Late, great baseball union head Marvin Miller once explained that even if the owners thought they lost badly when free agency was granted, what the union really wanted was the right of arbitration. It’s the arbitration process that has driven baseball salaries through the roof much more quickly than free agency.

The legal parameters and procedures attached to the arbitration process would take up far too much time and space for anything less than a book or two, (there have been several books written on this subject). Such discussion would be well outside my realm of expertise and too dry a read for anyone not in the legal profession.

Instead, let’s consider a much more subjective approach—a dissection with a no more than gut level observation. A dissection from a baseball fan and a baseball writers’ casual observation.

Of course, the temptation with such an approach is to degenerate into a rant along the lines of: “He’s a lousy player—why does he make so much money—and why does he deserve a raise?” The arbitration system as it currently stands is not set up in this manner. It is there only to decide between what a player is asking for and what ownership has offered to pay. Nothing else.

This can allow a player to make an outrageous salary demand with the knowledge that should an arbitrator decide that the offer made to the player by the team– usually a raise depending on performance that past season– is insufficient, the player’s demand must be met.

Baseball owners have little or no recourse in dealing with those players who had a less successful or slightly better than unsuccessful season than previously. In the past, it was the players who had little or no recourse. Arbitration has taken the equation from the one extreme, now to another.

It has been suggested by some that the arbitrator should have the authority to choose a figure that he or she feels would be reasonable if neither submission seems fair. This has it’s drawbacks however. The most disagreeable although perhaps the most money saving for ownership would be in losing of  control of the decision on what a player might be worth.  It’s true that arbitration decides what a player will earn that season, but at the very least, owners have had their say with their proposal. Having an independent board decide on a figure other than those submitted by either party might take such control completely away.

This might lead to the precedence of strict statistical “legal” guidelines. A player who bats .240 is worth this amount of money, a player who bats .280 is worth this amount. A pitcher who wins 10 games will automatically receive less than on who wins 15. This might lead to individual stats being more important to a player than team wins or losses.

A manager would be under pressure from both players and management— the players would need to do whatever they could for their own benefit and no longer the benefit of their team. Upper management would insist on the benching of a player fearing another home run or base hit would cost them X amount of dollars. Benching a number one starting pitcher would hurt the team and the player but help the owner. Of course, it would also probably be illegal.

Who knows of a better solution?

Here’s the latest article from Doug Bird, a Sunday contributor here.

_________________

The unsuccessful teams get the high draft picks, stock the farm system, and if they have chosen wisely (and with a bit of luck) eventually improve. This happened with the Atlanta Braves in the 1990s, the Oakland A’s, and more recently, the Tampa Bay Rays. But this success doesn’t always last as the draft picks become stars and often leave for greener pastures. The Bud Selig claims of parody is continuing to be nothing more than a bad pun. I contend that this is really the old smoke and mirrors and that any accountant worth his salt can make two plus two equal five.

Yes it’s true there are fewer and fewer repeat Major League Baseball champions, something which Selig claims is a true indicator of a level playing field and hope for fans irrespective of which team they are cheering for– almost every team since the implementation of the luxury tax has a legitimate chance at World Series glory.  Based on the last few seasons, and especially the 2010 season, who can really argue with him? But, two plus two always equals four, and everything comes out in the wash eventually.

The Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez pickups by the Boston Red Sox are the poster boy, double edged sword proof that, once again, all is not well in baseball and no one seems willing or able to come up with a formula which might finally make things right. Teams such as Boston  simply throw money at the problem. To be fair, Boston has a farm system filled with young minor league players who are attractive to teams like San Diego whose owners are unwilling to pay exorbitant prices to retain a franchise player. Paying such a high salary in order to keep him on the home team wouldn’t really get these small market clubs to the promised land anyway the logic being: If we can’t win with him, why keep him? But such a situation should not be a necessity of conducting business. Even paying fare wages does not allow these teams to compete with the Red Sox and Yankees.

Teams such as Tampa Bay are losing players as though they are conducting a giant fire sale, players who they groomed and nurtured through their formative years.  Teams such as Tampa Bay cannot afford to make mistakes with their draft picks, yet the success of said draft picks is only fleeting at best. Teams such as Tampa Bay sign players knowing that they have a very narrow window of opportunity for success and with success the risk of losing such players only increases. Success becomes unsustainable for these franchises as players who have enjoyed and been a vital part of winning teams usually bolt for greener money pastures.

Teams such as Boston or New York can afford such player defections because there are always those out on the open market who are nothing more than hired guns whose loyalty is only to the almighty dollar. These teams can simply up the ante as the situation dictates with little or no worry about the consequences and can simply outbid anyone else. Teams such as Boston or New York are also not bound by any rules other than the almighty dollar, a change in the rules which might level the playing field on international drafting. If they lose a valuable prospect, they have the means to simply go out and buy another.

I’m not knocking their organizations nor singling them out as both teams have impressive farm systems. Fixing the problem, however, shouldn’t be merely a matter of how much money you can throw at it to make it go away. Upping the ante merely at your discretion shouldn’t be the way to do business in a supposedly competitive field.

_________________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com

Here’s the latest guest post from Doug Bird, a regular Sunday contributor here.

_________________

Many people are aware of my opinion of the job baseball commissioner Bud Selig has done during his tenure but for this article I will put aside those opinions and take an objective look at the proposal, discussing the pros and cons as I see them. The feeling is that this will happen despite any negative views one might have and as I am in a positive mood this week I thought I would put pen to paper and take a good hard look at might happen.

The proposal to add two more teams to the playoffs, (one in each league), seems to be scheduled to begin for the 2012 season.   It’s only a proposal and the speculation at this point of when and how many teams is  There have been seasons previous in which a team finishing second has a better won-lost record than any of the other division winners yet fails to make the playoffs. These teams have been unfairly eliminated from playoff contention through no fault of their own, clearly deserving of a post season berth based on their talent and success.  Save for the introduction of the wild card, the American League East with its three powerful teams, would have seen the elimination of two of them on a regular basis, despite their better than average records.

The addition of a wild card team in each league has been very successful from a competitive viewpoint with fewer teams seeing their playoff hopes all but finished by the end of April each season.  The wild card has also given hope to teams who play in a division whereby one team gets off to a terrific start and finds itself with an almost insurmountable division lead by the all star break.  Fans in the majority of major league baseball cities are able to read about, listen to and watch crucial games well into September.  This has been very beneficial for attendance figures, marketing strategies, sales of merchandise and keeping the focus on baseball after the start of seasons by other major sports.

The wild card keeps more players and playing better as they are involved in crucial games much longer into the season. Even professionals with all their ability and pride of game can have difficulty focusing intently on games which are long past meaning anything other than the padding of personal statistics.  Despite what many of us believe, baseball players are only human and humans need to be focused properly and have a goal to perform at the optimum of their abilities.

The cons of the current wild card and the possibility of adding more teams to the playoff picture is one of the watering down of major league talent and the corporate motivations behind the expansion. Pre-wild card, a team with a barely above .500 record was unlikely to qualify for the post season. Certainly it did happen but only rarely and this team was usually quickly eliminated from further advancing. The strong survived and the weak were vanquished, a natural and logical occurrence.  There were no safeguards to prevent this from happening nor should there have been. This, as someone once said, is why we play the game.

The wild card has allowed this to occur much more frequently than in the past, with a season of 83-85 wins– barely over .500– allowing for the real possibility of these weaker teams becoming World Series champions.   There is no advantage gained by finishing first, aside from home field advantage which isn’t important in my opinion. As  the other major sports have shown for many seasons, the incentive to field a highly-talented  team and spend the dollars to acquire good players becomes less and less as more playoff teams are added. Business logic certainly dictates the philosophy: Why spend money if you don’t have to? As a greater number of teams realize this, more and more teams will attempt to present a group of players with only one or two stars amongst them backed up by the necessary warm bodies to fill the other positions. The owners will make more money while spending far less as the revenue generated from an expanded season will sell more television and radio time and fill stadiums well into late October. Any additional playoff teams will only serve the owners and fill their pockets.

I am neither in favor of the wild card nor an expansion of this system. Individual division standings become far less important with teams competing with other teams outside of their division as the season progresses. I am not in favor of this proposal but I am learning to live with those in charge. Baseball is still the best game there is and nothing will change that.

_________________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com

I’m pleased to present the latest guest post from Doug Bird, a Sunday contributor here.

_______________

Traditionally, the winners of baseball’s major post season awards are those who have played on winning teams. The voting for best position player, (MVP) and best pitcher, (CY Young), has usually been heavily influenced by the success, or failure, of the team for which an individual plays  The logic being that a particular team might not have enjoyed the success it did had it not been for the play of this individual. Conversely, no matter how important a player might be to a team with a losing record, that team would have had an unsuccessful season with or without him. Any player could have filled his role or so goes the argument. Both opinions are certainly valid.

The 2010 awards once again followed this trend-with one exception, an exception which bodes well for the future. Certainly, no one can really argue with the choices of Roy Halladay, Joey Votto, (well maybe Albert Pujols), and Josh Hamilton. All had excellent seasons and played for winning teams, all were key contributors to their teams’ success. All were team leaders and winning might have been very difficult if not impossible without them.

Roy Halladay gave the Phillies a tried and trusted staff ace, capable of a complete game victory every time he took the mound. He had accomplished this season after season with the Toronto Blue Jays but the Blue Jays continued in their frustrating lack of post season appearances. He was the best pitcher in the league and perhaps all of baseball stuck on a team which was not going to make the playoffs no matter how many games he won or how well he pitched. He was awarded the AL CY Young award in 2003 and the NL CY Young award in 2010. In 2003, the voters decided that he was the best pitcher in the league regardless of the lack of success his steam enjoyed that season, and in 2010, the voters were able to combine personal success and team success in giving him the award. His stats were simply too good to ignore using either criteria and he received all 32 first place votes.

Josh Hamilton was healthier than he had been in years previous, (he still missed almost a month of the season), and still had numbers which could not be ignored by the voting press. All facets of his game were well above average and the Texas Rangers rode on his back all the way to the playoffs. Yet, one could certainly argue, without the bat of Vlad Guerrero behind him,  would Hamilton have enjoyed the offensive numbers he did in 2010? But, MVPs shouldn’t be judged on hitting stats alone and the tremendous contributions made by Hamilton on defense and with his speed on the base paths made him certainly the best all around player in the league. Let’s not forget the swagger or presence a player such as Hamilton brings to the game either, one of those intangibles which don’t show up on the score card but make everyone else on the team that much better.

Joey Votto certainly had the stats to qualify for MVP in the NL but I suspect it was what he meant to the Cincinnati Reds who were a surprise NL central division winner. Their obvious weaknesses were clear in their being swept aside in round one of the NL playoffs.  The baseball writers were taken by surprise all season long by the Reds and felt obligated to come up with a reason.  A healthy and fierce competitor such as Scott Rolen and  the experience of Orlando Cabrera certainly made a difference in 2010 but the player the press settled on was the one who got Cincinnati over the top and gave the Reds the marquee player to get them over the top and into the playoffs. The only real slump the reds went through was the times Votto missed due to injuries. When Votto returned, the collective sigh of relief from players  and fans was audible. Sometimes, writers tire of giving the MVP award to the same player year after year. Albert Pujols is that best player in the NL year in and year out. Votto won his MVP award by being the best offensive player in the NL in 2010 from a strictly numbers consideration and having his best season when his team had its best in several seasons.

Felix Hernandez of the Seattle Mariners was awarded the 2010 AL CY Young award because without him, Seattle would have been even more of an American League doormat than with him.  Writers voted him this award because they couldn’t believe any other pitcher could have enjoyed the success of Hernandez with a team as bad as the 2010 Mariners. The writers awarded Hernandez for his season long effort and perseverance. Any hope of any in season success for the Mariners rested solely on his shoulders. No other starter gave the team much of an opportunity to win games and Hernandez had to win games for his team without much support from his fellow players. He had to be perfect and then some. Other AL CY Young candidates at least had the luxury of playing for teams which could win even when they themselves were not sharp that start. Their teams could win games without them. Seattle could not.

The 2010 baseball award winners proved that  awards can be given out using different criteria for different players. But, that’s what can make them fun isn’t it.

_________________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com

I’m pleased to present the latest guest from Doug Bird, who recently began contributing Sunday posts here. Today, Doug writes about an ever-fun offseason topic: trades and free agency.

________________

No, not the real games, or maybe they are come to think of it.  It’s the offseason and that brings silly trade rumors, players crying about their lousy $15 million per season for four years offer, owners hiring the same old merry go round of managers and GMs and claiming that every player in their minor league system is a potential superstar.

Most writers for the more popular baseball publications are at it again-spreading ridiculous trade rumors as if they were talking about the upcoming fantasy baseball season or trading bubble gum cards with six year olds. Unfortunately, while  occupying their time with these “I have a column due today and I have to write something” stories, they often miss real and legitimate possibilities. They continually fall for the “no one is untouchable on this team if the right offer came along” feeds from various GMs and owners. Case in point this week: the Justin Upton trade rumor. Few teams wouldn’t want to have this star player as part of their roster and it is obvious to me that the Diamondbacks have no real interest in trading their best player. We hadn’t considered trading our best player but hey,  give me four or five of your top players and I think we can work something out.  If Arizona had put Upton on the market initially, perhaps these rumors would have some merit, but that was obviously not the case here.  Yes, Arizona need a lot of improvement  in most areas but giving away your future is not the way any competent GM would choose to go. No one is going to meet their demands but many columnists insist on quoting rival GMs complaining the demands for Upton are ridiculous.

We have players turning down huge contract offers, money which even in today’s inflated market are eye opening, with their agents comparing them to Babe Ruth in his prime. Of course, these players and agents are well aware that certain owners will pay these inflated contracts and have a history of massive overpayments.  These same owners  discover that trading these overvalued and under productive players two years from now is next to impossible without having to pay his salary as well.  Florida traded Dan Uggla, a good power hitter if nothing else, and a player who put up these numbers in a pitchers park, because of his salary demands, only to sign a mediocre catcher who had a career year in 2010 in a hitters park, (John Buck), to a contract even sillier. Adrian Beltre is once again asking for a multiyear contract and owners are, once again, listening and bidding on his services. Beltre is a very good player in a market where good third basemen are few and far between, but– and a very large but here– everyone from owners to the casual fan knows his history. Time and time again, Beltre puts in a lackadaisical effort, puts up poor numbers, until the walk year of his contract. He then becomes the player the owner hopes he would have been all those previous seasons. Yet, someone this offseason will give him what he wants.

The end of the 2010 season saw an unprecedented number of managerial openings.  Many of the old guard stepped down, making for a sad but interesting changing of the guard. Many years of baseball expertise and experience retired or fell by the wayside and it will be interesting to see if owners and GMs will give opportunities to long serving non major league managerial personnel or simply follow the old rule of hiring a name manager who had failed in other organizations. The Cubs hiring of Mike Quade and the Blue Jays hiring of John Farrell  are examples of how thing should be done. The Pirates hiring of Clint Hurdle and the Mariners hiring of Eric Wedge are merely more of the same. The Dodgers have hired a bench coach with no managerial experience and another former Yankee legend and the Mets can’t seem hire anyone. Everyone seems to want the fiery Bobby Valentine yet he doesn’t want any of them-but he wants to return to big league managing. Japan doesn’t have a big league team it seems just yet.

The GM meetings seem, every year, to be merely an excuse to garner a few days in the warm sunshine. No one wants to trade their minor league players who, judging by the teams own personnel decisions, aren’t ready for the majors or aren’t good enough. Yet few are willing to part with any of them for a genuine proven big leaguer. The publicity machines continually spit out features about this can’t miss and that can’t miss yet rarely are they deemed good enough for the bigs except in the worst organizations.

Spend big money on the farm system yet rarely use it or spend  even bigger money on free agents. I guess it’s a case of who blinks first-or who believes Scott Boras and who doesn’t.

________________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com

I’m pleased to present the latest guest post from Doug Bird, who recently volunteered to start contributing Sunday articles here.

_______________

The hunt for a new manager has begun for several major league teams with some having signed their new field boss and others still going through the interview process. Those teams with a settled upon GM and manager and money to spend can now set their sights on the 2010 free agent class. Those who haven’t still have some work to do.

There are teams which need too many major league caliber players still to be contenders and would not be helped by signing either of the two big name free agents, Cliff Lee and Jayson Werth. There are self proclaimed we don’t spend money teams whose philosophy will keep them from any free agent pursuits other than spare parts. There are teams which will overpay by a ridiculous amount for players who had a great 2010 season but are unlikely to repeat such a performance.

As has been proven many times with lessons seldom learned, a sound and successful baseball organization begins with ownership that is committed to more than the bottom line and a GM who understands the game and recognizes what players his team needs to be and remain competitive. There are many GMs who don’t grasp this concept either because of their own incompetence, monetary restrictions imposed on them, or unknowledgeable owners who meddle in the day to day operations of the franchise. Any one of these three will prove disastrous to the franchise. A combination of these three factors will lead to a team which is uncompetitive year in and year out. Baseball should be more than a business and more than a hire a friend to run the team enterprise. GMs and managers are fired because the franchise is unsuccessful only to be hired by another organization hoping that those fired will have somehow become knowledgeable during their time on the unemployment line. Successful career minor leaguers are often overlooked or hired to run a franchise which is hopelessly untalented and then blamed for the inevitable failure to come.

Now comes the offseason and with it the free agent frenzy, especially for starting pitchers this year. How valuable is an ace starter? C.C. Sabathia and Johan Santana, (not a free agent by the technical definition), proved that owners and GMs consider them to be priceless and will offer contracts of a length and amount which none could ever live up to. A starting pitcher, no matter his talent, plays only once every five games and won-lost records are highly team dependent, not solely a result of a starting pitchers ability. This, of course, can change dramatically if a team reaches the playoffs, (Cliff Lee), but getting there takes twenty five players as the Giants proved during the 2010 World Series. Sometimes a contract is offered to ensure that a division rival is unable to secure the services of a player, subtraction by addition.

Position players are often over valued based on rival players salaries, many who become underproductive. The reasoning for a high salary demand for mediocrity , at least with agents, uses the logic of if a certain player is paid $15 million per season and hit .250, my client who hit .260 must be worth even more money. Many teams seems to hold this underproduction as relevant and are willing to pay for mediocrity or a player who is solid but not franchise saving. Signing a free agent marquee position player makes sense only if you are close to being a legitimate contender or wish to keep that status. A Jayson Werth, Andre Beltre, or Victor Martinez won’t help a failing franchise reach the playoffs. For some franchises it seems to depend on the market and whether you, as an owner or GM want this years’ free agent marquee players as a showpiece to the casual fan or feel that they are the one missing piece. Baseball has long proven that one player seldom puts you over the top-unless that player is the one missing piece on an aging franchise, a player who can also handle the pressure which a big contract often brings. Or maybe a last grasp at the playoff straw.

_______________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com

I’m pleased to present a guest post from Doug Bird, who has offered to write a regular Sunday post here.

________________

TBS hasn’t forgotten that the game is the star and not the announcer, Fox still hasn’t replaced the man with the golden voice with someone who actually cares about and pays attention to the game on the field, happening right before his eyes,   the replay afficiados are still screaming to be heard on virtually every play and the games on Fox are passing the midnight hour, no weekend day games in sight.

The coverage on TBS, as in past years, has been markedly better than that of Fox for several reasons.  The focus, despite the over-talk of Ron Darling, is on the game itself. Now, Darling has a pretty good broadcasting voice as far as that goes  and seems to know what he is talking about but seems to be of the opinion that no one listening has watched a baseball game before. The third man in the booth, John Smoltz, began his career in the over-explanation mode, but quickly realized that the odd insightful comment was much more valuable and in tune with the flow of the game and has become one of the few interesting ex-players to listen to during the game.

I do wish that TBS had used Atlanta Braves broadcaster, Joe Simpson, on its telecasts, a man who’s broadcasts are always insightful and interesting. But that is a small criticism. TBS does not run incessant commercials between pitches, nor do they fill the screen with bars and bars of information.  Unless you are one of those who own a gigantic television screen, it makes it difficult to actually see the events unfolding on the field at any given time. Most of us, and certainly the regular fan, are able to keep track of the number of outs, the score, the pitch count and how many runners are on base. For those who have just tuned in for whatever reason, a quick and non distraction to the ongoing game, would certainly suffice. TBS seems to realize that the game is for the fan, not for their corporate sponsors.

The opposite, sadly, has been true of Fox baseball coverage for many years now and four hour plus games have become the norm instead of the exception. I tuned in the other night an hour after the start time and the game was still in the second inning. Surely there must have been a long rain delay or a score of 10-10.  No, the score was 2-2 and there been no rain delay. As I continued to watch the game, there were commercials, and many commercials, between pitches.  These were not of the full thirty-minute variety, (fortunately), but a quick ten-second or so verbiage by Buck, with the company logo filling up half the screen.  There were also instances of missed first pitches because the commercial break had run too long.

Buck often finds it difficult to concentrate on the game, talking about anything else or engaging in what I’m certain he considers to be, witty dialogue with partner Tim McCarver.  Tim attempts to steer the conversation back to the on filed action but generally with little avail. I often feel McCarver would like to leave the booth and sit in the dugout or stands where he could hear relevant baseball conversation. Who could blame him? Fox often advertises other show during the game, either network shows or the upcoming Sunday NFL match. It seems to be a chore for the Fox network to even broadcast baseball games. With the Giants now in the World Series, the games will feature two teams which Fox rarely, if ever, have shown on their Saturday broadcasts.  How they must be crying in their collective soup now that neither their beloved Red Sox or Yankees will be on the biggest stage of all.

There should be day games on weekends.  No, a 4 p.m. start is not a day game– 1 p.m. is. Again, Fox is to blame although surely major league baseball shouldn’t pander to the Fox executives despite having greedily signed  on the dotted line.  Late October and early November weather is cold, especially at night.  Cold is not the optimum condition in which to play baseball.  It also gives no leeway in case of inclement weather, (see 2008 World Series).  The Little Leaguers of America, always given lip service by major league baseball executives, are not likely to be awake past 11 p.m., forcing them to miss the latter part of the games.

Baseball playoffs, on weekends, should be played in the warmth of the afternoon sun, not the cold frost of the evening. There should be no commercials between pitches. Announcers should discuss the ongoing events on the field, not everything but those happenings. The game should be first, foremost and last. I could do without everything else. Sadly, Fox will be covering the World Series again this season and with the conclusion of the American League playoffs, no more TBS.

_______________

Email Doug Bird at d.bird@rogers.com