 |
| |
|
 |
 |
On shaky ground Players, owners can't even agree on salary floorPosted: Tuesday July 23, 2002 12:13 PMUpdated: Tuesday July 23, 2002 8:37 PM
While there is no discussion about a salary cap in the current labor negotiations, there is talk about a salary floor -- that is, setting a minimum dollar amount that teams must spend on payroll. You might be surprised by which side of the bargaining table is arguing against it. It's the players who don't want the owners to be required to meet a payroll minimum. Management has proposed that teams spend at least $45 million on payroll. That is a conservative number. Only three clubs figure to be under that number this season. The players, meanwhile, have rejected not only that figure but also the concept of a salary floor. Union executive director Donald Fehr said earlier this month that "you need to give clubs discretion'' to spend on non-payroll items such as player development, new stadiums and front office personnel. Why would the union not oppose, for instance, a team cutting back to bare bones the way the 1998 Marlins did? The union's argument is that rebuilding is common in baseball and teams should be allowed latitude to do so as they see fit, rather than having it legislated. Left unsaid is that the union, to be consistent, must reject a salary floor since it has been so adamantly against a salary cap all these years. The owners have recognized that sometimes a team needs to take a step back in order to take two steps forward. They came back with a counterproposal in which clubs could use a three-year average to comply with a $45-million floor. For instance, if the Marlins want to cut back to a $30-million payroll, that's fine -- as long as they spend $105 million over the next two years. Why would management be interested in setting a floor? Much of the momentum comes from the big-market owners. The Yankees' George Steinbrenner, for instance, is tired of hearing about how he must share his revenue to help the competitive balance problem, only to see franchises take his money and put it into their pockets or business operations rather than investing it in players. Indeed, one club has floated a system in which a portion of revenue sharing be placed in some sort of trust fund that mandates the money be spent on players. Then again, if teams were required to spend on players, would that mean that poorly run clubs, such as the Devil Rays, would find more ways to blow cash on underachievers such as Greg Vaughn and Wilson Alvarez? The salary floor is one of the few issues in this negotiation on which there is a clear disagreement on philosophy. In any case, teams ought to be accountable to their fans on where the revenue sharing money is going. A few years ago, Royals fans organized a protest when the Yankees came to town, demanding that New York share more of its money. But would Kansas City fans like a system in which the Yankees fork over more cash with which the Royals could do whatever they wish with, including pocket it? A broken clutch for Cubs' lineupMuch of the talk in the Chicago Cubs' spring training camp included discussions about the best 3-4-5 hitters in the big leagues, if not (gulp!) the best of all time. That's how amped the Cubs and their fans were about the prospect of a full year of Fred McGriff and Moises Alou hitting behind Sammy Sosa. Alou was signed as a free agent to a three-year, $27-million deal after the Yankees crossed him off their list because they couldn't work out a quick contract with him. In Alou, the Cubs thought they were getting another major run producer, a veteran version of Magglio Ordonéz. It turns out they were getting the wrong Ordonéz facsimile. They were getting a more expensive version of Rey Ordonéz, the Mets shortstop, who is probably the worst offensive player of any regular starter in baseball. It's not just that Alou has been bothered by injuries and inconsistencies. It's that he's been downright brutal when it comes to delivering anything close to a key hit. Just how brutal? Entering play July 23, the left fielder had 10 hits all year with runners in scoring position, and just three of those came with two outs. Alou, who came out of the All-Star break with a 5-for-37 slump, turned 36 this month. Because of a backloaded contract, the Cubs still owe him $21 million over the next two years, making him virtually untradeable. He is a primary reason Chicago figures to make it 30 straight years without back-to-back winning seasons. Nobody ever mentioned Rey Ordonéz's name in the discussion of the best middle of the orders in baseball, but Alou has been so bad that he's become a near statistical twin of the light-hitting New York shortstop. You know you're having a bad year when Ordonéz is a better clutch hitter. Check out this comparison, entering Tuesday.
Greer getting rustySpeaking of left fielders in decline, Rusty Greer might not play another game for the Texas Rangers this season. Why has he been placed on the 60-day disabled list? a) herniated disk in his neck, b) bone chips in his left elbow, c) pain in his left hip, or d) all of the above. The correct answer, of course, is d. Greer is a lifetime .305 hitter with three seasons each of 100 RBIs, 100 runs and 40 doubles. Last spring training, just after Greer turned 32, the Rangers rewarded him with a three-year, $21.8-million contract extension. Since then he has played a total of 113 games, or fewer than half of Texas' games. The Rangers knew then that Greer's body was breaking down, partly because of his all-out, run-into-walls style of play. Of course, they couldn't have known his physical condition would deteriorate so quickly. But Greer's case is a good example of how the meaning of statistics has diminished. Former MVP Fred Lynn, for instance, was a career .283 hitter who had only two seasons each of 100 RBIs, 100 runs and 40 doubles. Greer's deal is also an example of why clubs shouldn't rush into extensions for what really are replaceable parts, no matter what inflationary statistics might show. (The Tigers' Bobby Higginson also comes to mind.) Greer would have been eligible for free agency after last season, but Texas chose to lock him up and he hasn't been able to stay healthy since. The Rangers still owe Greer $15 million over the next two years. Think that contract can be moved? Turns out Greer is more locked up than Texas ever dreamed. Sports Illustrated senior writer Tom Verducci covers the baseball beat for the magazine and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com. Click here to send a question to his Baseball Mailbag. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
