Portland sent the Celtics to their 3rd loss in 4 games. Yay!

Saw the box score on NBA.com!! HUZZAH!!! Cherish the day!!!

This should put an end to the "Are the Celtics on pace to win 70 games" talk. DOUBLE Huzzah!!

Willie Taveras deal with the reds is 2 years, 6.25 million.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Major_League_Baseball_Draft

Manny's agent contacts Dodgers

http://tinyurl.com/7l5smd

Let's see if they can work something out that makes Manny at least... content. And rich.

I'm not rich, but I am content, content enough to not feel too terribly depressed about turning (gulp) 40 on Thursday. (Even typing that is painful.) If I should survive, thankyoucomeagain. Celebratin' begins tomorrow night. Have a great New Year's Eve and Day, all.

Imagine, a fan of the hated Celtics living in the midst of Lakers country and then podcasting about Boston teams. I'm going to move to Boston and start my own podcast.

Ah, yes, I'm half-way there: I have the podcast part started (over on LOCKS of the Week) :)

[new episodes resume Jan 5th...]

http://mlb.mlb.com/network/

Man, I just read your pets story, Jon. Posted my condolences there. Thanks for sharing.

Likewise u-dog. Happy Birthday buddy. I hope the Colts can pull out a victory for your birthday!

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3801321

...still like his mailbags, however.

Manny Ramirez

Mr. Ultimo

But it's not. It's listed already on Cox on channel 282 - part of a Sports "tier" (which costs only $1 on top of a big package but rather more on its own on top of extended basic). I'll be interested to see if it turns up instead on 128 - I doubt it - sounds like a lost cause they were fighting.

It also doesn't tell me that the HD version is on channel 770.

But I agree with you. And I can't imagine Dunn and an available pitcher having the same impact. Plus, I don't think the front office does a deal with Manny unless they already have budgeted enough money left over to pay for an Andy Pettitte type.

I think with Manny in the lineup we would be fine with the rotation of Billingsley, Kershaw, Kuroda, McDonald, and Stults.

Taking a risk on John Smoltz would be worth it in my eyes. Or we could sign Sheets and be the favorites from the NL and have a solid chance to win the World Series.

Whatever feels good for you, Ned.

http://tinyurl.com/7vdqzy

At least thats the right kind of contract. It looks like the guy is no worse than most fifth starters.

from a loving dog owner, i'm sorry to hear of your family's loss, Jon.

My two cents as a Red Sox fan on Manny is that happiness for him is fleeting: It comes and goes and comes again. I think the Dodgers are the best place for him, the place where he'd be happiest, but he'll eventually start grumbling about something no matter what. The trick is to ignore it and just focus on the RBIs and playoff appearances piling up.

Anyway, Happy New Year, Dodger Thinkers.

I was pulled over by Smokey, now I'm headed toward the pokey,

Hell, yeah, ain't life grand.

I had to much to drink, and now I'm sitting in the klink,

Hell, yeah, ain't life grand.

I had me a Black Cow, now I'm stuck in the hoosegow,

Hell, yeah, ain't life grand.

I had one more gin and tonic, now my bracelet's electronic,

Hell, yeah, ain't life grand.

-------------------------------

If someone could add a verse about rum, I think this could function as a sea shanty, also.

Brad Penny in Boston does not feel like a good fit. I expect they will get what they got from Miller and Colon when they tried to rehab those shoulders and got little for it.

Even so, I always buy into these types of acquisitions and start thinking maybe, just maybe the guy will really turn it around.

The king of all these kinds of acquisitions for the Red Sox was when they brought in an aging Mark Fidrych in the mid-80s to see if he had anything left (he pitched briefly in their minor league system before calling it quits for good).

I hope he enjoys running his hand through his hair while watching Longoria and Arod launch his fastballs over the Monster.

Hear, hear. The Red Sox are now suddenly thinking they can turn any guy into a productive player. Having not learned the lesson of Lugo, now we see them pick up another Dodger re-tread.

Although knowing our luck, Penny will win the 2009 AL "Comeback Player of the Year".

(Arrrrgh me hearties. A pirate's life for me!)

I just hope Ned realizes (or at least, believes) that Manny hasn't gotten any offers better than the Dodgers's initial 2/45 offer, and that it is therefore not necessarily necessary to improve upon it. Manny's not gonna sit out the entire season if he doesn't get a better offer than that.

Castillo is deadbeat for 3 years...Jones only for one more.

Why not let Andruw sit on the bench smiling every game or simply DFA him?

Jones for Castillo would be fine for two reasons...

1) Jones is COMPLETELY worthless. Castillo is only MOSTLY useless. He did still have a .350+ OBP last year, and would at least provide another safety net for DeWitt. Don't get me wrong, I don't really want him, but he's preferable to Jones.

2) re: Castillo having 3 more years on his deal. This is true, but I'd rather have his deal ($6m/year for 3 years) than Jones' monster 2009 salary, because at least it provides you with much better payroll flexibility.

Angels signed Brian Futenes, two years plus an option.

Forget the players involved. Would you rather pay $22.1 million in 2009, or $18 million spread out over the next 3 years?

That is why it would be nice to know why the talks broke down at the winter meetings. If it was a straight swap and nothing else, I can't imagine the Dodgers not jumping on that offer.

My guess is it involved the Dodgers paying some of Jones salary and perhaps even adding some prospects. Because if not, it would be a great move for the Dodgers. One I hope is revisted if in fact they do end up with Manny.

What am I talking about? One I hope is revisited even if they don't end up with Manny.

If folks around here are right that the team was giving away prospects to avoid spending a couple million dollars last year, then I can't imagine McCourt being willing to pay most or all of Jones's salary and cut/trade him. Most likely, he'll stay with the team, get more starts than he deserves, and otherwise rot on the bench.

Mark DeRosa to the Indians for 3 minor league pitchers.

Besides, there is value in just getting the deal done. It's hard to put a dollar figure on it.

Imagine you need a place to live and want to spend $X/mo. You can't find anything good at that price, but prices are coming down and you think if you hold out you might be able to get something... or you can just say, y'know, you'll be OK paying $Y/mo. and taking this apartment that you like quite a bit and your search is over. Is that caving?

Actually, that's pretty much how I decide on all home improvement projects. For most, I COULD do the job, but in much more time than it would take a professional to do it. Sometimes it's worth it to pay the pro. My water heater blew up last month. It's an easy job to replace one, but it happened the day I was leaving town for 10 days, with non-refundable tickets. So I paid a plumber a ridiculous amount of money to do in 3 hours what I didn't have 6 hours to do myself.

If Manny Ramirez doesn't find a baseball contract to his liking and would like to clean my toilet, I will pay him one hundred dollars every two weeks.

Huh? You do realize they could make the trade and then release Castillo like 5 minutes later right? Or is there some baseball rule that prevents that? If so, then put him on the 60-day DL.

The point being, both Jones "and" Castillo can be worthless for 1 year (or even 0 years for that matter), the only difference being spreading the payments out over 3 years instead of 1 year. And if paying $18 million over 3 years is worse then paying $22.1 million over 1 year, I'll take it every time.

I could see Jones for Castillo if we paid both their salaries, but that's about it.

I had one more drink of tequilita, and now I have a cellmate who calls me his lindita.

Hell, yeah, ain't life grand.

The Time-Warner cable lineup for our area doesn't show it yet.

http://www.timewarnerla.com/channellineups/dsp_chOutput.cfm?luType=A

I mean, trade Jones to the Mets and pay all the $22.1 million, "and" get a player you have no use for other then to release him and pay his salary too?

Why would any team do that? They could just release Jones. They wouldn't need to pay an additional $18 million for the right to release Jones. Would they?

However, Olney asks the question, should the Dodgers use their leverage with Boras and Manny. He views this as a very touchy situation and believes ultimately, the Dodgers can sign Manny for 3 years/66M.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081231/ap_on_bi_ge/viacom_time_warner_cable

2002: $16.9 million
2003: 17.5
2004: 15.9
2005: 10.9
2006: 14.3
2007: 5.1
2008: 29.2

In other words, his defense takes a big toll, and he's likely to get paid more than his offense and defense are worth.

Course, this ignores his worth in terms of fan revenue and such.

I mean, does Boras wait for the Dodgers to make an offer? Or does he propose one?

I get the feeling the Dodgers just might say yes if Boras said 3 years $66 million and he is yours.

What the Dodgers (probably) don't want is to offer something close to 3 years $66 million, and then have Boras shop that offer.

Neither side wants to be the first to commit, and the biggest reason for this dragging on, is the apparent unwillingness of either party to flinch.

Given that Manny is going to sign somewhere, this only works in our favor.

I don't know what else the team can do aside from waiting for Manny/Boras to get back to them.

Right now, the Dodgers have played their cards, its up to the other side to either call, raise or fold.

Getting Manny, overpaid or not, makes the Dodgers a better team for the next few years. That's what's important.

But does he want to see #99 hit homeruns or does he want to see #99 push around old guys and sit on the bench with a sore knee (can't remember which one)?

But does it really? Temperamental Manny may eventually sign for a perceived (by him) low ball contract and then start the same charade he started last year with Boston. He could even say, if I can't get the deal I want, then heck with it, I'll just pull a Karl Malone or Gary Payton deal and sign for 1 year with the Yankees for low money trying to win a perceived easy WS ring while at the same time to try and stick it to Boston.

I just don't think being a "good" baseball fan has to be one hundred percent perfect winning rationality. I accept that I'm going to want to see and be a fan of things that SABR can't add up. It's not to say all of that isn't vitally important and should be thought about, but that if I let myself be a pessimistic curmudgeon about almost any move, I probably wouldn't be a fan to begin with.

Or the Dodgers could re-raise feeling the reluctance of Boras and Manny to get back to them is an indication their (Dodgers) bet was too low.

I am not saying the Dodgers necessarily should, but is is an option, that you failed to include.

Not to put words in his mouth, but it seems like he feels about Manny the same way that I feel (or felt, until recently) about Nomar Garciaparra.

Yeah, I knew there were better players out there, and I didn't care at all. My favorite player (ca. 2006) was playing for my favorite team and that was all that mattered. You can't parse it, you can't explain it, you can't bring logic to it.

As an aside, I will say that Nomar ceased being my favorite player when -- and only when -- (a) it was clear that his days as a regular were over, AND (b) I had a new favorite to take his place (the Bison).

I understand that, but doesn't his "heart" like Manny because he hits homeruns, not because he has behavioral quirks? I submit that people only like/put up with his behavior because he's really good at hitting.

If Manny hit like Sweeney, nobody'd be wearing fake dreadlocks.

Second question: how many of those innings should be out of the bullpen?

Third question: why do I keep typing "manny" when I mean "many?"

I'll talk about Nomar, since he's my guy. As my favorite player, I loved -- for example -- his whole batting routine, the playing with the gloves, the cap, the shoes, everything. If (when?) Nomar was terrible, or if he weren't my favorite player, that would be incredibly annoying.

So not to speak for Jacob, but I'd guess that he loves the whole Manny package.

And, the Dodgers original and only bet (offer) came in November. If Manny has merely stepped away for a drink, that must be some drink.

No matter what the stats say, my gut tells me that signing Manny will be a disaster and no words can calm the queasiness. I'd be more comfortable signing Manny if he'd had a normal two months with us.

It was like the 88 World Series. I knew afterward we'd pay a price for the bizarre World Championship. I just didn't realize at the time how severe the the price would be.

But if he signed a three year deal, hit the snot out of the ball the first two, and then struggled a bit in the third? Or even somewhere before that, I'm sure I would pull for him and root for him harder than some--just like I did watching Bills fall apart in Game 5, Bison during so many strikeouts and Loney through a cold streak.

With Manny and Ethier, we potentially have a lot of typos in our future. Just wait until Kyle Orr ascends to the big club!

Also, I'm not too concerned with McDonald's innings since he is entering his age 24 season. I don't mind him starting the season out of the pen, but I'd like to see him starting in the second half. If he isn't starting by then, let's hope it is because we have (at least) 5 solid starters and not just because Jon Garland has a contract.

I've been meaning to do a blog post about how Orel's 1989 was eerily similar to his 1988, yet he finished 15-15 instead of 23-8. Orel ended the season 1-7 despite a 2.05 ERA over his last 9 games.

But who knows, the economy could be better and maybe even the Yankees will fill the need to have the highest paid outfielder in baseball.

I would buy a documentary of Manny in a heartbeat, no questions asked.

18 yrs ago (or so) I was at one of the two original Gordon Biersch restaurants, in Palo Alto (the other early one was in San Jose). A friend that I was with had been roommates with Dan Gordon back in college (at Cal). I asked Gordon why, as a good Cal Bear, he had opened a restaurant in Stanford country. His answer was "Stanford students make good employees," with the obvious implication that he rather enjoyed that he was the boss and not the other way around. This seemed to me to be the pinnacle of wisdom.

So sorry, I can't work for you. I can happily mow your lawn as a favor, however. You're a good guy, despite your alma mater.

It seems like he'll probably be worth around $15-17 million in Fangraph terms, which (interestingly enough) will probably make him roughly as valuable as Ethier or Kemp.

Bet on it.

BTW, for anyone paying attention, the Pac-10 is now 3-0 in bowl games (Cal, Zona, Dux) with OSU and U$C to go. Natch, I'm hoping for a 4-1 final record. The Cal rivalry with Stanford (at least from my day) is one of friendly competition, mostly because both schools were so unremittingly awful at football and hoops in the 80s. The view of $C is much more visceral - unbridled contempt, disgust, and (of course) jealousy. I will root for ANYONE (yes, Bob, even Notre Dame) against U$C. Go Penn State!

The writers wife broke her leg the other day.

I have images of Woody Hayes imprinted on me from my youth. And nightmares about Ron Dayne. And running into the only football fans dumber than Arizona's: Northwestern's.

The last time I had money on USC, I lost.

BTW has anyone seen anything on Mr. Grumps? Has he retired?

Robert McNamara did graduate from Berkeley.

And do they venture as far down as South Pasadena?

It probably matters that Cal is usually so bad (and hasn't been the Rose Bowl for 50 years) that I haven't had to experience losing to Big-10 schools in the biggest game. Rooting against $C or Ucla involves a bit of schadenfreude, I must admit.

They may have to choose Ethier A Orr B at some point.

This explains why the other nine schools in the Pac-10 are so feared in football now. Each one is viewed as a potential USC.

Or maybe not.

Would Mrs. GoBears be OK with that decision...?

The Oregon State loss essentially nullified the value of the Ohio State win. And all of the other Pac-10 wins were considered to be of no value for USC.

This year was great as USC covered the win total over under yet didn't make the BCS game. It was win-win

And then came Timm Rosenbach.

UCLA has been ranked #1 in 1954 (by UPI) at the end of the season and one other week. Also UCLA was #1 for one week in 1967 and for TWO weeks in 1988.

When I finally put Colts on Saturday and this together (sometime late yesterday), I became devistated. The last time I didn't see a Colts LA-viewable TV game, let alone a playoff game, was the 41-0 Jets debacle when I had to work.

I'm going to have to hire a large crew of texters for updates, because I'm pretty sure there's no way I can wrestle myself out of this. Plus, I have been looking forward to it. Just wish I could have my Dodger Dog and eat it too.

137 - High five!

Go Horse!

It being free and in good company, it should be a pretty fun time--crazy lines or not.

150 Would Mrs. GoBears be OK with that decision...

Oh yeah. She'd divorce me in an instant if I took a job at $C. Then she'd hunt me down and do severe bodily injury. She hates the place even more than I do. She basically assumes that anyone associated with the school is beneath contempt.

Well, maybe not really, but she'd talk a good game to that effect.

Besides, I'm the professor. She has a real job. She's the breadwinner. My income amuses her.

Again, a detail that Cal fans can ignore. Only once ever has Cal been within shouting distance of a BCS bowl. The program is now good enough to have played in a minor bowl for 6 straight years (purely a function of being "bowl eligible" due to W-L record), but I remember when a winning season would have been a miracle, and a winning in-conference record a pipe dream. I don't care much whether UCLA's strength of schedule is enhanced by Oregon's success.

An over of 45 for the Rose Bowl seems dicey. $c's defense is much better than the offense.

Sean Casey Blake Dewitt

Are Cal and UCLA really so much poorer than Southern Cal...?

Atlanta
San Diego
Philadelphia
Miami

SC 31-10

They trail by 3 points.

Atlanta
Indy
Baltimore
Minnesota

SC 35-14

Put another way, has there ever been a 2-0 or 3-0 bowl game score?

Are Cal and UCLA really so much poorer than Southern Cal...?

BWAAAA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Um, yes.

Fordham scored on a blocked punt in the first quarter. There were only two completed passed in the game and 285 yards of offense combined.

There was very bad weather for the game.

USC's is not.

The man who would revolutionize the NFL passing game was 3 for 11 with 5 picks for 53 yards in the game.

LSU was 3 for 24 in passing.

It was raining during that game too.

As of 2007

http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/hqops/library/libraryfactsheet/alalibraryfactsheet22.cfm

Have a Happy New Year DT with Manny more to come! (sorry..couldn't resist)

http://tinyurl.com/9dpggh

Tomorrow at 3 p.m. PT

I'm more interested in the end of the Music City Bowl. The Fighting Olneys look to have won.

The Insight Bowl is not available for me. I don't know if this is a bad thing.

I suppose that depends on what you'll be doing instead.

That's very big of him.

"I'm always amazed at how popular the NFL Draft Combine is..."

As am I.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3802316

That sentence would be equally accurate without the Draft Combine.

But lately...I can't love them, but jeez, I have developed such respect for them. Maybe it's because LA lacks an NFL team, so SC is the closest we've got. My rooting interest in Cal will never change, but whenever Cal's not in the picture, I find myself wanting to root for them. So that's what I'll be doing tomorrow.

$C is like the Yankees - they start with a huge advantage (at least wrto the rest of the conference). It's not money, but "tradition" - a virtuous cycle for villains.

Actually, I think it's one reason that many $c players don't thrive in the pros like you might expect, especially QBs and WRs. They just so much bigger/faster/stronger than their college opponents, and because the team has no weak links, they're ALWAYS open/protected/given/unblocked/given huge holes to run through. When they get to the next level, they often haven't learned how to handle the difficulties posed by better competition.

I was sure that Aaron Rodgers would be better than Leinart in part because he had to be better to succeed in college (quick release, better reads, more mobile).

Go figure.

Matt Leinart will end up being marginally better than Ryan Leaf.

People tend to misjudge time when they're sitting around bored.

Do the Packers spy on other team practice sessions...?

Bryce Brown, the no. 1 high school RB in the country, is strongly considering Oregon (he's currently a Miami verbal). I can't see why any RB recruit would choose Miami over Oregon from just a football standpoint.

In this clip, "Hell's Bells" plays for about 2:20.

But it's worth it.

259. Like Pavlov's dog. Allude to the Foxboro Footballers, get a snarky comment from D4P about cheating. Bob - was that your intent? And if so, why?!

But I want that cupcake!

I had a few 8 a.m. classes as a freshman. I was literally a walking zombie. Never again.