Former Jays play-by-play announcer Dan Shulman sits down with Scott Carson to talk Blue Jays and the state of baseball.
Between 1995 and 2001, Dan Shulman was the play-by-play voice for the Blue Jays on TSN, teaming with long-time analyst Buck Martinez to provide, arguably, the best TV coverage in franchise history. I was thrilled to share the booth with these fine broadcasters and have watched from afar with great pride after Dan took his career to the next level on ESPN, both on TV and radio. Despite working solely in the United States, he still maintains his residence just north of Toronto with his wife Sarah and their three sons, Matthew, Alex and Ben.
I caught up with Dan and went over a variety of baseball subjects, first on the Blue Jays specifically and then on the state of baseball in general.
Scott Carson: From your view, on the outside looking in, where do the Blue Jays belong in the grand scheme of things?
Dan Shulman: My view on the Jays is the same as it's been for a few years... if they could only stay healthy, and have everyone have a solid season, then in my view, they're a legitimate contender. But since they play in baseball's toughest division, almost everything has to go their way for them to contend. And that just hasn't happened the last few years. They have very little margin for error. I like the players their system has produced, and I think they play with a lot of heart and grit, but they just can't stay healthy enough to put it all together.
SC: You've been on the scene, first as a Blue Jays broadcaster and then with ESPN, since Roy Halladay first arrived in Toronto. Is he the best starter of his generation?
DS: I guess it depends on how we define "his generation." If we assume that the Clemens/Smoltz/Pedro/Maddux, etc., group was from the "previous generation," then Halladay is certainly in the conversation. If I were to rank all the pitchers of the last decade or so, then my top 2 would be Halladay and Johan Santana. I think I would have to give Santana a slight edge, but the way Halladay was pitching this season before he got hurt, and with his ability to go so deep into games, he was quickly narrowing the gap.
SC: Remembering Cito Gaston from the World Series years until his firing in 1997, and his second coming with the current team, is there any noticeable differences in the way that he manages?
DS: It's hard for me to speak definitively to that, since I'm not around the team now like I used to be, but Cito seems more comfortable and relaxed now than he did at times in his first stint with the Jays. I think he also may be even better now at relating to his players, and putting them in a position to succeed. This is a team with a mixture of veterans and young players, and he seems to be at ease with all of them. He didn't have that many young players during his first tenure, but he seems to have done wonders for the likes of Lind, Carlson, etc... Lastly, this team plays with a lot of heart, and I always feel that teams are a reflection of their manager, and I think Cito deserves credit for the never give up attitude this team displays.
SC: How will history look back on the steroid era, where so many sacred records were broken or, at least, threatened?
DS: I think our grandchildren will be asking us questions about the steroid era. And I think people of our generation will always feel that the game's integrity was compromised during this era... as much as Bonds, Clemens, Manny, etc., are the names that will always be brought up, just as big a story is all the great players who played clean, but can't prove it... unfortunately, anyone who played in this era can't escape being under suspicion to a certain extent. That, and the mockery that has been made of the record book, are two of the biggest things that bother me about what has transpired.
SC: How did the game get to this point re: steroids? Was it a case of greed, or did the player's egos make them believe they were above the law and wouldn't get caught?
DS: I think it was a combination of fear and greed. I think many players who turned to steroids felt they needed it just to make the majors, or to go from being a bench player making the major league minimum to a starter who could make enough to ensure his future. That group, in my opinion, did it more out of fear and worry than greed. The stars who wanted to become superstars did it out of greed and ego. And once a certain number of players were doing it, I imagine it became harder for others not to do it. And like most of us in most walks of life, we always think it'll be somebody else who will get caught. And I think that applies to professional athletes more than most. They tend to have a bit of a "bulletproof" attitude about things. I'm sure most of them never dreamed they would get caught.
SC: If you were Commissioner, what changes would you make to improve this great game?
DS: In no particular order, I would speed up the game by keeping batters in the box and pitchers on the rubber, start playoff games earlier, have more transparency and teeth in the steroid policy, institute a salary cap in the draft so that the weaker teams can afford to sign the players they want to draft, and add one more wild card team per league.
SC: With the current collective bargaining agreement between the owners and the player's union set to expire in December of 2011, should a salary cap be finally included to give the mid and small market teams a chance to compete? Or should it remain the same where teams like the Rays and Marlins can rise up and play in the World Series every once in a while?
DS: A tough one... I think the luxury tax and revenue sharing have helped to a certain extent. I'm not sure, given how different the finances of the Yankees are from a team such as the Marlins, that a true salary cap is ever feasible in baseball. But I believe if some sort of a cap were to be instituted in the draft, so the weaker/small market teams could afford to sign their picks, that would help. I also would like to see all players subject to the draft, not just Americans, Canadians and Puerto Ricans. There are times now when the richer teams grab the most talented young players from the Dominican or Venezuela, for example, just by outbidding everyone else. If everyone had to go through the draft, then the teams who work the hardest at scouting would have just as good a shot at getting the best talent.
SC: Or should baseball get up to speed with the other sports and allow teams to trade their draft picks? Sure, the Yankees and Red Sox would then be able to draft the Stephen Strasburg's of the world, but the Nationals would also be able to acquire a parcel of prospects to rebuild their franchise without having to lay out millions of dollars in bonus money.
DS: I believe that trading draft picks is fine, as long as it's in conjunction with some sort of salary cap or structure in the draft. So the smaller/weaker teams could either load up on multiple picks for the #1 overall pick, or they could acquire first round picks for veterans at the trading deadline.
SC: Is it time for the Interleague experiment to end and go back to a balanced schedule? I personally feel that the current situation is inherently unfair for the teams in the Wild Card races whose strength of schedule varies so dramatically.
DS: Another difficult question... the NFL has teams competing for wild-card spots with unbalanced schedules as well, but that doesn't necessarily make it right. I would propose reducing the number of interleague games from an average of 18/team, which most play now, to either 6 or 12 games per team. There's something to be said for seeing players you never get to see, and increased attendance, but I think reducing the number of games would enhance interleague play at this point.
SC: My final question will be a two-parter that basically have nothing to do with each other (it's to squeeze an extra answer out of you).
With so many players/pitchers getting hurt, should they give consideration to scaling back the schedule to 154 again, thus creating eight extra days off to keep the players fresh for August? And, before your stellar career winds down, Blue Jays fans would like to know if we'll hear you calling games for the Jays again?
DS: I prefer the 162-game schedule, and I'm cautiously optimistic that as we (hopefully) distance ourselves from the steroid era bit by bit, that players will start getting hurt less. I think a lot of the injuries were caused by steroid use, and the players' bodies inability to handle the extra bulk, etc... What I wouldn't mind, though, is a mandated one doubleheader/month per team... and I mean a real doubleheader. Two games for the price of one, with the second one starting 20 minutes after the end of the first. The bench guys could get in there a bit more, and then teams could have the next day off. And it would be a nice gesture to fans who have put up with so much nonsense from baseball over the years in the areas of labour relations, steroids, etc. I know it's completely impossible, but I used to love going to doubleheaders. A guy can dream, can't he?
As far as returning to the Jays... let me say this. I am very happy at ESPN. I have been treated extremely well by my employers, and I love what I do at the network. But if for whatever reason, I were to ever have to look for work elsewhere, Toronto would be the first place I would look. It is still my home, and I have very fond memories of working on Blue Jays telecasts.
