Aging Hipster

Given how many writers still seem to have fun portraying Alex Rodriguez as some kind of cyst on the game of baseball, it's seems only appropriate that A-Rod develop one of his own, just so he knows how the game feels with him in it. Call it karmic penance. The condition began as a tightness and stiffness in his right hip, and has advanced to the point where Rodriguez is questionable for the upcoming World Baseball Classic (another one bites the dust).

But this post isn't meant to pillory A-Rod for his steroid-doing, nor to lament the ongoing laming of the WBC. Instead, this is a post about the home run record. The big one. The one formerly held by Henry Aaron, and now in the possession of one Barry Lamar Bonds. The new magic number: 762.


It was only a few short months ago that A-Rod still represented a prevailing hope that someone "clean" would break Bonds' record and restore a perceived legitimacy to baseball's most hallowed mark. And with 553 home runs through age 32, Rodriguez looked poised to deliver. After all, he simply needed to average a little over 23 homers over rest of his contract to do it, and he figured to be in the mid to high 30s for at least the next few seasons.

But then, of course, the public image A-Rod had constructed of himself collapsed under increased scrutiny when results of his 2003 steroid test was leaked. And suddenly, no one was hoping A-Rod would beat Bonds anymore. Because it's easy to categorize Bonds as a cheater, and to discount his accomplishments. Sure, he did amazing things on the baseball field, but his attitude and his seemingly shameless and repeated violation of baseball's PED policy, continued association with Greg Anderson, and unwillingness to give any quarter to his attackers turned him from a cartoonishly great hitter into a cartoonishly evil villain, one who could be swept aside in favor of the much beloved Aaron.

With A-Rod, who seemed play the game with dignity and pride and has had the decency to try to leave the circus behind when he steps on the field, it's harder to set him aside. He clearly had the talent before he began using. And statistical analysis suggest that his use may not have actually helped him at all. It's reasonable to question how much he used and how much it affected his play. And, as week as his apology was, A-Rod has apologized and has promised to try to recover some of the trust and goodwill he has lost. And that's something Bonds has never done. So to set A-Rod aside, and continue to acknowledge Aaron's record as sacrosanct would take significantly greater mental gymnastics that The Common Man doesn't think most members of the media and baseball fans look forward to.

Nate Silver offered a beacon of hope late last month when he announced that PECOTA sees A-Rod falling short of the mark. Silver wrote,

"PECOTA's best guess is that Rodriguez will finish with 730 lifetime home runs, running out of steam after another three or four seasons and leaving him just shy of the marks established by Aaron and Bonds. Of course, there is a lot of uncertainty in this estimate. If Rodriguez follows the path charted by Aaron or Frank Robinson [who were wildly successful in the late stages of their careers], he could finish with well in excess of 800 home runs (and possibly as many as 900). On the other hand, if he draws Albert Belle's ping-pong ball, he might not top 600. Overall, the system puts Rodriguez's chances of surpassing Aaron at only about four in 10 and of surpassing Bonds closer to three in 10."

And perhaps A-Rod's cyst is a sign of what to expect for the rest of his career. Small, chippy injuries that slowly take their toll on Rodriguez's body, slowing him until he has no hope of catching either Bonds or Aaron. Last year, after all, Rodriguez went to the DL for the first time since 1999, suffering from a strained quad. And if this is a precursor to additional hip problems (cysts can be associated with rheumatoid arthritis, the disease which quickly ended the career of Albert Belle), it could be a rapid descent indeed.

There's no right answer here. The Common Man himself is neither rooting for or against Alex Rodriguez. And if you want to root against A-Rod, you should go right ahead. But The Common Man does want to point out, again, that all the hand-wringing about records, about history, and about steroids is overblown. There is a chance that Alex Rodriguez will be the next home run king. But there's an even better chance that this is not even an issue. That Father Time and a death of a thousand cuts and strains and cysts will take care of the issue before it comes to a head. And maybe by the time the next contender for the throne comes along (Pujols?), everyone can just be a little more rational and a lot less star-struck about the whole process.

Breaking Down Breaking News

The Common Man woke up this morning with The Boy in his bed, kicking him in the head. The Boy was ready to get up, and wanted his father with him. So together they walked downstairs, had some breakfast, and turned on the TV. As they sat enjoying the MLB Network showing David Cone's 19-strikeout gem from 1991 (The Boy likes baseball, and keeps yelling "run, run, run!"), MLB came through with the first scoop of its short life.

Alex Rodriguez, the most complete and talented player in the game today, tested positive for steroids in 2003. The Common Man fired off an email to Shysterball as quick as he could, but hasn't really had time to unpack what this means for the game and for Alex Rodriguez until now.

--The original test in 2003 was supposed to be anonymous, an effort to determine just how many players were on the juice and whether further action by the league and the union was required. Obviously, it was. But it's somewhat disconcerting that the results that were supposed to be anonymous (and probably should have been destroyed in the aftermath of the testing) have been used to name names. Since there are apparently 103 other names that are connected to these positive tests, The Common Man agrees strongly with Shysterball, who argues that "Given that it is now inevitable that all of the names who tested positive in 2003 will come out, maybe it's in the union's best interest to release every name now rather than deal with the drip, drip, dripping of names over time."

At this point, the players (and the league) should be trying to minimize the damage of the positive tests. The longer this story keeps generating new information, the longer it will remain in the public consciousness. With Opening Day approaching and a bevy of storylines waiting to be exploited, there will be ample opportunity for baseball fans to get distracted. Also, by taking control over the release of the names, the players and the players' association can control the story to a degree, putting a more positive spin on their decision and shift the focus from the tests themselves to the union's responsible decision to clear the air.

Whether or not this is feasible is debatable. With an expectation of privacy, the players who tested positive may not be willing to have their names released, hoping that journalists will stop looking or they'll miraculously escape detection. And they may have legal recourse (honestly, The Common Man doesn't know) if their names are released without their consent. The union's statement today that "information and documents relating to the results of the 2003 MLB testing program are both confidential and under seal by court orders. We are prohibited from confirming or denying any allegation about the test results of any particular player(s) by the collective bargaining agreement and by court orders" would seem to suggest that releasing the names could prove difficult and complicated at best.

--Allegations that Gene Orza, the union's Chief Operating Officer, tipped off players about upcoming drug tests, are potentially more serious to the game's integrity than A-Rod's positive test. A-Rod tested positive before there were penalties in place for the cheating and represent a single player's bad actions. Orza's alleged behavior compromises the entire Players' Association and undermines its credibility tremendously. At this point, it's unclear how effective Orza's warnings were in minimizing positive tests, but it suggests that a) the union had knowledge of specific players who were using and b) was actively working against efforts to clean up the game. It would seem to be a violation of the collective bargaining agreement, and destroys Orza's personal reputation with league ownership.

--Jason at It Is About the Money, Stupid, writes that A-Rod "can kiss his HOF wishes goodbye." Later, in the comments, he writes, "maybe I jumped to that 'no HOF' stance too quickly, but in seeing the response that Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Palmiero, Sosa, et al are getting with respect to the HOF, I wonder how ARod will stand above it all." If these allegations against A-Rod are true, Jason is right that he'll get thrown in with Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Palmeiro, and Sosa (though, technically, Sosa's name has never been connected with any steroid allegations). But it's not at all clear what the BBWAA's response to these players will be. While McGwire has thusfar been shut out of the Hall, and Palmeiro is unlikely to gain induction any time soon, it's hard for The Common Man to imagine Bonds and Clemens on the outside looking in. And if there is an inconsistency in the BBWAA's voting with these players, The Common Man would argue that A-Rod (with his phenominal talent, his position on the field, and his ridiculous numbers) is far more likely to be in the Bonds/Clemens group than the McGwire/Palmeiro.

It's also worth remembering that Alex Rodriguez still has nine years remaining on his Yankees contract, and five years after he retires before he becomes eligible. There is no way to predict a) how the rest of his career will progress, and how his image will change in the public eye (he certainly has plenty of time to atone); b) how the public and media's perception of the steroid era and PEDs will change in 14 years; and c) how the voting pool of the BBWAA will change in that time.

--One interesting, and underdiscussed, aspect of this story was that, while it was broken by Sports Illustrated, SI has been linked closely with the MLB Network through the on-air presence of writers Tom Verducci and Jon Heyman. As a result, MLB Network, wholly owned and operated by Major League Baseball, was ostensibly breaking a devastating story this morning about its chief rival (the Players' Association) and its most prolific player. Whether or not there is a conflict of interest there, The Common Man doesn't know.

What interest does Major League Baseball have in this story, and were they at all responsible for alerting Selena Roberts, the SI reporter who wrote the story and who was interviewed on the network by Bob Costas today, to the existence of the test results? The Common Man isn't much for conspiracy theories, but the cozy relationship here and the obvious way in which this disparages the union and Gene Orza in particular makes The Common Man wonder. Also, and The Common Man is sure the league's lawyers have delved into this question, does the league and its subsidieries have a legal obligation to not release a story in which a specific player is outed as testing positive, especially in light of their agreement with the Players' Association and the existing court order to keep the results confidential?