BASEBALL : $280 Million Divided by 800 Won’t Go Well

It can be said with certainty that no owner was happy about having to contribute to the $280-million collusion settlement, but now they can sit back and watch the players fight over it.

There may not be a bloodbath, but in some cases the process will leave player pitted against player, player pitted against his union.

“It’s a strange and unhappy ending,” agent Richard Moss said of this final collusion chapter.

How can anyone be unhappy dividing up $280 million?

Consider:

--More than 800 players, some already retired, met the Monday deadline and filed more than 2,500 claims for salary damages stemming from collusion in the winters of 1986, ’87 and ’88.

The claims, some of which cite extenuating damages through 1991, may exceed $1 billion, meaning most will be reduced or thrown out.

--The Major League Players Assn. will determine who gets how much, but each player can then take his case to arbitration, creating the player vs. union scenario in which the player probably would compare his situation to that of another player-- breeding, perhaps, ill will among the union membership.

“The smartest thing the owners did was say to the association, ‘Here’s the $280 million; you decide what you want to do with it,’ ” Moss said. “It’s an unenviable position. A lot of players are going to be upset and dissatisfied with the way they’re treated, and for lack of someone better, they’re going to blame the union.”

Don Fehr, executive director of the players’ association, doesn’t subscribe to that theory, saying every award will have to be approved by arbitrator Tom Roberts, whether the player objects to the union judgment or not.

“The world’s not perfect, and to the extent that some players may be unhappy, I think they’ll understand the limits of what’s possible,” Fehr said. “I’m not concerned about it.”

What’s possible?

It’s too early to tell, but it has been learned that Jack Morris, who tested the frigid waters of free agency on behalf of the union in the winters of 1987 and ’88 and was forced to return to the Detroit Tigers without competing bids, has filed what is believed to be the largest claim, seeking $4.5 million of the $280 million.

And Andre Dawson, who was able to leave the Montreal Expos as a free agent only when he offered himself to the Chicago Cubs for $500,000 in 1987, is seeking $3.5 million.

Said Randy Hendricks, a respected agent who works in partnership with his brother, Alan: “The union faces a monumental job. It’s like reconstructing a plane that’s crashed. The union has to reconstruct a salary structure that would have existed had it not been for collusion.”

Most of the envelopes have yet to be opened, and it will be at least a year before anyone receives any of that $280 million.

The union, Fehr said, has to create a computer program that will help organize and cross-reference the claims plus provide an awards scale. It is all “found” money, to an extent, but not all the claimants will be laughing on their way from the data bank.

THE FIRINGS

Was there a thread linking the firings of Nick Levya, Don Zimmer, John Wathan and Frank Robinson, other than the losing records of the teams they managed?

The thread is that their firings continued to underscore the difficult and changing nature of the manager’s job in an era when big salaries and guaranteed contracts have made the handling of players more critical than game strategy--an era in which it is more difficult to trade because of those contracts, meaning it is the manager who has to go.

“It’s obvious things have changed,” said Don Grenesko, the corporate president of the Chicago Cubs and the man responsible for firing Zimmer.

“Managing is not the same as it was 15 or 20 years ago, and that’s because the players have changed--the salaries have changed the way they approach the game.”

Is bunting a lost art or does it simply not pay? Why should a player eligible for arbitration or free agency sacrifice his statistics by hitting behind the runner?

Why should a player with a guaranteed contract fear his manager or worry about criticizing him publicly, creating a perception of clubhouse unrest, of lost control on the part of the manager?

Why jeopardize the security of those paydays by playing with a hangnail?

“Find a manager who can control the clubhouse and you have a good one,” said Cub General Manager Jim Frey. “The decisions he makes there are as important now as those he makes on the field.”

THE FIRINGS II

A closer look at the three most recent changes:

--Zimmer forced the hand of a corporate owner who spent more than $23 million on free agents last winter and prefers the use of percentages and printouts over the seat-of-the-pants style of managing employed by Zimmer.

The manager was unhappy when he did not get a multiyear contract after leading the Cubs to a division title in 1989 and unhappier yet when he recently read a Grenesko quote to the effect that the manager would be evaluated at the end of the year, as all Chicago Tribune employees are.

Zimmer, though lacking leverage, asked for a meeting with Grenesko and told him that he wanted to be evaluated by July 1, and that if his contract wasn’t extended at that time, he would leave at the end of the year.

Grenesko, known as The Suit because of his corporate image, delivered a pink slip along with his evaluation Tuesday, citing a lack of spark along with the stumbling start. The team’s .220 average with runners in scoring position, the loss of injured pitchers Mike Harkey and Danny Jackson and the failure of third baseman Gary Scott to survive the jump from class A--he was sent back with a .165 batting average--all contributed to the lack of spark.

Jim Essian, 20 years younger than Zimmer, will try to restore it. He uses percentages, reads the printouts and was a brawling-type leader in the minors, but can he control a veteran clubhouse in which the average salary is more than $1 million?

--Like the Cubs, the Kansas City Royals invested heavily in free agents the last two years, only to finish sixth in 1990 and spend the first two months of 1991 in the division basement.

Injuries nearly destroyed the pitching staff last year, while the loss of George Brett and Kevin Seitzer to injuries, coupled with the struggles of rookies Brian McRae and Terry Shumpert, handicapped the offense this season, leading to 15 losses in 22 games when Wathan was fired. The manager could not be blamed for the injuries, but no other firing had been anticipated for so long.

A former Royal catcher, Wathan’s decision-making process was viewed as hesitant, and he was perceived to be a soft disciplinarian. He reportedly did not have the support of black players, who recalled that Wathan’s wife once led a petition campaign aimed at preventing former Royal Willie Wilson from moving into a certain neighborhood in the Kansas City area. And Wathan did not engender total trust among several players who were his former teammates and regarded him as a pipeline to management when he was catching for the team.

The Royals have the time and the talent to rebound, but it is characteristic of baseball’s often slapstick management that they have now given Hal McRae the multiyear managerial contract they refused to give him when he rejected their one-year offer in 1987, leading to the hiring of Wathan.

--In 1989 Frank Robinson was the American League’s manager of the year, taking the Baltimore Orioles to the final week of the season with a shot at the division title after they had lost 107 games the year before.

Did Robinson suddenly lose his 1989 magic, or have the Orioles simply returned to their true talent level, a test for any manager?

It is said that Robinson had become distant, that some pitchers were unsure of their roles and angered at the quick hooks they were receiving. But a staff earned-run average of 4.96 reflects the inconsistency of the pitching Robinson had to deal with, and the prolonged loss of Glenn Davis cut the heart out of his offense.

On the day before Robinson’s firing, 17 of his 25 players checked into the trainer’s room for various forms of treatment.

Robinson may have too much pride to accept the 40% pay cut and front-office assistant’s role he has been offered by the Orioles. Johnny Oates, a former Dodger catcher who enjoys reading the rulebook in his spare time and is a Robinson friend, has become the team’s fifth manager in the last seven years.

Said Robinson: “Johnny Oates has a chance to be a good manager, but don’t expect him to be a good manager if the players don’t perform.”

CRAIG NEXT?

Roger Craig’s strong relationship with San Francisco Giant president Al Rosen and his previous success seem to mitigate against his firing, but Craig has said he would walk away if he thought that would help lift the Giants out of the current morass.

Are the Giants at a point where they are accepting defeat?

“We’re at a stage where there’s something missing, but I don’t like to use the word accepting ,” Craig said. “We’ve been battling, but we’ve got to do more than battle. We’ve got to play with more intensity . . . take it out on the opposition. I see the same things every day now. Nobody is going to feel sorry for us and just give us a game.”

What’s missing? The electricity of Brett Butler at the top of the lineup for one thing and power from slumping Matt Williams in the middle for another, but what the Giants seem to be missing most is faith--in their recycled pitchers and in their ability to rebound from the dreadful start.