Bud Selig defiant

Shocker: Bud Selig believes that which has been thoroughly debunked


A letter Bud Selig recently wrote is making the rounds this morning. Why? Because in it he says “I really believe that Abner Doubleday is the ‘Father of Baseball,'” and makes reference to “some historians who would dispute this though.” You can see a copy of it over at Deadspin.

Of course, the story of Abner Doubleday creating baseball has been conclusively proven to be hogwash. It was a finding by a committee that was tasked by one A.G. Spalding to find that very thing in the early 20th Century.  See, it had become known that baseball was really just an evolution of any number of British sports such as cricket, rounders and bat and trap, and in those heady, jingoistic days, it just would not do to have our National Pastime be the bastard child of a bunch of limey schoolyard games. Better to create a story in which a Civil War general created it in a pastoral setting rather than to have had it develop over several messy decades among filthy Irishman kicking around New York City slums.

You’d figure Bud would know that.  But then again, you’d figure that he’d realize that eight playoff teams were enough by now too. Or that maybe the umpires could use some help on close calls. Or that it doesn’t take two years for a committee of experts to figure out if it’s better for the Athletics to play in their empty, awful stadium in Oakland or to move into a nice post one in San Jose.

But really, I don’t think Selig is that dense. He can’t be to have gotten where he’s gotten in life. The fact is, he’s a politician.  He’s someone who would do anything to avoid taking a definitive stance on an issue when someone — say, someone who wrote him a letter and whose own feelings on a matter are less than clear — asked him to.  Because the last thing he’d want to do is to upset someone.

And, as is usually the case, his efforts to avoid upsetting someone have upset everyone.

Report: Yasiel Puig started a fight at a Miami nightclub

Yasiel Puig
1 Comment

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.