Will -

Did you find it surprising that Edes left out the fact that Houston paid Roger 22 million (prorated) last year? Indeed, the comparison he makes (Boston's offer of 18 million to Yanks winning bid of 28) plays right into the PR manual of the Boston front office. By leaving out the 22 from last year, he makes the Yanks seem much more unreasonable, when in fact the Sox had no intention of ever entering the serious discussion.

I seriously can't stand the "mercenary" debate. What a load of crap. As far as I know, not one single team in MLB is comprised 100% of players who only came up through their farm system exclusively.

These guys are all mercenaries. So are the teams. Teams trade players all the time and the players can't really do anything about it. But when the greatest pitcher since WWII hops from team to team, apparently it makes him a bad person?

What a bunch of nonsense.

Miss Suz sounds like she smoked about 4 packs of Lucky's prior to that psychotic episode she had! HAHA!

The whole "family clause" debate is disingenuous on the part of so many of the pundits out on talk radio today and yesterday. Almost every superstar in sports has special clauses in their contract that separate them from their peers. Barry Bonds with the lounge chair. Giambi with the personal trainer. Dice-K with the personal masseuse (among many other perks written into the contract we hear). I mean - c'mon. All the upper echelon players are spoiled beyond our wildest dreams, and the lower tier players are jealous. This latest "family clause" wrinkle is no different. The fewer of these players available - the greater the perks teams are willing to give. It's simple supply and demand at work.

This signing is great talk show fodder, offering many more reasons for people to rail against The Yankees.

Boring.

I can't believe Clemens wants a lot of money. What an idiot. Why can't he be more like Beckett and Schilling???

Of course it was a 'distress signing'. If ever there was a rotation in distress, it's the Yankees'. And yeah, the front office threw a huge, "nobody's going to do better than this so just sign now" deal onto the table, and it had it's effect. Is this fiscally irresponsible?
Well, it's one year, so whatever financial damage it does is very limited. Second, paying $4 million/win is not exactly Billyball, but if it makes the difference between playoffs and no playoffs, then Steinbrenner will certainly regard it as money well spent.

I love listening to RSN tell each other what a loser Clemens is. I'll never get tired of it. (Unless he starts losing, then I'll get tired of it real fast.)

Suzyn sounds like a crazed muppet.

Clemens' perks through the media lens = much ado about nothing.

I heard Richard Justice on XM yesterday with Charlie Steiner. He basically re-iterated his column. It started with "Houston is too boring for Rocket, so he packed up and left for the bright lights and the big city." Blah blah blah bs bs bs.

3 minutes later, Justice gave what I feel is the real reason Clemens picked the Yanks and not Houston - in NY, he's playing with the best offense in the game. In Houston, it'd be another year of giving up 2.3 runs a game and watching the inept Houston offense score no runs for him.

I've ignored everything RSN and its media hordes have said about Clemens. The bitterness, though, is very palpable.

Discussion question - should we refer to ESPN as RSPN (R for Red Sox) or FSPN (F for football)? I can't decide which, and FRSPN, while perhaps most accurate, sounds weird.

7I've seen it referred to as NESPN (as in NESN) before, which seems fairly accurate.

6 While I know it's a long way down from when Kay and Sterling did creditable radio during the best recent years of the Yankees, I sometimes think Suzyn gets a little too much grief. She does try, and is more knowledgeable than many give her credit for.

But when I heard her bleating about the Clemens announcement when driving home Sunday, I was sure my eardrum had pierced. It was like listening to a sputtering air raid siren.

i've been surprised by how hard some are taking this in boston. at that price and at his age, i'm glad the sox didn't sign him, even if i can also remember when he was big in this town.

I thought Leiter made a good point about Clemens last night on the broadcast - he mentioned that in Houston, Clemens was pitching NOT to lose, since he knew he wouldn't be getting too much run support. Hence he would throw more pitches in the span of 5 or 6 innings.

With the Yanks, Clemens could be more aggressive and go after hitters since he knows the run support will be there...

Meanwhile Here's McAdam trilling the same $10 million "gap":

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2862383

Am I the only bothered that Sox writers conveniently leave out the fact that Boston's offer was a low-ball considering Hoston's 2006 salary.

I can accept that the Sox didn't want or need him. But to pull the wool over their more gullible fans? Just weird - it's the same nonsense they pulled on Damon and Pedro. "It's not our fault - we tried - the player was just greedy!"

I'm just surprised the Boston media helps them out.

9 I can't stand Waldman...her presence on really ruins what is an enjoyable thing about baseball...play-by-play on the radio. O course, since Kay left, Sterling hasn't been much better (nor has Kay). I'd gladly take a booth of Singleton/Leiter/Girardi-Flaherty every game.

11 Like many veteran pitchers, I think Clemens pitches to the score. Sometimes you can dismiss Wins as a team dependent stat, but my gut tells me it's a little more by design with Clemens.

11 Hey, that is a good point.
(Nothing like hearing a reason to believe exactly what you want to believe!)

On a completely unrelated note...I was racking my brain last night trying to figure out why Matt DeSalvo's name was so familiar to me (beyond knowing he was a Yankee ml'er). I thought perhaps there was another DeSalvo in MLB, but he was actually the first. Then it hit me...DeSalvo is an infamous last name in this country's anals of crime. I shudder to think of what the Post's headline would be if he ever beats the Red Sox.

As a Yankees fan in New Hampshire (northern RSN) I has never heard Susan until that clip. Wow (1) She must have testicles (2) How does a voice like that get on the radio?

Talking about Clemens salary and if he's worth it is a little like a bunch of Sumo wrestlers discussing who's fat. We are long past the point of 'financial insanity' in MLB, so I guess nothing is shocking.

Moose put it perfectly. If/when Hughes joins the rotation, we basicall have a #1.5 starter and 4 - #2.5 starters.

I feel like a sneakered socialist amongst many wing-tipped capitalists, but I think the 'special treatment' clauses are bullshit, and terrible for the game. Yes, Bonds, Giambi and many others have it, but that's like Paris Hilton saying her behavior is fine, because she acts just like Lindsey and Brittany.

I'm sure the Yankees players were 'fine' with it, but really, they're not. Sports is one place where, in the locker room, everyone is equal.

My feeling is that MLB should make some laws. All players should travel with the team (with special exceptions, of course... health, family emergency, etc), if you DON'T sign/play a full year, there are HEAVY financial penalties, and other rules to try to ensure that these 'special' clauses don't become more frequent or more 'exceptional'. I know there are a lot of 'live and let live' folks here, but baseball is a game with rules, history and traditions.

Roger, even after this year, still has done 50%+ of everything in Boston. I always think of him as a Red Sox. To go into the hall as anything else, is wrong. Buying players is one thing, but buying a legacy is another.

Of we we are way overpaying for him. Santana must be thinking "If Clem gets $28/m, what am I worth". Value-wise, Santana is worth 1.5-2 times what Roger is. It's worth it for us, because it's one year, and it could be the difference between PS or not.

Maybe you can answer this question Will.
How much per game (3-5) in the ALDS worth in income to the Yanks?
How much per game (4-7) in the ALCS worth in income to the Yanks?
How much per game (4-7) in the WS worth in income to the Yanks?
If you know these numbers, you can better calculate if this is a 'sound' financial decision.

I have been hearing alot of Steven A Smith and other talk show hosts that thought the Yankees should have passed on Clemens.Because he wasn't brought on board the Yankee Way. Why so the Red Sox pick him up and have a starting rotation of Schilling, Becket, Clemens, Matsusake, Wakefield etc.... and the yankees can start another Rookie and everyone (Steven A Smith) piss' and moan the Yankees did nothing to help the pitching staff. My thoughts are ESPN and Fat Mike and the Angry Puppy can only stir shit up and they don't really have a decent point ever! I think the shows are a joke, I wish somebody would start a real Sports Talk Show and call it the Voice of the People, not 2 birdbrains and a Mike oops Mic.
Thanks for letting me rant.

16 I have no problem with granting special clauses to special players. Personally, I consider it an honor to simply watch Clemens pitch, so you know where I am coming from. I also don't like the NFL mentality of everyone marching in lock step with the league, so for that reason I don't like your suggestions. Clemens didn't put a gun to anyone's head. If teams didn't want/need him, they don't have to offer him special privileges. Also, I have far less of a problem with granting a man permission to go home to his family than giving him his own chef, for example.

As for your question, Vince Gennaro at Hardball Times has gone to great lengths to assign players a dollar value. According to his 2005 analysis, Clemens would have been worth approximately $14mn had he played for the Yankees. He factors in a myriad of variables, including impact on making the playoffs, so that doesn't seem like a bad starting point.

i am a big fan of suzyn. I actually like her voice. I know, i know.

16 I have to respectfully disagree regarding the "special treatment" clauses, and your Paris Hilton analogy. Paris Hilton broke the law.

Roger Clemens is a very unique individual. He has a talent that is almost unmatched, and at the same time, he is of an advanced age relative to his peers. If the Yankees, or any other team, decide that his talents are needed, and so badly needed that they will make special accomodations to secure his services, I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

If it rubs other players the wrong way, tough. As soon as they are first ballot Hall of Famers, and arguably the best player ever at their position, I will consider their gripes.

I believe that Clemens has earned any special considerations that potential employers are willing to give him. I would bet that Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada would agree.

19 According to wikipedia, Suzyn Waldman was the 1979 bird calling champion in Point Pleasant, New Jersey.

Wikipedia also has the transcript of her Clemens analysis, calling it a sportsgasm:

"ROGER CLEMENS IS IN GEORGE'S BOX AND ROGER CLEMENS IS COMIN' BACK. OH MY GOOD--GOODNESS GRACIOUS! OF ALL THE DRAMATIC THI--OF ALL THE DRAMATIC THINGS I'VE EVER SEEN, ROGER CLEMENS STANDING RIGHT IN GEORGE STEINBRENNER'S BOX ANNOUNCING HE IS BACK! ROGER CLEMENS IS A NEW YORK YANKEE! AND THERE WE GO JOHN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO TAKE THAT SPOT IN THE ROTATION."

13 So, Sterling & Kay are better together because they basically neutralize each other's variation of sucktitude and create an interesting suck? I do miss the tension between the two, more interesting than Sterling/Steiner. Those two actively tried to outdo each other for Big Dog status, but Sterling & Kay complimented each other like FranDog, only... well, I dunno how different they are except that they obviously hated each other, which made it more entertaining.

15 You didn't have to work so hard, my friend. I noted that on the Rocket Redux thread. >;)

How exactly did Waldman get that job anyway? Could they not find a former player to be in the booth with Sterling? Players like Singleton, Kaat, Murcer, Leiter, Girardi and even Flaherty give great insight that can only come from playing the game. What insight does Waldman provide? She can quote stats and tell stories about how she was talking to one of the players the other day, but can she provide the level of commentary that comes from a former player? I don't think so.

One Sunday afternoon my wife and I were driving home from church listening to the game on XM and Waldman actually said: "Manny just stood there in the baseline like someone playing dodgeball". I had to laugh. Dodgeball, really? When the best you can do is draw from your vast "dodgeball" experience do you really belong in a MLB radio booth?

23 I don't know...I might prefer it to Sterling telling another Atlanta Hawks anecdote.

16 OYF - or should we call you singledd, or is that only at night? ;) -

Nate Silver of Baseball Prospectus has done some research that indicates a playoff appearance is worth $30 million to a team - and then there's even more money for each extra win Clemens adds.

So, if the Yanks didn't seem to have a good chance to make the playoffs before - BP's playoff odds report has them at 28% chance total (11% chance of winning the division, 17% of winning the WC, which is tops in the AL right now). If getting Clemens pushes them over the top, that alone could be worth $30M. Which would cover Roger's salary and then some.

If you're a BP subscriber, you can read the whole article at http://tinyurl.com/3c5p96. Their "Baseball Between the Numbers" book touches on this as well.

Regarding perks. Being a major league ballplayer includes all kinds of 'special perks' that most working people don't get. Like daily meal money. Private airplane travel for road trips. Staying in fancy hotel rooms. Laundry service. Clubhouse attendants to handle your every whim and request. The pre- and post- game food spreads. Free alcohol. And best of all, for some at least, a contractual bonus for being the best - or maybe one of the 10 best - at their job.

Distinguishing those things from the additional perks Clemens may get is, to me, splitting hairs.

18 & 20
Is it an honor to watch ARod? Is he special? How about Thome? Vlad? Manny? Santana? Hughes? Jeter? Was Mays? Mantle? Williams? Should I go on? How many 'Special' players have there been, and are playing now? And where do you cut the 'Special' line? How do you define it? Sori is a 40/40 guy. Pretty rare. Is he 'Special'?

And what about the numbers? How would Moose do if he only had to play 4 months instead of 6? Less tired? Relaxing at home while HIS team travels? Would this allow him to post a better ERA? W/L percentage?

Hey, if Clemens wants to up his lifetime strikeouts, maybe he can pitch 2 months next year. And Bonds? I got it. Bonds will rest his body all year, but have a decent work out. Then he works out hard in July and August, the signs with the leading AL team to be their DH in the Post Season. Hell, Bonds could probably do that for 3 more years.

You see, this is a 'slippery slope'. Who's special? How about a 3 month season? 2 months? Just the PS?

And what a Little League. Should 'Superstar' kids get special privilages? How about the minor leagues? After all, if the guys in the 'Bigs' get it, why not?

Part of baseball is the 162 game grind, the crappy travel, the late nights and early days. Should a pitcher who participates in the entire grind lose the ERA title to one who doesn't travel? Who gets more Home games? Who only grinds for 4 or 5 months?

When your grandchildren are playing baseball... do you want to recognize the sport?

15 FWIW, they picked up on it at USS Mariner

23 Just playing devil's advocate with you, Bama - who would you rather have in the booth with Sterling:

Waldman, or ex-player Joe Morgan?
Waldman, or ex-player Tim McCarver?
Waldman, or ex-player Steve Lyons?
Waldman, or ex-player John Kruk?
Waldman, or ex-player Dusty Baker?
Waldman, or ex-player Rex Hudler?

There's something to be said for not employing an ex-player. Too often, its the wrong kind of ex-player. That the Yanks have Singleton, Leiter, Flaherty, and Girardi is some kind of lucky. It could be a lot worse.

26 It depends. Much of your analogies don't hold water.

A roster has to be finalized during a certain point in the season for playoff eligibility. The players travel first class, there is no crappy travel. There are minimum qualifiers for ERA and batting titles and whatnot.

And 162 game grind or not, a starting pitcher's going to work in less than 40 of them.

This really isn't any different from co-workers that telecommute.

28 Yeah, we could have Paul Olden back in the broadcast booth.

22 I was about to mention that you fired the Albert DeSalvo salvo yesterday...

BTW, thanks Chyll for looking out for me during last nights thread. I left work during that discussion on the uniform colors and I didn't get to check back in with the game thread until the game was almost over. That "is there a doctor in the house" comment had me rolling...

26 Don't get in a tizzy about a slippery slope, no one's holding a gun to a club's head. They'll offer players perks/$ as long as the club feels it's to their benefit. Nothing more, nothing less.

Special treatment of aging stars goes back at least as far as the 30s. I seriously doubt any of the Jeter, Pettitte, or Giambi crowd has any problem with it.

28 Good point. It certainly could be a lot worse. But it could also be a lot better. As I have said on other issues, I would think that the Yankees would want to have the best possible people on the payroll at any given position (even in the broadcast booth). I mean, if people are not willing to accept Minky, Cairo and Nieves because we could do better, then why do we accept Waldman when we could certainly do better.

How about Alex or Cliff? Better yet, how about a radio booth of Alex and Cliff? We could eliminate Lumpy and Chuckles (names stolen from Sliced) altogether...

Will,

Love your insight as always.

I had a question for you and was hoping I could shoot you an e-mail - if you don't want to post it here, could you send me an e-mail at larry@thisiswhatwedonow.com?

Thanks

29 So it's just as easy for a player who plays 6 months as one who plays 4? Why isn't Roger playing 6 then? And with the current rules, can Bonds (hyperthetically) sign on as an AL DH in July and play in the PS? What if he signs in April... but just doesn't play or hang out with the team until July?

Maybe my examples weren't great, but do you get the idea? If GMs are allow to 'stretch' the rules to the max to accommodate 'special palyers', they will. And stats gained in partial years do count towards counting stats.

This year, will Roger have enough innings (barring injury) to qualify for the ERA title?

Again... I don't know where my examples stand. I know I don't like the idea of 'special' treatment for special players. I don't like the idea of players signing because the 'perks' were better. If it is not addressed it will get worse.