Red Sox Nation!

[RichBeBe]

Originally Posted by Rob Nye

I thought you had such class because you are a Yankee Fan who isn't a New Yorker.

Born in NY hospital in NYC and have traveled all of the U.S. and much of Europe and some Asia but never left NYC and never plan on leaving.
So I must be classless

[Ritalin Boy]

Originally Posted by RichBeBe

Born in NY hospital in NYC and have traveled all of the U.S. and much of Europe and some Asia but never left NYC and never plan on leaving.
So I must be classless

Just an anomaly then.

[RichBeBe]

Originally Posted by Rob Nye

Just an anomaly then.

[Gary in Indiana]

Originally Posted by RichBeBe

This is why I am not a Red Sox fan I have class

Yes, you do, Rich. But it's all low.

All kidding aside, it's a nice move on your part hanging on to your avatar through the end of the month so no one can raise any questions about your fulfilling the terms of the bet.

As to Gagne, I wouldn't be surprised if he pitches well in 2008. I just don't think he could ever have pitched well in Boston after 2007. He's going to be in the Ntional League as a closer now and that's his comfort level. I don't know whether he had injury problems or head problems or what when the debacle began. I'm sure it got into his head and would have made 2008 a nightmare in Boston.

[Gary in Indiana]

Originally Posted by G-man17

I believe the purpose to offering Gagne arbirtration was to take advantage of the draft pick rule. According to the rules, once Gagne turns down arbirtation, whoever signs Gagne (the Brewers here) have to give the Sox a draft pick. Without the offer of arb--they just lose him to free agency. (I know not much of a loss.)

G-man17, thanks for the explanation. I had wondered if there wasn't something like that involved, but I didn't know. I guess I can take some consolation in that we traded three young players for three draft picks then and just try to forget about Gagne altogether. Part of our trade for him was that if we didn't resign him, we got two first round draft picks from the Rangers. We've drafted and developed players well so maybe this will work out well for us in the long run (at least that's the way I'm going to play it in my mind now).

Do you happen to know what the draft pick we get from Milwaukee might be? What round or within what parameters? Thanks!

[G-man17]

Here is the rule

I don't know how Gagne is classified.

A player with six or more years of major-league service (on the team's 40-man roster) who is not under contract for the following season is eligible to file for free agency.
Teams can receive compensation for the player with a draft pick in the following year's draft in June. To receive compensation, the team must offer the player salary arbitration.
It is then up to the player to either accept arbitration or sign with another team. The team must offer salary arbitration to the player by early December or the team will not be allowed to negotiate with or sign the player until the following May 1. After arbitration is offered, the player has two weeks to accept or refuse salary arbitration. If it is refused, the player can only negotiate with the club until Jan. 7. after which no more negotiation can take place until May 1.
Top free agents are classified as Type A (the top 20 percent at their position as determined by the Elias Sports Bureau), Type B (between 21 and 40 percent at his position). If a Type A free agent who had been offered arbitration signs with another team, the team receives two first-round draft picks the following June – either a first- or second-round pick of the new team (depending on a team's record the previous season) and a “sandwich” pick between the first and second rounds. Type B free agents earn just a “sandwich” pick.
If there are 14 or fewer Type A or Type B free agents available, no team can sign more than one type A or B player. If there are between 15-38, no team can sign more than two. If there are between 39 and 62, there's a limit of three. However, teams can sign as many Type A or B free agents as they've lost, regardless of the limits above.

[AllanC]

I wonder how Gagne's prominent appearance in the Mitchell report on baseball doping will affect his marketability.

And I also wonder if it will have any effect on Clemens. Will he get an asterisk?

[G-man17]

I hate the whole steroid thing. I can't stand the use of any drugs--in sports or in every day life. (I think everyone knows what I mean and I am not talking about caffeine or alcohol.) That said, I believe this commission just sucks. Twenty million to raise suspsicions about peopleand ruin peoples names. What makes me angriest--and it is appropriate here in this forum--is that they used an individual with ties to a particular baseball team. Mitchell is on the Board of the Sox. Funny, about all those active Red Sox players being named. BTW, there have been rumors about Big Poppy floating around for years and what has caused his knees to break down. I say that not to tarnish his image but to piss you off--because you should be pissed off. You shold be pissed at the way this was handled. It is now all about the rumor and innuendo. Not even new rumors but ones that have been thrown around for years. The baseball owners did nothing to enforce the law and the players union protected players by fighting testing for as long as they could, the losers were us the fans. But now they have both gotten religion and so they cough up a few players and say we never knew. BS they new and they more than looked the other way--both the owners and union put pressure on the players to continually up the ante. Now they hire someone to gather blog rumors and have a new witch trial--perhaps, it is not a coincidence that Mitchell is from N.E. Why would they ever have a public airing of the players names? How will these players ever respond? What if one is innocent? How will they get their reputations back? Why were Sosa and Mcguire left of the list of names? I am more disgusted by this farce than I was by the steroid use. I am all for the testing, random testing, testing in the morning, testing in the middle of the night, testing in the off season and testing for any reason and anything, but I am opposed to any trial that does not have a jury and the accused an opportunity to confront their accuser. This just suck!

[Jurgen]

If Baseball truly wants to end the use of Steroids/Hgh etc it has but one choice. No Cooperstown for any implicated. The IOC has the balls to strip medals. I doubt that MLB will have the cojones to strip induction.

Jurgen

[G-man17]

Originally Posted by Jurgen

If Baseball truly wants to end the use of Steroids/Hgh etc it has but one choice. No Cooperstown for any implicated. The IOC has the balls to strip medals. I doubt that MLB will have the cojones to strip induction.

Jurgen

Jurgen I don't disagree with your conclusion. The same in cycling you are stripped of your victories. However, in both cases the accused gets a chance to challenge the evidence and the testing. Here no such challenge is possible. The evidence was proferred by people who were granted immunity to rat others out. I don't care if the rumors are 100% true, this is not how it should be done.

[RichBeBe]

I think the whole steroid thing totally sucks and I am not making excuses for anyone. But how can we make rules about steroids after the fact. As George Mitchell said, we can't punish someone for something they did before there were rules against it.
Not that he will be a hall of famer, but what about Pettite? According to the report he used steroids for treating tendinitis. I have tendinitis in my elbow and my physical therapist mentioned talking to my doctor about taking steroids. I did some research and it is common practice. So if Pettite it did it for that reason should he be banned?
The IOC has very clear rules and enforces them. When baseball makes some clear rules let the punishments begin and be harsh. As it was said everyone was at fault.

[Ritalin Boy]

What were the exact words? "A culture of steroid abuse permeated MLB for the last 10 years" or something to this effect.

Culture?

I think it sucks big time. Imagine a prospect coming up though the farm system in the last 10 years. Along the way he finds out that "everyone" at the top is doping. Now this prospect is saddled with the decision about weather or not to dope up to give himself a "fair" shot at achieving his goals.

I say you put an asterisk on all of MLB for the last decade or so, from the commissioner on down.

I do note that our favorite player to hate (A-Rod) did not appear on any list.

[DoctorIt]

Hi guys how's the snow treating you?

Can you believe the report was big enough news to make it down under? The world series? Not even a mention. Controversial report? 1/2 hour special report and they specially aired the Jim Lehrer New Hour in it's entirety.

Ironic, as Selig mentioned in his press conference, baseball revenue/fan following/popularity have never been better. By any objective metric, drugs have helped baseball. It's only subjectively that we disapprove...

[Odysseus]

I find it curious that the only prominent Red Sox player named in the Mitchell report was Mo Vaughn, a guy who hasn't played for the team since 1998 Unless you want to count the Rocket, who hasn't played in Boston since 1996, and most people associate with the Yankess these days. That and the fact that Paul Byrd's name was leaked to the media prematurely during the playoffs, at exactly the time the Indians had Boston on the ropes, and lots of former and current Yankees are all over this 409 page tome...

It might have been better to appoint an investigator who was a little less partisan.

[G-man17]

Originally Posted by Odysseus

I find it curious that the only prominent Red Sox player named in the Mitchell report was Mo Vaughn, a guy who hasn't played for the team since 1998 Unless you want to count the Rocket, who hasn't played in Boston since 1996, and most people associate with the Yankess these days. That and the fact that Paul Byrd's name was leaked to the media prematurely during the playoffs, at exactly the time the Indians had Boston on the ropes, and lots of former and current Yankees are all over this 409 page tome...

It might have been better to appoint an investigator who was a little less partisan.

I made a similar piont above. In addition, information about the Indiams pitcher just happened to be leaked prior to his game against the sox during the playoffs. There are actually a number of sox players that would have been very high on the list--most prominently David Ortiz. Besides the rumors Ortiz exhibits the classic symptoms of someone who has used steroids, in terms of his body wearing down. My point is the innuendo and rumor mill that Mitchell used as his evidence for public disclosure is compeltely wrong. If they aren't going to bring criminal charges no names should have been provided.