Some news

Dave · June 21, 2007 at 10:35 am · Filed Under Mariners 

A couple of quick items that deserve mention on the blog.

Ryan Feierabend is replacing Cha Seung Baek in the rotation, and will start on Friday night against the Reds. Baek probably didn’t deserve to lose his rotation spot so quickly, but for one game at least, it’s a better matchup – the Reds are a significantly better offense against RHP than LHP, and Feierabend should have more success against the Reds LH sluggers. I’m glad to see Feierabend get another look in the rotation, honestly, and Baek’s still around to replace Weaver if he struggles again in his next few starts.

Also, the A’s rid themselves of Milton Bradley today, designating him for assignment. This is now the fourth organization that has decided that they don’t want him around even when he’s playing well, as the Expos, Indians, Dodgers, and now the A’s have all come to the conclusion that he’s just not worth the trouble. He’s probably running out of chances, at this point. This definitely makes the A’s a worse team on the field, however, so it’s somewhat good news for the Mariners.

Comments

76 Responses to “Some news”

  1. shortbus on June 21st, 2007 10:47 am

    Will the Bradley DFA mean more playing time for Doyle?

  2. Dave on June 21st, 2007 10:48 am

    Doyle’s not healthy. Again. It’s sad, really.

  3. colm on June 21st, 2007 10:50 am

    Blimey, how much trouble can one player be? He hasn’t punched a fan in ages now. He seems to have spent quite a bit of his time with the A’s on the DL. I wonder if that soured them on him.

  4. carcinogen on June 21st, 2007 10:53 am

    Any spot for Bradley on another club?

  5. smb on June 21st, 2007 10:53 am

    It is sad. One of the few guys to leave Seattle that I’ve actually wished health and big numbers for.

    FYI,
    Sighting of Junior Griffey in the M&S Fish House on 4th last night. Welcome back, Junior!!

  6. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:01 am

    We’re not privy to all of the interactions in the clubhouse. We have no idea what Bradley has been doing or saying, we do know he soured every team before the A’s. The A’s are usually a little more tolerant of bad attitudes than most teams, but something made them decide to drop him. As much as chemistry is overrated by media, front offices, and casual fans, it doesn’t mean having someone with a very, very bad attitude doesn’t cause problems. I think there is some merit to chemistry, but it’s hard to gauge how players and managers will interact. Sometimes bad attitudes work for the team, but I suspect more often than not, there is some detriment. The question then becomes, does the talent outweigh the negative aspects of a players attitude/actions. Like I said, we don’t know everything that’s been going on behind the scene with the A’s.

  7. waitin_4_series on June 21st, 2007 11:02 am

    Billy Beane has been making a lot of moves lately. Anyone have any opinions on how good/bad they might be? Jeremy Brown (one of the moneyball guys) was passed through waivers and taken off the 40 man roster. Their back up catcher (Melhuse) was traded to Texas and number of pitchers were signed to minor league contracts. With 10 players on the DL for most of the season, its amazing that Oakland is in 2nd place. Why can’t we find guys like Jack Cust?

  8. Edgar For Pres on June 21st, 2007 11:03 am

    So…I know we don’t have room for him but some team will probably be happy to pick him up.

  9. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:04 am

    We can’t find the Jack Custs of the world because we are bad at evaluating talent, and the A’s are very good at it.

  10. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:09 am

    Jack Cust was a classic low risk pickup, he had some potential to be good, and the A’s knew it and took a flier on him. We’ve done some of that over the last couple years with pitchers (Barzado, Carvajal, Foppert), but none of them stuck. That’s partly luck partly poor talent evaluation. The other problem is when someone that’s not a “proven veteran” actually does well, we pigeon hole them in AAA or trade them off.

  11. joser on June 21st, 2007 11:09 am

    You know, I don’t really have a problem with a 4 man rotation plus two swing guys who either slip into the 5th spot or get used for long relief. If you actually plan it that way, and have a staff suited to it, it may actually be a better way to set things up. Of course, it looks like the M’s are doing it because they’ve been forced there by the general suckiness of the starters. Still, just as with the removal of Mateo (as well as use of the bench in interleague play), sometimes circumstances can force a bad manager to unwillingly (and perhaps uniwttingly) adopt a better strategy.

  12. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:17 am

    Also the Cust pickup is a lot like Johan Santana or David Ortiz, a guy that teams gave up on because he took too long to develop. Striking gold on guys like that is more the exception than the norm. It’s largely luck, but you still have to tip the hat to the guys who see enough talent to make a move like that.

  13. marc w on June 21st, 2007 11:18 am

    “Jack Cust was a classic low risk pickup, he had some potential to be good, and the A’s knew it and took a flier on him. We’ve done some of that over the last couple years with pitchers (Barzado, Carvajal, Foppert), but none of them stuck.”

    All of the M’s pickups have been made in trade, and generally for moderately high-value guys. I mean, Villone was coming off a good year, Randy Winn was a legit starter, etc. The Carvajal thing was a bit different, though I’m beginning to wonder if Colorado knew something the rest of the league didn’t, considering how fast he went from MLB reliever to MiLB failure.
    Oakland’s MO has been to acquire AAAA guys that no one wants. They’re PTBNL or cash deals. You almost get the sense that the M’s consider such things beneath them; why go dumpster diving when we can hand $4m to Carl Everett? Or much more to Jose Vidro?

    I actually wish the M’s were more willing to at least take a shot at guys like Knott/Witt/Cust. But if they’re not willing at this point to take a ‘chance’ on Adam Jones, it’s simply asking too much. sigh.

  14. bermanator on June 21st, 2007 11:19 am

    You wonder where Bradley will wind up. Which team thinks that it will have the magical approach that can keep him from disrupting the rest of the squad?

    Giving up Ethier for him won’t go down as one of Beane’s finer deals.

  15. marc w on June 21st, 2007 11:24 am

    I’m not sure that Cust has developed, either. He’s exactly the same as he’s always been, a guy who can’t catch, who won’t hit for average and who’s something of a pain.
    Most teams see that list of negatives and write him off. He just happened to stumble on to a team that sees the freakish OBP, good power, and put him in a position to succeed.

    It’s weird how teams can write off guys for not being what they thought. Like, once it was clear that Cust wasn’t going to be a .300/.430/.600 guy, they shipped him along. Maybe his winning personality had something to do with that, but you’d think SOMEONE else would want a .250/.400/.530 guy. I would.

  16. darrylzero on June 21st, 2007 11:24 am

    Yeah, I mean, if the A’s aren’t willing to tolerate him to keep his talent on the field, who does that leave? The Nationals I guess, maybe, if he can still really play center.

  17. darrylzero on June 21st, 2007 11:27 am

    Re: Cust

    Is he truly a .250/.400/.530 guy either? Hasn’t Dave been saying he can’t hit breaking stuff at all? And that as soon as he faces a series of pitchers who can actually throw good curveballs for strikes, he’ll look god-awful?

    I mean, obviously, he could improve in that, and he might not be as bad at it as Dave was saying, but we shouldn’t all forget Chris Shelton so quickly, methinks.

  18. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:28 am

    I’m also not sure Cust is THIS good anyway, but I’m also not willing to say that yet, he’s a good good bat whether he can sustain this kind of level or not

  19. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 11:29 am

    I didn’t mean he’s a good good bat, that second good snuck in there somehow :)

  20. marc w on June 21st, 2007 11:33 am

    Sure, yeah, he’s probably got some room to fall from here.

    But again, that .400 OBP is fairly solid, given his years of 120+ walks in the minors.

    The point though, is that even if he DROPS to something like .230/.390/.440 which would be a huge drop (and the drop can be mitigated with careful platooning), that’s still a fairly nice thing to have, isn’t it? And while most teams look at his K’s or BA, if you look past those things, he’s a decent piece at DH or off the bench. And ANYONE could have had him.

  21. Dave on June 21st, 2007 11:43 am

    So here’s the deal with Cust – he’s a known ‘roider, and a pretty crappy person. His teammates and coaches universally hate the guy. He also has no defensive value and can’t run the bases. He also can’t hit a breaking ball.

    Put all those pretty large deficincies together, and there just aren’t many organizations willing to employ a guy like that. If he was a better human being, he’d have had a job in the majors a few years ago. But, I have a hard time getting on teams for not wanting to have a guy like Jack Cust in the organization.

  22. Grizz on June 21st, 2007 11:44 am

    Assuming someone will claim Bradley even if Beane cannot trade him, it frees up $2 million in salary to spend on a new acquisition.

  23. joser on June 21st, 2007 11:52 am

    Yeah, I think Beane is clearing the decks for whatever move(s) he’s going to make at the deadline. In a way that’ll be just gravy this year, since he’s got a fair number of impact guys who should be coming off the DL in the second half (which will force him to juggle things so getting rid of deadwood like MB helps there too).

  24. Evan on June 21st, 2007 11:53 am

    I’d claim Bradley. He’d be effectively Vidro’s bat with some defensive value.

  25. Dave on June 21st, 2007 11:54 am

    Yea, because we need someone else in Adam Jones’ way.

  26. marc w on June 21st, 2007 11:58 am

    “Put all those pretty large deficincies together, and there just aren’t many organizations willing to employ a guy like that.”

    And yet the M’s gave $4m to Carl Everett, with almost an identical set of deficiencies. You’ve got a big-time roider who walked out on his team that signed a 1 year deal in Texas, and may make more next year.
    Cust brings a certain set of positives/negatives to the table, and I still find it moderately surprising that he didn’t get more of a shot – even with the A’s when he played for Sacto a few years back.

    Did he mellow out or something? All that work on teaching the Kids the Jack Cust way?

  27. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:02 pm

    Well, I’m certainly never going to defend the Everett signing. I’m just trying to help explain why Cust never got a shot.

  28. SDRE on June 21st, 2007 12:03 pm

    Jacque Jones is rumored to be headed to Texas. Texas might as well take a flyer on Milton instead. They’ll probably need a couple of outfielders when they dump Lofton and Sosa.

  29. joser on June 21st, 2007 12:04 pm

    Two days after the Yankees said they were the first to sign players with approval of China’s baseball association, the Mariners announced they had signed Chinese infielder-outfielder Yu Bing Jia and catcher Wei Wang.

    Whatever the skills and talents of these guys (Dave?), that catcher better come up with an “English” (nick-) name quick, or he’s going to get teased unmercifully whenever he gets over here. (Yeah, the proper Mandarin pronunciation doesn’t sound the way it looks, but what difference is that going to make?)

  30. dw on June 21st, 2007 12:11 pm

    Cust is still a jerk who can’t hit a curveball. He was dirt cheap, but think about this — he couldn’t stick with the Rockies because he couldn’t hit. Five years on, it seems like he’s finally figured out just enough plate patience to wait for the fastball. 154 PA, 31 BB, 50 K’s, 10 HRs — he’s a dirt cheap version of TTO poster boy Adam Dunn.

    And has been said before, there were a dozen Cust-type players out there who would cost a NRI or a minimum deal. All the M’s had to do was sign them….

  31. That Bootleg Guy on June 21st, 2007 12:12 pm

    Dave…outside of Cust’s on the field shortcomings (hitting the breaking pitch, slow, poor defense) I’d never heard anything about steroids or attitude. Those are pretty serious accusations and I’ve been reading this site long enough to know that you wouldn’t pull them out of your arse. Still, as an A’s fan and unabshed lover of locker room scuttlebutt, I’m curious as to how you know this with such certainty?

  32. colm on June 21st, 2007 12:13 pm

    That’s an unusually direct criticsm of Cust. I take it you’re not setting any sort of precedent? Or laying yourself open to a libel suit?

  33. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:16 pm

    Cust’s steroid usage and overall lousiness as a person are well known within baseball.

  34. the other benno on June 21st, 2007 12:16 pm

    re chemistry, I think that ‘team chemistry’ and having a guy on the team who has personality issues are not the same thing. I’ve always assumed that the ‘chemistry’ of which beat writers and managers speak is on the order of group bonding, not really having anything to do with an individual’s personality. I would think that guys with the reputations of Cust and Bradley would actually enhance team chemistry as it gives something for everyone else to bond over (we may have nothing else in common, but we all sure do hate that asshole over there).

    FYI – ESPN has an article on Page 2 about this year’s Long Island Ducks roster, which includes 2 ex M’s – Jurassic Carl and John Halama.

  35. dw on June 21st, 2007 12:17 pm

    Dunn 2007: 292 PA, 35 BB, 94 K’s, 20 HR
    Cust 2007: 154 PA, 31 BB, 50 K’s, 10 HR

    Cust is walking a hell of a lot more, giving him a 56 point edge in OBP. Otherwise, he’s tracking right with Dunn.

    Teams are going to dangle blue chip prospects in front of the Reds next month when they try and deal for Dunn, and they could have had the same player for a sub-$1M deal in the off-season. Obviously, no one expected Cust to finally get it together, but still, the Angels could have had him in Salt Lake and not have to let go of Howie Kendrick when the dealing time begins.

  36. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:19 pm

    Uhh, the Angels aren’t trading Howie Kendrick.

    And, again, Cust not getting a job had far more to do with who he is than how teams viewed his hitting ability.

  37. dw on June 21st, 2007 12:21 pm

    I’m not advocating for anything here. I’m just reinforcing the point that these sorts of guys are sitting right in the remainder bin. Even if they’re wastes of humanity and second comings of Pete Rose like Cust.

  38. dw on June 21st, 2007 12:22 pm

    Uhh, the Angels aren’t trading Howie Kendrick.

    I know. But it was the first Angels prospect that popped into my head.

    I don’t have your uber-prospect brain, Dave. :)

  39. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 12:22 pm

    I believe in chemistry both good and bad, but teams should be careful of assuming cause and effect, did the Chemistry cause a team to play well, or did playing well cause the good chemistry? I suspect the latter is more often what happens, but teams, media, and local fans put way too much emphasis on it. It obviously exists, and I’m sure the extra motivation of having fun and being happy with your team mates may have motivated more than a few players and teams to do better, but it’s just not something to build around or try and predict.

  40. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:25 pm

    Chemistry is a lot different than just having a minimum character level that you won’t go below in an employee. Cust fell below that line for a lot of teams, to where it’s no longer a risk/reward argument, but it’s just a not-compromising-our-standards decision.

  41. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:26 pm

    I know. But it was the first Angels prospect that popped into my head.

    He’s not really a prospect as much as he is the best young second baseman in baseball and the Angels 3rd or 4th best hitter.

  42. John L. Morgan on June 21st, 2007 12:30 pm

    Has anyone ever tried a fifth starter platoon? It would seem a lefty/righty compliment could be more valuable than the sum of its parts.

  43. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 12:30 pm

    I realize that. I suspect Elijah Dukes is going to go down a similar path unless he really puts up some awesome numbers somewhere. Someone will give him the chance, but he’ll be on a short leash everywhere he goes, especially if he keeps making headlines like he has. There’s a point when it’s not worth the trouble.

  44. TheEmrys on June 21st, 2007 12:33 pm

    Chemistry is a cult. If you buy into it, drink the kool-aid, and win, you have chemistry.

  45. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 12:37 pm

    I don’t think it’s just that winning creates chemistry, just like any business you’ll get better effort if there’s good morale. The problem is, as has been discussed here, plenty, is better effort does not overcome better talent, and it’s hard to quantify anyway. Sometimes guys just have good years.

  46. Max Power on June 21st, 2007 12:38 pm

    I suspect Elijah Dukes is going to go down a similar path

    Elijah Dukes is on another level. There’s a radio interview with him posted on a Tampa website – it’s beyond description.

  47. Dave on June 21st, 2007 12:40 pm

    Elijah Dukes belongs in jail.

  48. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 12:42 pm

    Also, people react differntly to different stimulus. Making things fun and easy going makes some people lazier, and motivates some. Threat of losing a job has the same effect, some people quit caring, some people try harder.

    I hadn’t heard the Dukes interview, but yeah, he’s on a different level, and makes guys like Bradley or Guillen look like choir boys. He has a lot of talent though, so someone will take a look when the Rays finally gives up, if he’s not in jail.

  49. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 12:48 pm

    Baek should probably take the Mateo role over (long/middle relief low SO Flyball guy), getting starts as needed for platoon reasons or to rest someone, until someone goes down or Weaver turns back into a pumpkin. There’s no way on earth he’s worse than Mateo, who I’m glad to finally be rid of.

  50. carcinogen on June 21st, 2007 12:48 pm

    Here’s the link to the article that will feed you to the audio file:

  51. carcinogen on June 21st, 2007 12:49 pm

    Don’t know why that didn’t work…

    Here’s the link to the article that will feed you to the audio file:

  52. joser on June 21st, 2007 12:53 pm

    I don’t think it’s just that winning creates chemistry, just like any business you’ll get better effort if there’s good morale.

    But you definitely get good morale if you’re winning. You see it right here at USSM: how was the general morale of posters 10 days agao when the team was in the midst of its hot streak? How was it this past weekend? You see it in business too: during the tech boom, at many companies you could sense how the stock was doing just by the overall energy in the offices. If the stock was up, people would put up with a lot more crap and jump into things with a smile on their faces; when it was down, every other little setback and indignity seemed magnified. “Winning” created the morale, not the other way around (and it certainly trumped interpersonal “team chemistry”).

  53. westfried on June 21st, 2007 1:32 pm

    I see “chemistry” as more of a virtuous/vicious cycle. I’ve been on teams that won a lot – we expected to win every time out, and we played better than the sum of our parts.

    That exact same team, when bumped to a higher level of competition, started losing. We got to a point where we lost every game… and we EXPECTED to lose every game. We were worse than ever, and lost to teams we should have beaten.

    That exact same team, when bumped back to the level we dominated, continued losing. Same players, same competition. The difference in attitude was palpable – we expected to lose, and so we were far worse than the sum of our parts.

    The Mariners, in recent years, have learned how to lose. The resignation, the successive days of flat offense, the rallies that always seem to fall short.

    And, despite what the Mariners FO tells us, you can’t force a winning attitude on a team. A “fiery presence” will just be a jerk if you’re losing.

  54. coasty141 on June 21st, 2007 1:48 pm

    Any body have an idea why the angels are so good at home? 26-10

  55. Chris Miller on June 21st, 2007 1:53 pm

    They’ve given up a lot less homeruns at home for one.

  56. Beniitec on June 21st, 2007 1:53 pm

    Yes. Vlad likes it there.

  57. carcinogen on June 21st, 2007 1:57 pm

    In other news: Adam Jones still in Tacoma.

  58. pumpkinhead on June 21st, 2007 2:19 pm

    54- My guess is that they tend to score more runs than their opponents do at home.

    Happy Felix day! I have a feeling he’s gonna return to true form tonight.

  59. Typical Idiot Fan on June 21st, 2007 2:22 pm

    Yea, because we need someone else in Adam Jones’ way.

    It took 24 posts, but I know you were waiting for someone to say “sign Bradley!”.

    Cust sounds a lot like Casey Craig, though I don’t know of any ‘roiding issues with Craig.

  60. Bearman on June 21st, 2007 2:50 pm

    Bradley has been either traded,DFAed,and/or released by 4 MLB clubs in the last what 5 yrs the A’s being the most recent.
    Apparently the man has issues and is best off most likely with a contender that those “issues” are mute.The NYY’s come to mind as such a club who might take a flyer on him.

    However I wouldn’t with the likes of Adam Jones,Balitein,even Mike Wilson down at AAA T-town who are near or flat out MLB ready suggest signing him if the A’s with there injury bug is giving him the DFA treatment.

  61. Bearman on June 21st, 2007 2:59 pm

    As to the Feierabend for Baek in the rotation I can see the reason for the move.The Reds are having a diffcult time with LHPing this season.
    With the shortage of good RHBs,Feierabend is much better suited to deal with LHedness of the Reds lineup.

    I also buy the ides of needing for now a second LHPer in the rotation to breakup the RHPing jam.
    However that doesn’t change the possible other scenrios involved here:
    1)The DFAing of one or more pitchers most likely of Ramirez and Reitsma when activated off the DL.
    2)Possible trade in the works that may bring a #2 SP to the M’s (unlikely but who knows).
    3)Neither Trade nor DFA just a sent down of say either Felix and/or Washburn to recoup their control and get over any “dead arm” troubles

  62. Gomez on June 21st, 2007 4:17 pm

    60. This brings up an interesting question for Dave: Dave, any idea what has become of Michael Wilson? He went on that 2-for-dozens slide to start the year and then went AWOL. Did he get hurt? Did I miss a transaction that should be common knowledge?

  63. Dave on June 21st, 2007 4:25 pm

    I haven’t heard official word, but I think Michael Wilson’s baseball career is over.

  64. Evan on June 21st, 2007 4:36 pm

    Elijah Dukes belongs in jail.

    To be fair, so does Mateo.

  65. Evan on June 21st, 2007 4:38 pm

    Yea, because we need someone else in Adam Jones’ way.

    That is a bit of a problem, yes. But, since both Bradley and Jones are better than either Guillen or Vidro, that’s two guys worth replacing, and two guys with whom to do it.

    I will grant that grabbing Bradley and then benching Guillen to give him playing time would probably turn the M’s clubhouse into a timebomb.

  66. rainiersfan on June 21st, 2007 4:51 pm

    ESPN’s transactions show that the Mariners signed Matt Mangini

  67. Ralph Malph on June 21st, 2007 4:54 pm

    Elijah Dukes belongs in jail.

    To be fair, so does Mateo.

    Granted this is probably true. But I have seen the press get things wrong enough times to not assume the truth of everything I read in the papers about things of this sort.

    I seem to recall some news stories early on about a certain rape case in Durham NC that turned out to not be entirely correct.

  68. Ralph Malph on June 21st, 2007 4:56 pm

    Apparently the man has issues and is best off most likely with a contender that those “issues” are mute.

    If the issues were mute, we wouldn’t be able to hear them because they’d be silent. I assume you meant to say “moot”, but this would not be a correct use of the word “moot”.

  69. eponymous coward on June 21st, 2007 4:59 pm

    I will grant that grabbing Bradley and then benching Guillen to give him playing time would probably turn the M’s clubhouse into a timebomb.

    Uh, why are we grabbing Bradley to start with? He’s an upgrade on Guillen, but not a huge one (the injury history makes Guillen and Vidro look like Cal Ripken, with exactly ONE season with 140 games in 8 MLB seasons), and Jones and Broussard are inhouse options if you want to change the mix of players without adding someone who’s widely viewed as a jerk.

    Wold I take a cheap offseason flyer on the guy to fill out a roster? Maybe. But at this point, I’d rather give Broussard and Jones playing time rather than import clubhouse cancers in a season where you’re tottering on the brink, anyway.

  70. colm on June 21st, 2007 5:28 pm

    Just love that idea of Bradley and Guillen in the same clubhouse. Hilarious. Bring back crazy Carl. Trade for that Dukes nut-job. Whoopee!

    It’d bloody liven up Mike Hargrove, that’s for sure.

  71. Bullpen Joe on June 21st, 2007 5:55 pm

    In other news of the day, Wladimir Balentien and Michael Saunders have been named to the 2007 Futures Game, to be played July 8 and broadcast on ESP2. Complete info and rosters at minorleaguebaseball.com.

  72. fetish on June 21st, 2007 9:59 pm

    Question, how lucky have the A’s been in picking up low-risk guys compared to other teams? Is it just a matter of them picking up so many that at least some of them had to hit?

    I seem to recall a certain John Mabry, who wasn’t fit to carry Raul Ibanez’s jock strap when he played in Seattle, turning into a world-beater in Oakland. I mean, that’s gotta be some luck right there.

  73. dbookey on June 21st, 2007 11:52 pm

    How so? What happened to him?

    “Dave Says:

    I haven’t heard official word, but I think Michael Wilson’s baseball career is over.”

  74. blee1134 on June 22nd, 2007 12:24 am

    Cust couldnt find a job because he was a known roider? Give me a break. The entire minor and major leagues are filled with “known roiders”.

    He’s a jerk? Jose Guillen isnt though. Carl Everett? Nah. Milton Bradley’s found a few teams interested and will find another within the next couple days. The Padres sure jumped all over Michael Barrett.

    He couldnt get a job because there are only so many DH spots to go around. Of those, I’d say the majority dont hold much value in a guy that would K 200 times in a season

  75. Typical Idiot Fan on June 22nd, 2007 3:37 am

    blee,

    Considering the fiasco surrounding Jason Giambi right now, exactly why is it so hard to believe that ‘roiding wouldn’t be the true issue? Pile on the “jerk” factor, and it doesn’t sound all that far fetched to me at all.

    Just because Oakland was desparate enough to get him doesn’t mean that other teams would turn up their nose at the stench surrounding him.

  76. blee1134 on June 24th, 2007 10:30 am

    If Cust doesnt go into a prolonged slump, there will be plenty of teams interested in him this offseason.

    I’ll use Guillen again. He’s a jerk. And if we can be honest, he’s probably a known juicer too. But he keeps finding teams

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.