"Is there a gas leak in here?"
-
Plankton
Sometimes I feel like I'm an extra on an episode of Spongebob
Squarepants, watching in utter amazement and amusement at the zaniness
that's going on. Some of the trade rumors being floated around
sound as if they originated from Spongebob's loyal but
not-so-intellectual best friend Patrick Star. Well, except for
that episode where his skull was replaced with a brain coral... but
that's another story.
But first I wanted to add my two cents on the Bonds saga. It was
thought that if he was indicted this past week that the Commissioner
would suspend him and that just as quickly the Player's Union would
file a grievance to have the suspension overturned. One question:
why would the Player's Union do anything for someone who isn't in their
union? For the last five years, if I'm not mistaken, Bonds has
not been a member of the union so that he could reap all the marketing
rewards of being Barry Bonds and not share any of it with his fellow
players. If you've played any baseball simulation or video games,
you are no doubt familiar with the player "San Francisco Left
Fielder". His defection from the union is the reason his name
isn't listed. He gave the union a big stiff arm so that he could
get the big payday from his PED usage. My guess is that Bonds
would have the sympathy of Orza and Fehr but not their legal counsel
and that he would be left to his own devices if suspended. That,
like his choice to use
HGH
and numerous steroids since 1999, is the path he chose for himself.
The most amusing (or perhaps disturbing) aspect of this sad episode in
baseball history is
that people are beginning to question why the government is "out to get
to Bonds." It's actually a pretty simple answer: he broke the
law.
I know it sounds far-fetched given the legal abuses that have occurred
under the current administration, but the Justice Department generally
tries to punish people who've flagrantly
broken laws. Since the early 90s it's been illegal to use
steroids without a doctor's acknowledgment. Bonds has been one of
the more obvious abusers of steroids in baseball and thus an obvious
target for law enforcement. True, it wasn't illegal under
baseball's rules to use steroids, but neither is it against baseball's
rules to poison opposing players. That, like using
steroids, would certainly give a player (or team) a competitive
advantage, don't you think? It seems strange that no one has
tried that yet... maybe that will be on the table in the next
collective bargaining agreement. Nevertheless, it's illegal and
punishable to do so. Go figure.
And there is precedent for the legal powers that be going after guys
who have "broken" laws even though the laws don't specifically forbid
their actions. Michael Milliken was sent to the white collar big
house for securities
violations involving junk bonds even though they were still a grey area
under the law when he did so. His activities played a significant
role in the failure of the Savings and Loans, costing taxpayers
billions of dollars in bailout money. Even after all the fines
and penalties Milliken was a billion dollars richer for his
efforts. Like they are with Bonds, some people are still on the
fence about him. And we wonder why the guys at Enron, Adelphia,
Worldcomm, etc. thought they could get away with their schemes...
But back to Bonds... He admitted to "unknowingly using steroids".
It's next to impossible to regularly use a controlled substance for at
least a year (as he admitted) without knowing it. And the Feds
have already exacted plea bargains from Bonds' trainer and
supplier. There's a popular meme going around that a competent
attorney could indict a ham sandwich. Perhaps, but on what charge
and can he/she also get a conviction? Because if a district
attorney or a federal prosecutor is going to use public funds to indict
someone (or a ham sandwich) for a crime, he/she had better be
reasonably certain that a conviction is a feasible outcome. No
indictment doesn't mean that Bonds is less guilty of wrong doing than a
lunch; it merely means the prosecutor doesn't have enough compelling
evidence to
expect a
conviction. And with top defense attorneys not above using any
tactic to get their client off the hook, that's not an easy benchmark
to achieve.
But you you know what I find most humorous in all the talk of Bonds and
steroids? There are still people who
argue that there's no proof that steroids have an impact on
baseball. The punchline is that when you ask those same people
for an explanation for the
home run binge of the last decade, the first thing
that almost always comes out their mouths is that "hitters are bigger
and
stronger". And what
exactly do steroids do? They make one bigger and stronger.
But I guess just not in a baseball way, eh?
The saddest part of this is that Bonds career is dead and he just
doesn't
know it yet. It's likely the Feds will continue pursuing this
until they get what
they want from him. It
sets a bad example if an obvious law breaker gets away with it; it
tends to undermine people's belief in the justice system, even with how
flawed it is. They aren't in the habit of giving up until they
get something in return, either a plea or a trial. I doubt any
team is going to want to sign a guy with this kind of legal baggage
who's also a liability in the field, even the Giants.
Speaking of the Giants (and back on topic, thank you), they swung a
pretty good deal with the Blue Jays to acquire Shea Hillenbrand.
In exchange for Jeremy Accardo, they got Hillenbrand and Vinnie
Chulk. And they say the Reds overpaid for middle relief... how
about the Blue Jays? He's still relatively young, but Accardo's
numbers in the minors weren't that exciting and his stuff isn't much
above average and only arguably better than Chulk's. Hillenbrand
is not particularly good against right-handers so while he may start
out as a
full-time player, he will have to get much hotter than his .244 July
average to prevent falling into a platoon with Mark
Sweeney. The consensus is probably that the Braves got the
best deal when it comes to relievers in trade but Wickman will probably
retire after this season, so two months for a prospect is still pretty
expensive.
Who's leading the wild card races? Cincy and
ChiSox. The Braves, who just made the deal for closer Bob
Wickman are only 6 games back but their chances are slim with five
teams ahead of them. In the AL, the Yankees are only a game and a
half back of
the Sox and the Twins are a measly 3 back after a terrible first
half. With Liriano on fire, Santana and Radke on their usual
second half surges, the Twins only need to address their outfield
situation to steal away with the wild card. Interestingly enough,
they were going to have to address those situations in the offseason
anyway with Torii Hunter and Shannon Stewart eligible free
agency. Hunter might be able to come back in a few weeks so why
not go ahead and fix the outfield, win the wild card and make some
noise in the post-season? Josh Rabe and Jason Tyner clearly
aren't the
answer. Tyner's batting average and defense are decent, but he
has yet to draw a walk or hit an extra base hit. That's not going
to cut it for a team that has limited power already. Why not
trade for Alfonso Soriano or Carlos Lee or Ryan
Klesko or Frank Catalanotto or Jose Guillen or
Craig Wilson or Dave Roberts or Jeromy Burnitz or Jose Cruz Jr. or Pat
Burrell. There's a rumor that the Twins are the mystery team in
the Soriano Sweepstakes. It's not a bad fit as they have numerous
young, ready for the majors players and some pretty decent pitching
prospects, all of whom won't get the time of day from Ron
Gardenhire. Jim Bowden's biggest score for Soriano would likely
be a trade with them.
As for Soriano, I'm still of the opinion that the Nats, now that their
new ownership is official, should with all speed sign him to a long
term deal. Sure, they could trade him for prospects and try to
sign him this winter. But if they do that they risk that Soriano
will not have the good will he currently has toward the team and that
he will only go to the highest bidder. That could prove more
expensive than signing him now and picking up veteran cast-offs to
bolster the rotation, something Jim Bowden has done with some success
the last two years with Esteban Loaiza, Hector Carrasco and Ramon Ortiz.
There's little doubt the Nats will have enough cash to sign
Soriano. This Saturday they drew over 38,000 to a game that
matched-up the last place Nats with the equally feeble Cubs. The
new ownership has gone to considerable lengths to make the game
experience more fan friendly with more diversity on the food menu, more
family friendly activities, and thousands of low cost ($3 and $5)
tickets. The between-innings entertainment is also much improved
with a President's race (similar to Milwaukee's famous sausage race)
and a giveaway called Nats Make a Deal in which a fan is allowed to
choose between a signed piece of memorabilia (like a signed jersey) or
what is in one of two boxes. On Saturday, the gifts in the boxes
were a) a game-used piece of gum and b) XM radios for the entire row
the fan had been sitting in.
There was a group of shirtless guys in the upper deck with the letters
for "GO NATS GO" painted on their chests, but the "T" was smeared so
from my seat it looked like "GONADS GO". That has nothing to do
with the topic at hand, but I thought it was pretty funny anyway.
Even opposing players were enjoying the atmosphere as Phil Nevin was
seen head banging in left field when the PA system was playing REO
Speedwagon's "Take it on the Run" during a coaches visit. I can't
defend his taste in music. But I can defend
my prediction that the
Washington Nationals are well on their way to becoming, at least
money-wise, a powerhouse franchise.
But back to Soriano - he electrifies the crowd every time he comes
up. The Nats
had played incredibly bad baseball over the first two innings of
yesterday's game thanks in part to third base coach Tony Beasley's
abysmally bad decisions to send Soriano home from third twice.
The first time was on a comebacker to the pitcher and the second was on
a shallow flyball to Jacque Jones. Still, after Soriano's triple,
the stadium was on it's collective feet. I don't know why GMs are
so willing to part with guys like Soriano and Barry Zito. These
are the kind of players one builds a franchise around, not sell off for
a couple of magic beans. Talent and durability like theirs, even
with the weaknesses in their game, is incredibly hard to find.
One smaller move that Bowden made recently that got overlooked was
signing Luis Matos. He's had lots of injury troubles the last two
or three years and his offensive upside doesn't look all that great
compared to Soriano and Kearns, but he definitely has the range and arm
to play center in RFK. If he can benefit from Frank Robinson the
way most Expo/Nationals hitters have, he should be a pretty solid
player for the team for years to come. His first year in
Baltimore 27% of his balls in play were line-drives. He's been
swinging for the fences a bit too much the last couple of years but if
he gets back to his earlier form, RFK should become very friendly for
him with an ample number of doubles and triples to offset the lack of
true home run power. That's always a big if, but the potential is
there.
I literally laughed out loud when I read that the Orioles would move
Kevin Millar, Javy Lopez, Latroy Hawkins, Jeff Conine or Rodrigo Lopez
for major league ready prospects. With the exception of Javy
Lopez whose bat is still decent if you can use him as a catcher every
once in a while, none of those guys are even replacement level.
Why would any GM trade a guy making major league minimum for a guy who
wouldn't be any more productive yet making two or three times the
money? If I were a GM and had major league ready prospects, I'm
not sure I would give up even one for the whole lot of that crew.
I would, however, trade low level prospects to help my bench. But
giving up a guaranteed major league talent for bench help, a
non-strikeout, non-groundball reliever with baserunner issues or a
starter with gopheritis seems like a high price to pay.
The Tigers and Mets are leading their
respective divisions and doing a pretty good job of playing with the
big boys in their league. Why is there any urgency for them to
make a big trade? It seems to me that the onus for making a big
deal is on the teams trying to catch them. Their GMs already made
their big deals in the offseason; that's why they are winning
now. I acknowledge that both of those teams do have weaknesses
that could be addressed, but neither team is so glaringly weak in one
place that it will no doubt be their undoing in the playoffs. The
Tigers need a left-handed power hitter. Well, if Dmitri Young is
healthy, that need isn't as great. The Mets need another starter
behind Glavine and Pedro, but if Mike Pelfrey pitches to his ability,
that need isn't as great either. I would be very surprised if
either team gives up their prized prospects this year. They might
make a lesser deal involving some lower level guys, but I just can't
see dealing a Lastings Milledge or a Humberto Sanchez for a two month
star rental.
Brian Meadows has the tenacity to close, although is not a long term
solution. As long as he's getting the low strike he'll be
ok. But if an umpire forces him to elevate, he's going to be hit
very hard because his stuff is below average. Still, some playoff
aspirant will find him attractive to help their bullpen.
Meanwhile, Seth McLung has found his niche in Durham bullpen.
Against Triple-A hitters he's thrown 12.2 innings, allowed 11
baserunners (only 2 walks) and 3 earned runs while striking out
22! There is your Tampa Bay Devil Rays closer as of August 1.