BACK TO BASICS

Jose Contreras had an impressive start yesterday for the Columbus Clippers, throwing five scoreless innings, allowing three hits and striking out eight. Apparently, the big Cuban's heater was clocked at 98mph, a far cry from what we saw from him when he was with the Yankees. To be fair, Contreras is a starter, and was regulated to the bullpen in New York.

Mariano Rivera is ready to go for the Yanks, and Derek Jeter was back with the team last night, shit-eating-grin and all. Jeter was goofing around on the bench, certainly a sight for sore eyes for us Yankee fans. He expects to be activated in a couple of weeks.

With a base on balls last night, Nick Johnson has now walked in thirteen consecutive games. He leads the AL in that category too.

Not for nothing, but I'm glad that Suzyn Waldman is not calling the games for YES any longer. He strength is doing the pre and post game shows, and I think she does that fine (although she's better suited for the radio, and I used to like her coverage of the Knicks as well as the Yanks). But I've noticed that she has become so breathy, that I'm going to start calling her ol' Iron Lungs. Each breath she draws sounds dramatically like it will be her last. Not only that, but she's looking more and more like Karl Malden with each passing day.

The Yanks face ol' man Moyer in the Bronx tonight. Moyer has an even better Bugs Bunny change than Chris Hammond. I don't know what his numbers are against the Yankees, but I always feel like he kills us. And it's a slow, painful death at that. I practically feel like jumping out of my shoes at home. My cousin Gabe said it would be good for baseball if the Yanks lost tonight (making it three in a row). "Then they can win 44 straight of whatever."

FORBIDDEN FRUITS

The subject of homosexuality in baseball is a touchy one indeed. After all, who really wants to talk about it? We're not Gay. Well, Christian Ruzich, The Cub Reporter, and I do, and we've exchanged e-mails on the topic, and I thought I would share them with you. First, here is what New York Times reporter Buster Olney had to say about it when we spoke several weeks ago:

BB: Do you think baseball is ready for a gay player to come out?

Buster: No. It's interesting cause when I covered the Padres Billy Bean was on the that team [that's Billy Bean, the gay ballplayer, who came out publicly a few years ago, not Billy Beane the Oakland GM]. I really believe that if any team would have been able to handle that situation, it would have been that team. Because the best player, Tony Gwynn, is a very tolerant person, he's very broad-minded. It was a very young team, that had stripped it down and they had all these young players, and Billy was very well liked. Some of the other leaders on the team like [Brad] Ausmus, were very bright guys. Trevor Hoffman, very accepting personality. If it was going to work, it would've worked on that team. But there is no doubt veteran teams like the Yankees I covered, or the Mets now: no chance. There is no chance.

BB: Because of the hoopla that would surround it?

Buster: Well, not only that, but the anticipation of it would prevent the front office from even making the move. Saying that, if the greatest pitcher in the game came out and said he was gay, they'd probably bend the rules. But it would have to be a great player. If you think about how they did it with Jackie Robinson, part of the reason why it worked was because he was a great player.

BB: And they chose him for his personality as much as his ability as a ballplayer.

Buster: Exactly. Billy Bean said that it's basically unworkable, and I agree with him. It would have to be a player who is established. A player who won three Cy Young awards and then came out. Right. And even at that point, he would never be accepted by half of the players. No matter what he did or what he said.

Here is the first letter I received from Christian:

I'm interested to know what you think about what he has to say about a gay player coming out. Do you think it's as impossible as he does? I go back and forth -- on the one hand it seems like a baseball clubhouse is probably one of the most homophobic places on Earth, but on the other hand I imagine if a player came out while playing in a more liberal city (San Francisco jumps to mind, but Chicago or Minneapolis are other possibilities) he might be accepted, or even embraced, by the city. Of course it would matter quite a bit who the player was, if he was already beloved, etc. I mean, if Kirby Puckett had come out, I don't think it would have been a big deal, but Carl Everett might have run into some problems.

Whaddya think? Also, was Buster's reference to a "three-time Cy Young award winner" purely hypothetical?

To which I responded:

I'm sorry to say that I do think it would be pretty tough for a player to come out of the closet in the pro game today. It's not that he wouldn't be excepted, or even lauded by some fans in certain cities, but I'm not sure if his supporters would out-number his detractors.
Think about the constant taunting the player would receive. Not only would some unruly fans call him a faggot when he's batting, but the ump could be thinking the same thing, and so could the catcher, and even the guy on deck.
I think his problem would lie in the locker room. It's like Olney was saying about women in the locker rooms: there is a sizable percentage of the players that would never accept them.
Yes, I think Olney was being hypothetical when he said that player would have to win 3 Cy Young awards to get away with it, but his point is well-taken. It would probably take a player who is an established star to get away with something so bold as coming out of the closet.
I think that for a queer player to come out publicly, he would have to be a man of tremendous character, strength and confidence. The Jackie Robinson analogy applies here, especially in that the player in question would have to be a stronger man than he is a player.
Of course there are gay ballplayers out there. Perhaps they are comfortable being private about their sexual orientation. I don't know. What I mean is that even if there was a triumphent example of a gay ballplayer coming out, I don't know that it would lead to others following suit. I could be wrong.
The question is: What does a gay ballplayer have to gain by coming out? We certainly know he'd have a lot to lose. Do I think this is a sad commentary on our culture as well as our favorite game? You bet. But what are you going to do?

Here is Christian's reply:

I think it's a damn shame that there isn't an out major league player. I love sports, but I hate the macho bullshit that often comes along with it. For so many people, sports is wrapped up in some weird belief system where success in sports equates with success as a man, and too often an adjunct of that is homophobia. Athletes talk about how trust is one of the most important factors in making a team, and how they could "never trust" someone who was gay, and it just makes me mad. And then I read Todd Jones go off on this very subject, and it just makes me madder:
I suppose it's just a reflection of the beliefs of the majority of America, and living in San Francisco and Oakland for the last six years has skewed my concept of what "everyone" thinks, but basically I can't wait for someone to be brave/stupid enough to come out while still active. It'll be a shitstorm to rival what Jackie Robinson went through, but I think (most) people will get over it relatively quickly and ultimately it will be good for baseball and America as a whole. We'll see, I guess.

Todd Jones is quoted in an article by Denver Post theater critic, John Moore, on Richard Greenberg's play "Take Me Out." The piece is an indepth and insightful examination of the deep-rooted homophobia that exists in pro sports. Greeenberg told Moore:

The only incentive for doing it anyway, he said, "is if the player just can't stand it anymore. When living the lie becomes impossible."

Colorado pitcher Todd Jones probably speaks for the majority of ballplayers when he said:

"I wouldn't want a gay guy being around me," Jones said. "It's got nothing to do with me being scared. That's the problem: All these people say he's got all these rights. Yeah, he's got rights or whatever, but he shouldn't walk around proud. It's like he's rubbing it in our face. 'See me, hear me roar.' We're not trying to be close-minded, but then again, why be confrontational when you don't really have to be?"

That kind of attitude "speaks volumes about America," said actor Daniel Sunjata, a Jeter lookalike who plays Lemming in "Take Me Out." "Sports are the last bastion of sanctioned homophobia in this country. The fact that something like sexual preference can so adversely affect your career and your income is depressing. If I were a pro baseball player, and I was gay, I might not come out, either, for those exact reasons."

All-around good guy, Mark Grace had a more enlightened take:

"I've played for 16 years, and I'm sure I've had homosexual teammates that I didn't know about," he said. "If one out of six or seven men are homosexual - do the math."

"I think the perception in the clubhouse would be one of, for lack of a better word - fear," Grace said. "Fear that they'd be stared at or (that a gay player might fall) in love with them. But I think if you're intelligent at all, you'd understand that homosexuals are just like us. They don't think everybody's attractive. Just because this guy's homosexual doesn't mean he's attracted to me."

I'd like to think that there are more guys like Mark Grace than Todd Jones out there, but I'd also like for money to grow on trees. Still, I think this is a fascinating subject and I'll continue to write about it as long as there is something to add to the discussion. Anyone with thoughts or comments, please send them in. I'm curious to know what the readers are thinking. Are you saying, "Enough already with the Fruits, let's get back to boxscores and pitch-count?" Let me know.

GIL, A REAL MECHE

Seattle right hander Gil Meche overshadowed Roger Clemens and the hoopla surrounding Ichiro and Godzilla at the Stadium last night, as the Mariners shut out the Bombers, 6-0. Meche, winner of the Audie Murphy award, looks like he just jumped out of an old WWII movie; he has the innocent good looks of the boy next door. ("He's attractive," my girlfriend Emily remarked, "but he could use a hair cut." For what it's worth so could Matsui. "Godzilla needs to get his ass to Barbazon.") He pitched quickly, and had the Yankee batters out of synch all evening.

After the game, Meche told reporters:

"Probably the biggest night of my baseball career," said Meche, who scattered six singles and walked two. "How could it not be? Beating a Hall of Famer and this lineup? It's unbelievable."

Clemens wasn't terrible (he did strike out eight), but he did give up 3 dingers (Boone, Davis and Edgar).

I was reminded just how much strong the rivalry with the M's has been over the past few years last night. Damn, I hate losing to those guys. But honestly, with the exception of Brett Boone, there is hardly anyone to dislike on Seattle. I don't even hate Boone, it's just that his cockines is easy to root against. Sheeet, what's not to love about Olerud, Edgar and Ichiro? And Bob Melvin appears to be a good guy as well.

No, the worst part about last night was that the Sox just keep coming and coming.

But fug it, I shouldn't be riffing. The Yankees will probably not be shut-out too many times this year. It could be worse,after all: I could be a Mets fan.

Speaking of which, my cousin Gabe called me in the middle of the Card-Mets game last night. I had caught Ty Wiggenton's at-bat with the bases-loaded in the first. He battled Matt Morris to a full-count and then smacked a grounder deep in the hole at short, which Edgar Renteria fielded and then threw a seed to first to record the out. Typical Mets I thought. About 20 minutes later, I saw on the ticker that the Cardinals had scored three in their half of the first. Ugh.

Gabe, who is anything but an alarmist, calls and says, "I'm not trying to be pessimistic, but this could be the season right here. They could be done. And I don't mean that as a judgement, but as an observation."

That just may be the case. Hey Steve Phillips, remember what ol' Satch said: "Don't look back, something may be gaining on you."

YANKEE BENCHES

By Guest Columnist: Chris DeRosa

Hello, Bronx Banterers. Alex asked me to come off the bench with a Yankee-related feature, so I thought I would take substitution as my theme and discuss Yankee benches: the best benches the team has had in the past and those of the current dynasty.

Yankee fans of a sabermetric bent tend to ignore the slew of coffee table books about the team, and therefore may have missed the fact that Bill James wrote three parts of the latest entry in the genre, The New York Yankees: One Hundred Years, The Official Retrospective. He writes short essays on each of the 25 greatest Yankees as selected by a group of sportswriters, five of the most famous Yankee teams, and six of the club's greatest managers. It is a pricey book, but it is fun to have James's always intriguing perspective and to have him take on greatest- (NY)-team-ever debate, even in abbreviated form. Besides, what other coffee table book is going to diss the '61 club and poke fun at Bobby Meacham?

Anyway, one thing James mentions in talking about Casey Stengel was how frequently his teams led in "Bench Value Percentage," a measure of the percentage the non-starters contribute to a team's success. Stengel's Yankees led three times, 1949, 1951, and 1954. I looked them up. Not surprisingly, these three also had the three highest win shares totals that any of Stengel's Yankee benches amassed. Might one of those clubs, I wondered, be identified as the best bench in team history?

Choosing one is harder than I thought. First of all, who should count as being a bench player?

If someone is acquired in the last third of the season to be part of the starting lineup, is his contribution really "off the bench"?

If a bench player plays himself into the starting lineup halfway through, score one for the bench? Or count him as a regular?

If you're half of a strict platoon, are you a semi-regular, or riding the pines?

Chili Davis is supposed to be your regular DH, but he gets hurt. Darryl Strawberry steps in and leads the team in homers much of the way. Strawberry gets sick and Davis makes it back late in the year. Strength in depth for sure, but which one counts for the bench?

The easiest thing to do is to define the bench as the contributions of everybody beyond the eight (or nine with DH) players who got the most playing time. Even then, you've got to make some common sense adjustments. Joe DiMaggio shouldn't count as a bench player for the 1949 Yankees even if he got less playing time than Cliff Mapes. Clearly, what matters in discussing the bench is the contribution of Mapes and other players who stepped in when DiMaggio was injured.

The question of injuries raises a further complication. The 1949 team was famously riddled with injuries. Is a reserve squad that is called on more often for this reason better than another that is equally ready and able, but kept on the bench by a healthy lineup? Maybe not better, but probably "greater." It's like when they rank the presidents. You have overcome a major crisis or two in order to rate with the greatest ever. Here are the total win shares claimed by some of the most active Yankee benches and their top not-ready-for-full-time-players:

1949 59 Mapes 12, Johnson 9, Lindell 6, Silvera 6, Stirnweiss 6, Keller 5, Kryhoski 4, Phillips 4
1951 51 Brown 13, Mantle 13, Collins 11, Jensen 9, Hopp 2, Johnson 2, Silvera 2
1954 48 Skowron 13, Coleman 6, Robinson 5, Slaughter 5, Miranda 4, Woodling, Cerv 3
1955 44 Howard 11, Collins 9, Robinson 7, Rizzuto 6, Cerv 5, Martin 2
1980 46 Gamble 11, Murcer 9, Piniella 7, Spencer 7, Lefebvre 4, Werth 3
1997 47 Curtis 11, Boggs 10, Posada 6, Sanchez 5, Whiten 5, Stanley 4, Duncan 3, Kelly 2

Another reason the total doesn't tell the whole story is that it is difficult to measure the crucial bench quality of versatility. The variety of problems a team can solve off the bench is important along with the overarching measure of their contribution offered by win shares.
Comments on Some Great Yankee Benches

All of which goes to say that it may be too hard to identify the one best bench in team history. Here are some of the excellent ones, though. The bench didn't figure much until Casey Stengel came along, and he always had a deep and talented roster. There is an extensive literature on Stengel's use of reserves, so I won't rehash all that here. In 1949, he did most of his rotating in the outfield and at first base. I think it was his 103-win 1954 club that best exemplified his concept of the roster as 16 players who were all worthy, with the batter-by-batter circumstances dictating which eight were playing and which were licking their chops.

1954: Only Mantle and Berra, the two best players in the league, batted 500 times on this team. The rest of the team was like a giant awesome bench. Charlie Silvera hit well in a handful of at bats backing up Berra, as he always did. At first base was Joe Collins (343 ab), Moose Skowron (215), and Eddie Robinson (142) combining for 22 homers and 89 walks. In the infield were Andy Carey (411), Gil McDougal (394), Phil Rizzuto (307), Jerry Coleman (300), and Willie Miranda (116). The outfielders after Mantle in descending order of playing time were Irv Noren (426), Hank Bauer (377), and Gene Woodling (304), Enos Slaughter (125) and Bob Cerv (100). All these players, with the arguable exception of Miranda, were important contributors to the Yankee dynasty, although not all played well in 1954. James's Guide to the Baseball Managers reports the 1954 Yanks set a record for pinch hitters, 262, who hit .292 and set a record with 7 dingers.

1977: An example of a fine bench that didn't get to strut its stuff the way Stengel's did is that of the 1977 World Champions. Billy Martin got over 500 at bats for seven regulars, but he had in reserve plenty of offensive punch and a couple of glove men who didn't hurt the team at the plate. Despite the signing of Reggie Jackson, Lou Piniella managed to get over 300 at bats again in a platoon outfielder-DH role, and he hit the snot out of the ball: .330 and slugging .510. Cliff Johnson hit .296 and slugged .606 in 142 at bats, in 56 games at 1B, DH, and catcher. Infielder Fred Stanley (.261) and outfielder Paul Blair (.262) came bearing gloves. George Zeber and Dell Alston both hit .320 in limited trials, and subsequently appeared on those four-head-shot Topps rookie cards in 1978. Klutts' also had Alan Trammell and Paul Molitor, so that turned out to be a pretty good card.

1980: Like 1954, a 103-win team that didn't go all the way and had few regulars. Only Reggie, Randolph, and Rick Cerone batted 500 times, Cerone actually led the team with 147 games. The bench was deep in bats. Switch-hitting outfielder Bobby Brown got a big break in center when Ruppert Jones got hurt and played pretty well, hitting 14 homers and swiping 27 bases in 137 games. From the right, Lou Piniella again had a good 300+ at bats, hitting .287 and slugging .462. When Graig Nettles went down, Semi-regular DH Eric Soderholm hit .287, slugged .462, and subbed at the hot corner when Nettles got hurt (though they later added Aurelio Rodriquez to play third and he didn't do much ¡© wrong A-Rod). From the left, back-up first baseman Jim Spencer smacked 13 homers in 259 at bats, outfielder Bobby Murcer hit 13 in 297 at bats. Best of all, Oscar Gamble, a great 200 at bat player, popped 14 dingers in 194 at bats. At the bottom of the bench, Joe Lefebvre kicked in 8 homers and 27 walks in 150 at bats and Dennis Werth hit .308 with 12 walks and slugged .492 in 65 at bats. However, the infield and catching subs didn't play much or well.
1993: This was at a point when Buck Showalter still had more in common with Casey Stengel than Joe Torre did. The Yanks had not one but two mini-McDougals: Mike Gallego had a career year as a super-sub, hitting .283 with 10 homers and 50 walks in 55 games at short, 52 games at second, and 27 games at third. Randy Velarde played short, third, and outfield, hitting .301 and slugging .469 in 226 at bats. Jim Leyritz had his best season, getting 259 at bats as a 1B-C-OF-DH, and hitting .309/.410/.525. From the left side, Matt Nokes poled 10 homers in 217 at bats platooning with and then backing up right-hitting catcher Mike Stanley, who had an unexpected breakout year as a slugger. Outfielder Dion James hit .332 and slugged .466 in 343 at bats, wedging himself into the starting lineup in the second half. This bench had super hitting left and right and great position coverage. Because James and Gallego played themselves into full-time jobs, the bottom of this roster, in the end, kicked in less than those of Stengel's teams. However, looking only at the players who began the season in reserve roles, the 1993 crew had a season that is tough to beat for the distinction of the best pinstriped scrubeenies.

Comments on Torre's Benches:

Each of Joe Torre's benches made key contributions to the championship run. The 1996 bench had a couple of good players in Jim Leyritz and Darryl Strawberry (slugged .490), Gerald Williams hitting .270, and Ruben Rivera's best 88 major league at bats (.284, .443 slug). But that was just the first half bench. For the stretch drive, New York adding Cecil Fielder (13 homers in 200 at bats as a mostly-regular), Mike Aldrede and Charlie Hayes (both slugged .456), and Luis Sojo (.275 with defense). Fielder, Hayes, and Sojo (the best lousy player I've ever seen) all helped the Yankees win postseason games.

The team in Joe Torre's tenure that got the most help from the lower half of the roster was not any of the champions, but the 1997 wild card team. This was a bench built on the run. In June the Yankees added text-book fourth-outfielder Chad Curtis (.291/.362/.475) to supplement reserve outfielder H.H.M. Whiten. In August they grabbed ex-Showalter stalwart Mike Stanley (.287/.392/.483) and acquired slick-fielding Rey Sanchez (.312) to supplant second baseman Pat Kelly. At third they used a straight platoon of Charlie Hayes and Wade Boggs, but in the ALDS it was Hayes in four of five games, so Boggs rounded out the playoff bench as a .292 hitter from the left side.

For me, Game 4 of the 1997 Division series against Cleveland kind of prevents this bench from numbering among the team's greats. In the 9th inning, after Sandy Alomar homered off Rivera to tie the score 2-2, Mike Jackson was on the hill to face the bottom of the Yankee order. Torre let Charlie Hayes (.330 obp) lead off with Wade Boggs (.380 obp and the platoon advantage) on the bench. Chad Curtis also would have been a better leadoff option, but Torre wasted him earlier in the game as a pinch runner. Assenmacher was out of the game, so if Hargrove wanted a lefty, he'd have to go to Alvin Mormon (5.89 era). And you just knew Boggs would have given us a good at bat and that Hayes was just going up there to hack, which he did, easy out. Then Torre let Girardi hit for himself with Mike Stanley on the bench. Girardi is the kind of hitter who is down 0-2 coming out of the on-deck circle. Another easy out. Sanchez made the third out.

Come on, if you couldn't use Boggs to lead off against a right-hander in the ninth inning when you only needed one run, why even have him on the roster? Easy moves: the kind where the guy played the same position as the guy for whom he should have hit. So for all the previous contributions of the 1997 reserves, in October we'd have been better off with a bench in which the manager had more confidence. Okay, back to the benches:
The bench of the great 1998 club had Strawberry leading the club in homers most of the way, and switch-hitting consummate pros Tim Raines and Chili Davis, depending on which two you want to call the bench players. Girardi backed up Posada and hit .276, while Luis Sojo filled in around the infield. Fifth outfielder Ricky Ledee did not have a good season but he did knock Kevin Brown around in the World Series. The Yanks also got hot cuts of coffee from speedy infielder Homer Bush (hit .380 and slugged .465 in 71 at bats), and immortally, from outfielder Shane Spencer (hit .373 and belted 10 homers in 67 at bats).

The 1999 bench wasn't as impressive, but Curtis (195 ab), Spencer (205), and Ledee (250) shared left field and each offered something: Ledee hit .276 with 9 homers, Spencer hit 8, and Curtis hit .262 with 43 walks. He also went Reggie in a series game and blew off Jim Gray. Luis Sojo and Joe Girardi again provided the glovework. Darryl Strawberry batted only 49 times, but he came back just as the Yankee attack was flagging a little bit and he was briefly the most feared hitter in the line-up, hitting .327/.500/.612. In fact, I've never seen Strawberry more locked in than he was in that little 1999 stint, not even in his glory days. Facing a world champion lineup with Bernie, Jeter, and O'Neill, people were pitching around a troubled 37-year-old recuperating cancer patient who had just come back to the majors.

The last title team had a weak bench in the first half, consisting of a large dose of Clay Bellinger, too-old outfielders like Lance Johnson and Roberto Kelly, and no-good back-up catcher Chris Turner. But the 2000 stretch-drive/playoff bench was a different beast. They added two right-handed bats, Jose Canseco (by then an unobtrusive vet who hit 6 homers and drew 23 walks in 111 at bats), and Glen Hill, who hit .333 and slugged .735, blasting 16 homers in 132 at bats. His spurt was almost twice as long as Shane Spencer's in ¡®98, and this time the Yankees really needed it. They also imported not one but two solid all-infield fielders, Jose Vizcaino and trusty Luis Sojo. Torre may do it by the seat of his pants, rather than by any Weaver-esque logic, but he picked spots for these guys and they won us the World Series again. Sojo, of course, had an extremely high Mookie Factor (the aura which causes game-turning events to occur in one's immediate vicinity).

How will Flaherty, Trammel, Zeile and company hold up against the benches of the past? Three trends are notable. First, since Posada became the regular catcher, Torre has relied on good-field/no-hit back-ups in the mold of his favorite, Joe Girardi, and shied away from boppers like Mike Stanley, the man Girardi replaced. He passed over Todd Greene and Bobby Estrelella last year to retain Alberto Castillo, and going into 2003, one senses that Chris Widger may have accidentally hit himself out of a job with his .297 average last year. The preference is most curious when you consider that as a player Torre was a slugging backstop himself.

Second, it appears that Enrique Wilson is going to keep pinch running. On April 13th against the Devil Rays, Wilson ran for Erik Almonte (to get "veteran presence" on the bases, said the broadcaster), got caught stealing to end the inning, then struck out in the 9th inning of a one-run loss. This performance recalled a series of costly pinch running appearances Wilson made in 2002. Here are the highlights:

9 August, Oak @ NY: Wilson ran for Jason Giambi in a tight game, got thrown out at the plate, then went 0 for 3 and made an error. The Yankees lost 3-2 in 16 innings.

14 August, NY @ KC : Wilson ran for Ventura, didn't score, and then went 0 for 2 in a game NY won 3-2 in 14 innings.

11 September, Bal @ NY: Wilson ran for Giambi and didn't score in a game NY won 5-4 in 11 innings. Coomer went in to play first base and went 0 for 1.

On the plus side of the ledger, on 21 July, Wilson pinch ran for Giambi and scored on a ball Giambi might not have to edge Boston 9-8 (the game in which Weaver gave up five bombs). I guess Yankee fans raised on sabermetrics are kind of like Eisenhower Democrats as far as Joe Torre is concerned. We know he's the right man for the job, but every once in a while there's a stinging reminder that we're not from the same party. I just hate losing those Giambi at bats to pinch running gambles! Generally, for a pinch running move to pay off, somebody needs to hit the ball, and then the hit has to be the exact right kind for the baserunning to make a difference. If you're taking out superior bats, then you're stuck with inferior production in these tied extra innings games. The hidden cost to the run Wilson scored against Boston is pinch running moves is his 0-6 on the three dates mentioned.

The third trend, on a less nitpicking note, is the aggressive rebuilding of the bench. If the current pine-riders should flag at all, the Yankees will not hesitate to overhaul the bottom of the roster in midseason. They've done it under both Bob Watson (1996 and 1997) and Brian Cashman (2000 especially), which may indicate that Torre himself has a substantial hand in retooling his benches for the playoffs, where few skippers have pushed buttons better.

Chris DeRosa is a historian living in Long Branch, NJ, who writes an annual newsletter for all his baseball friends. You can reach him at: christopherderosa@yahoo.com

THIS DATE IN ROCKET HISTORY

On this day in 1986, Roger Clemens struck out 20 Seattle Mariners. Tonight, he is gunning for career victory number 298.

WILLIE MAKES SURE SORI DOESN'T GET A SWELL HEAD

While Alfonso Soriano continues to defy the laws of probability with his battery-operated bat, he has steadily improved with the glove as well. But his mentor, third base coach, Willie Randolph isn't blowing smoke up lil' Sori's ass:

"I still think he's got a ways to go," Randolph said. "Being an All-Star is a nice thing, but an All-Star to me is doing it offensively and defensively. When you start talking about the whole package, that's when you see the confidence get to a new level. That's when you start saying: 'I enjoy doing this. I can be an All-Star hitter and an All-Star second baseman, too.' "

...From third base, Robin Ventura has noticed the footwork. That is a change from last season, when Soriano led major league second basemen with 23 errors. Ventura said Soriano used to wait for balls to come to him, but now he moves toward them to receive better hops.

"From where I'm at, I see the ball bouncing at him and what kind of hop he's going to get," Ventura said. "Last year you could see it happen before it got there. It was like watching a car wreck, watching the hops come at him. He was making it tougher on himself, but he's got it now. You can tell his confidence just by watching him."

ICHIRO, GODZILLA IN THE PLACE TO BE

Big happenings in the Bronx tonight as the Mariners come into town for a three-game series, which features Seattle's star Ichiro, and the Yankees' left fielder Godzilla.

Mariano Rivera will join the team for the first time this year, and Yankee fans will hold their collective breath until we see him pitch.

There should be a terrific crowd buzzing at the Stadium tonight, and I have a feeling the next week will provide a tense, playoff-like atmosphere in the House that Ruth Built.

Check out this scouting report on the Yankees from Seattle native Shane O'Neill.

Also, don't sleep on U.S.S. Mariner, for comprehensive blog coverage of the series.

DOGPILE ON THE METSIES

Buster Olney has an article that appeared on the front page of The New York Times this morning about the state of the Mets. As well all know, it isn't a pretty picture.

They are a bad defensive team. Among the league's best defensive teams a few years ago, the Mets are tied for second in the major leagues in errors. They strike out constantly, ranking fifth in that category, while compiling one of the major leagues' lowest on-base percentages.

...A general manager for another team said: "I can't believe a team that spends that much money is that bad. There's nobody who really scares you when you look at their lineup, on paper. The only starter who might scare you is Al Leiter. They don't look real good."

Mike Lupica, the King of the tabliod columnists in New York, weighs in on the ugliness that is the Mets, and characteristically doesn't pull any punches:

The Mets have to make some kind of move over the next month or so, or get ready to make some moves, and big ones, moves that even might involve Mike Piazza. If that is the way things work out, if they are falling out of another race and out of another season in June, the first move has to be with Steve Phillips, the general manager. Who can't be allowed to make any more moves himself at that point.

A LITTLE OF THIS AND A LITTLE OF THAT

The Yankees return home to New York today, where it is a clear, sunny and brilliant spring day. It's the perfect day to talk a walk across the Brooklyn Bridge. The Bombers start a six-game homestand tomorrow, and will face the Mariners and the A's. (Meanwhile the Red Sox will host the Royals and the Twins at the Fens.) Next week they fly out west to play in Seattle and Oakland. The next two weeks will be a good test of how the Yankees stack up against two of the best teams in the league.

Heavyweight Tom Boswell gives his take on the always-interesting/never-boring New York Yankees in The Washington Post:

They may be truly great this year, but, if you look closely, they're also old and flawed. They're admirable individually yet unpalatable collectively. They're off to the best start in their history. Which just sets 'em up for a big fall. Yes, right now, the Yanks have all their classic themes roiling at once.

...Never have George Steinbrenner's men been so brazenly greedy relative to the rest of the money-strapped sport. The Boss, luxury tax be damned, has topped all past buying frenzies. So his team has never been easier to hate. Feel the injustice of that $164 million payroll, a dozen times Tampa Bay's size. Let it burn. Doesn't it feel good? If your heart has a stitch or a seam in it, and you've never lived within the five boroughs, you have to root against them.

Yet, in this era, the Yankees define conflicted emotions. They're the team that's so exemplary they drag you, kicking, into their camp.

Gordon Edes reports on the Yankees early-season success in The Boston Globe, while Anthony McCarron delineates the power structure of the Yankees front office.

Lastly,John Sickels, ESPN's minor-league guru, has this to say about Derek Jeter's temporary replacement, Erick Almonte:

His strikeout rates are high, while his walk rates are all over the place, low at times but not so bad at other times. He is 25 years old, so he doesn't have a lot of development time left and is close to being as good now as he'll ever be.

Looking at the minor-league numbers, Almonte projects to hit between .230 and .260 in the major leagues, with touches of power and an erratic on-base percentage. What he's doing now is about what he should be expected to do, maybe a little better. He has no star potential that I can see, but certainly does enough to be useful as a middle infield reserve.

MONEY-BOSS PLAYER

The hot baseball book of the spring is clearly "Moneyball, The Art of Winning an Unfair Game," Michael Lewis' study of Billy Beane and the Oakland A's. Christian Ruzich, The Cub Reporter and Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus received reviewer's copies and are enjoying the book immensely, and quite frankly, I can't wait to get my hands on it too. The New York Times Magazine published an excerpt from the book last month, and Billy Beane comes across as a charming, slick, and danergous operator---like a shark from a David Mamet play. (Kevin Spacey should play him in the movie version).

Joel Sherman has a column on the book today in the New York Post. Needless to say, former Oakland skipper, and current Mets manager Art Howe, who was famously at odds with Beane, is not portrayed in a favorable light. Howe refused to comment on the book, but as Sherman reports:

Yesterday before his team was swept by Arizona while setting a double-header record with 27 strikeouts and committing an error at every position except third base, Howe described this discouraging first month of boos and boots as a "piece of cake compared to what I've been through in the past." When asked later if that meant his time under Beane, Howe would only say, "I had my moments."

As depicted in "Moneyball," the A's would not have been all that different if managed by a cardboard cutout of Howe. Unlike other GMs, Beane dictated (among other things) lineups, bullpen usage and strategy - specifically no steals or sacrifices. Howe would confirm with players who stole on their own that it was indeed their decision, so Beane would be furious with them and not him. Most unflattering of all was that Beane even ordered where and how Howe stood in the dugout - on the top step with his chin raised to project leadership to his players below, though Howe preferred to sit on the bench.

Considering the way the Mets played yesterday, Howe could have used cardboard cutouts of his players which may have at least cut down on all the errors.

TEXAS 2-STEP

I'm happy to report that my girlfriend Emily returned from her recovery-hiatus in the hills of Vermont this past weekend. She was down at my place in the Boogie Down Bronx on Saturday, and it was nothing short of great to be with her again. Em was even excited to watch the Yankee game on Saturday night, even though she was so beat by the time the game started, she didn't make it past the third inning. She was awake long enough to see her boy Giambi hit a first-inning home run. I had told her that Giambi---her favorite Bronx Bomber, had been slumping, so not to expect much. So naturally he hits a homer.

"Now that I'm back, he's going to be fine," said Emily.

David Wells didn't pitch particularly well, but he did go eight innings. The game irritated the hell out of me, for some reason. You know how there are some games that just drive you nuts? This was one of them. I figured the Yankees were going to be blown out. Boomer whiffed A Rod in his first two at-bats, but then Rodriguez jumped all over a 2-0 fastball his next time up, and tied the game with a solo shot to center. I turned in with the ol' girl during the seventh inning stretch figuring I had better things to do than dick around watching the game.

But I couldn't get to sleep, so against my better instincts, I got up to check the score about 45 mintues later, just in time to watch Juan Acevado K A Rod on three pitches (all looking), in the 10th inning to give the Yanks a 7-5 win. The Freak Soriano had 3 hits and collected the game-winning RBI off of Ugie Urbina.

Rodriguez, and The Rangers exacted a measure of revenge on Sunday, pounding the Yanks 10-6 to avoid being swept. A Rod went 5-5 and had 6 RBI, including a bases-loaded double that had Joe Torre second-guessing his decision to leave lefty Randy Choate in to face the King of Swing.

Sunday's game was the ugliest game of the series, but I didn't mind so much. Sometimes you gotta get spanked, right? Jeff Weaver didn't have much and when Joe Torre came to get him, he looked like he was trying to suppress a smile. Hey skip, I sucked pretty bad today, huh? The Yanks ended their longest road trip of the year at 8-2, so what's not to like about that?

I flipped back and forth between the game, and the Hoopskaball playoffs. As badly as the Yankees played, Jason Giambi pinch-hit in the ninth and represented the tying run. Even though the Yanks got smacked around, they still had a chance to win the game.

The Yanks are now 20-5, and the only drag is that the Red Sox are only 4 games back. Boston pulled out a 14-inning win over the Angels last night in Anahiem (incredibly, the Cardinals beat the Marlins in a 20-inning game yesterday too). Naturally, Pedro Martinez didn't get the win, although he looked fine, striking out ten in seven innings of work and leaving with a 4-2 lead.

I was talking with Ed Cossette of Bambino's Curse yesterday, and he expressed to me the constant anxiety Red Sox fans live with regarding Pedro's health. I was thinking about it later, and I have a question for the reader: Who was the last great pitcher who was as vunerable while he was in his prime as Martinez? I don't think the Koufax analogy works, because according to Jane Leavy's book, Koufax knew going into the 1965 season that his days were numbered. I don't get that sense with Pedro at all. Has there ever been as dominant a pitcher who was as frail as Pedro Martinez seems to be?

Inquiring minds want to know. (Like me.)

DEEP IN THE HEART OF TEXAS

The Yankees won the opening game of a three-game series in Arlington last night, beating the Rangers 3-2. Mike Mussina improved to 5-0, struck out nine, and allowed one run in eight innings of work. Mussina seemed to get better, working quickly, as the game went on. After striking out the side in the eighth inning, I was a disapointed that he didn't return for the ninth. Not only was Mussina spotting his fastball, and using his over-the-top knuckle-cuve effectively, but he added a three-quarter-arm breaking ball which had the mighty Texas bats stumped all night.

Juan Acevado pitched the ninth instead and made things interesting. With one out, Juan Gonzalez swung at a shoulder-high fastball and lofted the ball towards the seats down the third-base line. Robin Ventura followed the high pop fly, and carefully stepped onto the tarp, stood up, leaned over slightly and recorded the second out of the inning, before he fell gently over into the stands. Almost everything about Ventura appears laconic, and this play was no different. It was a sure-footed play, but it seemed as if it was happening in slow motion. YES broadcaster, Ken Singleton commented that Ventura, "Looks like one of those loggers, doesn't he?"

Carl Everett then reached on what looked like Alfonso Soriano's first error of the season (a difficult grounder to his left that he booted), and scored on Ruben Seirra's double to right (Raul Mondesi, showing off his powerful arm, almost nabbed Sierra at second to end the game). The second baseman, Michael Young was next, and he smacked Acevado's first pitch off the glove of first baseman Nick Johnson. The ball bounced to his right, and lil' Sori scooped it up and flipped it under-hand to Acevado to end the game. It was a long way to toss a ball under-hand, and Acevado practically snow-coned it in his glove, and they narrowly beat the streaking Young by a half-a-step, to seal the win.

Boy, the Rangers are a strange team. They are a motely crew of muscle-headed sluggers, managed by one straight-laced strategist in Buck Showalter. This is the first time Buck has managed against the Yankees since he left the Bronx in the October of 1995. Orel Hirshiser is his pitching coach, and the two of them look prim and studious.

Showalter and Orel each have their own, sleek little table-stand in the dugout. Hirshiser dilligently charted each pitch thrown by his staff. He has just the kind of business-like efficiency that makes him a perfect fit with Buck.

YES broadcaster Michael Kay said that he had asked A Rod before the game how he liked Showalter, and A Rod looked at him in the eye and said, "I love him. You know wanna know why? Because I crave discipline and he provides it."

It's not often that you hear your superstar saying he craves more order, and structure and accountability. Kay reported that Showalter compared Rodriguez with Mattingly, in terms of his love for the game and his work ethic. According to Kay, that is not a comparison Buck throws around lightly.

But the Rangers roster isn't just weird, it feels perverse. They have some youth of course, even though Mark Teixeira didn't play. The kid Hank Blalock did, and boy is he milk-fed, bro. "Good-looking ballplayer," as Buck O'Neil would say. He looks like a ballplayer. Or he looks like a jock, California-style, ala Shane Spencer. I would find it hard not to call him "meat." Mussina duped him into grounding into a weak ground out his first time out by throwing him an offspeed pitch on a full count; the next time up, he wacked a hanging curve ball up the middle for an RBI single; the last two times up, Mussina set him down on three pitches.

It was good to see Mr. Universe himself, Alex Rodriguez, and although I've never cared for him too tough, it was nice to see the smooth fielding, sweet-swinging future Hall-of-Famer Rafie Palmero too. But in the second inning, when Mussina faced Juan Gonzalez, Carl Everett and Ruben Seirra, I felt like I was watching a bad reality-TV show where they get a group of former celebrities and force them to live together. Or some ill espisode of the Rikki Lake show.

What a collection of Bone-heads, man.

My favorite Martian, Alfonso Soriano had a mutliple hit game again. As Steve Goldman noted in his Pinstriped Bible column this week, Nick Johnson is serving as a terrific counter-point to Sori. He is as patient as Sori is aggresive. Johnson collected a base on balls for the tenth consectuctive game. He flew out deep to left in his first at-bat, and hit a two-run homer to left in the sixth.

Jason Giambi put together a solid at-bat in the third, and drove a full count pitch up the middle to drive in the Yankees first run. Colby Lewis started for Texas, and he pitched well, mixing a good curve ball in with mid-90s gas.

LE FREAK, C'EST CHIC

I'm not the only one calling Alfonso Soriano "The Freak," these days. Aaron Gleeman simply prefers "Freak of Nature," which is the same difference, really (Initially, I started calling Sori "Superfreak," but he's still too young for that title, which I think fits Vlad Guerrero better at this stage of the game). Gleeman, who has a real gift for statistical analysis, covers lil' Sori, and his freaky-ass self in his column today:

I will admit to being one of the people who thought that there was just no way Soriano could continue to hit like he did last season while never walking and striking out in bunches. And while I will gladly admit I am wrong, I do so while still in complete and utter disbelief of what he is doing.

...Since Soriano will basically swing at and hit anything that is thrown close to the strike zone (and by "close" I mean within 5 feet on either side and from the tops of his shoes to his helmet), many people have wondered "why pitchers ever throw him strikes." I have also wondered this, particularly after seeing this stat last season...

Alfonso Soriano putting the first pitch of an at bat in play in 2002:
97 at bats
45 hits
.464 batting average
.825 slugging %
6 homers
15 doubles

Those are just about the freakiest freak numbers that ever freaked the earth.

Freakin A, bro.

BIBLE THUMPING

Here are the last two installments of Steve Goldman's excellent Pinstriped Bible column over the YES website (I'm sorry I forgot to link last week's piece). Goldman offers objective analysis of the current Yankee team, while providing a thorough, and detailed historical context to measure their accomplishments by. It makes his weekly column a must-read for all Yankee fans.

This week, Goldman compares the 2003 Yanks with four other Yankee teams who got off to similar starts (1928, '39, '49, and '58---yeah, all those teams went on to win the World Serious).

Here is what Goldman has to say about Nick "Godzookie" Johnson, since Joe Torre moved him to the 2-hole in the batting order:

Nick Johnson is now displaying the great eye at the plate that made him such a prized prospect. Credit Johnson and the Yankees brain trust for mental flexibility: Johnson's minor league success came from crowding the plate within an inch of its life. He tried it last year, and other than earning him 12 free bases/bruises on HBPs, it didn't work. This season Johnson has backed off -- he hasn't been hit once -- and he's found that not only can he still control the strike zone, but he can control it better. The mechanical issue resolved, the man's natural ability has taken over. At this writing, Johnson is carrying a .982 OPS and there's every reason to expect more of the same.

When Jeter returns, Torre is going to face a tough decision as to how to reorder his lineup. Respect for Jeter's previous accomplishments dictates a return to the top of the order, but Johnson is doing things in the two-hole that aren't in Jeter's bag of tricks -- Johnson is likely to draw twice as many walks as Jeter takes in a typical year. Jeter does many things well, and he could bat anywhere, and should be encouraged to do so. Johnson's confident, he's hot, and should be a fixture at the top of the order from now on.

GREAT GOOGLIE MOOGLIE

Just how good are the 2003 Yankees? Jayson Stark has a column at ESPN that says, well, they are damn good, perhaps great. Of course, it is way too early to be talking about great anything (the mere suggestion makes my Spidey Sense tingle), but considering that they've been without Rivera and Jeter (and a productive Jason Giambi), the Bronx Bombers have done a good job of living up to their moniker, for sure:

"Sometimes in baseball," [Elias historian and analyst Steve] Hirdt said, "you'll see something so overwhelming that you regard it as a special measure of a special talent. Like Kerry Wood's 20-strikeout game. Nobody has a game that good unless they're something special. And these Yankees have had 3¨ö weeks like that.

"It's one thing to have hot streaks. But to maintain it for 3¨ö weeks -- and not just against Tampa Bay, but by going 9-0 against Minnesota and Anaheim -- is kind of a signal. You begin moving away from saying this is an isolated case to where you say, 'This is significant.' "

..."They're like Tyrannosaurus Rex," Torii Hunter said the other day after the Yankees had finished wiping out the Twins for the seventh straight game by a combined score of 49-13. "Get them out of here. I'll get them a cab."

PEOPLES IS PEOPLES

Steve Keane, sole owner and proprietor of The Eddie Kranepool Society, writes:

Alex,

Great work as usual on the Olney interview. I was struck by a few things Buster said.

About Tom Lasorda, My wife and I were going to the theater about two winters ago when we ducked into the Marriot Marquis on Time Square to warm up. There was a sportswriters dinner going on and I happened to see Lasorda standing near by. I went over to say hello and the guy looked at me like I asked him for a loan. What a phony bastard.

I go to Cape Cod every summer for vacation. Peter Gammons is a year round resident of the Cape and I got to know him a few years back seeing him at Cape Cod baseball games. He is a true gentleman. Not only is he baseball guru but his knowledge of rock n roll music is unmatched.

You would think just by accident some player would ask a beat writer about his family or where he went to school or any kind of personal small talk. I mean you see these guys the whole season. I guess the players are as self centered as we believe they are.

As a whole, I think athletes are self-centered, but not any more so than your run-of-the-mill actor, musician, or artiste. As a side note, Steve mentions today that it may be time for the ancient mariner of the Mets radio broadcast booth, Bob Murphy to step down. Personally, the less coherent Murphy becomes, the more I enjoy listening to him. His voice, garbled, and slurred, sounds like Schlitz Beer, if Schlitz Beer could talk.

"Eeeeeee Strugg 'im out."

BOMBED

I got an e-mail from Ed Cossette yesterday as the Sox were getting their tits lit in Texas, and he told me, "I guess I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue." Derek Lowe continues to be inconsistent, and manager Grady Little told the Boston Globe:

''Right now,'' he said, ''the biggest thing I'm looking forward to is getting the hell out of Texas.''

Trouble is already brewing between the Sox and the Boston press, according to the Boston Globe. Pedro Martinez is not talking to reporters, and now Grady Little has issued a mandate that his players only talk to the media about baseball related issues, after a definite-type-of-situation went down earlier this week.

For what it's worth, I'm sure Ed will feel just a wee-bit better when he wakes up this morning and finds out that the Yankees finally lost a game. Andy Pettitte didn't have much of anything last night, and the Angels jumped on him for six runs; the Yankee bats for once, were unable to rally, and the Yanks are no longer the best team in baseball. The best team would be your Kansas City Royals, baby. Don't throw rocks at the throne, playa.

Not for nothing, but I caught the tail end of Mike Lupica's diatribe against the Bronx Bombers last night on ESPN's the Sports Reporters II. Ostensibly, Lupica echoed what my friend John alluded to yesterday, and that is that watching the Royals win is much sweeter than the watching U.S. Steel win. I understand his point. If you are an average fan, what's not to love about the Royals winning? It's a great story. But the Yankee fan in me says, "Speak for yourself, papi." Lupica finds the Yankees to be obnoxious and joyless, which is fair enough. But that's not going to stop me from enjoying their success, no matter how high their payroll climbs. (Do I ever feel guilty about it? Sure. But it's all part of being a Yankee fan.) If you can't find any joy in watching Soriano or Bernie hit, then it's your loss, not mine. But hell, Lupica has to sell papers, I just get to root for my team.

STARTIN' SOMETHING?

Things may not look promising for the Mets this year, but at least they are only 3 games out of first place. This doesn't feel like a team that go out and win 20 of 25 games, but at least Cliff Floyd and Robbie Alomar are starting to get hot. Floyd has been pounding the ball this week, and cursing the ill winds at Shea too, as he has had several balls knocked down short of the wall, and land safely in the gloves of the opposing team. Alomar had two doubles last night and now has nine on the season (he had 24 last year). What's more impressive is that he's driving the ball in the gaps like the Robbie of old.

Last night, Pedro Astacio made him first start of the year and Mets beat the Astros, 7-4.

GETTING DEFENSIVE

David Pinto has a nice exchange with Steve Bonner regarding the Yankees defense over at Baseball Musings. Pinto opines:

Yes, the defense and bullpen is weak. But the offense and starting pitching is so strong, those weaknesses are easily covered up. Sure, they can hurt them in the post-season; in a short series weaknesses can be easily magnified. But I would expect the Yankees to address the bullpen if it continues to be an issue, and I think the offense is good enough (especially if Jeter returns and Giambi starts to hit) to cover the weak defense.

END OF THE LINE...

The Mets placed David Cone on the DL yesterday, and though nobody said it, his career could be over.

According to the New York Times:

Cone seemed surprised when asked if he would pitch again.

"I would hope so," he said yesterday. "I'm not willing to give up at this point. I'm also very much a realist. I also understand physically I need to be able to go out there and give more than I've shown so far, be more reliable and show I can hold up every five days and pitch more than five innings."

At the same time, Cone admitted:

"I've had a long, very good career," Cone said. "At this point, it'd be in bad taste to complain about anything. I've had so much good fortune in my career. This was kind of an experiment at first. It turned into a pretty darned good story and now it's questionable. I understand that.

"I knew that coming in that this would be tough, that there was going be a chance I couldn't do this physically. I still haven't conceded anything at this point."

DEAR JOHN

Here is an e-mail I got this morning from an old friend of mine, John Burdick, one of my creative writing professors when I was in college, who also happens to be a long-time Yankee fan:

Alex,

From the AP:

"New York has outhomered opponents 43-5 -- hitting the most in the major leagues and allowing the fewest. The Yankees have as many homers as Detroit has runs."
Detroit is the new or posterboy for revenue sharing, now that KC is winning games and Montreal is not so bad at all.

In last night's romp, the Yankees left 27 men on base!

Now, you know I have my reservations about all of this. My team, right or wrong, of course, but I just don't enjoy it as much when they're payroll is 30M higher than the next closest, and when the only acceptable outcome is a championship, and even that is more a cause for relief than jubilation. Honestly, I wish I were a Royals fan right now. That would be fun. So I take to following individuals more than the team. Soriano looks to be rectifying the problem that kept him from winning the MVP last year, which is to say he didn't lead the league in *every* major offensive category. He looks a little bulkier to me this year, just a little.

Now, if you subtract the salaries of Jeter, Rivera, and Karsay, maybe their payroll looks more like the Mets'. Aw hell, subtract Giambi's too, as he's hardly been better than Rey Sanchez thus far. So no doubt, they are hot, *globally* hot, and it's not just money. But be still. It's a long season. Starters will slump and go down with injuries. The bullpen is suspect, but that doesn't show when the starters are going late and the offense is simply blowing everyone away.

The luxury is that just about the time Ventura, Posada, Matsui, and Mondesi start to decline, Giambi will be himself again and Jeter will be back. Bernie and Sori are the only others who need to be themselves all year all the time.

And correct me if I'm wrong, Alex, but isn't Bernie a traditionally slow starter, like a terribly slow starter? If so, damn, maybe this is HIS MVP year. Truthfully, I always thought he had an MVP in him, if he could stay healthy and play 145+ games.

BTW, I suppose you saw that my Orangemen won the national title? Nothing, no Yankee collapse or Laker triumph, can take the smile off my face this year. This was the most unlikely and most pleasant surprise of this fan's life.

Here is another e-mail I received today; this one is from reader, Steve Bonner:

Alex, First of all thanks for the great site and keep up the good work. I think the below quote, attributed to Rick Reed in Jim Caple's column this morning, sums up the Yankees perfectly:

"I'd like to give you my glove and and you go out there and try to pitch to that lineup,'' Reed told reporters after the game. "I'm thanking God we're in the Central and not the East. That's unbelievable. Un-be-lieveable.''

Steve

I want to thank all the readers who have sent me comments on the Buster Olney interview, and I especially want to thank my fellow bloggers (and Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus) for all the plugs and kind words. All of your support is more than somewhat appreciated.

ESPN has several good pieces on the Yankees today. Darren Rovell writes about the marketing of Godzilla Matsui, and Bob Klapisch reports on the Bombers hot start.

Jason Giambi, one of the few Yankees who is not on fire these days, told Klap:

"I can't even count how many times I've taken a walk with runners on first and second, just to load up the bases for Bernie," Giambi said. "To me, being disciplined at the plate, getting on base, scoring a lot of runs, it's the most important thing."

..."As soon as some of the other guys get cold, I'm going to get hot. And then Jeter is going to be back," Giambi said. "That's what a machine does -- it never stops. That's us. This could go on all year."

ROMPER STOMPER

"The Freak," Alfonso Soriano has hit a home run to lead off a game three times this year---all in support of Roger Clemens, who earned his 297th career victory last night in the Yankees 9-2 win over the defending World Champs. Raul Mondesi added a homer of his own, and Bernie Williams had a couple of hits and a couple of RBI (he now leads the team with 22). At the rate lil' Sori and the Yankees offense is going, how long will it be before the Yankees get in their first brawl? If they don't slow down soon, it's hard to believe that the rest of the league is going to sit back and watch them roll over everyone without getting a bit nasty with them.

Soriano's brilliance is unsettling in this regard: just how long can he keep this up? Both John Sickels and Rob Neyer confirmed his status as a freak of nature last year. So the question remains: Is Soriano a great player, or the next Juan Samuel? The great Sandy Koufax spoke with Joe Torre before yesterday's game and told the Yankee manager:

"I don't think I've ever seen anybody with quicker hands than Soriano."

There is something about Soriano's blinding talent that makes me question whether it will last over five, ten years. Still, it won't stop me from appreciating every moment that little freak gives us in the meantime.

The Bombers dominating offense and sterling starting pitching has masked the team's mediocre bullpen, which is starting to look like a M*A*S*H unit. Antonio Osuna joined Mariano Rivera and Steve Karsay on the DL yesterday with a strained groin. In his place, the Yankees have called up right-hander Al Reyes, who they picked up after the Pirates released him this spring. According to the Daily News:

Reyes, a 33-year-old righty, has eight years of experience in the major leagues. His career record is 15-8 with three saves and a 4.12 ERA. In eight relief appearances at Columbus, Reyes had one save and a 1.04 ERA. He struck out 10 in 8-2/3 innings.

The young Jason Anderson now moves into Osuna's set-up role, and the Yankees better pray that their bats keep clicking with Seattle, Oakland, and Boston on the horizon.

Rivera, who was supposed to throw yesterday, pushed his outing back one day due to some general soreness and will pitch this afternoon instead. He will likely join the team next week in New York when the Yankees face Seattle and then Oakland.

Meanwhile, Billy Conners is busy working on fundamentals and mechanics with Jose Contreras in Tampa:

"This guy has very good stuff, but he's a little messed up here," said Connors, the club's minor league instructor, motioning toward his head. "He has too much pressure to perform. What everyone is hoping is that we can get him to relax a little, get some success and self-confidence and quickly get him back with the team."

Contreras is scheduled to pitch for Triple A Columbus next Tuesday.

HURTIN'

This morning I sent Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus an e-mail asking him what we should make of the Steve Karsay situation. Yesterday, the Times reported that he would likely miss the remainder of the season, but after his visit with Dr. James Andrews, the reports today are that he'll be okay....when we don't know. I'm not the swiftest cat on the block when it comes to sports medicine so I asked Will why Karsay would need two cortisone shots.

He replied:

[Karsay] needed relief in two distinct areas. NEVER a good sign and one that they're already thinking he's at significant risk. Still, it's just inflammation and not something surgical so there's still a chance he'll come back. Give him a week's rest and he can pick up his rehab again. Chance of recurrence? 100%.

Meanwhile, things are sure looking bleak over at Shea these days. David Cone left last night's game vs. the Astros after two innings with a gimpy hip, and to make matters worse, Jeromy Burnitz suffered a broken hand late in the game when he was nailed by a 97mph Billy Wagner pitch. Naturally, Burnitz had been the hottest hitter on the team.

I caught some of the game on TV last night, and after Cone was yanked, Mex Hernandez was talking about how it's probably time for Cone to hang it up. The announcers didn't know why Cone had been pulled from the game at that point, so I don't know if Mex changed his tune when he learned that Cone had been hurt. But I would doubt it.

Cone, one of the all-time stand-up guys, spoke with the media following the game:

"I don't think I can answer all the questions tonight," Cone said in reference to inquiries about a possible trip to the disabled list. "All I can say is I'm not ready to give up. It certainly was disappointing tonight. I know everybody is wondering if I can go on - or what I have left. Those are all legitimate questions. I certainly think about those things myself. But I showed enough in spring training, threw the ball well in my first start. And I know something is still there. I still believe I can help the team. I still believe I can win games. But tonight was a big setback. It's something I'm going to have to think long and hard about."

The Wilpons (Jeff and his father Fred) are going to have to think long and hard about the future of their team. I thought that Steve Phillips should have been kicked to curb along with Bobby V last year, and if anything good comes out of another misbegotten season at Shea, it will be the firing of the GM. Steve Keane, who runs The Eddie Kranpool Society, has been harping about Phillips for weeks now. For the skinny on the sorry sons of bitches from Queens, be sure and check out Steve's blog, pronto.

JETER RE-INJURED

Yeah, my heart skipped a beat too, when I recieved an e-mail carrying this subject-heading yesterday. I should have known better when I saw that it was from my ol' pal, Greg G, winner of the most obnoxious Yankee fan west of the Mississippi contest (and that's saying something). Fortunately for the Anahiem faithful, Greg G will not be attending the Yankee-Angels series this week.

After I was finished cursing him out for fooling me with his phoney headline, I must say, his e-mail made me smile:

AFTERMATH

Jose Contreras had a bullpen session for the Yankee brass in Tampa yesterday and is scheduled to pitch a simulated game on Thursday. If all goes well, Contreras will start next Tuesday night for the Columbus Clippers. While George Steinbrenner has remained mum about the subject, Joe Torre has put his beef with George behind him:

"That's as far as this is going," he said. "Yesterday was our farewell swan song for that."

Mike Lupica spoke with former Yankee manager Dallas Green, who clashed plenty with George during his stint at the helm of the Bombers in 1989. Here is Green's take on the Torre-George affair:

I feel as if I know JoeTorre pretty well, and it must have taken a hell of a lot for him to take whatever beef he has with Steinbrenner this far. Particularly because he's been the one guy in all of history who's been able to work hand in hand with George, or at least the job George wants done with the Yankees."

"One more thing," Dallas Green, now a senior adviser with the Phillies, says. "Joe Torre is not an easygoing guy, even if he comes across that way. He is a tough guy. A tough, quiet, tough guy. If he thinks he's right and you're wrong, he's not going to let go. It's why I believe that eventually he'll have a face-to-face with George and get this straightened out, at least for the time being. After the season? I don't know.

"I keep hearing he won't ever walk away from his contract. I have a feeling Joe's got enough by now. And after this season, he might have reached the point where he feels as if he's done enough. And as if he's had enough."

We will be hearing that this is Joe's last year for the next six months, so we had better get used to it. Still, Green hit the nail on the head when he said:

..."Maybe it was as simple as him sending a message to his players at the same time he was sending one to George," Green says. "There's always the understanding, in every single clubhouse, that the clubhouse is for or against the manager. I'd assume that clubhouse is stronger than ever now for Mr. Torre."

At 17-3: mission accomplished, thus far.

YANKS BOMB WORLD CHAMPS

Since I get up at six a.m. during the week, there is no way I'm going to catch any of the Yankees-Angels series. I can't just catch the first few innings, because no matter what's happening, I'll get too worked up to fall asleep. Traditionally, west coast swings have been murder for the Bronx Bombers, so I have no qualms about holding out until the morning, and discovering the results on the backpage of the tabloids on my way to the subway.

Having said that, you can imagine the spring in my step this morning when I read that the Yanks rolled over the World Champs, 8-3 last night in California. Last week, a reporter asked Joe Torre if he looked at this series as a rematch of last year's playoffs. Torre said, "Let me ask you a question: If we sweep them, do we get their World Series rings?"

Still, the Yankees manager admitted:

"It's not just another series," Torre said. "You're playing the world champions. These guys manhandled us."

Bernie Williams had two hits and two RBI, "the freak" Soriano had two hits again (and so did Giambi), and Jorge Posada added a home run to keep the conga-line moving along. Jeff Weaver wasn't sharp, but he pitched well enough to earn the victory. Yankee starters are now 15-0.

Antonio Osuna left the game in the 8th inning with a leg injury. The morning papers didn't know the seriousness of the injury. In related news, the Times reports:

Reliever Steve Karsay, who cut short a bullpen session on Monday, saw Dr. James Andrews on Tuesday in Birmingham, Ala., and received two cortisone shots in his right shoulder. Andrews found no damage to the rotator cuff, and Karsay will resume his throwing program after resting for five days. "You couldn't ask for better news, considering how long we've gone with this thing," Manager Joe Torre said. "It was worrisome."

I will put in a call to the injury guru Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus and see what he makes of the latest news on Karsay.

BUSTING OUT

Buster Olney and Mike Freeman have an front page article in The New York Times today on the state of drugs in Major League Baseball. The piece is lengthy and well-researched, though it ostensibly tells us what we already know: that athletes will do just about anything in their power to give themselves a competitive edge. What the article does shed some light on, is just how unsettled the players are about how to address the issue of drugs and drug testing. Olney and Freeman cover everything from steriods to amphetamines:

"Sooner or later, it's going to get out that there's a greenie problem, and it's a huge one," said [fomer player, Tony] Gwynn, who became the baseball coach at San Diego State after completing a 20-year career in 2001.

"Guys feel like they need an edge. It didn't seem like there was a lot of it earlier in my career, but I know that coming down to the end of my career, it was rampant on my club. I would just laugh at the guys. I'd be like: `You're 23 years old. What the heck, look at me, I'm in my late 30's, and I'm taking two aspirin and saying, let's go.' "

Union rep, Tom Glavine, disagreed:

"I have a problem with all these guys that aren't playing anymore now coming out and saying that all these problems exist," Glavine said. "If the problems were there and they were so prevalent, how come nobody said anything when they were playing?

"Is there stuff going on? Sure. Is it 50 percent? I don't think so.

As Malcom Gladwell told Rob Neyer last summer, most players have probably moved beyond steriods and are now experimenting with Human Growth Hormone, which is much harder to detect:

An aggressive drug-testing program would cut down on certain abuses, but its never going to catch everyone -- or even close to everyone. The drug-user is by definition always one step ahead of the drug-tester, since you can't develop a test for a drug until people start using it.

Does that mean we should give up? Probably. But there are two issues worth considering. The first is -- is it really true that drugs destroy the integrity of the game? Sure, everyone is hitting 40 home runs right now, but I suspect that's because hitters were quicker to pick up on the value of performance-enhancing drugs than pitchers. There's a chance that pitchers will "catch up" and bring the game back into balance.

BRONX BANTER INTERVIEW: BUSTER OLNEY

I had the opportunity to meet up with Buster Olney on Easter morning at Shea Stadium to talk about the life of a baseball beat writer. Olney covered the Yankees for the Times from 1998 through 2001, and currently writes about the New York football Giants. We spoke for about 40 minutes in the chilly Shea Stadium parking lot, and I found him to be an engaging and bright guy.

I hope you enjoy our conversation.

The following interview was conducted on April 20, 2003.

Bronx Banter: Could you tell us how you became a beat writer?

Buster: When I was fifteen years old, Red Smith, who worked at the New York Times, came to the high school where I was and spoke there. Some of the English teachers knew that I was a sports nerd, so they kinda set it up so that I would sit next to him [Smith] at this dinner. And so we talked. That was about the age when I was starting to come to grips with the idea that I'm not going to play second base for the Dodgers. Or play right field. Or play for the Lakers.

BB: Where did you grow up?

Buster: In Vermont.

BB: So what's with the Lakers and Dodgers?

Buster: I read a book on Sandy Koufax when I was six and I became an L.A. fan. So anyway after I talked to Red Smith, it just kinda like popped into my head. I'd like to write [about sports]. You know, I was terrible.

BB: Terrible at sports?

Buster: Terrible at writing. But I loved sports. I was completely into it and it seemed like a natural thing for me to do, so I started working at my high school paper a couple of months later. And it's just what I wanted to do. Growing up I wanted to work at either the New York Times or the Boston Globe, and cover Major League Baseball, because that was always my love.

BB: How long did it take you before you reached the Times?

Buster: Aaah shoot, let me think here. I got there when I was 33 years old. So it was 17 years. I went to college at Vanderbilt; I worked at the Nashville Banner. My first regular, professional job. And then I worked four-and-a-half years for the San Diego Union, which merged into the Union-Tribune. I covered triple A baseball in '89 and '90 for the Nashville Banner. Keith Lockhart and Chris Hammond were two of the guys on that team that year. Then I covered the Padres in '93 and '94 for San Diego; covered the Orioles in '95 and '96.

BB: The Alomar years.

Buster: The whole spitting incident, yeah. And Ripken breaking the [consecutive games played] record in '95. It was an interesting two years, although they were by far the least favorite team of all the teams I've covered.

BB: Were there just too many sour personalities?

Buster: The sour personalities weren't as problematic for me as the number of guys who dogged it. There were players on the team that on a daily basis dogged it. And it was awful to watch. You know, people always figure since you cover the Yankees it's great because the team wins. I don't really care if the team wins, I care about writing interesting stories and there has to be an essential integrity to what you're watching on a daily basis. When I covered the Padres in '93, this was a team that lost 101 games, but the players made you care some. I mean here were these young guys that didn't know what they were doing, but they were great to watch. And obviously the Yankees were great to watch. I covered the Mets in '97 for the Times and then from '98 to 2001, I covered the Yankees.

BB: But you didn't grow up as a Yankee fan.

Buster: No, I hated them.

BB: Did that affect you when you covered them?

Buster: Well, the fan had gotten beat out of me¡¦well, not beaten out of me, that sounds too dramatic. It's just that you're training is to try and look objectively at things. Ah, when I met Tommy Lasorda when I was in Nashville in 1988 that pretty much took away my fan experience. You know I was a Dodgers fan, and he wasn't what anyone would have imagined. He was rather crass. That reinforced the notion that these guys¡¦You come to look at athletes as people you have to work with.

BB: How adversarial is your relationship with the players?

Buster: I think it's a lot different than people¡¦You know people by and large think baseball players are jerks. I think they are like any other group of 25 people, in any job: You like fifteen of them, don't have an opinion of eight of them, and can't stand two of them. That's the way it was for me. I found that players 95% of the time were very easy to deal with. I didn't run into too many difficult players over the years. You know Bip Roberts was difficult at times; Cal was difficult, when I was covering the Orioles. There were situations that would come up that would make a player more difficult, not necessarily the player itself, but like Knoblauch, on a daily basis would have to talk about his throwing problem. It became a little tough to deal with him, but you know, I don't really blame him. That's tough [not being able to throw]. I think that's one thing. People have to remember that these are guys, going to do their jobs on a daily basis, and I know that I have difficult days, and I can be moody. If some guy was a jerk on a given day, I just brushed it off and went on to the next day.

BB: What is the relationship like between you and the other beat writers?

Buster: Adversarial. My theory is that writers spend too much time talking to each other. My philosophy was to always be polite to everybody, I would never try to prevent anyone else from doing their jobs, I wouldn't like talk to other players about writers, or try to plant seeds, or try and do anything underhanded.

BB: I just read Bob Klapisch and John Harper's book about the 1992 Mets, "The Worst Team Money Can Buy," and they painted a tense portrait of the working relationship between that Mets team and the media. Was that your experience as well working the beat in New York, or was it just about that particular team?

Buster: I think so. Every team is going to have its guys that are difficult to cover, but that was a unique team. The worst thing to cover is a bad, veteran team, because the players are so cynical, the writers are cynical. Usually, the players are not playing that hard, because they are not excited. They probably recognize much earlier than a younger player would, how bad they are. Reading that book, and knowing some of the personalities¡¦You know Eddie Murray. At that time Brett Saberhagen [was] definitely immature. After a while, you can see the difference between you and the players. There's no question that in a sense it's a young man's business. When I was covering the Padres a lot of the players were my age. Now some of these guys you have in the clubhouse---

BB: Like Soriano.

Buster: Yeah, Soriano. When I started covering baseball he was like twelve, thirteen years old. I've had the experience of going through a number of different situations in seeing how players handle things. Let me give you an example. Randy Keisler was pitching for the Yankees [This was in 2001] and he had a bad game, and he was very emotional, and he basically ripped Stottlemyre and Torre saying, ¡®They didn't have faith in me.' It's my job as a reporter to ask the player his opinion. It's not my job to protect him from his own opinion. I remember sitting there, listening to this and thinking, oh you dumb schmuck. {ItaliCS}. But, hey, you know, you are supposed to report what the player is feeling. And there are times, as I get older, you definitely develop an instinct for, this is what you should say, this is what would probably be best, but you can't inject yourself that way.

BB: That kind of outburst was rare on the David Cone Yankees.

Buster: I think that Cone clearly was a guy who always knew how to deal with the press. Think of the players involved. Jeter is very savvy. He's intentionally boring, I think. He tones down his opinions because he knows how dangerous is can be for a player like him to go too far out on a limb. He's careful. O'Neil was great if the team played bad, because he would just indict himself. But if they played well, he would he would run away from you because he was superstitious and thought if he said anything, he'd blow it.

BB: What about Bernie?

Buster: Bernie doesn't like dealing with the media that much. I mean, he kinda runs, and when you get him, he's gracious. But there were definitely times when he would run out of the clubhouse. I think Cone provided a lot of cover for those guys because he would come out and make himself completely available. If he wasn't a pitcher he'd probably be the Whitehouse spokesman. I mean the guy could spin, and he was a talent, and Joe [Torre] could do the same thing. I think there was a tremendous amount of mutual respect for the players, and because Joe never blew up an issue. You know when Steinbrenner would say something inflammatory---he'd rip a player, rather than roll his eyes, or give a response that would escalate the situation, Joe would just it in place: Mr. Steinbrenner is the boss, and blah, blah, blah. One thing that is really important to players now is they want to hear from the manager first, rather than reporters, what an impending move, or their standing [is] and Joe uniformly, talked to the players before they talked to us. And that wasn't always great for us, I mean we wanted to get the information, but it was a tremendous way for Joe to maintain respect among the players.

BB: You know there was a lot of talk about how the clubhouse was different last year after losing Martinez, and Paulie O, and Brosius, even Knobolauch. But the other night I was watching Matsui sitting on the bench next to Todd Zeile and Robin Ventura, and I think they pick up where the old guys left off, in terms of providing a steady, veteran professionalism.

Buster: I think Matsui would have definitely fit in on that old Yankee team. Last year they got away from it, and lost their soul.

BB: Can you pinpoint what it was that was tangibly different?

Buster: Mondesi came in, and has a reputation as a guy who is very active off the field. And that's pretty different from what they had. You know his approach to hitting was you know¡¦.

BB: Dude is a hacker.

Buster: The thing that I remember about last year is the way Joe dealt with Giambi was very different than what I had been around.

BB: With kit gloves?

Buster: A little bit. Joe is always focusing on ways of winning, so in other words if he thought Cecil Fielder gave the Yankees a better chance to win than Tino Martinez in the '96 Series, he would put Cecil Fielder in the game. Strawberry would start one game; Raines would start another. And the players accepted it. With Giambi last year, I don't think there is a question that they are better team defensively with Nick Johnson at first base. It was interesting to see Joe, rather then at some point go to Giambi and say, 'We're a better team with you as a designated hitter,' and Nick Johnson as a first baseman. He never really did that. Giambi had good hands and no range. And he's not a very good defensive first baseman. And I'm curious to see if that takes place at some point. But that was a different type of thing from what I had seen with the Yankees.

BB: How much of a difference was there between the Mets and Yankees clubhouses?

Buster: The culture was definitely different. It's night and day. Joe, I think has a lot of players that he doesn't like. It's not players he doesn't like. For instance: Wells. I don't think he's going to be going out to dinner with Wells when he retires, but Joe realizes how to deal with a situation in a professional manner. With Bobby, I always thought he was superior to Joe in terms of in-game preparation. But in terms of managing people, he didn't do it as well. And that filtered over into the clubhouse. And I really believe this. I don't think the Mets have had good leadership in their clubhouse. They don't have leadership personalities.

BB: What's the deal with Mo? He was always known as a clubhouse guy in Boston. Is it all about having to produce?

Buster: Yes. He's a terrible player for the Mets. And because he is a terrible player, if he says anything, it kinda bounces off hollow walls.

BB: Isn't that what happened with Cone during his disastrous 2001 season?

Buster: I think so. Well, he felt that way; I don't think the other players felt that way. But he understood it because he had been around long enough. At the end of that year he had really toned it down in terms of talking [to the media] because he felt like he didn't have the credibility. And that's an important part of it.

BB: Do you think Bobby V's arrogance can be attributed to the fact that he's younger than Torre?

Buster: No. Joe suppresses a lot. I've heard about meetings between him and Steinbrenner where he basically picks and chooses his spots. Bobby is a guy who if he was a solider, would be in the front lines, always involved, always engaged. Joe is much more calculated. Bobby is quicker to react.

BB: Do you think Torre's years as a television broadcaster helped him understand the media angle better?

Buster: He says it did. But from my understanding of Joe, that's how he always was. Where as when you think about Bobby's history, you see that he was class president, ballroom dancing champion---

BB: Pancake-eating champ.

Buster: Yeah, he's out front on everything. 9-11, he was out there, all the time, trying to do things. He likes to be right out front. When he managed in the American League with the Rangers the other managers referred to him as ¡®Top Step,' because he was always on the top step of the dugout. Now, you could look at it and say he's only in it for his own ego, but after being around him, I think that's just the way he is. He likes to be out front.

BB: He's perfect for TV.

Buster: Yes.

BB: He's got the charm and the ego for it.

Buster: Ego, not so much. You could argue it's ego, but Bobby doesn't mind having his opinions known, and I think Joe picks and chooses his spots.

BB: Is Michael Piazza an easy guy to work with?

Buster: The beat writers like him a lot. This year, there is the perception that he isn't enjoying himself as much has in the past. But I know the beat writers think he's a terrific guy.

BB: You mentioned earlier that the relationship between beat writers is basically adversarial, was it the same way between writers at the Times, or were you guys all allies?

Buster: Definitely allies. I loved working with those guys. For instance when I covered the Yankees, Jack Curry and I would talk all the time, go through ideas, do a lot of sharing. The columns, the same way. If I heard something I'd tell Tyler [Kepner, now the main Yankee beat writer for the Times].

BB: How much did you learn from Murray Chass?

Buster: A ton.

BB: He's the Yankee Don, right?

Buster: I think there are two essential pioneers in our business. One of them is Murray, who was the first to really delve into the financial side of baseball. Think about how much is written on contracts and negotiations and stuff. I think that all started with Murray. And then you have Peter Gammons. He was the first to do a Sunday notebook. Which has now become a staple. Think about being a baseball fan, being excited, waking up Sunday morning, reading the baseball notes. Peter essentially invented that, and I think that the thing I've always admired about Peter is that he likes people. I know this, because I fell into this trap---and we all do---but Peter managed to stay out of it. He understands that you have to give people some space. You have to give players some space. And he hasn't gotten into the trap, even though he's almost 60 years old, of saying all ballplayers are jerks. He basically treats them as individuals and gives them the benefit of the doubt.

BB: Is Gammons widely admired amongst the baseball writers?

Buster: I think that most people that know him have enormous respect for him, yeah.

BB: How well did you work with the other guys at the paper?

Buster: Our paper was great. You hear stories. And that can come and go. Like when I worked in Baltimore, with Kenny Rosenthal. I loved working with Kenny. He had enormous energy: he could compliment what I did, I could compliment what he did. He could feed me stuff, I could feed him stuff, and it was totally wide open. Where you run into problems---and I never had this at the Times---is when the beat writer keeps stuff, hoards stuff away from the columnists. At the same time, if the columnist is not open to the beat writer, it's the same thing. And I never understood that because a beat writer is going to help the columnist, and vice versa. It seems silly to me when I've heard stories about that, but that happens.

BB: Do you enjoy baseball more now that you are not covering the beat anymore? Now that you do weekend-fill-in stints.

Buster: I always enjoyed it. I never lost---I love to come to the park, and I love to watch the games. And that never waned. The only thing that became extremely difficult was being away from home. Going away for ten days, two weeks, coming back, and your child is a different person than when you left. [Olney has a three-and-a-half year old daughter] But in terms of coming to the park, sitting down, starting up the pitch chart that I would keep, I loved doing that. I love watching sequences of pitches, seeing what the pitchers are trying to do. I'm probably watching more baseball now than I ever have.

BB: You got the dish?

Buster: Oh, yeah. Direct TV. Flip back and forth between games. Let's see what Brad Radke's doing. You know it's neat being able to see the Kansas City Royals. Because let's face it, where I grew up we didn't have a television. Everything I got was on radio. And if I saw a baseball highlight it was like a UFO sighting. And now, you can sit there and click through all these different games, and it's pretty neat.

BB: Did growing up with baseball on the radio force you as a writer to pay greater attention to detail?

Buster: I would guess that is true. Ned Martin and Jim Woods were the Red Sox radio broadcasters. And I never got more excited---you ask me about being a fan, and there are times I walk up to players like Reggie Jackson, who I rooted against as a kid, it's a benign experience to me now. But when I saw Ned Martin, I almost tackled him; I was so excited to see him. I think I scared him. Thank you Mr. Martin, so much, I learned so much about baseball from you . We used to have a silver radio that we would carry around---I grew up on a dairy farm, and we had a silver radio, about four inches by six inches. And I would just take that with me, through hay fields, on the tractor, shoveling manure, stacking wood. That's what I would do all day. At nights, I would listen to WDEV in Waterbury, Vermont and the signal would go dim at eight o'clock. So I would try to pick up games from other cities. CAU in Philadelphia. I heard some Expos games on the French stations. I don't understand a word of French, but I got to know the scores, and I learned the numbers so I could pick up the scores. It was funny I had a hard time picking up Yankee games, but I could pick up the Phillies, Orioles. I remember one game, it must have been a weird atmospheric thing, I actually got a Mariners game. And I don't know why. But for about an hour I got the bounce, all the way across the country.

BB: You grew up in Red Sox country. Do you root for the Sox?

Buster: No, I was actually a huge Dodgers fan. Psycho Dodgers fan. I followed the Red Sox because that's the team I could listen to on the radio. And you know, I wanted them to win the '75 World Series; made bets with my teachers. Going to Fenway Park¡¦you know, that my Mecca. Going to games. But I didn't quite catch that sickness. And that's quite a relief. I can imagine going through my whole life thinking, there's no way one of my teams is going to win a World Series.

BB: Well, what are they going to do with themselves when they do win a World Series?

Buster: They won't.

BB: They won't?

Buster: No. (Laughs)

BB: Will a Chicago team win the World Series before the Sox do?

Buster: Before the Red Sox, yeah. No, I'm kidding. No, they obviously have a good team this season. But it's part of the culture that they won't [win a Championship]. It's part of the culture that they'll fail. In some ways it's reassuring. I've met Chicago Cub fans, whose team does badly, and they seem relish that a little bit. Oh, yeah the Cubs stink . Where as the Red Sox fans are like, every year: This is the year! . It's reassuring that have it there. It's like a prisoner with like a life sentence or a death sentence, waking up in the morning thinking: I'm going to get out! I'm going to get out!

BB: It seems to me that the baseball life can be and extremely lonely one. The constant travel. It must affect the writers just as it does the players. Did you have some sort of empathy with what players go through in this regard, or them with you, for that matter?

Buster: No. In the years that I covered the team I think I had two players ask me about my family, or knew something about my family, period. I mean it's a totally one-way relationship. It didn't bother me too much, and I think the reason why is because I grew up in such a small town. I would basically be alone on the farm for three months at a time. It doesn't bother me to be alone. But I do think it does--and I don't know what it is, and I haven't been able to define it--but it does something to your personality that makes most of the relationships you are in, totally one-way. I think what covering baseball does actually, is it takes away your own empathy. Because when you walk up to a player, it's so much about them, it's all about them, it's all about them. Some days they are a little bit annoyed that you are asking questions about them. And I found myself toward the end of my being a beat writer, feeling that way toward people in my life.

BB: They are always interviewing you.

Buster: They're asking about me, and I was so busy, that I would be like: You know, I'm really busy . I don't know exactly how to define it, but I know that now that I've been off the beat, I can see how the life can skew your personality if you do it for too long. There is something unhealthy about living your whole life where everybody in your life, you focus on them, and they aren't interested in you. Not that they should be.

BB: You get about as much love as an unsolicited shrink.

Buster: Yeah, right. Exactly. I'm not complaining about it. It's not like it bothered me that players didn't ask me. But it's part of the dynamics and it's odd. It's odd. It's not normal. If I worked with you in an office and I got to know you, I would know if one of your kids was born, even if we weren't good friends. I would still know that; send a card, wish you Merry Christmas and that type of thing. And it just didn't exist that way. If you think about it, you deal with these guys and you know so much about them. You know their personal lives, you know how much they are making, their moods, their mood swings, and they don't know anything about you.

BB: Nor do they care.

Buster: No.

BB: Even Torre and these guys? The coaches.

Buster: I mean they may know you from your writing. But you know I had a child when I was on the beat, and nobody asked me about it or said anything. It's not a complaint, it's just the way it is.

BB: How do you find football players to be different from baseball players?

Buster: Well, there is definitely a harder line of us against them [in football]. I think baseball players generally view the writers as colleagues. It's like Hey, howya doing . You walk up to Mike Stanton, How you doing tonight? Yeah, tough game. With football players, it's like climbing over the wall to see their personality. The access you have in baseball is great. You have three-and-a-half hours before the game, lots of time after the game. In football, it's 45 minutes. You are rushing around, you don't have any time to say to a player, How you doing? And I've probably felt that type of connection with Tikki Barber, Strahan a little bit. A couple of the guys: Jason Garrett, who is the back-up quarterback. But it's much more difficult to get that in football. I understand why the NFL does it, because they want to keep that hard line. But I think people don't understand the personalities like we do in baseball and I think that is a detriment. Think about how much we learned about someone like Clemens, or Cone, or Brosius or O'Neill, because of the time that writers got to be able to know these guys.

BB: Are you going to stay with football for the foreseeable future?

Buster: You know the dynamics of it, where you cover the same players and only have sixteen games to write about? I don't see myself doing it for the rest of my life, that's for sure. I can see two or three years.

BB: Would you like to go back to baseball as a columnist?

Buster: I think that's Times choice. I love covering baseball, but I really love covering the NFL. I love the strategy, I love trying dissect that. There was a lot of stuff that happened in the games that was fun to explore like baseball was fun to explore. I loved covering the Giants last year, I just can't see doing it for a long time.

BB: Could the paper just up and put you on the NBA beat if they wanted to?

Buster: It's the same thing as baseball. The travel. In theory I would love to cover the NBA. I covered a ton of college basketball, the southeastern conference. So I love basketball, but the travel is brutal.

BB: Who was the best baseball player you covered while working on the beat?

Buster: The best player that I ever saw was Robbie Alomar in the first half of the '96 season. Every day the guy invented ways to win games. He was incredible. Then he broke he was thumb midway through that year, but for those three months, he was the best player I have ever seen. Deon Sanders is the fastest player I ever saw. There is no doubt that the most winning player was Jeter. I mean he just had an enormous prescence.

BB: When did the Yankee team look at Jeter like OK, he's the one?

Buster: See I don't know, cause I wasn't doing the Yankees until '98. I don't know if it was there right away.

BB: Was it there in '98?

Buster: Oh yeah. He had established himself as being a guy who cared a lot, but they could see that in '94, '95 when they saw him in spring training.

BB: We know Jeter's defensive numbers don't stack up. And there are several guys at his position who are superior offensively. So you try and rate him, and he may be the forth or fifth best shortstop in the game, but he may be his team's most valuable player, in spite of how well the Yankees have played without him.

Buster: Except for Rivera. I think a lot of the players on the other teams believe that Rivera is essentially the difference between the Yankees winning two championships and winning four or five. Because the Yankees had what other teams didn't have: a closer who would not lose in the ninth inning. He has this very calm demeanor but he is unbeliebably competitive. The purest confidence I ever saw in any player I was around came from Rivera and Jeter. I mean it wasn't even close. The classic thing about Rivera is when he gave up the homer to [Sandy] Alomar ['97 playoffs], the next year, you had the stereotypical story for every writer: Was this thing that was going to devastate Rivera? Would he have a Donnie Moore moment and never come back? So we watched him answer all theses questions, over and again as all the different writers came into the city, and he was very genteel about it. He always answered all the questions. And I said, ¡®It really doesn't bother you, does it?' Then he explained to me what he believed in his heart, or what he'd convinced himself, is that Sandy Alomar was lucky that he was pitching. Against any other pitcher, he never would have hit a home run. Because Rivera throws so hard, and throws it out over the plate, Alomar sticks his bat out, gets it off the middle of the bat, it flies into the stands. So Rivera thinks that even though he lost the game, he was in control of the situation. That's pretty rare. And he and Jeter are the only two players I saw that were like that. And actually, Jeremy Shockey, the Giants tight end has some of those same traits. You can see it right away; he thought he could control situations. O'Neill was a great player, and Cone was a great player, and so was Clemens, but they don't they didn't have that same level of confidence.

BB: Did Reggie Jackson have it?

Buster: I don't know. No, I don't think he did. There were times when he would struggle for two or three months at a time. I would guess not, but I can't really answer that.

BB: You mentioned that Robbie Alomar at one point was the greatest player you ever saw. When you see him know is it just a totally different guy?

Buster: Totally. Completely different. He can be a very moody player. I think that the Hirschbeck incident took a lot of his energy out of the game. I know he hated being booed, he hated the way people felt about him. You know he was public enemy number 1 for a couple of years. Every park that the Orioles went to, he got booed.

BB: What exactly did Hirshbeck say to him?

Buster: The situation was, it was late in the year, and the Orioles needed to win the game. It was a very tense game. In an important moment, Robbie complained about a call, went back to the dugout, and Robbie said, ¡®Just pay attention to the game.' Then Hirschbeck threw him out. He came on the field, Robbie's going nuts. [Baltimore manager] Davey Johnson asks Hirshbeck, ¡®Why did you throw my best player out of the game?' And he said, ¡®I don't care about that motherfucker, he's outta here.' Robbie w