The Resigning Derek Jeter Debate

October 25, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Babe Ruthless.

It will be an interesting offseason for Yankees’ fans. While I’m sure many of them are currently weeping and gnashing teeth at their ALCS exit and spotty bullpen, a potentially more significant decision looms on the horizon for the Bronx Bombers.

The face of the franchise, Derek Jeter, just completed the final year of a 10-year, $189M contract. General manager Brian Cashman and the boys will be doing a lot of soul-searching over this off-season to find the right contract to keep Jeter in pinstripes without damaging the franchise’s financial ability to acquire more high-priced talent.

Thankfully, we at the Sports Debates are here to help the Yankees’ front office. We will debate the question of whether or not Jeter deserves a similar contract to his last one, a contract that pays tribute to his consistent on-field production as well as his stature as one of the greatest Yankees of all time, or a smaller contract tied to the fact that he is a 36-year-old playing a position often reserved for younger ballplayers.

Babe Ruthless will be arguing that Jeter deserves another big contract because of everything he has given and continues to give the Yankees franchise. Loyal Homer will argue that Jeter deserves a smaller contract due to his age and some aspects of his play. May the best man win!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Resigning Derek Jeter Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Optimist Prime

The Most Disgraced Athlete of All Time Debate… The Bloom is Long Gone

October 7, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan.

What an amazing career. We will get to the stats in a moment. Before we do, conjure up some memories of Pete Rose playing baseball. I’m guessing a few specific memories popped into your heads. For me, I like the one of Pete Rose hustling in the All-Star game and bowling over the catcher. Sure, that was a violation of the unspoken rules and regulations in baseball. But it was also a beautiful play that embodied the hustle and attitude millions of dad’s across American were trying to instill in their children. Never quit. Never take a play off. Never phone it in. Pick the way you want to play, and play in that manner at all times, regardless of the consequences.

Rose used to be a legitimate role model. Until the truth set us all free. It turns out he was a chiseler. A liar. A fraud, and a phony.

Some athletes become disgraced for decisions others make, and some are disgraced by their own actions. Baseball legend Pete Rose falls into the latter category. He chose the path he so publically followed, and failed to confront the consequences until it was far too late for him to save face and respectability. Like a devastating and slow leak, negative information about Rose has leaked out for years. First it was just gambling. But, it has gotten worse.

The Pete Rose situation is a strange one. It seemed as though Pete Rose could not do anything that would further tarnish his image and reputation with American sports fans. Yes, despite the proven – and now admitted – gambling Pete Rose did on baseball, new evidence arises of further disgrace.

Before we come to that, however, it’s best to contemplate just how bad betting on baseball is as a player. If you have ever taken delivery on a sports magazine, you know the type of valuable information that is contained within it. You know, too, if you bet on sports that you need good information to help inform decision making. So, imagine the position Pete Rose was in? He knew the MLB scouting reporting on every player, every pitching match up. He built line up cards. He positioned the team on defense. That type of information could never be purchased, yet Pete Rose used it to bet on his team and make gobs and gobs of money. It’s not just that he gambled on the game, it’s that he cheated everyone out of respecting him. And what sucks the most is that he could have earned and kept that respect.

Pete Rose had 4,256 hits in his 24 year career. That’s right, he played baseball – productively – for 24 seasons and he owns the hit record. He batted .303 for his entire career. He won Rookie of the Year in 1963, MVP ten years later, second in the voting another season. He was also the rare player-manager that seemed to make it work.

Some pundits and fans will relentlessly defend Pete Rose arguing that just because he is a lousy person does not mean he cheated on the game. I mean, what harm do a few bets really do? After all, Rose never ADMITTED to cheating on the game, or gambling AGAINST his team. It is consistent with Rose’s personality to bet ON his team, then spur them to victory. His stats are amazing, right?

Except in June of 2010, very quietly, Deadspin.com reported on an X-ray that was done on the bat Pete Rose used in 1985 as he was chasing down Ty Cobb’s all time hit record. The picture does not lie. Yep, that’s cork. Pete Rose is not just a gambler, he’s a cheater too. Surprised? If so – why? We all know and understand Pete Rose’s character now. There are few surprises the man can throw at us.

Given this additional character evidence – on top of the years of self-perpetuating, stigma-building lying – it is not evident that Pete Rose is the most disgraced, and the most disgraceful, athlete in American sports history. His name has been dragged through the mud year after year after year since he stopped playing. Rose has done nothing to stop it, either. He tried to come clean – 14 years too late – in Sports Illustrated in 2004. Then, when it turn out that was not the complete truth, he again came “completely clean” in 2006 when he admitted to betting on the Cincinnati Reds nightly. Yes, every single night. And, in his arrogance, that admission was supposed to be exactly what people wanted to hear to quiet the criticism. Heh. How insulting.

Pete Rose has proven time and again that he just isn’t a good, trustworthy, upstanding person. He is a disgrace to baseball, to record-holding, to fanaticism, and to history. He further tarnished his imagine after it was discovered that he used a corked bat, too… for who knows how many seasons? No player in any sport has more publically, more thoroughly, and more dramatically tarnished his imagine that Pete Rose.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | The Most Disgraced Athlete of All Time Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Which Player Should Hang ‘Em Up Debate… From Mannywood to Mannywon’t

September 20, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Babe Ruthless.

I can still remember sitting at old Thurman Munson Memorial Stadium in Canton, OH, on a spring night in 1993 where the former Akron-Canton Indians, a minor-league affiliate of the Cleveland Indians, used to play their home games in the Eastern League. At this particular game, a kid that no one had ever heard of named Manny Ramirez stepped up to the plate and crushed not one, but two homeruns, one of which went all the way out of the stadium and into the parking lot.

I was only 14 years old at the time, but I was struck with such a sense of awe and amazement having never seen a display of power so impressive from a Minor League player, that I just knew I was witnessing the very beginnings of what would almost certainly become a special career in baseball.

That was 17 years ago, and for 14 of those years, I was right.

As the 2008 baseball season drew to a close, Manny Ramirez was widely regarded as one of the greatest hitters ever to play the game of baseball. His statistics as they were would have earned him legitimate consideration as a first-ballot Hall of Famer. And even at the age of 36, he was turning in remarkable performances, having finished that season with a .332 batting average, on 183 hits, with 37 HRs and 121 RBIs.

As far as career totals are concerned, he was batting .314 lifetime, with 2392 hits, 527 HRs, and 1725 RBIs. When you consider that there are only about 200 players in the history of baseball who can boast a career batting average greater than .300, and only about 75 who hit better than .314, Manny was sitting in some very exclusive company.

Then came the charges of Ramirez having used performance enhancing drugs, and everything changed. And while we can only speculate as to what his numbers would have been had he NOT used PEDs, there is one thing that we can be sure of – Manny Ramirez has played as only a shell of his former self since his return to the game after having served a 50 game suspension.

Ramirez returned to the Los Angeles Dodgers on July 3rd, 2009, from which time to the end of the 2009 season, he recorded 260 at-bats. Of those 260 ABs, though, he only recorded 70 hits for a batting average of .269. That result is a far cry from Ramirez’s career average, and is matched only by his 1994 season as being the worst performance of his career.

And although he still managed to hit 13 HRs and 43 RBIs during that time, it was not enough performance to bring Ramirez any job security. So in 2010, after he suffered a hamstring injury during the middle of the season, the Dodgers placed Ramirez on waivers.

He was simply getting paid too much money for the level of performance he was putting out, and the Dodgers decided they just couldn’t afford to pay him anymore.

Deciding to make a play for the postseason, then, the White Sox claimed Ramirez, and brought him over to the south side of Chicago . Their hope was that Ramirez’s hitting capabilities would provide a jolt to the White Sox lineup, giving them the last push they needed to compete for a postseason spot.

How has that decision worked out for the Sox?

In his 17 games since joining Chicago, Ramirez is a pathetic 13 for 64, with only one HR and one RBI (which came as a token run scored in a 9-2 loss to the Detroit Tigers. He has, however, struck out 18 times, has gone hitless in more than half of his games since joining the White Sox, and has only been good for five runs.

Corresponding with that very poor performance, the White Sox as a team have played to a record of 7-10, including being swept twice by the Detroit Tigers, and a third time by the Minnesota Twins. And now, the same White Sox team that was hoping to make a push for the postseason (as they were only four games behind the AL Central leading Minnesota Twins when Ramirez arrived on September 1st), are today a full ten games back from the Twins, and have virtually no shot at playing October baseball.

It has been a tale of two Mannys, and the Manny that we see today is doing no one any favors by sticking around, especially himself.

Before the 50-game suspension, Ramirez was a World Series champion, a 12-time All Star outfielder, and a nine-time Silver Slugger. After the 50-game suspension, he has become a financial liability and an injury risk that cannot produce any offense. He WAS a feared hitter who no pitcher wanted to face, especially in a clutch situation. Now, he is a 38 year old player who can’t run, apparently can’t hit, and is in grave danger of further damaging a legacy already marred by scandal.

His Hall of Fame candidacy is already in question, simply from the merits of having admitted to cheating in the game of baseball. But thanks to his decision to hang around still, two years removed from having made any REAL contribution to his team, he sits in danger of destroying what little hope he had remaining.

Perhaps it is sentimentality speaking, but as a longtime fan of Manny Ramirez, I hope for his sake that he retires from the game BEFORE it is too late.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!

Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Which Player Should Hang ‘Em Up Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The 2010 National League MVP Debate… Pujols Continues to Reign Supreme

September 15, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Loyal Homer.

The Holy Grail of hitting in Major League Baseball is to win the Triple Crown as the league’s leading hitter in home runs, runs batted in, and batting average, all in the same season.

Usually by this time each year, hopes of seeing the first Triple Crown hitter since 1967 (when Carl Yastrzemski became only the 16th player in history to do it) have been long since forgotten. This year, though, there is not only a possibility of one player contending for the Triple Crown – We actually get to enjoy a race between THREE of the best hitters in the National League!

Albert Pujols, Carlos Gonzalez, and Joey Votto each have a genuine opportunity to close out the 2010 baseball season by winning the first Triple Crown in over 40 years.

These three hitters each stand with a very real chance to earn the greatest hitting accomplishment in baseball, and have created baseball’s most exciting LEGITIMATE batting race (sorry Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Barry Bonds, your races just don’t count anymore in my book) since Pete Rose chased Ty Cobb’s career hit total.

It will be fun to watch, and we can only hope that one of these three players can accomplish the seemingly impossible.

But that is not the only race that Pujols, Gonzalez, and Votto have created. As a side effect of this quest for possible baseball immortality, another very real competition has been formed between Pujols, Votto, and Gonzalez that is far more relevant to the context of baseball today. That is the race for the National League MVP.

Obviously, if any one of the three is able to pull off the Triple Crown, they should be a shoe-in for the MVP award. But let’s assume that things will play out in similar fashion to where they stand right now, and once more a season passes by without a Triple Crown winner.

Who wins the MVP award then?

While each can stake a claim for the crown, the clear frontrunner for the award in 2010 is once again Albert Pujols.

Pujols is already a three-time winner of baseball’s highest individual season honor, and has reigned uninterrupted as the National League MVP since the close of the 2008 season, and with good reason. No player has meant more to his team, and to the game of baseball, than has Albert Pujols.

Triple Crown statistics are one thing, and they already speak very highly of Pujols’ individual performance over the 2010 season. He leads the NL in homers and RBIs with 39 and 104 respectively, and has the fifth best batting average in the league.

But that is only the tip of the iceberg when you are discussing Pujols’ contributions to his team. There are other areas, arguably more meaningful to a team in the game of baseball, where Pujols also sets himself apart as being far more valuable than Votto or Gonzalez.

For starters, Pujols is not an all-or-nothing hitter. Some batters may swing for the fences with each at bat. Sure, they get their share of homeruns, but they also fail to have their share of quality at bats, often striking out in their quest for big hit glory.

Albert Pujols is different.

Compare his homerun and strikeout numbers to those of Votto and Gonzalez. Joey Votto has 34 homeruns and 112 strikeouts so far this season, and Carlos Gonzalez has 32 homeruns with 122 strikeouts.

Basically, Votto and Gonzalez are good for nearly four strikeouts to go with every one homerun they hit.

So where does Pujols fall? With his aforementioned league-leading 39 homeruns, Pujols has struck out only 69 times this season. That is less than two strikeouts for every homerun hit!

Now, let’s add walk totals into the mix – Once again, it is Pujols at the top with 85 walks, leaving Votto (83) and Gonzalez (33) trailing.

How about extra-base hits? You guessed it. Pujols leads the NL with 74, while Gonzalez (72) and Votto (66) once more fall short of Pujols’ exceptional standard.

Oh yeah, he also happens to lead the league in runs scored with 100 so far in 2010.

All of those numbers point to one single fact – Pujols is by far the most productive hitter in baseball. He is extremely smart at the plate, and is good for considerably more QUALITY at bats than either of his two likely MVP competitors.

So allow me to sum up the 2010 National League MVP race for you:

Albert Pujols has hit for more homeruns and bases than any other batter in the National League. He has personally crossed home plate more than anyone else, and has driven more teammates across the plate than anyone else. Even when he DOESN’T hit the ball, he manages to make it on base more than just about anyone else in the league.

Contrarily, Joey Votto and Carlos Gonzalez strike out almost twice as often as Pujols, walk less, and produce much less offense.

If my team is down to their last out, and I can pick the one person I want stepping up to the plate, I am going to take Albert Pujols every single time.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 National League MVP Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Winning versus Wealth Debate Verdict

September 10, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

Writing this article has been one of the biggest challenges of my TSD writing career. Not because of the merits of the opposing arguments, (although they were both very well written).

This is a challenge because I am watching the NFL season opener between the Vikings and the Saints, but am trying to write an article about the Pittsburgh Pirates. That’s like trying to rate a bowl of ramen noodles while you are sitting in a steakhouse.

Nevertheless, I persevered!

After considering the arguments presented by both Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer, I am awarding this verdict to Loyal Homer.

I agree with the points raised in Babe Ruthless’ argument that a team should be free to spend the money it earns however it wishes. Where I disagree with Babe Ruthless is in the presentation of that point. The examples used, such as the Washington Redskins and the Atlanta Braves, are not a fair representation of the concern the Pirates have raised.

The intention behind my question for this debate was not to design a process to eliminate or punish losing. Obviously a championship cannot be awarded to everybody, and in sports competition, there must ALWAYS be a loser.

The issue at hand was whether or not major sports organizations like Major League Baseball should tolerate the actions of a team that clearly do not place competition among its highest levels of priority. In the case of the Washington Redskins, the business may have demonstrated profitability while losing, but the organization’s actions nevertheless demonstrate an ongoing commitment to winning. The Redskins were a playoff team in 2007, and finished 2008 with an 8-8 record. Entering 2009 the front office brought in the highest priced talent that could be found. After finishing the season with a record of 4-12 the front office brought in a new head coach (who happens to be a two-time Super Bowl champion), and a very talented quarterback to try and correct what I expect to be a short-lived trend of losing.

Likewise, the Atlanta Braves may place a high priority on developing talent from within, but the organization does not support that priority with a history of releasing talented players and aggressively trying to keep payroll as low as possible.

What the Pirates have done, as highlighted by Loyal Homer, sets them apart as the bad example MLB should ABSOLUTELY take action against. The Pirates have manipulated the system SOLELY for the purposes of profitability.

The model of profit sharing employed by MLB, and similar programs like those in the NFL, does not exist to help make all the league owners wealthier. It exists to help promote parity in the league. The luxury tax that the New York Yankees (for one example) pay annually because of their high-priced talent is not intended – nor should it – as a bonus payment to the Pittsburgh Pirates. It is extra money the team can pipe into the organization to help make sure the Yankees, and other “haves,” cannot simply run away with the season each year.

The Pirates are presented to the public as a baseball team that wishes to compete in Major League Baseball. However, behind the scenes management continues to hamstring the team, making that process of winning exceedingly difficult. The current system is being USED… not as a means to enhance his team’s viability, but instead as a means to enhance profitability.

Nutting’s operation of the Pittsburgh Pirates franchise is no different than that of a slumlord. He provides his consumers with nothing more than a shell of the product they pay for. He provides them with no means for long term viability, and intentionally undermines any chance they would have at success because he absolutely refuses to expend any cost other than the bare minimum to remain functional.

As long as he gets paid, he doesn’t care what happens to the organization or the public.

The business of sports and the purpose of sports are two separate things. While I completely understand and agree with the notion that a team must remain financially viable, competition must also remain the sports organization’s top priority.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Winning versus Wealth Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Winning versus Wealth Debate

September 9, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

It has been a while, but we have another TSD first on our hands.

They said it couldn’t be done. But I, Bleacher Fan – for the first time in The Sports Debates history – am about to include a Broadway Musical reference in today’s article.

In Mel Brook’s hit Broadway musical The Producers, main character Max Bialystock is a theater producer who discovers a loophole where he can actually make more money by producing flops than if he were to produce hits. Armed with that knowledge, Max convinces accountant Leo Bloom to partner and embark on the ultimate scheme: Find the world’s worst play, hire the worst director, raise a bunch of money, hire the worst actors, close the play after it flops and take all the extra money raised and run.

Now I am sure you are wondering how this could possibly be related to sports. Well, have you ever heard of the Pittsburgh Pirates?

In a recent reporting of their financial records, it was found that the Pirates, owned by Bob Nutting, are actually PROFITING despite being deep in the throes of having the longest streak of consecutive losing seasons – not just in baseball – but in ANY major American sport in history.

The team continues to lose on the field, but has a history of being a successful business.

Pirates’ officials claim they have simply been unlucky in developing their talent, but some are now saying that the Pirates have stopped trying to win.

For the few fans of the Pirates that still exist, it would be extremely heartbreaking to think that Nutting was following Max Bialystock’s lead in the running of their beloved baseball team.

Which brings us to our question of the day: Should governing bodies in sports, such as the MLB or NFL, force teams to pursue a winning strategy, rather than simply a profitable one?

This question is not intended to focus on what the rules would or should look like, but rather to ask whether these major sports organizations should tolerate teams that consistently take cost-cutting measures which appear to directly lead to poor performance on the field.

Loyal Homer will argue that leagues should enforce policies where winning always takes precedent over profitability, while Babe Ruthless will argue that profitability is a form of success that can and should also be pursued.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Winning versus Wealth Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Most Marketable Athlete of All Time Debate… Sharpening the Spikes In A New Era

August 20, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Sports Geek.

Ty Cobb was one mean son of a gun. The enormous chip on his shoulder drove him to play with reckless abandon, for his own safety and the well-being of those around him. He shot his mouth off routinely, often in order to play head games with his competitors. He was despised and feared by opponent and teammates alike, but he was an undeniably talented athlete and a larger than life character. His ruthless aggression is something missing in today’s kinder and gentler baseball era. I can’t help but wonder if his star would have burned even brighter if he played in the modern era of baseball.

Obviously any argument for Cobb’s marketability as a modern superstar must first acknowledge his greatest character flaw, overt racism. I want to be clear that I make no excuses for his prejudices, because there are none. Regardless of whether the racist rhetoric he put forth was a product of the times or his environment, being born and raised the segregated South just two decades removed from the Civil War. His racism mars his legacy as one of the greatest players in baseball history.

But the beauty of this scenario is that it removes Cobb from the circumstances that undermine his achievements. A Ty Cobb playing in the majors today would have been raised in a time of integration and greater equality. He would have played alongside a diverse field of players at all levels of baseball, to say nothing of having a group of handlers to steer him away from this potentially career killing controversial attitude. Contemporary athletes have entourages dedicated to ensuring athletes have positive images. Certainly no one could leash his wild temperament, but it is plausible that an exceptional agent , publicist, or even life coach could help him avoid some of the nasty pitfalls of his past. There is still no guarantee that any of this would endear him to those in his clubhouse or around the league, but it should at the very least minimize the greatest blemish on an otherwise impressive career.

With a clean slate in modern baseball there should be little doubt that Ty Cobb would take the league and world by storm. He has the story, personality, and tools to be a icon larger than any other in sports today.

Somewhat of a lesser known aspect to Ty Cobb is the fact that he overcame and was driven by a tragic youth. When Cobb was entering early adulthood his mother accidentally murdered his father. Cobb’s mother mistook young Cobb’s father for an intruder and shot and killed him. It was believed that his father suspected his mother of an adulterous affair and was lurking outside their bedroom to catch his wife in the act. It was a pivotal moment in Cobb’s life. In his own words, “My father had his head blown off with a shotgun when I was 18 years old – by a member of my own family. I didn’t get over that.” It certainly stirred something deep within the tortured ballplayer, pushing him to play with a ferocity that baseball had never seen.

>
Such a tale of adversity would make him more popular and marketable. The public likes underdog tales like Cobb’s because they create an emotional connection. When the public sympathizes with a celebrity, especially an extremely talented one with an electric personality, there is no telling what shortcoming they are willing to ignore. NFL icon Ray Lewis is living proof of that. He was once alleged to be connected with a double murder, but people don’t generally associate him with what would otherwise be a career defining incident. In light of years of dominance and personal loss, people view a more complete, likeable, and marketable Lewis. Now, when people think of number 52 they think of his intense persona, on field successes, and the story of how he overcame the hardships of his youth. A modern Cobb would surely be no different. He wouldn’t want sympathy though just a chance to take out his frustrations on the competition, which was something he excelled at.

What speaks the loudest in terms of Cobb’s contemporary appeal is his unrivaled ability. The achievements of his career are mind blowing. He won 12 batting titles, nine of which were consecutive (from 1907-1915). At one time he held nearly 90 MLB records, some which still stand today. That type of record breaking play would make him an instant success. If he received a Wheaties cover endorsement each month for every record he held, we would be looking at pictures of Cobb every morning for the next seven and a half years. At one time he held the career record for hits, runs, stolen bases, games played and at bats. Comparatively, he is like a mix of Pete Rose, Ricky Henderson, and Cal Ripken, Jr. But even more impressive is the fact that he still holds the record for career batting average with an astonishing .367 average. The man could flat out hit the ball anywhere he wanted, though that was hardly the most notorious aspect of his game.

Ty Cobb’s style of play offers something different, something that modern fans have never seen – the most brutal base running in MLB history. Everyone knows baseball fans love the long ball, but Cobb would have disagreed. He felt placing the ball, something he could do like no other batter, required more skill. He didn’t care for power hitters like Babe Ruth. It is even reported that to prove his belief –that hitting homeruns was easy and required less skill – he once changed his grip and hit three home runs in the same game. Instead of the easy homer, Cobb let his deadly feet do the talking.

Ty Cobb stole bases in an unruly fashion. He owned base stealing the way Roger Clemens owned the mound, and just like the brutish bat throwing hurler, Cobb would defend what was his at all costs. Rumors spread, adding to his legend that he even sharpened his cleats to take out any runner that dared to guard the bag. In a modern context that alone might make him an anti-hero and fan favorite in the process. But Cobb didn’t just steal the occasional bag. He stole them all. On 54 occasions Cobb stole home plate. A steal of home is an immediate SportsCenter highlight and it is something he did with regularity. On four occasions he even turned a single into a run by proceeding to steal second, third, and home plate. There’s a Nike campaign if I ever saw one.

Obviously the current MLB player is probably faster and more athletic than in Cobb’s day, but a great deal of Cobb’s prowess is bound to have survived in modern baseball. Looking around baseball today there are fewer villains that fans love to hate than in the past. Alex Rodriguez probably tops the list of contenders for that title, with his swagger, but Cobb’s antagonistic style and unique skill set would set him apart today. He would be controversial and innovative, electric and volatile. He would fit in with today’s stars just fine.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Most Marketable Athlete of All Time Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The 2010 MLB Trade Deadline Target Debate… Getting It Dunn in October

July 23, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

Don’t hold your breath about a very exciting MLB trade season as the deadline approaches.

Realistically, I expect 2010 to be one of the more lackluster seasons we have seen in recent history regarding trades. There are plenty of teams in the league right now who are either holding on to slim leads in their division or are within striking distance for a playoff spot. All of them could use some real help to stay in post-season contention.

The problem is that there is an absolute dearth of pitching talent on the market, putting all of the emphasis on offense (and that pool isn’t much deeper).

As far as the pitching talent that IS available, Roy Oswalt COULD make for some interesting trade conversations, but the latest reports of his very high demands may have diminished his appeal somewhat. And when you consider the fact that Cliff Lee was dealt to the Rangers two weeks ago, the depth of available pitching talent is just not what it has been in recent seasons, when guys like C.C. Sabathia, Cliff Lee (the FIRST time around), and Roy Halladay were sitting on the block.

As for hitters, Prince Fielder is one who could certainly make a team in need of offense happy, but the latest out of Milwaukee seems to be that he is not going anywhere this season.

That really only leaves one viable trade option, and that is Washington Nationals first baseman, Adam Dunn.

The Nationals’ slugger has already notched 23 home runs on the season, tying him for the second most in the National League. Along with those homers Dunn has also knocked in 61 runs (the tenth most in the N.L.) and has a slugging percentage of .565 (the third highest in the N.L.).

While the Nationals have publicly expressed a desire to keep Dunn on the roster, the reality is that he will command far too hefty a salary as a free agent, and I doubt an organization that is five games away from crawling out of the basement WITH him on the payroll would be willing to ante-up as much as $60M, which is reportedly Dunn’s asking price.).

The Nationals are in a classic small-market pickle, and while it may not be an ideal situation, it is the perfect formula for a big-deal trade.

The likelihood of Dunn staying on in Washington after this season is very slim, so the Nationals are going to want to get some value for the slugger, rather than just watch him walk away. There are plenty of potential suitors out there, such as the Giants, Angels, and the White Sox, who would love to see Dunn’s bat added to the lineup. All three teams have expressed an interest in upgrading at the plate, and all three currently are either preserving or chasing very narrow leads within their respective divisions, likely serving as motivation to pull the trigger in order to stay on top.

The question boils down to how much the Nats are going to hold out for before they are willing to make a deal.

Washington’s general manager, Mike Rizzo, understands the value that Adam Dunn brings to the table, and I think he also understands the fact that they currently hold the rights to one of the only viable trade targets of the season. He will do his part to make sure the price tag for Dunn remains as high as possible, but in the end Dunn should wind up as a great mid-season acquisition for a lucky team who was looking for a little post-season insurance.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 MLB Trade Deadline Target Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Steinbrenner Good for MLB Debate Verdict

July 21, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

George Steinbrenner has been the single most notorious sports franchise owner of this generation.

None in sports have been more divisive than The Boss. Guys like Jerry Jones come close, but we aren’t talking about horseshoes or hand-grenades. There simply is no middle ground when it came to Steinbrenner – you either loved him, or you hated him.

I found the arguments by Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer both to be very entertaining, because they were emotionally charged from those very opposite ends of the spectrum. In addition to being very entertaining, though, they were both also very accurate depictions of how Steinbrenner’s legacy is perceived across baseball.

Yes, Steinbrenner’s approach to ownership greatly impacted Major League Baseball. And yes, his actions greatly widened the gap between big and small market baseball. But to say that his actions and/or his legacy were bad for baseball is an unfair criticism of how he ran his organization. As such, I am awarding this verdict to Babe Ruthless.

As pointed out by Babe Ruthless, it is easy to blame Steinbrenner for the condition of baseball in cities like Pittsburgh, Kansas City, or Cleveland today because Steinbrenner was successful. However, each and every team in the league had the exact same opportunity for that success that the Yankees had under Steinbrenner.

George Steinbrenner did not manufacture the financial climate of Major League Baseball today. All he did was turn the heat up on all the other owners in the league. He didn’t prevent those owners from getting the most talented players, he just told them what they would have to sacrifice. Some were willing to play his game, others weren’t. It was THOSE owners’ decisions not to spend money that set them back.

The owners of the “have-not” franchises are just as responsible as Steinbrenner for the current division in baseball.

Look at the Cleveland Indians and owner Larry Dolan. The Indians are clearly a part of the have-nots. However, it is not because the city of Cleveland is a small market, and it is not because the people in Cleveland cannot afford to go watch the Indians play. Dolan, who is one of the worst owners in all of sports, has aggressively cut his payroll whenever possible. The result is that he will not pay his star talent the same amount of money they could get elsewhere, and so they leave town. He CAN pay them, but chooses not to.

The fans in Cleveland have proven that they will greatly reward success on the field with financial success. During the mid to late 1990s, when the Indians were successful on the field, the fans rewarded that success by selling out 455 consecutive home games, a record total at the time.

Fans in Cleveland (and other so-called small market cities) aren’t poor, and the franchises don’t suffer because of the environment they play in. Those fans are just discriminating. Why pay Major League ticket prices to watch a team that can only compete at a minor league level? If Larry Dolan paid up and brought in some talent of his own, the Indians would find success on the field, and the fans would flock to the stadium. The value of the Indians organization would skyrocket, too.

LeBron James proved that. If Cleveland as a city could not sustain a viable sports franchise and keep them financially successful, the Cavaliers would not have sold out any games even with LeBron. Instead, when LeBron played for the Cavaliers the team won games, games sold out, and the value of the franchise increased exponentially.

Attacking Steinbrenner for the condition of baseball in those so-called small market cities is little more than jealousy rearing its ugly head.

Further proof that Steinbrenner’s philosophy was not bad for baseball is the fact that being a so-called big market franchise is not a guarantee for success. Two of the top five payrolls in the league are owned by the Chicago Cubs and the New York Mets, and neither team has even won a pennant, let alone the World Series, in the last ten years.

As far as Loyal Homer’s argument that there is a lack of parity in baseball as a result of Steinbrenner’s actions, look to the list of postseason participants to find out that parity is alive and well in baseball.

Here’s a fact for you – NINE different teams have played in the World Series in the last five years alone. If you go back over the past decade, that number increases to 15 different teams with a World Series appearance. That is HALF of the league.

Neither the NBA (10 out of 30 total teams, or 33%), nor the NFL (14 out of 32 total teams, or 43%) can match that kind of parity.

Once again, the perception is that Steinbrenner’s success has somehow corrupted the game of baseball. But when you look at the numbers objectively, you find that he did very little (if any) harm to the game.

As for what he did that was “good” for the league, Babe Ruthless sums that up very nicely.

His work on developing the YES Network to broadcast Yankees games led to copycat networks across the league, a great source of financial revenue for many teams regardless of market size. Additionally, the greatest source of revenues that are shared across the entire MLB are generated by the Yankees, also providing a benefit to the entire league.

George Steinbrenner will forever be remembered as an integral figure in baseball’s history. His attitude and approach as an owner helped sustain the league’s relevance in spite of the rise of football as America’s new favorite sport. He has been vital to driving the financial success (as well as fan interest) for the entire league, and his passing is a loss that will be felt by the entire baseball world.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Steinbrenner Good for MLB Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Steinbrenner Good for MLB Debate

July 20, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

The Boss has left us, but his imprint will forever be left on professional baseball.

For more than 30 years George Steinbrenner ruled the Bronx Bombers with a style all his own. Whether you agreed with his style or not, it was undeniably successful. During his reign as owner of the New York Yankees the franchise won seven World Series championships and a total of eleven A.L. pennants.

His style as owner for baseball’s most prestigious franchise has undoubtedly shaped the game today, as his record-setting contract offers were instrumental in dividing the league’s franchises into the current big versus small market divisions we see today.

With Steinbrenner’s passing, The Sports Debates would like to honor his legacy with a debate befitting his stellar, albeit controversial, career.

Was George Steinbrenner good or bad for MLB?

Ever the Yankee fan, Babe Ruthless has expressed that he would consider it an honor to sing the praises of George Steinbrenner, while Loyal Homer – who as a fan has found his team on the receiving end of Steinbrenner’s “style” – will happily express his displeasure at the influence Steinbrenner had on the game of baseball.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Steinbrenner Good for MLB Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.