|
May 20, 2013
Who is Shyster?
Monthly Archives
May, 2012
November, 2009 October, 2009 September, 2009 August, 2009 July, 2009 June, 2009 May, 2009 April, 2009 March, 2009 February, 2009 January, 2009 December, 2008 November, 2008
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Sam Zell’s Nightmare Continues (10)
William S. Stevens: 1948-2008 (22) Teixeira’s Options (18) Cole Hamels Meets Talk Radio (23) Appropos of nothing (4) Shyster's Daily Circuit
Rob Neyer
AaronGleeman.com Joe Posnanski Blog Baseball Analysts Baseball Musings Cot's Baseball Contracts It IS About the Money Keith Law Cardboard Gods Baseball Think Factory MLB Trade Rumors Retrosheet Vegas Watch Way Back and Gone Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog The Biz of Baseball The Daily Fungo U.S.S. Mariner Braves Journal Scott Simkus The Common Man Jorge Says No! Baseball Over Here Fack Youk Wezen-Ball Chop-n-Change |
Baseball. Blogging. Whenever.Wednesday, June 17, 2009Quote of the DayBuster Olney's contribution to the post-Sosa world, couched in the notion that the clean players like Raul Ibanez should be outraged at the steroid users:Ibanez and others should say out loud that as far as they're concerned, cheating should not be tolerated. Insist that the drug-testing penalties be given sharper teeth. Demand that one positive test means a voided contract and a year out of baseball, and a second strike means a lifetime ban. Question: given all of the below-market early deals these days, might such a thing not actually create an incentive for some players to take steroids, at least for one season? Would Evan Longoria -- who's scheduled to make $550,000 this year -- be better or worse off financially if he had his current contract voided, spent the rest of this summer and next spring playing for the Long Beach Armada (note: Longoria is from Long Beach) and was allowed to re-enter the game as a free agent just before the 2010 All-Star break? Sure there's some risk there, but I submit that he'd stand to make a minimum of a hundred million dollars more by getting his current contract voided and sitting out a year than he would be to walk the straight and narrow with the Rays. So too would many other 0-6-year players, actually, at least assuming that "voiding the contract" didn't mean that the team still retained control over the player. Which it would pretty have too, wouldn't it? Of course, I may be overestimating the extent to which Buster is thinking this one through . . . UPDATE: To be fair, this quote came in the course of Buster's thoughts on the Jerod Morris--Raul Ibanez affair, and to his credit, I think Buster gets it right for the most part. Posted by Craig Calcaterra at 3:23pm Comments
MJ said...
Btw, what’s with Olney backing off previous statements of his how all parties (media, ownership and the players) were complicit in the steroid problem? Now it seems like everyone just wants to blame the players while ownership/media/selig gets off scott free? Posted 06/18 at 10:15 AM
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. Next Post: Great Moments in Rain Delays>> <<Previous Post: Comment and response | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Owners would never do that. It’d be akin to one of them hiring someone to dig up dirt on one of his players, lets call him Wave Dinfield, so you can void his contract because he’s not playing up to par.
That’d never happen