Orlando Hudson suggests racism is the reason Jermaine Dye doesn't have a job

Leave a comment

Yahoo!’s Jeff Passan and Orlando Hudson spoke yesterday about this Thursday’s Jackie Robinson Day and about the still-unemployed Jermaine Dye. Culture warriors: let’s get ready to rumble:

You’ve got some guys who miss a year who can come back and get $5, $6
million, and a guy like Jermaine Dye can’t get a job. A guy like Gary Sheffield,
a first-ballot Hall of Famer, can’t get a job . . . We both know what it is. You’ll get it right. You’ll figure it out.
I’m not gonna say it because then I’ll be in [trouble] . . . Call it what you want to. I ain’t fit to say it. After I
retire I’ll say it. I’ve got a whole bunch of stuff to say after I

Many will immediately dismiss this, especially in light of the news that Dye received — and rejected — yet another offer recently, this time from the Washington Nationals. Before doing so, it’s worth reading Passan’s take which, while not endorsing Hudson’s views on the merits, puts them in context. The upshot: Hudson is not a lone nut crying racism here. There are others who have done so recently, and it’s reflective of a chasm of perception between black ballplayers and the game’s power structure that needs to be addressed.  It’s a good point.

As for the merits, personally I’m an Occam’s Razor guy. I don’t think it’s as clean or easy to explain Jermaine Dye’s unemployment as a racist thing as I think it is to explain it within the context of a set of financial realities in baseball that (a) has severely depressed the value of aging sluggers with little defensive value like Dye; and (b) may, depending on who you believe, have a collusive element to it all.  Jim Edmonds and Mike Sweeney have jobs and Jermaine Dye doesn’t, but I suspect that has less to do with race than the fact that Jim Edmonds and Mike Sweeney were willing to take $850K and $650K, respectively, and Jermaine Dye is not.

Not that I think the financial aspects to all of this will be seriously considered as talk radio guys rush to pillory Orlando Hudson of being the second baseman who cried racism.

Report: Yasiel Puig started a fight at a Miami nightclub

Yasiel Puig

When last we posted about Yasiel Puig it was to pass along a rumor that the best player on his team wants him off of it. If that was true — and if this report is true — then expect that sentiment to remain unchanged:

Obviously this report is vague and there has not been, say, a police report or other details to fill it in. Perhaps we’ll learn more, perhaps Puig was misbehaving perhaps he wasn’t.

As we wait for details, however, it’s probably worth reminding ourselves that Puig is coming off of a lost season in which he couldn’t stay healthy, so trading him for any sort of decent return at the moment isn’t super likely. Which leads us to some often overlooked but undeniable baseball wisdom: you can be a distraction if you’re effective and you can be ineffective if you’re a good guy. You really can’t be an ineffective distraction, however, and expect to hang around very long.

Are the Padres adding some yellow to their color scheme for 2016?

Tony Gwynn

We’ve written several times about how boring the Padres’ uniforms and color scheme is. And how that’s an even greater shame given how colorful they used to be. No, not all of their mustard and brown ensembles were great looking, but some were and at some point it’s better to miss boldly than to endure blandness.

Now comes a hint that the Padres may step a toe back into the world of bright colors. At least a little bit. A picture of a new Padres cap is making the rounds in which a new “sunshine yellow” color has been added to the blue and white:

This story from the Union-Tribune notes that the yellow also appears on the recently-unveiled 2016 All-Star Game logo, suggesting that the yellow in the cap could either be part of some  special All-Star-related gear or a new color to the normal Padres livery.

I still strongly advocate for the Padres to bring back the brown — and there are a multitude of design ideas which could do that in tasteful fashion — but for now any addition of some color would be a good thing.

Brett Lawrie “likely to be traded” by the A’s

Brett Lawrie

Oakland’s re-acquisition of infielder Jed Lowrie from Houston makes it “likely” that the A’s will now trade infielder Brett Lawrie, according to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Slusser says Lowrie’s arrival “all but ensures” both Lawrie and Danny Valencia are on the trading block, adding that Lawrie “is considered the better bet to be traded.”

Acquired last offseason from the Blue Jays in the Josh Donaldson trade, Lawrie hit .260 with 16 homers and a .706 OPS in 149 games while playing second base and third base. At age 25 he’s a solid player, but Lawrie has failed to live up to his perceived potential while hitting .263 with a .736 OPS in 494 career games.

At this point it sounds like the A’s plan to start Marcus Semien at shortstop and Lowrie at second base.

Gammons: The Red Sox could go $30-40 million higher on David Price than anyone else


Peter Gammons reports that the Red Sox are on a mission to sign David Price and that they will pay some serious money to get him. Gammons quotes one anonymous GM who says that he expects the Sox to “go $30-40 million above anyone else.”

The man calling the shots for the Sox is Dave Dombrowski and he knows Price well, of course, having traded for him in Detroit. But there is going to be serious competition for Price’s services with the Jays and Cubs, among many others, bidding for his services. It would be unusual for a team to outbid the competition by tens of millions as Gammons’ source suggests, but the dollars will be considerable regardless.