FJM is a closed forum, but we welcome reader feedback. We're especially interested in corrections of our work, and research (usually number-crunching) that we may not be able to do ourselves. Please check the comments section as well, where we often post readers' opinions, and, less frequently, announce that we were wrong about something.
You can e-mail dak,Ken Tremendous,Junior,Matthew Murbles, or Coach individually.
Ozzie Guillen Wants Derek Jeter Inside His Hypothetical Daughter
It's come to this: Ozzie Guillen saying out loud that he wishes he had a daughter so Derek Jeter could fuck her. In the already crowded Hall of Fame of Jeterbole (you can figure that portmanteau out), this is going to get its own wing. "I keep saying the best [Yankees] player who ever happened—bigger than someone else, but I'm not going to say the name here—is Derek Jeter," Guillen began, perched in the Sox dugout.
Is "best player who ever happened" some weird, different category from "best player ever"? It certainly must have nothing to do with, I don't know, being good at baseball. Because Derek Jeter is terrific, spectacular, amazing at baseball (mostly). But he's nowhere near the best Yankee ever. I know it's tough, but I've always tended to think Mr. Babeland Ruthlor was the best. That's probably because I've always got my head buried in a book full of computers!
"Derek Jeter has everything in his life. He's got money. He's got rings. He's got …"
Guillen paused, because timing means everything in comedy.
"He's not married."
Well, yes. I suppose money should factor in the discussion of best Yankee who ever happened. In which case, I nominate whoever plays 3rd space base for the Intergalactic Space Yankees in the year 30-Space-40. He will make 3 alpha credits per year, which is a ton of alpha credits if you know anything about that sort of thing.
"At the All-Star Game (where Guillen managed him in 2006), I looked around to see if he has anything I don't like. No. He's the perfect man. Too bad I don't have a daughter."
Calling out Ozzie Guillen for saying crazy things is like calling Robin Williams out for being ... really really funny! I love you, Robin. Big fan of RV. Anyway, here's the part where Ozzie talks about wishing he had a daughter so Jeter could get all up in that hot mess. I always sort of thought Ozzie would raise his daughter to like guys with shittier OBPs, though. Then little female Ozzie could rebel and date Jack Cust or something.
Let's also not overlook the fact that Ozzie went all the way to "He's the perfect man" to describe Jeter. We've reached the point where you can't outdo other Jeter-praisers with talk of baseball or sports or sportsmanship or leadership. You have to go to overall quality of personhood. I look forward to the day when Time Magazine crowns Jeter "Invention of the Millennium."
"He's the best thing ever in the game. He's got everything he wants. He lives in New York. Even [ George] Steinbrenner loves him. Nobody is better than Derek Jeter in the game. Nobody."
There's one thing Derek Jeter doesn't have: true love.
For reals question: would Jeter's life be better, in the eyes of Ozzie and people like him, if Jeter had a super hot wife? Like Alba or someone? Or is the mystery and majesty of widespread single-dude starlet/model boning so vicariously alluring that it's an essential part of his celebrated Jeterdom?
You know what I'm talking about. Three days into the season, a sportswriter disembowels a player for "hitting .028!!! He's killing his team!!!!" Then a month or two later, it's completely forgotten because baseball's season is eternal.
Exhibit A, NUMBER ONE, AWESOME today: Wallace Matthews in Newsday.
Reyes, do you want to be a Jeter or a Rey Ordonez?
We're 18 games in, Wallace. Please don't use statistics -- which I'm sure you claim not to trust anyway -- to crucify a guy who is 24 years old and in all likelihood is going to be fine.
I'll summarize the intro for you: Derek Jeter is a supergod amongst gods, like all Titan-style, like Cronus and shit. Rey Ordonez was a bust. Jeter rules, Ordonez drools. Et cetera, ad nauseam.
Here's the meaty part:
This year, you [Reyes] are hitting only .280.
I'm excited to do this. Are you?
Jeter: .277.
You have drawn a mere four walks,
Jeter: 2 walks.
stolen only three bases in five tries,
Jeter: 0 steals.
scored only 12 runs.
Jeter: 7 runs (!)
Your OBP, .313,
Jeter: .309.
is worse than all but three other NL leadoff hitters.
-- but better than the living embodiment of heroism, Derek Jeter. Even Rickie Weeks, batting .192 at the top of the Brewers' lineup, is getting on base more often than you.
And Jeter. Don't forget the man whose face I am nominating to adorn the next dollar coin, Derek Jeter.
Jeter is a terrific hitter. Jose Reyes is a terrific player. Wallace Matthews is driving an Underwater StupidTank to Uninformed Thinking Island if he believes that either of their starts is indicative of what their career values will end up being.
Sure, sometimes it seems like we've said everything there is to be said about EqA and VORP and why batting average and wins are for stupids. We're repetitive, redundant, reiterative, repetitious, redundant, redundant and redundant. We get it.
Then we take a step back and remember that 99.999992% of baseball fans think like the people in this article:
YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING! STUDY SAYS DEREK JETER'S THE WORST
No, nobody is kidding. This is old news, of course, to the other 0.000008% of us.
February 17, 2008 -- How's this for junk science - even with three Gold Gloves, Yankees captain Derek Jeter has been labeled the worst fielding shortstop in baseball.
I'm so happy the New York Post is out there doing its thing -- being angrily, outrageously, passionately wrong about everything. Rare is the institution you can rely on day in and day out, but you can set your watch by the Post. Whatever time the Post says, you're guaranteed to know: it's wrong.
Gold Gloves are a m.-fucking joke. Although I've learned nothing yet about this junky "science" study and of course I will learn nothing further by reading the rest of the article (thank you, Post!), I already trust it infinitely more than Gold Gloves, because Gold Gloves are liars. They are no-good cheating liars, and I would not let my fictional daughter marry a Gold Glove.
But the numbers prove it, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania said yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in (of course) Boston.
Yes, these researchers from the University of Pennsylvania meticulously altered their data, fudged everything they'd worked on for months, slandered Jeter and praised A-Rod, all because they had a meeting once in Boston. Never trust a scientist! All scientists are Sox fans! Post!
Post BREAKING NEWS: SCIENCE PLAYS FOR BOSTON!
Using a complex statistical method,
for nerds with calculators and pocket protectors and Daily News subscriptions,
researchers concluded that Alex Rodriguez was one of the best shortstops in the game when he played for the Texas Rangers.
This is an interesting finding. I wish I knew more about how the study worked. Just kidding: give me what Mike Birch has to say on the matter. Mike Birch works at Lids, the hat store.
"I don't know what they're smoking down at Penn," said Yankees fan Mike Birch, 32.
Take that, complex statistical study. Birch is insightful and funny. One time he sold me a sweet lid with the Under Armor logo on it. "I don't know what they're smoking"! Classic. Classic Birch.
"That's preposterous. I completely disagree. Jeter's a clutch player."
In one corner: "The method involved looking at every ball put in play in major league baseball from 2002 through 2005 and recorded where the shots went. Researchers then developed a probability model for the average fielder in each position and compared that with the performance of individual players to see who was better or worse than average."
In the other corner: Mike Birch. Watches three innings a week, occasionally while sober. Listens to Mike and the Mad Dog "except when they talk too smart and shit." Watches "Rome Is Burning" with the sound off. I.Q. of 175. Graduated from Cambridge University. Fields Medal winner.
I know who I'm taking.
"It's ridiculous," said fan Jay Ricker, 22. "Jeter is all-around awesome.
"I agree," said Science, 424. "Fuck me, that is a good argument. I might as well not exist. That's it. I'm taking 500 Darvocets. Humans, welcome your new overlord, Jay Ricker, 22. He is all-around awesome."
He's better than A-Rod any day. Character has a lot to do with it. He's out there for his teammates, not just himself. He does it for the good of the team. That's the kind of guy you want on the field."
Yes. You would never, ever want a guy scientifically proven to be dramatically better at fielding. That is not the kind of guy you want on a field. No fielders. Just team guys.
Ricker added that "A-Rod's only out for the money. For him it's not about baseball, it's just about banking."
Studies have shown that A-Rod is, incidentally, the league's best banker. A lot of people don't know this, but he was heavily recruited by Blackstone and Goldman coming out of high school. Jeter is genetically incapable of using an ATM; he in fact only understands those letters to be the abbreviation for ass to mouth.
Fans said Jeter's greatness goes beyond the numbers he produces on the field.
"He has intangible qualities that can't be measured with statistics," said East Village bar owner Kevin Hooshangi, 28.
Fans repeated a thing they had heard innumerable times on the TV and radio.
"I can't change my mind about this," despaired Kevin Hooshangi. "My whole worldview depends on it being true. Jeter has intangibles. Jeter has intangibles. He does. He does!" Hooshangi continued to chant about Jeter, tears streaming down his face. "I know he does. He has them. Intangi...(unintelligible sobbing)..." "He's the ultimate teammate. It doesn't matter what his percentages are when he's making big plays in big games. He's the one with four World Series rings."
However, Frank Angelo, 50, gave A-Rod his due. "He's the best shortstop in the American League playing third base," Angelo said.
Then Angelo realized what city he lived in, and what newspaper he was talking to.
But Jeter as one of the worst?
"That's not true," Angelo said. "He's a good fielding shortstop." He even said he would keep Jeter at short. "Jeter's the captain, he was there before A-Rod," said Angelo.
By this logic, Jeter never should have taken over for Tony Fernandez. Fernandez was there before Jeter. Jeter should've had to slide over to third. But wait, Wade Boggs was at third. No go. Already there. But hey, should Boggs have even been there? No! He took over for Charlie Hayes. That never should have happened.
NO ONE SHOULD HAVE CHANGED POSITIONS EVER. After the original roster of the 1903 New York Highlanders died, all baseball should have stopped being played forever. Thanks, Frank Angelo. But as Yankee fan Brittnay Thompson, 32, said, it's about who's good in May, and who's good in October.
"In big situations A-Rod drops the ball, no pun intended," said Thompson.
Thompson added, "Are you awake, FJM guys? We're still out here. Morons, I mean. We totally outnumber you. We're loud, we're close-minded, and we dominate the media. We'll never stop being dumb about baseball. Never. We'll always keep the idiot ball rolling. Is that a pun? If it is, I didn't intend it."
Alex Rodriguez's brown eyes were moist and bloodshot, obvious evidence of how he had reacted on a gloomy night. You know what A-Rod could have really used? A couple drops of Derek Jeter's CalmEye from Visine.
He watched the Yankees lose to the Cleveland Indians, 6-4, to end a potentially memorable season and perhaps end his career, too.
Wait -- what? End his career? Quoi?
Yes, Rodriguez singled with the Yankees trailing, 6-1. Yes, he drilled a homer against Rafael Perez with the Yankees behind by four runs for his first homer and first run batted in across the last 16 playoff games. He also popped out in the ninth. But Rodriguez's first two at bats, those uncomfortable at bats, will stick with him. Especially if this was his last game as a Yankee.
To put a Juniorian twist on it, let's rewrite that paragraph as if Jeter, not A-Rod, had gone 2-5 with a tater:
After being fooled like so many of his teammates by Paul Byrd in his first two at bats, the Captain's bat awoke when his team needed him most. Jeter punched a gutsy single to left in the bottom of the fifth, only to be stranded. And in the seventh, the Truest of Yankees crushed a Rafael Perez offering deep into the Bronx night towards monument valley where someday, his stately calm-eyed countenance shall join the likes of Ruth, Mantle, and DiMaggio. Like so many of his home runs before, this hit was perfectly timed; down four with their backs against the wall in the series, his team had never needed him more. Sadly, the rules of baseball prevented HRH Number Two from batting more than one other time (a most un-Jeterlike pop-up in the ninth), and his teammates could only muster one other run before time ran out. As Cleveland celebrated, and the home team walked off the field for the last time until April, one thing remained certain: Derek Jeter was the real hero of 9/11.
Do you think they had this paragraph written before A-Rod homered?
The Yankees came in streaking, overcoming a 21-29 start to win the AL wild card. But they were done in by poor pitching, an insect invasion and the latest October vanishing act by Alex Rodriguez, whose bat was quiet until a solo home run in the seventh inning.
Alex Rodriguez started the series 0 for 6 in the first two games in Cleveland, but when the chips were down and his team needed him most, he dug down deep and bounced back with four hits in Games 3 and 4, including a gargantuan home run Monday night that drew his team within striking distance. Despite these herculean efforts from the best player in the game, the Yankees could not overcome a late, dramatic GIDP by series goat Derek Jeter, his third of the series in only seventeen at bats. Jeter, a reliable on base presence in the two hole during the regular season, looked uncomfortable all series long, never getting into a groove and finishing with a 0.176 OBP with no walks in the series.
** EDIT **
New version: good job, AP. They've added a section about A-Rod's home run and even a sentence about Jeter's GIDPs! Congrats.
Tuesday Night "Monday Morning Quarterback" Quarterback
I am way, way behind on my e-mail reading, and to those of you who have sent in tips and gotten a wall of angry silence in return, I apologize. I've been out for three days straight celebrating James Spader's Emmy win. But I'm back now, and sobering up, and will post more soon.
I tend to subscribe to the "three dogs barking" theory of internet interest, and even though I feel like picking on Peter King's "10 Things of Things I Think I Think Are Things" column is like shooting fish in a barrel with a barrel-sized fish annihilation laser, enough people sent this quote to me I feel almost a civic duty to link it:
Never a good idea to pitch to Derek Jeter if you could pitch to Bobby Abreu instead. I don't care what the stats say. Ask Curt Schilling if, with first base open, he'll ever want to pitch to the best player of my lifetime again.
Forget OPS match-ups and career stats (most/all of which favor Abreu). Let's just focus on the fact that Peter King, born in 1958, thinks that Derek Jeter is the best player of his lifetime.
With reader Matthew's help, that's a big old handful of f-you to:
Barry Bonds Albert Pujols Mickey Mantle Vlad A-Rod Willie Mays Hank Aaron Gary Sheffield Pete Rose Joe Morgan (just for fun) Rod Carew Tony Gwynn Mike Schmidt Reggie Jackson
Every time -- and this is not an exaggeration; I literally mean every single time -- a sportswriter writes an article about whether Player X is good enough to make the Hall of Fame, and that sportswriter has decided that: no, Player X is not quite good enough to make the Hall of Fame, the sportswriter smugly and anti-humorously writes some variation of the sentence: "It's not called the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Some incarnations include:
Classic: "It's the 'Hall of Fame,' not the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Positive: "He belongs in the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Sarcastic: "Maybe he'd get my vote for the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Dickish/Cowherd-ian: "Um...hello? It's not called the 'Hall of Good.' It's called the 'Hall of Fame.' Fame, as in famous. 'Fame' is part of the equation!!!!! I am bad at my job!!!!!!!!'"
The #1 thing (out of eighteen or so total things) that bothers me about this, is that it's a purely semantic argument. If it were called "The Hall of 500 Homers" and a guy ended with 496 homers, then you could write an article where you sneeringly said, "Sorry -- it's not called the 'Hall of 496 Homers.'" But in this case, the term "Hall of Fame" itself is a vague, ill-defined phrase that is not clarified or elucidated in any way by contrasting it with the equally odd and ill-defined "Hall of Very Good." (Indeed, one could argue, there are already a lot of only "Very Good" players already in the Hall of Fame, so the whole thing is moot, and certainly should not be argued in the snide/condescending way in which it is frequently argued.)
Not exempt from this crew -- again, because there are literally no exemptions -- is Jean-Jacques Taylor of the Dallas Morning News, who wrote this little number about whether Craig Biggio belongs. Let's get right to the trite:
Biggio is in the Hall of Very Very Good.
Cue the band. Release streamers. Exit to your left.
The article isn't really offensive -- he merely argues that the old benchmarks of 500 HR and 3000 H might need to be adjusted as "shoo-in"-type numbers to account for steroids and the offensive explosion and so forth. Fine. But at the end, he writes this: (and this is the complete list. I have made no edits).
HALL OF FAMERS?
No Question:
Roger Clemens: Best pitcher of "live ball" era.
I agree.
Ken Griffey Jr: Injuries cost him a shot at Aaron's record.
Well, congratulations, Ramiro Mendoza, Andy Pettitte, Tino Martinez, Bernie Williams, El Duque, Chuck Knoblauch, Gene Tenace, Dal Maxvill, Don Gullett, Bump Hadley, Luis Sojo, Mike Stanton, and Snuffy Stirnweiss -- you're in!
Mariano Rivera: The most dominant closer in the game.
I'd vote for him.
Alex Rodriguez: The game's best player.
Him, too.
WE NEED TO DISCUSS
Wait -- there are other no-brainers. Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux...no?
Craig Biggio: I love the consistency, but where is the greatness?
I guess that depends on how you define "greatness." He did play two very difficult positions, and a third, easier position... plus, 3000 hits is nothing to sneeze at. He stole 400+ bases at a 77% success rate. That's pretty good. I don't know. His career OPS+ is only 113. He's very definitely borderline. Unlike...
Jose Mesa: Don't laugh.
Too late.
If we don't adjust the standard, you must consider him because he has more saves than Bruce Sutter (300) and Goose Gossage (310).
He also has a career ERA+ of -- wait for it -- 101. He is 1% better than the average pitcher of his era, ERA-wise. His career WHIP: 1.473. He has about 1000 Ks in 1500 innings.
For comparison: Bruce Sutter had a 1.14 WHIP and a 136 ERA+. 800+ Ks in 1000 IP. He was a weird choice, but he's way better than Jose Mesa. Goose: 1.23 WHIP and 126 ERA+. 1500 Ks in 1800 IP.
I must not consider him. For anything. Saves are dumb.
Gary Sheffield: Will steroid allegations slow the only man to represent five different teams in the All-Star Game?
I don't know. I do know that he has a .926 OPS and a 146 OPS+ in 20 seasons and is still probably the best or second-best hitter on his team at 38. If he keeps hitting this way for a few more years, his numbers will be indisputable. They probably already are. As far as steroids go, I don't know why, but I kind of believe him when he says he didn't know what they were when Bonds gave them to him. He is so crazy, he might have actually believed they were flaxseed oil.
Oh -- also, the All-Star Game is stupid and should not be used to discuss a player's Hall of Fame candidacy. And the fact that he represented five different teams is probably a strike against him, if you take the "character" issue into consideration. (Not saying you should, but if you do, he's clearly a son of a gun, this guy.)
Frank Thomas: The former two-time MVP fell so low, he has also been Comeback Player of the Year.
How dare he...win three awards?
Frank Thomas has a .984 career OPS (11th highest all-time). He has a 158 career OPS+. He has a .422 career OBP. He has 500 HR. He has a .341 career EqA.
This is not really a question. Or if it is, it is pretty easily answered.
Jim Thome: Is he an overrated, one-dimensional player?
Thome needs a few more good years to solidify his bid, but he has a 149 career OPS+. He will go if he stays healthy for a while longer. He's definitely not overrated as a hitter.
And that's it. Those are the only people he mentions, for either category.
There are so many people to talk about. Manny, Bonds, Chipper, Glavine, Smoltz, Piazza, Trevor Hoffman, Helton, Vizquel...
Yawn. Larger Than Life: Today's Future Legends by Eric Neel
DEREK JETER, SS, NEW YORK YANKEES ...His numbers (despite some serious and legitimate questions about his defensive effectiveness, particularly as it applies to range) are outstanding, but he can't be reduced to statistics because every swing, every throw, comes to us laden with aura -- with some preternatural, supernatural composure that never fails to amaze (even if, it must be said, it also rarely manages to charm) us.
Laden with aura. Preternatural. Supernatural. Composure. Barf.
That's par for the course, I guess. No real crime here except Kool-Aid Consumption. This is the real doozy:
(Remember: the subject is: Future Legends)
DAVID ECKSTEIN, SS, ST. LOUIS CARDINALS In a country that loves gritty and gutty, he is the grittiest, guttiest cat of them all.
He has the averagest, most perfectly mediocre .260 career EqA of any gritty, gutty cat in the world.
He barely can throw the ball across the infield,
Not a good quality for a MLB SS.
and he chokes the bat like a T-baller.
The very definition of "neither here, nor there."
But he comes up big,
He had two good WS games last year. Congratulations. He also has a .358 lifetime SLG.
comes up swinging, and is humble and gracious about every miraculous accomplishment.
He does seem like a nice person. I will grant that.
The guardians of days gone by like to think they have the market cornered on gamers, but this generation has its Eck. And though little, he stacks up.
For two years now, even as he compiled (literally) MVP-level statistics, the press has been asking: "What's wrong with ARod?" They based their ideas that something was wrong with ARod on his performance in a very very small number of games in October, which is like basing John Gielgud's acting career on "Arthur 2: On the Rocks."
Yes, he swiped the ball from Arroyo's glove, and yes, he failed to come through in the "clurmtch," or whatever that word is. But so did every other Yankee. Sheffield popped the ball up in key at bats. Matsui K'd a lot. Giambi forgot to take his medicine and turned back into a pumpkin. They all fell apart, but only ARod got blamed. And in the 2005 postseason, when he went 1-14 (the very definition of a small sample size) the press was all over him like a cheap suit.
Now he's off to a torrid start, and the new fun story to write is "ARod Finally True Yankee!!!!" But whom are they going to blame now, based on a tiny sample size?
Not...surely they wouldn't...oh my God...Run!!!!!!!!!!
Time to ask ... what’s wrong with Jeter?
As A-Rod's fortunes soar, Yankee captain down in dumps
By Mike Celizic
MSNBC contributor
Mike Celizic
Alex Rodriguez has undoubtedly had many moments — some of which could be timed with a calendar — during which he wished he were Derek Jeter. This is not one of them.
The Yankee captain and New York’s favorite baseball player since Don Mattingly has been having a rough go of it this year. It’s not so much his hitting, although his average is sinking fast after a torrid start and he’s got just three RBI in 12 games, but his fielding that’s been a problem.
Jeter has made a lot of errors so far. But so has Mike Lowell. And unlike Jeter, Lowell is actually a good fielder. Freaky things happen in small sample sizes. That's why after a week Ian Kinsler is 2nd in HR. That's why people say things like "At this pace, Garth Iorg will have 300 RBIs!" and then he ends up with like 34. You really can't tell anything about a player's year after 40 AB or 10 games in the field.
For the record, the reasons Jeter has made a lot of errors are probably: (a) it's been really crappy playing conditions, or (b) he's never been that good a defensive SS, or (c) it's a complete fluke.
Jeter has won three Gold Gloves, but he’s not on his way to winning a fourth. Through 12 games, he has six errors, the most in the major leagues.
For the millionth and final [sic] time, Gold Gloves are 99% meaningless.
Everybody’s writing about his problems catching and throwing, but no one’s trying to run him out of town. Yankee Stadium with him would be like the Sistine Chapel without Michelangelo’s ceiling work.
I’d ask you to imagine A-Rod in the same situation, but you don’t have to, because we’ve seen what would happen...He was booed at every opportunity and flayed daily by the talk-show guys and the columnists, many of whom suggested the only way for him to fix things was to take the first plane out of town. I was one of them, and I don’t apologize for it.
You should. It was insane. In 2005-06 he hit 83 HR, drove in 251. He walked 181 times. His OBPs were .421/.392.
SLG .610/.523.
EqA .354/.319.
His WARP3s were 13.0 and 7.5 (same as Troy Glaus in 2006, BTW), and if he had been able to play his natural position on the field, they would probably have been much higher, all things being equal.
Even when he had his legendarily "terrible" year, when everything "fell apart," when he hated New York and was a "head case" and everyone in the world wrote about how he didn't fit in with the Hallowed Pinstripery of New York, he was an awesome, awesome baseball player. Who in his right mind can think differently?
He had come to the Yankees as the best player in baseball.
By last season, he wasn’t even the third best third-baseman.
J'accuse, Monsieur de Chapeau!!!
And the worse it got for A-Rod, the better it got for Jeter. Every bad throw, every late-inning out, every clumsy attempt to explain himself made A-Rod look more misplaced and Jeter more the true Yankee hero.
Jeter had a great year last year. ARod had a very very good year that looked bad only in comparison to his outstanding previous years. It happens.
So this year, A-Rod showed up wearing high stirrups and after a couple of games to warm up started hitting — for average and power, in early innings and late, by day and by night.
I don't think this makes cognitive sense. "...after a couple of games to warm up started hitting." Does that mean, "after taking a couple of games to warm up?" Also, the part that comes after the dash reads like a weird parody of "Paul Revere's Ride."
After three years of waiting for him to do his part, he was suddenly doing everybody’s part.
He has been doing pretty much what he did in his 2005 AL MVP Season, when he went .321/.41/.610 with 48 HR, a .354 EqA and a 13.0 WARP3. This didn't come out of nowhere, people. He has always been this good. He was this good even while you were all talking about how bad he was.
But there’s something wrong with this picture — the Captain’s early-season slump, especially in the field. The SABRE folks will tell you that Jeter has never been a particularly good shortstop despite the Gold Gloves, but his teammates, his manager and anybody who watched him every day will differ.
"The facts will tell you some information. Some casual anecdotes will contradict this. Your choice."
There are some things the stats don’t tell you, and unless you watch the guy every day, there’s no way to tell you about them.
I've seen somewhere in the vicinity of 500 Yankee games, I'd say. And I think Jeter is vastly overrated as a fielder by every anecdote-toting sportswriter and fan out there. Twice a year he goes deep into the hole to his right, stabs a backhand, jumps in the air and gets the guy at first by a step. It's very impressive and flashy, but it doesn't nearly make up for the fact that he gets nothing to his left. He has what people often call a "high baseball IQ" in that he is very alert and smart when the ball is in play -- I will give him that. He takes relays well and is very athletic. But he is nowhere near the league of the Vizquels, Everetts, or even Cabreras of the world.
But there’s no denying he’s killing his team in the field right now, and his hitting isn’t that great either. Come to think about it, he’s not even stealing bases with his normal ease — just one-for-three on the season.
He's not off to a great start, but his OBP is .390, which tells you his patience is still there. And it's been like 50 AB. In 2004 Jeter had an 0-32 in April, and ended up having a fine offensive year.
It’s as if he and A-Rod are two yo-yos that are out of synch. When A-Rod was down, Jeter was up. And now that A-Rod is tearing the cover off the ball, Jeter is down. It’s a little spooky. It’s as if he thrives on A-Rod’s negative energy and is being sapped by A-Rod’s success.
Or, alternately -- and I don't mean to disparage the Yo-Yo/Vampire-Energy-Suck Theory, which seems air-tight -- ARod has always been awesome, Jeter had a mediocre first 50 AB, and this is all pointless and stupid.
I’m sure — well, pretty sure, anyway — it’s just an aberration, that Jeter’s problems are just a slump that will pass and not the result of him trying for the first time since A-Rod arrived, to keep up with and outdo his teammate.
Yeah, probably. Or -- and bear with me here -- what if ARod, brimming with jealousy and malice, is secretly poisoning Jeter with a magic serum that causes him, Jeter, to have a slightly mediocre first 50 AB of the season and be slightly worse in the field than normal? Could such a serum exist? Get on this. Pronto.
You never thought of Jeter as needing to outshine anyone. He’s shared the stage with plenty of great players, and it’s never stopped him. On the other hand, in the three years that A-Rod’s been playing next to him, he’s always been the leader and A-Rod the guy trying to keep up.
The roles are reversed right now. Jeter says it’s just a slump. So do Joe Torre, his manager, and Brian Cashman, the team’s G.M. They’re probably right.
But what if they’re not?
I said get on this! Visit every witch doctor in the city! Search ARod's home for boiling cauldrons! We will get to the bottom of this, fair readers. That I promise.
My theory is that for years, Joe Torre has been secretly feeding Jeter an experimental Awesome Serum concocted by a Haitian witch doctor in Queens. This season that witch doctor has gone missing, perhaps kidnapped by his mortal enemies, the yakuza.
So you see, KT, the real problem here is the absence of a serum rather than the presence of one.
The Gold Glove is probably the most meaningless award given out in sports. Ergo, the All-Time Gold Glove Award is the All-Time Most Meaningless Award in Sports.
Exhibit A: Derek Jeter, a mediocre-to-bad fielder, is a candidate for all-time greatest fielding SS.
I urge you all to vote for him -- seriously -- as a kind of nihilistic, Duchampian-urinal-type artistic expression of the meaninglessness of life.
Recently, the Yankees Captain has been hit with some misguided criticism that he should come out stronger in his defense of Alex Rodriguez...
"That's exactly what I said," Jeter calmly explained. "I said the only thing I wasn't going to do was tell the fans who they should boo and who they shouldn't boo."
Then Jeter took the opportunity to stand up for Giambi, who was booed so loudly after he struck out in the eighth inning it was hard to hear public address announced Bob Sheppard announce the next hitter. Jeter implored Yankees fans to stop booing Giambi.
"The fans have to start cheering for him," Jeter said. "If you're a Yankee fan, you want us to win and we need Jason ."
One more time: 2006, re: ARod:
"I said the only thing I wasn't going to do was tell the fans who they should boo and who they shouldn't boo."
And 2005, in re: Giambi:
Jeter implored Yankees fans to stop booing Giambi. "The fans have to start cheering for him," Jeter said. "If you're a Yankee fan, you want us to win and we need Jason ."
I wonder if its pure objective analysis, or a fetish for contrarianism that's led us to the conclusion that 2006 Jeter = great tangibles, weak non-tangible things.
Sportswriters: when you make an argument, it's cool to back it up with evidence. It just is. It gives you more credibility. It makes people think you're a conscientious writer who's paying attention. And sometimes, it validates the headline of your article (which I'm aware is often written by an editor. But still.)
For example, Joe Christensen of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune just wrote a column called Why Morneau, Not Jeter, Deserved the MVP. I will now document for you how many sentences in this column explain why Morneau, not Jeter, deserved the MVP.
I am brainless. I have no clue. I attend about 150 major league games per year but never watch a pitch. I have clubhouse access four hours per day, but I'm too busy twiddling my thumbs to glean any insight from the players and coaches.
Not a good start. Joe starts off on the defensive, complaining about people who complained about his MVP choice. That's four sentences of sarcastic crying, zero sentences of evidence (unless you count the oblique appeal to authority that he's talked to players and coaches and therefore he knows better than you). In other words, I was one of 28 members of the Baseball Writers Association of America entrusted with an American League MVP ballot. If you spent time in the blogosphere this week, perhaps you read about morons like me.
More crying, this time specifically about the blogosphere. Hi Joe! Six sentences, no Morneau explanation.
ESPN.com called Justin Morneau a "laughable" choice for MVP. Foxsports.com called his selection "downright criminal."
I mean, those aren't really even blogs. Those are big mainstream sites. Maybe they're onto something, Joe. Eight sentences.
My ballot went like this: 1) Morneau, 2) Derek Jeter, 3) Frank Thomas, 4) David Ortiz, 5) Joe Mauer, 6) Jermaine Dye, 7) Travis Hafner, 8) Carlos Guillen, 9) Jason Giambi, 10) Johan Santana.
We're getting warmer. That's some information, at least. Frank Thomas, by the way, finished 22nd in the AL in VORP, a purely offensive stat. You may be aware of the fact that Mr. Thomas also does not happpen to play a defensive position. I'll count this list as one sentence, so that's nine so far. Look, I welcome any and all criticism. Just don't assume I didn't give this a shred of thought beyond home runs and RBI.
More defense. I particularly enjoy the "Look, I like it when you criticize me" defense in the first sentence. (These are the tenth and eleventh without Morneau info.)
I looked at OPS (on-base plus slugging percentage). I looked at month-by-month statistics, averages with runners in scoring position and two-out RBI.
Here we go! The meat of the argument! Here's where Mr. "I have four hours of insight-gleaning clubhouse access every day" convinces us all! Oh. Uh oh. These statistics aren't great. They aren't great at all. OPS vastly overrates SLG over OBP. Averages with runners in scoring position? Two-out RBI? Yeesh. I don't think those stats should even crack the top ten of numbers you look at when determining which player is the most valuable. Two-out RBI?
Also, by the way, Mr. Christensen, what were the results of your looking at OPS and looking at two-out RBI? Not gonna tell us? Cool. I don't read newspapers for information.
I'm pretty sure saying "I looked at OPS" doesn't count as evidence, so we're on a sweet 13-sentence data-less streak here.
I had conversations with coaches and players from around the league, many off the record. Let there be no doubt: The Twins themselves felt Morneau was their MVP.
I've been thinking about it, and I don't think this is a very good way to pick your MVP. Let's perform what our good friend Hans Christian Orsted would call a gedankenexperiment. Say there's a fictional professional baseball team with two really good players on it. One of the players -- we'll call him Player Shithead -- is a real shithead. The other one is a seriously awesome, totally sweet dude -- we'll call him Player Dickface. Now say one year Player Shithead totally outplays Player Dickface. I mean, on the field, he's clearly more valuable -- 13 more points of EqA, 2 more wins by WARP3, plus he plays a more difficult defensive position considerably better than Player Dickface. But that same year, Player Dickface keeps being the same seriously awesome, totally sweet dude and he buys all his teammates Bentleys for their birthdays. Meanwhile, Player Shithead lamely sends his bros birthday E-cards -- that is, if he even remembers, that shithead.
The point is, everyone on that team picks Player Dickface as their MVP. Because of the Bentleys and stuff. But I think Player Shithead should be the MVP because he's a better, more valuable baseball player.
These two sentences are the first Christensen's written that even approach something resembling evidence for Justin Morneau. Since they're so crappy, I will count each as half a sentence, making him one for fifteen.
He gave them the run-producing presence they had sought for years, and his transformation changed the team's entire season.
Ugh. Doesn't matter what the Twins did last year, or in 2001. Doesn't matter. Half credit. 1.5 out of 16.
Eventually, my top choice came down to Morneau and Jeter. Morneau had the statistics, especially over the final four months.
Wow. There you go. Morneau had the statistics. Morneau had the statistics. It's as simple as that, you bloggy eggheads! Blogheads. Eggblogs. No elaboration necessary. No explanation of how, why, or in what way Morneau had the statistics. Can't fit that in this column, what with the thirteen-sentence whiny prologue.
We've been over this before, but I'll type out here what I think some of the relevant statistics are.
Jeter WARP3: 12.1 Morneau WARP3: 8.6
Jeter Win Shares: 33 Morneau Win Shares: 27
Jeter VORP: 80.5 Morneau VORP: 52.0
Jeter EqA: .324 Morneau EqA: .315
Jeter RC: 138 Morneau RC: 121
Jeter FRAR: 39 Moreau FRAR: 16
Jeter WPA: 5.98 Morneau WPA: 4.46
Jeter OBP: .417 Morneau OBP: .375
(By the way, I'm counting "Morneau had the statistics" as part of Christensen's argument. See how generous I am? 2.5 out of 18.) I also believed if you took Jeter away from the talent-rich Yankees, they still win the AL East. Take away Morneau, and the Twins don't make the playoffs.
Right -- because the Blue Jays and the Red Sox were terrible, Justin Morneau deserves the MVP. You know what, Christensen? I'll give 'em to you. 4.5 out of 20.
Finally, I wrestled with the "homer" factor. Was I picking Morneau simply because I cover the Twins? Quite frankly, I might have listed Santana in the top seven, if I hadn't listed two other Twins so high.
These sentences have nothing to do with the discussion of whether Morneau was better than Jeter. Your objectivity should be a goddamn given. 4.5 out of 23.
Let's just say I felt better when the 27 other ballots drew similar conclusions. I know most of these writers very well, and I can assure you they agonized over their choices just like me. Criticize us all you want, but I believe these awards are in very good hands with the BBWAA.
Thanks, I did criticize you. It felt great. Of course you believe the awards are in "very good hands" -- they're your hands. Anyway, that's the end of the article. That's it. Ends in more defensive bullshit. Twenty-six sentences. Four and a half of them (maybe six if you're feeling really charitable) deal with the substance of the argument: was Morneau in fact more valuable than Jeter? None of them do so in a serious, thoughtful way. Don't we deserve better than that?
Here, it's not my job, but I'll make a quick attempt at an argument for Jeter over Morneau. Jeter led Morneau in many (most/all?) of the semi-robust offensive metrics: EqA, VORP, RC, WPA. Moreover, Jeter had a forty-point advantage in OBP, and the single most important aspect of a hitter's job is to get on base. Forty points isn't a trivial lead -- some players who trailed Morneau by forty points, for example, include Willy Taveras, Jose Bautista and Alfredo Amezaga. Morneau did have a staggering advantage over Jeter in power, but it's my contention that Jeter's on-base lead overwhelms that advantage, and the metrics bear that out. On top of all this, Jeter plays a premium defensive position, one that is difficult to fill, with adequate skill. Baseball Prospectus has him at 39 fielding runs above replacement, which is actually better than adequate. Morneau, meanwhile, plays the defensive position at the very top of the defensive spectrum, and he doesn't do it particularly well by most accounts. BP has him at 16 FRAR. In other words, most baseball players could step in and do what Morneau does defensively, but the same is not true for Jeter.
Hey, see that? It's nine sentences and sixteen lines of data (earlier in the post) about Derek Jeter and Justin Morneau and the results of their play on baseball fields. All that stuff plus the rest of the nonsense making fun of Joe Christensen took about twenty minutes to write while I also watch the USC-Notre Dame game. Couldn't Joe Christensen have done at least that much?
By the way, the stats for Dickface and Shithead are correct for Morneau and Joe Mauer. But I'm pretty sure that Mauer didn't send anyone an E-card for their birthday this year. I think he gave Nick Punto one of those customizable teddy bears that comes inside a balloon.
I realize that you're talking about a hypothetical "Team MVP" vote, but I feel it's once again necessary to point out that the BBWAA clearly state that character evaluation is not only allowed as part of MVP voting, but indeed listed one of the very criteria.
3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.
Now. I have no idea if Mourneau is a better dude than Jeter. But, I still believe that a case could easily be made that Jeter's actions/words re: A-Rod's alleged "slumping" were demonstrative of questionable character and loyalty (in an otherwise unblemished character-career).
More importantly, we may not like it for many reasons, but certainly these writers are in a much better position to judge players' characters, dispositions and loyalties than we are. Now, that doesn't mean that they'll necessarily make the right judgment. But we simply have to concede that the MVP race -- as it is now -- is not simply meant to be a measure of which player was "the best" or, in a broader sense, which player had the "Most Valuable" on-field performance.
In a way, talking to teammates and managers could be considered doing the same kind of homework that we're doing by looking at (more relevant) numbers. (Again: like it or not.)
And I know, Junior, that your point is larger than MVP voting -- that, say, if building a team from scratch, you'd rather have the really good dickhead on your team than the mediocre saint. So would I. Yet I think any stat-based criticism of MVP voting warrants the long-winded caveat our readers are currently not enjoying in any way.
Yeah, I remember that third criterion. But I choose to weigh it significantly less than the baseball-related qualifications. Plus, if you read what Christensen wrote:
Let there be no doubt: The Twins themselves thought Morneau was their MVP.
I think it sounds like he's defending himself from the numerous people who were saying Mauer or Santana were more important to the Twins. I agree with those critics because in my opinion, their baseball contributions overwhelm what their teammates think of them.
There's a good continuation of this Morneau vs. the field debate over at Lone Star Ball. The guy compares second-half OPSes and two-out RBI, which Christensen seemed to weigh super heavily. (Hint: some guys who did really well in two-out RBI included great MVP candidates Hank Blalock, Richie Sexson and Torii Hunter. Also: A-Rod!)
Again, I am very very cautiously on Team dak here. I would add, in JR.'s defense, that this dummy didn't get anywhere near quoting the official BBWAA criteria for MVP, nor did he suggets in any way that Jeter's behavior in any way affected his vote.
I think what dak and a very cautious KT are saying, really, is:
the MVP has weird and vague criteria, and it's essentially a popularity contest, and people like Terry Pendleton win it for like "veteran leadership" and shit, and there's not really a whole lot of value in sportswriters even trying to justfy their vote, because the criteria are in fact so vague that they can kind of do whatever they want and justify it "officially."
What still burns me, ironically, is Jeter winning the Aaron Award for Best Offensive Player. Because when you take away the position he plays (not that you should, at all, for things like MVP, I think, but in the case of the Aaron Award you must,) and simply assert that he is the best offensive player, then, my friend, you are an idiot.
Derek Jeter. The Captain. Intangibles tangible-fied. The perfect biological specimen. God's real son. Jeter.
Most people know him as the late character actor Michael Jeter's little brother, but to me he'll always be the only baseball player whose tears cure malaria in whales. There's been a lot of talk about Jeter in the last few days. Men who deal with numbers have declared him overrated, almost to the point that many are now saying he's underrated. This discussion bores me. How can you overrate or underrate a glorious sunset? A sunset just is. That's Jeter.
Wallace Matthews agrees with me. In the span of three days he's written two paeans to Jeter, one before the American League MVP vote and one after. Here are some excerpts from the first:
He's won it clearly, cleanly If you can give baseball's most prestigious honor to Barry Bonds six times and to Alex Rodriguez twice, don't you think it's about time the academy showed some love for Derek Jeter?
Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes. I've heard of Derek Jeter. I know him. That's why he's the MVP. I've heard of Barry Bonds and Alex Rodriguez too, but they're bad men. I know this to be true. Bonds won it six times? Surely Jeter deserves it at least that many as well. He's nice.
I know, the MVP is not supposed to be a lifetime achievement award, but it's not supposed to be a stats competition, either.
Amen. Stats can't capture Jeter's essence. He's more than a ballplayer. If you wanted to describe the most beautiful songbird in the world singing a Mozart sonata to an innocent child, would you use numbers to do so?
Jeter has been in consideration multiple times in his 11-year career, but always there was either some guy with eye-popping numbers to go along with his forearm veins, or else there were simply too many other Yankees with legitimate claims to the award and they canceled each other out.
Jeter doesn't have veins in his forearms, just rivers of quicksilver and liquid gold that spring forth from his luminescent heart. You probably didn't hear about this because he hates publicity, but Derek Jeter saved Christmas last year.
The perception that the Yankees never quit, that the Yankees play smart baseball, that the Yankees will find any way to beat you, all come from Derek Jeter. He doesn't represent the Yankees so much as the Yankees represent him.
The Yankees are but a collection of mortal men. Derek Jeter is infinite. Eternal. Every time Derek Jeter steps on a baseball field, a town in India sees their food troughs fill with millet.
It is amazing - and in a way frightening - that a 32-year-old man with so much out there for him away from the ballpark can remain as single-mindedly focused upon baseball as Jeter has all these years.
Frightening and awesome, like seeing the face of God, but better. Sexier. Granted, those are tickets to Cooperstown, not the MVP award, but if we are going to reward numbers, artificially enhanced or not, then for once, why not reward "intangibles," the qualities that can't be juiced?
Here Mr. Matthews is uninformed. In the late 1960's, a group of baseball players came into possession of a serum developed by Japanese scientists that exponentially increased one's intangibles to dangerous, superhuman levels. Calling themselves The IntangiBros, these players quickly left the game of baseball to pursue higher callings. Unbeknownst to the public, they fought injustice around the world and in the late 80's brought about the end of the Cold War. Derek Jeter is an honorary IntangiBro.
So what if Mauer edged him out for the batting title on the last day of the season, or if Morneau hit twice as many home runs as Jeter did? Despite what A-Rod told Esquire, I have yet to hear anyone in baseball say, "We better not let Joe Mauer beat us." I have heard plenty say it about Jeter.
This is beyond baseball. What Wallace Matthews has heard about Derek Jeter is what should determine the MVP award. It's only common sense.
Unfortunately, the villainous intangi-haters emerged victorious on election day, and the extremely mortal Justin Morneau walked away with the trophy. Never fear, though, because Wallace Matthews knows what Jeter thinks about all this:
Crowns most valuable for Jeter
If it's any consolation to Derek Jeter, in 1980 "Ordinary People" won the Oscar for Best Picture over "Raging Bull." A quarter-century later, people laugh about that one and someday, they'll laugh about this one, too, the year Ordinary Player, otherwise known as Justin Morneau, was named the American League's MVP for 2006.
In fact, Jeter's probably already laughing about it.
Ordinary Player indeed! Matthews, you know how to keep it current, my friend. If I may extend the analogy, I think you will have no argument with the proposition that Joe Mauer is The Elephant Man, Frank Thomas is Tess, and David Ortiz the beautiful Coal Miner's Daughter. Jeter's detractors use a lot of insults to describe him: cold, condescending, aloof, bloodless, a robot programmed to play baseball.
Every time I open up the paper I see some guy saying that Derek Jeter is a robot programmed to play baseball. A condescending robot. That's why I stopped reading and started feeling. The truth that Derek Jeter is the MVP isn't out there. It's in here. (I'm pointing inside my heart.)
But Jeter doesn't exist to placate teammates or the media, or to accumulate statistics and accolades. By all available evidence, he exists to win baseball games, not awards.
That is the best summation of Derek Jeter I have ever read. Sprung forth whole like Athena from Zeus, Jeter won a game in his first minute of life, 1-0 on a beautiful squeeze play. People aren't aware of this, but on days when the Yankees lose, he actually doesn't even exist.
[Y]ou know that if Alex Rodriguez dies without a World Series ring but with his two MVPs, he will die smiling.
Wallace Matthews will test this theory at 10:30 pm Eastern time. I will not reveal how or where, but the plan is in place.
The Yankees who won four world championships in five seasons never had an MVP. and they certainly don't need another one now.
MVP? More like MV-pee-pee! More like MV-poo!
What they need is a return to the hunger and drive and resourcefulness that Jeter has embodied since he was a rookie and that he continues to bring to the park as he approaches his mid-30s. A-Rod, Giambi and Johnson have their awards, but they don't have a trace of any of that.
That's why none of them have ever won a championship. Ever. Especially Randy Johnson. I refuse to look this up, but I am 100% certain that Randy Johnson has never won a World Series because he lacks the necessary hunger and drive and resourcefulness. And he isn't performing now because he is so full and undriven and resourceless. It's not because he's old. For Jeter, it would have only served as one more reminder of what has gone wrong with the Yankees over the past six years.
Too many MVPs. Not enough rings.
Matthews is right. Jeter isn't about the MVP. Jeter didn't want the MVP. If Jeter had won the MVP, he would have donated it to Mother Teresa, and when he found out Mother Teresa was dead, he would have buried it with Pat Tillman, because after all, he's the real MVP. Besides Jeter, that is. Because the real real MVP is the guy with the rings. Not Pat Tillman.
Every day in my hotel I get a little distilled edition of the NY Times slipped under my door. Today I read it as I sipped my coffee and watched "Tommy Boy" on F/X Buenos Aires. (It loses something in the translation.) And today, my NY Times distillation had an article about the AL MVP voting (which had not yet happened). The title of the article was "Jeter Looms as an MVP Candidate."
In the distilled article, there was a quote from worthless pontificator Tim McCarver, who believed that Derek Jeter should have been MVP. Why, you ask? WARP3? VORP? WPA? EqA? Probably EqA. That's McCarver's like go-to stat. I can't quite remember...well, let me just re-read the article and refresh my memory as to why Jeter should be MVP.
"Derek Jeter is different from all the other power guys," said the Fox broadcaster [sic] Tim McCarver..."It's not like he doesn't do anything from a numbers standpoint; he does a lot of things. But he's different, and you have to consider him differently. If Phil Rizzuto can win the MVP in 1950, Derek Jeter can be a candidate 56 years later."
Now, if any of you loyal readers out there ever question again why we at FJM despise Derek Jeter, or Tim McCarver, please just read that quote.
Derek Jeter is different. You have to think of him differently.
Yikes.
Now. It's possible that what McCarver is saying here is:
"Derek Jeter is different from the power guys. You have to take his position into account. You have to realize that the numbers he puts up as a SS are perhaps more valuable than the numbers Justin Morneau puts up as a 1B. Therefore, let's use things like VORP and WARP and stuff to determine exactly how valuable this guy is to his team."
I don't think that's what he is saying, though. I think he is talking about intangibles, here.
Perhaps that is a leap for me to make, here, in Argentina. But look again at that qualifier: "It's not like he doesn't do anything from a numbers standpoint; he does a lot of things." He brings up how Jeter has good numbers, which leads me to surmise that when he talks about how Jeter is "different," he is not actually talking about numbers at all, or about comparitive numbers among players at different positions. Plus, I have heard McCarver talk about Derek Jeter so often, and so miserably faux-poetically, that I'd be willing to bet 10,000 pesos (about $3500 US, give or take) that McC is saying that in a metaphysical, poetic, intangible way, we have to think of Derek Jeter differently.
And to that extrapolated exhortation from McCarver I say: no, sir. No we do not. We do not have to think of him differently. We have to think of him exactly the same as we think of any baseball player. We have to consider his position, yes. But when it comes to evaluating his contributions to his baseball team, we absolutely do not have to think of him "differently".
He does not possess superhuman powers. He is not physically handicapped. He is not a warrior-poet. He is not blessing us with his very presence. He is not a wizard. He is a baseball player.
He should have been the MVP because of how good he is at baseball. Not because of his calm eyes (a phrase McCarver, I believe, invented) or his intangibles or his steely gaze or his charisma or his elegant gait or his composure or the fact that he's currently schtupping Jessica Biel.
The thing that really bugs me is, McCarver is right about the Rizzuto-in-1950 comparison, but not the way he thinks he's right. Rizz had this line:
Phil Rizzuto, 1950:
.324/.418/.439 122 OPS+ 7 HR 112 RC .296 EQA
And there were certainly bigger power guys, like Larry Doby and Vern Stephens and stuff. (Teddy W. would assuredly have won the award if he hadn't played in only 89 games due to Korea -- he hit 28 bombs and had a .338 EqA in those 89 games. Also, did you know he had a farking .419 EqA in 1941? I mean, holy shit.) But, Rizzy had a 12.3 WARP3 because he played SS. Much the way Calm Eyes McGee had a 12.1 this year. Although, to be fair, DJ is a way better offensive player than Rizzy ever was.
I might have actually given the 1950 award to Yogi Berra, who had a 10.5 WARP3 and a .303 EqA, going .322/.383/.533 with 28 HR. But really, I would have given it to him because in 597 AB he struck out TWELVE TIMES. Look it up. That is batshit insane, my friends. But I digress.
The point is, Tim McCarver is a dumb dummy. And he is right about Rizzuto/Jeter for exactly the opposite reason that he is arguing. And no one should ever think of Derek Jeter, or anyone else, "differently" when evaluating him/them.
And if McCarver says tomorrow that all he was talking about was VORP and WARP and RC and FRAA and EqA, I will take this all back. And I will eat my sombrero.
A Spanish language grammar correction from beloved reader Pandrew.
Hey Sr. Tremendous.
The word "noche" in Spanish is feminine and is accompanied by a female article: la noche triste, for example. Thus, the greeting is "Buenas Noches," as both adjective and noun must agree on a gender.
Qué tienes buena suerte en Buenos Aires.
Let me just say that I am proud to be a poster on a blog that gets grammar corrections in two languages.
