Barry Bonds Returns to Baseball, Baseball Still Hypocritical

For some reason I get Comcast Sports Bay Area with my cable TV package. It's weird seeing promotions for Oakland A's spring training updates and Golden State Warriors coverage.

On Monday they broadcast a press conference involving Barry Bonds, who will be spending a few days with the San Francisco Giants in spring training as a guest hitting coach. This marks Bonds' return to the game after retirement, conviction, and failing to be elected into the Hall of Fame.

He was asked 45 questions (not counting multi-part questions and follow-ups). Only 10 of them had to do with PEDs or the Hall of Fame. Many were about his responsibilities as a guest hitting coach. There was also a number of suck-up questions phrased in ways to praise his greatness. "These kids are in awe of you..." one question began.

I don't want Bonds to be cross-examined wherever he goes. Nor do I think he should be issued a restraining order by the game of baseball and court ordered to remain 300 yards from any MLB facility. I do, however, think it's odd that the faces of PEDs in baseball are being invited back to the game. Mark McGwire, for example, as the hitting coach for the Dodgers.

The hypocrisy of the PED era remains alive and well. The game wants to appear clean and so it harshly and publicly punishes those who break the rules. Yet teams welcome back McGwire and Bonds. The Bay Area media treat Barry Bonds like a king, and they defend him like his knights. Meanwhile the high priests of the BBWAA judge him as a sinner, even though for years they praised him as he sinned.

The 30 Major League clubs have made a big deal to demonstrate their absolute intolerance of PEDs. They even went so far as to suspend Alex Rodriguez for a bizarre number of games. The 30 clubs don't want PEDs to be part of the game.

If you were to create a Mount Rushmore of PED usage in baseball, Barry Bonds' swollen cranium would be up there, along with McGwire's, and then Jose Canseco and A-Rod. Baseball wants PEDs out, yet PED users are welcome to return.

It's baseball saying one thing and doing another. It's baseball writers saying one thing and doing another.

At least McGwire admitted it. Kind of. Actually, let's not praise McGwire for his post-PED "honesty." When Bonds was asked on Monday if he should admit to his usage, he gave this answer worthy of a politician:

"I already went to court and that's where I'll leave it."

When asked about Biogenesis he responded:

"I don't want to get into that at all."

When asked about his intimidating persona, Bonds modestly admitted "I had teammates who said 'Barry, you're too nice.'"

The question I would have asked is "What will you say to a young player who tells you he's thinking about doing a little something extra, maybe outside of the rules, to help himself out, and wants to know your thoughts on that?" That's the question to ask. It falls within his role as a guest coach, he'll probably still give a meaningless answer, but it's not a direct, accusatory question about his PED use either. You can even add "As a veteran," or "As someone who played in the era."

I'm not mad at Bonds. I'm mad at the game for making a spectacle of punishing steroid and HGH users, and then welcoming the men who inspired that use back into the game as coaches.

More than that, I'm mad at the Bay Area media who have been Bonds apologists for years. They've given Bonds more free passes than NL pitchers did. There were only a handful of difficult questions for Bonds to answer. And when he was asked if he was jealous or upset about the Giants winning the World Series without him in 2010 and 2012, one of the gathered media pointed out that Bonds was at the games and cheering. The Bay Area press stood and defended Bonds like knights defend their king.

At the end of the press conference, the microphone caught reporters saying "Thanks, Barry." And "Good job."

And while one segment of baseball media defends Bonds at all costs, another has the unshakable stance that he should never enter The Hall of Fame except as a paying customer. Both groups are hypocrites. Both are fighting a battle over ethics, but doing so in unethical ways. The Bay Area Knights of Bonds dismiss and excuse any and all wrongdoing by their king. And the high priests of the BBWAA have banished him from Cooperstown because of his sins, even though those same priests praised him endlessly while he was sinning.

Baseball wants to seem clean, yet guys like McGwire and Bonds still carry their inflated skulls and massive biceps around baseball clubhouses. Even if they are clean as coaches, what's the message to young players? Take PEDs, hit 600+ homeruns, then get paid to coach. No Hall of Fame? No problem.

Then the writers are divided on how to be unethical and wrong in their coverage of the game. Some want to gloss over the truth or explain it away. Some with sin want to cast the first stone.

All are wrong. The 30 clubs punish violations too harshly, and also shouldn't welcome back famous cheaters with open arms while doing so. And the media shouldn't be so entrenched with their positions. Bonds can be a cheater and a Hall of Famer. He can be bad and be great.

Miguel Cabrera's Impending Triple Crown Is a Huge Deal

I stopped paying much attention to baseball when the Red Sox lost their 70th game of the season, so maybe I've just been too unplugged to notice, but it doesn't seem like Miguel Cabrera's Triple Crown campaign is getting the attention it deserves. This is a huge, massive deal. He leads all three categories going into the last day of the season.

Only 15 players have done what he's about to do. Only 11 since 1920, when double-digit homerun totals became necessary to achieve it (9 HRs won Ty Cobb the Crown in 1909, 14 won it in 1901 and 1887, and 4 won it in 1878).

It's a tough combination, to be the best power hitter and the best hitter for average.

It hasn't been done for 45 years. It's an achievement that went untouched even during the Steroid Era. Not even hulking sluggers, their veins throbbing with PEDs, could do it.

Then look at the players who have done it. Only the best: Carl Yastrzemski, Hall of Famer. Ted Williams, perhaps the best pure hitter ever, did it twice. Frank Robinson, another HOFer. Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby did it twice, hitting over .400 each time. Lou Gehrig, Jimmie Foxx, Hall of Famers Chuck Klein, Joe Medwick, and Napoleon Lajoie. The only two Triple Crowners not immortalized in Cooperstown are Paul Hines and Tip O'Neill, who both did it in the 1800s. Hines hit 4 homeruns for the Providence Greys in 1878, and that was good enough.

These are some of the best hitters of the modern era, and this might be the most impressive and most prestigious single-season achievement a hitter can hope to reach.

It practically guarantees an MVP (In 1942, Ted Williams finished 2nd in voting behind Joe Gordon of the Yankees. The media didn't like Ted much), and it can significantly improve a Hall of Fame resumé.

Cabrera looks like he might be on his way to Cooperstown one day. He's only 29 and already has 1,800 career hits, over 300 HRs, some All-Star Games, some Silver Sluggers (at three different positions), and a World Series ring. Add a Triple Crown and an MVP to that list and you're approaching enshrinement territory.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo

Forbes Magazine Ranks Most Valuable Sports Teams: Patriots Ranked 6th, Red Sox 23rd

Every year Forbes ranks the top 50 sports teams around the world based on their value as a business. And although the top two teams are European soccer clubs (Manchester United of England and Real Madrid of Spain), the list is dominated by the NFL. All 32 teams are in the top 50, due mostly to the League's colossal TV contracts.

Here's the full article on Forbes' site. The list is very interesting, although it noticeably and inexplicably omitted Ted DiBiase's Money Inc.

Top teams Man United (valued at $2.23 billion), and Real Madrid ($1.88 billion) have global followings and companies pay top dollar/pound/Euro to sponsor them.

The New York Yankees ($1.85 billion) were ranked 3rd. The Yankees have a lucrative regional sports network (YES) and massive revenue from tickets and luxury boxes. The Yankees generate $330 million in ticket revenue, far and away the most in the Majors. The Red Sox are second with $190 million.

The Dallas Cowboys tied with the Yankees for 3rd. Their new stadium apparently includes a money-printing machine.

The Washington Redskins were 5th, valued at $1.56 billion.

The Patriots were 6th, worth $1.4 billion. That's thanks in part to owning their own stadium, selling out every game, and having some of the highest ticket prices in the NFL.

The LA Dodgers tied with the Patriots at 6th. Spanish soccer team Barcelona was 7th worth $1.31 billion. The New York Giants were 9th at $1.3 billion. London-based soccer club Arsenal FC were 10th at $1.29 billion. Here's the rest of the list:

11. Bayern Munich (German soccer team) - $1.23 billion
11. New York Jets - $1.23 billion
13. Houston Texans - $1.2 billion
14. Philadelphia Eagles - $1.16 billion
15. Ferrari (Formula 1 racing team) - $1.1 billion

Maybe Fenway Sports Group invested in the wrong kind of racing. Formula 1's global appeal attracts massive sponsorship money.

16. Chicago Bears - $1.09 billion
16. Green Bay Packers - $1.09 billion
16. Baltimore Ravens - $1.09 billion
19. Indianapolis Colts - $1.06 billion
20. Denver Broncos - $1.05 billion
21. Pittsburgh Steelers - $1.02 billion
22. Miami Dolphins - $1.01 billion
23. Carolina Panthers - $1 billion
23. Boston Red Sox - $1 billion

The Red Sox are the 3rd ranked baseball team on the list, which is nothing to be ashamed of. The two ahead of them (Yankees and Dodgers) play in the two largest media markets in the country. The Red Sox are in the #6 market in the US, have a small ballpark, and are still worth $1 billion. They're worth more than half the teams in the NFL, which is saying something.

The Sox make their money from high ticket prices, technically selling out every game, and from their 80% stake in NESN. Even when Fenway Park isn't filled to capacity, people still leave a lot of cash there.

25. Seattle Seahawks - $997 million
26. San Francisco 49ers - $990 million
27. AC Milan (Italian soccer team) - $989 million

AC Milan will be playing an exhibition game at Gillette Stadium on August 4th. So the 27th most valuable sports team in the world will be guests of the 6th most valuable team.

28. Kansas City Chiefs - $986 million
29. Tampa Bay Buccaneers - $981 million
30. Cleveland Browns - $977 million
31. New Orleans Saints - $965 million
32. Tennessee Titans - $964 million
33. San Diego Chargers - $920 million
34. Arizona Cardinals - $901 million
35. LA Lakers - $900 million
36. Chicago Cubs - $879 million

Proof that winning doesn't necessarily mean profits. Perhaps the Red Sox are learning too much from the Wrigley-model. The Cubs are far and away the most popular team in Chicago, even though the White Sox are much more successful on the field.

37. Cincinnati Bengals - $875 million
38. Detroit Lions - $844 million
39. Atlanta Falcons - $814 million
40. McLaren (Formula 1 racing team) - $800 million
41. Minnesota Vikings - $796 million
42. Buffalo Bills - $792 million
43. New York Knicks - $780 million
44. St. Louis Rams - $775 million
45. Oakland Raiders - $761 million
45. Chelsea FC (English soccer team) - $761 million
47. Jacksonville Jaguars - $725 million

The least valuable team in the NFL is worth more than 26 MLB teams, 28 NBA teams, and all 30 NHL teams.

48. Philadelphia Phillies - $723 million
49. New York Mets - $719 million
50. Texas Rangers - $674 million

It's amazing how valuable NFL franchises are. Even in very small markets like Jacksonville and Buffalo, teams are worth more than MLB teams in Philadelphia, New York, and Dallas-Fort Worth.

At the same time, the Cowboys are worth more than twice as much as 10 other NFL teams.

Market-size seems to dictate value in the 3 non-NFL leagues. But even in the NFL, market-size, history, and success separate the ultra-wealthy teams like Dallas, Washington, New England the Giants; from the just-rich teams like Buffalo, Jacksonville, Cincinnati, and Minnesota.

Single Elimination Baseball

I was originally opposed to the new MLB playoff system. The idea of a single-elimination game was problematic. A 162 game season ending with just 1 game? Wild Card teams with good records playing each other while inferior divisional winning teams rested their pitchers? The notion that one good starting pitching performance could determine an entire round of playoffs.

I've changed my mind. Now I like the idea. In fact, I think it should be expanded.

The calendar is responsible for this realization. It's March. The month of single-elimination excitement. The NCAA tournament and the conference tournaments that preceded it have reminded me how enjoyable it is to witness two teams playing one game to determine life and death.

I caught myself watching Colorado squeezing past Oregon in the quarterfinals of the Pac-12 tournament. I had no interest in either team, the game had no stakes for me, and I don't even like basketball that much. But I was glued to the game. Riveted. Captivated. Because one would advance. The other wouldn't.

That type of drama might be what baseball needs. We get 162 games of pitchers shrugging off signs, batters adjusting gloves, and managers arguing about foul balls. The excitement comes in the playoffs, in Game 7, when everything is on the line.

So why not start the series at Game 7? Why not have 2 Wild Card teams play each other for the right to live. Why stop at 2? Why not have 8 Wild Card teams play each other in a tournament? Wouldn't that be cool?

Some might argue that such a system would make the regular season meaningless. As if it had meaning now?

Such a glorious system will probably never be implemented. But anyway, I no longer mind the idea of single-elimination baseball. It'd be nice if they made a provision that division winning teams with less than 90 wins not be automatically rewarded a bye. But whatever.

And next year, lets add relegation to the mix. Demote the 5th place teams in each division to AAA and bring up 6 minor league teams to replace them. That will give us exciting races at the top and bottom of the standings.

MLB To Add Wild Card Teams

As soon as next year, each league could be sending 5 teams to the playoffs instead of 4. This will be the first time MLB has expanded its playoff structure since 1995. This also means that the Red Sox would have made the playoffs the last two seasons.

I don't mind the expansion. MLB will be sending 10 teams to the playoffs. The NFL sends 12, the NBA and NHL send 16 each. Any complaints about losing late-season pennant race drama can be silenced by pointing out that in any given year the race for 5th can be just as tight as the race for 4th. In 2010 for instance, the Red Sox had 1 more win than the White Sox in what would have been an exciting race for 5th.

I'd actually prefer 12 teams in the playoffs, with the top two from each league receiving byes.

What I don't like is the way that the new "Wild Card Round" will probably be played: a one game winner-take-all playoff. So after 162 games, it will all come down to just one? That seems a bit unfair. Especially since you're only as good as your starting pitcher performs that day. One meltdown start could be the end of what could have been a very good season.

It's also unfair to Wild Card teams that have better records than divisional winners. In 2010 the Yankees won the AL Wild Card with the 2nd best record in the AL. Why should they have to risk their entire season in a one-game playoff while the AL West winners with a worse record get more margin for error.

I'd prefer a 12 team playoff, with a best-of-three game opening round. I don't know what the point of adding Wild Card teams to the playoffs is if they only get one game to advance any further.

This is great for the Red Sox, though. Even when this team disappoints, they still win at least 88 games, and that will probably be good enough to get the 5th playoff spot.

MLB Once Again Taking Itself Too Seriously

A few weeks ago, the Washington Nationals wanted to pay tribute to our armed forces by wearing hats representing the five branches of the military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard). But Major League Baseball said that the Nats would be out of uniform, and squashed the tribute.

Now MLB has once again taken its uniform policies too seriously, and in doing so has really pissed me off. The Mets wanted to wear special hats to honor the first responders to 9/11, the NYPD and FDNY.

But Major League Baseball said they wanted to keep policy consistent throughout baseball. In other words, every team has to wear the same type of hats. Over the weekend, teams wore hats with small American flags embroidered on the side. Joe Torre (MLB's executive VP for baseball operations), said of the policy: "Certainly, it's not a lack of respect."

No, it's just a lack of common sense.

In September of 2001, the Mets wore hats given to them by NYPD and FDNY. I don't see what the big deal would have been if they were allowed to do so last night. The NFL allowed individual players to alter their uniforms yesterday. Yet baseball can't allow the New York Mets to change their hats for a game?

There are some uniforms that should be taken seriously, even revered. A military uniform. A police uniform. Those uniforms have meaning, and should be respected. But a baseball uniform is just cloth.