Sud bucks...

Where to start?

While I have a few questions regarding Alex Rodriguez’s mea culpa I cannot help but be struck at the almost simultaneous event of Bud Selig doing the exact opposite--hey, not my fault the out of commission(er) is saying about all this; in fact ol’ Budley DooWrong stated: "Starting in 1995, I traied to institute a steroid policy. Needless to say, it was met with strong resistance. We were fought by the union every step of the way.”

Yet, this is the same guy that stated regarding ‘95: "If baseball has a problem, I must say candidly that we were not aware of it. It certainly hasn't been talked about much."

Despite not talking about it much they were trying to implement a steroid policy?

Ho'kay.

Rewind to aught-five and we get: "I never even heard about it. I ran a team, and nobody was closer to their players. And I never heard any comment from them. It wasn't until 1998 or '99 that I heard the discussion ... I don’t know if there were allegations in the early 90s. I never heard them.” Fast forward one year and ol’ Buddy testified under oath: "In 1994, before anybody was really talking about steroids in baseball, we proposed a program of testing for such substances to the MLBPA. As early as 1998, I began formulating a strategic plan to eliminate the use of performance enhancing substances from the game."

Uh, yeah. Despite their being no allegations he was aware of in the early 1990’s and nobody discussing the subject they were going ahead on dealing with steroids in 1994 (didn't he say 1995?) even though he had never heard about the drugs?

Clearly, Selig hasn’t heard about the internet--it’s a place where anyone can access what one has said in that past but I guess he isn’t aware of it and like A-Rod (ironically enough) says whatever he feels forwards his agenda at that point in time.

I find it striking that everyone is going along with the revisionist history of the so called “steroid era” that Selig is trying to implement--the players are apologizing and management is posturing as the unwitting victims of the players’ avarice and the media is doing their part (mostly because they wish folks would forget their sorry role in all this) to help it along.

Pathetic.

Anyway, for those lamenting the taint on A-Rod’s and Barry Bonds numbers I have one question: what does an untainted stat look like anyway? I mean, when is the mythical time and place when we can look at the numbers and state unequivocally that they’re completely honest?

For instance, we cannot accept the stats accumulated before 1947 since some of the best players weren’t allowed to play in the big leagues. The end of WWII brought amphetamines into the game plus for 1969 the mound was lowered and the strike zone shrunk which altered pitching and hitting totals and amphetamines and anabolic steroids have been in the game since the 1970’s. As we stated earlier, Tom House stated that 6-7 pitchers per staff (when pitching staff personnel were numbered in single digits) were monkeying around with forms of steroids and HGH when disco was king and check this out:

"drug use exists...in all sports and levels of competition...In some instances, the danger of improper drug use--primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids--can only be described as alarming"--The 1973 House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce

Again I ask--what years can we look at the numbers and claim unadulterated purity?

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but untainted baseball stats simply do not exist--all of them have to be put into the context of the times in which they were garnered. The next “pure” era of the sport will be the first. The thing is, nobody takes seriously the single season strikeout totals of Matt Kilroy (513), Toad Ramsey (499) and Hugh Daily (483) because the pitching distance was just 45' and just for gits and shiggles, consider the following:

Kilroy set the record in his rookie season at age 20; he threw 583 innings, and had a 29-34, 3.37 ERA campaign--that ERA was about league average. Ramsey was a sophomore at 21 and tossed 588.2 IP and went 38-27, 3.43 ERA and Daily was positively ancient (36) but in only his third professional season. Despite a solid ERA (2.43; 124 ERA+) Daily was merely a .500 pitcher at 28-28 and logged a whisker over 500 innings.

Those numbers seem unreal today but then again Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds’ 70+ HR seasons would look pretty bizarre to our trio of moundsmen that toiled in leagues where eight and 13 four-baggers led the circuit. Then again, when Curtis Granderson legged out 23 triples in 2007--the last player to top that total was Kiki Cuyler who managed to bang out 26 three baggers in 1925. Sam Crawford topped 20 triples five times, Ty Cobb did it on four occasions--do you know who the last player was that had more than one season of 20 or more triples?

Stan Musial.

Have baseball players gotten slower? Have they gotten worse? Why the drastic decline in triples--has the level of play regressed or simply changed?

The answer is obvious.

What has to be borne in mind is that the record book is what it is--a log of what occurred and who accomplished what; no asterisks are needed. Barry Bonds hit 73 HR over the wall and 762 career, Hank Aaron hit 755 with a season high of 45 and smacked 44 'taters four times, Babe Ruth walloped 714 with a personal best of 60--these events happened.

What is important is the history--the history tells us the circumstances and environment those numbers were accumulated in; it informs us of the level of competition faced and what type of equipment was used etc. These things tell us what we need to know to establish legacies and legends. It’s why folks care about Nolan Ryan and Sandy Koufax and not Matt Kilroy or Toad Ramsey; it’s why Lefty O Doul and Riggs Stephenson aren’t in the Hall of Fame despite career batting averages of .349 and .336. It’s why Bobby Mathews' 297 career wins and four seasons of 30 or more wins (with a career best 42) and two others at 29 victories plus a BB/9 of .97 and a 2.98 ERA in almost 5000 IP isn’t enshrined in Cooperstown.

It’s why Alex Rodriguez may eventually wear the home run crown.

More to come on this in the days ahead.

Ode to Bud…

In honour of Selig’s mindlessness in all this, I’ve reworked a “Wizard of Oz” classic song (guess which one?) to pay a fitting tribute--enjoy:

I could chase away steroids
Even test for hemmorhoids
And hide my urine stains
And my head I'd be scratchin'
'bout which teams need contractin'
If I only had a brain

I'd unravel any riddle
'bout Barry's tainted piddle
Or A-Rod's career stain

With the thoughts I'd be thinkin'
'bout why the nads are shrinkin'
If I only had a brain

Oh, I would tell you why
I'm such a fiscal whore
I could wring some bling from the Yanks' rev'nue source
And get a raise, be paid still more

I would not be just a nuffin'
My shirt all full of stuffin'
My pockets of ill gotten gain
I would dance and be merry
Since I'm such a dingleberry
If I only had a brain

Best Regards

John

The indelible scarlet letter...

I think we’re safely at the point where we can state that once a player is accused of steroid usage he is guilty in the eyes of public opinion. It is why the identities of the 103 remaining names of the 2003 survey testing should be guarded with extreme prejudice.

When the accusation has dropped, we’ve seen players respond in a number of ways yet one theme holds undeniably true--nobody believes them.

Not only that, if they do deign to confess, that confession is viewed with suspicion unless they declare that they’ve juiced their entire professional career and continue to do so until this very day. It is generally assumed that whatever the perpetrator has admitted isn’t the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and he’s holding back some details so it won’t look so bad.

We’ve had a chance to witness a number of confessions over the years and among the star players they are--without a doubt--viewed with suspicion. Nobody believes that the accused have been completely forthright. Those who claim they’re innocent are generally viewed to be lying and it doesn’t matter what the player does or how he makes his assertion he simply will not be believed. Let’s look at the example of Roger Clemens and John Q. Public’s reaction to how he has handled things (a shout out to fellow primate Ray DiPerna for drawing the map):

First Clemens outright denies the charge through his attorney. The public says “If he were really innocent he would speak to the people directly.”

He does so and releases a video statement to that effect, however the public remains skeptical and says “If he were really innocent he would deign to be interviewed”--a form of public cross-examination--so he faces the tough Mike Wallace to plead his case.

However, the public still refuses to believe him and states: “If he were really innocent he would make himself available to the media to clear his name” he does this, but no dice since now the people say that “If he were really innocent he would sue the person making the allegations and accusations against him.”

Clemens now sues Brian McNamee--the source of the claim against him but nothing changes as the masses state “If he were really innocent he would deny steroid use under oath in front of the government" and guess what?

He is still guilty in the court of public opinion. Clemens jumped through every hoop folks demanded that a player go through to defend his innocence and it wasn’t good enough--they still wanted more; bottom line: to be accused is to be guilty and to be guilty (as previously noted) is to be a juicer from cradle to grave and being interred with a syringe sticking out the casket.

For those who defend themselves by pointing out that every accusation has produced a juicer then think: there have been a lot of accusations tossed out and players implicated--up to 80 percent of players by some. That being the case, then we can safely assume the number is that high can we not? After all, Tom House stated back in the 1970’s that (1) 6-7 pitchers per pitching staff were using either steroids or human growth hormone and (2) that number has decreased in recent years.

Decreased to 80 percent of players? Hey, that’s the logical conclusion of believing every claim and pointed finger at a player regarding steroid usage.

What does that say about how level the playing field was (and is)--if that many players are on steroids then doesn’t it stand to reason that what has been achieved in the game has occurred with nobody with a competitive advantage over others? This in turn would make Barry Bonds' records fairly legitimate would it not? He faced juiced pitchers and the fielders chasing down his shots did so with juiced legs and juiced reflexes. If that many were on steroids then it was pretty much a zero-sum game for Bonds, Mark McGwire, Alex Rodriguez et al.

Now you know why it’s so important that the 103 remaining names that came up positive in the survey testing in 2003--there will be a small number of false positives and players that took a tainted supplement. What hasn’t received near enough press is what happened in 1994--DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) was signed into law. What this did was allowing the manufacturers of supplements to put products on the market without having to prove that they were completely safe and untainted with anabolic substances; DSHEA meant that the FDA would have to establish there was no problem with these things after they hit the marketplace.

Make no mistake--a lot of supplements had steroidal elements to help them deliver the promised gains and these could be purchased at any pharmacy and GNC and also bear in mind that “euphemisms” for various hormones in them would be used so as not to trigger suspicion and some wouldn’t be listed at all. Athletes of all stripes bought these by the bucketful and ingested large quantities of these things never knowing that they could potentially result in a positive test for steroids.

Chances are excellent that some of the 104 positives from the survey testing were just that--remember: the players knew that testing was coming and would’ve prepared for it accordingly but 104 still flunked which would indicate that some were ingesting steroids through supplements not realizing what was in them.

That, ladies and gentlemen why those 103 names need to remain anonymous--to protect that small handful that were false positives and the result of tainted supplements because were those names to be revealed they would be tried and convicted of being lifetime hardcore steroid abusers deserving of all the scorn the public can muster and there is absolutely, positively no way they would be able to prove that they weren’t cheaters.

Heck, Sammy Sosa is guilty in the eyes of many for his "no speaka da English" routine in front of the government committee, a corked bat and a trio of 60 HR seasons even though nobody has linked him to any dealers, never flunked a test and didn't show up in the Mitchell Report but is guilty as charged regardless.

As Colonel Nick Jessup said: ‘We can’t handle the truth’; or more pointedly, we cannot be trusted with it because we have been conditioned by the media to be completely irrational on the subject and our own inherent pettiness and jealousy toward those “spoiled, pampered, overpaid ballplayers” require that we take these self-entitled brats down a notch whenever possible since we’re too lazy to engage in the hard task of self-improvement and so are content to merely tear down others so we can feel better about ourselves.

It’s sad--but it is true.

Best Regards

John

Collective stupidity...

I heard she’s also angry at Alex Rodriguez’s admitting to using steroids.

Can’t worry too much about the children now can we?

That, my friends, in a nutshell is why I get so ticked off at the media and people in general for dumping on A-Rod and Barry Bonds as this evil scourge that needs to be eradicated with extreme prejudice. Yeah, I’m not keen on players using steroids; my biggest beef is with the hypocrisy and revisionist history that is going on. Bud Selig along with his harem of whores in the media are trying to portray themselves as the heroes of this saga--Selig, the courageous warrior-commissioner bent on eliminating evil from the sport and the press as the ever vigilant watchdogs looking out for the public wellbeing quick to put the malefactors in the stocks of public opinion where they can receive their deserved scorn.

Nails on a chalkboard.

You’d think after so much time, John Q. Public would clue in and resume thinking for themselves rather than taking the attitude of ‘if it’s in the paper it must be true.’ While almost all would deny they hold such a mindset, their actions reveal that they still take what they read pretty much as the gospel truth--especially if it makes them feel better about themselves; trouble is, what makes them feel better is dragging people above them down to their level.

However, it’s only the ones the media anoint as the reapers of scorn that get nailed. Miguel Tejada--despite an MVP and being an All Star will not receive the flak of Rodriguez, Bonds, and Clemens because he hasn’t been the subject of press scrutiny and never signed an obscene contract but he’s no different than Barry Lamar, Roger or Alex.

Nobody is suggesting that Tejada is a menace that society needs protection from as my favourite SF Chronicle commenter opined with his “Bonds should get prison time, at least for that nasty personality. Society needs protected from big headed liars.” They have never been conditioned to hate Tejada.

As I discussed with a reader of my SMSN column this week: steroids were (and are--if you think the game still isn’t awash with them then you’re an idiot) an institutional failure in which blame rests upon commissioner, management, union, players and media.

I'm doing my level best to keep the focus on the larger issue.

The public has long railed (at the media's behest) about the "pampered, greedy overpaid players" and the Helen Lovejoy's come out in droves to "protect the children" when in reality they could do a lot more in that regard by looking in a mirror once in awhile.

Go into a classroom and chances are good nowadays that one in every two/three girls will experience sexual abuse during their childhood--that ain't A-Rod or Barry responsible for that; adults and parents expose their children to second hand smoke (see Ms. Williamson above), drug, alcohol and sexual abuse on a level that is truly staggering. As mentioned in the (SMSN) article, the world is being wrecked by people who get a tiny fraction of the vitriol being given steroid using ballplayers but the media has us convinced that "cheating ballplayers" are what is truly harming “the children.”

Why do people focus on A-Rod/juiced ballplayers over more important issues? Its either they’re jealous or superficial idiots obsessed with the celebrity culture.

I, for one, am sick and tired of reading about how ballplayers are this great evil that everyone rails against deluding themselves into thinking they’re being noble and “protecting the children.” They do that because it’s a lot easier than focusing on the larger problems (oftentimes the ones staring back at them in the bathroom mirror) and effecting change--something they do not wish to do--it’s easier to blame A-Rod for corrupting the children than their crappy parenting.

If you smoke in front of your children--shut up about A-Rod.
If you’ve driven your car after taking a drink with your children in the car--shut up about A-Rod.
If you’ve cheated on your taxes to save a few bucks and you have children--shut up about A-Rod.
If you’ve produced children and do not look after them physically, mentally, emotionally--shut up about A-Rod.

See my point? These will do far more damage to the children than players using steroids. The trillions being spent cleaning up the mess made by the truly greedy (that will be pocketed by many of these very ones) rather than schools, healthcare, social services, adequate nutrition and the like will do more damage to the children in the next year than every ballplayer that has ever stuck a syringe full of steroids into his butt (or popped a greenie) combined for the next 100 years.

As I’ll be dealing with next week on SMSN, since 1990, over $6 billion in tax dollars (unadjusted for inflation--for example: the $150 million for the building of U.S. Cellular Field is in 1991 dollars--not 2009) has been used in construction costs alone for ballparks and this excludes the value of the land given away, infrastructure, low interest loans (where the government makes up the difference), tax free bonds (the government forgoes the revenue on the bonds) and a myriad of other tax breaks that go along with such scams. It excludes any renovations made, maintenance required and a myriad of other costs associated with such boondoggles.

Adjust those dollars for inflation and you’re literally looking at tens of billions of dollars.

How many services that directly affect the children--such as education, teaching jobs and support staff, public safety, school programs (including nutrition, counselling and extra-curricular activities), healthcare, public parks and recreation programs, libraries--could’ve been funded with that amount of jack? Heck, Czar Bud’s almost $18 million salary is literally being subsidized indirectly by “the children” he’s allegedly concerned about protecting by wagging his finger at A-Rod! He does that because it’s easier to do than take a pay cut--he wants to protect the children from steroids and little else. Well, c’mon--how many kids are going to be harmed by steroid using ballplayers as opposed to a lack of funds to look after their needs?

Yeah, to me steroids are bad but the blame is being distributed unevenly and unfairly insofar as baseball is concerned and it’s negative effect on “the children” and the world at large is waaaaaaaaaaaaay waaaaaaaaaaaaay down on the list of things that can harm them yet folks act like it’s John Wayne Gacy being cloned on the scale of Star Wars Episode II.

Yet folks still think I “support” steroid users because I point these things out.

(sigh)

Best Regards

John

The eve of destruction...

My head hurts:

• Robbie Alomar allegedly has AIDS.
• Miguel Tejada pleads guilty to lying to Congress.
• Adam Dunn signs a two year/$20 million deal with the Nats.
• Bobby Abreu signs a one year/$5 million deal with the Halos.
• Manny claims he was provoked into shoving Red Sox travelling secretary Jack McCormick to the ground.
• Jose Canseco wants to help MLB to cope with the steroid problem.
• Darryl Strawberry discusses the lurid conduct of his time with the Mets.
• Keith Hernandez says that the era and Alex Rodriguez’s totals are tainted by his steroid use.
• Wayne Huizenga repents of his dismantling of the 1997 Florida Marlins.
• Brian Giles counter sues his girlfriend claiming he was the victim of abuse.

All of this has crossed my desk today--10 items. I may go into more detail on some of these topics in the near future but for right now we’ll go with the whole knee jerk reaction to these revelations (a good choice of words since it feels like the Apocalypse is nigh):

Robbie Alomar allegedly has AIDS

I feel bad for the former Blue Jays All Star second sacker (and hopefully first ballot Hall of Famer) and wish him nothing but the very best. I don’t know what this is all about save that it’s seriously messed up.

Miguel Tejada pleads guilty to lying to Congress

Nobody is going to give a rip about this--he doesn’t make enough money and isn’t a good enough player to become a pariah. Public crucifixions are for those that the media have told us we should despise.

Bobby Abreu signs a one year/$5 million deal with the Halos

A major bargain--the Toronto Blue Jays should be ashamed they wouldn’t beat this--as of right now, they’re the only team in MLB to not have signed a major league free agent. Had the simply non tendered Jose Bautista, Jason Frasor, Brian Tallet, Shawn Camp and ignored the reclamation projects they could’ve topped this easily. This is the sort of thing that destroys a fan’s confidence in the team for which he roots. Why should the customer care when it’s clear that the team is disinterested in improving the product?

Adam Dunn signs a two year/$20 million deal with the Nats

Another bargain--nobody likes baseball there including the front office.

Manny claims he was provoked into shoving Red Sox travelling secretary Jack McCormick to the ground

I’m really sure an employee that disrespects the meal tickets of a major league team would hold onto his job very long. If McCormick was everything Ramirez claims he was, he would’ve been fired long ago. A truly pathetic episode and it gives teams another excuse to just say no to signing him.

Jose Canseco wants to help MLB to cope with the steroid problem

You can’t make this stuff up! It’s a real shame Jeffrey Dahmer is dead--he would’ve been a heck of a counsellor for folks with eating disorders.

Darryl Strawberry discusses the lurid conduct of his time with the Mets

Professional ballplayers partying and skirt chasing? Who knew? I thought they were into Bible study and working with the homeless.

Keith Hernandez says that the era and Alex Rodriguez’s totals are tainted by his steroid use

Hernandez stated: “I was 191 pounds my rookie year, if I had ingested steroids, I would have been close to 230 pounds. Now how much better would that have made me, 230 pounds without any body fat? And how many more home runs would I have hit? I hit 164 home runs . I probably would have hit over 250. I drove in 1,100 runs. I probably would have drove in 1,400. And I think that, along with 11 Gold Gloves, I’d be in the Hall of Fame.”

Had you not snorted so much cocaine you might have made the Hall of Fame as well. At least A-Rod was trying to improve and not destroy his talent and chances of winning ballgames. Bloody hypocrite--somebody should rip him a secondary sphincter for such idiocy.

Wayne Huizenga repents of his dismantling of the 1997 Florida Marlins

Amazingly, he still clings to the lie that he lost $34 million when he simply diverted team revenue to his other businesses--I’ll leave the rest to Doug Pappas (RIP) “...economist Andrew Zimbalist reviewed the Florida Marlins’ claim to have lost $34 million in their World Championship season of 1997. Zimbalist found that Marlins owner Wayne Huizenga, who also owned Pro Player Stadium through a different entity, attributed about $38 million of luxury suite, club seat, parking, concessions, advertising, and naming-rights revenues to the stadium rather than the team. This finagling made a profitable venture appear to be hemorrhaging money, and was used to justify Huizenga’s gutting of the team and subsequent demands for a new taxpayer-funded park.” --Baseball Prospectus

We miss you Doug--Wayne, not so much; don’t worry though, your Marlins are still safe in the hands of like-minded slime balls.

Brian Giles counter sues his girlfriend claiming he was the victim of abuse

But everybody is mad at Barry and Alex with people wanting to see them in jail. One of my favourite comments (for its sheer mindless rabidity) was from a SF Chronicle reader that opined “Bonds should get prison time, at least for that nasty personality. Society needs protected from big headed liars.” Yup, I remember telling my daughters when they were small to never take candy from strangers, never accept rides from somebody that wasn’t a family member, to avoid people selling drugs and big headed liars since they were the most dangerous menaces out there.

Ever see an episode of COPS when they were tracking big headed liars? Ever see a big headed liar on America’s Most Wanted but society needs protection from this scourge like this nitwit needs protection from natural selection.

Finally, I received an e-mail that made my day; either this guy was doing bong hits or doing the best bit of Stengelese that I have ever read. I don’t want to embarrass the guy in case it’s the former but here is it in all its unedited glory…

Reporters love to hate!!!

Baseball has been after Barry Bonds for breaking Babe Ruths record. That's all! If Mark Maguire had broken the record you and the rest of baseball would be ok with it. But when Bonds broke it both home run records and everyone has something to say about it. If Bagwell of the astros broke it you would have nothing to say. Although he quickly retired quietly and noone has anything to say. Now you are all willing to turn in and distroy all your players that you would of accepted, if they broke the record!! But Bonds broke the record and to stop him you are willing to turn in ig. Roger Clements, Mark "juice" Maguire and the rest of white baseball. The south does not seem like it is the same but from baseballs' point of view " Nothing has changed "

Just remember nobody said Maguire was on juice when he set the record!!! But the minute Bonds went after it!!! Their was a problem right!!

He should know his place from the view of white baseball!!!

Get over it

You’re not supposed to understand it--you’re supposed to enjoy it.

I have decided I don‘t get enough hate mail…

He did it for you (SMSN Canada) More on the A-Rod saga--my boss decided to add some fuel to the fire with the title and intro to it (I can’t take credit) and promised I’d pass along the best of the flames to him. He’s a sick man--it’s why he’s so much gosh darned fun to work for.

A slap at liberty (Hardball Times) The real story behind the A-Rod saga--at least the one about which we should really be upset if we have half a brain and a decent sense of self preservation.

Best Regards

John

My 'roid rage...

For all the Betty Bowers in the media and general public clamouring for Alex Rodriguez to come clean I have one question: If he does tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth--will you believe him?

Here is what I mean--the only thing we know at this point is that in the 2003 survey testing, A-Rod’s sample came up dirty. He has been tested since then including the Olympic style regimen used for the World Baseball Classic and has come up clean each time.

What does this mean insofar as Rodriguez’s usage goes? Well, there are a number of scenarios that are possible:

1) He experimented during his time with the Rangers and was caught and wizened up realizing that it wasn’t worth the potential cost.
2) It was a false positive and he never used.
3) He started using in high school and discontinued doing so once testing with penalties came about.
4) After seeing the results other players were getting in the late 1990’s thought it might be a good idea to see what they could do for him seeing as he was coming into free agency after the 2000 season.
5) He started using after he hit .204/.241/.204 and .232/.264/.408 in his cups of coffee in 1994-95 and was scared that he couldn’t cut it and started juicing until testing with penalties came out.
6) He used only briefly, he felt awful and discontinued--this occurred about the time the survey testing was done.
7) He’s used his entire professional career and switched to undetectable designer steroids after he tested dirty in 2003 and remains a user to this very day.

Now--while there are other possible scenarios--let’s assume one of the above is the complete, unvarnished truth and A-Rod comes forward with it.

Will we believe him if it’s anything other than No. 7 on the above list?

Of course not.

The prevailing public opinion (regarding the elite player) generally is once you’ve been busted--and you’re not a beloved player (read: good to the press and well liked by the fourth estate)--it means you’ve been a hard core user from the get-go and continue to be one. To confess to anything less means you’re lying--in the public’s mind there is only one kind of steroid user: the out and out, ongoing, filthy greedy cheat that is only out for number one. You eat Winstrol and eggs for breakfast, grilled Deca Durabolin sandwiches for lunch and testosterone-bone steak for supper washed down with a Clear cocktail and peaches and Cream for dessert.

Guns 'n' boozers?

Barry Bonds has probably passed as many MLB-mandated steroid tests as Rodriguez but were you to ask the average fan, they would tell you that he’s probably still on it. Jason Giambi was a noted good guy before BALCO, has never flunked a test and has never been under serious suspicion since--however, when I saw this recent picture of Giambi, well...

However, the media loves him, he issued a mea culpa commensurate to his popularity level with the press to satisfy them and has generally been forgiven by the public simply because the fourth estate says that it's O.K. to cheer for the penitent slugger.

Rafael Palmeiro was busted in his final season, Roger Clemens hasn’t pitched since he was mentioned in the Mitchell Report, Mark McGwire was never tested but there isn’t a soul alive that believes any of them had a brief flirtation with steroids. Heck, Sammy Sosa has never been formally linked by anyone to using anabolic substances but his blocky physique and trio of 60 HR seasons have him convicted as a hard core user in the minds of many.

Sadly, even if Alex Rodriguez were to fully disclose his usage chances are he wouldn’t be believed because it doesn’t line up with what many want to believe. He is in the same boat with Barry Bonds--people want to think the very worst about them since it makes them feel better about themselves. As we discussed below, 252 turned Rodriguez from a saint to a sinner almost overnight and he went from everything that is right and good about the sport to symbolizing everything that is wrong with it.

There will be no redemption for Alex Emmanuel Rodriguez. He fell from grace on January 26, 2001 when he did what everyone else would do if somebody offered them a quarter billion dollars. Since we will never have an opportunity to lack that kind of jack, we don’t anyone else to have it either, we want them to say “Heck no, that’s too much money--let the billionaire keep his money so the fans who will boo my ass off once my skills decline can feel better about their miserable little lives.”

It‘s O.K. for the little guy to want as much money as his skills are worth in his world but it’s not O.K. for baseball players to do so because the media tells us that the truly great players would play for free so some of the richest men in the world can keep their money.

Give me a break.

The glee in the media over this is stomach churning and believe me, there are a lot of petty folks having absolute orgasms over this; they want their pound of flesh and will only believe the truth if it agrees with what they’ve already made up their minds that it is--even though there is only one failed test from six years ago to go on. Sadly, all too many people in the press and the general public will accept nothing less than a confession of a professional lifetime of usage as the “truth.”

I’m sorry, but we, as a species, suck.

Best Regards

John

The number of the beast…

If MLB did indeed collude against Barry Lamar Bonds then it’s hard not to think that it has received karmic payback.

Bud Selig has been desperately trying to rewrite history; attempting to paint himself--not as the commissioner than allowed steroids to become entrenched in the sport--but as the man that saved the game from it. In the minds of the public, ridding baseball of Barry Bonds was to purge MLB of its anabolic menace.

Indeed, as Craig Calcaterra pointed out so eloquently in his chapter in the Hardball Times Annual, the Mitchell Report was designed to serve as the demarcation point of the “steroid era” and the happy fiction that the game was drug free could now proceed. All that was needed was a few more Alex Rodriguez quality seasons and 762 would fall to a clean player and all would be well with the world.

They all lived happily ever after as the saying goes.

Well, Bonds is gone and even had he played in 2008--unless he enjoyed a season for the ages--chances are good he’d be gainfully unemployed by now however A-Rod has a lot of years left in him; Selig’s sentence has just been extended and his true legacy will live on.

As the Yankee third baseman continues his march toward history, every ball that clears the fence will be another painful reminder of all he failed to do in his lust for profits.

Probably the most disturbing question I have regarding this particular aspect of this saga is this: was Selig aware that Rodriguez flunked that particular test?

If he was cognizant of it, then it has to be asked why he allowed Rodriguez to be touted as the heir to the home run crown? Granted, he could hardly blab the news that A-Rod’s test came up dirty but it does imply that he hoped that the result would never become public knowledge in which case he was knowingly promoting one “fraud” as king over another.

Of course, there would be money to be made off Rodriguez’s chase and that’s all that matters--it’s the same reason that Rafael Palmeiro was allowed to notch his 3000 hit before the stanozolol hit the fan…first cash the checks then let the truth come out.

How typically Selig.

Anyway, the feces based unstable weather system has already begun in the media regarding A-Rod with the usual hysterical, ill informed bleating that characterizes these things. A tip of the cap certainly needs to be made in the direction of Jay Mariotti who mangled the truth in his haste to unleash the venom:

he led the American League with 47 home runs and a .600 slugging percentage and was named Most Valuable Player, setting him up for a blockbuster $252-million contract with the New York Yankees.

Uh no, he received that contract from the Rangers--they later traded him to the Yankees; A-Rod later opted out of that contract and inked a new deal with the Bronx Bombers for 10 years/$275 million.

That, my friends, is the main reason for the vitriol that will be spilling out in the coming months from both the media and the fans.

It’s not about steroids, or cheating, or the home run crown--this is part of Rodriguez’s ongoing penance for the number of the beast circa the 21 century: 252.

He still has not been forgiven for failing to turn down Tom Hicks now infamous quarter billion dollar offer of January 2001. Granted, he does have to shoulder a bit of the blame himself in that he double-talked himself into a corner with such statements as:

“I've always said to everybody that Seattle is my first choice” and “But if you tell me, am I willing to take `X' amount less and win a championship, absolutely. I would defer money, I would take a lot less money. Trust me, there's no one that wants a ring in a worse way than I do.”

Of course we know he went to Texas coming off a last place finish. In his defense, the Rangers brain trust showed A-Rod the talent coming up through the pipeline, which Rodriguez said played a large factor in his decision. However when he requested a trade from the Rangers he stated: “I would have never gone to Texas if they had told me, ‘Alex, it's going to be you and 24 kids.’ Never. For no amount of money.”

However while he was with Texas, Rodriguez commented about his free agency tour “I wanted to be a Met. I've always wanted to be a Met, I've been a Met fan since I was a kid. And I would've played there for less money and less years and they know that.” The Mets were obviously interested in A-Rod as well, so why didn’t this deal come off?

He capped it all off by saying “it wasn’t about the money” only to turn around and say that it was for Esquire Magazine:

"He [Mike Lupica] kills me on national TV ... On The Sports Reporters. I would like to ask that guy, What would you do if you had this guarantee? He's barkin', 'You wanna win? Seattle gave you a winner.' So what? I made a business decision. An economic decision. It was simple." (bolding and italics mine)

Toss in the fact that all of this was engineered by one that is considered as big a baseball villain as Bonds--Scott Boras--and Rodriguez became a marked man and 252 was his scarlet letter--everything that has happened since that has caused the media to dump on him can be traced back to “the contract.”

252 gave way to 275 but make no mistake, Alex Rodriguez is still paying for accepting the money and the revelations about his positive steroid test is just another manifestation if it. Had he stayed in Seattle, or even gone to an organization that didn’t finish dead last the year before and left a little money on the table (let’s face it; the prevailing wisdom--thanks to Scott Boras‘ priming the pump of popular opinion--was that he’d get at least ten years $200 million when he became a free agent) in order to do so and while there’d be some weeping and gnashing of teeth regarding it, it would be nothing like what we’re in for in the coming months.

It may well have been the costliest contract (for a player) ever signed.

Best Regards

John

Before you begin to froth...

There’s one guy we need to hear from in all this…

Scott Boras.

His agency does far more than represent professional athletes--he is also involved in the minutiae of his clients’ careers. He provides every service imaginable for his stable including psychological counselling. There are doctors, trainers everything required for building up a player to max out whatever talents exist in a given player’s body.

For all his faults, the man provides an incredibly high level of service for the men he represents. He often boasts about how involved his agency is in the professional lives of the players under the umbrella of Borascorp.

Some of the high profile names that have been part of all this in recent years include A-Rod, Ivan Rodriguez, Eric Gagne, Kevin Brown, Rick Ankiel, Gary Sheffield and Barry Bonds.

All have been linked to the sport’s steroid era either through BALCO, positive tests, the Mitchell Report and Jose Canseco’s literary masterpiece “Green Eggs and Deca” (AKA “Juiced”).

For a man so involved in the physical and psychological upkeep of his stable could he possibly have been so ignorant or so blinded to what the players were taking?

It’s not only Boras--this isn’t the first time the action of agents have affected players in this regard. The Hendricks Bros that represented both Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte apparently didn’t pass along key correspondence from George Mitchell regarding the evidence that was uncovered that linked them to either steroids or HGH; both Any Pettitte and Roger Clemens testified regarding the multiple letters sent by Mitchell that (1) Pettitte was informed of one over the phone and (2) Clemens was completely unaware that Mitchell had tried to get in touch with him.

Of note…

One agent, who told me that he has instructed his staff to refer to Boras as “he who shall not be named,” then requested that his own name not be identified, for fear of recrimination from the union. “Gene Orza is a figurehead,” he said, referring to the chief operating officer of the Players Association. “Scott Boras is the union.”

While the comment can easily be taken as an over the top bit of snark it does illustrate that the working relationship between agents and the union is a lot cozier under Don Fehr than it was under Marvin Miller.

It does beg the question about how much various agencies knew about their clients’ steroid use. Do not forget that Kirk Radomski said he dealt with about 300 major league players not including those that networked from the original (300)--these players have agents as well.

Since Rodriguez is currently the hot topic one has to wonder when you consider that he and Boras were once BFF on the scale of Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie before “The Simple Minds Life” and the battle of Opt-ober created a chasm on the scale of Hilton and Boras’s respective I.Q. between the parties in question.

During their bromance is there any way that the Shrivelled-Rod (well, this one is inevitable, I’d best get it started before the NY Post) wouldn’t let Boras know that particular “FYI”?

Sadly, while I know Bob Costas is blaming the naughty, naughty MLBPA for all this it’s good to bear in mind who their partners were if they decided to tackle steroid use in the game--that’s right, the owners that kept their of anonymous testing about as well as the other pledges they make--so it’s not difficult to understand that their reticence wasn’t strictly motivated by avarice but it does beg the question how much influence the agents do have considering that both parties have an interest in pushing up the salary bar by any means possible.

As I wrote back on THT after the Mitchell Report came out:

Here is where Fehr and Orza blew it—what they failed to understand (or simply ignored) is that by trying to keep an environment where players could use performance-enhancing drugs without concern of sanction, they were doing ownership a huge favor. Steroid-fueled performance was incredibly profitable and ownership didn’t want the gravy train to end. Players were risking their health by taking substances that possibly came from dubious sources and manufactured in unsanitary and unhygienic conditions.

Management didn’t care; player turnover is a fact of life in baseball. Somebody is always available to take the spot of somebody not performing should someone become injured due to steroid usage. They found an indirect ally in the MLBPA; higher profits translated into higher salaries and the interests of the salary bar were being served. Citing privacy issues, Fehr and Orza long resisted drug testing. This suited ownership just fine and it finally took government action to get both to deal with the issue in a substantive way.

Who was protecting the players now? Both sides were allowing them to take risks with their health to play in the major leagues.

Fehr and Orza’s ideologies created a multi-tiered playing field between players who used and those who did not, but also between players who could afford substances that were more sophisticated and manufactured in sanitary conditions and those who had to look to the black market to get what they needed to get or retain a job in the big leagues. Beyond this, players on the 40-man but not on the 25-man roster weren’t subject to testing while players not on the 40-man roster were subjected to regular testing.

What it boiled down to was that an aspiring major leaguer had to choose to use cheap anabolic substances created under dubious conditions or allowing players who were doing precisely that to get an available job. A lot of players gained MLBPA membership because they were willing to use these drugs to reach the major leagues. Further, two players on the same Double-A/Triple-A team competing for a 25-man roster slot may have been in a rigged contest if one was on the 40-man roster (and not subjected to testing) and the other was not.

A union that potentially creates/allows a situation where ingesting potentially toxic substances is a prerequisite to employment has lost its way. The MLBPA should be the one insuring that its membership have a healthy, safe, fair environment to work in. Pathetically, it appears that management is the one trying to create that safe workplace but is meeting resistance by the organization that should be protecting the workers it represents.

…it may be time to include agents in the group of those that exploit players. Let’s face it, they too profited handsomely from the steroid era and it seems that they were hand-in-hand with the owners and the union in seeing the money ball roll on even if it endangered player safety.

My point?

In the immediate future you’re going to be reading a lot of small, petty, jealous and vindictive editorials regarding the cheating and greedy A-Rod just as you have been about Barry Bonds; never, ever lose sight of the fact that this was an institutional failure--everyone was complicit in the steroid era. It’s just there has always been a lot of resentment toward the “spoiled, pampered, greedy, overpaid player” and we’re about to face a new round of it in the media and the comments section of the articles written.

Everybody profited big time from this: Bud Selig makes almost $18 million a year, Don Fehr is among the wealthiest union leaders in the country, player agents like Scott Boras looked the other way and reaped obscene commissions off the players that injected themselves with these substances and there is no escaping it--the “steroid boom” caused revenues to spike and this in turn showered money on all parties.

The dollar will never fall as low as the means people will stoop to acquire it. Greed won the day and it wasn’t just the players that were responsible--they had a lot of accomplices.

Never forget that.

It’s all about me!!

Field of Schemes (SMSN Sports)

THT EXCLUSIVE : Feds raid dog house on spinster’s property (For you snarkologists this was inspired by something funny my boss at SMSN did--you might wish to read this to understand that this isn’t about BLB for me--it’s about Selig; it’s just a pity that you cannot see through your own media inspired hatred of Bonds to discern that.)

Best Regards

John

Pop goes the world…

Well, if Sports Illustrated is to be believed, Alex Rodriguez has been busted for anabolic steroid usage.

I’m not surprised myself if it’s true and if the contents of the article (to be dealt with shortly) are to be believed, it certainly sounds like the home run record will remain shrouded in controversy.

My lack of shock has nothing to do with any perceived moral failings on the part of the Yankee third sacker--it’s just that steroids were a major, major part of the sport for a lot longer than folks care to admit. We already know that people will do a lot of god-awful purulent things for even a small pittance yet alone when there are hundreds of millions potentially at stake.

Our global economic crisis was largely caused by people’s lust for wealth without any consideration or conscience toward others or the greater good. Major league baseball is an entity that devours its young without pity and the competition for roster spots is often a no hold barred event where the darker side of natural selection takes place.

I tend to be more surprised when somebody is completely above reproach or suspicion rather than otherwise--the culture of getting any kind of edge in the sport is as old as the game itself and it’s largely a myth that MLB reflects the best in America; to the contrary, it reflects America as it truly is: winning isn’t everything it’s the only thing, nobody remembers who finished second, if you ain’t cheatin’ you ain’t tryin’ and as Albert Einstein once said “Too many of us look upon Americans as dollar chasers. This is a cruel libel, even if it is reiterated thoughtlessly by the Americans themselves.”

“Sports do not build character. They reveal it.”--Heywood Broun

For what it’s worth, the alleged reactions of A-Rod and MLBPA No. 2 Gene Orza are what I find especially damning:

"You'll have to talk to the union ... I'm not saying anything."--Rodriguez

When asked about A-Rod being tipped off about an upcoming drug test, Orza stated: "I'm not interested in discussing this information with you" and Don Fehr isn’t returning calls. We recall that John Rocker stated that the Rangers and the MLBPA made Rodriguez part of a meeting discussing the safest way to use steroids and that Jose Canseco also made noises about him being a juicer.

Again, the sport’s dirty secret is gradually becoming known as we’re seeing that it was (and is) as likely as prevalent as some players initially stated before being pressured to recant.

For a little perspective, how many recall the Yankee third sacker’s interview with Katie Couric a couple of years ago:

Couric: "For the record, have you ever used steroids, human growth hormone or any other performance-enhancing substance?"

Rodriguez: "No."

Couric: "You never felt like, 'This guy's doing it, maybe I should look into this, too? He's getting better numbers, playing better ball?'"

Rodriguez: "I've never felt overmatched on the baseball field. I've always been a very strong, dominant position. And I felt that if I did my work as I've done since I was, you know, a rookie back in Seattle, I didn't have a problem competing at any level. So, no."

Rodriguez said the following about the Mitchell investigation: "Katie, you're putting me in a tough spot. I mean, these are guys that I play with. They're my teammates. If anything comes of this, I will be extremely disappointed. And it will be a huge black eye on the game of baseball." (bolding and italics mine)

Ouch.

Obviously (and fortunately) Couric isn’t a grand jury but if S.I.’s report is to be believed but what is the difference between Barry Bonds and Rodriguez? I mean both are inner circle Hall of Fame level talents, both used anabolic steroids and lied about it.

I think it’s time we simply acknowledge that a chunk of the game’s history involved the use of both amphetamines and anabolic steroids. Our indignation at a small minority of players singled out by the media (that were every bit as complicit in the scandal as anyone) is misplaced. This was something that permeated the entire sport from the commissioner on down and should be viewed as such--to slag on a few convenient scapegoats says more about us than it does about them.

Probably the saddest aspect of all this is that a bigger scandal will go largely unremarked upon: The player's union only agreed to the 2003 tests--the source of Rodriguez’s sample--in the first place on the condition that the results remain strictly anonymous. If the players and their union ever needed another reason to never, ever trust anything management ever promises--well, here it is in bold relief. Also, the fact those very results were seized and are now being made public is a scandalous abuse of government power (if you don’t think this effects you--guess again; ever give a urine or blood sample for insurance purposes or as part of your job? Well, if you thought the results would be kept private you could be in for a nasty lesson) and this is far more worrisome than some ballplayer trying to get an edge in his profession.

(Thanks to my fellow Primates at Baseball Think Factory for their diligence and digging.)

Best Regards

John

Burn the witch!

Well … not really, I just really thought it would make a cool title for a post.

Regardless, when I saw this article on Yahoo: Boras: Don’t play chicken with Manny I had to laugh. First Manny (or Boras…I’ll just call them Boramirez) turn down--or even really acknowledge--the two years/$45 million offer from the Dodgers and Boras later states (when teams could bid on free agents) that they’re willing to entertain “serious offers” for Ramirez which never materialize, then Boramirez turns down arbitration, then arrives the one year $25 million offer and now we get this announcement from Boras.

Uh huh.

What I thought interesting was Boras’ half statement of a “healthy market” without really defining the parameters of what constitutes a “healthy market.” I mean, if healthy means that there are a number of clubs willing to better what the Dodgers have put on the table then (1) why even bother with LA yet alone (2) issue warnings about not playing chicken. I’m sure the market for Ramirez is healthy but is it healthy at the levels Boramirez are seeking?

I would imagine that if Ramirez publicly stated that he was willing to sign a four year/$16 million contract that Boras’ switchboard would short out. I’m equally certain that if he said he was looking for a Pat Burrell type contract (2 years/$16 million) the same thing would happen.

What is not to be forgotten is that “healthy market” has Bobby Abreu and Adam Dunn still on the shelves--in Abreu a team gets better defense and base running, solid offense and a good citizen at a lot less per year than what Ramirez has turned down. In Adam Dunn they receive a consistent power bat (I mean, 40 HR on the nose in each of the last five seasons and six straight of 40-plus--how cool is that?), fewer headaches and a guy not yet 30 years old that can likely be had at half of what they’re seeking on an annual basis for Manny Space Cadet.

Sure, it was really convenient that San Francisco Giants player personnel director Bobby Evans stated “You can’t deny interest if there’s an opportunity to bring him to the Giants. … We’re going to monitor the market on him. It doesn’t seem to be going down, although he did turn down this offer” but let’s face it: there is an opportunity to bring him to the Giants--offer more than the Dodgers.

However, that’s not an option they seem keen on exploring; heck, any team has the same opportunity but nobody has stepped up to the levels Boramirez are demanding. The Yankees say they’re out (I say they’re not), the Mets likewise, the Red Sox (HA!) definitely not so who does that leave with $25 million lying around and willing to blow it on one player when you can probably get some combination of Dunn, Abreu and Orlando Hudson for the same amount with change left over?

Either Boras has a hole card (the Yankees) or he’s desperately trying to get Ned Colletti to bid against himself and let’s face it--is there any other team out there that would love to see the Dodgers do just that more than the Giants?

I think it’s safe to say that the duo blew this one--Ramirez’s age, demands and disgraceful exit from Boston did more damage than they initially thought; Ramirez said that ‘gas was up and so was he’ however he went into the tank while in Beantown never considering that the economy and the free agent market might follow right along.

A bit of poetic justice to be sure.

The thing is, surely Boras is not so dense to realize that a one year contract at $25 million followed by a season of Manny being magnificent proceeded by a return to the free agent auction with a healthier economy and fewer slugging corner OF/DH types on the market isn’t the worst scenario ever devised and let’s face it 2/45 is better than the 2/40 they left on the table in Boston (with no guarantees that the Red Sox would even pick up the options in this economic environment). Therefore, the question has to be asked:

Who is the driving force behind the debacle: Ramirez or Boras?

Is Ramirez’s pride wounded and he refuses to play for anything less than what he feels he is worth or is it Boras trying to save face hoping that something will transpire a la Derek Lowe that will bring another bidder or two into the picture?

Or is it a team effort: Beavis and Butthead Do America?

I guess time will tell.

This much is certain--this is one of those rare times I’ve stooped to indulge in a little schadenfreude; I was willing to do so after Scott Boras announced A-Rod’s opt out during the World Series but when Rodriguez manned up and did what he wished to do then the future Hall of Famer earned back a lot of respect from me and I was happy for him (I'm sure he sleeps better at night knowing that). Well, there are two people in MLB that bring nasty visceral feelings to the surface in me by the very mention of their names: Bud Selig and Scott Boras. I feel strongly (and have written articles) that Ramirez’s exit from Boston was choreographed to get Ramirez into free agency in what appeared to be a very lucrative market.

The fact that it could have affected a pennant race made it that much more purulent to me and quite frankly I am happy that it appears to be backfiring. Nobody will suffer from this--both men will remain fabulously wealthy and gainfully employed but it’s nice to see that when you screw with the game then sometimes the game will screw with you.

Baseball is a century-plus old institution enjoyed by billions over the decades and few have had the privilege of playing at the highest levels--it is not a playground and piggybank for small minded and greedy men whose time in the game is short.

It’s good that we be reminded of that on occasion.

Best Regards

John

Collusion vs. Deep Throat...

Probably the biggest hang up folks have in wrapping their minds around a possible collusion of Barry Bonds is the very logical, honest truism of Deep Throat’s “follow the money.” I mean, baseball owners and their $18 million a year commissioner are as money-grubbing as it gets and signing superstar players and winning games, pennant races and playoff series translates into the happy music made by cash registers (or the melodious beep of debit card machines or the seductive swish of the credit card) ergo it raises the question--why would teams jeopardize the revenue that could be potentially generated by signing ol’ Barry L. Zebonds by participating in a collusive blacklisting of Mr. Sunshine and Happiness?

What has to be borne in mind is that money rarely takes a linear path. Bud Selig is a politician and as one he accumulates a lot of political capital through a number of means by getting clubs indebted to him. For example: The Toronto Blue Jays received equalization payments when the Canadian dollar was low and doubtlessly are hoping for more--because of that money they’re going to do Selig’s bidding. In the last decade (or so), he’s gone to bat for a large number of franchises to line up public money for stadium construction, he got the Red Sox and Marlins into his back pocket by engineering the sales of those teams (to the second-highest bidder in the case of the Sawx) and providing loans to the Fish (that became outright cash grants), choosing the group to get the Expos in D.C. (plus the $600+ million stadium there).

Bud is the great dispenser of goodies and because of this clubs could find that it is more financially prudent to stay on the good side of Selig for years to come rather than enjoy the short term benefits of employing you know who. You just never know whether the commissioner’s office will approve a trade that involves a large shift of cash from one team to the other to cover a Boras-inspired impulse purchase contract of which a club is desperately trying to divest itself … sometimes it’s wise to hedge your best and strongly consider any “informal recommendations” made by the man in charge.

For all his faults, Selig is very good at working a room and building up a reserve of goodwill and favour among the cartel. He has accumulated a lot of capital among the clubs (only a small fraction ever becomes public knowledge) and he has the chits to call in--having discretionary control over the Central Fund doesn’t hurt either.

As to Selig, never forget that Bonds is a symbol and think of precisely what he symbolizes to Selig: his failure to address steroids, his friend losing the home run record (I mean, did anyone think in 2001--even after his 73 HR season when he was at 567 HR that he'd hang around long enough to hit almost 200 more? I did my first out and out “players are unquestionably on steroids” column that year and I didn’t think that BLB was a threat to Hank Aaron) having probably never imagined that his lack of diligence would cost “The Hammer” the crown. He wishes to be remembered as the commissioner that rid the sport of steroids and not the one that allowed it to become entrenched--Bonds was a living breathing indictment of Selig’s failure and true legacy and watching his reaction after HR 755 cleared the fence spoke volumes.

It’s personal for Selig and he had accumulated enough clout, political capital and chits owed to indulge his feelings. On a more practical level it also allows him to posture for Congress and how would it look if the poster boy for steroids in baseball was allowed to put the record further out of reach? If the feds became even more involved in the issue it might bring a level of testing and penalties to the sport that would (1) out the ineffectiveness of the current program--Selig’s pride and joy and (2) those severe penalties and more comprehensive testing costing the sport ticket-selling level players and the revenues they provide.

He needs the sport to look steroid-free (as possible) while it was still a hot news item and focus of government attention--for both for his legacy and maintaining the profitable status quo, Bonds is a convenient scapegoat: remove the symbol and the “scourge” follows in the public and media’s eye. He knows the fourth estate will fall in step because of its dislike of ol’ Pumpkinhead and the public image is--get rid of Bonds and you’ve rid the sport of steroids. Just check out the feedback section on articles dealing with Bonds and various message boards--Bonds “is” steroids and as such needed to be exorcised…the media provided necessary “cover fire” for any collusion to take place assuring one and all that “common sense” was simply prevailing as it had in the 1980’s collusion.

This is what makes me think Don Fehr does having something that will prove Bonds was blacklisted--he’s going against popular opinion. Does anybody really miss Bonds among the players, clubs and large segments of the fan base? I don’t miss him, my take on all this is far, far more anti-Selig (just check how many times I have blasted him) than pro-Bonds and I think the whole collusion issue is simply another manifestation of Selig’s attempts to rewrite the history of the steroid era in his favour and if I accomplish nothing else in my writing career I will do my level best to make sure folks know that it was an institutional failure and not just a handful of ‘greedy, self absorbed players with a sense of entitlement.’

That is why I have written so much about it--it has little to do with Bonds for myself personally.

Getting back to Fehr, Bonds pulled out of the union’s licensing program and make no mistake--both he and Gene Orza were livid at him for so doing. Unless he has something significant he wouldn’t even bother with the issue since he’s not on a major league roster (unlike John Rocker back in the day)--Fehr is a cautious man and never moves unless he’s sure the ground is solid under his feet. He has told players in the past that wanted to file a grievance that they had no case (such as Dan Quisenberry‘s release from the Royals back in the 1980‘s) and if Barry Lamar didn’t have a case, I can’t envision a scenario where he’d bother wasting any time on a player nobody really misses and flipped off the MLBPA in effect saying “Who needs you? I’m Barry Bonds and you’re not!”

Another misconception about any possible collusive activity is that all 30 clubs have to be involved. According to the collective bargaining agreement it is simply not the case that all teams need to be involved for a charge of collusion…four or five would be enough; Selig wouldn’t need to worry about every club--the Giants already let him go, not every team had a hole in LF/DH, other teams are known for not making big signings (Royals, Twins, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and before C.C. Sabathia--the Brewers) so Selig only would have to worry about a minority of clubs yet enough for a collusion charge to be filed.

It’s not crazy for them to understand where their financial best interests lie--one year of Bonds vs. staying on Selig’s good side…especially when they know how strong his feelings are on the matter.

An easy choice--especially if you’re not a club that prints money.

Bottom line, a team can both agree to a conspiracy regarding a player while simultaneously “following the money.”

More Bond-age

People still hate Barry Bonds (SMSN Sports)

Plus, I’ve done a satirical article on the whole Bonds saga for THT that will hopefully run this week. My favourite part is always when the Bonds-haters respond to the article on Ball Hype with a comment that states: “It‘s not funny--it‘s just not” or “You tried to be funny and you failed” or something to that effect. For the folks that truly despise BLB and believe unconditionally everything that is written about him--well, I find it irresistible not to tweak them a little; I mean, they take it so seriously. One person wrote on Ball-Hype that my collusion articles drove him from even visiting THT--think about it, remove me from the equation and THT is a tremendous resource with a cadre of talented writers but this person deprives himself (or claims to) of all that because he despises Bonds so much that he cannot bear to visit a site where there might be something that doesn’t involve venom, vitriol and blanket condemnation of the man.

He’s never met Bonds and likely never will but he allows that hatred to literally impact his personal life; that my friends is why you should never believe everything the media says about anyone or anything--they will make you act crazy.

As to his “ban” of THT--who is he hurting? Me? I’m completely unrepentant and if anything it stiffens my resolve to cover unpopular subjects and provide counterpoint to what is written in the MSM. Bonds? Chances are good that he’d simply laugh at the very notion--the only person affected or harmed is himself.

There is a lesson to be learned from that.

Best Regards

John