The right time to trade Kendall was, in hindsight, the day he was brought in.

But that's hindsight. At the time, it made perfect sense to head for the playoffs with a proven clubhouse leader, defensive star, and guy who'd block a slide to home with his face.

Canseco needs cash, Canseco has no morals, and Ordonez is a big fat rich target.

Who in all likelihood uses/used chemicals.

He spoke the truth, but he did it for $$$$.  If he was going to betray the confidence of his friends and colleagues, he should do it for good reasons, such as eliminating the PED problem in sports, not so he could make a quick buck.  And threatening Ordonez that he would come clean unless Ordonez gave him $$$? Even dirtier.  He basically stabbed people in the back for selfish purposes.  

I don't respect that--at all.

in this Mike Wallace interview:

"You write repeatedly about injecting steroids and growth hormones with and into Mark McGwire," says Wallace. "Tell me about your firsthand experiences with McGwire and steroids."

"Just the first time, injecting them in his buttocks," says Canseco, laughing. "It wasn't like you gave a lot of thought. It was something so common."

"What we did more times than I can count was go into a bathroom stall together, shoot up steroids," read Wallace from Canseco's book. "After batting practice or right before the game, Mark and I would duck into a stall in the men's room, load up our syringes and inject ourselves. I would often inject Mark."

"I injected him probably twice," adds Canseco. "But it wasn't like, I mean, we would just walk in and a lot of times they were pill form. A lot of times, you would just, a quick injection of whatever and that's it."

"I'm just repeating what you say in the book," says Wallace. "And if we're to believe what you say in the book, 'I would often,' not twice, 'inject Mark.'"

"Well, I think it was more inject ourselves. I think I injected him. I mean, this is a long time ago. Once or twice for sure. I didn't keep track," says Canseco. "An athlete may prepare his needle and may ask another athlete to inject him quickly. And that's the way it works."

"And these were not allowed at that time in the league," asks Wallace.

"Absolutely no," says Canseco.

He also claimed that he beat up Kevin Costner at Cal Ripken's request, because Costner was making moves on Cal's wife.  Credibility is not Jose's middle name.

Sad that it's come to this, but I saw some old Cal Ripken footage the other day, and dude was pumped the year he retired - far more than he was five years earlier.

The Twins simply don't pay that kind of money for players. Sure, they could afford it, but they won't. Plus, Chavez on turf?

The sense I get from the Giants is that they're maxed out (remember, in addition to their passel of big/bad/dumb contracts, they've got a lot of stadium debt they're financing) -- though I think Chavez would make a fair amount of sense for them if he's healthy. (OK, he'd make more sense for Sabean if he's not healthy.)

Dodgers and Brewers, I'll defer to your and others' judgment. Dodgers certainly have the revenue.

But to my central point -- would any of those 3-7 teams pay full freight on him given his health?

My contention is against this: "I guarantee you every team in baseball that had the money available would bang down the clubhouse door if Beane offered to trade him for a random arm." I haven't seen anything to back that up.

In terms of on-field talent for '08 (both in terms of what Chavez represents if healthy and what the A's might potentially get using his cost savings), yes, I agree, trading Chavvy wouldn't optimize the A's competitiveness for this year. But freeing themselves of the '09-10 commitment would surely be useful, yes?

To pursue a different angle, I'd like to nail you down on what you think Chavez' chances are of recovering and providing good offense and defense '09-10. Me, I think those chances are really slim.

Keeping Chavez is useless, even if he has a career year this season (and he won't).

We won't be competing for anything more than .500 in the standings, he'll chew up many millions that, admittedly, aren't needed elsewhere, but at the same time, there's no point in throwing the cash down a hole just for the sake of it, and he's sucked increasingly more every season, thus killing his trade value to the point where he's in Kotsay Land.

Look at it this way - with Chavez out there, we prevent a good young future corner outfielder getting real world game time. Is it better to hold onto Chavez in the hope that he increases his trade value (I'd say that's 50-50), while forking out large cash to him each month, or is it better to bring someone new in (perhaps FOR Chavez) who can turn into something great by the time we're competitive again?

Oh, and lastly, if other teams were seriously in a Chavez state of mind, don't you think they'd be talking to Billy RIGHT NOW, knowing he's surplus to requirements, knowing his contract isn't outrageous for the potential upside, and knowing that his trade value is low?

Heck, I'm shocked he's not already gone - the only reason I can think of as to why he isn't, is because other teams are looking at what he's done over the last three seasons, while we're looking at what he did when Giambi was here.