 |  |
 |
| Thursday, November 29 Updated: November 30, 12:56 PM ET Selig, owners have some 'splaining to do By Jayson Stark ESPN.com |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
This time, they say, things are different. This time, they say, they really are losing money. Seriously. No kidding. So help Bowie Kuhn.
OK, it's true, they say, that they've made a lot of claims and made a lot of mistakes these last 30 years. They understand, they say, that people haven't forgotten those claims and those mistakes. So if people like us act skeptical when people like Bud Selig say the baseball industry is a half-billion bucks in the red, at least they're not blaming us for that. Heck, skepticism over remarks like that is practically a tradition in this sport. "You have every right to be skeptical," says Selig's trusty executive vice president, Sandy Alderson, "in light of past history." But this time is different, he says. Honest. Past history, Alderson says, doesn't have to mean these owners are "crying wolf" now. And he promises, just as Selig did the other day, that we'll all see why when the owners open their books next Thursday for the reading pleasure of the House of Representatives. Of course, even after they open those books, we still have every right to be skeptical. As our colleague, Rob Neyer, pointed out, Forbes magazine estimates that 20 teams actually made money in the 2000 season -- and that the industry turned a $130 million profit. In the season since then, the sport took in even more money -- somewhere between $3.3 billion to $3.7 billion, depending on whose estimate you believe. That's an all-time record. Meanwhile, the percentage of that money which teams paid to their players actually went down. Yet Selig's accountants still tell him that despite those developments, 25 clubs lost more than $500 million this year. That's a bigger swing than Jeromy Burnitz's. It seems to us that Selig and his accountants sure have more motive than Forbes and its analysts to portray their business ledger as looking redder than Larry Bowa's cap. After all, what does it matter to Forbes whether baseball is in the red, in the black or in a big bottle floating out to sea? But Bud says that the critics have never seen the books. So that's his story, and he can stick to it until Thursday. Meanwhile, we point to the impending sale of 53 percent of the Red Sox ownership group for $400 million. By our calculations, that means the total value of the franchise would be somewhere around $750 million. And we can't help but notice that the groups trying to purchase that interest include two former owners (San Diego's Tom Werner and Houston's John McMullen), a current owner (Florida's John Henry) and a member of Selig's Blue Ribbon Panel (former Sen. George Mitchell). We see these things and we conclude that the business can't be THAT bad, and that franchise values must be going up, even if profits aren't necessarily keeping pace.
But Alderson says people like us, who make conclusions like that, are, essentially, adding two and two together and coming up with Ichiro Suzuki's batting average. "Just because revenues have gone up recently doesn't necessarily mean that teams are making money on a net basis," he says. "And it doesn't mean franchise values are going up." The Red Sox franchise's value may be going up like the Space Shuttle, but that's just because the Red Sox "don't represent the industry." Instead, they are simply one of the few model franchises out there, Alderson says. He isn't confirming the involvement of Henry in the group trying to buy the Red Sox. But Alderson does say that if it's true, then "John Henry moving from Florida to Boston is just like Jason Giambi moving from Oakland to New York. They want more money, and they want to win." And if former owners like Werner and McMullen want back in, or Henry or Jeffrey Loria want to sell teams and buy others, that's only because "it's an upgrade in their ability to compete." Maybe you can accept these explanations. Maybe you can't. We offer them mostly as a public service, just so Selig and Alderson can see we're more open-minded than they think we are. These guys have a lot of 'splaining to do on this claim, so let them start 'splaining. All we want in life is for baseball to find peace and long-term prosperity. So we're happy to listen, even if we're not ready to believe. The other day in Chicago, Selig was asked a tough, pointed question about how successful billionaire businessmen could turn into such unsuccessful half-a-billion-dollar-losing businessmen the minute they stepped into baseball. He gave a condescending answer that suggested his 8-year-old granddaughter could figure that out. Heck, his granddaughter must be smarter than we are, because we can't figure it out. And we've talked to many other intelligent people this week who also consider this to be a bigger mystery than the Loch Ness Monster. It happens over and over, though, apparently. "When people get into this business, they're not good businessmen anymore," Alderson says. "That just has to do with the unique nature of professional sports. The one major difference is that in every other business, the primary motivation is profit. That's not true in baseball. The two motives in baseball are 1) economic, and 2) competition. People want to win. "What I'm saying," he went on, "is that people who have made a billion and a half dollars in business don't get into baseball to make another billion and a half dollars. They get into it for some sort of psychic satisfaction. And they're often making choices between winning and not losing money. That's not a choice the New York Yankees have to make. But it is a choice the Oakland A's -- and many other teams -- have to make. "That creates an irrationality across the industry," Alderson concluded. "And the thing we don't have, to bring everyone back into focus, to provide some sort of equilibrium, is revenue sharing and some sort of salary restraint." So as we move on now to the next phase of this great adventure -- the upcoming labor free-for-all -- keep that in mind. These owners merely want these players and their union to help them restore their own rationality, which, by their own admission, they just can't restore on their own. The last 30 years offer ample proof of the irrationality. It's now up to the commish and Sandy Alderson and all their ownership lobbyists to offer equally convincing proof that everyone else has to pitch in to help them get their economic sanity back. As we said, they've sure got some 'splaining to do to sell that crate of goods. But let the 'splaining begin -- right there on the floor of the U.S. Capitol building.
Miscellaneous rumblings "I don't even think about it anymore," said one NL executive. "It never enters my mind." "I don't think it's happening," said another. "And I don't know anyone else who does, either." So by delaying that admission, all the commissioner is effectively accomplishing is helping his side's negotiating stance by guaranteeing the industry takes in less money next season than this season. "If you don't name the teams," says one prominent baseball man, "people think there are four teams that might contract instead of two. So you cut down season-ticket sales in all four cities. It means revenues go down. Basically, those teams are almost worse off now than if they'd contracted. If you're contracted, at least you can't lose money. They're going to get killed."
Isringhausen's agent, Danny Horwitz, says he thinks there's "a legitimate chance" his client will sign in the next week. The most likely destinations would seem to be the Rangers and Cardinals, if only because they've both pursued him so openly in the last week. Horwitz visited St. Louis on Tuesday, and Isringhausen personally had dinner with owner Tom Hicks and GM John Hart of the Rangers on Wednesday. It's believed the Rangers offered him a four-year contract for about $28 million. Horwitz said only that he has gotten offers from "numerous teams." Horwitz said he plans to talk with two more teams (believed to be the A's and Dodgers) before week's end. Meanwhile, the Red Sox and Orioles also are known to be interested. And the Braves and Mets are reported to have interest if they need to plug holes left by John Smoltz and Armando Benitez. But we would bet on Texas, where Hicks has given Hart a mandate to upgrade this staff, and fellow GMs say Hart has been the most proactive GM in the sport so far this offseason.
Home runs the last four years: Giambi 141, Gonzalez 141. RBI the last four years: Giambi 490, Gonzalez 492. Age next season: Giambi 31, Gonzalez 32. And those numbers, Moorad can't help but mention, include the worst year of Gonzalez's career -- his 2000 nightmare in Detroit. On the other hand, Moorad says Gonzalez's decision on where to play won't be determined by simply who offers the most dollars. After Detroit, Gonzalez realizes he needs to find an "appropriate place" to play, Moorad said. "Cleveland was a very positive experience for Juan," he said, "given the winning, the experience in the clubhouse, as well as the strong Latino support system in the organization." Gonzalez's first choice to replicate that comfort level, according to some accounts, is Texas. But the Rangers have yet to show interest.
Most policies of this sort don't cover preexisting conditions such as Gonzalez's back troubles. But Moorad says this one is "free of exclusion." The policy runs through Feb. 15, at which time any team signing Gonzalez has the option to pick it up or insure him itself. "I've never been faced with a situation where there was so much focus on the insurability of a player," Moorad said, "let alone in such an uncertain marketplace. So rather than let people in the industry speculate, we decided to take the matter into our own hands." While some teams have shown interest -- primarily, it's believed, the Mets and Orioles -- Moorad expects to get a clearer picture at the winter meetings.
Rolen to the Dodgers in a deal centering around Adrian Beltre? To the Cardinals in a deal that would include Bud Smith? To the Cubs in a deal that would start with Jon Leiber? To Seattle for a package that would include Arthur Rhodes and Joel Pineiro? Clubs that have spoken to the Phillies continue to report they've been told the Phillies have to be "overwhelmed" by a three-player package. And given the uncertainty of whether Rolen will sign beyond this year, that has turned away some teams. "They want a gold mine back, plus you'd have to pay him big money if you can sign him at all," said one club official. "We're not going to be able to do that. I'm sure somebody will." Despite continuing rumors linking Rolen to Colorado, the Phillies are said not to be interested in a package that would include Jeff Cirillo and Denny Neagle -- or even Mike Hampton, for that matter. But the Phillies at least are reportedly telling clubs they're flexible enough that they don't have to get a third baseman back -- and would take either a front-of-the-rotation starter or an emerging-star type position player as the centerpiece of any deal. If they don't get a third baseman in return, they would pursue free agents David Bell and Craig Paquette. If they get pitching back, they would turn around and trade some of their own surplus of young pitching to fill their offensive needs. (And teams have been told any of their pitching prospects except Brett Myers would be available.) And if they don't fill their pitching holes with the Rolen deal, they are said to be prepared to make a major run at John Smoltz, with names like Terry Adams and Hideo Nomo as fallbacks.
"This entire thing," he said, "could be a way to stop Paul Molitor from managing anyone but the Brewers."
Triviality
Useless information dept. Even after a season in which he set the single-season record for home run ratio (one every 6.52), Barry Bonds could still homer in his next 199 consecutive at-bats -- and not pass Big Mac's career ratio. (Even after all that, Bonds still would be at 10.61488, just above McGwire's 10.61235.) That sensational burst of calculating inspired us to take a look at the rest of the top five active leaders in the post-McGwire era. Sammy Sosa (current ratio: 14.38): Could homer in his next 176 consecutive at-bats and not pass McGwire. Manny Ramirez (14.44): Could homer in his next 110 consecutive at-bats and not pass McGwire. And Junior Griffey (14.60): Could homer in his next 150 consecutive at-bats and not pass McGwire. Bear in mind that these guys have fewer career at-bats than Bonds, so they would need fewer consecutive homers. But somehow, we have a feeling that's one Big Mac record in no imminent danger.
McGwire and Paul O'Neill both retired this winter following seasons of 20 homers or more. According to the Elias Sports Bureau's Ken Hirdt, there have only been two other seasons in history in which two different players packed it in following seasons of 20-plus home runs. The others:
2000: Albert Belle (23) and Will Clark (21)
They just became the first team ever to win two different postseason series in the same year on the last swing of a sudden-death game (seventh game of a best-of-seven series, fifth game of a best-of-five series). Before Arizona came along, there had been just six games like that since the playoffs expanded with division play. Here's the whole list:
2001 World Series,Game 7: Arizona beats Yankees, bottom of 9th Extra credit if you can name the hero in all those classic finishes. Aw, what the heck. We'll give them to you: Luis Gonzalez, Tony Womack, Edgar Renteria, Edgar Martinez, Francisco Cabrera, Gene Larkin, Chris Chambliss. And Johnny Bench hit a homer to tie that 1972 game in the ninth, but the goat was Bob Moose, who wild-pitched in the winning run.
There was still a home run hit every 30.5 at-bats -- the third-highest rate in history (trailing only 2000 and 1999). The American League offensive numbers rolled back only as far as the mid-'90s. And while the National League didn't approach the insane numbers of the previous two years, it still had one of its most prodigious offensive seasons of all time. The NL's leaguewide ERA (4.35) was still at its third-highest level since 1930. The rate of runs per team per game (4.70) was the third-highest since 1953, and the league slugging percentage (.425) was third-highest since 1930. That new strike zone achieved one thing, however -- a new record for strikeouts per game in both leagues (6.39 per team per game in the AL, and an amazing 6.92 per game in the NL). That was approximately two strikeouts per game, per team higher than the strikeout rate 20 years ago.
Year HR AB AB/HR 2000 5693 167290 29.4 1999 5528 167137 30.2 2001 5458 166234 30.5 1996 4962 156801 31.6 1987 4458 144095 32.3
Most times pitching out: 106, by Jimy Williams (in only 118 pre-guillotine games). (Ironic note: The manager Williams will replace in Houston, Larry Dierker, pitched out 12 times all year.)
Most intentional walks issued: 71, by Davey Lopes.
Most sacrifice-bunt attempts (NL): 140, by Don Baylor.
Most sacrifice-bunt attempts (AL): 95, by Jerry Manuel.
Most hit-and-run attempts: 148, by Lloyd McClendon.
Most times using relievers to face one batter: 60, by Tony La Russa.
Right-handed hitters batted under .150 against him (25-for-168, .149, with 42 strikeouts). Left-handed hitters batted over .500 against him (27-for-52, .519, with four strikeouts).
Right-handed batters vs. Beckett: 5-for-48 (.104) -- but four of the five hits were extra-base hits (three doubles, one homer). Figure that out.
Musial 7 (3 MVPs) The group at four includes Willie Mays, Jimmie Foxx and Lou Gehrig. There are worse neighborhoods to hang around in than that one.
Humor of the week
Bonds wins record 4th Most Valuable Player Award
Trivia answer Jayson Stark is a senior writer for ESPN.com. |
| ||||||||||||||||||
