by Baseball America.

Shaun Marcum started tonight for Dunedin.  Two perfect innings so far.

How does Beane do this! Cardenas is ranked by some as the #1 prospect in their system and Otman is top 10 in their system. Blanton is more durable and younger, but damn it! So this leaves the Dodgers and Cards as the possible suitors left. It's looking more and more like all we'll get for Burnett is a supplemental pick.

Mike Green, Bonds has already said he'd be willing to take the minimum (and even give that portion to charity).

So yes, again, it's exactly like they chose Sexson over Bonds.

Billy Beane obviously subscribes to Branch Rickey's dictum that it is better to get rid of a pitcher a year too early than a year too late.

So I took a little time today to look at the stats at the All-Star break, and discovered a few interesting things.

First, the Yankees. Quick quiz: can you identify Player A and Player B from their stats at the break? They're both shortstops, and they both play for American League teams. Both have seen their 30th birthday come and go. Player A is at .284/.395/.345 (AVG/SLG/OBP), with five stolen bases in seven tries. Player B is at .269/.354/.354, with two stolen bases in three tries. From this, we can surmise that Player A is a bit better, but not a lot better: he's slugging a bit more, but his on-base percentage is lower. And his salary is way, way higher.

Have you guessed who they are yet? Player A is Derek Jeter... and Player B is David Eckstein. Whoosh: what a comedown for Saint Derek, the patron saint of people who spend way too much time idolizing athletes. And it's not as if Mr. Jeter is playing good defense to make up for his declining offense. Father Time may have caught another one, methinks. I'm not a Jeta Hata - it isn't his fault that grown men fawn over him as if he were a God - but I can't help but be pleased by this news.

No one has talked about it much around here - as the focus has been on the horrible series of gruesome road accidents that is Blue Jays Baseball, 2008 Edition - but the Yankees are in the process of dropping like a rock. Despite a payroll of roughly a hillion jillion dollars, the Yanks are at 50-45, and might be a bit lucky to be even there (the Jays have roughly the same runs scored/runs allowed ratio). The Yanks' fabled offense has scored only 37 more runs than that of the Jays, who are universally condemned for having bats of spaghetti. And all their best players are venerable: Matsui, Damon, A-Rod, Jeter, Abreu, Posada and Giambi, the Yanks' seven best hitters when ranked in order of batting average, are all over 30, and most are well over 30. Their best pitchers, except for Joba the Hutt, are Rivera, Mussina and Pettitte, all of whom are approaching their Oatmeal Years.

And it's going to be difficult for the various members of the Steinbrenner family to wield their mighty wallets to replenish their roster. Most everybody else is making enough money now to keep their star players. And there aren't as many overpriced veterans in their late 30s available. And and, Steinbrenner and Stein Junior are not likely to be patient enough to wait for Kennedy and Hughes, or anybody else, to develop into quality starting pitchers, if they ever will. The Yanks are used to ordering star pitchers as if from a menu: "I'd like a Clemens with a side order of Kevin Brown. And make it snappy."

If that isn't enough evidence to prove that the Yanks are doooooomed: they're giving starts to Sidney Ponson. Sidney Ponson! Enough said.

Moving on to Tampa Bay. The first thing I noticed when looking at the Somewhat More Saintly Rays' stats is Evan Longoria. He's pretty good, isn't he? Of course, it is his first time through the league: big league pitchers haven't figured out how to get him out yet. And his on-base percentage, even now, is only .348, and he's striking out a lot. I like him, but he's got one more step to take. Eric Hinske looked pretty good in his rookie year, too, before the league caught up to him. (Does anybody else find it disturbing that Evan Longoria's name is startlingly similar to Eva Longoria's? I'm suffering from image clash: it's as if a bikini-clad woman has been patrolling third base in Tampa Bay.)

Speaking of Eric Hinske: what the? He's whacked thirty extra-base hits before the break, is 7 for 9 in stolen bases, and is walking a fair bit. Did he finally make the adjustments that various batting coaches in two countries have been begging him to make for years, or is this something of a fluke? He's batting .267, even now, so you've got to figure he'll drop off a bit. Maybe not having to deal with that annoying guy who used to scream at him all the time when he came into Tampa as a visitor has taken a weight off his shoulders.

Overall, the Rays remind me of the 1983 Jays: a bunch of young players who suddenly got good, peaked in mid-summer, then crashed in the fall. The 2008 Rays have just lost seven in a row; they seem to be reading from the exact same script.

Boston? Yeah, they're good.

Baltimore? Yeah, they're not very good (except for Markakis and Roberts). I'm surprised they're doing this well, even. Maybe Markakis and Roberts will eventually become Yankees. Sigh.

As for the Jays: what's wrong with them is easy to spot. They lack Big Scary Bats. Wells has been hurt twice, Rolen doesn't have power any more, Thomas is in Oakland recovering from a two-month leg injury incurred while running the bases (!!), Hill is still Brain Dizzy and isn't really a scary bat anyway, and Rios is his usual mystery wrapped in a riddle wrapped in an enigma. And the bats that are available have been sapped by the former regime's insistence on working the count. (One positive benefit of Cito's arrival: Rance Mulliniks will no longer be at risk of catastrophic brain aneurysm after becoming terminally frustrated by the Jays' hitters' unwillingness to turn on a fastball. Cito likes to have his hitters zone down and attack.) Give the Jays two or three big bats, and they're right up there.

If there's any ray of hope for the future (and I'm having trouble seeing one), it's that hitters are easier to find than pitchers.

Notes on individual players:

Burnett: to make it in the major leagues as a pitcher, you usually have to have exceptional command. The minor leagues are full of pitchers with great stuff who don't have any idea where it is going. There are a few pitchers who make it to The Show without exceptional command; these pitchers have such good stuff that, as long as they are anywhere near the plate, they can get hitters out just by overpowering them. The Jays have had a few of these over the years: Guzman, Escobar, Koch (for a bit), and now Burnett. A.J. has a wondrous fastball and a sharp-breaking curve, and has never completely mastered either. Perhaps he never will. (Note: I have no idea what Burnett is like as a person, but I don't think his personality has much to do with his talent. Guzman, who has similar stuff and had similar results, was, by all accounts, an intelligent and hard-working player. Without naming names, one or more of the other Jays' hard-throwers weren't either of these, from what I've heard. But the results were the same.)

Rios: Y'know, we should have known exactly what kind of player Alex is by looking at his minor-league record: a bunch of so-so seasons, plus a season or two in which he was just insanely great. The same thing has happened at the major-league level: he has all the talent in the world, but doesn't have complete command of it. For short periods of time, he has played like an MVP; the rest of the time, meh. Since - again - I don't believe talent is a reflection of character, I don't blame Rios for not playing up to his peak at all times. I just hope that somebody can figure out how to give him more control over his considerable abilities. And I also hope that somebody isn't wearing pinstripes.

Halladay: I don't think he wants to leave - I think somebody was just looking for a story angle. At this point, he deserves whatever good things can possibly happen to him, whether here or elsewhere. If circumstances force him to move on, I won't boo him if he's wearing someone else's uniform. But I will be sad beyond words.

Apologies for being so long-winded - it was a slower day at work :-)

Well, if Barry and his agent say it, it must be true. I can't think of any reason they might have to put out misleading information; we all know Bonds has an unimpeachable record of honesty.

If the only question was one of performance and pay, then yeah, you could make a case for collusion. But the fact he's been charged with a serious crime and is reviled by many fans gives just about every team a decent reason not to sign him.

Well, if Barry and his agent say it, it must be true. I can't think of any reason they might have to put out misleading information; we all know Bonds has an unimpeachable record of honesty.

And I'm sure if it wasn't true, he'd be called on his Bull****.   There would be a quote in the SF times from some Random GM saying "I offered Barry League Min and he turned it down". 

No apologies needed Dave.  I enjoyed the read.

IF - ya I know it's a BIG IF - the Jays storm back in the second half - I'll bet my Garney Henley autographed TiCat shirt and my Jessie Barfield autographed baseball that Adam Lind emerges as a star in the second half. IF - Adam does emerge I expect him to pull Rios in his draft. Lind and Rios both power hitting like they're able and this team has a chance to keep us awake till well into September - October - IF we're lucky.

Lot of IF's in that though....

" Father Time may have caught another one, methinks."

I wouldn't celebtare too soon. Jeter's OPS by month. .654/.715/.801/.824. I suspect, by year's end, we'll see an OPS over .800. Jeter might be both the most overrated and underrated player in baseball. 

I think the 1983 Jays comparison to the Rays is apt, but so are a bunch of young teams in history. Some fall apart, others do not. This could easily be nothing more than a blip as much as a full collapse.

"So yes, again, it's exactly like they chose Sexson over Bonds."

If Sexson were indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. I hardly think you can blame teams for not wanting a guy in Bonds' situation. Also, Sexson will slip into the clubhouse and nobody will notice him. Bonds would be a whole new circus.

Whoosh: what a comedown for Saint Derek,

Yankee fans allege that Jeter has been playing hurt, citing a specific HBP after which his numbers have dropped precipitously. So while age may well be taking its toll, there may be some validity to the playing hurt argument.

Eric Hinske looked pretty good in his rookie year, too, before the league caught up to him.

The crucial difference between Hinske and Longoria as rookies is age. Hinske was 24 yrs, 8 mos. Longoria was 22 yrs, 6 mos. That 2-year difference is huge.

Y'know, we should have known exactly what kind of player Alex is by looking at his minor-league record: a bunch of so-so seasons, plus a season or two in which he was just insanely great.

Sounds like Vernon Wells. Check out his entirely uninspired final two years at AAA.

Halladay: I don't think he wants to leave - I think somebody was just looking for a story angle.

I mentioned in another thread that John Smoltz comes to mind as the only prominent pitcher of late who has spent his entire career with one team (Lackey and Webb are both under 30, too young to include in that last). Based on that alone, I would say that the chances of Halladay staying with the Jays until the bitter end are less likely than him eventually moving on.

Also, Sexson will slip into the clubhouse and nobody will notice him.

An impressive feat for someone who stands 6'8".  And relatively speaking, compared to Bonds, he would be unnoticed.

... Halladay staying with the Jays until the bitter end ...

Here's hoping it's not a bitter end, but there's a chance of that.  In the case of John Smoltz sticking with the Braves, well Atlanta was a very good team for all those years.  Sticking with a winner is one thing, sticking with a perpetually-.500 team is another.

If Sexson were indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. I hardly think you can blame teams for not wanting a guy in Bonds' situation

Legal proceedings that have no bearing on the 2008 season, as Bonds won't face a trial until February 2009, if he does then. And name another time that pending legal proceedings have stopped a team signing a player? It hasn't for the numerous players facing charges stemming from, most commonly, DIUs or spousal abuse. 

Whatever you think of Bonds, I'm going to guess 99-100% of fans had no problem cheering for the 2004 Jays, with Terry Adams, wife beater, on the team.

The Phillies were already out of the A.J. discussions because they refused to discuss any of Golson, Carrasco or Marson. ANd the Jays (quite rightly) said that if they don't get back someone of that level they will just wait for the compensatory draft picks.

 

At least that is the rumour, and it makes sense.

Whatever you think of Bonds, I'm going to guess 99-100% of fans had no problem cheering for the 2004 Jays, with Terry Adams, wife beater, on the team.

I don't recall much of anyone cheering when Terry Adams was on the mound, but that's probably beside the point. Half of those fans probably didn't even know who Adams was, let alone what legal problems he was having. Bonds, on the other hand, travels in a constant cloud of media scrutiny. And even if the fans are hypocrites, they're still the ones buying tickets, merchandise, and driving TV ratings.

The fact we're talking about the Yankees makes the idea of collusion even more absurd. These are the Yankees, Steinbrenner's Yankees, the team that'll spend just about anything on anyone if they think it's the right move. They've got steroid-poster-boy Giambi, and A-Rod, who may be approaching Bonds' Unpopularity Award. If they really thought Bonds was a good idea, would they turn it down just because Selig was worried MLB would look bad? What incentive do the Yankees have to play nice with everyone else?

Actually, it's completely the other way around. The Yankees have never had a problem signing unlikeable guys before in their goal to win, why would they suddenly stop and choose the route of mediocrity in Sexson?

So, what about the Yanks vs the Jays in age?

Offense:

• Jays: 31.6 yrs old, 3 regulars under 30 (Hill 26, Rios 27, Wells 29) plus Lind (24) who will be listed as the regular in LF after another 15 games started.  Regulars over 35 are Zaun (gone after this year most likely, replaced by kid from AAA or AA) and Stairs (to be replaced by Snider if he hits well enough).
• Yankees: 31.3 yrs old, 2 regulars under 30 (Cano 25, Cabrera 23) both with OPS+ in the low 70's.  Regular over 35 is Giambi (free agent and gone most likely after this year).  Posada has played just 49 games and is listed as a backup at the moment but is there for a few years to come

Pitching:

• Jays: 28.6 yrs old, 3 regular starters out of 5 are under 27, none over 31.  Only guy over 32 used this year was Benitez
• Yankees: 30.5 yrs old, only 2 regular starters over 30 out of the 7 to have 5 or more starts, 3 under 24 but only Joba has an ERA+ above 100 of the sub-30 crew (Wang is at 100 on the nose)

Looking at the age groups the Jays have the better young hitters and the Yanks young pitchers (outside of Joba) would not make the Jays staff.  Going forward will this stay the same?  Hard to say but for pitching the signs are not as good as they appear as McGowan is DL'd with something that could be long term repeatable and Litsch still seems to be doing it with mirrors.  Guess we'll see in '09 and beyond

What about free agents?  The lifeblood of rich teams, and an area the Jays have used a fair amount.
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2002/02/2008-09-free-agents.html
Not much out there that catches my eye right away.  Most good players are now signed before free agency hits, suggesting many teams expect an inflationary spiral to occur with anyone who reaches that stage.  Thus any and all improvements must come from within or via trade. 

Top 20 prospects (BA) - Yankees 1 (Joba), Jays 1 (Snider).
Top 21-40 prospects (BA) -Yankees 1 (OF Jose Tabata), Jays none
Top 41-60 prospects (BA) - Yankees 2 (OF Austin Jackson, P Ian Kennedy), Jays none
Top 61-80 prospects (BA) - none for either
Top 81-100 prospects (BA) - none for either

So the Yanks have 4 of the top 100, all in the upper half, while the Jays have just Snider.  Oops.  I'd rather not count the Rays total (4 in just the top 20).

The Jays and Yankees could be fighting it out for 3rd for the next couple of years with the youth of the Rays and the overall quality of the Sox.  Sigh.  From one purgatory (3rd all alone behind the Yanks and Sox) to another (fight for 3rd with the Yanks behind the Rays and Sox).  Lets hope that Bud decides that another round of playoffs is just the ticket for MLB as that appears the only way to make it in the tough and getting tougher AL East.

FYI: If we had the NHL/NBA method of playoffs (8 teams per league) the Jays would now be 10th, 2 1/2 games behind Texas for the final slot with the Tigers inbetween them.  They would've made it in '07, 7 games up on the 9th place team.

The Yankees have never had a problem signing unlikeable guys before in their goal to win, why would they suddenly stop and choose the route of mediocrity in Sexson?

For one thing, Sexson's not mediocre of his job is to hit left-handed pitching.

Aside from that, one could suggest there hasn't been a player with Bonds' reputation in a long time - not just unlikeable, but a cheater, and whose cheating brought about serious criminal charges. The Yankees may be ruthless, but they've always had standards, too. (And yes, they've signed the likes of Giambi and Clemens, but not after the steroid allegations came out.)

That may or may not be a plausible excuse. But is it any less so than "Because Bud Selig asked them not to?"

One does wonder just how much Bud hates Bonds and how much pressure he has put on teams and what hammer he used.  In MLB history many others have done disgusting, publicly repulsive things without being left in the cold to this degree.  From wife beating, to drugs, to who knows what.  The Yankees in the 90's kept signing Steve Howe no matter how often he was suspended for drug violations (I think it ended after 8 times getting caught). At least until Howe stopped being a good left handed reliever that is in 1996.  That was with Steinbrenner as owner and their current GM.  More recently teams like Washington keep taking in guys who have been caught on steroids or who have done things that brought about criminal charges with no problems. 

There is something up with Bonds and I suspect there is a lot more to his story than we may ever know.  Right now I wouldn't be surprised to find that Bud wants to clear out all the steroid guys (and the ugly publicity each would get individually if they were first timers in different years) in one swoosh for the HOF voting in 5 years with Clemens, Bonds, and Sosa being up for election all at once along with the guys who have been hanging around for years (McGwire of course plus Palmeiro who will have been on the ballot a bit by then).  5 guys eating up slots on the HOF ballot with some new method being put in place to allow them all to be cleared out fairly quickly.  I know the HOF is a seperate thing from MLB ownership and that the media voters are again seperate but I suspect he is applying pressure from behind the scenes on both.  Perhaps something that says if a guy goes down in percent voted for two years in a row he is automatically removed just as he would be with under 5% of the vote.

FYI: that ballot for guys retired in 2007 will also include Craig Biggio (3000 hits and a clean rep) and Curt Schilling (unless he somehow makes it back) who both are 'character' guys who are easy for the HOF & MLB to sell to the public.  Boy that will be a crowded ballot with lots of holdovers and stuff.  At least 7 guys who would've been locks without the drugs plus 2 guys who are generally viewed as locks as well and just 10 slots on the ballot.

I don't understand the Bonds/Sexson comparison.

Right now, the Yankee depth chart lists Jason Giambi and Wilson Betemit as the top two options at both 1B and DH. And even if Bonds was a viable LF still -- questionable at best -- though he would almost certainly be a clear improvement over Brett Gardner and Justin Christian, you're still left with the "Wilson Betemit is actually spending time at 1B?" conundrum.

So Sexson is cheaper, he provides more flexibility, he's younger and he's way (WAY, WAY) less controversial. What's the question?

"So Sexson is cheaper, he provides more flexibility, he's younger and he's way (WAY, WAY) less controversial. What's the question?"

If that's your only criteria then the Yankees signing *me* to a contract would be logical.

"If that's your only criteria then the Yankees signing *me* to a contract would be logical"

Can you hit lefthanders? :)

If that's your only criteria then the Yankees signing *me* to a contract would be logical.

I wonder why you haven't been signed. There are 30 teams out there that haven't offered you a contract. I smell collusion...

There is one other factor in the Yankees signing you to a contract. You have to already establish yourself as a "big money" type player, preferably already having been signed to an incredulously large contract by some other team. You can only play for the Yankees if you can demonstrate that you believe you are worth a lot of money and that some other major league team may think or have thought that you are worth a lot of money. If you aren't already pulling in 8 figures annually, you need not apply.

Otherwise you just wouldn't fit in with the Yankees clubhouse.

And if you think you'd like to play for free? No way you are going to join. There's no room for freeloaders or guys who would donate their salary to charity.

The Sexson is good against LHP still is a sample size myth.  In 2007 against LHP he hit 238/333/438, in 2006 he hit 204/325/438... its only this year he's been some uber lefty masher.  His career stats against LHP are a bit better than against RHP (265/369/510 vs 260/336/507).  

Barry Bonds hit 265/470/521 against LHP last year and 255/451/519 in 2006 for comparisions sake, although I don't think there is much argument that Sexson is a better player than Bonds.