ARod2212

That time is cool.

I won't be home until 7 at best. I'm in class until 6, and it's an hour home if I'm lucky.

Good to see Kyle Farnsworth in midseason form.

My guess is he took his paycut to build value this year for a big payday. We'll see what happens, but I wouldn't be shocked at all to see him somewhere else next season.

Bruins are playing well, they've got a great defense there. Rangers are finally getting their act together. Save the collapse in Montreal, they've played crisp, complete games the last month. Henrik has been solid, if not spectacular in spots, and the offense is clicking. Dubinsky amazes me every game, Avery is playing the best hockey he's played with the Rangers, and Shanahan has been scoring since coming back from injury. They just have to stay focused down the stretch, and there should be a high seed waiting for them at the end of the season.

I love the quote. It's arrogant, stupid, and unnecessary. Awesome.

I agree on Teixeira. He makes the most sense in '09.

Giambi's bought out at the end of the year.

Well I'll wait to see what happens in New York. I can see how it could become a problem because Girardi seems to be a demanding manager, but with this clubhouse belonging to Jeter, Rivera, and Pettitte, I can't imagine a mutiny happening in the Bronx. So far so good, anyway.

If Manny's option isn't picked up, he could end up with the Yankees. I think that's the threat he's making. My take is that Manny picked up Boras to say just that. Boras clients always go to free agency when they have a chance (even if they don't want to, apparently). Boras clients also tend to sign the biggest paycheck, which the Yankees might put out there. It puts pressure on Boston to pick up the option. Honestly I don't think he'd come here anyway. I don't see him fitting in that clubhouse. It would be interesting to see him go on the market, and watch Hank play 'The Boss' and go after him, while Hal does the smart thing and lets him go elsewhere.

Yeah Girardi is probably the only manager in the league who wouldn't deal with Bonds' crap. Bonds always gets along so well with everyone. Anyway besides the whole 'why bother with this *******' argument, we already have an overabundance of left fielders and DHs, I don't see why Bonds fills a need. My guess is nobody signs him until the season gets underway, and somebody gets desperate after a key injury.

There are enough distractions in Yankee camp. Great for a fantasy team or a video game team. Not someone you want in the clubhouse.

I can live with Jeter's fielding. If he gets to the ball, he makes the play. His range isn't good, but he's not f***ing up routine grounders. He's also very good with pop-ups and relays, two important aspects for a shortstop. There is no way he deserved the Gold Glove awards. I just think the talk of how bad he is defensively is exaggerated. I think the fact that he's a smart ballplayer is undervalued when people are talking about his defense. Knowing where to throw, where to position yourself, when to make calls are all very important aspects of playing the position, and he is good at that. (Of course, A-Rod was better. I pushed for Jeter in centerfield when we got Rodriguez.)

If a slot opens up I'd be interested. I like playing fantasy with you guys. I was runner up in the last two Talksox leagues I was in.

The only reason this matters is because it hurts the Sox depth in the rotation. Besides that, it doesn't really make that much of a difference. They weren't depending upon Schilling to give them that much this year, and were probably expecting an injury at some point anyway. I do like the Sox forcing him to not get the surgery though. That way when he comes back still injured at the ASB, he can cost them a game or two before shutting it down for good.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/news/story?id=3207592

The call was made because McNamee's 10 year old son was sick, and he emailed Clemens about it. Clemens emailed him back, then the call was made. The call was legally recorded because in the states on New York and Texas only one party must consent to the recording of the call, in this case Clemens. Clemens couldn't come out and say "tell them I didn't take steroids." That would be witness tampering. Clemens was definitely advised by his lawyer to be very cautious with his responses, so he doesn't do anything illegal. McNamee looks bad if you listen to the convo. He never said Clemens did take steroids, which is really not good for his side.

This is the disposition against McNamee in the defamation suit. http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080107/mlb_clemens.pdf Pretty clear, unequivocal statements by Clemens. Between that and the phone conversation, McNamee is not in a good spot right now.

The thing that jumped out at me, and the big difference between Clemens and Bonds- Bonds did not file a defamation lawsuit. The suit opens Clemens up to cross examination and allows the defense to pry into his personal life. If he has something to hide, it'll come out in court for the defense. Defamation lawsuits are no joke. For a statement to be defamatory it needs to be specific, untrue, published to a third party, and most importantly- the prosecution needs to prove damages. I studied a lot of 1st amendment law last year, and the fact that Clemens has filed the lawsuit carries a lot of weight. Most celebrities never do it in something scandalous. Kobe was found not guilty of rape, which was a pretty damning charge the girl put forward. It cost him hundreds of millions of dollars in endorsements and killed his reputation. Kobe never filed a defamation suit because then the burden was on him to prove the girl was lying. Same situation now. If Clemens used steroids, he's to have a hell of time proving he didn't to a jury. The burden is going to be on Clemens to prove McNamee was lying, and it'll be interesting to see how far this progresses. To quote my professor- the ultimate, unbeatable defense to slander and libel is the truth. A case like this, the one that proves to be telling the truth wins.

That's called roid rage.

Allegedly. Just seems weird to me. They're able to implicate a ton of Yankees and no Mets? My take on it is that a huge percentage of players are in fact using, so there's no real shock. Knoblauch made me laugh though.

How do they interview Radmonski, trainer from the Mets, and not have one Met in the report? That doesn't fit right to me. Andy Pettitte has been my favorite player since I was a kid. I'm curious to see his public response, which according to his agent will be coming after they read the report. Pettitte's citation in the report was when he was rehabbing his elbow, so I want to see his spin on it. I'm not really that broken up about it, but it does suck that he's in it.