PDA

View Full Version : Milton



WMR
02-26-2007, 08:28 PM
I see Milton is starting the first game... with that degenerative knee and pretty much knowing what you're going to get out of Milton... might it not be better to just hold him out of Spring Training altogether and hope that'll help him keep it together a bit longer this season? He seemed to clearly lose strength and ability as the season progressed last year.

redsmetz
02-26-2007, 08:31 PM
I see Milton is starting the first game... with that degenerative knee and pretty much knowing what you're going to get out of Milton... might it not be better to just hold him out of Spring Training altogether and hope that'll help him keep it together a bit longer this season? He seemed to clearly lose strength and ability as the season progressed last year.

Well there's a novel idea, send a pitcher out in the season with no prep. Wish I'd thought of that one. What I want to know though is it a violation of the HIPAA regulations for you, as a medical professional, to reveal a patient's condition on the internet like this?

Cyclone792
02-26-2007, 08:48 PM
What I want to know though is it a violation of the HIPAA regulations for you, as a medical professional, to reveal a patient's condition on the internet like this?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

From December 5th, 2003 ...

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2472


The trade of Eric Milton to the Philadelphia Phillies in return for Carlos Silva, Nick Punto, and a MLTBNLATRFD (minor leaguer to be named later, after the Rule 5 draft) is one fraught with medhead angst. Milton, of course, is coming off a season defined by and almost completely lost to an extensive knee surgery. Is this surgery the reason that the Twins were willing to move him, or was his 17-inning audition at the end of the 2003 season enough for the Phillies to be satisfied that he can move into a rotation that may lose ace Kevin Millwood?

Like most instances where baseball and medicine meet, the answer is "both." After Milton's late-March knee surgery, details came out about the severe deterioration that was found despite his relatively youthful age of 27 (he's now 28). His surgeon, Dr. Thomas Rosenberg had operated earlier in 2003 on Tiger Woods, but unlike Woods' relatively simple surgery, Rosenberg found Milton's knee required much more extensive work. In the procedure, Rosenberg removed more than 30 discreet pieces of cartilage from both the medial and lateral meniscus. He was also forced to debride what was described as significant osteoarthritis from the knee both above and below the joint. As you can see from this illustration and description of similar procedures, Milton's knee likely looked like that of a much older person that may at some point be a candidate for complete joint replacement in order to maintain function.

The six-month recovery and involved rehabilitation that Milton went through in order to return to the game went according to plan, according to Twins sources. Once he began to pitch again, both in drill and during a brief minor league rehab stint, it was clear that at least in the short term, Milton was able to return to his previous level of pitching. There is, however, a significant worry that his knee will continue to degrade over the course of a full season, endangering his ability to contribute as expected. It's one thing to pitch 17 good innings and quite another to the reach the 200-inning level for which the Phillies are paying.

Milton's injury is similar to, but much more advanced than that of fellow lefty Randy Johnson. Johnson was able to come back after injections of synvisc, a synthetic lubricant that seeks to reduce bone-on-bone friction in the absence of normal, natural shock absorbers. There is a great deal of disagreement over which, if any, technique is more effective in the long-term, but sports medicine often takes an odd perspective on both efficacy and function. There is clearly room for interpretation and individuality. Where both techniques returned the respective pitchers to function, both are also likely to be walking around with their children and grandchildren on a replacement joint. It is one price of professional sports that we seldom see.

The Phillies receive a pitcher with significant risk of recurrence who will likely pitch--and walk--with some level of pain. It is Milton's pain tolerance and the abilities of the Phillies' medical staff that will decide his effectiveness on the mound. The team takes on a one-year risk, which given the usual timeframe for recurrence, is only slightly elevated over a normal pitcher of this age. They also deal with a known quantity: By knowing the level of damage, the Phillies' staff will be able to come up with a plan to keep Milton as healthy as possible, something they were unable to do in Minnesota before the problem showed up.

GAC
02-26-2007, 09:08 PM
So how do you get the guy ready for the season if you don't pitch him? The innings allowed is always restricted anyway.

Cyclone792
02-26-2007, 09:14 PM
So how do you get the guy ready for the season if you don't pitch him? The innings allowed is always restricted anyway.

Well, if it were up to me, Milton wouldn't even be in the rotation as I'd rather have Saarloos and/or Belisle in the rotation in place of him to start the season. Milton's been a complete disaster the last three seasons in the rotation, and call me crazy, but it's very likely he'll be a disaster in the rotation once again in 2007.

I'd opt to put Milton in the bullpen and see what he could do there. He actually could be a semi-worthwhile reliever if his role was relegated to pitching two to three innings per week since he could just go out there and give everything he has for 20 pitches per outing.

Ltlabner
02-26-2007, 09:16 PM
My guess is they want to see him pitch to see how much the knee has improved. I'd rather they find out sooner rather than later.

Tom Servo
02-26-2007, 09:25 PM
Wasn't Milty claiming a few weeks ago that he went to a new doctor guy and his knee felt fine? Maybe he's eager to test it out.

SunDeck
02-26-2007, 09:25 PM
I think what you do with Milton is pitch him. He's on the payroll and nobody's going to take him from the Reds. If he implodes, they've got 2-3 guys who are probably at least as good as he is. If he pitches well, then hope it lasts.

Patrick Bateman
02-26-2007, 09:42 PM
Well, if it were up to me, Milton wouldn't even be in the rotation as I'd rather have Saarloos and/or Belisle in the rotation in place of him to start the season. Milton's been a complete disaster the last three seasons in the rotation, and call me crazy, but it's very likely he'll be a disaster in the rotation once again in 2007.

I'd opt to put Milton in the bullpen and see what he could do there. He actually could be a semi-worthwhile reliever if his role was relegated to pitching two to three innings per week since he could just go out there and give everything he has for 20 pitches per outing.

Agreed. We know Milton can put up a mid 5's ERA in the rotation. May as well try one of those guys.

Not very likely they will do worse.

TeamSelig
02-27-2007, 02:05 AM
Milton did lead the team in quality starts.

Would extra rest help his knee out? We could always use Milton as our 5th starter, and maybe let a guy from the bullpen start here in there later in the season.

mth123
02-27-2007, 06:38 AM
You have to get him out there and find out if he is healthy. I'm more concerned about his arm (surgery) than his knee right now.

Whatever path the Reds choose with Milton, step 1 on that path involves a determination of his health status and step 2 is showing the rest of the world in a few games.

redsmetz
02-27-2007, 08:28 AM
I understand that his past knee problems have been an issue, although last year's problems, as I recall, were arm troubles. Now certainly those arm issues may be a direct result of the knee condition. That said, it would be ill advised to send any pitcher out in a season without first preparing in Spring Training (and perhaps WilyMo was being more tongue in cheek, and therefore not deserving of my snide remark, than it seemed to me).

I have no idea whether, in fact, Baseball Prospectus has accurately told Milton's story. We can't know anymore because of the new CBA which prohibits release of a players medical info (probably doing as much with HIPAA as anything else).

I do know that Milton v.06 was better than the previous year. When he was on, he was pretty good, but when he was off (and sometimes that was him running out of gas - e.g. Narron's big mistake game of leaving Milton in just a little too long), he was fairly putrid.

I wouldn't disagree with seeing him in the pen and that might be the best for everyone. They may see how he does out of the gate and see if he can be moved mid-season. Who knows?

LoganBuck
02-27-2007, 08:51 AM
If Milton has health issues I want to know now, not April 21st.

RedFanAlways1966
02-27-2007, 09:08 AM
I understand that his past knee problems have been an issue, although last year's problems, as I recall, were arm troubles. Now certainly those arm issues may be a direct result of the knee condition.

Actually it was both the knee and the arm last year, metz. The knee was operated on in April. He went on the DL on April 21 and came back on May 20. September 17 was his last start due to the arm problem.

I have mentioned this in other Milton threads (there tends to be a few of those on this site!)... take away the two starts where he took the mound injured (Apr. 18 & Sept. 17) and the guy had an ERA of 4.41 for the year. Two injured starts added 0.76 to his ERA (total: 4.2 IP, 15 ER).

redsmetz
02-27-2007, 09:44 AM
Actually it was both the knee and the arm last year, metz. The knee was operated on in April. He went on the DL on April 21 and came back on May 20. September 17 was his last start due to the arm problem.

I have mentioned this in other Milton threads (there tends to be a few of those on this site!)... take away the two starts where he took the mound injured (Apr. 18 & Sept. 17) and the guy had an ERA of 4.41 for the year. Two injured starts added 0.76 to his ERA (total: 4.2 IP, 15 ER).

Thanks for the clarification and I stand corrected. The truth is, Milton is a contractual albatross and at 9 Million, we need to make the best of a bad situation. I like the guy personally; he seems a stand up guy in the face of the adversity he's faced coming here (and would have most anywhere else too). If he's on the mound for us, I want him to do well; which I think everyone wants. Obviously many don't want him out there and that's understandable.

M2
02-27-2007, 11:08 AM
My guess is they want to see him pitch to see how much the knee has improved. I'd rather they find out sooner rather than later.

Thing is, he's got degenerative knee condition. It never really improves. There might be times when it bothers him less than others, but the team knew before it signed it him that it wouldn't improve.

redsmetz
02-27-2007, 11:24 AM
Thing is, he's got degenerative knee condition. It never really improves. There might be times when it bothers him less than others, but the team knew before it signed it him that it wouldn't improve.

But we can't undo what DanO did, so we've got to make the best of it. Last year, he showed he was capable a number of times. He's here, and nine million's not going to get eaten; that's too large a number to swallow. So we have to do the best we can as his contract plays out.

M2
02-27-2007, 11:34 AM
But we can't undo what DanO did, so we've got to make the best of it. Last year, he showed he was capable a number of times. He's here, and nine million's not going to get eaten; that's too large a number to swallow. So we have to do the best we can as his contract plays out.

I'll say it again, it's far worse to pay him $9 million to sabotage your team than to pay him $9 million to stay home. I don't see how putting a guy who has no earthly hope of besting a 5.00 ERA in the starting rotation constitutes making the best of it.

texasdave
02-27-2007, 11:37 AM
I'll say it again, it's far worse to pay a $9 million to sabotage your team than to pay him $9 million ot stay home. I don't see how putting a guy who has no earthly hope of besting a 5.00 ERA in the starting rotation constitutes making the best of it.

True dat. :)

RedFanAlways1966
02-27-2007, 11:48 AM
I'll say it again, it's far worse to pay him $9 million to sabotage your team than to pay him $9 million to stay home. I don't see how putting a guy who has no earthly hope of besting a 5.00 ERA in the starting rotation constitutes making the best of it.

According to Milton he knew he was hurting (knee and arm) when he took the mound on Apr. 18 & Sept. 17 (but did not fess up). As previously stated he had an ERA of 4.41 w/out those two "injured starts". If he had been honest and admitted his health problems, then is it possible that he could be a sub-5 ERA pitcher? When healthy the numbers seem to show that he was a 4.41 ERA pitcher. Still not worthy of $9 million, but as of today worthy of a spot in the REDS rotation.

M2
02-27-2007, 12:04 PM
According to Milton he knew he was hurting (knee and arm) when he took the mound on Apr. 18 & Sept. 17 (but did not fess up). As previously stated he had an ERA of 4.41 w/out those two "injured starts". If he had been honest and admitted his health problems, then is it possible that he could be a sub-5 ERA pitcher? When healthy the numbers seem to show that he was a 4.41 ERA pitcher. Still not worthy of $9 million, but as of today worthy of a spot in the REDS rotation.

Clearly he thought he was well enough to pitch and the team probably knew he wasn't 100% too. That's the thing with Milton, he's always on the lip of that gorge. He can fall apart in the middle of start like no one's business too. I've never seen a guy lose it the way he does.

Plus, Milton had a .273 BABIP last year, making him an excellent candidate to backslide in 2007.

Marc D
02-27-2007, 12:05 PM
I've bashed Milton as hard as anyone over the years. I would just like to put in my .02 and say how much respect I have for him as a person. He could have easily ridden the DL nearly his entire time here and pocketed the money. Instead he goes out there in what is obviously a great deal of physical pain and does what he can. Knowing a bit about the mind set of pro athletes, I am pretty confident in saying the beating his ego takes hurts him a lot more than his knees do. Put those two sources of constant pain together and many ballplayers are going to take their guaranteed money and go to the DL(extensively) to make the pain stop.

It's not his fault Dan O gave him that contract. All Milton has done is go out and try to earn it within the framework of his profession. He's failed, but he's never taken the easy path and never quit. Those are qualities I admire in a person regardless of how good a ball player he may or may not be. I don't want to see him and Paul Wilson on my teams roster but they can can be charachter coaches for me anytime.

RedFanAlways1966
02-27-2007, 12:06 PM
Clearly he thought he was well enough to pitch and the team probably knew he wasn't 100% too. That's the thing with Milton, he's always on the lip of that gorge. He can fall apart in the middle of start like no one's business too. I've never seen a guy lose it the way he does.

Plus, Milton had a .273 BABIP last year, making him an excellent candidate to backslide in 2007.

Good assessment, M2. The REDS optimism in me always hopes that there is an upside (never a $9 mill upside of course!). :)

BRM
02-27-2007, 12:07 PM
I'll say it again, it's far worse to pay him $9 million to sabotage your team than to pay him $9 million to stay home. I don't see how putting a guy who has no earthly hope of besting a 5.00 ERA in the starting rotation constitutes making the best of it.

No kidding. If you have to pay him anyway, don't pay him to contribute to the team's loss column. Pay him to hurt someone else's chances instead of your own.

BRM
02-27-2007, 12:07 PM
Plus, Milton had a .273 BABIP last year, making him an excellent candidate to backslide in 2007.

More wonderful news this morning. Thanks M2.

redsmetz
02-27-2007, 02:43 PM
I'll say it again, it's far worse to pay him $9 million to sabotage your team than to pay him $9 million to stay home. I don't see how putting a guy who has no earthly hope of besting a 5.00 ERA in the starting rotation constitutes making the best of it.

And it's so easy for you to spend someone else's money. That's a lot of change to just piddle away. He's here until we can find a buyer or his contract expires - that's the cold hard reality.

texasdave
02-27-2007, 03:18 PM
And it's so easy for you to spend someone else's money. That's a lot of change to just piddle away. He's here until we can find a buyer or his contract expires - that's the cold hard reality.

It has nothing to do with spending someone else's money. No one is advocating going out and spending more money. If Milton is one of the top five starters then fine. But if there are five better options, to keep Milton in the starting rotation simply because he has a 9 million dollar contract is silly.

redsmetz
02-27-2007, 03:31 PM
It has nothing to do with spending someone else's money. No one is advocating going out and spending more money. If Milton is one of the top five starters then fine. But if there are five better options, to keep Milton in the starting rotation simply because he has a 9 million dollar contract is silly.

And what is proposed to do with him? If he's not on the roster, then he's cut. If he's cut and clears waivers, we're stuck with the $9 Million bill. It's too simple for us to say that should be done. That's a lot of cheese there and it's very likely not going away.

Chip R
02-27-2007, 03:47 PM
And what is proposed to do with him? If he's not on the roster, then he's cut. If he's cut and clears waivers, we're stuck with the $9 Million bill. It's too simple for us to say that should be done. That's a lot of cheese there and it's very likely not going away.


Of course it isn't going away. Barring some kind of season ending injury or some team insane enough to claim him off waivers. But he hurts the Reds more than he helps them. I don't care if he's making $900k or $9M, if he's hurting the team, I don't want to see him out there. Why even bother? Just to justify the signing the previous GM made? I don't expect the Reds to get rid of Milton because I believe they feel that he should earn that $9M even though he sabotages the team. But they should.

BRM
02-27-2007, 03:55 PM
And what is proposed to do with him? If he's not on the roster, then he's cut. If he's cut and clears waivers, we're stuck with the $9 Million bill. It's too simple for us to say that should be done. That's a lot of cheese there and it's very likely not going away.

He's going to cost the Reds $9M either way. Would you rather pay the $9M for a negative impact (Milton in the rotation) or for zero impact (Milton's gone)?

M2
02-27-2007, 04:04 PM
And it's so easy for you to spend someone else's money. That's a lot of change to just piddle away. He's here until we can find a buyer or his contract expires - that's the cold hard reality.

If that's the reality then part of that reality the team is unable to identify a sunk cost.

Chip and BRM summarized it nicely. Milton doesn't deserve any chances because he's due to make money, he should either be a good pitcher or the Reds should seek a better option.

Ltlabner
02-27-2007, 04:10 PM
He's going to cost the Reds $9M either way. Would you rather pay the $9M for a negative impact (Milton in the rotation) or for zero impact (Milton's gone)?

But it isn't a zero impact proposition because you have to consider who will replace him. Would the replacement take the impact above zero or below? Who jumps in and gives you 4.50 to 5.00 ERA performance over the course of a season?

Saarloos?
Santos?
Belislie?
EZ?

And the answer "they couldn't be worse" doesn't count because the fact is, they very well could be worse.

So if one of these guys jumps in and gives you the same performance as Milton over the course of a year you've spent $9m + the replacements sallary to get the same performance. That doesn't make sense other than having less gray hair worrying if Milton will get injured or explode. If he does worse, you've spent $9m + the replacements sallary to get worse performance. Spending more to get worse performance is not a good business model IMO.

So the only hope is you scuttle Milton, spend the $9m, spend the money on the replacement and hope that over the course of the season that one of those 4 guys, who nobody on RZ seems to have any confidence will cut it as the #5 starter, will somehow greatly improve as the #3 guy. That seems like a long shot to me.

GridironGrace
02-27-2007, 04:14 PM
contract year.. he'll do good :)

Must believe.. besides last season he was pretty solid until the injuries and fatigue got him......

Buy us til mid-sesaon when we can get another starter or Bailey up here... but even then.. we would have an all Right handed Staff with no Milton?

BRM
02-27-2007, 04:17 PM
Ltlabner,

I think the point M2 made and I agree with is if Milton isn't one of the five best starters, he shouldn't be in the rotation. He shouldn't be gauranteed a spot simply because of the money owed. If the Reds have someone who can provide better performance, that player should take Milton's spot.

Matt700wlw
02-27-2007, 04:17 PM
Just to note, Bronson and Homer start the scrimmage on Wednesday.

Ltlabner
02-27-2007, 04:23 PM
Ltlabner,

I think the point M2 made and I agree with is if Milton isn't one of the five best starters, he shouldn't be in the rotation. He shouldn't be gauranteed a spot simply because of the money owed. If the Reds have someone who can provide better performance, that player should take Milton's spot.

I agree that in a perfect world performance would rule the roost.

But I don't agree that "anybody else would be better" and the other potentials currently on the staff are not locks to put up better numbers over an entire season.

That doesn't preclude another trade. If we suddenly picked up a decent # 3 type, or found a suiter willing to take on the majorty of Miltons sallary I'd be willing to serriously consider just plugging in Loshe, Sarrloos and Santos/EZ and see what happens.

BRM
02-27-2007, 04:27 PM
I agree that in a perfect world performance would rule the roost.

But I don't agree that "anybody else would be better" and the other potentials currently on the staff are not locks to put up better numbers over an entire season.

That doesn't preclude another trade. If we suddenly picked up a decent # 3 type, or found a suiter willing to take on the majorty/some of Miltons sallary I'd be willing to serriously consider just plugging in Loshe, Sarrloos and Santos/EZ and see what happens.

Well, I never said "anybody else would be better" and I don't think M2 or Chip did either. I do know that Milton will very likely provide negative value to the Reds in 2007. It shouldn't be hard to find a better pitcher than one who will probably be well below average this year.

M2
02-27-2007, 05:24 PM
I agree that in a perfect world performance would rule the roost.

But I don't agree that "anybody else would be better" and the other potentials currently on the staff are not locks to put up better numbers over an entire season.

They're also not locks not to put up better season. My point is that if you've got a starting pitcher with a 5.00+ ERA, no matter how much he makes, then you need to find somebody better.

We know how bad Milton's been and there isn't really much reason to think he'll be anywhere near good in 2007. Given that, I say the Reds should keep an open mind and an open set of eyes for someone who can do better. Just because you can't cherrypick who that person will be at the moment doesn't mean the team shouldn't be looking.

Ltlabner
02-27-2007, 05:51 PM
They're also not locks not to put up better season. My point is that if you've got a starting pitcher with a 5.00+ ERA, no matter how much he makes, then you need to find somebody better.

We know how bad Milton's been and there isn't really much reason to think he'll be anywhere near good in 2007. Given that, I say the Reds should keep an open mind and an open set of eyes for someone who can do better. Just because you can't cherrypick who that person will be at the moment doesn't mean the team shouldn't be looking.

Oh, I agree. If they can find a solid #3 type, I'd be much more willing to consider eating Milton contract (as if it were my money) and run with a mix of Sarrloos/Santos/EZ at the back end of the rotation. And based on Krivs activity over the course of his tenure, I'm comfortable that they are out looking.

15fan
02-27-2007, 05:56 PM
Even if Eric Milton is healthy, the problem is that he's still Eric Milton.

I'd make him the mop-up guy. Only pitch him in games that are lost causes, such as when Randy Johnson is going for the opposition, or the Reds are down double-digits.

The less he pitches, even if he's healthy, the better it is for the Reds and their chances of winning on any given day.

PuffyPig
02-27-2007, 07:29 PM
Milton did lead the team in quality starts.



I don't think so. No way he had more than Arroyo.

In past years the reason to stick with Milton was based on the fact that he had a long term contract. You hope he improves so you get some value down the road. hard to consider it all a sunk cosdt and sit him, as it gives you no chance to ever get any value from him.

This year is different. Once you determine he has little chance to be effective for 2008 (for some that time is now), you can consider it a sunk cost and deal with him.

Patrick Bateman
02-27-2007, 07:45 PM
I don't think so. No way he had more than Arroyo.


Not thay QS is a very good meadure of performance, but here is the top 3 Reds pitchers:

1. Arroyo 23
2. Harang 17
3. Milton 14

I think the only reason Milton is that high on the list is due to opportunity. It shoudln't be hard to replace that number.

PuffyPig
02-27-2007, 08:11 PM
Not thay QS is a very good meadure of performance, but here is the top 3 Reds pitchers:

1. Arroyo 23
2. Harang 17
3. Milton 14

I think the only reason Milton is that high on the list is due to opportunity. It shoudln't be hard to replace that number.

It looks like Milton had a better QS % than Harang. If you looked closely, I think you would see that Harang lost a number of potential QS late in games because he often worked into the 7th and 8th innings. Milton was usually gone after any decent 6 inning start.

Reds1
02-28-2007, 01:16 AM
It's contract year! He'll step up and go 12-11 with a 4.99 ERA and we'll sign him to another 4 year extension. LOL ;)

KronoRed
02-28-2007, 01:55 AM
It's contract year! He'll step up and go 12-11 with a 4.99 ERA and we'll sign him to another 4 year extension. LOL ;)

The horror :(

mth123
02-28-2007, 06:49 AM
If that's the reality then part of that reality the team is unable to identify a sunk cost.

Chip and BRM summarized it nicely. Milton doesn't deserve any chances because he's due to make money, he should either be a good pitcher or the Reds should seek a better option.

I'm not sure I'm completely in agreement here. While its true that on February 28th, Milton is sure to get that $9 Million in 2007, I'm not in total agreement that the Reds are destined to pay all of that. With the complete dearth of pitching in baseball, at least part of that salary can be moved IMO.

I will agree that there will unquestionably come a point in 2007 where the Reds need to cut bait on Milton if he isn't traded first. I just don't think its today. Let him show he's healthy, let the spring and early season play out to allow time for some other teams start losing guys to injury, and move him for at least some salary relief.

I will say that if keeping Milton means losing Ramirez or Belisle, I'd have to think long and hard. But it shouldn't come to that because there are so many other options left to make room. Maybe EZ and Maj start on the DL. Cormier and Shackleford could probably be moved.

The Reds need a placeholder for the number 5 spot for part of the year until Bailey has served his time in AAA. Let Milton be the guy. Skip his spot every now and then to allow the knee to hold up better, and trade him around Memorial day or so. If that saves the Reds $4 or $5 Million that can be put towards a July acquisition (in the unlikely event of 2007 contention) or roster improvement for 2008, it would be worth it when the alternatives might be using Victor Santos or Andrew Good.

I will say this problem of maybe not having room for guys with a potential future (like say EZ or Belisle) was created by bringing in so much pricey clutter in the offseason (Lohse, Cormier, etc). Wayne should have moving a few of these guys (and Milton should be high on that list) as his top priority right now.

I'm still hoping for a trade or two to sort this out a little.

GAC
02-28-2007, 09:28 PM
I say, since he is in the last year of his contract, run his butt out there and get what we can out of the guy while keeping your fingers crossed. But darn it! I would like to get something out of that 10 mil/year we're paying him. But the guy knows he had better put up some kind of numbers this year or most teams won't even look at him. That possibly is to our advantage.

And if we can get some other sucker GM to take him off our hands at the trading deadline, then so be it. Looking at what transpired over this past winter at some of the signings it's possible. If nothing nelse, then let him walk at season's end and be done with it.

And if the knee finally gives out, then take him out on Pete Rose Way, put him out of his misery and send the remains to the glue factory. :mooner:

Always Red
02-28-2007, 10:34 PM
The key to getting a decent year out of Eric Milton is to never let him pitch past the 5th inning. I think it's just that simple. The guy can sail through some early innings, and when he's done- boy is he done quickly.