For those who don’t know the name, Mark Cuban is the notorious owner of the Dallas Mavericks. He has become famous for his high profile actions on reality TV shows, arguing with NBA referees and executives, and even quarrelling with NBA players. Some people — including other owners in Major League Baseball — are opposed to the idea of Cuban owning a team in their league. He tried to buy the near-bankrupt Chicago Cubs in 2009 but was quickly turned away. This writer thinks he could be very good for the sport, even though he could be the next George Steinbrenner.

Though it’s still one of the most popular sports, professional baseball has become stale in some ways. MLB Commissioner Bud Selig is so set in his ways (which is usually the ways of the owners), that it has become a slow, painful process to get any sort of change in the game. The owners have become an old boys club that stays tightly knit to prevent any changes from coming to their beloved game.

For example, how many years have people been debating the appropriate use replays in baseball? How long have people been calling for a more balanced game with a salary cap?

As it stands, teams in the major markets have an advantage over smaller fan bases. Sure, a team can build themselves up with good trades, great scouting, well run management, and a little bit of luck; but these chances are much more unlikely for the small market team. The window of opportunity closes much faster for a team like Kansas City, which must have everything fall into place for them to contend, not to mention that it takes five to six years to build a team. And if everything does fall into place, they may be able to contend for only two to three seasons before a key player may leave for greener pastures.

On the other hand, a team like the Yankees can spend what they want and keep that window open for years at a time.

You may be asking yourself what all of this have to do with Mark Cuban. Well, first, the Texas Rangers have a chance to get an owner that almost every fan wishes would own their team. Unlike many owners who use their team as a tax write off or bragging point, Cuban has shown that he cares about the same thing that sports fans care about: winning. Cuban is a sports fan who just so happens to be wealthy enough to own professional sports teams. Rangers fans would be lucky to get him as their owner. If he wins the bid, Rangers fans can expect a new era of winning in Texas.

Personally, I am not a Rangers fan. But as a baseball fan, I would love to see a few changes made to the game I love so dearly, and I think Cuban is the fresh face that could catalyze some of those changes. Imagine him kicking in the door of the big-wig baseball owners meetings and nagging those stiffs until they’re forced to concede, or at least to attempt to make a change.

In an era where it seems every umpire call is constantly scrutinized (and it seems with great reason more recently), how is baseball the only sport not utilizing the technology afforded to them? In the past few weeks, there are been a few terrible calls that have changed the outcomes of a few games. Would you know who Jim Joyce is if not for the un-“Perfect Game”?

Bud Selig has done very little to advance this game during his reign as commissioner and continues to drag his feet. He’s very lucky that baseball fans are some of the most loyal fans in all of sports. Mark Cuban could be just the man this sport needs to get things done. When the owner of your team is also the president of a fan club of a player signed to his team (as is Cuban of Dirk Nowitzki of his Mavericks), isn’t that a team you’d want to play for? Isn’t that a team you could feel proud to root for?!

Why would MLB and its owners want to keep Mark Cuban out of their beloved game? The only answer that seems logical is fear. Fear of the winds of change that Cuban would bring.

As crazy as Cuban comes across in the press, he cares about winning, he cares about his team, he cares about his coaches, and he cares about his players. How many owners can you truly say that about?

A few years ago, Bud Selig changed all of that. Now the All-Star Game “matters”.

For some inexplicable reason, Bud decided that an exhibition game, where the fans vote for the starting line-up, determines home field advantage in the World Series.  Logic would say that the team with the better record in the regular season deserves the reward of home field advantage in the World Series. That’s something fairly obvious to everyone — except Bud Selig, I guess.

(Since the All-Star Game has decided home-field advantage in the Fall Classic, the American League hasn’t lost. This includes the 2009 All-Star Game.)

The All-Star Game itself has also suffered. Every year, a few head-scratchers make the All-Star team (every franchise gets one All-Star representative), and up until a few years ago, that’s all they were.  Now, players who don’t deserve to be All-Stars — and play for last-place clubs — play key innings in the fight for home-field advantage in the World Series.

On that note, let’s look at the lineups and see which questionable All-Stars could figure into the outcome of the game and home-field advantage in the World Series. In the National League, the first name that jumped out to me was Omar Infante. Sure, he may be having a good year… for Omar Infante! Why is he there, especially when he has fewer home runs than Yovanni Gallardo? Well, NL Manager Charlie Manuel felt that he needed a utility infielder, just in case. As stupid as that sounds, can you really blame Charlie for wanting a player who can play any position when home field advantage is on the line?

Next up is starting catcher Yadier Molina? Does Molina really deserve to start over Brian McCann, much less even make the team over Miguel Olivo? Jose Reyes over Rafeal Furcal? Should Joey Votto have to wait until the “Final Vote” get him in?!  He’s got the best OPS (On-base plus Slugging) in all of baseball!  But, Manuel has no need for a fourth first baseman. And while Jason Heyward may have been anointed the greatest rookie hitter of all time prior to the season, his numbers pale in comparison to other NL outfielders.  None of this should matter, but because Bud Selig changed the game’s meaning, all of it does.

I think Charlie Manuel got it right by not picking Stephen Strasburg for the All-Star game this year. Although it would be amazing — and probably good for the game — to have the kid out there with that heat and that curveball, putting him in the game would mean another player was left out. That player would probably be Evan Meek. Most of you have probably never heard of him, but Manuel plucked him out of the NL’s Triple-A team, also known as the Pittsburgh Pirates. His fantastic ERA (0.98) and WHIP (0.87) make him a linchpin in the NL bullpen. Strasburg will get his All-Star nods, so why rush him now with when he’s already got an innings limit this year?

While I agree with the Strasburg decision, an entire team of pitchers was ignored. No Padres pitcher made the All-Star game even though San Diego has the best earned-run average in baseball.

As for the American League, I think the fans and managers got it right for the most part. I could throw in a few deserving names that were left off the list — Paul Konerko, Brennan Boesch, Michael Young, Jared Weaver, Shin-Soo Choo — but I would just be nitpicking.  Weaver got the invite after CC Sabathia was named ineligible since he’s pitching for the Yankees on Sunday.  The problem is, Weaver is also pitching on Sunday.  Now they’ll need a second replacement for Sabathia AND Weaver.

If the game had no meaning, I’d have no problems with any player picked or snubbed and could just enjoy the game for what it is/should be. Still, I know exactly where I’ll be on Tuesday: on my couch, feet up, brew in-hand, and watching the MLB All-Star game.