Lost art of the steal

In standing the test of time, baseball has gone through many cycles independent of labor strife. Look at the power factor, for instance. At the turn of the century, ten and 12-homer totals would be enough to win you a crown. Babe Ruth then came in and changed all that with his magnificent swing.

Now think back to the 1960s, the "Decade Of The Pitcher". How many clubs actually had a composite team average of .250 or better? How close did the leagues come to not having a .300 hitter at all? How many ERAs were grossly below two?

Then comes 1987, the year of the "Rabbit Ball" that's still talked about today. Afterward, expansion and (yes) steroids boosted the power totals for a time. Now they seem to be levelling off, as 60 homers a season once again ranks as an accomplishment instead of something to yawn at.

What's been lost in all this is the stolen base. Really getting into the game in the mid and late-1980s, I expressed jealousy at the St. Louis Cardinals, who would swipe 300 bases a season as a team. How could you think of stopping Vince Coleman as he stole 100-110 bases on his own every year? Rickey Henderson and Lou Brock? Forget it, you may as well assume they'd score once they get on base, because they truly manufactured runs on their own.

Look at today. Even the once-speedy veterans hanging on today are nowhere near the top-ten basestealers of all time. Can Kenny Lofton, once a 70-steal absolute for the Indians, hold a candle to people like Tim Raines? Will Carl Crawford ever hit such a total for the Devil Rays, or will his power come into more prominence? It is likely that could happen, and his speed will be put aside for Earl Weaver's favorite strategy: the three-run homer.

I do not knock clubs' strategies. These days, you need instant rallies to attack otherwise effective pitching staffs. There's nothing more debilitating to a pitcher than having three earned runs come at him suddenly, signalling an early end to their day.

But whatever happened to the speedy leadoff man? To see Jason Kendall lead off for the A's is a case in point. Kendall has great speed for a catcher and will never be known for a power bat. But is this saying that the A's don't have another better speed weapon for the top of the order? Or are they putting those speedsters lower in the order because speed is not the manager's weapon of choice?

I applaud "small ball", and still think it could be as effective today as it was in Raines' era. For sure, it would befuddle pitchers and opposing managers.

Great clubs find ways to win that are multi-dimensional and have a huge bag of tricks they can pull out at any time. What did they do with the bag labeled "steals"?

Pardon the expression; but in game play, stealing is not a crime.