Ryan Braun has it all, he’s the reigning NL MVP, he’s got a sick scruff beard that would be the envy of any zit faced 13 year old boy, and according to Major League Baseball, he’s twice the man as you or me… no literally, he’s TWICE the man.

During a random drug test that was administered to Braun during the playoffs last year, it was found that the eventual National League Most Valuable Player had DOUBLE the amount of testosterone than a normal man of equal or less scruffiness.

Major League Baseball immediately jumped to the conclusion that Mr. Braun is guilty of breaking one of baseball’s most recent sacred rules, and I’m not talking about urinating on George Steinbrenner’s grave. It seems that if the initial test findings are upheld, then Ryan Braun would be suspended for the first 50 games of the Milwaukee Brewers 2012 season.

Steroids have been a black cloud over baseball for almost as decade as many of the high home run numbers of the 1990’s were assumed to be the result of a needle. In this day and age of strict testing by Major League Baseball, it’s hard to believe that a player would risk his reputation and potentially his career by juicing up.

After the story broke of the Milwaukee slugger’s positive test, it seemed that a “Fox News” style spin team was on the case on behalf of Braun, trying to cast doubt on MLB’s handling of the sample and assure the public that the only performance enhancer any Brewer took apart of during the playoffs last year was Prince Fielder’s double decker Italian sausage sandwich topped with onions, mayo and fried cheese curd.

If the positive test is upheld, the main question that needs to be asked by Major League Baseball, fans, players, and owners alike is should a player who is found guilty of using performance enhancing drugs during an award winning season face the possibility of having his award stripped away for cheating. Obviously up to this point, no Major Leaguer has had any of their numbers or records stripped away for using PED’s. However, current penalties for using PED’s have just come into existence over the past few seasons and even players that were found to have used them in the past, like Alex Rodriguez, didn’t face any punishment by Major League Baseball.

This is the first time that a significant major leaguer in the prime of their career has tested positive for a PED and if the initial test is upheld, then Commissioner Bud Selig, could and should make a real statement against the use of illegal substances in baseball and strip Braun of his National League MVP and award it to Matt Kemp of the Dodgers who finished second in MVP voting to Braun.

Of course, Commissioner Selig has never been one to do anything to the detriment of his beloved Brewers and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was found that the test was a false positive or that there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation for the fact that Braun was found to have twice the amount of testosterone as any player that’s ever been tested, hell, maybe he’s got 4 balls.

Photo: Getty

In the wake of Albert Pujols STUNNING defection to the Angels, a thought immediately popped into my head:

Did Albert Pujols just become a bigger social pariah then LeBron James?  Did the beloved iconic slugger just tarnish his ’sterling’ reputation by bolting the only franchise he’s ever known for sunny skies and warmer weather?  And o yeah, lots and lots of cash.

$250 million worth.  And if reports are true — I’d love to verify this — some even claim the Marlins (assumed all along to be St. Louis’ only competitor for the big lug) were ready to dole out $275 million for the 31 year old slugger (If he turned that down, maybe that tones down the greed aspect of this equation a bit).

The timing of the signing is incredibly interesting, as it comes on the heels of LeBron’s historic move to Miami a year and a half ago.  Two superstar stud players, presumed to be the best in their respective sport, have now left for greener pastures and new starts. Been some commencement to the decade huh?

Their stories are different, but have some eerrily similar qualities.  Afterall, both had played for their respective teams — the only teams they had ever known — for at least 7 seasons.  Both had racked up MVP awards and had experienced huge success from the get-go. Both were worshipped in their respective cities.  But this is where the conversation gets interesting. Really interesting.

LeBron was blasted mercilessly for leaving Cleveland high and dry last offseason.  His infamous, “I’m taking my talents to South Beach,” announcement was one of the most memorable and repeated quotes of the year. He jersey went from the hottest Cleveland sports garb to literally on fire, as fans protested his stunning exit from his home state by burning his jerseys.

His return to Cleveland last December was a massive-boo fest, and signs like “Traitor” littered Quicken Loans Arena.  It was ugly, and the media loved all the hate. Miami became the number one sports story of the year, and the most villainized basketball team in the history of the instant information age.  ESPN didn’t help by dedicating an entire tab on their BottomLine to the Heat, but the attention the move brought literally shook the world (Okay, not literally).

Now back to Pujols, who left the Cardinals today after spending 11 years with the team.  He helped bring St. Louis 2 World Series titles and quickly supplanted Mark McGwire as the greatest thing besides Stan Musial to ever hit the Archway.  He was the face of the Cardinals and an excellent 1st baseman.  He did it all.  Like LeBron, his free agency status became a point of discussion years before he hit the open market.  While he claimed that he wanted to be a “Cardinal for Life,” no one knew for sure what to believe.  Like LeBron however, it was widely assumed that he would re-up with his original team, retire in their uniform, and get a statue built of him outside those playing grounds.

But as the years went on, and Pujols got closer to hitting the open market, talks stalled between his agent and St. Louis.  After rejecting a 9 year, $195 million contract Pujols made it clear to Cards brass that he would cease discussions and enter free agency.  I wrote this at the time:

“I get that Pujols wants to put this stuff behind him and that his stand is that he “wants to be a Cardinal forever.  That’s my goal,” he says.

“If it’s his goal than make it happen.  What’s the difference between $200 million and $280 million?  I mean, really, when you get into that kind of echelon, and claim that you’re not greedy, what’s $80 million less when you’re already raking in hundreds of millions of dollars.  So of course he’s greedy… And this idea that the situation is out of his control is B.S. to the max.  Out of his control? Are you freaking serious?  It’s completely in his control.  If he said tonight that he would take $20 million a year for 7 years, St. Louis would ink him faster than you could say ‘set for life.’”

But I never fully bought Pujols’ supposed loyalty. Very few athletes know the definition of loyalty anymore and Pujols chasing the almighty dollar because the Cards didn’t want to give him a ‘competitive offer’ was well within his rights. Didn’t make it right however.

So now, with Pujols scurrying for Los Angeles with a money truck backed up to his front door (after St. Louis manned up and gave him a huge offer), it’s time to ask the question: Does this make Pujols the new LeBron?

The dominance and name they have over their sports is comparable.  Their global appeal is an interesting debate.  A 9 time All-Star, Pujols is a legend in the Dominican Republic and probably many other spanish lands.  But he does not carry the global stick that LeBron had right out of college.  Pujols is a star, but LeBron transcends sport.  My dad and I were engaged in an interesting discussion today when he made a fantastic point: does the casual person know who Pujols is?  Because they sure as heck know who LeBron is. Maybe that’s why LeBron took so much flack.  Because of his global name.  Because of his larger than life persona.  Because he relished the spotlight, unlike Pujols who tried to shy away from it.  Then my dad made another great point: how many Pujols commercials do you see on TV?  None that I can recall and I study advertising.  Maybe in St. Louis.

In other words, Pujols is a great player, but unlike LeBron he’s not a brand.  He never came out and said he wanted to be a billionaire.  He never wore Yankees caps at Indians games. He laid low in the weeds, putting up historic numbers, while leading the Cardinals to a great 11 year run. He did his thing, but he was never bigger than the game.

Which takes us back to LeBron.  James’ public announcement on ESPN to officially announce his exit from Cleveland was mistake #1.  Miami’s party the next day: “Not 1, not 2, not 3…” was mistake #2.  Going to Twitter to express his honesty made for a social media feeding frenzy.  That was mistake #3.  We’ll never truly know what LeBron’s image would have been had he exited the way, well, Pujols did.

There may have been a circus at the baseball winter meetings in Dallas today, but it wasn’t to see Albert.  He wasn’t even there.  While his agent was pulling the strings of 3 different ball clubs, he relaxed at home, knowing that he was the talk of the sports world.  But his free agency, didn’t go beyond sports.

So again, back to the debate: Is Pujols the next LeBron?

LeBron was villified for leaving Cleveland without winning a championship.  Fans said he chickened out, showing he wasn’t man enough to do it as the top dog, when he hooked chains with Wade and Bosh in Miami.  People called him a coward.  His owner wrote a letter in comic sans on Cavs.com in an angry tirade in which he claimed the Cavs would win a title before LeBron’s Heat.  Then Dan LeBatard made his epic “royal penis” rant on sports radio, which only blew the whole thing up further.  The media covered the Heat like the Beatles, leading to the nickname, “The Heatles.”  It was a fascinating subplot.

Pujols leaves St. Louis after winning a championship, his 2nd with the club.  Ironically like LeBron, his long-time coach Tony LaRussa, was gone (Mike Brown was fired, LaRussa retired) before any decision had ever been made on whether to return or not.  No one knows what kind of impact that may have had on Pujols, or if it was simply about the almighty dollar and a hispanic community. He hasn’t said anything lately. So this still remains at pure speculation.

That said, he leaves the Cardinals after winning a title for far more money in a more glamorous city. LeBron left the Heat to take far less money, so that he could try to win more titles in a more glamorous, warm weather city (See what I’m getting at here?)

It seems as if Pujols was more about the money, but that LeBron will forever be seen as the worse guy.

But it’s interesting, because if the goal in sports is to win games, bring home championships, make money, and break records, well Pujols had all of that in St. Louis. With Adam Wainwright scheduled to come back healthy in 2012, the Cardinals appeared to have an even stronger team ready to repeat next year (scrap that without Pujols).  LeBron was crucified for going where he thought he could be most successful.  Pujols already had a championship team and the Cardinals were ready to fork over $220 million.

And it still wasn’t good enough.

Pujols’ 11 years in St. Louis were special, but did he leave the Cards high and dry?  Especially after reports surfaced that the two were a few million apart last night and closing in on a new deal to keep him “A Cardinal for Life.”

Cardinals fans, excited to get the slugger back last night, woke up this morning to the shocking announcement that he was bound for the left coast.  No one expected this.

Couple that with the signing of C.J. Wilson to a now loaded Angels team, and doesn’t that eerily resemble what LeBron walked into in Miami?  Or is it different because the Heat were literally created out of money, with franchise icon D-Wade anchoring the ship?  These are all questions people should be asking these next few weeks and months.

If we gave LeBron crap for leaving a team close to a title to win titles and take less money, then how can Pujols be excused for taking the money and bolting a champion?

If LeBron turned his back on Cleveland then didn’t Pujols just do the same thing to St. Louis?

If anything, LeBron’s decision now looks much more defensible:

He left money on the table. He sacrificed a small amount so that Miami could land Bosh and keep Wade.  Pujols left so that he could take far more money.

But will the public care?

If its double standards we’re talking about, then this certainly puts that to the test.

So I ask you: Albert Pujols, villain?

Photo: Reuters

While the Marlins and Cardinals hogged the spotlight in the Albert Pujols derby, a third ‘mystery team’ was waiting in the wings. Hello Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

Shortly after Miami pulled their $200 million offer to Pujols, it was assumed that Phat Albert was a lock to return to the Red Birds.  The sides were allegedly a few million dollars apart.  And then came the Angels, who you could say swooped in from the outfield and broke the bank for the iconic St. Louis slugger.

10 years, $250 million: an albatross of a contract that may be the most ridiculous deal in sports history.

As I outlined in my column yesterday, Pujols was a risk at $220 million.  Well, he’s an eye sore at $250 million.  This is the most outlandish, unexplainable contract since the inception of free agency.  A-Rod’s was pretty bad too, but this is just dumb.  Inexcusable.  It almost reeks of desperation.

The Angels are pinning their ears back and committing $25 million a year to a guy who turns 32 in January.  They’re banking on the 3 time MVP, who hit .300 with 30 home runs and 100 RBI’s his first 10 seasons in the bigs (the only player ever to do so) to not only age gracefully, but to continue his dominance until at least his late 30’s.

In my mind, it’s one of the dumbest contracts ever handed out.  Pujols is coming off a really good year, but not a great one in which he struggled with injuries yet still hit 37 home runs, batting .299 with 99 RBI’s. He’s a 3 time MVP, and has finished in the top 10 of MVP voting 10 times.  That’s amazing.  He has more MVP votes in history, with the exception of one Barry Bonds. That’s insane.

And yet, this contract is still hilariously misguided.

This feels more like a lifetime achievement award, then a contract.  Los Angeles of Anaheim is basically looking at the situation in a fluid manner, with the idea that they have the chance to pounce and grab a stranglehold of the LA market, with their neighbors, the Dodgers in financial disarray. I get that this was their opportunity to make headlines, spend some money with their new TV deal set to kick in, and that the AL West is wide open – especially since they hurt the Rangers by also grabbing C.J. Wilson.

But that doesn’t validate the length of this deal.

If the Angels goal is to seize Pujols prime, they better be competitive and a World Series contender every year for the next half decade, because it’s a lock that Pujols’ numbers are going to continue to decline as he gets older.  So like I said yesterday about the Marlins, the Angels better know what they’re committing to.  And if Albert gets hurt and misses work (Aflac!) well, forget about it.

The Angels have missed the playoffs two years in a row, and they were desperate to remedy that.  They have a deep, talented roster without Pujols.  With him they’re a World Series contender for sure.  But in the uncertain economic climate that we’re in, giving him 10 years is a big-time risk.

From a numbers standpoint the Angels needed hitting, so unlike the Marlins, this was a need, and not a luxury piece.

Los Angeles of Anaheim finished 17^th in runs last season, 15^th in batting average, 21^st in on base percentage, and 14^th in slugging percentage.  Assuming Pujols stays healthy those numbers figure to rise significantly.

And considering that they had nary a single player hit 30 HRs in 2011, well Pujols’ bat and power will certainly be a welcome addition. Three Angels had 20 or more homers last year.  No Angel hit .300. Mark Trumbo led the team with 87 RBI’s.

So in the short term, it’s pure brilliance.  Pujols plugs a massive offensive hole in the middle of LA’s lineup.  His presence immediately means more hittable pitches for the guys behind him and in front of him.  There’s no doubt about that.

Jered Weaver and Dan Haren are a legitimate 1-2 punch on the mound.  The Angels boasted a team ERA of 3.57, good for 6^th in all of baseball last season.  Their pitchers ratcheted 98 quality starts, which put them 5^th in MLB.  Like the Dodgers, pitching was their strength.

Throw in new signing C.J. Wilson as a 2^nd or 3^rd starter and the Angels may have the best 1-2-3 punch in the league.  There is no excuse for them not to be great in the short term.

My questions come in the long term.  It’s not that the Angels don’t have the money: they’ve been throwing out big money for years now under their current ownership.  The question becomes how valuable their current assets will be in the future.  Albert Pujols at the age of 36, with 5 years left on a gargantuan deal is not a sexy trade piece and no one in their right mind would take that contract on. It’s kind of a moot point anyways, because his deal comes with a full no-trade clause in his contract.

Of course in the short term, you have Vernon Wells’ massive contract on the books as well.  Wells who signed a 7 year, $126 million deal in 2006 with Toronto still has 2 years left.  He made an astonishing $26,642,857 last year, giving the Angels a whopping .218 batting average (Okay, maybe that’s the worst contract ever).

The Angels are not afraid to spend as evidenced by their payroll last year, which was 4^th at $138,999,024.  They have at least 6 guys on their roster who were already making $8 million or more last season.  Tack on Pujols and Wilson, and now that number jumps to 8.

It’s bold. It’s risky.  And it makes the Angels the must-see team to watch for 2012. And hey, the Angels may know what they’re doing.  If the world ends in 2012, I’m pretty sure that would void the last 9 years of this deal.

Let the hype begin: Albert Pujols his taking his talents and his greed to Hollywood.  How’s that for an E! True Hollywood Story?

Photo: Getty

There’s lots of dollars and minimal sense in the wild Albert Pujols bidding war.   Three teams, including the previously penny-pinching Marlins (more on them in a moment) and the hometown Cardinals are apparently all willing to give a decade long deal to a guy who is 31, and closing in on 32.  They’re ready to fork over north of $200 million to a guy whose numbers went down last year.

Pujols may be a once in a generation kind of hitter, but this is the kind of once in a decade type of contract that could cripple any of his suitors for years.  Especially the Marlins.  I get that Pujols is the type of big ticket, box office draw that the team has probably been dreaming about as it prepares to open its new palace.  I get that the Miami Marlins are trying to disconnect themselves (in every way possible) from their past (though last time I checked they won 2 World Series, including one in their 5th year of existence). But I digress.

The point is I don’t get it.

Alex Rodriguez’s 10 year, $252 million contract hamstrung the Rangers for years as they plummeted to the bottom of the AL West.  Then in 2004, they dealt him to the Yankees in one of the most publicized trades in the history of existence.  Texas actually agreed to the deal knowing they’d still be on the hook for $67 million of the $179 million that was remaining on his absurd deal at that time.  It was also the most cash included in a trade in Major League history.  And here’s a fun fact, Texas will be paying A-Rod (or Roid) through the year – wait for it, wait for it – 2025!

Just think about that for a minute.  2025! If we just close the book on 2011, and proclaim that it’s basically 2012 now, the Rangers will continue paying for the services of a player they haven’t had in 8 years, for the next 14. Fourteen.  That isn’t just hilarious. It’s astounding.  So if Rodriguez somehow manages to blow his most recent absurd contract ($275 million for 10 years from the Yankees, signed in 2007) he’ll still have money coming to him over a decade from now.

And now, the Marlins and Cardinals, caught in all the hoopla of the generation’s other great player, are haggling over 10 year deals.  St. Louis is reportedly now offering the slugger $220 million.

It’s so mind-blowingly absurd that it’s hard to fathom how either of these teams could make their offers without either being drunk.  Or high.

Pujols is a fabulous player.  A 3 time MVP.  An all-world superstar who may go into the books as one of the greatest players to ever play the game.  But that doesn’t change the fact that he’s almost 32, coming off an injury-plagued season, and that this contract would be paying him $20 million+ as he gets into his late 30’s and early 40’s.

To get the prize, sometimes you have to overspend, but this is just stupid.  Especially for the Marlins.  Miami already has a pretty good 1st baseman in highly thought of Gabby Sanchez, but he doesn’t bring the star appeal or the latin passion that Miami wants to engrave into their franchise.  Or the leadership for that matter.  If it was an 8 year deal I’d question it.  Pujols’ window for greatness probably stands at 5 years.  After that it’s only fair to expect his numbers and production to decline. You can’t predict injuries and if you’re the Marlins, you can’t predict revenue stream.  Fans will literally revolt if the Marlins buy another high priced team and sell the parts off a few years later, because they spent over their heads.  That would be the franchise’s final straw.

So instead of throwing a boatload of money at a slugger in his 30s, why not sign a pitcher or two, and build the team through a strong farm system.  As is, you’ve got a guy in Mike Stanton, who many suggest could be the next $200 million player when his rookie contract expires. So from a pie in the sky standpoint, it sounds amazing.  It’s unprecedented for Marlins fans to fathom this.  But this isn’t signing Pudge Rodriguez to a 1 year $10 million deal in 2003.  Even that was considered a bit of a risk.  This is a decade long commitment.  This is getting in bed with Pujols and telling him you’ll still love him even when he’s old.  This is a contract that runs till 2021.

As for the Cardinals, well Pujols embodies that franchise.  He’s been the face of 2 World Champion teams, and he is beloved.  He is the heart and soul of their offense and he’s been with St. Louis since the start.  They will build him a statue in St. Louis and idolize the ground he walks on.  Miami will embrace him and celebrate him in their usual fickle way, and then when his talent dries up and he’s no good, they’ll be ready to dispose of him like a prom night dumpster baby.  St. Louis is loyal.  Miami has a short memory.  St. Louis is the All-American heartland.  Miami is trendy and unforgiving.

Maybe the Angels jump in, or another surprise team.  Who knows.

And the fact that Miami refuses to put a no-trade clause in his deal (stating that they wouldn’t for anyone) leads me to believe that if this multi-million dollar experiment of theirs fails, that Pujols would be the first one sent out of town.  This is the Marlins we’re talking about.

The upside of course is that you bring Pujols into town, become the hottest story in baseball, and you join the Heat as the most fascinating purchased team in the sport.  And if he wins you a few titles and collects some hardware along the way, maybe swallowing the final 4 or 5 years is worth it.  But if you bring him in at this price, you better know he’s going to deliver.  It’s a risk of course, but it’s a high-risk, high-reward.

A quick story:  In 1920 the Red Sox sold Babe Ruth to the Yankees in what is widely considered the most famous trade in sports history.  Boston owner Frankie Frisch sent the Bambino to the Bronx, not for money, but for players.  The final amount: $125,000, or in laments terms, $1.37 million in current dollar terms.  New York also loaned Frisch $300,000 or $3.29 million in current terms, with a mortgage on Fenway Park as collateral.

The point to the story: in current dollar terms, Ruth was worth $1.37 million dollars to the Red Sox.  The reason he was traded: he wanted a raise double that of his salary.  His salary at the time: $10,000.

If Pujols gets a 10 year contract worth, let’s say $23 million a year, it would amount to $141,975.309 a game, $15,775.03 an inning, $5,258.34 an out.

For a decade (before taxes).

If only Babe Ruth were still alive. Could only imagine what he’d be thinking.

Photo: Getty

Read more here: McCourt ready to challenge his law firm (Fox Sports)

CHRIS KNEPLEY

In case you missed it, last week, MLB commissioner Bud Selig took time from his busy offseason schedule of kicking puppies and harvesting the organs of unborn children to announce that MLB and the players union have come to an agreement on a new collective bargaining agreement.

The new agreement will ensure 20 consecutive (uninterrupted) years of labor peace in Major League Baseball (after the new deal expires). Pretty amazing when you consider how impossible that would have sounded during the 90’s when the relationship between the two sides were tumultuous to say the least.

This new collective bargaining agreement is highlighted by a few changes and tweaks to the game of professional baseball.

- There will now be two wild cards in each league instead of just one. The two wild card teams will play at the end of the regular season in a one game, winner take all steel caged death match to decide which team is going to get their asses handed to them by the Yankees and Phillies, respectively.

Other highlights to the CBA include:
-  new blood testing measures for human growth hormone
-  the elimination of smokeless tobacco from player interviews
-  the expansion of instant replay to include trapped balls (and I’m not talking about what happens to Big Papi when he slides into 2^nd base, because nobody wants to see that).

The biggest issue, however that Major League Baseball has again, and continues to fail to address is the problem of competitive balance between the big market “haves” and the small market “have not’s.”

Year after year it seems like the big market clubs snatch up on the premium free agents while the small market teams are left to wallow in mediocrity until they can develop their own talent, and make a run at the playoffs for 3-4 seasons (until they are forced to let their home grown talent walk away as a free agents and join the big market teams that can afford to pay for premium talent).

Take Prince Fielder of the Milwaukee Brewers, for example. The small market Brewers can’t afford to pay what it will cost to keep Fielder and it has been speculated that he could end up in a large market like Chicago or Texas while the Brewers are left with nothing but a draft pick as compensation.

MLB seemingly tried to help fix this issue a few seasons back when it instituted a luxury ax on the teams that would spend over a certain salary threshold.  However to date, the only teams that have ever had to pay into the luxury tax are the Yankees and the Red Sox, who can more than afford to throw some extra cash down the toilet to ensure a winning team.

This new collective bargaining agreement does nothing at all to help small market teams and has actually hindered their abilities to be competitive by placing new restrictions on signing players out of the draft. The new rule states that teams will be penalized for paying a drafted player more than 15 percent over MLB’s recommended bonus for their particular slot. Any team who happens to pay more than the 15 percent barrier not only will have to pay the slot difference in the form of a luxury tax, but they will also lose their top two picks in the next year’s draft.

On the surface, this rule seems like it would hurt the big market teams that spend much ore all around than small market teams.  However, over the past decade or so, the smaller market teams are actually the one who are investing more in the draft and internationally than the big market teams are. Small market teams have found that it is more cost effective in the long-term to take the 3-5 million dollars a season they would be paying to a mediocre veteran outfielder hitting .260 with 15-20 home runs and instead use that money to lure a top draft pick to sign with their organization.

Now, with this penalty that teams will incur, small market teams may be less willing to draft top amateur talent if they know it is going to cost them double the difference in the slot and their top two picks the next season. Large market teams like the Yankees or Red Sox, who normally draft late in the 1^st round, could see top talent fall in their laps and take a player who they would normally lose out on at the cost of a little more cash and a late first and second round pick next year.

The penalty for this rule hurts small market teams like Rays, Pirates, and Royals much, much, more than it does the medium to large market teams. Teams that already had to play the draft to perfection for 3-5 years just to make a run at the playoffs now will have a much harder time putting everything in place in order to be semi-competitive.

Until baseball takes a note from the NFL and NBA and decides to actually institute a salary cap that will benefit all teams equally, then there’s no hope for small market teams to ever be competitive for more than 5 years at a time. Time and time again will you see franchise caliber players like Prince Fielder walking away to a Chicago or Texas in order to cash in, while teams like the Brewers dig through the bargain bins of the free agent market to try to fill 300 pound production holes in the middle of their lineups. It’s time for Bud Selig and the players association to wake up and finally realize that what’s good for the Yankees, isn’t always what’s good for Major League Baseball as a whole.

Photo: Getty

MVP.  Most Valuable Player.  It does not stand for Most Valuable Pitcher.

That’s not a slap in the face to Justin Verlander, who had a remarkable season, in almost single-handedly willing the Tigers to the playoffs.  It’s a distinction.  Think about it for a second: You will never see a position player win the CY Young, so why should a pitcher be able to grab ahold of the MVP award, an award created for position players.

Verlander isn’t the first pitcher to win MVP.  He’s not the first to take home the CY Young and MVP in the same season.  Don Newcombe, Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Vida Blue, and Rollie Fingers were amongst some of the others to pull of the impressive feat.

And while I disagree with pitchers ever winning the awards, those pitchers went out more than once every 5 games.  They could handle the load and weren’t held to ridiculous pitch counts.  Pitchers used to pitch.  Now it’s a game of chess. Everything is mathematically mapped out.

Which is why this award comes across like theft.  It comes across as a slap in the face to position players who bust their hump for at least 130 games in a given year.  It’s a giant middle finger to players who carry the offense and put up big numbers.  Baseball is a two prong sport: there’s offense and there’s pitching (with defense obviously somewhere in the latter). If you can’t pitch, you don’t win.  If you can’t score, you don’t win. You need some of both to be successful.  You take away Miguel Cabrera from Detroit’s lineup and the Tigers lose much of their teeth.  Verlander doesn’t win the MVP, because he doesn’t get the run support, and because he doesn’t get the run support, he doesn’t win enough games, and because he doesn’t win enough games, maybe the Tigers don’t even make the playoffs.

You see what I’m getting at here?

Verlander had one of those rare seasons in 2011, where most of his starts resulted in decisions.  He took the mound 34 times, and he won 24 games.  Obviously that’s an impressive win total.  Especially in the day and age of shorter pitch counts, super-specific bullpens, left handed specialists, right handed specialists, guys who come in for one batter, and closers who don’t always close, to win that many games is certainly a rarity.

And to that I give Verlander kudos.

But the flip sign of 34 appearances, 24 wins, and 5 losses is this: you play 162 games!  That means Verlander was M.I.A. for D.E.T. in 128 games.  I’m no mathematician, but the calculator on Google tells me that’s less than 21%.  That means that in 79% of Detroit’s games he had no impact.  How can that make for a MVP?

In no other sport, could any player get away with participating in 21% of his team’s games and even be eligible for MVP.  If Tom Brady threw for 20 touchdowns in 3 games, but then was lost for the season with a freak injury, there’s no way he would be considered (though, I might want to rest on those laurels should Peyton Manning get MVP votes).  If LeBron played 17 games for the Heat in an 82 game season, no one would dare consider voting him MVP, no matter what kind of season he was having.

How could you?  If part of the battle is showing up, how do you get an award, when your impact is felt every 5 games?

So, don’t look at this as an indictment of Verlander.  He had a great season. I cannot repeat that enough.  He won the triple crown in the AL in all the major categories.  He was flat out special in 2011.  He was a runaway choice for CY Young and… that’s where it should have ended.

Verlander won MVP, because he was great in a year that the position players were merely really good.  He lucked out with Boston’s collapse, which took out Jacob Ellsbury with it (Ellsbury still finished 2nd).  He was the end result of a strange season.

The argument isn’t that Verlander isn’t valuable.  The argument is that he shouldn’t be eligible for MVP.  No pitcher should.

If I took a history class which had 10 tests, and only showed up twice, aced both tests plus got all the extra credit questions, and then didn’t show up to a single other test, I wouldn’t get commended.  I’d get thrown out.  I’d fail.

Somehow in baseball, you can win MVP.  Not a good analogy, but you get the point.

Photo: Getty

1. Cole Hamels

SP  /  Philadelphia Phillies
Skinny: Hamels is in the last year of his contract and is set up for a huge payday next winter. With both Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay under contract, it would be hard to see Philly dropping 15-20mil a season on Hamels. I could easily see the Phillies trading away Hamels for a team looking to make a one year push to the World Series before Hamels gets paid next off-season.

2. Joey Votto

1B  /  Cincinnati Reds
Skinny: Votto, the 2010 National League MVP is coming off a solid 2011 but failed to match his production from two years ago. The Reds have Votto under contract for two more seasons and will never have a chance to get more for him than they do this off-season. If Cincinnati can’t sign him to a club friendly, long term deal, the Reds would be hard pressed to afford Votto after 2013.

3. James Shields

SP  /  Tampa Bay Rays
Skinny: Shields finished 3^rd this season for the American League Cy Young Award and helped carry the Rays to the playoffs once again. The Rays are stacked with pitching depth and Shields could be their most tradeable piece as they look to upgrade their offense going into 2012.

4. Hanley Ramirez

SS  /  Miami Marlins
Skinny: The Marlins reportedly are in hot pursuit of Jose Reyes this off-season and if they do happen to land the former Mets shortstop in Miami, Ramirez could be on his way out. Hanley’s agent has already claimed that he does not wish to change positions and an unhappy franchise player at a need position for most MLB teams could lead to Hanley changing zip codes by opening day.

5. Clayton Kershaw

SP  /  LA Dodgers
Skinny: With the Dodgers in a historic financial mess and the team in the midst of a sale, it wouldn’t be completely out of the question to see the Dodgers attempt to dump salary in order to make the team more appealing to potential buyers. Kershaw is a legitimate number one starter and although I think it would be more likely for the Dodgers to try to move either Chad Billingsley or Andre Ethier to dump payroll, I wouldn’t be all that surprised to see Kershaw in a new uniform in 2012.

Photo: Getty

The title ‘off-season’ is misleading for the period of time between the end of the World Series and the start of spring training. In Major League Baseball, there is no such thing as an “off-season.”

“Hot Stove” is the best term used to describe the period of time where no games are being played. The image I get when I hear “Hot Stove” is of a chef getting busy in the kitchen with flames up high mixing different ingredients to make the perfect dish. That term fits well with owners working around the clock bidding huge dollars on star players and complimentary pieces to take their franchises to the World Series.

The Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees annually have two of baseball’s highest payrolls, and every off-season they look to restock their team with new superstars. Much like the Super Bowl winners get a trip to Disneyworld, superstar free agents and World Series winners get a trip to New York- financed by the Yankees and complete with a pinstriped uniform. The Philadelphia Phillies are also getting to that expensive superstar status. These teams change players so often, teams should have a service available that supplies leaving players with movers to help them get their stuff together- perhaps complete with a trailer that bandwagon fans can hitch on to. Dedicated baseball fans tend to love to hate these teams because they attract the better players from the smaller franchises that offer the bigger contracts and endorsement opportunities, stripping the smaller market teams and cities of their stars.

But a team packed with talented players doesn’t guarantee wins. Baseball, or any sport, is not always about having the most talent, it’s about how these superstars can function as one unit, rather than singular personalities. That’s why some teams that lose a superstar don’t completely crumble- and the team that gets the superstar is not guaranteed to win.

After the Toronto Blue Jays traded their pitching ace Roy Halladay to the Phillies, the team went from an 85 wins in 2010 to 81 in 2011. While 81 wins isn’t good it’s also not much worse than 85.

Aside from wins and losses, ballpark attendance numbers are also worth noting:

Toronto Blue Jays
2010 (with Roy Halladay): 26^th in MLB  / 20,068 per game
2011 (without Halladay): 25^th in MLB  /  22,045 per game

Philadelphia Phillies
2010 (without Halladay): 2^nd in MLB  /  45,027 per game
2011 (with Halladay): 1^st in MLB  /  45,440 per game

This one stat may not seem hugely important, but the fans that come to a game spend big dollars- and that doesn’t even include the price of tickets to the game or box suites.

Successful teams with huge superstars also attract major media and fan attention while winning games. This isn’t just great for fans, the entire community benefits. Media attention creates a buzz, and a buzz brings people to town. Once in town people spend money.

Cities with teams that don’t have a top player and a winning record have less attraction power, and local businesses lose out on customers.

Players that have been with a franchise for years also become part of the community in other ways.

Fans form bonds with athletes who become representatives of their cities. Look no further than Prince Fielder of the Milwaukee Brewers. Fielder has been a cornerstone of the franchise since he came to the majors 5+ years ago. Milwaukee fans have seen him grow, and he has embraced them, most notably with his creative celebration to get the crowd fired up.

Fielder is a free-agent and can leave the team in search of more money and a bigger market. Other big name stars like Jose Reyes and Albert Pujols may relocate too.

Regardless of roster changes, this hot stove season will no doubt lead to some fired-up conversations.

Photo: Getty