ESPN MLB

Life sure is beautiful these days on Planet Manny. Uhhh, a little too beautiful.

Hey, we couldn't be happier for those Los Angeles Dodgers, who are selling about 30,000 tickets a day now that they've moved their home games to Planet Manny. But we'd like to ask one little question of all those people in L.A. who are showering their man Manny Ramirez with so much love:

What the heck are you cheering for?

For a man who decided his personal net worth was more important than an entire franchise and all the people who played with him, covered for him, depended on him?

Sheez. How sad is that?

"It really bothers me," one GM said this week of the Manny-mania lovefest that has unfolded in L.A. "What he did in Boston was criminal. Now he goes there, and everything's OK? No, sir. It doesn't change the fact that how he got there was criminal."

Yeah, we know what every Dodgers fan on earth is thinking: "What he did in Boston isn't our problem. He didn't blow up our franchise. So who cares?"

OK, here's why you should care: Because this could easily morph into a giant problem for every franchise; for the entire sport, in fact.

If Manny Ramirez wanders into the free-agent market this winter and gets anything close to the four years and $100 million he believes he'll get, think about the message that would send, the precedent that would set.

It would, in effect, be an open invitation to every selfish superstar in baseball to pull a Manny. Act up. Stop hustling. Stop trying. Refuse to play. Make up an injury. Whatever you have to do to get back out there on the free-agent market. It's all worth it.

Why not? If bad behavior winds up delivering a $100 million reward for Manny Ramirez, why wouldn't two or three, or 50 or 100, other great players think, "Heck, it worked for him. Why not me?"

Most players -- and most agents -- don't think that way, luckily. But that doesn't mean we should pretend there's only one Manny. And we'd be crazy to pretend that his agent, some guy named Scott Boras, has only one client. So don't kid yourself. What happens to Manny this winter can, and will, have larger ramifications.

We found ourselves in a conversation on this very subject the other day, with an executive of a team that briefly kicked around Ramirez's name before the deadline. That team would have wanted him purely as a rental, however -- because it was well aware it would have That Other Manny on its hands if it were to sign him beyond this year.

This team knew it couldn't possibly give this guy the deal he'll want this winter -- because of that very precedent we just laid out for you.

"If you do that," this exec said, "you're setting a precedent that will lead to failure -- and expensive failure."

But this same executive harbored no illusions that every team in his sport would think that way -- or care about that precedent even if it were to do so.

"See, you're thinking logically," he said. "You have to think selfishly. Unfortunately, there will be somebody who says, 'He's just what we're looking for.'"

It's hard to dispute that theory, obviously. There's always somebody. Right? But just out of curiosity, we surveyed officials of five teams from all over the payroll spectrum. The question we asked was this:

What kind of market, and what kind of contract, can Manny expect this winter?

The answers we got headed in every conceivable direction.

"I don't think the market will be very big, and I definitely don't think he'll get $25 million a year for four years," an official of one large-market club said. "How could you go more than two years on a guy like that? I think he'll get the Red Sox deal -- two years at $20 [million] a year."

"I don't think there'll be a feeding frenzy for Manny Ramirez," said another executive who has worked for large-market, small-market and middle-market teams. "I don't see many places he could land."

Said a middle-market GM: "I think he'll get a lot of money. I just don't think he'll get a real long-term deal. I think somebody might gamble on giving him two years, at $18-20 million a year. But I can't see anybody going longer than that."

The other two clubs we surveyed didn't see it that way, however.

"I think he'll find some team that will give him what he wants," said an official of one small-market club. "And if he can't, I think he'll stay out there 'til he gets it."

"I bet he gets $15-20 million a year for three or four years, especially if he keeps his nose clean and helps the Dodgers win it," said another executive who has worked for large, small and middle-market teams. "Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if [Dodgers owner] Frank McCourt would do that. He loves all those Boston guys."

But within seconds of making that prediction, the same executive made it clear how appalled he was by the whole thought that Manny would cash in after all this.

"He wouldn't play for me," the exec said. "I'll tell you that. I might cost my team a chance to go to the World Series. But we work too hard to put a team together to take on a guy like that. As soon as you open the vaults for him, you'll wind up with the same problems Boston had."

The Dodgers, of course, haven't experienced any of those problems -- yet. Oh, they had a chuckle-filled Manny Moment the other night, when the ninth inning almost started without their left fielder joining in on the festivities. But other than that, the Dodgers' visit to Planet Manny has been one big happy carnival of line drives, tough at-bats and cha-chinging cash registers.

It's a wonderful little portrait of how much fun it can be to have this guy around when he feels like going with the program. He can be lovable. He can be a good teammate. He's one of the half-dozen greatest right-handed hitters who ever lived. He can even run to first base on days when the constellations line up correctly.

But after what went on in Boston last month, what should we make of it when this Manny shows up in Southern California? Is this the real Manny? Or is this just part of his new hit-the-lottery marketing campaign?

You watch him mash in Chavez Ravine these days, and he looks like a guy who has decided to hit about .700 the rest of the season. But if he really thinks that pushing his "on" button for two months will make teams more interested in handing him $100 million this winter, he might just have it backward.

"It makes me less interested," one NL executive said. "Not that I'd have been interested in the first place. He's going to turn it on to get a contract. But once you give him that contract, he's going to turn it off. And then all you've got is a headache every other week."

So will teams line up this winter to volunteer for that headache, knowing what they know -- and knowing the kind of behavior they might be encouraging? It will be fascinating to watch, all right. Will there really be a team dumb enough to give this man his four years and $100 million, just months before his 37th birthday?

"If there is, it's somebody stupid," the same executive warned. "And he'll probably get fired a year later for doing something stupid. I don't think Manny should get more than a one-year deal the rest of his career. And anybody who gives him more deserves what they get."

No doubt. But does the whole sport deserve the consequences? That's the real question every team should weigh before it empties its checking account for the inimitable Manuel Aristides Ramirez.

Ready to rumble

• Rays-ing the stakes: Clubs that have spoken to the Rays this week came away thinking it was highly unlikely they'll make a major deal for another bat, even after losing Carl Crawford and Evan Longoria in the same weekend. The Rays are still sending exactly the same message they sent before the trading deadline -- that they want to add a hitter only if it's a guy who can make a difference and is multitalented enough that he won't hurt them defensively. But no one who has passed through the waiver minefield so far fits that description.

Gary Sheffield? The Rays have shown zero interest because he can't play the field (among other issues).

Barry Bonds? As one NL executive said, "If they're looking for some justification (for going after him), now they've got a way to justify it." But there is still no indication Tampa Bay has any interest -- for all the obvious reasons.

"The thing they're scared about is disrupting what they have in the clubhouse," said one scout who has seen a lot of the Rays recently. "And really, that's the only way he doesn't fit in there. But I don't blame them. Their chemistry is the best thing they have going for themselves right now. … There's really something magical going on with that club."

• Rockie time: Teams that have been monitoring the waiver wire keep asking: Where are all the Rockies? From all accounts, not one player Colorado was dangling in July has been placed on waivers this month. But that actually stands to reason in this team's case.

It makes sense for the Rockies to wait as long as possible to determine whether they're contenders. Plus, baseball men who have done a lot of business with GM Dan O'Dowd say his normal August M.O. is not to place his biggest chips on waivers until near the end of the month, because he feels that's a time teams claim players to make a deal, not to block a deal.

So it should be at least a week until the next Brian Fuentes Watch erupts. But when Fuentes does hit that wire, file this away: It's believed that the team that came closest to dealing for him in July was the Cardinals -- with Colorado targeting left-hander Jaime Garcia.

• Phila-Manny-ical: Maybe the Phillies didn't exactly lie about the full extent of their interest in Manny Ramirez before the trading deadline. But it's evident now that they talked more seriously about dealing for Manny than they let on. Nevertheless, they had a bunch of concerns that stopped them from moving forward. And one of them was a never-ending Manny issue -- hustle (or lack thereof).

How'd you like to be Charlie Manuel trying to explain to Jimmy Rollins why he got benched for not running out a ball when Manny has turned that act into an art form?

• Fresh Eyre: We're also hearing the Phillies nearly came away with Pittsburgh reliever John Grabow before the deadline, as part of a three-team deal that also could have brought them a back-of-the-rotation starter. Instead, they wound up trading for Lou Piniella's least-favorite left-hander, Scott Eyre. "There were a million left-handed relievers out there, and he's as good as any of them," one scout said. "His only problem in Chicago was getting in Lou's doghouse. And when you get in that doghouse, you don't get out. It's a very deep doghouse. It's kind of a Saint Bernard doghouse."

• Their Bucs stopped there: Speaking of Pirates deals that almost happened, it's incredible how many teams thought they were on the verge of some kind of pre-deadline trade with Pittsburgh that fell through when the Jason Bay/Ramirez extravaganza came together.

Indications are that, with only minutes left until the deadline, the Rays still thought they were in line to trade for Bay, the Rockies apparently thought they had a shot to reel in Ian Snell, the Marlins believed they'd be the third team in the Manny/Bay deal, and the Phillies thought that the Grabow trade was very much alive.

Then the Pirates opted to focus all their last-minute energies on that Boston/L.A. blockbuster. So the only thing those other clubs got out of it was fewer rollover minutes on their cell phone bills in August.

• Out of the Pitts: In the hours after the trading deadline, we were critical of the Pirates for dealing three high-profile players without getting back a single can't-miss, centerpiece prospect back. But in the days since, we've been convinced by executives of several teams that the Pirates actually did better in their two big deals than we originally gave them credit for.

"There are no stars in there, but they need that depth of talent," an official of one club said. "They need numbers. And they accomplished that."

"I think they're on the right track," one NL scout said. "At least they decided they couldn't keep doing the same thing they've been doing and took some chances."

One NL executive even defended them on the widely hammered Xavier Nady-Damaso Marte deal, saying: "If they got three major league pitchers in that deal, and I think they did, then great for them. And all three guys (Jeff Karstens, Ross Ohlendorf and Daniel McCutchen) are either ready or close. So that's a good deal, not a bad deal."

Nevertheless, when asked to name the best player of the eight this team received in those trades, the baseball men we spoke with had a tough time finding a clear-cut Pirates acquisition they'd buy stock in. The name we heard most: 21-year-old right-hander Bryan Morris (3.15 ERA in low Class A). "If he stays healthy, he's definitely the best talent in that group," one GM said.

• Livan large: The good news for the Twins when Colorado claimed Livan Hernandez off the waiver wire was that they were off the hook for the $1 million or so left of Hernandez's salary. The bad news was that the Twins agreed to stay on the hook for all of Hernandez's incentives. And those could get pricey.

Hernandez's innings total is now up to 142 1/3. Once he gets to 160, the Twins will owe him $133,334 (or $133,333) for every five innings he pitches for the rest of the season. So if he reaches, say, 190 innings, that's another $800,000. If he makes it to 200, that's an extra $1.1 million. It's always the fine print that gets you, isn't it?

• Dunn deal: Did Arizona give up too much (three players, presumably including Micah Owings) for Adam Dunn? The Reds based their asking price on the premise that Dunn will be a Type A free agent, so they needed to do better than two draft picks. But officials of two other teams say there's "no way" they would've offered Dunn arbitration. "There's a guy who, if you offer him arbitration, there's too good a chance he's going to take you up on it," one said.

Nevertheless, the Diamondbacks needed to add offense, especially left-handed-hitting offense. They're 13th in the league in hitting, and 11th in OPS, versus right-handers.

"He's a better player than people give him credit for," one scout said of Dunn. "People think he's just some lazy guy who can't do anything but hit the ball out of the park. He's better than that. He's a force. You have to make pitches on him. If you don't, he'll go long on you or he'll walk."

• Danks a million: White Sox GM Kenny Williams might not be able to find a starting pitcher this month to replace Jose Contreras. But if you look backward instead of forward, you can argue that Williams is the GM who made the best trade of each of the past two offseasons -- that Carlos Quentin heist last winter and John Danks for Brandon McCarthy the year before.

"I love him," one scout said of Danks. "He's a top-two rotation guy. No doubt in my mind. Maybe not this year, but not real far down the road if he's not already."

• Seeing Red: We've heard some buzzing lately, among baseball men, scouts and players, about a recent Dusty Baker quote on the Reds' troubles that sure looked like an attempt to absolve himself of all blame.

"I have never wanted to win more than I do right here, and I will," Baker told the Dayton Daily News' Hal McCoy. "But this is Wayne Krivsky's team, not Walt Jocketty's and not mine. I just hope there is enough out there after the season that we can get to help us."

Maybe we're not reading that right. But if we're misinterpreting it, suffice it to say we're not the only ones. And it appears Baker is saying that the Reds' disappointing record is his players' fault, and his former GM's fault, but not his own or his current GM's doing.

Well, obviously, Jocketty is only now beginning to put his stamp on this roster. And the players haven't exactly overachieved. But doesn't the manager bear some responsibility for this mess, too?

Scouts who have followed the Reds continually talk about their messy execution, their mediocre defense and their distinct lack of energy. There also has been plenty of second-guessing of Baker's lineup choices (particularly those 242 at-bats Corey Patterson has gotten).

And there is no shortage of people wondering whether Aaron Harang's forearm injury -- along with his 1-6, 8.49 slide in the past 2½ months -- might be a direct result of Baker's decision to allow him to throw 63 pitches in relief on two days' rest in a May 25 18-inning game, then start him on three days' rest immediately afterward.

Dusty Baker has many admirable traits. And this is not an attempt to heap all the blame on him. We're just saying that when teams like this fall apart, it's everybody's fault -- including the manager's.

• From our scout troop: This week, the beloved Rumblings and Grumblings scouting bureau presents scouting reports on a couple of AL Central pitchers who are nonstop topics of conversation these days:

Justin Verlander -- "His stuff is now a grade below what it was. He's become a two-seam sinkerball pitcher. Where's the front-door hammer [curveball]? Where's that four-seam fastball he used to bang guys away with? I'm not seeing it. I'm seeing a lot of contact, and the hitters look way too comfortable."

Francisco Liriano -- "He's still good, but he's not the Liriano we saw before the surgery. His stuff is probably 3 to 4 miles per hour less than what it used to be. The changeup is pretty much the same speed, but the slider and the fastball are not the same. Don't get me wrong. He's still good. But he's not that 'wow' he was before. He's not as electric. He's not as intimidating. But he's still a good, useful, No. 3-4 starter type. And that's not a bad thing."

• Manny, meet Hank and George: Finally, for all those people who have been so quick to dismiss the idea that Manny Ramirez could wind up with the Yankees next year, we bring you this word of caution: True, the Yankees' baseball operation may already have decided it wants no part of him. But as a longtime official of one AL team laughed when this topic came up, "When the Steinbrenners own your team, you can't ever say there's no chance of anything."

Quotes of the week

• From 45-year-old Phillies pitcher Jamie Moyer, after learning he'd just become the first Phillie to allow three runs or fewer in 12 straight starts since Chris Short ran off 23 in a row in 1967: "Was I playing then?"

• From Pirates first baseman Doug Mientkiewicz, on the zany play Sunday in which Moyer ran over first-base ump Randy Marsh on his way to second after a wild throw: "I told Randy it was a moving pick, but if he had his feet set, it would have been a block, and he would have got the call."

• From Dodgers pinch-hit witticist Mark Sweeney to Manny Ramirez, a day after the Dodgers found themselves left-fielder-less when the ninth inning began, because Manny thought he'd been taken out for defense: "Hey Manny, we're playing nine innings tonight."

Stat of the week

From the latest edition of our favorite Chicago sports parody publication, The Heckler:

All-time baseball movie batting leaders
1. Kelly Leak, Chico's Bail Bonds, .665
2. Roy Hobbs, New York Knights, .422
3. Crash Davis, Durham Bulls, .398
4. Dottie Hinson, Rockford Peaches, .377
5. Willie Mays Hayes, Cleveland Indians, .356

Star power of the week

Remember back before the All-Star Game, when we asked you loyal readers to propose ideas for improving the All-Star festivities? Well, now that we've got that pesky trading deadline out of the way, we can present some of our favorites.

But before we get to them, we should report that we received hundreds and hundreds of responses. So although we tried our best, we couldn't possibly get to them all. Sorry. Maybe next year.

• Loyal reader Will Schlickenmaier proposed a new array of skills competitions, including a race of baseball's fastest runners against the outfielders with the best arms and a fielding competition that would give Gold Glovers a chance to flash a little leather. Cool ideas.

• Loyal reader Chase Marshall proposed a pitchers' control contest. But loyal reader Angel Vizcarra had the opposite thought, suggesting a radar-gun competition. Hmmm, would Dr. James Andrews throw out the first ball?

• Loyal reader Nick Elam had a fun idea for jazzing up the Home Run Derby -- sending a bunch of slick-fielding AL outfielders (Torii Hunter, Ichiro, etc.) out there to try to leap above the fence to rob NL Derby contestants. Then he'd dispatch the NL Web Gem patrol to do the same with the AL boppers. You might have to station them all in the third deck, but what the heck.

• Loyal reader Ian Rubinoff doesn't think All-Star Games should last 15 innings, or until the bat boys have to pitch. His plan: If it's tied after nine innings, decide it with a Home Run Derby. So let's get this straight. This time, the Derby would count, too?

• And loyal reader Dave Litman was one of many folks who think that if the game goes to extra innings, starting position players should be allowed to go back into the game. Just think of the drama if Albert Pujols were to pop out of the dugout to pinch hit in the 11th inning. Hey, works for us. As do many of your great ideas. So store them up and hit us again with them next June.

Jayson Stark is a senior writer for ESPN.com. His book, "The Stark Truth: The Most Overrated and Underrated Players in Baseball History," was published by Triumph Books and is available in bookstores. Click here to order a copy.