Two Veteran Baseball Scribes Continue Talk On State Of MLB

Q: What do you feel is the biggest threat to MLB?

Writer Says MLB Needs To Keep Ticket Prices Affordable For Families

Hagen: Like any other business, they have to continue to run their business well. One thing I have been critical of baseball in the past is looking short-term and not looking at the long-term ramifications of what they do. I think they have done a real good job of bringing better marketing people in and understanding the importance of marketing the game. I think those kinds of decisions are probably looked at in a lot different way than they were 20 years ago. I think it is just important to keep an eye on the future. My generation, and Gordon’s generation, were probably introduced to baseball by their dads. Their dad took them to the baseball games, and I think it is important to keep baseball that sort of game -- where it is affordable enough and tickets are available. Kids should be able to go to games with their dad and also have the opportunity to follow it on television without having to have a dish or having to pay an exorbitant amount of money. I think there still has to be free over-the-air baseball games to keep people interested.

Edes: Haven’t there been some teams, I think of Seattle first and foremost, that have found luxury seats to be a very tough sell with some actually taking out some of their luxury suites? This actually speaks to what Paul was saying in that maybe baseball’s greatest appeal over the years has been its flexibility to the rank-and-file fan with parents bringing their kids to games. I think baseball in its haste to try and maximize their short-term revenue gains, maybe overrate some in appealing to the high-roller corporate fan at the expense of the average fan.

In terms of what external force might be the greatest threat to baseball? Paul, you are going to laugh because we have been hearing this for 35 years or so, that one day soccer is going to get a foothold in this country and become another major professional sport here, but it just hasn’t happened. At the grassroots level, a lot more kids are playing soccer than baseball, and you wonder if it finally is going to reach that tipping point where soccer does get a major foothold here and that would be a threat.

Hagen: You are right. We have heard that for 30 years and I haven’t really seen the carry-over, not that it couldn’t happen. Another thing is the competitive imbalance issue. That is another thing we have heard about for 30 years and for a long time it didn’t happen. A market like Pittsburgh that has one of the best, and in my opinion, the best stadium in baseball in a lot of ways, and they can’t draw because they have had 14 straight losing seasons. A team has to, every once in a while, be in a race to keep people interested. Detroit was a dormant baseball town but once the Tigers gave people reason to come out, they came out and they got excited.

Edes: I think they have taken significant steps to address competitive imbalance. When the Kansas City Royals can go out and spend $55 million on a Gil Meche, obviously there is money to be had for franchises that are struggling. You wonder in those cities where teams have had a losing culture for extended periods of time, if it is more a management issue than a competitive imbalance -– “We don’t have the money to compete” issue. When the Oaklands, the Minnesotas and the Florida Marlins on short money can win, the Pittsburghs have to take a hard look at themselves.

Hagen: When you look at the Florida Marlins, there is a team that has been boom or bust for most of their history. I do firmly believe that a franchise cannot have a fire-sale every six or seven years and expect to be successful in the long-run, no matter how many world championships you win in between. I think fans have to have a connection of some sort with the franchise and I don’t think you can just sell off your team to the highest bidder every six, seven or eight years and expect people to stay interested.

Q: What is your assessment of Bud Selig’s tenure as commissioner?

Hagen: I think it is going to be a mixed legacy. Some people will always remember him as the guy who cancelled the World Series. I am still not a huge fan of the wild card or interleague play, but a lot of people like it. He has been an innovator; he has innovated in a sport that doesn’t innovate very easily. Under Bud, the revenues are at a record level, attendance is at a record level and they signed a new labor contract without a strike or the threat of a strike for the first time in about thirty-some years. You have to give him really high marks for that.

Panel Feels Selig's Tenure Will Most Likely Be Seen In Positive Light

Edes: Paul, both you and I have covered the game through decades of labor war. It was a remarkable accomplishment finally that for the first time really in 36 years, a season started without a work stoppage or a threat of a work stoppage in a contract year.

I think, in the end, history is probably going to look pretty favorably on the Selig era. We should underscore the fact that the whole steroid question has yet to be fully aired. You wonder what kind of light the Mitchell investigation is going cast on this entire era. Selig’s harshest critics would have you believe that it is almost conspiratorial on the part of Major League Baseball that there was plenty of knowledge and awareness of what was going on in the game and that they didn’t want to risk the bottom line. If it was that conspiratorial, then I guess I plead guilty too because I certainly didn’t cast the light on it in my paper; not very many papers did. I think there was an ignorance factor there that I am embarrassed to admit to now. Certainly we were aware of guys taking supplements and all of that, but the fact that all of the illegal performance-enhancing substance use was going on, I plead ignorance. Bud has said that he has tried to address it and baseball in some ways has been far [more] aggressive than other sports while being held at a different level of accountability than other sports. That is why, in the end, the judgment of history will be that Selig acted in a responsible manner. I know his critics will laugh at that but let’s see.

Hagen: Maybe we were ignorant to some extent, but what really could anybody do? I know as far back as the early 90’s we would see players coming in and we would talk to them about it. I remember Lenny Dykstra coming in one spring being all pumped up and we would say “Lenny, what did you do?,” and he responded with, “I took some of those real special vitamins.” Well OK, we all know what that means, but what do you do after that? We can’t go through lockers, we can’t compel testing and frankly, neither could Major League Baseball. I know in the case of the Phillies in those years, questions were asked; but once the players denied it, what was the alternative? There was no testing, they couldn’t compel testing, so all you could do was ask the question, and if the player says he is not doing anything wrong, that’s where it ended. It is easy to go back now and say well baseball should have done something or the writer should have written about it or the teams should have done something. To this day, I’m still not sure what should have been done.

Edes: I think Bud’s greatest strength -- and we have seen it time and again in a variety of circumstances -- is his ability to build consensus. You cannot find a more fractious group of people than the 30 owners of Major League Baseball clubs, and he was able to build consensus time and again. He was able to bridge the gap with the bitterness that existed between the players’ association and baseball’s central office. He has taken far more hits and far more personal hits than probably the commissioner of any other sport and he has weathered the storm. I think in the end, history is going to render a very favorable judgment on Bud Selig.

Q: Who should replace Selig as MLB’s next commissioner?

Hagen: I am guessing it will probably be one of the inside people: Sandy Alderson, Rob Manfred, maybe even Bob DuPuy. I think they like the way things are going right now and I doubt that they go far-a-field to look for somebody. I know George Bush has been mentioned because he is a former major league owner, obviously, but I don’t think they have the need to have a show commissioner now. Maybe there was a time where they would have wanted a celebrity commissioner, but I think they will keep it in-house and try to stay the course.

Edes: Andy MacPhail and Steve Greenberg are a few other names to throw out there. I wonder if you were looking for a more visible, charismatic figure, if George Mitchell would get consideration, but with his age, he may be a long shot. Once upon a time Larry Lucchino’s name was mentioned as a potential candidate. He has been very involved in numerous executive committees in Major League Baseball, but I suspect Larry has made one too many enemies over the course of the years to be a viable candidate.

Steinbrenner Consensus Pick As Best MLB Owner

Q: Who is the best owner/worst owner in MLB?

Hagen: For all the criticism he has taken over the years, a lot of it deserved, you’ve got to think of George Steinbrenner as one of the best. He wanted to win, he took over a franchise that is very important to baseball and has a lot of history, and he has won and created a lot of interest in that team.

Edes: It’s funny, he was the first name that popped into my mind too. As autocratic as he has been and having such highly publicized missteps, in a lot of ways, George’s primary interest first and foremost was his baseball club and putting a championship team on the field while sparing no expense to do so. ... Some of the newer ownership groups like Arte Moreno with the Angels, I would put high up on the list. The Henry/Werner/Lucchino group here in Boston came in under a microscope -- that they were these carpetbaggers that were going to mess with the “Old Towne Team,” while they have actually done things in a dramatically better fashion than their predecessors.

On the debit side, the first name that comes to mind for me as one of the worst owners is Peter Angelos and the situation in Baltimore, which used to be one of the crown jewel franchises in baseball. They had everything going for them, a fantastic ballpark, tremendous tradition, tremendously loyal fans, and no real competition until the Ravens moved back and he has just run that franchise into the ground.

Hagen: I have to agree with that. I was down in Baltimore last year after I hadn’t been there in a couple years and I was astonished at how quiet it was and how small the crowds were and I said to somebody, “What is wrong tonight? Is there something else going on in town?” and they said “No, it is like this every night now.” It was really sad and really disappointing.

Q: Who is your favorite baseball announcer?

Hagen: For me it is probably Vin Scully. When I was a young sportswriter living in Southern California and covering the Dodgers for a suburban paper, he was the guy I listened to.

Edes:Vinny is like Ali. He is the champion until someone takes the belt away from him. He is the gold standard in broadcasting. I have always been a big fan of Costas although he isn’t doing as much baseball. I think very highly of Joe Buck on the national level. In terms of analysis, Peter Gammons occupies a special mix in this baseball world and his work still carries a lot of currency.

Q: Who has a better game production, ESPN or Fox?

Hagen: It is a close call. I certainly appreciate that Fox tries to be innovative and think of doing things in ways that haven’t been done before, but I am more of a nuts and bolts guy. I would go for ESPN probably. I think Fox tends to treat a baseball like a football game. I like my baseball straight forwardk, so I would give a slight edge to ESPN myself.

Edes: The honest answer, I don’t think Paul or I fit Fox’ demographic. We aren’t their target audience, Paul (laughs). With all their flashy graphics, enhanced drama, all the close-ups in the crowd with people biting their fingernails, sometimes I just want them to show me what is going on in the field. ... The reality is, Paul and I spend way too much time in press boxes. We don’t get to sit down and watch enough games. I couldn’t really say who does a better job.

Hagen: I like the NBC Saturday Game of the Week with Pee Wee Reese and Dizzy Dean (laughs)

Q: Who is a team that no one is talking about that will surprise people this year?

Hagen: I don’t know if nobody is talking about them because they tied for the division lead last year, but I think the Dodgers have a chance to be a much better team this year. If you are thinking about who is this year’s Tigers, I don’t know if there is going to be one, at least thinking off the top of my head.

Edes: What about Milwaukee, Paul? I like what Doug Melvin has done there, adding Suppan to Capuano and Sheets and some of the young players like Hardy, Weeks and Fielder. To me they are going to be a team that potentially could make some noise.

Print This Article