No one knows where Barry Bonds is headed this season: To 50 homers? To 60? To 70? Or beyond?
But you don't have to be Stephen King to know the biggest Barry Bonds mystery of the year is this:
|  | | Will Barry Bonds be receiving congratulations from Dusty Baker next season? |
Where is he headed next season?
That's a question with no simple answer, and here's why:
Bonds' contract with the Giants will end whenever the Giants' season does.
He and Jason Giambi will be the most dazzling products on the shelves next winter down at the free-agent megamart.
It's clear the Giants aren't going to hand Bonds any five-year, $100-million contract at age 37, no matter how photogenic his numbers end up this summer.
And it would be hard to read Bonds' selection of Scott Boras as his latest agent as a sign that he's inclined to offer the Giants any discounted hometown deals.
So where is Bonds headed? That's a question we'll be ruminating on for months to come.
"I think he wants to stay," says Giants GM Brian Sabean. "And I think it's safe to say we'll do the right thing and try to keep him. The problem is, we don't have all the information right now. We have a payroll that can go up maybe 2½ million dollars a year. We're not a club that can go to $75 million or $90 million. So it's up to me to juggle to try to find a way to make it work."
|
Triviality
|
|
Since the beginning of the 1990 season, only one active player (Mark McGwire) has outhomered Barry Bonds -- and just five have outstolen him. Can you name the five current players who have stolen more bases than Bonds since the beginning of the '90s?
(Answer at bottom.)
|
Over the years, of course, Sabean and his astute assistant, Ned Colletti, have proved many times they can juggle better than the Ringling Brothers. But to keep their man Barry, they are looking at their most challenging juggling act yet.
On one hand, Pac Bell Park has been a jolt of electricity for the franchise and a potent revenue source. On the other hand, the Giants have to plow $20 million of that revenue every year into paying off the debt on a park built with no public funding.
So Sabean has said a thousand times that this is one team that "can't afford to make a mistake" on any high-priced player.
Sure, re-signing a future Hall of Famer might not seem like a mistake now. But what happens if Bonds is still collecting $20 million or so at age 41 -- and giving the Giants 80 games and 18 homers a year for their $20 million?
"The big issue with a guy like this is the years more than the dollars," says one NL club official. "He's in such great shape, you don't worry about the next couple of years.
"But then he's getting into his 40s. And how many players in their 40s put up, let's say, 25 homers and 85 RBI? If any player can do that, it's Barry, because he's a special player. But say, at 40, he goes 20 and 85, and people say he had a real good year -- for age 40. Is that worth $20 million?"
The answer: Of course not. What Manny Ramirez is giving the Red Sox is worth $20 million. What A-Rod is doing in Texas, regardless of the pitching mess around him, is worth $20 million. But by today's standards, that's about it.
"And this guy," says that NL executive, "is not A-Rod. If money weren't a factor, all 30 teams would have wanted to sign A-Rod, because of age, because of position, because of attitude. But Barry Bonds, at age 40 -- there might be four or five teams that might want to sign him and can afford to pay him. But how many of them are teams he wants to go to?"
We spoke with a baseball man who knows Bonds well. And his read on this enigmatic superstar was this:
He wants no part of New York or any high-pressure media market where every 0-for-4 would generate another is-he-worth-it debate.
His home-run binge this year has been motivated, at least in part, by his impending free agency and, in larger part, by a need to be appreciated more by the masses after years in the shadow of Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Junior Griffey.
While his comfort level in San Francisco gives him strong motivation to stay, his desire to climb back into the salary elite one last time could drive him elsewhere.
So suppose Bonds does get out there on the market? What is the market for a 37-year-old slugger looking for a five-year deal?
Boras no doubt will tout the lure of signing a guy with a chance to get to 700 home runs or even, if he could average 40 a year for five years, to approach Hank Aaron's 755.
But hold on. As amazing as Bonds is, he will age.
Before we talk too much about Bonds breaking Aaron's record, let's remember that only seven players in history have hit 100 more homers starting with the season they played primarily at age 37.
Before we talk too much about Bonds averaging 40 homers a year beyond this season, let's remember that no 40-year-old has ever hit 35 home runs in a season, let alone 40 or 50.
So how many years could a player his age possibly ask for at today's superduperstar rates? Oh, he'll no doubt ask for five. But one GM we surveyed says: "Signing him for more than three years would be ridiculous."
And let's keep something else in mind. Talented as Bonds is, charming as he can be at times, he's not exactly as easy a personality to have around as, say, Dale Murphy.
"He's a guy," says one NL GM, "that you'd have to bring into the right environment. And you'd have to have a manager who can deal with him, or you'll have your hands full."
Finally, there's one other question teams may think about next winter, after what has happened in baseball this season: Will clubs look at the Mariners without A-Rod -- and Texas with him -- and continue to blow up their bank accounts for one marquee name?
"It's been pretty well proven this year," says one GM, "that one guy doesn't make a difference between winning and losing in our game."
Still, there always seems to be some owner or two out there who has other ideas. So you know there will be teams willing to do what it takes to put Bonds on the cover of their yearbook. But it's also possible it won't be as many teams as he -- or most people -- might think.
That's why, in the end, we think this will all rest in Bonds' hands. If he wants to do a McGwire-esque deal -- two years at under $20 million -- he'll certainly remain with the Giants. If he even wants to be creative, to protect the Giants as his age mounts, he probably stay in San Francisco.
But if this is going to be a show-me-the-money deal for four or five years, he'll be playing for whatever team wants to pay him.
Our bet right now is: This is his last year in a Giants uniform. But this is one prediction we actually hope we're wrong about.
Barry Bonds deserves to be a Giant. Whether he is or not is almost solely his call.
Marlin fishing
The firing of John Boles in Florida tells you one thing about the Marlins:
They feel they're ready to win.
John Boles is one of the finest men you'll ever meet. But GM Dave Dombrowski clearly felt his team was underachieving. And while Dan Miceli's postgame outburst Sunday wasn't the only reason Dombrowski acted when he did, it may, in the words, of one Marlin, have given Dombrowski "a crutch" to act.
The player we spoke with said Dombrowski told his team Monday that "this is the next step. Now we're playing to win. No more 'we're developing.' He told us, 'We believe we're better than anybody in the National League East, and I wouldn't say that if I didn't think it was the case.' He said Bolesy was a great person ... but we're not developing anymore. We're trying to win now."
There actually have been indications for some time that Boles had lost the faith of a number of players -- many of whom had played for him in the minor leagues. There has been open second-guessing of lineups and in-game maneuvering. And Monday, that caught up with Boles.
"As a human being, he's a tremendous person," the player said. "But as far as managing, there was something lacking there, whether it was intensity or whatever."
Among the names circulating as potential replacements: Buck Showalter, Terry Francona, Braves Triple-A manager Carlos Tosca (who worked in the Marlins' organization until 1997) and former Dodgers manager Glenn Hoffman.
In terms of pure talent, this is, potentially, one of the best teams in baseball. But they're young. They've had one winning season in franchise history. And there has been a sense around the sport that maybe these guys didn't know quite how good they could be.
But now that they've been given the challenge to win something, it will be fascinating to see how they respond.
"I think you could see guys get that eye of the tiger right away," the player said. "The vibes are there now. What we need to do is get on a seven-, eight-, nine-game win streak and then see what happens."
Miscellaneous rumblings
So where is David Wells going? Probably nowhere fast.
The Cardinals were portrayed in the New York media as being the favorite, but they say they haven't talked to the White Sox in weeks.
The Mets -- 11 behind the Phillies in the loss column -- aren't even sure yet whether they can get back in the race. They're actually looking to add offense first. And they're leery of how motivated Wells might be if he were back in New York on a team that was out of it.
The Red Sox already have the highest payroll in baseball and the lowest ERA. And the only young position player who would seem to fit what the White Sox want is Trot Nixon.
The Astros have been looking for a left-handed starter for two years. But owner Drayton McLane just tiptoed along the fine line of tampering in last week's public comments on Wells. So Houston may have to back off for that reason alone.
Officials from three different clubs have told us they think the Phillies are the dark horse. But there is no indication the Phillies want to mess with their chemistry right now -- or overpay in talent or dollars for a guy pitching as unevenly as Wells is these days.
The Indians have done no more than monitor the situation -- but they know Wells doesn't want to be there and they don't think the White Sox would trade him there anyway.
Then there are the Yankees. They could use another starter. And they haven't ruled anything out. But they, too, seem more leery of Wells than interested right now.
One club official's take on all this: "You're playing the risk-versus-reward game here. The guy could be motivated by being back in a race. But the way he's pitching now, we'd only be interested if it means a lesser prospect. We would have to be asolutely convinced his stuff hadn't dropped off to give up prospects and take on the money. And off his last couple of starts, it would be hard to be convinced of that."
Since he was 15-2 at the All-Star break last season, Wells has made 26 starts and hasn't won two starts in a row at any point. Opponents' batting average since the break: .292. And he's allowed five runs or more in nearly half those starts (12 of 26).
Another GM: "Why would anybody give up anything significant for a pitcher who is 38 years old, has back problems, isn't pitching well and every time he opens his mouth, he sticks his foot in it?"
One of the questions bouncing around baseball last week was: Why would Bud Selig have urged John McHale Jr. to take that COO job in Tampa Bay if baseball was getting ready to eliminate the Devil Rays' franchise through contraction?
Selig says only that "they had an emergency there, I've known John for a long time, and I told him how much they needed him."
But one prominent baseball man says contraction (of Tampa Bay, Montreal and other cities) is still high on ownership's agenda and that McHale "went there with his eyes open."
Speculation is that baseball officials haven't made a final decision yet whether Tampa Bay is a franchise they would target for contraction. So they would like McHale's help in evaluating whether the franchise can survive. And they want to evaluate whether the franchise can be more viable under more capable leadership than it was getting from the turbulent Vince Naimoli.
Since the NFL realigned last week, you may have wondered whatever happened to baseball's once-dramatic realignment plans.
"We have to get back to that," Selig says. "We have to wait and see what happens on other fronts (i.e., labor, contraction and potential franchise moves). But it's still very much on my mind. I don't know how radical our realignment would be. But we have many options."
The Rick Ankiel story has taken such an unhappy turn that there has actually been talk among Cardinals people of letting Ankiel play the outfield a little in extended spring training, just to take some of the pressure off him, a la Chuck Knoblauch.
If the whole point of sending Ankiel to Memphis was to get him to relax and have fun outside the big-league spotlight, that obviously didn't work. So whatever it takes to get this guy to be able to enjoy coming to the ballpark again can't be ruled out.
There is so much parity -- particularly in the National League -- that some clubs are already starting to worry they might have limited trading options come July.
"It's a basic principle," Sabean says, "that if more and more teams are in it, the price of doing business goes up."
Right now, the only NL teams that would seem to have no chance are Pittsburgh and Montreal. Which explains all the rumors surrounding Ugueth Urbina, Tony Armas Jr., John Vander Wal, etc.
Speaking of the Pirates, several clubs have been paying extra attention lately to closer Mike Williams. The Yankees, for one, have had Gene Michael following the Pirates recently. They're believed to interest in several Pittsburgh pitchers, including Williams and starter Omar Olivares.
Jason Kendall jokes that the only reason the Pirates want to move him into the outfield is that manager Lloyd McClendon is "tired of having me hanging around the dugout when I don't catch. He's tired of kicking me in the shins."
But obviously, the Pirates have more serious reasons -- including the threat of top catching prospect J.R. House taking a football scholarship at West Virginia. And Kendall, rightly, has reservations about giving up catching full-time.
"This guy's an All-Star catcher," says one NL club official. "I don't know that he's an All-Star at another position. And we like J.R. House as a prospect -- but he's not Jason Kendall."
The latest team that's clearly in a mood to make changes is Kansas City, where everything that could go wrong has gone wrong this year. After getting swept by the Mariners, Royals CEO David Glass vowed that this club "will make changes." But sources say those changes won't include manager Tony Muser.
Second baseman Luis Alicea figures to go as soon as Luis Ordaz and/or Carlos Febles return from their rehab options.
Brian Meadows apparently will be bounced from the rotation, probably for prospect Chris George.
And the Royals are suddenly in a mode to listen to offers on just about anyone else, including Jermaine Dye. Seattle has had interest in Dye in the past and has pitching to deal, so stay tuned.
You know a guy has an innate feel for managing when he benches players or drops them in the lineup -- and gets exactly the response he was looking for. Larry Bowa sat Pat Burrell for two days this month, and Burrell came back to go 15 for his next 33 (.455). Earlier, Bowa briefly dropped Doug Glanville from the leadoff slot to the No. 6 and No. 7 holes -- and Glanville has hit .300 since then, with five home runs.
How good was Curt Schilling on Saturday in that near-perfect game? Catcher Damian Miller told the East Valley Tribune's Ed Price afterward that Schilling was more dominant than Randy Johnson was in the Unit's 20-strikeout game May 8.
For those wondering if Ben Davis will have any retribution from the Diamondbacks for dropping that bunt single on Schilling, we won't have to wait long to find out. Schilling starts against them again Friday in Arizona.
|
List of the week
|
|
Barry Bonds will play most of next season at age 37 (turning 38 late in the year). Only seven players in history -- six of them Hall of Famers -- have hit 100 career homers from that stage of their careers on (meaning, starting with the season in which they played at 37). Here are those seven, courtesy of the Sultan of Swat Stats, SABR's David Vincent:
Name Before 37 After
Hank Aaron 592 163
Darrell Evans 262 152
Carlton Fisk 230 146
Ted Williams 394 127
Carl Yastrzemski 338 114
Dave Winfield 357 108
Babe Ruth 611 103
|
Useless information dept.
Is there a more stunning development anywhere on the stat sheet than the sight of Ryan Klesko third in the National League in stolen bases? Klesko was just four behind league leader Luis Castillo, whom he outweighs by 45 pounds. And here's what he ought to know:
Last first baseman to lead his league in stolen bases: George Sisler in 1927 (with 27).
The only first basemen since 1900 to lead their league in stolen bases: Sisler (four times), Frank Chance (1903 and 1906) and Frank Isbell (1901).
Last first baseman to steal 40: Gregg Jefferies, 46, for the 1993 Cardinals.
First basemen who have stolen 30 in the last 50 years: Jeff Bagwell (twice), Rod Carew (49, in 1976), Dan Driessen (31, in 1977) and (no kidding) Bill Buckner (31, in 1974).
Klesko stole three bases in one game Thursday. The only other first basemen to duplicate that trifecta in the last 10 years, according to the Elias Sports Bureau's Rob Tracy: Bagwell (July 5, 1977), Jefferies (Sept 7 and 15, 1993) and, of course, John Jaha (four steals on Sept. 12, 1992).
Jon Lieber threw a complete game in 78 pitches Thursday. Elias' Randy Robles reports that through Monday, there had been 25 times this season when a starter had thrown 78 pitches or more and not gotten through the fourth inning. As recently as Monday, in fact, David Cone threw 77 pitches in 2 2/3 innings and Eric Gagne needed 81 pitches to get 11 outs.
There's a chance that Pedro Martinez and Mike Mussina could meet in three straight starts over the two-week period that started Thursday. And that's something that has never happened in the history of the storied Yankees-Red Sox rivalry.
Over the last 50 years, one Yankee -- Duke Maas in 1958 -- made three straight starts against the Red Sox. And one Red Sox pitcher -- Dennis Eckersley in 1978 -- made three starts in a row against the Yankees.
But the closest we've ever come to having two pitchers start against each other three straight times was in 1901 -- before the Yankees franchise even moved to New York. That year, Cy Young and Harry Howell dueled on Aug. 5 and Aug. 8, and both faced the other team in a doubleheader Aug. 10 -- but in different games. Oh, well.
What were the odds of Curt Schilling throwing a perfect game against a team like the Padres? Well, on one hand, it ain't easy getting through a zero-walk no-hitter against a club leading the major leagues in walks. But Schilling ran just four two-ball counts to the first 21 hitters he faced.
On the other hand, Schilling's control has been the least-heralded facet of his game. Peel away the strikeouts, and you'll find he went into the season with a 3.48-to-1 strikeout-walk ratio -- third to only Pedro Martinez and Shane Reynolds among active starters.
By the way, Ben Davis' perfecto-shattering bunt single off Schilling was the first bunt hit of Davis' career.
Had the Padres been no-hit by Schilling, they would have been just the third team in history to be the victims of two no-hitters in the same calendar month. The others: the '71 Reds (by Ken Holtzman and Rick Wise) and the 1923 Athletics (by Sam Jones and Howard Ehmke).
How 'bout them Cubs? It isn't every year you see a team lose eight in a row and then be resilient enough to come back and win their next eight in a row. Last team to do that, according to Elias: the 1985 Twins. They lost eight straight from April 11 to April 20. Then they won eight straight from April 21 to May 1.
Another amazing Cubs fact: They've won eight in a row without Sammy Sosa hitting any homers.
And finally, when was the last time the Cubs and White Sox were in the midst of simultaneous winning streaks of five games or more? How about Aug. 7, 1984, when -- thanks to Randy Robles --- we know that the playoff-bound Cubs had a five-gamer going and the White Sox had a six-gamer in progress.
Trivia answer
Rickey Henderson (509 through Sunday), Kenny Lofton (469), Delino DeShields (438), Marquis Grissom (404) and Chuck Knoblauch (366). Bonds' SB total: 359.
Jayson Stark is a Senior Writer at ESPN.com. Rumblings and Grumblings appears each Monday.
| |
|
