Not everyone is on board with baseball commissioner Bud Selig’s idea of expanding the current playoff format.

“It doesn’t seem very fair, and personally, I don’t know where his head is at,” said Giants’ ace Tim Lincecum in an interview last week. “Players like it the way it is. It’s dog-eat-dog. People know they need to win 11 games to win the World Series.”

I for one like the idea of an expanding the current playoff pool, although not if it’s going to be a one-game format like some have suggested. Anything can happen in one game and as Lincecum points out, it’s not fair that a team goes through a 162-game jaunt to make the playoffs, only to be knocked out in one game because its pitcher had an off day. That’s not right.

But I can’t be alone in the thinking that adding two more teams (one from each league) to the current playoff pool is a bad thing. It’s good for the game for several reasons, none bigger in that it’ll keep fans interested (and stadiums packed) through August because they know their team has a shot at making the postseason. (This is assuming of course that their team isn’t 15 games out of first place.)

Lincecum isn’t alone in criticizing Selig’s idea, as Yankees’ first baseman Mark Teixeira has sounded off about the news as well.

From the New York Daily News:

“For a team like us, I don’t like it,” Mark Teixeira said. “We battle all year long in a very tough division; if you win the division and have to have five or six days off before the start of the playoffs, or you win the wild card and still have to play another one- or three-game series just to get into the playoffs, it doesn’t make much sense.”

Hey, I get why this would upset the players. They don’t want to have to win more games in order to reach/win the World Series and they don’t want extra days off. They like the current format and want to see it left alone, which I get.

But from a fan’s perspective, if Selig figures out a way to add two more teams and a new five-game series (not just a one-game series), then I’m all for it. Maybe I’m in the minority though.

A day after Bud Selig announced that Major League Baseball would assume control over the Los Angeles Dodgers, club executive Steve Soboroff has come to the defense of current owner Frank McCourt.

From ESPN.com:

Soboroff, the Los Angeles civic leader and former mayoral candidate whom the Dodgers hired Tuesday as vice chairman, said Thursday the Dodgers are in good shape financially and Selig’s move was “irresponsible” and came as “a shock.”

Soboroff cited the Dodgers’ potential 20 year, $3 billion television deal with Fox as evidence McCourt has sufficient funds to operate the team.

“All this momentum is building and then all of sudden this letter comes in and says, ‘You don’t have any money. You don’t have this or that.’ I think it was irresponsible,” Soboroff said.

Soboroff also expressed frustration Thursday with the way Selig handled Wednesday’s announcement and the lag time before appointing an overseer.

“To me, if you’re going to send somebody out here to take something over, you don’t write a letter that says, ‘Gee whiz, here’s all these problems with you and here’s everything else, but don’t worry, later on in the week we’re going to send somebody else out,’” Soboroff said. “You do it the same day. … What are you supposed to do for four days?”

I’m not going to pretend that I know even half of what’s going on with this situation with Frank McCourt, Major League Baseball and the Dodgers. It’s not like I’ve been in a room with the McCourts over the past decade and taking diligent notes on their spending habits. I just can’t know everything about everything – even if I pretend to. (And trust me, I do pretend to.)

That said, it’s not like Selig isn’t within his rights to want to know what the hell is going on with one of his teams. Thanks in large part to the acquisition of Manny Ramirez, the Dodgers have had some recent success under McCourt (not World Series success mind you, but success nonetheless). But there are some ugly reports out there about McCourt’s spending, which include the fact that he gave himself a $5 million salary and his ex-wife $2 million (which is according to evidence at their divorce hearing). There was also a report that they gave a six-figure free to Vladimir Shpunt, a self-described scientist and healer in Boston, to send positive energy across the country to the Dodgers. (Shpunt might want to check the coordinates on that positive energy, because he may have mistakenly sent it to the Giants last fall.)

So while I don’t blame Soboroff for coming to McCourt’s defense, I don’t think Selig is off his rocker in wanting to do a little investigating into the Dodgers’ financial books. As baseball’s commissioner, he owes it to the game and to the fans in L.A. to make sure that everything is on the up-and-up and that McCourt does have his club’s best interests at heart (financially speaking).

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig told the media on Thursday that he won’t consider taking Barry Bonds’ name out of the record books in wake of the slugger’s conviction of obstruction of justice last week. This will make a lot of fans angry, but it shouldn’t.

There was a huge outcry from fans that wanted to see an asterisk next to Bonds’ name in the record books when he broke Hammerin’ Hank’s home run mark in 2006. But that was never going to happen, and neither was Selig striking Bonds’ name from the record books altogether.

But the fact that Bonds hit 762 home runs in his career only has meaning because we as fans give it meaning. If we refer to Bonds as the current home run champ, then that 762 becomes much more than a number. But if we refer to Bonds as the cheater that pumped himself full of drugs in efforts to break Aaron’s record, then that 762 holds about as much weight as the needle that Greg Anderson used to inject the former slugger.

Don’t get it twisted: What Bonds did, matters. How he accomplished what he did, matters. The fact that he cheated, matters. But that 762 number? Means nothing. It’s a question at someone’s trivia night. In fact, I didn’t even know the exact number before I started writing this piece. I had to look it up, which should tell you how much it means to me.

Do true baseball fans wish that Aaron’s number were still at the top of the record books? Yes, but in some ways, it still is. Nobody refers to Bonds as baseball’s all-time home run leader unless they follow it up with a “But…steroids.” And there’s a large contingent that refuse to even mention Bonds’ name when the record is mentioned. They’ll still refer to Hank Aaron as the all-time home run champ and will continue to do so until they take their last breath.

It would be nice if Selig stepped to the plate and made a statement for once. It would be nice if he gave Bonds his middle finger and said: “Not in my record books, buddy.” But he wasn’t and isn’t going to do that. Baseball is run by conservative men who make conservative decisions. Selig wasn’t going to rock the boat with something like this, just like he will never allow someone as flamboyant and aggressive as Mark Cuban to come in and purchase one of his ball clubs.

But as long as we the fans don’t allow Bonds’ 762 to have meaning, then Hank Aaron will always live on as the true all-time home run champion.

Baseball commissioner Bud Selig is seriously considering reinstatement for banished former player Pete Rose.

Lobbying for the move began five years ago but died when Selig became convinced Rose was not “reconfiguring” his life, the newspaper report said, part of the late commissioner Bart Giamatti’s demands on Rose when he was ruled ineligible.

“I think a lot of the guys feel that it’s been 20 years now for Pete, and would lean toward leniency and time served,” an unnamed Hall of Famer said, according to the Daily News. “If he had admitted it in the first place and apologized way back then, he’d probably be in the Hall by now.”
If Rose were to become eligible, it stands to reason he would have to be voted into the Hall of Fame by the 65 living members that make up the Veterans Committee.

Inclusion on the writers’ ballot expires after 15 years, but Rose has never appeared on their ballot except by write-in.

“I know there are still guys who feel strongly against him,” said another Hall of Famer, according to the report. “And I don’t know if that would change even if Selig clears him.”

This might be like comparing apples to oranges, but to me, players using steroids is 10 times worse than betting on baseball when you’re a manager. I’m not justifying what Rose did, but compared to what these selfish players did in the steroid era, “Charlie Hustle” should get a reprieve.

Gambling never helped Rose accomplish what he did on the field. Was he a scumbag for gambling on games he was managing? Yes. But he would be getting into the Hall of Fame based on what he accomplished as a player, which was (in short) quite a lot.

Bud Selig wants a rule changed that allows suspended MLB players to sharpen up in the minor leagues before their suspensions are over. The latest example of this rule came this year when outfielder Manny Ramirez was able to play in the Dodgers’ minor league system before his 50-game suspension for testing positive for a banned substance was up.

“I believe that should be changed,” Selig said Tuesday during a one-hour question-and-answer session with the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. “Their logic was OK — look, guys get hurt, they can go out on rehab, and so on and so forth. But I think that’s something we need to really change in the next labor negotiation.”

The current rules are in place through December 2011. Rob Manfred, baseball’s executive vice president of labor relations, said management will not ask for a rules change before then.
“I’ll let them work that out. I don’t want to do our negotiating here,” Selig said. “But it’s 50 games and then go do what you got to do to get back into [shape].”

For one of the first times in the history of my existence, I actually agree with Bud the Slug.

If a player is suspended, he should have to serve the full length of that suspension before he’s allowed to partake in baseball on the major or minor league level. I was vilified by a couple of readers in this article for criticizing this rule, but it’s amazing how people don’t find a player being allowed to sharpen up in the minors (while they’re suspended mind you) a ridiculous concept. I understand that it’s baseball’s rule, but it’s a dumb freaking rule.

It’s like sending a kid to time out in the corner for 15 minutes, but for the last five minutes, he gets to play with Legos so that he’s ready to get back to building a Lego house with the other kids after his 15 minutes have been served.

According to Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune, baseball commissioner Bud Selig is upset that names from the 2003 list of players who tested positive for banned substances are being leaked to the media.

Apparently Selig and others around Major League Baseball believe that a lawyer with the U.S. Attorney’s office (either past or present) ignored a court seal in order to give Sammy Sosa’s name to Michael S. Schmidt of the New York Daily News, who reported yesterday that the slugger was on the ’03 list.

I don’t blame Selig for being peeved that someone is leaking names that were supposed to be kept anonymous. After all, the only reason the player’s union agreed to the ’03 drug testing was because the players who tested positive wouldn’t be punished and because their names would never be released.

That said – give…me…a…break. If Selig wants to be upset with anything, how about he get upset with himself, the owners and the player’s union that allowed us to get to this point. He turned a blind eye to the steroid issue and now he wants to play victim. I guess he has to put on this little front about being mad about the leaks in efforts to settle down the player’s union, but he has nobody to blame but himself for this mess.

What Selig should do is go back on his word to the player’s union and release the rest of the 104 names on that 2003 list before the media does. A-Rod and Sosa’s names have already been released – how much longer until more names are announced? If Selig thinks that the media is going to stop digging, he has another thing coming. He may anger the players and the union by releasing the names, but it’s well past time for people to start taking responsibility for what has happened to the game of baseball.

Joe Posnanski of SI.com wrote an interesting piece about why the MLB draft doesn’t work as a popular television event.

1. The vast majority of players drafted will never get close to the big leagues. Take the 1994 draft … 15 years ago. There were 287 players taken in the first 10 rounds, and 190 of them — two thirds — did not get a single at-bat or throw a single pitch in the big leagues.

2. Even the players who DO make it will not make it for years. If the NFL Draft is, as the cliché goes, like getting presents on Christmas morning, well, the baseball draft is like getting a savings bond from your grandmother that will mature when you turn 18.

I love the analogy Posnanski used in his second point.

Yesterday I DVR’d the MLB draft and was actually looking forward to watching it. The MLB Network had hyped the event up for a couple of weeks and being a Giants fan, I was excited to see who’d they take at pick No. 6.

But once Bud Selig (who was awful, by the way) read Zack Wheeler’s name at pick six, I realized that I could care less about the rest of the first round. Unless you’ve lived under a rock the past couple weeks, you knew that the Nationals were going to take San Diego State pitcher Stephen Strasburg with the top pick and there was a good chance the Mariners would select North Carolina’s Dustin Ackley (arguably the best position player in the draft) at No. 2. So outside of hearing whom your favorite team picked, there wasn’t much excitement to the draft.

Posnanski is right – the MLB draft as a televised event doesn’t work. I applaud MLB for trying to make the event even a smidgen as popular as the NFL draft, but there just isn’t enough quality substance in the end. As Posnanski points out, most (and that’s not an exaggeration) of the players drafted in the first couple of rounds will never see the big leagues and even if they do, as a fan you have to wait three to four years before that happens. By that time, most casual fans have forgotten where those players came from.

Again, I think it’s great that baseball has embraced the idea of making the draft more of an event. But the reality is that I would rather watch the entire third round of the NFL draft than just one pick in the first round of the MLB draft. And I think others feel the same way.