Welcome to Cooperstown, Joe Torre!

Torre, Cox, LaRussa. Still no Miller. In a way I'm glad. At least the sons of bitches didn't elect him the first chance they got after he passed away.

wow, Roy Halladay is calling it a career. Get ready for the next really annoying HOF debate, everybody!!

[2] It will be forever their shame that the players refuse to elect Marvin Miller to the Hall. However, considering that the players are in the process of undoing everything that Marvin Miller did for them by electing an unqualified Tony Clark to be the new executive director of the MLBPA, Miller might be better off not in there.

3) Just saw that. Wow.

4) Agreed that Marvin is better off not in the Hall. Curious though. Why isn't Clark qualified?

[5] Tony Clark has absolutely no experience with labor law and the union movement beyond the MLBPA. I rolled my eyes at Clark talking about casually reopening the collective bargaining agreement to randomly change the drug agreement. He damn sure is no Marvin Miller.

I think Miller should be in, but I get why he isn't. And I feel like people are being willfully obtuse in this debate.

Miller's contributions to the game are undeniable, but the fact remains that there is NO precedent for a union chief to get induction. He wasn't a player, executive/scout, owner, broadcaster, etc. Again, I think he should be in, but I don't think it's the no-brainer people make it out to be. And I think the people who clutch their pearls every time he (predictably, at this point) misses out are completely ignoring this.

6) Interesting. I wonder why he got voted in.

how involved are the players and the union in the push to get Miller into the Hall? I think there should be a place for him in Cooperstown, but how organized and vocal is the campaign to get him there? and how much resistance is there?

I read over the weekend that Winfield is going to be an assistant to Tony Clark.

Congrats, Joe!

So long, Roy...

Is Miller even *eligible* for election/selection to the HoF? According to the current rules for election, he would fall under the "expansion era" category. The committee for this era is defined as follows:

The Expansion Era Committee ("The Committee") shall refer to the electorate that considers retired Major League Baseball players no longer eligible for election by the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA), along with managers, umpires and executives, whose greatest contributions to the game were realized from the 1973-present era.

Further, we have the rules of eligable candidates:

Eligible Candidates – Eligible candidates must be selected from:

(A) Eligible candidates must be selected from managers, umpires, executives and players, who meet following criteria related to their classification:

Players who played in at least 10 major league seasons, who are not on Major League Baseball's ineligible list, and have been retired for 21 or more seasons;
Managers and umpires with 10 or more years in baseball and retired for at least five years. Candidates who are 65 years or older are eligible six months following retirement;
Executives retired for at least five years. Active executives 65 years or older are eligible for consideration.

(B) Those whose careers entailed involvement in multiple categories will be considered for their overall contribution to the game of Baseball; however, the specific category in which these individuals shall be considered will be determined by the role in which they were most prominent. In those instances when a candidate is prominent as both a player and as a manager, executive or umpire, the BBWAA-appointed Historical Overview Committee shall determine that individual's category as a player, as a manager or as an umpire or as an executive/pioneer. Those designated as players must fulfill the requirements of 6 (A).

(C) Any person designated by the Office of the Commissioner of Major League Baseball as ineligible shall not be an eligible candidate.

Does the union boss qualify as an executive? Has the Office of Commissioner deemed him ineligible?

I wouldn't rush into a trade for Gardner (mainly because our corner outfielders are ancient) , but could we get Hector Santiago from the White Sox for him? mlbtraderumors says the southpaw is available.

if this is true it's amazing:

By mid-day Friday, Seattle had heard that some team bid nine years and $225 million for Robinson Cano, so the Mariners upped their bid to $240 million and 10 years before apparently realizing the initial bid had come from themselves, too.

13) it's probably true, and the Mariners most likely learned a few tricks from The Yankees Guide to Negotiating Against Yourself

12) I agree that keeping Gardner makes sense to backup the old guys, but the Yanks are lacking in trading chips. It is more likely they will have Vernon Wells as the backup. The Yanks don't have to pay anything for him this year, so he keeps them closer to 189 mil. They should have locked up Gardner for long term and gotten someone besides Ellsbury.

As for Ichiro, he might be a backup too if they can't find a trading partner. The Yanks may have to eat some of his salary to move him?

Reading over the budget constraints, this might be close to the team we end up with for 2013. Some creative trades might get made, but even with ARod's salary coming off the books, I don't see that much magic left for Cashman to pull off, but I still believe in Santa Cashman.

Good for Torre. I love that guy, and LaRussa and Cox are deserving too.

[15] It is more likely they will have Vernon Wells as the backup.

Thanks. You just made me sad for Christmas.

As for Ichiro, he might be a backup too if they can't find a trading partner. The Yanks may have to eat some of his salary to move him?

They would almost certainly eat some of his salary, just to get him off the team and lower the payroll for this year. LIke they could trade him and $4 million for a MiLer to save $2 million. God, what a great contract that Ichiro deal was!

[3] I'm a small hall guy, but I'd put Halladay in.

There, I got it started for ya'.

16) Wells was a cost savings deal. And it worked in that respect. In April it looked like they caught lightning in a bottle, but Wells reverted to form, or reverted to crap I guess I should say.

This year they might have a slightly better team then last year (If all the old guys don't break down like last year, and then they can get back to their free-spending that got them into this mess to begin with.

[17] I agree, what is going to hurt him is a) a slow start to his career, and b) a sudden end. But hey, Koufax had that too and it didn't hurt him any.

Imagine what he could've done had he spent his peak on a good team...

[16] I'm not sure how Wells works in any way. He cost a boatload of money last year and sucked, but the move was (then) justified that he wouldn't cost anything this year, which would allow the team to simply cut him. But now there is talk that since he won't cost anything, he can stick around as the back up and they can trade Gardner. And when the inevitable injury occurs, Wells will be back to starting and he'll suck for the fourth year running, and Gardner will be gone. So to sum up, he will have cost a lot of money (one year), sucked (for two years), and opened the door for trading Gardner (which will cost them a valuable player).

I mean, wow, it's a win all the way around!

Oh my god, did you guys see this???

Congratulations to Jon! Very well deserved!

Schilling and Kruk. I will read a book on Sunday night.

As for Miller not getting in, cannot understand the discussion here. Assuming he is eligible, which I always assumed he was, his representation of the players changed the game. He was a giant, second to "42" in his importance to how the professional game is managed and played.

Torre got in. Steinbrenner didn't.

[22] Are convicted felons eligible for the HOF?

Likely in the minority here but I'm for a smaller Hall with only ballplayers & managers. No Bowie Kuhn, no Marvin Miller, no Bill James. Just the guys on the field is fine for me. MAYBE Dr. Frank Jobe as his impace seems to dwarf all others.

[21] wow. awesome!

congrats, jon : )

[24] I could go for that.

Still, I am not sure Miller is eligible for the HoF based on the current rules, and until that is clarified all discussion of his snubbing is "mute."

[26] To take your view that "executive" is limited to those who work for the game or the owners underlies the issue about voting Miller in. The voters don't consider him part of the game. The game of baseball is made up of the owners and the players. To only allow executives of the companies that own the players (through their contracts and only for their talent, minus some other incidentals they gave up or gained in bargaining) is exactly the issue which Miller fought about and defeated.

[24] The season lasts from opening day to the final out in the series. Baseball goes on year-round. The writers, owners, trainers and groundskeepers, not to mention the photographers, all have a place of honor in the HoF. As a regular visitor who has recently tired of the place due to its limiting the permanent mainly plaques and no longer relevant records (a problem that has to be addressed), I wish more were honored so I wouldn't have to make a pilgrimage when a show I would enjoy is in the halls.

[27] I'm not arguing against your historical analysis. I'm simply stating that as the rules are written by the HoF (a private and separate yet related to MLB institution that sets its own rules), Miller does not appear to qualify as eligible. Moreover, it is possible, according to the rules as written, that the Office of Commissioner has deemed him ineligible, which would preclude his election. It's not *my* view that executive is or should be restricted to GMs and other agents of the teams. I'm simply pointing out that the rules seem to imply this, and that may explain why Miller has not been voted in: because he is simply not eligible according to the rules of the institution.

So all the handwringing about the voters doing Miller wrong by not voting him in is misplaced. Instead, the problem may lie with the *rules* themselves. And if so, then complain about the HoF and its rules, not the voters. I'm not saying that is the case--we don't know--but until the *reasons* behind him not being in the HoF are clarified, blame cannot be properly assigned.