SoB '06, Part II

I am an old time, old school AL guy. I grew up with the DH. For that reason, I once assumed that the DH was a natural progression of the game. I accepted the Charlie O’ line of thought that it brought more offense to the table and made the game more exciting. Growing up, I hated watching NL games because of the dreadfully redundant pitcher’s at bat.

But the DH rule bothers me now. It goes beyond an occasional exception to the rule, more than the blind injustice of an ump’s nod to an outside strike by Tom Glavine. It is a wedge issue, dividing the league, making the World Series champion arguably decided by something other than honorable play under common conditions.

If I was organizing a baseball league today, I seriously doubt I would agree to allow two divisions within the league to play by different rules. It’s simply not fair to expect two teams to play all season under opposing rules and then force them to contend with the conflict during the championship. The argument that limited regular season interleague play prepares these teams for the reality of two different rule books during the series just doesn’t wash, in my opinion.

Remember what we learned from day one in The Game: it’s not about winning but it’s about how you win. MLB is violating the “how you win” law with the DH.

It’s suggested that Commisioner’s office accepts the idea of two leagues playing by different rules. The DH controversy is characterized by a “What’s wrong with it?” logic.

If that’s the case, what’s wrong with the NL outfielder playing without gloves? If that’s the case, what’s wrong with leveling the pitcher’s mound in the AL? All these kinds of absurd things would improve the hitter’s chances and increase the team’s offensive potential.

But these rules wouldn’t be fair to the teams in either league and they wouldn’t enhance the game or even protect the vague “integrity” of the game.

No. It’s time for MLB to end the experiment. The DH rule must be terminated now.

But if this rule is retained, presumably through the ineptitude of the Commissioner or the petty and short-sighted demands of the Players Union, then the most important thing is that all teams in both the NL and AL play by the same rule. Enough already!

Easy to say but is such common sense even possible?

Only the Office of the Commissioner of MLB can say.

“Baseball has had nine Commissioners since first electing Kennesaw Mountain Landis to the post in 1921 …”

Err-umm, yeah, I tell ya, so far I made three swings at trying to describe the Office of the Commissioner of MLB. I struck out each time, trashing each and every one of those attempts. So, let me cut to the chase here.

Allan H. “Bud” Selig will step down as Commish on December 31, 2006. The new guy, whoever he is, will probably be just like Bud. He will still be far more the CEO of Baseball rather than some impartial judge who gallantly protects the integrity of The Game. Being “elected” to serve sounds really cool but he will be chosen not by fans, not by players, but by the owners. His marching orders will be to steadily improve the income of the league, up the attendance figures, increase the stock of baseball teams wherever possible.

That’s it in a nut shell.

The new Commish won’t dwell too much on trivial rule changes and the like. He has no reason to be concerned with who actually plays the game or anything like that. He’ll be more focused on controlling realignment and revenue sharing. And in his journey to protect the league’s anti-trust exemption, he has to do something about illegal drug use among the players.

After Jason Grimsley was cornered with HGH this year, other names of players who he knew to be using this drug or that began to surface. Quickly, the Commish issued an open letter response on MLB.com that said, in part, that he was "disappointed and angered by revelations that a major league player had acknowledged using human growth hormone."

Interesting choice of words, suggesting his disappointment or anger is reserved for the revelation rather than the truth of the matter. Maybe the Commish should hire some sharper PR folks.

Substances like HGH are high profile but apparently used by those who wish to heal faster than normal. Steriods, in essence, are generally employed to speed up the body’s natural chemistry. I really can’t imagine why the Commish would be disappointed by any such honest revelation.

News for the Commish, I guess, but the Rules violate the “How You Win” law with the DH and the Players violate that law with stimulating drugs.

Rather than Superman Drugs, the word is out in numerous articles and stories around the league about players using stimulants that are harder to detect. See Dave Sheinin’s Washington Post, 8/25/06, or go find Will Carroll’s "The Juice: The Real Story of Baseball's Drug Problems", or even better, go way back and read Jim Bouton’s “Ball Four”.

If the new Commish really wants to soothe his anger on this, he’s going to have to bone up on how modern non-amphetimine stimulants or “mood-brightening psychostimulants” like Modafinil really effect players today. These are all Class IV type drugs, legally identified in the Controlled Substance Act as non-addictive.

I am just sure George Mitchell’s investigation will help illuminate such revelations to further enhance the Commish’s present disappointment. While he’s at it, Mr. Mitchell should offer an informative chapter to shed light on the questionable ingestion of espresso and Red Bull, as well.

Anyway, there’s really no reason to expect the new guy to be any different than Bud Selig. The owners will protect what they already have and see to it that the status quo will continue to rule.

“The status quo is not working…There is a competitive balance problem in baseball, and there is no question about it.”

Commissioner Allan H. (Bud) Selig 7/2002

Competitive balance … no question … yeah, that’s the ticket.

In spite of any perceived imbalance, tickets to The Game were sold like hot cakes in 2006. Attendance was up again, expected to top 75 million for the regular season. The top teams, the most profitable teams, should be no surprise to anyone. It’s the same old story of huge payrolls and gross local cable television deals. See the ESPN MLB 2006 Attendance Report for all the ugly details.

According to MLB.com, more than $165 million has been “transferred” from the profitable teams to unprofitable teams during Bud’s 8-year reign. Did that help with the competitive balance problem?

"There's work to be done. I'm not suggesting there isn't. There are still inequities. I want to make that point very carefully. But revenue sharing has really leveled the playing field. If a person left baseball in 1998 or 2000 and came back today, they would be stunned at the difference."

Commissioner Allan H. (Bud) Selig 7/2006

Inequities … leveled playing field … stunned at the difference … oh, such soft, soothing words.

Judging by the teams that always seem to make it into the playoffs each year (you know who I’m talking about), perhaps Bud was talking about something other than a competitive balance problem within the league. Maybe the inequities and the stunning differences are to be found somewhere else. Well, I tell ya, Bud, I was here between 1998 or 2000 and now, and I, like you, definitely remained stunned at the inequities and the differences.

I’d love to see a sheet of hard words, stats and numbers showing how revenue sharing has “really leveled the playing field” but I can’t do that. MLB doesn’t have to share any of this data with me, the public or even Congress. We just have to take the Commish’s word for it.

I heard through the grapevine that KC Royals received something like $10 million in revenue sharing last year. No, no, that can’t be possible. They lost another 100 games in 2006, hitting that inglorious mark for the third time in four years, and their whole team payroll was only a bit over $47 million. Now, the Royals still haven’t received their share of the millions Jackson County taxpayers agreed to pay to upgrade Kauffman Stadium and, hey, it’s going to be several months until they see any small benefit from raised ticket prices for next year. That’s right, they are raising seat prices for next year. They have to raise the prices since, as the Royals ticket director was quoted in the KC Star, it’s a “show of faith of the direction we think the club is going.” Yeah, right, what direction is that, anyway? According to Bud, these little inequities require these kinds of “shows of faith” and are exactly why losing teams like the Royals are struggling to make ends meet. In spite of increased attendance, in spite of revenue sharing, in spite of tax paying communities bending over to pay the bills, the Commish says contraction is still a possibility and anti-trust is a necessity and, and …

HEY! ANYBODY STILL OUT THERE?

Yeah, ok, here’s the point. The Office of the Commish does not serve the community of baseball fans or even the loose federation of baseball people. The Commish serves at the pleasure of the owners committee. The Commish is no more connected to the fan base than the CEO of Exxon is connected to his customers. The Commish has no reason to consider dramatic changes to the game or even contemplating the true inequity of the DH rule as long as people continue to buy tickets to the game.

And we continue to buy them, no matter the cost.

Whoever the next Commish is, he may have an opinion on the inequities, he may be aware of the imbalances, he may even dislike the DH, but he will have little substantive to say about it as long as he serves as the voice of the owners.

Hell, I’m convinced the only way Pete Rose will be reprieved and given an opportunity for the Hall of Fame is if the Commish can square away a deal to increase league revenue because of it. That’s the real bottom line there, folks.

Even with all his Congressionally-protected power, Cooperstown is still the one area in the world where his vote doesn’t count anyway. Not that it matters, but the Commish has nothing to say about his own place in a Hall that will one day honor him, the Hall that baseball fans everywhere love to talk about.

And that brings me to the final, sobering topic of this SoB ’06.

At first, my reaction to the last year’s events led me to believe that the bronze busts displayed in the Baseball Hall of Fame were forever tarnished. Somehow, they cut Buck O’Neil from that line-up.

There’s no way, I thought, that I could ever hold the institution or the people within it in such high regard ever again. “They” made a horrible mistake. They overlooked a wonderful, beautiful man and an important key to the long tradition and symbolic relationship between the history of baseball and American society.

I know it’s not the first time they made a mistake. They’ve put some real rascals in the Hall, some old guys like Buck once described being “a little meaner than what they said.” But this time they ignored a truly good character of the game whose chapter gave credence to the power of hope and fairness in a world too often maligned by the human realities of hopelessness and foul play.

I thought Buck would get the honor he deserved. I thought that, in some small way, his selection would be like that singular game changing moment I’m always waiting for, a short step forward to the plate for our society that would signify a new atmosphere while paying homage to the struggles of the past.

I don’t understand how or why Buck was left out. There are some good rumors out there about that. But I still don’t get it.

Well, it’s done. That’s that. It can’t be changed. They knew the pitch was coming, they knew exactly where it would be, but they just didn’t take advantage of it and now it’s too late. To go back and honor him now would be wrong, it would only add to the injustice and, for me at least, the ignorance.

Like I said, I want to be pissed off about all that but instead I choose to remember the simple words Buck spoke after he got the bad news earlier this year.

“God's been good to me. If I'm a Hall of Famer for you, that's all right with me. Just keep loving old Buck. Don't weep for Buck! No, man, be happy, be thankful!"

John Jordan “Buck” O’Neil, 1911-2006

Ok, Buck, I’ll try. I’ll try to just be thankful.

Cheers,
Mb