Perez, Bay contracts
I'll give you 2 good reasons why I (unlike the seeming majority of fans) have a hard time feeling sorry that the contracts the Pirates gave to Ollie Perez and Jason Bay weren't to their liking.
1. Because that's the way the system works, as negotiated by the players.
2. Because of quotes like this, from Jack Wilson:
"It's unfortunate that two of our best players have to find out the harsh business of baseball so early in their career."
Wilson is one of the humblest, most unassuming athletes in professional sports. But if he can be so divorced from reality, then I have a hard time fretting that Perez and Bay each got raises that are significantly higher than the
median income in Allegheny County.
In case you think Wilson is alone, here's what Josh Fogg had to say:
"It's kind of sad. It makes you wonder what (the Pirates) are doing if this is how they treat their best pitcher and offensive player on the team last year."
Let me tell you what they are doing, Josh. They are playing by the rules to which you, your teammates, and your union leadership agreed.
They are playing by the rules just as they were when they paid Derek Bell's full salary during operation shutdown.
They are playing by the same rules that guarantee every contract, whether a player wins the MVP or sits out half the season with a hang nail.
They are playing by the same rules that ensure Perez and Bay, if they deserve, will be multi-millionaires many times over.
I have never, will never begrudge any player or professional athlete his salary. I have never, will never curse a player for leaving my favorite teams to follow the gold somewhere else (and there's plenty of opportunity to curse here in Pittsburgh.) Why? Because those are the rules.
So my suggestion to Perez, Bay, or any 0 - 3 player who is unhappy with their salary is to get on the phone with your union leaders and tell them that you want to pursue a purely performance based salary structure in baseball. I have a feeling the owners will be mighty receptive.
Don't blame Maz
As you may have heard, the newly configured Veteran's Committee has failed to vote anyone into the Baseball Hall of Fame this year. This really isn't surprising as the new rules instituted in 2003 make it likely that nobody will ever be elected via this means. This isn't necessarily a bad thing.
What IS a bad thing is the
AP story that reported the HOF vote and concluded with the following paragraph:
The old Veterans Committee, which met annually, had 15 members in most years and was criticized for cronyism. The Hall changed the system after Bill Mazeroski, a career .260 hitter with a great glove, was elected in 2001.
On the way in to work today, I heard 2 national radio commentators (copy readers) report this story and then opine that the rules were made tougher as a result of Bill Mazeroski's induction in 2001. One went so far as to refer to Mazeroski as "Bill Mazeroski, of the .260 lifetime average." I don't know how much the average middle-aged national sports reporter knows about Maz (after all he never played for the Red Sox, Yankees, or Dodgers) but I can't think of too many other players for whom their lifetime batting average is a worse description of their achievements.
Now I have no idea who wrote this story for the AP. But whoever it was obviously feels as though ol' #9 doesn't belong in the HOF and was inducted due to cronyism. The commentators I heard obviously took their cues from the article. As you might surmise, I have a problem with this.
First, let's tackle the obvious. Does Bill Mazeroski belong in the HOF? That's something that can only be answered subjectively, but Maz certainly didn't lower the standards of the HOF. Still, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so if someone wants to think that Ozzie Smith is a first ballot HOFer yet Bill Mazeroski doesn't belong, then they are entitled to be wrong.
What really burns my britches is the allegation of cronyism. You can argue that Maz doesn't fit the bill based on his performance, but there's no basis for arguing that his election was fraudulent. If you want evidence of cronyism, take a look at the elections of Pee Wee Reese or Phil Rizzuto, two guys who stretch the limits of the Hall's credibility who had teammates on the VC. Who did Maz have in his back pocket on the Veteran's Committee?
Whether or not you think Maz belongs (and he does belong), let's not blame him for keeping the Santos and Hodges of the world out.
Humberto Cota
In the
Q&A, Dejan writes:
Oh, and do not forget about catcher. The uncertainty at that position might not go away all year, especially if Humberto Cota makes the most of his chance. The optimism seems to be very high in the Pirates' fold that this will happen.
Based on what? The Pirates are so high on Cota that they brought in the fossilized remains of Benito Santiago? I see nothing in Cota's resume to warrant such faith anyway. Damn I hope he proves me wrong.
Ollie Perez
Uhhhh....so you think the Pirates will
be able to want to sign Ollie Perez to a long term deal before he hits free agency? Think again. I believe
this is what my English teacher called "foreshadowing."
Past evidence says that they'd rather pay a couple of million each to a collection of over the hill stiffs than pay 1 star player his value and surround him with cheap young players. Of course, you can't fault them since this strategy has worked so well for them during the last dozen years.
Training camp for writers
"News" is starting to flow from Bradenton. If you are interested in how your favorite Pirates are faring against batting practice pitchers and local community colleges, the stories are tallied daily over at Honest Wagner.
I haven't paid much attention to spring training yet. Maybe it's because all of the "news" is so predictable. Covering spring training must be the greatest gig. You get to lounge around on the beach, watch baseball, and mail-in a couple of cookie-cutter columns per week.
For example, there are typically about 5 or 6 standard-issue stories that you have to choose from.
1. Non-roster invitee trying to rediscover past performance level
2. Player coming off of disappointing year reports to camp in the best shape of his life
3. Mediocre pitcher showing off new pitch he learned in the off-season
4. Player X is hoping to be ready by opening day after off-season surgery
5. Failed prospect in camp for last shot at sticking with team
6. Player X is hoping weight gain/loss helps him improve power/speed
See if you can match them up with the recent camp reports you've read. I'm sure that I'm missing a few too.
Baseball America's top 100 prospects
As reported by Honest Wagner, Baseball America is in the process of listing their top 100 prospects and right there at #81 is the newest Pirate prospect, Neil Walker. As BA counts down to #1, it will be interesting to see who else on the list hopes to one day wear black and gold. Zack Duke and Ian Snell are the best bets to make the list. Bryan Bullington might also make an appearance. Am I missing anybody?
Apart from the top 10-15 guys, I don't put too much stock in these lists. It's hard enough to project guys with some major league experience, let alone someone like Walker who hasn't even tasted AA ball. These lists say more about the relative strength of a team's system than they do about individual players.
