Revenue Stream, or Scheme?

So, the Oakland Athletics won’t make a contract offer to shortstop Miguel Tejada because baseball’s economic system wasn’t sufficiently repaired by the new bargaining agreement, their small-market revenue won’t permit it and they don’t want to insult the American League’s most valuable player, who is eligible to leave as a free agent when the new season ends.

Co-owner Steve Schott reaffirmed all of that by phone from his Santa Clara office Monday, but is it that simple, that clear-cut?

The answer is that there is no answer.

The answer is that no baseball development is simple and clear-cut in an era of complex economics and claims by agents that the owners have been involved again in collusion -- illegally impeding the market by sharing information on offers and fixing prices (i.e. salaries).

How simple can it be, for instance:

* When Schott claims, as he did on the phone, that the A’s can’t generate enough revenue “in our [miserable] ballpark” to satisfy Tejada’s stated desire for an eight- to 10-year contract, but then adds that the door isn’t closed and Tejada could document his insistence that he wants to stay by walking in and agreeing to negotiate a three- or four-year deal?

* When an agent tells me that he categorizes Schott’s announcement as “public collusion” but Rob Manfred, baseball’s lead labor lawyer, calls that nonsense, saying Tejada isn’t a free agent at this point, that there is no market for him at this point and, thus, the A’s didn’t violate anything but merely said how they were going to respond (or weren’t going to respond) to the number of years Tejada said he wanted?

* When baseball’s new bargaining agreement was supposed to help the low-revenue teams become more competitive through an increased dole from their wealthier brethren but Schott said it would not be fully implemented until the last two years of the agreement and was not significant enough to cover a contract of Tejada’s magnitude?

“We avoided a strike and that was the most positive thing about it, but the agreement doesn’t come close to fixing the system,” Schott said. “When you’re not even in position to make an offer to a kid who has been in our organization since he was 17 and is like a son to us, it’s not fair. Of course, a lot of things aren’t fair.”

Among them, perhaps, was the winter market. The players’ union has already asked management for documents that might prove there was collusion.

If the Tejada situation has compounded suspicions, Gene Orza, the union’s associate general counsel, chose his words carefully when reached in Seattle on Monday, saying:

“How would the A’s know what Tejada really wanted when they hadn’t negotiated with him? I mean, it’s food for thought. Were they really communicating with Tejada, the fans or the other clubs? Coupled with the fact that they said they weren’t going to trade him makes it even more curious.”

In that regard, Orza added, wasn’t increased revenue sharing -- over which the labor talks almost collapsed -- supposed to help clubs in the Athletics’ situation?

“That’s what we were told, at least, but maybe that wasn’t the purpose,” he said, implying that the money may be ending up in the owners’ pockets, as many big-market clubs had feared.

Said Manfred, when asked about the revenue-sharing issue: “Will it help clubs stay together? Yes. Will it help those clubs sign every premium player? No.”

The A’s have a $50-million payroll but only $80 million in revenue, according to management figures. They will receive about $12 million in revenue sharing, but even that might not be enough to cover Tejada, 26 and still improving.

It would certainly not be enough to cover Tejada and other A’s in line for a raise or eligible for free agency, as third baseman Eric Chavez will be after the 2004 season.

The A’s have been to the playoffs for three straight years, tying the New York Yankees for the most wins in the American League over the last four, and General Manager Billy Beane has been a miracle worker, juggling payroll and personnel.

Only two years ago, the A’s lost another MVP, despite making a six-year, $91-million offer to Jason Giambi. The club’s refusal to include the no-trade clause Giambi demanded left many convinced that the $91 million was merely for show in that the A’s knew their first baseman wouldn’t accept it without the no-trade clause.

Still, if they were going to put $91 million on the table for Giambi, why wouldn’t they at least make a proposal to Tejada, let the shortstop decide if he’d been insulted or not?

Of course, there’s that business of nothing being simple and clear-cut, and there are conspiracy theories devoid of merit:

* If by drawing attention to their inability to pay Tejada the A’s were trying to stimulate civic interest in a new stadium and providing Commissioner Bud Selig with another pulpit from which to preach that the A’s can’t make it without a new park, that isn’t going to happen, given the economy and environment in Oakland

* If by making their intentions regarding Tejada public the A’s intended to remove the issue as a distraction, that too isn’t going to happen because Tejada and the A’s are going to be asked about it throughout their travels.

Said Schott, “There was no hidden-agenda, underlying plot.”

Said Beane, “We simply didn’t want to be disingenuous with a player who has meant so much to us, and the fact of the matter is that a player of his caliber is going to receive contract offers that are beyond our means.”

Perhaps, but the A’s sent a dangerous message in the process.

Tejada can be counted on to play hard, as all players do in their walk years, but he and his teammates have been reminded that Oakland is merely a career bus stop.

“We’re seeing now that the team will basically fall apart year by year,” outfielder Terrence Long told Bay Area reporters. “We’ve got no other choice but to speed up our timetable. We have to take advantage of what we have and get it done this year while Miggy is still with us.”

Maybe Miggy will place a three- or four-year value on his desire to stay.

Maybe the A’s, high on shortstop Bobby Crosby, their No. 1 draft pick two years ago out of Long Beach State, will rescind their no-trade promise and deal him in midseason, having now informed clubs that they don’t intend to sign him.

Maybe all this is what it is and he is headed to free agency, which is no longer what it once was, and he may find that even the big-market offers are scarce, although some Dodger officials seemed to be salivating when Tejada’s name came up Monday.

Of course, this has a long way to go before playing out, and it’s worth repeating: Nothing in baseball is simple and clear-cut.