PITTSBURGH _ The Hall of Fame continues to bar one of the greatest pitchers (Roger Clemens) and maybe the greatest player (Barry Bonds) of all time. A team cheated its way to a World Series title by banging on garbage cans (and none of the players were punished). Relief pitchers are now mandated to face at least three batters (unless the inning ends first), and the mighty Boston Red Sox just dumped a star player the way the Pirates would (because they didn't want to pay him).
All of which pales in comparison to the biggest farce of all: MLB's payroll inequity.
The New York Yankees are projected to open the season at nearly $250 million, while the Baltimore Orioles will check in at roughly $65 million. The Los Angeles Dodgers will spend something like $130 million more on players than the Pirates will.
Some of this is by choice on the lower end, of course, but the lack of a salary cap (or salary floor) renders the whole enterprise laughable.
You'll always see some rinky-dink markets win and some deep-pocketed teams lose, but in the end, as with most things in life, you get what you pay for. A USA Today study after last year's World Series revealed that 24 of the past 25 World Series champions began the season in the top half among payrolls.
The average payroll rank of those 24 winners: sixth.
Keep that statistic in mind the next time a local GM talks about how the goal is to play "meaningful games in September and October."
The goal is to win it all, and if you're not among the haves, your chance to win it all is next-to-none _ and next just left town.
It might, however, be coming back.
That brings us to Manfred's latest brainstorm, or least an idea somebody leaked to the New York Post: a hugely expanded playoff field that would put nearly half the teams in the postseason, render the six-month regular meaningless and see some clubs choose their first-round opponent in a televised selection show.
I didn't make that up.
And you know what?
I LOVE it, mostly because it would hurt the rich, help the poor and expand the entire charade to unimaginable proportions.
Last year, for example, the 103-win Yankees would have been forced to play the 84-win Red Sox (assuming the Yankees chose them as their opponent) in a three-game series.
In other words, the previous six months would have meant nothing. That simply isn't fair _ but it's not as unfair as the Yankees and other teams being in position to spend $100 million more than many other teams. Therefore, I'm all for it.
Now, before we move on and give this "proposal" too much credence, I absolutely believe it could be a bogus story, leaked to distract from the ongoing Houston Astros saga. I still believe we might hear the Astros used buzzers in their jerseys in their latest run to the World Series.
I mean, I hate to cast doubt on Jose Altuve's contention that shyness combined with a potentially angry wife caused him to suddenly protect his jersey like it was filled with explosives on his way around the bases after an ALCS-winning walk-off home run. I just wonder.
In the meantime, Pirates fans should love this proposal. It gives them hope. Small-market teams almost never win it all, but if you get to the playoffs, it's still something of a crapshoot, especially in a three-game series. Hang around .500, and you will contend for a playoff spot.
The 82-win Pirates might have made the playoffs two years ago under this format, pending the result of their 162nd game (they only played 161), and might have caused some serious trouble in October.
Players will hate this at first. Many have already spoken out against it. Who cares? They'll change their tune when they realize more money's in it for them, via sweetened national TV contracts.
Money always talks. Or shuts people up.
