During his amazing playoff run last month I penned a lengthy article about Chase Utley being the most underrated player in baseball, writing: "Many media members and fans seem to think of him as merely a very good player rather than a truly great one."

Part of my evidence for Utley being significantly underrated was his poor showings in past MVP balloting and with the latest votes revealed yesterday we now know that this season was no different.

Utley finished eighth overall while receiving just five top-five votes and was completely absent on 14 of 32 ballots. In other words, 27 of the 32 voters didn't think Utley was among the five best players in the league this season and 14 of the 32 voters didn't even think he was among the 10 best.

All of which is baffling considering that Utley hit .282/.397/.508 with 31 homers, 63 total extra-base hits, 88 walks, 93 RBIs, and 112 runs in 156 games while going a perfect 23-for-23 swiping bases and also played Gold Glove-caliber defense at an up-the-middle position.

He had a remarkable all-around season and not surprisingly Fan Graphs pegged Utley as being worth 77 runs more than a replacement-level player based on his offensive and defensive contributions. That total ranked second in the entire league behind only Albert Pujols at 84 runs, yet Utley received no second-place votes, only a handful of voters recognized him as a top-five player, and nearly half the ballots failed to even include his name. And the amazing thing is that this is nothing new.

Based on runs above replacement level Utley also ranked as the league's second-best player in both 2007 and 2008, yet finished No. 8 and No. 14 in the MVP balloting. And in both 2005 and 2006 he ranked as the league's fourth-best player while finishing No. 13 and No. 7 in the voting. In his five full seasons Utley has been second, second, second, fourth, and fourth among all NL position players in runs above replacement level, yet he's never finished higher than seventh in the MVP balloting.

What makes the lack of respect shown to Utley particularly confusing is that he's a hugely popular player on a tremendously successful large-market team. He's not thriving in obscurity for some last-place, low-budget team, he's putting up huge numbers for the back-to-back NL champs in the country's sixth-largest city. Heck, two different Phillies have won MVPs with Utley as a teammate, so clearly a lack of attention for the team isn't to blame.

MVP ballots were sent in long before Utley's playoff heroics, so perhaps his big October this season will lead to more support from voters in 2010. In the meantime, Utley retains his title as the most underrated player in baseball for at least another year.

Someone let ESPN's Buster Olney know that teams asking the Padres about Adrian Gonzalez are being told to take a hike.

Which makes perfect sense.  Gonzalez is cheap, he's the only draw left in San Diego, and it's season ticket renewal time. Trade him now and not only do you not likely get value back (wait until everyone is desperate at the trade deadline) but you discourage the last two dozen Padres fans there are left.

The implications: either (a) the beery rumor talk isn't as reliable as we think it is; or (b) Buster Olney just doesn't go to the right bars.

And I'm not just saying that because I'm a Braves fan.  MLB.com's Braves expert Mark Bowman thinks so too, reporting that Wagner's agent has been in contact with Atlanta and making the excellent point that, though signing Wagner may very well cost a team a first round pick, the Braves are unique in that their need at closer will be occasioned by losing two relievers -- Rafael Soriano and Mike Gonzalez -- each of whom will bring a similar compensation pick in return.

More generally, Wagner is the kind of guy Bobby Cox and the Braves brass loves: older and lower maintenance. He's coming off of surgery sure, but at a point in his career where there isn't a huge need for Cox to baby him.  He makes more sense in Atlanta than just about anyplace else.

Bowman cites Fernando Rodney as a fallback option, but after the John Rocker and Mark Wholers eras, I'm pretty sure that Bobby Cox swore off of wild things with great gas.  It's a health thing. Both mental health and cardiovascular health.  Bobby's old now and doesn't need any more 20-pitch ninth innings than are absolutely necessary.

Yahoo!'s Tim Brown reports that Tim Lincecum's agents could file a $23 million arbitration figure if the Giants don't come to their freakin' senses and buy out the guy's arbitration years.

$23 million would dwarf the previous largest request -- Derek Jeter asked for $18.5 million in 2001 before settling on a ten-year contract.  The largest ever award to a guy with low service time like Lincecum was $10 million to Ryan Howard. Personally, I can't see the Giants even submitting anything as low as $10 million as their arbitration number (remember: the arbitrators have to pick either the player's number or the team's number; they can't split the difference).  He has already accomplished more than Ryan Howard did at this point in his career, and there is a good argument that there is no better pitcher in the game than the guy. Against that backdrop, it strikes me that the Giants would have to submit at least $10 million in order to not insult the arbitrators' intelligence.

That said, I don't think that the arbitrators would actually award $23 million. The process is defined by the search for comparables with a healthy dose of service time analysis, and while there certainly isn't a comparable pitcher in terms of quality to Lincecum, there isn't a comparable salary anywhere close to that either.  CC Sabathia makes that and he has eight years under his belt.  The arbitrators would certainly balk at just erasing nearly seven years of service time.

But clearly, Timmy is gonna get paid.  If the Giants move now and make a long term offer, they can make that paycheck (relatively) low on the front end, and allow it to grow as Aaron Rowand's and Edgar Renteria's contracts fall off the books in the next couple of years.  With a talent like Lincecum's, it seems like the smarter play than gambling with the arbitrators.

Last week Aaron ran down the Red Sox' shortstop options. Among the possibilities? Signing free agent Marco Scutaro.  That possibility is inching closer to reality, as the Boston Herald's Michael Silverman is reporting that Boston is, in fact, sniffing around Scutaro.

Scutaro hits better than Alex Gonzalez, and for a team that lived and won a lot of games with Julio Lugo, he's certainly good enough on defense.  The only downside? If Boston gets him and Roy Halladay and wins the World Series, Blue Jays fans might commit mass suicide.

Wait, they're Canadians and Canadians are sensible. If Boston gets him and Roy Halladay and wins the World Series Jays fans will simply start paying attention to the Leafs earlier next fall than they usually do.

Frank McCourt -- who owns a baseball team worth close to a billion dollars, multiple luxury homes and eats out at fancy schmancy restaurants seven nights a week -- claims that he's got a cash flow problem:

Mr. McCourt's filing paints the picture of a man who, relative to his lifestyle, is operating without much of a cash cushion. In the filing, Mr. McCourt said his liquid assets consisted of a bank account with less than $1.2 million.

His filing said Mr. McCourt wouldn't see any significant income until next year -- possibly as late as March -- when he expected a quarterly payment of as much as $1.25 million from the partnership that owns the Dodgers. He said payments from the partnership were "my only source of personal cash flow" other than checking-account interest. Mr. McCourt said his liquid assets recently fell as low as $167,000, after paying about $700,000 in expenses for his wife, who filed for divorce last month. He said the Dodgers don't pay any of his personal expenses.

Jamie McCourt's lawyer says that's "baloney" and says that Frank should "be ashamed of himself" for pleading poverty like this.

I think the truth is somewhere in between. Even if you believe Jamie McCourt's previous filings which seek to paint the couple as loaded (and her as entitled to much of that wealth) they also show severe indebtedness.  Indeed, the McCourt's whole empire, the Dodgers included, is based on leverage, much of it tied up in homes that aren't likely worth what they paid for them, and the bills continue to come due.

It's exactly this sort of situation -- minus the divorce, mind you -- that has led to Tom Hicks' ownership of the Rangers to near damnation. Throw in the divorce and you have Padres' owner John Moores.

The more I see of this case, the more certain I am that the Dodgers will be sold in the not too distant future, and that until that sale comes, they'll be cutting expenses wherever they can.

And hey, look! Higher ticket prices!

Johnny Damon, speaking to the press at a light switch-flipping event at the Empire State Building yesterday:

"I know what's here in New York - you have the new Stadium, you have the great coaches, you have the great players. You guys just have to tell Cash to get things going with me. I'm up for it."

I don't mean to beat this theme to death, and to be sure, Damon was likely just joking around with the press a bit yesterday, but it makes absolutely no sense to me that Damon is sticking with Scott Boras this winter.

Damon wants to sign now. Boras likes to wait as long as possible. Damon obviously wants to sign with a certain team. Boras likes to play the field. Damon is a leftfielder. Boras' top free agent this winter is a better leftfielder who would clearly like to have the Yankees bidding on him, either in earnest, or to simply jack his price up to other teams.

There may be dynamics in the Boras-Damon we know nothing about. Loyalty. A real game plan that is totally at odds with Damon's current statements.  But as things presently stand,  there is nothing to suggest that Damon's interests are best served by the usual Scott Boras approach.

And now for your daily Roy Halladay rumor. This one, from Mark Feinsand and Bill Madden of the Daily News, sounds a bit bolder than your usual "Team X may be considering possibly maybe potentially trading for Roy Halladay" stuff:

The Red Sox are "putting on a full-court press" to acquire Roy Halladay, according to a source, and are hoping to add the former Cy Young winner to the top of their rotation to go with Josh Beckett and Jon Lester.

"They would love to get it wrapped up before the winter meetings (beginning Dec. 7)," the source said of the Red Sox, who made a big push to deal for Halladay last summer.

The Red Sox package for Halladay would likely start with Clay Buchholz and would possibly include pitching/shortstop prospect Casey Kelly.

The Sox landing Halladay in the next week would shake the Yankees the hell out of their "we're gonna wait and see" approach, wouldn't it?  I mean, if that trade gets made, is there any chance in the world that Brian Cashman doesn't immediately call John Lackey's agent and offer him a gabillion dollars?

I mean, that would be like the Kaiser not doing anything after the Royal Navy built the HMS Dreadnought.  It would be like Kennedy letting the Russians keep their missiles in Cuba back in '62. It would be like Walter not responding when the Nihilists peed on The Dude's rug.  If the Red Sox trade for Halladay, they'll be drawing a line in the sand, Dude, and such aggression can not be allowed to stand.

About a week ago, rumors cropped up that the Chicago White Sox were looking into dealing for San Diego Padres stud Adrian Gonzalez.

There didn't seem to be much to the rumors. The Chicago Tribune gave credence to a report that the White Sox, Angels and Padres had discussed a three-way deal that would send Gonzalez to Chicago and Paul Konerko to Anaheim. Then the Chicago Sun-Times trashed the idea, and the whole thing kind of went away.

But then just the other day, a Chicago White Sox blogger wrote about his "Evening With Jake Peavy," in which the White Sox pitcher allegedly dropped this bombshell during a friendly encounter at a bar:

"We're trying to get Adrian Gonzalez right now too." I was like..."Really? I heard about that, but didn't know if it was true." He nodded and took another drink.

Peavy, of course, is a former teammate of Gonzalez, so it's possible he has some inside information on trade talks. It's also possible he simply saw the reports that everyone else saw. And thirdly, it's possible that Peavy didn't say it at all.

Even the author admits that "I'm sure there are some things about the meeting that I might be forgetting. I've tried to remember as much as I can, but I was also slightly buzzed at the time."

Upon hearing a hint of a rumor that he could be dealt to the Mets, Jose Guillen told Dominican paper Diairo Libre that he was open to waiving his partial no-trade clause to play for the club and that he doesn't expect to be back with the Royals next year.

According to the translation provided by the Adam Rubin of the New York Daily News, Guillen said the following:

"If trading me would help the Royals, New York would be one of the clubs I would approve. ... I have just started a rigorous program of winter training in order to arrive in the best form possible for spring training. My mind is focused on having a great season next year and until now I believed that would be with the Royals. ... It would be a little unjust if they judge me for the statistics of this year, because the injuries did not allow me to play, but I have shown that when I am healthy I can produce a lot."

Guillen, of course, hit a pretty unimpressive .264/.300/.438 while healthy in 2008. He came in at .242/.314/.367 in 81 games last season. Maybe he can bounce back offensively, but he'll still be a liability defensively with a subpar OBP. The Mets hardly need him when they already have a similar offensive player and a far superior defensive one in right field in Jeff Francoeur.

Of course, there isn't a contender in baseball that needs Guillen. The Royals can pay the majority of the $12 million he's still owed, yet there will still be superior free agent options in the $3 million-$4 million range. As a result, the Royals will likely be stuck with Guillen into next season. If he shows something in April and May, then perhaps they'll be able to dump the rest of his contract or at least a significant portion of it.