How much was Damon's steal really worth?

Leave a comment

The latest collection of rumors and notes from SI’s Jon Heyman has a couple of interesting items:

Before these playoffs, the Yankees were believed willing to go for two years and $16 million for [Johnny] Damon. But that was before his solo double steal in Game 4.

That was a spiffy play and all, but is it really the sort of thing that’s going to change the calculus for a savvy team like the Yankees?  They have almost certainly made a decision as to whether they are going to go after Bay, go after, Holliday or stick with Damon before now, and probably came up with a pretty good idea as to how much they’re going to offer them some time ago.  I can’t really feature the double steal entering into it.  If someone else wants to pay for that, great, but I don’t see the Yankees being any more willing to add a “steal premium” to Damon’s deal than the Red Sox were to go the extra mile for Dave Roberts after 2004.

Manuel’s explanation that somebody should have been covering third base didn’t really cut it. If he himself couldn’t have named the person, it’s no wonder the Phillies players didn’t know who should’ve been there.

Or maybe Manuel just didn’t want to throw anyone under the bus by name. Cholly is not the greatest manager in the history of baseball, but he’s a guy who stands up for his players. Assuming that he didn’t know who should have been covering third base simply because he didn’t name a name is wrong in my view.

If the Yankees win one more game, Mike Mussina wins the award for unluckiest Yankee, beating Don Mattingly. A Yankees from 2001-2008, he will have provided the stale sandwich meat to the Yankees’ World Series wins in 2000 and 2009.

You can add Bobby Murcer to that too. Murcer showed up the year after the Yankees’ last pennant of the Mantle teams, was traded right before the Munson-Reggie teams took off, and then returned to New York after they started to decline.  Yeah, he was on a pennant winning team in 1981, but they lost.

The Cubs are considering a sportsbook at Wrigley Field

Getty Images
6 Comments

With the nationwide ban on sports gambling gone — and with sports gambling regulations slowly being implemented on a state-by-state basis — any number of businesses are considering getting in on the action. Among those businesses are the Chicago Cubs.

ESPN reports that the club is considering opening gambling facilities in and around Wrigley Field which might include betting windows, automated kiosks or, possibly, a full, casino-style sportsbook. They’re characterized as preliminary discussions as the team awaits the Illinois governor’s signature on recently-passed legislation allowing gambling. The Cubs aren’t commenting, but a source tells ESPN that nothing has been done yet. It’s just talk at the moment.

If the Cubs move forward from the talking stage it will cost them a pretty penny: a four-year license will, under Illinois’ new law, cost them $10 million.

Now: let’s see the White Sox take some action this year. I can think of nothing more fun than sports gambling at what was once Comiskey Park on the 100th anniversary of the Black Sox scandal.