I have no intention to launch into a discourse of one of my favorite subjects outside baseball: alleged infomercial scam artist Kevin Trudeau; but I saw that Trudeau has a new infomercial hawking a book he's written as some sort of companion to his other poorly written, poorly reviewed and useless books about the mysterious "THEY" who are plotting to destroy and enslave humanity. (This one is about some mysterious diet that makes all the dreams of those who are looking to lose weight and don't want to have to actually do anything to lose the weight, come true.) The thought occurred to me that perhaps Kevin Trudeau would be the man to take over the Tampa Bay Devil Rays and turn them into something resembling a competent major league baseball team.
    I have no idea whether Trudeau knows or even cares anything about baseball; but I have to give credit where credit is due: the man is diabolical. He can sell anything using his tried and trusted techniques of playing on the baser human instincts of laziness and fear. Such skills are easily transferable; perhaps the Devil Rays should talk to Kevin Trudeau. The man, to my knowledge, has no background or experience running any kind of baseball team; but then again, neither does Andrew Friedman, the current man in charge of the Devil Rays baseball "operation".

    As horrendous as Jeff Weaver was with the Angels last season; with the colossal failure he was in New York; and the disappointment he was in Detroit; what makes the Seattle Mariners believe that three months in St. Louis under the tutelage of Dave Duncan and Tony LaRussa and some success in the playoffs will translate into a smooth transition back to the American League?
    Weaver didn't even pitch all that well during the regular season with the Cardinals; he pitched relatively well in the post-season in some high pressure games, but that doesn't mean he's "turned the corner", as the Mariners undoubtedly hope. This move seems more desperate than anything else.
    On the plus side, Weaver only signed a one-year contract; he should still be motivated to prove that he deserves a long term deal; so it's no long-term commitment for either side; there really isn't much for either side to lose. The Mariners shouldn't place their hopes particularly high with Jeff Weaver.

    Todd Helton would be a good pickup for the Red Sox; the change might wake up his bat; but it's doubtful that, at age 33, he's ever going to approach the ridiculous numbers he put up from 2000-2003. It's interesting that as the whiffle ball numbers diminished for everyone in Coors Field, so did the numbers of Todd Helton.
    Yes, his on base numbers are still huge, and yes, he's a Gold Glove winner at first base and an intense competitor; but is he worth the salary the Red Sox are going to have to pay him even if the Rockies pick up a large chunk of it? Regardless of what they have to surrender in the trade (Mike Lowell and Julian Tavarez aren't much of an asking price); and perhaps they can afford to throw in one of their young arms; but is Helton a necessity or a luxury item designed to gain attention for the Red Sox in January to distract from the reality that they still don't know who their closer is going to be?
    With the addition of J.D. Drew, the expected seasons from Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz; the understated production of Kevin Youkilis; along with Julio Lugo, Jason Varitek and a comeback year from Coco Crisp, the Red Sox have more than enough firepower. They don't need Helton, especially since he has struggled with injuries over the past few years. Unless the Red Sox address their problem in the bullpen, all the firepower in the world isn't going to help them make the playoffs; and unless they have secretly planned all along to place Jonathan Papelbon back into the bullpen, they still don't have anyone who they know can be trusted in the back of the bullpen.
    If they trade Manny Delcarmen and/or Craig Hanson along with Lowell and Tavarez, the Red Sox fans should ask themselves why they didn't put together a similar package to get Chad Cordero from the Washington Nationals because he fills a need that the Red Sox have, rather than feeds a desire to see another big name like Helton's splashed all over the Boston tabloids along with another nauseating Theo Epstein press conference.

    The only thing that concerns me regarding the Todd Helton to Boston rumors are the prospects of another anointing press conference replete with Theo Epstein's corporate crud; are we going to hear something similar to what he said when the Red Sox won the bid for Daisuke Matsuzaka? The quotes: "We have long admired Mr. Matsuzaka's abilities and believe hewould be a great fit with the Red Sox organization"; and "Clearly, we believe Mr. Matsuzaka is a real talent."
    I can't wait for them to introduce Helton: "Clearly we believe Mr. Helton can provide that which he achieved for the Rockies of Colorado here with the Red Sox; if not, perhaps we can use his quarterbacking skills honed at the University of Tennessee in backing up Peyton Manning on our flag football team; aha ha ha ha ha; how droll." Then he can sing the Yale school fight song.

    As for Dan O'Dowd, he'll be too busy trying to enter his office by doing as he always does------pulling on the door handle for forty-five minutes before his secretary comes over and shows him that the three signs surrounding the door that say "PUSH". Then she'll open the door for him and gently escort him to his set of blocks to build something creative.

    With Todd Helton's production having dwindled from it's ridiculous heights of a few years ago, it does make sense for the Rockies to try and trade him to get some value while taking his salary off the books; but given his history, Dan O'Dowd is not the guy I would want making this deal for the Rockies. O'Dowd's ineptitude is become the stuff of legend. What exactly is it that has allowed him to continually make these absurd decisions in running his team and yet still keep his job?
    The rumored "bounty" for trading Helton (and paying a chunk of his salary) is reported to be Mike Lowell and Julian Tavarez. I'll let that digest for a moment.

    Yes. He's going to get back Mike Lowell and Julian Tavarez and he's going to pay a chunk of Helton's bloated salary. The Rockies are supposedly asking for young pitching in the form of Craig Hanson and/or Manny Delcarmen, to which the Red Sox have said no. There will supposedly be some pitching prospects going back to the Rockies, but with O'Dowd, who knows?
    Dan O'Dowd should tell the Red Sox that if he's getting Lowell and Tavarez in exchange for Helton; and the Red Sox are refusing to include any of the requested pitching prospects, then the Red Sox have to pick up Helton's entire salary. Will O'Dowd do that? Apparently not. How much more are Rockies fans going to take of this absurd reign of the inept Dan O'Dowd?
    As for the Red Sox, Helton would be a good addition and the change to a possible contender would quite possibly wake up his bat; but shouldn't they be more focused on addressing the pressing problem in the bullpen? Unless they intend to let Jonathan Papelbon start for awhile and return him to the bullpen if none of the "tryout" closers works out, there isn't anyone on the roster who can be counted on in the late innings. If they can get Helton for what the rumors are stating is the asking price, they should do it; then they should tell Papelbon that he's going to be needed in the bullpen. Only then will they be able to truly consider themselves contenders, because without a dependable closer, there are going to be a lot of games blown regardless of how many runs that reconstituted lineup is able to score.

    This is the absolute truth: I was intending to get the Extra Innings package on my digital cable this season; now that baseball is about to announce that exclusive deal with DirecTV, I won't be able to get it. I'm not as upset as some fans who have had the package and grown accustomed to it have a right to be.
    I'm not quite sure whether the baseball people that are making this deal realize that the exclusive deal that the NFL has with DirecTV should be seen differently; in the past I've given those in positions of power the benefit of the doubt that there must be some rational basis for the decisions they make. With each passing day, that belief is becoming more and more absurd. I won't miss it because I never had it, but it must be irritating for fans who look forward to seeing certain teams now that they either have to switch to DirecTV or find another option.
    One thing I will say is that these types of selfish and shortsighted decisions tend to backfire. My cable system received a "freeview" of the NFL network in late December and there really wasn't all that much to get excited about. For the eight or so NFL games that the network is going to show, they're going to have to find a lot of filler to pass the time. What I saw on the network was the constant repeating of the week's highlight shows, followed by "insider" type reality shows about tryouts for various teams' cheerleading squads; my fiancee seemed to be more interested in that than I was. (I'm not all that interested in the decision making process that goes into the chosen color for some chick's hair.) Only the truly fanatical NFL fan is going to go through the time and trouble of switching cable systems for eight games when they can just as easily walk to a local tavern and watch them.
    As for baseball, there are, of course, many more games available than there are in the NFL; but to think that a large enough number of fans are going to make that same switch because of their desperation to watch those out of town games is overestimating their fanaticism. I'm speaking as to my own preferences when it comes to watching games, but I believe that there are a great number of people who share my sentiments and will decide that it's easier to forego the Extra Innings package than to go to the time and trouble of changing their cable provider.

    Until Roger Clemens definitively retires, we're going to have to deal with the constant speculation as to which team he will join for his half season of work. Clemens's agents have said that the only teams that Clemens will consider joining are the Astros, Yankees and Red Sox; now with Yankees second baseman Robinson Cano surrendering the uniform number 22, which Clemens wore while with the Yankees, in hopes of Clemens's arrival in mid-season, the pros and cons of which team would be best for Clemens to join should be weighed.
    The pros for each:
    The Yankees will offer Clemens the opportunity to win another championship and to do it while pitching with his close friend Andy Pettitte. They will also probably offer him the most money out of all the interested suitors.
    The Red Sox would offer Clemens comparable money to the Yankees and his return to Boston would right a supposed wrong that was perpetrated by then Red Sox GM Dan Duquette in letting Clemens leave in the first place. The Red Sox have also said that they would be willing to be flexible with Clemens's schedule, as the Astros are.
    The Astros continue to offer most of the same things that they've provided over the past three seasons, except that Andy Pettitte is no longer there. They're going to be competitive this season; they have a strong bullpen; and there is the matter of the special perks that Clemens receives in that he doesn't have to show up at the ballpark unless he's pitching, and that he doesn't accompany the team on all the road trips. There are also the matters of Clemens's son Koby, who is in the low minor leagues for the Astros; and the personal services contract that Clemens has with the Astros; those things make it very attractive for Clemens to remain with the Astros.
    The cons:
    The Yankees aren't going to let Clemens make his own schedule as the other teams appear willing to do.
    The Red Sox bullpen is looking like it might be a problem; they really don't need another starter, they need bullpen help. Why would Clemens want to join a team that is going to have a hard time making the playoffs while drawing the ire of both the Yankees and Astros?
    The Astros probably wouldn't be very happy with Clemens if he abandoned them to selfishly re-join the Yankees or Red Sox after the Astros have been so generous financially and accommodating to his desires to be a "part-timer". One other thing that shouldn't be discounted is the presence of Clemens's son in the Astros minor league system. In looking at Koby Clemens's stats, he doesn't appear to be much of a prospect. If Clemens wants his son to make it to the big leagues, the only chance he may have is if Clemens himself is still a member in good standing with the organization. If he leaves, the Astros might up and release Clemens's son.
    All of this speculation is ultimately meaningless. Clemens himself knows the pros and cons of each situation. I believe that the decision is going to come down to the Astros competitiveness in their division; money won't be such an overriding factor. If the Astros are in contention for a playoff spot, then Clemens will return there. If not, then he will choose between the Yankees and Red Sox. Since the Astros look like they're going to be pretty good this year, it'd be a huge surprise if Clemens is pitching for anyone other than the Houston Astros this season.

    Intelligence crosses the boundaries of all aspects of life, especially in the sports world and the management (or mismanagement) of franchises. Just as there are general managers who don't know what they're doing in baseball (Andrew Friedman, anyone?); there are similar situations in every other sport; but the constant doomsday predictions for the Dallas Cowboys now that Bill Parcells has announced his retirement seems to be designed to create a story where one doesn't exist.
    For all of Jerry Jones's faults as a person (huge ego; questionable morals; etc.), I don't think anyone will quibble with the fact that he's a savvy guy. If Parcells had a Feb. 1 deadline to decide whether or not he was going to return as Cowboys coach, doesn't it make sense that Jones would have a couple of replacements in the front of his mind if Parcells did indeed decide to retire? All of this silliness about the Cowboys not being able to put together a qualified staff at such a "late" date is as absurd as the suggestion that the team is going to have a problem finding a coach willing to deal with all the controversy that comes with coaching the Cowboys.
    Parcells left behind a team that is relatively well stocked to compete in the coming years; in fact, the Cowboys are probably going to be better off now knowing that they have someone coming in for the long haul, rather than the constant speculation about Parcells and whether or not he's going to retire. Management is everything, and, if nothing else, Jerry Jones knows how to manage his entities, and the Cowboys are no exception.

    I don't know if it's my paranoia shining through or some inherent need to explain the unexplainable through conspiracy theories, but the continuing speculation that the Giants might not complete the contract that they've agreed to with Barry Bonds is giving me pause and leading me to wonder whether or not it might actually happen.
    The stories that are surfacing about the Bonds deal still not being completed strike me as a well-timed leak designed to gauge public reaction to the mere possibility that the Giants will back out of the deal with the vilified slugger. The Giants came to an agreement with Bonds after failing to sign any of the big free agent names that they had pursued. Bonds would no longer be a Giant had the club been able to sign Alfonso Soriano or Carlos Lee; or traded for Manny Ramirez. Had any other team expressed interest in Bonds and shown him the money, Bonds would have left San Francisco of his own accord.
    The two were stuck with each other. The Giants, an aging team without much hope; Bonds, a demonized and polarizing figure desperately trying to hang onto what is left of his career and overtake Hank Aaron for the all-time home run record. Then two things happened that could swing the decision to bring Bonds back from thumbs up to thumbs down: Barry Zito agreed to terms with the Giants; and Barry Bonds's name was disclosed for having failed a drug test for amphetamines and he reportedly blamed teammate Mark Sweeney. The two things on the surface have little to do with one another, but in the back room machinations of the Giants and their probable desire to excise the disease that Barry Bonds has become, they have a great deal to do with one another.
    The Giants without Zito were at best a .500 team if everything went right for them next season. They're either young and inexperienced or old and rickety with no in between. The attempts to bring in new blood were all rebuffed; they had little choice but to bring back Bonds for the fans he will bring in as he chases one of baseball's most hallowed records. But the signing of Zito brought the Giants credibility along with a very good pitcher. There wasn't going to be an empty cupboard without Bonds; there was going to be an affable and quirky winner who would attract fans by his presence and abilities.
    Bonds having been disclosed to have failed the test for amphetamines and having been said to blame something he took from Sweeney's locker as the culprit, has become even more of a reprobate in the eyes of the Giants. With the contract not having been signed, the controversy that follows Bonds everywhere he goes and with everything he does, the lack of interest almost everyone has in seeing Bonds break Aaron's record, and the failed amphetamine test, the Giants have a convenient excuse for backing out of the agreed upon deal.
    Bonds's churlishness and selfish behavior has been tolerated in San Francisco for this long because he was their biggest star; he was productive; and he put fans in the seats. Now that they have another star to trot out for their fans, the front office may be putting feelers out to see what the reaction would be if they really were to back out on the deal with Bonds.
    They don't have a replacement for Bonds in left field; and they probably won't be able to contend with their current lineup; but the addition of Zito and the possible departure of Bonds might make it more palatable in the future for the Giants to attract players who otherwise wouldn't want to deal with the media circus that is a prerequisite for being anywhere in the vicinity of Bonds. The team has to realize that they probably aren't going to be a title contender this year; why should they have to go through the aggravation of another season with Bonds if they don't have to? And if they can save the money for some other names that may come available over the next year, so much the better. I still believe that Barry Bonds will be a Giant this season, but the longer the story is out there about that unsigned contract, the greater the likelihood becomes of the Giants deciding to turn the page without Bonds.

    What a shock! David Wells has apparently decided to pitch again for his hometown San Diego Padres and the two sides are exchanging contract proposals to make Wells the Padres fifth starter. I don't know if anyone really believed Wells when he said he wanted to retire; but all kidding aside, it is a good move for both sides. Wells has the type of rubber arm and stress free motion that will allow him to pitch effectively indefinitely if his back and waistline cooperate. An incentive laden deal in this pitching-thin market is a smart move for the Padres to bring back the Boomer.

    As for Sammy Sosa, there are a lot of people in the media who are openly scoffing at Sosa's attempts to come back. With the Rangers supposedly close to agreement with Sosa on a minor-league contract, I fail to see the humor. What do they have to lose? All of these experts who are openly deriding Sosa have no idea whether or not Sosa will be able to return to the big leagues; so it's absurd to simply laugh it off. Do I think that Sosa will be able to come back and hit effectively in the big leagues? Probably not, but what do the Rangers have to lose by bringing him to spring training to have a look? If nothing else, it will generate some attention for the team in the spring games in which Sosa plays and sell some extra tickets. To simply laugh it off is as nonsensical as thinking he's going to return to his 60+ homerun glory. It's a no-lose situation for both sides.

    After weeks of speculating that the Braves were trying to acquire Mike Gonzalez for Adam LaRoche in order to spin Gonzalez to the Yankees for Melky Cabrera, the first part of the deal was completed as they acquired Gonzalez for LaRoche.
    I'm not quite sure what to make of this deal. Gonzalez is a valuable commodity in that he is lefty and has experience closing games. LaRoche hit 32 homers this season and his stats have improved year after year; for his career LaRoche hasn't had much success against left-handed pitchers. He's considered a Gold Glove caliber first baseman. Gonzalez has had great success against left-handed batters; but right-handed batters haven't done particularly well against him either. LaRoche to me is a replaceable component; while it is very difficult to find quality arms for the bullpen-----especially 28-year-old lefties.
    Another aspect of the trade to look at is the track record of the respective general managers. John Schuerholz is going to end up in the Hall of Fame; Dave Littlefield is, well, Dave Littlefield. This deal comes down to the value of that which is traded; by that calculation, the Braves got the better end of the trade.

    I have great respect for the Florida Marlins and the way they run their organization; they're always mining other teams for their most talented prospects; they rebuild quickly and efficiently; they're not afraid to spend money when they feel they can win; they're willing to make bold and decisive moves that may not be popular (such as firing Joe Girardi). But for a team whose fan base only shows the slightest bit of interest when their team is in contention to win the World Series, if I were the citizens in Florida, I wouldn't be happy at all about the prospect of state funds being used to build a new $500 million stadium for an organization that no one seems to care whether they're there or not until just before they win a championship.
    I don't claim to know all the machinations and back room dealings that go into a team getting a new ballpark, but this problem has existed for the Marlins since they came into being. The state of the team has always had little to do with the support that they receive in South Florida. The Dolphins, win or lose, have always been first and foremost in the hearts of South Florida sports fans. The Marlins have been well run and well organized for years now. They've had committed ownerships that have done everything they can possibly do to invite fans into being dedicated Marlins supporters; but now there is talk that there will "finally" be a new ballpark on the horizon for the Marlins. But will it make a difference? Will the fans all of a sudden go to the Marlins games because there is a new venue in which to watch them? Perhaps initially. But what about after that?
    Teams that struggle to maintain attendance can't be choosy about the types of fans that they attract; but the types of people that are going to attend games because it's the trendy thing to do are always going to be fickle. The Marlins should want to have a fan base that is going to appreciate all the work that has been put into building and rebuilding their team over and over again; not one that is going to show up because it is the cool thing to do at the moment. Even if they get the new stadium, it remains to be seen whether the team is going to develop a loyal enough following to warrant such a public expenditure. There are plenty of other towns that would be desperate for a baseball team to call their own; especially one that is as smartly run as the Marlins. Why there is this constant and desperate attempt to keep a team where they aren't particularly appreciated is a mystery to me.

    What will we do without the ignorant, unhinged, ranting and raving Stephen A. Smith and his now canceled show Quite Frankly With Stephen A. Smith?
    I know! We may get a knowledegable, factually correct voice to disseminate sports insights to enhance our viewing experiences. But then again, it is ESPN; we'll probably get a show with someone else who screams a lot; or another show about poker. At least I wasn't the only one who wasn't watching Stephen A. Smith humiliate himself night after night; ESPN took notice of the dearth of viewers and pulled the plug.
    Quite frankly, we are greater for having lost him.

    After the Mets were eliminated in the NLCS, Mets upper management stated unequivocally that they wanted to reward manager Willie Randolph with a contract extension for his role in the team's rapid turnaround from laughingstock to one on the verge of the World Series; but after three months, nothing has been completed. This leads me to wonder whether Randolph and his representatives have their eye on another prize should it come open-----Randolph's original home in the Bronx with the Yankees.
    After so many years of paying managers with lucrative guaranteed deals and receiving mediocre to poor results, the Mets were prudent in their handling of the Randolph contract negotiations. Randolph received an entry level managerial contract, which despite his experience as a bench coach and winning player, was more than fair considering that he had never managed before in his life. After the 2005 season in which Randolph instilled discipline and personal accountability on and off the field, the Mets made a rapid jump into the playoffs in 2006.
    Truth be told, Randolph was learning to manage on the fly. His disciplinary procedures and judicious way in which he molded a predominately young team into a well-behaved and cohesive unit doesn't alter his strategic failures in his rookie season as a manager. The mistakes were so egregious to my eyes that I fired off a letter to Omar Minaya following the season that stated matter of factly that the Mets would probably be better off if they replaced Randolph with Lou Piniella. His rookie errors in 2005 cost the Mets between 5 and 10 games; that is enough to win a playoff spot. I felt that unless they hired a strategic minded bench coach (a la Don Zimmer) Randolph wasn't going to be able to learn quickly enough to win with their roster; if they were going to spend the money to import high profile players such as Billy Wagner, the players had to know that their manager wasn't going to continuously make the same mistakes over and over again to cost them games. As it turned out, the best thing that the Mets did was to switch roles of their 2005 first base coach Jerry Manuel and bench coach Sandy Alomar Sr. Randolph improved markedly in his handling of game situations; some of which is due to what he learned as a rookie; some from having Manuel next to him instead of Alomar. (I wrote a blog entitled "Mea Culpa" for my suggestion that the Mets fire Randolph, although I did have viable reasons for the suggestion.) Now that Randolph's entry level contract is due to end at the conclusion of the 2007 season, and the extension has yet to be completed, I have to wonder whether the thought has crossed the mind of Randolph that he might be able to return to his baseball home to continue his career as a manager after cutting his teeth with the Mets.
    I have no way of knowing one way or the other what the thought process of Willie Randolph is regarding his demands in signing an extension; nor do I know how much longer Joe Torre intends to manage the Yankees. But the thought is intriguing. Now that George Steinbrenner has aged to the point where his public appearances are few and far between; that GM Brian Cashman and managing partner Steve Swindal were able to talk Steinbrenner off the ledge of firing Torre in favor of the then-available Piniella following the Yankees embarrassing loss to the Tigers in the ALDS, the Yankees job isn't as transient as it once was. The question has to come to mind as to whom the Yankees front office really wants to replace Torre when he decides to step down.
    The speculation has been that Don Mattingly's elevation to bench coach is a portent of his eventual replacement of Torre; but Randolph has proven that no matter how much coaching experience a man has; no matter how great a player he was; there is a period of adjustment to being the man in charge. Randolph did play for such managerial luminaries as Billy Martin; Tony LaRussa; and Tommy Lasorda; and he coached for Buck Showalter; and Torre. He should have been ready to manage; but such a transition is exacerbated when the person who is slated to manage has never managed before anywhere at all, regardless of his experience with other managers. 
    Joe Girardi's availability and new job as an analyst for the Yankees has fueled speculation that he, and not Mattingly, may be the replacement for Torre once the time comes. Having watched Girardi and Randolph, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I would rather have Randolph by a wide margin; not just because I think Randolph is a better field manager (he is); but because he has shown more of an aptitude of being able to coexist with a wide variety of people both in the clubhouse and in upper management.
    Randolph and Minaya should have been able to come to an agreement on an extension rather quickly with Randolph being paid commensurately with his newfound experience and success. He shouldn't receive Tony LaRussa/Jim Leyland/Lou Piniella money; nor should he be lowballed like Bob Geren/Bud Black/Terry Francona. Randolph should receive a two or three year extension which would place his current salary somewhere above the middle of the managerial pay scale; with escalators if he reaches and wins the World Series.
    The Mets are not a cheap organization; but perhaps Randolph was irked at the contract that he had to sign in order to get that first chance to manage. Perhaps he would like to keep his options open. He and Torre still talk and grew close while Randolph was with the Yankees. Everyone knows that friends talk about personal issues surreptitiously; perhaps Torre knows that Randolph would prefer to be wearing Yankee pinstripes one day; perhaps Randolph knows how much longer Torre intends to manage. One way or the other, it is curious that it is taking so long for the extension to be completed.
    As for the Mets, if this ever does come to pass, where would they go for a new manager? Randolph has developed into a good manager, but I don't believe that anyone is irreplaceable. Any good GM (and Omar Minaya is one of the best) always has a list of two or three names in his head should anything occur in which he needs someone to replace the current man at the helm; and despite his improvement, Randolph isn't exactly Billy Martin when it comes to strategy. The Mets have developed a system and organization in which no individual is bigger than the team. I like Randolph, but if this situation doesn't resolve itself, the Mets would move on; my guess is that they wouldn't miss a step. I want Randolph to stay with the Mets-----but only if he's truly committed; and I have to wonder after three months: What is the holdup for completing the extension?

    So, let me get this straight: Barry Bonds goes over to a teammate's locker, takes a pill bottle out and ingests something about which he knows nothing; not what it is; not where it came from; not what it does. If the report that Bonds claimed that he took a pill of unknown origin out of Sweeney's locker is true, then Bonds is either the stupidest human being alive; or he thinks that the people to whom he is proffering this excuse are the stupidest people alive.
    Who in their right mind would believe such a nonsensical story? And who in their right mind would take some unknown substance? The pill could have been Cialis, in which case Bonds would have been advised to be head to the hospital if he sustained an arousal of more than four hours; or it could have been birth control for Sweeney's wife. If could have been anything----if the story were true, which of course it probably isn't.
    Now there is a report that Bonds has said that Sweeney had nothing to do with any of this. Who knows what to believe? As for the amphetamine use, it is something that has been going on in baseball for years and years and years. That they are now cracking down on it is one thing; but the fact that these supposedly "sealed" drug tests are somehow being leaked is bound to diminish any remaining trust that the players had in their bosses, and rightfully so. This seems to be more of the same repeated attempts to embarrass players who are putting their reputations on the line by believing that the results of said tests are going to be kept confidential. Bonds is still Bonds----a selfish, babyish, polarizing figure----but he has rights. He doesn't deserve to be dealing with this disclosure when the test results were supposed to be kept anonymous for every player, Bonds or not.
    The players should demand that if these supposedly "sealed" results are leaked, then the punishment, if any, should be null and void----the equivalent of a criminal not being read his rights or given access to an attorney. If this type of thing is continually allowed to reach the public, there is no reason for the players to continue to participate in the programs, because they have absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose if this is the way things are going to proceed. Once a player's name is out there involved in any type of banned substance, it is very, very difficult for him to regain his reputation; this simply is not fair and should be handled appropriately.

    A mediocre journeyman like John Thomson should probably think twice before speaking his mind on issues that are irrelevant to his current situation. Thomson recently signed a one-year, $500,000 contract with the Toronto Blue Jays; then he announced (unsolicited evidently) that he rejected a similar big league contract with the Mets. Thomson's quote: "As far as just looking at Paul Lo Duca across the field, I'mnot really into how he acts behind the plate." Then he praised Vernon Wells's defense and mentioned Cliff Floyd's defense as a reason that he wouldn't want to play for the Mets if Floyd were still there.
    All of these comments may or may not be legitimate; but one would think that a guy whose career has consisted of bouncing from one team to another with a modicum of success; who received a bargain bin deal with the Blue Jays; and whose main attribute as a pitcher at this point is that he has a pulse and his arm is still attached, would keep his mouth shut in the event that he becomes desperate for a job in the future and is forced to sign with a team that he might not particularly want to join due to the lack of other offers he may receive. A guy like John Thomson is in no position to be burning bridges with potential employers and would be well advised to think about that before opening his mouth in such a way to reporters when it was unnecessary to do so.

    Had Mark McGwire sat in front of that congressional panel on March 17th, 2005 and jabbed his finger in the direction of his inquisitors and vehemently denied any steroid use ever in the same manner as did Rafael Palmeiro, would McGwire be celebrating his induction into the Hall of Fame today along with Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn?
    Palmeiro's denials struck a chord because of the insistent way in which he put them forth. That Palmeiro was busted in a drug test having taken the performance enhancer stanozolol five months later portrayed Palmeiro as not only a liar, but as a first rate actor as well. Palmeiro claimed that had he taken anything illegal, he did so unknowingly; a reasonable explanation would present itself once everything was sorted out. We're still waiting. Perhaps the reasonable explanation is resting safely in the hands of the "real" killers of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman whom O.J. Simpson is so relentlessly pursuing.
    Thankfully, Palmeiro has receded into the shadows where he belongs; rife with embarrassment and shame for being so stupid as to deny guilt in such a way, then to see that he couldn't perform without the drugs as he desperately fought a losing battle to get his 3000th hit. Maybe Palmeiro thought that he wouldn't get caught; maybe whoever was providing the drugs told him that they were undetectable; maybe he thought he had an effective blocking agent. Whether it was arrogance of ignorance, the final result is that Palmeiro was caught shortly after issuing that denial; as a result, his Hall of Fame candidacy is gone. But what of Mark McGwire? What if it was McGwire who issued a denial with the vehemence of Palmeiro?
    Mark McGwire tried to be genuinely aboveboard at the congressional hearings. He refused to deny that which everyone suspected------he was using performance enhancing drugs. All that non-denial did though, was shine a light of suspicion upon him; whereas before there was only an unproveable suspicion, there was now a documented cringe-worthy moment to see McGwire squirming as he did everything he possibly could to avoid answering the question directly.
    The simple fact is that had McGwire denied any drug use during his career, there is a great chance that he would be in the Hall of Fame right now. McGwire was retired. There were no forthcoming drug tests; no desperate attempt to hit one last home run; one final single to place himself into the pantheon of other players who had achieved such lofty statistics. All there was was a claim of collaborative drug use from one of the most universally reviled players of the era; one who was quite open in his disclosure that he had a vendetta against baseball for a perceived persecution and blacklisting.
    That player, Jose Canseco, who had become known for everything he did between the white lines, suddenly became famous for everything that occurred in his life away from the stadium. From the bar fights; to the speeding tickets; to the various incidents with his wives and girlfriends; to the claims of being kept out of baseball by the commissioner's office; to the final attempt to squeeze every last dollar out of his career by preparing to write a "tell-all" book------Canseco was universally despised and discredited. Only when he and the other players were summoned before congress did the reality hit. That reality being that simply because the messenger is someone who is despised, doesn't necessarily mean that they are lying.
    Things might have worked out for McGwire had he sat in front of that panel and stated unequivocally that he was never involved with any illegal drugs at any time. Instead, he tried the opposite approach by not saying anything at all. Whether that was a decision he made on his own or he was given some faulty advice is not known because McGwire has barely been seen or heard from since.
    Both McGwire and Canseco were seated at that long table in front of congress. What would have happened had McGwire simply said that he was innocent of the allegations while Canseco was claiming that McGwire was guilty? Who would have been believed? Would it have been Canseco with all of that negative baggage? Or would it have been McGwire-----baseball's version of a cartoon superhero who almost single-handedly rescued the game from the abyss of the lost World Series of 1994 with his rampant display of power, kindness and humility? People would have believed McGwire because they would have wanted to believe McGwire. No one would have been able to prove anything to the contrary because there was no tangible proof of any wrongdoing. No one could say without a shadow of a doubt that McGwire's muscles were the result of anything other than long hours in the gym and legal supplements (Androstendione included).
    Now, the situation is what it is. Did Mark McGwire use performance enhancing drugs over the course of his career? Obviously, the answer is yes. But there is no proof other than the claims of Jose Canseco and McGwire's stumbling testimony in front of the congressional panel. At this point, it is highly unlikely that McGwire is ever going to come anywhere close to induction into baseball's Hall of Fame, even though he deserves it based on his power numbers. The writers don't appear ready to change their minds about him; the Veteran's Committee is definitely not going to elect him. One has to wonder what goes through the head of Mark McGwire when he's alone in the dark and reflecting on what has become of his career. Does he wish he had presented an angry denial in front of the entire world? Or is he comfortable in that, while he didn't tell the truth, he also didn't lie. It all depends on how important induction into the Hall of Fame is to the former hero. Which would be more important: The shaky semantics of his testimony; or the idol-worship that he enjoyed over the last years of his career? Unless McGwire emerges from his self-imposed exile, we may never know. But the question will always linger: Was it worth it?

    With the Randy Johnson trade now complete, the Yankees and the Diamondbacks both got what they wanted. The Diamondbacks re-acquired the best pitcher in their history and a best-case-scenario return to that which won them their championship; the Yankees remove a dour and inconsistent pitcher from their clubhouse and their roster and gain some relief from an unconscionable payroll.
    Despite Johnson's advanced age the Yankees expected to be getting a reasonable facsimile of the pitcher that had dominated the National League for the majority of his stay in Arizona. The numbers Johnson put up in Arizona were reminiscent of an in-his-prime Sandy Koufax; the Yankees, with their elite closer and ability to put up runs in bunches had every right to expect that they were going to get their money's worth with Johnson. It didn't work out that way. The Yankees were hoping to formulate a fearsome rotation headed by an intimidating future Hall of Famer. While Johnson won 17 games in each of his two seasons in New York, the performances that merited his paycheck and cachet of greatness were few and far between; what's worse were his terrible performances in perhaps the most important starts in his Yankees career against the Angels in the 2005 ALDS and the Tigers in the 2006 ALDS.
    The Yankees are the type of team that has such a strong closer and lineup that average pitchers are going to be able to rack up 12-16 wins without pitching all that effectively. Johnson's performance during his two regular seasons in New York, along with the palpable awkwardness with the stifling attention that that the Yankees and their players receive all year long, never matched up with the salary and expectations. Now they were able to get Luis Vizcaino who has shown to be a useful and reliable reliever; and they received some players who, at worst, are going to provide depth to the organization. That the Yankees had to kick in some money to get Johnson off the team is not all that important as it was for them to move along without the 6'10" lefty who seemed thrilled to head back to the West Coast.

    As for the Diamondbacks, they have little to lose in this deal either. If Johnson is healthy, then he should provide them with his customary 200+ innings; his statistics should improve with a return to the National League; at worst he'll contribute 13 or so wins; at best, 18.
    The idea that the Diamondbacks can repeat the success of the Johnson and Schilling formula that they had in the early part of the century with Johnson and Brandon Webb isn't as absurd as it seems on the surface. The National League West is going to be notoriously weak and eminently winnable for the team that can play consistently well enough to win 88 or so games. There isn't really an offensive powerhouse in the entire division, so Johnson and Webb should win their share of games. The Diamondbacks depleted an already suspect bullpen with the inclusion of Vizcaino in the Johnson trade; Jorge Julio is not the guy I would want to trust as my closer; but they're no worse than any of the other mediocre teams in the division. If things break right, they should contend at least into the summer; and with all the teams bunched together, the division winner may come down to whichever one makes the boldest mid-season deal.
    With Johnson comfortable in his surroundings and healthy, the Diamondbacks have a solid 1-2 punch at the top of their rotation. As he is also the best pitcher in their history and is on track to win his 300th game sometime next season will also provide a gate attraction to the team. They didn't really give up all that much to get him and they're in a position to contend. It's worth the gamble for the Diamondbacks and was essential for the Yankees to retreat from the haphazard and mindless way of building their teams in recent years. It's a win-win for both sides regardless of the overall results.

    I just got back after a few days in Washington; now I'm sick. So, I should be back with some pearls of wisdom later on today (hopefully).

    The things that the Yankees can offer Roger Clemens-----money; reuniting with Andy Pettitte; a great chance to win-----are important, but the things that the Astros can offer are going to be equally important; they also offer things that the Yankees don't-----specifically the freedom to come and go as he pleases and the opportunity to play in the big leagues with his son.
    The Yankees are going to be extremely interested in bringing Clemens back to New York for the second half of next season, especially when they unload Randy Johnson. But will Clemens's desire to play with his close friend Andy Pettitte and for a team with a championship mandate preclude the opportunities that the Astros offer?
    Joe Torre and Brian Cashman will probably be willing to ease up on some of the restrictions that the Yankees players adhere to without exception for the chance to add Clemens to their rotation; but they won't acquiesce to the perks that the Astros provide. The most I can see Torre doing is allowing Clemens to stay in Texas an extra day or two when the Yankees leave town after playing the Rangers. As for the other things, such as not even showing up to the ballpark when Clemens isn't scheduled to pitch, I find it hard to believe that the Yankees are going to tolerate such a bending of the rules regardless of the player.
     The Astros have spent a lot of money this off-season while standing firm on their offer to Pettitte. The front office has been aggressive and creative and has refused to allow Clemens and Pettitte to hold the team hostage for another off-season. Runs shouldn't be as hard to come by with the signing of Carlos Lee; Jason Jennings is in his free agent year and should be counted on for a solid to excellent season; Woody Williams is what he is and should contribute his 12 wins or so. Along with Roy Oswalt, that is a solid top three starters who will keep the Astros in contention until Clemens makes his decision.
    The Astros have also not been shy about paying Clemens what he feels he is worth in addition to all the other benefits he receives from the team; but one thing with which the Yankees will not be able to compete is the prospect of Clemens playing in the big leagues with his son Koby. Koby Clemens played in the high A level of the Astros minor league system last season. A third baseman who doesn't appear to be much of a prospect, Koby is undoubtedly a carrot for the Astros to dangle in front of his father. Clemens is, first and foremost, family oriented as evidenced by his constant references to his wife and children; the idea of playing in the big leagues with his son is going to be too enticing for Clemens to turn his back on the Astros and draw the ire of the entire organization simply to play for the Yankees as a career swan song for a couple of months. That Koby's statistics indicate that he isn't much of a prospect will only add viable reasons to the decision to return to the Astros. If Clemens does go to the Yankees (or less likely, the Red Sox), it's highly doubtful if Clemens and the Astros cut ties, that Koby Clemens will last much longer in the organization. With all of these factors taken into account, it is very probable that the team for whom Roger Clemens pitches next season will be the Houston Astros.

    Matt over at Diamondhacks (http://azdiamondhacks.mlblogs.com/) presents a case for Bert Blyleven to be elected to the Hall of Fame; he also plays devil's advocate with some of the compelling reasons that Blyleven should not be elected. I responded with my opinion that Blyleven is on a level with Don Sutton; in looking at Sutton's stats, Sutton probably shouldn't have made it; therefore why exacerbate the same mistake by putting in Blyleven?
    Another contemporary of the two pitchers who has generated a similar debate is Tommy John. But John is a case that, despite his not reaching the magic number of 300 wins, should probably gain election. John's numbers are similar to Blyleven's; as Matt points out, John had the good fortune of being on better teams. But John is a different case. John was a pitcher that got by on guile and control. What set him apart though, and should probably be the clincher in his candidacy is the surgery that now bears his name.
    It took an immense amount of courage for John to undergo the then-experimental procedure of removing a tendon from another part of the body to replace the damaged one in his elbow; to even try to do something of that nature------when the usual result of such an injury at the time was the end of a career; or a "wait and see and hope" strategy-----took faith that most of us wouldn't have been able to muster. Without Tommy John, would there even be the number of pitchers who recovered and thrived after the so-called "career ending" ligament tears of the elbow? Or would dozens of notable careers have come to an end because there wasn't a proven case study of the veracity of the procedure?
    It took Tommy John 18 months to recover from the procedure and he managed to come back better than before. This was a time in the mid-seventies when pitchers injuring their arms were faced with the prospect of either pitching through the pain or no longer having their jobs. How many great careers have been saved due to the ingenuity of Frank Jobe and courage of Tommy John?
    The 288 wins are one thing; the three 20 win seasons are another; the two runner-up finishes in the Cy Young voting and one fourth place spot are also viable testaments to John's career. That these things all happened after he had a surgery that no one thought had any chance at all of working is the main reason that John, and not Blyleven, should be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

    I understand that January is a time when there are usually relatively few things to write about regarding baseball; but the names that are being mentioned as "hoping for a call from the Hall of Fame" are downright insulting to the intelligence of any knowledgeable fan.
    Some of the names have a legitimate argument for the Hall. Orel Hershiser had a career that could be argued one way or the other. On a quick glance at his stats, I'd say that he's a genuine possibility. Bret Saberhagen won't get in; his career was shortened by injuries and robbed him of a real chance at true greatness; but he did win two Cy Young Awards and a World Series MVP. Mark McGwire; Andre Dawson; Goose Gossage-----these are names that could spark a legitimate debate. (I think all three should be in.) But let's take a look at some of the other names that are being mentioned for one reason or another:
     Scott Brosius? Bobby Witt? Tony Fernandez? Dante Bichette? Wally Joyner? Please.
    The mere fact that these names are being mentioned as even being connected in any way to the Hall of Fame is an insult to the players who are going to be enshrined and those that are already there. I have great respect for any player who can reach the big leagues and have some success; but to begin to mention a few of these names with some of the greatest players to ever play the game is absurd and insulting to any fan who has paid any attention to their careers and the game at all.