I don't believe the tickets have gone on sale yet. There's a "lottery" for the privelage to buy tickets to see the oh so wonderful Red Sox. Oh joy!

I should be going to 2 or 3 of the Sox games. With our season tickets we got our standard 2 tickets plus an opportunity to buy 3 sets of 4. I grabbed 2 tickets for the first game in the draft of tickets and I will probably be partaking in the extras as well. Wade is a Sox fans, so hpoefully he can go with.

Anyway, the state of the Nationals is a mess. There are teams that are probably worse, attendance wise (Florida for instance) but it's pretty rough. It is a new team, but I would hope in a market like this that they would be doing better. They just need to win and maybe people will start to care.

Hm, I just looked it up and the Nationals were 15th last year in PCT attendance (69.2%). 19th in AVG attendance (29,005). It's not as bad as people think, but you would expect more in a season with a new stadium. They were well ahead of Baltimore in both categories, which is an important number, particularly considering the attendance Baltimore gets for New York and Boston games.

The real question for the Nats:

1) How much will the pay for Strasburg

2) Will they bring him up immediately

It's weird- for as much crap as everyone gives the Royals, I can't remember the last time they didn't sell out Opening Day within an hour or two of single game tickets going on sale. It's harder once the season gets started because there's just not the same population base to draw from so the numbers drop but you can never get Opening Day tickets.

SI

Why is Jay Bruce not playing center?

This will indeed be interesting. Obviously whether they bring him up will depend on how he plays -- I can't imagine them calling him up without first playing a few starts in the minors, but maybe Boras is going to attempt to make that part of the deal somehow. I've mentioned it before, but I think the Nats have to tread lightly here -- they lost their 1st RoundDraft pick last year because they couldn't sign a deal. AS others have mentioned, the reality is that it doesn't hurt the team much, but I worry about the image it gives to potential fans.


I think I would rather average 29,000 in attendance and not sellout opening day than have a 20,000 average attendance and sell out opening day. :) KC barely cracks 1.5mil in attendance for a year.

I fnothing else it is, again, an image thing. At the end of the year I can load up espn.com and get these numbers, and it tells me nothing about opening day. In addition, as I alluded to, "we" want to sell more tickets than the Orioles. There's a quote around somewhere from Angelos where he says that a team would not be successful in Washington. So I get joy each year when the Nationals have a higher attendance number.

Having said that, I just looked and KC spends JUST a little more on their payroll, so take that for what it's worth (KC #25, $58m, WAS #26, $55m). That's 2008, though, and 2009 includes, if nothing else, Dunn and the aforementioned Strasburg.

Maybe it seems sad because it's the Nats & they're still relatively new in town or something but you can get two in the field level just past first base for the Braves home opener right now. Then again, you could say that pretty often.

Why anybody would pay $45 buck a pop ($40 + $5 to Ticketmaster), plus parking plus concessions to watch this incarnation of the Braves escapes me frankly. And it's about $10 more per ticket in DC for a similar, or slightly worse, location. $55 for starters for a team that lost 102 games last year? Who in their right mind?

Living in a city with a minor league team, I'm stoked that we can get 4 seats behind home plate for $40 and have a great time. I haven't been to a major pro league sporting event in years. I've been wanting to go to a Reds game just because we live close enough, but haven't gotten around to it. But we'll hit 8-10 Lexington Legends games this year, I'm sure.

I miss the Macon Braves. Gwinnett is about as close but hasn't opened, would really like to hit the Rome Braves at some point (where my dad is from) but it's on the opposite side of the state for me now & a bit of a pain.

What we do have here in Athens though, and I'm planning to check out for the first time this year, is one of those semi-pro/summer league teams, the Athens Pirates.
Mostly departing college seniors looking to up their chances of being drafted or signed, as they call it "pre-professionals, some JUCO kids trying to get scholarship offers to finish their college careers. The Great South League
has now expanded to include 20 teams across 6 states. My hope is that it'll be reasonably competitive ball, which is the biggest thing for a good baseball game to watch.

In one of those odd things that apparently happens with teams like this, the upcoming roster includes 4 players from Siena, 4 from NY Tech, and 3 from Alcorn State. Previous alums of the team include Washington's John Lannan and top Twins prospect Mike McCardell.

The one thing I do miss about living in Norfolk was going to go see the Tides for such a rediculously low amount of money. I think it was something like 7 bucks, and you could basically sit anywhere, as long as it wasn't packed.

We do have a rookie ball team around here, but I've at least heard of a few of the AAAers. I'll probably try to check out a game though, this year.

I'd wager they won't want him throwing much more than 200 innings this year. So, I'd guess 2 minor league starts, and assuming he doesn't look retarded, he'll be around for about 5-6 major league ones before getting shut down for the year.

...and I got in on the lottery, so on April 2 I can buy up to 4 tickets to each of the 3 games.

The Phillies have named Chan Ho Park the #5 starter today.

Well, that World Championship was nice while it lasted. :(

Has anyone started the "Chan Ho Park Blows, Year X" thread for this year yet?

SI

It's much more fun to just bump the prior one...you don't know what kind of stat line you're about to see.

I agree- that's why I said it's all about numbers- KC doesn't have the people in the metropolitan area to draw 45K or even 30K nightly with a bad team. It just seems odd to me that they have seats for Opening Day when they average 29K per year- those ~15K extra fans should be easy to find for a premium game. Then again, it's a week after the season starts so that probably has something to do with it.

SI

Phillies are looking at Sheffield

awesome. if you're offering then i'll check dates and prices and all that shit tomorrow.

if you want them all then i can just always buy them on stubhub i'm sure

I'm going to buy 4 for each game no matter what. I will probably do best available with some possible adjustments based on location. If you're used to fenway prices this would be a cake walk. ;) I should end up with extras, though. It hsouldn't be hard to unload them -- I think I've had enough friends ask to fill it almost, so I'm not worried about being stuck with tickets. If you need to work something out early, we can talk. If not, I can let you know what's going on when the games get closer, but it's a very good possibility that I can make 2 or 4 tickets available for you.

who knows, maybe someone will pitch a no no

you ass-face! :D

sounds good. really good. i may sound out a friend or something just for shits.

Eh, sure, why not. That would unquestionably give them the best defensive outfield in the league, when he's paired with Ibanez.

Still, very humorous that Sheff got cut with 499.

I think Amaro just likes acquiring players whom are on his favorite baseball cards

Ross Gload banished from the Royals to Florida today so Trey Hillman is not tempted to use "grit" as too much of a determining factor when he puts together his lineup. He still has Willie Bloomquist to pencil into the starting lineup too much, tho.

SI

What do bad hands have to do with how much ground he can cover? And whether he's infinitely better than Willy Tavaras?

20 year old Rick Porcello makes the Tigers rotation, as does 2008 1st rounder Ryan Perry. Perry will pitch 6th/7th inning most likely. Features a 100 mph FB and so far seems tough as nails.

Going to be interesting.

Defensively he's almost certainly not better than Taveras. Taveras is average to slightly above average in range, while Bruce is better suited to a corner spot. Certainly a combo of Taveras/Bruce is far better defensively than Bruce/Griffey. The issue isn't Bruce or Taveras, or IMO even having Taveras on the team, the issue is letting one of the worst OBPs on the team bat first just because he can steal bases.

Sidney Ponson and Horacio Ramirez are the 4th and 5th starters for the Royals.

Who on earth thinks they are a sleeper team if 40% of their starts are going to be made by this duo or by people that couldn't beat them out for the spots?

Is there honestly nothing better in the Royals' system?

Brian Bannister and Luke Hochevar would be better but hey, if the Royals want to throw Ponson and Ramirez out there to start the season only to realize they were wrong in about a month and a half, that's fine by me.

The "good" news is that Ramirez will get all of one start in April and will pitch mainly out of the 'pen. Banny has looked bad this spring- he needs something to get his confidence back and head on straight as neither has been true since last April. Hochevar- I dunno. I think they might be trying to stretch out his arby clock but that's the best I can guess. Both of them in the rotation is a joke.

SI

I fully expect Hochevar to be the 5th starter by early to mid-May and Ramirez will be in the bullpen. If that happens, Ramirez will only make two or three starts. My impression is that they want Hochevar to get consistant starting work every 5th day in April.

Ponson will do until Bannister gets his head screwed back on straight again.

Royals now have 56 homers in spring training with Teahan hitting one every 9 at-bats. I don't care who you're facing. That's a lot of homers and the other teams are facing the same pitching fodder that the Royals are seeing.

So you're saying he's on HGH?

Banny just hasn't had his head on straight in a year and he needs to be in Omaha working things out so I'm just fine with that move- it had to be done or he's going to get lit up. Also, in the end, it's easy to say that it's just 2 or 3 games tops and gaining an extra year of Hochevar's MLB service while sticking it to Boras is always good. But I don't think that's the truth.

Problem is that Hochevar is our 4th best pitcher, not 5th best so he should get that #4 spot not number 5 spot. Having him out there for 30 games in a season and innings sponges Ponson, Duckworth, Ramirez, whoever for 20 would be what's best for the Royals. However, having Ponson out there for 30 and Hochevar out there for 20 is a big difference.


I could hit 56 home runs off my sister in a little league park but it doesn't mean much. I could also sit there and take walks all day if my paycheck isn't really on the line and I'm being told to do it so it looks like I'm working with coach like I'm supposed to. But when it counts, let's see what they do. If Teahen would like to revert back to 2nd half 2006 Teahen, I would be really happy- he was everything you could want in a hitter: power, average, took walks, even had the look of being "clutch" (I know, it doesn't really exist).

SI

The Royals are know as one of the cleaner organizations during the steroid era. We obviously need to cheat more.

Obviously, the Royals were not good enough at cheating ;)

SI

I'll be shocked is Strasburg pitches in the majors this year. Hell, I'll be shocked if he signs any sooner than August 15 at about 11:59 PM. By that point he won't have pitched in a game in months, so it'd be in their best interests to hold him back until next year.

Also, I saw it mentioned that the Nats didn't sign their first round pick last year, but didn't see it mentioned that they get that pick again this year. They'll have two picks in the top 10, since they picked at 9 last year and get slotted right behind the 9th pick this year. While I highly doubt that will factor into their decision with the first pick, it will be interesting to see if they go cheap with their second pick. If they don't, they could receive quite the influx of talent into their system this year.

Strasburg may be the exception for Boras as far as getting his picks signed quickly. If he can get Strasburg in the majors this year it gets his service clock ticking and the big payday is that much closer.

I guess that's possible, but I don't think it'll play out like that. Boras is going to try and get the most money possible, bottom line. He's going to try and set the bar for rookie contracts. Just look at the rumored $50 million/6 year deal. There's no way he gets that, but he's going to get the most money in draft history. He'll sign a major league deal, which will ensure he moves fast. Plus, MLB doesn't like it when deals are made for above slot, so they try and hold the announcements back until right before the deadline. I think, taking all these factors into account, that he'll debut sometime in late May/early June 2010.

Dude, the Giants lead the ML in homers during spring training. This is the same team, with the same players, that hit less than 100 all season last year. Spring stats don't mean anything.

Ichiro has been held out the last few days with what has been reported as fatigue, presumably from his effort in the WBC. The team sent him to a doctor today as a precaution, and they announced earlier tonight that they'd present the results to the media tomorrow. One would think if the results were routine and there was no news, they'd have said that, but who knows.

Obviously M's fans are crossing their fingers that the news tomorrow isn't bad on Ichiro.

This is great news. Can you say "Strasburg"?

EDIT: NM..I forgot that this seasons draft is based on last seasons record. Bad news, indeed.

The news on Ichiro - he's been suffering from a bleeding ulcer and will start the season on the 15-day DL.

So Sheffield sounds like he'll be a Met soon ... Not sure wtf the Mets are doing. Sheff is an all time favorite of mine, but this has bad news written all over it.

Scapegoat of 2009 ;)

Not sure why this is bad for the Mets. They need corner OF help and he may be able to provide it. If its a cheap incentive laden deal, I say go for it.

Are there any racists on the Mets?

He cannot play the field. At all. Plus Sheff is not going to be happy once his role is limited, which it will be, and sure they can cut him, but I won't be shocked when he poisons the room before it happens.

and he's a roid-head right?

fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck

Shitty day to be a Met and Giant fan

Did Omar forget that we were looking for a RH power bat?

I'm perfectly fine with taking a chance of Sheff considering how bad they need another corner OFer.

ok, I really hate this move.

I am sure at first Sheffield will be a good soldier, but how soon before he starts to bitch about playing everyday?

He is a total black hole in the field, but at least Beltran can somewhat cover that shortcoming.

The only way I see this as a positive is they can get him some starts at first and let Delgado rest more. They have commited to Murphy as the everyday LF and before Church got hurt he was the Mets best player.

I like having a big bat on the bench, but really is that a role Sheffield will want? I think not.

Sheffield batted .247 and averaged 22 home runs and 66 RBIs in two seasons with the Tigers.

Plus he plays no defense and is a potential cancer. I would rather take my chances with Murphy and Church.

Thank God Jocketty couldn't get Shef in Cincy.

apparently Omar wasn't paying attention when the Mets bought in Mo Vaughn, Rickey Henderson etc...

I am hoping Sheffield will be the difference in the NL East...in the Phillies' favor.

He hit .265/.378/.462 in '07 when he was healthy. Considering Church was an absolute disaster after coming back from his concussion last year I don't see why it isn't worth seeing if Sheff can still hit.

His defense is below average, but not terrible. He can give Delgado a rest at 1b. Personally, I believe clubhouse cancers are an excuse after things go wrong so I think he's worth taking a shot on. Its not like there's a big financial risk here and he can't be released.

I think it is understandable that Church was hurt. I hate the fact that he and Murphy are now going to be looking over their shoulder and possibly pressing.

I hope I am wrong.

I hope he has a resurgence and hits 40 HR, I'll be the first to say I was wrong.

Maybe he can platoon with David Wright.

Sheffield will not play 1B, trust me. He said he'd rather DH then play 1B and he didn't like DHing.

I think Sheffield is going back to SS.

Not only that, but the Mets are paying squat (thanks Tigers!)

(From ESPN.com)

Raul Ibanez > Pat Burrell

I don't think we hold off the Braves/Marlins for the division without Ibanez.

In Amaro/Gillick we trust. :D

I'm glad you pulled that out because I was just thinking about that offseason debate!

Oh and don't forget...David Wright for MVP ;)

Oh, and I'm not above the whole "hoof-in-mouth" thing. I said earlier in this thread that the Nationals would finish ahead of the Braves in the NL East this year.

Not so much.

I do wonder if the Philly fans realize that after May, Ibanez wasn't all that good...

Hell, his numbers post All-Star Break were .233/.326/.449 with 11 HRs and 29 RBIs. He kinda had 2 amazing months and then sucked. Not worth the $$.

Uh, he also got injured, which clearly lingered throughout much of the summer since he got back.

And compared to what Burrell gave the Rays, I'll take those amazing two months in a heartbeat.

Why do you care about money? Are you paying the guy's salary? :)

Obviously once he got hurt he cut out the enhancements!

Fucker drilled a HR when the ball was a centimeter off the dirt.

Also, we could probably say the same thing about the Mets. :)

It might have taken you an extra hour and a half, but it was still pretty good.

Unless you're talking about the Yankees or possibly the Red Sox, salary is a consideration because your favorite team has a limited budged - what Ibanez makes helps determine the rest of the Phillies' roster.

This is obsolete. The Sox ($121mil) are fourth in payroll this season behind the Yankees ($201mil), Mets ($149mil), and Cubs ($134mil). The Sox cut $12mil in payroll from last year, the Yankees cut $8mil, the Mets added $12mil, and the Cubs added $16mil. The Red Sox are certainly willing to spend money on the right players, but they aren't just throwing it around anymore.

Of course salary is "always" a consideration. Even as Greg pointed out, the Yankees and Red Sox are starting to tighten their belts.

But, the argument here was whether the amount the Phillies paid for Ibanez's production would compensate for the cost savings by adding Burrell for the same amount.

Ibanez = approx. 13 million per year for life of deal
Burrell = approx. 8 million per year for life of deal.

Now taking into account the production which Ibanez provided above and beyond what Burrell did, I'm sure the $5 million more cost justifies that.

Further, I still stand by the argument that the difference in production gave the Phillies about ten or more so games won than without Ibanez. Heck, there are games in April/May which he single-handedly won for the team.

If no Ibanez = no playoffs, that also equals no playoff dollars which also help off-set the cost.

In short, I think its funny when fans complain about the dollars that their team spends unless they are (1) small market teams, or (2) A-Rod/Zito/etc. type free agent deals.

People were portraying the Ibanez deal in this thread as if it equaled Soriano/Zito/etc. deals. As seen above, it clearly does not fall into that category.

No player was worth 10 wins, so I doubt you can say that for Ibanez (I have to check fangraphs to see how many wins added he actually was worth though).

I blame Flozell Adams.

Even in this current recession, the Yankees have still been throwing around a crazy amount of money. If there's a player they want, it's highly unlikely they will let salary be an impediment.

I said "possibly" the Red Sox because, up until this year, they've been consistently #2 behind the Yankees in both revenue and payroll, and had started to climb into Yankee territory of not really having to worry about their payroll. That may or may not be changing - I'm not sure one year is enough evidence to buck the larger trend, but we'll see over the next few years.

Mainly, my point was this - most teams have to worry about their payroll budget, some more so than others. The Yankees have the least worry about payroll, and the Red Sox recently haven't been far behind.

It hasn't been a horrible deal so far for the Phillies, but the contract isn't completed yet.

Furthermore, you are vastly overstating the contribution Ibanez has made in saying that he's added 10 wins to their total. That's Barry Bonds at his best territory; not even Albert Pujols has cracked double-digit WAR in his career. According to FanGraphs, Ibanez hasn't even hit 5 WAR so far this season. There's nothing wrong with a 4.2 WAR player - that's a heck of a season. But let's not get carried away.

It's actually gone down 2 years in a row for the Red Sox and will go down next year in all likelihood. Lugo (9m) Smoltz/Penny (10.5m) Jason Bay (7.5) all come off, and even assuming we throw 15m at Holliday or Bay, and another 10 at Lackey or reclamation pitchers we'll end up ahead - only Papelbon is due for a large raise, and if we go for a blockbuster trade like Felix or Adrian Gonzalez they're not making much money in 2010. There just aren't the available free agents to spend money on like CC and Teixeira last offseason.

Pedroia, Lester and Youk are signed to reasonable deals for 3-5 years and Ortiz/Lowell (26m) and Beckett (10m) are coming off in 2010. I think this RS ownership is content to spend in the range they're at now, with more on player development than most teams, as opposed to the last one which outbid the Yankees for big name players like Manny, trying to get that 1st championship.

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't forget about the Mets and Cubs. ;)

MLB Salaries - CBSSports.com

Or the Tigers, Angels, and Phillies, all who are withing 5-8% of the Red Sox payroll. The Red Sox, on the other hand, are within 61% of the Yankees.

As a Yankees fan, the current payroll makes me nauseous. But, it is their money to spend however they choose, and they are in the biggest market. It is better than not trying to win and just cashing in on revenue sharing (i.e., Pirates).

*shrug*

I have no problem with the Yankees spending. I do, on the other hand, think people continuing to equate the RS and Yankees, while ignoring both the disparity between the two and the multitude of teams near the Red Sox, is disengenuous.

Not to mention the pirates never spent money or tried to win, even before revenue sharing.

The Yankees are clearly in a different category, as I've alluded to in all my previous posts. The Red Sox are the next on the list though if you look at their pattern over the last decade. Based off of payroll estimates from Baseball-Reference.com (for 2001-2008) and the CBSSports.com link above (for 2009), the Yankees have averaged a $175M payroll from 2001-2009, rising from $112M to peaks of $208M in 2005 & 2008.

Here's some other notable teams:
Boston: $121M average, low of $100M in 2003, high of $143M in 2007
Mets: $110M average, low of $93M in 2001, high of $138M in 2008
Dodgers: $101M average, low of $83M in 2005, high of $119M in 2008
Cubs: $94M average, low of $65M in 2001, high of $135M in 2009

In each year, here is how each of those team's payrolls compared to the Yankees:

2001: Bos - 98.2%; Mets - 83.0%; Dodgers - 97.3%; Cubs - 58.0%
2002: Bos - 85.7%; Mets - 75.4%; Dodgers - 75.4%; Cubs - 60.3%
2003: Bos - 65.4%; Mets - 76.5%; Dodgers - 69.3%; Cubs - 52.3%
2004: Bos - 69.0%; Mets - 52.7%; Dodgers - 50.5%; Cubs - 49.5%
2005: Bos - 59.6%; Mets - 48.6%; Dodgers - 39.9%; Cubs - 41.8%
2006: Bos - 61.5%; Mets - 51.8%; Dodgers - 50.3%; Cubs - 48.2%
2007: Bos - 75.7%; Mets - 60.8%; Dodgers - 57.1%; Cubs - 52.9%
2008: Bos - 63.9%; Mets - 66.3%; Dodgers - 57.2%; Cubs - 56.7%
2009: Bos - 61.2%; Mets - 67.7%; Dodgers - 49.8%; Cubs - 67.2%

So in 6 of the last 9 years, Boston has had the 2nd highest payroll.

On average, Boston has had 69.0% of the Yankees payroll, the Mets 63.0%, the Dodgers 57.8% and the Cubs 53.7%.

Is there a big gap between the Yankees and everyone else? Yep. Is the gap much closer between #2 and #3? Yep. And perhaps the Mets and Cubs are now going to consistently compete with the Red Sox for the #2 payroll in the game moving forward.

Let's review my original statement:


I still don't feel this is controversial. I guess to make Red Sox fans feel better, I should've added the Mets and Cubs after I said "possibly the Red Sox"; would that really have changed my larger point?

I think there should be some sort of stipulation that a certain percentage of the revenue you get from the revenue sharing has to be put back into the team, not the owner's pocket.

It's cute, but I'm not sure why the Red Sox don't have salary considerations while teams that actually spend more than them do, which was what you said.

I'm sorry, has MLB only existed for the last year?

And please show me the quote where I said the Red Sox don't have salary considerations? I said they were a "possible" exception to the rule that teams have limited budgets. I guess I should've added the Mets to that list of "possible" exceptions too. And maybe with new ownership, the very recent significant rise in the Cubs payroll will continue.

But I fail to see why you get so upset about my statement when for most years in this decade, the Red Sox have been the clear #2 in payroll to the Yankees.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dude wrong thread :)

But I like the excitement

Every time Raul does something big, this thread gets a bump! :D

They're not saying boo.

They're yelling


RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, I don't care what the statistics say. No way Burrell makes that catch.