Where is Barry Bonds?

ON BASEBALL

I am, in one word, shocked.

Here it is July 25, just a week away from the second-to-last full month of the regular season. The contenders have separated themselves from the pretenders. Those contenders are looking to pad their rosters before July 31's non-waiver trade deadline.

And Barry Bonds is nowhere to be seen.

Shocking. Unbelievable. Good for the game?

Well, maybe. The fact that every team's owner has passed on signing Bonds to a minimum prorated contract worth a bit more than your split-level house is morally strong of them. Who wants a pariah like Bonds in the clubhouse? Who wants an indicted man setting a bad example for the youngsters?

Good job, owners. You should be proud of yourselves. You're great citizens.

But, c'mon. We're talking about professional baseball. Not the college level, not even the minor-league level. Professional baseball! Before the season, the Washington Nationals had no problems adding Elijah Dukes to their roster. Forget that he threatened to kill his wife. The Nationals, apparently, were enamored with his .190 batting average in 2007.

Bonds' absence from a major-league field is completely character-related. There's no denying this. How else can you explain passing on a guy who had the best on-base percentage of anyone last year at .480. Other stats to consider -- in 126 games, he still managed to blast 28 homers and drive in 66 runs. And he walked 132 times compared to just 54 strikeouts.

I don't care if the guy's 44 and off the 'roids. He can still play. And he would be a valuable addition to just about any team's lineup.

The most obvious team is the Yankees. With Hideki Matsui and Jorge Posada done for the year, the Yanks have a void at designated hitter. Can you imagine Bonds hitting third ahead of Alex Rodriguez? Pitchers would have to throw him strikes -- something that never was the case in San Francisco. Convince me that Bonds wouldn't do some damage in New York, especially with Yankee Stadium's short porch in right field.

Plus, Bonds is reportedly close to Rodriguez and Derek Jeter. For a team that has always prided itself on one thing -- winning -- adding Bonds for a season makes perfect sense.

OK, say it's not the wealthy Yankees who want Bonds. A cheaper team like the Diamondbacks, maybe. Did I mention that his agent, Jeff Borris, has said that Bonds would play for a minimum salary. We're talking six figures, people. And no guaranteed money to him after this season. What's the risk in that?

Not only that, but Bonds would donate his salary to charity. No, I'm not trying to make him into a saint. He could donate his entire bank account to charity, and he still wouldn't reach that status. Some things are irreversible.

But major league baseball is about winning. And on the field, Bonds would undoubtedly improve a team's chance of winning. That's not hard to figure out.

Would there be clubhouse issues? That's hard to tell. Of course there would be more cameras before and after games -- at least for a while. Of course Bonds would sap some attention away from other deserving players. That could cause some rifts. But we're talking about professionals here. They should be able to work things out.

As long as he didn't get the special treatment he received in San Francisco, I don't think there'd be many issues. No special trainers in the clubhouse. No special managers. That would need to be specified before he signed. Lay out the rules very clearly.

Yes, there's the pending indictment. But again, let's consider the time frame here. I'm talking about signing Bonds for two months, maybe three if a team plays in the postseason. How much can go wrong -- at such a cheap price -- during that time? No trial involving Bonds will take place during the season. That's all stuff for the offseason.

Which is when whoever signs Bonds could easily part ways with the slugger. Look, teams can do as they please, but when their GMs are complaining in late September that they lacked that strong, left-handed bat, that they needed a middle-of-the-lineup guy for the stretch run -- well, they should look themselves in the mirror and point their index finger at that mirror.

The thing nobody is talking about is Bonds' desire to get back in the game. Yes, he's a surly, arrogant, cocky SOB. But this season has to have been a bit humbling for the man with the home-run record. He couldn't have thought that almost four months into the season, no team would be interested in him, no offer would be on the table.

Say what you want about Bonds' despicable influence on baseball, about the substances and the lying. It's all true -- he's not a dignified man. But he loves baseball, and I guarantee you he's itching for one thing: to get out on a field and prove, once again, that he's one of the game's best hitters. All the other fodder, the locker-room and legal issues, isn't what Bonds truly cares about.

The man just wants to play.

Will I be happy if he continues to go unsigned? Yes, a bit. The owners would be sending a strong message that an athlete's on-field performance isn't the lone factor in determining his worth. (Although the players' union is expected to file a grievance saying owners acted in concert by not going after Bonds.)

But if I'm a fan of a team that's in contention, that's one big bat away from possibly making that leap into first place, then I'm writing letters to my team's owner. "Sign Barry," they read. "Just for these next two (hopefully three) months. Just for this season."

Sounds simple enough, right?

But Barry Bonds remains nowhere to be found.

What a mess

ON BASEBALL

Does anyone even care anymore?

Do modern-day records even have any legitimacy anymore?

Yes, it's gotten to this point.

If it weren't for the Red Sox winning its first World Series in 96 years and the White Sox its first in 98 years, wiping out the past 10 years of baseball wouldn't be a bad idea.

Seriously.

Here's how bad things have gotten for MLB commissioner Bud Selig: Arguably the game's best hitter of all time, Barry Bonds, is generally assumed to have taken steroids and was recently indicted for obstruction of justice and perjury.

And arguably the game's best pitcher, Roger Clemens, looks just as dirty. According to last week's Mitchell report, Clemens had his trainer inject him with Winstrol.

While I'm not jumping to any conclusions, Clemens has done nothing in the week since the report came out to make himself appear innocent. Tuesday, he issued a statement through his lawyer believable as Bonds' countless "I am innocent" statements.

If Clemens were innocent, he would have immediately called a press conference after learning of his name's inclusion in the report. He would have stood up in front of dozens of cameras and told the truth. But, no, instead he said in his heartfelt statement that he will speak at the "appropriate time."

When will that be? Once, of course, Clemens' legal team figures out what can happen to him because of the report's findings.

Whatever.

No matter what scheme Clemens' team puts together, I'm not believing him. He had a chance last week to refute the report. Statements through lawyers don't count. Call me Mike Nifong, but Clemens is guilty.

Which makes him no better than Bonds.

So following that thinking, here we stand in 2007 — with two of the game's greats under a nebulous anvil, not to mention several other high-profile players, such as Andy Pettite who admitted to using HGH twice.

Once, twice, 18 times, it ain't right, Andy. Even if you're supposedly using it to heal from an injury. Yet Pettite's apology, if you can call it that, read (AP), "If what I did was an error in judgment on my part, I apologize. I accept responsibility for those two days."

"If," Andy? C'mon. Illegally obtaining HGH from a trainer isn't exactly a good deed. Who are you trying to kid?

Not only are the guilty players unwilling to stand up for their actions and admit they were 100 percent wrong, Selig thinks he tried everything to keep this from happening.

You serious, Bud?

Let's see. Despite that home-run jacking Summer of '98, when Big Mac launched 70 and Slammin' Sammy added 66 — after hitting 36 the previous season. Despite Bonds' jump from 49 dingers in 2000 to 73 to '01. Despite increased long balls from Miami to Seattle, Selig refused to implement a steroids policy until September of 2002.

And despite revisions before the '05 and '06 seasons, it's still as weak my non-existent triceps (see my previous column, "Baseball needs to follow IOC's lead").

Yet Selig, like Bonds and Clemens, refuses to apologize for what the nation's former pastime became.

In an AP story, Selig said: "I'm proud of where we are. We have the toughest testing program in American sports. We banned amphetamines, which were a problem in our sport for seven or eight decades."

Selig went on to say that minor league drug testing has been in place for eight years now

Yay! Good to know we've been catching the guys who we don't care about anyway. It's not the younger players — the minor league players — who have done the most juicing, Bud. It's the older guys who need that boost to make it through the long season.

And as far as baseball having the "toughest testing program in American sports," who cares?

I hate when people defend themselves through comparative means. Sure, baseball has a stricter policy than the NBA. But I'm sure if David Stern smelled a rising HGH addiction among his players, he'd institute harsh penalties. Heck, Stern regularly suspends players for flagrant fouls even when they appear to be going for the ball.

But back to that other sport.

This isn't going away. Not this year. Not in five years. Maybe not in 10 years. The debate will be heated when Bonds and Clemens become eligible for the Hall of Fame. And when, and if, A-Rod approaches Bonds' home-run record.

I've already suggested a lifelong ban for MLB players who are caught taking steroids or HGH. It won't happen. Players, unfortunately, won't be scared to use the next undetectable product on the market. They won't be afraid of getting caught.

At first I thought the Mitchell report was a good thing, which helped to shed light on baseball's Big Problem and submit suggestions for the future.

Now, I don't know. Now, I don't care.

Being naive is no longer an option. The truth is too transparent.

Baseball, its players, its records and it holy shrine in Cooperstown are all tainted.

And will likely continue to be tainted.

In sports, planning ahead can never hurt

ON BASEBALL

Joe Torre didn't exactly "shock" the sports world or turn it on its axis this week when he declined the Yankees' offer to manage the Bronx Bombers for another year with a smaller salary (not including incentives).

I'm sure the Yanks' brass was prepared for Torre's rebuke — even the hour-plus press conference, not that it cared about that.

Kudos to George Steinbrenner & Sons for knowing that Torre might walk away and for beginning the "find-the-right-guy" process as soon as Torre said "No." The Yankees will likely be fine. Lots of money usually = fine. They'll pay to bring back Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada. They'll probably pay for A-Rod (even if that's not what they're saying).

And they've got a couple of good managerial candidates in Don Mattingly and Joe Girardi despite the unsuspected migration of the other possible candidate, Trey Hillman, to Kansas City to manage the Royals (what was he thinking?).

But, more often than not, a situation like this can devastate a team. Too frequently good managers/coaches are taken for granted and dumped after a few bad seasons/losses without their team having a good replacement in mind.

It's an epidemic in the sports world that needs to be dealt with. Too many good teams becoming bad. Too many good managers and coaches finding themselves out of work while their inferiors drive their teams into the ground.

This has got to stop!! Now!!

"Detroit Free Press" columnist Michael Rosenberg knows what I'm talking about. Just earlier this week he wrote how Nebraska — feeling the pressure from its rather, uh, red fan base — dumped Frank Solich a couple years back only to be left with the rotten leftovers, aka Bill Callahan, who has not only ditched the traditional running attack for the dreaded spread (this is Nebraska, not Purdue!), but drove the program so far down that he got athletic director Steve Pederson fired so the university could bring back legendary coach Tom Osborne as an interim AD/savior of the state of Nebraska.

Yeah, maybe the Cornhuskers should have looked around at potential candidates before dumping Solich.

We haven't seen the results yet, but the Arkansas men's basketball team perfectly exemplifies this firing/hiring disaster. After Stan Heath led the Razorbacks to the NCAA tournament for the second consecutive season last March, apparently the university was unhappy with him, immediately giving him the pink slip.

Rumors swirled about up-and-coming Texas A&M coach Billy Gillispie taking over in Fayetteville, but instead Gillispie went to a place called Kentucky.

The Razorbacks eyed other big names, such as Kansas' Bill Self, but couldn't bait them. Then they hired Creighton coach, Dana Altman, but he, um, pulled a quick "Billy Donovan," backing out after one day on the job (did he get paid for that day?).

Finally, after two weeks of scrambling, Arkansas hired South Alabama coach John Pelphrey, who is there to stay — I think. And everyone's saying the right things. But is the program in better hands with Pelphrey than it was with Heath? That's not an easy question to answer. Arkansas may come to regret its decision.

Of course, the firing/hiring situation is even worse in pro sports than in the college ranks. Where else is a coach fired after a 14-2 NFL season like San Diego's Marty Schottenheimer, who was replaced with Norv "he's never performed well as a head coach" Turner after last season.

While things are a bit sunnier in San Diego now after two consecutive wins put the Chargers at 3-3 and tied for the AFC West lead, it can't be overlooked that Turner's staff has suffered as many losses as Schottenheimer's did — including the playoffs — all last year. With the same players. We'll have to wait to see how this one turns out.

That completes the history lesson portion of this column. Now it's time for the advice section, addressed to general managers/athletic directors:

1. Never fire a coach unless you have at least two good candidates in mind and you're 90 percent sure one of them will take the job. The exception, of course, is if the coach you're firing has won, like, 30 percent of his games. Then you can't do much worse.

2. Same as No. 1.

3. Don't let an angry fan base or media influence you into dumping a coach when you have no clue who will jump into the lava to save your team.

4. In college sports, give a coach four years — and three recruiting classes — to prove himself. In the pros, give him at least two years.

All general managers and athletic directors should follow the example of Joe Dumars, the Detroit Pistons president of basketball operations. In 2003 Dumars dumped coach Rick Carlisle despite back-to-back division titles and 50-win seasons and Detroit's first birth in the conference finals since 1991.

Sounds insane, right? Well, it wasn't simply because Dumars already knew he had Larry Brown in the bag to become Detroit's next coach. He was 99 percent sure Brown — one of the greatest basketball coaches of all time despite his vagabond tendencies — would step in and take the Pistons one step further than Carlisle.

Sure enough, "L.B." led the Pistons to the 2004 championship. Just like that.

After losing in the NBA Finals in 2005, however, Dumars — feeling pressure from owner Bill Davidson — let Brown, who had been talking to Cleveland about their GM position during Detroit's postseason run, go on his way, replacing him with Flip Saunders.

Saunders has received plenty of heat for failing to get the Pistons back to the Finals in his first two years. Fans have called for his head, for a new coach. But Dumars has stood pat this time. And with good reason.

There is no better available coach out there. No one who could do a better job than Saunders has. Joe-D knows how to run his team.

Other GMs should watch how his organization flourishes and take notes.

There's always an air of excitement when a new coach takes over a team. Yes, there was even a hint of verve in Kansas City when Hillman was introduced. The new man in town talks about taking the team in a "new direction."

But in many cases, that new direction is no better than where the previous coach was headed. Prudence is the key word here.

It should be used anytime an AD/GM is chomping at the bit to move in that new direction.

They should know what that direction is before making the turn.

Thinking about baseball

ON BASEBALL

My trip down here to Tobacco Road, to the Research Triangle, provided me with a lot of thinking time.

Approximately 13 hours alone in my Honda Civic. As good as my Journey CD is, I couldn't listen to it 44 consecutive times. I had to put on my thinking cap.

And while baseball isn't more than an afterthought in this basketball-crazy environment, it consumed my mind for much of the trip.

Here are a few thoughts as we prepare for the league championship series:

Only in New York
So it is very likely Joe Torre will not be back as Yankees manager next year after 12 extremely successful years. The Boss said during New York's series with Cleveland that anything short of a series win would probably mean the end of Torre's tenure.

Crazy, I thought -- only-in-New-York crazy.

Let's see... Torre's Yankees have never missed the playoffs and won four World Series. Of course, it's a what-have-ya-done-for-me-lately society, but any other team in the majors would be happy with making the playoffs every year (not to mention winning the division every year except this year).

Poor Joe.

On a related side note, I recently finished watching "The Bronx is Burning," ESPN's original show about the flamboyant 1977 Yankees. The show, which received rave reviews, portrayed an inexorable George Steinbrenner constantly on the brink of firing quirky manager Billy Martin.

Martin barely held onto his job and went on to lead the Yanks to an improbably
world championship that year and the next. But The Boss wasconstantly breathing down his neck, questioning every personnel decision he made.

So maybe Torre didn't have it that bad after all. He's the longest-tenured
Yankees manager since Casey Stengel held the job from 1949 through 1960.

And Stengel didn't have to deal with a certain Boss running the show.

A good start for the Tigers
The Detroit Tigers got their very important off-season running in the right
direction this week by picking up the $13 million option on catcher Ivan Rodriguez.

Is "Pudge" worth $13 million at this stage in his career? No way. But name five catchers in the game better than Pudge right now -- especially defensively and calling games.

Tough task, isn't it?

The reason keeping Pudge was the right decision is because his replacement would undoubtedly be a downgrade. Detroit wants to win now. It's not building for the
future. It's got the pieces to repeat that magical run of a year ago, and Pudge (even with his putrid OBP of .294 this season) is one of the pieces.

The most telling number that demonstrates his importance to the Tigers is that the team's pitching staff's ERA was 1.00 lower with Rodriguez catching compared to Mike Rabelo catching.

The Tigers still have plenty of work to do before pitchers and catchers report. The most pressing issue now becomes finding an All Star-caliber shortstop to replace Carlos Guillen, who's moving to first base.

Atlanta's Edgar Renteria seems like a good bet if Detroit can pull off a trade with the Braves. And then there's Alex Rodriguez, or "A-Rod."

Many Tigers fans are quick to rule out trying to sign the soon-to-be American League MVP, but before they shun the idea, they should consider who exactly they're shunning.

Forget his playoff numbers. During the regular season, A-Rod is the best player in baseball -- hands down. If owner Mike Ilitch is willing to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars, the Tigers should pursue A-Rod, who is expected to opt out of his current Yankees contract.

You just never know what might happen.

There's still baseball
Because of how quickly the first round series were completed, we've experienced this three-day window devoid of games and filled with speculation. Fortunately, this period is almost over.

Colorado-Arizona begins Thursday and Cleveland-Boston commences Friday.

Have the playoffs lost a little spice with the quick exits of the Yankees and Cubs? Sure, they have. But these two series appear very competitive (then again, I would have said the same about the first-round matchups).

As is usually the case in October, pitching ruled the first round. The Rockies shut down the Phillies' high-octane lineup and the Indians pitchers were able to limit the
damage caused by the Yankees. So forget the bats for a moment -- these two series will be decided by pitching.

Which is why I'll take the Diamondbacks and Indians in two series that stretch six or seven games.

While no one will argue that Colorado has more punch in its lineup than Arizona, the D'Backs -- led by Brandon Webb -- have the pitchers to quiet the Rockies bats (even at Coors Field).

Cleveland and Boston's top two starters are a wash, but I like Cleveland's Nos. 3 and 4 guys over Boston's, and the Indians' middle relief has proven more steady of late.

So I'll take Arizona in 6 and Cleveland in 7.

Giving the D'Backs a chance to win two World Series in seven years (while the Yanks have none during that period) and the Indians an opportunity to win their first championship since 1948.

Yes, minus the Yanks and Cubs, there are still myriad storylines left in October.