My only concern, not really a concern, is if we will ever see Magglio as magnificent as he has been this year. I mean will he ever be able to put together a season as productive as this one. It’s been so special.

Trading Santana would be a good move. They could get a very good prospect who could be developed into a star by 2010, and by that point, Santana would be long gone anyway.

And would they not trade Santana to a division opponent? Well if they did, they would only be trading him for next year– a year in which they would be rebuilding anyway. Say if they traded him to the Tigers, by 2009 he could bolt as a high priced free agent to the Mets.

Thanks for the YouTube link. Thoroughly moronic. Here’s a little response to comments made in that specific episode:

“….To underscore this point, we need only look at Fransescas’s game-three analysis of the series. This was the one “shoe-in” win for the Yankees, based on Fransesca’s understanding of Kenny Rogers, ex-New York hurler set to pitch the pivotal game for the Tigers. Again Fransesca’s miscalculation was not without analysis. He and others like him did have considerable experience seeing Kenny Rogers up close in regular season games and in playoff situations, when Rogers had pitched both for the Yankees and for the Mets from 1996-2000. And Rogers stunk. The stats from ten years ago don’t lie. Forget about his 17 posted wins this season, forget about his impressive ERA this season, and forget about his sub-2.00 run ERA the last few games he pitched in 2006. When Rogers pitched in New York, he stunk. Period. Moreover, his overall track record against Yankee bats was atrocious. Bottom line: it was a foregone conclusion that Rogers would stink in game three and the Yankees would win.
Again, the folly of this analysis is colossal. Did Fransesca even bother to look at the reason Rogers was able to win 17 games for the Tigers during the regular season (much more recent history than his performances that ran him out of town on a rail)? Did Fransesca even bother to pull up Roger’s track record during the 2006 season against the Chicago White Sox, a divisional foe of the Tigers and a slugging team on par or arguably better than the New York Yankees? If he did, he would have discovered that Kenny Rogers absolutely dominated the Chicago White Sox, just like he dominated the Yankees in game three of the ALDS. Just ask Ozzie Guillen (Chicago White Sox skipper) about Kenny Rogers if you want the real story. And the real story is simple. A veteran pitcher like Kenny Rogers, never known for being a hard thrower to begin with, must rely on continually developing and improving his pitches. He must rely on being crafty, on keeping hitters off balance, and on simply out-pitching opponents. He must also succeed at this quest if he is to continue pitching in the Big Leagues. If he doesn’t do these things well, and continually improve at these things, he simply does not advance his pitching career (certainly not to age 41), and he certainly does not pull off 17 wins at forty-one years of age. Just ask Al Leiter. He was that kind of pitcher. Like Rogers, Leiter was the kind of pitcher who actually improves with age. But no matter. This point is completely lost on Fransesca and friends who know only of Kenny Rogers, vintage 1996-2000, and who didn’t even bother to try to understand how it might be possible that Rogers recorded 17 wins this year, and for a playoff team no less. I need say no more about Kenny Rogers. Let his performance in game three speak for itself.
Fransesca and crew will eat humble pie this winter because they simply did not see the train wreak coming. It was heading directly toward them faster than Joel Zumaya’s 103-mile-per hour fastball, the same fastball that mowed down the heart of George Steinbrenner’s 220 million dollar prized batting order. In the aftermath of picking up the pieces from the crash, one thing is certain. I don’t think Mike Fransesca will ever claim any future-postseason-series victory as a foregone conclusion, even if the New York Yankees do happen to face the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, or, God help them, the Kansas City Royals during the last three games of their regular season with the division title on the line.”

Thanks for the YouTube link. Thoroughly moronic. Here’s a little response to comments made on that specific episode:

“…To underscore this point, we need only look at Fransescas’s game-three analysis of the series. This was the one “shoe-in” win for the Yankees, based on Fransesca’s understanding of Kenny Rogers, ex-New York hurler set to pitch the pivotal game for the Tigers. Again Fransesca’s miscalculation was not without analysis. He and others like him did have considerable experience seeing Kenny Rogers up close in regular season games and in playoff situations, when Rogers had pitched both for the Yankees and for the Mets from 1996-2000. And Rogers stunk. The stats from ten years ago don’t lie. Forget about his 17 posted wins this season, forget about his impressive ERA this season, and forget about his sub-2.00 run ERA the last few games he pitched in 2006. When Rogers pitched in New York, he stunk. Period. Moreover, his overall track record against Yankee bats was atrocious. Bottom line: it was a foregone conclusion that Rogers would stink in game three and the Yankees would win.
Again, the folly of this analysis is colossal. Did Fransesca even bother to look at the reason Rogers was able to win 17 games for the Tigers during the regular season (much more recent history than his performances that ran him out of town on a rail)? Did Fransesca even bother to pull up Roger’s track record during the 2006 season against the Chicago White Sox, a divisional foe of the Tigers and a slugging team on par or arguably better than the New York Yankees? If he did, he would have discovered that Kenny Rogers absolutely dominated the Chicago White Sox, just like he dominated the Yankees in game three of the ALDS. Just ask Ozzie Guillen (Chicago White Sox skipper) about Kenny Rogers if you want the real story. And the real story is simple. A veteran pitcher like Kenny Rogers, never known for being a hard thrower to begin with, must rely on continually developing and improving his pitches. He must rely on being crafty, on keeping hitters off balance, and on simply out-pitching opponents. He must also succeed at this quest if he is to continue pitching in the Big Leagues. If he doesn’t do these things well, and continually improve at these things, he simply does not advance his pitching career (certainly not to age 41), and he certainly does not pull off 17 wins at forty-one years of age. Just ask Al Leiter. He was that kind of pitcher. Like Rogers, Leiter was the kind of pitcher who actually improves with age. But no matter. This point is completely lost on Fransesca and friends who know only of Kenny Rogers, vintage 1996-2000, and who didn’t even bother to try to understand how it might be possible that Rogers recorded 17 wins this year, and for a playoff team no less. I need say no more about Kenny Rogers. Let his performance in game three speak for itself.
Fransesca and crew will eat humble pie this winter because they simply did not see the train wreak coming. It was heading directly toward them faster than Joel Zumaya’s 103-mile-per hour fastball, the same fastball that mowed down the heart of George Steinbrenner’s 220 million dollar prized batting order. In the aftermath of picking up the pieces from the crash, one thing is certain. I don’t think Mike Fransesca will ever claim any future-postseason-series victory as a foregone conclusion, even if the New York Yankees do happen to face the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, or, God help them, the Kansas City Royals during the last three games of their regular season with the division title on the line…”

Thanks for the YouTube link. Thoroughly moronic. Here’s a response to comments made on that specific episode…

“….To underscore this point, we need only look at Fransescas’s game-three analysis of the series. This was the one “shoe-in” win for the Yankees, based on Fransesca’s understanding of Kenny Rogers, ex-New York hurler set to pitch the pivotal game for the Tigers. Again Fransesca’s miscalculation was not without analysis. He and others like him did have considerable experience seeing Kenny Rogers up close in regular season games and in playoff situations, when Rogers had pitched both for the Yankees and for the Mets from 1996-2000. And Rogers stunk. The stats from ten years ago don’t lie. Forget about his 17 posted wins this season, forget about his impressive ERA this season, and forget about his sub-2.00 run ERA the last few games he pitched in 2006. When Rogers pitched in New York, he stunk. Period. Moreover, his overall track record against Yankee bats was atrocious. Bottom line: it was a foregone conclusion that Rogers would stink in game three and the Yankees would win.
Again, the folly of this analysis is colossal. Did Fransesca even bother to look at the reason Rogers was able to win 17 games for the Tigers during the regular season (much more recent history than his performances that ran him out of town on a rail)? Did Fransesca even bother to pull up Roger’s track record during the 2006 season against the Chicago White Sox, a divisional foe of the Tigers and a slugging team on par or arguably better than the New York Yankees? If he did, he would have discovered that Kenny Rogers absolutely dominated the Chicago White Sox, just like he dominated the Yankees in game three of the ALDS. Just ask Ozzie Guillen (Chicago White Sox skipper) about Kenny Rogers if you want the real story. And the real story is simple. A veteran pitcher like Kenny Rogers, never known for being a hard thrower to begin with, must rely on continually developing and improving his pitches. He must rely on being crafty, on keeping hitters off balance, and on simply out-pitching opponents. He must also succeed at this quest if he is to continue pitching in the Big Leagues. If he doesn’t do these things well, and continually improve at these things, he simply does not advance his pitching career (certainly not to age 41), and he certainly does not pull off 17 wins at forty-one years of age. Just ask Al Leiter. He was that kind of pitcher. Like Rogers, Leiter was the kind of pitcher who actually improves with age. But no matter. This point is completely lost on Fransesca and friends who know only of Kenny Rogers, vintage 1996-2000, and who didn’t even bother to try to understand how it might be possible that Rogers recorded 17 wins this year, and for a playoff team no less. I need say no more about Kenny Rogers. Let his performance in game three speak for itself.
Fransesca and crew will eat humble pie this winter because they simply did not see the train wreak coming. It was heading directly toward them faster than Joel Zumaya’s 103-mile-per hour fastball, the same fastball that mowed down the heart of George Steinbrenner’s 220 million dollar prized batting order. In the aftermath of picking up the pieces from the crash, one thing is certain. I don’t think Mike Fransesca will ever claim any future-postseason-series victory as a foregone conclusion, even if the New York Yankees do happen to face the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, or, God help them, the Kansas City Royals during the last three games of their regular season with the division title on the line….”

Thanks for the YouTube link. Thoroughly moronic. Here’s a little response to comments made in that specific episode:

….To underscore this point, we need only look at Fransescas’s game-three analysis of the series. This was the one “shoe-in” win for the Yankees, based on Fransesca’s understanding of Kenny Rogers, ex-New York hurler set to pitch the pivotal game for the Tigers. Again Fransesca’s miscalculation was not without analysis. He and others like him did have considerable experience seeing Kenny Rogers up close in regular season games and in playoff situations, when Rogers had pitched both for the Yankees and for the Mets from 1996-2000. And Rogers stunk. The stats from ten years ago don’t lie. Forget about his 17 posted wins this season, forget about his impressive ERA this season, and forget about his sub-2.00 run ERA the last few games he pitched in 2006. When Rogers pitched in New York, he stunk. Period. Moreover, his overall track record against Yankee bats was atrocious. Bottom line: it was a foregone conclusion that Rogers would stink in game three and the Yankees would win.
Again, the folly of this analysis is colossal. Did Fransesca even bother to look at the reason Rogers was able to win 17 games for the Tigers during the regular season (much more recent history than his performances that ran him out of town on a rail)? Did Fransesca even bother to pull up Roger’s track record during the 2006 season against the Chicago White Sox, a divisional foe of the Tigers and a slugging team on par or arguably better than the New York Yankees? If he did, he would have discovered that Kenny Rogers absolutely dominated the Chicago White Sox, just like he dominated the Yankees in game three of the ALDS. Just ask Ozzie Guillen (Chicago White Sox skipper) about Kenny Rogers if you want the real story. And the real story is simple. A veteran pitcher like Kenny Rogers, never known for being a hard thrower to begin with, must rely on continually developing and improving his pitches. He must rely on being crafty, on keeping hitters off balance, and on simply out-pitching opponents. He must also succeed at this quest if he is to continue pitching in the Big Leagues. If he doesn’t do these things well, and continually improve at these things, he simply does not advance his pitching career (certainly not to age 41), and he certainly does not pull off 17 wins at forty-one years of age. Just ask Al Leiter. He was that kind of pitcher. Like Rogers, Leiter was the kind of pitcher who actually improves with age. But no matter. This point is completely lost on Fransesca and friends who know only of Kenny Rogers, vintage 1996-2000, and who didn’t even bother to try to understand how it might be possible that Rogers recorded 17 wins this year, and for a playoff team no less. I need say no more about Kenny Rogers. Let his performance in game three speak for itself.
Fransesca and crew will eat humble pie this winter because they simply did not see the train wreak coming. It was heading directly toward them faster than Joel Zumaya’s 103-mile-per hour fastball, the same fastball that mowed down the heart of George Steinbrenner’s 220 million dollar prized batting order. In the aftermath of picking up the pieces from the crash, one thing is certain. I don’t think Mike Fransesca will ever claim any future-postseason-series victory as a foregone conclusion, even if the New York Yankees do happen to face the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, or, God help them, the Kansas City Royals during the last three games of their regular season with the division title on the line….

Thanks for the YouTube link. Thoroughy moronic. Here’s a litte response to that specific episode:

….To underscore this point, we need only look at Fransescas’s game-three analysis of the series. This was the one “shoe-in” win for the Yankees, based on Fransesca’s understanding of Kenny Rogers, ex-New York hurler set to pitch the pivotal game for the Tigers. Again Fransesca’s miscalculation was not without analysis. He and others like him did have considerable experience seeing Kenny Rogers up close in regular season games and in playoff situations, when Rogers had pitched both for the Yankees and for the Mets from 1996-2000. And Rogers stunk. The stats from ten years ago don’t lie. Forget about his 17 posted wins this season, forget about his impressive ERA this season, and forget about his sub-2.00 run ERA the last few games he pitched in 2006. When Rogers pitched in New York, he stunk. Period. Moreover, his overall track record against Yankee bats was atrocious. Bottom line: it was a foregone conclusion that Rogers would stink in game three and the Yankees would win.
Again, the folly of this analysis is colossal. Did Fransesca even bother to look at the reason Rogers was able to win 17 games for the Tigers during the regular season (much more recent history than his performances that ran him out of town on a rail)? Did Fransesca even bother to pull up Roger’s track record during the 2006 season against the Chicago White Sox, a divisional foe of the Tigers and a slugging team on par or arguably better than the New York Yankees? If he did, he would have discovered that Kenny Rogers absolutely dominated the Chicago White Sox, just like he dominated the Yankees in game three of the ALDS. Just ask Ozzie Guillen (Chicago White Sox skipper) about Kenny Rogers if you want the real story. And the real story is simple. A veteran pitcher like Kenny Rogers, never known for being a hard thrower to begin with, must rely on continually developing and improving his pitches. He must rely on being crafty, on keeping hitters off balance, and on simply out-pitching opponents. He must also succeed at this quest if he is to continue pitching in the Big Leagues. If he doesn’t do these things well, and continually improve at these things, he simply does not advance his pitching career (certainly not to age 41), and he certainly does not pull off 17 wins at forty-one years of age. Just ask Al Leiter. He was that kind of pitcher. Like Rogers, Leiter was the kind of pitcher who actually improves with age. But no matter. This point is completely lost on Fransesca and friends who know only of Kenny Rogers, vintage 1996-2000, and who didn’t even bother to try to understand how it might be possible that Rogers recorded 17 wins this year, and for a playoff team no less. I need say no more about Kenny Rogers. Let his performance in game three speak for itself.
Fransesca and crew will eat humble pie this winter because they simply did not see the train wreak coming. It was heading directly toward them faster than Joel Zumaya’s 103-mile-per hour fastball, the same fastball that mowed down the heart of George Steinbrenner’s 220 million dollar prized batting order. In the aftermath of picking up the pieces from the crash, one thing is certain. I don’t think Mike Fransesca will ever claim any future-postseason-series victory as a foregone conclusion, even if the New York Yankees do happen to face the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, or, God help them, the Kansas City Royals during the last three games of their regular season with the division title on the line….

When he is a free agent, I would obviously love the idea of signing him, but I am sure it will be NYY, BOS, NYM, etc.

Here is a youtube of Mike and Maddog the day after the yankees lose the ALCS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=We7d2jss5KM

I’m not sure if you’re joking or not. I personally don’t hold the Tigers to THAT high of a standard. Not making the playoffs this year with the team they have would be a disappointment, but I wouldn’t even call it a failure since they’re at least in the race.

If the Tigers get in the playoffs, regardless of how they do, then I call the season a success.

I look for them to trade Santana this next winter. He is going to be a free agent after ’08 and will surely be too expensive for the tight pockets.

Here’s a thought: if that were to happen, would there be any possibility the Tigers could get into the bidding? What would it cost, and would it be worth giving up a big time prospect (such as Maybin) for only one year of Santana?