Too even

Parity is one thing; the NL wild-card race is another

A little parity, as we all know, can go a long, long way. I mean, we like things to be nice and level in our little world of sports. We like everyone to have an equal chance. We like intrigue in our games.

But, you know, when you let everyone in, when everyone has a semi-same shot, when the Expos and Cubs of this world rise up to challenge, what you get is chaos. You get anarchy. You get dogs sleeping with cats, you get Auburn winning a national title, you get Bud Selig and Don Fehr sharing an ice cream cone.

Why, you get ... you get the National League wild-card race.

Now there's some parity that would spin Pete Rozelle's head.

It's a wonderful thing, as baseball marches its way into September, that seven NL teams still can count themselves as October possibles (and that's not counting the Cards, who have only a slim one-game lead in the NL Central, in this wild-card bunch).

It's a beautiful thing, really, for the long-suffering fans of the Cubs. It's a great deal for the Dodgers and the Astros and the Marlins and the Expos and the Phillies and -- is that all of them? -- oh yeah, and the Diamondbacks. Let's not forget the Diamondbacks.

But, brother. Let's not fool ourselves here. We're not watching the Giants and Braves of '93 slug it out. This isn't the Dodgers and Giants back in '62 or the Cardinals and Brooklyn Dodgers back in '42.

Not to get all old school on you. I like the wild card. I like parity, for the most part. I like, as they call it now, competitive balance.

But, come on. This isn't even the Giants and Dodgers of '02.

Here are the records, over the past 10 games, of the seven teams in the running for the NL wild card, in the order that they stand as we head into September:

4-6, 4-6, 6-4, 5-5, 4-6, 5-5, 4-6.

A bunch of forceouts at second and couple of stuttering third basemen.

That's parity, all right. Hardly inspiring, is it?

A wild-card race is a good wild-card race when there are two or three good teams in it. That's it. The American League wild card is exciting this year. Boston and, now, Seattle are slugging it out. Oakland may fall in there if the A's ever lose again and the Mariners ever quit screwing around.

But the NL ... now, that's a real mess. Philadelphia and Florida would both be 6 ½ games back in the AL wild-card run. The Phillies are coming off a road trip in which they started 1-9 (quick note: thank goodness, Philly fans, for the New York Mets). They are 21-23 since the break. Larry Bowa is apoplectic. And the Phillies, still, are one of the NL wild-card leaders.

Florida started the second half so nicely, going 20-9 to get back into the thick of the thing. Now the Marlins have lost: A) eight of their last 12; B) their leading slugger, Mike Lowell, to a broken hand; and C) six years off manager Jack McKeon's life expectancy. The Marlins are your wild-card co-leaders.

Compared with the rest of the NL group, though, the Phillies and Marlins are practically the Giants and Braves. The Dodgers, amazingly, are still in it with no signs of a working offense. The Astros are in it with few signs of life whatsoever. The Diamondbacks -- let's not forget them -- have some pitching, but that's evidently not enough, as the Dodgers can attest. The Expos don't even have a home (are you ready for playoff games in Montreal?). And the Cubs are the Cubs and this is September. You do the math.

You know how many of those seven teams have winning records since the All-Star break? Three. The Marlins (at 24-17, they're the best of the bunch), the Dodgers (22-20) and Cubs (22-19).

Are you ready for some baseball?

It's fun, in a curious kind of way, watching the teams flip-flop in the standings almost daily. But here's the bad part: At this pace, for the year, the wild card winner will pull into the postseason with an 87-win season. There hasn't been a wild card, in either league, with that few wins since they started this wild card thing (not counting the shortened '95 season).

And the way these teams are playing, there's no betting they'll get to 87. There's a whole September of beating up on one another to go. Every one of these teams plays another wild card contender for at least a series this month. Arizona and L.A. have seven games against each other remaining. The Marlins and Phillies have six. The Expos play four against the Cubs; the Astros have the Dodgers ... it'll be a mess.

Sure, September's wild-card surge also could be the most exciting, competitive race since the wild card came along after the disaster of '94.

But, come on. We're pushing parity a little too far this time, don't you think?

 •  Jeff Conine is not Mike Lowell, but he'll help ease the sting of Florida's injured hitting star. I think it's high time to give credit to the management in Miami. If the Marlins are going down, they're going down swinging.

 •  Last year, the Orioles were 63-63 on Aug. 23, then went 4-32 the rest of the way. This year, they were 57-59 on Aug. 10 -- and they're 4-16 since. Facing a September that includes seven games against the Yankees, seven against the Red Sox, three against both the Mariners and A's and six against the Blue Jays -- the Jays being the worst of those teams, at two games under .500 -- is it any wonder people are speculating about Mike Hargrove's future?

 •  You know, the Mariners made a bunch of moves in the offseason to avoid the type of swoon that they're going through now. Injuries, lackluster play and, maybe, a little recent history are getting to the Mariners. But they have time to bounce back.

 •  The Jays went through all of July and all of August without winning a one-run game. They are on an 0-10 streak in one-run games.

 •  Detroit's Mike Maroth, for you car wreck fans out there, goes for No. 20 on Friday against the Jays.

The viruses have been purged to that great Inbox in the netherworld and we are back on line with the E-bag. This week, shots on the Yankees, me, my new mug, baseball's future, the Devil Rays and some other stuff ...

What are the rules for saves? Why did Mike Neu get a save when he pitched the ninth in the A's 17-2 rout of the Blue Jays? And why don't closers get saves in 6-2 or 8-1 game? -- Ryan Karerat, Gaithersburg, Md.

Welcome to the overhyped world of saves, Ryan. The game in question was on Aug. 24, in Toronto, and Neu, indeed, nailed down a save, even though when he entered the game, his A's were ahead 16-2. One of a handful of ways to get a save is to pitch "effectively" for three innings at the end of a game. He did, giving up only a hit. Thus, a closer is born.

MAILBAG MAILBAG Comments, questions or obviously unfounded criticism? To e-mail Donovan, use the form below. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

I believe the article from 08/27/03 did not nearly go far enough. This is the whole basis behind the small-market vs. big-market theory. The Yankees took on these exorbitant salaries, and when they did not pan out, they continued the cycle of adding more salary. If the Brewers were to take on Raul Mondesi's salary, were he to fail, this would cripple the team. The difference between the small- and large-market teams is exactly this: The large markets have a room for error, and the small ones don't. -- Kelly Durian, Milwaukee

Yep. I feel the Brewers' pain, Kelly. And sorry for the not-going-far-enough thing.

What the heck has happened to Roy Halladay? He was lights-out before the break, and now he's -- what? -- 1-4 in his last five? I'd hate to see Loaiza win the Cy if Roy tanks the rest of the season! -- Chad Stewart, Victoria, British Colombia

Halladay was 2-4 in August, with a 5.40 ERA, with opponents hitting .317 off him. Since his 15-game winning streak, he's had three losses in six starts. The big guy's got a lot of innings, but he is a big guy. He's not walking anyone, which is a good sign, and I haven't seen anything that indicates he's losing it. My guess: In his past four losses, the Jays have scored seven runs. That could do it.

Sometimes people can adapt to their surroundings. It's obvious that Jeff Weaver would be better suited in another atmosphere. He obviously cannot handle the New York area. Time to send him packing and cut your losses. -- Scott Jarman, Little Rock, Ark.

Scott, you may be right. If I were the Yankees -- and I look terrible in pinstripes -- I'd wonder. Weaver was stuck at the bottom of the rotation, where the expectations and pressures are a lot lower. When Clemens retires, when Wells falls apart, if something happens with Pettitte, is Weaver ready to be a No. 2 or No. 3 guy? Sure doesn't look like it now.

Want to re-assess your A's are in trouble and won't make the playoffs take? -- Terry Lake Hayward, Calif.

Yes, Terry, I do. But no one will let me. I have to say, that entire piece was done under duress. I was on deadline, and the other take I was working on fell through, and Mulder was hurt and ... I want to repent, but no one will let me.

Hey, Donovan, you blind mouse. Squeeek! You forgot to factor in the Mariners' annual second-half choke job. Then again, Boston dances to that tune as well. Hmmm. Didn't think of that, did you? Obviously not. You also didn't factor in the character of those still playing for the A's ... the rest of the team not on the DL. I'll take what they still have -- Hudson and Zito --over any other team's top two pitchers. And no, they may not have the offense of some of the other teams, but they do have one thing not all the others do have, and that is confidence and heart. So, go back into your chicken pen, Henny Penny, because the sky isn't falling. At least not in Oakland. -- Erik P., Mountain View, Calif.

And Eric was one of the nicer Oakland fans. Hey, the A's are playing well. No denying it. The Mariners aren't. Excuse the pine tar out of me.

Wow ... a whole article devoted to slamming the A's ... do you work for the San Francisco Chronicle? Now instead of having 3.5 elite pitchers, they have 2.5, yet that is somehow not good enough? Maybe instead of Tejada, Chavez, etc., having an off year, they are just now catching up to their usual stats. Pressure does something to the A's, and pressure does something to the Red Sox. The Red Sox are chowdah again this year. -- Brian Durack, San Antonio

I wasn't slamming the A's. Hey, they lost their best pitcher. Their rookie phenom pitcher was looking like a rookie again. The A's are playing well. Better than I thought they would be. But, folks, I hope you're not burying the Sox and Mariners just yet. Well, that's the end of that.

Is Vernon Wells the best kept secret in baseball? -- Rob Vandenberg, Oshawa, Ontario

Who?

The main argument going around now as to why Barry Bonds is the MVP this year is that the players surrounding him in the San Francisco lineup are much worse than the talent surrounding Albert Pujols in St. Louis. To answer that argument, the hitters surrounding Pujols are not as fearsome as the analysts say. Pujols is batting a stellar .387 with runners in scoring position. Rolen, Edmonds and Martinez (the guys analysts like to cite as Pujols' main protection) are batting a combined .241 with RISP. Take away the streaky Rolen: All-Star Jim Edmonds and bust Tino Martinez are batting an anemic .224 and .198 respectively. My point is, if Albert isn't getting it done, it ain't getting done on this team, PERIOD. This team would be completely hopeless without young Pujols. Pujols is the No. 1 reason the Cardinals are competitive. The flipside is to ask what makes the Giants competitive. Certainly having Bonds helps at almost any time, but the true strength of that team is pitching. The Giants have a 3.76 ERA, compared with a shaky 4.68 for the Cards. The bullpens are like night and day: 3.46 for San Francisco vs. 5.03 for St. Louis. I think it's fair to say the No. 1 thing making the Giants go this year is their pitching -- not Bonds. Take Bonds away, the Giants will still win their fair share of games. Take Pujols away, and the Cardinals are roughly a .420 to .450 club with no postseason aspirations whatsoever. -- Will Grapperhaus, Louisville, Ky.

Thanks, Will. Everyone remembers Will, who got a bunch of grief a couple of weeks ago for sticking up for Pujols' numbers over the ones being manufactured by some atmospherically boosted players in Coors. I think Bonds showed what he's worth to the Giants when the Giants didn't have him. But you're undoubtedly right on the pitching. No way do Pujols and the Cards get the support from pitching that Bonds and the Giants do. Of course, the lack of support argument never worked for Alex Rodriguez.

In this new look that SI.com has put up, you look dangerous and psychotic. Your old pic was better. Sorry. Do you think baseball will survive much longer? I love the game and the tradition of the game, but it seems like baseball is traveling on thin ice and may manage to destroy itself in the next 20 years or so. Maybe I am just too pessimistic. -- Jeremiah H., Terre Haute, Ind.

With the owners and players making happy, baseball is supposed to be turning its efforts toward making the game better. Expect some improved marketing efforts soon, which may help spark some interest. The game itself is constantly being evaluated (you've heard of QuesTec, I'm sure). Baseball isn't dead, and it won't die. It's an industry that pulls in billions annually. It may change; it may shrink a little. It won't ever be a "national" pastime again. But it will be around. And, by the way, I'm not dangerous.

Yes! Finally someone has come forward to say what I have been saying all along: The Yankees are smart, but not brilliant. They make many mistakes, and they just emerge without a scratch. Genius is building a winner with very few resources, not putting an overpriced winner on the field with $4 million-per-year pinch hitters on the bench and expensive short-relievers in the bullpen. -- Frank Benevento, Conn.

With all those resources, it's no wonder George Steinbrenner expects to win every season. And it's no wonder he's a tad peeved when he doesn't.

Do you think there's any hope for the Devil Rays to become a postseason-caliber club during the next three seasons? And be gentle, please, I'm a Tampa Bay fan living in Red Sox Nation. -- Mike Egan, Boston

Man, Mike, you are the original glutton for punishment, eh? Not to be Dear Abby here, but I think you need to seek some professional help. As far as your Rays, we all know the answers. They're playing well. They've taken the first step. Now ownership has to come up with some money. Three years seems quick, especially considering the competition in that division, with at least three teams (NY, Boston and Toronto) who will be pretty good in that time frame. But it's all about the coin, Mike. They have to spend some.

Let's end the nonsense about the modern-day Yankees being a great franchise. When you are able to outspend all other teams by as much as the Yankees do, you've accomplished nothing. True winners aren't satisfied unless they've overcome superior competition to reach the top. If the Yankees had to spend in line with the rest of the teams, they'd have zero championships since the 1980s. To their recent accomplishments, I say BIG DEAL. -- Steven Smith, Las Vegas

It has to be a pretty big deal, I guess, to impress a guy from Vegas.

Are the Tigers really that bad? -- John Savickas, Detroit

John, hate to break this to you, but ... yeah. They're that bad.

John Donovan is a senior writer for SI.com.