Ken Davidoff's baseball insider

David Ortiz
Kyle Lohse
Francisco Liriano
Jason Bartlett
Johan Santana

Any idea what these players have in common, beyond their Minnesota Twins ties?

None of this quintet _ one of baseball's best hitters, a decent veteran starting pitcher, an extremely promising young starting pitcher, a starting big-league shortstop and baseball's best starting pitcher _ began his professional career with the Twins. All started in other organizations, only to be traded to the Twins before they had a day of major-league experience.

Do you know whom the Mariners received in return for Ortiz? Dave Hollins, who played just 28 games for Seattle before moving on. Bartlett came over from San Diego for Brian Buchanan, one of the youngsters the Twins received from the Yankees for Chuck Knoblauch. The Cubs gave Lohse for the last year and a half of Rick Aguilera. And Liriano was a virtual throw-in, in the infamous deal that made A.J. Pierzynski a Giant for one season and also gave the Twins Joe Nathan and Boof Bonser.

Santana, as you probably know, came from Florida for Jared Camp, in a pre-arranged deal, after the Marlins agreed to swipe Santana from Houston in the Rule 5 draft.

So the Twins have a history of 1) knowing what they're doing, and 2) getting the most out of their young talent.

Are they perfect? Of course not. After all, they non-tendered Ortiz following the 2002 season. And while general manager Terry Ryan executed all of those prior moves, the deal of Johan Santana to the Mets marked Bill Smith's first big decision as Ryan's successor. My opinion hasn't changed in the last 24 hours; Smith should have jumped quicker on the Yankees' Phil Hughes-Melky Cabrera package.

Nevertheless, I am curious to see what becomes of Carlos Gomez (pictured above), Deolis Guerra, Phil Humber and Kevin Mulvey. Joe McIlvaine, the former Mets GM who is now a Twins scout, liked what he saw of Gomez. While McIlvaine was a disaster as an administrator (the reason the Mets canned him in 1997), he always had a good scout's eye. The Twins have liked Guerra since he was 15, and they probably would have taken Mulvey with the 64th pick of the 2006 draft if the Mets hadn't done so at 62.

Humber? Well, he just hasn't shown much since his Tommy John surgery.

But let's not forget that part of the equation is coaching and instruction. A players' talent is paramount, obviously, yet he can be aided or hurt by an organization's staff. The Twins, history shows, help their kids more than they hurt them.

"It's going to be a long winter, Mets fans, so let's stop _ now _ the suggested trade packages for Johan Santana."

I wrote that in the October 7 edition of Newsday.

Yeesh.

So how did I screw this up? Let us count the ways:

1) I figured that the Twins, if they couldn't get the high price they justifiably wanted for their ace, would have no qualms about sticking with Santana and making a very feasible World Series run in 2008. What I failed to anticipate was that the Twins, having completed their 2007 season in disappointing fashion, would not want to repeat the experience they had with impending free agent Torii Hunter.

You New York fans are accustomed to the "big-time player in his walk year" storyline. Shoot, in 2007 alone, we had Andy Pettitte, Jorge Posada, Mariano Rivera and Alex Rodriguez potentially leaving the Bronx, and Tom Glavine and Paul Lo Duca in Flushing. They know the deal: They're going to be asked about it, repeatedly. They answer the questions and move on.

Torii Hunter is one of the nicest guys in all of baseball. I was one of countless reporters last year who did the "Hunter on his free agency" story. When the Mets were at Shea Stadium, Hunter smiled and politely, colorfully answered about seven minutes' worth of questions.

And yet...for some reason, this freaked out the Twins. Frankly, it's a terrible reason for them to accept a low-ball package in return for arguably the game's greatest pitcher.

2) I underestimated how few teams would actually be willing to give up both the trading chips and money necessary to land Santana. The Yankees' interest waned once Andy Pettitte returned, and with that, so did the Red Sox's.

Perhaps the Mariners would have done it, yet it's pretty clear that Santana, who still makes his full-time home in Venezuela, preferred to be on the East Coast.

3) I underestimated the Twins' opinion of the Mets' prospects. It turns out that Joe McIlvaine, the former Mets general manager who is a respected voice in Minnesota, is high on Carlos Gomez. And the Twins tried to get Kevin Mulvey in last summer's trade for Luis Castillo.

4) I overestimated the savvy of new Twins GM Bill Smith. I am a fan of both Smith and his predecessor, Terry Ryan. But Smith terribly misread his potential trading partners. As I wrote in my column today, Smith clearly held the belief that Hank Steinbrenner would relent and give up a huge package. Yet no matter how much Hank blathered over the last month, there never existed even a remote chance that the Yankees were going to trade Melky Cabrera, Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy for Santana.

So that's that. I wanted to be accountable, because I hate people in my business who slither away from poor forecasts as if they never happened.

But in the far bigger picture, give credit to the Mets for their sticktoitiveness. Once they sign Santana _ and they're going to sign him, and I feel very confident about this prediction _ they'll have the best pitching staff in the National League East, and perhaps even the entire league. Spring training will be dominated not by talk of The Collapse, but talk of Santana.

Congrats, Mets fans. You deserved this one. And in the future, ignore my pleas to leave me alone.

My least favorite refutations of steroids allegations are those in which the accused offers a non-defense defense. One which doesn't at all preclue the steroids usage.

Jason Giambi, back before his grand-jury testimony was unjustly leaked, used to complain about the steroids rumors surrounding him, saying something equivalent to, "I'm working my *** off in the batting cage." Similarly, when Jose Canseco's book came out, Tony La Russa defended Mark McGwire by recalling McGwire's incredible work ethic.

Of course, it's no great leap to say that illegal, performance-enhancing drugs aid and abet those very off-the-field workouts, rather than the two items being mutually exclusive.

Which brings us to the Roger Clemens Report, which Clemens' representative Randy Hendricks released yesterday with the thought of putting Clemens' remarkable career in a new light. There are theories and explanations that attempt to shoot down the notion that Clemens' late-career surge was attributable to steroids.

It's a very interesting study, even more so if you dropped in from Mars and had no idea why such a report was being compiled. But it hardly lays a glove on Brian McNamee and his accusations, because the report could be 100 percent accurate (and it isn't, as Rob Neyer explains here), and it wouldn't challenge any of the Mitchell Report.

Undoubtedly, Clemens is an extremely smart pitcher who, as his velocity dropped, relied increasingly upon a split-fingered fastball and two-seam fastball, as Hendricks argues. His "legal" workouts, and the way prepared for every start, watching mounds of video, are legendary. But just like with Giambi and McGwire, why couldn't he have done all of that, PLUS the steroids?

Furthermore, Hendricks and his associates break out a chart of "peak" 1-5 month periods in Clemens' career; there are a total of 24. But two of those 24 constitute two of McNamee's three alleged periods of steroids usage. In July and August of 1998, Clemens put up a 1.25 ERA, and in July 2000, Clemens talled a 1.91 ERA. Hendricks points out that Clemens recorded an even longer, more dominant stretch in 1997, so that 1998 surge shouldn't seem so unusual. Yet a cynic would respond, "Who's to say Clemens wasn't using illegal PEDs in 1997, too? He just didn't meet McNamee until 1998."

I covered the 2000 Yankees. For his first year and a half in pinstripes, Clemens was surprisingly mediocre. Then, when he returned from the disabled list, that July, he was a completely different pitcher: Better velocity, better bite to the splitter, more confident. We all thought, "What the heck happened to this guy?" I find it pretty believable that steroids helped create that guy. Hendricks points out that Clemens' August ERA that year went back up to 3.23, but that's still quite good, and a considerable improvement from the prior year and a half.

I admire Hendricks for putting this report together. I admire Clemens for throwing heat under the chin of the profoundly conflicted George Mitchell. Mitchell deserves far more scrutiny that he has received, as I might have mentioned in the past. But ultimately, this report does virtually nothing to refute the former Senator's work.

It's an interesting idea, and I'm very curious to see how it becomes reality. Is there anything less exact in professional sports than the philosophy behind retiring numbers? Cashman mentioned, with regret, that some of the past numbers were retired for emotional reasons. Yet it's understandable that emotion plays a role in this decision.

The Yankees already have 15 numbers retired, honoring a total of 16 players, and you could argue that the future will bring forth a staggering eight more candidates. From the "Torre dynasty," you have Derek Jeter (2), Joe Torre (6), Jorge Posada (20), Paul O'Neill (21), Mariano Rivera (42), Andy Pettitte (46) and Bernie Williams (51). And if Alex Rodriguez (13) spends the next 10 years as a Yankee and becomes baseball's all-time home run leader in pinstripes, what do you want to do about him?

Let's take a time machine to 2030, and give ourselves the authority to redo the Yankees' retired list as we see fit - add or subtract whoever we want. Here's what my list would look like:

In Monument Park:
Jeter (2) - Lifelong Yankee, longtime captain, seems to be headed to the Hall of Fame.
Babe Ruth (3) - This one's pretty easy.
Lou Gehrig (4) - As is this one.
Joe DiMaggio (5) - And this one.
Torre (6) - Second all-time in franchise victories, four World Series titles and helped drive the club into the age of mass media and regional sports networks.
Mickey Mantle (7) - Another slam-dunk.
Yogi Berra and Bill Dickey (8) - I thought maybe I could lop off Dickey, but his numbers and ring total are too good to ignore.
Phil Rizzuto (10) - Really, as much for his broadcasting as his playing.
A-Rod (13) - If he actually sticks around through 2018, then fans will probably be pretty into him, by that point.
Thurman Munson (15) - The captain of the 1977-78 World Series champs, and an elite catcher for a short while.
Whitey Ford (16) - Best pitcher in franchise history.
Posada (20) - Extra points for being a lifelong Yankee like his buddy Jeter.
Don Mattingly (23) - He recorded a phenomenal, if short-lived, prime, and he served as a ray of hope during a tough period.
Casey Stengel (37) - Seven titles in 12 years. That's ridiculous.
Rivera (42) - Yet another slam-dunk.
Williams (51) - He ranks quite high in essentially every major Yankees offensive category.

UPDATE: After readidng Mike McCann's comment, I'm changing my mind on Elston Howard (32), from no to yes. Granted, his statistics are not as good as you would think, but as the Yankees' first African-American player, he holds a special place on the team's timeline.

Falling short:
Billy Martin (1) - Not shockingly, he probably was the most irrational of George Steinbrenner's designated retirements.
Roger Maris (9) - His accomplishments are legendary, but he spent only seven seasons with the Yankees.
O'Neill (21) - He didn't do anything wrong. You just have to draw the line somewhere.
Reggie Jackson (44) - Agreed, it would be particularly odd to see another Yankee wearing this showtime number. But Reggie played just five years with the Yankees.
Pettitte (46) - Those three years with the Astros hurt his candidacy, although this is predicated on the notion that Pettitte will actually follow through on his retirement threats sooner than later. If he pitches into his 40s, then let's talk again.
Ron Guidry (49) - If you look at the Yankees' all-time pitching leaders, you'll see that you can make a better case for Red Ruffing than for the Gator.

This would add two numbers and two players to the current total. So the final tally of retired numbers would still be obnoxious, but not considerably more obnoxious than the current list.

Whom would you add and/or subtract from the Yankees' list?

The Mets have been so quiet this offseason, as Wallace Matthews notes in today's Newsday. Not good, especially in light of the collapse that ended 2007 in such an ugly fashion.

But if you're looking for hope, Mets fans, I'd continue to thank the heavens that you have David Wright on your side.

The guy is an amazing player, and _ especially notable at a time like this for Mets fans _ he is an incredible team ambassador.

Just look at what he says about Paul Lo Duca, his good friend and former teammate, in this story.

Of all the 90+ players named in the Mitchell Report, Lo Duca might have gotten nailed worst of all, as Kirk Radomski kept (and gave to Mitchell) a personalized note from Lo Duca on Dodgers stationery. Lo Duca, who has yet to speak publicly since the Dec. 13 release of the report, must be highly embarrassed.

But his buddy, Wright, didn't really give him an out. No attempts to put the Steroids Era in perspective, or take shots at George Mitchell, either of which would have been understandable. Just a proclamation that all cheaters _ friends of Wright, or not _ deserve punishment.

Bravo to Wright for speaking his mind, even if it's not the talking point the Players Association would prefer its charges to offer.

The Yankees acquired Chuck Knoblauch on February 6, 1998, and in Knobluach's four years in pinstripes, the Yankees played in four World Series, winning three. Yet anyone under Yankees employ during that time, and probably most hard-core Yankees fans, would agree that the trade proved something of a disappointment.

Knoblauch joined the Yankees on a Hall of Fame track. When his name came up on the Hall of Fame ballot this year, he received one vote. He has made far more news for being the most surprising invitee to the Feb. 13 House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Roger Clemens' challenge of the Mitchell Report. Knoblauch clearly has no interest in returning the public eye, as the Committee has resorted to sending a subpoena to ensure his participation.

In the 12 years I've covered baseball, Knoblauch undoubtedly goes down as the oddest player I've met. He reported to Legends Field in 1998 eager to please; within a week, he had memorized the names of the nine reporters who travelled with the team. I recall sitting with him at Tampa International Airport that spring and chatting, as our wives were on the same flight coming down from LaGuardia.

He wasn't awful that first year, but he didn't give the Yankees what they expected, either, swinging often with an uppercut that produced a career high 17 homers and a disappointing .361 on-base percentage. And he displayed the first signs of those throwing yips that eventually doomed him.

He put up a pretty good 1999, but the yips surged in 2000, and in 2001, the Yankees switched him to leftfield. The more he struggled, offensively and defensively, the less he spoke with not only the media, but pretty much everyone.

Here's what fascinated me most about Knoblauch: In his four years with the Yankees, he had four distinct group of friends. He jumped from clique to clique, like Jill in Judy Blume's "Blubber." In 1998, he hung out with the devout Scott Brosius and Chad Curtis and their families. Then he divorced his wife, so in 1999, he joined Derek Jeter in what can probably best be called the Page Six crowd. He had a falling-out with Jeter in 2000 and started associating with Jason Grimsley - and you need only read this to know what they had in common. The Yankees let Grimsley go after 2000, and Knoblauch turned to reserve players Clay Bellinger, Todd Greene and Shane Spencer.

We all theorized at the time what in the world was going on with Knoblauch. Was he traumatized by his father's Alzheimer's Disease? His divorce? Could he simply not handle New York? But that was all guesswork, and Knoblauch, who could most certainly be engaging during specific junctures, had no profound answer for what had become of his career.

I look forward to seeing him at the Feb. 13 hearing, just to see what he looks like, if nothing else. But honestly, as a human being, you just hope that he has found the peace that so clearly wasn't there during the Yankees years.

The Knicks filled Madison Square Garden with an annual championship contender, Bill Parcells was working his magic with the Jets and the Giants offered buzz with their new head coach, an offensive wunderkind named Jim Fassel.

From then until now, New York turned into Baseball City, as Neil Best likes to put it. It's been a great thing, but to be fully honest _ and please, don't think of this as a complaint - I'm just attempting to level with you _ it can be exhausting to cover a sport that never experiences any down time.

Enter the Giants, who became a legitimate, "flood-the-zone" (scroll down) story once they upended the Cowboys last week. And now that they are in the Super Bowl, it'll be all Giants, all the time, as well it should be.

So we here at Newsday will be covering the pertinent baseball stories, from the Johan Santana trade discussions (or lack thereof) to Roger Clemens' throwdown with Brian McNamee. Yet we'll understand if people don't follow the stories to the level which we've been accustomed.

In the meantime, I'm going to take a few days off this week (previously scheduled, back when the Giants stunk). See you here on Thursday. Although, in the self-promoting tradition of Mr. Best, you can see me tonight (Monday, Jan. 21) on "Mets Hot Stove," 6:30 on SNY.

Okay, the last time I attempted to praise Bug Selig in any fashion, I wound up recanting the whole thing by day's end. But here we are, with the news that Bud has gone back on his retirement pledge (for the second time) and re-upped for three more years, and my immediate reaction is, "This is good for baseball."

I have a standard line when I'm asked about Selig's performance: "A for innovation, D for integrity."

The former includes the wild card, interleague play, three divisions in each league, revenue-sharing, the World Baseball Classic and MLB.com.

The latter includes owning the Brewers while serving as interim commissioner for nearly six years; a longtime failure (which ended only earlier this week) to take accountability for baseball's steroids era; the steroids era in the first place, of course; Selig's decision to take a loan from Twins owner Carl Pohlad; MLB's refusal (scroll down) to allow Omar Minaya's 2003 Expos, very much alive in the pennant race, to make any September call-ups; and, our personal favorite, the hiring of the profoundly conflicted George Mitchell to lead the steroids investigation.

That averages out to a B-/C+, but, as the owners made clear yesterday, innovation _ meaning, of course, money _ trumps integrity every time in the real world.

You and I can rail all we want about all of Selig's ethical snafus, and we should continue to do so. Yet we're pretty much doing that in a vacuum. The businessmen and -women who run the teams obviously care very little about it.

And Congress _ which is about 1,000 times more powerful than the rest of us combined, team owners included _ loves Selig, as long as he listens to them and commits questionable acts like hiring Mitchell as Steroids Cop.

If you judge an industry by its revenues, then Selig is indeed an unqualified success. And don't say that anyone could have pushed baseball ahead like this in the last 15+ years; I don't believe that for a second. Selig possessed the vision to push through the important changes listed above, and he had the personality to get the owners, a highly diverse and divided group, on board with those changes _ and to peacefully coexist with the union since the disastrous 1994-95 work stoppage.

I also think that Selig's lack of panache (see the above photo) works against him in the general public _ he's nowhere as smooth as his NFL and NBA counterparts Roger Goodell or David Stern _ but works in his favor internally; he comes off as a salt-of-the-earth guy. Most owners like Bud, and most reporters do, too, even ones like myself who criticize him pretty regularly. Selig is also a major advocate of reporters being allowed in clubhouses, which allows us to get better information to the readers.

So go ahead. Fire away at Bud. I probably won't disagree with many of your comments. But I am sticking to the belief that, in the real world, baseball will remain in good hands through 2012.

On my train ride down to D.C. Monday night, I finished watching "Home Run Derby - Volume 1" on DVD, and I loved it. What a phenomenal time capsule, especially for those like myself who never got to see Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks, Harmon Killebrew, Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays play in person.

It got me thinking about which player, from before my time, I'd most want to see in a live ballgame, and it was an easy choice: Mantle. He's in four episodes of the "Home Run Derby," because he won his first three "games," and I love the way The Mick seems to carry himself. There's a relaxed confidence there, a grace. Add that he was a switch-hitting centerfielder, with both power and speed, and that's a clincher for me.

While guys like Mays, Aaron, Babe Ruth and Joe DiMaggio intrigue me _ not to mention pitchers like Bob Feller, Satchel Paige and, well, Babe Ruth _ Mantle is my favorite ghost.

Some of the regulars here, like RMT, Steve from South Amboy and Poppy, got to see Mickey, Willie, Hank and that generation, so you guys would have to go earlier. And perhaps others aren't old enough to have personal memories of Reggie Jackson, or Tom Seaver, or Rod Carew.

Who is your favorite ghost?

Motor problems, we were told. We had to go back to Union Station and get it fixed. We sat at Union Station with the power off for about 20 minutes, then got going for five minutes _ then retreated once again to Union Station, as the fixed motor apparently wasn't all the way fixed.

It was a long, painful night. And yet, if forced to choose, I'd rather experience that again then listen to some of those grandstanding politicians in Congress. At least I could sleep through the train problems and not appear rude.

Nevertheless, yesterday's House Oversight and Government Reform committee produced enough moments of interest that I wound up writing three stories for Newsday - this one, this one and this one.

Our Jim Baumbach did a fine job yesterday, posting some real-time observations on the hearing. Now here are my day-after thoughts:

1. As expected, George Mitchell received the treatment of a returning king. Committee chairman Henry Waxman essentially apologized while asking Mitchell to take his oath prior to testifying, and Waxman kept urging Committee members to limit their time, because MItchell had a train to catch. What a joke.

It can't be repeated here enough: Mitchell is not a candidate for sainthood. He hasn't spent his time rebuilding New Orleans, or saving lives in Darfur. He is a businessman and a politician _ and yes, kudos for his work in Northern Ireland, but he gets demerits for constantly bringing it up.

He showed his true colors more than ever yesterday, refusing to veer from his script, not uttering a word of substance, referring time and again to his report rather than treat his questions with fresh thoughts. I develop less respect for Mitchell each time I see him. To paraphrase John Cleese from this episode of "Cheers," I've grown to hate him.

2. Now, all of this said, Bud Selig chose MItchell as his investigator largely because he knew Mitchell would play well to Congress. So even if we civilians rip Selig for selecting someone so conflicted, the Commish deserves credit for deftly playing the political game. Once Roger Clemens has his day in the spotlight, February 13, baseball should stay off of Capitol Hill for a while. That's a tribute to Selig and union head Don Fehr.

3. I loved that Congress kept making Selig and Fehr take accountability for their roles in the steroids era. You have to appreciate how both men steadfasly refused to do this for the longest time _ until Fehr cracked first, last month, the day Mitchell released his report. Now, they're both getting so conditioned to saying it, that a month from now, rather than answering their phones by saying, "Hello!" they'll be saying, "I was complicit in baseball's steroids scandal!"

4. Fehr was the star of the day, raising a number of salient points. How about the fact that human growth hormone is so readily available out there? And he explained, in great detail, why he couldn't possibly advise the players to meet with Mitchell. As Fehr said, Mitchell was the investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury rolled up into one, and there was no guarantee that a player wouldn't incriminate himself or others with his comments.

Congressman Mark Souder of Indiana called it "horriffic" that players largely refused to meet with Mitchell. I'd say it was closer to "heroic" than "horrific."

I have one quibble with Fehr, however: He shared an advertisement that he ripped out of Continental Airline's on-flight magazine _ on the trip down to D.C. Monday night, he said _ that read, "Choose life. Grow young with HGH." Why was Fehr flying Continental to D.C.? Everyone knows it's easier to take the Delta or US Airways shuttle from LaGuardia!

UPDATE::As you can see the Comments below, RMT alerted me that Continental flies from White Plains to Ronald Reagain Airport - and Fehr lives in Westchester. I had no clue, not being a Westchester guy. Thanks, RMT. Fehr is forgiven.

5. I know many of you feel that Congress has no business holding a hearing like this, and more often than not, I'm inclined to agree with you. But when you read about an issue like the therapeutic-use exemptions, you have to appreciate the juice that Capitol Hill can bring. Baseball felt compelled to give its information on this to Congressman John Tierney of Massachusetts. Now baseball will have to deal with this clear concern. Mitchell was right when he said the game needs a truly independent drug-testing arm.

6. Congressmen and -women are very busy, we know, but couldn't they and their staffs prepare a little more? It would be nice if everyone knew how to pronounce Selig's name, for starters. The ignorance of some Committee members was appalling. Edolphus Towns of New York scolded Fehr for the "code of silence" among not only the players, but the team trainers, too _ as if Fehr had anything to do with team trainers. And Mark Souder of Indiana suggested that if a player's statistics improve considerably, that should be probable cause to suspect illegal performance-enhancing drug usage. Good grief.

7. You'd have to think that Miguel Tejada's troubles are going to hurt new Astros GM Ed Wade's candidacy for 2008 Executive of the Year.

8. And finally, I'm with RMT here: Enough about SAVING THE CHILDREN!!! How about parents, teachers and coaches taking more responsibility when young athletes turn to illegal PEDs?

ESPN.com posted a story yesterday reporting that the Yankees had again taken their offer for Johan Santana off the table. Yet as Hank Steinbrenner told the Associated Press, and as someone in the loop told me earlier yesterday, there was no offer on the table, to begin with.

The truth is, despite Steinbrenner's endless public musings _ and don't get me wrong, I LOVE endless public musings _ the Yankees haven't been seriously involved in discussions for Santana since the winter meetings last month. Brian Cashman doesn't want to make the deal, and neither does Hank Steinbrenner's dramatically less chatty brother, Hal. From this vantage point, it's the right call.

I'm with Cashman: Give the kids a shot and see how it goes. Everyone whines about how the Yankees always buy pennants. Well, now they're trying to build a team in a more organic fashion _ granted, they landed Joba Chamberlain and Ian Kennedy in the amateur draft because of their willingness to pay over slot _ so they should get some credit for that.

As for the Mets, who could use Santana more but have fewer prospects than their New York counterparts, I still get the sense that the Twins simply have no regard for the Mets' prospects. The Twins want players they can plug immediately into their major-league team and from whom they can expect a quick return _ like Melky Cabrera and Phil Hughes with the Yankees, and Jacoby Ellsbury and Jon Lester with the Red Sox. The Mets don't have anyone in that category.

The Twins' keeping the Mets around in these discussions reminds me of how J.D. hooked up again with Danni in this episode of "Scrubs." J.D. wanted to let Elliot know he could find another girlfriend, and the Twins want to let the Yankees and Red Sox know they can find another trading partner.

The Mets, too, are better off seeing what becomes of Kevin Mulvey, and Carlos Gomez, and Fernando Martinez, and Deolis Guerra. Perhaps one can become part of the club's nucleus. Perhaps another can boost his value as a trade chip.

The Red Sox don't have a great need for Santana, anyway. They always seemed like they were just hanging around these talks to keep tabs on the Yankees.

As great as Santana has been, it would still be an extreme risk to give up both huge talent and huge dollars for him. Better to wait a year, until Santana will cost only the dollars. And the Twins are better off holding onto Santana, not settling for a lesser package, and making a very feasible run at the 2008 playoffs.

Okay, plenty rested now, and ready to get the blog going back on a regular schedule. Hope you are all well.

I put Newt Gingrich here because he wins my personal honor of Most Famous Person On a Flight of Mine. It was right after the 2001 World Series _ November 5, to be precise _ and the flight was from Phoenix to Atlanta (at which point I hopped a connection to Newark). The silver medal goes to Geraldo Rivera, whom I saw on my April 17, 1998 flight from Newark to Detroit.

Anyway, I thought of Newt because I'm boarding a train to Washington, D.C. tonight, and tomorrow, I'll attend the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on baseball and steroids. George "Mr. Impeccable" Mitchell will testify alongside Bud Selig and Don Fehr.

It should be interesting _ I'm curious to see whether it's a complete lovefest for Mitchell, the former U.S. Senator, or whether he receives some deserved scrutiny for his controversial report _ but we all know this is the mere opening act for the Feb. 13 showdown between Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee.

From speaking to Congressional people last month, I believe they would have been perfectly content to meet with Mitchell, Selig and Fehr, get some headlines and move on. But Clemens, by virtue of his challenges of McNamee's testimony in the Mitchell Report, led the Committee to believe it couldn't pass up the opportunity to address the juicier, "He said/he said" dynamic with Clemens and McNamee.

I have mixed feelings about this phenomenon of Congress calling up baseball players, which we witnessed most recently in 2005. On one hand, many members of Congress would rather fawn over the pro athletes than grill them, and don't they have more important things to do? On the other hand, you can't deny that it makes for fascinating theater. And that baseball's current drug-testing plan, pretty good compared to other professional sports, never would've gone through if not for Congress' pressure.

What do you think?

Back on December 21, I wrote, "I'm outta here, folks. On vacation for the next two weeks."

It turns out I made an error: It's three weeks, not two, putting me in contention with our President (here he is at his Crawford ranch) for the longest, least-deserved vacation in the history of work. I'll be back on the blog regularly on Monday, January 14th, but I figured I'd check in and touch base.

Topic number one has to be Roger Clemens, who is raging against the dying of the light when it comes to his legacy. Watching Clemens on "60 Minutes" earlier tonight, I somehow felt sympathy for him. He actually seems to believe what he's saying, even though what he's saying is ludicrous.

To think that Clemens was "shocked" that Andy Pettitte had used human growth hormone...that Brian McNamee, obviously not a licensed physician, injected lidocaine and B-12 and that Clemens doesn't see anything wrong with it...to watch the hemming and hawing on the lie-detector test...As Neil Best would blog, "Oy."

Clemens' strategy is apparent: He has so much to lose here that he's willing to take his fight all the way to Congress. If he enters the Rayburn House Office Building on January 16 and simply pleads the fifth amendment, he's toast. He's got to continue his denials, even at the risk of a perjury charge down the road.

So why do I feel sympathy for Clemens? Because even though I think he's guilty _ and, as I've written here before, I don't intend to vote for him come Hall of Fame election time _ he ultimately was nothing more than fresh meat for Bud Selig to feed Congress, with George Mitchell serving as a high-priced mule. The same goes for everyone else named in the Mitchell Report. The owners and commissioners should be just as culpable as the players regarding what happened in baseball, but it's not working out that way at the moment, for sure.

In any case, do any of you believe that Clemens is telling the truth and that McNamee is lying?

By the way, I cracked up when Clemens told Mike Wallace that he was done pitching, then qualified it - "probably" - roughly five seconds later. I'm betting on Unretirement V in 2008.