Kuzul

Now that the Tampa Bay Rays have extended a qualifying offer to B.J. Upton, is it any less likely the Philadelphia Phillies pursue him?

Probably not. But it should be.

If there is a silver lining to the terrible season that was 2012, it is that the Phillies will once again draft outside the bottom of baseball.  With an 81-81 finish, their worst record in a decade, the Phillies qualified for the 16th pick in baseball’s annual draft next summer—the highest they’ve selected since 2001.  (Cole Hamels was the 17th pick in 2002.)

In the four drafts that proceeded their fall (or climb, depending on how you look at it) from the top half of the draft, the Phillies selected Gavin Floyd (’01, picked fourth), Chase Utley (’00, picked 15th), Brett Myers (’99, picked 12th) and Pat Burrell (’98, picked first overall).  Each of these players, outside of Floyd, were major components of the club that won the 2008 World Series.

No player the Phillies have drafted since Cole Hamels has had as much impact as Cole or the three of the four first-round picks preceding him (mentioned above). 

Could that be a direct correlation to where in the draft they are selecting, or is it simply luck of the draw?

Vance Worley was chosen with the 102nd overall selection in 2008, and while he has been a nice find, his future is anything but set in stone.  He could develop into the next Cole Hamels or simply be a flash in the pan.  Most likely, Worley will end up somewhere in between the two extremes.

The probability of finding impact talent outside the first round of the draft is too rare for the Phillies to pass up on their highest draft pick in a decade in order to sign a player with so many question marks.

I’m well versed on what the Phillies need going forward.  (While the team’s biggest fault in 2012 was the lack of a true eighth-inning shutdown reliever, it’s hard to believe it’s going to be an issue going forward.  Either the Phillies will sign a veteran setup reliever or one of their young arms, many of whom gained valuable experience in 2012, will step up and fill the void.)  They need a center fielder.  They need a right-handed power bat in the lineup.  And they need to get younger.

B.J. Upton fits all of those things and more: He can steal bases, plays good defense and despite his nearly seven full seasons in the major leagues, still has enormous upside.  I have no doubt that if the Phillies were to sign Upton, he would thrive in Philadelphia.  His power numbers would probably skyrocket playing in Citizens Bank Park, and until he gave them a reason not to, the fans would adore him.

But Upton is also a player who has struck out almost one out of every three at-bats in the major leagues, is a career .255 hitter and has never slugged over .500 in a season in which he’s gotten 500 at-bats.  

Is spending $75 million (which is what it will likely take to sign Upton) and losing a first-round draft pick worth the cost?  Upton has a career WAR (although it’s the stat I hate the most, because its premise is flawed and makes absolutely no sense) average of just 2.4 per season.

To me, it isn’t, and there are far better uses for both their money and draft pick.  The Phillies would be better served, both in 2013 and going forward, in bringing back Shane Victorino and signing a veteran right-handed bat like Torii Hunter to play right field. 

B.J. Upton would look great in center field next April.  However, the cost would be too great.  Paying the man is one thing, but doing so and giving up the opportunity to find the next Mike Trout is something else. 

Now that Tampa Bay has attached draft-pick compensation to B.J. Upton, please move on and find someone else.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Philadelphia Phillies have a payroll bordering on the obscene:  They owe tens of millions of dollars in guaranteed contracts to players who are unlikely to ever live up to them, have a rapidly aging roster and a rabid fanbase thirsty for another parade.

With all that going on—and a front office determined to continue filling seats at Citizens Bank Park—will the Phillies be able to significantly overhaul their roster while not missing a beat on the field?  

The odds say no, but if the events of the 2012 baseball season are any indication, nothing is impossible. Would anyone have believed the Red Sox could have moved as much payroll as they did?  

In this piece, I will examine a few outside-the-box trade ideas that will probably never occur, but that could dramatically reshape the Phillies’ roster for years to come.

Begin Slideshow

Do you have any friends who you absolutely adore, but hate talking to? I know I do. Whenever they call, I can’t seem to get off the phone fast enough.

That’s what it must be like for Ruben Amaro’s fellow general managers around Major League Baseball. 

Amaro has been in baseball his entire life and knows everyone.  However, when other GMs see his caller ID on their phones, they must cringe.

“Oh no, what does that man want now?” they all must say.

Whatever it is that Amaro does say to them must make them want to get off the phone quickly; they must be willing to give up practically anything to just shut him up. 

There’s no other explanation for how he continually gets the players he wants from the teams he wants by giving up the scraps he no longer needs.

For the second time in as many Julys, Amaro has “stolen” a player from the Houston Astros.

Reports were that he’d offered Jonathan Singleton and Jarred Cosart for the 28-year-old Hunter Pence a while back, but was flatly rejected. Then rumors started surfacing that Domonic Brown’s name was being floated around in trade talks for Pence, and many Phillies fans panicked. Why give up the future that is currently learning at the major league level, a player that is projected to be better than the one you’re acquiring?

Instead of parting with the one player he’d refused to in dealing for aces Cliff Lee, Roy Halladay, and Roy Oswalt, Amaro re-offered the package, included a couple of “players to be named later” (one of whom is rumored to be Double-A pitcher Josh Zeid), and wouldn’t let Astros GM Ed Wade off the phone until he accepted. 

Thus, the Phillies acquired Hunter Pence, who will be starting in Philadelphia’s right field beginning Saturday night.

Ruben Amaro has struck again! 

Once again he has gotten the player he targeted and only given up what he felt was expendable.

Now that he has done so, two questions have arisen: Do the Phillies have enough? If not, who will Amaro go after next?

As constructed, the Phillies have enough to potentially win the World Series. 

But before they dealt for Hunter Pence, the same could have been said. He’s an extra piece for a team that could have won the World Series without him. 

But he’s nice to have.

Now that the right-handed hitter they lacked is in the fold, what other piece or pieces do they go after? 

With Roy Oswalt seemingly on his way back to the rotation (and if history tells us anything, Oswalt is going to be dominant down the stretch and into the postseason), Vance Worley impersonating Roy Halladay, and the other aces performing well, the rotation is stacked for another deep run into October.

Once Placido Polanco returns from his injury, the Phillies will have nine everyday players for eight spots.  (The bet here is that Domonic Brown’s playing time gets cut down, as he has not produced as well expected and has actually cost the Phillies some games this year.)  

The only two places at which the Phillies really could use an upgrade are on the bench and in the bullpen. 

The bullpen has been strong all year, and with Brad Lidge back and showing his best stuff since 2008, it could get stronger. 

But it’s difficult to imagine the Phillies having 100-percent confidence in the abilities of Antonio Bastardo and Michael Stutes to get the biggest outs of the season under the hot lights of October. 

A veteran arm would be a tremendous addition, and with the market flooded with them, an acquisition shouldn’t be too hard to imagine.

Heath Bell and the like are probably out of the question, given payroll constraints and a dearth of prospects in the minor leagues.

But the Phillies could add a midlevel piece such as Tyler Clippard or Mike Gonzales. Some rumors put Octavio Dotel on the market as well, but nothing to tie the Phillies to him.

The Phillies definitely need some help on the bench. 

The only rumor floating around the internet is that Ruben Amaro has contacted the Minnesota Twins about the possibility of reacquiring Jim Thome.  The 40-year-old slugger is closing in on 600 home runs and would fit in with the Phillies much the way Matt Stairs did in 2008. Nothing would be sweeter than watching Thome launch a Brian Wilson fastball into McCovey Cove in the NLCS.

The Phillies are going to win the 2011 World Series.

I’ve believed that from the start of the season, and nothing I’ve seen has change my mind.

Ruben Amaro has his faults as a general manager, but he is aggressive and makes bold moves.  

With only hours left before the 2011 trading deadline, it will be interesting to see what other rabbit Amaro can pull out of his hat.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Cliff Lee has been fabulous for the Philadelphia Phillies, both this year and in 2009 when the team acquired him from the Cleveland Indians. 

Lee undoubtedly will be named the National League’s Pitcher of the Month for June after going 5-0 with a 0.21 ERA and finishing the month throwing three consecutive complete-game shutouts. He’s also third in the league in wins (and while many feel it is an overrated statistic, it is not completely useless) and leads the major leagues in shutouts. 

Other than not demanding the ball in Game 4 of the 2009 Fall Classic, nothing Cliff Lee has done for the Philadelphia Phillies has been anything less than spectacular.

However, his mere presence—and how it came to be—on the 2011 version of the Phillies has potentially cost them their ability to acquire the right-handed bat they need to hit behind Ryan Howard.  

Not that any of it is Lee’s fault.  

From day one Lee has been a stand-up guy, insisting that he wanted to spend the rest of his career in Philadelphia. 

When he made that statement after being dealt to Seattle, it could have been simply what any player in his position would have said.  When he happily smiled at the Phillies demise to the San Francisco Giants in the 2010 NLCS—while his Rangers were still alive—there is no question most of us in his situation would have done the same.  (Of course Lee probably would have been more satisfied had the Phillies reached the World Series and he beat them to capture the title.)  

But when Lee spurned higher and better offers from the Rangers and Yankees to return to Philadelphia, there remained no question Lee was sincere in his words after the Seattle trade.  

Cliff Lee truly never wanted to leave, and he never should have been shown the door by Phillies management. The argument that they needed to “replenish the farm system” was a valid one, but became obsolete the moment they dealt more prospects for Roy Oswalt only eight months later. 

No one except Philadelphia management knows if the motives for dealing Lee to Seattle were anything but what the team said they were. My hunch is it had something to do with finances, but with two straight World Series appearances and all those consecutive sellouts at Citizens Bank Park, there was no way they could sell that to the fans.

Penny Wise and Dollar Foolish

With the Phillies behind in the NL East race in 2010—and with Jamie Moyer, who’d been pitching as well as he had in years, lost for the season, and perhaps ever—the Phillies needed to another starting pitcher. 

They needed Cliff Lee (and probably tried to get him back).  

Instead they settled on Roy Oswalt, who pitched fabulously down the stretch and helped turn the Phillies’ season around.  They easily won the NL East and were poised to return to the World Series for the third consecutive season.  (No need to relive what happened next, is there?) 

However, the Oswalt trade cost the Phillies prospects and money—both of which could have been used to acquire the offensive force they now need.

Had the Phillies kept Lee all along, they would not have needed to trade for Oswalt. Who knows what an extension for Lee would have cost the team if he never reached free agency? 

Perhaps the Phillies would not have realized the mistake, and not gone to five or six years on his deal, and he would have left anyway.  Maybe he’d be a Yankee right now and the Phillies would have only Roy Halladay and Cole Hamels as their aces instead of their current four-headed monster. 

Or maybe it would have cost them less money and fewer years to get something done earlier, and they could have enticed Jayson Werth to stay (although not with the kind of money he received from Washington).  

Either way the Phillies would have more cash in their budget (whatever it actually may be) and enough prospects to get an offensive threat, like a Michael Young from Texas. 

Without Lee the Rangers would have liked to add another starter, and perhaps the Phillies and Rangers could have built a package around young lefty J.A. Happ (please don’t bring up his 2011 record—as of February it didn’t exist) or any of the other prospects Philadelphia dealt for Oswalt. 

Of course without trading Lee to Seattle, J.C. Ramirez, Tyson Gilles or Phillipe Aumont—who as early as next year may be closing games in Philadelphia—wouldn’t be with the organization. 

However, the trade in itself was flawed, and the Phillies easily could have gotten better by shopping Lee around. 

What would Minnesota—who has/had a fabulous farm system—have traded for Lee a year ago?  How about Boston?  Or Oakland? Billy Beane’s never scared to make a dramatic move, even from a big-money player in the last year of his deal. 

Or maybe Tampa Bay would have been willing to put together a package that rivaled or bettered what Seattle gave Philadelphia in order to make one last run at the New York/Boston-dominated the AL East before losing a significant portion of their veteran club.

Instead of making a “hush-hush” deal with Seattle—one that was probably easier to get accomplished quickly due to Philadelphia’s upper management’s ties to the Seattle front office—the Phillies could have either kept Lee or gotten a better return for their prized left-hander.

We know now it wasn’t about budget, that the Phillies could have afforded to retain Lee.  We don’t know if they believed it at the time, however, and can’t make judgments either way without all the facts—something we fans will never have access to.

Of course, even if the Phillies had kept Lee and had a lead in the division at the trading deadline last year, they may have dealt for Oswalt.  After all, with the cash the Astros are paying to help subsidize Oswalt’s contract and the marginal prospects Houston required in return, it’s not out of the question that the Phillies would have made the move anyway.  Getting Oswalt was too good of a deal to pass up, regardless of his injury this year.

Hindsight is 20/20, however, and there were better ways for it all to play out.  The Phillies may or may not be able to acquire an impact hitter during the season, and that may or may not affect them come October.  

If they win the World Series, all will be forgotten. 

However, if they come up short; if they cannot get that clutch hit that propels them to another parade and ensures that another banner hangs aloft in Citizens Bank Park, fans and management are going to be left questioning whether the moves made in December 2009—and what they led to over the next several months—were the correct ones.

If it were my choice all along—and the budget is what it is—I’d have kept Lee and still dealt for Oswalt, regardless of offensive holes. 

The Phillies are going to play in October, and they’re better off with Halladay, Lee, Hamels, and Oswalt to pitch in a series than they are with Michael Young or Michael Cuddyer paying left-field. 

But we shall see.  Again, hindsight is 20/20.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Joe Halverson recently wrote a solid piece discussing how rumors of an Albert Pujols trade make no sense, much like those surrounded Felix Hernandez of the Seattle Mariners.  Mr. Halverson links the two players and explains why Albert Pujols will not be traded this season. 

However, as a fan of baseball (not a Cardinals fan, nor of any team potentially linked to him in free agency this coming offseason) and someone who tries to look at the bigger picture of Major League Baseball, its economic climate and landscape, I am hear to dispute that.

Felix Hernandez will not be traded. There, I said it.  He is the best pitcher in the American League, won’t turn 26 until the start of next season and is under contract and team control through the 2014 season. 

For Seattle to trade King Felix, they would have to be completely overwhelmed in a trade—imagine two to three times the value Texas got for Mark Teixeira from Atlanta a few seasons ago.

But Felix Herandez and the Seattle Mariners are in a much different position than Albert Pujols and the St. Louis Cardinals.

First let’s start off with the simple explanation most fans give as to why Albert Pujols will not be traded: Pujols himself has publicly stated that he will veto any trade the Cardinals present him with.  Therefore he is not going anywhere, will remain in a Cardinal uniform through the end of the season and then we’ll see what happens in free agency.  So there’s really no point in this article, is there?  

Well, there is.  How many athletes with veto power—whether as a 10 and 5 player or its written into their contract—have stated “I won’t accept a trade anywhere” and then turn around do that very thing when it suits them? 

Albert Pujols publicly stating he won’t accept any trade has little value until the Cardinals actually present him with a trade destination and he turns them down.  Until then, it’s just mindless media chatter.

Why would the Cardinals considering dealing the game’s best player, their most popular attraction, and the best right-handed hitter the game has seen in decades? 

For a number of reasons. 

Before the St. Louis Cardinals—or any other professional sports team—are a baseball team, they are a business.  The object of that business is not to win World Series and throw parades in the streets, but to put people in the stands, sell tickets, jerseys, beers and commercial spots or TV and radio broadcasts. 

The object is to make money first; winning comes second.  (This point is indisputable; anyone who wants to try claiming such and such team chose winning over making money and “lost” cash to try to do it—please come with facts, that is the actual financial accounting of said team, not just some speculative report in the media from a source that has as little access to the clubs inside financial information that you or I do).

Albert Pujols is an investment in that business and has paid off handsomely for the Cardinals.  Their return is as good as it gets in professional sports.  Pujols has been the game’s best hitter since Barry Bonds retired, won a batting title, a couple of home runs crowns, two gold gloves, been a major cog in two World Series runs and is among the offensive leaders in practically everything every year.  And Pujols has been paid very generously for those services as well.  He’s made over $100 million in his 11 brilliant seasons with the Cardinals.

Speculation is that Pujols will be looking to more than double that figure in his next contract, with the possible starting point in negotiations even triple that. 

Can the St. Louis Cardinals, Major League Baseball or even Albert Pujols, himself, expect that a player turning 32 before the start of next season to be worth up to three times the amount of money he made the previous eleven seasons when he was younger and had less wear and tear on his body?  

No, it is not realistic.  Pujols is a tremendous player.  He’s had one of the finest first 11 years of a career that baseball has ever seen.  However, it can almost be written in stone that his next 10 or 11 seasons will not be nearly as productive, not when he’d pass the 35 and 40 year milestones during that time. 

Paying Pujols $30 million dollars (or more) per season when he’s 30 years old, the most feared hitter in the game and constantly leading many offensive statistical categories can be seen as reasonable by many fans and teams.  However, paying a player that amount at age 38 or 39 when he is a shell of his former self will be disturbing. 

The St. Louis Cardinals are a first-class organization.  Housed in a relatively small market they have been run profoundly well for decades, never far away from competing for championships nor disappointing a loyal fan-base.  Why would a team so efficiently run risk investing upwards of $300 million in a player they know will not be as productive as the one they spent $100 million one from 2001-2011?  They wouldn’t, and that’s most likely why contract extension talks broke down this spring.  

Pujols has a number in mind, wants to get paid what he feels he’s worth and will get it—either from the Cardinals or someone else.  Because in professional sports us fans must have learned by now that it’s not about loyalty to the fans, to teams or even about winning.  It’s about the almighty dollar, and that is what drives both players and teams to make the choices they do. 

Of course there are some exceptions, but they are few and far between.  And never about enough money—percentage-wise anyway—to be taken seriously.

The Cardinals know they will not be able to keep Pujols after this season.  Oh, they may very well be capable of affording his $30 million-plus annual salary as Joe Halverson pointed out.  He has cited Forbes for income-related issues, and while they do not have full-access, nor 100 percent accuracy, to the clubs finances, it’s an excellent starting point. 

His next contract may fit within their financial structure and they may still profit—cutting costs elsewhere, perhaps—but the investment makes no sense even if they can afford it.  Giving Pujols the contract he speculatively wants is bad business, and the Cardinals are not likely to do it.

What choices does that leave?  Rolling the dice, keeping Pujols through the end of the season, and then offering him arbitration and hoping to re-sign him at a rate they feel works for them?  Getting a couple of draft picks if and when he signs with another team?  Or trade him to a team that gives them more value than a potential draft pick(s) can?

Exploring trade options makes the most sense for the team.  Yes, they are in first place in their division and playing well.  A trade of their best player would signal waving a white flag and throwing in the towel on another season in which the Cardinals are among the game’s best. 

However, even Tony LaRussa and upper management must realize that even if the Cardinals hold on and win their division, they simply do not have the pitching to compete with the game’s best teams in October. 

With Kyle Lohse anchoring the rotation, they stack up unfavorably against the Phillies, Giants, Braves, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.  More than likely they’d lose any series against the top teams in baseball and then have to watch Pujols walk away for only draft picks.

I’m not underrating draft picks here, either.  They are a great way to build a franchise.  Tampa Bay and Minnesota have shown what teams can do when equipped with ammunition in the June draft. 

However, those teams spent many years drafting near the top of the board, something St. Louis is not used to, nor would get the chance to when and if Pujols signs with another team.  The not so guarded secret is that when a Type-A free agent signs with another team, the team losing their player is not guaranteed a first round pick. 

If the signing team picks in the top half of baseball’s annual draft, their slot is protected, and instead only give up a second-rounder, along with baseball kicking in a compensation round pick between the first and second rounds.  There is a big difference between the 10th pick in the draft and the 35th pick. 

When Tampa Bay and Minnesota began building their franchises, they did so with top of the round picks like David Price and Joe Mauer—each Top 5 selections.  A team can get lucky in the draft—Pujols in the 13th round for instance—but those are few and far between. 

Most of the game’s best players are picked in the top half of the draft, and the Cardinals will not receive a choice there.  The Cubs are rumored to be the front-runners for Pujols’ services after this season and if they do sign him, the Cardinals will be given their second round selection, not their first.  Two picks in the draft after 58 of the best 60 players are taken just doesn’t sound fair for a player of Pujols’ caliber, does it? 

That is why exploring a trade for Pujols makes the most sense for the Cardinals.  They will take a hit—both on the field and with their fans.  However, St. Louis is probably the only city that could get away with dealing their best player.  They have arguable the best and most loyal fan-base in sports and have the luxury of having a team that that is constantly in contention. 

Trading Albert Pujols, while an unpopular choice, will only continue the winning ways St. Louis has exhibited in its long history in baseball.  The haul they will ask for—and be able to get—will more than outplay what they will receive as draft picks when Pujols inevitably leaves next winter.

There will be many teams lining up to trade for Pujols, even if its just a two-month rental.  The Giants, Braves, Marlins, Yankees, Rays or Indians come to mind.  All are in contention, all are in need of an extra push to help them to a possible World Series championship.  Why would they risk the potential windfall a World Series Championship can bring them by deciding to hold on to prospects who are just that—prospects that may never pan out.

Pujols may very well spend the season in St. Louis, they may win their division and shock baseball (again) and win another World Championship and Pujols is convinced to stay in the only major league city he’s ever played for. 

He may very well mean it when he says he will veto any trade, and the Cardinals may mean it when they say they have no intention of trading him. 

However, until the trading deadline comes and goes without Pujols being moved, clubs can be expected to call St. Louis and inquire about his availability—it behooves the Cardinals to at least listen.  No one knows what will come of those conversations until they come to an end.  

Then the baseball world will know whether or not Pujols will be a Cardinal the entire 2011 season.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The day a lot of fans have been waiting for has arrived.  On the day the world is supposed to end, according to some, the Phillies have announced that prized prospect Dominic Brown will be returning to the big league club to provide some offensive punch for a team that’s struggling to not only score runs but to simply get base hits.

It appears that Phillies manager Charlie Manuel and GM Ruben Amaro disagreed about calling up Brown so early, with the GM convinced more time in Triple A would do the youngster some good.  Manuel, who has a success of bringing young players, especially those with potentially prolific bats, along at a pace that makes their transition to the major leagues successful, wanted the kid up here as soon as possible.  

The stalemate between the two men ended when Amaro folded his hand and issued the call-up order to Lehigh Valley.

Dominic Brown is once again a Phillie.  Barring something strange happening or complete failure on his part it will be the last time Brown is “called up” from the minor leagues.  He should be here to stay, and Phillies fans everywhere hope he lives up to the hype.  

However, was it a good idea to call him up at this precise moment?  Yes, the Phillies recently dropped four straight and five of six.  They have loosened their grip on first place in the National League East, and their dominant pitching can only carry them so far.  

But Pennants cannot be won in April, May and June.  They can surely be lost but despite the panic surrounding their offensive (un)production they have in no way damaged their quest for a third pennant in four years.  

Promoting Dominic Brown today is a mistake.  It could have waited a week or two, when that other player toying around in the minor leagues is ready to return as well.  Brown is a fantastic talent.  He’s got all the tools to succeed in the major leagues and may very well have a superstar career.  In a couple of years he may be the face of the franchise and one of the best players in the National League, he’s that talented.  

However, bringing him up now is asking him to be savior, and that’s a lot of pressure to put on a 23-year-old.  The Phillies will say all the right things, to the media, to the players and especially to Brown himself.  

They will tell anyone who will listen that Brown will be eased in, that there is not much expected of him, and they will truly mean it and believe it themselves.  But it’s the fans and the media who will expect Brown to carry the team offensively.

He will be under extreme scrutiny and his every move will be watched by hundred of thousands. The first moment he steps in the batter’s box at Citizens Bank Park he will be greeted with a standing ovation, and the love fest will continue for a while.  

But what happens the moment he begins to struggle, as all rookies and young players do? What happens when he goes 2-for-34 and strikes out 20 times?  What about when he overthrows the cutoff man attempting to show off his arm and nail a runner at the plate and the winning run scores?  Will fans continue to give him standing ovations as the savior, or write him off as quickly as they written off Raul Ibanez and Ben Francisco?  Time will tell.

Dominic Brown should have been called up this year.  If he hadn’t have gotten hurt, he more than likely would have made the big-league club out of spring training.  However, once he was sent to the minors the best time to call him up would have been at the same time Chase Utley is activated from the disabled list.  

Between the two, Utley is the star and would have garnered the media and fans attention either way.  Brown’s return to Philly would have been a story but the BIGGER story would have been Utley, and he could have been eased into spotlight.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Is it possible to say a player is arguably the most overrated athlete ever to play professional sports and yet still believe his accomplishments make him a surefire first-ballot Hall of Famer?  Yes it is, and that player is Yankees legend Derek Jeter.

It seems every day Jeter is amassing some new milestone, passing another all-time great on some statistical chart and picking up yet another postseason honor.  He’s already the Yankees’ career leader in hits, and ranks highly on a number of other offensive charts.  By the time he retires, Derek Jeter will likely have compiled more than 3,000 hits, 250 home runs, 350 stolen bases and scored better than 2,000 runs.

The back of his baseball card is littered with statistics that spell out his address in Cooperstown.  Add in his multiple Gold Glove awards (whether or not you feel he deserved them), numerous All-Star appearances and the fact that he’s looking to begin filling his second hand with World Championship rings, and it appears that No. 2 might be one of the best players to ever grace the fields of Major League Baseball.

But he’s not.

Derek Jeter is merely a very good player who benefited greatly from being drafted by the right team, at the right time, playing in the right city.  Had he been drafted by any other team his legacy would be vastly different.  For starters, he would not be as recognizable, nor as well-paid—both on and off the field—as he is.  And he likely would not have spent the majority of his career surrounded and protected in a lineup filled with the game’s best and highest paid player.  Derek Jeter’s greatness is more a matter of happenstance.

To be fair, Jeter is a great player.  He plays the game’s second most difficult position and plays it well.  He’s a .314 career hitter with some power and speed, and seems to come up big when it matters most.  Most Yankee fans will argue that it’s what he does outside of statistics that makes Derek Jeter great.  He’s a leader; a team player more concerned with winning than anything else.  He will do whatever it takes to win, giving up his body and anything else for that “W.” 

His defensive play in Oakland a decade ago is legendary.  There is no defensible (pun intended) reason for a shortstop to be at that position on the field other than genius anticipation.  His diving play into the stands at newer-old Yankee Stadium in a mid-season game against the hated Red Sox, shows his guts and determination.  The home run he launched against Arizona on November 1, 2001 earned him the nickname “Mr. November.”  And he’s one of baseball’s good guys.

However, Jeter has never had to be “they guy”; he’s always been surrounded by players and pitchers better than him who have carried the majority of the load.  He’s never been the best player at his position, on his team or in the game.  He’s been given the benefit of the doubt all throughout his career by umpires, managers, players and fans.  Buck Showalter was correct to call him out.

Jeter has never been best at anything baseball-wise except extracting the most dollars out of the least ability and production.  (Compare Jeter’s earnings with his contemporaries.  Who in his pay-class have produced less?)  And when his team acquired a better player, both offensively and defensively at his position, Jeter showed no signs of being willing to give up his sacred shortstop spot.  (At 36-years-old and a few steps slower, he seems insulted the Yankees would suggest he’d ever have to give up a position meant for players a decade younger.)

If I were building a team from the ground up and had a chance to have Derek Jeter, I wouldn’t hesitate to gobble him up.  He’s a very good player who produces when needed.  He’s a clutch hitter who averages 120 runs per year (although getting more than 600 plate appearances in the lineups Jeter’s played in, he better score that many runs), and at one point was a solid defensive shortstop.  

Where would Jeter’s career be if he was drafted by the Mariners?  Or the Cardinals?  Would he be as successful or revered as Rodriguez and Pujols are?  No, because he’s not as good.  Where would Jeter be if he weren’t surrounded in a lineup with great hitters and players?  Without the likes of Mariano Rivera, David Cone, Andy Pettitte, Jimmy Key and CC Sabathia, would he have five World Series rings?  Not likely.

Derek Jeter is and was a great player.  He’s got a spot reserved for him in Cooperstown; a day at Yankee Stadium to have his jersey retired and a monument erected in left-center field.  However he’s not Babe Ruth.  He’s not even Barry Bonds or Alex Rodriguez (and we cannot be completely sure who did and did not use performance enhancing drugs; we know Bonds and Rodriguez did, but cannot be one hundred percent sure Jeter didn’t).

Derek Jeter is, simply put, slightly better than Ryne Sandberg, which is not a bad thing.  A very good, even great, player who winds up in Cooperstown one day.  But he’s not an all-time great, not one of the game’s legends, and for that he’s overrated.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Originally, the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York was created to honor the best and most important people in the game’s history. The first class of players—Babe Ruth, Honus Wagner, Christy Mathewson, Walter Johnson and Ty Cobb—are some of the biggest names the game has ever seen (how Cy Young was omitted from selection that first year is baffling, given his credentials). 

In the decades that have passed since 1936 there have been many more entrants elected to the sacred hallways of Cooperstown, most deserving the honor.

However people are elected for different reasons and different times, and not voting system is perfect.  Therefore sometimes those who deserve entry are overlooked for one reason or another, and in other cases people whose merits lack Hall of Fame worthiness are enshrined.

Today there are more ways to get elected to the Hall of Fame then ever before.  Players have twenty years from the time they retire to be elected by the Baseball Writer’s Association of America (BBWAA).  If they fail to receive the necessary 75 percent of votes in all 15 years on the ballot (after waiting the five-year hiatus post retirement) they are dropped from the ballot. 

Any player receiving less than 5 percent of the votes in any given year on the ballot is also dropped.  However that is not the end of their chances. A special group set up by baseball and the Hall of Fame, known as the “Veterans Committee,” also votes each year to elect players, executives, umpires and managers of the game who otherwise would not be elected.

Players today also benefit from circumstances players of the past did not—the designated hitter rule, for instance. Players of yesteryear did not have the opportunity to extend their careers by taking off three-quarters of the game while still padding their offensive statistics. And while we have not come up yet on all the bigger named PED users like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa and the like, the enhancement of medicine has not hurt today’s player either.

This is a look a the top-10 players honored with a plaque in Cooperstown that gained entry when their play on the field did not merit it. Managers, executives and umpires are not factored in. Neither are Negro League players or anyone who’s career ended prior to the modern era (1901-current).

Begin Slideshow

Performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) have tarnished the last twenty years of Major League Baseball, and that is sad.  After witnessing perhaps the greatest era of individual performance in the game’s history during the last twenty years or so, we are forced to live with the reality that a lot of those accomplishments are tainted.  The problem now faced by those who love and respect the game is their lack of full knowledge of which of those accomplishments, of the records attained, are tainted and which are clean.  And how do we rank the players involved?  Where will history judge them many years down the line?  Will history remember the steroid scandal and its participants in the same light as the Black Sox Scandal of 1919, or compare it more favorably to the rampant use of amphetamines by players of the 1970’s and 1980’s?

We all know who the primary suspects are.  Most fans can recite names of players implicated—or strongly suspected—of using PEDs.  Anyone with a computer and internet connected can pull up the Mitchell Report and read its findings.  The issue then becomes how does baseball, its fans and the media treat those players.  Do we choose to ignore their accomplishments, ban their entry into the Hall of Fame and scrape the record books of them, or do we look the other way and instead choose to ignore how they achieved their accomplishments?

More than likely players whose on-field accomplishments normally would have given them easy entrance to Cooperstown will be left on the outside looking in because of their link to PEDs.  In any other era players with 583 home runs or 3020 hits and tenth in career total bases would be no-brainer first-ballot Hall of Famers.  However, Mark McGwire’s name appeared on barely a quarter of the ballots his first year and has been losing ground since, and Rafael Palmeiro’s initial time on the ballot resulted in a showing that was nothing short of embarrassing for a player with his statistical resume.  At this point he will be lucky to reach the ballot a third time.

McGwire and Palmeiro are not likely to ever gain entrance into the Hall of Fame without purchasing a ticket.  Neither are Sammy Sosa, Gary Sheffield, Andy Pettite and countless others who at least made a case for induction with their on-field play.  While Sosa ranks seventh all-time in home runs and is the only player in history with three seasons of 60 or more home runs, his case for the Hall of Fame is tainted.  Prior to the magical 1998 season, Sosa was a very good major league player.  He had four seasons of at least 30 home runs and was a force in the Cubs lineup.  But that wasn’t enough to get him to Cooperstown.  Even if he doubled his career accomplishments pre-1998 and added a couple of MVP trophies it still wouldn’t have been enough—just ask Dale Murphy.  Were the PEDs Sosa is suspected of using able to take him out of Dale Murphy’s stratosphere and push him squarely into Willie Mays’?  The baseball world will never know for sure, but the Hall of Fame is not ever going to raise a plaque honoring Sammy Sosa either.

But what about Barry Bonds?  Or Roger Clemens?  Do either—or both—deserve entry into baseball immortality?  The Baseball Writers Association of America has clearly shown it will draw a line for players they feel only achieved Hall of Fame worthy careers through natural methods.  McGwire was a one-dimensional player whose career could have ended without his admitted use of steroids; Palmeiro was a very good player who was never truly great; even with the use of PEDs, Pettite is at best a borderline case to make the Hall of Fame.  But what about players who had Hall of Fame careers before entering the world of PEDs?

Barry Bonds was a five-tool player from the start of his career.  Before turning 30 years old he was already a home run champion, an All-Star, a three-time MVP and multiple gold glove winner.  He was the game’s best and highest paid player, and that continued throughout the 1990’s.  He consistently batted near .300, slugged 35 or more home runs and drove in better than 100 runs yearly.  He was a five-time member of the 30/30 (home runs and stolen bases) club and once reached the 40/40 plateau.

Bonds’ suspected PED usage began around 1999, when McGwire and Sosa were getting all the accolades for passing Roger Maris’ single season home run record.  Bonds’ numbers post-1999 are nothing short of ridiculous, and rivaled only in baseball history by Babe Ruth.  Including those numbers in his overall career statistics and Bonds is second greatest offensive player to ever wear the uniform.  However are his 14 years prior—1986-1999—enough to justify induction into the Hall of Fame?

Yes, they are.

Bonds may not have reached the 500 home run club, stolen 500 bases and wasn’t knocking on the doors of 3000 hits or 2000 RBIs but he was a Hall of Fame player.  He was a .288 career hitter, the only member of the 400/400 club, had an on-base-plus slugging percentage (OPS) higher than Mel Ott, Ralph Kiner, Willie Mays, Frank Robinson and Ken Griffey Jr., and was the all-time leader in intentional walks.

Bonds was a feared hitter, a great defender and the game’s best all-around player.  Even without the help of PEDs he surely would have reached 500 home runs and been a no doubt Hall of Fame player.  But he did not need to get there, just as Sandy Koufax did not need 300 victories for his entrance.  Bonds was a Hall of Fame player had his career ended in 1999 and he avoided all the PED talk and speculation that his career was tainted.

Roger Clemens’ case for the Hall of Fame is more questionable, however.  After leaving Boston for Toronto following the 1996 season he experienced a career rebirth.  In the next 11 seasons with Toronto, New York and Houston Clemens nearly doubled his win total, added four more Cy Young’s to his mantel and reached the top 10 in wins, strikeouts and WAR.

Was the offseason of 1996, after being spurned by the Red Sox and criticized by their general manager, Dan Duquette, the point in Clemens’ career when he began his involvement with PEDs?  If so, were his 13 years in Boston enough to justify his entrance into the Hall of Fame?

It is close, but not likely.

He won 192 games, struck out better than 2500 hundred batters and was a three-time Cy Young winner with an MVP to boot.  He was a feared and dominant pitcher, suffering only two losing seasons and constantly was among the league leaders in wins, ERA and opponents batting.  But it still wasn’t enough.  He was not as dominant as Sandy Koufax or Pedro Martinez, and did not reach the career totals of Bert Blyleven or Robin Roberts.  Without his second wind the career of Roger Clemens is only slightly better than that of David Cone or Orel Hershiser, neither of whom is a Hall of Fame player.

Both Roger Clemens’ and Barry Bonds’ careers would have gone on without their involvement with PED’s.  They would have played more years and games and added to their resumes.  But Clemens clearly needed that brilliance of the second half of his career to get to the Hall of Fame, and if those years were tainted by PED usage, then Clemens does not deserve his plaque.  Remember at one point Dwight Gooden was considered the better pitcher of the two early in their careers.

Very few players involved with performance enhancing drugs will be enshrined in the Cooperstown Museum, and most do not deserve it.  If they were good enough players to get into the Hall of Fame than they would not have needed extra, illegal help to get there; the statistics that would get them there are tainted and they do not belong.  However, as with every rule in existence there is always an exception, and the only one I can find in baseball is Barry Bonds.  He was a jerk, a suspected cheater and a lot of other things that shouldn’t be mentioned, but he was also a Hall of Fame player before performance enhancing drugs, and thereby should still be honored in Cooperstown.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

It is almost a foregone conclusion that, barring catastrophic failures, Alex Rodriguez will replace Barry Bonds as baseball’s all-time home run leader.  After he does, however, is there any other current player with a realistic chance of reaching 784 (Rodriguez’s projected total) and beyond?

Could that player be Albert Pujols?

Possibly, but it’s not likely.

Pujols is the greatest player of his generation and one of the best players of all time.  He does everything—hits for average and power, fields his position and is a leader on and off the field.  He has already won a World Series championship, has not been scarred by baseball’s steroid scandal or any other issues. 

In a world that is filled with controversy Pujols has risen above it all and become baseball’s Mr. Perfect.  He just won’t be its career home run champion no matter how quickly he is climbing the ladder now.  Likely he will not reach second, third or even fourth on the all-time list.  Fifth place, slightly ahead of Willie Mays, is where Pujols will finish up, struggling near the end of his career and failing to reach 700 home runs.

Sure Pujols has the ability, the power and the greatness to get there.  He has all the tools and should have the opportunity to chase Bonds and Rodriguez.  However he cannot fight the one obstacle surely to get him as it has gotten countless others: Father Time.  There is simply not enough time left in Pujols’ great career to reach that hallowed mark. 

He is 31 years old and has slugged 408 home runs; he is 354 shy of Bonds and 376 away from Alex Rodriguez’ projected total.  With eight to 10 years left—only four of them prime—does Pujols have enough time left to nearly double his already monstrous home run total?  No, and history proves that.

In the careers of baseball players, age 35 has proven to be a pivotal year.  A player’s career can often be broken down into three categories: the younger years (from their debut up to age 26), the prime years (ages 27 through 34) and the decline (35 and beyond).  Baseball’s top 20 career home run leaders have combined for 11,941 home runs.  They have also hit 78 percent, or 9,347 of those home runs, before the season in which they turned 35. 

Only three players in history have even topped 200 after that pivotal year (Bonds, 284; Hank Aaron, 245; Rafael Palmeiro, 208).  In the non-steroid eras no player has ever increased their average home run production after turning 35.  (Babe Ruth did, as his yearly average up to age 35 is skewed by spending his first five seasons primarily as a pitcher, and only coming to the plate a combined 678 times.)

Alex Rodriguez is 35 years old this year and has 613 career home runs.  His production, whatever caused it, has been declining since his 31st birthday.  Breaking his career into five-year trends shows exactly what history teaches us.  He is very good at first, averaging 38.6 home runs per season, and then he’s great, running his average season total up to 48 and then very good again, duplicating his 38.6 number for the next five seasons.  Breaking it down further, into three-year trends, Rodriguez’s production begins at 33.6 home runs per season, reaches a high of 46.6 and then begins falling again, reaching as low as 31.6 home runs per season as the steady, inevitable decline begins. 

Following the same trends Rodriguez has set for himself, he will see his three-year arcs fall from 31.6 to 30.9 to 21.4 before finally finishing off his career with the lowest total of his career, 14, in his final season, 2017.  He will have passed Bonds a year or two before, but will not reach 800.  Sadahaur Oh’s world record of 868 from the Japanese league is not in jeopardy.

Albert Pujols begins his 11th season of major baseball at age 31 and he has 408 career home runs.  That is 56 fewer than Rodriguez had when he began play in the season he turned 31. 

Pujols’ three-year trends are also similar, beginning at 41.3 home runs per season his first three years and peaking at 45.3.  He hasn’t reached Rodriguez’s season high (57), but he hasn’t bottomed out as low (23) either.  Pujols has been more consistent and should remain so, but even he cannot fight time.  Eventually the decline, as seen by every other player to play the game, will begin and that day is approaching faster than any of us realize.

Rodriguez’s decline may have been sped up by mitigating factors—steroids, the degenerative hip problem he had surgery to repair a few seasons ago—Pujols may or may not face in his career.  Following Rodriguez’s career decline rate and projecting Pujols’ may not be perfectly accurate, but it’s worth comparing Pujols against his contemporaries rather than against the likes of Willie Mays (who hit only 134 of his 660 career home runs after turning 35) or Frank Robinson (who hit 111 of his 586 home runs after age 34) or any other player from decades before.  And Rodriguez’s production has not fallen completely, the way Ken Griffey Jr.’s did because of all the injuries he suffered.

If Pujols suffers the same type of decline rate that Rodriguez has experienced his three-year trends will fall from 39.3 home runs per season to 27.1 to 26.3 to 18.1 to his final season in which he hits 13 (I’m giving Pujols another 10 years of play, as that is apparently the length of contract he is looking for).  That will leave Pujols with a career home run total of 633, only good for sixth all time. 

However since Pujols may not face some of the issues Alex Rodriguez has, his decline rate may be slower.  Giving Pujols the benefit of the doubt and assuming he keeps up his production longer, we can cut his decline rate in half, giving him the three-year home run trends that follow: 39.3 to 33.4 to 32.6 to 27.7 to 22 in his final year, at age 30.  That gives Pujols a healthy total of 742 home runs, within striking distance of Bonds and just 43 shy of breaking the all-time mark.  He may hang around, even with dwindling skills and a body breaking down, to attempt to reach the biggest number in sports.

More likely however Pujols will see his decline fall somewhere in between the two arcs listed, so let’s split the difference and say he finishes with 688 home runs—good enough for elite status, a place in Cooperstown, but not within striking distance of baseball immortality.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com