Right-hander John Maine has agreed to a minor-league contract with the Rockies, according to Jerry Crasnick of ESPN, a day after it was reported that Philadelphia was on the pitcher’s short list of teams to sign with.
CSNPhilly.com's Jim Salisbury reported Wednesday that Maine was mulling offers from two teams, and, according to reports the Phillies were a possibility. The Phils watched Maine several times this winter, hinting at potential interest. He was expected to garner a minor-league deal. No go. If he doesn’t make the Rockies’ opening day roster, he can reportedly opt out. If he makes it, he can reportedly make up to $3 million if he pitches in the bigs. Maine was unable to find guaranteed money, or a major league roster spot, coming off season-ending shoulder surgery seven months ago. Seemingly strapped for offers, Maine joins an organization with a full starting rotation that plays in the most hitter-friendly park ever. Rock lobster. Maine lobster, that is.
Written for Beerleaguer by Evan Burgos
Not exactly sure why the Phils had any interest in Maine. That ship has sailed.
Posted by: Rich H | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:27 PM
Hilarious comments in the last thread bemoaning the fact that a drunk driver (with a record of problems) was (*GASP*) arrested and charged instead of being given a lift home from a helpful officer.
What is the world coming to!?!?!?!?!?
Posted by: CJ | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Heather: Understood. However, I do not like the argument about women earning .60 on the dollar. I think it is a skewed statistic like Hamels's BABIP inflated ERA in 2009.
Posted by: Bay Slugga | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:41 PM
They were going to offer him a minor league deal, supposedly. No harm there.
Posted by: Bedrosian's Beard | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Bay Slugga - your cat is dead - or is it?
I'd prefer someone who could kill and maim people through their own selfishness be taken off the road immediately.
Remember when you could through a serf in the dungeon for looking at your wife? Those were the days!
Posted by: MisterZoomer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:43 PM
Garry Sheffield officially retired today? HOF? I don't think so.
Discuss.
Posted by: Bay Slugga | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:44 PM
I particularly liked it when a surgeon could walk out of the operating room and immediately light up a cigarette.
As for Maine, I doubt he ends the season with the Rockies.
Posted by: Kutztown Fan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:49 PM
Sheffield a HOFer?
One word: Steroids
Not a chance.
Posted by: CJ | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:50 PM
Why would any starter who wants to make a mlb roster as a flyer sign up with the Phillies?
Posted by: Jbird | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:52 PM
zoomer - i never realized how much I missed chucking serfs in the dungeon until you brought it back up.
Posted by: lorecore | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:52 PM
Sheffield = Over
Posted by: Tim from Williamsport | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:55 PM
Sheffield a HOFer?
Several words: One of the biggest assholes to ever play the game.
Not a chance.
Posted by: Pete Happy | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 03:57 PM
As specious as I think the wage gap is (doesn't correct for education or experience), it's something closer to 77 cents on the dollar now.
Posted by: Jbird | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:02 PM
"Maine joins an organization with a full starting rotation"
with two slated starters Cook/Chacin who are coming off injury-plagued seasons and have some serious health questions going into the season.
Maine wants to get paid by appearing at the MLB level this year and his chances of doing that in Colorado are hell alot more than in Philly.
Posted by: MG | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:05 PM
"closer to 77 cents on the dollar "
Well, that makes it okay then.
Posted by: Andy | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:11 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
Posted by: ozark | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:16 PM
Andy: we were discussing progress, not utopia.
Plus, like I said, those numbers don't correct for education or continuous work experience or job type. Women are more likely to drop out of the workforce or go part time to have children. The wage gap is about 7 cents for 20-24 year olds but between the ages of 25 and 35 (prime child bearing years) women fall 20-30 cents behind. The wage gap is also largest at the oldest ages, women who are now between 50-65 were much less likely to go to college and on to grad school than their male counterparts. Those statistics have since flipped. Though men still lead in well compensated fields like medicine, computer science, and engineering. while women tend to lead in fields that pay less upon graduation. My theory also is that their are more high paying jobs available to males that topped out eductionally in high school than females. More men become plumbers and electricians and mechanics and train engineers than women, and all those jobs pay very well vis a vis the traditional amount of education needed to attain them.
All things being equal and on a micro level, you absolutely should pay a women the same amount of money as a man. However on a macro level the limited snapshot of the data is skewed.
Posted by: Jbird | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:26 PM
wonder how much Pujols salary will skew male-female wage data all by itself. I think his $30 million will probably account for a whole penny of the discrepancy.
Posted by: Jbird | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:34 PM
The point is, the good ol' days weren't always so great. People always romanticize the past.
'You can never go home again, it doesn't exist' - John Lennon
Posted by: MisterZoomer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:40 PM
Can't wait for the Phillies to give Mr. Maine a case of whiplash in Coors Field.
Posted by: Scotch Man | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:54 PM
Eventually, I think HOF voters will come around to the view that steroid use shouldn't automatically keep you out of the HOF. But when that shoe finally drops, I expect it to drop selectively. The juicers who will get in will be guys like Bonds, A-Rod, Manny, and Clemens, whose numbers were simply so transcendent that, to deny them their spot in the HOF is almost like rewriting history. Sheffield is basically on the B-list of steroid users -- guys whose career stat lines were HOF-worthy, but not transcendent. Others on this list would be McGwire, Palmeiro, Sosa, & maybe Juan-Gon. I don't see any of these guys getting voted in -- at least not during their initial 15-year period of eligibility.
Posted by: bay_area_phan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 05:01 PM
BAP: and I think you could make the argument for the 4 you mentioned that they would have made the HOF even if they'd never juiced. For my own part, I hope they never get in and I wish they'd scrub the record books. Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, & Roger Maris still deserve their official due.
Posted by: Jbird | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 05:06 PM
"to deny them their spot in the HOF is almost like rewriting history."
Their steroid use rewrote history.
They will be left out of the Hall to bring a small piece of justice to this forged history.
Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod, etc have a snowball's chance in hell of getting voted in by either the sports writers or the vets.
Posted by: Will Schweitzer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 05:09 PM
Re: Maine - What is Rube DOING? Here we are with spring training upon us and he's NOT SIGNING ANYONE! Is he just content to stand pat and let the last viable 8th starters slip away? With this kind of complacency, I just don't see how this offseason can end well for the Phils.
Posted by: andersog | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 05:15 PM
bap: I think there's a chance the absolute elite may make it... like you mentioned (A-Rod, Clemens, Bonds), but that's it. The steroids scandal will keep a large number of players out who otherwise would have made it. Sheffield is definitely one of those players.
Posted by: CJ | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 05:39 PM
"Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod, etc have a snowball's chance in hell of getting voted in by either the sports writers or the vets."
Well, with climate change, I think there will be a snowball in hell. Bonds & Clemens will get in. To be so resolute they won't get in is ridiculous.
Posted by: Bedrosian's Beard | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 06:21 PM
If Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds are convicted of perjury the won't get in the HOF. If they ARE somehow voted in, then Pete Rose, Joe Jackson and Rafael Palmiero ought to be in as well.
Posted by: awh | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 06:30 PM
Oh, and as far as Maine is concerned, he would have been a nice MiL signing as insurance, and could possibly have contributed.
Hopefully, losing him to the Rocks won't make any difference. Good luck to him.
Posted by: awh | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 06:44 PM
Rose bet on baseball...he should never go in.
Same with Shoeless Joe...regardless of how good Field of Dreams was.
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:02 PM
awh: If a HOF voter takes the view that committing perjury disqualifies a player from consideration, that voter already has more than enough evidence to exclude both these guys. Anyone with more than a pea-sized brain already knows that Clemens & Bonds both did steroids & both lied under oath about their steroid use. I don't need a formal conviction to tell me that.
My own view (with which reasonable minds may differ) is that the HOF honors on-the-field achievement, not solid citizenship. Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, Rose & Shoeless Joe should all be in there.
Posted by: bay_area_phan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:02 PM
NEPP: The evidence is equivocal, but I think the general consensus is that Shoeless Joe did NOT bet on baseball. He just knew that his teammates were doing so & he didn't snitch on them.
Posted by: bay_area_phan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:07 PM
IMHO, not snitching is just as bad. Also, he DID take the money even if he didn't throw any of the games (arguable).
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:09 PM
Even if he did it, there just comes a point when the symbolism of keeping these guys out almost seems counter-productive. I mean, Shoeless Joe, who may have bet against his own team in the World Series, is now widely regarded as some kind of folk hero specifcally because he has been kept out of the Hall of Fame.
I say let them all in. The stains on their legacy will still be there, either way.
Posted by: bay_area_phan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:19 PM
Any thoughts on how much we will miss Davy Lopes, and his knowledge of the game this year ?
Posted by: Casey | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:54 PM
There is another Heisenberg joke. It has nothing to do with getting stopped by a cop, however. But since guys' wives are a constant topic I'll share it anyway:
Why was Heisenberg's wife unsatisfied?
Cause when he actually had the time, he didn't have the energy; and even when he had the position, he didn't have the momentum.
Posted by: Andy | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:56 PM
In the HOF argument, I'm on the side of whomever thinks it's irrelevant because the hall of fame is not about the greatest players and their accomplishments, but about up-holding an ethos which has only limited coherence with the reality of the game.
Posted by: Andy | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 07:59 PM
Last year while riding my bike I was struck by a drunk driver. He then fled the scene, wisely, I suppose, as the times have a changed and drunk drivers who maim and murder with their one ton sized weapons can no longer look forward to friendly pats on the shoulders and a 'get home safe old boy'. And to think, women still haven't entered the work force.
Posted by: Klaus | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:01 PM
I'm pondering Shoeless Joe now.
But I'm wondering whether anyone has done the tour of Citizen's Bank Park and would (or would not) recommend it?
We toured Fenway and found it entertaining, largely because the tour guide was a lifelong Sox fan (who'd lived a long time) and was full of stories. Older ballpark, of course.
Posted by: GBrettfan | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:03 PM
Not to beat a few horse or anything, but read some interesting numbers about Pujols today. The 2 biggest were that he's the only player in the history of baseball with 400 HRs in his first 10 seasons and that he has 99 more extra-base hits than any player ever in their first ten seasons (Ted Williams is 2nd).
This is in addition to his .331 career BA. And the fact that 23 current HOFers never had a single season as good as his WORST season in the majors.
Why haven't the Cards signed him again?
Posted by: Chris in VT | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:07 PM
*dead, not few obviously. Stupid IPhone.
Posted by: Chris in VT | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:09 PM
***And the fact that 23 current HOFers never had a single season as good as his WORST season in the majors.***
How many of them are SS or C though?
I mean, how do they measure that with positional differences?
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:12 PM
Quite a few of them are 1 or the other, NEPP. And there are quite a few Mazeroskis and Rizuttos in that group. However, we're talking about the worst season he has ever had. There is another list that includes HOFers who have had only 1 or 2 seasons as good as Pujols' worst season, and names like Gwynn, Yount, etc are all over that one as well.
I'm just amazed every time I read more about him...he really is the best hitter in about half a century, and his cash-rich team is unwilling to commit to him because they don't want their payroll to be "top-heavy." It's astounding...
Posted by: Chris in VT | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:18 PM
Yeah, Pujols is probably the best player of the last few decades if not since Williams.
Looking at his numbers, its simply ridiculous how good he is.
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:22 PM
So, am I the only one that thinks the BlueJays are taking a huge risk by signing Bautista to a 5 year, $65 million contract after one year of production at Age 29?
Age 26-28: 1442 PA, 95 OPS+
Age 29: 683 PA, 166 OPS+
I mean, sure, he could repeat his success but what if he doesn't. It'll be Vernon Wells and Alex Rios all over again.
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:30 PM
Bautista has about 2000 career ABs as a below-average hitter and 600 ABs as a great power-hitter. They are taking a huge risk signing him to that kind of deal. If I were running the Jays I would have taken him to arbitration and lived with a 1 year deal. If he wa for real, I'd sign him to a big deal then. This has Alex Rios-like bust potential.
Posted by: Chris in VT | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:38 PM
Bautista destroyed fastballs in 2010...wanna bet he gets very few to zero good fastballs in 2011?
I mean, I'm sure opposing clubs can scout things like that too.
Posted by: NEPP | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:41 PM
Every single one of Bautista's HRs went to left or left-center last season.
Posted by: BENTZ | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 08:46 PM
CJ is right. Bonds, A-Rod and Clemens will get in. It's the borderline guys that the steroids issue will be a problem for.
And JBird, you are wrong about the gender gap. The gender gap is HIGHEST at the levels where women and men both work 60+hours a week. So it's not just the family effect of women taking time off and working part-time. It is true that more men work in high-paying fields, while more women work in lower-paying fields. But even when you look at just the high-paying fields, and only at women who DON'T take time off, you still find a gender gap in pay.
Posted by: Jack | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:30 PM
There is also a strong subconscious bias that women take more time off for family stuff. They did a survey at a very large company, where managers were asked about their employees' work habits. They consistently reported that their female employees took more time off for family-related activities.
They then checked timesheets, emails, reports, etc., and there was no correlation with those women actually taking more time off for family-related activities.
Posted by: Jack | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:35 PM
Also, couldn't the Jays have done pretty well in arbitration? From what I understand they judge on a player's body of work up to that point. That would favor the Blue Jays. Then again, I know some teams avoid the process at all costs, as the player must be there and hear his achievements belittled by the club's rep.
Posted by: gobaystars! | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Based on the votes that McGwire has gotten, I don't know how anybody can be so confident that Clemens and Bonds are getting in.
Keeping Barry off of the ballot will be a symbolic statement against the steroid era by sports writers who, by in large, couldn't stand Barry in the first place. Barry's statements that he'd refuse to go to the HOF induction ceremony if they displayed his home run ball with the asterisk burned into it certainly doesn't help his case.
I'd be shocked if Barry got over 25% in his first year of eligibility.
I don't buy the argument that anyone gets in based on their performance "pre-steroids" because why in gods name should I trust that they ever had a career pre-steroids. If I'm taking their word for it, most of them claimed at one time or another that they never used steroids at all. If I couldn't trust their word then, why should I trust it now?
Posted by: Will Schweitzer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Will S: Do you trust Willie Mays' word that he took amphetamines to help him play?
I really don't get why people care so much. Players have always cheated in some way. Deal with it. I'd much rather have a steroid user on my team than a guy who gets behind the wheel drunk and is a danger to actually hurt someone besides themselves. Or a pitcher that beats his wife. Let's keep things in perspective here, people.
Posted by: Jack | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:49 PM
I actually think that the Bonds/Clemens trials will play a big role in their Hall of Fame chances. Each of these two guys were offered opportunities to cop out, admit guilt, and face no actual punishment. Each of them chose to risk a trial, where losing could result in serious prison sentences. Why else would they make this choice?
Posted by: bigbigbuck | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:58 PM
Will S: Do you believe that the baseball you're watching today is completely clean? Overall, power numbers are still up considerably and it's not just the ballparks. Players are still pretty productive at some advanced ages. Also, do you consider the Phillies WFC tainted? After all, we know now that JC was throwing some juiced up strikes for the '08 champs.
Posted by: bigbigbuck | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:07 PM
Klaus - glad you are well enough to post on Beerleaguer. I hope you are well in all other ways as well.
Posted by: Mister Zoomer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Some of those stats with "first 10 seasons" discount guys like Jimmie Fox who started out as just a bench player from 17-19yr old.
Only 7 players in baseball history have amassed 200HR, 1000RBI, with a 1.000 OPS by time they are 30yr old.
Ted Williams - 1.130 OPS, 265 HR, 1038 RBI
Lou Gehrig - 1.078 OPS, 299 HR, 1285 RBI
Jimmie Foxx - 1.073 OPS, 429 HR, 1520 RBI
Albert Pujols - 1.050, 408 HR, 1208 RBI
Hank Greenberg - 1.040 OPS, 249 HR, 1015 RBI
Manny Ramirez - 1.010 OPS, 310 HR, 1036 RBI
Mickey Mantle - 1.009 OPS, 404 HR, 1152 RBI
Posted by: lorecore | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:12 PM
lorecore, color me shocked that The Babe is not on that list.
Posted by: awh | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:16 PM
awh: Ruth's years as a pitcher prob hurt him.
Posted by: Jack | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:20 PM
JBird--I'm pretty sure that there are, in fact, gender-income disparity stats that do correct for education, work experience, and job type. And that women on average earn less money for men in the same job with the same experience and education.
Posted by: timr | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:23 PM
Ruth didn't start hitting in the lineup as a regular until he was 24, so he got a late start and only played 7 seasons as a regular by time he was 30 - but yet he only missed the cutoff by RBIs
Ruth by age 30: 1.171 OPS, 309 HR, 955 RBI
Posted by: lorecore | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:25 PM
And you can factor in the late 1910's - when 11 HR led the entire majors. Babe Ruth pretty much invented the HR.
Posted by: lorecore | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:27 PM
McGwire was a completely one dimensional player. His power numbers are who he is, and they were severely impacted by steroids. Of course, Bonds has most HRs all time, so roids helped him, but he did other things very well.
Posted by: Bedrosian's Beard | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:32 PM
Eh...I've heard all the arguments before and they all amount to one of three things:
1. "everybody cheats, just look at so-and-so"
2. "there are way worse things than steroids"
3. "they were HOF caliber before they used steroids"
4. "steroids can't help you to (insert item here)"
All three make for pretty lousy campaign slogans to get anybody voted into anything.
Big Mac is probably the most likable guy among sportswriters from the steroid era and he isn't even close to getting in. Bonds? Clemens? You'll see Lonnie Smith in the hall before either of those clowns.
Posted by: Will Schweitzer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:38 PM
...make that 4
Posted by: Will Schweitzer | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:39 PM
Being "likable" or not wouldn't affect who I vote for (if I had a vote).
Posted by: Bedrosian's Beard | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:50 PM
That was really a non answer. I'm confused as to when baseball counts, and when it doesn't count.
Posted by: bigbigbuck | Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 11:52 PM
Free Agent Maine is a Faggot. This comes from the top.
Posted by: Brohamel | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 12:18 AM
Bedrock: For better or for worse, likability is a major factor in anything determined by a vote.
If it were the only thing working against Bonds, I'd say that it was less of a factor, but for Barry, it's just one item.
That being said, I think Barry being shut out from the HOF is going to set the tone. Voters who deny Barry will be of the mindset that if steroids can keep out the man who passed Hank Aaron, there's no reason to vote in Clemens, Palmerio, Sheffield, etc...
It's just an opinion, but based on what has already happened, I don't see any suspected or confirmed steroid users getting voted in by the writers. If anyone has a chance to change this and open the doors for all PED users, it'll be A-Rod because his eligibility will come at a time when steroids aren't so fresh in the minds of voters.
Posted by: Will Schweitzer | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 06:51 AM
Will s: If the HoF is based on all the things you say it is, then it is a pretty lame excuse for a hall of fame.
It should be there to celebrate the players who were the best and who help transcend the game to higher levels.
I understand your(and others) arguments about steroids, but your constant harping about player's personalities and close-mindedness to the idea that nothing in a players' career should be considered if suspected of roids makes your vision of the HoF an embarassment to even be considered a Baseball HoF.
Posted by: lorecore | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 08:37 AM
Jack & timr - I don't say there's no gap, I think there is one, but it's not anywhere close to 60 cents on the dollar. I'm willing to bet the difference is no greater than a dime when adjusted for all sorts of factors. (another factor is that, I've read surveys that have shown that men are much more likely than women to negotiate for more money when hired. If you start at a higher pay, you're % raises are larger, etc.) In my family, I'm the one that quit my job when we had kids and I worked nights for 6 years and watched the kids during the day because I didn't want to put a 6 week old baby in daycare. I think my salary's about $10-15k lighter than it would have been otherwise, but there's no National Organization for Men (NOM?) to whine about it for me. We just made the decisions that were best for our family and have dealt with the consequences.
Posted by: Jbird | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 08:38 AM
Yo, new thread
Posted by: EastFallowfield | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 08:43 AM
Pete Rose and especially Shoeless Joe are more famous for not being in the hall of fame than they would have been otherwise. I hate to agree with Will, but I don't want the juicers to get plaques. One of my favorite writeups on steroids in baseball was a Bill Simmons column.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090507&sportCat=mlb
Posted by: Jbird | Friday, February 18, 2011 at 08:47 AM