Bring Back the Expos

This weekend, baseball was back in Montreal. It was only a couple of exhibition games, but Olympic Stadium was packed to the rafters again. Of course, it was the Blue Jays and the Red Sox, the two teams who are most naturally a draw in Montreal. Even so, the crowd was good.

I remember how bad attendance got by the end of Montreal baseball. I remember the troubles they had keeping players. Obviously they would need a new/upgraded stadium, a big TV contract, and a commitment from MLB to make it work. Expansion in Canada still makes sense though, and Montreal is trying hard to show a commitment to make it work.

I used to see Montreal play in Philadelphia a lot. As a kid, I loved their hat. So many great players went through there, from Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez, to Vladimir Guerrero. Montreal would be a great destination city for American baseball fans to go see their team play. I'd love to see the Phillies play there. Sign me up on the pro-Montreal baseball side, with all the fans that went there this weekend.

My Ten Favorite MLB Baseball Stadiums

My ten favorite MLB Ballparks:

1. Citizens Bank Park- This is total homer-ism, sure. It's a great ballpark though. It's nice, clean, relatively new, and the smell of barbecue coming from right field on a Summer night is immaculate. You can watch the game from almost any vantage point in the stadium, and you can get a cheesesteak in centerfield. When it's packed, it's an atmosphere that is unmatched.
2. PNC Park- Simply put, the view of Pittsburgh from the ballpark does that city justice. I'm glad to see the team good, and the stadium packed finally, as this is one of the nicest places to see a game in all of sports. Want a Primanti Brothers sandwich? You can get one, and watch the ballgame while you eat it. Buctober is really something else.
3. Wrigley Field- The renovations actually dropped this place from my favorite park, but it remains a goal of mine to see a game with the ivy wall still up. Wrigley is baseball history, especially when Cole Hamels no-hits the Cubbies in their park.
4. Camden Yards- I went to Camden Yards in year one, and haven't been back since. The warehouse is one of the iconic images in sports. Camden Yards started the trend towards grass-infields and baseball only parks again. We're all grateful.
5. Petco Park- As if San Diego wasn't paradise to begin with, they put a beautiful ballpark in there. I love how left-field is built into a Warehouse. I also love the openness that ballpark has. It's another place I need to see.
6. Citi Field- You know I hate the Mets, right? Seriously though, this is a really nice ballpark. Shake Shack is awesome. I like the Shea Bridge. The field is nice. Utley's corner is awesome. While I can't stand the ones in Philadelphia most of the time, the Mets fans are actually a good fanbase to share a game with, on the whole. 
7. Dodgers Stadium- Chavez Ravine is just a cool name for a park. I mean, it's Hollywood, it's paradise, and it's the Dodgers. I'd love to go see a game out there. Preferably either from behind the plate or the outfield bleachers. I kind of just want to see some actors prowling around.
8. AT&T Park- No, I don't really like this group of Giants. I do love what that franchise has going out there. McCovey Cove is one of the coolest gimmicks in baseball. I bet the breeze off the water is real nice in the Summer. I love ballparks near the ocean, of which, this is one of the few. The stadium is full every night, the field is nice, and the team is currently good.
9. Yankee Stadium- Yes, it costs too much, but if you can get past that, Yankee Stadium is awesome. Yankee Avenue is a fun place to hang out, if you don't want to hang out in the Mohegan Sun or the Hard Rock Cafe. Monument Park isn't what it was, but it's still a historical treat to see. The bleachers are really cool too.
10. Fenway Park- I do want to go to Fenway, though I hear it's a dump. I guess you have to see a game on the Monster at some point though, right?

Jason Heyward Ushers in a New Era in Free Agency

Jason Heyward is a unique baseball player. He came up very young, and reached free agency by the time he was 26, this off-season. He made a ton of money in free agency too, despite never hitting 30 homers, not being a .300 hitter, and never driving in or scoring 100 runs. His career-high OPS is .849. Baseball reference projects a .277/.352/.419/.771 slash line, with 13 homers and 15 stolen bases in 2016 for the Chicago Cubs. Heyward landed an eight year, $184 million deal to play for the Chicago Cubs though. He did so in large part because he's an elite defensive player. That elite defense and being a slightly above average hitter makes Heyward a sabermetric-lover's wet-dream of a player. In 2015, being a sabermetric-stud means more than belting 30 homers- just look at the difference between Heyward's situation and Chris Davis'. And to think that Heyward turned down several larger offers...

Get used to this. There are more and more Ivy League statisticians and MBA's landing jobs in MLB front-offices than there are ex-players at this point. Everyone wants to hire the next Billy Beane, even though Beane's teams have had zero post-season success in his long run in Oakland. If you're not an "advanced stats" guru, you will increasingly find yourself scratching your head at $23 million annual value deals to .277 hitters with 13 homers, or Chase Utley still getting $7 million a year entering his late 30s off of his worst year ever, because the advanced metrics say he wasn't that bad. Owners rightly don't want to get caught in bad contracts, and advanced metrics help them avoid that. It also makes a player like Heyward, who's skill set isn't homers and high batting averages, into a much better buy than fans and even old-time players think he is.

Again, i'm not saying guys like Davis or Miguel Cabrera, that put up eye-popping "old school" numbers aren't going to get paid well- they will. I'm saying that the number of Ivy League stat guys running front offices now will change free agency, and create a lot more demand for players like Heyward. Does his deal seem ridiculous to me? Yes. Can they justify it? Absolutely. And so, we're going to have a new norm here.

Pete Rose

This week, Major League Baseball decided to not grant Pete Rose his reinstatement. Rose apparently forgets details, doesn't fully admit what he did, and still gambles. That's a real shame. It isn't good for Rose, and it isn't good for baseball. As a result, Baseball's Hall-of-Fame will probably continue to deny Rose his eligibility.

First, I feel like you have to separate the two issues- reinstatement and the Hall-of-Fame. No owner is going to hire Pete Rose in 2016- not as a manager, not as a general manager, and not as a coach of any kind. No one would trust him in those roles at this point, and no one is going to chance their franchise on that. He's been out of baseball 27 years this coming season, so I'm not even sure he'd be qualified anymore. Nothing in Rose's past or present suggests he should be reinstated to work in baseball. MLB can't do that in good faith, given that they wouldn't hire him themselves.

Then there's the Hall-of-Fame issue. Before you say "they are one in the same," Commissioner Manfred wrote:

It is not part of my authority or responsibility here to make any determination concerning Mr. Rose's eligibility as a candidate for election to the National baseball Hall of Fame ("Hall of Fame").  In fact, in my view, the considerations that should drive a decision on whether an individual should be allowed to work in Baseball are not the same as those that should drive a decision on Hall of Fame eligibility.

In other words, Rose shouldn't work in baseball ever again, but the Hall-of-Fame is a different matter altogether. Rose is 74 years old, and Manfred is essentially signaling to Cooperstown that they can do as they wish. They are choosing not to though.

I disagree with that decision. The Hall-of-Fame is a museum. It is there to commemorate baseball history, a history Rose has earned a place in that we can't take away from him. Sure, it's a good argument to say that lots of Rose artifacts are in that museum already, so he's been acknowledged. That is true. That doesn't cut it though, at least for me. The plaque in the Hall-of-Fame is not an "honor," it is a historical document commemorating the most significant players of an era. Rose was that player in the 1970s and early 1980s. In my view he should have a plaque. It should talk about his career. It should also talk about his gambling addiction and how it got him thrown out of baseball. Rose has earned both of those distinctions being memorialized well beyond his life. He is 74 years old, and he should be acknowledged in the same way that other legendary ballplayers were. He also should be acknowledged for his failings on that same plaque. This isn't about the honor, it's about the truth, the history of it. Let's not "white wash" away the "bad guys," let's acknowledge them for who they are.