 | Video: Baseball from NBC Sports |
 Nats name Riggleman Jim Riggleman was officially introduced as the manager of the Washington Nationals. |
Just when the baseball public was braced for another riveting round of the United States vs. B.L. Bonds along come the Yankees to force the pending all-time home run champion into a sidecar.
It takes some strong plotlines to derail perjury, tax evasion and amphetamine tests, but the Yankees have delivered.
Not much in the legal arena, but plenty of good old virtues: jealousy, ego, pride and a dash of venom mixed into a daily stew for the always-hungry New York tabloids.
The team's owner George Steinbrenner, who always kept his stewards under an ironclad rule, has retreated into the corner, now fighting age rather than his employees.
His heir apparent Steve Swindal, also his son-in-law, was arrested by the St. Petersburg Police for driving under the influence, not an easily dismissed matter in this sensitive age.
A highly-paid starting pitcher, Carl Pavano (signed as a free agent in December of 2004 for four years at $40 million), has been injured so often during the last two seasons that he has thrown all of 100 innings for the Yankees since signing his contract.
Pavano's physical woes have left him less than the class pet in his own clubhouse.
His teammates would like to see some drive from Pavano on the field, and no more tales of injury sustained while driving off the field (he suffered broken ribs in a car accident last season which he did not immediately inform the team about).
Mike Mussina, fairly tame in his comments throughout a productive Yankee career, was the player who called out Pavano at the start of spring training. That led to a closed door meeting between the two which reportedly cleared the air, but you can bet Pavano got the message loud and clear.
Meanwhile, three of the glory Yankees are entangled in their own contract matters.
Bernie Williams won’t come to camp without a guaranteed job, nor will he retire. The best the Yankees have offered is a non-guaranteed minor-league contract. Williams likely feels that to be insulting.
So a great Yankee twists and turns back in New York as so many outstanding players do at the end of their run -- a phenomenon only to worsen with the ever-increasing wads of cash thrown at players.
Jorge Posada is in the final year of a five-year, $51 million contract. He's a catcher of durability, 130-plus games caught for seven straight years.
At 35, he looks for another deal, but the Yankees aren't racing to sign a catcher of Posada’s workload.
And then there is Mariano Rivera, the most insanely underpaid player of his era.
Weep not for anyone earning $10.5 million this season (the last year of his three-year deal), but there is no Yankee dynasty, no manager earning a record $7 million this year, and no dozen Yankee players earning more than $10 million in 2007 without Rivera.
He has defied time, age, and the erratic nature of his position to be the greatest closer ever.
Rivera commented recently that if the Yankees want to discuss an extension, they better do so soon. The door on any contract talks slams shut once the regular season starts.
What Rivera got back from the Yankees was that they plan to wait until after the season to discuss a contract extension.
His reply was if he goes into free agency, the Yankees get no special consideration.
"Everybody would have the same shot," Rivera said. "The Yankees would not have an advantage. Everybody would have a free shot."
How can the Yankees even chance losing the pitcher who has saved 413 games for them over 12 seasons?
The coup de grace is the predicted soap opera of Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez. The seeds that were planted last summer, began to sprout in the fall, and were left dormant for the winter.
But under the first glare of February sun, this melodrama blossomed into a battle of the super-rich, their egos, pride, and responsibilities.
To be clear, Jeter has neither started nor fueled any of this A-Rod business. Yet, he is facing rare criticism in New York for simply doing nothing.
Certainly, he wonders why a player making $27 million this year (Rodriguez) needs a teammate’s protection. Jeter might ask how many rings A-Rod wears and why he, the captain of the Yankee dynasty, needs to protect a man who has not contributed to a championship.
For his part, Rodriguez should have known the end began on that day last October in Detroit when Joe Torre batted him eighth. It may have been the prudent move on that day for the Yankees' playoff hopes, but it left Rodriguez marooned on an island of embarrassment from which there is no return.
Players earning $27 million a year don’t bat eighth.
Nor should players who post numbers of .290-35-121 have to term their year a “struggle, playing poorly.” But that is what Rodriguez gets with a massive contract in New York and no rings to show for it.
As a final incendiary device, toss in the Scott Boras special: the opt-out clause. As ingeniously devised by agent Boras and most recently executed by J.D. Drew, A-Rod has the option to walk from the Yankees at year’s end.
That would mean walking away from $81 million for the last three years of his deal in the belief that a better deal was ahead.
Sounds foolish, but this is baseball. Problem is that this opt-out clause will hover over Rodriguez this summer on a daily basis, another distraction he hardly needs.
Boras would never allow A-Rod to abandon that precious contractual right. Jeter will never accept Rodriguez, and their daily rituals will be tabloid fodder, all to be handled by a brilliant manager Joe Torre, himself on the last year of his contract.
So I am left with one unanswered question about the New Yankees Zoo: Why didn’t they trade Rodriguez this winter?
Feb. 16| 1:30 p.m. ET
File this under the banner of “occupational hazard.”
Managers know their lifespan is precarious, with the rare exceptions like Bobby Cox and Joe Torre.
And with more teams spending big dollars this offseason, more owners feel the pressure of the win-now mindset.
Thus the start of the 2007 season is very important and perhaps vital to the survival of some managers.
They are already on a hot seat in the spring, never mind the summer.
ERIC WEDGE, CLEVELAND
The Indians took a step backwards last season, scoring 88 more runs than they allowed, but losing more than they won.
Yes, they play in the game’s toughest division. Sorry Yankee and Red Sox lovers, but results speak for themselves -- the American League Central is baseball's most brutal fight.
General manager Mark Shapiro addressed a glaring need (bullpen ERA 4.66) by adding Roberto Hernandez, Aaron Fultz, and Joe Borowski.
Watching the Mets of 2006 has seemingly infused the game with a strength-in-numbers bullpen approach.
Here are the Indians' April records in the four years of Wedge’s tenure: 7-20, 9-13, 9-14, 13-12. This division is too strong for the Indians to survive another bad/mediocre start.
MIKE HARGROVE, SEATTLE
A member of the “lame duck” club, Hargrove enters the final year of his contract leading a team that was unable to secure its prime offseason targets -- Barry Zito and Jason Schmidt.
CEO Howard Lincoln placed Hargrove on the "hot seat" in published comments at the end of last season. Hargrove hasn't forgotten and reacted angrily when the phrase was brought to his attention yesterday.
The Mariners have the promise of youth in infielders Jose Lopez and Yuniesky Betancourt with starter Felix Hernandez, but the additions of Jose Vidro and Jose Guillen to the offense underwhelmed most observers.
And the trade of set-up reliever Rafael Soriano to Atlanta for oft-injured Horacio Ramirez was perplexing.
On paper, the M’s still look fourth in a four-team division -- not a recipe for a new deal for Hargrove.
JOHN GIBBONS, TORONTO
Another yet more surprising lame duck than Hargrove, Gibbons led the Jays to a much-overlooked second- place finish (ahead of Boston) in the American League East while weathering conflicts with Shea Hillenbrand and Ted Lilly.
He is a friend of general manager J.P. Ricciardi, and has a salary at the bottom of the manager compensation list.
Ricciardi was trained by Sandy Alderson and Billy Beane, who stress that a field manager executes the organization’s plan. Hence the concept of field manager as “middle manager” which can sound demeaning but is an accurate description.
Still, it surprises an outsider that Gibbons is allowed to enter 2007 without the authority that allowed him to discipline Hillenbrand and Lilly.
Gibbons' future in Toronto may come down to the Jays’ expectations in the wake of the huge financial commitment given to Vernon Wells in the offseason.
Does management truly believe this team can make a run at the Yankees? If so, the heat falls squarely on the manager.
CHARLIE MANUEL, PHILADELPHIA
Here is the classic case of inheritance. General manager Pat Gillick inherited Manuel, who was originally hired in part due to his friendship with Jim Thome, who now slugs in Chicago with the White Sox.
The Phils finished well last season, staying in the wild-card race through the final week, but now their sights are set on catching the Mets in the National League East.
What makes this hard to figure is that Manuel has managed for four full seasons, two in Cleveland, and two with the Phillies, and the FEWEST wins his teams have posted in any of those seasons is 85. He has a career win percentage of .535.
Perhaps Manuel is a victim of our media-obsessed age or the fact that a general manager always likes to hire his choice as manager, but my listing of Manuel as being one of the mangers on the hot seat from the get-go is admittedly unfair. Yet, one can’t help but feel there is truth behind the curtain.
NED YOST, MILWAUKEE
The last two names on my list fall into the category of small-market teams spending more money and wanting to see results. Not making the World Series, but making significant progress.
Like Cleveland, the Brewers took a step backwards last season, and a second step in reverse won’t be tolerated.
Owner Mark Attanasio has spent for players, most recently with the Jeff Suppan contract, and an extension for Bill Hall.
The Brewers want to escape the small-market mindset and payroll that plagued the team in the early years of this decade.
Yost was trained by Bobby Cox, and has a similar demeanor of calm and control. The only problem is selling your program internally when in four seasons, 81-81, is the best result.
A winning season is a must for Yost.
BUDDY BELL, KANSAS CITY
Just as with Milwaukee, Kansas City wants to see progress in 2007. In this case though a winning season might not be needed, just meaningful progress from a 100-loss campaign in 2006.
Fault here lies not with Bell, one of the game’s terrific people, and a perfect match for a building franchise.
But the Royals have spent money (the wisdom of the $ 55 million deal for Gil Meche has been debated to death already), drafted well (third baseman Alex Gordon is regarded as one of the game’s next stars), and are tired of losing (100-plus games in four of the last five years).
Any progress the Royals make will largely hinge on a bullpen that was an absolute disaster (5.36 ERA) last season. Octavio Dotel is the hope to close with David Riske and Ken Ray added as set-up men.
Bell must hope for production from that group as well as health for DH Mike Sweeney and outfielder Reggie Sanders.
With all that, remember what I said about the American League Central. How much improvement should the Royals realistically expect in the division that hosts the last two American League champions?
Feb. 10| 3:30 p.m. ET
Bud Selig walked into a room ready to get pounced on and walked away, two hours later, with nary a scratch.
Nothing better symbolizes the qualities of the man who has led baseball through its most prosperous era. Now, to be fair, the room in San Francisco on this February afternoon was a mix of baseball and television folks gathering in an annual kickoff event.
But, the Bay Area media is invited, and San Francisco is the city of Balco and Bonds. So, there were writers poised to ask the questions everyone, Selig most of all, knew were coming.
And he was ready.
After the ice was broken by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom who acknowledged that he was the only person able to knock Bonds off the front pages of the local newspapers, Selig’s address displayed the passion for the game that is his signature.
Be not mistaken about Selig -- he owns a genuine love for the game to which he has devoted his life. About that, he is sincere. He was the captain of the ship when baseball nearly pulled its own Titanic, so he is justifiably proud of the rebound the game has taken since 1995.
For 30 minutes, Selig spoke of the game’s advances: 22 new ballparks, 2.5 million average attendance in 2006, the World Baseball Classic, a leading symbol of MLB’s devotion to spreading the game globally.
Said Selig, “In 10 years, you won’t recognize this game worldwide."
The wild card (admittedly a brilliant move), interleague play (to this view, semi-brilliant as this year’s Yankees-Giants weekend series in San Francisco is an obvious success, but the Giants play the Cardinals, a century-old NL foe, FIVE times all year! The Giants play OAKLAND more times than St. Louis. That will never make sense), and competitive balance.
On that issue, I am puzzled by Selig’s stance that revenue sharing has brought the game more parity today than in the “late '80s and early '90s” (his words) when this problem began.
Well, in those years, the five best teams in baseball were Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Minnesota, Oakland and Toronto. Today, all are known as small markets.
When I broadcast for the Minnesota Twins in those years, they and Oakland were the highest payrolls in the AL
Yes, sharing the wealth has allowed Kansas City to sign Gil Meche and Cincinnati to sign Aaron Harang, but on-field success is the measure and the present era does not have the balance of the aforementioned time.
Selig closed his prepared remarks on baseball’s new steroid policy, which he rightly called the toughest in sports.
Baseball operates under a horrid double standard here, and Selig takes unfair shots. Fact is that the players have TWICE reopened an existing agreement to allow testing.
Selig made a decision in September 2002, just months before we learned of BALCO, which has likely haunted him. He pushed for testing in the Basic Agreement, but the players were unyielding.
In the final moments of negotiations, with the players poised to walk over this issue, Selig backed off rather than take another strike on his watch. Question that choice, but do not question Selig’s commitment to addressing this painful point.
Baseball is scrutinized thoroughly for its so-called inaction while implementing the toughest policy in team sport, and a NFL team doctor sits in jail for distributing steroids to active players and barely a word is heard.
You can sense this grates on Selig. If so, we should understand. He is quick to remind that Andro, the only substance we KNOW that Mark McGwire used, was legal in 1998 and stayed legal until 2004. Big difference from steroids, which have been illegal under federal law since the 1970’s.
Selig knows that baseball’s renaissance will always be tied in some way to home runs, and McGwire, Sosa and Bonds. So, it was an act of self-confidence that he took questions after his prepared remarks. There were pointed queries about Bonds and Aaron and 755, followed by Selig’s rehearsed responses (If Bonds breaks the record, it will be handled the same way as other record-breaking moments).
There was an interesting aside about each generation having had its problems to deal with and a recent Whitey Herzog quote that cocaine was a bigger problem in the '80s than steroids in this era was repeated.
Huge difference---cocaine is not performance enhancing.
Finally, Henry Schulman of the San Francisco Chronicle asked the last and best question. Selig, it is frequently said, would like nothing more than to see Bonds disappear.
Schulman asked if that feeling attributed to Selig is fair. Selig replied that it is not and that -- as commissioner -- he cannot make personal judgments.
On the way out of the luncheon, I heard several guests jabbing Selig for that comment. To which I ask, what alternate response could he have given?
Any personal statement would have been thoroughly inappropriate and Selig is too smart for that. He did his job well, which is why he has held it, at the whim of the owners, for 15 years.
And, by the way, the game’s gross revenue has more than TRIPLED on his watch.
As the luncheon’s host smartly noted, were MLB to be listed on the NYSE, it would be a “hot growth stock.”
When was the last time you heard that about MLB?
Here’s what we have learned about Barry Bonds in the last 48 hours:
Money rules: No surprise here, but Bonds took money from the Giants that no one else would have offered.
To get the cash, though, Bonds had to sacrifice the entourage that has become his calling card. He went on the radio in San Francisco Tuesday and positioned it as a “mutual” agreement between him and the team, but actions outweigh words.
Bonds fought vigorously for that access, beginning with Greg Anderson in 1999, and he would not give it away if he had any leverage.
Leverage: A magic word thrown freely around baseball circles for the last 50 days -- as in, “Why did the Giants pay Bonds when no one else would have?”
Well, the Giants needed Bonds for baseball so they had to pay him commensurate to their payroll (one in which Randy Winn will earn $8 million this year).
But the Giants had the leverage in every non-dollar matter and Bonds knew it. Hence the reported clauses covering indictment, etc. that reports Tuesday night indicated MLB would not approve. No matter -- the Giants will reword to satisfy all parties.
2008: Bonds plans to play at least two more seasons. This was suspected once baseball started handing out massive contracts, but Bonds confirmed it in interviews Tuesday.
There is almost (the writer’s hedge!) no chance of that happening in San Francisco, but the Giants believe Bonds to be motivated this year to earn a DH deal in 2008.
Mark Sweeney: The Giants believe the New York Daily News story to have significant inaccuracies. An investigation was conducted after the story broke and the Giants halted talks with Bonds.
Only when satisfied that Bonds could re-enter the clubhouse without friction was the deal finished. This view is that it would behoove the Giants to outline some of those inaccuracies, as T.J. Quinn has been a solid reporter on all matters BALCO.
Humility: Bonds displayed more of that trait than expected in his trip to San Francisco. He met with the entire Giants front office staff, unprecedented in his 14 years, and conducted the aforementioned radio interview on KNBR, the Giants’ flagship radio station.
He tried to say the right things, about not imposing himself on his teammates, expressing his undying love for the fans of the Bay Area, and looking forward to talking more this year in response to the “manipulation” he claims the media has applied to the fans.
His track record would indicate it’s fair to wait for the actions rather than believe the words.
Lawyers: He must be paying them well for he used the legal wall as protection against any tricky questions. Most notably, let it not be forgotten that his personal trainer, Anderson, is sitting in jail.
Anderson, who has a toddler son, sat in jail through the holidays to protect Bonds.
When asked how he feels about that by KNBR, Bonds threw up the legal shield. This remains the most amazing aspect of the Bonds affair -- the man is allowing his self-proclaimed “close friend” to spend months in jail.
Guillermo Mota: Moral outrage on the steroids issue continues, although exhaustion on this matter is palpably felt, yet it is not mentioned that Mota signed a two-year contract with the Mets.
Mota flamed out in Cleveland, posting a 6.21 ERA, and he was dumped in an August trade.
Arriving in New York, he suddenly regained life on his fastball and posted a 1.00 ERA. He also failed a steroid test, and will serve a 50-game suspension.
Yet, the Mets signed him. And there is no moral outrage about Guillermo Mota, who is approaching no records and is anonymous to all but his family and close friends.
Don’t think Bonds hasn’t noticed.
Time to answer some feedback from bloggers.
From Steve in Nashville, Tenn.
I lived in Atlanta from 1982 to 1999. I never was a Falcons fan because the ownership wasn't committed to winning, as you say, the Falcons were a "tax shelter" franchise.
Now my beloved Braves find themselves with one of the best managers and the best general manager in the game and ownership that doesn't give two squats about the team's performance.
Andruw Jones is the Willie Mays of our time defensively. The best in centerfield in an era when there are a half dozen great ones at the same position.
Offensively, he's streaky, but potent and desirable.
And he has a million-dollar smile that could command a fortune promotionally in a larger, more diverse market like New York or Chicago.
As much as I'd miss Andruw, God bless him for what he's done over the years. He deserves better than to toil for an ownership that squanders so much talent. Bobby Cox and John Schuerholz probably won't be far behind him in leaving Atlanta.
Steve,
Good to hear that Braves fans feel deeply about the direction of their team. I wonder what MLB could have done to prevent a model franchise from being treated as a tax break.
Atlanta deserves better, as do Schuerholz and Cox, masters of their trade.
The NL East has changed dramatically with the Mets renaissance, the Phillies improvement under Pat Gillick, Washington's new ownership, and the Marlins' bevy of young talent.
Competing will be a tougher challenge than ever for the Braves.
From Eddie Robbins in Cumming, Ga.
I have been a Braves fan since they came to Atlanta. The Braves have no choice but to deal Andruw Jones. Not to do so leaves us wondering what will happen after this season when he would become a free agent.
I can see a deal to Boston or Detroit for young pitching. Jeff Francoeur will be an able center fielder for many years to come.
I just hope the Braves do a deal for Jones early in the season.
Eddie,
The contracts of this winter, notably that of Vernon Wells, make it certain to me that Jones will be moved. It's sad that a cornerstone player might not finish his career with his original team.
Atlanta's problem in trading will be extracting young talent in return for a pending free agent. An offseason deal, see Randy Johnson, gives the new team a chance to negotiate a deal before finalizing the trade, but Jones has 10-and-5 rights so nothing happens without his approval.
From Gary Stitch in Templeton, Calif.
As usual, Ted, you hit the nail on the head. The Giants and Zito are both big winners. Zito gets his money and the Giants get life after Barry Bonds.
San Francisco management is telling the world when Bonds leaves we are winning on pitching and defense.
Since that fits perfectly with AT&T Park, the Zito deal makes all the sense in the world.
Looking forward to 2007 as a Giants fan.
Gary,
It's been a long, strange offseason in San Francisco. Understand that the Mark Sweeney story was taken seriously by the Giants. It absolutely put the brakes on the Bonds talks.
If the Bonds deal is finalized and things seem to be moving in that direction, the Giants will be convinced that Bonds was not guilty of accusing Sweeney.
There is no other way they can bring Bonds back into their clubhouse (See: Palmeiro, Rafael).
As to fan reaction, the Giants welcomed over 20,000 to a day at the ballpark last Saturday. Baseball always wins.
From Alan Klevit in Thorndal, Pa.
Barry Bonds. Until his head became the size of a large medicine ball, he NEVER hit 40 homers, only hit .300 a handful of times, hit below .275 just as many, wasn't a top RBI man and was a borderline Hall of Famer.
Actually, you are right on Dave Parker, who was better than Bonds when Bonds was a normal size person.
Jack Morris was terrific, but number of wins do count.
Hall of Fame voters do reward quality as well as quantity. See Sandy Koufax, who by the way had several World Series wins better than that Morris masterpiece.
I think The Bulldog deserves to be in, not sure on Steve Garvey, nix on Harold Baines.
Alan,
Correction on Bonds: he was the BEST player I have ever seen in 1993 (.336-46-123), winning his THIRD MVP in four years with no suspicion of chemical enhancement.
I agree that you can't arbitrarily draw a line and declare that it's OK to cheat after you've won three MVP awards, but Bonds was a HOF player before any of us had any suspicion.
I maintain that Jack Morris had enough wins, the most in the 80's. He was always the lead pitcher on his team, in contrast to others who have been elected because of the number of wins.
From Dale Armstrong in Norwood, Ohio.
Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa should be in the Hall of Fame not just for their numbers, but for saving baseball.
If it wasn't for their home run chase in 1998 we wouldn't be having this conversation because baseball would be dead.
You still have to be able to hit the ball even if you take steroids. I can't hit a baseball as far as McGwire and Sosa and I have played baseball all my life, and now at 30, I can say I have used steroids.
Dale,
Sorry to hear about your steroid use unless it was under prescription. Your take is one I have heard from several players through the years, but I keep asking if the stuff doesn't help you hit the ball, why use it?
It obviously makes the sheer act of playing the game at a high level every day easier.
From Edward Lawler in Zunt, Va.
Gee, a morality vote from sports writers. I guess the 24 percent that voted for McGwire to be inducted to the Hall of Fame are immoral?
Are these the same sports writers that voted for all the drunks, drug users, wife beaters, bat corkers, and spit ball throwers?
Let he who is without sin cast the first vote, I mean stone.
Edward,
I am waiting for the first voter who denied McGwire to tell me about their vote for Gaylord Perry.
From Mark in Dunkirk, N.Y.
Jeff Loria may be the worst owner in sports, although he may have company. And for him to dump his manager because they had a little conflict was not too smart.
He will unfortunately continue to run the Marlins as he has, maybe someday he will be enlightened and get it, but that's doubtful.
Baseball becomes less attractive to other cities because of over-the-top salaries and no salary cap.
For example we in Buffalo would have loved a team, but it is just never going to happen because of the salary structure now.
Buffalo probably has one of the best minor league stadiums that could be expanded to major-league capacity within a season.
Mark,
I have never understood why baseball has allowed Loria to flourish while many high-quality ownership groups look to enter the game.
I do understand that MLB feels there are few, if any, viable markets for relocation. Buffalo's track record of supporting Triple-A baseball is excellent, but baseball places a unique demand on its cities: 81 home games.
It requires a strong population base to support that home schedule. To me, that is the reason that MLB can't follow the NBA lead of going into mid-markets (Sacramento, San Antonio, Memphis, Oklahoma City) and establishing themselves as the only game in town.
Did you ever imagine reading the following statement from an elected official in Florida: “It is important that we embrace baseball.”
Charlie Crist is the new Florida governor, and unlike his predecessor, the Bush with a distaste for the summer game, this administration is closing in on a deal for a new baseball stadium in Miami.
Yes, we have been down this path before and it has never ended in primrose or anything other than angst. And it has kept hope alive in burgs like San Antonio and Portland that they could eventually land a big league club, hope that Major League Baseball needs to foster.
But truth is occasionally unpleasant and in this matter, there is no home for the Marlins better than South Florida, which isn’t a colossal endorsement of what has passed for a home in the first 14 seasons.
We grant here that the fans of the Marlins have been treated like carnival customers, suckered with the brazen expectation that the experience would be so enjoyable that they would always return.
There was the 1994 strike, the 1998 dismantling of a World Series winner, the horse-trading of ownership that left Miami with Jeffrey Loria, and the slower disintegration of a second title team, all while playing in a disastrous cement trough built for football, but unfit for one moment of baseball.
Still, the Marlins had three straight winning seasons (2003-05) and have won at least 76 games each season in this decade while never drawing two million fans in that period.
So the news from Florida this month is noteworthy. A new stadium beckons and the team’s marquee players, Dontrelle Willis and Miguel Cabrera, are entering baseball’s upper class: those who can soon buy their own teams.
Willis has already signed a 2007 contract for $6.45 million while Cabrera, exercising his arbitration rights for the first time, filed for $7.4 million, a fourth-year player record.
Against the backdrop of the Marlins’ $15 million payroll in 2006, these numbers are striking.
Thus we watch the continued unfolding of one of baseball’s most intriguing sagas “As the Marlins Turn.”
Will the owner, who just fired his Manager of the Year after said manager delivered an astonishing 78-win season from the remains of the previous year’s house-cleaning, allow his team to field a payroll that will likely double from last year?
Will the owner be mollified by the knowledge that he controls the rights to a certain Hall of Famer (Cabrera) and a certain pitching star (Willis) for THREE more years and resist the temptation to offload one or both?
Will the owner turn to his general manager, the game’s most anonymous success story (Larry Beinfest), and ask him to spin more of his magic by turning one or both of his stars into multiple major leaguers thus repeating the Marlins tale of 2006?
Will the owner allow his team to push ahead in 2007 with the hope of adding low-cost castoffs to fill holes (Armando Benitez if the Giants pay the bulk of his salary is Exhibit A)?
Insiders believe their young starting pitching is strong enough to give the Fish a chance to contend.
Or will the owner cash out, dump both stars, and once again turn Marlins fans, who with a new stadium and promising players might “embrace baseball”, into sideshow suckers?
Don’t think there aren’t general managers and owners watching Florida and waiting to pounce if the answer to the last question is yes.
Jan. 10 | 1:30 p.m. ET
Random thoughts after trying to digest an intriguing, unsettling, and era-defining Hall of Fame vote.
Never before has the baseball electorate delivered a moral judgment (witness Gaylord Perry and Ty Cobb in the Hall of Fame), but they delivered an opening whopper to the steroid era in a total rebuke of Mark McGwire’s candidacy.
My stance on McGwire has changed. It's now either vote for no one from this era or treat all equally. Judge McGwire against his peers, many of whom we have cause to believe were impure.
Well, McGwire was judged FOR his peers. The message was sent to all to follow: Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds, Ivan Rodriguez, etc.
Expect nothing from this vote. The electorate is judge, jury and hangman. What baseball and the union wouldn’t police, these voters will.
As first up, McGwire took the hit for his generation. Fair? No way, but who is to expect fair. McGwire dug his own hole and is paying the price.
But there are several positions voiced by voters that seem unfathomable: 1) Since McGwire chose not to address the past, voters won’t address HIS past.
What? McGwire doesn’t OWE anyone an explanation of “alleged” offenses. As is true with Bonds, McGwire is neither accused (except by Jose Canseco) nor charged with steroids use.
Who is any media member to demand an explanation based on Canseco’s word?
Let’s go over this one more time: McGwire accepted and employed sound legal counsel when he went before Congress -- an appearance that had massive image ramifications for him, hence the aforementioned price he pays.
Avoiding perjury cost McGwire the freedom his lawyers thought it would save.
2) Bonds was a Hall of Fame player before he appeared to bulk, thus the steroid issue isn’t an issue in his candidacy.
A wise man tried to run that by me over dinner and I still don’t understand this: When is it OK to cheat? After you’ve won three MVP awards? Or hit 400 homers?
Then you get the green light to break the rules?
Put this voice in the small, if not sole, chorus that believes McGwire will one day appear in Cooperstown. Time will unveil more of the sordid reality that BALCO brought to light, and likely expose greater numbers of steroid users than we ever imagined.
McGwire will begin to gain sympathy for bearing an unfair burden and, at some point in the next 14 years, he will surface and make amends.
Yes, he has a long road to go from the 24 percent of the HOF vote to the 75 percent he needs to get in, but 14 years is a long time.
And, I always remember that Richard Nixon was forgiven and died a statesman.
The electorate is getting closer to sanity: Goose Gossage is closing in on election.
Can anyone please explain how any Hall of Fame is legitimate when it inducts Dennis Eckersley and Bruce Sutter, but not Goose?
Hope comes in the form of a thinner 2008 ballot, and the sense that voters are actually making some attempt to understand closers from Gossage’s era. Throw out sheer save numbers and look at workload: Goose pitched 2 2/3 innings in the Bucky Dent playoff game. Unheard of today.
Jack Morris remains a victim of the quantity over quality thinking that too often rules the voting. Morris was simply a winner, the winningest pitcher of his decade, and a World Series hero whose 1991 Game 7 10-inning shutout trails only Larsen’s perfecto as the greatest postseason pitching performance.
But whether it’s his total number of wins or secondary stats like ERA, the focus has moved off the quality Morris provided and turned to a numbers show. Sad.
In that vein Harold Baines received barely enough votes (29) to stay on next year’s ballot. Five of those votes came from Chicago Tribune writers. Now hometown loyalty is an expected result in these scenarios. Curiosity, though, reared its head upon reading the justifications offered by the voters.
They leaned on Baines’ longevity and hitting prowess, admittedly often in a poor hitters park (Comiskey), compared to the shorter career of Jim Rice.
What about Dave Parker?
Parker’s career totals rival those of Baines, but Parker clearly outshone Baines as a player. Parker was an MVP and finished in the top 3 in voting for the award four times -- the best MVP showing for Baines was ninth place once.
Parker won three Gold Gloves, an award that never involved Baines. Parker led his league in batting (twice), hits, RBI, doubles (twice), and total bases (three times).Baines led his league once in slugging percentage.
Baines was a very good hitter, but Parker was a great player. There is no legitimate means to try and compare the two -- Parker was clearly better. Yet, of the five Chicago Tribune writers who voted for Baines, only one voted for Parker as well.
Speaking of dominant players who get no love in this process, Albert Belle is off the ballot after receiving only 19 votes. Is bat corking now a McGwire-like offense?
Also heading to the Veterans Committee are the HOF candidacies of Steve Garvey, Orel Hershiser (who once felt that 200 wins with his scoreless inning streak and World Series heroics would make him electable), and the proud owner of six inexplicable votes, Jose Canseco.
Here is today’s baseball world: a team has a center fielder who will turn 30 in April with nearly 1,600 career hits and 350 home runs, nine Gold Gloves, and an undisputed reputation for durability (he has never missed more than nine games in any full season).
And the team will most certainly try to trade the player.
Who wouldn’t want Andruw Jones?
In this time when contracts are bloated beyond any sensibility, the Atlanta Braves have arrived at the year when they will trade the centerpiece player teams strive to develop.
When will the trade happen?
That’s up to Jones, now a 10-and-5 player, who is believed to want to complete the 2007 season in Atlanta.
And therein lies the Braves’ dilemma: they need Jones to have any chance of competing, but can ill afford to lose him at year’s end for draft picks.
The Andruw Jones story has the feel of a movie -- teenager from a small island nation signs a pro contract in the U.S. at 16, is the starting center fielder in the World Series at 19, endures a public and occasionally painful maturation with a championship team and a manager who removes him once mid-game, and spurns free agency after an accidental conversation with team management at a basketball game.
We all know the storybook ending: Andruw Jones displays his undying loyalty to the Braves and the fans of Atlanta by staying as the team rebuilds.
He reaches individual milestones and becomes a beloved figure to generations of Braves fans. He finishes his career in the only uniform he knows and heads to Cooperstown as a pure Brave.
In short, he should be Atlanta’s version of Robin Yount.
But it doesn’t work that way anymore in baseball. Neither players nor teams are what they once were. Somehow, a proud franchise in Atlanta, the model of excellence in baseball management, has been allowed to pass ownership hands as a tax shelter.
Can you imagine the NFL allowing the Dallas Cowboys to be treated in a like manner?
Braves general manager John Schuerholz is trying to retool with a payroll that is being passed in the game’s new fast lane. He has always been responsible, preserving some sanity while money flows around him.
Schuerholz has excelled like no others in winning in the majors while constantly replenishing a farm system. But the title ride ended in 2006 and Schuerholz now faces life with ownership that appears uninterested in baseball.
Jones is a bargain this year ($13.5 million), but he sees the Vernon Wells contract as a new benchmark (back loaded with annual salaries over $20 million in the last four years).
And with Scott Boras representing Jones, there is no reason for the Braves to believe in any hometown discount.
Schuerholz has been a magician, retaining John Smoltz at a rate laughable in today’s world, acquiring Mike Hampton for three years on Florida’s dime, and achieving the proper balance of young players to afford salaries like Tim Hudson, Chipper Jones and Edgar Renteria.
How will the trade happen?
Jones will need to be convinced that he has no future in Atlanta. The Braves would have to marry Jones with a contender. Would the new team insist on a new deal as a condition of the trade? Or would they surrender any respectable players to Atlanta without a guarantee of keeping Jones?
Either way, Boras is a huge hurdle.
Who trades for Jones?
A long list of teams has both the need and the means. The only logical eliminations are the Mets (Beltran) and Blue Jays (Wells), both with long-term commitments to center fielders.
Obviously, this is some serious crystal ball gazing. Some is rooted in the frequency of the Jones rumor mill in the last two years. But knowing the brilliance of Braves' management, it is difficult to imagine them not trying everything in their power to gain some value in return for a future Hall of Famer.
Barry Zito's preliminary agreement on a $126 million, seven-year deal with the Giants is one hell of a shocker.
No New York bidding war, no protracted negotiations with phantom offers, no dramatic cross-country flights or press conferences.
San Francisco snatched Zito away from all the normal Scott Boras-generated drama with an offer straight from the playbook of Texas Rangers owner Tom Hicks.
To get Alex Rodriguez signed, Hicks had to outbid others so dramatically that Boras convinced A-Rod he had an obligation to sign with a team that he had little interest in joining.
Zito has lived in San Francisco while playing for the Athletics, but to stop a potential Yankees-Mets bidding contest, several factors had to be in play: 1) The Giants making a substantial offer with an expiration date; and 2) Boras believing that neither New York club had the stomach for a similar bid.
The second part is key.
Zito heading to the Giants indicates that Mets general manager Omar Minaya does not believe that Zito is a pitcher in the Pedro-Martinez mold, a lead starter that could reshape the identity of a franchise.
It also says that despite recent rumblings of a Randy Johnson trade, the Yankees were not inclined to seriously compete against the Giants bid.
Why San Francisco? My view holds that the Giants ownership was stung by the backlash to the Barry Bonds signing.
Having failed to land Alfonso Soriano or Carlos Lee, the Giants brought back Bonds as their signature bat, expecting the hometown love of the slugger to continue.
But the fact that Bonds’ return has not been universally well received in San Francisco opened some eyes.
Also note that the Giants' ownership has been unflinchingly committed to bringing San Francisco its first World Series title. From the initial Bonds signing in December 1992 through Zito signing, the Giants have played for the moment.
Player development has been secondary to seizing the moment. A Giants season-ticket holder should not doubt the team’s commitment to winning.
For Zito, this deal is sensible on multiple fronts. He stays in a comfortable environment without the contract-induced pressure that New York would inspire from Day 1. He moves to a pitcher-friendly league and home park. And he signs without leaving jilted suitors in the dust (see Carlos Beltran: Houston).
Did the Giants overpay? Who hasn’t this winter?
Fueled by a new collective bargaining agreement with the players, and an internet venture whose latest valuation was $5 billion, teams across MLB have been spending freely.
Again, Zito’s annual salary, when measured against the recent deals signed by Ted Lilly, Gil Meche and Jeff Suppan, is understandable. The length of the contract is another matter. It’s what the Giants had to offer to seal the deal, but can anyone name one long-term starting pitcher contract that has worked out for the team that did the deal?
Today, though, the Giants win. They trot out the best available pitcher to their fans. They believe they can contend with the Dodgers and Padres. They quiet those who question their lack of player development with a marquee signing.
And make no mistake, Zito and Boras win. Zito makes a wise lifestyle decision, and is handsomely paid at the same time. Boras erases the sting of the Matsuzaka negotiation with the Red Sox by again proving that he can land a huge contract, beyond the realm of most, for a premier player.
In San Francisco, they have given the fans a premier downtown ballpark, Hall of Famers galore, the All-Star game, and a potential home-run record this summer.
All that is missing is a World Series title, one the franchise came so agonizingly close to in 2002.
Signing Zito is about this Giants' ownership taking one last run at that dream.
Once upon a time, baseball shut down for the holidays. The trading and spending sprees were finished as trees and wreaths went up across the land.
Players were eager to know their destination so they could relax for Christmas. Executives and scouts could enjoy their one true break of the calendar year.
No more.
Now the baseball carousel never stops. And deep into the holiday season there are several teams, players, and one agent needing a Christmas gift.
Scott Boras
The super agent is on the rebound after a rare “loss” (can $50+ million really be a negative?) in the Matsuzaka negotiations with the Red Sox.
Along comes Barry Zito in the spirit of giving.
Although Boras has exaggerated and misrepresented Zito’s achievements, the truth is that Boras has discovered the bidding war was denied to Matsuzaka by the posting system, and he's counting on things being different with Zito.
Word is that the Giants, stung by the negative backlash from their own fans to the return of Barry Bonds, are going hard for Zito.
They want a positive result to show their incredibly loyal fans (over 90 percent renewed high-priced season tickets before the Bonds signing.)
Never mind that Zito’s numbers run well behind Jason Schmidt's over the last four years (a fact conveniently ignored by Boras), the Giants will overpay out of desperation, and cite Zito’s durability as justification.
Last question: Will the Mets go to the end to secure the front-end starter they need to replace Pedro Martinez?
Zito is this year’s Carlos Beltran. Boras will likely extend this negotiation into January (unlike Beltran, there is no arbitration deadline date any longer, thus Boras faces NO deadline -- dangerous territory for any team dealing with an agent who never does a deal until he has to.)
Red Sox Bullpen
Could there be domino effects from other signings that land the Red Sox their closer?
With Eric Gagne in Texas, is Akinori Otsuka available? Or Mike Gonzalez from Pittsburgh?
If Boston is intent on staying with its mission of making Jonathan Papelbon a starter, then trade options appear available.
Slugger for Dodgers
The only missing piece of L.A. general manager Ned Colletti’s reconstruction is a cleanup hitter. Will he part with one of a deep group of starters to acquire a needed big bat?
Santana's wingman
Minnesota has the opposite problem. With Francisco Liriano’s surgery and the retirement of Brad Radke, the Twins need a second starter to avoid their playoff problem of rookie Boof Bonser starting a Game 2.
Closer for Marlins
Here’s a team that underscores the importance of a closer. They have a talented lineup, and young rotation, all of which was undermined last year by a shaky bullpen.
They have talked about bringing back Armando Benitez, a good move in that he has always thrived away from the spotlight, But this team needs a stable option at the end of games.
Jays looks for innings
After retaining Vernon Wells, they have to replace Ted Lilly’s innings. Left hanging by Gil Meche, the Jays say they have $8-9 million U.S. currency to invest in a replacement.
Remember when that amount could get you some decent starting pitching?
Seattle lead starter
The Mariners are another team facing some unsettled fans at home for their lack of a signature move this offseason.
They hope Jose Vidro as DH quiets some of the chatter. But Miguel Batista doesn’t salve the wounds over losing in the bidding for Washingtonian Jason Schmidt.
Question: Do they dive in on Zito?
Baseball finally found the one thing Scott Boras can’t manipulate -- Japan. So Daisuke Matsuzaka signed with the Red Sox, one full day before the deadline, for a “reasonable” number in the current market. And the Red Sox offseason has taken a marked turn upwards.
We have watched Boras become a legendary agent by discovering loopholes, creating imaginary bidding wars, withholding player services (Jason Varitek, J.D. Drew) for a year to escape a draft spot and generate unprecedented bonus money for draft picks.
Now, the super agent tackled a new obstacle -- the posting system that governs Japan-to-Major League Baseball movement.
Only no one agent can combat a culture, one that emphasizes humility, team over self, and de-emphasizes capitalism.
So Matsuzaka decided that $52 million was enough, that he couldn’t face his countrymen and try to explain who Scott Boras is and why he held out for an unfathomable sum of money or explain to his financially-strapped team why they can’t improve and rebuild or explain to his countrymen why a huge tax windfall (from the posting fee) is no longer coming to Japan.
A week ago Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein was reeling from the controversy over Boston's signing of J.D. Drew. Other baseball executives spread the word that the Red Sox were operating with less than ideal integrity. They claimed Boston had “tampered” with Drew, enticed him to exercise his opt-out clause from the Dodgers and promised Drew's agent -- who happens to be Boras -- a “package” deal with Matsuzaka.
Rumors floated of an official tampering charge from the Dodgers. It was postured that Epstein would have trouble dealing with other general managers.
And then the Red Sox made a move that changed the whole dynamic of their offseason. When Boras began his patented final squeeze meant to take control of the talks and catapult them towards a last-minute maximum offer rooted in panic, Epstein and Larry Lucchino showed up on Boras’ front porch.
They knew that Matsuzaka could not refuse to talk with guests and maintain “face” in Japan. That single move, for the first time in this memory, took the leverage from Boras. Interesting that when Barry Bonds arrived to walk the runway at the winter meetings, he was ridiculed. But he, like the Red Sox, ended up with what he wanted.
And now the Red Sox own Matsuzaka for six years at a sensible number, they have kept him from the Yankees, and they pay no luxury tax on the posting fee. If Josh Beckett can find any stability, then Boston has a fabulous young core of starters with Jonathan Papelbon.
Wild card: Suppose the Red Sox can entice Roger Clemens to finish where he started his career. If Epstein hasn’t found another option, Papelbon could return to closing. And the Red Sox would have completed a wondrous remake of their staff.
One year ago the Red Sox front office was fractured by a schism that ended in Epstein's short-term departure. A disastrous third-place finish followed, and the start to the winter was clouded with the annual Manny Ramirez buffoonery.
But in one swift move, Boston won their prize target, and regained their balance amidst baseball’s careening landscape.
Dec. 7 | 1:00 p.m. ET
Each refresh of any baseball web page brings news or rumors of another deal with the winter meetings serving to heat up the sport's hot stove. And each refresh shows us the craziness is far from over.
Money is once again being tossed at baseball players like John Daly tosses his cash at a blackjack table. Who among us could resist?
We are numb to this by now, and what we really want to do is just talk baseball. With that in mind, and declaring that the business of baseball is forever intertwined with the game, I offer the top stories to follow in the final hours of the meetings and beyond:
BARRY ZITO
Expect the Giants to push hard in a late run to find their next Jason Schmidt. One hurdle in landing Zito is that the Giants haven’t done much business with Zito's agent Scott Boras, but there is urgency around San Francisco that hasn’t been experienced in the new ballpark era.
The Giants were willing to spend for Alfonso Soriano and Carlos Lee, and with the Dodgers’ position, the Giants may well hedge against future sellouts in an All-Star Game year, and make the big plunge for Zito.
Either way, Zito wins. Unless he has a massive change of heart, he’ll avoid the Texas organization and hope the Giants and Mets drive up the price for his services.
J.D. DREW, DAISUKE MATSUZAKA
Baseball executives think agent Scott Boras has linked these deals. The Red Sox were overly “generous” in signing Drew and thus goes the theory they will get Matsuzaka on a more reasonable deal.
It’s a win-win as the team forms a solid rotation with Curt Schilling, Josh Beckett, Matsuzaka, and Jonathan Papelbon while Boras saves face by likely getting Matsuzaka a shorter deal that provides him another run at free agency.
SECOND-TIER STARTERS
Ted Lilly broke the ice with his $40 million deal in Chicago. But everyone in the game was waiting for the bar to be set ridiculously high for second-tier pitchers. Adam Eaton, Vicente Padilla and Lilly have broken the bank. Jeff Suppan waits for his payday.
And it’s impacting injured pitchers. Eric Gagne and Mark Mulder are talking about deals with guaranteed money AND incentives. Remember when a guy had to prove himself healthy?
DODGERS
Their general manager Ned Colletti has had a sterling offseason, stealing Schmidt and top medical man Stan Conte from the Giants as well as locking up center field with Juan Pierre. And Pierre is the only long-term deal Colletti has granted.
They are the best in the National League West today. Their next question is whether to trade a starter (Brad Penny?) for the corner outfielder that would replace Drew.
NOT JUST THE YANKEES
Spending is contagious. The Cubs -- although a highly respected baseball executive labeled the Soriano deal “irresponsible” -- the Red Sox, and the Dodgers, all major-market teams are raising their game this winter.
The Mets and Phillies appear to holding steady while Texas is talking big.
The middle-class teams are sitting back, shopping in different aisles, and cherry picking hopeful bargains. But they can’t complain about the Yankees alone anymore when it comes to big spending.
WHO’S JOINING SAMMY
Mike Piazza signed with Oakland for $8.5 million after playing for $1.5 million guaranteed in San Diego last year. Cleveland guaranteed 42-year-old reliever Roberto Hernandez $3 million, and 44-year-old Jamie Moyer signed a two-year deal in Philadelphia.
Do you think Sammy Sosa is the only recently retired player looking at these pay days and considering a return?
THE BOTTOMLESS PIT
Where will the Cubs stop? On the last day of the 2006 season, new management proclaimed its only goal was to win.
Conditioned through decades of “responsible” spending by the Tribune Company, Cubs fans are shocked at the profligate spending by an ownership preparing to sell the team. But remember that Soriano’s contract will become another owner’s problem.
TRADES
They are next. Two-thirds of the teams look at these big free-agent contracts and realize they can’t play in that game. So baseball will return to the time-honored art of trading (Freddy Garcia for Gavin Floyd broke that ice). Watch for more teams to use dealing to address their needs by spring training.
Does Mark McGwire deserve to be in the Hall of Fame?
My mind was changed by a friend, Bruce Jenkins, who writes eloquently, intelligently and passionately about his true love, baseball, for the San Francisco Chronicle.
Something learned quickly about aging is the realization of how much we don’t know. The certainty of youth fades with time, and is replaced by a willingness to listen. Admitting that you don’t have all the answers is a major rite of passage into middle age.
So, I found myself in a late-night New York conversation with Bruce during the U.S. Open. I was in a lather after a summer of blogging in this space about the need for Barry Bonds to take responsibility for the steroid mess swirling around him.
Bruce calmly raised the topic of Bonds’ future Hall of Fame candidacy. The only honest way to measure players, he said, was against their peers. And we all suspect that steroid use was relatively widespread during this era. So, judge Bonds against other sluggers and, most importantly, other pitchers who may have dabbled in chemicals.
It was a moment of clarity. Bruce was right. In accepting a sad truth about the steroid era -- a decision that all who love baseball must face -- judging the achievements of this time was defined.
This brings me to McGwire.
Is he a Hall of Famer for his on-field performance? Yes.
Should he be penalized or disqualified for what we suspect or believe about andro and other substances? No.
(Disclaimer: I hold no vote nor would I if asked). The Hall of Fame has become a material honor, too often used as a revenue-generating tool (see: Gaylord Perry).
McGwire's home runs are enough (583 with a .263 career batting average) given the precedent of Harmon Killebrew (573, .256). Faded from memory is McGwire’s 1990 Gold Glove. And the necessary intangible comes from his 1998 summer tour with Sammy Sosa that catapulted baseball into an age of unprecedented riches.
What can keep McGwire from Cooperstown is morality. We have heard too much about BALCO, HGH and andro. Little has been proven or confirmed, but urban myth has convinced most of us beyond a reasonable doubt that the rules of baseball engagement changed.
I was a broadcaster for the Oakland A’s when McGwire arrived as a rookie who actually played third base. And in 2001, I sat for a final interview with the Cardinal slugger whose forearms matched my thighs in size.
So I am convinced of malfeasance, but as Bruce showed me, where does a moralist stop once that door is opened?
I saw most of Bonds’ 73 homers in 2001. Now, I wonder how many of the pitchers he victimized were using their own magic potion.
As a broadcaster, I live with the unease of knowing I chronicled a period that will forever be tainted. I point no fingers. Sometimes I feel as if I was duped. I am saddened by the erosion of the game’s integrity and my unwilling role as a chronicler of this period. How does one translate those feelings into acting as a moral judge?
Bottom line: McGwire’s Hall of Fame candidacy lies in apparent tatters for one reason, March 17, 2005. It was McGwire who was subpoenaed to face a Congressional panel poised to grandstand. Also subpoenaed were other players including Sosa, who played his Chico Escuela card (baseball BEEN BERRY BERRY GOOOOOOD to meeeeeeeee), but not Bonds, who was absent in a mystery never fully explained.
McGwire made one mistake before the panel: he listened to his lawyers. Their only interest was keeping McGwire from a perjury charge. How sad as the lawyers celebrated McGwire’s non-answers while the court of public opinion judged him overwhelmingly guilty.
The slugger has paid a steep price for that day: Five years of near-isolation, surfacing once in St. Louis for the funeral of broadcaster Jack Buck, and occasionally in Hawaii for corporate golf outings. He was a great teammate who fully respected the game and the people of baseball.
McGwire has paid enough for the sins of an era. Judge him against his peers and he comes up a Hall of Famer.
Nov. 22 | 2:00 p.m. ET
It’s shaping up as an intriguing winter on the left coast.
In the San Francisco Bay area, both teams have changed managers, one has announced plans to move to the boundary of the other’s declared territory, and the beginnings of a tussle over the game’s greatest home run hitter are growing.
For nearly four decades, the A’s have been the stepchildren of Bay Area baseball. Give an A’s fan or employee one minute and they’ll recite the World Series statistics (4-0 Oakland in titles) as if a stat that belongs on the History Channel is relevant to today’s fan.
What has changed over the last 15 years is the perception of the two franchises. From the mid-1980’s through the early 1990’s, the A’s were cool -- the franchise of muscle with the rock star duo of Jose Canseco and Mark McGwire changing the face of the game. At first for better, and much later we fear, for the worse.
They won on the field and in the minds of all but the hardcore Giants fans. One man changed that -- Barry Bonds.
When Bonds arrived as part of the grand plan that saved baseball for San Francisco, he promptly ended the remnants of Canseco’s reign with the A’s. It was the Giants who had the game’s best player while Canseco was exiled to Texas, and McGwire battled a string of foot injuries.
It took five years for the Giants to finally win, but when they did in 1997 they also had worked out their vexing ballpark issue. Since that day, they have owned the Bay Area despite the A’s successes of recent years.
Now the pendulum is swinging towards the A’s. They announced a partnership for a new ballpark with a foremost technology firm that brings the team within seven miles of downtown San Jose.
When Cisco Field opens in 2011, the A’s will be the team playing in the heart of the nation’s most concentrated wealth with the attraction of a state-of-the-art ballpark.
Can the Giants stop this? And is Bonds the key?
Last week Frank Thomas signed with Toronto. His 2007 salary will be $10 million. As productive as Thomas was for the A’s, ask this question: Who would you rather spend $10 million on as your 2007 DH: Thomas or Bonds?
A’s owner Lew Wolff might well answer Bonds, even if the final price goes north of that number. Bonds sells tickets, Thomas doesn’t. Bonds generates revenue that should more than offset the cost of his contract, Thomas doesn’t. Without the burden of playing the field, Bonds should be every bit the equal of Thomas as an offensive threat.
And Bonds makes the A’s relevant. He steals all the thunder that the Giants have built over 14 years. He makes the A’s cool again.
So, it makes this development interesting. The Giants initiated talks with the agent for Bonds. And their rep was chief operating officer Larry Baer, a supporter of Bonds, rather than general manager Brian Sabean. It forces one to think that the Giants internal thinking is driven by the desire to keep Bonds in their uniform to the end -- especially if their local rivals are interested in his services.
It will be a fascinating tale to watch. And, once again, Bonds sits in the best seat. Once Thomas signed with Toronto, Bonds regained his leverage. He has an option that the Giants never imagined.
And, remember one more thing. Baseball’s irrational revenue sharing plan means that the Giants are payers and the A’s are receivers. Thoroughly unfair to the Giants, this means that the A’s could try to steal away the Giants’ asset using much of the Giants’ own money.
Free-agent shopping starts in earnest on Sunday Nov. 12, and it’s once again looking like a great time to be a starting pitcher on the open market or super agent Scott Boras.
The combination of free agency and being represented by Boras -- as Barry Zito and Daisuke Matsuzaka are -- is often the ticket to great wealth.
There is no longer any question about whether teams have the money to spend for pitching. In touting both record attendance figures and the new collective bargaining agreement, Major League Baseball has tacitly admitted to new riches.
And the willingness of teams to spend on pitching can’t be doubted after last winter’s orgy on a crop best labeled average to above average. Credit to Kevin Millwood, the only lottery winner last winter (5 years, $60 million) to return his new team’s investment.
But if you’re a second-tier starter on this winter's market, let’s say a Jeff Suppan or Jeff Weaver, and you look at the contract bestowed upon Matt Morris last winter (3 years, $27 million), why wouldn’t you think your day is about to come?
So clubs have to ask themselves how far they should extend financially?
If you’re in the market for a starter and the price for a Suppan, who strong postseason aside is someone with the track record of a nice third starter, is $10 million per season, do you then reach for one of the big prizes?
There are three: Zito, Jason Schmidt and Matsuzaka, and they each have a chief selling point.
Zito is durable, a welcome commodity for anyone not wishing to have a Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, A.J. Burnett experience.
Matsuzaka brings the ability to generate huge new revenues for a team that can market to Pacific Rim companies, and Schmidt, whose numbers are better than those of Zito, is the only true No. 1 starter available.
They each also have questions to overcome.
Zito is five years removed from his Cy Young season, and his numbers since are good, but not overpowering. Is he the Tom Glavine of this generation, a strong No. 2 starter?
Matsuzaka must prove he is not the next Hideki Irabu -- an over hyped “power pitcher” from Japan. The only successful long-term starter to leap from Japan to MLB was Hideo Nomo, a one-time power thrower who became reliant on a splitter.
Schmidt is 34, and was questioned, perhaps undeservedly, about his fortitude in several late-season situations.
Zito is the safest bet for innings, but teams must be wary of his high walk (99) and WHIP totals from 2006. Boras sells him as a No. 1 although his numbers the last four years (55-46, 3.86) are not of that caliber.
Zito has declared his wish to pitch in a big market and may be best suited to reunite with Rick Peterson of the Mets, a pitching coach confident who could return Zito to his Cy Young form.
Schmidt may be the safest buy. He likely commands a shorter deal. In the second half of the season, his performance dipped, and most notable is his OBA went from .216 pre-All-Star to .267. It should be noted that Zito’s same split went from .233 to .286 with an alarming drop in strikeouts, which should impact the length of offers he receives.
But at 34, Schmidt should be good for 2-3 years at the front of a rotation.
Matsuzaka is the youngest of the trio (26), although Japanese custom means he could have a high-mileage arm.
He is appealing to big-market teams for the aforementioned marketing reasons, and because he costs nothing but dollars. No player or draft-pick compensation and no development costs involved, but there is a “double hit” in the posting fee paid to the Seibu Lions and the contract for Matsuzaka.
Nomo and Hideki Matsui are the exceptions, but I maintain it is difficult to expect an immediate impact in MLB from a foreign player. Cultural differences are so strong that time is needed to smooth the transition.
I watched the last mega-hyped Japanese player, infielder Kaz Matsui, struggle terribly with the adjustments needed to succeed in American ball.
Matsuzaka has it easier as a pitcher, but he fits best in a place where his team can assimilate him into a quality pitching staff, rather than a team asking him to be the lead guy right away.
Schmidt likely stays in the National League, especially given the Yankees dismal record with pitchers changing leagues.
The safest bet is Schmidt on a three-year deal, the greatest upside and highest financial risk is Matsuzaka, and the most intriguing signing will be Zito. Just how much will teams pay for quantity (innings pitched) over quality?
New York in a nutshell: Both the Mets and the Yankees were the winningest teams in their respective leagues, but both fell short of the World Series, and while the Yankees are vilified, the Mets are praised for their rebirth.
Institutional arrogance carries a cost. The Yankees -- from ownership through media mouthpieces -- tell their fans the World Series is an entitlement, as if their massive payroll that basically guarantees regular-season success means as much in a random short October playoff series.
The Mets are operating smoothly -- a calm, yet demanding owner trusting his baseball hierarchy. And they have foundation players in David Wright, Jose Reyes, and a prime-of-his-career Carlos Beltran.
The Yankees have their rock in Derek Jeter, and a strong young starter in Chien-Ming Wang, but their questions -- other than the future of A-Rod -- revolve around older players.
Offseason predictions: Both teams make many changes, a function of today's game, but the Mets' changes will be more dramatic.
Despite what his agent says, A-Rod will be dealt to bring back much-needed young pitching. And the Yankees need to begin the process of grooming the successor to closer Mariano Rivera.
Much of the Mets maneuverings will be subtle, addressing bench and middle relief. But they have more obvious needs than the Yanks.
Left-hander Barry Zito, a free agent after six seasons in Oakland, would give them a top-line starter, and the Mets will need to add two more starters unless they feel John Maine, Mike Pelfrey, Oliver Perez, and Brian Bannister are ready for prime time.
But unlike the Yankees who would only have third base to fill if A-Rod is dealt, the Mets must find longer-term answers to second base, and their corner outfield spots.
What to most watch: Do the Mets bid for Alfonso Soriano? He would fill any of the above holes, but the feeling last year was that Willie Randolph's Yankees familiarity with Soriano dimmed his eagerness to see Soriano as a Met.
Oct. 11 | 11:30 a.m. ET
Now that Joe Torre is coming back for a 12th season as Yankees manager, watch the team's general manager Brian Cashman. Does he read his clubhouse and manager and move Alex Rodriguez?
Discount Cashman’s comments on A-Rod's future following the news Torre was returning. That's when the GM said the team had no intention of trading A-Rod, who failed to drive in a run in the playoffs for the second straight season.
"I fully expect him to be here," Cashman said Tuesday. "We're going to figure this thing out together."
Cashman can say nothing else without limiting his leverage. But Torre told WFAN Radio Tuesday that he worked harder to accommodate Rodriguez than any player in his 11 Yankee years.
 |
Julie Jacobson / AP |
As for Cashman's sentiment that the A-Rod issue can be worked out together by the Yankees and the superstar — well, perhaps that could happen in many other cities, but not in New York.
The tabloids buried Rodriguez with their near-daily obsession over his failures. Teammates piled on in the now-famous Sports Illustrated story.
Torre cannot have this hovering over his team when they gather in February.
Would Rodriguez waive his no-trade clause?
His first choice as a free agent was Atlanta, but the Braves would not meet his price. If the Yankees are willing to offset some of the remaining dollars, an avenue of conversation may open.
A-Rod has four years and $95 million left on his record 10-year, $252 million contract he signed with Texas before the 2001 season. The Rangers (under the terms of their dealing him to the Yankees before the 2004 season) are obligated to pay $28.4 million of that $95 million, with the Yankees on the hook for the remaining $66.6 million.
Moving A-Rod probably would mean the Yankees agreeing to pay some portion of that $66.6 million over the next four years.
 |
Frank Franklin Ii / AP |
And it's not only because there would be addition by subtraction by putting an end to the A-Rod melodrama in the Bronx, but also because moving A-Rod could in return bring to the Yankees some younger starting pitching — a key need for the franchise.
Of course, nothing gets done without A-Rod's signoff, and the question remains: Has he had enough of New York or does he want to tough it out in pinstripes for at least another season?
It's not clear what this superstar feels deep down inside, but it is clear that if he is a Yankee in spring training, it bodes poorly for Torre.
As for the Yankee skipper besides the A-Rod issue, he is dealing with 11 terrific regular-season years, four World Series titles, and a near miss in 2001 that have been forgotten after five successive October failures.
And make no mistake that 97 wins are thoroughly negated by three October losses when you cash Yankee paychecks.
So, there is surprise that Joe Torre had his sentence commuted by George Steinbrenner. And Joe is likely as surprised as anyone.
Nothing is fair when you work for the Yankees. Torre has done the two best managing jobs of his Yankee tenure in the past two regular seasons. He won the division in 2005 with an absurd starting rotation and this year playing outfields of Melky Cabrera, Bubba Crosby and Aaron Guiel through the summer months.
Now, they mean nothing. More than ever, baseball has abandoned its beauty, the daily rhythm of a six-month marathon that always determines the best teams. Championships are won in short series, none more random than the five-game LDS that claimed Torre’s Yankees this year.
With the money tossed everywhere in the game, and the money freely taken by Torre as baseball’s highest-paid manager, October is everything. And the look on Joe’s face as the Yankees withered away without a fight in Detroit was confirmation.
They talked Monday and Torre said his piece to the owner. Credit Torre for not taking the back door out of the madness. He wanted back for a 12th year on a job that could chew up ordinary men in 12 weeks. Tuesday, the owner agreed.
Watch Lou Piniella. Does he take one of the jobs that will most likely be offered? Or does he stay in the broadcast booth and the managing bullpen if the Yankees stumble early next year?
And read the New York Daily News on Wednesday. They reveled in the national publicity surrounding their reporting of Torre’s imminent ouster although the story was cleverly worded to provide the authors an out.
And on New York television on Monday afternoon, one of the writers, Bill Madden, produced an unbelievable response to a question asking him if Torre’s firing was a done deal.
Madden said, the day after writing the Torre-out-Piniella-in story, “I don’t know. I can’t predict what Steinbrenner will do.”
Steinbrenner did nothing. He has a Hall of Fame manager who had a spectacular season. He has a team that lost to — overlooked fact — another very good team. And he has a team that faces an overhaul.
Under Torre young players such as Cabrera and Chien-Ming Wang have flourished. And the Yankees have a prize pitcher, Philip Hughes, in the wings.
By keeping Torre in place, nothing was the best Steinbrenner could have done.
It was hard to understand how Oakland could win 93 games and easily outdistance the Angels to win its division.
After watching the Athletics take a 2-0 ALDS lead by dismantling a Minnesota team that stormed through the second half of the season to overtake Detroit, it became much clearer.
The sum of the A’s far exceeds their parts.
|
Their starting rotation is fine, more so if Rich Harden is healthy, and they do have a vastly underrated setup reliever in Justin Duchsherer, who would be a closer for many teams.
But what the A’s accomplished in the first two games of the series in Minnesota explains much of their success. They beat the Twins at their own game.
Built around pitching and defense for two decades, the Twins have a well-earned reputation for playing the game right. Oakland’s success in the early part of this decade was built around slow-footed hitters with high on-base percentages and no more than a passing interest in defense.
Well, the world has changed.
Oakland took command of the ALDS because it played two games of mostly-sparkling defense. Eric Chavez has been a non-factor at the plate this year, but saved Game 2 with a sprawling play on a Joe Mauer grounder that had the look of an RBI single.
Mark Kotsay has a back that hates turf, but he patrolled center field as if it was his home while the five-time Gold Glover Torii Hunter made a grievous error that may have stuck the dagger in Minnesota’s heart.
Marco Scutaro, a journeyman until arriving in Oakland three years ago, replaced Bobby Crosby, and he's made every play in a workmanlike manner while heralded Minnesota rookie shortstop Jason Bartlett had crucial misplays that handicapped Twins' pitchers in each of these games.
Scutaro and Mark Ellis both hit balls to the right side, advancing runners in a tight playoff game, while Luis Castillo fails to either bunt or hit behind a runner in the eighth inning of Game 1.
Get the idea.
These are no longer the A’s of Ben Grieve or Matt Stairs. This team does not wait for the three-run homer and lets easy plays go unmade. This team plays “little ball” when needed, and has the big bat of Thomas to clean up in one swing.
Mostly, this team plays the game right, the trait that has endeared the Twins to baseballers for years. How strange to watch the Twins beaten at their own game on their own field.
There seems no way that these A’s will blow a 2-0 lead as did their predecessors of 2001 and 2003.
If the A’s can get a lead to the seventh, Duchsherer seems unhittable while closer Huston Street, wobbly at times, pitches with the swagger that characterizes this team.
They walked tall in Minnesota with much of the healthy brashness that characterized the A’s of Canseco and McGwire. They seem convinced that they should win. No matter the Twins second-half run, it was the A’s who posted baseball’s best record after the All-Star break.
Think about this -- Frank Thomas has led off an inning SEVEN times in two games. Unreal.
Sept. 28 | 10:30 p.m. ET
It’s easy to equate the loss of Pedro to a disastrous turn in the Mets’ postseason hopes. But that’s too simple.
No one doubts that the Pedro of old, or even the Pedro who dazzled for much of 2005, would be a significant edge for the Mets. However, that Pedro hasn’t pitched this year. No surprise to those in the know — he finished last year held together with wire and tape.
This could be positive for the Mets. Rather than assigning Pedro an important game without any confidence in his health, and having the team preparing for a huge game uncertain as to their pitcher’s abilities, the Mets can turn to others who were important cogs in their spectacular season.
The Mets have faith that Orlando Hernandez can turn back the clock one more time and summon more October magic from his mid-40’s arm. And they believe that Tom Glavine, thirsting for another postseason chance after enduring three playoff-less seasons, will respond in kind.
Though routinely dismissed in New York, Steve Trachsel pitched the Cubs into the 1998 postseason with an outstanding performance in a one-game playoff.
Without Pedro, the Mets lack a dominating pitcher. But who in the NL playoff chase has one? Maybe Chris Carpenter. Certainly Houston’s trio if the Astros’ miracle run continues.
But the point is that the Mets’ postseason hopes will rest largely on the NL’s deepest lineup. If Jose Reyes is a sparkplug and Paul Lo Duca excels in the No. 2 spot, then the frightening middle of the Mets’ order should deliver.
I maintain that pitching wins the regular season and hitting takes over in the postseason. No one reaches October without good pitching. Hitters get no at-bats against back-end starters or the end of the bullpen. Those who hit good pitching are rewarded in the postseason. On that count, the Mets should survive.
Fragility was part of the deal the Mets accepted in signing Pedro. His physical decline at the end of 2005 was no surprise to anyone in Boston.
Martinez deserves credit for pitching magnificently as the poster boy for the Mets’ renaissance. He accepted the responsibility of his free-agent contract (if every player had his pride!) and led the Mets’ march to respectability.
His was a front-end deal, meant to pay off immediately. Anything at the back end of the four years was strictly a bonus.
Pedro delivered last year. This year, the Mets have ruled the NL and are stocking themselves with talented young arms. With Pedro’s future uncertain, the truth is that the Mets are closer to the time where they won’t need “Super Pedro.” And Pedro may be at that moment himself.
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
-
Rate Story:
LowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM BASEBALL |
 Baseball Section Front |
| Add Baseball headlines to your news reader: |
Sponsored links