Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Report: Jason Bay Signs With Mets, Pending Physical

After hinting to Matt Cerrone of Metsblog that he would have a “big” update today, Mike Francessa of WFAN says the Mets and Jason Bay are close to agreeing to a deal, with a physical the only remaining hurdle. Its tough to know just how Mike was able to keep this info so tightly under wraps since last night without worrying it might leak out, so look for confirmation elsewhere. He says to expect an official announcement sometime after the weekend. There was no info on the financials provided.

Repoz Posted: December 29, 2009 at 08:16 PM | 147 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: media, mets

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. billyshears Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:47 PM (#3424233)
I vote for Ben Sheets.
   102. Textbook Editor Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:49 PM (#3424234)
Not sure why you wouldn't offer 4 x $10 million or something and see if Bay's desperate... Not sure there were really any other serious bidders here. My take is the Red Sox thing the last few days was pretty clearly a smokescreen by the agent to get Omar to bid against himself... And it seemed to have worked. Not sure anyone else was really all that interested in Bay at anything close to 4 x $15.
   103. PreservedFish Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:49 PM (#3424235)
Does anyone remember, BTW, that the Mets HAD Bay at one point,


Not only this, but I remember analyzing the Lou Collier trade minutely, and I remember saying something like, "Bay will probably never amount to anything, but he might have a future as a good 4th outfielder and he is young enough that you'd prefer not to trade him" when the Mets gave him away. The other guy they sent to San Diego was Josh Reynolds, who IIRC was a soft tosser that had wonderful numbers in the low minors. Both of them were the type of prospect that you don't expect much out of, but you still keep on eye on because they are producing well. That trade made me go crazy because the Mets were something like 7 games down in the standings and already had Scott Strickland, a good ROOGY, and were trading prospects for a second ROOGY in Steve Reed.

Those were the days that I was dying to have the Mets rebuild, screaming it from every corner of the internet, lecturing my poor girlfriend on it, scolding fellow fans, and trades like that made me pull my hair out.
   104. JPWF13 Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:50 PM (#3424236)
I was about to say I prefer Doug Davis to either Garland or Pineiro, walk rate be dammed, but he does have a significantly lower ip/gs rate than either Garland or Pineiro (1/2 ip per start)

and the Met starters just don't go deep enough into games as it is.
   105. Dewey, Crackpot and Soupuss Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:50 PM (#3424237)
I actually think the opposite is MUCH more likely...

Pineiro career ERA+ - 98
Garland career ERA+ - 104

Pineiro is almost exactly one year older.
   106. JPWF13 Posted: December 29, 2009 at 11:55 PM (#3424239)
Pineiro is almost exactly one year older.


2007-09
Garland k/9: 4.39
Pineiro k/9: 4.81

Garland bb/9: 2.62
Pineiro bb/9: 1.72

Garland HR/9: .96
Pineiro HR/9: .92

and they both pitched in the NL last year and Pineiro's ERA was half a run lower
   107. Quaker Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:01 AM (#3424241)
Pineiro's XFIP was 3.76 last year. If he keeps the GB% & his other peripherals the same, he'd be a tremendous addition.
   108. Dewey, Crackpot and Soupuss Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:02 AM (#3424242)
2007-09

I see we're conveniently leaving out Pineiro's 2005 and 2006, which were terrible. And he didn't pitch very much in '07 and '08, and he wasn't great when he did pitch.

You have to put a ton of stock in Pineiro's 2009 season to think that he's a dramatically better pitcher than Garland.
   109. Banta Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:05 AM (#3424245)
I'm happy with this deal. I would have rather had Holliday, but not so much so that it upsets me.

I'm all for Pineiro/Garland and Delgado and calling it an offseason. I know Delgado's a gamble, but so is Murphy. And you gotta imagine that Delgado's upside is light years higher.
   110. Lassus Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:07 AM (#3424247)
I'm all for Pineiro/Garland and Delgado and calling it an offseason. I know Delgado's a gamble, but so is Murphy. And you gotta imagine that Delgado's upside is light years higher.

I'm in agreement here, also agreeing with billyshears about Sheets. He seems to be the definition of "worth a flyer".
   111. Elvis Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:10 AM (#3424249)
Pineiro's K/9 rates
2007: 5.5
2008: 4.9
2009: 4.4

Garland's K/9
2007: 4.2
2008: 4.1
2009: 4.9

Final four months of the season, when Garland figured out the Chase Field thing:

Garland - 147.2 IP, 37 BB, 88 Ks 3.35 ERA
Pineiro - 148.2 IP, 19 BB, 80 Ks 3.33 ERA

Final two months of the season:

Garland - 75.2 IP, 16 BB, 52 Ks, 3.33 ERA
Pineiro - 77.2 IP, 12 BB, 44 Ks, 4.64 ERA

Pineiro was better on the entire season than Garland but they were essentially even the last four months of the year and Garland was much better over the final third of the season when Pineiro had a normal HR rate. Unless Pineiro can recapture the HR magic he had the first four months, it won't be pretty in 2010.
   112. Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:13 AM (#3424251)
On Citifield and HR's:

According to the Bill James 2010 Handbook, Citi Field depressed run scoring eight percent compared to a neutral ball park. Home run production was stunted by four percent.


http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/bay-inks-with-mets/
   113. JPWF13 Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:15 AM (#3424253)
I see we're conveniently leaving out Pineiro's 2005 and 2006,


very little value insofar as projecting future performance


but anyway, 2005-09:
Garland k/9: 4.53
Pineiro k/9: 4.86

Garland bb/9: 2.29
Pineiro bb/9: 2.30

Garland HR/9: 1.01
Pineiro HR/9: 1.03

Hey, let's do 2003-09:

Garland k/9: 4.62
Pineiro k/9: 5.41

Garland bb/9: 2.58
Pineiro bb/9: 2.52

Garland HR/9: 1.11
Pineiro HR/9: 1.03

Anyway, as I've said it's mostly my gut, I see Garland and I'm mystified he's been as successful as he has been, I see Pineiro, and think he should be better than he is
   114. Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:21 AM (#3424254)
I see Pineiro, and think he should be better than he is


I assume that's what the Red Sox thought when they signed him to be their closer in 2007. He sucked for 5 years before 2009. He's going to be overpaid and disappoint in 2010.
   115. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:21 AM (#3424255)
Isn't a little scary to have Delgado and Castillo in the same infield especially considering Delgado is coming off hip surgery?
   116. JPWF13 Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:22 AM (#3424256)
I'm in agreement here, also agreeing with billyshears about Sheets. He seems to be the definition of "worth a flyer".


What I've read about Sheets scares me enough to think he;'s not worth a flier any more than a random AAAA lifer at this point, kind of like everyone thought Prior was worth a flier when SD picked him up awhile back, IF he pitches again, he won't be the same guy.

But what the hell if the guaranteed money is close to league minimum...

Anyway my take on 5th starters, if the guy is not going to do better than an ERA+ of 93 (Nelson Figgys' carer mark), don't bother- and that is another thing that drives me crazy about Omar- Redding? Livan? Lima?

and BTW does anyone have any news on Fernando Nieve?
   117. greenback likes millwall, they don't care Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM (#3424257)
Pineiro's XFIP was 3.76 last year. If he keeps the GB% & his other peripherals the same, he'd be a tremendous addition.

There have been a couple of pitch f/x columns documenting how this came to be, that Piñeiro started throwing oodles of sinkers. I'd be worried that he messed around with the scouting report in 2009, and that his 2010 will be something like Loaiza's 2004.
   118. Elvis Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:27 AM (#3424260)
Last year, Pineiro abandoned his slider and instead threw a two-seam fastball, a pitch known for its sink and ability to get grounders. In 2008, Pineiro did not throw a single two-seam fastball in his July 2nd start against the Mets. In his June 23rd start last year, Pineiro threw 26 two-seam fastballs.
   119. Banta Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:34 AM (#3424268)
Isn't a little scary to have Delgado and Castillo in the same infield especially considering Delgado is coming off hip surgery?

I doubt both of them survive the season injury free anyway. I'd sign Delgado just for depth, if nothing else.
   120. billyshears Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:48 AM (#3424277)
What I've read about Sheets scares me enough to think he;'s not worth a flier any more than a random AAAA lifer at this point, kind of like everyone thought Prior was worth a flier when SD picked him up awhile back, IF he pitches again, he won't be the same guy.


Keith Law has been very high on Sheets, FWIW. I know that I'm in the minority, but I don't really think the Mets need an innings eater, especially on more than a 1 year deal. Everybody agrees that the Mets are more than a couple games behind the Phillies, so why waste time on a guy who might only be worth a couple games, at best. Both Pineiro and Garland look like junk to me. I guaranty you that if the Mets sign either to a multi-year deal, at some point in mid 2010, we're going to wake up and say \"####, now we owe this jackass $8 mil in 2011."
   121. GM Posted: December 30, 2009 at 12:53 AM (#3424282)
I doubt both of them survive the season injury free anyway. I'd sign Delgado just for depth, if nothing else.

In the Matt Stairs role I take it?
   122. Shock Posted: December 30, 2009 at 01:11 AM (#3424291)
Sadly, I can't find any BBTF threads from 2002 about the Mets dealing Bay.

Sz might have written about it -- there is a thread from that day called "New York Mets." Unfortunately, he simply named it "new york mets" and it was later overwritten by another thread called "new york mets" which was about the Mets trading for Wilson Delgado and Chris Widger.

PS Delgado can come back to Toronto now. That might make me want to watch.

PPS. uh, talking about Carlos, of course. Thought I'd clarify that what with the preceding paragraph mentioning Wilson. Wilson Delgado going to Toronto would not cause me to watch.

PPPS. Although it wouldn't surprise me if it happened, really, given this offseason.
   123. PreservedFish Posted: December 30, 2009 at 01:27 AM (#3424300)
Read #103 for a peak into the mind of a Mets fan at the time. My memory on this is crystal clear. The trade was made at the very height of my Mets nerdiness, when I knew all the prospects, could discourse for hours on the direction I wanted the FO to take, and would spend hours doing things like manually calculating DIPS for each pitcher.
   124. Banta Posted: December 30, 2009 at 02:32 AM (#3424347)
In the Matt Stairs role I take it?

Mr. Delgado isn't a small man, but he's gonna have to hit some major buffets to get up to the Stairs level before spring training.
   125. David Wrightwing obstructionist Posted: December 30, 2009 at 02:58 AM (#3424363)
I'm certainly not disappointed by this. I think Beltran does better when you don't get in his way.

Maybe this means we get a Pagan/Frenchy platoon now? I'd be thrilled with that.
   126. Sam M. Posted: December 30, 2009 at 03:38 AM (#3424388)
Everybody agrees that the Mets are more than a couple games behind the Phillies, so why waste time on a guy who might only be worth a couple games, at best. Both Pineiro and Garland look like junk to me. I guaranty you that if the Mets sign either to a multi-year deal, at some point in mid 2010, we're going to wake up and say "####, now we owe this jackass $8 mil in 2011."

As to the first point, being behind the Phillies isn't the only relevant issue. The Mets with a solid guy to sidekick for Johan would be a heck of a lot closer to Atlanta, Milwaukee, Colorado, et al., than they are right now. And they'd be in a better position to take advantage of any bad luck that might befall the Phillies in 2010.

As far as Piniero and Garland being junk, I just don't see that. They aren't elite, by any means, but then again they're not looking for Sabathia money, either. They're middling pitchers ... and the Mets could use them some of that. I'd rather they developed more of it, of course, so they have some low cost middling pitchers. But in lieu of that, I doubt I'll have much buyer's remorse about a market-priced solid pitcher like Garland.
   127. Ignatius J. Reilly Posted: December 30, 2009 at 03:52 AM (#3424397)
Maybe this means we get a Pagan/Frenchy platoon now? I'd be thrilled with that

If Francoeur is platooned, he won't be happy. If he's not happy, he'll ##### to the media. And they'll take his side, of course.

I'm not trying to gloat, it's just that he's a spoiled brat.

The worst thing about Francoeur isn't all the outs. It's the arrogance. But the outs are pretty bad, too.
   128. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: December 30, 2009 at 04:16 AM (#3424412)
I like this move. Now that we have LF covered, we can look at the other needs the team has:

SP: Santana is the rock, and as long as he's healthy, he's a good bet to be a top 5 pitcher in baseball next year. Perez, Maine and Pelfrey are next in line but the Mets would be crazy to count on all three to be healthy/do well next year. Nieve, Figueroa and Niese are fine as depth in AAA. Essentially, the Mets absolutely need to sign at least another starter capable of giving them 200 IP of average or better production.

Catcher: Between Blanco, Coste and Santos, the Mets have backup catcher covered, but starting any combination of these three would be the equivalent of having two pitchers in the lineup everyday. Thole is the great white hope in the minors, but he won't be ready in 2010.

First base: Murphy is not good enough to be the LH portion of a 1b platoon. Chris Carter has a 306/380/510 line in over 2700 minor league ABs, but I don't know enough about him to say he deserves a shot or not. IMHO, he is as good as Murphy if not better. This will be Ike Davis' position after this year, but the Mets can't afford to give up offense here. Given the available options in the market (Delgado, LaRoche, Thome, Overbay), I have to think significant improvement from what we can expect from Murphy/Carter could be achieved rather easily and more importantly, cheaply.

Second base: We are stuck with Castillo...I'd love an Overbay/Castillo deal, but that ain't happening.

Right field: Frenchy is the incumbent, but I gotta believe the Mets won't stick with him for a long time if he gets to an awful start, and especially now that Pagan has become the 4th OFer. Fernando! looms in the background. If he has a monster start in AAA, he could be in CitiField by midyear.

Bullpen: Frankie is the man here. Feliciano and Parnell (and Green) return from last year. Omar has decided to go with the low risk/high reward approach for the rest of the spots with Escobar, Everetts and Igarashi. I like the idea, but I would love to see him bring in more arms just in case some of these don't work out.

In short, the Mets MUST pick up an average starter or two and figure out what to do a catcher. They can easily pick up a couple of wins by adding a first baseman who can hit and making sure they have a short leash on Francouer. Adding more bullpen arms wouldn't hurt either.
   129. Sam M. Posted: December 30, 2009 at 04:49 AM (#3424433)
Bullpen: Frankie is the man here. Feliciano and Parnell (and Green) return from last year. Omar has decided to go with the low risk/high reward approach for the rest of the spots with Escobar, Everetts and Igarashi. I like the idea, but I would love to see him bring in more arms just in case some of these don't work out.

I don't know, OFF. I think Omar's work is pretty much done with respect to the pen. Besides the guys you mentioned, they also have Stokes, who is OK in the 5th-6th inning role. That should be enough arms, I think.

Overbay for the last year of his deal would be excellent, and I can't believe it would take much to get him. His high OBP would be perfect in the # 2 hole in the Mets' line-up against RHP. But if that is one hole that takes until 2011 to fill, I could live with that.
   130. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: December 30, 2009 at 05:09 AM (#3424448)
Well, if Bay wanted an easier media market than Boston, he sure picked the wrong city to stay in for (at least) four years. And I suspect Mets fans are going to really dislike him on defense.
   131. Dale Sams Posted: December 30, 2009 at 05:27 AM (#3424457)
(130)

...and here i was just about to post how Red Sox fans are being their normal, even-headed selves about this.

I mean not ALL of them are saying "F*%k that sell-out", and "I hope he breaks his leg." It just seems that way.

http://www.facebook.com/#/pages/SurvivingGradycom/28061318402?ref=nf
   132. Mr. J. Penny Smoltzuzaka Posted: December 30, 2009 at 05:50 AM (#3424470)
Good for Jason Bay to get his big payday... he seemed like a nice guy while he was in Boston. And he did a decent job standing in front of the Green Monster for 1 and a half years. I truly hope he can meet Mets fans expectations for at least a couple years.
   133. Banta Posted: December 30, 2009 at 05:53 AM (#3424471)
I truly hope he can meet Mets fans expectations for at least a couple years.

If he doesn't spontaneously combust sometime in May, he'll meet my expectations!
   134. PreservedFish Posted: December 30, 2009 at 06:00 AM (#3424472)
Everybody agrees that the Mets are more than a couple games behind the Phillies, so why waste time on a guy who might only be worth a couple games, at best. Both Pineiro and Garland look like junk to me.


I can't speak for everyone, but part of the hope in looking to Garland or Pineiro is the possibility that one might turn into a new Steve Trachsel, a dependable #3 starter for years to come. If you sign Garland for something cheap and he puts up seasons of 200 IP, 4.00 ERA, then you've added a nice player to your team that you'll want to keep around.

Also, I don't get the nihilistic approach. If you go in with this attitude ("the Mets are garbage so why bother?") the team will never improve. Maybe the Mets stay garbage for a couple years but Garland will be a worthwhile trading chip. Maybe they'll improve faster than we think and he'll win a couple games in the playoffs. Who knows? There is no justification for tanking. It's not like they have a shot at Hakeem Olajuwon next year.

I guaranty you that if the Mets sign either to a multi-year deal, at some point in mid 2010, we're going to wake up and say "####, now we owe this jackass $8 mil in 2011."


Well, that is certainly possible, which is why above I advocated getting whoever is cheapest. But the starting rotation is flat out embarrassing, and a starter somewhat better than Tim Redding would be mighty helpful.
   135. Sam M. Posted: December 30, 2009 at 06:18 AM (#3424482)
It's not like they have a shot at Hakeem Olajuwon next year.

Hah. Hell, Omar just drafts Sam Bowie anyway. So we may as well try to win, right?
   136. billyshears Posted: December 30, 2009 at 06:47 AM (#3424488)
But the starting rotation is flat out embarrassing, and a starter somewhat better than Tim Redding would be mighty helpful.


I don't think the starting rotation is embarrassing, but I have more faith in Maine and Perez than most. Part of my issue is that I would really like to give Niese a shot because I think he is ready. Granted that signing Sheets would marginalize Niese as well, but I'd be willing to marginalize him for a guy that could put up a 130 ERA+. I'd prefer not to marginalize him for a guy that could easily have an ERA+ of less than 100. Maybe the Mets don't have faith in Pelfrey, Maine or Perez and one of them would get the shaft, but if the Mets won't give pitching prospects a chance to start in favor of expensive hopefully average veterans who have strikeouts rates that perennially warn of a collapse, how will they ever develop young pitching?
   137. Rough Carrigan Posted: December 30, 2009 at 07:20 AM (#3424499)
Well, if Bay wanted an easier media market than Boston, he sure picked the wrong city to stay in for (at least) four years. And I suspect Mets fans are going to really dislike him on defense.


Actually, because he was the guy who replaced Manny, a player the Boston media pretty openly hated, Bay was treated about like they might treat Konrad Adenauer following you know who. New York might be a *lot* tougher for Bay.
   138. PreservedFish Posted: December 30, 2009 at 07:47 AM (#3424503)
if the Mets won't give pitching prospects a chance to start in favor of expensive hopefully average veterans who have strikeouts rates that perennially warn of a collapse, how will they ever develop young pitching?


Every Mets starter save Pelfrey is a health risk. You could sign 4 Garlands and Niese will still be able to get innings. Last year there were 60 starts for starters #6 and up.

For a while the rotation was Figueroa-Misch-Parnell-Pelfrey-Redding. I order them alphabetically to avoid the ghastly realization that one of these fellows was the "ace" of the staff.
   139. Something Other Posted: December 30, 2009 at 08:49 AM (#3424524)
I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more gnashing of teeth over the Bay signing, particularly since no one seems likely to break the bank for Holliday. Over the last three years Bay has been worth all of 6.4 WAR. Even discounting his replacement level 2007 (I'll play nice and credit him with 2.5 WAR that season) a 3-2-1 projection puts Bay at 3.1 WAR for 2010. There's nothing about his game that suggests he'll be immune to typical, age-related decline, so if we dock him an accumulating half win per season we can reasonably project him, from 2010 through 2013, to produce 3.1, 2.6, 2.1, and 1.6 WAR. That's 9.4 wins above replacement level. 4/60, let alone 4/65, is a brutal overpay for that kind of production. It's also not like 1B is at all a sure landing spot. Bay may have played the position in high school, but iirc he didn't play an inning there in the minors or the majors.

This isn't paying a reasonable FA premium; it's 60 million dollars (and that doesn't even get into the rumored, easy-to-meet vesting option) for what's very likely to be less than 10 WAR production. Bay's a 3 WAR player in his 30s. The contract's a serious overpay that's in the same neighborhood as the Castillo contract.
   140. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 30, 2009 at 08:53 AM (#3424526)
Does anyone else think that the Bay contract makes it less likely the Mets will ever extend Francoeur? If Bay is in left next few years, and Beltran is in center, where is Fernando? I really believe that Omar would have to be overwhelmed to trade Fernando.

Fernando looked pretty good in center for a guy I think most scouts believed would be a corner outfielder and Beltran is only signed for two seasons. Also, Bay could be moved to first base or traded eventually.

What do you guys think?
   141. Lassus Posted: December 30, 2009 at 09:10 AM (#3424531)
What do you guys think?

I know that nobody here likes to fathom that people can actually play well or improve, but honestly I think it's as simple as that. He plays to the level of where he was for the Mets last year, they extend him, because we just don't know WTF goes on with Fernando yet.
   142. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 30, 2009 at 09:25 AM (#3424540)
Lassus, let's say Fernando spends the 2010 season mashing in AAA and Frenchy posts a .800 OPS in 2010. What do you do? If you extend Frenchy, do you not try to extend Beltran and hope that Fernando can play center? Or do you move Bay to first which means Ike Davis becomes trade bait?

Obviously, it's unlikely that all of these guys play so well that you have to make a decision but it's something to talk about while we look at our windows, waiting for spring.
   143. GM Posted: December 30, 2009 at 06:48 PM (#3424818)
is there any player on the current Mets roster that fans believe will—unequivocally—perform as well as their career average?
   144. Banta Posted: December 30, 2009 at 07:04 PM (#3424831)
is there any player on the current Mets roster that fans believe will—unequivocally—perform as well as their career average?

Brian Stokes! In fact, I feel pretty sure he'll beat his career 86 ERA+.

Aside from him though....
   145. JPWF13 Posted: December 30, 2009 at 07:20 PM (#3424847)
is there any player on the current Mets roster that fans believe will—unequivocally—perform as well as their career average?


1: Frenchy's career OPS+ is 92. He will be "26 with experience" in 2010, he will beat that 92 in 2010, jut a he did (93) in 2009.

2: FMart if he has more than 25 PAs will beat last years 38 OPS+

3: Niese- he will have better than a 79 ERA+
   146. There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 30, 2009 at 08:46 PM (#3424945)
Pineiro's success last year was no joke (he had a Tewksburyesque BB/9) but Garland has the consistency and endurance. Both could be a major help to the rotation.


That settles it: sign 'em both. Hell, it ain't my money...
   147. depletion Posted: December 30, 2009 at 11:10 PM (#3425074)
I don't know how one can figure Pinero to be a better bet than Garland. Pinero has had One successful year as a starter since 2003. That happened to be last year. The last time he pitched more than 200 innings (2003), he dropped to 140 IP, ERA+ 97. Garland, otoh, is a relative lock to pitch 195+ innings, ERA 105. The Mets need the consistancy of Garland given the injury problems their last year. I hope they get him.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Kiko Sakata
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for APRIL 21, 2014
(6 - 11:31am, Apr 21)
Last: JJ1986

NewsblogJ.R. Gamble: Albert Pujols' 500-Homer Chase Is A Bore, But That's Baseball's Fault
(6 - 11:31am, Apr 21)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogA’s Jed Lowrie “flabbergasted” by Astros’ response to bunt
(25 - 11:29am, Apr 21)
Last: Hal Chase School of Professionalism

NewsblogBryce Harper benched for 'lack of hustle' despite quad injury
(110 - 11:29am, Apr 21)
Last: bunyon

NewsblogMorosi: MLB must evolve to let players express themselves without rebuke
(20 - 11:28am, Apr 21)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogVIDEO: Brewers, Pirates brawl after Carlos Gomez triple
(121 - 11:24am, Apr 21)
Last: Rickey! In a van on 95 south...

NewsblogIvan Nova’s season in jeopardy after tearing elbow ligament
(13 - 11:22am, Apr 21)
Last: bunyon

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1746 - 11:22am, Apr 21)
Last: Rickey! In a van on 95 south...

NewsblogDoug Glanville: I Was Racially Profiled in My Own Driveway
(421 - 11:13am, Apr 21)
Last: The Id of SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(964 - 11:12am, Apr 21)
Last: ursus arctos

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-21-2014
(28 - 11:09am, Apr 21)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogMinuteman News Center: Giandurco: This means WAR
(97 - 11:08am, Apr 21)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogGleeman: Mets minor league team is hosting “Seinfeld night”
(162 - 11:00am, Apr 21)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogDeadspin: Here is a Chicken Playing Baseball
(1 - 10:52am, Apr 21)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(138 - 10:11am, Apr 21)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.8537 seconds
52 querie(s) executed