Grant (NYC): Steve, Can you explain how the "playoff share" system works? Since I have no real stake in the game when it comes to the NLCS, I am pulling for the Rockies because they voted to give a share to Michael Coolbaugh's widow.
SportsNation Buzzmaster: The players on each team get a percentage based on where their team finished. The players vote as to which players and staff get shares of the allocation. Some get 100 percent, while players who came in at the trade deadline, for instance, get voted a percentage by their peers. The Rockies made an extraordinary gesture that speaks volumes as to their character,
The Rockies keep on rolling and I think it is ridiculous that a large majority of baseball fans are disinterested in this team's story. They are the feel good story of the year out of any sports team and they continue to earn some of the worst ratings. Baseball, more than any sport, loses the interest of the fan of the teams that did not make it. You would have to think that the rich history of baseball would mean that there would be more true fans of the sport. Where is the disconnect?
Of course there has always been a problem keeping people interested in this sport as it runs into October because it is so long. Once people's teams are out of it, there just is not much incentive to care anymore, but here is thought. For anyone that actually cares about baseball and has the ability to spread the word (like every sports radio show in New York), why not spread it instead of bad mouthing this series and calling it pointless? Regardless if your team is in it, there is still some amazing baseball to be played and people should be encouraged to tune in.
I have to admit that I have been a big offender in the past of tuning out of the playoffs when the Mets were out. This year has been a complete 180 for me and I have been tuning in as much and as often as I can whether it be for the AL or the NL games. It is a shame that baseball generates so little interest this time of year when the Yankees are out of it or when two small market teams go at it. Typically society loves to root for underdogs except when it comes to baseball and that is certainly confusing to me. Three small to mid market teams remain and have slaughtered all the giants but the Red Sox. Surely that would be of some interest, no?
Jaramillo was a finalist for the Mets' managerial job that went to Randolph. That would raise eyebrows considering the organization let Randolph squirm for 48 hours before confirming he'd return for a fourth season as skipper. But those who know Jaramillo believe he's content as a hitting coach and doesn't have managerial ambitions now. Jaramillo is taking his hitting-coach responsibilities with Texas seriously, too. With his contract not set to expire until Oct. 31, Jaramillo just flew to Arizona to work with Rangers minor leaguers.
Really, the guy has one opening and the Mets still will not let him name anyone to his staff. Throw on top of it all that Rudy was seemingly their top pick for the managerial opening over Willie himself. Regardless if Rudy wants to coach, it seems like an awful big distraction and it seems like the Mets front office has a lack of respect for Willie.
Not that I have a problem with the Mets doing what they see fit, but I just think that these types of things speak volumes of their faith in Willie and how sedentary he actually is.
They should concentrate on their pitching more than anything and allocating that much to one player at this point is probably not the best course of action.
Transaction No. 1: Sign Curt Schilling to a one-year, $13 million deal with a $15 million club option or $2 million buyout for 2009.
Not a bad idea.
Transaction No. 2: Re-sign lefty reliever J.C. Romero to a 3-year, $9 million deal that includes a $2.5 million 2008 salary.
Ouch. Not sure I do that, but how does that fix the Phillies anyway? They had him and went to the playoffs. That is more keeping the status quo than fixing.
Transaction No. 3: Sign reliever David Riske to a three-year, $10 million deal that includes a $3 million 2008 salary.
Hmm...two big contracts to relievers? It seems like we've seen this somewhere. There is certainly a lot of risk throwing a lot of years at relievers these days since very few of them seem to do it year in and year out.
Transaction No. 4: Sign infielder Mark Loretta to a 2-year, $6.5 million deal that includes a $3 million base salary for 2008.
A light hitting 36 year old for third base? Not really sure how that makes anyone better. He is best utilized as a utility player at this point in this career.
Transaction No. 5: Sign center fielder Mike Cameron to a 3-year, $27 million deal that includes an $8 million salary for 2008.
Great peripheral player, but losing Rowand and picking up Loretta and while getting Cameron only is not exactly a step in the right direction.
Transaction No. 6: Trade left fielder Pat Burrell and reliever Geoff Geary to Anaheim for two decent minor leaguers.
So let me get this straight. Bill Stoneman is hesitant to trade his youth away for you....know....talented players and he will give two decent minor leaguers away for one year of Burrell and then only Geary?
2007 dollars spent: $23 million; Free dollars: $0.
There you have it, a championship team in place.
Truly perplexing how that makes one iota of sense to any rational human being.
But you know what? Most managers make the same mistakes. And if they don't, then they commit others. This mythology of the genius manager is just that. It's nonsense. Lou Piniella and Tony La Russa look pretty dumb a lot, too. They are all great thinkers when they are in the World Series, and then they are all screwy when they are knocked out in the first round.
Mattingly or Joe Girardi would fare just fine. Managing isn't that complicated. This is baseball. American League baseball. A coach tells you when the pitch count reaches 90. The data sheet tells you how a certain batter has done against a certain pitcher. You inform the first baseman why you're benching him, before you tell the media.
This is no big deal. It's hilarious to read all the concerns out there now about Mattingly's alleged inexperience. The guy played with the Yankees for 14 years. He's coached with them for four years. He's smart. He's steady. You really think he doesn't know when to flash a steal sign, or when to hold a team meeting?
Losing Torre should be a minor blip on the radar, but it matters to the players. Keeping them happy may be worth the retirement package of giving him a few million, letting him sit in on some high level meetings, and shake some hands in the clubhouse.