Eric Gagne was a struggling marginal pitcher when he burst on the scene in 2002 in his new role as closer for the Dodgers. For the next three years, he dominated in ways never seen before. He still holds the all time record for consecutive saves with the herculean total of 84. In 2003, he won the Cy Young award with 55 saves and a 1.20 ERA. I happened to catch Gagne pitch once in 2003. He finished the ninth against then Cub, Eric Karros. He started Karros off with a fastball that the stadium gun clocked at 99 MPH. His next two pitches were both change ups. One change up was clocked at 74 and the next at 72 MPH respectively. I still remember the ridiculous amount of drop that his last change up had. He made Karros look silly and it redefined the term "pull the string" normally associated with change ups. Gagne's career sputtered through a series of injuries and lack of production following the 2004 season and he continues to be a struggling, if not well paid, closer/middle reliever today.
As it turns out, it is very likely that any success that Gagne has had was most likely manufactured. Eric Gagne was one of the hundreds of names mentioned in the Mitchell Report. While there is certainly no proof, I have the strong suspicion that his success coincided with his meteoric rise. His fall also coincided with the time period that baseball finally began to test for steroids seriously.
The implications of the story of Eric Gagne and hundreds of others like him are huge and they aren't talked about nearly enough. Gagne most likely cheated his way into millions of dollars. It is of course unclear when (or even for sure if) he cheated, however it certainly appears to me that his best years were also years he cheated in. He no longer throws the fastball in the high nineties. Thus, the difference in velocity between that and his change up is no longer the obscene 25 miles that I used to see. It appears that the un hittable closer that we witnessed in 2002-2004 was created chemically.
Again, the implications of this are massive. Gagne was a marginal player that struggled to make a major league roster prior to 2002. Then, out of the blue, he became one of the most dominant pitchers in baseball. This year he is being paid 10 million dollars. Without performance enhancing drugs, he likely would have long been out of the league. Instead, he is being paid 8 figures to struggle and rehabilitate.
If my suspicions are accurate, he not only cheated his way into fame, fortune, and baseball immortality, but worse than that, he took the spot of someone who didn't fall to the same urges. Because Gagne did not resist those urges, he is now rewarded with a Cy Young, a place in baseball's record books, and ten's of millions of dollars. He didn't just cheat to gain an edge, but he cheated to manufacture a life. Meanwhile, this life that he created took the place of someone else who didn't fall to those same urges. Not only is that unfair, but frankly it is tragic. How do we teach the lessons of cheating to our youth when clearly they paid off so well for Eric Gagne?
Showing posts with label steroids. Show all posts
Showing posts with label steroids. Show all posts
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Clemens Vs. McNamee: There are No Winners
I was in the overwhelming minority in believing that Congressional hearings were positive and necessary in the steroids scandal. Congress has oversight responsibility and regulatory responsibility over interstate commerce. For the most part, Congress ought to leave sports leagues to their own devices, however in this case, we have a major sports league involved in systemic cheating, and while it would be nice for Congress to look at other matters, it would be irresponsible to overlook it. In fact, I was perfectly happy with the hearings turning into a witch hunt on Clemens because witch hunting players is, in my opinion, the best way to deter future ones from doing the same. I just didn't want the witch hunt to stop with Clemens but rather to continue to as many accused players as possible.
That said, while I thought that hearings were a good idea in theory, they turned out to be nothing more than a disaster with every party, including and especially Congress itself, coming out looking terribly ugly. The first and unexplicable problem was that Congress excused Andy Pettite. He was the Keyser Soze of the hearings. He was alluded to over and over again but never actually heard from. Over and over again, Pettite's statements were used to try and impugn Clemens and Clemens maintained that Pettite was mistaken. It would have made a whole lot of sense for Pettite to be able to answer Clemens. It is inexplicable why Pettite was allowed to be removed from the hearings. His testimony became critical throughout. It was referenced by numerous Congress people and used to impugn Clemens. Clemens continued to maintain that Pettite was mistaken, however it would have only made sense for Pettite to be able to answer that charge face to face.
Second, the hearing lost all control and credibility when it, like everything, became another partisan exercise. While partisanship is nothing new in Congress, once it creeped into this hearing there was frankly no more reason to pay attention. Suddenly, the Republicans sided with Clemens and the Democrats with McNamee. I don't know why, but I do know that each side attacked each with equal vigor. That means that all the Congress people should have attacked each with equal vigor. Steroids aren't a partisan issue, and neither is perjury. One of those two people lied, and deciding truth shouldn't have become an issue of R and D. Once it did, the hearing lost any credibility it may have had.
Third, and most importantly, ultimately, neither person was believable. The problem, for me at least, with figuring out which one lied is that I don't believe either. One of them is definitely lying but the problem for me is I believe they both are. Long before the Mitchell report came out, I suspected something wasn't right with Clemens. The report only confirmed those suspicions. I don't believe Pettite was mistaken about any conversations, and I don't believe he didn't know his wife was taking the exact same performance enhancing drug he himself is accused of taking. I certainly don't believe that he used McNamee to inject some vitamin into his backside. That said, McNamee leaves a lot to be desired as far as truth telling. He has all sorts of contradictory statements, Shays, while one sided, was right in pointing out that he is a cop turned drug dealer. One of them is definitely lying, and one may be telling the truth, however to me neither one sounds like they are telling the truth.
Ultimately, all we were left with was a spectacle that was long on drama and short on any reasonable results. Whatever one's view was of Clemens going in, it likely didn't change. The issue of steroids in baseball was certainly not moved in any meaningful way, and once again, Congress turned into a partisan battlefield.
That said, while I thought that hearings were a good idea in theory, they turned out to be nothing more than a disaster with every party, including and especially Congress itself, coming out looking terribly ugly. The first and unexplicable problem was that Congress excused Andy Pettite. He was the Keyser Soze of the hearings. He was alluded to over and over again but never actually heard from. Over and over again, Pettite's statements were used to try and impugn Clemens and Clemens maintained that Pettite was mistaken. It would have made a whole lot of sense for Pettite to be able to answer Clemens. It is inexplicable why Pettite was allowed to be removed from the hearings. His testimony became critical throughout. It was referenced by numerous Congress people and used to impugn Clemens. Clemens continued to maintain that Pettite was mistaken, however it would have only made sense for Pettite to be able to answer that charge face to face.
Second, the hearing lost all control and credibility when it, like everything, became another partisan exercise. While partisanship is nothing new in Congress, once it creeped into this hearing there was frankly no more reason to pay attention. Suddenly, the Republicans sided with Clemens and the Democrats with McNamee. I don't know why, but I do know that each side attacked each with equal vigor. That means that all the Congress people should have attacked each with equal vigor. Steroids aren't a partisan issue, and neither is perjury. One of those two people lied, and deciding truth shouldn't have become an issue of R and D. Once it did, the hearing lost any credibility it may have had.
Third, and most importantly, ultimately, neither person was believable. The problem, for me at least, with figuring out which one lied is that I don't believe either. One of them is definitely lying but the problem for me is I believe they both are. Long before the Mitchell report came out, I suspected something wasn't right with Clemens. The report only confirmed those suspicions. I don't believe Pettite was mistaken about any conversations, and I don't believe he didn't know his wife was taking the exact same performance enhancing drug he himself is accused of taking. I certainly don't believe that he used McNamee to inject some vitamin into his backside. That said, McNamee leaves a lot to be desired as far as truth telling. He has all sorts of contradictory statements, Shays, while one sided, was right in pointing out that he is a cop turned drug dealer. One of them is definitely lying, and one may be telling the truth, however to me neither one sounds like they are telling the truth.
Ultimately, all we were left with was a spectacle that was long on drama and short on any reasonable results. Whatever one's view was of Clemens going in, it likely didn't change. The issue of steroids in baseball was certainly not moved in any meaningful way, and once again, Congress turned into a partisan battlefield.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Digesting Baseball's Steroid Nightmare
Introduction:
I am a fan of Mike and Mike in the Morning. I generally enjoy their back and forth sports banter however on the issue of steroids in baseball I find the dialogue to be frustrating. Mike Golic has a habit of taking any idea to deal with the problem of past systemic use of performance enhancing drugs and picks it apart to find all of its flaws. This is a worthless endeavor in my opinion. The problem is that there is no real fair solution. That's because the mess that has been left to fix is too large, too complicated, and too widespread to ever be fixed fairly. No matter what, we will likely be left with those that cheated and got away with it and those that take the hit for the entire sport.
I believe it was Jayson Stark that said that he believes that about 80% of all award winners in the last fifteen years were cheating when they won. That should give everyone an idea of the systemic nature of the cheating that was going on. At this point, there is no fair solution and all anyone can do is come up with something that is as fair as possible.
Also, I get amused whenever anyone begins a diatrobe about how the Congress has better things to do with their time then investigate baseball. I agree. They do and there is no reason they should be forced to investigate baseball. On the other hand, they aren't left with much choice. Baseball, along with the other two sports, has become a vital part of our culture and our fabric, and the league allowed for systemic cheating for over a decade. While it may be true that they have better things to do, the Congress cannot very well simply ignore this problem. While the hearings are more drama than substance, they all serve a purpose. They exposed McGwire last time and ultimately Palmeiro's words came back to haunt him. While it would be nice for Congress to attend to other matters, the reality is that this problem is now too big for them to ignore.
I personally am in favor of any witchhunt. Only a nasty witch hunt in which reputations are ruined and players are turned into villains will have the sort of chilling effect that would really discourage future players from trying to cheat. What I would like is as many witch hunts as possible. Right now Roger Clemens is in the hot seat and that is fine, however there are many more. I saw Eric Gagne pitch in 2003 and he was lights out. I saw him start Eric Karros off with a fastball that was clocked at 99 MPH. He followed with a 74 MPH change and then a 72 MPH change. Was he cheating? The Mitchell Report raises a lot of questions about his own use of performance enhancing drugs. The only way to really drive the message home that this is unacceptable is for there to be a public spectacle of all suspected cheaters.
Furthermore, it is time for all sports analysts to stop muddying the waters on this issue. I hear too many rationalizations. Statements that go something like this,
he still had to hit the baseball
All of that is pure nonsense. Each player must accomplish their task. The pitcher pitches and the hitter hits. If one is getting an ufair advantage through performance enhancing drugs, the whole entire result is tainted and corrupted. Cheaters deserve no sympathy, rationalizations, or equivocations. They made the playing field uneven and that is the only thing that matters. Their results are beside the point. Of course, they are likely to be impressive because cheating likely brings with it impressive results. If cheating continues to be rationalized then it will also be excused. If we are serious about addressing it, then the time for excuses is over.
Again, there will never be any truly fair investigation or outcome, however I think the Mitchell Report is a good place to start. Every player mentioned in the report must answer for what is in the report and appropriate punishments should apply.
Now, the way I see it is that we have three things that need to be addressed: the records and awards, the Hall of Fame, and future potential cheating. Unfortunately, I don't see any reasonable way to address the previous championships. It is likely that multiple members of winning and losing teams were cheating and thus deciphering who did more is impossible.
As for the Hall of Fame, I believe the very difficult 75% threshhold will take care of most of the cheating on its own. In order to be voted into the hall of fame, the player needs to be included in 75% of the ballots. The writers have already shown what allegations will do to the hall of fame chances of players. Mark McGwire got only 23.5% of the votes. Clearly, the stench that he left after his appearance on Capitol Hill two years ago has cost him a plethora of votes. While no one can predict the future, it is also quite unlikely that he will ever receive the 75% necessary to enter the hall. The rules for entering the hall of fame are strict enough and will weed out most suspected of cheating on their own.
As for the records, I suggest that a committee be formed. The committee should consist of former players, advocates, administrators, and anyone else that would first and foremost be of unquestioned integrity and have an interest in the continuing success of baseball. This committee should hear evidence and make decisions as to whether or not those that broke records did it by cheating. The decision of the committee must be final concerning the records.
As for future cheating, the current testing system is a good start and so is the new punishment system. That said, it currently has one glowing flaw that needs to be addressed or the system faces total non credibility. The testing system currently has no test for HGH. While there is no full proof cheating system, and anyone that wants to cheat badly enough will likely pull it off, there must be a test for HGH. It is true that for every new test there is a new designer steroid that can beat it. That was the crux of the BALCO scandal and the clear. HGH is known and it likely has been used by countless players. Unlike a designer steroid not readily known or available, HGH provides any potential cheater with an obvious and simple tool. The first thing the testing must do is find a test for HGH. Second, the tests must be more prevalent, random, and include the off season. It is also pointless to have a testing system without an off season test. That is when most of the performance enhancing drugs are taken.
Conclusion:
Here is the thing that bothers me most about this whole affair. Baseball lost a huge portion of their fan base when the strike of 1994 cancelled the World Series. Attendance, viewership, and merchandising all went down dramatically in the aftermath. The sport was revitalized with the home run chase...a chase that is now likely to have been committed by two cheaters. The fans, the players, MLB all looked the other way because the excitement the chase brought was seducing. The chase and the subsequent home run explosion brought the fans back to the game. All of it was likely caused by cheating. While some players will face stiff consequences, the game itself will likely not suffer. The fans didn't much care when cheating was artificially producing all those home runs. They are likely to not give too much care now that the whole thing has been exposed as a fraud. Thus, a strike nearly caused the collapse of the game, and it was only revitalized through cheating. Worse than that, now that all is known most fans aren't bothered by any of it.
I am a fan of Mike and Mike in the Morning. I generally enjoy their back and forth sports banter however on the issue of steroids in baseball I find the dialogue to be frustrating. Mike Golic has a habit of taking any idea to deal with the problem of past systemic use of performance enhancing drugs and picks it apart to find all of its flaws. This is a worthless endeavor in my opinion. The problem is that there is no real fair solution. That's because the mess that has been left to fix is too large, too complicated, and too widespread to ever be fixed fairly. No matter what, we will likely be left with those that cheated and got away with it and those that take the hit for the entire sport.
I believe it was Jayson Stark that said that he believes that about 80% of all award winners in the last fifteen years were cheating when they won. That should give everyone an idea of the systemic nature of the cheating that was going on. At this point, there is no fair solution and all anyone can do is come up with something that is as fair as possible.
Also, I get amused whenever anyone begins a diatrobe about how the Congress has better things to do with their time then investigate baseball. I agree. They do and there is no reason they should be forced to investigate baseball. On the other hand, they aren't left with much choice. Baseball, along with the other two sports, has become a vital part of our culture and our fabric, and the league allowed for systemic cheating for over a decade. While it may be true that they have better things to do, the Congress cannot very well simply ignore this problem. While the hearings are more drama than substance, they all serve a purpose. They exposed McGwire last time and ultimately Palmeiro's words came back to haunt him. While it would be nice for Congress to attend to other matters, the reality is that this problem is now too big for them to ignore.
I personally am in favor of any witchhunt. Only a nasty witch hunt in which reputations are ruined and players are turned into villains will have the sort of chilling effect that would really discourage future players from trying to cheat. What I would like is as many witch hunts as possible. Right now Roger Clemens is in the hot seat and that is fine, however there are many more. I saw Eric Gagne pitch in 2003 and he was lights out. I saw him start Eric Karros off with a fastball that was clocked at 99 MPH. He followed with a 74 MPH change and then a 72 MPH change. Was he cheating? The Mitchell Report raises a lot of questions about his own use of performance enhancing drugs. The only way to really drive the message home that this is unacceptable is for there to be a public spectacle of all suspected cheaters.
Furthermore, it is time for all sports analysts to stop muddying the waters on this issue. I hear too many rationalizations. Statements that go something like this,
he still had to hit the baseball
All of that is pure nonsense. Each player must accomplish their task. The pitcher pitches and the hitter hits. If one is getting an ufair advantage through performance enhancing drugs, the whole entire result is tainted and corrupted. Cheaters deserve no sympathy, rationalizations, or equivocations. They made the playing field uneven and that is the only thing that matters. Their results are beside the point. Of course, they are likely to be impressive because cheating likely brings with it impressive results. If cheating continues to be rationalized then it will also be excused. If we are serious about addressing it, then the time for excuses is over.
Again, there will never be any truly fair investigation or outcome, however I think the Mitchell Report is a good place to start. Every player mentioned in the report must answer for what is in the report and appropriate punishments should apply.
Now, the way I see it is that we have three things that need to be addressed: the records and awards, the Hall of Fame, and future potential cheating. Unfortunately, I don't see any reasonable way to address the previous championships. It is likely that multiple members of winning and losing teams were cheating and thus deciphering who did more is impossible.
As for the Hall of Fame, I believe the very difficult 75% threshhold will take care of most of the cheating on its own. In order to be voted into the hall of fame, the player needs to be included in 75% of the ballots. The writers have already shown what allegations will do to the hall of fame chances of players. Mark McGwire got only 23.5% of the votes. Clearly, the stench that he left after his appearance on Capitol Hill two years ago has cost him a plethora of votes. While no one can predict the future, it is also quite unlikely that he will ever receive the 75% necessary to enter the hall. The rules for entering the hall of fame are strict enough and will weed out most suspected of cheating on their own.
As for the records, I suggest that a committee be formed. The committee should consist of former players, advocates, administrators, and anyone else that would first and foremost be of unquestioned integrity and have an interest in the continuing success of baseball. This committee should hear evidence and make decisions as to whether or not those that broke records did it by cheating. The decision of the committee must be final concerning the records.
As for future cheating, the current testing system is a good start and so is the new punishment system. That said, it currently has one glowing flaw that needs to be addressed or the system faces total non credibility. The testing system currently has no test for HGH. While there is no full proof cheating system, and anyone that wants to cheat badly enough will likely pull it off, there must be a test for HGH. It is true that for every new test there is a new designer steroid that can beat it. That was the crux of the BALCO scandal and the clear. HGH is known and it likely has been used by countless players. Unlike a designer steroid not readily known or available, HGH provides any potential cheater with an obvious and simple tool. The first thing the testing must do is find a test for HGH. Second, the tests must be more prevalent, random, and include the off season. It is also pointless to have a testing system without an off season test. That is when most of the performance enhancing drugs are taken.
Conclusion:
Here is the thing that bothers me most about this whole affair. Baseball lost a huge portion of their fan base when the strike of 1994 cancelled the World Series. Attendance, viewership, and merchandising all went down dramatically in the aftermath. The sport was revitalized with the home run chase...a chase that is now likely to have been committed by two cheaters. The fans, the players, MLB all looked the other way because the excitement the chase brought was seducing. The chase and the subsequent home run explosion brought the fans back to the game. All of it was likely caused by cheating. While some players will face stiff consequences, the game itself will likely not suffer. The fans didn't much care when cheating was artificially producing all those home runs. They are likely to not give too much care now that the whole thing has been exposed as a fraud. Thus, a strike nearly caused the collapse of the game, and it was only revitalized through cheating. Worse than that, now that all is known most fans aren't bothered by any of it.
Friday, December 21, 2007
What's Happened to Baseball
UPDATE: Of course, this didn't actually happen last night, however everything I originally wrote then continues to be in play and none of the problems have yet to be addressed.
Last night, I was watching Sunday Night Baseball on ESPN between the Detroit Tigers and Atlanta Braves. The Detroit Tigers had pitching for them one Andrew Miller 6-6 210 pound left hander with mid to upper nineties fastball and wicked hook (that's curveball for all you non fans). http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7847In a word, his stuff was sick.Miller was drafted sixth last year's in the amateur draft. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/events/draft/y2006/index.jspThe first five were neither incompetent or asleep at the wheel. In fact, there was pretty much universal consensus that Miller was the best player available. Why then did the first five teams not draft Miller? The answer, as explained by the announcers at ESPN, was "signability". In the crudest, most appropriately demeaning terms, "signability" means that the first five teams were too damn poor to afford Miller.
Miller was signed with an upfront three and a half million dollar signing bonus and a contract behind it. Can you really blame the Devil Rays for passing on him? Their entire payroll was 30 million. By contrast, Alex Rodriguez made just over $25 million in 2006. In fact, the New York Yankees payroll ran just below $200 million in 2006.
The reason that the New York Yankees have a 200 million dollar payroll while the Devil Rays have a 30 million dollar payroll has to do with several factors. The first is obvious. New York City is metropolis with over 8 million residents, while the Tampa Bay area has about 2.4 million residents. With the introduction of cable and satellite, big market teams like the Yankees are able to take even more advantage to create more revenue streams. The YES network is a station Steinbrenner created to carry Yankees games exclusively. What are the chances that the Devil Rays would ever create their own network to host their games? The other factor is that baseball has no salary cap unlike all of the other major sports leagues. The long and short of it is that the Yankees spend 200 million per year because they can, and the Devil Rays spend 30 million per year because that is all they can.
How about this? Can anyone reading this name what round any of these players were drafted: David Ortiz, Bobby Abreu, Carlos Zambrano, Sammy Sosa, and Pedro Martinez? If you answered they weren't you would be right, and that's because the amateur draft is only for American amateurs, on other words that are playing for an American high school or college. For foreigners, it becomes a free for all. Of course any prized foreigner like Daisuke Matsuzaka invariably gets bid on by only a handful of teams. It isn't that Tampa couldn't use him, but they simply can't afford to pay him. Even in the market of foreign born players, the deck is stacked against the small market teams and in favor of the big markets.
Baseball has created a system that is rigged where only a handful of teams have any legitimate shot to win it all in any given year. Now, some may point to the Oakland Athletics and Minnesota Twins as "small market" teams that are able to thrive regardless of whatever inefficiencies I have mentioned. It is true that Billy Beane, general manager of the Athletics, has done a tremendous job, but how good would the team be without their inherent handicap?In 2002, the Athletics had a formidable rotation anchored by studs, Barry Zito, Mark Mulder, and Tim Hudson. One by one, through trade or free agency, the A's lost each and everyone of them. It wasn't that Beane didn't want to keep them. It would have been too much to sign one individual guy and still fill other needs. The A's have a very strong farm system that produces young talent like Rich Harden consistently. Thus, they could afford to lose the nucleus. The simple fact of the matter is that if the A's weren't hamstrung their rotation would just be lethal, and these three guys would be followed by Harden. The A's would be winning World Series not just making the playoffs.
Then there is the issue of steroids. Barry Bonds is now only six home runs away from tying the most hollowed record in sports. The evidence against him is so plentiful and overwhelming that it is now to the point of overkill. Only die hard Giant fans continue to believe that he didn't take steroids. Soon we will all hold our collective noses while the universally loathed Bonds becomes the new home run champ.
How did we get here? It all started in 1994. You all remember that baseball year. What a great World Series that was? It was full of drama and excitement. If by drama and excitement you mean a blank screen because they didn't have a World Series that year because there was a strike. As one of my friends said back then, "a bunch of millionaires and billionaires can't seem to figure out how to divvy up the money". In the aftermath of the strike, the fans revolted. What brought them back? It was the home run chase of 1998. Today, most of us are convinced that the Home Run chase was a fraud and the participants cheaters.
Baseball either knew and did nothing or simply looked the other way, and either way, it isn't good for baseball. Steroids run so deep that no one knows just how many players were involved, but we all know that it was lots. A couple years ago I was watching another Tigers game when Ivan Rodriguez came up to bat. The announcers began a long analysis of why his home runs were down in the last couple years: he moved to Comerica Park which is spacious, he moved into the second spot in the office, he was getting older. It was like the announcers were dancing around the issue. All of those were probably contributing factors, however Rodriguez showed up to spring training in 2005, the first year they tested, with about thirty pounds less of muscle. Now, I am not saying he used steroids, but I am saying that all that muscle he lost had something to do with all the less home runs he hit.
The union of course has their dirty hands in both of these matters. For years, the union was able to fight of drug testing on right to privacy issues. They were also able to fight off the salary cap that has contributed to the mess that is the current salary structure. Other forces have also played a role like free agency, and agents who have set a market that only some of the teams can reach. Everyone already knows about Scott Boras and Alex Rodriguez' contract http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/oconnor/2003-12-27-oconnor-losers_x.htmhttp://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2000/1210/937273.htmlThat said, the role of the ridiculously strong union cannot be downplayed in this whole mess.
The national pastime allowed a strike to nearly bring it down, and then most likely allowed cheaters to bring it back into the spotlight. Now, it has a policy that provides an unfair advantage to big market teams while turning most small market teams into sacrificial lambs.
Finally, during the game I took a poll of what everyone thought of the designated hitter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_hitterWe were unanimous on two aspects: one we didn't like it and two, we didn't dislike it enough to get upset. Well, maybe if we weren't dealing with cheaters and an unfair playing field then maybe we would care some more that baseball allows people to play only parts of the game.
Last night, I was watching Sunday Night Baseball on ESPN between the Detroit Tigers and Atlanta Braves. The Detroit Tigers had pitching for them one Andrew Miller 6-6 210 pound left hander with mid to upper nineties fastball and wicked hook (that's curveball for all you non fans). http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7847In a word, his stuff was sick.Miller was drafted sixth last year's in the amateur draft. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/events/draft/y2006/index.jspThe first five were neither incompetent or asleep at the wheel. In fact, there was pretty much universal consensus that Miller was the best player available. Why then did the first five teams not draft Miller? The answer, as explained by the announcers at ESPN, was "signability". In the crudest, most appropriately demeaning terms, "signability" means that the first five teams were too damn poor to afford Miller.
Miller was signed with an upfront three and a half million dollar signing bonus and a contract behind it. Can you really blame the Devil Rays for passing on him? Their entire payroll was 30 million. By contrast, Alex Rodriguez made just over $25 million in 2006. In fact, the New York Yankees payroll ran just below $200 million in 2006.
The reason that the New York Yankees have a 200 million dollar payroll while the Devil Rays have a 30 million dollar payroll has to do with several factors. The first is obvious. New York City is metropolis with over 8 million residents, while the Tampa Bay area has about 2.4 million residents. With the introduction of cable and satellite, big market teams like the Yankees are able to take even more advantage to create more revenue streams. The YES network is a station Steinbrenner created to carry Yankees games exclusively. What are the chances that the Devil Rays would ever create their own network to host their games? The other factor is that baseball has no salary cap unlike all of the other major sports leagues. The long and short of it is that the Yankees spend 200 million per year because they can, and the Devil Rays spend 30 million per year because that is all they can.
How about this? Can anyone reading this name what round any of these players were drafted: David Ortiz, Bobby Abreu, Carlos Zambrano, Sammy Sosa, and Pedro Martinez? If you answered they weren't you would be right, and that's because the amateur draft is only for American amateurs, on other words that are playing for an American high school or college. For foreigners, it becomes a free for all. Of course any prized foreigner like Daisuke Matsuzaka invariably gets bid on by only a handful of teams. It isn't that Tampa couldn't use him, but they simply can't afford to pay him. Even in the market of foreign born players, the deck is stacked against the small market teams and in favor of the big markets.
Baseball has created a system that is rigged where only a handful of teams have any legitimate shot to win it all in any given year. Now, some may point to the Oakland Athletics and Minnesota Twins as "small market" teams that are able to thrive regardless of whatever inefficiencies I have mentioned. It is true that Billy Beane, general manager of the Athletics, has done a tremendous job, but how good would the team be without their inherent handicap?In 2002, the Athletics had a formidable rotation anchored by studs, Barry Zito, Mark Mulder, and Tim Hudson. One by one, through trade or free agency, the A's lost each and everyone of them. It wasn't that Beane didn't want to keep them. It would have been too much to sign one individual guy and still fill other needs. The A's have a very strong farm system that produces young talent like Rich Harden consistently. Thus, they could afford to lose the nucleus. The simple fact of the matter is that if the A's weren't hamstrung their rotation would just be lethal, and these three guys would be followed by Harden. The A's would be winning World Series not just making the playoffs.
Then there is the issue of steroids. Barry Bonds is now only six home runs away from tying the most hollowed record in sports. The evidence against him is so plentiful and overwhelming that it is now to the point of overkill. Only die hard Giant fans continue to believe that he didn't take steroids. Soon we will all hold our collective noses while the universally loathed Bonds becomes the new home run champ.
How did we get here? It all started in 1994. You all remember that baseball year. What a great World Series that was? It was full of drama and excitement. If by drama and excitement you mean a blank screen because they didn't have a World Series that year because there was a strike. As one of my friends said back then, "a bunch of millionaires and billionaires can't seem to figure out how to divvy up the money". In the aftermath of the strike, the fans revolted. What brought them back? It was the home run chase of 1998. Today, most of us are convinced that the Home Run chase was a fraud and the participants cheaters.
Baseball either knew and did nothing or simply looked the other way, and either way, it isn't good for baseball. Steroids run so deep that no one knows just how many players were involved, but we all know that it was lots. A couple years ago I was watching another Tigers game when Ivan Rodriguez came up to bat. The announcers began a long analysis of why his home runs were down in the last couple years: he moved to Comerica Park which is spacious, he moved into the second spot in the office, he was getting older. It was like the announcers were dancing around the issue. All of those were probably contributing factors, however Rodriguez showed up to spring training in 2005, the first year they tested, with about thirty pounds less of muscle. Now, I am not saying he used steroids, but I am saying that all that muscle he lost had something to do with all the less home runs he hit.
The union of course has their dirty hands in both of these matters. For years, the union was able to fight of drug testing on right to privacy issues. They were also able to fight off the salary cap that has contributed to the mess that is the current salary structure. Other forces have also played a role like free agency, and agents who have set a market that only some of the teams can reach. Everyone already knows about Scott Boras and Alex Rodriguez' contract http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/oconnor/2003-12-27-oconnor-losers_x.htmhttp://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2000/1210/937273.htmlThat said, the role of the ridiculously strong union cannot be downplayed in this whole mess.
The national pastime allowed a strike to nearly bring it down, and then most likely allowed cheaters to bring it back into the spotlight. Now, it has a policy that provides an unfair advantage to big market teams while turning most small market teams into sacrificial lambs.
Finally, during the game I took a poll of what everyone thought of the designated hitter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_hitterWe were unanimous on two aspects: one we didn't like it and two, we didn't dislike it enough to get upset. Well, maybe if we weren't dealing with cheaters and an unfair playing field then maybe we would care some more that baseball allows people to play only parts of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
