In keeping with the theme of self-centeredness, lest anyone fail to worship my snark....

"Speaking of tailgates and such, would anyone be interested in having an armchair GM gathering over the winter?"

As long as it's ONLY in the District of Columbia, none of that suburbs stuff, we OWE the Council!

Thanks for the update, Barry. I feel updates on Manny Acta's foundation are a priority story for me, I'm really interested in this thing. How does the rest of the blog feel?

Thanks, Barry, for the Manny update. I'd ask whether he's aware that many Nats fans also felt that they did well but the piece in the 35-center indicates that he already knows that.

Would be interested in info on where one could donate to his charitable effort, if they're set up for that yet.

Thanks for the details on how voting works, too.

"As long as it's ONLY in the District of Columbia . . ."

I live on the District line in Maryland, so beautiful downtown Washington is OK with me.

Not to ignore the hurt feelings of the DC council, but I wonder what Virginia fans think about having to come over to Bethesda for the Fanfest?

Thanks for carrying that over, Sect. 506, AKA the snarkmeister, as I hadn't seen it...

---

In keeping with the theme of self-centeredness, lest anyone fail to worship my snark....

"Speaking of tailgates and such, would anyone be interested in having an armchair GM gathering over the winter?"

As long as it's ONLY in the District of Columbia, none of that suburbs stuff, we OWE the Council!

Speaking of snark, check out that second Screech link...whoooeee!

I remember going to the Silver Spring Thanksgiving Day Parade when I was a kid... that sure was a long time ago... It is very cool that Manny is going to be the Grand Marshal.

Several people mentioned in the previous thread about how gracious Manny was in regards to the MOY vote, and the Nats fans' reactions, etc. and I couldn't agree more. I think there are certain qualities that a manager should have that go past the basic skills and abilities that you need to be a Major League manager... and those most likely will separate the good from the great. We don't know yet... but Manny certainly has the makings of a great one.

A technical question for Barry, though it really doesn't matter that much... does the Washington-Baltimore BBWAA chapter get one vote in each league?? I assume so... and would more Washington-centric members get the NL votes, while more Baltimore-centric members get the AL vote??

I totally get the reason why the Post reporters can't vote... and I think it is a good thing. Even if there's nothing improper going on, perhaps it changes the mindset of the reporter when he's doing his or her work -- not that it is the only reason, but that is just one indication of the ethical separation that is needed between reporter and the story.

This is a general question, and I guess Barry is the only one who can easily answer it. If neither the WaPo or Balto Sun allow their sportswriters to vote on these awards, can we assume that the same holds true in other markets?

If that is true, doesn't that leave open the voting to a number of not necessarily top drawer publications (i.e. CityPaper) and/or publications that might not be nearly as "independent" as one might hope (The Chicago Tribune, which owns or owned the Cubbies comes to mind)?

If all of that is true, doesn't that make all of these even more suspect?

Off topic, but I talked to my season ticket rep yesterday, and apparently the "My Tickets" site will be opened up tomorrow, and we will be able to see where our seats are before the mailing even gets to us.

*crosses fingers for row 1 in LF or RF*

A DC armchair GMs meeting would work for me, Hendo.

As to your question, heck, it's an all-day Nats fan fest. Are you kidding me? I am soooo there whether it's in DC, MD, or VA. I *would* like to see a team store in Virginia at some point though...

---

I live on the District line in Maryland, so beautiful downtown Washington is OK with me.

Not to ignore the hurt feelings of the DC council, but I wonder what Virginia fans think about having to come over to Bethesda for the Fanfest?

I'd come to the armchair GM meeting, but alas... I am on another planet. Videoconference me in!

Wigi, maybe we could work something out with a laptop if there was a wireless connection where we met...

---

I'd come to the armchair GM meeting, but alas... I am on another planet. Videoconference me in!

As far as getting Screech a bath, some of you may have seen the KidsPost article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/28/AR2007102801366.html ) or the Fox News story about the group of kids with serious peanut allergies who got to see a Nats game in September when the team made a peanut-free section of the stadium available for our group to use and made other special accommodations to keep everyone safe. My son was the one featured in the article and despite all the precautious, he still had a (relatively mild) allergic reaction after the game. We strongly suspect Screech was the culprit, since he came into the box to give the kids a surprise, played with them, hugged them, etc., and we later realized his costume probably had peanut shells and peanut residue embedded from a season of frolicking around the stadium. A thorough cleaning would be a great idea.

so, is the DC Council also upset that Manny Acta is grand marshall of the Silver Spring Thanksgiving Day Parade, which is not being held in DC?

I mean, they gave the Nats a free stadium, the least they could do is to have their players/managers do these appearances in DC and not in MD or VA :-)

WT[RF] do you people *want* from me? Now I'm getting blamed because I visited some sick kids??!!!

[RF]!
****************
We strongly suspect Screech was the culprit, since he came into the box to give the kids a surprise, played with them, hugged them, etc., ...
Posted by: | November 15, 2007 01:44 PM

Have the Nats posted any actual details on the FanFest? Dates, times, locations? I'd love to go, but it seems like the Nats give very last minute details about events. Even the promotional events during the season should be ironed out prior to the season starting. I have selling my season tickets only to find out I am missing something I'd like to go to.

Arm-Chair GMing sounds like a good time. Perhaps the Washington City council can provide us with a free venue? Even for us suburbanites.

I too would like to see a Nats Store in VA. Don't the Lerners own the Tyson's Malls???

Take a deep breath, and then take a long hot bath.

Throw in some veggies and cilantro, while you're there.

I am in Fairfax, and I am unlikely to go to Bethesda, although I might if I just wrap my mind around the fact that it is only a half-hour away. I am not angry or upset, or whatever, but I do think that the team shows little awareness of who butters their bread when they fail to come out our way with promotions.

I will, never, never, NEVER cross "The Moat" except to go into the District. I drive through Ohio in order to get to Delaware.

Maybe a small exaggeration, but it might as well be true for Virginians.

Also, in case anyone missed it cevans has the sublimely amazing post of the day. Hats off! (except for He Who Cannot Remove His Hat)

manny acta is such a stud.

The not voting for awards for the reason given is silly.

Just reporting on the players, on a day to day basis, can help or hurt them when it comes to getting awards. And certainly commentary about players can impact whether or not they get season ending awards. Beat writers talking to beat writers from other teams about players they cover can impact whether a player gets votes.

The holes in this policy are HUGE!

...and it should be the Washington-Baltimore chapter not the Baltimore-Washington chapter!!!

Also, (for the tenth time today, I can't get everything in one post apparently), I normally think it's hackneyed, but Tank McNamara has been a pretty hearty spoof of ESPN's obsession with NYY. It's still a bit hackneyed, but it's so true.

"Not to ignore the hurt feelings of the DC council, but I wonder what Virginia fans think about having to come over to Bethesda for the Fanfest?"

Doesn't bother me. I live and work in VA, but my main extra-curricular activity aside from going to Nats games happens to be in Bethesda. Even though I'm in DC at least 20 times a year to go to games, I'm in Bethesda even more, up to 100 times a year. Bethesda is a good place for the fanfest. It's Metro-accessible, and there is abundant public parking available in Montgomery County garages (which are even free on Sunday). Downtown Bethesda is maybe a mile beyond the DC line. It might as well be in DC, as far as most Virginians know. So as long as they rotate it between DC, MD and VA from year to year, I don't care where they hold the first one. If I'm free that day, I'll go.

Voting: Though some papers have gone the way of the Post and the Sun, there are still several -- I would say most -- traditional papers that allow their writers to vote. I do think it makes sense to watch this, though, as we move forward and more papers decide not to allow the practice.

Lets go Devils!

In terms of voting, as more papers do NOT allow their writers to vote, aren't we really getting votes from writers who are not primarily writing about baseball? I mean Barry and Dave "live" baseball. I doubt that writers from the local independant papers are dedicated to a team or even a sport. Does it make sense for them to vote? Its like the Managers voting for the Gold Glove award. Are they really the right people? The scouting directors might make more sense.

The SD paper says the Padres are interested in Church for CF but that the Nats want a lot in return.

Corey Patterson -- just say no.

"Important caveat: all of this should be considered speculative until we get a better handle on things like the hitters' background and prevailing wind conditions, which we'll know next to nothing about until the park opens. But Ryan Zimmerman's fantasy owners can treat themselves to an extra beer tonight."
--------

Yessir, Mr. Silver, will do!! :-)

Are you covering the game in South Bend, or are you going to watch for fun? Are you an alumnus of one of those schools?

An extreme example of a potential conflict of interest with writers voting is Curt Schilling's new contract -- he gets $1 million for a single Cy Young vote.

I can't imagine that the BoSox have that much faith in the collective unbribability of the Cy Young voters, so they must have a heck of a lot of faith in Schilling's character.

William asks three questions:

1. Are you covering the game in South Bend?
2. Are you going to watch for fun?
3. Are you an alumnus of one of those schools?

1 and 2 are possible, 1 and 3 are possible, but 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive on this trip. Charlie Weis. He's no Manny Acta.

I think Boston expects Schilling to get the vote, but set that up to simply save face- this way it is an incentive contract.

As for driving through Ohio to get to Delaware- that was funny and clever. It is a good point, too. I don't go to Maryland unless I am on my way up north, and it really is idiotic to pass up on Bethesda. I bet it has all sorts of attractions equal to those of Arlington and Alexandria, and it is equidistant for me. I will try to remember that.

Barry- Duke vs Notre Dame? For that level of play you could see the Yale-Harvard game. They are both undefeated in the Ivy League (and Yale truly undefeated, thank you), and playing for the Ivy title. No? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Finally, Mr. Head- good find on the SD interest in Church. I hope that if we don't get better than fair value for him that we just keep him and play him consistently. The team probably undervalues him (except when trying to trade him), and replacing him with Corey Patterson would be a farce.

If memory serves, Barry's a Duke grad. When we saw him at the NatsJournal tailgate in September, the pain from nearly beating Navy the day before (which he also attended) was still prevalent.

Barry attended the Duke-Navy *game*, he never studied at Navy, just to be clear.

I think.

Crap.

Better get that extra beer Baseball Prospectus recommended...

Woo-Hoo! Just off the wire...
Federal Grand Jury Indicts Barry Bonds

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=126&sid=1293324

What TOOK them so [RF]-ing long to indict Bonds, is what I wanna know.

Good for Barry. Now he's a real athlete, with an indictment and all.

Oh, yeah, that's bad, sorry. I'm letting football season skew my values.

I love that the second Screech link has the words "tandoori chicken" in the URL. :D

3mm: I'm sure the Sox would love Schilling to pitch well enough to merit a Cy Young vote (he didn't get one this year).

The interesting part would be if he were very borderline, and only received one vote. That would present at the least the appearance of impropriety for that voter; especially if he's a Boston sportswriter.

estuartj had it exactly right... I think that if Church was a FA, he'd be at the top of the class with the current crop... It is silly to trade him... and I am not a huge Church fan. I would extend him (modestly), and require him to work on his hitting against lefies...

Barry the Duke Grad would not have been indicted, just like the Giaambino won't be, because they are good, truthful lads. Can the feds win this? I dunno - ask Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart. And now for some commentary on Indicted Barry from Baseball Think Factory:

You can indict a ham sandwich.
And I have. It was delicious.

There ain't enough mustard in the world to cover that ham sandwich. And by "mustard," I am of course referring to trenbolone cyclohexylmethylcarbonate.

If the helmet fits you must acquit!

Does this make him the bargain of the winter for a rambling, gambling GM?

And I thought the days of Bonds getting a multi-year deal were over.

Kevin, that's pretty good for typing with one hand.

And Kevin retorts:
And the other one is... Popping a bottle of champagne!!!!!!

Whooo!!!! Whoaaa!!!!!! Yaaa!!!!!!

Has the past month been a prefect storm of baseball joy for this Boston baseball fan or what??

The Red Sox dominate. The Yankees tank. And now Bonds is going to the joint.

And I cannot repeat the last very funny line, becasue we age G-rated at the Nationals Journal.

for more: http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/barry_bonds_indicted/

anybody catch the connection in the last blog entry?

both names (melvin and wedge) are forms of torture by displacement of the lower undergarments.

I think someone has a sense of humor.

Thanks, mrjennx, I had been aware of the second form but not the first. Now I've learned my first thing for the day, so thanks (no demo required)! ;-)

Isn't a just a little suspicious that Barry finally gets indicted now that he has passed the record and is no longer with the Giants?

Speaking of Bonds, the Post needs to print a correction for Wilbon's column, in which he stated that the pitcher who gave up the historic HR #756 had tested positive for steroids in the minors. That would be Clay Helmsley, who gave up #755, not Mike Bacsik, who gave up #756.

Arrrgh. It would be nice if Post sports columnists (besides Boz, to be sure) would pay a little attention to baseball.

Considering the amount of ink Bacsik generated for being Bonds' victim, not to be aware of that fact verges on deliberate myopia. (And where was Wilbon's editor, BTW? Any fact checkers in the house?)

So Manny and the Nats were 27-24 in one run games for a .529 winning percentage (.451 overall for theyear). Bob Melvin and the Snakes were an amazing 32-20 for a .617 winning percentage. No one else came close. Charlie Manual 14-23 (.378); Bud Black 23-26 (.469), Clint Hurdle 19-19 (.500); and Bobby Cox 18-25 (.418).

There are several factors that go into these records including how good of a bullpen did your GM provide the Manager with, but the Manager's skill in using that bullpen matters a great deal as does his ability to field a fundamentally sound team that keeps its focus and keeps playing hard. I use the above analysis to support my theories that Charlie Manual sucks; Bobby Cox did not have his best year; and Bud Black (who had an excellent bullpen) did not deserve his 4 votes. I understand why Hurdle is in the running. Its clear that Melvin deserved the MOY. But, Manny should have drawn a little more support. I would think all the "so called experts" should have given their second place votes to Manny, hands down. If you expect 40 wins and he delivers 73 shouldn't you give him credit for a superb job. Was there another Manager out there this year that performed that far over expectatinos?

So Manny and the Nats were 27-24 in one run games for a .529 winning percentage (.451 overall for theyear). Bob Melvin and the Snakes were an amazing 32-20 for a .617 winning percentage. No one else came close. Charlie Manual 14-23 (.378); Bud Black 23-26 (.469), Clint Hurdle 19-19 (.500); and Bobby Cox 18-25 (.418).

There are several factors that go into these records including how good of a bullpen did your GM provide the Manager with, but the Manager's skill in using that bullpen matters a great deal as does his ability to field a fundamentally sound team that keeps its focus and keeps playing hard. I use the above analysis to support my theories that Charlie Manual sucks; Bobby Cox did not have his best year; and Bud Black (who had an excellent bullpen) did not deserve his 4 votes. I understand why Hurdle is in the running. Its clear that Melvin deserved the MOY. But, Manny should have drawn a little more support. I would think all the "so called experts" should have given their second place votes to Manny, hands down. If you expect 40 wins and he delivers 73 shouldn't you give him credit for a superb job. Was there another Manager out there this year that performed that far over expectatinos?

Let me preface with I really like Boswell, but it would be nice if Boz paid attention to the Nats. In this calendar year, Boz has done alomost as many golf stories (16) as Nats stories (22), and already has 14 Redskin stories through the first half of a much shorter season. He did do 22 baseball stories about other teams, 7 Orioles stories and 2 Nats/Orioles stories.

I couldn't sleep one night and it seemed like the thing to do...

I wish our local Baseball columnist would pay more attention to the Nats. Especially since many of the Nats stories were about stadiums new and old.

Exactly. One would hope that an editor, proofreader, or fact checker would have caught something like that.

---

(And where was Wilbon's editor, BTW? Any fact checkers in the house?)

"I wish our local Baseball columnist would pay more attention to the Nats."

I wish he'd written that column instead of Wilbon. Or that Wilbon would have seen fit to check his facts.

Then again, Bacsik's got a job next season, so he doesn't have to worry about whether his future employer(s) read the Post. Not for a year or so, anyhow.

Cheer up folks, it could be worse. What if Kornheiser had also written on the subject, instead of only Wilbon?

"What if Kornheiser had also written on the subject, instead of only Wilbon?"

[RF1] [RF2], tomterp. Don't give the man any ideas...

Then you'd have "Pardon the Misinformation"?

---

Cheer up folks, it could be worse. What if Kornheiser had also written on the subject, instead of only Wilbon?

If you want to find out your location in the new park, the "My Nationals Ticket" page on the Nats website is now operational. I just found out my seasons ticket location and I am one extremely happy camper!!!

On the plus side, I *did* appreciate the pieces by Barry and by Sheinin/Shipley.

When I log into the "My Nationals Ticket" page my tickets don't show up, anyone else having this problem?

Found my ticket. Right about where I wanted it, too.

Am polling my RFK rowmates to see if we got to sit together.

I had no problem finding my ticket location on "my tickets" and am very pleased.

Is it already "I hate the WaPost" day? Gosh, the week goes by so fast.

It's not "I hate the Post day" in my house, but as someone who works in the publishing field, I find factual errors unfortunate, particularly when they involve a local paper erroneously attributing an illegal activity to a local player.

And also an extremely happy camper with my new location. Where? Check my new signature.

On the subject of Tony the K, let me ask if he still can be considered a Washington Post WRITER -- vs. a Post personality -- since the last time he filed any copy for the newspaper was more than 13 months ago on October 5, 2006. Compare that to Barry "seven-stories-totaling-5000-words-a-day" Svrluga.

Wish I could say the same. They backed me up 10 rows and my confirmation number from the original year was 376. There could not have been many before me...

Ditto natsfan1a re thumbs-up to the stories by Svrluga and by Sheinin et al.

I particularly like the way Barry wraps it up with a well-balanced quote from Fay Vincent: ". . . [B]aseball can take it. . . . Baseball would be more at risk by not doing what they're doing, not cleaning it up."

Sounds like a man who would make a pretty fair commissioner, huh?

I have written Nats questions into Wilbon's "Chat House" every week. Not once has he responded. Then I wrote one asking why he never mentions the Nats, despite the fact that he almost always talks about his beloved Cubs. The answer I got was, basically I am a "national beat writer" and besides the Post has Boswell to write about baseball. He also admitted that he never goes to Nats games.

Flaw here is that Boz writes not only about the Nats, but he also covers other "national" events like major golf tournament, etc.

But, funny, being a "national writer" doesn't prevent Wilbon from writing about the Redskins every single week or the Wizards!! I think it should be embarrassing for the Post that one of their two most famous sports writers considers writing about the Nats to be beneath his dignity!

I think I got my third choice. Not bad, considering I'm the lowest of the lows in priority.

Not only have I been online already to get my new seat location, I have already called the ticket office and changed it. Got right through, too. I bet not many others will be able to make that claim today!

I actually was offered a seat in my third-choice section, so I suppose Stan Kasten would count me as a relocation success story. But the truth is that I screwed up in setting my priorities on the questionnaire. In RFK I had a great seat in Section 419, right behind the plate in the purple seats (lower part of the upper deck). But for priority-granting purposes I knew I was the lowest of the low, being a class of 2007 20-game plan guy. In Nationals Park, the Infield Gallery are the seats most comparable to my RFK location, so I made that my first choice. But I screwed up in selecting my second and third choices. Looking at the 3-D tool and seating diagrams, I was afraid to select any of the other gallery sections as my second or third choices because I might end up at the very back of one of those sections, which looked like true nosebleed territory. So instead I picked left field mezzanine and left field corner second and third. So what did I get? The next-to-last row (UU) of my third choice! Not good, especially since the cost of that seat is two-thirds again more than the seat I really wanted in the Infield Gallery. So I got on the phone right away, amazingly got right though to a service rep without being put on hold, and after a bit of haggling I was able to get a seat in Row D of the Upper Infield Gallery, only four rows back from the section I really wanted to be in (and just a bit higher up). Basically I'll be at the same eye level as Charlie and Dave, just down around first base instead of behind the plate like they will be. And from the photos I've seen that have been taken from the lower press box level, it appears that in reality that won't be as high up as the 3-D tool makes it seem. So I'd say I'm happy. (But I'll be paying Stan exactly half as much as I would be if I took him up on that third-choice seat he offered me, so he's probably not as happy, eh?) And what section will I be in at Nationals Park? 420! Hence my new moniker, which will probably morph sometime closer to Opening day to just plain old Section 420.

New park, new seat, but expect the same old same old questioning of the priorities of the Washington Post, whenever they stray down the wrong path. To steal a line from Manny Acta, thees ees mah pledge.

Sec 105 Row D!!! Couldn't be happier with 4 rows from the LF wall :)

According to the Post site, Sheinin will have a live Q&A session on the Bonds indictment at 1 p.m. (or noon, depending on which link you believe. My money is on 1 p.m. as it appears in more places than noon, including the schedule, but there's a 50-50 chance that you'll be there at the right time, either way ;-) ).

I ended up with Section 417 in a pretty low row that I am happy with. I only picked up my half season tickets in March 07 right before opening day so I'm pretty happy with my seats.

Paul: Dude, awesome seats!! Good value.

The more I look at my seat, the giddier I am. I can see them in the Clark Construction camera shot. I think I got a great deal. Third row back, upper scoreboard section. I look forward to getting to know you Kearnsy!

From the baseball prospectus projection of Nats Park;

"Basically, we're removing one of the most pitcher-friendly parks in baseball and replacing it with what looks like it should be a neutral park....Left-handed hitters look like they will get most of the benefit."

Does the name Ryan Church come to mind in that last sentence? Nick Johnson too once he's back up to speed...

yeah, totally a great deal. I'm ridiculously excited now. I can't wait to actually catch HR balls instead of wondering if they were even HR's.

I'll be hanging near Barry (*our* Barry) this coming season. We got bumped from the purple seats (behind home plate to the left)last year to Infield Gallery. We're more than a few rows up (*grimble, grumble*) but we're right next to the Press Box on the first base side. I'm not super happy, but it does beat paying more for seats one section down only to be all the way up the first or third base line.

Congrats on all your seats fellow Nats-minded peoples! I am insanely jealous. They don't quite pay us teachers enough to spring for a season ticket package. And there's the minor issue that I live in Atlanta now... le sigh.

To go back to baseball though, if A-Rod has ditched Boras and negotiated his own exorbirant contract, is it possible that Boras is done? If he is, this could open up many players to contract extensions. I don't know who his clients are, but if we can trade for one of them, take advantage of the fall of Boras, how crazy amazing would that be?

I should point out first, I am a fan of keeping Church around at least one year in the new park. Kids got skillz with a "z."

re. Boras -- I'm sure that he's still pulling the strings behind the scenes. Frankly, I suspect that the Yankees claim that he's not directly involved in the negotiations, and the A-Rod and his wife reached out to Yankee management on their own, closer to fiction than fact.

Congrats to everyone who received their seat assignments today. Hope that the ticket fairy was good to you.

Boras ain't over til he's over

I agree with most of you that Boras isn't done... all that's happened is that we've found his ceiling... he'll still eke out every last drop of blood for lesser free agents.

That does bring up an interesting possibility, though. A team might just decide not to deal with Boras, because you could assume that by definition, the price will be too high... which is of course what happened with A-Rod, but he's also the highest of the high. It will be interesting to see what happens with Andruw.

I wonder where my seat is??

I'm back. Started to miss everyone so I began to read a few of the threads and noticed that the overall tone was back to its polite way (unlike during the playoffs).

Got my seat assignments and I can't complain too much. I was in 416 at RFK (almost behind home plate, the third base line running straight in front of me). They've placed me in 307 at the new place. Looking at the virtual view on the Nats site, it looks like we're between 3rd base and the outfield grass. Would I have liked to have been closer to home plate? Of course. But at least I wasn't pushed farther up or farhter out. At least I'll have a direct view of the brand new scoreboard!!!

My guess, and my sense from the media, is that Boras will continue to serve A-Rod at least as legal counsel in contract and other matters. At the negotiating table, if Boras is there at all, his input will be minimal.

Shed no tears for Boras; on balance, he's benefited too many clients to be cast adrift any decade soon. Besides, the specter of possible collusion limits the degree to which he or any agent -- or any of their clients -- could be marginalized.

Does anyone know if, for those of us who have 20 game plans, we will have the option of choosing between 2 schedules once the schedule is finalized like we were able to before?

I'm very happy with our seats, we got our 1st preference and will be in 222U.

Welcome back, e! Yes, things pretty much got back to normal after the playoffs.

e, Welcome back. The thread was indeed a bit unpleasant for a day or two there but quickly returned to form once CapHcky got booted.

Partial Plan: short answer to your question is no, at least not if you want to stay in the seat you were assigned.

Long answer is that I'm a 20 game holder, and was told when this process started that they'd only be assigning one partial plan person to a seat along with a 41 gamer, and then let you pick the 20 game plan you wanted (freeing up 20 games for indiv. sale). I learned this morning that instead they've fully subscribed most seats, so your current seat now also likely belongs to a 41 game account holder and someone for the other 20 game plan. If you were an A plan last season, they gave you A this season. If you were a B plan, they gave you a B. (You can check on your invoice in My Tickets - should say A or B). I was also told the structures of the A and B plans should be generally the same, with A remaining mostly Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday games, and B remaining Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday.

If when the schedules are announced you want to switch from your letter to the other letter, they said they'll work with you, but can't promise what section / seat will be open at that point, as they either need to move you out to where the open seats are, or swap you into a seat vacated by someone else who switched.

"Does anyone know if, for those of us who have 20 game plans, we will have the option of choosing between 2 schedules once the schedule is finalized like we were able to before?"

Based on my conversation with the ticket rep this morning, if you have been given a seat for a 20-game plan in 2008 it has been pre-determined already whether you are in Plan A or Plan B, and that determination was made based on which one you were in last year, i.e. last year's Plan A gets 2008 Plan A, and last year's Plan B gets 2008 Plan B. The ticket rep also told me that the current thinking is that the characteristics of the two plans will also carry over from last year, and that Plan A will still be Mon/Wed/Fri/Sat games and Plan B will still be Sun/Tue/Thur games. (I may have that reversed, but the point is that they will be the same as whatever they were last year.) Obviously they can't say what the specific games will be yet because the schedule's not out. So, if you're happy with what you had last year you probably don't need to call, but if you're not you'd better call right away to get it changed, since to change from A to B or B to A could mean that your seat will need to change too.

Ticket results similar to e. Tried to move down but the ticket fairy moved me up to Infield Gallery rather than out. I guess this makes me part of the 50% that does not get top three choices. Down side for the Nationals is that I committed to paying 200% more and the sale now appears a bargain at 33% total projected cost. Plus side the comparable price to last year with very similar sight lines (3rd base batter box instead of 1st base box - I went for the shade) means my food and beer tab will not be adversely affected.

All five of our seats from 428 at RFK (in three adjacent groups) got relo'd to the infield gallery on the third-base side, as we'd asked. We're guessing we're at or near the end of a row (18-19-20-21-22).

We'll be very near the edge of the net, so communed electronically this morning regarding how bad that might be. After brief angst, we've decided to stick with where we are versus trying to change from something that might be just fine.

re: Partial Plans ... I will NOT BE HAPPY if they assign Plan A and Plan B the same way they've been doing it for the past two seasons. I HATE the fact that Plan B has Tue-Thu-Sun games. All the Sunday games are day games, and with no shade at the new stadium, we're going to get fried! It was barely tolerable at RFK during the day games with the shade!

Plus, if all I have for a weekend game is Sunday, then most (if not all) of my Sunday is spent at the park (leaving early to park/Metro; spending 3 hours in the sun; spending who knows how long trying to get back home).

If I'm getting a weekend series, and Plan A has the same weekend series, how difficult is it to alternate which day of the weekend series we both get? Why do I always have to have the Sunday game, yet Plan A gets either a Friday or Saturday night game? It really isn't that difficult to sparse it out a little and be fair to all.

In other news, they've changed it to "historic #755" on the website, so now I can take off my proofreaders' hat (but leave on my Nats cap).

Got my first choice. Upper deck, Section 405, Row F, and what looks like an aisle seat (28).

From the virtual seat view thingie on the Nats home page, the height of the seats don't look that much higher than the yellow seats at RFK. If anything, they look a little lower.

When do pitchers and catchers report, again? :-)

uh, make that "proofreader's"

(thanks, proofreading fairy)

e, I'm afraid they've got to assign partial plans that way -- they've now got several thousand seats parceled out to people who have figured out whether A or B work better for them. If they ditch the structure, it will be chaos to try and re-seat people. Given that A and B schedules don't typically come out until after the 1st of the year, they'll presumably have added many more new season ticket holders, too, meaning they'd be re-seating people with seniority along with the new folks. It'd be a trainwreck. If you have B now, and think A would be better, you should probably call sooner rather than later, as they are willing to make changes from A to B / B to A now.

Also, there were 3 Thursday day games as part of the Plan B package. Add that to the 6 Sunday day games, and nearly half of Plan B's games were during the day. I'm not complaing that much because I believe baseball should have more games played during the day, but I shouldn't I at least have an option of getting some evening games?

I just looked back at the 2007 Plan A vs Plan B schedule. Of the 20 games, A and B shared the same series 11 times, with 8 of those series being on the weekend.

Of those 8 weekend series, there shouldn't have been any problem with giving Plan A some of the Sunday games and Plan B some of the Friday or Saturday games.

Please, please, please Stan et al, be fairer with the dispersion of the Plan A and Plan B schedule. DO NOT BE LAZY and base it on days of the week. If you can't figure out how to spread out the days of the week, give me a call and I'd be happy to do it for you!

Should be around February 15.

---

When do pitchers and catchers report, again? :-)

For the March 29 exhibition game with the O's, there's also a note that says 20-game account holders "will receive alternate seat locations for this game."

Any idea what this means?

"In other news, they've changed it to 'historic #755' on the website . . ."

An apology still would be a classy touch, as well as allaying concerns about disengagement and factual accuracy. (It's the disengagement thing that really, really bugs me; I know I've been a drone about this, so I'll try to sheddup about it for the rest of the thread at least.)

I'm guessing that because all STH are supposed to be admitted to that game at no charge, it's so that you won't have to seat in the lap of the other people who use that seat during the season.

---

For the March 29 exhibition game with the O's, there's also a note that says 20-game account holders "will receive alternate seat locations for this game."

Any idea what this means?

I agree, Hendo. I would expect that a correction notice would appear in the 35-center as for other gaffes.

---

An apology still would be a classy touch, as well as allaying concerns about disengagement and factual accuracy.

I meant "sit" in the lap. Must be some sort of karmic proofreader comeuppance, because I complained about the 756...

---

I'm guessing that because all STH are supposed to be admitted to that game at no charge, it's so that you won't have to seat in the lap of the other people who use that seat during the season.

e, LOL, ROTFLMA, you n00b are back putzzzz lafingstock. You're pityful team has not got half the pitching arm of shilling!

Where would the internet be without creeps?

Good to have you back, buddy

"Of those 8 weekend series, there shouldn't have been any problem with giving Plan A some of the Sunday games and Plan B some of the Friday or Saturday games."

Not that it should have happened in the first place, but this is the sort of logistical problem that fascinates me. I wonder if the FO could gin up a site where discommoded Plan A/B holders could swap individual dates with similarly situated fans in the opposite plan?

BTW, I was very successful in '07 with future-date ticket exchanges (e.g., future Sunday for future Saturday), although YMMV because (a) I'm a full STH so I don't know whether different rules apply for partial plans; and (b) Nats Park will be much fuller this season than last. Still, that might resolve some fans' issues at least some of the time.

e, if you hate all those aspects of Plan B so much, why did you buy it last year? In the absence of a specific schedule to be able to offer to purchasers of 20-game plans, I for one am happy that they made the assumption that what a particular STH liked last year schedule-wise is what they would prefer this year. I bought Plan A last year specifically because I didn't want any Sunday games that are always day games. That would have been my preference this year too had they asked me for a preference, and since they didn't ask for it I'm very glad that's what they assumed.

If you don't like the plan you had last year, you'd better get on the horn right now and tell them, so you can get changed to the other plan. Likely, though, as others have said you'll probably have to sacrifice your current seat location to do it.

You pretty much nailed it, Sect. 506. Throw in a sexist comment or two and the impersonation would be gold.

Hendo, I also made liberal use of the ticket exchange program last year, indeed actually changing nearly half the games in my 20-game plan to another date. So when I talked with the ticket rep this morning I asked if they would still have the ticket exchange program in 2008. The answer was yes, but it will be much, much more limited in scope. Specifics haven't been worked out yet, but it looks like what guys like us were able to do last year via ticket exchange will no longer be possible. Makes sense, because the more full the stadium is, the harder that kind of benefit is to offer.

Section 506--you had me for a second there. I thought the little creep was back! e--glad to see you're on board again.

"So when I talked with the ticket rep this morning I asked if they would still have the ticket exchange program in 2008. The answer was yes, but it will be much, much more limited in scope."
===========

Makes sense. I was able to exchange a lot of mine last season without a problem.

Let's hope they never again have 20,000 extra seats available for exchange...

Were it not for the Friday/Saturday on one plan and Sunday on the other, we would not have been able to get a partial plan at all. For all of us that observe the Sabbath on Friday night/Saturday (including the owners and President of the Nats, although they are not as observant as some others of us), we would have had to do major amounts of swapping just to be able to have a plan. Plenty of other teams do this and I am happy to see that the Nats do it as well.

I must run and prepare for the Sabbath now...

Shabbat Shalom, LNP.

A beautiful post for a beautiful weekend to you all:

"phredbird Posted: November 16, 2007 at 01:20 PM (#2617626)

last night my girlfriend and i were talking about all the hubbub in baseball and somehow we got to talking about what heaven would be like (look, i can't remember the transitions, just indulge me), and i told her if heaven exists, i'd be playing major league baseball, probably right field, and mashing the ball every time i got up to bat. i guess i might get tired of it after a while, but i wouldn't mind finding out. what struck me about it was how quickly and easily that came out. my answer was automatic. in heaven, i'd be a great major league ballplayer."

Oh, and to Mike Bacsik, what's a guy got to do to hit one out on you dude, get indicted?

flynnie's posting brings to mind a nonsecular baseball joke, one variation of which is:

Two old men had been best friends for years, and they both live to their early 90's, when one of them suddenly falls deathly ill. His friend comes to visit him on his deathbed, and they're reminiscing about their long friendship, when the dying man's friend asks, "Listen, when you die, do me a favor. I want to know if there's baseball in heaven."

The dying man said, "We've been friends for years, this I'll do for you." And then he dies.

A couple days later, his surviving friend is sleeping when he hears his friend's voice. The voice says, "I've got some good news and some bad news. The good news is that there's baseball in heaven."

"What's the bad news?"

"You're pitching on Wednesday."

HaHAH! Good one, Natsfan1a!

Don't forget the MoCo Thanksgiving Parade tomorrow in Silver Spring, which Barry mentions and links to above, and at which Manny will be Grand Marshal.

I'll report back tomorrow afternoon on whether Screech has had a bath.

Have fun, Hendo. Better stay upwind of Screech just in case...

For the March 29 exhibition game with the O's, there's also a note that says 20-game account holders "will receive alternate seat locations for this game."

Any idea what this means?

Posted by: Juan-John | November 16, 2007 02:24 PM
--- --- ---- ---

J-J, I'm going to speculate that it means those of us with 41-game plans get to sit there.

222 (ex 502) said:

"For the March 29 exhibition game with the O's, there's also a note that says 20-game account holders "will receive alternate seat locations for this game."

Any idea what this means?

Posted by: Juan-John | November 16, 2007 02:24 PM
--- --- ---- ---

J-J, I'm going to speculate that it means those of us with 41-game plans get to sit there."

It may also mean that you'll be selling cotton candy.

I received my ticket package in the mail and for all of you 20 gamers, they have Plan A and B already chosen. Plan A is all Wed, Fri and Sat with one Tue game and Plan B is mixed up with no Fri/Sat games

Nats, those A and B Plan listings are presumably tentative, as the schedule hasn't been set yet. Of course, that's roughly what it'll end up looking like, with a few changes here and there.
--- --- --- --- --- --- ---

I received my ticket package in the mail and for all of you 20 gamers, they have Plan A and B already chosen. Plan A is all Wed, Fri and Sat with one Tue game and Plan B is mixed up with no Fri/Sat games

Posted by: Nats | November 16, 2007 04:48 PM

BALTIMORE (AP) - A seven-year-old Baltimore, Maryland boy was at the center
of a Baltimore courtroom drama yesterday when he challenged a court ruling
over who should have custody of him. The boy has a history of being beaten
by his parents and the judge initially awarded custody to his aunt, in
keeping with child custody law and regulations requiring that family unity
be maintained to the furthest degree possible. The boy surprised the court when he
proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly
refused to live with her. When the judge then suggested that he live with
his grandparents, the boy cried out they also beat him. After considering
the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence
was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented
step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.

After two recesses to check legal references and confer with Child Welfare
officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Baltimore Orioles, whom
the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.

[Okay, the version sent to me originally said "Ravens"...but I'm goin' with O's]

We got absolutely screwed in the relo process. We were in 313 row 3 at RFK. They gave us 135 row k - down the right field line about 10 rows back. Closer to the field but way the hell out in the outfield. So much for tenure. We were class of '05.

Can someone please confirm that row A is the front row and by extension that my new seats in row E of section 320 are therefore fifth row from front of infield gallery (upperdeck).

Also what were your experiences today asking for adjustments. I am hoping to move closer to home plate without moving further back. Any hope?

Got the seating for my 20 game plan! Section Infield Gallery 320 Row F. I am thrilled and Boswell called me a savvy fan.... Stan Kasten got it right by me! I cannot wait to Opening Day. Go Nationals!

Hmm, 6th and D, was that one of the sections for which you indicated preference? Sounds a bit strange to me if it wasn't.

Have you phoned your ST rep yet?

So looking at pictures from the stadium, it seems like there might only be 6 rows (A-F??) in section 320 and other 300 level Infield Gallery seats. Does anyone know different?

Yep Hendo. On the blower with the Nats as soon as we found out. we are trying to relocate.

So answering my own questions, I find that the majority of the 300 level seats are rows A-F before the aisle and some 300 sections then have a few more rows after the aisle.

"I absolutely loathe Barry Bonds. I hate how he adores his home runs and sometimes turns doubles off-the-wall into long singles. I hate how he comes across like every jock a**hole you knew in high school. I hate how he paraded his son Nikolai before the media during spring training, 2005 - the kid was barely a teenager, clearly dying inside, but Bonds insisted on using him as a prop for his persecution complex, instructing photographers to take pictures of him "so you guys can see the pain you're causing my family."

But more than anything else about Bonds, I hate his voice. You don't expect it from a guy of his stature. You expect something commanding, stentorian. Instead it comes out gentle and sedated. Or, more accurately, it comes out synthetic, as if he shared a soul with HAL 9000. It's so out of character with everything else you know about the man that it creeps me out. It's always reminding us, as Jeff Pearlman put it, that Bonds is "completely, undeniably 100% full of s**t... Nothing he says holds any meaning."

Brian Gunn

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/08/roid_monster_or.php

I'm thrilled with my seats, but one of my seatmates had some misgivings sitting right in front of the scoreboard (craning necks to see it, unrelenting sun) despite it's low row number, so I called. I ended up talking to two different people at two different times, but each was the picture of professional, courteous, and helpful.

Of course, I started the conversations out courteous myself, so maybe that helped, but when I asked where else we might hypothetically sit if we did change seats, I got several options, some cheaper some more expensive, with frank comments about the pros and cons of each seat. I haven't made any changes yet, but I hung up with the impression that if I called back to do so, it would be no problem at all.

I really think they prepared well for this and I'm tickled that there has been little to no angst about it on this site.

Hey Barry, how are your group's seats?

Nice sum-up by Boz this morning on the state of baseball in the wake of the Bonds indictment.

Are we on the road to closure of the "steroid era"? Maybe. If I was unsure before, I'm even less sure now, but that may not be a bad thing.

In a belated attempt at battling my own ignorance and prejudices on the matter, I just got around to reading "The Juice," by Will Carroll, which anyone should read who cares about the role of PEDs in sports.

Carroll's book is neither a jeremiad nor a justification. It is a reasoned and well-written examination of what we know and don't know about PEDs.

And now I think I know some of what I don't know. What I think I do know is that PEDs aren't going away any time soon. For some reason, though, I feel less helplessly indignant than I did before -- perhaps because I'm encouraged that folks like Carroll are willing to engage in calm discussion, to encourage scientific inquiry, and to keep dialogue open.

If all that makes little sense to you, read Carroll's book. Or if you've read the book, I'd be interested to hear your impressions.

Say, Hendo, does this mean that the floor is officially open for the baseball book discussion that we'd put off during the regular season? Boo hoo, that would mean I'd have to miss out as I'll be heading over the river and through the woods early tomorrow.

Speaking of stories about the indictment, didja see the correction printed on p. 2 of the Post's main section?

More from Brian Gunn

"(1) No one has any idea how much Bonds has been helped by steroids.

Well, let me rephrase that: some people have some idea how much Bonds has been helped by steroids. But unfortunately they don't form a consensus, and each of them would admit that he's more or less playing Pin the Tail on the Donkey. Nate Silver estimated that steroids give position players 10 extra points of AVG, OBP, and SLG. J.C. Bradbury found that the benefits are negligible. Others - notably Patrick Hruby, who reckoned that about a hundred of Bonds' homers can be chalked up to steroid use - fall more in line with popular thinking.

Even with these studies, we're still left with a quagmire. How many other players were using steroids during Bonds' home run spree? How much of an advantage was he getting? More to the point, how many pitchers were juiced up over the last ten years? (Oddly enough, Bonds hit #755 off of Clay Hensley, who, unlike Bonds, has actually failed a drug test.)

And did steroids make Bonds more durable or less durable as he got older? Sure, the evidence shows that Bonds hit more homers after age 35 than anyone in history, but evidence also shows that steroid use can lead to soft-tissue deterioration, tendon damage (particularly triceps tendon injuries, the kind that caused Bonds to miss 7 weeks in 1999), as well as the type of back and knee problems that have plagued Bonds the last few years. When you look at the shortened careers of known or alleged steroid users like Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Jason Giambi, you wonder if steroids gave Bonds a boost when it came to breaking short-term records, like the single-season home run record, but had mixed results when it came to toppling career records, like Aaron's 755.

Of course, we'll never know. And that's precisely the point. Until we have good, solid data - as opposed to armchair theorizing - regarding the effects of steroid use on ballplayers, then I think it's best to extend a bit of graciousness (the kind, incidentally, that often seems missing from Bonds himself) and give him the benefit of the doubt. Because the bottom line remains that Bonds was a great ballplayer - the best of our generation - before he supposedly began taking "the clear," and he's been a great ballplayer, one of the very best in the league, even after he presumably stopped using steroids. That's no small feat for a man well into his 40's.

And if nothing else, we can say that Bonds is truly the greatest steroids hitter in major league history. I know, I know, that's a stupid statement, satisfying to no one... but then again, as Chuck Klosterman pointed out rather amusingly, the Beatles took performance-enhancing drugs (how else do you think they came up with side two of "Revolver"?), and no one holds it against them."

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/08/roid_monster_or.php

No comment on the Bonds stuff at the minute, back to stadium seating. We got 109 and at first were quite happy but then figured out (we think) that our row (NN) puts us under the overhang, which I think we wd like to avoid. The 300 sections at RFK under the overhang felt like a dungeon to me. Anyone else deliberating this? I think I'll be thrilled regardless, but want to be as thrilled as possible. I'm a little disappointed that ticket agents aren't available today, but otherwise I'm impressed with how the Nats are handling all of this.

Just checked the $.35er, natsfan1a. And thanks to the Post for the correction.

Manny was well received at the MoCo Thanksgiving Parade, and gave a nice interview with emcee Doug Hill that was broadcast over the speakers. (No hot news, just hearty thanks and we're excited for next season. Stan needs to work on this in future years; I'd be boiling with pride if an expensive FA signing were announced right in my town on the Saturday before Thanksgiving.)

George and Teddy were there. Teddy looks like he's been getting in his road work, so he should have bright hopes at Nats Park.

Screech was also there, looking neat and well groomed. His coat may or may not have had an application of Eagle-Kleen, but I didn't get close enough for a thorough visual or nasal inspection.

Nor did I take a camera -- don't own one at the moment, truth be told -- but ABC7 (given Hill's presence) and NC8 should have some video footage.

Thanks for those excerpts, flynnie. I did go over to baseballanalysts and have a look at the full article. Gunn indeed makes some good points.

As for the court case, unless I'm a juror it's not my place to dictate an opinion. As for Everybody's Favorite Giant personally, as far as I'm concerned it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. (NJ doesn't accept the UML markup for snark, so readers will have to insert their own.)

RE: Bonds -

I don't care if his use of steroids actually HURT is performance. The point to me is that he took them with the intent of gaining an unfair advantage, and that by definition, nullifies all of his efforts -- homers and strikeouts, and everything in between. The idea that you could somehow quantify the impact of the steroids, and mentally adjust (and not officially) his totals tacitly condones the behavior.

He's a cheater. He's a lying cheater.

If it weren't for the fact that MLB turned a blind eye for as long as it did, and that the behavior was so ubiquitous, I would suggest that the solution would be radical surgery... and take away all that was earned under false pretenses... Certainly that is what should be done on an individual basis.

Thanks for the Manny (and Screech, I guess) report, Hendo. FWIW, I read an online blurb about the parade and they said that channel 8 would rebroadcast it opposite the Macy's Thanksgiving parade on Thursday.

What does everyone think about Roger Clemens. Do you guys think he was a 'roid user?

Don't expect any new posts from Barry until, oh, Monday night at the earliest. I imagine it'll take him that long to recover from Duke's loss to Notre Dame today. ;-)

"Do you guys think [Roger Clemens] was a 'roid user?"

When asked that question about any individual player, here's what goes through my mind:

1. Why do we think of one player or another in particular? Because his head has grown? Or he's reported to have acne on his back? Or, as with Clemens, he remained a phenom into his forties? Or just guessing at random?

2. Assuming the last, guessing at random -- which I think applies to most people not named Bonds, Giambi, Palmeiro, etc. -- then, for me, it boils down to percentages. What proportion of players have been serious juicers?

The numbers bandied about fall in the general range from 5% to 80%. Excluding (a) those names we already know, (b) those who might have been in the room when PEDs were being administered, but never juiced themselves, and (c) those who juiced for a brief time but quit for one (smart) reason or another, my SWAG on the number of current MLB players who have been serious PED users would be one in seven. Which puts the a priori odds against Clemens or anyone else having juiced at six to one.

Clemens is the most powerful pitcher I have ever seen in person; I admire his achievements, and bear him no animus, personal or otherwise. So, to answer the original question, I hope not. Based on my number-flinging, I would bet not.

Based on my visceral cynicism about the bumbling and dilatory investigative process, and the oh-so-cheatable testing process -- I wouldn't bet a nickel on anything.

My guess is that ALL players have used something. Just to much money available if you make the bigs that they will do almost anything to insure they make it. Not saying they use roids, but I'll bet every single player as tried something to enhance there ability. On the XM show baseball this morning with Mark Patrick and Buck Martinez, Patrick said in an interview with an undisclosed minor league player, when asked how many players he thought used something, he said...all of them.

The Dodgers seem to remain committed to punting away their young talent. Rumors around Marlins 3B Miguel Cabrera have LA ready to pony up Matt Kemp, James Loney and a couple others in exchange.

Now, the Nats don't need to be dangling any star 3B out there, and would seem to be set at first. But I'm still liking Kemp as a potentially cheap OF pickup, if one must be made.

Laugh if you will, but recall that the Dodgers are the team that frittered away Wilson Betemit so they could squeeze the last precious drops out of Nomar. Meanwhile, even as Kemp -- who is not yet even arb-eligible! -- hangs on a string, Ned Colletti pants after Hunter, Jones and Rowand.

No wonder Colletti's phone is ringing off the hook. You gotta think (hope?) that at least one of the messages in his voice mailbox is from Bowden.

A great nod from Lee Jenkings and Sports Illustrated:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/magazine/specials/sportsman/2007/11/07/jenkins.bascik/index.html

Every bit of recognition, right? And it's a nice reminder, as the long, cold nights of winter set in, of how lucky we got with the personalities on our team. Here's to you, Mike Bacsik. Cheers.

Indeed, Atlanta, a well-earned tribute to a good guy.

One note on the SI story: The photo caption states that Bacsik is a free agent. However, Bacsik in fact signed a non-guaranteed minor league contract with the Nats, including an invitation to Spring Training, on October 26, as reported by mlb.com's Bill Ladson on October 30:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071030&content_id=2288022&vkey=news_was&fext=.jsp&c_id=was&partnered=rss_was

Here's hoping to see Mike on the hill at Nats Park in '08.

Hey, if we could get proofreading-enhancing drugs around here, I'd be all for it. I can see the ads now: "At last! A drug old people will be urging youngsters to take!"

Congratulations, btw, to all you happy recipients of your new Spot.
I'm still ogling Sec. 236 in the Lower RF Terrace, fair territory just inside the pole.
OR
the Cherry Bomb Pavilion (I love that name) in left.

On a (slightly) related note, I wonder if my evident inability to reliably judge a fly ball is attributable to having sat in the infield seats my whole life? ...

The Boras ain't over til Kenny Rogers sings ...

Buried in the car racing notebook: this from Detroit www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ article/2007/11/17/AR2007111701465.html

BASEBALL: Warren Buffett advised Alex Rodriguez to approach the New York Yankees and go around agent Scott Boras, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Rodriguez, on Boras's advice, opted out of the final three seasons of his record 10-year, $252 million contract on Oct. 28.

Upset with developments after he opted out, Rodriguez contacted Buffett, and the investor told him to approach the Yankees without his agent, the Journal said.

After speaking with the investor, Rodriguez contacted a managing director at Goldman Sachs whom he knew, John Mallory, who then got in touch with Gerald Cardinale, a Goldman Sachs managing director who has worked with the Yankees and their YES Network.

With the assistance of the two Goldman executives, Rodriguez and the Yankees negotiated a 10-year, $275 million contract that is in the process of being finalized. . . .

Kenny Rogers is representing himself as a free agent, the Detroit Tigers confirmed.

The move seems to be a sign that the left-handed pitcher is closer to returning to Detroit and not letting Boras shop his services to the highest bidder.
*******************************
******************
Boras ain't over til he's over
Posted by: [the former] Section 506 (Before moving) | November 16, 2007 12:59 PM

Does that mean, cevans, that you didn't get your ST relo info yet? Or that you did and are displeased? (Or that you're not yet a STH?)

Sorry for the non-posts. Have had computer problems.

I'm not particularly happy with my seats, and we were one of the first in '05. The problem may be the way my brother originally requested them. I probably can't gripe, since I let him do that part (I do the divvying up).

Clemens is an interesting situation. First of all, there is a theory floating around that, for all of the steroid controversy with the "big" hitters, the players who would most benefit from the use of steroids are pitchers, particularly relievers. There is a great deal of logic to that concept, but I don't know if it holds up to scrutiny. Clemens is an interesting case in that, among other things, he absolutely fits the mold that Bill James has projected for a long term, successful HOF type pitcher.

Of course, one of the problems, in this whole controversy is how do you define PEVs. Remember, beginning in the sixties, there were literally bowls of "greenies" in virtually every major league locker room. That went on for forty years.

Then what is the place of the post-game PEV...(read: the pharmaceutical promoted by certain ballplayers to enhance evening experiences)?

so-so feelings about our seats. we were hoping to be closer to home plate in our category (223 is closest), ended up four sections over in 231, and 5 rows back. and we're from class of 05, too. now, we upgraded from the first couple of years, but still, i was hoping we'd be closer.

i figure that next year, the day after season tix payments are due, i'll do what i did the last two years and call and move us to better seats in our category for 09.

Hendo, no, not a STH. I tend to "vulture" off my friends and coworkers on days they can't use theirs.
Funny thing about PEDs: I don't know how much to account for the placebo effect. Baseball players can be such a superstitious bunch, generally, anyway, it's probably high.
Catcher50, I have read the exact opposite, that pitchers benefit little or none from steroids (and if I had taken my Adderal today I could probably remember where I read that).

Cevans, Doncha love it when one study says that coffee is good for you and the next says that it'll kill ya?

Certainly the placebo effect is very strong. How much of the greenies/steroids thing is a matter of an average player saying: well I'm not going to let x or y get an advantage over me? Or how much of it is a 9 year player hoping for a 10th (vesting) year?

I was in the back of the lower deck, Section 313 at RFK. Now I'm way over in Section 132 at double the price. This wasn't even my sixth choice. This is coal in the stocking on Christmas morning.

Forgot to add that I was a full season ticket holder since the first group in November 2004.

What do you hear when you call your ST rep, Bummed?

You know what they say, Bummed, when life gives you coal make massive amounts of pollution to clog the lungs and kill all the [RF] that treated you wrong.

Pretty happy with my new seats... moving from RFK 320 out to LF (106, Row D) where I look forward to Cherry Blossoms and HRs.

Anyone have thoughts on the course for the President's race this year? Looks like they'll probably be entering the field from the CF access area and hopefully rounding LF and the 3B line...?

Barry's got a new post.

I spoke to a very nice lady at the Nationals Ticket Office this morning. One little tidbit for those of you who might not know -- As you face the field, seat numbers count up from right to left. So if you have seat #1 you are all the way to the right in your section (as you face the field).

Now that I know where my seats are, its time for me to start worrying about how close I will be to the best draft beer, barbecue, hot dogs, escalators, restrooms etc....

Gibby, I'm jealous, or looking forward to running into you, I can't decide which.

I hear TR is PO'd he's the only Rushmore who didn't get a luxury box named for him. George, Tom, and especially Abe have been mercilessly ribbing him, I hear. "Maybe if you'd WON a race in THREE YEARS, Teddy!"

************
Pretty happy with my new seats... moving from RFK 320 out to LF (106, Row D) where I look forward to Cherry Blossoms and HRs.
Anyone have thoughts on the course for the President's race this year? Looks like they'll probably be entering the field from the CF access area and hopefully rounding LF and the 3B line...?
Posted by: Gibby | November 19, 2007 11:12 AM

If you're tired of talking or reading about Barry Bonds, stop here.

Barry Bonds is sullen and egotistical. If he lied to the grand jury, he should do time. There will be no apologies given for perjurers here.

Having said that I would like to make a case for giving him a pass for his steroid use. Those who call him a cheater and vilify him for taking steroids are being a bit sanctimonious.

The ingesting of PEDs by major league baseball players has been going on since the 1950s. The use of greenies was so wide spread that they used to have bowls of them in the locker room like candy. I once asked a friend who played pro ball to tell me why he took greenies. He asked me to imagine what I felt like on my best day ever playing baseball. He said he felt like that every time he took one. Billy Ripken was widely held in awe by pro ball players because he came to the stadium every day with great energy and did NOT take them. They couldn't believe it. He was held in such high regard because he was the exception.

Given that general outlook about PEDs, it's easy to see how steroids took hold during the late 80's and early 90's when they became much safer to use. There was widespread usage because management turned their collective heads the other way and these athletes were put in competitive situations where their livelihoods were staked on beating the other guy - a guy who was more likely than not juiced. I'd like to think I would have been honest enough not to do it, but I'm not so sure. It seems foolhardy to think that most players did not give in. They are human like the rest of us. Sure, we can kick the names around - Clemens, Mariano Rivera, Chipper Jones - but we should also include all the no name middle relievers and guys who never made it out of AA. There are lots of those too.

I chuckled when I attended a Nats game in the middle of the Bonds HR chase last year. Bonds was being booed lustily on a nightly basis. During the game I attended, Ryan Franklin, the first player to be caught on a drug test, came on to pitch. There was nary a comment from any fan. Why does he escape our wrath?

If we recreate what probably was going through Bonds' mind when he decided to "sit on a needle", it was probably something like this:

1. Most guys I know are doing something and baseball doesn't seem to care.

2. I am the greatest natural HR hitter in baseball, but McGwire and Sosa are getting all the attention. I'm sick of it.

Vilifying Bonds for taking steroids has an ex post facto quality to it. He should go into the HOF. There shouldn't be an asterisk next to his HR record. It just is what it is - another footnote to part of baseball's history. We should spare him our "holier than thou" criticism.