After Descalso’s Tuesday hit, catcher Gerald Laird was shown in the dugout rubbing the fingers on his non-broken hand together in the universal symbol for money.

“We call him D-Money,” manager Tony La Russa said about Descalso after Tuesday’s win.

This season, Descalso has now driven in nine runs from the seventh inning on with the game tied or the Cardinals down a run. This is generically called a “late and close” situation.

I asked researcher Tom Orf to put Descalso’s early-season, late-game feats into some historical perspective.

In the last 60 years, only ten Cardinals had collected at least seven late and close RBI through the end of May. Descalso makes the 11^th player to do so.

With six games to go in the month, Descalso needs just two more late and close RBI to pass his teammate Albert Pujols and join his hitting coach Mark McGwire at the top of the list as the most productive early-season, late-game Cardinal since at least 1950.

Big Mac collected 11 RBI to kick off his record-breaking 70-home run season of 1998. Pujols had ten early-late RBI in what went on to become the Cardinals World Championship season of 2006.

Descalso may not reach those kinds of heights this season, but his success in crucial situations still deserves notice.

St. Louis Cardinals, late and close RBI, through end of May, 1950-present

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

In the 2011 Baseball Hall of Fame voting announced Wednesday, former St. Louis Cardinals home run hero Mark McGwire saw his total drop under 20 percent for the first time in his five years on the Baseball Writers’ Association of America ballot.

In the 12 months since the previous vote, McGwire had been more active than in the previous four years combined. He came out of a long seclusion, admitted steroids use in his past and returned to the game as hitting coach for the Cardinals.

So much has already been written on the subject that I had not planned to add to it today. However, I read a pre-announcement piece by Derrick Goold at the Post-Dispatch today that moved me to comment.

Goold analyzed the McGwire situation, past and present, in considerable detail, but in my view, painted Big Mac’s steroids admission and reaction to it in black and white terms.

My read is that by insisting that his steroid use did not affect his results on the field, McGwire left a gray area, effectively negating his admission. The way his words were chosen was seen by some as being less than fully sincere and honest. There was also no mention of the carefully-crafted public relations campaign behind McGwire’s return.

These important aspects of the situation and their potential impact on Hall voters were not explored in Goold’s article.

The 2011 Hall of Fame results would seem to confirm that coming out – or at least the way McGwire chose to come out – was ineffective in terms of him gaining support among the ten-plus year members of the BBWAA.

Goold also discusses Houston’s Jeff Bagwell, suspected by some of steroid use, but never caught at anything. Bagwell recently felt the need to come out and deny the rumors directly, something Big Mac and Rafael Palmeiro once did as well.

The writer predicted that due to the suspicion alone, Bagwell would only “get a slim percentage of the vote” this year, his first time eligible. That did not turn out to be the case.

Bagwell received 41.7 percent support. While far short of the 75 percent needed for election, it was a solid showing. McGwire finished with 19.8 percent, a drop of almost four percent from 2010. Interestingly, former Cardinal Larry Walker debuted at 20.3 percent, just ahead of Big Mac.

Palmeiro, with Hall of Fame-caliber numbers, but also a failed drug test and a hollow denial as major black marks against him, had just 11 percent support in his first year on the ballot.

Had McGwire been a normal case, one would have expected to see his vote total rise over time, but as we know, this is not business as usual. It is a very unique situation, different from Bagwell, Palmeiro and all the others.

There is one fact that cannot be debated. McGwire’s Hall trajectory is not positive. He seems to be running out of chances to try to make it right.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

What many, myself included, thought would be one of the biggest ongoing stories of the year for the St. Louis Cardinals, the return of Mark McGwire, did not have staying power. The story was on fire as the year began, but interest cooled substantially by the time the 2010 regular season was underway.

On October 26, 2009, the Cardinals announced that Big Mac was coming out of self–imposed retirement to become their full-time major league hitting coach. McGwire was not present at the news conference. As the calendar flipped to 2010, over two months had passed with no word from the ex-slugger about his present – or his past.

The results of the annual voting for Baseball’s Hall of Fame were announced on January 6, 2010. McGwire’s support remained below 25 percent in his fourth of 15 possible years on the ballot.

On January 7, McGwire’s boss and biggest supporter, manager Tony La Russa, fantasized about the prospect of activating the 46-year-old for use as a pinch-hitter during the final month of the season. La Russa quickly backtracked, calling it “half-joking, half-serious” before letting it quietly drop.

Four days later, the first step in McGwire’s carefully-crafted re-entry orchestrated by former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer began with an hour-long interview with Bob Costas on MLB Network followed by one-on-one calls to selected media members. The ex-slugger admitted past steroids use for the first time, telling Costas and millions watching on television that it was “the stupidest thing I ever did.”

Yet the confession was not entirely satisfying to many. McGwire insisted his only reason for using over a multi-year period was to help recover from injury. Further, he would not accept the common supposition that steroids positively affected his strength and his on-field results.

The next step in McGwire’s return was a speech at the team’s Winter Warm-Up event over Martin Luther King Jr. weekend that was prefaced by a standing ovation from forgiving Cardinals fans.

Even his area support was not universal. In March, Missouri lawmakers initiated proceedings to rename a six-mile section of Interstate 70 in St. Louis from “Mark McGwire Highway” to “Mark Twain Highway”.  The bill passed in both the Senate and House and was signed into law by Governor Jay Nixon in July.

During Winter Warm-Up, scores of national and local scribes and photographers were upset over a hastily and clumsily orchestrated media session that was held at the end of a crowded hotel hallway. In terms of Big Mac’s remarks, nothing new was offered.

This created raised anticipation for the opening of spring training, given the brief January session did not allow the national media full access to McGwire. As camp opened, special precautions were initiated to limit access to the new hitting coach. After McGwire spoke with scribes several times, repeating the same messages as before, the novelty quickly wore off. He then moved into business as usual mode.

During the summer, questions over the level of use of video scouting by Cardinals hitters came to light after McGwire stated his feelings that the approach was being overly-relied upon.

On the field, the members of McGwire’s offense collectively scored six more runs in 2010 than in 2009 while maintaining a flat batting average and on-base percentage – in a year in which hitting was down across the game. La Russa praised his new coach’s job performance.

Critics suggested periods of offensive inconsistency were masked in the full-season numbers. One key area of disappointment was in the middle infield, where Skip Schumaker and Brendan Ryan were McGwire pupils even prior to his hiring by the club.

After his wife gave birth to triplets in June, McGwire delivered increasingly mixed signals about his interest in returning for a second season. In an unusual move, the club announced La Russa’s new contract on October 18, but did not divulge the names of his coaches until one week later. When the 2011 staff was introduced, the incumbent hitting coach was among them.

McGwire’s second year in the job should be quieter than the first.

Link to The Cardinal Nation Blog’s top 20 stories of the year countdown

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

Over on the main The Cardinal Nation site on Sunday, the feature article was from friend and fellow SABR member Bill Gilbert. It handicaps the chances of the former Major League Baseball players on this year’s Baseball Hall of Fame ballot using Bill James’ Win Shares.

Four ex-St. Louis Cardinals are among the 33 names competing for votes, but Gilbert forecasts that none of the four will be elected into the Hall of Fame in 2011. Two are holdovers in Mark McGwire and Lee Smith and two are first-timers, Larry Walker (pictured upon his induction into Canada’s Sports Hall of Fame) and Tino Martinez.

Let’s look at each of the four.

Mark McGwire

By all measures, McGwire would seem to have the on-field credentials for Hall election. Voters have been torn over his candidacy due to the steroids issue and that may continue indefinitely.

Big Mac’s admission last winter that he used steroids in an attempt to recover from injury during his playing days but his denial that those substances boosted his on-field performance did not help his standing with the voters. In fact, he was one of the few players on the 2010 ballot whose support dropped from year to year. McGwire garnered approximately 23.5 percent of the vote in both 2008 and 2009, but slipped to just under 22 percent approval in 2010.

With no significant new revelations about the steroids era this past year, one might look at any uptick or downturn in McGwire’s 2011 votes to be a reflection of feelings over his return to the game. He is of course heading into his second season as the Cardinals hitting coach. At the time of 2010 balloting, there was still considerable concern over the media circus that might ensue over McGwire’s baseball re-entry. That was handled without significant incident and has died down to almost nothing since.

Lee Smith

Smith was one of the dominant relievers of any era, though his then-record of 478 career saves is downgraded by some as being a by-product of the evolution to the one-inning specialist.

Until another former Cub-Cardinal, Bruce Sutter was inducted after tossing just 1,042 career innings, no pitcher with fewer than 1,700 frames had made it to Cooperstown. Smith finished with 1,289. At this point, only five in the Hall are considered to have been primarily relievers – Hoyt Wilhelm, Rollie Fingers, Dennis Eckersley, Goose Gossage and Sutter.

Smith’s voting support has slowly crept up into the upper 40 percent range, but is far away from the 75 percent needed for induction. Despite being eligible to remain on the ballot until 2017, he is going to need a much more aggressive push of support to make it.

Larry Walker

Walker is an interesting case. Gilbert’s Win Shares score places him third among first-year candidates behind Rafael Palmeiro and Jeff Bagwell and just ahead of John Olerud. Gilbert sees Walker securing more than the five percent of the vote needed to remain on the ballot, but fall short of the needed 75 percent for induction.

The former MVP (1997) has three Silver Slugger Awards, was a five-time All-Star and owns seven Gold Gloves, yet his Hall candidacy seems in a gray area.

Of the ten players listed at Baseball-Reference.com as having the closest career similarity to Walker, only four are in the Hall. They are Duke Snider, Joe DiMaggio, Johnny Mize and Chuck Klein. On the other hand, two of the top four are Walker’s former teammates, Ellis Burks and Moises Alou, players seemingly destined to land in the Hall of the Very Good, not Cooperstown. Contemporaries in the top ten include some other borderline candidates, Vladimir Guerrero, Edgar Martinez and another duo of ex-Walker teammates, Jim Edmonds and Todd Helton.

As a point of comparison, Martinez garnered 36.2 percent of the vote in 2010, his first year of eligibility.

Tino Martinez

Needless to say, Tino Martinez is a celebrated New York Yankee who found himself in St. Louis for two unhappy late-career seasons, 2002 and 2003. Having been a very good player during four World Championships with New York means Tino may pick up a handful of recognition votes, but his numbers, including 339 home runs, are not Hall-worthy. Interestingly, among those in Tino’s top ten similarity scores is another former Cardinals and Yankees first sacker, Jack Clark.

Bios of all 33 candidates can be found at the Baseball Hall of Fame website. Results of the 2011 vote taken by 10-plus year members of the Baseball Writers’ Association of America will be announced on January 5 and winners will be enshrined on July 25 in Cooperstown, New York.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

Theriot joins St. Louis

On Tuesday, the Cardinals acquired infielder Ryan Theriot from the Los Angeles Dodgers for pitcher Blake Hawksworth. GM John Mozeliak immediately anointed the former Chicago Cubs shortstop as Brendan Ryan’s replacement as his starter there. According to the Post-Dispatch’s Joe Strauss, Ryan is rumored to be headed out of town. Once they pull him out from under the bus, that is.

Theriot is arbitration-eligible and is under team control for two more seasons. More details on his signing are available at TheCardinalNation.com.

Tallet signed

The Cardinals picked up what appears to be a situational lefty in 33-year-old Brian Tallet. He was let go by Toronto after five seasons of both starting and relieving. With decent numbers against left-handed hitters in his career, Tallet looks like he could be ok if not overexposed.

You can find more on him in the same article linked to above. The roster matrix here is current with Tuesday’s moves.

No Type A free agents likely

The Cardinals are not likely to sign a Type A free agent who was offered and declined arbitration, Mozeliak told MLB.com. Otherwise, they would give up their first-round pick in the 2011 First-Year Player Draft, currently sitting at number 22.

Though the final decisions are not yet in, here are the names likely out of bounds as a result. No major surprises. Paul Konerko (CWS), Adam Dunn (Was), Adrian Beltre (Bos), Jayson Werth (Phi), Carl Crawford (TB), Cliff Lee (Tex), Carl Pavano (Min), Rafael Soriano (TB), Scott Downs (Tor), Jason Frasor (Tor), Frank Francisco (Tex), Grant Balfour (TB).

Fat Elvis sighting

Former Astros first baseman Lance Berkman has been told that Houston, who traded him to the Yankees this past summer, does not want the free agent back. In comments to The Houston Chronicle, Berkman included the Cardinals among a number of clubs kicking his tires. Apparently, they considered him a viable corner outfield candidate.

FOX Sports reports that Berkman wants $7 million for 2011 and will likely get it, perhaps from Oakland. The rub is that despite having bad knees, Berkman does not want to be a designated hitter. It appears that getting in better shape could help his cause.

Pags gone

Catcher Matt Pagnozzi, who saw time with St. Louis in September with both Yadier Molina and Jason LaRue injured, has been signed by the Colorado Rockies as a minor league free agent. Pags declared free agency after having been removed from the Cardinals’ 40-man roster following the season.

A pair of Pirates cut loose

Two Pittsburgh Pirates, third baseman Andy LaRoche and switch-hitting second baseman/outfielder Delwyn Young, cleared waivers and became free agents. Both had been removed from the Bucs’ 40-man roster after being designated for assignment. The two were former Dodgers top prospects. LaRoche had been Pittsburgh’s starting third baseman in 2009, but didn’t hit enough to keep the job.

La Roche could offer third base depth for the Cardinals, but they may spend more for a stronger option such as Miguel Tejada. If they stop at LaRoche or someone like him, it would seem another high-risk gamble on David Freese’s health.

Another chance for Big Mac

33 players are up for election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2011. 14 are repeaters, including Mark McGwire, joined by 19 first-timers. Former Cardinals are in bold.

The complete ballot includes: Roberto Alomar, Carlos Baerga, Jeff Bagwell, Harold Baines, Bert Blyleven, Bret Boone, Kevin Brown, John Franco, Juan Gonzalez, Marquis Grissom, Lenny Harris, Bobby Higginson, Charles Johnson, Barry Larkin, Al Leiter, Edgar Martinez, Tino Martinez, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Mark McGwire, Raul Mondesi, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, John Olerud, Rafael Palmeiro, Dave Parker, Tim Raines, Kirk Rueter, Benito Santiago, Lee Smith, B.J. Surhoff, Alan Trammell and Larry Walker.

link to bios for each candidate

Cardinals post-season shares

With a second-place finish, the 2010 Cardinals get money even though they didn’t make the playoffs.

Share of Players’ Pool: $549,021.64; value of each full share: $9,679.42 – The Cardinals awarded 44 full shares, 12.05 partial shares and 4 cash awards.

Link to MLB press release

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

Last October, in a controversial move, the St. Louis Cardinals hired former home run hero-turned shamed recluse-soon to turn repentant ex-steroids user Mark McGwire as their hitting coach. In the process, his predecessor, Hal McRae, was shown the door after five years.

Among manager Tony La Russa’s many comments at the time:

“The pros overwhelmed the cons… I think I was trusted by our ownership to make the right judgment,” La Russa said, “and I would have been very disappointed if I wasn’t.”

With the 2010 regular season in the books forever, let’s see if the only quantitative measure of McGwire’s results – the numbers posted by his hitters – are pro-Big Mac or con.

During a disappointing season in which the defending National League Central Division champion Cardinals missed the playoffs, the club’s inconsistent hitters were considered by many to have been a key factor in the team’s unexpected shortfall.

Of course, there are a number of variables in any year-to-year comparison, yet the core of the Cardinals offense remained the same from 2009 to 2010. One positive in 2010 was a full-season of $120 million-man Matt Holliday, partially offset by only a half-year of former All-Star Ryan Ludwick.

When all was said and done, across the entire 162-game season, the Cardinals scored six more runs under McGwire in 2010 than they did under McRae in 2009. That works out to a statistically-insignificant rate of 4.54 runs per game compared to 4.51.

Let’s take a look at a number of other stats from the Cardinals offense as well as their rankings within the 16-team National League.

First, we see the team batting average and on-base percentage remained remarkably stable from year to year. The respective stats’ rankings improved in comparison to the rest of the league in a year when pitching was up and hitting was down across the game.

Surprisingly, the slugging percentage of the former slugger McGwire’s Cardinals was down from the year prior, despite an early-season home run burst. The next table breaks down the difference.

As indicated above, McRae’s 2009 charges had hit nine more doubles, ten more home runs and collected 41 more total bases than did the 2010 Cards hitters, with better NL ranks accordingly. Another way to look at it is that the team’s 2010 home run count was down over six percent compared to the previous year.

Just because McGwire’s hitters didn’t bring more pop doesn’t mean they didn’t show at least some improvement in other areas. As mentioned above, they plated six more runs. The batters also demonstrated a bit more patience, drawing eight more non-intentional walks, fanning 14 fewer times and grounding into three fewer double plays than the year before.  In each case, the Cardinals improved their relative standing against the NL.

Remember that the magnitude of all these differences must be considered over a full 162-game schedule, making most of these year-to-year changes relatively minor.

Considering everything, decide for yourself if all the Cardinals McGwire-related activity was worth the benefit received.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

The manager

As has been reported ad nauseum, manager Tony La Russa has announced his intent to return to the St. Louis Cardinals for a 16^th season. His newest contract is a one-year deal with a mutual option for 2012.

The option was explained by general manager John Mozeliak as an attempt to avoid some of the “circus” surrounding La Russa’s annual Brett Favre-like end-of-season decision-making process over whether or not to return.

Not realistic.

Whether or not La Russa has a contract for the next season, he is still going to go through the same soul-searching at the conclusion of 2011 as he has done every year in recent memory. As the manager’s three decade-long career nears its end, these machinations will likely continue at least one more year – even though they are entirely unnecessary.

During the 2012 season, La Russa should pick up the 126^th additional managerial win needed to pass legendary Giants manager John McGraw for second all-time. Though La Russa does not discuss it, that mark is likely a big deal to him and as such will be the reason he will almost certainly remain with the Cardinals for 2012 as well.

The pitching coach

One factor I had not considered before now was the effect of La Russa’s contact on his extraordinary pitching coach, Dave Duncan. By the manager basically dodging the subject of a two-year deal, he put extra pressure on his long-time collaborator, who recently came out publicly with a request for a three-year extension.

Let’s face it. At this point in their lives, mid-sixties in age, when most Americans are looking at their own retirement, it seems most likely that neither La Russa nor Duncan want to move on and resume their careers in a new organization. That is understandable.

While Duncan’s past work would justify such a multi-year commitment, it would be unusual to give a coach two more years of job security than his boss. Still, La Russa’s eventual successor should be delighted to be presented with a year overlap with one of the best pitching coaches ever.

The bullpen coach

Duncan’s former chief deputy, bullpen coach Marty Mason, was fired for making critical remarks about the organization’s player development function. Mozeliak has suggested that Mason’s replacement will come from within.

Fan interest immediately focused on two recent Cardinals players in their early 40’s who have until now resisted taking on full-time jobs with the team so they could be more involved in raising their families.

I am speaking of the former battery of pitcher Cal Eldred and catcher Mike Matheny, St. Louis teammates in 2003 and 2004.

Both seem to be good baseball men and solid communicators, assets important for the position. On the other hand, neither has paid dues in the minor leagues, learning first-hand what is expected of an everyday, all-day coach.

Further, it has been nine years since one of the hard-working coaches at the minor league level has been asked to join the major league staff, Joe Pettini back in 2002.

One has to wonder how giving Mason’s job to a former La Russa player with no regular professional coaching experience would be considered a benefit by those currently toiling in the bowels of player development.

The hitting coach

Speaking of which, the last coach to have joined the staff also had no pro coaching jobs on his resume. Hitting coach Mark McGwire is having second thoughts about coming back for a second season in 2011.

His family is obviously important to him and has multiple new members as his wife had triplets in June. The reality of three new youngsters has apparently become a major concern. As recently as early September, McGwire was still very much gung-ho on returning to the Cardinals, but perhaps being home every day since the season ended has eroded his coaching resolve.

Despite others crediting McGwire for leading the offense to increased run-scoring over 2009, the reality was a difference of just six runs in total over the entire six month season compared to deposed Hal McRae‘s hitters the year prior. In 162 games, six runs translate to a scoring rate of 4.54 runs per game compared to 4.51. Putting all the noise aside, the bottom-line statistical benefit of McGwire over McRae was insignificant to say the least.

McGwire has been critical of the club’s reliance on video scouting. One prominent columnist joined in the attack, calling the La Russa-driven process an “infatuation” and an “addiction.” Right or wrong, at a minimum, it would seem there is a fundamental mismatch here between La Russa’s favored approach and McGwire’s.

After the major investment the organization made in supporting his controversial hiring last winter and afterward, McGwire owes them a timely decision on his future so they can move ahead.

If Big Mac walks, a prime replacement candidate is assistant hitting coach Mike Aldrete, like several others a former La Russa associate with no past connections to the Cardinals. While the ex-Oakland player may have done well in his assistant role, looking to the minor league ranks for the new hitting coach would be an even more important step in building bridges than would the sourcing of arguably the least-visible member of the staff, the bullpen coach.

Mozeliak’s next steps will be most interesting.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

In the fine print of Monday’s announcement of the return of manager Tony La Russa for his 16^th season at the helm of the St. Louis Cardinals was the word that bullpen coach Marty Mason was being fired for having made what was later disclosed to be internal remarks critical of the organization’s player development processes.

In contrast with past La Russa return announcements, there was no statement made about contracts for next season having been offered to and accepted by the remainder of the major league coaches. There had been earlier speculation that one reason for La Russa’s 15-day delay since the end of the season to make his decision was over the future of his staff.

One major question surrounds first-year hitting coach Mark McGwire, a controversial choice from the start due to his past steroid use, lack of professional coaching experience and later because of the offensive inconsistency demonstrated by the Cardinals this past season. Two of McGwire’s holdover students from his private hitting instruction days, Brendan Ryan and Skip Schumaker, were among the club’s biggest disappointments in 2010. The new coach also publicly criticized the organization’s long-standing reliance on video. Mac’s hiring was originally announced last October 26 in conjunction with La Russa’s decision to return for 2010.

Late Monday evening, Post-Dispatch beat writer Joe Strauss tweeted the following:

“According to TLR, McGwire “really torn” about return as hitting coach. (Family reasons.) My guess: He doesn’t.”

This seems very strange.

Just six weeks ago, the Post-Dispatch ran an article by Derrick Goold entitled “McGwire finds he loves coaching,” in which the rookie hitting coach was extremely positive. Among his remarks:

“I know one thing after this, I would really love to be a hitting coach for many, many years,” McGwire said.

Big Mac’s closing comment (highlighting is mine):

“I’ve learned a great deal of stuff throughout this whole season, and I’d love to continue doing this for a long time,” McGwire said. “But I’ve got to be offered the job first.”

Nine days later, Strauss penned another positive McGwire piece, this time from La Russa’s perspective, “La Russa gives McGwire high marks.” Strauss’ opening sentence said it all.

“Mac is back, at least if Cardinals manager Tony La Russa factors in the decision.”

What changed since September 11? Big Mac didn’t mention family matters pulling him away from his work. La Russa was pushing for his return. The outcome of the Cardinals disappointing season was already all but officially decided.

Reading between the lines, perhaps McGwire isn’t being offered the job in 2011.

In other words, could La Russa have lost an internal battle to keep McGwire, with the Cardinals offering the hitting coach a far more gracious exit than given Mason? Or did Big Mac have a 180 degree change of heart since last month?

We’ll see over the upcoming days.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

Yesterday, I featured the 47 members of Major League Baseball’s 400 home run club, a group that St. Louis Cardinals first baseman Albert Pujols joined on Thursday night. That list was ranked by the players’ ages when they achieved the milestone. Pujols was third youngest.

This time, we re-order the list by the number of at-bats each had at the point in their career when they hit their 400^th.

Pujols’ current hitting coach Mark McGwire, with a career shortened by injury, reached 400 with the fewest number of at-bats. Pujols is fifth.

MLB 400 home run club, ordered by at-bats when reached

Thanks to researcher Tom Orf for the above table.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

When Albert Pujols slammed three home runs against the Chicago Cubs on Sunday at Wrigley Field, it became the first baseman’s fourth such game in his nine-plus years as a major leaguer. In doing so, he broke a tie with his hitting coach, Mark McGwire, for the most three-home run games by a St. Louis Cardinal player since at least 1952.

Together, the two had seven of the 12 three or more home run games by a Cardinal during that time. Hall of Famer Stan Musial is next with two. Of course, any such list would be incomplete without noting “Hard Hittin’” Mark Whiten’s chart-topping four home run, 12 RBI performance in 1993.

St. Louis Cardinals, three or more home run games, 1952-current

In another oddity unearthed by researcher Tom Orf, Pujols joined McGwire (4/14/98) as one of just 35 major league baseball players and second Cardinal since 1952 to hit at least three home runs in a game without making an out.

Three or more home runs without making an out, game, MLB, 1952-current

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

WiLD 95.5 radio learned the upper limits of wildness in the eyes of Roger Dean Stadium officials on Thursday, when they were booted from the premises.

It isn’t just St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony La Russa protecting new hitting coach Mark McGwire from the relentless media hordes. Roger Dean Stadium general manager Joe Pinto got into the act, banning the Palm Beach-based radio station from the site.

The WiLD crew was booted from the Cardinals and Marlins spring training facility due to what Pinto labeled a “tasteless” promotion. Outside the stadium, the station set up a stand with a life-size McGwire cutout. They passed out large “steroid darts”, encouraging fans to toss the projectiles, “injecting” the cardboard version of Big Mac.

Wacky morning disc jockey Kevin Rolston told the Palm Beach Post that about ten people had hit the target, winning spring training game tickets, before stadium security gave them the boot.

Rolston, who didn’t actually come to RDS, sending station employees instead, defended the stunt. “Our point is, I don’t think many people are past it, even after the apology he gave, unless they’re blinded by being diehard Cardinals fans.”

Pinto got the last word, however.

“Mark McGwire is a partner on our team,” the GM told the paper. “I am not going to exploit the guy. My issue was they were doing something stupid on our property. It wasn’t right. It was tasteless.”

Follow me on Twitter.

As many St. Louis Cardinals watchers know, the club engaged the communications firm led by former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer to guide them through Mark McGwire’s re-entry into baseball.

The message delivered did not resonate well as McGwire insisted his use of performance enhancing substances was for recovery reasons only and did not assist his impressive home run totals – his primary claim to fame as a player.

As the architect of the Big Mac rollout, Fleischer took a fair amount of heat. Now, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports the National League champion Phillies have not retained Fleischer’s services. Used as a speaker last spring for media training for players, he was replaced by a competitor for 2010. Anonymous organization members did not offer positive comments on Fleischer’s effectiveness.

The paper also notes that Major League Baseball no longer employs Fleischer Sports Communications, having used them from 2005-09 when steroids was a more prominent issue for MLB. The source referenced noted the parting of ways was amicable.

Fleischer’s McGwire strategy began with a short general release followed by a hour-long interview with Bob Costas and a series of individual calls to key media members. McGwire’s time at the Winter Warm-Up fan event was the best and worst of times, as he was greeted with a long ovation from fans, but a poorly-arranged meeting with the general media flopped badly.

From the process perspective, McGwire recovered somewhat by meeting with the media several times once he arrived in Florida, though the major concern with his message will apparently remain.

Follow me on Twitter.

“What goes up, must come down,” went the 1960’s song “Spinning Wheel.” So it may follow for the signs designating “Mark McGwire Highway.”

According to an AP report, on Monday the Missouri State Senate voted unanimously in approval of Senate Bill 841, which includes renaming a six-mile segment of Interstate 70 in St. Louis from “Mark McGwire Highway” to “Mark Twain Highway.” The road was selected to commemorate McGwire’s then-record 70 home runs hit during the 1998 season.

Apparently the 34-members of the Senate were not among those who gave McGwire a standing ovation in his first public appearance as the St. Louis Cardinals new hitting coach at the Winter Warm-Up fan event in January.

Twain is a national treasure best known as an author and humorist, traits not associated with the former slugger, under criticism for his admission of steroids use as he amassed those records as a player.

Perhaps the choice of Twain, born as Samuel Langhorne Clemens in Florida, MO in 1835, was made so most of the real estate on the existing signs could be reused.  A more inappropriate, yet equally resource-saving alternative, “Jay McGwire Highway,” likely did not receive any serious consideration from the lawmakers.

To formally change the road’s designation, added in 1999, the measure must still pass the State House.

In acknowledgment of the occasion, I thought I would share a few of Twain’s countless timeless quotes, courtesy of twainquotes.com.

“By trying we can easily learn to endure adversity–another man’s I mean.”

“When a person cannot deceive himself, the chances are against his being able to deceive other people.”

“There is no suffering comparable with that which a private person feels when he is for the first time pilloried in print.”

“The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might.”

“The public is the only critic whose judgment is worth anything at all.”

Follow me on Twitter.

Remember the old line of jokes revolving around the titles of “the shortest books ever written”? You know, like “Tony La Russa’s Favorite Recipes with Beef” or “Why MLB’s Television Blackout Rules are Fan-Friendly”?

In this week when the news of Jay McGwire’s new book dominated sports page headlines and his older brother Mark called it “a sad day” for the McGwire clan of Pomona, California, I couldn’t help but wonder, ‘What if?’

What if Big Mac sat down to write a book of his own? What might it be entitled?

Continuing with the above theme of the shortest books ever, it could be:

“My Public Crusade Against Steroids,” by Mark McGwire

In a Friday column at the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, sports editor Rob Rains gives Jay McGwire credit for bringing the dangers of steroid use to the citizenry through his upcoming book, noting the younger brother’s religious awakening and hopes of a family reconciliation in the future.

Rains recognizes the irony in the likelihood that Jay seems aligned to become the anti-steroid spokesman that Mark pledged he would be five years ago but never carried out. Further, Rains expresses disappointment in Big Mac’s “personal and private perspective” on the entire situation. A major opportunity is being missed.

Until I see that Jay actually uses his 15 minutes of fame in a positive manner, I will reserve my judgment on his motives. After all, he could have limited his book to dealing with his own steroid demons, leaving Mark completely out of it. Of course, we all know that story most likely would never have seen the light of day. It seems to me that if Jay wants to get back on the same page with Mark, little brother could donate his book profits to anti-steroid initiatives.

Pulling out his much-larger checkbook in support of the cause is something Big Mac has done. During the infamous 2005 Congressional hearings, Mark had no choice but to listen and squirm as Donald Hooton told the painful story of how steroids and depression led to the suicide of his teenage son. McGwire has since quietly made a series of monetary donations to Hooton’s anti-steroids foundation in apparently significant denominations.

Yet McGwire did not honor another commitment he made while under oath on March 17, 2005 – to become a public spokesman against the use of steroids by youth. Perhaps the publicity-averse McGwire was badgered into agreeing and really didn’t mean what he said.

No, his generous financial donations cannot be ignored. On the other hand, a cynic might wonder if this isn’t just another example of a wealthy individual using cash to make an uncomfortable subject go away.

In recent interviews, McGwire has repeatedly stated his desire to “turn the page” and “move on from it.” He certainly is not required to do anything concerning steroid education with young Americans, having already made his meets-minimum, general-purpose apology.

One thing we have seen since Big Mac’s return to the public eye is that he is not a polished speaker and certainly does appear to be shy. Speaking out on any subject may be difficult for him.

Yet Big Mac grew his fame and his frame while making millions, buoyed by his use of those harmful substances whose names he conveniently asserts he can no longer remember. Couldn’t he do more in return than simply falling on his sword repeatedly? Instead, he seems content to merely fit in as a major league hitting coach and to try to sweep the broken parts of his past back under the rug as quickly and quietly as possible.

The fact remains that McGwire could do much more – if only he wanted to.

Since arriving in Florida this spring, Big Mac reiterated that he has no intention of becoming that national crusader against steroids, instead preferring to do his work behind closed doors.

“Like I said, I do that stuff privately,” McGwire stated on February 18. “I have always done charitable stuff privately and talk to people privately. That is the thing about me. I have never wanted to do anything just because there is a camera in my face and say, ‘This is what I am doing.’”

McGwire either doesn’t seem to understand or care that he could accomplish far more good for others by being in the public eye rather than out of it. He also doesn’t have a very good memory about this part of his past – or figures we don’t.

Big Mac, the home run hero, got behind several causes back in the good old days, including fighting child abuse and bed wetting. These laudable efforts seemed to vanish from view when the going got tough.

Quietly writing some checks, perhaps having some talks in private and turning the public page as quickly as possible is likely the path of least resistance, but is it the best one to follow? Does Mark really want little brother Jay to be the one to tell his story to the masses – the people who might actually take something positive from all this?

Follow me on Twitter.

Not surprisingly, Jay asserts to ESPN that Mark did not tell the whole story – about what he used, how much he used or the perceived benefit – either to Bob Costas or in the subsequent carefully-scripted media tour that followed.

Tell us something we don’t already know, Jay. Timing is everything and your book is at least a year past its expiration date. Your profit window is literally shrinking by the hour.

Normally, this wouldn’t be enough for me to even notice here as I recognize that opinions regarding this issue have long been set. Further, among at least one camp, heavy McGwire fatigue has set in. I imagine that was part of the communications strategy carefully laid out in advance.

Big Mac has been accepted back into baseball and is happily tutoring Cardinals hitters. His Hall of Fame chances rest with the writers with the next mandate still ten months away. These points seem set.

Still, one nagging concern led me to this post.

McGwire generally scored well in terms of sincerity points during his admission tour, even as his misinformed message that PEDs did not affect his performance was appropriately trashed and elements of the rollout itself were bungled.

I have never felt totally comfortable with giving him a sincerity pass, feeling as if it was a professionally-driven attempt to dupe the public. The preparation behind the interviews, followed by a set series of talking points and canned phrases that Big Mac repeated over and over in his scheduled discussions, only added to my discomfort.

One rub regarded McGwire’s interaction with his father. During his tour stop at MLB Network, Big Mac noted that he struggled in breaking the word to both Tony La Russa and his family the day before, as if they would all be stunned by the “news”.

“I told my dad yesterday when I finally had to,” Big Mac tearfully admitted.

I can see how perhaps it was difficult for Mark to own up to it directly, but how in the world could admission of steroid use in his family be a surprise to his dad? Jay McGwire first got into them as a professional bodybuilder two decades ago.

If Mark’s use was news to his father, the only conclusion I could draw from that is that papa must have had some serious issues with ability to deal with reality as well. Jay’s book title says it all – the “worst-kept secret”.

Nothing on the surface would seem unusual. John McGwire is a well-known member of his community, for years a prominent dentist in Pomona, California. He cranked out five big boys, among them Mark, one-time NFL quarterback Dan and Jay.

Black sheep Jay apparently began using steroids in the early 1990’s and stopped in 1996. In between, he was a professional bodybuilder with the typical cartoonish caricature that goes with the sport. He also admitted introducing his older brother to steroids around the time dad talked Mark out of quitting baseball.

How could pop have not noticed his baseball-playing son subsequently getting bulked up? (Make sure you look at the various before and after photos of Jay in the ESPN article.)

“I remember calling him (his dad) in ’96,” Mark told MLB Network. “I was so frustrated with injuries I wanted to retire. He’s the one that told me to stick it out.”

Perhaps dad kept his eyes covered, later accepted his son’s “I did not use steroids” statement and further did not know that behind the embarrassing Congressional testimony from 2005 was Mark’s desire to come clean.

Fast forward to 2009. When news of Jay’s book first came out, how do you suppose that was handled in the John McGwire household? Did family members tear those pages out of his newspaper? Apparently, the estranged siblings did not sit down for Thanksgiving dinner together with the rest of the clan.

Like I have said numerous times, I accept Mark McGwire’s “apology” in terms of him being the new hitting coach of the St. Louis Cardinals. That doesn’t mean I have to buy his entire story, hook, line and sinker, any more than I care about brother Jay’s money-making spin on the sad escapade.

Let’s face it. At this point, anything that comes out about any members of this family should not be a surprise to anyone. ‘Move on, there’s nothing to see here…’

Follow me on Twitter.

As the entire baseball universe knows, former St. Louis Cardinals home run hero-turned hitting coach Mark McGwire conducted a series of planned interviews last month to discuss his admission of past steroids use.

Following a blueprint established by the crisis management firm headed up by former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, neither McGwire’s explanations nor the process followed to grant media access met with positive reactions from many corners.

Add Blake Rhodes to the long list of the unimpressed. Before you incorrectly write him off as just another angry member of the hordes, understand that he’s been there, having worn the shoe on the other foot.

The 16-year former employee of the San Francisco Giants once served as the club’s Director of Media Relations. In that role, he guided Barry Bonds through a media maze he described as 40-50 deep every day during some very troubled times, including when the outfielder was under investigation by a grand jury. As most fans are aware, Bonds took the major league single-season home run record away from McGwire in 2001.

Rhodes sees a similar media relations storm on the horizon for the Cardinals and McGwire this spring and is not positive about what has been done to date. In a Wednesday morning radio interview on KTRS 550 Radio in St. Louis, host McGraw Milhaven asked Rhodes to grade Fleischer’s work with McGwire.

“I would give him a ‘C’ to ‘C-minus’… I don’t think that Mark was coached very well previous to doing his interviews. I don’t they put him in the best foot forward,” Rhodes said.

Rhodes is now a vice president with Xenophon Strategies, where he leverages his experience in media and public relations, strategic communications, crisis management, brand marketing and special events.

In an article posted on the company’s website entitled “Let’s Find Out if McGwire Is a Team Player – Some Strategies to Mitigate the Media Distraction”, Rhodes articulates a simple, two-part approach for how he believes the McGwire situation should be handled starting next week.

The intent is to minimize disruptions to the remainder of the Cardinals family by making McGwire available at certain pre-defined times to answer the inevitable questions. As Rhodes explained to me, the potential distractions should not be taken for granted.

“To reach the playoffs, there needs to be a focus on the task at hand on the field.  Quite frankly, with all of the media attention it will be hard to find that focus.  I know. I saw it first hand,” Rhodes said on Tuesday.

His first recommendation is for the Cardinals to “hold a media conference in Jupiter on the day the pitchers and catchers report, Feb. 17.” The next would be for the club to allocate early afternoon time for press conferences with McGwire on the Cardinals’ arrival day in each road city throughout the regular season.

For such a strategy to work, McGwire would need to put the team ahead of his own interests, Rhodes notes.

Quoted in a Tuesday article posted at USAToday.com, St. Louis general manager John Mozeliak seemed to indicate the Cardinals aren’t on the Rhodes Plan. In other words, McGwire is apparently done talking about his past.

“He’s answered more than 250 questions on this, and he reached out to multiple levels of media,” Mozeliak told Mel Antonen. “He’s not required to do any more. If (reporters) want to talk to him about players, hitting and the experience, that’s fine.”

Other past steroid users caught in recent years, including New York Yankees Alex Rodriguez and Andy Pettitte, held news conferences as spring training began to clear questions based on their off-season admissions. As a result, the press seemed to back off.

In the Wednesday radio interview, Milhaven asked Rhodes his view if the Cardinals do in fact believe they can move ahead with McGwire only talking baseball this spring while avoiding further media questions about his past.

“I think they are naïve if they think that,” Rhodes concluded.

Follow me on Twitter.

First, we looked at the top 20 stories affecting the St. Louis Cardinals this past year. Now it is time to predict the top story lines for 2010 as well.

Right up front, I will set aside the easiest and most logical entry – the results of the 2010 team on the field. The nature of that story has yet to be determined, shaped by the items discussed here and many more plotlines not yet developed.

Another top story I will not be including is the signing of Matt Holliday. It occurred on January 5, so technically would qualify as a 2010 story, but the reality is that the excitement was quickly over in this calendar year. Now, Mr. Holliday simply needs to produce – for the next seven or eight years.

As I developed my list and their ranking, I considered the staying power of the story, how long it might remain in the headlines, as well as its potential impact on the 2010 Cardinals and the organization’s future.

Without further ado, here are my projected top five St. Louis Cardinals stories of 2010. As always, your comments are welcome below.

5. Continued closer concern?

Ryan Franklin did a fine job closing games for the St. Louis Cardinals in 2009, far better than his career norms would suggest. He was an All-Star for the first time, was the August Delivery Man of the Month for MLB and came in second for the NL Rolaids Relief Man of the Year.

Yet Franklin faltered down the stretch and through the far-too-brief post-season. Possible reasons offered up revolved around fatigue and overwork rather than a new contract. Yet to date, the team has not added any external proven relief help for 2010 and is making rumblings they may not. If a Plan “B” is needed for the ninth inning, its details remain cloudy.

Perhaps Franklin will surprise as he did in 2009, providing stability to a questionable situation coming into the season. Or perhaps the law of averages will catch up with the veteran right-hander, who turns 37 years of age during the first week of March.

4. Will Freese ice down third base?

When compiling the Cardinals top prospect list at the main The Cardinal Nation site as I do each winter, it struck me that our rankings named five different individuals as the organization’s top third base prospect over the last five years.

In the past, when Scott Rolen anchored the position in the majors every year, it didn’t matter, but times have changed. With now-departed Troy Glaus missing most of 2009, third base became the weakest link on the entire team offensively. It also had the most uncertainty, with seven different players receiving regular-season starts at the position – and that didn’t include Joe Mather, once the leader during spring training.

David Freese heads into camp for the second consecutive spring as the favorite to take the job, but is hardly a lock. Many observers, myself included, believe the team needs to add a veteran as insurance in case Freese has a meltdown either on the field or off.

While there are plenty of options around, including Allen Craig, Julio Lugo, Ruben Gotay, Tyler Greene and Mather, none are likely considered starting material at third base. Further, there is no obvious help at the position in the upper levels of the minor league system.

On the other hand, if Freese demonstrates he can handle the job, the Cardinals could have as much as five more years of cost-controlled stability at an important position that was a major problem for them in 2009.

3. La Russa’s future plans

Now 65 year-old, previously-ageless Tony La Russa has begun to publicly admit the inevitable – that he will not manage forever. In taking several weeks to decide whether or not to return in 2010 and then accepting only a one-year contract, La Russa made that clear.

Bringing Mark McGwire back into baseball provided a new vehicle for the fiery La Russa to keep his us-against-the-world competitive juices flowing. His ongoing, unwavering and at times, irrational support of his former slugger and new hitting coach is keeping him on the hot seat.

By ownership shelling out the money to re-sign Matt Holliday and add Brad Penny, La Russa has been presented with a club that comes into the season with high expectations. If the team does well and presents La Russa with his third World Series championship, the temptation to ride out on top may be too tempting to pass up.

Yet if the backfire from the McGwire move continues and/or his loaded 2010 team struggles, might La Russa decide to call it quits?

The manager comes into the season 211 wins short of John McGraw for second on MLB’s all-time list. I tend to side with those who think La Russa will remain in the dugout at least long enough to achieve 212 victories.

Another way to look at it is that Albert Pujols will presumably stay in St. Louis at least two more years. It is hard to come up with a strong case that La Russa would yet walk away from a player who one day may become the greatest in the history of the franchise and one of the best ever to play the game.

2. The McGwire reaction

The return of McGwire from self-imposed isolation was a risky move from the start. La Russa wanted it and ownership agreed. Despite high-profile external crisis-management assistance, the rollout of McGwire’s apology for steroid use did not go well. His credibility remains in question in many corners and as such, he remains a divisive figure both within the Cardinal Nation and across baseball as a whole.

If the 2010 Cardinals get off to a fast start with their bats, the pressure may diminish a bit and if the hitters are viewed to be successful all season long, McGwire will be singled out for a considerable helping of praise. On the other hand, if the offense falters early, the entire season could tip over what on the surface was the simple hire of a hitting coach.

If the going remains tough, could any of the principals involved, La Russa, Bill DeWitt/John Mozeliak or McGwire himself, decide to pull the plug? If La Russa decides to retire from managing after the season, what will McGwire do? Finally, as 2010 nears its close, national writers will again be faced with the question of whether or not to vote for McGwire for the Hall of Fame, rekindling heat on this story.

1. Pujols’ pending payday

With ownership’s commitment to spend at least $120 million additional on Holliday, Pujols’ previously-expressed concern over whether there will continue to be a competitive team around him in the future should have been answered. Granted, the first baseman has two more years on his current contract, but his post-Holliday signing comments were both encouraging (wants to remain a Cardinal, will consider a discount) and concerning (no issue with testing the free agent market if necessary) at the same time.

Pujols said he is willing to entertain contract talks until the season begins but not during. As such, if a deal is not done soon, the buzz will quiet until October. By that time, as a player with ten years in the majors, five with the same team, Pujols could not be traded without his consent, an unlikely occurrence anyway.

With the Cardinals already set to remain pretty much intact for 2011, the noise over Pujols’ future plans could reach a deafening level come fall. Unresolved, his contract status could become the biggest story of all for the 2010 Cardinals and has the potential to remain there for the next year, too.

Link to The Cardinal Nation Blog’s top 20 stories of the year countdown

Follow me on Twitter.

As the divisive battles rage on over the status of former home run king-turned St. Louis Cardinals hitting coach Mark McGwire, there is one perspective that I do not think is being fully understood.

I see two main issues here that are tangled together. One is the acceptance of McGwire as the Cardinals new hitting coach. The other is his legacy in the game and his standing for Baseball’s Hall of Fame.

Personally, I think he has done enough to satisfy the former and I sense many agree. I think many in the national media are hung up on the latter because though that prism, McGwire did not do enough in their eyes to clear his name – not as a hitting coach, but as a former home run hero.

To date, Mac has been coy about the Hall of Fame, saying he is leaving it to the voters to decide. The writers then understandably want to know more about what he used, when he used it, etc. to try to determine how to assess his results.  They are clearly unconvinced by McGwire’s assertion that steroids did nothing to help his numbers. That is understandable.

Unless/until he can separate the two, the job and the Hall, I believe the controversy will continue.

Of course, that is easier said than done. McGwire has already made his statements and clarifications. He should have said that he has no way of knowing how steroids affected his results. That would have been believable, but it would have put his numbers into question (as if they weren’t already). There does not seem an easy way to backtrack. At this point, perhaps there is nothing McGwire can say to help his cause, especially if the past details he is avoiding are too damning.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t a way out.

Assuming McGwire does not want to provide specifics at the level the national press demands, one way to try to cut the ties would be to say, “I will not talk further about my past steroid use just to try to improve my Hall of Fame chances. I believe I have said enough to be allowed to become the Cardinals hitting coach. That is all I want.”

That would most likely cement his low vote totals into the future, but would return him to the more familiar world where “I am not here to talk about the past.” This would offer a safer port for Big Mac in the storm and perhaps allow him to carry out his new hitting coach assignment in some semblance of peace.

Having suggested that, we have no idea if McGwire is willing to chance giving up what remains of his legacy for this job. Yet the entire Cardinals community in its broadest sense (including ex-players, fans, etc.) has both dealt out and taken a lot of heat on his behalf with no end in sight. It may be time for McGwire himself to do something more to turn down some of that heat.

Follow me on Twitter.

Wednesday, day three of the Mark McGwire re-entry program as architected by the crisis-management firm of former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, apparently called for a shift in focus to the all-new Big Mac. The Cardinals hitting coach is shown swinging the bat and happily teaching his hitting students in California, relieved by his confession and ready to move forward.

It was inevitable that change would not go completely smoothly. Jose Canseco, self-proclaimed whistle-blower of the steroid era, did his best to ensure that, trying to keep the focus on the past, instead of the future.

While the primary subject of Canseco’s claims, widespread use of illegal drugs in baseball, was again reinforced, McGwire’s former Bash Brother teammate still has a long history of contradicting himself, embellishing details and later wishing he had handled himself differently.

With that backdrop, the “he-said, she-said” debate over whether or not Canseco injected McGwire, where, when and how often is most incredulous. What we have here is a dispute between two admitted long-time drug users, both of whom have been proven to foster a long-term habit of avoiding or at least severely bending the truth.

The phrase, “the first liar doesn’t stand a chance” was coined for situations precisely as this. If you hooked these two up to a polygraph, as Canseco has challenged, there would probably be an explosion the likes of which hasn’t been seen since Godzilla and Ghidorah destroyed Tokyo.

Canseco’s counterattacks included a blast fired at his former manager and the current skipper of the St. Louis Cardinals, Tony La Russa. In an ESPN Radio appearance, Canseco vehemently disputed La Russa’s claim that the manager was unaware of McGwire’s use of steroids until this Monday.

Said Canseco: “That’s a blatant lie. There are some things here that are so ridiculous, and so disrespectful for the public and the media to believe.”

It is a sad state of affairs indeed when Canseco is left to define what is ridiculous and disrespectful.

Putting the foolishness aside, I have been among the many troubled by the apparent rigidity of the manager’s remarks. Just as in McGwire’s damning unwillingness to acknowledge the performance-enhancing nature of performance-enhancing drugs, La Russa’s insistence that he was unaware of McGwire’s use all these years is a credibility-crusher.

As the result of his remarks, La Russa has been hammered in many corners of the press, almost as much as McGwire himself, it seems.

La Russa’s assertion that he did not know of McGwire’s past use may have been akin to Bill Clinton swearing he didn’t inhale. A member of the legal profession like the former President, La Russa never said he did not have past suspicions. He only said he did not KNOW until Monday.

Of course, he didn’t know. Without positive drug tests, no one knew for absolute certain until McGwire himself said so. Yet, La Russa left himself wide open by avoiding the obvious.

It is not as if La Russa didn’t have past suspicions about steroids use on his own team, as did current Cardinals first base coach and former A’s strength and conditioning coach Dave McKay. At the time, during the original “don’t ask, don’t tell” era, there were no processes to deal with the issue, so everyone apparently just kept quiet.

Directly from the Mitchell Report:

“…La Russa and McKay acknowledged that they had suspected Canseco of using steroids when he was playing with Oakland. McKay said: ‘It just got to the point where you knew he [used them].’ Neither La Russa nor McKay shared their concerns with the Oakland front office, however. According to La Russa, ‘I thought, what’s the use? So I didn’t say anything.’”

In a Wednesday St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, Joe Strauss recounted the following discussion with La Russa this week:

“La Russa referred to McGwire’s initial experimentation with steroids in 1989-90 as ‘a little flavor here and there. That is not right, either. But he was not a big abuser at that point,’ La Russa said.”

If the manager didn’t know about McGwire’s use back then, during the final years of when Canseco and Big Mac were Oakland teammates, the only logical assumption one can make is that his hitting coach must have shared those details of his steroid use for the first time when he spoke with La Russa on Monday.

As one might expect, the manager is defending his new hitting coach to the nth degree, including McGwire’s controversial, logic-defying stance that his long-term steroid use was solely for health reasons.

”He admitted his performance was enhanced when he took steroids because it kept him healthy,” La Russa said Tuesday. ”But he also worked on his stroke, put better spin on the ball, learned the game between pitcher and hitter and became more dangerous as a result. With that stroke, good things happened.”

As MLB executives, Cardinals chairman Bill DeWitt Jr. and general manager John Mozeliak together worked the details of McGwire’s re-entry plan with Fleischer and company leading up to Monday’s blitz, La Russa was kept on the outside.

On one hand, I understand that, as the job of any team’s field manager is in the dugout, not in helping to define a very ticklish public relations rollout. On the other, this isn’t any manager, nor is La Russa detached from the story personally. There seemed both benefit and risk avoidance reasons for including La Russa in the process.

La Russa had spent the last five years on a seemingly ever-shrinking island, angrily defending McGwire against any and all attackers while the former player himself remained far underground. A major pillar of that defense was La Russa believing McGwire when the slugger assured his manager he did not use steroids.

In a January 18, 2009 New York Times interview that did not receive enough attention at the time, La Russa said the very thing he needed to this week, but did not.

La Russa acknowledged that Canseco (and therefore by implication, his teammates, as well) may have been using drugs behind his back and those of his staff. La Russa remained firm that McKay ran a “100 percent straight” program in Oakland, but the manager explained that he and his coaches couldn’t be everywhere.

“Now, as José (Canseco) said, when you go to the toilet or you leave the ballpark, Dave didn’t control that,” La Russa told the Times.

In his defense of McKay, La Russa only reinforced the obvious – coaches can’t be with their players all the time. As such, especially when there was no drug testing, they could not be sure what the players were taking or not taking. Yet for reasons only he knows, La Russa did not say that again this week in McGwire’s context when he easily could and should have.

One might wonder if in his staunch desire to defend his own, La Russa purposely drew more than his share of the heat in an attempt to take some focus away from McGwire. If so, the maneuver seemed instead to fan the flames that lap at both of them.

Just as if McGwire had simply said something realistic like, “I have no way of ever knowing how the drugs I took affected my performance and results.”, had La Russa repeated his earlier comments, as common-sense as they seem, a lot less dirt would have been thrown around this week.

Instead, the trenches around that lonely island are seemingly being dug even deeper – when they didn’t necessarily have to be.

Follow me on Twitter.

Currently tied for eighth on Major League Baseball’s career home run list with 583 and the former single-season leader with 70 in 1998, Mark McGwire has spent much of the past decade in seclusion.

That changed in a most surprising manner when on October 26, 2009, St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony La Russa announced the reclusive McGwire was returning to baseball as the club’s full-time hitting coach for 2010.

This move would only help the 2010 Cardinals, La Russa explained. McGwire had worked in an informal hitting coach capacity in past winters near his California home. Among his students were current Cardinals Matt Holliday and Skip Schumaker and ex-Card Chris Duncan.

There was just one problem – the 800-pound gorilla in the room – McGwire’s past.

The 1998 discovery that McGwire was using a then-legal supplement banned in other sports began a marked change to the feel-good story of the former slugger, whose exciting home run chase with Sammy Sosa helped re-energize the game following strikes that had turned countless fans away.

McGwire’s problems picked up momentum as allegations of more serious steroid use were raised by his former teammate Jose Canseco and others, affirmed much later by Big Mac’s own brother Jay.

La Russa remained Big Mac’s staunchest defender following McGwire’s 2001 retirement and especially after his fateful 2005 Congressional testimony. Joining a number of then-current players subpoenaed, McGwire’s infamous refusal to discuss his past made him an unwitting symbol of baseball’s steroid era.

Having become eligible for Hall of Fame consideration four years ago, McGwire has yet to receive more than 25 percent approval in the annual vote where 75 percent is the minimum. Voters often cite the unanswered questions about Big Mac’s alleged steroid use as the reason for withholding their support.

The day McGwire’s hiring was announced, general manager John Mozeliak emphasized the new coach would meet with the press “sooner, rather than later”. Over two months later, there was still no sign of McGwire.

That is how this story should end, since the focus of this series is last year. Had I been ranking the top 20 stories of 2009 plus the first two weeks of 2010, this would have been much higher than number nine.

Because this story is so hot, I will bring it the rest of the way home – briefly, I promise, to those as weary of McGwire commentary as I.

On January 7, a new wrinkle was introduced when La Russa said that he had discussed only part jokingly with McGwire on multiple occasions about the idea that the now-46-year-old might be activated as a late-season pinch-hitter for the 2010 club. Mozeliak moved quickly to write it off as a joke.

Just four days later, a multi-step rollout plan for McGwire’s re-entry was carefully executed, reportedly under the guidance of the crisis-management firm led by former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer.

The blitz began with a press release from the player, followed by shorter written responses from club officials and the commissioner. Next were one-on-one interviews with local media and the big show – an hour-long live interview expertly handled by MLB Network’s Bob Costas.

The eyes of baseball were upon Big Mac as he tearfully told his story – at least the parts he chose to tell. He made solid points in most every aspect, from outlining key events to showing contrition, but those gains were overshadowed by an odd refusal to acknowledge that steroids could have impacted his strength and his results on the field.

Still, if McGwire’s true intent was as he said, to relieve his guilt and open the way to becoming the Cardinals hitting coach, he met those objectives. Let others decide if he or any player from the steroid era should grace the Hall of Fame. McGwire said this wasn’t about that.

Even without McGwire’s press blitzkrieg, concluding its second day as I post this, the sheer magnitude of importance of the return of one of team’s most popular players of all time cements this story’s placement in the 2009 top 10.

Link to The Cardinal Nation Blog’s top 20 stories of the year countdown

Follow me on Twitter.

The primary concern many media members seem to have with the Mark McGwire interview with Bob Costas live on MLB Network Monday night is that McGwire would not acknowledge using steroids to enhance his home run power. He stated his only reason for using over a multi-year period was for health purposes, to help recover from injury. Further, McGwire would not accept that steroid use positively affected his strength and his numbers.

Many seem to think McGwire overall did well by coming out. Yet, some are stuck on the point regarding what the slugger believes about the supposed non-impact on his results.

Let me offer another perspective. Why does it matter what McGwire believes? Does it matter if he is ill-informed or naïve or in denial or just plain wrong?

People wanted his admission. They wanted his apology. They surely got even more than they expected. After listening to an entire hour spent on the hot seat, McGwire not dodging any tough questions, does anyone question his sincerity?

“It’s the stupidest thing I ever did. It’s an illusion,” McGwire said regarding steroid use.

McGwire talked frankly about what he used and when, about his congressional testimony and that fear of prosecution was why it happened the way it did. He outlined the personal anguish. McGwire tearfully apologized and asked for a second chance.

Let the Hall of Fame voters decide for themselves whether to diminish McGwire’s accomplishments or any other baseball player from his era, as difficult as that task may be. They now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that McGwire used steroids.

If writers want to put into question the authenticity of his records, so be it. But that should be driven by a review of the numbers, not by what McGwire personally believes about the impact of steroids. I don’t see the relevancy.

McGwire’s stated reasons for coming forward are for himself and because of his employment as the Cardinals hitting coach. He specifically said it was not about the Hall of Fame. So, why didn’t he say enough on Monday to be allowed to assume his new job in peace?

A final thought. If McGwire firmly believes that steroids won’t help, is that a bad message to send to youth?

Follow me on Twitter.

“If we’re in contention, we’ll put him on the roster Aug. 31. It’s a nice little dream,” said La Russa. “Is it likely? Probably not. I don’t think it’s a zero possibility. The point is, you’ll see him in spring training. He won’t be leaning on the batting cage chatting it up. He’ll work his (butt) off, and hitters will be thrilled he’s there helping them.”

Seems to me the manager should be fantasizing about how to get McGwire in front of cameras and microphones first. Since the October 26 announcement of McGwire’s hiring, his coming out party has been “imminent” ever since.

The delay, now approaching three months, has led to Cardinals beat writers hinting of problems in “coaching” the coach and suggesting that McGwire may be reconsidering the whole idea.

The reluctant McGwire has been pushed by La Russa to return to the game for years. The reasons could be just to gain his teaching knowledge or to help restore some luster to the slugger’s tarnished image or a combination. La Russa admits his over-30 year managerial career is nearing its end and may be trying to settle his accounts first.

When I read about the pinch-hitting idea, all I could think of was La Russa trying to make amends for sending light-hitting Kerry Robinson to the plate for McGwire in a sacrifice situation in the top of the ninth inning of the final game of the 2001 NLDS. The Game 5 loss ended the Cardinals season and would be McGwire’s final career appearance as an active player. A month later, Big Mac faxed notice of his retirement to ESPN.

La Russa was conflicted over the move from the moment he made it.

“One of my lowest moments as a manager was pinch-hitting for Mark. But you’ve got to try to win the game. Pinch-hitting for Mark is not something I am going to remember fondly,” La Russa said at the time.

Could this recent dream be another attempt to right a past wrong?

Update: In a Thursday morning radio appearance with Charlie Brennan on KMOX 1120, La Russa said McGwire and his family are likely to be in St. Louis next weekend for the Winter Warm-Up fan event and the new coach is expected to have cage time with some of his hitters also in town for WWU. The manager said that McGwire is not going to be a “celebrity coach”.

It was not asked whether McGwire’s long-anticipated meeting with the media to answer questions about his past would also occur during Winter Warm-Up weekend, scheduled from January 16-18.

Quizzed about the California pinch-hitting story, La Russa reaffirmed it and provided additional detail. He characterized it as a running “half-joking, half-serious” discussion between the two. La Russa said he saw McGwire at a recent hitting session in California and Big Mac was “really whistling the ball.” The manager attributed McGwire’s 2001 retirement to a “barking” back, apparently now healed.

Update #2: In addition to down-playing La Russa’s dream, in a head-scratching moment, Cardinals general manager John Mozeliak spoke to MLB.com on Thursday about the McGwire event. The GM had stressed way back on October 26 that it would be held “sooner, rather than later.” It is not known if Mo was cracking a smile on Thursday while asserting the following about McGwire’s coming out:

“Right now we’re on track. In terms of when we roll it out, I don’t know.”

That pretty much sums up the entire McGwire situation.

Follow me on Twitter.

While new St. Louis Cardinals hitting coach Mark McGwire spent years in isolation to avoid having to deal with steroids-related allegations, his final manager and newest boss Tony La Russa was often Big Mac’s staunchest defender.

For a number of years, La Russa had tried unsuccessfully to convince McGwire to rejoin the club just as a spring training instructor, though he was apparently close two years ago.

Then on October 26, during the press conference announcing La Russa’s return for a 15^th season at the Cardinals helm in 2010, came the shocking news that Mac was coming all the way back – to become the full-time major league hitting coach.

With the 65-year-old La Russa admitting his three-decade career in the dugout is nearing its end, some believe that while the manager’s power and influence is greatest, he is taking his best and perhaps last shot at helping Big Mac.

The focus would be to:

• Reintroduce McGwire to the baseball world
• Rehabilitate his shattered image, and specifically
• Improve the former slugger’s moribund Hall of Fame candidacy

One could certainly understand if La Russa feels a share of personal responsibility for the events of the past, but he could also just be continuing to fiercely defend one of his own. More than likely it is a mix of the two, with the split undoubtedly forever remaining a source of speculation.

Along with McGwire’s decision to accept the job came the baggage of having to step up to doing something he repeatedly told a Congressional hearing in March 2005 that he did not want to do – talk about the past.

This “coming out” event, expected to be a one-time-only affair, was said by general manager John Mozeliak in October to be occurring “sooner, rather than later”. In fact, the GM used those words at least three times that day the hiring was announced just to hammer home the point.

Earlier this month at Baseball’s Winter Meetings in Indianapolis, La Russa had this to say about the long-standing, yet impending event: “…I think it’s imminent.” That was two weeks ago and counting.

The above statements clearly reinforce the perception that the Cardinals are not in control of their new coach’s calendar. That doesn’t mean the club is not a very important stakeholder, as they will surely be the ringleader of the upcoming event and have a lot to lose if things go badly.

So why is it taking so long to get this event arranged and from where might the delay be coming? Here are some theories – not facts – theories. Like La Russa’s motives, the exact combination of potential ingredients will likely never be known.

Theory: It is taking a longer-than-expected time to coach the new coach and there are a number of groups engaged.

With Bud Selig’s fondness for the former slugger and his likely desire to avoid (more) bad publicity for the game, I can definitely see MLB being involved. After all, on the steroids issue, they have more sleeping dogs than the ARF kennels at midnight.

By coming out so enthusiastically in support of McGwire’s return, Selig reinforced the placement of the game itself shoulder-to-shoulder with the unwitting symbol of baseball’s past drug culture. Like it or not, everyone involved needs a good showing from Big Mac. As such, if MLB has not engaged the Nation’s best spin doctors (see Washington, D.C.) to assist, they are asleep at the switch.

The former player’s legal counsel would certainly have to be engaged, too. Here is hoping the advice offered, received and taken is more practical than it was in 2005. Hopefully with the passage of time, Congress will have moved on to other, far more pressing matters.

Theory: Postponing the event until later in the holiday season, a traditional downtime for baseball, would cut back the manic press coverage somewhat.

Theory: The ex-slugger may be having second thoughts, recognizing the press conference will likely prove to be comparable to enduring a double root canal without Novocain.

And finally, a different idea:

Theory: Skirting the 2010 Hall of Fame balloting and the immediate mandate on McGwire’s legacy it would represent.

I believe ballots for the current nominees are due to have been mailed and received by December 31. By waiting until after the votes are in, a full year would be required to pass before writers must make their firm and binding decision on the strength or weakness of McGwire’s explanation.

Because this is far from Big Mac’s first impression being made on the matter, he is not starting on a level playing field. Whatever he says will be micro-analyzed and nit-picked for weeks following the press conference. It is unavoidable.

The passing of 12 months would allow the initial emotion to wear off, the potential for others to either come forward or be ensnared in similar controversy and for McGwire to reinforce his rehabilitation by spending a season as a successful major league hitting coach. There would also be the opportunity to re-energize his high-profile charity work that either disappeared or at least went far underground with him, if deemed necessary to further the cause.

All of the above can potentially strengthen the prevailing view of McGwire, aided by Father Time.

By holding off saying anything even a bit longer – until after the January 6 announcement of the 2010 Hall vote – the “rehab McGwire” camp can gain another important data point – the knowledge of Mac’s 2010 vote total. The change from 2009 will represent the movement in voters’ thinking solely from the announcement of Big Mac’s return, prior to any explanation from the former player himself.

Based on articles penned by several Hall voters since October, I have been led to believe that McGwire has already boosted his share of the vote simply by saying he will talk. For reference, it has been hanging in the 20-25 percent range since McGwire first qualified, with 75 percent required for induction.

Another benefit of waiting well into January is to show respect to those who will be inducted into the Hall in 2010. Otherwise, the press will surely bombard the winners on their special announcement day with inappropriate McGwire questions that would detract from the new inductees’ well-deserved headlines. (This was previously cited as a reason to not hold the press conference during the period when the annual MVP, Cy Young, etc. awards were being rolled out during November.)

Following the January Hall announcement, “Team Big Mac” can then gauge how far they might need to take their one-time-only press conference and the other repair actions while preparing to re-institute radio silence on the past, this time for good.

Follow me on Twitter.

Well, perhaps you aren’t of that generation, but I was. Here in baseball’s off-season (unless you live in New York or Philadelphia), there is still a good quantity of interesting and quality writing that pops up on the traditional day of rest.

Here are a few articles of interest to me as a St. Louis Cardinals watcher.

TLR unsure on passing McGraw

With Tony La Russa home in California for the winter, the local scribes have better access and as such, are writing about him. John Shea of the San Francisco Chronicle deals softly with the manager and the Mark McGwire issue, exploring it from a risk perspective taken by La Russa as his career nears its close.

Shea suggests 2010 will be the manager’s last season in that role and asked him point blank about the importance of overtaking John McGraw for the second-most managerial wins of all time.

“La Russa is open to a front-office gig after he’s done managing. He said moving up the wins leaderboard isn’t a priority. With 2,552 wins, he needs to manage into the 2012 season to catch John McGraw (a 211-win difference). He’s nearly 1,200 behind leader Connie Mack.

“’Passing John McGraw is not everything,’ La Russa said. ‘You want to assess that fire in the gut, because it takes that fire to do the job properly. I’ve seen players skate for their final couple of years. You could see them losing the competitive edge, and they took the money because they’re going on their past. There’s a line of integrity there. I don’t want to do that.’”

What’s ahead on the labor front

The Boston Globe’s Nick Cafardo is one writer I often check out. His pieces typically indicate a greater depth of thought and seem less rushed than the many deadline-driven snippets that seem so common in today’s click-driven world.

In his Sunday column, Cafardo reviews the current status in the ongoing standoff between the Players Union and ownership. New Players Association executive director Michael Weiner, who is replacing outgoing Don Fehr next month, discusses the current concerns over contract collusion.

Further, Cafardo considers several factors that may be on the table during the next collective bargaining period. They include the length of the schedule, off days and travel days, draft pick compensation, international draft and small-market payroll subsidies.

A number of these issues need to be addressed. Here is hoping the new Weiner regime is able to work with the owners to make progress in these and other areas.

Team of the decade

Another writer whose work I care for much less is the Chicago Tribune’s Phil Rogers and it is not just because he covers the Cubs. Yet, there are times he deserves a nod. Today is one of those days.

Rogers puts forward a compact, but compelling case for the Cardinals to be labeled as MLB’s “Team of the Decade”, noting their payroll efficiency as a differentiating factor.

Bud welcoming Bonds?

William C. Rhoden of the New York Times is one of the many scribes concerned by Bud Selig’s different stance taken over McGwire compared to other accused steroids users of his era, including Barry Bonds.

“Asked about Bonds’s future in baseball if he is acquitted on perjury charges, Selig said that if a club wanted to hire him as a player or a coach, ‘I don’t think there will be an issue.’”

Bud seemed to down a healthy serving of Sunday breakfast waffles when he qualified his statement.

“’Every case is different,’ Selig said. ‘But as we move forward in the future, every case is different, that’s all I’ll say.’”

Rhoden raises what I think is a good question when he wonders why those from the steroids era aren’t dealt with in a consistent manner, welcomed back to the game. By potentially playing favorites and establishing a “double standard”, Selig risks undermining his credibility and that of Major League Baseball.

McGwire/La Russa/Selig hardliner

Boston Globe columnist Bob Ryan is representative of the many critical of the Cardinals’ hiring, coming down hard on the returning slugger/hitting coach, the manager and the commissioner.

“Tony La Russa is a sad enabler, a steroid denier whose legacy is entwined with that of a cheater. At least we can understand his motivation in bringing Mark McGwire back to baseball. But Bud Selig should say no, not happening, until we hear from the man who deceived us to such an astonishing degree.

“Mark McGwire owes an explanation to the (Roger) Maris family, if no one else.”

I actually feel sorry for Barry Bonds.

Bonds has been a resident of MLB’s doghouse for some time, having been placed there when news of his involvement in the BALCO case first came to light.

Like McGwire, Bonds’ defenders point out that he has never failed a test for steroids. His primary problems are in a legal area McGwire carefully chose to avoid, perjury.

Following Bonds’ record-breaking 2007 season, his contract with the San Francisco Giants expired. He made known his interest in playing the next season, yet reportedly did not receive a single contract offer.

Cardinals manager Tony La Russa is one of the few baseball officials to make public remarks in defense of Bonds the player. Though La Russa expressed interest in the outfielder joining his club for the 2008 season, nothing happened with St. Louis – or anywhere else, for that matter.

Though not proven, it was accused by some that Bonds has been blackballed from the game. Commissioner Bud Selig’s long-standing coolness toward Bonds has been well-documented.

Bonds had already broken McGwire’s single-season home run record in 2001 and in the summer of 2007 was approaching Hank Aaron’s revered top career home run total of 755. The baseball world seemed obsessed with how Selig would note the occasion.

One very strong opinion was expressed by another player once linked with steroids himself, Gary Sheffield.

“Bud Selig wants to talk about the integrity of the game? To him, the integrity of the game is how much money they make. That’s how far their integrity goes. I hope Barry not only breaks the record, but shatters it. The more homers Barry hits, the better, because that’ll really piss Bud Selig off,” Sheffield said in 2007.

Though Selig did follow the Giants for a time, he was not with the team on August 7, 2007 when Bonds hit number 756. Selig issued a statement labeling Bonds’ record “noteworthy and remarkable” and called Bonds to offer his congratulations. It was reportedly the first time the commissioner and the player still viewed by many at the time as one of the best in the game had spoken in several years. Two months later, the new career home run champ was out of work.

Ironically, Bonds broke Aaron’s record against Washington. That club’s home was the location of the infamous March, 2005 congressional hearing.

Was the real issue that day the use of steroids by individual players or the bigger picture – that the game had not moved nearly quickly or decisively enough to stop the use of PEDs during a heady time of record revenue, attendance and likely, profits?

Selig was among those in the room when McGwire personally took the highly-public and painful fall for the game of baseball’s years of inattention to a problem that was both widespread and well-known by that time.

Had McGwire talked, he could have opened a gaping wound that may have further exposed and embarrassed Selig’s grand old game. Instead, Mac took a bullet for the team.

Could gratitude over protection of his golden goose and perhaps some personal guilt over McGwire’s humiliation be guiding Selig’s very different reaction toward McGwire compared to Bonds?

If not that, what is it? Thanks for the rejuvenating effect the 1998 home run chase gave his game? All the invisible work McGwire has done for steroids awareness and prevention since his 2005 pledge to do so?

How about an even more contemporary example, baseball’s highest-paid player, Alex Rodriguez? As the world knows, this spring A-Rod was forced to admit past use of PEDs and did so, stating he used them for several years starting in 2001. Coincidentally that was Bonds’ 73-home run year and McGwire’s final season as a player.

Eight months ago, Selig said the following in reaction.

“While Alex deserves credit for publicly confronting the issue, there is no valid excuse for using such substances, and those who use them have shamed the game.”

Contrast that with Selig’s remarks this week regarding McGwire’s return.

“I have no misgivings about this at all,” Selig said. “Mark McGwire is a very, very fine man and the Cardinals are to be applauded. I give Tony La Russa a lot of credit and (Cardinals chairman) Bill DeWitt a lot of credit for making this happen. I was—and am—very supportive of their decision.”

What are the key differences?

• A-Rod was caught and admitted guilt. McGwire was not caught and admitted nothing.

• The first shamed the game while the second is welcomed back with no reservations.

Maybe Gary Sheffield and those who see the world like him aren’t crackpots at all.

Putting this all together, I am becoming less and less convinced that McGwire will say anything of substance (no pun intended) when he does talk. Apparently what he has done to date is just right for Selig, and that counts for an awful lot.

As such, his upcoming plan to speak to the media may have repercussions that could affect the perception of his entire generation.

There are some that believe McGwire needs to say no more than he already has. At the other end of the spectrum, some expect more details than McGwire may be able to give. The majority likely fall somewhere in the vast gulf between.

Below, I have characterized over a dozen different points about which I have read in the last 24 hours, with issues organized into those covering McGwire’s past and those more related to his present.

A pro/con format is used to suggest every point has a counterpoint, rather than to suggest any particular thought is right or wrong. Some believe certain points are relevant while others may see the same items as insignificant. That further illustrates the challenge represented by Mark McGwire.

Regarding the past

Pro: McGwire has been punished enough. Even under today’s rules, a positive steroids test would have been only a 50-game suspension.

Con: McGwire’s absence from the game has been self-imposed, furthered by his bungled 2005 congressional testimony.

Pro: There is no proof against him. McGwire did nothing illegal at the time.

Con: Adding to the weight of evidence against McGwire included details of usage provided by his own brother.

Pro: McGwire should not be singled out when hundreds are assumed guilty, including players on the current Cardinals team.

Con: McGwire evaded the truth. Others have apologized. Are any of them big-league coaches?

Pro: Why should McGwire try to say more when the questions will not stop?

Con: Many other players have been able to move on following apologies. Remaining in limbo will not work while being in a job in the public eye.

Pro: MLB has not banned McGwire, so why should the Cardinals?

Con: There is no ban, but strong sentiment against McGwire exists. He has yet to receive more than about 25 percent of the Hall of Fame vote, for example.

Pro: McGwire chose not to talk to Congress to protect himself and others.

Con: Why did he not follow up on his offer to educate youth against steroids?

Pro: McGwire was my favorite player and is a local hero.

Con: McGwire has a tarnished image, especially outside of St. Louis and his signing sends a bad signal to youth.

Regarding the present

Pro: McGwire was a great hitter, so he will be a great hitting coach.

Con: A number of great players have shown they cannot effectively teach others.

Pro: McGwire has worked with major league hitters informally.

Con: He has no experience as a hitting coach in organized ball.

Pro: The Cardinals need a more patient hitting style – too many strikeouts, too few walks.

Con: McGwire was a home run hitter with a below-average average.

Pro: The hiring was done to help in the efforts to re-sign Matt Holliday.

Con: Holliday didn’t fully embrace McGwire’s advice and money factors may be more important.

Pro: The move was engineered by Tony La Russa to resurrect McGwire’s national image.

Con: Even with an apology, many opinions about McGwire have been set.

Pro: Having McGwire back is a good PR move by the Cardinals.

Con: Without closure, McGwire’s presence will be an ongoing distraction for the team.

Pro: If McGwire can coach, that is all that matters. MLB hitting coaches need not be role models.

Con: McGwire needs to address the past so he can move forward.

The hope of some is that McGwire being hired as the Cardinals 2010 hitting coach might provide encouragement to Holliday to take a hometown discount to return to St. Louis next season and beyond.

Yahoo Sports’ Jeff Passan credits Big Mac as having been a factor in Holliday’s rise as a slugger in his days with the Colorado Rockies.

“McGwire originally suggested Holliday employ the leg kick that turned him from a gap hitter into a powerful slugger,” Passan recalls.

In fact, there were reports that in the Clint Hurdle days, the Rockies offered their major league hitting coach job to McGwire, who declined.

Yet would Holliday be as excited to have McGwire as his coach today as he was one year ago?

After their intensive winter workouts, Holliday joined the Oakland A’s, who acquired one year of his services in an off-season trade with the Rockies.

In his first spring training with the A’s, Holliday turned into a singles hitter, having just two doubles and no home runs in his 62 March at-bats.

Once the regular season opened, the problems continued. As April came to a close, Holliday was batting under .240 and had yet to go deep in the Oakland uniform. Counting spring training, the drought was 136 at-bats and 40 games before Holliday finally homered in his final April plate appearance.

By June 5, Holliday had shown slight improvement, having reached a modest total of eight home runs and a .286 batting average on the season. From that point on, he went right back into the tank. Over the next five weeks, until July 16, Holliday endured a 33-game, 121 at-bat homerless streak, the second-longest regular-season period of futility in his career.

Some were labeling Holliday a Coors Field phenom. Others said he could not handle American League pitching, which if true would surely decrease his value as a free agent, since a number of his potential targets could be deep-pocketed AL East Coast clubs.

Clearly, by the time Holliday was dealt to the Cardinals, many A’s fans were glad to see him go. Between spring and the regular season, Holliday had 11 home runs and 61 RBI in 408 Oakland at-bats and a subpar slugging mark of .436, well over 100 points under his career average.

In mid-July, something changed – an adjustment that carried Holliday through his final week with the A’s and into his initial red-hot period as a Cardinal.

Passan reminds us of media reports that it was getting away from McGwire’s winter hitting tips that enabled Holliday to rediscover his mojo and resurrect his sinking free-agent value.

“He (McGwire) also prodded Holliday this offseason to lessen the kick into a stride, which threw off Holliday’s swing for the season’s first three months.”

Taking that at face value, whatever McGwire gave, he later took away. All told, it has to make one wonder how effective Mac’s instruction really has been for Holliday.

His other reported students include the Duncan brothers, Chris and Shelley, a pair of all-or-nothing hitters trying to get back to the majors, Oakland shortstop Bobby Crosby, who lost his job because of a lack of hitting and can’t get either one back and scrappy Skip Schumaker, who hardly fits the McGwire profile. As Rick Hummel of the Post-Dispatch notes, the .263 career-hitting Mac “had just three sacrifices in his career and none in his last 10 seasons”.

I am not suggesting that Mark McGwire cannot become a good major league hitting coach. I am only noting he is unproven and his limited past track record may not be as stellar as some think.

That in itself is hardly news, as the former Royals and Devil Rays manager has been on the hot seat as the team’s offense sputtered down the stretch and in the post-season despite the addition of three new, high-profile players.

What is news however, is that ESPN is labeling secluded slugger Mark McGwire as the leading replacement.

On one hand, that is not new either, as La Russa has stated on several occasions that he has tried to get his former first baseman into coaching. Yet becoming the full-time hitting coach would be light-years ahead of what appeared to be the previous target – just getting Big Mac to show up at spring training camp as a special instructor.

In fact, McGwire actually agreed to assist La Russa in spring training 2008, but had to back out at the last minute, reportedly over a family matter.

There are a number of reasons the 46-year-old McGwire would be a good and inspired choice to replace McRae.

1. Freshness in the coaching ranks. The continuity that La Russa has fostered in his staff is admirable and a contributor to the team’s success. Yet, no turnover could lead to some stagnation. McGwire, while a long-time La Russa favorite, would clearly change that.
2. Coaching familiarity. Though he has no formal professional coaching credentials, McGwire has worked with current Cardinals Matt Holliday and Skip Schumaker and former Redbird Chris Duncan in California in recent off-seasons. All have been very positive about the instruction given.
3. The Holliday factor. In his evaluation of where to sign a new contract, impending free agent Holliday might give a slight increase in consideration to the Cardinals with McGwire in the dugout. I don’t want to oversell this however, as I sincerely doubt agent Scott Boras cares one way or another enough to increase the value of any “hometown discount” for Holliday’s continued services.
4. The Pujols factor. Albert Pujols came up from the minors in spring training, 2001 and learned the ropes of being a major leaguer at the knee of McGwire, who was then starting what would be his final season. In fact, I have often wondered if Pujols hadn’t learned how to deal with the media from Big Mac, too. Then there is that not-so-little issue of Albert’s contract extension. Having McGwire around again every day surely couldn’t hurt Pujols’ feelings about the Cardinals’ commitment to win.

So, what is not to like?

It’s that 800-pound gorilla in the room – McGwire’s unwillingness to discuss the past. Those darned media types won’t let him alone. And that is the problem, a huge one.

Unless Mac deals head on with the questions that have smudged his reputation since his appearance in front of a congressional committee in March, 2005, his mere presence as a coach could turn the 2010 Cardinals into either a circus, a high-security prison camp or both.

There are two ways this could go. In their zeal to get McGwire out of hiding, the Cardinals may have decided to take the careful path – not addressing the off-field issues directly. Instead, they could decide to build an even stronger protective cocoon around McGwire than they did when he was an active player.

I think most of us can imagine what a distraction that could become and ultimately, how unsuccessful it would be.

The other way to move ahead is for McGwire to do precisely what even La Russa himself suggested this past spring – for Big Mac to provide some closure to the open questions about his past.

“I think if he came to spring training and was seen, so the writers and the fans could say, ‘There’s Mark,’ and answer whatever they want, I think that would go a long way, in my opinion,” La Russa told the New York Times in January.

It is an interesting theory that the prolonged delay on the part of La Russa to announce his return as manager for 2010 is not totally due to his own indecision, but instead to buy time to come up with a workable plan to get McGwire onto his coaching staff.

Here is hoping it is successful, but only if McGwire steps up and allows us all to move ahead.

Update: The Cardinals will be holding an 11 a.m. press conference on Monday. Subject not disclosed.

“30 million-plus.”

My first thought was that Big Mac must not be planning to come to work for the Cardinals as a spring training instructor any time soon. After all, Bill DeWitt, Jr. and the other members of the Cardinals ownership group probably spit out their morning coffee when reading the quote.

Obviously, the amount seems high, especially for those hoping upon hope that Pujols will accept a “hometown discount”. Then again, remember that Alex Rodriguez will be paid $32 million by the New York Yankees in each of the next two seasons and Pujols is almost five years younger.

To those who wonder if Mac might be serving as an agent for agents, priming the pump for Pujols’ representatives, the Beverly Hills Sports Council, it probably isn’t so, at least by design.

After all, McGwire was an oddity in that he did not even deploy his agent, Bob Cohen, in negotiating his final Cardinals contract. When he was ready, Big Mac simply called up DeWitt and hammered it out the old-fashioned way. McGwire knew he could have gotten more, but felt his deal was fair.

Pujols is not taking that path, instead following the common approach of deflecting discussion about his contract talks to his agents – along with placing his future in the hands of God.

As I thought about A-Rod’s money and McGwire, it reminded me of the latter’s famous 2001 interview with CNN/SI. Ironically, it was given during the first Cardinals major league spring training of a then-unknown, wearing number 68 in camp that March, Albert Pujols.

In the interview, McGwire, then the Cardinals slugging first baseman, was critical of escalating salaries in the game, affirming an earlier remark that he had been paid enough money to last “umpteen lifetimes”. He wondered aloud why others could not be satisfied with their current multi-million dollar commitments.

At the time, McGwire had just signed what would be his final deal, a below-market value contract for two years, $30 million. It wasn’t a hometown discount; instead it was an acknowledgment by McGwire that he had enough, more than enough, in fact.

I wonder how Pujols will ultimately decide how much is enough for him.

Specifically, in the 2001 interview, Big Mac demonstrated a high level of concern over the Texas Rangers’ ten-year, $252 million contract for A-Rod’s services that represented a record payday at that time.

“It’s mind-boggling. I’ve talked to a lot of veteran players and all their mouths have dropped. It set the bar very, very high. What Alex has done in the first six years, he’s going to have to do so much more to justify getting paid $20-$25 million. And I wish him nothing but the best. But just going out there and playing is not good enough. That’s not going to justify making $20 million. People are going to want to see more. And I hope he understand and realizes that’s what he’s going to have to do,” McGwire told CNN/SI.

Apparently during the intervening years, Big Mac has gotten over those concerns as he pushes Pujols’ current value, which in his view could surpass A-Rod for a new record-high annual value salary in MLB history.

When asked why he negotiated his own contract, this was McGwire’s reply in 2001:

“I think agents are starting to take over the game,” McGwire observed. “They’re starting to have more power than they should. And I’ve always told my friends that play major league baseball that you have to understand that the agent works for you, you don’t work for the agent. You, the player, make the calls, they don’t make the calls for you. And I hope more players do that. That it’s not about playing for every cent that you can get.”

Fast forwarding again eight years, it is too bad McGwire apparently hasn’t gotten the message through to his good friend and workout partner Matt Holliday. Under the direction of agent Scott Boras, the Cardinals outfielder is poised to auction his skills on the open market to the highest bidder. Yes, Boras is Rodriguez’ agent, too.

For the entire 2001 CNN/SI article, including video (RealPlayer plugin required), click on the following: “Heavy hitter – Mark McGwire speaks his mind”.

I began to read the four-page article with a healthy dose of skepticism. “So what if a stats guru had finally decided to break his silence about the steroid era? What possibly could he say that is new?” I thought to myself. By the end, James’ practical arguments had me in agreement.

Rather than recap it, lest I leave out important supporting points, I offer the link for you to read it in its entirety.

“Cooperstown and the ‘Roids” by Bill James, courtesy of ACTA Sports.