Dear Hamels STOP Quit Crying STOP Warm Regards -- Everyone

Hamels wanted more money. Shucks. You'll get yours soon enough. Let's look around to see what those who are paid to write about the Phillies are saying about this before we get to my knee-jerk, reactionary words on the matter.

I defer to Philly's answer to Tolstoy (Bill Conlin) for an analysis of the situation. An analysis which passes the three requirements I look for in a Colin piece: Poetic wordplay? Check. Misguided attempt at humor through tortured storytelling and confusing metaphors? Check. Accurate analysis of how things are? Not really......at all. Yup, they're all there.

"A 15-to-18 win season by Cole Hamels could help the Phils to the Promised Land this season, but the thought of both their young lefthander and Howard lined up at the arbitration trough next February has to have the Teflonics bathed in soaking night sweats. What if Hamels wins more games than $137.5 million Met Johan Santana?"

Oh quite a bit would happen, Mr. Conlin. If this happens the heavens will spill onto the Earth and an epic battle between Heaven and Hell will commence for thousands of years until God comes down and tells everybody to shut up while him and the Ms. watch their "stories" and he makes a comet smash into the Earth thus proving science is for stupids and intelligent design to be awesome in one fantastic happenstance. (But since God controls everything is there really such a thing as a happenstance? Mind = blown) Also it would mean Hamels gets to swap his crappy 500k contract for Santana's 137 million dollar deal because that's how baseball works. Sheep would become become articulate and revive the dead language of Latin. Dog's would lay eggs and walk erect. Refrigerators would run the country. Lou Diamond Phillips would be on a stamp. Peokkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

Good Lord, I just passed out. Moving on.

I applaud Jim Salisbury just for entitling his column "Cole Hamels is out of line" because I get giddy when sportswriters uses a title the clearly indicates how, in the article, they're gonna give this kid a good ole' fashioned talkin' to. I was happy - I agreed with the title. But......then I kept reading. He goes on to say Howard's situation was different from Hamels'. He states the following:

"For symbolic value, for PR and good-will points, the Phils should have given Howard $1 million, even if the player stubbornly refused to sign for something closer to that amount. After all, he was coming off two spectacular seasons in which he was the National League's rookie of the year, most valuable player and home-run and RBI king."

Oh....just...wow. Two things here:
1) Symbolic value. PR. Good will points. You know, he's absolutely right. I was wrong to question his assertions. I was wrong because if my memory serves me correctly no one has ever been last in the league in these categories and gone on to win the World Series. The reason for this could easily be linked to the fact that they don't fucking exist. These are three ridiculous, arbitrary and monumentally stupid reasons for a professional baseball team to base it's decisions upon. These things are completely subjective. They are meaningless. Almost as meaningless as.............

2) Know who was the winner of the not real, meaningless, fake, exists only in Salisbury-land, made-up award that's never ever ever ever been a tangible thing AL RBI King Trophy was in 2001? Bret Boone. Who won the NL version of the same fake, not-for-realsies award in 2003? Preston Wilson. Former Rookies of the Year (to Salisbury's credit: this award actually exists): Pat Listach and Scott Cooper. Conclusion: these awards (even the ones that do exist) are both meaningless and arbitrary.

Despite my many many problems with some of the claims Salisbury makes, I do agree with his sentiment. Hamels got a raise. He'll get paid next year. Please - just go pitch. However, the problem with Salisbury's column is that the reasoning be uses to claim Howard should have gotten paid applies just as well to Hamels if you choose to, ya know, apply it.

Howard had a great year and a half of service time - so did Hamels. Pitchers tend to make less through arbitration than position players do so Hamels won't get Howard money next winter but he will get a sizable raise. The problem seems to be that sportswriters (who I thought would know better) seem to be pandering to the sentiment of the public that players should be paid based on the season they just had instead of factoring in service time and track records. This is why players enjoy the security of multi-year contracts. They aren't reevaluated after every frickin' season because you're going to have the occasional down year (see Pat Burrell.)

Players feel (and honestly I get why they feel this way, having been an entry-level employee) a lack of fairness in the process. Hamels looks around the pitching rotation and thinks "Adam Eaton is awful and he's making 8 million a year. What the hell???" Well - like any business - baseball is all about service time and having a track record. Those are the two biggies when it comes to getting compensation. Jamie Moyer has a long track record of success and even though he has been declining he has service time and a body of work to draw from. You need to put in the time. It sucks. It's lame. You look around and see a douche like Eaton making a ton more when you are 50 times the asset he is. It's the same situation in any company. Difference is - you're playing baseball, I'm cold calling people. Fuck. My. Life.

You don't get to completely re-do your contract just because you had a great year. Why? Because you can't have it the other way around either. If the Phillies had their druthers they could re-do Adam Eaton's contract after last year by setting the old one on fire and handing Eaton a bus ticket to the hippie commune of his choice. It's important for the Phillies to maximize the years when the can get away with paying these young studs so little because, as we've already seen with Howard, the kids are going to get paid in the near future.