I heard some politican lying on the radio, too. And maybe the sun will set in the west tonight.

at some point an insurance company has to say no way to the braves when they call about getting coverage on Hampton right?

what underwriter would issue that policy?

I found Hampton's quote on this funny. to paraphrase, "I have had all kinds of groin strains so I know that this one is not serious. I will make my next start."

yes, Mike, we believe you. There is not an injury you are not experienced about.

It is also a crapshoot whether Mike Hampton can stand up to the workload required of a major league pitcher.

In spring training.

I wouldn't gloat about this, or point to the massive predictability of it all, except I refer you to Mr. Hutcheson's inability to avoid contributing with glee during yesterday's Mets' injury thread. Har, har, har.

The difference is that no one expects Mike Hampton to contribute. At least, no one on this site. I hope that the Braves don't expect it - and based on their offseason moves, I think it's clear that they don't. They added more candidates for the rotation. If they honestly believed that Hampton would do something, guys like James and Reyes would have been on the block.

Unlike the mets, the Braves have major league capable backup in the minors.
Last I heard, Roger Cedeno was warming up to check if he can play for the Mets again. Or was it Fernando Tatis?

at some point an insurance company has to say no way to the braves when they call about getting coverage on Hampton right?

His entire contract is covered under the same policy; they don't have to take out a new policy each year. Otherwise, no, I can't imagine anyone would issue one.

Unlike the mets, the Braves have major league capable backup in the minors.

Oh? We'll see how "capable" the Braves' fifth starter turns out to be if/when it isn't Mike Hampton.

The difference is that no one expects Mike Hampton to contribute.

I'd say the biggest difference is that many of the Mets' walking wounded -- granted, not all -- can reasonably be expected to heal and contribute for most of the season. Hampton? Not so much.

His entire contract is covered under the same policy; they don't have to take out a new policy each year. Otherwise, no, I can't imagine anyone would issue one.

thanks for that.
i always thought it was an annual thing

Oh? We'll see how "capable" the Braves' fifth starter turns out to be if/when it isn't Mike Hampton.

I'd rather have Jurrjens than Hampton even if Mike was healthy. This only hurts the depth of the team.

I'd rather have Jurrjens than Hampton even if Mike was healthy. This only hurts the depth of the team.

Jurrjens over a healthy Hampton? Not seeing it. I mean, the notion of a "healthy Hampton" is kind of hard to wrap your head around, but if you could have it, I find it hard to conceive that you'd really expect better performance from Jurrjens in 2008 than a healthy Hampton. Jurrjens looks like a good prospect down the road, but I can't see that it's all that reasonable to expect much from him as a rookie starter.

Even if healthy, how much can be expected from Hampton? His peripherals weren't that good in 2005 as he had a poor k/9. I'd be shocked if he could post an ERA better than 5.00.

Jurrjens over a healthy Hampton? Not seeing it. I mean, the notion of a "healthy Hampton" is kind of hard to wrap your head around, but if you could have it, I find it hard to conceive that you'd really expect better performance from Jurrjens in 2008 than a healthy Hampton. Jurrjens looks like a good prospect down the road, but I can't see that it's all that reasonable to expect much from him as a rookie starter.

Hmm. I actually have no idea how Hampton would perform if he were suddenly healthy. I'd expect both rust and injury related fatigue to affect him, but he was a very good pitcher. No real way to even project him. I do think you're selling Jurrjens short. Every statistical projection I've seen marks him as about an average starting pitcher. To my untrained eye, he also looks very good, no reason for his stats to be misleading. Even if he misses that by a bit, he's still an above average 5th guy.

Speaking from a Braves fan, no, we didn't expect Hampton to magically contribute, the projection of 17 IP mean, 0 IP pessimistic from ZiPS sounded about right, and anything is better than signing Mark Redman at the last minute, after being caught flatfooted.

There's a bunch of pitchers capable of posting VORPs in the positive single digits, which is all a team should be able to hope for from a combination of 5th starters.

The concern is when this 'depth' has to be used for 4th starters as well, as it was last year. We got lucky once with Buddy Carlyle.

His entire contract is covered under the same policy; they don't have to take out a new policy each year. Otherwise, no, I can't imagine anyone would issue one.

Do we know this for sure?

When a player is traded, seems like an opportunity where the insurance can be adjusted? Imagine a player, pitcher, moving from the AL to the NL. Suddenly you have to hit and run the bases, seems like I would want that contract adjusted if im the underwriter. I know that is not the case for Hampton, but I wouldn't be so sure his being traded didn't allow changes to be made or in fact, how do we not know his being injured already, prior to this, didn't result in a one time payout and termination of the remainder of insurance.

There is a lot that goes into this. I recall reading an article where a team exec basically said the fans and media exaggerated the availability of insurance in sport contracts.

Maybe Keith Law can shed some light on the subject.

How are the public schools in Richmond?

When a player is traded, seems like an opportunity where the insurance can be adjusted?

Well either you or I misunderstand something here, but when a player is traded, that sounds like an opportunity for insurance to be canceled, not adjusted. When you sell your car, you don't bundle your insurance policy with it. The new owner gets to take out his own policy.

16: I hear they're laying down the bubble wrap as we speak.

Well, he outlasted Matt Mantei.

### #### ############# ###### #### ########### #### #### ####

*cries*

Nick Johnson is looking worried, as he daintily checks for news about Griffey Jr and Harden.

Wren said that insurance will cover part of Hampton's salary if he goes down (again) in 2008. According to Dave O'Brien, the Braves aren't telling how much is covered, but it's believed to be between 40-60%.

The Braves have some options. Jurrjens, Reyes, James, Carlyle...they're not amazing pitchers, but there's a good chance one or two of them will do enough to cover the inevitable Hampton 'loss.'

When you sell your car, you don't bundle your insurance policy with it. The new owner gets to take out his own policy.

But when you trade for a player, you are actually trading for rights to his contract. When you by a car from someone, you don't accept their terms on the loan.

Jurrjens over a healthy Hampton? Not seeing it.

How would you even make that comparison? What is a healthy Hampton?

I'm glad it happened already. Bring on Jurrjens.

8 years
$121 million
134 GS
813 IP
4.80 ERA

Is James healthy now?

I don't believe that Chuck James is a viable option for the Braves. He was diagnosed with a slight rotator cuff tear at the end of last season, and was instructed to rest his arm. He has not yet begun to work out and, when he does, I expect him to have more injury problems. His bad mechanics invite shoulder problems.

Sam, you're going to love my prediction for Hampton in this year's Looking Forward (assuming of course that I write it again.)

As to the Braves' rotation and depth if Hampton gets hurt (?!), you seem to misunderstand what he is on this roster. Hampton is not Jair Jurrjens or Buddy Carlyle insurance. He's Tom Glavine gets old insurance. With Hampton the Braves can push Glavine into a very comfortable #4 slot. Without Hampton Glavine needs to pitch at least as good as a #3.