Back to You, in the Booth

Tom McCarthy

Gary Matthews Sr.

Last night, on the Phillies television broadcast, Tom McCarthy, the Phillies play-by-play commentator mentioned that the Phillies had reached agreements with their the team's top draft picks.  In response, Gary Matthews, one of McCarthy's co-commentator, mentioned that Major League Baseball had recently changed the rules regarding the signing of players from the first year draft.  The two went on to acknowledge that the changes made to the collective bargaining agreement, altering teams' ability to sign players from the draft, would help teams in signing these players.

MLB's new collective bargaining agreement gives teams a maximum amount of money they are allowed to spend on a given draft pick.  This new rule severely limits a team's ability to sign a given player.  Prior to this year's draft, teams were allowed to offer a player any amount of money, in signing bonus form, in order to convince said player to join their club.  Now, teams will be penalized if they exceed the maximum amount that MLB has decided upon.  This significantly affects which players are drafted in which spots.  In addition, the new CBA, creates serious roadblocks for teams attempting to acquire and sign international players, who are not subjected to the first-year player draft.  Recently, many teams have spent large sums of money in scouting international talent, but due to the new CBA, their ventures in Latin American will be curtailed.

Overall, one thing is certain.  No one actually knows how the new collective bargaining agreement will shape the draft, "signability" of players, or the game as a whole.  On the other hand, most pundits agree that, for the time being, the CBA seems to constrict teams, giving them less choice and freedom to exploit the system in order to gain an advantage.  Major League Baseball wants to create as much parity as possible, but, as long as MLB goes without a salary cap, some teams will always have more money than others.  This truism means that smaller market teams like the Kansas City Royals and Tampa Bay Rays will always look for holes in the system, in order to compete with the larger market teams.  As long as Major League Baseball remains salary capless, complete equality amongst teams will never exist.

So, back to the statements made by McCarthy and Matthews.  Without even touching on any of the more important details concerning the new CBA, the draft, or MLB's decision behind changing the rules, Tom McCarthy and Gary Matthews gave millions of viewers misinformation.  The new CBA will not make it easier for teams to sign players, it only restricts their ability to choose a fitting contract for draft picks.  In the far off distant land of economics, we learn first that choice is better than no choice.  MLB is taking away the freedom of teams in negotiating with draft picks.  So, while players may sign contracts quickly, the new CBA does not guarantee that signing players will be easier.

Darling, Cohen, and Hernandez from left to right

McCarthy and Matthews have the bully pulpit at their disposal.  Most fans do not know what the collective bargaining agreement is let alone read about its affects on the game.  Although, based on the views of both McCarthy and Matthews, I'm unsure if either broadcaster read the document themselves. These two men are supposed to represent the knowledgeable baseball elite, but instead they fall very short.  Often, Gary Matthews will give an explanation as follows: "The reason that ball went so far is because he put a good swing on the ball."  I think we can all agree that this comment offers absolutely nothing towards the analysis of the game.  These types of comments are ubiquitous throughout the Phillies broadcasts as well as many others around the country.  Although I think teams could and should find better announcers, such as Ron Darling, Gary Cohen, and Keith Hernandez for the NY Mets, these asinine comments are the norm.  The Mets television announcers provide such eloquence and in depth analysis that the New York Times often publishes transcripts of their broadcasts.

The issue remains that announcers cannot be allowed to say things that are incorrect.  If McCarthy and Matthews do not completely understand new CBA and how it might affect the draft, then the Phillies should have a guest, with knowledge on the subject, come and explain it to viewers.  In addition to speaking without knowing, the Phillies announcing crew will almost never question Major League Baseball's decisions.  I understand that the Phillies are part of MLB and in turn that the commentators work for the Phillies, but to never dispute or doubt anything handed down from Major League Baseball is a travesty to the system.  Instead of actually commenting and analyzing, announcers, at least in the Phillies' case, have lost the ability to share original thoughts.  These supposed experts should use their time on the air to speak intelligently about the issues facing Major League Baseball and explain how it affects their respective team.  Instead announcers like Matthews and McCarthy shy away from criticizing or even questioning the validity of Major League Baseball, thus showing their viewers no perspective, and providing all Phillies fans with banality.

Vin Scully, Dodgers Hall of Fame Announcer

Recently I found myself watching the LA Dodgers broadcast.  Through the TV came the unmistakable voice of Dodgers play-by-play announcer Vin Scully.  Scully not only announces the game with a great voice, he knows everything about the players,  keeping track of the day-to-day business of the Dodgers and Major League Baseball.  He admits when he does not know an answer, and speaks intelligently when calling the game.  Younger commentators should take note of the hall-of-fame announcer and attempt to emulate his conduct.

Often times I will mute the television during Phillies broadcasts because I become so frustrated with the level of broadcasting, but rarely do I actually yell at the TV.  Last night, when Gary Matthews and Tom McCarthy attempted to pass themselves off as experts of the new CBA and its affects on the draft, I lost it.  These men possess a lot of power given their visibility in the Phillies organization, but they choose to spoil it by making incorrect statements and not providing factual evidence to back up their claims.  Even Fangraphs.com ranked the Phillies TV broadcasters near the bottom in their broadcaster rankings.

Lao Tzu famously said, "Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know."  I don't profess to know about the business of announcing and commentating on games, but from a baseball fan's perspective, announcers like Gary Matthews and Tom McCarthy need to be replaced.  Misinformation, ignorance, and stupidity should never be tolerated, especially from those with so much power.  I challenge the Phillies to realize this problem, and do something to fix it because my frustration level towards the Phillies announcers has reached its limit.

No Hits, No Runs, No Problem

Santana Celebrates with Catcher Josh Thole

On Friday night the Mets played the Cardinals in the beginning of a four game series.  This seemingly innocuous inter-divisional series turned into an historic one very quickly.  Johan Santana made sure that Mets fans, and baseball fans everywhere, would remember June 1st, 2012.  Santana threw the first no-hitter in New York Mets history.  For some perspective, think about this: The Mets franchise began in 1962, replacing those of the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants, who departed New York for Los Angeles and San Francisco respectively.  Half a century later, the 2012 Mets are an interesting team.   The Mets have stormed the 2012 season, thought to be a rebuilding year, with ferocity.  Now midway through the season, they find themselves tied atop the tightly packed NL East, a place which no analyst, pundit, or fan thought they would occupy.  They have won 31 games, doing so with mostly home grown players whom few thought would contribute sun flower seed shells to the dugout floor let alone 239 runs to the scoreboard (4th in the NL).  At one point this season, the Mets, starting lineup contained players all from their farm system, and daring feat.

Despite the 2012 Mets doing their best job to imitate the “Amazin's” of the past, nothing can overshadow Johan Santana's recent no-hitter.  Santana faced the Cardinals, the National League's best offense, making them look like a Little league team playing at PETCO Park.  Despite the no-hitte result, Santana wasn't at his best Friday night,  his control shaky at times, especially when throwing his fastball.  He walked 5, struck out 8, and threw a career high 134 pitches in the momentous effort.  Nonetheless, he was effectively wild to the point that hitters could not pick up his dynamic changeup, which he used early, often, and on any count.  Santana did a fantastic job keeping the St. Louis hitters <consider “sluggers” instead for alliterative effect> off balance, forcing them to swing at pitches out of the zone and keeping them guessing whether they would next encounter his incredibly deceptive changeup.

Santana's no-hitter did not occur without some controversy.  Former Met Carlos Beltran hit a line drive down the third base line that on instant replay clearly hit the line, making it a fair ball and thus a hit (video footage of the play can be seen here).  Not so fast, said third base umpire Adrian Johnson,who called the screamer a foul ball, thus continuing Beltran's at bat and keeping the no-hitter intact.  The Saturday morning St. Louis Post-Dispatch sports section prominently placed an asterisk next to "no-hitter", making an obvious reference to the hit that wasn't. <St. Louis is a town well accustomed to asterisks, eh?> While Cardinals fans may not be happy with the result Friday night, is this missed call such a big deal?  Certainly, Adrian Johnson made the wrong call, and it may anger some to see that call stand. However, until MLB incorporates instant replay into game decisions, fans must expect the human element to come into play.    In no way did Adrian Johnson's blunder fall in the same category as the missed call that cost Armando Galarraga a perfect game, but it does rekindle the on going argument in baseball concerning the a role for instant replay.   

Mets General Manager Sandy Alderson

In the end, the call on the field was foul ball, giving Johan Santana the first no-hitter of his career and in Mets history.  This leaves the San Diego Padres as the lone franchise in MLB history with no pitcher having thrown a no-hitter.  For comparison's sake, the Dodgers franchise has had 20 no-hitters, the most in MLB history.  As someone pointed out to me, the Padres also have never had a hitter hit for the cycle, but the latter event seems more of an aesthetic accomplishment than does a no-hitter.  Now that the Mets have the no-hitter monkey off from their backs, perhaps fans will take notice of their team's overall success.  The 2012 Mets have a bright future with minds like Sandy Alderson, Paul DePodesta, and J.P. Riccardi in the front office and a solid manager, Terry Collins, at the helm.  Watch out for the Mets: they exude a great attitude on the field, and in a tight and competitive NL East, anything can happen between midseason and the playoffs.

Decisions Decisions

This year's MLB trade deadline has proven exciting.  General managers from numerous teams have spent sleepless nights with no one other than their Blackberry for company.  Big-name players have moved, minor deals have been made, and contenders have filled holes while teams in the cellar have cut payroll.  One fact is certain, no team wins anything by making a trade.  Teams may upgrade their talent or replenish their farm systems, but two months of baseball remain unplayed and trades do not always correlate to wins.

Pundits, analysts, and fans listen, watch, and read about every trade rumor that comes across their computer screens, hoping their team's GM will strike a deal to help the winning cause.  One aspect of trades that goes overlooked by fans is the sacrifice made by players who are forced to move from one city to the next.  Although some players do not face any difficulties due to their young age and bachelor status, many players must leave a city they call home and worry about their family's future.

Let's go through a few examples.  The Mets recently traded Carlos Beltran across country to the San Francisco Giants.  Beltran had a no-trade clause in his contract allowing him to veto any preposed trade.  He used this clause to inform the Mets he would only accept a trade to an NL team contending for the playoffs.  His choices were professionally motivated, unrelated to personal matters.  Beltran cared little about moving from one coast to the other, putting winning above everything else.

Other players, like the Dodgers' Hiroki Kuroda, chose to invoke his no-trade clause in order to veto all trades, even a few scenarios that put him onto the Red Sox and Yankees.  Kuroda formerly pitched in Japan, but when he signed with the Dodgers, he moved his whole life to the United States.  His life would once again be turned upside down were he to move from Los Angeles to either Boston or New York.  Most would wonder why Kuroda would ever veto such a trade due to the Dodgers' abysmal season and financial troubles coupled with Boston and New York's strong desire to acquire him.  Kuroda chose family above winning, a choice that angers fans but does not baffle many players who understand such decisions. Being traded is akin to an army general being transferred from base to base requiring them to relocate their families.

As a Phillies fan, I have experienced the tension and joy that goes into making a big trade deadline acquisition.  Had I been a Red Sox or Yankees fan during the negotiations for Hiroki Kuroda, I would not have been pleased with his decision, but my opinion has recently changed.  Far too often we as fans see MLB players as chess pieces, easily sacrificed and exchanged, all towards the winning cause, but we overlook the fact that these players are men with families and responsibilities beyond baseball.  As fans we should have the right to boo a player for underperforming or refusing to be traded for purely superficial reasons, but not for refusing a trade due to personal reasons.  Although players make millions of dollars, and "trades are part of the game," these are not valid enough arguments to be made in favor of bashing a player for refusing a trade due to personal reasons.