In a message of  to Stephen Frazier (1:360/23), you 
wrote:
 EG> Cleveland took steps to prevent this from happening to them and several
 EG> players went along with their plan and cost themselves millions in
 EG> arbitration awards to help the team.  People outside of Chicago gasped 
t
 EG> the sum of money that Jordan got but the Bulls ponied up to the bar
 EG> because they knew that Jordan HAD sacrificed a lot of money for the good
 EG> of the team (Plus, I don't believe that Reinsdorf and Krause wanted to 
e
 EG> hung from the rafters by the fans after they lost him to another team).
 EG> Albert (And I'm sure the others) expected Cleveland to do the same 
hing,
 EG> especially since they were finacially stable because of the sacrifices
 EG> that these players made for the team. What he demanded was not only fair
 EG> market value but a little payback for those years of sacrifice.
You make the "sacrifices" seem so one sided.  The TEAM risked something, too, 
by giving second year players long term contracts.  The players risked some 
additional income in exchange for security in the manner of guaranteed 
contracts.  In addition, the players made significantly more in the seasons 
BEFORE they were eligible for arbitration.  These were deals that were good 
for BOTH sides.  It didn't happen, but Belle (and others) could have been 
hurt, and out of the game before the "big" payday.  
For the money they would have had to pay Belle, they can have Matt Williams 
playing first, third or DH (take your pick, if you really think playing third 
is going to turn him into Bob Horner, Thome can adequately play the hot 
corner if Williams can't) AND another quality player like a Moises Alou 
playing left.  No one player makes that much of a difference, not even the 
best player in baseball (which Albert Belle is not, the best player in 
baseball is still in San Francisco.)
--- The-Box Edit 1.10- PC
---------------