McCarver compares Yankees to Nazis and Communists. But that's not the real problem

40 Comments

It doesn’t happen very often, but Tim McCarver actually said something interesting during the Yankees-Rays game on Saturday. Too bad it wasn’t interesting in a good way. Here’s what he said, transcribed by Lisa Swan over at Subway Squawkers (Note: NY Stadium Insider had it first, with video):

You remember some of those despotic leaders in World War II, primarily
in Russia and Germany, where they used to take those pictures that they
had … taken of former generals who were no longer alive, they had shot
’em. They would airbrush the pictures, and airbrushed the generals out
of the pictures. In a sense, that’s what the Yankees have done with Joe
Torre. They have airbrushed his legacy. I mean, there’s no sign of Joe
Torre at the stadium. And, that’s ridiculous. I don’t understand it.

Not surprisingly, this has created a great deal of ire across the Internets since Saturday. And I understand why.  What he said was really, really stupid. Only I don’t think the Nazi/Communist comparison — in and of itself — is what makes the comments stupid.

Obviously anyone should tread lightly when playing the Nazi/Soviet card because it’s not too often that you’re going to be making a fair comparison in terms of moral equivalence. I mean really, no matter who your subject is, odds are pretty good that he or she wasn’t responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people.

But McCarver is obviously not making a moral equivalence here. He’s simply saying that he thinks the Yankees are playing propaganda games like Hitler and Stalin did. As I explain below it’s a dumb point, but if you’re trying to make a propaganda analogy — especially when talking about airbrushing figures out of photos in an effort to alter history — Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia really are the go-to references. Heavy-handed, sure, but I don’t think McCarver is treading in taboo territory here.

But his comments were stupid. Why? Because as several people have pointed out, he’s simply wrong. There are pictures of Torre on championship banners on field level at the ballpark. There are photos of him in pictures of celebrations of championships in some of the luxury boxes and elsewhere.  As such, McCarver saying that Torre has been removed from Yankees history is just false.

And really, what would McCarver have the Yankees do regarding Torre’s legacy at this point? He’s an active manager working for a historic rival. When he left town, he wrote a book about the Yankees that pissed just about everyone off.  Would McCarver expect the Yankees to have a statue of Joe Torre up at the main gate? Should there be a giant banner with his likeness hanging next to the Hess ad on the scoreboard? Call me in 25 years if the Yankees haven’t honored Torre somehow, but I think it’s a little premature for the team to be building monuments to the man, especially given the recent bad blood.

Oh, and one final note. If McCarver is going to accuse the Yankees of not treating Torre’s legacy fairly, perhaps he should disclose to viewers who were not otherwise aware that he is Torre’s close friend and former teammate and may very well be letting his personal feelings color his perception of how the guy is being treated by the Yankees.

The upshot of all of this: I’m not going to burn McCarver at the stake for saying what he said, because his comments weren’t outrageous in the way a lot of people are saying.  They were just wrong in the fairly normal and conventional way in which we’ve come to expect Tim McCarver to be wrong about things over the years.

Rob Manfred is prepared to implement a pitch clock unilaterally for 2018

Getty Images
17 Comments

Rob Manfred has long been on record wanting to speed up the pace of play in baseball and, to that end, last year proposed a 20-second pitch clock. Pursuant to baseball’s Collective Bargaining Agreement, he could not implement that unilaterally last year. However if, one year after a proposed rules change, no agreement can be reached with the union, he has the power to impose the originally-proposed change unilaterally.

Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic says today that he is prepared to do just that — imposing that pitch clock and a rule limiting mound visits — for the 2018 season. He further says that the players might very well allow him to do that, despite the fact that they and Manfred are currently negotiating an agreed set of rule changes.

Why? Because, Rosenthal says, if they step aside and let Manfred do it by himself and the rules changes prove unpopular, he’ll take the blame for it:

If enough players oppose the changes, they could absolve themselves of responsibility and allow Manfred to force the issue by introducing the two key elements of MLB’s plan: a 20-second pitch clock and reduction in mound visits. The onus then would be on Manfred to deal with any public fallout and unintended consequences the new rules might trigger.

I’m not sure, based on the story itself, if that’s just Rosenthal’s speculation or if it’s actually a potential union strategy to do nothing and let Manfred own the rules changes. If it’s the latter, though, it’s a monumentally stupid strategy. For a few reasons.

The first and biggest reason is that it is not a union’s job to play public relations games. It’s a union’s job to make workplace conditions as good as possible for its membership via bargaining. Rob Manfred is required to engage with the union on these rules changes for a limited time and is doing so, apparently in good faith. The union, while not possessing great leverage here, has at least some ability to put its two cents in on a rule that impacts all of its members and could, conceivably, make the rules a bit better for them. Barring that, they could at least attempt to obtain some sort of concession in another area in order to get their agreement to the rule. Blowing the chance to have input on work rules because of a chance to win a public relations fight is an abdication of responsibility for a labor union.

Second: there is not going to be any sort of public relations win for the union regardless of what happens. Indeed, to even think there could be one is to ignore what has happened with every rules change in baseball history and how they have played with the public.

No matter how much some people complain about a change in baseball — and some people love to complain — most folks eventually get used them. The DH rule just celebrated its 50th anniversary. People moan, but it’s just part of life. Same with interleague play and divisional realignment and expanded playoffs and no-pitch intentional walks and the takeout slide rules and everything else. The complaints about such things are loud, but they’re not deeply felt or widely felt by any but a handful of self-proclaimed traditionalists. The game chugs on and most people get used to it without there ever being the kind of P.R. fallout that puts egg on the league’s face or which puts the players in some better light. If the pitch clock rule is imposed, people will complain a lot and lot of ink will be spilled about it, but it won’t do anything to substantially harm the league let alone help the players.

That speaks to a larger historical lesson about public relations and players, of course: they’re almost always going to be seen as the bad guys by fans, no matter what they do.

Owners abused their power for a century and fans didn’t care. Starting in the 1960s, when the players finally began to effectively assert their leverage, the players were cast as greedy mercenaries. An owner gives out a foolishly large contract and the player is blamed for taking it. The owners band together in an illegal scheme to harm the players’ interest and the owner who orchestrated it is inducted into the Hall of Fame. The DH rule gets imposed and players who excel as designated hitters are viewed poorly by the writers and the public when it comes time to consider their Hall of Fame case. A new rule gets implemented to deal with slides and it’s not “The Rob Manfred slide rule” it’s “The Chase Utley Rule.” The players are the visible ones. They bear the brunt of just about anything that happens.

Which is to say, if the pitch clock creates some weird situations or controversies, the players involved in those situations and controversies are going to be the ones to take the blame. Just imagine a Dodgers-Giants game that turns on some weirdness involving Madison Bumgarner taking too long to deliver a pitch to Yasiel Puig, forcing in the walkoff run. Imagine that both Bumgarner and Puig saying the other was to blame. Imagine that the umpires messed up the application of the rule. You think Rob Manfred is going to catch hell for it as opposed to the players and the umpires involved? Hell no. Giants fans will yell that Puig did something that should’ve caused the clock to be reset. Dodgers fans will blame Bumgarner for taking too long. It’ll dominate the news for a couple of days but it won’t be the league and its owners taking crap for it.

Against that backdrop, why in the heck would the union try to win some P.R. battle? Screw the P.R. battle. Union leadership — including Tony Clark and the player reps — should negotiate for the best rules possible for the players they represent and let the public relations chips fall where they may.

Will they do that? Based on how the last few management-labor battles have gone, I don’t have a lot of confidence. In recent years the union has seemed far more focused on relatively short term and picayune concerns while trying not to look like the bad guys to fans. Meanwhile, the meat and potatoes labor issues which sometimes require a union to take unpopular stances in the long term, big picture interests of the players have been dominated by the owners. Ask the free agents who can’t find a team because the luxury tax is far lower, compared to revenues, now than it was 15 years ago and is serving as a defacto salary cap. Ask the guys who are being lowballed because of the qualifying offer.

It appears as though we’ll have a pitch clock in 2018 one way or another. The players need to decide pretty quickly if they’re going to have some say in that process or if they’re going to allow themselves to be marginalized in the management of the game even more than they already have been.