Fred Wilpon, Jeff Wilpon

The Wilpons test their defense in the pages of the Daily News


As has become standard practice, the day after the New York Times says something bad about the Wlipons/Madoff case, the New York Daily News has a story — sourced, quite clearly, by Wilpon’s lawyers — endeavoring to counter it.  Today’s story: explaining the Wilpon defense.

And that defense:  “hey, if the Securities and Exchange Commission had no clue that Madoff was a fraudster, how on Earth could the Wilpons be said to have “known or should have known” that things weren’t on the up-and-up?”

And you know what? That defense has some surface appeal.  It’s the SEC’s job to sniff out such frauds. If they can’t do it, why should the Wilpons be expected to?  But here’s my problem with it, provided by Daily News itself:

In attacking the SEC, the Wilpons are echoing the claims in a civil suit brought against the commission in 2009 by Phyllis Molchatsky and Steven Schneider, two alleged Madoff victims who claim the SEC’s “negligence, incompetence, inexperience, inattentiveness and laziness” is to blame for the epic scandal.

“For at least 16 years, the SEC’s failure to follow basic investigative procedures and practices, or even to observe simple common sense, allowed Madoff to perpetuate his scheme, drawing in innumerable new victims who were totally unaware that the government agency sworn to protect them had fallen down on the job,” their suit says.

As lawyers annoyingly say sometimes, that argument proves too much.  It’s one thing to say that the SEC was itself hoodwinked and unable to uncover Madoff’s crimes, which is how a defense attorney unrelated to the Wilpons characterizes the defense in the story.  If that’s the case — if the SEC, using all of its investigative powers and native experience and intelligence hit a dead end — of course the Wilpons shouldn’t have been expected to do better. But it’s another thing altogether to say the SEC didn’t even try and was epically incompetent, and thus the Wilpons should be judged by that standard too.

Indeed, the other side of the accusations in that above quote is that anyone who “was able to observe simple common sense” or anyone who wasn’t “negligent, incompetent, inexperienced, inattentive or lazy” could have figured Maddof’s fraud out. Just because the federal agency charged with looking into Madoff was utterly incompetent doesn’t mean that reasonable, sophisticated investors with better information at their disposal about Bernie Madoff than the SEC had shouldn’t have been expected to do the basic kinds of due diligence the Wilpons are accused of not doing.

Put differently, if the city cop on the corner “fell down on the job,” people on the street aren’t permitted to break the law and can’t point to the face-down cop as a defense when the more attentive county sheriff comes to arrest them.  People still have a duty to act in a reasonable manner and behave the way the law expects them.

I’d have a lot more faith in the Wilpons’ defense if it was the SEC going after them. Because, yeah, it would take a lot of nerve for the SEC to say “you should have done better than us.”  But it’s not the SEC going after the Wilpons. It’s a trustee appointed to represent the interest of people who were wronged by Madoff. His claim isn’t that the Wilpons should have done better than the SEC. It’s that the Wilpons should have done better than the did based on the information they had at their disposal.  As such, pointing at the SEC as their defense doesn’t totally do it for me.

Game 2 is going to be the poster child for pace of play arguments this winter

CLEVELAND, OH - OCTOBER 26:  Zach McAllister #34 of the Cleveland Indians is relieved by manager Terry Francona during the fifth inning against the Chicago Cubs in Game Two of the 2016 World Series at Progressive Field on October 26, 2016 in Cleveland, Ohio.  (Photo by Gregory Shamus/Getty Images)
Getty Images

In August, it was reported that Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred would like to implement pitch clocks, like those in use in the minor leagues for the past two seasons, to improve the pace-of-play at the major league level. You can bet that last night’s Game 2 will be the lead argument he uses against those who would oppose the move.

The game was moved up an hour in order to get it in before an impending storm. By the time the rain finally started falling the game had been going on for three hours and thirty-three minutes. It should’ve been over before the first drop fell, but in all it lasted four hours and four minutes. It ended in, thankfully, only a light rain. The longest nine-inning game in postseason history happened a mere two weeks ago, when the Dodgers and Nationals played for four hours and thirty two minutes. There thirteen pitchers were used. Last night ten pitchers were used. Either way, the postseason games are dragging on even for those of us who don’t mind devoting four+ hours of our night to baseball. It is likely putting off more casual fans just tuning in for the Fall Classic.

It’s not all just dawdling, however. Yes, the pitchers worked slowly and a lot of pitching changes took place, but strikeouts, walks and the lack of balls in play contribute to longer games as well. We saw this both last night and in Game 1, which was no brisk affair despite each starting pitcher looking sharp and not working terribly slowly. Twenty-four strikeouts on Tuesday night had a lot to do with that. Last night featured 20 strikeouts and thirteen — thirteen! — walks. It’s not just that the games are taking forever; the very thing causing them to drag feature baseball’s least-kinetic forms of excitement.

But no matter what the cause for the slower play was — and here it was a combination of laboring pitchers, the lack of balls in play and, of course, the longer commercial breaks in the World Series — Manfred is likely to hold Game 2 up as Exhibit A in his efforts to push through some rules changes to improve game pace and game time. So far, the centerpiece of those efforts is the pitch clock, which has proven to be successful and pretty non-controversial in the minor leagues. It would not surprise me one bit if, at this year’s Winter Meetings in Washington, a rule change in that regard is widely discussed.

Kyle Schwarber is the feel-good story of the 2016 postseason


Most baseball fans and even the Cubs had resigned themselves to most likely not seeing Kyle Schwarber in game action until spring training next year after he suffered a gruesome knee injury in a collision with teammate Dexter Fowler back in early April. Schwarber suffered a fully-torn ACL and LCL in his left leg.

To the surprise of everyone, including manager Joe Maddon, Schwarber was cleared by doctors to play if the Cubs wanted to put him on the World Series roster. So they did. And, boy, are they glad they did it. In preparation, Schwarber saw over 1,000 pitches from machines and pitchers in the Arizona Fall League.

Schwarber essentially crammed for the final exam and unlike most students who do it, it has panned out well thus far. No one was expecting him to look outstanding against Indians ace Corey Kluber in Game 1, but in his first at-bat — his first in the majors since suffering the injury in April — Schwarber worked a 3-1 count before eventually being retired on strikes. Schwarber came back up in the fourth and drilled a Kluber sinker to right field for a two-out double.

In the seventh inning, facing one of the American League’s two scariest left-handed relievers in Andrew Miller, Schwarber worked a full count before drawing a walk. During the regular season, Miller walked exactly one lefty batter. Schwarber made it two. Schwarber would face Miller again in the eighth, going ahead 2-1 before ultimately striking out. He finished 1-for-3 with a walk and a double in the Cubs’ 6-0 loss. Considering the circumstances, that’s amazing.

Schwarber continued his great approach in Game 2 in what turned out to be a 5-1 victory. He struck out against Trevor Bauer in the first inning, but returned to the batter’s box in the third inning and singled up the middle to knock in the Cubs’ second run. Schwarber made it 3-0 in the fifth when he singled up the middle again, this time off of Bryan Shaw, to make it 3-0. Facing Danny Salazar in the sixth, Schwarber drew a four-pitch walk to put runners on first and second base with two outs. Finally, he struck out against Dan Otero in his eighth-inning at-bat, finishing the evening 2-for-4 with a pair of RBI singles and a walk.

But now, as the Cubs return to Chicago for World Series Games 3, 4, and 5 at Wrigley Field, they have to contest with National League rules, a.k.a. no DH. Will Maddon risk Schwarber’s subpar defense to put his dangerous bat in the lineup? Even if Schwarber is not put in the starting lineup, he can at least serve as a dangerous bat off the bench late in the game when the Indians send out their trio of relievers in Shaw, Miller, and closer Cody Allen. At any rate, what Schwarber has done already in the first two games of the World Series is mighty impressive.