He actually used those words when he spoke with reporters to try and clear up exactly why he wants to test the free-ageny waters after the 2002 season.

He says it's a matter of principle

I read the entire article, and I hope for once we have found an athlete that is actually sincere. He is choosing to be "just one of the team" on a competitor, rather than have one of the highest salaries in the game on what could be a very bad team in 3-4 years. Wish there were more players like that in professional sports these days.

Of course, barring injuries this year, he'll get a nice sized contract from someone come next offseason. Provided, that is, there is MLB after this season.

Ditto, and I wish to hell Rolen would stop backpedaling by repeatedly referring to himself as an "idiot". He claims that he turned down the contract for reasons other than money or ego. So fine, man, now stand up for it.

Why weren't they able to trade him?

They didn't trade him because no one met their price, whatever that is.

Rolen's whole "look at the 15-year history" argument doesn't quite wash. It's not like a bunch of free agents wanted to come here, with the team being lousy and the stadium being lousy. Even if the Phillies made an offer they'd only use it to get more money out of their actual desired destinations, as Bobby Bonilla once did prior to his signing with the Mets.

As for making a trade, they haven't had much to trade until recently. It's only in the last couple of years that they've rebuilt their scouting system, started investing money to get talent from Latin America and rebuilt the minor leagues. It's only now that they've developed enough of a stockpile of minor league talent that
they could consider trading for immediate help.

So now he says if he were to sign long-term he wants to know that guys like Abreu and Burrell are still around. Well, why should THEY sign contracts if HE'S gone?

Well, they still don't have much to trade. At least, not in the minors. And I wonder now that Abreu has signed a big deal, if they really are trying to show Rolen something. Of course, Abreu seems to be more of a quiet leader who gets it done on the field, obviously Rolen speaks out more.

The Phils have a lot more in the minors than they used to. They've been rated among the best minor leagues in the last year or two.

Is it good leadership to say that the team around him isn't good enough to contend and that's why he won't sign a contract? I woneder if the other players are happy to hear that they're not a contender?

Rolen isn't a vocal clubhouse leader. That was something Larry Bowa wanted from him last year and didn't get. Now Bowa says Rolen should just be himself.

In fact, he hardly speaks out at all. He rarely does in-depth interviews (outside of the typical post-game type stuff) and values his privacy. It was a surprise to learn recently that he had a "long-time" girlfriend, let alone married her.

The only time in recent memory that he's been quoted extensively was this past weekend.

The Phillies say they're committed to keeping their main core together. The Bobby Abreu contact announced today has to be seen as a sign of that. After the 1999 season they signed Mike Lieberthal to a long-term deal to keep him for a few years after when he would have become a free agent. It weakens Rolen's argument a little more in my view, although many people around here won't agree.

And the Phillies' president is going on the offensive now, contesting Rolen's comments.
Among the quotes: \"The one part of what Scott said that I agree with is his statement that he's an idiot for not signing with us.\"

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

In today's installments at Soap Opera Central, Scottie and Larry have a little chat and things got "animated." Meanwhile, Larry had some not-so-nice things to say to Ed, but when they found out that cameras recorded their chat they were none too happy!

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

From today's Phila. Daily News, someone who can identify with Scott Rolen to some extent.
Mike Schmidt on Scott Rolen

Today's installment--on Saturday Scottie had another chat, but this time Larry wasn't involved...

from the Phila. Inquirer:
[quote] Third baseman Scott Rolen's volatile spring training continued when he was seen underneath the right-field bleachers at Jack Russell Stadium having a long and sometimes heated discussion with third-base coach John Vukovich.

The conversation started before 9 a.m. and lasted nearly 90 minutes. Rolen would not comment on what the discussion was about.

"It was a private meeting," he said.

It's the second time this spring that Rolen has been involved in a private meeting in a public place.

Controversy arose earlier in camp after Rolen met with manager Larry Bowa in full view of fans and reporters during a workout at the Carpenter Complex. Television microphones later intruded on a private conversation between Bowa and general manager Ed Wade, and reports circulated that the manager made some inflammatory remarks about the third baseman.

There were reports last week that Bowa was not talking to Rolen and that the manager did not shake the third baseman's hand after he scored a run. For those of you following the handshakes at home, Bowa has failed to shake hands with other players who have scored runs this spring; he did shake Rolen's hand yesterday.

Whatever friction remains, it's not affecting Rolen's play on the field. The third baseman had two more hits and three RBIs yesterday during the Phillies' 9-8 exhibition victory over the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. He is hitting .382 this spring, the best among Phillies regulars.

---

from the Phila. Daily News:

[quote] Rolen shrugged off the incident yesterday.

"I feel as healthy as I've felt physically in three years," he said. "I'm excited about the start of the season, to play baseball. Mentally, I am stress-free and completely at ease with the decision [not to sign a long-term contract extension] that was made. In my mind, that's all been left behind."

---

Ya know why dont you just trade him to us (Orioles. We have wanted him for two years and from the best I could tell we made you guys a decent offer for him. Sidney Ponson and two prospects?? Isnt that better than nothing when he just leaves. Ponson would be a decent 3 or 4 for you guys and has some upside. I think that we will go heavy for him anyways when he files.

The Phillies don't need a 3rd or 4th starter. If they need a starter at all, they need an ace.

The strategy now seems to be to keep Rolen as long as they're in the pennant race. And here's a writer who thinks they'll stay in it. It'll look pretty bad if they follow up 2001's success with more success in 2002. That will not bode well for his argument that he wants to leave because he wants to win.

Ballbusters, fyi, the Phillies brass DID agree to trade Rolen to the Orioles during the winter meetings last December (which Syd Thrift, the O's puppet for Peter Angelos...er, I mean G.M. had agreed to) only to see Angelos veto another deal that would have helped his club immensely long-term....I have now officially lost count of the dozens of worthwhile deals that former quality GM's in Baltimore (like Pat Gillick and Doug Melvin, to name two) have attempted to make in an effort to help improve the team only to see their idiot owner nix the trade for highly questionable reasons -- followed shortly thereafter by the GM's getting fed up with Angelos and resigning, which is highly understandable given the circumstances.

Tom Boswell's article in yesterday's Washington Post (see link below) addressed the TRUE reasons why Angelos is intentionally attempting to field as poor of a team as possible this season and drive down attendance in order to "prove" his point that he cannnot survive if DC/NoVa gets a major league team in 2003 as expected....anyone who thinks such tactics are beyond the thinking of this ruthless, selfish billionaire attorney obviously hasn't been following Angelos' ownership tenure in Charm city....he has single-handedly taken one of the most successful and proudest franchises and turned it into one of the biggest laughinstocks in all of sports.

Speaking as a FORMER partial season ticket holder (29 games minimum) in Baltimore for nearly ten years (who willingly drove 40 miles from northern virginia 5-6 times per month to see the greatest game on earth) as much as I love Camden Yards I will have to think long and hard before giving Angelos any of my hard earned money again....especially in light of what Boswell accurately points out in his column (this is not the first time that I have heard this mentioned and I have been highly suspicious, given Angelos' comments in past years, for quite some time) I think I will drive far longer distances to Philly or New York to see a REAL major league team with an owner that at least gives a damn about his paying customers rather than pad Peter's pockets any longer.

As the column on ESPN.com pointed out, anyone remember the plot behind the great movie "Major League" involving the Indians female owner?....well, I'm sorry to say that this fiction is coming to life right before our eyes in Baltimore.

Orioles showing their true colors

[ March 19, 2002: Message edited by: gamecock ]

Hi, Gamecock - I think I'd be every bit as frustrated as you if I were an Orioles fan. As a baseball fan, it's discouraging to see what's happened to that franchise since 1996. Sounds like there'll be more tickets than ever available for Yankee fans who want to drive down to Baltimore to watch the Yanks - O's.

If you do decide to come up to New York for some baseball, I'd be happy to take in a game at Yankee Stadium with you.

Sorry gamecock, but I really thought it was the Phillies that backed out of that deal or was it the third team involved that did it. Anyway it would not surprise me if he did back out of the deal. I still have this feeling that Rolen will end up as an Oriole.

As for not attending games that is very hard to do. My grandfather and dad took me to my first MLB game to see the Orioles in 1976 and I have been an Orioles fan ever since. The owner may be a jerk (or worse) but I so fondly remember going to games each summer with my Grandad and Dad that I just cannot let go <G>. Guess I will always be an Oriole fan but I can understand your decisions.

have a good one

[quote]Originally posted by Ballbusters:
Sorry gamecock, but I really thought it was the Phillies that backed out of that deal or was it the third team involved that did it. Anyway it would not surprise me if he did back out of the deal. I still have this feeling that Rolen will end up as an Oriole.

---

There were never any reports here that a deal with any team for Rolen was ever remotely close to being done.

Without Ripken and with the team being that bad, it sounds like I won't have much trouble seeing games in Camden Yards while I'm there this summer.

Not to question your sources, Joe in Philly, but based upon the December 14, 2001 article by Dave Sheinin in The Washington Post (see link below, which should still work) the nine-player deal that would have sent Rolen to the O's WAS all but done until Angelos vetoed it (for reasons I believe Tom Boswell accurately identified in the link attached to my earlier post)....the Phillies had agreed to send Scott Rolen, right-handed pitcher Chris Brock, Kevin Jordan and a prospect to be named in exchange for Sidney Ponson, Jeff Conine, Buddy Groom, right-handed pitcher Sean Douglass, and left-handed pitching prospect Eric Bedard....the Post article states Angelos and the O's were unwilling to part with Bedard even though Sid Thrift and Phils GM Ed Wade had agreed to that nine-player deal.

In either event, I continue to believe that Angelos is intentionally "killing" his own teams chances of winning this year in order to drive down attendance for the intended purpose of preventing DC/NoVa from getting a team in 2003 (which will hopefully prove to be fruitless anyway)....he has reduced the Orioles payroll from nearly $84 Million to $41 Million in four years and fans are left to wonder why their winning percentage has plummetted?

Ballbusters, I too have been to hundreds of games at both Memorial Stadium and Camden Yards since I was a teen and first got my drivers license and have had countless enjoyable moments there (not the least of which was seeing the entire hall-of-fame careers of Eddie Murray and Cal Ripken along with the end of the HOF careers of Brooks Robinson and Jim Palmer) and while I'm certain I won't be able to resist the temptation to drive to Camden Yards a few times this season, giving any of my money to Angelos after all the BAD things he has said and done for DC/NoVa (not to mention the great Baltimore fans themselves) just turns my stomach.

Getting back to the subject at hand, while Rolen would not have been able to single-handedly turn around the O's fate this season, acquiring the 26 year old star would have at least sent a positive message to all of the loyal, supportive fans of the orange and black....they deserve so much better than what the ruthless billionaire attorney is giving them.

O's brain trust kills deal for Rolen

Thanks gamecock. Never know whats on the horizon. It will surely feel strange this year not seeing those steel blue eyes on the field and that major studbody roaming centerfield. At least the tall dark handsome one is returning to the rotation. Sure hope he is well.

Who knows maybe we will eventually end up with Rolen anyway. I think he would be a great Oriole no matter what the fans in Philly think.

I also remember reading in a local paper one of the main reasons Angelos vetoed the deal was he had heard Rolen turned down $140 million (I believe that is contract offer) from the Phillies. Not realizing Rolen turned down the $ because of other reasons, not because it wasn't enough $, Angelos probably thought he couldn't afford him.

Rolen is ours for another few days, weeks, months, we'll see. If we lose him, I'd love to have him play for Baltimore, different league than Phillies and close enough to drive down (or hop the train) to see him play.

[quote]Originally posted by gamecock:
Not to question your sources, Joe in Philly,

---

I have no sources but my memory, which is admittedly faulty at times. Not knowing anything about the lefty prospect, I'd have to say that deal does nothing for me.

And if Rolen signs with the Orioles, I'd say it makes him a hypocrite if he's more concerned about winning.