Getty Images

Braves would like Ronald Acuna to keep hat straight


Ronald Acuna is the top prospect in baseball and, the Braves hope, their next franchise player. Though only 19 last season, he sailed through three minor league levels, even handling Triple-A pitching with ease, batting .344/.393/.548 with nine homers in 54 games. The outfielder is in big league camp right now and the smart money has him spending most of his year in Atlanta.

Mark Bowman of reports, however, that the Braves would like to see something else from him before he makes the big leagues:

The Braves want Acuna to wear his hat straight and maintain a professional appearance while in uniform. But they do not want to change much about the fun-loving, flamboyant approach that has made him one of the game’s most exciting young players.

A straight cap? Is that something that really matters in this day and age? That comment, not attributed to anyone in the organization, is just sort of hanging out there. I’ve met and talked to Mark Bowman a number of times and I have no reason to suspect that that’s him just editorializing. He’s not a “play the game the right way” kind of guy who would be bothered by a young player wearing his cap crooked. It sounds like it’s something he’s heard people with the Braves say and Bowman is slipping it in there.

Indeed, someone with the Braves right now — spring instructor Andruw Jones — is explicitly on the “respect the game” train. Here he is talking about Acuna:

“Cocky is a good thing. But respecting the game is also very important . . . The main thing he needs to remember is keep your head straight and respect [your surroundings] . . . Be humble, but a humble-cocky.”

Whatever that means. It’s baseballspeak. If you win 20 in the show you can have fungus on your shower shoes, etc.

My specific issue here isn’t to harp on someone caring about Acuna’s cap, even if that’s a dumb thing to care about. I flag this mostly because I suspect that this narrative on Acuna — he’s great but he’s young and needs to learn to respect the game — is aimed at laying the groundwork for an excuse to keep him in the minors for service time issues to start the season, even if he rakes all spring training long. I mean, yes, the Braves are almost certain to do that anyway because keeping young players from arbitration and free agency for as long as possible is what clubs do, but clubs do prefer to have a pretext if at all possible so as not to be so obvious about it. Remember the Kris Bryant controversy? No one wants that.

In the meantime, knowing how a certain swath of Braves fandom operates when presented with a certain sort of young player, I suspect the Braves’ concern about Acuna’s maturity, his respect for the game and the straightness of his cap will serve as a source of criticism for the young prospect. Watch for comments about his cap and his “professionalism” on a Braves message board near you.



Don’t let Rob Manfred pass the buck

Rob Manfred
Getty Images

Yesterday morning, in Ken Rosenthal’s article, Rob Manfred made it pretty clear what his aim is at the moment: throw blame on the union for the sign stealing scandal getting to the place it is. It was clear in both his words and Rosenthal’s words, actually:

In fairness, Manfred was not alone in failing to see the future clearly. As far back as 2015, the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) expressed concerns to MLB about the rise of technology in the sport. The union, however, did not directly focus on the threat to the game’s integrity.

Then, in his press conference yesterday, he went farther, saying that the union refused to allow a situation in which punishment might happen, going so far as to claim that the union refused to make Astros players available for interviews without blanket immunity.

The union, both in its official statement last night and in Tony Clark’s words to Yahoo’s Hannah Keyser earlier this afternoon, is basically saying Manfred is full of it:

“We were approached with respect to their intentions to not discipline players. Our legal role and responsibility is inherent in accepting that consideration, which is what we did.”

Which is to say, it was Rob Manfred, and not the union, which started from the presumption that there was immunity for Astros players. Manfred is the one who settled on that at the outset, and he’s now trying to make it look like the union was the side that insisted on it so that people who are mad will get mad at Tony Clark for defending the indefensible as opposed to getting mad at him for creating a situation in which there was no legal way to punish Astros players.

And, as we have noted many times already, he did create that situation.

It’s undisputed that Manfred never attempted to make rules or set forth discipline for players stealing signs. Indeed, he did the opposite of that, saying over two years ago that GMs and managers, not players, would be held responsible. If he wanted to discipline players now, he’d have a big problem because he specifically excluded them from discipline then. I’d argue it was a mistake for him to do that — he should’ve said, three years ago, that everyone’s butt would be on the line if the cheating continued — but he didn’t.

Some people I’ve spoken to are taking the position that the union is still to blame here. I’m sort of at a loss as to how that could be.

It is the union’s job to protect its members from arbitrary punishment by management. It is not the union’s job to say “hey, I know our workers were off the hook here based on the specific thing you said, but maybe we should give them some retroactive punishment anyway?” If someone in charge of a union proposed that, they’d be in dereliction of their duties and could be fired and/or sued. Probably should be, actually. A lot of people might be mad about that, and I know fully well that unions aren’t popular. But then again, neither are criminal defense attorneys, and they don’t go up to prosecutors and say “well, there isn’t a law against what my client did — in fact, the governor issued an order a couple of years ago saying that what he did wasn’t prohibited — but we’re all kind of mad about it, so why don’t we work together to find a way to put him in jail, eh?” It’d be insane.

That doesn’t make anyone feel better now. The players are certainly mad, with new ones every day finding a camera to yell at over all of this. I get it. What has happened is upsetting. It’s a situation in which some members of the union are at odds with other members. It’s not an easy situation to navigate.

They should take that anger, however, and channel it into telling their leader, Tony Clark, that they don’t want this to happen again. That, to the extent Rob Manfred now, belatedly, proposes new rules and new punishments for sign-stealing or other things, he should get on board with that. They should also — after the yelling dies down — maybe think a little bit about how, if the facts were slightly different here, they would never argue that Rob Manfred should have the power to impose retroactive or other non-previously-negotiated punishment on players.

Either way, neither they nor any of the rest of us should take Manfred’s bait and try to claim that what’s happening now is the union’s fault. If, for no other reason, than because he doesn’t have much credibility when it comes to this whole scandal. Remember, he’s the guy who issued a report saying that, except for Alex Cora, it was only players involved despite knowing at the time he said it that the front office had hatched the scheme in the first place. Which, by the way, similarly sought to make the players out to be the only ones to blame while protecting people on management’s side. He’s not someone who can be trusted in any of this, frankly.

At the end of the day, this was a scheme perpetrated by both front office and uniformed personnel of the Houston Astros. To the extent nothing more can be done about that than already has been done, blame it on Rob Manfred’s failure of leadership. Not on the MLB Players Association.