BASEBALL : Owners Talk Tough, Then Act Differently

It doesn’t jibe. It doesn’t figure.

Baseball’s owners have created a state of confusion and contradiction again.

On the one hand, their new negotiating team is opening collective bargaining talks with a proposal that would restrict free agency, eliminate arbitration and impose a modified salary cap. That’s a dramatic cutback in player rights, an unwinding of the clock that may be supported by a spring lockout, a measure of the owners’ commitment to it.

On the other hand, there they are again, going bananas in the marketplace, treating free agency as they did in the late 1970s and early ‘80s, when it was their new toy.

We’re not talking here about Rickey Henderson or Kirby Puckett or Robin Yount. Three-million dollars a year for a legitimate superstar can be chalked up, in some shocking measure, to normal escalation.

Three-million for Mark Langston or Mark Davis can help put a pitching staff in the World Series.

We’re talking here about:

--The St. Louis Cardinals giving $6 million for three years to Bryn Smith, who won 10 games last year.

--The Boston Red Sox giving $6.4 million for three years to Tony Pena, who drove in 37 runs last year.

--The New York Yankees giving $5.7 million to Pascual Perez, who won nine games last year, has had problems with drugs and sometimes can’t even remember how to get to the park.

Insanity?

How about the Pittsburgh Pirates giving Walt Terrell $3.6 million for three years, even though he was 18-34 in the last two seasons?

Or the Texas Rangers giving Gary Pettis $2.66 million for three years, even though he drove in only 18 runs last year, one with his annual home run?

There’s more, but the trend is clear, and the questions beg to be asked.

Where’s the restraint?

Where’s the cutback that the owners seem to deem so necessary as reflected by their collective bargaining proposal?

Is that just a sham?

Do they know no middle ground?

Or does it always come down to a choice between collusion or polluting the salary structure?

“It’s a wild scene,” Dodger owner Peter O’Malley agreed. “I don’t know where the storm is going to take us or where it will end, but you’ve got to stay in the race. You can’t stick your head in the sand.”

In other words, as much as O’Malley and others believe there is need for change in the system, the competitive environment is difficult to ignore, though they all did for a time and are still getting the bills for collusion.

“Sure, you can say you’re not going to pay $3 million a year or $2.5 million a year, but salaries continue to escalate, and if you’re going to compete on the field, you have to compete in the market,” said General Manager John Schuerholz of the Kansas City Royals.

“I don’t care how strong your farm system is, at some point you’re going to have to deal with a free agent, either one of your own or someone else’s.”

And at some point, Schuerholz added, the process has to change or the game will devour itself. As it is, there is already dissension.

Charles Bronfman, owner of the Montreal Expos, who have already lost Perez and Smith and are about to lose Langston and Hubie Brooks, said Wednesday that his fellow owners are acting like “damned fools,” making it impossible for clubs in smaller markets to compete.

Added Claude Brochu, the club president: “Bryn Smith is a good, average pitcher. That’s what he is, a .500 pitcher. If you triple his salary, it’s not suddenly going to make him a 20-game winner.”

Maybe not, but a lot of clubs seem determined to test the theory.

And in the process, undermine the theory behind their collective proposal.

The loss of three starting pitchers as free agents doesn’t tell the whole story of the Expos’ decimation.

It may be recalled that they traded another starting pitcher, John Dopson, to Boston for shortstop Spike Owen before the 1989 season, then traded three pitching prospects to the Seattle Mariners for Langston in May.

Now, in addition to the departure of Langston, Perez and Smith, the Expos are about to lose Brooks, generally their most consistent run-producer.

Manager Buck Rodgers, swallowing the developments at his Yorba Linda home, has yet to take arsenic along with them.

“Fortunately, the strength of our organization is pitching,” he said. “We’ve lost a lot, but what we’re talking about is replacing a couple of 10-game winners (Perez won nine, Smith 10 and Langston 12). We’re not hurting that badly.

“We have six pitching spots open now, but we have some young pitchers who may have replaced some of those people anyway. I’d rather push a young arm than pump up an old one.”

Even so, the Montreal rotation includes Dennis Martinez, Zane Smith and a series of question marks. One, Mark Gardner, was the American Assn.’s pitcher of the year in 1989. Mel Rojas, Howard Farmer and Brian Barnes, the NCAA strikeout leader at Clemson in 1987, will be given the chance to make the jump from double A.

“It’s going to take work, it’s going to take patience, but by the end of the season I think we can be decent,” Rodgers said. “No one is going to pick us to win a pennant, but no one picked us in ’87 and we won 91 games. There’s no sense crying about it. I think we can still be competitive.”

More than in the area of pitching, however, the Expos have been hurt most, Rodgers said, by a depleted inventory. They have nothing to trade for the left-handed hitter they needed so desperately down the stretch in ’89.

“No free agents want to come to Montreal,” Rodgers said. “None want to go to Cleveland. There are 15 or 16 clubs who have no chance of signing a (quality) free agent, and that puts more emphasis on trading and makes it that much harder to trade.

“On top of that, we really lack the inventory now. We can’t take a pitcher and get the hitter we need. I think I’ll take a deck of pinochle cards to Nashville (and the winter meetings) next week. I don’t think we’ll be doing anything else.”

Robin Yount has returned from a vacation in Hawaii, where the tug of war for his services continued.

Yount vacationed with longtime Milwaukee Brewer teammate Paul Molitor and close friend Bob McClure, a former Milwaukee teammate now with the Angels. While Molitor attempted to talk free agent Yount into staying with the Brewers, McClure tried to sell him on the Angels.

It is believed to have come down to that: either Milwaukee or Anaheim.

It would be a surprise if Yount went anywhere else, though it is said that he wants to be sure McClure will still be here before agreeing to an Angel contract. He is watching how the Angels handle McClure.

Unfortunately, there has been nothing to watch, agent Alan Meersand said.

The club has had no negotiations with McClure, who earned $275,000 last year, one of the Angels’ best investments. McClure, 36, was 6-1 with a 1.55 earned-run average and three saves. He restricted left-handed hitters to a .155 batting average.

A more practical complication in Yount’s possible departure from Milwaukee involves $5 million in low-interest loans that he received from the Brewers for investment in Arizona land.

Baseball frowns on a player switching teams while indebted to his previous team. Any offer to Yount will have to include a payoff of the loans.

Add Yount: Fred Claire, executive vice president of the Dodgers, flew to Phoenix Wednesday to meet with Robin and Larry Yount, who handles his brother’s negotiations. Claire was not available for comment, but Larry Yount said that Robin has an interest in any club he is talking to.

Barry Rona has refused to comment on his resignation as executive director of the owners’ Player Relations Committee.

However, the initial portrait seems accurate, a variety of baseball sources say. Rona was unhappy with the increased role of attorney Charles O’Connor in preparations for the collective bargaining talks, and unhappy with the pressure he was receiving from some owners to allow O’Connor to serve as lead negotiator.

“We’re trying to build a better relationship with the union, and Barry represented a bridge to collusion,” one executive said.

In other words: baseball burned its bridge.

Utility infielder Dave Anderson, who made $420,000 while hitting .229 in 140 at-bats with the Dodgers last year, is guaranteed $1.1 million by the two-year contract he signed with the San Francisco Giants Tuesday. Anderson will receive a $100,000 signing bonus and salaries of $450,000 in 1990 and $550,000 in 1991. He can also make another $200,000 in appearance and award bonuses.

His departure enhances the chance of young shortstop Jose Vizcaino to stay with the Dodgers in a utility role and means that Mike Sharperson is almost certain to stay, joining Mickey Hatcher and Lenny Harris as utility infielders. Hatcher and Harris can play the outfield as well.

Attorney Robert Fraley said that Anderson had an obvious tugs of emotion and loyalty at the thought of leaving the team that brought him to the majors, but that the Dodgers “wouldn’t offer any security (in the form of a multi-year contract), so there was no real decision for him.”