Viva chaos: Deadspin is trying to buy a Hall of Fame vote from someone.
After correctly observing how screwed up and ridiculous the spectacle of watching people moralize and over-think come Hall of Fame vote time is, Tim Marchman lays out his plan:
The sensible thing to do would be to just stop paying attention to this raging trash fire, but we don’t think that’s enough. We’re going to seize some small, symbolic bit of power and turn it over to the public. We’re going to buy a Hall of Fame vote.
If you’re a 1o-year member of the Baseball Writers’ Association of America, we want to give you cash in exchange for allowing Deadspin’s readers to fill out your ballot. We’re not entirely sure what the market value of a vote is, so we’d like you to contact us—at email@example.com, or in the comments below—and name a price, so that we can start negotiations.
I think it’s a hoot. Sure, it’s corrupt, but it’s no more corrupting to the process than it is to have people who have never covered baseball — or who haven’t covered baseball since the 70s or whatever — voting on Hall of Fame candidates. It’s no more unseemly than the appalling game of character assassination that Hall of Fame voters have engaged in in recent years when it comes to guys who they suspect of PED use, but either can’t or won’t tell us why. Or can’t make a coherent case for why it matters.
But most of all it’s fun. And fun is one thing the actual, un-bought-and-paid-for Hall of Fame voters have taken out of the process in recent years. They’ve done so by talking down to baseball fans and claiming that what we thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated on the baseball field was, in reality, horrible. By acting as if their task in filling out a ballot is some awful dark night of the soul. About how how utterly serious it is and how they wish they didn’t have to make such hard choices. Well, don’t. Take $150 form Deadspin and let people who actually like sports vote on the thing.
Or write a column about how Deadspin’s offer is obscene and a disgrace to journalism. That will be just as fun, actually. Indeed, now that I think about it, I’d rather see that.
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.
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.
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.
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.