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.
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.
We're going to be seeing a lot of shit like this in the next month:
I know, I wrote that the Yankees would be better off letting Rodriguez walk and using the savings to shore up the pitching staff, but, like Cashman soon will, I reserve the right to change my mind.
The funny thing is, it took him until HR #47 and 48 to admit he was wrong about ARod.
And by the way, I don't think Brian Cashman is dumb enough ever to have thought -- like you did -- that the Yankees should just let him walk. (You can find that journalistic face-plant here, if you're interested.)
What's a bunch of meta-sports-commentary commentators to do?
Bill Plaschke hasn't written an article in nine days. Wallace Matthews hasn't published since June 26. Woody Paige, apparently, has been neglecting his writing in favor of his on-going propulsion experiments. The White Sox are playing down to their PECOTA predictions, so no one at the Trib or CST can glow about Ozzie. Even this guy -- normally so reliable -- has taken a break to cover Wimbledon.
It's tough days here at FJM.
I post this only to ask you, our loyal readers, to be vigilant. Go about your lives. Go to the movies, have a picnic with your children, do all of the things you normally do. But also, send us links to poorly-conceived and -executed articles in your hometown papers. Because if you don't, then the journalists will have won.
Wallace Matthews is my new hero. I haven't been this excited about a journalist since Junior discovered Bruce Jenkins.
In this edition of "Indefensible Positions," Matthews posits that ARod's salary might be better spent on middle relievers. Because...
$25M could buy lots of arms
A-Rod: Stats but no rings
In 1996, the Yankees got four home runs, 54 RBIs and a .308 batting average out of Charlie Boggs, the two-headed monster that held down third base that year.
In 1998, the third baseman's name was Scott Brosius and the numbers were 19, 98 and .300. In 1999, Brosius again: 17, 71, .247. In 2000: 16, 64, .230.
How dare you assail Scott Brosius. That man is a saint!
The Yankees won the World Series in every one of those years and in fact, won 14 World Series games in a row, stretching from Game 3 against the Braves in 1996 through Game 2 against the Mets in 2000.
Do you guys see where this is going? Are you as excited as I am?!
During the previous three seasons, the Yankees' third baseman has averaged 40 home runs and 119 RBIs and batted just about .300. Two seasons back, he won the AL MVP, and this season he has a great chance to put up the best numbers of a career that already is a first-ballot ticket to Cooperstown.
And with him, the Yankees have won precisely nothing.
Cue the band! Release the balloons! Strip down to your underwear, slap some warpaint on your faces, bang your drums and go wilding in the streets -- because Wallace Matthews is arguing that having an all-world 3rd baseman who hits a lot of HR and generally kicks ass is worse for your team than having a terrible third baseman who does none of these things.
It will be worth remembering this at the end of the year when general manager Brian Cashman is faced with the agonizing choice of burning more cash on Alex Rodriguez or bidding him a fond farewell.
No it won't. Because Cashman, unlike you, is not an idiot. Cashman will want to keep the 31 year-old surefire first-ballot Hall of Famer who is going to hit 70 HR this year despite the fact that he -- ARod -- is a weirdo and everyone hates him and there is an organized media movement -- of which you, Wallace Matthews, are a key player -- to drive him out of New York by arguing that Scott Brosius was better for the Yankees than he is.
There is nothing agonizing about deciding whether to keep Alex Rodriguez. If he isn't sick of NY, and wants to stay, you keep him. Because he's awesome. And because -- and this is the first of several times I will point this out, the Texas Rangers are paying you $7 million a year to help you keep him, because Tom Hicks is a bigger idiot than you, Wallace Matthews.
I am going to repeat that.
The Yankees, who have a $200m payroll, are being paid $7 million a year to help them retain Alex Rodriguez's services. And you still think this is a difficult decision?
To lose A-Rod would do me no good at all - who on Earth would I write about when the Yankees are slogging through some meaningless August tilt with the Devil Rays - but it might be the best thing the Yankees can do to right a ship that be sinkin', slowly, for the past seven years.
Honesty in journalism, here, folks. Who indeed would hacks like Matthews write about, were ARod gone? Who could allow them to drag out their tired old columns about the glory days of Scott Brosius? God forbid Matthews would have to work hard and form new opinions about things. That simply won't do. He needs ARod around, yelling things at rookies on the Blue Jays and saying slightly-off things in interviews about therapy so Matthews can put down his giant tumbler of Old Grandad, head to his file cabinet, blow dust off the A-D drawer, dig through his Brosius file, pull out a winner from 1998 that reads, "Yanks' 3rd Baseman About More than Stats," and do an old-fashioned cut-and-paste job. Then: more whiskey!
You can argue successfully that without Rodriguez, the Yankees would be even worse off than they are right now.
Correct.
You also can point out that without the burden of his salary, they can start shopping to fill the real needs of this team.
Incorrect. They have no limit to their salary. None. They said last year that they had a limit, and then they traded a pile of old hoodies for Bobby Abreu, who cost $13 million last year and $15m this year. Actually, let's just go ahead and list the most expensive Yankees this year:
Jason Giambi: $21m Derek Jeter: $20m Roger Clemens: $18.5m (ish) Alex Rodriguez: $17m (ish) Andy Pettitte: $16m Bobby Abreu: $15m Johnny Damon: $13m Hideki Matsui: $13m Jorge Posada: $12m Mike Mussina: $11m Mariano: $10.5m Carl Pavano: $10m
Are you seriously telling me that of these guys, ARod is the one not earning his pay? That his money is less well-spent than that spent on Giambi? Pavano? Matsui? Abreu? Mussina?
The question of whether he will opt out of his contract isn't even worth discussing. Originally, [the opt-out clause] was included to provide Rangers owner Tom Hicks with an ejector seat to escape from what remains the richest contract in the history of sports. Now it serves as a way for A-Rod and his agent, Scott Boras, to further cash in on what so far has been a phenomenal season...
To think Rodriguez and Boras won't invoke it at the end of this season, no matter what its outcome, is to believe that Donald Trump will wake up tomorrow and say to the latest Mrs. Trump, "Honey, I'm loving you so much, I'm gonna forget all about that pre-nup."
Ain't gonna happen.
Yikes. Leave the comedy to the professionals, Wallace. Stick to Brosiusian Hagiography.
...When the time comes to say deal or no deal, the Yankees would be wise to remember the lessons of 1996 and 1998 and 1999 and 2000. Those championships weren't won by slugging third basemen, or designated hitters built like Schwarzenegger, or prima donna starting pitchers who show up when the season is half over.
Here it comes...the moneyshot...
Those teams were built on small ball - incredibly, Bernie Williams' 30 homers in 2000 represents the peak of Yankees power for that era - on timely hitting, on role players who worked together like the cast of "The Sopranos," and on pitching.
Mostly, on relief pitching.
Okay. Everybody take a deep breath. We're going to get through this together.
First: Tino Martinez had 44 HR in 1997. Second: The 1998 Yankees had all nine starters and one reserve (Shane Spencer) in double-digits in HR. They hit 207 HR that year, which was fourth in the league. In 2000 they were 6th in the league. They were not a huge power team, but they hit their share of HR. Third: 2, 1, 1, 2, 5. Those are the AL ranks of the Yankees' teams in OBP, 1996 to 2000. That's what those teams were always based on, offensively. They walked a lot and grinded out at-bats and wore people down. Fourth: 1, 2, 4, 3, 4. Those were their yearly league ranks in K's by their pitchers. Their starters were very good, 1-5, all of those years, in striking out people and not walking people. Their relievers were good, except Mariano, who was impenetrably brilliant.
The Yankees did not win those championships with "smallball" or "smartball" or "intelli-ball" or "think-ball" or "genius-ball' or "Torre-ball" or "How'd-they-do-that?-ball." They won with great starting pitchers (Cone, Clemens, Pettitte, Wells, Key, Hernandez), a 9-man line-up that grinded out long at-bats and walked a lot and hit for good power, and the greatest closer in the history of baseball.
And these days, more than ever, that is where Yankees games are won and lost. In fact, throughout baseball, that is where most games are won and lost, with starters going six innings and managers jumping for the bullpen phone when the pitch clicker nears 100. For all the brilliance of Mariano Rivera, it is the grunts, the middle relievers, the Sean Henns and Brian Bruneys and Scott Proctors and Kyle Farnsworths, who have become the most important pitchers on the Yankees' staff. Too often this year, they have been much too important and not nearly good enough.
Yes, the problem with the 2007 Yankees so far was been Brian Bruney and his 28 IP with 25 K's, and Scott Proctor's 32.2 IP with a 1.30 WHIP. Not Kei Igawa's 30.2 IP with a 1.60 WHIP, or Carl Pavano disappearing, or Mike Mussina's 5.63 ERA, or having to rush Tyler Clippard up to start games, or having Darrell Rasner and Matt DeSalvo start 11 games, or Hughes' hamstring. I think it's Bruney.
The Yankees' relievers stink. But their starters haven't even been able to start. Except Pettitte and Wang, it's been Russian Roulette out there. (And by the way, I'd like to see Pettitte duplicate his first half while still striking out fewer than 5/9IP. Watching him revert to the mean is going to be very enjoyable for me.)
Anyway, the point is, I think the Yankees should let ARod walk and spend the money on middle relievers. What do you think, Wallace?
Saying goodbye to Rodriguez would be a gutsy and risky move, because he is one of the few players about whom it can be said there truly is no other. But they have done without his likes before and they can do it again.
And surely for every Rodriguez, there are dozens of Mike Stantons and Jeff Nelsons and David Weatherses out there. What the Yankees need to do now is take the money they will save on A-Rod and go find them.
Oh good. You agree with my crazy joke stance.
Read that last paragraph again. Then consider that at the bottom of this article, Newsday saw fit to print this:
Bank-breaking numbers
If A-Rod keeps up his current pace, these are his projected numbers for 162 games:
Hits 186 Runs 149 HRs 64 RBIs 167
as if to chastise Matthews themselves. Consider for a second, again, that the Yankees are being subsidized by Tom Hicks to the tune of $7m a year so that ARod can put up those numbers in the Stadium. Consider that Wallace Matthews thinks they should use the money on 6th inning set-up guys and 37 year-olds with WHIPs in the 1.50 range. Consider also that the Yankees do not need to free up any money to sign anyone, much less a reliever or two who cost like $2m a year. Consider that Alex Rodriguez's EqA is .354. Consider all of that, and then read this article again, and try to figure out why this article ever got written. And then consider why a mild-mannered claims adjuster for a mid-level insurance company would spend his entire morning dissecting it for a meta-critical blog that only he and a few of his stupid friends really care about.
Coincidence? Not if you're Wallace Matthews, who believes that the Yankees' recent resurgence has one cause and one cause only: Jason Giambi's injury.
(And before I begin investigating this article, allow me to say, as a meta-critic of sports journalism, that the discovery of Newsday's Matthews has been, for me, equal to Darwin landing in the Galapagos Islands.)
[Giambi's] rehab is going as well as can be expected, he said. Another MRI is planned, but surgery is not an option because cutting would only make things worse. Yesterday, his treatment consisted mainly of sitting around waiting for his sore foot to heal...As far as the Yankees are concerned, Giambi should take as much time off as he needs.
For the record: Giambi was in a terrible funk right before his injury. Even still, he was at .262/.380/.436 for the year, with a .297 EqA. Not bad. Not everything you want from Giambi, but not bad.
The Curse of the Giambino descended upon Yankee Stadium in December 2001 and they haven't won a thing of importance since. Giambi may not be out of their lives, but he is out of their lineup, and what do you know? They win.
Each of these things has had roughly as much to do with the Yankees not winning the WS as Giambi signing with the Yankees.
Here are Giambi's season HR totals in his NY career: 41, 41, 12 (injured), 32, 37.
Here are his season EqA's: .351/.327/.262/.347/.332.
Steroids or not, (ok: steroids), Giambi is a world-class hitter. He walks all the time. He hits home runs. (He singlehandedly roided two of them out of the Stadium in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS from the 7-hole, keeping the Yankees in the game.) His illicit substance-ing has no doubt been a distraction for the team, but his on-field exploits far outweigh whatever negative effect that might have had.
Also: there is no such thing as a "curse."
Suddenly, October doesn't seem quite so bleak. There are plenty of factors to point to as reasons for this remarkable turnaround - the rejuvenation of Bobby Abreu, the return to his April form of Alex Rodriguez, who hit two homers and drove in five runs yesterday; the long-awaited arrival of Roger Clemens, who, we are told, inspires by his very presence even when he's not around.
Yes. These are all actual reasons. Also, the Yankees were pretty seriously under-performing their Expected Win-Loss prediction before the injury to Giambi, so it was only a matter of time before they went on a run like this. In fact, ExWL has them at 35-26, five games better than what they are now, so the run will most likely continue, if not immediately, then over the next month or so. They had a ton of guys slumping significantly below their career averages, like Cano and Abreu, who have been on fire recently.
And who, might I ask, "told you" that Roger "inspires by his very presence even when he's not around?" Have you been talking to Suzyn Waldman?
And then there is the absence of Giambi, the beginning of whose stint on the disabled list coincides almost exactly with the resurgence of his team. Call it coincidence or call it karma, but the Yankees, who were a far better team before Giambi's arrival in December 2001, are a measurably better team since his departure from the active roster 10 days ago.
Also coinciding almost exactly with the resurgence of Giambi's team, Dr. Kevorkian being released from jail.
I would also like to address the idea that the Yankees were, and I quote, just to rub it in, "a far better team before Giambi's arrival in December 2001." In order to address this, I will quote my own post of April 15th:
The payroll became more menacing after that, but the trophy has not returned. As the Yankees stocked up on Randy Johnson, Kevin Brown, Jason Giambi, Johnny Damon, Gary Sheffield, et al., they became less potent.
Incorrect. They became far more potent.
In 2000 they won 87 games and got to the WS from a very weak AL East. They scored 871 runs, allowed 814 .
In 2002, the first year with Giambi, they went 103-58. They scored 897 runs, allowed 697.
In 2003, they went 101-61. They scored 877 runs, allowed 716.
In 2004, the first year with Sheffield/ARod, they went 101-61 again, scored 897 runs, allowed 808.
In 2005, 95-67. Scored 886 runs, allowed 789.
In 2006, first year with Damon: 97-65. Scored 930 runs, allowed 767.
So. To sum up. More "potent" pretty much every year since 2000. Just haven't won the WS, due mostly to thinner pitching, better competition, and bad luck (esp. 2001, 2004).
In what universe can you claim that the Yankees were a "far better team" before Giambi arrived? Perhaps only in the universe where you point out that the Yankees' pitching was not as good after he arrived; a universe, I might add, that thanks to reason and logic, would indicate that the Yankees being "worse" in some way has nothing to do with Giambi, who has certainly helped the Yankees' offense.
Without the drag of Giambi, the Yankees' lineup is rolling again. In the 10 games Giambi has missed, Abreu has hit .500 (19-for-38) and raised his average 44 points to .272. In the same period, Melky Cabrera is hitting .378, A-Rod .371 with five homers and 18 RBIs, Jorge Posada .364, Robinson Cano .293, Miguel Cairo .292 and Hideki Matsui .282.
This is all due to Giambi not playing.
Abreu is a walking embodiment of the idea of "regression to the mean," given his career .313 EqA, the fact that he was hitting like .040 for the first two months, and the significant fact that he was still walking a lot even while not hitting, meaning that he had not lost his strike zone management. Or maybe it was Giambi going down that caused Abreu to start hitting.
And Cabrera...thanks to his incredible hot streak -- due entirely to Giambi going down with his injury -- he is up to a blistering .255 EqA, which is still shy of his 50th percentile PECOTA projection. Say it with me people: regression to the mean.
ARod is ARod. He hits like a motherhumper all the time. He was mediocre in May, and is knocking the hell out of the ball in June. This is 100% because of Giambi's foot injury, and not his decade-long demonstration of hitting dominance.
And Posada! My God! He is hitting .364 since Giambi went down?!? That is hugely significant, since he is hitting a paltry .358 for the entire season. (Also, if any of you can explain to me how an almost 36-year-old catcher has a .980 OPS this deep into the year, I would be much obliged.)
Robby Cano had an OPS more than 100 pts. below his career average through May. His torrid Giambi-induced hot streak has him...still below his career averages in most offensive categories. So he will probably keep hitting. Regression to the mean.
Miguel Cairo. Oh my God, you're citing Miguel Cairo's 7-24 June as an indication that Jason Giambi's injury is making the Yankees play better. That's 24 AB. And 7 hits. All of these batting averages you've cited -- besides being batting averages, which is a stupid stat -- are from really small sample sizes (around 40 AB or so) but this one takes the cake.
And finally , Matsui. He has hit .282 since Giambi went down! My goodness, that is interesting. You know what he was hitting before Giambi went down, in a much large sample size? .282, dummy. In fact, in the month of June, Matsui's slugging .371. He has 1 HR. His OBP is down. His power is down. He has gotten worse. So the question is: How can you cite his performance as evidence that Giambi going down is helping the team?
If you're going to claim that solar eclipses cause crops to grow, at least cite some crops that are actually growing.
The absence of Giambi has allowed Johnny Damon to DH, a role he likes, and get his legs healthy while Cabrera, a defensive upgrade over Damon, plays centerfield. And because of the regular at-bats, Cabrera has become the Melky of 2006.
The fact that Damon can DH might actually help, since he's been battling leg injuries. But you know what Damon has done so far in June? .262/.340/.333/.673. No HR. Worse across the board than May, when he was in the OF. And the phrase "Cabrera has become the Melky of 2006" sounds like bad Dr. Seuss. (The Melky of 2006 had a .272 EqA. The Melky of 2007 has a .255 EqA.)
In a culture in which a player will wear the same underwear for weeks if it has hits in it, that seems to be prima facie evidence that for the Yankees, the absence of Giambi has been addition by subtraction.
First of all, how dare you try to smarten up your article with Latin. Second, your underwear has hits in it. Third, all the superstition in the world can't change the fact that most of the guys you cited as doing better since Giambi went down with his injury are doing pretty much the same, or worse, or they are simply starting to hit after bad slumping. This, to me, is prima facie evidence that you are a moron, but, you know, de gustibus non est disputandum.
This should come as no surprise to Yankees purists, for whom the signing of the greasy-haired, tattooed captain of the bad-boy Oakland Athletics to a seven-year, $120-million contract signified the franchise's crossing over to the dark side. In his years as a Yankee, the postseason record stands at 19-22 with one World Series appearance, the six-game beatdown by the Marlins of Wal-Mart.
Why in the world would you blame this on Giambi, and not their pitchers? In exactly 100 Yankee post-season AB, Giambi has 28 H, 6 HR, 6 2B, and 19 BB. He rakes in the post-season, roughly like he does in the regular season. How about looking at Pettitte, Mussina, and Wells getting lit up by Anaheim in the 2002 ALDS, while Giambi went 5-14 with a HR and a .526 OBP? That series loss was Giambi's fault?
Dollar-for-dollar, win-for-win and ring-for-ring, Giambi probably is the worst deal the Yankees have ever made this side of Carl Pavano
Kevin Brown. Kyle Farnsworth. Johnny Damon, probably, by the time it's over. Matsui's new deal, probably, by the time it's over. There have been a lot of iffy deals. Giambi's isn't one of them.
Giambi, for on-field only reasons, was a good signing. I don't care if he's immobile and can't field. They signed him in his prime, the year after he had a .381 (!!!!) EqA. And yes, he was clearly on steroids, and yes, he was expensive, but nobody in baseball cared about steroids then, and the Yankees don't care about money.
and like it or not, they are stuck with him, to the tune of $47 million - $21 million each for this year and next, plus a $5-million buyout. The money they will eat. It's the losing they can't swallow.
Fortunately, the losing doesn't really have anything to do with him. And yes, he is expensive now vis-a-vis his performance, by they knew that would happen. This is what teams like the Yankees do -- they offer more years and more money and no-trade clauses, knowing the deals will be costly at the end of them, in order to out-bid teams who can't afford to take that financial hit. For a long time, they suspected they were a better team with Jason Giambi on the DL than on the field. Now they've got the numbers to prove it.
No, they didn't, if they had a brain. And no, they don't now.
You wrote this ab absurdo. I end this analysis ab irato.
I am not a trained psychologist, but I can say with 100% certainty that Newsday's Wallace Matthews has serious emotional problems. How else to explain this bizarre ad hominem attack on Tim Wakefield?
If the commissioner of baseball truly wants to get to the bottom of one of the great mysteries of his game, he can shelve the steroid investigation and start looking into how Tim Wakefield has managed to get away with his act for the past 15 years.
Let's just get a few facts and figures out of the way right off the bat, here. In his career, Tim Wakefield has thrown almost 2500 IP at an ERA+ of 109. That's pretty solid. Only twice has he ended the season with a below-league-average ERA+. In 2002 he had a 157 ERA+ and a WHIP just over 1.0. This year, at the age of 40, he has a 139 ERA+ in 57 IP. That's pretty darned good for a fourth starter.
In 1995, he was 3rd in the Cy Young voting and 13th in the MVP voting.
Let's face it, we already know that Juicin' Giambi, among many others, took steroids, that baseball's greatest batting records are already either irrevocably tainted or soon about to be, and that at least three of its MVP awards were won by cheaters under false pretenses.
What I want to know is, how in the world has Wakefield been able to draw a major-league paycheck since 1992 with the kind of stuff you generally see at a family barbecue?
What is your deal, man? How does this have anything to do with steroids, even in an over-the-top facetious way? Seriously, what are you talking about? The guy is a rock-solid MLB pitcher. He has better numbers year-in year-out than the majority of the other MLB pitchers. In this day and age, if a guy can throw the ball backwards over his head lefthanded and post a 109 ERA+ over 2500 innings, he's going to be very successful. In fact, one could argue that Wakefield's contract, which pays him $4 million a year in perpetuity at his team's discretion, is one of the absolute best veteran contracts in all of MLB for any team. His knuckleball, or whatever you want to call it, is a bigger menace to the game than steroids, growth hormone or Clomid will ever be. Okay. Even though you're joking, this is actually offensive to me. This is the sports journalism equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. You need to apologize for this. I'm not kidding.
When Wakefield is pitching, the game moves slower than David Ortiz going from home to first.
Here are the times of the 8 games Wakefield has pitched in this year:
April 6: 6IP., 2:14 April 13: 7IP, 2:49 (and the Sox scored 10 runs) April 18: 7IP, 2:24 April 23: 6IP, 3:02 April 28: 5.1IP, 3:25 (nine total pitchers used, one long injury delay) May 4: 7IP, 2:33 May 10: 7IP, 2:18 May 15: 7IP, 2:45
The average time of a baseball game in 2006 was 2:51. Tim Wakefield works very quickly, and the longer he pitches, the faster the games go.
If as many guys in major-league baseball threw the knuckler as have taken performance-enhancing drugs, the game and its fans would have died of boredom years ago.
Hey! What did I just say to you? This is shitty irresponsible journalism. Steroids are actual health risks. They kill kids sometimes. MLB stood idly by and allowed them to infiltrate and generally fuck up the game that I love. Tim Wakefield is a good dude who is good at baseball. His knuckleball has nothing to do with anything bad. If anything, actually, it is a cool (and dying) link to the past. So shut the fuck up.
At 40 years old, Wakefield might not be quite ready to retire, but it certainly is time to retire his reputation as a Yankees killer. After last night, when he allowed six runs and five walks in five stupendously mind-numbing innings, his record in his last nine starts against the Yankees stands at 1-7, with an ERA of 6.00. That's not even counting the home run he allowed to Aaron Boone that put the Yankees into the 2003 World Series. In October, he's done more for this franchise than Alex Rodriguez.
Wake has struggled against the Yanks recently. But look at this game (6IP, 2H, 2R and a win) and then look at this game a few days later (7IP, 5H, 1R, and the win), and then shut the fuck up, please, again, thank you.
So before you start to think that the Yankees, who have now won two straight, are back to normal, here's one bit of advice: Now, let's see them do it against a major-league pitcher.
If you thought the Yankees were "back to normal" after salvaging one game of a 3-game series with the Mets and then winning the first game of a series with the Red Sox, making them an awesomely "back to normal" 4-6 in their last 10 games, you are already a moron, and if you think that Tim Wakefield is not a "major-league pitcher" you are a double moron, and if you just blindly write spittle-laden hate pieces against a guy because he doesn't throw fastballs despite the fact that he has pitched an an above-average level for fifteen years, you are a triple-asshole moron, which are very rare. So, this is actually quite an honor, to be reading your writing, good sir!
Wakefield may very well be the least entertaining player ever to appear in a major-league uniform, unless of course passed balls, uncontested stolen bases, endless delays between pitches and three-ball counts on every batter is your idea of fun.
Well, your claims about speed have been scientifically disproven. Passed balls are indeed an element of his game, yes, as are a lot of stolen bases. Over his career, Wake walks 3.0 per nine innings. Tom Glavine is at 2.7, as is Randy Johnson. So, there you have it. Tim Wakefield: walking one more person every three games or so than Tom Glavine and Randy Johnson.
Last night's 6-2 victory over the Red Sox at Yankee Stadium was like watching a T-ball game, only slower. There's nothing remotely entertaining about watching big-league hitters stand rock still in the box, waiting for the ball to make its interminable trip from Wakefield's hand to home plate, then rock back on their heels to swing for Westchester County.
I happen to think it's incredibly entertaining to watch him pitch. It's weird and different and fun. Perhaps you would like all pitchers to be replaced by pitching machines, and for the batter to be able to program the pitch speed and location. Now that would be some fun-style baseball!
And the only thing slower than Wakefield's knuckler is the time he wastes in between throwing it.
I have already shown you to be a moron when you make this claim. And yet you continue to make it. Your only real move right now is to resign in disgrace.
Once Terry Francona, and the rest of Yankee Stadium, had seen enough, the remainder of the game moved along in an orderly fashion. By then, of course, Wakefield had done his job, at least for the Yankees. He got Rodriguez back on track in the first inning, allowing a monstrous two-run homer, and did the same for Giambi, who claims now to be playing with the help of nothing more than orthotics for his aching feet. In fact, Giambi's performance-enhancer of choice last night was Wakefield, who served him an upper-deck homer in the second and walks in the third and fifth.
He also did wonders for Johnny Damon, who had three hits off him, and Robinson Cano, who tagged him for a double and a three-run triple. In fact, by the time Wakefield was lifted, it was hard to believe this was the same Yankees team that was sitting dead in the water, four games below .500, 10 1/2 games behind the Red Sox and 7 1/2 games out of the AL wild-card spot.
The Yankees are very good hitters. They hit all kinds of pitchers. Last night they hit Wakefield. What is your point? That Wakefield losing that game is going to propel the Yankees to a return to glory? Well, Papelbon just struck out Captain Intangibles looking, and the Yankees are right back where they were before Wake took the hill.
A sweep would still leave the Yankees 7 1/2 games out,
Irrelevant, now.
and to reach 90 wins, the minimum number any team could expect to need to eke out a playoff spot, they would have to go 70-49 the rest of the way. Under any circumstances, it is a lot to ask.
Unless, of course, they get to face Wakefield 70 more times.
Why do you hate Tim Wakefield? What is your problem? Is this just sour grapes because ther Yankees are having a bad year, or something? Seriously. I need to know. Please, Wallace Matthews, if you ever read this, e-mail me and explain this weird factually inaccurate and bizarre attack so I can sleep at night.
(I mean, Papelbon just struck out Jeter looking to end the game, so I'll sleep fine. But I would sleep better if you e-mail me and explain yourself.)
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.
