FJM has gone dark for the foreseeable future. Sorry folks. We may post once in a while, but it's pretty much over.
You can still e-mail dak,Ken Tremendous,Junior,Matthew Murbles, or Coach.
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.
There's this series of kids' books out called the Harry Potter books -- pretty sure you've never heard of it. I only know about it because I'm such a voracious reader. Anyway, Harry is this little wizard kid who runs around doing magic and such, and one of his fun toys is a cloak that turns you invisible. Sort of a level one idea in a story about magic, but I digress.
The point is: I'm 99% confident that Derek Jeter possesses and wears a cloak that causes other people to see his intangibles instead of his physical form. I'm going to call this thing the Cloak of Intangibility because it's a name that makes a lot of sense. The science on the cloak is fuzzy, but intangibles aren't about facts or science. Intangibles just work. So it was that everyone who saw Derek viewed him through a hazy, intangibly prism. I mean, look, we'd heard for years how special he was -- how captain-y, and how Truly Yankee-y. That cloak was working like gangbusters for Derek. But today is a banner day, because today Phil Taylor turns Derek Jeter's Cloak of Intangibility against him. It's all there in the title:
Jeter's no MVP Captain's lack of leadership sank Yankees' hopes
Delectably crazy already.
Now that baseball's postseason is over, the individual awards will soon be handed out, including the American League MVP. Boston's David Ortiz and a trio of Twins, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau and Johan Santana, are all viable candidates for the hardware, and there will be no complaints from this corner if any of them win. The only injustice would be if the award goes to the player who may just be the favorite: Derek Jeter.
We've gone over this many times on FJM. Derek Jeter led the AL in VORP by a hair over Travis Hafner. There are arguments to be made here, but none of them end with the conclusion that giving the MVP to Jeter would in any way be an "injustice." Let's save the word injustice for the Rwandan genocide.
There's no question that Jeter had a fabulous year, finishing second in the AL batting race
Don't care.
and helping the Yanks to the best regular-season record in the league.
Care just a little tiny bit maybe.
But Jeter, the Yankees captain, was also derelict in his duty this season. The supposed team leader led everyone in pinstripes except the teammate who needed him most -- third baseman Alex Rodriguez.
He led the fuck out of Brian Bruney. He grabbed Bernie Williams by the scruff of his neck and willed him to that .768 OPS. He kidnapped Chien-Ming Wang and read the entirety of Nietzsche's Human, All Too Human to him despite the fact that Wang speaks little to no English. Jeter didn't care. He read it aloud in its original German -- a language neither of them understand.
Jeter is the Yankees' Teflon shortstop, the golden boy to whom no criticism ever sticks. He is a clutch player, to be sure,
It's in plain view! When I look at him, I see only a halo of clutchness, no mortal body. This entity has transcended the plane of tangibility. Where was I?
But in the most crucial area, the A-Rod area, he was a crashing failure. Rodriguez was a psychological mess by the time the postseason rolled around, desperate to be accepted as a "real" Yankee,
Please -- it's True Yankee.
Manager Joe Torre buried him in the eighth spot in the batting order in the final game,
An act we can, in hindsight, completely blame Derek Jeter for.
So now the Yankees have an emotionally fragile star on their hands and no idea what to do with him. Trade him, rehabilitate him, what? It's sad to see a great player fall so far so fast, but the saddest thing of all is that Jeter might have been able to keep the situation from getting this bad.
Because of his special powers. Just imagine: what else does Jeter have besides his cloak? A Leadership Hat? Hustle Stirrups? Scrappy Shoelaces? Remember, the issue we're discussing here is the MVP. A-Rod is a man of tremendous insecurities, even though he struggles to appear as though he has none. He craves acceptance, and on the Yankees, there is only one man who can bestow that him, and that man is the sainted Jeter. All the Teflon shortstop had to do, at any point in the season, was to let it be known that he was on A-Rod's side. The rest of the Yankees, and then the public, would no doubt have followed suit.
Still talking about the MVP award. Did I mention Jeter had a .324 EqA, his best since 1999? And while his power wasn't stellar, he did OBP .417. But let's get back to the real MVP nitty-gritty: how well did Jeter make A-Rod play?
A few words of support to the media would probably have done the trick. Jeter's never been much of a talker, so perhaps that was too much to ask, but words weren't even necessary. It would only have taken a token gesture from Jeter -- a hand on A-Rod's shoulder,
Gayer, please --
some horseplay in front of the television cameras
Thank you.
And now a scene from Phil Taylor's forthcoming stage play MVP!:
MVP Committee Chair: Let's not mince words, Derek. You were a great hitter and an adequate fielder this year. Derek Jeter: Where did I go wrong? MVP Committee Chair: There was one area in which you were startlingly deficient. Derek Jeter: Oh no. It's not what I think it is, is it? MVP Committee Chair: Yes. I'm afraid so. Derek, this year you were absolutely terrible at televised horseplay. Unbelievably bad. The last time someone was this bad at televised horseplay was Edd Roush in 1923, before the invention of television or horses. Derek Jeter: I -- I understand. MVP Committee Chair: Now would you please tell Mauer to come in here? We have reason to believe he failed to give enough hugs to Nick Punto this past season. But the Yankee captain couldn't bring himself to do that. By his silence, by his body language, he sent the unspoken message that he had no interest in helping A-Rod out of his funk. Go ahead and boo him, go ahead and rip him in the press, Jeter seemed to be saying. I don't like him any more than you do. By all accounts Jeter has never forgotten some mildly disparaging remarks A-Rod made about him years ago in a magazine article. But apparently he has managed to forget that Rodriguez switched from shortstop to third base when he became a Yankee rather than ruffle Jeter's feathers, and that he has deferred to him at every turn ever since he came to New York.
I suspect that some of this utter speculation is true. But how does this fit into anyone's conception of how the MVP should be awarded? Let's blackball David Ortiz because Josh Beckett didn't pitch well. Screw Jermaine Dye -- what did he do to prevent Neal Cotts from imploding? Phil Taylor, you're just building my case: Derek Jeter owns a piece of clothing that causes people to forget about baseball and needlessly make up stories about what kind of person he is. It may be a cloak. It may be a coat. It may be a knit cap, although I find this proposition to be laughable.
Whatever sin A-Rod committed against Jeter, he has more than paid penance for it. Jeter is no one's MVP until he finds a way not just to accept A-Rod, but also to help him.
I think Phil Taylor will be surprised when he wakes up on November 21st and reads that Derek Jeter has handily won the 2006 AL MVP Award when everyone knows he is no one's MVP.
I will not be surprised, however, when the following unfolds at Derek Jeter's open-casket funeral in early 2008:
Joe Torre: To me, he was the Captain. The Truest of Yankees. The Zeus of Clutch. The real President of the United States -- forget who's in the White House. (A young boy walks up to the casket, and before anyone can stop him, he pulls back the Cloak of Intangibility. The crowd gasps.) Hideki Matsui: It can't be! Jason Giambi: This man -- Jorge Posada: This god -- James Earl Jones: -- is just a baseball player. Yes: an earthly, human baseball player with no magic in his bones nor sorcery in his blood. (A lengthy, solemn silence.) Phil Taylor: Whoa! No fucking way!
You're all going to think I'm crazy, but I sort of -- sort of-- agree with this guy's point.
The BBWAA have criteria for MVP voting. To keep things in the family, you can find that stuff here, in the middle of an old JoeChat.
The third listed criterion is: 3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.
I'm looking at general character and loyalty. Now, I wish these things weren't in the list of criteria for MVP voting, but they are.
Here's what I think: I don't think Jeter necessarily did a bad job of leading A-Rod. I disagree with Taylor on that point. But I do think that Jeter had plenty of opportunities to say that any talk of A-Rod struggling was absolute 100% butt-a-fucking hogwash. He never did. He didn't quite throw him under the bus, neither. I have to paraphrase here because it's late and I don't feel like looking up quotes from the year, but I remember his general take being "whatever happens, we're right there with him. Through his good times and bad."
I think he was a total dick. I think a good teammate stands up and says: "he's not struggling. He's awesome. Write a new story. This is bunk. I'm going to start a blog making fun of sports reporters because of the things you say."
And I don't know excactly what's meant by "character" and "loyalty," but I could see Jeter's actions in re: A-Rod's performance counting against him. Don't think it's a huge deal, but I just barely agree with this guy's point, so I wanted to write something to stick up for it.
Don't get me wrong -- it's a terrible article and his reasoning is generally awful. Let's just not toss the whole notion out; I think it has some merit.
I'm aboard the dak train on this -- though I buy my ticket regrettably. The thing I keep going back to is when HGH Boy was hitting like .190 in April a few years ago with like no HR, Jeter stuck up for him hard core in the press -- he said something like "We need Giambi to help us, and this booing stuff ain't helping." (That is assuredly a direct quote -- don't bother checking my facts.) But with ARod it's "he doesn't need me to stand up for him."
Whatever. Jeter is a sensitive guy who's still upset about that dumb like GQ article. I think he's lame for that. I don't know if that should impact the MVP. But then again, all BBWAA-voted-on awards are stupid anyway, as evidenced by Mo Vaughn beating Al Belle for MVP the year Belle had 100XBH, mainly beause no one liked Belle and they thought Mo was like a "character" guy, even though Mo was always stumbling drunk out of strip clubs.
Or how Jeter just won his motherhumping third Rawlings Pepsi Burger King Microsoft Vista Gold Glove Award, despite being terrible at gloving things.
If the baseball writers thought that Vaughn's character was much "better" than Belle's, than they were not only allowed to, but actually instructed to weigh that in their consideration.
While it may be ridiculous to try to judge one's "character" for a baseball award, it would be more ridiculous to ignore the rules entirely.
Okay…not the best choice anymore. Hafner seems like the best choice so far, maybe. Or Ortiz. But let’s keep going. Because I love Derek Jeter, and I really want to believe that he was the best offensive player in the league this year.
IsoP, AL, 2006
1. Hafner .350 2. Ortiz .349 3. Thome .310 4. Dye .306 5. Giambi .305 Then there's a really long run of dudes who stink, like Kevin Millar and stuff, and then... 50. Pierzynski .141 51. Iguchi .141 52. Jeter .140
Huh. Now I'm definitely iffy on Derek Jeter being the best offensive player in the AL this year. Let's keep going.
SecA, AL, 2006
(This takes into account Jeter's SB, remember)
1. Hafner .570 2. Ortiz .565 3. Giambi .556 4. Thome, .529 5. Ramirez (Bos.) .519 (Then there's a long list of dudes, including Johnny Damon and Jorge Posada and Alex Rodriguez and, yes, Kevin Millar again, and then we get...) 28. Millar .302 29. Jeter .297
Ugh. This is looking more and more like Derek Jeter didn't deserve this award. Sorry I put in the thing about how Millar was in the long list of dudes who came before Jeter and then also wrote in Millar's place on the list right above Jeter, but I really wanted to hammer home the insane fact that Kevin Millar had a higher SecA than Derek Jeter in 2006.
Well, at least Jeter led the league in OPS. Check that -- he was 15th. Hafner was first.
No matter. I'm sure he was at the very least the best offensive player on his own team. Oops -- hang on. Giambi was way better in every single stat except BA and SB. And ARod was 13th in OPS. (Surprising -- I thought that guy sucked, based on what people who are professional sportswriters have told me.)
Well, okay, fine, whatever -- Jeter was definitely the very very best offensive SS in the AL. Except arguably Carlos Guillen, who had a higher OPS, more HR, more 2B, and more walks, in 80 fewer AB.
But look, everyone -- Jeter was second in VORP in the AL. So he's not a bad choice.
Of course, Hafner was first in VORP in the AL.
Travis Hafner is a better hitter than Derek Jeter. So are lots of other people. Jeter might deserve the MVP, because he put up his very very good stats from the SS position, which makes those stats very very valuable. But the Hank Aaron Award is not the MVP.
So there you have it, folks. Derek Jeter. Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.
There have been some very angry blog-o-types -- my favorite kind, as I myself am an angry blog-o-type -- who have chastised me for using SecA and IsoP in the same breath as VORP, EqA, etc. Just to clarify: I am not equating these stats. The umbrella stats -- VORP, EqA, etc. -- tell the big picture story, and the smaller, more specific stats -- SecA, OPS, IsoP -- tell the details of the story. And the story is: Travis Hafner -- and probably Ortiz, Thome, and a few other dudes -- all had better offensive years than Derek Jeter.
Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.
is an exaggeration. Just having a little fun.
But Giambi had a better year. And ARod (.311 EqA to Jeter's .316) was basically equal.
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.
A little correction on beloved reader Pandrew's Spanish:
One would say "Que tengas buena suerte en Argentina."
1. there is no accent over the e on Que because it is not a question marker.
2. When you use que to wish someone well, the verb it precedes should take on a subjunctive ending (further explanation would be long and boring). Anyway, there you go.
Derek Jeter is a good baseball player who brings out the worst in baseball writers. Take this guy:
His name is Richard Griffin and he writes for the Toronto Star. Now, when I pick up and read the Toronto Star, as I do every day, I expect nothing but the finest, most objective, cold-blooded, rationalest, numbery-est baseball analysis out there. I was appalled to find the following article polluting the pages of my beloved Star:
Jeter's MVP on all levels Huge contributions on and off the field
Off the field, Jeter is a way better baseball player than anyone can imagine. Did you know he leads the AL with 46 off the field home runs and is second in off the field steals with 53? Off the field, Derek Jeter slays giant centipedes while riding an iron pegasus.
Yankee captain Derek Jeter looked bad in his first three at-bats against the Jays in last night's series opener. Then, in the seventh, with a runner on second, he drove a 3-0 A.J. Burnett offering into the centre-field stands for a lead the Yankees never gave back. Performance when it counts.
I checked the box score for this game. Jeter's home run put the Yankees ahead 4-3 in a game they eventually won 7-6. Great. A-Rod also hit a two-run homer in this one, but since it was one inning earlier, it didn't help the Yankees at all. I don't think they even keep score for the first six innings, right?
"It just gets us closer to where we want to be," Jeter said of the impact of his home run.
The key word is "we." There is no question that, despite what Red Sox' slugger David Ortiz argues, the AL MVP this year should be Jeter.
MVP Criterion #1: MVP must, at some point in the year, offer a quote that correctly refers to his team, a group of people to whom he belongs, with the plural pronoun "we."
Sure, the Yankee captain doesn't have the raw offensive numbers to match Big Papi, Justin Morneau or Jermaine Dye, but his contributions to winning go far beyond the numbers.
This needs a lot of explanation. Jeter sits with a .340 average — 14 homers and 95 RBIs — nice but not monstrous power numbers. Beyond that, he is a calming extension on the field and in the clubhouse in much the same way as his manager Joe Torre.
Oh, right. The Calm Eyes Effect.
MVP Criterion #2: MVP must be a "calming extension" on the field and in the clubhouse.
Derek Jeter gives his teammates free massages.
The classy way Jeter handled last week's Ortiz diatribe against his MVP candidacy was typical Jeter, pointing out that, as a Yankee, team goals are more important and then, on the weekend, interacting with Ortiz on the field at Yankee Stadium like a friend. End of controversy.
MVP Criterion #3: Classiness.
There is no jealousy emanating from Jeter with regard to any of his teammates. And if any of the baser emotions are hinted at by the media reporting on the Bombers, issues are quickly defused by Torre and/or his clubhouse equivalent, Jeter.
There is something supremely confident about a Yankee clubhouse. They arrived in the wee, wee hours of Sunday, exhausted after back-to-back doubleheaders against the Red Sox, bloodied from three losses, but unbowed. You wouldn't know it.
Maybe because they're like 50 games up and they knew they would clinch the AL East even if they lost all of the rest of their games. Or, alternatively, the explanation is Jeter.
The Yankees have had 14 players on the DL, led by outfielders Gary Sheffield and Hideki Matsui. Second baseman Robinson Cano missed 40 games. A-Rod has slumped badly at times and Randy Johnson has recorded 17 wins despite a 4.93 ERA.
They also have perhaps the best collection of offensive talent of any team in baseball history ever, including at least three players who have been on average more valuable than Derek Jeter over the course of their careers.
Yet here they sit, about to clinch the AL East for the 10th time in 11 seasons, with the other result being a wild card and a '97 World Series win.
No and no. It's the 11th time in 12 seasons. (CORRECTION: I'm wrong. He's right. It's 10 in 11. But he's still wrong about the next thing.) In 1997, the Florida Marlins won the World Series. Shouldn't you know that? Or barring you knowing it, shouldn't you have at least checked it out before writing it down to be published in a baseball bible like the Toronto Star?
Barring injury, the 32-year-old Jeter, five years after he retires, is headed to the hall of fame. He has a World Series and an All-Star MVP, but never the regular-season hardware. This should be Jeter's time.
MVP Criterion #5: It's the MVP's time.
His campaign talking points are simple. A normal-looking guy doing normal-looking things — only better. It would be a great response to baseball's distressing steroid scandals.
MVP Criterion #6: Be normal-looking. No uglies.
I was a Yankee hater until the late-'90s World Series. The easiest thing to hate was that they always seemed to be buying their stairway to heaven.
Oh Jesus. Really? "Buying their stairway to heaven"?
Voters may resent the Yankees believing they buy greatness, but just remember that Jeter is homegrown.
Besides, my daughter Kelly in her room at university has four pictures of Jeter and only one of me. If I'm going to be trumped, let it be by an AL MVP.
MVP Criterion #7 (Most Important): MVP must have four (4) pictures of him hanging in Richard Griffin’s daughter Kelly’s room at university. The number of pictures is non-negotiable.
Real quick, now, take a look at this guy one more time.
Notice that the top of his head is cut off. Could there be a fedora up there?
A lot of you got all up in it after I said Derek Jeter is a terrible choice for MVP. I was hoisted on my own petard, as e-mail after e-mail slammed me with VORPs and WARPs and even a few Win Percentage Added arguments, which is getting really hard-core nerdy, and God bless you all for it.
I stand by my assertion that to give Derek Jeter the MVP this year -- even for the first half -- is dumb. However.
On Mike 'n Mike in the Morning today, Eric Kuselias and Buster Olney played "Are the Fans Right?" with all-star predictions. Kuselias, who is, by ESPN Radio standards, a friggin' genius, said that Michael Young should be the starting SS for the AL. Why? More 2B than Jeter, more RBI than Jeter, and, in part because, and I quote: "He won the batting title last year."
He won the batting title.
Last year.
Derek Jeter 2006 OPS: .882 Michael Young 2006 OPS: .817
Derek Jeter 2006 SecA: .317 Michael Young 2006 SecA: .211
Derek Jeter 2006 RC27: 7.53 Michael Young 2006 RC27: 5.53
Now, Baseball Prospectus actually has Young above Jeter in WARP1, 4.3 to 3.6, largely because they list him at 12 FRAA and Jeter at -2 FRAA (take that, people who yelled at me). But come on. Jeter is the choice.
Now stop e-mailing me and telling me I am biased against Derek Jeter, that overrated, overpaid, iron-gloved, pretty-boy turd muncher.
I'm really sorry about this, but I was re-reading old posts on this (delightful) compendium of insanity, and I came across this sequence from a previous Joe Morgan chat:
Sean (Washington DC): Joe, you mention "intangibles" Do you think that most players understand and believe in them (such things as clubhouse chemistry, baseball IQ, etc. because I do and I think a lot of fans do but there seem to be quite a few analysts and reporters who think they are overrated. What's your take?
Joe Morgan: Well, Sean, I agree with YOU. Those intangibles ARE important. To hear people downplay them, means to me that they don't understand them. The computer age that we are in does not look for intangibles or reward them or recognize them. It's a definite plus when a guy brings more than a batting average to the table. Derek Jeter is the best example that you can get of a guy that helps you win championships with his intangibles. I've played the game for a long time and I've been an analyst and I know just how important those intangibles are. I couldn't agree with you more
Now, look. I don't want to beat a dead horse. But everyone who is stupid talks all the time about how undervalued "intangibles" are, and how there are guys who do things that "don't show up in the box scores" and all that stuff, and they argue, these idiots, that these "intangibles" are just as valuable to a team as actual baseball skills, and that no one rewards these people for their "intangibles."
But the thought just hit me: first of all, contrary to what Joe says here, EVERYBODY recognizes Derek Jeter's intangibles. People can't fucking shut up about Derek Jeter's intangibles. Ironically, there are dozens of sportscasters and -writers who talk incessantly about how nobody talks about Derek Jeter's intangibles. This, then, nullifies one part of Joe's "point." And second, in re: Joe saying that nobody rewards Derek Jeter's intangibles: Derek Jeter makes $18 million a year. Think about that. A guy who is, by any measure, a less-than-average shortstop, and who every year has like an .825 OPS or whatever (I don't have the energy to look it up) makes more than Bobby Abreu, and Adam Dunn, and Vlad Guererro, and even Pujols, and a whole lot of guys who are flat-out better players. So, what is he being paid for, if not "intangibles?"
In fact, if you decide to be crazy and take the approach that "intangibles" are a quantifiable aspect of baseball, like OPS or RC27 or anything else, then you would have to say that "intangibles" are among the most *over-appreciated" and *over-valued* of all skills. Because Derek Jeter is wildly overpaid, and everyone who is insane agrees that Derek Jeter does the most "intangible" things to help his team win.
And there are other guys, who don't make nearly as much money, but who are nonetheless overpaid, seemingly because they provide their team with intangibles. Jason Varitek is the best catcher in baseball right now, but will he be when he is 37? Because he'll be making like $10 million when he's 37, and a big part of the reason is his "intangibles."
It seems to me that if you want to make a lot of money as a baseball player, you should stop working out and taking extra BP and stuff, and work on your intangibles.
And also, since it's late and I am riled up, let me add the oft-made point that if Derek Jeter played for the Tigers, and had put up the exact same numbers and said and done the exact same things on and off the field, no one in the fucking world would ever have mentioned his name and the word "intangible" in the same sentence. And if Carlos Guillen had patrolled SS in the Bronx from 1996-2000, Joe Morgan would lie awake at night screaming at the ceiling that nobody recognizes how many intangibles he brings to the table.
In conclusion, I'd like to thank everybody here at the Institute for the Advanced Study of Preaching to the Converted.
when JM finally does publish everyone in the league's "intangibles" stats in the Joe Morgan Anecdotal Abstract, i'd be interested to see how they break down along racial lines. it seems to me that baseball's "intangibles" stat is analagous to basketball's "heart" stat of the bird/magic era.
it's amusing to me that JM believes he has special privy to the world of "things that don't show up in the box score." well, sabrmetrics was invented to fix shortcomings in box scores and traditional statistics -- to invent more accurate and more useful stats than batting average, wins, etc. yet JM will reject sabrmetrics for traditional stats and box scores -- the very things he routinely calls into question whenever the intangibles debate comes up. it's almost as if he senses that the inaccuracy of batting average and wins are what allow him to speculate stupidly that the gaps are filled in not by quantifiable numbers, but by derek jeter's nutsack, which he hopes to grasp tightly and fondle some day.
Good points, Jimmy. I would also add that the term "throwback" is almost always applied to white guys. Chipper Jones, Jim Thome, Paul Molitor, Trot Nixon, Roger Clemens, etc. Right now, I'd say guys like Juan Pierre, Dontrelle WIllis, and even, say, Mike Cameron, are all throwback players, yet you never hear them referred to as such. Why is that?
Hey, when are you going to get a blogger account and start posting here? Or are you worried that if you use your real blogger ID, we'll find your Warcraft III slash fiction blog?
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?
Greg (Tallahassee,FL): Joe, with all the controversy still out there about steroids and such, shouldn't MLB try to push young players like David Wright, Jose Reyes, Clint Barmes and Justin Morneau? It seems like they are pushing superstars who are still questionable...Instead of young players who play hard.
Joe Morgan: Well, I think you answer your own question, Greg. The big names start are only 'questionable' NOT proven.
Ken Tremendous: (looking around for help) What?
Seymour (Brooklyn): Joe, as far as best players in the game today are concerned, where do you rank The Captain - Derek Jeter?
Joe Morgan: Well, I think Miguel Tejada is the best player in the game for everything that he adds and brings to the field each day. I think Alex Rodriguez is next on that list. I don't know where Jeter would rank, obviously he's one of the best players, and he does bring the intangibles like leadership, etc. ... but he's not better than Miguel Tejada. I'd say Derek Jeter is in the top 8 or 10 best in the game today.
Ken Tremendous: Jeter is having a decent year -- one of his better starts. There are still 24 players with a higher RC27 in the AL alone. Prefer stupid stats like BA? Okay. He's 16th in the AL. SLG? Not in the top 40. Remember -- this is AL only. He also has the 5th lowest ZR in all of baseball. He is not one of the 8 or 10 best players in the game today. He is one of the 60 best, perhaps. You should be fired, Joe Morgan.
Chris, Toronto: Are the Blue Jays for real? What do they need in order to seriously make a run at a playoff spot?
Joe Morgan: Well, they've definitely improved over last year's team, but I think in the long run, they'll still miss Delgado's bat. I just can't see the Blue Jays beating out the Yankees ... BUT, anything IS possible.
Ken Tremendous: Joe, the question was, "What do they need in order to seriously make a run at a playoff spot?" You should try answering the question. It makes the chats more fun!
Sean (Washington DC): Joe, you mention "intangibles" Do you think that most players understand and believe in them (such things as clubhouse chemistry, baseball IQ, etc. because I do and I think a lot of fans do but there seem to be quite a few analysts and reporters who think they are overrated. What's your take?
Ken Tremendous: Now, Joe, before you answer, remember. You are an analyst. You have to be smart, and current, and knowledgeable. You have to correct people when they are wrong, and express, in clear, concise language, opinions and facts based on empirical evidence. Okay? Great. So, the question is about "intangibles," which are pretty irrelevant and meaningless. So, let the guy have it!
Joe Morgan: Well, Sean, I agree with YOU. Those intangibles ARE important. To hear people downplay them, means to me that they don't understand them. The computer age that we are in does not look for intangibles or reward them or recognize them. It's a definite plus when a guy brings more than a batting average to the table. Derek Jeter is the best example that you can get of a guy that helps you win championships with his intangibles. I've played the game for a long time and I've been an analyst and I know just how important those intangibles are. I couldn't agree with you more.
Ken Tremendous: Oh, Joe. Joe Joe Joe...
Derek Jeter (Kalamazoo, MI): Hey, Joe? You can stop licking my balls, now.
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.
I think I said something to my bride the other night that I never thought I'd say about a New York Yankee. As many of you may have divined from this column over the years, that's not my favorite franchise on earth. Anyway, I said to her: I'm not sure about this, but I think when Derek Jeter retires, I will say he's the best baseball player I ever saw.
I know this is subjective, but: Peter King graduated from college in 1979, so I estimate he is 49ish. If we can assume he has been watching baseball since the age of, say, eight, in 1965 or so, that means he has been able personally to see these people play baseball: Willie Mays, Frank Robinson, Albert Pujols, Barry Bonds, Hank Aaron, Alex Rodriguez, Willie McCovey, Mike Schmidt, Willie Stargell, Ken Griffey, Jr., Harmon Killebrew, and Reggie Jackson. He has also seen: Tim Salmon, John Olerud, Ryan Klesko, J.D. Drew, Chipper Jones, Bobby Abreu, Larry Walker, Jim Edmonds, and Scott Rolen, all of whom have a higher OPS+ than Derek Jeter.
Living in Jersey, I see the man come to bat maybe 300 times a season, and I watch him in the field maybe 40 percent of his innings. But Jeter personifies effort every time he puts on the uniform; there is never anything but 100 percent effort.
A lot of baseball players exhibit this quality.
Every at-bat is quality.
Fair enough. He does put together nice at bats.
Every ball hit to him, and some only close to him, are gobbled up with certainty.
Although defensive metrics are problematic and often rudimentary, every single one of them lists Jeter as one of the worst defensive SS in the last ten years. The Baseball Prospectus book "Baseball Between the Numbers" calculates that he moved up to the middle of the pack in his first gold glove year, but overall, he is quite weak.
And the way he carries himself ... He is baseball's Tiger Woods. He is this Yankee generation's DiMaggio. And I think he'll go down as better than Mantle, because though Mantle was truly great, he also squandered much of his ability through wild living.
Oh boy.
He is not baseball's Tiger Woods. Given that baseball is a team sport and golf one of individuals, I'm not even really sure what that means, but assuming it means he is a great champion and clutch player and something like "he's at his best in big moments," or something, I'll dispel this wild assertion simply by saying that in the exact same number of AB in the postseason, Jeter's own teammate Bernie Williams has more HR, way more RBI, a higher SLG, and, obviously, the same number of rings.
"This Yankee generation's DiMaggio" is actually an apt description of Jeter, since DiMaggio, for most of his life, got far more praise than he actually deserved. Not that he didn't deserve praise -- he is obviously a HOFer and a wonderful hitter, but tell me exactly how it is that people agreed to call him "The Greatest Living Ballplayer" when Mays, Williams, Aaron, Bonds, Robinson, and about fifteen other guys were still walking the earth? DiMaggio and Jeter are both very very good baseball players -- DiMaggio was far better -- who get too much praise relative to their peers because they play in New York.
And as for the idea that Jeter will go down in history as a better baseball player than Mickey Mantle...there are maybe a thousand statistics I could lay down to prove him wrong, but I'll just give you one.
Derek Jeter Career RC/27: 6.45 Mickey Mantle Career RC/27: 8.78
A team of 9 Mickey Mantles would beat a team of 9 Derek Jeters by more than two runs per game. The end.
It's time for a small number of people's favorite FJM post-type: The Gallimaufry!
Tony says:
From today's NY Daily News: A poll of 15 baseball "brains," taken to determine which player is superior: Jose Reyes or Derek Jeter. Reyes wins 8-5, with 2 voters undecided. Fine. My gripe is with this, in defense of Jeter:
"Those who picked Jeter talked about his clutch play and leadership. As a National League GM put it, 'Derek Jeter wins Game 7 of the World Series better than anyone in baseball for 2007.'"
Derek Jeter, were he to play in a WS Game 7, would win...better than anyone? What?
So: Jose Reyes could conceivably be on a team that wins a WS Game 7, but if Derek Jeter were playing in place of Reyes, he would win the same game "better?"
And, presumably, Jeter would also win "better" than his own teammates in such a game, since they would each count as "anyone in baseball for 2007."
It's fun to try to figure out which anonymous NL GM made this asinine comment. My guess is the Nationals' Jim Bowden.
I second the nomination of Bowden. Few others can match that quotation's combination of senselessness and poor grammar.
John writes:
I was watching the Yankees/White Sox game yesterday, and it was the Chicago feed, featuring the loathsome Hawk Harrelson. I'm sorry that I don't have a transcript of what he had to say about Darin Erstad, but I do have a very good memory.
Here goes:
"You look at Darin Erstad, and you don't see the best hitter in the game. You don't see the best centerfielder. You don't see the best first baseman. But put it all together, and he's one of the best baseball players you'll ever see."
This was after a little opposite field single and a stolen base. Imagine if he had laid down a bunt!
Yes. Just imagine. My goodness. Hawk might have had a heart attack.
***Note: Reader Jim chimes in to say that it was Darrin Jackson, not Hawk, who said this about Erstad. Even so, I'm betting Hawk was right there with him. Plus, there's also this next comment...
Speaking of Hawk and Ersty, Patrick files this report from the financial heart of Boston:
This came from Hawk and DJ during the Chisox v. Yanks game tonight,
about one Darin Erstad...
DJ: "I think he's faster now than he was with the Angels a few years ago."
Hawk: "Oh, yeah, I totally agree. You know, a lot of people don't know this, but he was the state champion in the 110 and 330 meter hurdles in high school, up there in North Dakota."
Punter, hockey player, track star.....WHAT CAN'T HE DO???!!
Play baseball well. Dan writes in with a special hockey note:
I know you don't really cover hockey, but on ESPN's Sabres/Senators highlights from last night's game, after the Sabres' 3-0 lead was chipped down to a 3-2 lead, Barry Melrose described the Sabres' mental state as being "like Jack Nicholson in the movie 'Psycho' "
That makes me angrier than Hank Azaria in "The African Queen."
And finally, John writes in to explain Joe Morgan's overuse of "consistency."
It's simple: Joe doesn't actually know the definition of the word "consistency." He just uses it because it sounds analytical.
Case in point, the Twins/Tigers game from Sunday night. The Twins scored 14 runs, you might recall. Joe said something during the broadcast to the effect of "the Twins have had trouble staying consistent, until tonight."
So....they haven't been consistent, until this one game. How is one game a sign of consistency? It's clear that Joe thinks that consistency just means "playing well", instead of what it actually means. So don't expect a consistent answer from Joe.
Fair enough.
And as always, loyal readers, thanks for the continuing stream of links, tips, thoughts, and analyses. You, not the children, are truly the future.
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.
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."
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.
Here are some highlights from Rob Dibble's most recent column, in which he laments Jeter's failure to make the All-Star Game. He concludes the column with this:
"Derek Jeter is better than the All-Star game. It makes me sick that he won't be there." (author's emphasis)
>I'm not really quite sure what it means to be better than the All-Star Game, but thank god Jeter didn't get enough votes to play, lest he embarrass all the players who were just good enough to be All-Stars.
Also in the column: "Derek Jeter just lost out on the internet vote to Scott Podsednik. That never should have happened. And Michael Young is more deserving than Jeter??? Don't make me laugh."
>Three question marks? Why is Dibble so indignant about Young? Let's forget the 2005 stats that Dibble would not even look at (OPS, RC27, range, etc. -- all of which tilt in Young's favor or are roughly similar), and let's focus on the ones that I'm sure Dibble would say makes a player deserving of a being an All-Star. The amazing stats of Avg., HRs, and RsBI are all in Young's favor as well. So if the important stats don't make Young more deserving, and the unimportant stats also don't make him more deserving, then what stats does Dibble care about? Is there a solid dude metric? I bet Young would take that one as well.
"If I were starting a team right now, the first player I'd take would be Jeter. No one is more clutch in big games than him, no other shortstop in baseball has more championships, and no other shortstop has to play in a tougher media town."
>This is outright moronic. If I were starting a team, I would take Bernie Williams -- he's also wicked clutch, he has a bunch of championships, and I want my team to stink.
>And I'm too tired to comment on Dibble's claim that "Jeter is the Jordan of baseball."
Rob Dibble is quickly becoming the Michael Jordan of Fire Joe Morgan. We should consider hanging him from the rafters and looking elsewhere. I would feel the same way about John Kruk if he weren't employed by a real purveyor of ostensibly accurate sports commentary.
You've got to do better than this. SportsJustice, as the subtitle helpfully tells us, is "a sports blog with Richard Justice." It would have been weird if that were the name of Jason Whitlock's blog or something. Here are Richard's latest JusticeThoughts:
A-Rod to the Astros? Absolutely not.
Please, elaborate. You seem emotionally invested in this.
I'm getting e-mails about bringing Alex Rodriguez to the Astros.
Sure you are. The Astros were sixth-worst in baseball in runs scored, worse than the Royals and the Nationals. Your starting shortstop, Adam Everett, played in 150 games and posted a line of .239/.290/.352 for an OPS of .642. He hit six home runs in 514 at bats. This is no fluke. Last year his OPS was .654. Of all of the men who played American major league baseball this year and recorded 500 or more at bats, exactly one man had a lower OPS than Adam Everett. Ronny Cedeno.
(His EqA was .225. .2 2 5.)
To those of you who have written, let me ask you a simple question: Are you nuts?
No. They are probably interested in replacing one of the very worst offensive players in baseball with one of the very best. That is, at least in my opinion, not nuts at all.
Why in the world would you want to take another team's problem?
Because that problem, in a down year, went .290/.392/.523 with an EqA of .315. That problem hit 29 more home runs than a man you presumably deem not to be a problem, Adam Everett. Last year, that problem was the goddamn freakin' AL MVP. That is why.
If the Yankees want to trade Derek Jeter or Hideki Matsui, let's do business.
Really? Hideki Matsui is coming off a wrist injury that leaves his future at least somewhat uncertain, and in his very very best year as an MLB player, he basically did what Problem-Rod did this year. Also, the Yankees are paying Derek Jeter way more than they're paying Alex Rodriguez, when he's really never been as valuable a player until this season. Weird, huh?
A-Rod? Absolutely not.
Okay, right. That was your title again, pretty much. First of all, the guy is walking, talking distraction. If the Astros get A-Rod, they ought to go get Terrell Owens, too.
Of course. A-Rod is T.O. How could we not have seen this? Who could forget the time A-Rod pulled out a Sharpie and signed home plate as he crossed it after a home run? Or the time he showed up the Red Sox by kneeling on their logo? How about that interview with Playboy where he insinuated Jay Buhner was gay? The shirtless pushups in his driveway? The suicide attempt? The time he raped Nicolette Sheridan?
By all means, I do actually think the Astros should sign Terrell Owens.
Players like that don't win. They split locker rooms. They have their own agendas. They're all about themselves.
Alex Rodriguez has been on five 90-win teams. I know he's never won a World Series and we're supposed to think that he's some sort of jinx or bad luck charm, but I don't really believe in jinxes. I also think that a 162-game sample is a more valid indicator of whether a team is good, or if you insist, a "winner," than going 1-3 against the Tigers over the course of a few days.
Second of all, A-Rod would see Houston as a trip back to Double-A ball. He'd separate himself from the other players. He'd let everyone know he was different. He'd care nothing about his teammates.
Wow. You know a lot about this guy.
Third of all, his salary means he's the type player you build a team around. Problem is, he's not capable of doing that. He's a great player. He puts up great numbers. But when the game is on the line, when it really counts, he's the last guy on earth you want on the plate.
As opposed to the first guy on Earth you want at the plate, Adam Everett.
I can't imagine he'd agree to a trade even though he's clearly miserable in New York, and the Yankees have to be miserable with him. Next time they trade for a guy, they ought to do their homework.
We're talking about whether the Astros should maybe call the Yankees and see if they're interested in an A-Rod trade. If they say, "No, we're not interested" or "No, Alex doesn't want to be traded," fine. You hang up the phone. Why would you pre-emptively speculate that A-Rod has no interest and convince yourself never to call at all? I don't get it. Maybe I just don't understand sportsjustice.
Baseball is a game of numbers to a large extent,
Huh?
but the pieces still have to fit.
Oh. Pieces ... fitting. I get it. Like, for instance, the Adam Everett piece fitting into the .225 EqA hitter slot. And hey, let's just keep pencilling Brad Ausmus into the lineup. He's OPS-ing .593 and EqA-ing .215, but dammit he is a fitting piece. There still has to be a feeling of oneness, a feeling that we're all in this together.
A feeling that we can, as a team, finish second to last in major league baseball in slugging percentage. We'll suck, but we'll suck as a team, and we'll feel warm and fuzzy and one-y while we're doing it.
(Have I even mentioned that Minute Maid is a hitters' park and we're still seeing these kinds of numbers?) (Some of you friendly posters have compared A-Rod to Jeff Kent and Carlos Beltran. Don't go there. Kent was an ornery guy who didn't say much. He also did wonderul work with young players, and when he messed up, he'd come back to the dugout and apologize to everyone around.
You read it right here. Richard Justice thinks Jeff Kent is a better guy than Alex Rodriguez. Because when he messes up, he apologizes, and he's "wonderul" with the kids.
A-Rod comes off as a phony. He supposedly once asked Cal Ripken the best way to shake hands.
And there you have it. Because A-Rod asked Cal Ripken how to shake hands once, your professional baseball team should absolutely never trade for him, ever. Basically, because he's a sort of lame guy who's "phony."
Listen, if Derek Jeter doesn't like you--and Derek Jeter has embraced a lot of different guys over the years--there's a problem.)
Or you're Ken Huckaby.
Joe Sheehan wrote a piece in Baseball Prospectus today that I liked a lot. I'm going to copy and paste a portion of it right here. I hope no one minds. At just about any point along the way, one of the two most visible Yankees—Joe Torre or Derek Jeter—could have come forward and said what should be obvious: Alex Rodriguez is a great, great player, and in the worst season of his career he’s a star. Defining his season by his lowest points is doing him a disservice, and the constant focus on his play is an insult to the other members of the team. Whatever Rodriguez’s performance issues, such as they were, his overall contributions were valuable. Beyond that, he’s one of the game’s model citizens, with barely a controversy to his name in a time when so many others have been tainted.
That statement, completely true, would have done more to alleviate the pressure on Rodriguez than anything else. They didn’t do so, instead allowing petty nonsense like his desire to please people (heaven forfend) and his performance is varied subsets (in Boston, in the playoffs, against a small handful of pitchers, in 20 at-bats in July) to substitute for real information. They didn’t defend their teammate, and by allowing, even stoking, the situation, they absolved themselves and every other Yankee of blame for their fortunes. If they lost, it would be Rodriguez’s fault, no matter how the rest of them played.
Thank you, Joe Sheehan. Better than I could've ever put it. Back to SportsJustice: He's not worth it, either in terms of salary (the team that acquires him will owe him $64 million over the next four years) or chemistry. A-Rod may be the kind of guy Tim Purpura would want, but I'm guessing the best GMs--Billy Beane, Gerry Hunsicker, Pat Gillick, etc.--wouldn't touch him.
First of all, you'd probably try to get the Yankees to kick in some of his salary. Second, in a world where A.J. Burnett gets $55 million for five years (and people are now saying that guys like Alfonso Soriano and Carlos Lee could be asking for $70-80 million deals), four and sixty-four isn't that bad for someone who could have been (and still could be) the greatest shortstop of all time. I mean, honestly, he was headed there. His accomplishments on the field have been staggering, no matter how many Post back pages he's been on.
If you can get A-Rod for a reasonable price -- catch Steinbrenner in an emotional moment, perhaps -- I think you look into it. What you don't do is say "absolutely not" because his negative clubhouse chemistry quotient somehow overrides his baseball-playing ability.
My whipping boy in this post, Adam Everett, is absolutely adored by the fielding evaluation system Baseball Prospectus uses. Or at least he is this year -- he's credited with 24 FRAA, helping him to a 5.6 WARP3 despite his abysmal hitting. It seems like this is an anomaly, though, since his last three FRAA years look like this: 3, 2, 1.
A-Rod crashed and burned fielding-wise, with a disastrous -20 FRAA. As a Yankee, he's been average to bad, with -6 and 6 the last two years. However, with Texas and Seattle (and at shortstop), he was regularly in the double digits (positively). And hey, since he was such a miserable third baseman, his WARP3 this year got knocked down to 6.9, only 1.3 higher than Everett's!
So there's your one piece of ammo, Richard Justice. Why trade for a headcase who only earned about a win and a half better than the guy you've got?
Of course, in 2005 A-Rod had a WARP3 of 12.5. Everett? 3.8.
Some questions from reader John Damon. I think that's his real name.
I am astoundingly curious how it is that Richard Justice is justifying Alex Rodriguez as being a 'clubhouse cancer' as the term may go. Does he know A-Rod? Has he interacted with him? A few key points:
Does A-Rod sit out half a season before deciding which team to play for?
Does A-Rod get special permission from Team Management to skip road trips he won't pitch in, and get special rooming accomodations?
Does A-Rod get accused of being a 'roid junkie by other 'roid junkies?
Does A-Rod blame the others on the Yankee offense for him not producing offensively and losing games?
(loud, audible whisper) -- I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT ROGER CLEMENS.
John (New York, NY): Do you agree with other analysts that Derek Jeter's defense is overrated? With the number of errors he's made so far this year, it seems like everyone's jumping off the bandwagon.
Joe Morgan: I would not put myself in that group.
Ken Tremendous: Explain why.
First off, as a middle infielder, shortstop is the most difficult position to play on the field.
KT: I agree.
Any lapse of concentration or injury can throw you off.
KT: Same can be said of all positions, but I'm still with you.
I think with Jeter, he's been losing his concentration recently, but I expect him to get out of it. Middle infield demands that you have your highest confidence at all times, so a few errors can throw you off.
KT: It's a confidence problem? For Derek Jeter? Are you sure?
I won't say someone's overrated because I don't see him every day.
KT: All-time low for the Joe Morgan "I don't see him every day so I can't comment" thing. How many times have you seen Jeter in your life, Joe? A hundred? Two hundred? And you still can't comment on whether you think he's overrated? This is insane. If you are telling me you can't make a comment on Derek Jeter because you haven't seen him play enough, you are officially saying that you can never render your opinion on anything, ever.
Obviously, if he's won 3 consecutive Gold Gloves, he has to be pretty good.
KT: Opposite of true.
Rick in DC:Mr. Morgan: The Tigers are pitching well thus far, but all we hear about are the arms on the Red Sox. Do you think these teams will meet in the ALCS this year?
Joe Morgan: I actually feel like Detroit might win the American League again. Obviously it's early, so I can't make a real prediction.
KT: People make predictions all the time. Before seasons even start. Can you ever just offer an opinion without qualifying it? What is the point of constantly saying you can't give your opinion? Why do you have this job?
So far, with Boston, Schilling has bounced back, Beckett is capable but hasn't reach his full potential, and Dice-K looks like a stud. You can't say they have a great staff just yet; they've certainly made some good starts. The Tigers have more room for improvement than the Red Sox, as Schilling and Wakefield aren't getting any better. I still think the Tigers will prevail in the end.
KT: See? Was that so hard?
Tony (Weymouth MA):With all of the injuries to the Yankees starting rotation, will Roger Clemens lean to signing with the Red Sox as the best chance to win it all one last time? Does he stay in Houston or retire?
Joe Morgan: I know Roger pretty well, but I'm not going to predict what he will do.
KT: Oh my God.
Here's a play I just wrote:
(Scene: Joe is the blind Greek seer Tiresias. Oedipus approaches.)
Oedipus: Tiresias, priest of Zeus. I come to you to gain knowledge of the slaying of King Laius. Joe Tiresias: Well, I knew Laius pretty well, but I don't want to say I know who killed him. Oedipus: But your visions are never wrong, great seer. You see all. Joe Tiresias: I have seen a lot of things happen, yes. I have been a seer for a long time, so don't tell me I don't know what's gonna happen in Greece. Oedipus: (confused) ...I wasn't saying that. I am saying the opposite of that. I am asking you for your help in learning the identity of the slayer of King Laius. Joe Tiresias: I knew Laius. I watched him be King for a long time. He was a great veteran King. Oedipus: ...What? Joe Tiresias: If you're saying that he is not as good a King as you, I wouldn't say that. You just started as King, and he did it for a lot of years. He knew how to rule. Oedipus: ...Yikes. Okay. Listen. I want you to use your wisdom and sight and the power of the Gods to tell me who killed him. Joe Tiresias: Well, I didn't watch him rule every day, so I don't want to comment. I don't want to say one way or the other. Oedipus: (Blinds self out of frustration)
Personally, I believe the only place Roger Clemens can play is Houston, because Roger doesn't want to travel, and Houston is the only team of the three to allow him to do what he's doing. Neither the Yankees or Red Sox can allow him to do that. If he pitches again, as an analyst, I feel he will pitch with Houston.
KT: And again, he ends up answering the question after saying that he can't answer the question.
Shawn in Philly: Do you really believe the lack of African-American players in the game is a "crisis"? Does it matter how many there are in the league as long as the opportunity is there? To me, the real problem is the lack of African-Americans in front office positions.
Joe Morgan: Of all the people I've listened to about this percentage, you have the right understanding. I cannot find it in my heart to blame MLB for the percentages. The opportunity is there. Players are making a choice to go to the NBA or the NFL. If baseball wants to try to help persuade them to go that way, that's great, but it's not baseball's fault. Football is 70 percent African-American and basketball is 80 percent African-American. All those athletes are not playing baseball. I agree fully that the problem is in the front office and in the management, but if you do not have African-American players, where are the managers going to come from? They have brought people into the front office who have graduated from Harvard, but not African-Americans who have graduated from Harvard. You have guys who get two, three chances, but a guy like Cito Gaston, Dusty Baker, Don Baylor, Lloyd McClendon, Davey Lopes, Jerry Manuel who don't get as many chances. Yet a aguy like Phil Garner, who lost in Milwaukee and Detroit, found a good team in Houston. Not to pick on him, but the opportunity isn't there. Only Frank Robinson has managed more than three different teams; Cleveland, San Francisco, Baltimore, and Washington. You have a very good understanding of what I see as the problem.
KT: All right, look. Dabbling in racial discussions is always a dangerous thing. And I fully agree that all different types of people should have the opportunities to manage MLB teams, and I think it's probably true that MLB, like the NFL and the NBA, should have more minority managers and front-office types -- especially African-Americans.
But. Look at that list of guys who, Joe is insinuating, didn't get a fair shake. Cito Gaston won two WS, then went 56-88, 74-88, 72-85, and was fired. I'll quote from his Wikipedia page here...
He had failed to lead the team to a winning record since 1993 and seemed uninterested in keeping his position. Gaston forced [GM Gord] Ash's hand by telling his boss that he was taking a vacation at season's end and would not be around for the usual post season evaluation process, thus ending his Jays managing career in an undignified fashion. He was replaced by then-pitching coach Mel Queen on an interim basis for the last week of the 1997 season. Gaston rejoined the team as a hitting coach after the 1999 season but was not retained after a disappointing 2001 campaign and the sale of the franchise to Rogers Communications. In 2002, he was hired by the Jays for a third time, as special assistant to president and chief executive officer Paul Godfrey.
Given Gaston's impressive record and World Series titles, it is somewhat surprising that he never managed again in the Major Leagues. Nevertheless, Gaston was a final candidate for the Detroit Tigers manager's job in the 1999-2000 season and was the runner-up to in the Chicago White Sox manager position in the 2003-4 off season. Sox GM Kenny Williams, a former Blue Jays player, had Gaston as one of two finalists for the job but decided to hire Ozzie Guillen. Gaston had several offers to rejoin major league teams as a hitting instructor...but declined offers. His length of unemployment now makes it unlikely he will return to the major leagues as a manager.
So...it was African-American GM Kenny Williams who hired Ozzie Guillen -- a minority candidate -- over Gaston. Just sayin'.
And Lopes, well, he has a career record of 144-195. (Also, I don't believe he is African-American. Am I wrong?) Dusty Baker is the man who thinks that you shouldn't "clog up the bases." He probably ended the careers of Mark Prior and Kerry Wood by having them throw like 150 pitches a game even after DL trips. He stinks on ice. Don Baylor won more than 83 games once in nine years. Lloyd McClendon was 336-446 in five years. Jerry Manuel was better (500-471), and is currently coaching for the (African-American-coached) Mets, I think, and he's only 53. He'll get another chance.
A lot of these guys -- like McClendon, and Baylor to some extent -- had crappy teams. But they also didn't do that great, so it's not totally surprising that they haven't been handed other jobs. I don't know. MLB should do more to encourage front-office -- and, I guess, non-Harvard -- minority hires. But I don't think it's racism, necessarily, that has kept, say, Dusty Baker, from getting hired. I think it's good sense.
Doug (New Rochelle, NY): Joe - how do you assess Junior Griffey's legacy? The last few years have been marred by injuries, and yet he still has a great shot at 600 home runs and he is one of the few sluggers in this geneation without a steroid question hanging over his head.
Joe Morgan: What you havre with Griffey is a Hall of Fame career, but unfortunately people may remember him near the end, when he broke down. Willie Mays was the greatest I ever saw, but he was average toward the end of his career. Fortunately, he's already built his legacy. His place in history is already set. He's one of the greatest to ever play the game.
KT: That part is kind of boring. But I love this next part:
Joe Morgan: When you saw Griffey on the field, you knew he was having fun. You don't see that with all the other players.
KT: To me Griffey is kind of a famously sourpuss kind of guy. He always looked unhappy, to me. Am I crazy? And also: who cares?
Bob(Chicago): In your opinion, why didn't more teams interview Dusty Baker during the offseason? Has he been scarred by the Wood/Prior injuries since 2003 or is it just the residue of being a Cubs manager?
KT: Here's a quotation you might have read, that Dusty Baker once said, when his team was last in the league with a .318 OBP and was asked if his team should walk more: "On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."
That is why more teams did not interview him. It betrays a lack of understanding about baseball bordering on the criminally insane. But let's see what Joe thinks.
Joe Morgan: I think all those things are in play. I don't think the Wood/Prior situation is as important as being in a losing situation in a big market. I'll go back to my answer before. Do you think if he was not African-American and had his same resume, would ha get interviewed?
KT: I think that no matter what ethnicity a man is, if he believes that walks "clog up the bases," he should not be a major league manager, because he is ill-suited for that job.
The same goes with Cito Gaston. We can say we shouldn't look at it that way, but you tell me another way to look at that, and I will.
KT: I just did. But here it is again, same guy (Dusty), same subject, different quote:
“No. 1, I’ve let most guys hit 3-0 (in the count). That’s one reason. . . . I think walks are overrated unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps, but the guy who walks and can’t run, most of the time he’s clogging up the bases for somebody who can run.”
And this one:
“Who have been the champions the last seven, eight years? Have you ever heard the Yankees talk about on-base percentage and walks? . . . Walks help. They do help. But you aren’t going to walk across the plate, you’re going to hit across the plate. That’s the school I come from.”
For the record, the Yankees' championship teams were very much about OBP and walks.
Want more?
“Everybody can’t hit with two strikes, everybody can’t walk,” Baker said. “You’re taking away some of the aggressiveness of a kid if you’re telling him to go up there and try to work for a walk. . . . It’s like when I see kids in Little League and they make the small kids go up there and try to get a walk. That’s not any fun. . . . Do you ever see the top 10 walking (rankings)? You see top 10 batting average. A lot of those top 10 do walk, but the name of the game is to hit.”
How in the world is any sane GM going to let that guy manage his team?
There's no way that you can win like Dusty and Cito and not get another job. If you're an honest man, you realize there's something wrong with that picture.
KT: I actually take offense at this. Joe Morgan is calling me a racist. Or at least, not an honest man. That's wrong. If he's not careful, my friends and I might create a blog that ridicules him and people like him who don't know what they are talking about.
Bob (Tinley Park, IL): Joe, what do you think of Henry Aaron and Bud Selig's stance on Bonds breaking his record? Should they be there in your opinion or is Bonds a cheater and therefore not worthy of their presence?
Joe Morgan: I don't ever call anyone a cheater unless I know for sure.
KT: Okay. Fair enough. Barry Bonds told a federal grand jury that he used a clear substance and a cream supplied by the Burlingame laboratory now enmeshed in a sports doping scandal, but he said he never thought they were steroids, The Chronicle has learned.
Federal prosecutors charge that the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative, known as BALCO, distributed undetectable steroids to elite athletes in the form of a clear substance that was taken orally and a cream that was rubbed onto the body.
Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson, during the 2003 baseball season but was told they were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm for arthritis, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by The Chronicle.
Federal prosecutors confronted Bonds during his testimony on Dec. 4, 2003, with documents indicating he had used steroids and human growth hormone during a three-year assault on baseball's home run record, but the Giants star denied the allegations.
During the three-hour proceeding, two prosecutors presented Bonds with documents that allegedly detailed his use of a long list of drugs: human growth hormone, Depo-Testosterone, undetectable steroids known as "the cream" and "the clear," insulin and Clomid, a drug for female infertility sometimes used to enhance the effect of testosterone.
The documents, many with Bonds' name on them, are dated from 2001 through 2003. They include a laboratory test result that could reflect steroid use and what appeared to be schedules of drug use with billing information, prosecutors told the grand jury.
In a September 2003 raid on Anderson's Burlingame home, federal investigators seized documents they said showed Bonds was using banned drugs, according to court records. Anderson was indicted in February on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to distribute steroids in the BALCO case.
Now can you say he cheated?
(Did you not hear about that, Joe? it was a really big story.)
Joe Morgan: Hopefully this will be a better week for all of us, and baseball will help us move forward in the aftermath of what happened at Virginia Tech. It has not been a good start to the week. I'm concerned because my two daughters will be going to school two years from now. It's almost like the Imus situatiion; kids and people going to get educated and being hit from the outside with negative comments and threates on their lives. I guess if you're not safe in college, where are you safe?
KT: I'd just like to say here that the Imus situation was horrifying and despicable, and I'm glad he was fired. But how on God's green earth do you even begin to compare that with the Virgina Tech massacre? That's not even apples and oranges -- it's like apples and hurricanes of murderous insanity that destroy entire communities.
Sorry this chat was so downerish and sad. Hopefully next week he'll just go back to saying he can't comment on anything.
i wouldn't expect joe to know this, or do any research, but mike hill (assisstant general manager for the florida marlins) is an african american harvard graduate. he played football and baseball for the crimson and was recruited by a coach i work with, which is the reason i know he's a harvard grad. additionally, his race should be fairly obvious from his picture.
Don't know if you heard the Dan Patrick show today but Joe Morgan was on and had the audacity to compare the VaTech massacre to the Don Imus comment. He said, "Here are kids going to school, not bothering anybody; trying to make something of themselves, trying to be better--and this is what they're subjected to."
I'll let that sink in for a moment...
Anyway, here's the link: http://insider.espn.go.com/insider/sportindex?sport=radio You need to be an ESPN insider to access it.
