When Will it Stop?

Scandals in professional sports are becoming as common as the cold it seems. Recently, professional tennis has been abuzz with a possible scandal brewing. Number 5 in the world, Nicolay Davydenko has been under the microscope since a suspicious betting incident on August 2nd. Davydenko, seeded 4th in the tournament, played the 73rd ranked player in the world, Martin Vassallo Arguello. Most bets placed on tennis matches go unnoticed, but what made this one odd, was most of the $7 million in bets were placed on Arguello, after Davydenko had already won the first set. Davydenko eventually retired from the match citing a nagging toe injury. Since the investigation has begun, the bets have been canceled, and the money has been returned. It's too early to say whether or not Davydenko was aware of the betting and if he fixed the match. Time will tell if he fixed it or not, but here are reasons why he may or may not have.


Davydenko possibly fixed the match:
• the disparities in their world rankings (#5 vs. #73)
• most of the $7 million in bets came after he was already winning the match
• despite the injury, he is continuing to play tournaments without resting
• the amount of ATP players being asked to fix matches
• other Russian tennis players were photographed with a suspected Russian mobster

Davydenko unlikely fixed the match:
• he is #4 in the world, and has too much to lose if caught fixing matches
• he has been having foot problems, which were noticeable during the match
• despite the foot problem, he was noticeably trying to win the match
• he has been struggling in the early rounds of tournaments lately
• he truly seemed stunned when word got out regarding the investigation
• Davydenko was not one of those photographed with the suspected mobster

Only time will tell, but I truly hope he isn't involved, and I don't think he is. I am not however stunned by the fact that many players and judges are asked to fix the games.

Gagne's a Good Move for Sox

Yesterday was a good day in Boston professional sports. Not only did the Celtics get Kevin Garnett, but the Sox scored Eric Gagne, adding more depth to the majors best bullpen. We've already seen that money itself does not translate to wins. However, money well spent can go a long way. One may argue that the Sox didn't need anymore help in the bullpen, but let's see why that this trade is a smart one.

First, it is unlikely that Gagne will stay in Boston after the year is over, since he wants to close, and Jonathan Papelbon is still Boston's main man. Because Gagne is considered a Type A free agent, if he leaves at the end of the season, Boston will receive two draft picks within the first two rounds.

Secondly, Boston didn't give up much in the big picture to get Gagne. Gagne comes to Boston in exchange for Kason Gabbard, David Murphy, and Engel Beltre. Gabbard has pitched well in Curt Schilling's absence. However, he looked a bit shaky in his last start (5 runs in 4.2 innings). Overall, Gabbard looks good right now, but he hasn't had a full season in the majors, so Boston is taking a chance by selling him high, not to mention, there will be a log jam of starters once Schilling returns. Although Murphy was a good looking prospect in Pawtucket (Red Sox AAA affiliate), he was unlikely to see playing time because of Jacoby Ellsbury. It's hard to say what Beltre might do, as he was playing in A ball. That being said, Boston may be able to replace him with one of those early draft picks if Gagne decides to leave.

Lastly, the addition of Gagne will prevent the overuse of Boston's bullpen. Overall, Terry Francona has managed the use of the bullpen well. It helps to have starters who go deep into the game as well, but it never hurts to have a rested bullpen in the stretch run. With the Yankees starting to get it together, Boston will gladly take any help to make the final push towards the playoffs.

Hindsight being 20/20, only time will tell if this will pan out for Boston, but right now, I think Boston has a lot to be excited about.

Keep Spending Those Dollars, Boys

I was rudely awoken the other day when my phone rang sometime around 4:00 AM. A friend of mine still living in Boston who is apparently confused by the concept of time difference, decided that we needed talk. This would be fine if it was an emergency, but no, my friend had to call me to talk about a conversation he heard between a couple of Red Sox fans. Mildly irritated, I told him I would call back when it was not 4:00 AM. Besides, what Red Sox talk could be so important that you had to call someone that early in the morning?

The fans were ultimately questioning why the Red Sox spend so much money on players, and how it was stupid and imprudent to do so. If teams can win with less money, why can't the Red Sox? One might argue, they spend because they can. Well, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Perhaps the Red Sox actually have to. If John Henry (Red Sox principal owner) had his choice, I'm sure he'd rather spend less than more, but let's look at several reasons why the Sox have to spend so much money.

First, to have a chance at winning the World Series, a team must make the playoffs. In order to make the playoffs, a team must either win the division or the wild card. That being said, the Red Sox are competing with the Yankees for one playoff spot. Yes, they can win the wild card, but in recent years, there is no guarantee that the wild card is going to come from the AL East. Due to the unbalanced schedule, the Red Sox have to face the Yankees 18 times a year. With that many head to head games, the Red Sox need to try to have a lineup that can keep pace with that of the Yankees. This usually means, that they need to go out and spend their fair share of money.

I understand that the Red Sox could just refuse to spend that kind of money, and take a chance that they could win with a lower payroll. But, that brings me to my second point. The Red Sox can't take that chance, because their fans would never let them. The only way to truly understand Red Sox fans is to live amongst them. Red Sox Nation would be ripping management a new one if they decided to cut payroll AND subsequently if the Red Sox did not make the playoffs, or worse yet, came in behind the Yankees. Red Sox Nation expects a quality team that is in contention for the playoffs yearly. That expectation to its fans and customers means management has to spend the money to field a contending team. This expectation has become more prevalent since John Henry took over in 2002.

For now, it is what it is, and while they can, the Red Sox are going to spend the money to buy a good team, just as the Yankees do. Yes, the Yankees set the market, but the Red Sox aren't going to try to shift the market anytime soon. With the amount of fans coming through the gates, and the fact that they've become adept at "rebuilding" while still being competitive, it is unlikely that their payroll will decrease significantly anytime soon.

The Baseball Club

Throughout Moneyball, references have been made that baseball is a "club" that is fairly unwilling to let outsiders in. It also has a tendency to cast away those that do not fit in. Pages 287-288 state,

"The greatest offense a Club member can commit is not ineptitude but disloyalty. Had he not been an indiscreet writer, Jim Bouton might have made a second career scouting and coaching big league prospects. But because he wrote Ball Four he was as good as banished from the Club."

After reading this particular passage, a host of thoughts emerged. First, was a recollection of listening to an interview with Jim Bouton and Bill "Spaceman" Lee on a local radio show in Boston. The two talked about many things, including the Club's reaction to Ball Four. As you can imagine, the Club did not appreciate Bouton's comments in the book. Also part of the show was Lee promoting his upcoming book, Have Glove Will Travel: Adventures of a Baseball Vagabond. He also promoted a documentary on him, Spaceman: A Baseball Odyssey. That leads me to my second recollection. After reading the above passage in Moneyball, I immediately thought of Lee's banishment from baseball as well. However, unlike Bouton, Lee may have been kicked out of the club before his playing days were truly over.

If you are interested in a good summer read, you should pick up Have Glove Will Travel. Part of the book talks about Lee being kicked out of the Club for throwing tirades against management for letting Bernie Carbo (Red Sox) and Rodney Scott (Expos) go, among other antics he pulled during his career. The book is full of his colorful and crazy adventures in baseball since "retiring". Funny, a man who has baseball running through his blood and an unlikely ambassador for the game in a way, will likely never be accepted into the Club just because he sees things a little differently. Who would have guessed?

Facilitaiton Topic for Monday, July 9

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to let everyone know that I will be facilitating this coming Monday. The topic will be: Will Bud Selig (the commissioner of Major League Baseball) be in attendance when Barry Bonds ties and passes Hank Aaron for the all-time home run record?

As of tonight, Barry needs four home runs to tie, and five to break the record. Currently, Mr. Selig is sitting firmly on the fence, unsure whether or not he is going to be in attendance or not. I have listed several reasons for each side below.

Possible reasons Mr. Selig WILL be in attendance:

• He is the face of baseball at the moment, and needs to represent the sport as graciously as possible.
  
• By not attending, it may appear that he feels the record still belongs to Hank Aaron, his good friend of 50 years.
• To perhaps avoid making an ugly scene similar to when Bowie Kuhn did not attend Aaron's record breaking game.
• By not attending, it becomes a bigger issue. It would become a national media field day, and the inevitable would be dragged out even more.
  
• By not attending, it would appear that he is better than baseball.
• By not attending, he may lose fans (aka customers).
  

Possible reasons Mr. Selig WILL NOT be in attendance:

• By Attending, it may appear that he is condoning the use of performance enhancing substances.
• By not attending, and congratulating Bonds over the phone, he would make a statement to baseball.
  
• Attendance is not mandatory, and he was not in attendance for other milestones, such as a 300th win, etc.
  
• From a personal standpoint, he would be avoiding the awkwardness of that moment.
• Aaron is a good friend of his, and he will not be attending.
  

Should Every Team Have an All-Star?

With Major League Baseball's All-Star roster just being announced, it's time for people to discuss who got snubbed, and who will win the Home Run Derby. Another question that gets talked about, is should every team be represented in the All-Star Game?

The short answer is NO!

The funny thing is, it wasn't always this way. From 1986 (my first baseball memory, thanks Boston.) to 2002, it was an emphatic YES! However, since 2003, I have felt that not every team should have a representative. What happened all of a sudden to make someone change their mind after 22 years?

Well, in 2003, Major League Baseball changed the way home field advantage for the World Series was determined. Instead of it being the team with the best overall record, it was determined by which league won the All-Star Game. Prior to 2003, it really didn't matter who won the game. Naturally, the players want to win for competition's sake, but for the fans, it's nice to see every team be represented. Another plus to having a representative from every team, is that the game has a mix of both small and large market teams.

Now, it's different. Although the All-Star game is technically still an exhibition game, it really isn't, since "This time, it counts". If it's going to count, and you need to win, then why not fill your roster with the best players in the league once the fans have finished voting. The Yankees thus far have shown this may not be successful over the course of a season, but for a one game play-off, I'll take my chances. Yeah, it would still be nice to see every team represented. But, if your team has a chance of making the play-offs, and home field advantage is riding on this game, you'd rather see the best of the best, rather than a guy who's good, but only got picked because there had to be someone from every team on the roster.

Unfortunately, from a business standpoint, it would make all too much sense to fill the team with Red Sox, Yankees, and Mets while leaving the Rangers, Royals, and Devil Rays out of the mix. "This time, it counts" plays with our psyches. On one hand, we want to be fair and not leave teams out, but on the other, we want our respective league to win, so our team may get home field advantage (assuming our team has a chance to make the World Series). Let's face it, we want to have our cake and eat it too. "This time, it counts" doesn't allow for that. If I could be commissioner for a day, I'd get rid of "This time, it counts". Not that the old system was perfect, but it was at least justifiable and seemed to make a little more sense.