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.
Ladies And Gentlemen, This Man Has A Hall Of Fame Vote
His name is Mark Kreidler. He's been a sportswriter for twenty years. He just wrote this article. Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a Hall of Fame vote.
Impact, not numbers, should define a player's HOF status
Team spirit, not numbers, should determine who wins the World Series
Feelings, not data, should tell us whether to release this new cancer drug
Aura, not page views, should determine what I, Mark Kreidler, get paid for these ESPN.com articles
Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a Hall of Fame vote.
This just in from the other side of the wall: It's time to reconsider the whole proposition.
The Hall of Fame benchmark labyrinth, that is. The numerical ladder to the pantheon just doesn't work anymore, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Sure. Benchmarks -- that is to say, fixed, round numbers of counting stats like wins or hits or doubles or sac flies -- should not be used on their own to determine Hall-worthiness. They have to be taken into context. The rates of these counting stats fluctuate over the history of the game. We can use more sophisticated numbers to see how a player compares to his peers.
That's what you're saying, right?
It is, in fact, going to force a general reconsideration of how to view players by those Hall of Fame voters who've traditionally taken the easy way out and looked for a statistical validation of their choices from year to year.
Oh boy. Stats are not the easy way out. The easy way out is throwing up your hands and saying "I like this guy. Great guy. Famous. Hall of Fame. Impact. Impactuous guy. This guy is better because he had more impact. I am making up what impact is as I go along."
Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a Hall of Fame vote.
And I should certainly know: I'm one such lunkhead. Been voting for years, and there are still times when I check the numbers -- at the last minute, sometimes -- to see if they bear out what I'm thinking.
Let me get this straight. You, Mark Kreidler, are saying that sometimes you take one last minute, perfunctory glance at the numbers before you cast your Hall of Fame vote? Even worse -- you're saying that at other times, you don't look at any numbers at all?
This is akin to Clarence Thomas freely admitting, Hey, sure, sometimes I read the case files if I've got some time to kill on the crapper or whatever. Other times, boom, straight in the garbage. Also, guess what I wear underneath this judge robe -- a bathrobe! Because hey, two kinds of robes! Did I just blow your mind?
Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a Hall of Fame vote. The Hall voting always has been like that. It's an odd little procedure, very personal, very subjective,
Trust me, Mark, it's made very much more subjective when you refuse to look at numbers for more than five seconds.
and many of us have argued over the years that it is, in fact, a Hall of Fame and not of numbers.
This is my least favorite "argument" about anything ever. First of all, the words in the name of something do not determine the tools you use to make that thing. No one's saying "It's a House of Representatives, so let's all meet in a fucking house, okay?" (Sorry for all of the political references. I have no idea what's gotten into my brain.) Second, even if you wanted to nomenclature-parse the Hall of Fame, you would find the third word in the title to be the word "fame," which, taken literally, is a piss-poor criterion for entry into said institution.
So no, it's not called the Hall of Numbers, a foyer which presumably would include e and pi and Planck's constant, it's called the Hall of Fame. Thank you for that clarification. It helps us zero.
Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a Hall of Fame vote.
But as Rob Neyer explains elsewhere on this site, 500 homers ain't what they used to be. We have witnessed a dramatic devaluation of that figure over the past two decades, with greater accomplishment suddenly skewing upward into previously unimaginable territory -- 600 and beyond.
That is why we have numbers that help us compare between eras. This has been an issue throughout the history of the Hall, not one that just came up because Frank Thomas reached 500 home runs. I can't believe you're not aware of that.
Ladies and gentlemen, you know the end of this sentence.
And I'd add that there are important numbers -- wins,
No.
hits --
And no, not really.
that seem to be sliding the other way, gradually farther from the view of today's player. Biggio's achievement, that is, may well stand taller as the years go by. Three thousand hits and 300 victories aren't merely difficult to attain; they're becoming endangered species as statistics.
Well, of the 27 players with 3,000 hits, 11 played in the nineties. You're going to see fewer Greg Madduxes or Tom Glavines, players who just stay and stay and stay. With five-man rotations and a normal season's worth of work, even a great pitcher is going to average maybe 15, 16 wins a year. At that rate, you've got to stick in the bigs for two decades to get to 300. Maddux is in his 22nd year, Glavine his 21st. How many more such players figure to come down the pike?
Pitchers are also playing at unprecedented levels of greatness well into their forties.
I wonder if, over time, 200 wins might become accepted as a career benchmark for pitchers -- the benchmark, maybe. You already see stories that celebrate a pitcher's 200th win, and rightfully so: every one of those victories was tough to get. Shoot, Mark Buehrle has 102 wins at age 28, and he's pretty good. Assuming 15 wins a year, he'll be about 35 by the time he gets to 200. Getting to 300 just looks out of the question.
There you have it. Because Mark Buehrle, a guy who looked totally lost and posted a 4.99(!) ERA as recently as last year, probably won't make 300 wins, we have to rethink this whole numbers thing.
And I think that's where the voters will have to go, too. Increasingly, we'll have to subtract some of our old notions from the Hall of Fame rubric. What if, over time, there just aren't any more 300-game winners? After Glavine (297) on the active list, there is Randy Johnson at 284. What if Johnson comes up, I don't know, seven shy? He was still, for years, the most feared and arguably most effective pitcher in baseball. That's worthy of a Hall conversation.
For God's sake, Mark Kreidler, no one who's not a total idiot is arguing that you can't make it into the Hall if you don't have 300 wins. The majority of guys already in the Hall don't have 300-win resumes.
And of course Randy Johnson makes it in. Stop talking about "most feared" -- what the hell does that even mean? Johnson has a career 137 ERA+ (Sandy Koufax's was 131), finished first or second in ERA seven times, led the league in strikeouts per nine innings for nine consecutive years, and is closing in on 4000 IP. It's not a conversation, it's a motherfucking 360-degree slam dunk with two balls in each hand.
Then again, does a Hall voter really need to see Jeter reach 3,000 hits to know he's deserving of a vote? Certainly not -- and good thing. The old benchmarks are coming down, in some cases literally. We're going to be voting in the years to come on impact as much as anything -- and that, to me, goes hand in glove with the concept of a Hall of Fame, not a hall of numbers.
Impact, which Mark Kreidler will measure in terms of the number of fragrances a player has named after him. Get cracking, Craig, there's still time for Biggieau (TM) to hit the market in time for your Hall of Fame case.
The eternal debate over who's hot and who's not is driven by an even more maddening question: What, exactly, is the definition of hot? Well, let's ask ESPN's Bob Klarrpischrnrg:
The eternal debate over who's hot and who's not is driven by an even more maddening question: What, exactly, is the definition of hot?
Hey! You totally just copied my intro! How dare you?!
In identifying baseball's hottest division, do we mean the trendiest (most attractive to free agents), the most talented (greatest star quotient) or the most competitive (tightest races)?
I don't really care. This whole thing seems kind of meaningless to me, but off the top of my head I'd say it means the division with the best, most exciting teams.
Let's face it, instant popularity is king in a world of short attention spans, which is why the NL West gets our vote. It's hot, at least right now, because it's the new home of the game's richest free-agent pitcher (Barry Zito), the most celebrated homecoming king (Randy Johnson) and the collective migrations of Jason Schmidt, Greg Maddux, and David Wells.
Oh. I guess "hot" means..."old?"
Zito, I guess, lends some "hotness" to the NL West. But Randy Johnson? He's 43, has no cartilage in his knees, and wasn't a very good pitcher last year. Jason Schmidt is pretty good, but Greg Maddux? "Hot?" And Wells? Really? He makes the NL West "hot?" That's like saying that "Mork and Mindy" got "hot" when Jonathan Winters came aboard to play Mearth.
It's enough to make you think the lure of the East is finally on the decline; Zito turned his back on what should've been an layup courtship for the Mets, just as Schmidt blew off the Yankees and everyone else to the right of the Mississippi. Had it not been for the Red Sox's snaring of Daisuke Matsuzaka, the East would've had its worst recruiting winter in years, although it can still be argued that the Sox and Yankees are still on the shortest path to October.
Yeah...I guess the only thing that might make the AL East "hot" by your definition is... the $100m+ signing of the biggest international superstar not already in MLB. Also, Vernon Wells re-signed with Toronto early. And JD Drew is coming. And Bobby Abreu last year, for the Yankees. So:
AL EAST: Major new additions or re-ups since last July 31:
Abreu Matsuzaka Drew V. Wells
NL WEST:
Zito Maddux Fat D. Wells Johnson Schmidt
You pick.
In the meantime, however, the NL West likely will post the majors' lowest overall ERA -- or as Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti told Peter Gammons recently, "[the division] is clearly a pitching-oriented division."
PetCo is huge. Dodger Stadium is huge. It's like 534 feet to left center in PacBell. The former BOB is huge. Congrats on having the lowest ERAs, NL West.
What made the West so tempting? For some, it was money. Zito obviously couldn't resist the $126 million he'll be earning over the next seven seasons. While it's true the Giants essentially were bidding against themselves -- one AL general manager called it "madness in a market that'd already gone mad" -- Zito opted for San Francisco's familiarity over, say, New York's energy.
Scott Boras: You ready to talk decision, Barry m'boy? Barry Zito: (Ending transcendentalist tantric yoga session) Yes. Present me with a forked path, down one of whose tines I shall wander. Scott Boras: The Mets are offering some money, as well as the nebulous idea of 'New York's energy.' The Giants are offering way way way too much money. Like, crazy "fuck-you" money. Money that will make you the richest pitcher ever, which is crazy, because you're like a B+ pitcher. So, just to reiterate: New York, money and nebulous idea of "energy." San Francisco: a million dollars for every zen water fountain in your house. Barry Zito: But...I have 126 zen water fountains. Scott Boras: Correct. They are offering $126 million. But remember, New York is offering "New York's Energy." Now, I know that you're a very spiritual person, so you have to think long and ha-- Barry Zito: Giants and money. Scott Boras: That's my boy. Barry Zito: Namaste.
Familiarity was also a critical factor in Johnson's request to be traded back the Diamondbacks. Soon after the death of an older brother, the Big Unit told a Yankees official he "wouldn't mind" if they could engineer a deal with Arizona. One club official said, "he didn't confront us and demand anything like Gary [Sheffield], but it was clear Randy wanted to move on."
The NL West is H-O-T hot! How hot? So hot that Randy Johnson, a 43 year-old jerk with no cartilage in his knee and a very bad ERA and a lot of HR given up last year, mentioned in passing to someone that he:"wouldn't mind" coming back! Feelin' hot hot hot!
The NL West: Old People Wouldn't Mind Comin' Back! If you can't take the heat, then you should mind coming back!
And why, you might ask, does an old person not mind coming back? Because he couldn't hack in in NY because of the pressure and excitement! And he got mildly grumpy and said to himself, "Hey, I know who is desperate enough to give me another year on my contract -- those desperately-in-debt folks in Arizona who need to sell tickets!"
Ouch! The scalding hot NL West strikes again!
Johnson might or might not be the strikeout machine who averaged nearly 11 K's a game in 2004, his last year in the National League. Logic says no chance, considering he's 43, coming off back surgery and was working with a diminished fastball in his two years with the Yankees. But working in a friendly environment will make a real difference to Johnson, who was a virtual outcast in pinstripes, distancing himself from teammates and fans alike.
The NL West: So Hot We Got a 43 Year-Old Grumblepuss Who Just Had Back Surgery and Has No Cartilage In His Knees to Come Back Here and Pitch for a Mediocre Team Where He Will Likely Make Very Little Difference! Feel the Heat!!!!
Runners-up
The NL Central was actually a close second to the NL West in generating winter heat. The Cubs, in particular, put on a dazzling show, spending enough money to fuel a third-world economy. The new faces include Alfonso Soriano, Ted Lilly, Henry Blanco and Jason Marquis, not to mention Lou Piniella. All that was missing from the Central's coronation as baseball's hottest division was Roger Clemens' announcement that he's returning to the Astros.
Soriano, Pinella, the presence of Carlos Zambrano and the resigning of Derrek Lee a year+ ago makes the Cubs alone more interesting and "hot" than any team in the NL West. Also, Klorprishh, guess where Clemens is going to sign? Can't guess? The team is in a big city on the East Coast. Derek Jeter plays for them. (Hint: Not Arizona.)
When Clemens signs with the pinstripers I want an immediate apology and retraction from you, Bob Krellpshren, because the AL East will officially be hotter than the NL West. And hotness is something I care about!
Further down on the list is the AL East, which didn't undergo any radical makeovers but nevertheless played host to the global bidding war for Daisuke Matsuzaka. The Thousand Year conflict between the Yankees and Red Sox became even more more intense after Boston invested some $100 million on Japan's greatest pitcher. Can't wait for the first showdown between Matsuzaka and Hideki Matsui.
Neither can I. But you know what I look forward to more? The first showdown between Barry Zito and Andre Ethier! Hot hot hot hot!
The AL Central isn't quite the bruising division it was two years ago. The Twins will be hard-pressed to replace starters Brad Radke (retired) and Francisco Liriano (Tommy John surgery). Actually, the division race will be determined by just how much leftover momentum the Tigers will have in '07. Their acquisition of Gary Sheffield was an intriguing one; his loyalty to Jim Leyland, his former manager in Florida, might be the tipping point in sending the Tigers back to the playoffs.
I just crunched the numbers, and the AL Central, especially if Liriano comes back, is way hotter than the NL West. Liriano, Sheff, the Tigers' Young Guns, Sizemore, Hafner...the Hotness Index is off the charts!
How can Kirkplecch say that the NL West is the hottest division?! If I didn't know better, I'd almost say that "hotness" is a dumb adjective to use when you think about baseball.
You guys, I totally pulled my own Klapischistic boner: I just announced that all the NL West parks were huge, and linked this to pitchers having low ERAs. I kind of knew that I would get hit for this...somewhere in the back of my brain was the feeling that, like, the Former BOB was a hitters' park. And lo and behold, several of you were less lazy than I was, and wrote in to chastise me. Here's Eric:
Chase Field is widely regarded to be a hitter's park, despite its size. [However, BP] lists Arizona as a better hitters park than all but Coors Field in 2004.
Here's David:
"PetCo is huge. Dodger Stadium is huge. It's like 534 feet to left center in PacBell. The former BOB is huge. Congrats on having the lowest ERAs, NL West."
Not so fast. Park factors from ESPN indicate the division skews toward hitters. -- http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor
Coors Field, despite the humidor bringing HR back down to reasonable levels: #2 hitter's park in MLB last year.
Chase Field is located in Phoenix, which is at about 1200 feet of altitude and which was most conducive to HR last year: #4 hitter's park.
Dodger Stadium, with the new extremely reduced foul ground: #10 hitter's park.
SBC Park, even with the 421 foot power alley in right center and its tendency to destroy left handed hitters' power: #16 hitter's park last year, right in the middle of all MLB teams.
You're right about PETCO; best pitcher's park in MLB.
Also, not that I'm defending Klapisch's choice of a term like "Hot Index", or whatever, but one can be rationally optimistic about the NL West this year because those of us who enjoy good pitching are looking forward to the possibility the division has the four best 1-2 starter combos in the league.
Schmidt/Penny Zito/Cain, Peavy/Young Webb/Johnson
is each better than any other team except perhaps Sheets/Capuano, or Willis/Johnson. Extend that to the AL, and the Central is the only one of the three AL divisions with that depth of pitching talent.
Fair enough. Thanks to all of you who correctly chastised me for a silly mistake.
P.S. Kid Canada adds this to the discussion (as did many others, BTW):
Klapisch is giving divisions credit for its teams adding players...but if the player stayed within the same division, does that make the division "hotter" or merely maintain the previous level of "hotness"?
Jason Schmidt went from San Francisco to the Dodgers. Greg Maddux went from L.A. to San Diego. Jason Marquis (the EPITOME of hotness) went from the Cardinals to the Cubs. All of these moves just keep the hotness of those divisions at the same level. Although I would argue the NL Central would have gotten hotter if Marquis had gone elsewhere. His HORP (Hotness Over Replacement Player) was a disgusting - 182.76 last season.
P.P.S. A lot of people also wrote in to point out that Henry Blanco should in no way be associated with anything involving "hotness." Theron sez:
I think it's funny that the Klapisch article mentions Henry Blanco as both a new face on the Cubs and an element in making them a hot team. Not only has he been a Cub since 2005 anyway, but he's a backup catcher. Maybe the true measure of the next hot division will depend on where Chris Widger ends up?
And Eli:
Additionally, Henry Blanco is not a "new face" to the Cubs. He's a familiar face, attached to a body that plays terrible baseball.
New York FJM Correspondent America's Sweetheart files this report in re: the Randy Johnson trade (the whole thing, I believe, is non-verbatim, which we normally do not do, but for America's Sweetheart, we at FJM make an exception).
America's Sweetheart writes...
I just love listening to people talk about ND losing in football. So much so that I clicked on a link to the Michael Kay show to hear Mike Golic talk about it. Then I heard Kay talk about the Randy Johnson deal and the callers who phoned in to disagree with him.
Opening comments....
Randy Johnson won 17 games last year in the toughest division in baseball....
People say he didn't win in the playoffs. Neither did Mike Mussina and we signed him to a two-year extension.
He's well worth they money he has on his contract....16 million.
He won 17 games...please don't forget that.
(now a caller)
CHRIS IN WEST NYACK
Chris - You keep saying that it's important that Randy Johnson won 17 games, but equally as important is, he had a five ERA.
Kay - Why does that matter? Only thing that matters is the W.
Chris - The win is the function of the team. But the ERA is more indicative of how he pitched.
Kay - How come Mike Mussina didn't win 17 Games?
(he won 15 games)
Chris - This isn't about Mike Mussina.
(thank you, Chris)
Chris - How many pitchers in the AL would win 17 games if they pitched behind the Yankees. With that run support?
(At this point there is a very long beat. Kay must be taking into account that of qualified ERA leaders, Johnson was 34th out of 39. Perhaps he will go with 20 or 25 as an answer?)
Kay - But...but...It doesn't matt...I again I tell you I understand what you're saying that it's a function of a team but I also say it's a function to a...You're a Yankee fan right? They scored eight runs he gave up six...they won, so what....he's a veteran pitcher that knows how to pitch to the score so his ERA is going to be higher. It doesn't matter. All that matter is if he wins and loses.
Chris - Any pitcher who gives up six runs a game under your scenario would win 17 games.
Kay - Pitchers pitch to the runs they are given. Good pitchers do that.
Chris - That's not true. Pitchers are going out there to give up the fewest runs possible.
Kay - No. If the Yankees score 8 runs in five innings he's not going for the shutout!
(A luxury pitchers on bad teams don't really have, but that's their fault)
Chris - What about the year Jason Marquis won 15 games and had a 6.21 ERA. Are you impressed with that?
Kay - No, not in the national league.
(but why not?)
Chris - What if he did it in the American League?
(nice one, Chris)
Kay - Yeah. I would [be impressed].
(Chris, please don't let him off the hook!)
Chris - So you would take someone like that over Kevin Millwood in '04 who went 9-13 in and won the ERA title with Cleveland.
(I love you Chris from West Nyack)
Kay - I'm gonna tell you why, and you are bringing up good points so I am not going to say that you are 100% wrong here. I believe by watching baseball my whole life and being involved with it for 25 years is that there is nothing harder to do in sports than to win a game by a pitcher.
(Nothing harder, save for the fact that in every major league game that has ever been played it has happened exactly one time)
Kay - That's why the era of the 300 win pitcher is going.
(hmmmm)
Kay - It's not easy to win games. And there is an art to it. So if the art is to win 17 games and have a 5.00 ERA I don't care.
(don't forget the league leading 7.51 run support. That's like forgetting the paint brush)
Kay - All these Sabermatricians get locked up with all of these stats and I don't. You know what stat I care about?
(wins?)
Kay - Did he win the game?
(that's the question you care about. the stat you care about is wins.)
Kay - Would you rather have a guy really lose a good game. "Wow, he pitched well -- we only lost 2-1!" I always said this about those pitchers, "Oh, the Yankees only scored one, then you have to give up zero." In twenty years you're going to look back on Mike Mussina in game 2 against the Tigers...had a 3-1 lead and we lost 4-3....That's not that bad...yeah it is bad! He gave up runs he shouldn't have given up!
(note: don't start a sentence "would you rather..." if you are only going to bring up one choice. it ruins the game)
(also, am I allowed to remember the next game when Randy Johnson gave up five runs? Note: The Yankees had not scored eight runs in the first inning. They hadn't scored at all. Perhaps Johnson was confused because he was used to 7.51 runs a game)
Kay - I don't care that his ERA was 5. It was good enough to win 17 games. Mike Mussina didn't win 17 games.
(he won 15. and his ERA was 1.5 lower.)
(Kay at this point rambles on to Chris about how the AL is hard. Not so hard that 33 players can't have higher ERAs than 5.00 hard, but hard nonetheless. I think he's hung up on Chris because Chris stops talking. Kay does end with this....)
...and Richard pretty much finishes him off with this:
Michael Kay must not have been paying close attention when Johnson was pitching. This is how he pitched in 2006, split by plus/minus score at the start of the inning.
+5 or more (Yankees leading by 5+) -- 21 IP, 7 R, 6 ER, 2.57 ERA +4 -- 12.1 IP, 10 R, 10 ER, 7.30 ERA +3 -- 11.0 IP, 11 R, 11 ER, 9.00 ERA +2 -- 25.1 IP, 15 R, 9 ER, 3.20 ERA but 6 unearned runs +1 -- 28.0 IP, 21 R, 21 ER, 6.75 ERA tie -- 59.2 IP, 36 R, 35 ER, 5.28 ERA -1 -- 19.1 IP, 15 R, 12 ER, 5.59 ERA -2 -- 20.1 IP, 7 R, 7 ER, 3.10 ERA -3 or more -- 8.0 IP, 3 R, 3 ER, 3.38 ERA
Johnson actually pitched worse when the game was close. By my count, he gave up a lead 18 times during the season. I don't know what's typical, but 18 seems like a lot if you're making Kay's argument. He started 60 innings with the score tied and gave up at least a run 20 times -- about average, if I remember correctly -- but a total of 36 runs, 1 unearned. He started 28 innings with a one-run lead and gave up the lead 11 times.
There's an art to coming off the mound and saying, "Uh, guys, I need some more runs."
Al I Wanted for Christmas Was a Mike Celizic-Brand Hat
And instead I got, like, a shirt. And "The Wire: Season 2" on DVD. Which is awesome, but it's no Celizic Hat. And I'm angry.
For this reason, and also because Junior's last couple posts contained an unreasonably small amount of anger/swearing, I present some thoughts on Magic Mike's latest word-conglomeration, which is sub-titled, hilariously:
Bronx Bombers could have enough to being in Zito after dealing Big Unit
Like the Yankees couldn't pay for them both. Like they care if their payroll is $206 million or $222 million. Whatever. Let's see why ol' Mikey thinks the Yankees should deal Unit and pick up Zito.
The Yankees went into this offseason saying they wanted a leaner payroll and younger lineup in 2007. Word out of the team’s front office also was that Brian Cashman, the general manager who looks like Jeff Van Gundy, but without the sunny disposition, had wrested control of the team away from George Steinbrenner’s Tampa-based committee of crack baseball advisers.
I'd just like to say here that the patented Mike Celizic "...x is like y..." comparison used in this paragraph is actually not totally, completely terrible. Calling Cash a grumpy version of Jeff Van Gundy kind of makes me laugh. Maybe he's getting less hacky/boring with his jokes.
Experience has taught us to take such pronouncements with a grain of salt the size of the Matterhorn.
Nope. He's not. That's pretty hacky/boring.
Invariably, every Yankee long-range plan crumbles the moment an overpriced and superannuated superstar comes on the market. They couldn’t help themselves; it was the Steinbrenner way, and to expect them to behave any differently was like expecting a St. Bernard to swear off drooling.
And that one is just weird. In fact, it's fucking weird. (Take that, Junior.)
But this year, it’s been different...[excised discussion of Sheffield and Wright trades] And now, word is that the Yankees are shopping the Big Unit himself, Randy Johnson. Suddenly, the idea that the pinstripes have an actual plan that will not only keep them competitive but also build for a future that’s farther away than next March, isn’t so farfetched after all.
Read that last sentence. Savor its tangled syntax. St. Bernard-style drool over how hard it is to parse.
Can this mean the Yankees are about the join the Barry Zito sweepstakes? Yankee fans hope it does; Red Sox fans hope it doesn’t.
Huh. Red Sox fans hope the Yankees don't get Barry Zito, you say?
Barry Zito 3-Year Splits vs. Red Sox, 2004-2006
2-3, 6.45 ERA (7.20 at Fenway) 7 GS 38.2 IP 50 H 27 ER 30/22 K/BB .309 BAA
Yeah. We wouldn't want that coming at us four or five times a year. Especially if it's instead of this guy:
Randy Johnson 3-year Splits vs. Red Sox, 2004-2006
7-1, 4.87 ERA 10 GS 61 IP 59 H 33 ER 64/32 K/BB .252 BAA
Both relatively small sample sizes, obviously, but still.
Moving Johnson makes all the sense in the world for New York, which is another reason it is so surprising. This hasn’t been a team that’s made a lot of intelligent moves ever since its run of four titles in five years ended after the 2000 season.
Since then, they got: Mike Mussina, Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Alex Rodriguez, Johnny Damon, Randy Johnson, and Bobby Abreu. They also kept: Chien-Ming Wang, Robby Cano, Melky Cabrera, and Phillip Hughes. There have been a bunch of high-profile disasters, absolutely. Lots of them. But don't tell me that these weren't intelligent moves.
Johnson is a first-ballot Hall of Famer and one of the most dominant power pitchers of all time. But he’s 43, he’s coming off his second back surgery, his 2006 ERA was 5.00, and he’s got $16 million coming in salary next year. By some measures — 17 victories being the primary one he’s still a premier pitcher. But for $16 million, a team can buy a lot of replacement.
I don't get this. Yes, he is clearly old and passed his prime. No question. He might be worse next year than he was in '06. But he might be better. And even though he was hurt, he still threw 205 innings. And, best of all, after next year, he's off the books -- he's a one-year committment right now, to a team that doesn't care about money anyway.
Trading him might be a good move, depending on what you get back. But not because of his salary. They don't care about his salary. I promise, they don't.
So let's see what Mikey's plan is.
[$16 million] just happens to be the annual salary Zito, the premier free agent on the market, wants for each of the next six years...Zito is still on the good side of 30 and has never had injury problems. He’s not the same pitcher who won the Cy Young four years ago, but he’s still the best starter available and one of the best lefties in the game. In other words, he’s exactly the kind of pitcher the Yankees need to continue to control the AL East; exactly the kind of guy they’ve always pursued with the single-minded determination of a border collie chasing a Frisbee.
First of all, sweet metaphor. Second: Barry Zito wasn't the ace on his own team. His OPS-against over the last three years is basically idenitical to that of Mike Mussina, to whom you are about to refer as: ...39 and losing effectiveness. (He also has like 2.5 times as many BBs as Mussina in that time frame.) Zito's pretty good, but a #1? Seriously?
[The Yankees] aren’t going to win the World Series without a couple of top young arms in the starting rotation. Wright wasn’t it. Carl Pavano shows no signs of being the man, either. Johnson is old and very hittable. Chien-Ming Wang is a terrific number two or three starter, but he’s not an ace. Mike Mussina is 39 and losing effectiveness...[R]ight now, the Yankees need a number one. Zito could be that man. And if Randy Johnson can be made to disappear, the Yankees could have the money to sign him.
Wang is a way better candidate for a #1 than Zito right now. I don't know how he does it, with his like 0.04 K/IP, but he does it. That power sinker is something to behold. Zito is a flyball pitcher who walks a ton of dudes, and he'd be making 30% of his starts against the Sox and Blue Jays. And they'd have to sign him for 6 or 7 years.
Also, again, the Yankees have enough money to sign him regardless. They have enough money to sign anyone. That is not the reason to move RJ. And where is the section of this article where you discuss the oft-cited rumors that RJ wants out of NY? I mean, the guy has a no-trade, so in order for these discussions even to be happening, he kind of has to want out, right? And where's the obvious counter-point that if they do not pay Boras/Zito $100 million over 7 years, they would have that money, plus the RJ-off-the-books money to pay for Carlos Zambrano, a far better pitcher than Zito, when he becomes a free agent in 2007? Are you going to talk about that, Mike?
2. I think Zito is a slightly better bet to pitch well in 2006 than Johnson. Not a lock, of course -- my guess is that RJ will lower his ERA a little from last year, and if Zito were to join the AL East you'd think his might go up. But still, Zito's had ERAs the past three years ranging from 3.83 to 4.48, and he'll probably end up somewhere in there. Unit, meanwhile, did post that ugly 5-spot last year and he's not getting any younger or healthier. (It is interesting to note that Zito's WHIP was 1.40 in 2006 and Johnson's was 1.24.) So if you think like I do that Zito will be overall a better pitcher, then yeah, I would rather the Yankees stand pat regardless of their numbers against the Sox, because he'd help them win more games over the course of the season.
3. Season 3 is the best. 2 seems almost like a different show from all of the other seasons.
4. Now HatGuy is on a dog kick (St. Bernard, border collie)? What happened to ice cream sundaes? Can we look forward to "Omar Vizquel ate up that baseball like a Weimaraner slurping up a banana split"?
I think RJ's #'s will come down next year. As you pointed out, that 1.24 WHIP is nothing to compain about. And like I said, yes he is old, but he is also only a 1-year committment I look at Zito for 7/$100m and see an AL East mistake waiting to happen. He should go to Shea.
Ziggy Sobotka is by far my least favorite character in The Wire. Must be the revulsion of self-recognition. KT, I think you are Proposition Joe.
Well, Zito went to the Giants, so this conversation is moot now. 7/$126m is a pretty big overpay, but you just knew he was gonna get it in this market. I think he'll do well for himself in the NL. It makes you wonder what the Giants' long-term plan is. "Stay sort of okay for perpetuity"?
Loyal readers of FJM will remember that John Kruk predicted Randy Johnson would win 30 games this year. And that Harold Reynolds seconded that prediction a month later.
After tonght, Randy Johnson: 10-6, 4.21 ERA, .266 BAA, 21 HR allowed. On pace for a 17-10 season.
Rubbing it in? They deserve it, those idiots.
Also, completely inappropriately for this board:
Jason Giambi's OPS in 2003: .939. Jason Giambi's OPS in 2004: .721. Jason Giambi's OPS in April 2005: .768. May: .664. June: .905. July: 1.541.
More significantly, his SLG: April: .373. May: an Alex Cora-esque .315. June: .431. July: 1.000.
Somebody give me one reason not to think that he is back on the Juice, effective June 1, 2005.
