Was having our Johnson yanked a good thing?
The signing of Randy Johnson to a one-year contract with the Giants has been greeted with a great range of reactions. Generally, San Francisco fans have been wildly enthusiastic, while fans here are unhappy at the prospect of their future Hall of Famer playing for a divisional rival, and possibly even getting his 300th win against them. The horror. The horror. However, it's a move that I'm not particularly upset with. Sure, it'd have been nice to have him get #300 in Sedona, but how much would that possibility be worth?
This piece is certainly, to some extent, my attempt to come to terms with it - I freely admit that, if we'd signed him, there'd probably be a similar article going the other way, and saying how marvelous it was! I've posted chunks of what follows in various places [here, DBBP, AZ Central, McCC], but this is an effort to pull together all the threads and explain the various reasons why the Big Unit's departure leaves me only slightly-stirred, rather than shaken.
1. Market value
Much has been made in some circles of the Diamondbacks offer to the future Hall of Famer, believed to be about $3m, and how this was "derisory". However, while $8-10m is easily the going rate for a league-average pitcher, that only applies when they are in the prime of their career - not their mid-forties. Here are numbers for three pitchers, with their age the following year, and their output over the previous three seasons
| Three-year | ||||
| Age | Starts | Innings | ERA + | |
| Pitcher A | 44 | 74 | 455 | 103 |
| Pitcher B | 45 | 73 | 445.2 | 103 |
| Pitcher C | 46 | 99 |
607 | 104 |
Pretty similar numbers, really. Now, I certainly admit there are differences. Pitcher A is David Wells from 2004-2006, who missed much of 2006's first half, coming back from knee surgery. But just like Pitcher B [Johnson from 2006-2008, natch] Wells came back strong in the second half, posting a 3.03 ERA over his ten starts in August and September and a 3.60 playoff ERA for the Padres. The net result was Boomer's tenth consecutive season with an ERA+ above 100. Before the 2007 season, however, Wells signed a one-year deal for only $3m guaranteed [albeit with $4m in potential incentives]. Has the pitching market changed so much, especially given the financial crisis which is unquestionably damping things this off-season?
Meanwhile, Pitcher C is an absolute model of durability, despite his age - which is probably enough alone, to clue you in that it's Jamie Moyer, now the proud possessor of a World Series ring as part of the Phillies rotation. He's had eight consecutive years with 32 or more starts, and an ERA+ in that final season of 118, better than the Big Unit's figure this year of 117. And yet, he just signed a contract where, even if he hits all his incentives, he'll earn a maximum of only $7.75m in 2009 - less than the Giants guaranteed the injury-prone Johnson, with a possible $5m more in incentives.
The problem, I think, with the Diamondbacks' $3m offer is not so much the dollar amount as the unwillingness to add incentive-based elements on top. This has been (and, as far as I know, still is) a long-standing policy, in the interests of providing a solid financial basis, with expenditure known in advance. That makes sense. However, it hampers the team in negotiations with any player coming off injury, or who represents any degree of risk in another way. In a case like Johnson, incentive clauses are sensible risk-mitigators, and I wish the franchise would re-think their position here. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, as the proverb says.
2. Past Performance
There's no doubt that Johnson had a stellar second-half, posting a superb 2.41 ERA, and holding batters to a .232 average. The general wisdom is that he pitched much better, once he'd recovered from the back surgery that delayed his appearance at the start of the year. However, a closer analysis of his results don't show this to be the case. Johnson actually pitched significantly better right at the start of his season, compared to the second quarter.
Starts 1-9: 51.2 IP, 3.83 ERA, K:BB 56:14, Opp: .262/.318/.441 (.759 OPS)
Starts 10-17: 46.1 IP, 6.80 ERA, K:BB 39:14, Opp: .303/.350/.511 (.861 OPS)
If anything turned around his season, it was the trip to see renowned pitching coach Tom House at the All-Star break. Johnson said. "It was hands on, him showing me what I was doing. For me, it always comes down to mechanics. Being tall, there's a lot that can go wrong." Whatever the cause, the effect was dramatic, even though his quest for #300 fell short, his post-break performances were undeniably impressive, climaxing with his complete-game effort against the Rockies on the last day of the season.
However, I wouldn't rely on that carrying forward into next season. Not with a BABIP of .278 - that's fifty-seven points below the figure from the first half, and significantly below the Diamondbacks' team average in this area, at .303. While Johnson may have been the best starter for Arizona after the break, he was also among the luckiest: contrast the BABIP for Webb (.293), Haren (.375!) and Davis (.339). Overall for the entire year, his figure was within a few points of the mean, but the second-half should probably not be relied upon as any indicator of future performance. I also note a post-break drop in his strikeout rate, from from 8.72 to 7.57 - though let's face it, even the latter figure is pretty damn good for his age!
It's also worth pointing out that, it's far and away the best half-season Johnson has had iin the past three years:
2006:
First half ERA 5.13
Second half ERA 4.85
2007
First half ERA 3.81 [only 56.2 IP]
Second half: did not pitch at all
2008
First half ERA 5.23
Second half: ERA 2.41
I know there were all manner of issues with his back, but still.... The only time since 2005 his ERA was less than double that of the brilliant second-half we saw, was his short 2007 campaign, abruptly terminated with a slide into third-base. Nice for his free-agent campaign the surge was, looking at the bigger picture, and the last three years overall, it's the obvious aberration, not the standard. Regardless of excuses or explanations one may offer, it seems more than a little dangerous to base any decision on thinking otherwise.
3. Future performance
This is, of course, what really matters, and the cold, hard fact is this: Randy Johnson is 45. He shouldn't be pitching in the major-leagues. He certainly shouldn't be pitching with any expectations of success in the major-leagues. Since 1901, do you know how many 45-year old pitchers have given their teams even 150 innings and an ERA+ above 100? Four. In 108 seasons. One spitballer (Jack Quinn, 1929), one knuckleballer (Phil Niekro, 1984), the epitome of the soft-tosser (Jamie Moyer, 2008), and Nolan Ryan. So, what Johnson is trying to do is all but unprecedented by a pitcher of his type.
The attrition rate at this point in a player's life is horrible. Since 1961, seven pitchers have thrown 400+ innings in their age 42-44 years, like Randy. Three of them never came back to play at all in their age 45 season. The exceptions: Niekro, Moyer, Ryan and another knuckleballer, Charlie Hough. The good news for Johnson is, three of those four actually had better seasons, as measured by ERA+, at age 45 than at age 44. The bad news is, that's the two knuckleballers and the soft-tosser. Nolan Ryan - the obvious nearest mark to Johnson - fared much less well. While still above average, with an ERA+ at 103, that was a thirty-six point drop from his figure the previous year. A repeat of this decline would send Randy to an ERA around the 5.70 mark, if he were still pitching in Chase.
However, the other side of the balance-sheet has one huge factor on it. This is Randy Johnson. No, make this bold font and block capitals. THIS IS RANDY JOHNSON. The Big Unit has been through two back surgeries and has osteoarthritis of the knee, which has necessitated shots of an artificial lubricant on a regular basis since 2003. He had a knee brace dipped in liquid titanium. Then there's the whole 'killed a bird with his fastball' thing. If Chuck Norris wears Jack Bauer pajamas, then Jack Bauer wears Randy Johnson pajamas. His will to win is legendary. I think the only effective and permanent way to stop the Big Unit from pitching, is by removing the head, or destroying the brain. If anyone can defy time, it's this man. I wouldn't bet on him pitching like the Cy Young winner he is in 2009. But I'm not stupid enough to bet against it.
The two projection systems to have chipped in so far on Johnson's 2009 season, are Bill James and Marcel, and there's already a wide disparity in the results. The former loves the Big Unit, giving him 170 innings and a stunning 3.40 ERA. Marcel is much less optimistic, predicting 158 innings and a 4.33 ERA. This mirrors their expectations in the season just ended, though they were even further apart then: James, 3.25 ERA; Marcel 4.46 ERA. Marcel ended up being closer to reality, though neither system exactly nailed it, both being out by more than half a run.
Me? I have no idea what will happen. I can see why the Diamondbacks balked at offering Johnson any more money, especially given their limited available resources this off-season - the consensus from most sources is, we had no more than $10m. Given that, and the other holes that needed to be filled, I would be loath to spend (say) $6m of if on a 45-year old with a history of back problems. The risk of it being a write-off, any way you care to estimate it, is just too much, and for Arizona the money is better spent elsewhere. Such as on Lopez, Schoeneweis and a nice contribution towards Snyder's extension.
That said, I can see why a number of other teams - with more money to spare than us - were prepared to take the risk. The second-half of the season was like a throwback to Johnson v.2004 and, while all the signs are that it was a mirage to a good extent, it is a hell of a beguiling prospect. It is, unquestionably, a roll of the dice, but there are worse deals going to be signed over this winter than the one that will take Johnson to San Francisco. It helps the Giants have a solid enough rotation that if his back were to explode in spring training, they could survive a lot better than many teams.
For Johnson, it may not all have been about money - he might have got more on the East coast - but it clearly was still a significant factor, despite Arizona alone having paid more than a hundred million dollars for his services in the past decade. [If you want to argue this, start with an explanation of the significant difference between earning $170m in your career, and earning $175m] I have to say, his offer of a 50% pay-cut to us now rings somewhat hollow, when he signed with the Giants for a 47% pay-cut, based on the guaranteed amount and the $15.1m he received from us last season. Not much of a hometown discount.
I still can't bring myself to dislike Johnson. Though I'd never admit it on McCC, I'll be rooting for him to do well, as long as San Francisco remain the sub-.500 team I expect [their offense still blows chunks], and he's not pitching against us. Johnson has been responsible for so many of my best Diamondbacks' memories, most notably him coming in from the bullpen in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series. Even now, the mere thought of that sets the hairs on the back of my neck doing a samba. So, for all us forty-somethings, I'm pulling for Johnson to do well - but reserve the right to say, "Told you so," if things get derailed.
And, Giants fans, here is my gift to you. We won't be needing it any more.
Comments
I just want to say
that I got 7 Diamondbacks games next season for my birthday. Woooooooooo!
You keep on rowin', and I'll keep on smilin'.
by soco on
Dec 31, 2008 2:09 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
What REALLY Happened:

Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Dec 31, 2008 4:21 AM EST
reply
actions
1 recs
that’s awesome.
We don't really have that much pitching depth. We don't really have that much pitching depth. FOR GOD SAKE, VERUCA, DON'T GO FAKE TRADING JONATHAN SANCHEZ. We don't really have that much pitching depth
by oldjacket on
Dec 31, 2008 12:50 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Nice marmot
"We...probed them all the way through. They're completely meat." — Terry Bisson
by Scrbl on
Dec 31, 2008 2:23 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
MCC has a wiretap on this place.
I’ve probably said this a million times on a million websites, but Petit >>>> whatever dreck the Giants were going to be trotting out every five days instead of RJ. It makes more sense for us to take this risk than y’all.
We don't really have that much pitching depth. We don't really have that much pitching depth. FOR GOD SAKE, VERUCA, DON'T GO FAKE TRADING JONATHAN SANCHEZ. We don't really have that much pitching depth
by oldjacket on
Dec 31, 2008 1:00 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
OH NOES!
I am shocked… shocked to hear that fans of other teams may be reading this site. They’ll be posting here next…
I’m a bit worried about Petit. Especially in the second half, his BABIP was utterly unsustainable, and his home-run rate overall was insane. As a #5, he might be okay though. The front-office is muttering about getting another starter, but given our resources, I’ll be impressed if the count of his functioning limbs passes three.
Oh, and am entirely with you on Infernal Affairs. Better than The Departed for me, but Mrs. SnakePit and I are huge Anthony Wong fans.
by Jim McLennan on
Dec 31, 2008 1:21 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don’t think he’s going to wake up and be an ace, but he’s a reasonable bet to be a functional MLB pitcher. The candidates for our rotation were guys who haven’t done very well in the upper minors, or who haven’t even pitched in the upper minors. None of them have a season like Petit’s 2004 or 2005 on their resume.
Anthony Wong is the man, but I love Eric Tsang in that movie. The Departed explained too much of that character.
We don't really have that much pitching depth. We don't really have that much pitching depth. FOR GOD SAKE, VERUCA, DON'T GO FAKE TRADING JONATHAN SANCHEZ. We don't really have that much pitching depth
by oldjacket on
Dec 31, 2008 1:45 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And that muttered about 4th starter was...
From reports out today, it appears that mystery 4th starter that Moorad teased us with in his chat may have been Brad Penny. According to Buster Olney at ESPN, AZ was making a push for Penny before Boston landed him.
by TAP on
Dec 31, 2008 2:49 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Guess I was right about the functioning limbs...
by Jim McLennan on
Dec 31, 2008 2:51 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ugh....
That’s pretty frustrating. Then again, this franchise should probably never get into a bidding war with a team like the Red Sox.
I wonder whether we’ll pursue another FA starter.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Dec 31, 2008 3:03 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
or...
according to Nick Piecoro it may be Ben Sheets
by J Up on
Dec 31, 2008 9:31 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's Nick's suggestion.
Frankly, I wouldn’t be shocked if it went down, either. J.Byrnes loves to buy low.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Dec 31, 2008 10:07 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sheets would be a great buy. I’d be all over that. It’ll be hard to get Sheets to come without incentives, though.
"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck
by njjohn on
Jan 2, 2009 11:06 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hard to get Sheets to come without incentives?
I’d say incentives would be neutral, since his track record also suggests that he might not have the ability to meet some injury-based incentives.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Jan 6, 2009 2:55 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Wow....
Mike Shanahan got fired. Never thought I’d see the day. I thought he was pretty much Coach/GM-For-Life.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Dec 31, 2008 3:54 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
As a Broncos fan, I'm not too surprised
They haven’t made the playoffs since 2005, and it’s the third year in a row that the whole season seems to have gone downhill after the first few weeks.
"That's a cop-out, and you know it, and it breaks my heart into a thousand pieces that we ain't gonna save America with your blog today."
by kishi on
Dec 31, 2008 4:41 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’m shocked. Seems pretty unfair. I mean Shanahan himself was suited up as the backup RB for the last game, I think.
"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck
by njjohn on
Jan 2, 2009 11:06 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
TO me the risk with RJ
is not performance – if he can get out to the mound for 30 starts then 170 IP and a 3.50 ERA is not unreasonable. THe risk is injury. As anyone who watched him last year could see, he has significant back problems. In particular, watching him run the bases was excruciating and he is starting to have a tough time fielding his position. (Not that he was ever good in that regard. . . ) He looks like a guy that is one mis-step away from wrenching his back and being in traction.
The DBacks are so cost-conscious right now that I suspect the thought of having $5M tied up in a guy on the DL just was unbearable.
by golfmanthee on
Jan 1, 2009 2:58 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Lies! Abomination!! and Scottish Devilry!!!
…insidiously masked as “healthy introspection”, YOU’RE NOT FOOLING OL’ HACKS, MCLENNAN!!
//kidding, of course//
Impressive post, lots of great points…shows why you’ll always be the Flyin’ Spaghetti Monster around here and why, damn, I just cant QUIT you!
The following is not meant to be argumentative, just a different point of view. If anyone wants to pursue individual points, fine; if not, that’s fine too.
Age, Comps & Injury – Casual readers may not understand that Randy’s been a markedly better pitcher over his career than even Nolan Ryan, striking out more batters per inning, walking far fewer. Come to think of it, Unit walks fewer than Jamie Moyer. He’s one of history’s truly great pitchers, who didnt really pitch like it until he was 29 – a year younger than when Sandy Koufax retired! He might be the greatest “old” pitcher ever, and I think it makes more sense to comp him against his own recent past (however one defines that) than against Ryan, or certainly v the knucklers, spitballers, etc. I agree injury is a legitimate and serious concern, although my guess is not as great as when we last signed him; extrapolating a 5.70 Chase ERA from Ryan’s age 45 decline seems unreasonable to me. To golfmanthee’s point, based on RJ’s recent history and the fact he’s an intelligent pitcher rather than a mere hard thrower, Johnson should pitch much better than that, or he wont pitch at all due to injury.
Projections – Excellent argument about Tom House vs back issues, but if House propelled RJ’s recent dominance, what’s to say that mechanical instruction cant carry over fairly easily to 2009? Also agree BABIP is likely to rise from .278, but he’s moving from one of the best HR parks to one of the worst – lifetime 2.14 ERA @ AT&T incl 2 starts earlier this year (12IP, zero ER). Obviously, that wont sustain, neither will the luxury of throwing to the Giants, but it’s been a terrible hitting division with no strong offensive team (pending Manny’s whereabouts), and the park seems like a great fit for him.
Money & Negotiations – You’re dead on re incentives. Categorically eschewing performance bonuses not only puts AZ at a competitive labor disadvantage, but doesnt the risk mitigation aspect – tying overall spending closer to actual performance – fit in with an FO consistently espousing such valuated prudence?
EXTENDED SPECULATION ALERT (which I’ll stubbornly cling to as ’analysis’): I wonder if this club policy is rooted in more than simple cost certainty – a deeper business philosophy that well paid employees should intrinsically perform well, without bells and whistles – and if they dont, the player somehow “owes” the club. If so, I think such a philosophy quaintly misunderstands the nature of professional sports. Of course, I mention it fully suspecting this had something to do with the $3M offer – the notion Randy didnt “make good” on the $24/2 (due to injury), the craw of deferred checks RJ already gets in ‘09’, maybe even the idea they “saved” him from NY – just this overarching idea that Randy somehow “owed” them. I realize the $3M has been presented quite differently, as all they could “afford”, but specifically, Moorad’s notion that $3M (as opposed to, say, $5M) was “fair” can only be reconciled, in my mind, with this idea that RJ somehow “owed” them and that normal market considerations didnt apply.
I do think money was a significant factor in Johnson’s decision-making, but not for it’s own sake, or in the way most often suggested. Money’s significant to athletes as rich as Randy, in that it represents something even more important to them – respect. That often doesnt translate well with us minimum wage lintmongers, who would gladly pitch a major league inning for free, but that’s not the real world choice here, is it? None of us have (presumably) Boston throwing $10-12M for our services. As you noted, if $ was the endgame, he’d likely be on the East Coast. He wanted to play for teams offering less dough, not more – for a variety of personal reasons.
As to the $170 v $175M, unless he’s parlayed it all into Geddy Lee memorablia, he should be living quite comfortably, regardless. He certainly hasnt lost his fortune on clothes ;-) Randy’s a really rich guy. The people writing checks are really rich guys. They get in a room to negotiate. Nobody’s leaving that room poor. It’s not so much about getting an extra mil for the new barbeque as it is avoiding being taken for a fool. My guess is, Randy felt that’s what $3M represented – and I dont blame him. An intelligent player posture should account for the generally weak market economy, but beyond that, why should a professional athlete care about his first choice destination’s reasons as to why they’re offering a quarter of what he can get elsewhere? On some level, he must think, “WTF? Why is Byrnsie’s extension or Colangelo’s debt my effin’ problem? Isnt that your guys job, to manage all that and be in a position to meet someone like me half way? My starting "bid” was $7.5M, four or five M below market, and you dont even come back with 5? You come back with 3? Less than half what Doug Davis makes, after I start 30 games and appear to put the worst of my 2006-2007 health issues behind me? You’re taking me for a fool."
I’m about Randy’s age. Our kids play ball in the same school league. He goes to the games, stays out of people’s way, tells his kid “Nice game” and they drive home together. In my heart if hearts, as a father of teenagers who’s also lived in NYC myself, I believe he quite strongly preferred to stay here, near his family. I dont believe he decided to play up in San Francisco “for the money”. He’s playing in SF because of a principle. This is an unusually driven, prideful guy. And that principle isnt, “I’m god’s gift and the world revolves around me and I demand market value”. The principle is, “I work really hard, I’ll make considerable concessions for the privilege of working near my family, but I’ll be goddammed if any MLB owner expects me to work my ass off for 25% of what I’m worth on the free market. I’d rather compromise and play in San Fran – it wont be as bad as Boston (AZ spring ball and I’ll fly home more often), than "give in” to these local bleepedy-bleeps. And he’s mature enough now and far-sighted enough not to bring any of that up publicly.
I still can’t bring myself to dislike Johnson. Johnson has been responsible for so many of my best Diamondbacks’ memories
Hear, hear! Indeed, we should all make lists, maybe before he’s scheduled to start against us :-)
most notably him coming in from the bullpen in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series. Even now, the mere thought of that sets the hairs on the back of my neck doing a samba.
Bingo. A moment about more than just winning and losing – about pride and dignity, bestowed upon an insecure city by a consummate warrior. We root hard for our teams, but in the end, deep down, I think we root for people. Organizations provide wins and losses, but for those of us who believe sports, even professional sports, are about more than winning and losing, only individual people can provide our most enduring and cherished connections.
So, for all us forty-somethings, I’m pulling for Johnson to do well – but reserve the right to say, “Told you so,” if things get derailed.
Like life itself, it could all come tumbling down tomorrow. No question about it.
All the more reason to take a chance :-)
Peace
by Diamondhacks on
Jan 1, 2009 4:40 PM EST
reply
actions
3 recs
Just another...
‘Hacks post full of misrepresentations, bitterne… What? My mistake. Make that recommended, and I appreciate your time and thoughtful response. You make some very valid points, and I can’t argue with some of them – as noted, if we’d re-signed him, I’d likely be making them myself! Couple of minor points, however;
1) Yes, Johnson is a superior pitcher to Ryan. However, Ryan at age 44 was a superior pitcher to Johnson at age 44.
2) Pitching well at…This Space For Rent Park in SF this year by Johnson is probably largely down to him facing the Giants and their utterly toothless offense. He won’t have that opportunity in 2009!
3) Personally, I feel a certain sense of Johnson ‘owing’ the team, for the exact reasons mentioned – the circumstances under which he came here, and his performance in 2007. But I have no idea whether that factored into the amount offered, or whether it should… Certainly, in any other line of work, how you performed in your last contract/pay period would factor into negotiations. But sports contracts are not like that, as we all know.
4) One of my step-step-grandkids plays football with RJ’s kid, and everything I’ve heard agrees with your experiences. The money = respect thing makes sense, but as with the cash, at this point in his career, how much more validation [self- or otherwise] does he need? He’s a sure fire, first-ballot HoFer, with a World Series ring and a mantelpiece that’s groaning under an extreme workload. Can you – or anyone? – honestly say they’d think less of Johnson if he’d signed with us for $3m? Quite the opposite, personally.
I understand his position, respect his decision, and will be cheering for him when he gets win #300. Especially if it’s against the Dodgers or Padres. :-)
by Jim McLennan on
Jan 1, 2009 7:51 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’m going to file “utterly toothless offense” away for later perusal.
Caveat Emptor , ad nauseum.
You pays your money (or you doesn’t)…or you’re the Yankees and it’s the World’s Fair.
Who has the fun?
Is it always the man with the gun?
- The Stranglers
by victor frankenstein on
Jan 2, 2009 12:36 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Less than four runs per game in 2008
Only the Padres scored less than SF. Heck, even Washington scored more.
Of course, past performance (or lack thereof) is no guarantee of future incompetence. Unless you’re a Pirates fan.
by Jim McLennan on
Jan 2, 2009 11:11 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Or
a Devil Rays fan nevermind
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
by DbacksSkins on
Jan 6, 2009 2:56 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We’ve got at least a carney’s smile worth of teeth now.
We don't really have that much pitching depth. We don't really have that much pitching depth. FOR GOD SAKE, VERUCA, DON'T GO FAKE TRADING JONATHAN SANCHEZ. We don't really have that much pitching depth
by oldjacket on
Jan 2, 2009 12:14 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You nailed it
I’m sure the D’backs feel RJ owes them one year at or near the minimum to make up for getting one year’s production out of a 2 year contract. Never mind that it was their own stupidity that caused them to take on that contract in the first place.
by fjm235 on
Jan 1, 2009 5:32 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
We print shirts up with this...
If Chuck Norris wears Jack Bauer pajamas, then Jack Bauer wears Randy Johnson pajamas.
"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck
by njjohn on
Jan 2, 2009 11:08 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs



















