 |
| |
|
 |
 |
Laboring along Off-the-field questions fill up the 'bagPosted: Wednesday July 24, 2002 12:12 PM
Click here to send a question to Tom Verducci's Baseball Mailbag Why does the players' union have a say regarding issues such as contraction,
revenue sharing and interleague play? If my boss decided to close down his
business, he wouldn't ask me if it was a good idea. If he decided to go into
business with others, I wouldn't be expected to voice an
opinion.
The players have a say in those matters because it affects their salaries and working conditions. Let's face it, we're not dealing with an ordinary union here, and I grow weary of hearing players talk about themselves as if they're steelworkers or pipe fitters. Two generations ago the players had no say in where they could work or what they earned, which is why Marvin Miller belongs in the Hall of Fame. The players have made great strides over the years in terms of their rights, but let's remember that they took none of them. All of them were negotiated. I just read your piece on
the labor negotiations and I'm curious as to why the players would ever agree to
a salary floor? Wouldn't this allow teams to keep payroll at or around the
minimum and further afford the owners a built-in excuse to keep salaries down?
You make a valid point. The floor might give teams an out by allowing them to say, "Hey, we're in compliance'' when really they should or could spend more. The extreme example would be 30 clubs all spending $45 million each. In the real world, though, if you're going to have revenue sharing, I think you must have some safeguards against a team stripping its payroll to next to nothing while cashing welfare checks from the rich. I don't know if $45 million is the right number, but the idea has merit. Your column regarding the
non-production of Rusty Greer and Moises Alou seems to cry for a change in
baseball contracts. The fact that they are guaranteed regardless of performance
seems to be a large reason some clubs are perpetual losers; they simply cannot
get rid of dead weight. Should the players choose to strike, would it be wise
for owners to use the opportunity to make a change in this
area?
It would be wise for the owners not to give multiyear contracts to non-superstar players. Greer and Alou didn't force their clubs to guarantee that kind of money. Teams do it willingly and must live with their mistakes. I don't blame the players, who are so highly skilled, for getting guaranteed money. In fact, I'm stunned the NFL can dump players at any time and be off the hook for financial commitments. Sporting a 12-4 record and a 2.71 ERA while playing on a horrendous team,
could Blue Jays starter Roy Halladay be Cy Young
material?
If he stays on this roll for another two months, Halladay is absolutely Cy material. Derek Lowe, Barry Zito and Pedro Martinez will have something to say about it, though. Taking into account all the factors you consider relevant, who would you rank
as the five greatest home run hitters of all time, and in what order?
I'm assuming you're not looking for the top five in order of career home runs, so I looked at total home runs, at-bats per home run and home run titles, and came up with this list. Feel free to disagree. 1. Babe
Ruth
What's wrong with Roy Oswalt? He was unhittable in spring training and very
good for the first two months of the season, but he's been quite ordinary ever
since. Any sense that he is pitching through pain?
I don't get any sense that Oswalt is hurt. His walk-to-strikeout ratio (134 to 37 going into play Wednesday) remains impressive, which indicates his stuff is still darn good. I think it's just unreasonable to expect he'd keep winning 75 percent of his decisions. I do wonder a bit about the right-hander's stamina; he could finish his first full year in a big league rotation with 235 innings pitched, though so far Astros manager Jimy Williams has kept Oswalt below 120 pitches in every start. What are Fred McGriff's chances of making the Hall of
Fame?
I'd say he has a decent chance of getting in, especially if you view his career as compared to Tony Perez's. Maybe McGriff doesn't get in on the first ballot, but he's always been an underappreciated player -- and a class act, too. With the acquisition of Ryan Dempster and Ken Griffey Jr. getting ready to
play everyday, do you think the Reds will make the playoffs? If you had to place
a bet on whether they'd make the postseason, which way would you
go?
Betting on the Reds? Hmm, sounds like asking for trouble, huh? Anyway, I think Cincinnati may be helped by those three NL West teams beating up on each other. And watch out for the Mets, who seem to be getting their act together in time to make a run at the wild card. With the Hall of Fame inductions
on July 28, I thought I'd ask your opinion about Dave Concepcion, who I feel is
an underrated member of the Big Red Machine. Concepcion's fielding percentage
(.972) compares favorably with Ozzie Smith's (.978), and his batting average was
slightly better than Ozzie's (.267 vs. .262). Davey also won five Gold Gloves
(to Smith's 13). The only knock I can see against Concepcion is that he may have
benefitted from being on those dominant Reds teams. Still, I find it hard to
name a better shortstop for the decade of the '70's. Your
opinion?
I like Concepcion a lot, but he's no Hall of Famer. Do you realize while playing on The Big Red Machine he scored 80 runs in a season only once? Plus, he led the league in fielding percentage only once. (Larry Bowa did so six times. If you put Concepcion in, Bowa has to go in, too.) Offensively, Davey rates similarly to Ozzie, but Smith's defense was so extraordinary that he separated himself from all others. I hate excluding steady players such as Concepcion, but you have to draw the line somewhere and I believe when it comes to the Hall you err on the side of keeping it elite. 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 Mailbag |
