Baseball Toaster Bronx Banter
Log in | Register | Help
Monthly archives: February 2004

 

Yankee Preview Sunday: Roundtable Discussion
2004-02-29 00:15
by Alex Belth

The Flip Side

Part One, Side B

BB: Jason Giambi hasn't been embraced by New Yorkers in spite of two impressive offensive campaigns in pinstripes. Has the criticism been unfair? How much pressure do you think Giambi is facing going into the 2004 season? Does he get a pass now that Rodriguez and Sheffield are here to help? Short of the Yanks winning a championship, what will it take for him to be accepted by Yankee fans?


Larry Mahnken: Of course the criticism of Giambi is unfair. The man was one of the top ten hitters in baseball last season despite being injured all year, and is the best hitter the Yankees have had since Mickey Mantle. He hit two home runs off of Pedro in Game Seven, for goodness sake! Giambi will have a lot of outside pressures applied to him, but I don't think he'll let it get to him. How he plays in 2004 depends a lot more on his knee than his response to pressure. I don't think having A-Rod and Sheffield here help take pressure off. With the added offensive punch, Giambi will be looked up to put up even bigger numbers, because he'll be "protected".

Tim Marchman: Giambi symbolizes the moment when the Yankees went completely overboard, and so he’ll never get any love from New York. I never think criticism of a player (as opposed to his play, a big distinction) is fair so long as he gives his best effort, which Giambi seems to have done. Pressure or no, he’s ageing and frequently injured, and I see no reason to think he’ll be more than a hitter with a .900 OPS. Without defense or speed that’s not an MVP candidate, which is what he was sold as. The expectation that he would continue to have seasons like he did his last two years in Oakland was unrealistic, but he doesn’t need to perform like that to be an asset to the team.

Buster Olney: I think Giambi will be helped out greatly by the addition of A-Rod and Sheffield, because it will take some heat off him. But in the end, he'll be targeted again, because of his defense (which is terrible) and his growing problems on offense, which are exacerbated by the fact that he's not a very good athlete and he has physical problems. I don't think he'll ever be really loved by Yankees fans, because now, if they win another title, Alex will get much of the credit.

Joe Sheehan: I'm not sure exactly what Giambi would have to have done for the criticism to *not* be unfair. The guy has been one of the top players in the league in every year as a Yankee. I think, to a certain extent, the pressure's off him, as pressure tends to shift to new guys. (Caveat: I don't think Giambi has been on steroids, but if that turns out the be the case, all bets are off.) So yes, Rodriguez, Sheffield, Brown, Vazquez...all these guys deflect the pressure.
By the way, isn't this an old conversation? Wasn't Giambi accepted when he hit the grand slam against the Twins in the rain? Maybe he should have been accepted when he hit two home runs off Pedro Martinez to keep the Yankees in a game they were well on their way to losing. I don't know. Maybe he has to build the Jets a new stadium by hand, craft and present the city's bid for the 2012 Olympics, and use his wealth to subsidize free rides on the C, D and 4 lines for the next 15 years.

Joel Sherman: I think Giambi is the poster child - in many ways - for the fight between strict adherence to statistical analysis and factoring in non-quantative issues. There is no doubt that Giambi still has great value as an offensive player due to his patient/power combo. But he has been a lesser player with the Yankees than he was in his final three seasons with Oakland. The dramatic increase in strikeouts should worry the Yankees. So should the knee problem. This is an injury that has been likened to the one that forced Mark McGwire's retirement and the Yankees do have five years left on this contract. His ties to McGwire, his bulked-up body, his insistence on having a personal trainer accompany him at all times and his summoning to testify for the Balco grand jury also puts him in a dubious light when it comes to illegal performance enhancers. Is that fair? Perhaps not, but we would just all have our heads in the sand to not notice this accumulation of information and the potential distractions and detractions to Giambi's game.

Giambi also was brought here with the idea he had leadership skills. That is just not the case. He is often an island or simply missing in action. That does not mean he is hurting the team, simply that he has shunned an opening to step forward and do more. In all these regards, I think no Yankee benefits more from having Alex Rodriguez on the team than Giambi. It is a distraction away from the Balco story, at least until more stuff hits the fan. It lessens Giambi's need to hurry into the batting order if his knee is not ready and no longer is his unwillingness to step forward as leader/spokesman as great a factor.


Glenn Stout: If he was really hurting, then of course the criticism isn’t fair – if he was jaking it, the criticism was deserved. We’ll never know. Of course the wild-card with him is the whole steroid issue. A-Rod and Sheffield should help him, but no one is going to be happy if he hits .250 again. I’d rather see him hit over .300 with 25 HRs and 40-50 doubles and strike out less. Last year it looked as if he got totally homer happy, but then again, no one else but Posada was hitting home runs.

BB: Who will have the better season: Pettitte or Vasquez? Clemens or Brown.


Larry Mahnken: If you're trying to ask who'll have the better ERA, I think it's very tight, and it's tough to pick one over the other. However, the question behind the question is whether the Yankees would have been better
off with Pettitte and Clemens or Vazquez and Brown. If you put it into that context, I think there's no question that Vazquez and Brown will outperform their
predecessors. The Yankees' defense will hurt them, and the Astros' defense will help Clemens and Pettitte, so the numbers might not reflect that.

Tim Marchman: Vasquez will easily have a better season than Pettitte. I think Brown will be better per inning than Clemens, but pitch a lot fewer innings.

Buster Olney: Vazquez will thrive, more than Pettitte. Clemens will stay healthier than Brown and win a few more games.

Alan Schwarz: I think they're all pretty darned even, Pettitte and Clemens moving to Minute Maid of course poses questions. Brown, if healthy, a huge if, will be the best of the bunch.

Joe Sheehan: Vazquez over Pettitte is an easy call. Deciding which old pitcher will stay healthier isn't. I'll say Clemens, but without much conviction.

Joel Sherman: This is a real good question, and probably one that will more determine if the Yanks do great things this year than anything involving A-Rod. Whether Vasquez and Brown outdo the men they are replacing is not as significant as them simply having very good years. I, for one, believe the switch from NL to AL is a dramatic one. There are just less outs in the lineup and I think it takes a toll on starters mentally and physically. I keep hearing Vasquez is a tough-minded guy. Well, we are going to find out. We know Brown is tough-minded, the question is whether he is tough body. If you absolutely forced me to guess - and it is a totally a guess - I would say Pettitte will outdo Vasquez and Brown will outdo Clemens.

Glenn Stout: I think "better season" needs defined. Ballpark and league differences could result in Pettitte/Clemens having better raw numbers, but in general I think Vasquez/Brown will do better for the Yankees in 2005 than a combo of Pettitte and Clemens would. I don’t think the Astros will be all that good, really – their younger players and vets aren’t really dove-tailing.

BB: Will Mike Mussina win 20 games? If not, will he at least win 15 games again? How close is Mussina to being a Hall of Famer?


Larry Mahnken: In a just world, Mike Mussina would win 20 games. He's one of the top 15 pitchers in baseball, and he's supported by one of the best offenses. Hopefully, Kenny Lofton will take over for Bernie in center, which should lower Mussina's ERA. I think there's a 50/50 chance he'll win 20, and a 99% chance he'll win 15, barring injury. As for the Hall, I think Mussina is 51 victories, or three seasons away from becoming a lock for Cooperstown. 250 victories isn't impressive on it's own, but with only 110 losses so far, Mussina is one of the most consistent winners of the past 10 years. He won't get shafted like Blyelven, because he's not going to lose 250 games, too.

Tim Marchman: I think he’ll win from 15 to 20 games like he does every year. To my mind, he’s already a Hall of Famer of the Jim Bunning class if he retires tomorrow; it’s not his fault that he’s been overshadowed by some of the greatest pitchers to ever live, or that he’s pitched in a DH league in an extreme hitter’s era. To my mind the question is whether he can get up into the Jim Palmer class of the Hall.

Buster Olney: Two more great seasons, where he starts to approach 240 wins, and I think Mussina will get into serious Hall of Fame range. He'll win 20 this year.

Joe Sheehan: Yes, because he's probably due for a lucky year in which he gets run support. I'm picking him for AL Cy Young (not news, I pick him about every other year) and could see him go nuts, 25-3 or something. By merit, that year would probably push Mussina into the Hall. In reality, the standards for starting pitchers have become a little weird, so it's not clear what they need to do to be Hall of Famers going forward. Mussina is going to look a lot like Tom Glavine, with a bit more value but less shiny things on the resume. Not good.

Joel Sherman: I think Mike Mussina rolls out of bed with 15 wins. He should have been a 20-game winner a few times in his career. As far as stuff goes, there are few pitchers that combine his arsenal and intellect. When he fails, I believe, he is just thinking too darn much. The Hall of Fame question is an intriguing one because, of course, many voters are going to look for 20-win seasons. But he does have eight top six finishes in Cy Young voting. I think he is going to need many more people who do statistical analysis to come into the electorate who honor how much better than league average he has been throughout his career. Without that, I think he falls into the Bert Blyleven netherworld.

Glenn Stout: If he’s ever going to win twenty, this should be the year. He sort of needs that to move out of the longevity HoF group of pitcher, but then I think the HoF is rather meaningless anyway. Tom Yawkey is in the Hall of Fame, for crying out loud.

BB: Do you see Jose Contreras as the x-factor in the Yankees starting rotation?


Larry Mahnken: Contreras isn't just the pivot of the rotation, he's one of the crucial factors in the AL East race. If Contreras is the ace the Yankees hope he is, then they'll be dancing with the Red Sox for the division title right down to the wire. If he's inconsistent and rarely dominant, then the Yankees have to hope that Brown and Lieber stay healthy and pitch their best. If he's hurt or mediocre at best, then they'll be eating Boston's dust and fighting it out with Oakland and Anaheim for the last playoff spot.

Tim Marchman: I see Randy Johnson as the x-factor in the rotation. Contreras can, I think, be reasonably expected to pitch from 150-200 innings of league average ball. He might well do better than that, but that’s all the club needs him to do.

Buster Olney: I think Lieber is the X-factor, whereas Contreras will be like Hideki Irabu in '98 and '99: He'll dominate mediocre and bad teams and get frazzled against good teams.

Joel Sherman: I think just about everyone in the Yankee rotation is an X-factor, accept perhaps their near sure thing in Mussina. But, yes, Contreras is vital. I am still wondering if he is not a set-up man. I wonder if he has the endurance to make 30 starts. He has very good stuff. But we will have to see that he can apply that over a full season.

Glenn Stout: I still think, in the long run, he’ll prove to be a more important player for NY than Matsui.

BB: How do you think Bernie Williams will adapt to being a designated hitter? Will Kenny Lofton's presence distract him or inspire him? How close is Williams to being a Hall of Famer? What does he need to do to qualify?


Larry Mahnken: Bernie has undoubtedly been underappreciated by the Yankees in his career, but I think he's somewhat used to it now. Proud as he is, I don't think he is upset at how the move from center was handled, and Torre's decision to let him fight to keep his job will probably help smooth the transistion for him. I think Bernie Williams needs to get at least 500 more hits and 60 HRs while staying over .300 for his career to get serious consideration for Cooperstown. Four rings, and maybe more before he's done certainly help his case, but I think he's borderline at best.


Tim Marchman: Whether he adapts well to being a DH has to do, I think, with whether his injury problems are solved by moving him out of the field. He’s quite capable of having a 7-year run where he’s a hitter of near-Edgar Martinez quality. No idea how upset he is about being moved, but he’s been a great hitter for a long time and I’d expect him to hit as well as he’s physically able; his seasonal numbers were, until last year, incredibly consistent for someone with such a reputation for being a flake. His numbers are in the grey area for the Hall, and the 6 pennants and 4 rings are a significant argument for his inclusion. I think he’ll eventually get in, probably as a Veteran’s Committee selection.

Buster Olney: Bernie needs some more volume to go into Hall of Fame consideration, and whatever Lofton's role, Bernie will figure it out and be at peace with it. A more serious question is how his shoulders will hold up -- and whether they will hold up. He's got a lot of mileage.

Joe Sheehan: I don't think Lofton's presence will matter at all. This is largely speculation, but Williams strikes me as a very self-aware man. I can't imagine he doesn't understand that he's better off not playing center field at this point in his career, and his body's age. If Williams isn't a Hall of Famer, I propose that the pile of bricks out by Glimmerglass Lake with the plaques be converted into low-cost housing. Or maybe a Wal-Mart.

Joel Sherman: I think Bernie will end up playing the majority of his games in center field. Joe Torre is going to need his clubhouse lieutenants more than ever this year and he is not going to disrespect Bernie if Bernie shows Torre in spring that his knee is fine. Kenny Lofton is going to end up on the bench a lot if Travis Lee plays first base. I see Lofton getting traded in July as part of a deal for a player of some money that the Yankees need.

BB: Theo Epstein and Billy Beane are the two most celebrated general managers in the game right now. Is there any doubt that Brian Cashman belongs in their company?


Larry Mahnken: Yes, there certainly is doubt. Cashman is a very good general manager, but the Yankees have made some questionable moves under his watch. You can blame all of those moves on Steinbrenner, but one has to ask why Cashman didn't find alternate, superior solutions to the problems that led George to make those moves before it ever came to that. I don't think the Yankees should fire Cashman on his own merit, but if Billy Beane was willing to work in The Bronx, I'd dump Cashman in a second. He's good, but he's not THAT good.in the elevator.

Tim Marchman: Epstein and Beane have no world championships between them, and I think they would say that means the question is whether they belong in his company. As for Cashman, the obvious problems appraising him are that the Yankees are run by committee, and that he can go out and get Alex Rodriguez if his third baseman tears up his knee. We’ll have to see Cashman in full charge of a team other than the Yankees to fairly judge his ability. For what it’s worth I find John Schuerholz to be by far the most impressive GM in baseball, the only clear Hall of Famer currently running a team.

Buster Olney: Cashman has four rings. Theo has done a great job, and so has Billy, and between them, their teams have won one postseason series, let alone a World Series. The question should be whether those guys belong in the same breath as Cashman.

Alan Schwarz: "Celebrated" basically means media hype. The jobs each of them have are vastly different, and I don't think it's truly reasonable to compare them. And Epstein has only been on the job for a little over a year.

Joe Sheehan: Sure. Why the hell would you let the guys with no rings--and one with a year on the job--hang with the guy trying to catch one for the thumb? In all seriousness, it's hard to know how much of the Yankees' success is due to Cashman's work. He inherited the core developed by Bill Livesey and Stick Michael, and a chunk of the additions along the way are hard to credit to one person, given the Kremlin-like state of the Yankee front office. ("Mark Newman was sitting on Steinbrenner's right. This must mean frost in Leningrad, and an attempt on the life of Koyastkov!") Cashman knows what he's doing, but it'll take his next job until we know just how strong a GM he is. My guess is he's top-tier, in the discussion with Beane, Epstein, et al.

Joel Sherman: There will always be doubt about Brian until he goes to a team that does not spend as freely as the Yankees and proves that on a more reasonable budget that he could assemble a consistent winner. But among his peers, Brian has a great admiration society.

Glenn Stout: Well, I think both Beane and Epstein, in particular, are celebrated more because they are celebrated rather than for anything else. Cashman has been good for this team, for entirely different reasons that the supposed "genius" of Beane and Epstein. You manage according to your team and resources and you general manage according to your team and resources. Cashman has been most valuable for his ability to negotiate the mine fields of that position under Steinbrenner.

But I think the A-Rod deal was savvy in that they were able to move in Boston’s wake and put together a deal that didn’t expand the boundaries that had already been staked out, thus giving Selig no reason to block it under the "best interests" clause – which I think he would have done had he not allowed Boston so much latitude earlier. Cashman has also always sensed that you have to play to the back page in NY, and deals like the one for Clemens and A-Rod recognize that.

BB: The Yankees have a gruff edge this season with the additions of Kevin Brown, Sheffield and Kenny Lofton. Some observers look at this team as a far cry from the Paul O'Neil Yankees. Will the new attitude help or hurt the team?


Larry Mahnken: A lot of guys have come into New York in past years with a bad reputation, and turned out to be fine teammates. Joe Torre is excellent at keeping the clubhouse professional, and making sure everyone's focused on their goal. I don't think the new personalities will have any effect on the Yankees' performance on the field.

Buster Olney: Even if you assume that these guys are benign, rather than cancerous, it won't be the same; those guys of the dynasty all had shared history, they played for each other. The Yankees of 2004 are a lot of islands loosely connected by the color of their uniform.

Joe Sheehan: Um...what? You know the difference between Paul O'Neill and Kevin Brown? Paul O'Neill played for the Yankees. Same actions, same attitude, but Yankees fans liked their guy. Seriously. Calling Kevin Brown a "far cry" from Paul O'Neill is ridiculous.

Joel Sherman: I think too often this becomes about the media not getting along with a player, which at times could impact a team if other players feel they are having to talk too much in their teammate's behalf. But I think Kevin Brown is a different animal. His teammates have not liked him at his various stops. That could cause problems. Kenny Lofton long had that reputation, as well. But in the past two years with the Giants and Cubs, he actually has been hailed as a good teammate on teams that made the playoffs.

Glenn Stout: That will be totally determined by their W/L record. Attitude only matters when you lose.

BB: From a writer's viewpoint, is this the most interesting Yankee team since the Bronx Zoo days of the late seventies?


Larry Mahnken: I thought the early-90's Yankees were much more interesting, because they were an underdog team coming out of the cellar, and collecting, for the most part, underappreciated players. This certainly is an interesting team, with some new personalities, but New York has tended to suck the personality out of players in recent years. I thought Jason Giambi would be a lot of fun as a Yankee, but he's been all business. What a letdown.

Tim Marchman: Controversial excellence interests me much less than quiet excellence.

Buster Olney: No, I much prefer a functional team to a dysfunctional team. Then you can write more about baseball than catfights.

Joel Sherman: I think A-Rod and the heat of the Yankee-Red Sox rivalry make this the most fascinating team I have ever been around.

Glenn Stout: I don’t think so – today’s writers don’t have nearly the same access as then, and the contemporary player is much, much more guarded. There’s nothing really inherently interesting about a group of rich guys with no perspective, whether they are ballplayers or CEO’s.

BB: What are you looking forward to about the 2004 Yankees? And what are you dreading about them?


Larry Mahnken: I'm looking forward to seeing Gary Sheffield rip doubles into the outfield gaps. I'm looking forward to seeing Javier Vazquez and Kevin Brown on their best days. I'm looking forward to seeing if Hideki Matsui
can HIT THE DAMN BALL IN THE AIR!!! I'm dreading injuries, or seeing Bernie Williams in center field again. But most of all, I'm dreading seeing the Red Sox win it all--or, at least, the aftermath of that.

Tim Marchman: I look forward to seeing Alex Rodriguez play every day; I’ve always gone out of my way to watch him, but this is the first time I’ll be able to see him play every day, and that should be a treat. I dread that instead of putting a team in Brooklyn to counter the Yankees’ revenue advantage, MLB will seek to thwart them by foolishly instigating a longer strike than the one we saw in 1994 by insisting (again) on a salary cap the players will never, ever agree to.

Buster Olney: They are a fascinating collection of Rotisserie Gods, playing under extraordinary expectations -- win the World Series or be deemed losers -- and it'll be fascinating to see how they react. I dread being around the team in important series, because the media pack will extend into Manhattan.

Alan Schwarz: What I dread is their heading into the season as favorites again. Before the Rodriguez trade, it was reasonable to see the Red Sox as favorites for a change. Now we're back to the same old, boring storylines.

Joe Sheehan: They could score an obscene number of runs, especially if they get lucky at second base. I love the idea of watching Rodriguez play for the Yankees. I think this is the year Mike Mussina gets his close-up, too. Dreading? The Carnival of Denial. Any four-game losing streak, because of the potential for an ownership meltdown. Whiny fans in places like Kansas City staging impotent "protests" over payroll figures, as David Glass gets ever richer by whittling away at an entire class of Americans.

Joel Sherman: I am looking forward to the 19 games against the Red Sox. I can't think of anything I am dreading.

Glenn Stout: I’m looking forward to the nineteen games with Boston. I’m dreading all the stupid crap that will be written before and after those games, or said by broadcasters, particularly references to the specious and tired "curse."

BB: Do you think the Yankees will get into a bench-clearing brawl during the regular season?


Larry Mahnken: Without a doubt. Another team might be involved, too, but that's less likely.

Tim Marchman: I’ll be very disappointed if they don’t.

Buster Olney: Yes; with the Red Sox. And Pedro will be involved. It's all but inevitable. (It's a lock that either Posada or Sheffield will be the Yankee charging the mound...)

Joe Sheehan: Yes.

Joel Sherman: The Yanks and Red Sox play 19 times. Enough said.

Glenn Stout: You mean with each other? 3-1 vs the Red Sox, 5-1 vs. Tampa, 10-1 vs anyone else or each other.

Tune in on Monday when a second group of writers tackle the same set of questions.

Yankee Preview Sunday: Roundtable Discussion
2004-02-28 23:20
by Alex Belth

Seven Up: All Together Now

Part One, Side One

When I was growing up I remember feeling that it was very important to be right about things. Opinions mostly. In family discussions and conversations, being right seemed to equate being heard, feeling recognized. As an adult, I don’t feel the burning need to be right anymore. I’m much more interested in learning something I don't know. That is why I get so much out of what other people have to say. I find listening and paying attention to be one of the most stimulating aspects of following baseball—or just about anything else for that matter. It helps that baseball attracts good talkers.

So I asked an eclectic group of baseball writers to answer a dump truck load of questions I had about the upcoming Yankee season. I purposefully chose a diverse group—from professionals to bloggers—so that the reader would get a balanced feel for what some of the best baseball minds have to say about the Yanks.

A note on how the forum was conducted. The questions were e-mailed to the participants. When I received the responses—from fourteen guests in all—I recognized that I would need to run this in two parts on two consecutive days. As it is, it's looooong. Hope you don't have anything to do for a while. But hey, the whole purpose of Yankee Preview week is to offer a feast of insight and opinion to all the insatiable Yankee junkies like me out there. The worst it should be is too long.

Regardless, I tried to keep things brisk, and conversational. I have edited portions of the answers at my own discretion in order to keep the length manageable. In no way have I tried to misrepresent any of the contributor’s original intent. Further, I am grateful for all of the time and effort each guest put into answering the questions. I hope you enjoy what they have to say and that it stimulates even further discussion.

Cast of Characters:

(In Alphabetical Order)

Larry Mahnken: Replacement Level Yankees Weblog

Tim Marchman: The New York Sun

Buster Olney: ESPN

Alan Schwarz: Baseball America, ESPN

Joe Sheehan: Baseball Prospectus

Joel Sherman: The New York Post

Glenn Stout: Baseball Historian

Bronx Banter: Will Joe Torre be fired during the 2004 season? If so, when? If he is canned, who will replace him? Will Torre ever manage the Red Sox?


Larry Mahnken: I believe that it's unlikely that Joe Torre will get fired in mid-season unless the Yankees go into an extended slump, or are winning but playing very poorly. It's possible, but I'd be surprised if it happened. If Torre does get fired, I think his replacement will be Willie Randolph, who it seems is being groomed for the job by being named bench coach. Randolph should probably keep the job through 2005 at least, but if the Yankees go out meekly, he might get axed. I think this is Joe Torre's last managing job.

Tim Marchman: I can’t imagine Torre being fired this season. If he is replaced, either in-season or in the fall, I hope the Yankees buy Bobby Valentine away from the Chiba Lotte Marines.

Buster Olney: Yes, Torre will be fired during the season -- by the All-Star break. Willie Randolph will take over. Yes, I think Joe will manage the Red Sox within three years... It'll be Joe McCarthy all over again.

Alan Schwarz: I think Torre will survive just fine, and retire after the season. Don't see the Red Sox in his future, except, I hope, this year's ALCS.

Joe Sheehan: I'll say Torre survives, in part because a postseason slot is a near-certainty. Torre will never manage the Red Sox.

Joel Sherman: The question I always ask when it comes to Torre and the Yankees is "if not him, who?" This is not the Tigers or Brewers or any team in the NBA's Eastern Conference. These are the Yankees. By the time the season is over, they will likely have a luxury tax payroll of $200 million. George Steinbrenner is capable of staggering moves due to fits of anger. But with that kind of payroll can he really just guess or hope a Willie Randolph or Don Mattingly can step in and save a struggling team? I think Steinbrenner would only do that if matters looked utterly hopeless anyway - the Yanks were under .500 at the All-Star break or in early August, and he would take the humiliation of Torre as his 2004 victory.

Glenn Stout: I don’t think Torre will be fired. Neither do I think he will ever manage the Red Sox. I think he is focusing on his legacy now. His managerial record combined with his playing record gives him a reasonable shot at the Hall of Fame, one that would only be damaged by managing elsewhere.

BB: The arrival of Alex Rodriguez brings with it plenty of potential for controversy. The biggest issue of course is who should play shortstop? Though the Yankees don't have any intentions of moving Jeter right now, who do you think should play shortstop for the Yankees


Larry Mahnken: Does this question really need to be asked? Playing Jeter at shortstop and moving Alex Rodriguez is madness. It's like if the Yankees traded for Curt Flood in 1968, and moved him to left because they already had Joe Pepitone out there.

Tim Marchman: For this year, Jeter at shortstop and Rodriguez at third base seems to make best sense for the Yankees. I think that for 2005 they should look to move Jeter to centerfield and Rodriguez to shortstop.

Buster Olney: I think Jeter should play shortstop, because he's been there, he's earned the right, and the Yankees are better overall with him at short and A-Rod at third. I think A-Rod is the better shortstop, but I think Jeter would have far more difficulty in changing position than Alex would (Neither one, incidentally, would make a smooth transition to second base...)

Alan Schwarz: Rodriguez is pulling the very smart PR move by graciously moving to third, making Jeter look selfish. The pressure's on Jeter now, not the other way around. I don't see him moving this year. Next year, I wouldn't be shocked if the pressure mounts for him to move to second. Eric Chavez looms as a free agent...

Joe Sheehan: Alex Rodriguez. He's the better defender of the two, and that should be the only consideration. The rest is unprofessional puffery

Joel Sherman: I think Jeter should play shortstop. Yes, Alex Rodriguez is a better shortstop than Jeter. But he also profiles as a better third baseman. Jeter does not seem to read the ball well off the bat and that would be an even greater detriment at third base. From what I have seen - an admittedly limited sample - and what I have learned talking to baseball officials I respect, my sense is that A-Rod has a good first step. He also has softer hands than Jeter, another valuable tool at third.

Glenn Stout: I’m fine with Jeter at shortstop, particularly since that was the understanding when the deal was made. To back away from that now would be to invite controversy. And I actually think it makes a great deal more sense to play A-Rod at third now – its an easier position to protect such an enormous asset.

BB: Some baseball observers are more offended that A Rod--the better defensive player, and perhaps the best shortstop since Honus Wagner--will be asked to move positions than they are that he's joined the Yankees. Jeter is famous as a team-first player. Do you think he would ever consider moving positions, ala Chipper Jones, if it helps the team? If he doesn't, how could that change his image? In addition, what position do you think would best suit Jeter's talents?


Larry Mahnken: I've always thought that Jeter is the kind of guy that wouldn't put up a fuss if Joe Torre asked him to change positions. He might not like it, but he'd do it, and wouldn't complain. However, I'm pretty sure he's not going to volunteer to move.
Does that change my impression of him? Not really, why should he offer to move from a position he likes? Maybe he doesn't even know how bad he is. The real question is why the Yankees haven't asked him to move. It's mind-boggling.

Tim Marchman: If Jeter flat-out refused to make way for a better player it would rightly change his image to that of a jackass. That seems extraordinarily unlikely. He is a professional who will do what he is asked to do by management.

Buster Olney: No, I don't think he'll consider changing positions. I think that as soon as Joe is gone as manager, the firewall between Jeter and The Great Shortstop Controversy will be gone and George will affect a change; I'd venture a guess that within three years, Derek will ask for a trade.

Joe Sheehan: I think he should be approached privately and given the chance to move voluntarily. If that fails, he should be asked to do so, If that fails, he should then be told to do so. Would he go? I have no idea, but you have to have the conversation.
Jeter's image--winner, vs. Rodriguez the non-winner--is the holdup here. I'm not convinced the people involved don't truly believe that moving him would have some intangible negative affect on Yankee baseball. I think calling him out on the issue would bring forth legions of people doing ring counts. The argument for Jeter at shortstop amounts to crediting him with having better teammates from 1996-2003. I'm on record in all kinds of places as advocating Jeter to center field. Let the raw speed have a greater impact, and eliminate the footwork problems.

Joel Sherman: I think Jeter's best skill as a shortstop is tracking balls in the air. If he maintains his athleticism, I think he could move to center field in a similar fashion to Robin Yount. I do not think he would go easily. This is a prideful man, and pride is one of the fuels that has made him an exceptional player. I think it would be a much easier transition if Joe Torre were the one telling Jeter to move. However, Torre holds those who have done big things for him in esteem. He has loyalty to them. He expects Jeter to be his lead lieutenant in the clubhouse. He does not want to offend Jeter, and then lose that.

If Jeter's flaws at shortstop become even more overt this year, this is going to become an even bigger issue, and, yes, Jeter will lose public points if he refuses to make a move that is so widely accepted as the right one.

Glenn Stout: I think if he is injured in some capacity that would obviously affect his play at short, Jeter would probably move. Not doing so doesn’t really detract from the whole image thing – I think the Yankees were wise to take that decision out of his hands. I can see Jeter later in his career moving either to 3rd or 1st, although at this stage of his career I think he could also play LF or CF.

BB: There has been a wide gap in the perception of Jeter's defense. Now that the Yankees have a superior defensive option on their roster, will the perception of Jeter's defensive reputation change?


Larry Mahnken: That could ultimately be the good thing about A-Rod being at third: it makes the media and fans much more critical of Jeter's defense, and with every ball that rolls into center past a diving Jeter, the fans might start moving closer to calling for A-Rod to move back to short.

Tim Marchman: It seems to me that it already has. I haven’t read one article suggesting that Jeter is anything other than a poor defensive shortstop. The casual fans I’ve talked to about it acknowledge this as well.

Buster Olney: The fact that A-Rod is here will put Jeter in an almost no-win situation: Unless he plays exceptionally, there will be voices -- Steinbrenner's among them -- clamoring for change.

Alan Schwarz: Yes. It will be under far more scrutiny than ever before, though there still aren't accepted statistical tools to measure this.

Joe Sheehan: I think it has already. The interesting thing in this discussion is that it's a given that Rodriguez is better defensively than Jeter. I haven't seen anyone argue that Jeter is better with the glove. Whether people will yet come around to what the performance analysis--and to my mind, observation--shows about his defense is doubtful.

Joel Sherman: By the sheer concentration on just the defensive job Jeter does in 2004, there naturally will be more analysis than ever before. And Jeter's defensive reputation already has taken a hit. His inferiority to A-Rod was a major part of the storyline for the week surrounding the trade and it will continue to be. The casual fan who is not immersed in range factor and zone rating, and quite frankly probably has no idea of error totals and fielding percentage probably did not recognize the gap in talents until it was underscored in all the stories.

Glenn Stout: Only because it will be talked about more and written about more – that’s what perception is. Until it is vocalized there is no such thing.

BB: How much better is the Yankees bullpen this season than it was in 2003?


Larry Mahnken: It all depends on the health of Karsay and Gordon. If those two stay healthy all season, this may be the best bullpen the Yankees have had since 1998. They're lacking a strong lefty reliever, but they didn't really have that last year, either.

Tim Marchman: I have no idea. Gordon and Karsay are rather fragile, and like Quantrill are, if not ancient, getting up there in age. I wouldn’t at all be surprised if the middle relief ranked among the best in the game, nor if it was mediocre. I do think it will matter a lot more than last year, as only Mussina and Vasquez are solid best to pitch 200 innings.

Buster Olney: Could be much better, depending on the health of Gordon and Quantrill. On paper, it's terrific. But Gordon and Quantrill are old men, in their baseball lives, and Gordon, in particular, has an injury history...

Joe Sheehan: Two or three games. Quantrill isn't a great match for this defense, and Tom Gordon hasn't been healthy and effective in consecutive seasons in a while. On the other hand, the '03 bullpen was awful for five months.

Joel Sherman: Much better. I think this is the most improved area of the club. Mainly because I am a huge Tom Gordon fan. The fact he excelled as a closer with the Red Sox suggests to me he will not be cowed by pitching in big spots for the Yankees. He provides a legitimate option to fill in for Mariano Rivera during Rivera's inevitable one-month groin injury.

Paul Quantrill is a bulldog, but keep in mind a groundball-inducing bulldog who benefited from Dodger Stadium and the Dodger infield. He is still better than Antonio Osuna or Juan Acevedo or much of what the Yanks sent out last year to get the ball to Rivera. I would think the Yanks will get nothing from Steve Karsay, but will be more stable (though still not overwhelming) by having Felix Heredia and Gabe White available from the outset.

Glenn Stout: Much, much better, if this pen performs to expectations. Had last years bullpen done better, the Yankees would have won 110 games, and I think the starters would have had a bit more left in the tank in October. There were a number of times when Torre left starters in last year – or went to a certain reliever early – simply because he had no faith in anyone else. I also think that they are better inoculated against an injury to Rivera than before – Gordon, or even Karsay can close.

BB: Will the Yankees sign Mariano to a contract extension before the end of the 2004 season? And should they?


Larry Mahnken: Unless Rivera suffers a sudden drop in performance, I
see no way the Yankees let him get away, and I consider it equally unlikely that Rivera will jump ship unless the Yankees lowball him. There's no MLB team in Panama. Should the Yankees sign him? Well, that's money that could be used for signing Carlos Beltran, but the Yankees also don't have any other options to close next season. Unless his performance drops off considerably, I can't see how the Yankees could afford to let him go, overpriced though he may be.

Tim Marchman: It would be foolish not to extend his contract; Rivera is historically great. Having a $7-$10 million closer is one of the luxuries afforded by a massive payroll, and if he suffers a severe decline it’s not going to prevent them from getting a replacement.

Buster Olney: Rivera will sign an extension. Unlike Pettitte, there is no other place he can play and be closer to home (really close, that is), and he'll work it out. Money doesn't matter with the Yankees: As long as the guy is effective, he'll get the dough. And once he signs his next contract, it'll be his last.

Alan Schwarz: I think they'll resign him and pay him more than market value, which is no shock out of the Bronx.

Joe Sheehan: I don't see the extension coming, as the Yankees have shown a willingess to let guys go. Can you extend Rivera at that number with Foulke in at $6MM a year, and with Billy Wagner coming on the market? I doubt it. I think he'll be back in 2005, because I don't think he wants to leave, but this is going to be like the Williams signing, not the Jeter one. If his performance in '04 is in line with reasonable expectations, I'd be OK with three years and $22-$25MM.

Joel Sherman: More and more I see Rivera compared to Andy Pettitte. But more and more I have come to believe the Yanks simply did not want Pettitte back. That they preferred Javier Vazquez, in particular. Will they really prefer anyone to Rivera? Not if he remains healthy and productive. There is not great history in closers having longevity. But Rivera has been a great reliever for eight years, and a great closer for seven already. Does he have three more years in him? I don't know, but it will probably be a greater risk for the Yankees not to find out.

Glenn Stout: I think they’ll sign him and I think he is smart enough to stay put. Again, it’s the legacy thing. Saving 70-100 games or more for the Yankees for the rest of his career, and presumably getting more post-season opportunities, serves Rivera well. And I think the Yankees should sign him, unless there is some injury that seriously impacts him both this year and in the future. With the Yankee offense and pen depth over the next few years, Rivera remains plenty talented enough to be virtually automatic at this stage. And he has shown the ability to adapt over the last two seasons, by adding that fastball that backs in on righthanders. The ability to adjust as you age is important, and he is showing he has that capacity.

End of Side One. Turn the record over, or scroll back to the top...

Yankee Preview Saturday: Mariano Rivera
2004-02-27 21:36
by Alex Belth

"C" is For Closers: Enter Sandman

By Chris DeRosa

After the 1999 World Series, Yankee closer and series MVP Mariano Rivera said that he would give it four more years and then return to his native Panama to be an evangelical minister of a church he was building there. Going into 2004, I’d say that on the balance, New York fans should be happy that great pitchers don’t always follow through on their retirement plans.

The Yankees too should be happy, and about as optimistic as possible about a 34 year-old relief ace who has paid visits to the disabled list in each of the last two seasons. Shoulder and groin injuries limited Rivera to only 46 innings in 2002 and cost him last April. After struggling a bit in May, things seemed to click for him and he tore through June and July throwing about as well as ever. August, however, was one of the worst extended stretches of Rivera’s career:


Aug 1st: Blew 2-1 lead in the 8th (broke Tejada’s bat but Soriano couldn’t field the ball).

Aug 3rd: Came into Pettitte’s 1-0 shutout with man on in 9th, let up single and double to lose game.

Aug 6th: Rangers hand him second consecutive loss.

Aug 7th: Rangers roughed him up again in a shaky save

Aug 15th: Gave up homer to Jack Cust (the Orioles have been toughest on Mo historically).

Aug 16th: Luis Matos homered to tie game in 9th (the game the Yanks won because Cust fell down twice)

Aug 20th: NY lead 8-2 in the 9th when KC greeted him with four straight hits. Yanks squirmed out of it 8-7.

There were a couple of good ones in there too, but the Yankee bullpen was in agony. The team had gone into Boston in late July and opened the series with a win to take a 3.5 game lead in the AL East. From there, they went 9-9, with seven of the losses charged to the bullpen. Armando Benitez, Al Osuna, Sterling Hitchcock, Jesse Orosco and Chris Hammond surrounded Rivera’s bad stretch with memorable meltdowns of their own. Six poor performances in eleven August outings – ouch. Was he losing it?

He wasn’t. A light workload for the rest of August helped him bounce back and have a good September. In the end, it was a fine season. He worked 70.2 innings and allowed only 61 hits and 3 homers. He set career-best marks in walks allowed (10) and ERA (1.66). Considering the number of games Rivera missed on the DL (in 1998, 2002, and 2003), Joe Torre worked him at a harder pace than he had in any season since he became the closer in 1997:

Year     Games “Available”     Batters Faced     BF/GA
1996          162                 425            2.62          
1997          162                 301            1.86
1998          149                 246            1.65
1999          162                 268            1.65
2000          162                 311            1.92
2001          162                 310            1.91
2002          105                 187            1.78
2003          137                 277            2.02

His fine totals notwithstanding, Rivera did react entirely well to this quickening of pace. Here are the records of the 12 relief aces with at least 30 saves last year when pitching on no days’ rest:

Unrested Closer              ERA     IP        H       Run     ER     HR     BB     K
John Smoltz                  0.41     22.0     11       2       1       0       3     23
Troy Percival                0.75     12.0       2       1       1       1      4    12
Keith Foulke                 1.11     24.3      15       3       3       2      9    20     
Billy Wagner                 1.35     26.7      17       4       4       1    11     31
Eric Gagne                   1.82     29.7     17       6       6       0       6      54
Eddie Guardado              3.18     17.0     15       6       6       1      3     17
Uegeth Urbina               3.46     26.0      21     10     10       2     13     31
Tim Worrell                  3.46     26.0      24     10     10       3       5     20
Mariano Rivera              3.48     20.7      29       9       8       2       1    19
Jorge Julio                  3.52     15.3      13       6       6       1       3    17
Joe Borowski                4.86     16.7     13       9       9       2      4    18
Rocky Biddle                 4.91     25.7     30     15     14       3       9     19

Among the elite closers, John Smoltz, Keith Foulke, Billy Wagner, and Eric Gagne were all called upon without rest as often as Rivera, but were their normally deadly selves. Mariano was a lot more vulnerable when he had to work in consecutive games, allowed 29 hits in 20.7 innings. His 1.66 ERA is also a little deceptive. Just looking at how many RBIs a closer gave up can be a quick and dirty corrective counterweight to his ERA when you want to know what kind of year the guy had in the pinches:

30-Save Closers                     BF     RBI     RBI/BF
Eric Gagne                           306     10       .033          
Billy Wagner                        335     17       .051
John Smoltz                         244     16       .066
Keith Foulke                        338     25       .074
Joe Borowski                       280     25       .089
Eddie Guaradado                    260     24       .092
Troy Percival                       206     20       .097
Mariano Rivera                    277     30       .108
Uegeth Urbina                     316     36       .114
Jorge Julio                      273     36       .132
Rocky Biddle                      330     44       .133
Tim Worrell                        335     45       .134

Mo was as hard on lefties as ever, but right-handed hitters got better swings than usual (.283/.336/.398). None of which is to say Rivera didn’t have a very good year and isn’t a good bat to have another one in 2004. Certainly his October performance gave no cause for alarm. Rivera threw 16.7 innings and allowed only one run, which dropped his lifetime postseason ERA to 0.75.

Against Minnesota, Rivera notched a pair of no-hit, no-walk two-inning saves. In the Game 3 frenzy in Fenway, he set down six straight Boston batters to protect the Yankees’ 4-3 lead. After the game, Roger Clemens marveled at his apparent serenity, “You take your worst… you take your two favorite superheroes, and I’ll put Mo up against both of them. He could take on anyone.”

Game 5 of the ALCS was another 2-inning save. Boston touched him for a run in the 8th when Todd Walker tripled and scored on a ground out. Game 7, of course, was perhaps the greatest outing of his career. With the game tied at 5 and the pennant on the line, Rivera shut out Boston’s superb lineup for three innings. Though Aaron Boone’s homer ended the game, it was Mariano whom the Yankees lifted onto their shoulders, in what seemed in that unclear moment like a fitting inversion of what he had done for them.

From Starter to Reliever

Single players, much less relief aces, don’t really carry teams, but Rivera pitched in all four wins against Boston and made as good a choice as any as Series MVP. He hurled eight innings with one run on five hits and no walks. The sight of Mo collapsed on the Yankee Stadium mound (a strange one in so much as a pinstriped player was still circling the bases) seemed to close a circle from the beginning of the Yankees’ current run:

                ip      h      r     er     bb     k     dec.
4 Oct 1995       3.1     2     0     0       0      5      W
16 Oct 2003     3.0     2     0     0       0      2      W

In game 2 of the 1995 ALDS against Seattle, Mariano also pitched three scoreless innings and got the win on an extra-inning homer. The game was tied with two outs in the top of the 12th when Ken Griffey Jr. homered off Yankee relief ace John Wetteland. Edgar Martinez followed with a single. Rivera struck out Jay Buhner, and then just went on throwing strike after zooming strike for three innings.

Though Rivera’s 67 innings made him the 8th most heavily used pitcher on the team that year, one imagines that Buck Showalter could not have been too happy to turn to a rookie with a 5.51 ERA in that situation. He had already used the two relievers he most counted on to preserve leads (Wetteland and Bob Wickman), and Mariano hadn’t fared well in two regular season starts against Seattle.

At that point Rivera was still penciled in as a future starting pitcher. Many fine relief aces are failed starters. In ten starts, Rivera pitched 50 innings, going 3-3 with a 5.94 ERA. In nine relief outings (most of them in September), he held opponents to 8 hits in 17 innings (2-0, 4.24 ERA). It seems foolish at this point to debate the Yankees’ evaluation that his stuff was better suited to relief, but if you look at it, you can’t really say that he was a thoroughly failed starter.

About two-thirds of Rivera’s appearances were starts in his mostly successful five years in the Yankees’ minor league system. He debuted on May 23rd, losing to the Angels. Jim Edmonds tagged him for a three-run homer, the first of 11 long balls Rivera would give up in his rookie season. He won his next start, a 5.1 inning stint against Oakland, but lost a rematch with the A’s when he gave up a grand slam to Geronimo Berroa and a 2-run shot to Ruben Sierra. Edgar Martinez blasted a three-run homer in the first inning of his next start, which put him out of the Yankee rotation for three weeks [In the late 90s, Edgar the Hammer hit Rivera almost at will, which is something not too many other hitters can say. Even after going 0-4 in 2003, he’s 9-15 off Mo lifetime with five extra base hits and two walks].

Rivera seemed to be getting his bearings as a starter upon his return in July. On Independence Day, he had his best start, holding Chicago to 2 hits in 8 innings and striking out 11 batters. For the month, he went 2-0 in four starts, pitching 25 innings with a 2.52 ERA. Nevertheless, he started only two more games.

Steinbrenner and Showalter broke up over the loss of the Yankees’ first playoff series since 1981. The new regime did not immediately pronounce Rivera a reliever in 1996. Their first instinct was to try to teach him a change-up. “To be a starter, he has to have a change,” Torre told The Daily News on April 24th. Although Rivera had “a closer’s velocity,” the manager told the Bergen Record the same day, he would rely on Jeff Nelson and Wickman to set up Wetteland, meaning that even with the ’96 season underway, the Yankees intended to groom Rivera in long relief for an eventual starting role.

Of course Rivera seized the set up role and had arguably his best season, pitching 107.7 innings with 130 strikeouts and only one home run allowed. The 1996 season was the first full-length season of the mid-90s slugging era (the league ERA was 5.00), so not many starting pitchers compiled traditional-looking Cy Young candidacy stats. Rivera finished third in the voting and the Yankees let John Wetteland walk in order to make him the closer.

Of course the other big change for Mariano in 1997 was that he began to rely heavily on the cut fastball, as opposed to mostly four-seamers with the occasional slider mixed in.

Spare us the Cutter

In 2002, ESPN.com ran a poll, based on a Jayson Stark column , in which fans could vote for the most devastating pitch in baseball. Mariano Rivera’s cut fastball finished second to Randy Johnson’s “fastball-slider combination,” which I guess means it actually finished first.

Andy Pettitte became famous for his cutter before Mariano did for his. Pettitte also became famous for being a heart-throb before Derek Jeter did, but we tend to forget these things. People used to talk about how Pettitte’s cutter sailed in right-handed batters and tied them in knots. But comparing Pettitte’s cutter to Rivera’s is like comparing a butter knife to Excalibur. New York fans have seen pitchers like Pettitte and Al Leiter make fine use of the pitch, but they lose a lot of velocity when they cut their fastballs. Their cutters seem to arch in there and break down. Rivera’s has been likened to a 94-mph breaking pitch. It burrows in on lefties like a wood-seeking missile, but is almost as fast as his four-seamer and betrays little downward drip.

It is one of those pitches that is so effective as to require an origin story. He didn’t always throw it, at least, not on purpose. I taped the ESPN Classic version of that 1995 ALDS Game 2. He was a different pitcher then, but not radically so. He worked up in the zone more, but he worked about as quickly then as now. His motion may be slightly more streamlined now, but there were no awkward edges that had to be sanded down. At one point he threw a buzz-saw pitch outside that the announcer described first as a slider, then, after the replay, he said perhaps it was actually a “good cut fastball.” His fastball was jumping so much they didn’t know what the kid was throwing.

Before the 2001 World Series, Rivera told Adrian Wojnarowksi of The Bergen Record that he discovered the cutter by accident playing catch with Ramiro Mendoza. Two years earlier, he explained to Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated, “I didn’t do anything. It was natural.” He started using it in games, and the rest was history. “It was just from God.”

By God, I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean Mel Stottlemyre. But I don’t know. If you had told me in 1997 that the Yankees’ brilliant set-up man with the exploding mid-90s heater was going to see his strikeouts plummet from 10.9 per nine innings to 8.5 and 5.3 over the next two years, throwing cut fastballs to conserve pitches, I would have said, “That idiot Stottlemyre is trying to ruin Mariano the same way he ruined Gooden!” OK, actually, I did say that.

Dwight Gooden is cursed to be remembered as two separate men, “Dwight Gooden” and “the young Dwight Gooden.” When you talk about Sandy Koufax’s stuff, or Steve Carlton’s, you don’t feel compelled to specify, “the mature Koufax,” or “Carlton in his prime, not with the White Sox.” But with Gooden, the separation between 1985 and 1986 was so striking visually that it seems to demand this distinction. Looking back at it now, when it is apparent that 1986 was actually one of Gooden’s best seasons, someone who wasn’t following at the time might be surprised to learn that for much of the year, Mets fans were wondering when he was going to get back on track.

NL hitters tacked more than a run onto his ERA, and his strikeouts fell from 8.7 per game to 7.2. Few observers were content just to say, “Shut up, people, he can’t have a 1.53 ERA every year.” Maybe we were imagining it, but it sure seemed like his fastball just didn’t have the same hop to it. Some said hitters had learned to lay off his high heat. Tim McCarver said the umps had taken the high strike away from him (Yankee fans may recall that the same year, Rickey Henderson said the umps had taken the high ball away from him).

Others, however, drew a direct line between Gooden’s drop-off and the reports that in spring training, Mets pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre had convinced him to stop going for strikeouts and save his arm by putting more balls in play. There was mention of the cut fastball in Dwight Gooden’s arsenal going back to 1984, but it took on a whole new life in the spring of ’86. During Gooden’s late July slump, Stottlemyre admitted to the New York Times that “I have downplayed the strikeouts with him for the simple reason that he doesn’t need to strike out 10 batters to have a strong game. The important thing is[,] put zeroes on the scoreboard. I probably made too great an emphasis with him on getting ground balls, and not enough on getting pop-ups.”

Not everyone thought this was the best approach for a young pitcher with a world class fastball. The Times reported Cardinal manager Whitey Herzog saying in July of 1987 of his rival’s pitchers, “They’re 22, and somebody tries to teach them to pitch like a guy who’s 30. Gooden’s that way. In spring training last year, all you heard about was his new cut fastball and his two speeds of curveballs. You got a guy who can throw 94 miles and hour, let him throw. He starts cutting the fastball, taking something off it, he loses the fastball he once had. And he’ll never get it back.”

Bill James, who has demonstrated several times that power pitchers last longer than finesse pitchers, was just as blunt in the 1987 Baseball Abstract. Noting that the pitching coach himself was a ground ball pitcher who had his last good year at 31, the analyst wrote: “… if Mel Stottlemyre wants Dwight Gooden to last as long as possible, he’d better stop this crap about throwing ground balls and tell him to concentrate on striking out as many batters as he can.”

After returning from Smithers in 1987, Gooden himself announced that he was junking his cut fastball. “It was a matter of him cutting his pitches even when he didn’t want to,” Stottlemyre told the Bergen Record on June 7, “There is a carry-over from the cut fastball to the regular fastball.” Gooden’s drug suspension buried the story of his attempted conversion to a put-it-in-play type pitcher. People needed no reason besides drugs for his inability to get back to his 1985 level. Indeed, it is impossible now to separate the factors that may have prevented him from having a Hall of Fame career. Did he mess himself up with drugs? Had Stottlemyre monkeyed around with the rarest of talents? Or was it simply that he just pitched way too many innings between 18 and 21 years of age? By the time Rivera was enjoying his first great season, teammate Dwight Gooden was hanging on as a finesse pitcher. Rivera reminded him of himself “a long time ago.”

Mel Stottlemyre must have had the same thought, because there is an alternate version of Rivera’s cutter discovery story. The same reports that have Stottlemyre teaching him a change-up in 1996 have him teaching Rivera the cutter as well. A fuller explanation from Tom Haudricourt in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (October 5, 1999):


Because Rivera has the ability to blow his fastball past hitters, Torre and Stottlemyre thought he might be getting a bit strikeout happy. They also fretted about the toll it would take on Rivera’s arm as pitch counts continued to rise.

With that in mind, Stottlemyre worked with Rivera on using different grips and arm angles with his fastball, making the ball rise or dip when he wanted. Rivera also learned to “cut” the ball in on left-handed batters, sawing off their bats and preventing them from leaning over the plate.

As a result, Rivera no longer lives and dies by the strikeout….

“I think once Mariano got over the fact that he would think about striking people out, he became a real good reliever,” Torre said. “Now you see him go through some innings throwing six, seven pitches, which enables us to have him available more so than before.”

Does this happen on other teams? Does the Boston pitching coach say, “We’re concerned about Pedro striking out so many hitters.” Are there people in the Marlins camp telling Josh Beckett, “Let them hit the ball, son. We want more grounders out of you.”

Did Stottlemyre really repeat his dubious Gooden experiment with another golden arm? I don’t know, but if he did, you could consider it something of a vindication. Rivera managed a remarkable transformation in which he dropped a lot strikeouts and yet remained a power pitcher (the strikeouts have actually been creeping back up in recent years). Maybe Rivera’s low-K style has helped him stay as sharp as he has through age 34. And Torre was not wrong when he noted that his ace gets out of his share of innings in under ten pitches, and this increases his availability for multiple inning stints.

Is This the Way to Cooperstown?

In fact, I think Torre should have left Rivera in Game 4 of the 1997 ALDS after Sandy Alomar Jr. took him deep. Alomar’s shot only tied the score and he was throwing fine. They yanked him out of there to save him for Game 5, but Game 5 never came for Mariano. Blowing the Yankees’ chance to clinch the Division Series interrupted Rivera’s assembly of his postseason legend. Despite an excellent season in 1998, USA Today ranked the Yankee juggernaut’s relief ace only seventh among the eight playoff closers. Trevor Hoffman, Mike Jackson, and Tom Gordon had had their best seasons, Rod Beck had 51 saves, John Wetteland had… seniority, I guess. At least the writer liked Mo better than Kerry Lightenberg. Even after the series, Larry Dierker was less than effusive in his series commentary for The Sporting News: “[Rivera] reminds me a lot of Billy Wagner from our team, but he has better control. I don’t see him having much command of the breaking pitch, though.”

Didn’t need no stinking breaking pitch, Larry. It took two postseasons to overwhelm the Alomar homer and make Rivera’s rep as a bat-breaking October demigod. He won the World Series MVP award in 1999. In Game 3 of the 2000 ALCS, he broke the record for consecutive scoreless innings in postseason play. Cool record – once belonged to Whitey Ford and Babe Ruth.

[Disclaimer: As with any postseason record, Bob Costas and assorted other guardians of the integrity of the national pastime would like you to know that previous record holders did all of that wonderful pitching in World Series games – not in these despicable little playoff games that don’t even count for anything. Of course, we can’t have the few children who are interested in baseball growing up thinking that Mariano Rivera, pitching against these sub-World Series performers like Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, and Jason Giambi, was doing anything remotely similar to Whitey Ford facing clubs like the mighty 1960 Pirates].

The end of the 2001 World Series (1B, throwing error, comebacker, 2B, HB, bloop, OK?) was, of course, the worst thing ever to happen. Interestingly, it was right after the series that I first started hearing people talking about Rivera as a Hall of Famer. You know you are doing pretty well when you blow Game 7 of the World Series and touch off a Hall of Fame debate about yourself.

Hall of Fame talk surrounding a player can have a variety of meanings. If it is about a guy starting out, like Albert Pujols, the question is, will he sustain it? For someone on the way out, like Fred McGriff, the question is did he meet the standard, did he hit enough homers or whatever? Stumping for Rivera in mid-career is asking for validation about either a) the centrality of the closer to a championship team, or b) the centrality of the postseason to the whole baseball experience.

It would be reasonable to think that the Hall of Fame ought to enshrine pitchers basically in order of the wins they contributed to their teams by saving runs over the course of their careers, with slight adjustments for peak performance, postseason play, leadership, having invented the curveball or whatnot. That is more or less the sabermetrician’s basic player greatness model, right?

On that scale, Rivera has a long way to go; impossibly long actually. For example, Baseball Prospectus, after attempting to adjust for park and era, estimates chic sabr-candidate Bert Blyleven saved 1408 runs over what a replacement level pitcher might have (PRAR). They have Mariano Rivera worth only 477 runs above replacement so far. Win Shares has Blyleven leading Rivera 339 to 128. Even with the new efforts to give more credit to pitchers in high-leverage situations, closers just aren’t going to climb Raw Greatness Mountain.

So to make a Hall of Fame case for Rivera, you first have to think that relievers get to compete in their own category. If you do, then Rivera is a contender. Mike at Mike’s Baseball Rants has undertaken a major study of relief pitchers to try to determine the value of the runs they’ve saved as adjusted for the efficiency of their use pattern. Despite being in the somewhat inefficient “closer” pattern, Rivera holds his own against the stoppers and firemen of yore. Mike’s system ranks Rivera as the third greatest relief pitcher of all time, behind Hoyt Wilhelm and Rich Gossage (although as an active pitcher, his ranking may suffer through the end of his career).

And that’s without the postseason record. In his January 20th piece, “Closed Out of Cooperstown,” Tom Verducci came down in favor of the de facto one-per-decade Hall of Fame reliever standard, which is reasonable enough. After likening Rivera to a place-kicker and Troy Percival, he does admit, “Of course Rivera has been knighted as The Greatest Postseason Reliever in History.”

The passive construction of this sentence fails to do justice to the achievement. Rivera wasn’t just handed this title by some sort of lazy sportswriter peerage. To say that he is the “greatest postseason reliever” is granting him nothing beyond the obvious. The real question is whether he is in fact simply the greatest postseason player of all time.

I’m not sure you could ever reconcile postseason performance quality and opportunity to everyone’s satisfaction, but Rivera has an awfully impressive combination of quality of play and playing time logged. It’s not a slam dunk. Babe Ruth’s teams won seven championships, and he could have been World Series MVP four or five times. I’m just saying Rivera has to be in the argument with Ruth, Bob Gibson, and not too many others. If he’s the greatest postseason player of all time, with a substantial specialist’s career, I think that makes a pretty decent case.

Buster Olney, in an interview with Bronx Banter, said “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.”

I don’t want to overrate the closer’s role in particular but from 1995-2003, the Yankees played .602 ball in the regular season, and .653 ball in the playoffs. There were two Yankee players in this run who really stepped up their games in postseason: Orlando Hernandez and Mariano Rivera. To say Rivera would not lose in the ninth inning perhaps takes you into the clutch ability debate. The baseball intelligentsia cannot abide fans who pop the clutch for Jeter, Pettitte, or Tino (hey, has Jason Giambi gotten any credit for hitting two homers off Pedro in Game 7 yet?) because they know performance in small samples is not predictive.

This point is lost on the Church of Clutch, because to them, calling someone a clutch player is not really a prediction anyway, but more like an appreciation of past favors. It is on this level that Rivera’s postseason numbers are relevant. Not that he would not lose, but that for a crucial stretch of games he did not, not often anyway. Our modern baseball experience is big and little dynasties dominating small divisions and racking up tons of postseason games. There are guys like John Smoltz, Bernie Williams, and Mariano who might not quite stack up as traditional Hall of Famers, but have been our October fixtures for a decade, annually contesting baseball’s most important games. Nobody has been better in those games than Mo. If you want the Hall of Fame to reflect that, I won’t argue the point.

Chris DeRosa lives in Oakhurst, NJ and had the absurdly good luck to be at both the ’95 ALDS Game 2 and the ’03 ALCS Game 7 to see Mo pitch. You can reach him at christopherderosa@yahoo.com

Cooperstown Confidential
2004-02-27 12:58
by Alex Belth

Spring Training Edition

By Bruce Markusen February 26, 2004

What’s On Second?

Now that “The Trade” has become official and all interested parties have had a chance to chime in on the merits of Alfonso Soriano vs. Alex Rodriguez (and it is amazing how a few Sabermetricians are now saying that onetime whipping post Soriano isn’t really that far from the godlike A-Rod on the value scale), it’s time for the Yankees to begin their spring training search for a new All-Star second baseman. Or at least one who can pick up a ground ball. Right now, the list of candidates features four participants, but that could change based on a trade or a waiver wire pickup during the spring. Let’s start with the pivotmen currently training with the Yankees down in Tampa.

In House Candidates:

Erick Almonte: He’s probably the longest of long shots to win the second base derby, given his non-roster status and lack of experience at the position. Almonte has struggled at shortstop, so he might be better suited for the other side of the diamond in the long run. I’d expect that he’ll start the season as the Opening Day second baseman for the Columbus Clippers.

Homer Bush: Also a non-roster invite, Bush is working against long odds, especially since he didn’t play in the major leagues in 2003. Offensively, Bush will never compile even a decent on-base percentage since he likes to swing early in the count. On the plus side, Joe Torre remembers the impact that Bush had as a reserve in 1998, when he became a late-inning intimidator with his game-changing speed on the bases. Bush has lost a step or two since then and is no longer a feared basestealer, but he’s still an above-average defender at second base with plus range and the capability of turning the double play. The 31-year-old Bush could emerge as a sleeper in the second-base sweepstakes, particularly if general manager Brian Cashman fails to swing a deal for help outside of the organization.

Miguel Cairo: Of the four in-house candidates, Cairo is probably the weakest hitter; he won’t hit for a high average, doesn’t draw a lot of walks, and has no power. Yet, he’ll probably catch Torre’s attention with his fielding around the bag, where he’s more comfortable than either Bush or Enrique Wilson. Once a favorite of Tony LaRussa in St. Louis, Cairo has good range and soft hands, and turns the double play well. Unlike Bush, Cairo has a fallback option of making the team as a backup player; he possesses enough versatility to play third base, shortstop, or the outfield, whereas Bush can only play second or third.

Enrique Wilson: Despite several unproductive seasons as a Bronx utilityman, Wilson has managed to gain favor with both Torre and Cashman. They like his professionalism and upbeat attitude, which helps them overlook his severe lack of offensive output in pinstripes. Wilson really hasn’t hit since his days in Cleveland, and he’s not as capable a defender as either Bush or Cairo. Yet, Wilson is almost certain to make the team and has already been installed as the pre-season second-base favorite by Torre.

While the list of in-house contenders is relatively short—and somewhat nondescript—the possibilities on the trade market offer a far wider range of options. The name of Jose Vidro has been mentioned by a number of writers, but the Expos’ infielder would likely cost too much in terms of prospects. More to the point, he really doesn’t answer the Yankees’ primary need of better infield defense; their priority should be in finding a second baseman with as much range as possible. Vidro, who is no better than average in the field and was bothered by a strained knee in 2003, is a great offensive player, but the Yankees already have a lineup that runs eight deep.

Putting Vidro aside, here are the players the Yankees will realistically consider from other organizations.

Out-House (So To Speak) Candidates:

Alex Cora (Dodgers): Rated strictly on defensive ability, Cora ranks as the best available second baseman on the trade market. He’s also an extremely weak hitter, making him a kind of modern-day Mark Belanger among middle infielders. If the Dodgers had better hitters around him, they could live with Cora for another summer, but their overall offensive ineptitude makes him a liability. If the Yankees can come up with a young hitter as the bait, they’ll likely be in a better position to put Cora in pinstripes. Unfortunately, the Yankees are lacking in offensive prospects, unless the Dodgers would reconsider the abilities of outfielder Bubba Crosby, whom they traded away for Robin Ventura last summer. In reality, that’s not likely to happen.

Jerry Hairston Jr. (Orioles): The son of the former White Sox outfielder is very much available; the Orioles have Brian Roberts to play second base and would love nothing better than to trade Hairston for pitching help. The Yankees might be a match, since they have the likes of Jorge DePaula, Scott Proctor, or Bret Prinz to offer. While the 27-year-old Hairston brings nothing special to the offensive table (he’s a .270 hitter with plus speed), he has forged a reputation as a solid defender with good quickness in turning the double play. The Yankees, however, will want to take an updated look at Hairston this spring, just to make sure that he’s fully recovered from the broken foot that cost him nearly four months of the 2003 season.

Mark Loretta (Padres): The Yankees passed on an opportunity to trade for Loretta last season, when their primary infield need was at third base. Now the Yankees are considering Loretta for the other side of the infield, where he has plenty of experience and sure hands, if not tremendous range. With a glut of second base prospects (led by California League MVP Josh Barfield), the Padres might still be interested in trading Loretta, but the asking price has gone up after a career season that saw him hit .314 with 13 home runs. The Padres will likely ask for one of the Yankees’ few remaining minor league gems (translated, that’s Dioner Navarro or Eric Duncan), a request that Cashman will almost certainly turn down for the 32-year-old Loretta.

Frank Menechino (A’s): A onetime starter, the overachieving Menechino has hit a roadblock in Oakland, where Mark Ellis figures to play second base until he becomes eligible for free agency. Although Menechino hit under .200 last year, he still compiled a respectable .364 on-base percentage, a testament to the kind of plate patience that Billy Beane and Co. love. Defensively, the native New Yorker is best described as steady and solid, while possessing only adequate range. Given his age (33) and his lack of versatility, he’s more than available on the trade market; that said, Beane won’t just give him away, not when he knows the Yankees have a major need at the position.

Luis Rivas (Twins): After Alex Cora, the 24-year-old Rivas is the best defender among those second basemen who are realistic trade targets for New York. Rivas has good range (though less than Cora), but has a cannon arm which makes him deadly on double plays and choppers hit up the middle. The bad news? He’s a poor hitter who’ll struggle to get out of the .250 range and won’t take many walks—in other words, a suitable ninth-place hitter in the potent Yankee order. The Twins might be willing to move Rivas for some inexpensive bullpen help, which could come in the form of Proctor or Prinz.

Junior Spivey (Brewers): Of all the potentially realistic trade candidates for the Yankees, Spivey appears to be the best all-around talent. He’s a poor-man’s Alfonso Soriano, what with his combination of power and speed, and his tendencies as an impatient mistake hitter who swings too often and too hard. Defensively, Spivey is also similar in style to Soriano, with stiff hands and awkwardness in turning double plays, but he has more range than the former Yankee second baseman. So why are the Brewers willing to trade him? For one, he is scheduled to make $2.3 million in 2004, a pittance for a pinstriped player but an exorbitant sum for a member of the Brew Crew. Secondly, Milwaukee has a glut of veterans at the position, including fellow ex-Diamondback Craig Counsell and holdover Keith Ginter, with stud prospect Rickie Weeks waiting in the minor league wings. If the Brewers are willing to take some combination of DePaula, Prinz, Proctor, and rehabbing minor league hurler Danny Borrell, and don’t insist on Navarro or Duncan, the Yankees might be able to squeeze out a deal with baseball’s troubled franchise.

At least two other second basemen have been mentioned in trade rumors, but neither seems like a realistic possibility for the Yankees. Cincinnati’s talented D’Angelo Jimenez might be considered a lighter version of Jose Vidro; he’s a good, patient hitter with some pop. Unfortunately, he carries some heavy defensive baggage at second base (it’s hard to believe he was once projected as a major league shortstop). And then there’s Toronto’s Orlando Hudson, a youngster with a high ceiling, but I can’t see J.P. Ricciardi making a deal that would help his divisional rivals in any way.

Card Corner

I started collecting baseball cards in the spring of 1972; this Jim “Mudcat” Grant Topps card (No. 111 in the set) was one of the very first I picked up at my local Gillard’s Stationary Store in Bronxville, New York. Even though I didn’t know anything about Grant as a player (he could have been the batting coach for all I knew, and I certainly didn’t know about the “Mudcat” moniker), I loved that card almost immediately—partly because of the green and white Oakland uniform and partly because of those funky oh-so-1970s mutton-chop sideburns. Simply put, Mudcat owned the biggest and best groomed sideburns in the big leagues.

Little did I realize that this would be the last Topps card issued for Grant as an active player. I had no idea that Grant had already been released by the A’s during the winter. I never thought that would have happened, considering the fairly impressive statistics on the back of Grant’s card.

After a mid-season trade to the A’s, Grant had finished out the 1971 season in the Bay Area. Grant had pitched effectively in middle relief for manager Dick Williams, posting an earned run average of 1.98 in 15 appearances. Although Mudcat appeared to have plenty of life left in his 36-year-old arm, the A’s released him after the season, primarily because Charlie Finley didn’t want to foot the bill on the right-hander’s expensive contract. As a seven-year-old baseball fan, I didn’t understand how money could alter a front office’s opinion of a player. Either a guy could play—or he couldn’t.

In what remains a mystery to me to this day, no other major league team would give Mudcat a spot on its 25-man roster. Several teams seemed needy of relief help (including the Red Sox, Angels, Royals, and Cubs) but only one team—the non-contending Indians—gave him as much as a non-roster spring training invite. Settling for what amounted to a glorified tryout, Grant failed to make the Indians’ staff in the spring and received a not-so-generous offer of a demotion to Triple-A Portland. Grant decided to continue his career by pitching briefly in the minor leagues, all the while hoping that a major league team would come calling. When no one showed interest, Mudcat grew discouraged, prompting what seemed like an unfair and premature retirement. Mudcat thus ended his career with a record of 145 wins, 119 losses, a respectable ERA of 3.63, and 53 saves.

Instead of leaving the game completely, the outgoing Grant opted for a job as a broadcaster with the Indians. During a seven-year tenure with Cleveland, Grant doubled as the team’s community director and delivered about 200 speeches per year. After a short broadcasting stint with the A’s, Grant removed himself temporarily from baseball circles, becoming a special marketing director for the Anheuser-Busch Company in the Cleveland area. Grant also worked for the speakers’ bureau of the NBA’s Cleveland Cavaliers. Grant returned to the national pastime in 1984, when he was chosen as an assistant venue director for baseball at the Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles.

About a month after the Olympics ended, Grant ran into former playing great Hank Aaron, who was serving as the Atlanta Braves’ Director of Player Personnel. Aaron offered Grant a position as pitching coach in Atlanta’s minor league system. Grant quickly accepted the offer. Six years later, Grant began operating a nationwide program called “Slug-Out Illiteracy, Slug-Out Drugs” in Los Angeles, where he encouraged former players to put forth an anti-drug message during baseball instructional clinics. And as part of his efforts to help former players who have hit hard times, Grant has faithfully served as a board member of the Major League Baseball Players Alumni Association.

All the while, the personable Grant has continued to pursue one of his life-long loves: singing. Mudcat, who began his professional music career at the age of 30 with a group called “Mudcat and the Kittens,” still tours on occasion and performs his song-and-dance act at nightclubs. “I’m a pretty good singer,” Grant told Sports Collectors Digest in 1995. “I was taught by some of the best, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Ella Fitzgerald, Nancy Wilson, Bobby Darren, O.C. Smith.”

Now Grant’s hoping to get some of the best young African-American baseball talent interested in playing a sport that has become all too foreign to them. Grant, who recently visited the Hall of Fame to participate in a Legends Series event celebrating Black History Month, is currently working on a project called the “12 Black Aces.” The effort celebrates the dozen African Americans who have had 20-win seasons in the major leagues. Grant hopes the project, which is headlined by a book that is currently in progress, will help resurrect the interest that young African Americans have in the National Pastime… In our next column, I’ll provide a partial transcript of the interview I conducted with Grant and his former Pirate teammate Al Oliver, who visited the Hall on February 14.

The Nickname Game

SABR member and researcher extraordinaire Maxwell Kates recently compiled a list of unofficial team nicknames for SABR’s on-line exchange. While all current-day teams have official nicknames, there’s always been a tendency to give some clubs more colorful names, as a way of paying tribute to unique characteristics or personalities within the teams’ dynamics. Using Kates’ list as a drawing board, here are 10 of the most colorful names that have been given to teams over the years, either by fans, the media, or by the players themselves.

“Murderers’ Row:” 1927-1928 New York Yankees
No team nickname has matched the fame of “Murderers’ Row,” which actually originated as a 19th century reference to an isolated row of prison cells featuring some of the worst criminals of the infamous Tombs prison. The baseball version of Murderers’ Row included four future Hall of Famers—Earle Combs (batting leadoff), Babe Ruth (batting third), Lou Gehrig (in the cleanup spot), and Tony Lazzeri (batting sixth). The ’27 Yankees didn’t receive much punch from the bottom of the order, where weak links like Jumping Joe Dugan and Pat Collins resided, but the top six batters in the lineup did the damage of nine full men.

“The Gas House Gang:” 1934-1939 St. Louis Cardinals
This name originated with a neighborhood on the lower east side of Manhattan, where a violent group of young men tormented citizens and came to call themselves the “Gashouse Gang.” The Cardinals’ version of the “Gang” wasn’t quite as vicious as the street thugs, but they did feature a number of ruffians, including infielders Leo Durocher and Pepper Martin, outfielder Ducky Medwick, and ace pitcher Dizzy Dean. The Cardinals of those era played a hard-nosed brand of ball, sliding hard into bases, knocking over opposing defenders, and rarely backing away from on-field brawls.

“Whiz Kids:” 1950 Philadelphia Phillies:
Coming out of nowhere to win the National League pennant, Eddie Sawyer’s “Kids” featured a day-to-day lineup of players almost exclusively under the age of 30. The oldest regular was 30-year-old first baseman Eddie Waitkus, but the stars were the 23-year-old Richie Ashburn and the 25-year-old Del Ennis. The starting rotation was also headlined by two youngsters, Robin Roberts and Curt Simmons, whose combined total of wins (37) nearly matched their collective age (44).

“Big Red Machine:” 1969-1976 Cincinnati Reds
Some newspapers and magazines began to refer to Cincinnati’s dynamic offensive team as the “Big Red Machine” as early as 1969 and ’70, but the name really caught on when the franchise steamrolled the rest of the majors in winning the ’75 and ’76 World Championships. The cast of characters changed significantly from 1969 to 1976, with Lee May, Tommy Helms, and Bobby Tolan eventually giving way to George Foster, Joe Morgan, and Ken Griffey Sr. The constants were Johnny Bench, Tony Perez, and Pete Rose, though both Perez and Rose switched positions in mid-stream; Perez moved from third to first, and Rose went from right field to left field to third base. Combining power and speed, few teams in history have matched the offensive potency of “The Machine.”
“Pittsburgh Lumber Company:” 1970-1976 Pittsburgh Pirates
Using a free-swinging approach that might not have been fully appreciated by some Sabermetricians, the Pirates pummeled their way to five division titles, one pennant, and a World Championship during the first half of the decade. Other than Willie Stargell and Bob Robertson, the “Lumber Company” didn’t like to take walks, which they generally regarded as unmanly. Instead, Roberto Clemente, Al Oliver, and Manny Sanguillen preferred to swing the bat early and often, and they did it well, banging a parade of singles and doubles in a constant barrage against opposing pitching staffs.
“The F-Troop:” 1973-1974 Atlanta Braves
The Braves’ bench players came to call themselves the “F-Troop,” in reference to the popular TV show that starred Ken Berry and Forrest Tucker. Although the Braves finished fifth and third, respectively, in 1973 and ’74, they did have some productive players in reserve. In 1973, backup catcher-first baseman Dick Dietz hit .295 while drawing an amazing 49 walks against only 25 strikeouts. Reserve first baseman Frank Tepedino hit .295 with 29 RBIs. And utilityman Chuck Goggin batted .289 while showing the versatility to both catch and play shortstop. Without Dietz and Goggin, the bench wasn’t nearly as productive in ’74, resulting in a quick fadeaway for the F-Troop nickname.
“The Southside Hitmen:” 1977 Chicago White Sox
The ’77 White Sox of Bob Lemon finished no better than third in the American League West, couldn’t field a lick, and had the third-worst pitching in the league, but still managed to win 90 games while creating a legacy that makes them one of the most beloved Sox teams in memory. The hard-hitting, stone-gloved lineup featured Jorge Orta at second, Eric Soderholm at third, Ralph Garr in left, Richie Zisk in right, and Oscar Gamble at DH, all the while wearing those awful black and white throwback uniforms that featured collared shirts of the “untuckable” variety. Finishing second in the league in runs scored, the “Hitmen” made the summer of ’77 a fun one in the Windy City.
“The Bronx Zoo:” 1977-1979 New York Yankees
This nickname became popular because of the book of the same name written by Sparky Lyle and Peter Golenbock. “The Bronx Zoo” served as a perfect description of a team where arguments took place on a daily basis, players fought in the showers (Cliff Johnson vs. Goose Gossage), the team’s center fielder (Mickey Rivers) spoke in a language all his own, and Lyle himself routinely sat on birthday cakes delivered to the clubhouse. It was all in a day’s work with the Yankees of the late seventies.

“Riders of the Lonesome Pine:” 1981 Detroit Tigers
The ’81 Tigers finished out of the playoff money during the split season and the bench players really were nothing special, but they deserve credit for coming up with one of the most colorful nicknames for a backup squad of players. “The Riders” included the wacky (Johnny Wockenfuss), the obscure (Ron Jackson, Mick Kelleher, and Stan Papi), and the forgotten (Lynn Jones and Ricky Peters).

“Harvey’s Wallbangers:” 1982-1983 Milwaukee Brewers
This nickname was a natural, given the first name of manager Harvey Kuenn and the team’s ability to hit home runs at a moment’s notice. Stormin’ Gorman Thomas led the American League with 39 home runs in 1982, while Cecil Cooper and Ben Oglivie also cracked the 30-home run barrier. The “Wallbangers” advanced to the seventh game of the 1982 World Series, but fell back in ‘83, finishing fifth in a stacked American League East. Two future Hall of Famers, Paul Molitor and Robin Yount, played as regulars for the ’82 Wallbangers, while two others, Don Sutton and Rollie Fingers, contributed to an underrated pitching staff.

Pastime Passings

Andy Seminick (Died on February 22 in Melbourne, Florida; age 83; cancer): Seminick was the last surviving everyday member of the 1950 Philadelphia Phillies’ “Whiz Kids,” who stunned the baseball world by capturing the National League pennant over seemingly superior competition. Regarded by many as the spiritual leader of the Whiz Kids, the rough-and-tumble catcher batted .288 with 24 home runs in 1950. It was arguably the best season of Seminick’s 15-year career, as he matched lifetime highs in home runs and RBIs, and achieved a personal best in batting average that summer. Respected for his toughness, Seminick played in the 1950 World Series despite a badly injured ankle. For his career, Seminick hit 164 home runs, making him one of the most powerful hitting catchers of the late forties and early fifties. After his playing days, the hard-nosed Seminick became highly successful as a minor league manager in the Phillies’ organization. Considered outstanding in the area of player development, Seminick managed the likes of Mike Schmidt, Ferguson Jenkins, Alex Johnson, and Bob Boone, all of whom eventually became stars in the major leagues. In particular, Seminick helped Boone make a difficult transition from third base to catcher at Double-A Reading in 1971, paving the way for the young Phillies farmhand to make the big leagues only one year later.


COMMENTARY: I was surprised to hear about Seminick’s passing, considering how he looked on a visit to Cooperstown a few years ago. Even though he was well into his seventies at the time, witnesses say he still owned the kind of rock-hard frame that he had as a player. He had apparently suffered from cancer for several years, but it was only within the last few months that his condition worsened appreciably… For years, it’s been reported that Seminick played the ’50 World Series with a broken ankle, but a source who once talked to Seminick said that the catcher actually had sustained torn ligaments in the ankle. Either way, his willingness to play in the Series with such a painful injury was testament to the kind of rawhide toughness that Seminick possessed.

Charlie Fox (Died on February 16 in Stanford, California; age 82; complications from pneumonia): A former player and manager in the major leagues, “Irish” was best known for his tenure as manager of the San Francisco Giants in the early 1970s. After replacing Clyde King midway through the 1970 season, Fox led the Giants to the National League West title in 1971, forging a record of 90-72. The Giants’ performance under his leadership earned Fox National League Manager of the Year honors. Although favored by some to advance to that fall’s World Series, the Giants lost the Championship Series to the Pittsburgh Pirates, falling three games to one. Fox remained the manager of the Giants through the 1974 season, compiling a record of 348-327 in the Bay Area. He later managed the Montreal Expos and Chicago Cubs on an interim basis, and also served as the Expos’ general manager from 1976 to 1978. Fox most recently worked as a scout for the Houston Astros from 1990 to 1993 before retiring… As a player, Fox batted .429 in three games for the New York Giants in 1942, but saw his catching career interrupted when he entered the Navy to serve in World War II.


COMMENTARY: In looking at photographs and baseball card images of him from his managing days with the Giants, I think Fox epitomized what a big league manager should look like: tough, grizzled, no-nonsense, and about 20 years older than his actual age. As Baseball Primer contributor Steve Treder has pointed out, Fox was a distinctive character who owned a good sense of humor and spoke with a heavy Irish accent that made him all the more quotable. He also compiled a pretty good record as a manager with the Giants, considering that his tenure coincided with the declines of both Willie Mays and Juan Marichal, and the horrific trade that sent Gaylord Perry to the Indians for Sudden Sam McDowell.

Lawrence Ritter (Died on February 15 in New York City; age 81; series of strokes): One of the most respected authors of the baseball genre, Ritter wrote the highly-acclaimed book, The Glory of Their Times, a compilation of oral histories of players from the early 20th century. Ritter spent four years traveling and interviewing subjects with a tape recorder. Among those he interviewed were Ty Cobb and Honus Wagner, two of the five inaugural members of the Hall of Fame. A devoted and popular member of SABR, Ritter also wrote several other lesser-known but still respected books on baseball, including Lost Ballparks and Leagues Apart: The Men and Times of the Negro Leagues.

Ted Tappe (Died on February 13 in Wenatchee, Washington; age 73): Although Tappe had a relatively nondescript three-year career in the major leagues, he did gain notoriety when he homered in his first big league at-bat. Making his debut for the Cincinnati Reds on September 14, 1950, the left-handed hitting outfielder came to the plate as a pinch-hitter and hit a home run against Brooklyn’s Erv Palica. It was one of five home runs that Tappe would hit in only 58 career at-bats.

Adriana Orsulak (Died on February 9 in Timonium, Maryland; age 39; brain cancer): Drawing praise for the courage she displayed in battling cancer for many years, the wife of former major league outfielder Joe Orsulak finally succumbed to the disease in early February. Adriana Orsulak first met her husband in Venezuela in 1983; they eventually married and had two children. Joe Orsulak played for the Pittsburgh Pirates, Baltimore Orioles, New York Mets, and Florida Marlins during a 13-year career in the major leagues.

Juan Armenteros (Died on October 8, 2003 in Miami, Florida; age unknown; bladder cancer): Playing in the Negro Leagues in the years after Jackie Robinson integrated the major leagues, Armenteros was a member of the Kansas City Monarchs from1953 to 1955. A native of Cuba, he also played for the Havana Cuban Giants and for Cuba’s Artes Officio baseball team.

Cooperstown Confidential writer Bruce Markusen is the author of three books on baseball, including A Baseball Dynasty: Charlie Finley’s Swingin’ A’s, which is available at www.amazon.com and at Borders Books. A fourth book, The Kid: The Life of Ted Williams (Greenwood Press) is scheduled for release this spring.

Yankee Preview Friday: Jorge Posada
2004-02-27 08:11
by Alex Belth


Bonafide Bomber

By Jay Jaffe

The area directly behind home plate in Yankee Stadium has played host to a pretty fair collection of ballplayers. Two Hall of Famers, Bill Dickey and Yogi Berra, have donned the tools of intelligence for the Yankees, and four men -- Dickey, Berra, Elston Howard and Thurman Munson -- have won a total of five MVP awards (three by Berra), five Gold Gloves (three by Munson) and made an astounding 42 All-Star teams. Not coincidentally, the uniform numbers of those four men have all been retired by the Yankees. Into the large cleats of these bronzed Bombers steps Jorge Posada, a man with four All-Star appearances already under his belt, not to mention a healthy third-place showing in the 2003 MVP vote. With relatively little fanfare, Posada has shown himself not only a solid, worthy heir to the men who've manned that hallowed spot of dirt, but also one of the league's most valuable players and arguably the best catcher in baseball.

Along with Bernie Williams, Derek Jeter, and Mariano Rivera, Posada remains one of the shrinking core of homegrown Yankees who ushered in their recent dynasty, "Joe Torre's guys." He's the junior member of that quartet, playing only nine major-league games prior to 1997 while the other three figured prominently in the team's 1996 championship, their first under Torre. But he's become part of the old guard, a leader in the clubhouse as well as on the field, his fiery demeanor channeled to better use than simply goading Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez onto the same page. Following the Yanks' early ouster from the 2002 playoffs, Posada emerged as a vocal critic of his teammates' uninspired play, echoing Derek Jeter's it-don't-mean-a-thing-if-we-don't-get-that-ring sentiments, and in Jeter's absence last year, he assumed even more of a leadership role. The hothead in him still emerges from time to time; recall his heated exchange with Pedro Martinez as all hell broke loose in last year's ALCS Game Three.

The Yankees drafted the Puerto Rican Posada in the 24th round in 1990 out of Calhoun (Alabama) Community College, but it was as a second baseman, not as a catcher. Looking at his physique today, those thunder-thighs supporting that skinny upper body, it's difficult to imagine him fielding grounders or pivoting on the double play, which may be why after his first season in the minors the Yanks converted him to a backstop. Given that he led his league in either passed balls or errors in 1993 and 1994, some would argue that he wasn't stopping much of anything. But Posada's hitting skills, particularly his abilities to control the strike zone and to hit for power from both sides of the plate, were apparent as far back as 1992, when he hit .277 AVG/.389 OBP/.472 SLG for Greenville (A). He spent three years in AAA Columbus, struggling in 1994 (.240/.308/.406) but winning International League All-Star honors in both 1995 (.255/.355/.435) and 1996 (.271/.405/.460) and earning brief cups of coffee in the Bronx in the latter years. He even made the postseason roster in 1995, scoring a run as a pinch-runner in the Division series against Seattle.

In part due to his defensive struggles and to Torre's taste for defense-first catchers, the Yankees brought Posada along slowly once he stuck on the roster for good in 1997. Jorge appeared in only 60 games that season while Girardi remained the regular, but the roles were reversed during 1998, and he's held the job ever since. Since Girardi's departure following the 1999 season, Posada has become even more of a mainstay in the Yankee lineup, catching 130 or more games in each of the past four years, hitting .278/.389/.497 and averaging 25 HR and 95 in that span. Most teams would do well to have such a solid contributor at any position, let alone catcher. For the Yanks, such production from their homegrown up-the-middle players has been as much a given in the Torre era as a formidable rotation.

Prior to last season, Posada's best year with the bat came in 2000, when he hit .287/.417/.527 with 28 homers and 107 walks. His raw averages and totals in 2003 were slightly off that mark, .281/.405/.518 with 30 homers and 93 walks, but relative to the league, he was a better hitter; his adjusted OPS of 146 (seventh in the league) blew away his 2000 mark of 134. Notably, he cut down his strikeouts considerably last year, whiffing only 110 times after averaging 142 in the previous three seasons. Oh, and he also tied Yogi for the Yankee record for home runs by a catcher in a single season while topping 100 RBI for the first time. Not too shabby.

One factor which may have played a part in Posada's great season was the improved health of his son, Jorge Posada IV. The youngest Posada, now four, suffers from craniosynostosis, which causes the bones of the skull to fuse before the brain has stopped growing. He's endured three major surgeries to correct the problem, including a ten-hour ordeal a year ago this week. The sight of young Jorge squirting onto the field during the player introductions of each of the last two All-Star Games has added a heartwarming touch to the games, and it's not too hard to envision how his improved health has been a boon to his father.

Was Jorge the Yankees' MVP last season? In a year which saw Derek Jeter miss six weeks with a dislocated shoulder, Bernie Williams undergo knee surgery, Jason Giambi struggle with eye and knee problems, and Nick Johnson break his hand, Posada's got a pretty solid case. He may not have the speed and flash of Alfonso Soriano, but his plate discipline makes him a much more valuable hitter. Looking at two valuation metrics which consider both offense and defense, Baseball Prospectus' Wins Above Replacement and Bill James' Win Shares (as calculated at BaseballGraphs.com, Posada tied for the team lead with Soriano in one and edged Giambi in the other:

         WARP3   WS   WSAA
Posada    9.2  27.75  13.0
Soriano   9.2  27.38   8.6
Mussina   8.7  18.62   7.3
Giambi    8.5  27.68  12.6
Clemens   8.0  15.47   4.5
Rivera    7.2  17.49   9.7
Wells     6.5  14.46   3.4
Pettitte  5.7  14.62   1.6
Matsui    4.8  18.89   1.2
Johnson   4.8  14.49   5.6
Williams  4.5  13.13  -0.1
Jeter     4.2  17.81   4.4 

The third column is Win Shares Above Average, an attempt to reconcile one of the major flaws with James' Win Shares, namely the lack of an opportunity baseline (the methodology for WSAA is here). While I'm more partial to systems which measure from a replacement level than from average, the WSAA adjustment is striking. Not only does Posada shoot to the top of the Yanks, he's got the fourth-highest total in the A.L. All of this confirms Posada's legitimacy as an MVP candidate last season (he finished third; I made the case here that he should win the award).

Is Posada the best catcher in the game? Win Shares and WARP3 support that conclusion emphatically. Here are the Top 10 catchers over the last three seasons (Win Shares 2002 data from Baseball Truth; WSAA isn't available yet for years prior to 2003):

           WARP3   WS
Posada      23.0   73
Rodriguez   21.7   52
Lo Duca     19.6   66
Lopez       16.2   53
Pierzynski  15.0   54 
Piazza      15.0   51  
Hernandez   14.2   44  
Kendall     14.1   42  
Varitek     13.4   47  
Santiago    10.6   38

The key here is durability. Aside from L.A.'s Paul Lo Duca and Minnesota's A.J. Pierzynski, all of the would-be heavyweight contenders for the Best Catcher title besides Posada have missed a significant chunk of time or ruined a season due to serious injury. Pudge's back, Piazza's groin, Kendall's ankle, Lopez's knee, and Varitek's elbow have given way, while Posada's ability to remain healthy, despite nagging injuries and arthroscopic shoulder surgery after the 2001 season, has made him the most valuable catcher in baseball as much as his bat has.

As for his glove, that's not his strongest suit. Posada has thrown out only about 30 percent of opposing base stealers over the course of his career, which is solid but unexceptional. Last season he ranked 19th out of 29 qualifying catchers at throwing runners out. He also led the major leagues in passed balls, despite the relatively well-publicized return (as these things go) of catching instructor Gary Tuck after a few years' absence. Looking at the advanced metrics, Posada places almost exactly average on the Prospectus fielding scale, fourth in total fielding Win Shares (7.53) for an AL catcher, and sixth the league in terms of Win Shares per 1000 innings (6.47, leaders based on 500 innings played minimum). It's worth noting that Pudge, long with the reputation for being the best defensive catcher, has fallen off considerably; his WS/1000 is pretty anemic (3.75), and he's only 9 Fielding Runs Above Average over the past two seasons according to BP.

For all of his defensive woes, Posada is certainly an asset, and it helps that the Yankee staff speaks highly of his game-calling instincts and his ability to frame pitches (though his tendency to argue balls and strikes with the umpires while hitting doesn't win him many favors). It helps even more, of course, that the Yanks have had an excellent rotation to begin with. But with three new starters joining the staff in Javier Vazquez, Kevin Brown, and Jon Leiber, Posada will face some real challenges this year. The sparks might fly between him and the ornery Brown, and he'll have to keep Contreras focused and working on pace. He'll probably mesh quite well with fellow Puerto Rican Vazquez, which should ease his transition to the Bronx, but how he'll fare in working with new relievers Tom Gordon and Paul Quantrill is pure conjecture.

Baserunning is another shortcoming in Posada's game; despite his less than stocky build, he's a slow runner if not exceptionally so for a catcher. Fortunately, he knows this, attempting only 24 steals (9 successfully) in his entire big-league career and hitting only five triples. Since he hits the ball in the air a fair amount, he manages to avoid grounding into double plays, yet another small edge to his game.

Posada signed a five-year, $51 million contract in February of 2002, and while it's small potatoes compared to what Jeter, Giambi, Alex Rodriguez, or Mike Mussina make, that contract does carry with it some risk. Catchers age more rapidly than other ballplayers, and few of them are productive into their late 30s. Posada is 32, and will be pulling down $9 million, $12 million, and $13.5 million (including bonuses) for the rest of the contract, not exactly chump change. The Yankees hold a $12 million team option for 2007 with a $4 million buyout, while Posada can void his contract after this season. Given the slowing growth of player contracts and Posada's attachment to winning, that has about as much chance of happening as the beatification of George Steinbrenner.

The fact that Posada converted to catching at a relatively late age means he's got considerably less mileage on his body than most 32-year-old catchers, and his history of durability bodes well. But based on his age and body type, Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA prediction system sees a bit of decline immediately ahead for Posada; its weighted mean forecast calls for a .261/.368/.460 line with 20 homers. Posada should surpass those numbers if he remains healthy, but lady luck will have her say; one nagging hand injury can hamper a catcher's hitting for the entire season, and one freak injury can alter the expectations for the rest of his career. Just ask Jason Kendall.

Assuming he stays relatively healthy, does Posada have a chance at becoming the all-time greatest Yankee catcher? Almost certainly, no. His late start means he won't rack up the career totals of the exceptionally durable Berra and Dickey, both of whom were established stars by their mid-20s and remained productive into their late 30s.

Earlier this winter, using Baseball Prospectus' Wins Above Replacement metrics, I took a look at the hitters on the 2004 Hall of Fame ballot and compared them with the enshrinees at each position. My method was to balance career length (using total Wins Above Replacement, WARP3) and peak (best five consecutive season WARP3 total, abbreviated W5C) by averaging the two figures together to get what I called the Weighted WARP score (WPWT). The results were published in articles on BP this past January, but since no catchers were on the ballot, that section was omitted. Applying my methodology to the aforementioned Yankee catchers (denoted by Y in the chart below), the Hall of Fame catchers (H), Posada's top contemporaries (C), and some interesting historical also-rans (N) gives an interesting snapshot of where he fits in and where he might end up.

                  WARP3  W5C   WPWT
H Gary Carter     119.8  49.9  84.9
H Johnny Bench    118.0  50.4  84.2
H Yogi Berra      109.9  45.1  77.5
H Carlton Fisk    111.6  39.8  75.7
C Ivan Rodriguez   98.3  47.0  72.7
H Bill Dickey     101.0  42.4  71.7
N Joe Torre        99.7  40.5  70.1
H Gabby Hartnett   95.8  36.7  66.3
N Ted Simmons      94.3  38.2  66.3
C Mike Piazza      84.2  45.5  64.9
H Mickey Cochrane  83.9  45.2  64.6
N Lance Parrish    87.1  33.3  60.2
H Buck Ewing       79.7  33.9  56.8
N Bill Freehan     75.0  35.5  55.3
N Gene Tenace      71.4  38.5  55.0
Y Thurman Munson   68.9  38.1  53.5
N Darrell Porter   75.5  31.6  53.6
H Roy Campanella   64.8  42.0  53.4
N Jim Sundberg     68.2  33.6  50.9
H Ernie Lombardi   71.6  29.3  50.5
N Wally Schang     68.3  25.7  47.0
H Rick Ferrell     64.9  28.9  46.9
Y Elston Howard    58.6  34.3  46.5
N Bob Boone        67.8  22.8  45.3
H Ray Schalk       57.8  25.7  41.8
C Jason Kendall    48.7  34.0  41.3
H Roger Bresnahan  53.7  26.6  40.2
Y Jorge Posada     43.4  36.3  39.9

The lower ranks of Hall of Fame catchers represent the nadir of the Veterans Committee's selections; the Committee elected Ferrell when the thought they were voting for his brother, pitcher Wes Ferrell, while Bresnahan got the nod in part because he pioneered the use of shin guards. More worthy catchers such as Torre (who switched positions), Simmons, Parrish, Freehan, Tenace and Porter had careers superior to that lower echelon. Posada is just beginning to dent this chart, but it's important to note that since he's only been a regular for four years, his peak score is low; the 2004 season will essentially count double, and another season on the order of the one he just had, say a 9.0 WARP, will move him past Ferrell and Howard, among others. Three solid seasons, not exactly a given, would push him past Munson and into the third slot among Yankee catchers, but he'd need about seven good seasons to pass Dickey. He won't make that, but three more good seasons and a typical, gradual decline phase would put him between Ewing and Cochrane, which is Flavor Country where the Hall of Fame is concerned. Even there he won't be a lock, especially because Rodriguez has a pretty good shot at winding up #1 on this chart -- three solid seasons will do it -- and Piazza will continue to climb, albeit less rapidly. Given that it took six ballots for Carter to reach Cooperstown, it's a safe bet that Posada will have to wait for his ship to come in even if it's due, because his contemporaries will overshadow him. The bottom line is that there's far more uncertainty about him getting to that point than there is about him attaining his just reward once he does.

The 2004 season should be another exciting but tense one for Yankee fans, as their star-studded lineup tries to meet the unbelievably lofty expectations that have been set. Posada might just be at the intersection of two of the most interesting questions about the team, namely, "How will this revamped rotation fare?" and, "With all these stars and superstars, who are the true leaders of this team?" Expect Posada to continue asserting his authority even in the presence of A-Rod, backing Jeter in whatever subtle power struggle may emerge between the two men on the left side of the infield, and continuing to be one of Torre's guys in gauging the mood of the team. Posada is definitely part of the Yankees' old guard now, comfortably filling the big shoes of those who came before him.

Jay Jaffe is the sole owner and proprietor of The Futility Infielder, one of the longest-running and best baseball websites on the Internet.

Man Down
2004-02-26 15:21
by Alex Belth


This Just In

Awww, man. The AP is reporting that Bernie Williams will have surgery today to have his appendix removed. This sudden turn of events means that Kenny Lofton will likely start the season as the Yankees' starting center fielder. Shoot, I feel for Bernie. I was hoping that he would be able to get a full season in this year. Maybe he'll only miss a few weeks of the regular season. Still, he'll be behind everyone. Williams played well early last year, but has traditionally been a slow starter. This won't help any. Drag.

Shedding
2004-02-26 13:06
by Alex Belth


While the Yankees officially parted ways with Aaron Boone this afternoon, Joe Torre could be leaning towards a contract extension. Tom Verducci has a piece on the Yankee manager over at SI.com. One of the things they discuss is the Yankee line-up. Like Joel Sherman also suggests in a sabermetric-friendly article in The Post, Bernie Williams could be a fine leadoff man.

Speaking of leadoff hitters, have you seen Johnny Damon, Boston's answer to Captain Caveman? (Damon also looks a bit like the little kid with the deadly boomerang in "The Road Warrior.") Most modern athletes are accused of being dull and guarded, but Damon is a flake with some real chutzpah. The anti-Yankee is sure to keep things lively in Boston this year (as if they needed any help in that department).

Finally, Jay Jaffe, and my label-mate Jon Weisman have posts up today about Michael Lewis' Sports Illustrated article. Both are well-worth checking out.

Lickshot: Michael Lewis Bites Back
2004-02-26 09:00
by Alex Belth


Michael Lewis has a sharp, at times caustic, article in Sports Illustrated this week responding to the critics of his best-selling book, "Moneyball." (The article isn't available on the net, but it's worth picking up the latest issue on the newsstand.) Lewis details his experience writing the book, and clarifies his relationship with the Oakland front office. He also examines how organized baseball is run more like a Club than a business, and how many mainstream newspapermen are card-carrying members of that Club. Lewis was bemused by the criticism directed at Billy Beane:


It was, in a perverse way, an author's dream: The people most upset about my book were the ones unable to divine that I had written it."

Here is Lewis' reaction to Tracy Ringolsby's brusque dismissal of the book. For Ringolsby:


The problem wasn't just that Beane's ego was out of control. It was that the author of Moneyball "has a limited knowledge of baseball and a total infatuation with Billy Beane."

A limited knowledge of baseball--it sounds damning enough, but what does it mean? It doesn't mean that there's some distinct body of insider knowledge that he has mastered, or if it does, Ringolsby produces no evidence of it. It cannot mean the knowledge that might only come from playing the game, for he himself never got beyond Babe Ruth baseball. And it most certainly does not mean that he has some special understanding of what these people in Oakland are up to, because he has shown scant interest in interviewing them. Think of it! A guy who makes his living writing about baseball, working himself into a fine lather about Billy Beane's radical experiment in Oakland and never, according to Beane himself, asking for an explanation. A limited knowledge of baseball: What it means, so far as I can tell, is that Ringolsby is just another guy who's assigned himself the job of barring people from the game who, in his view, have no business inside. He's not a writer. He's a bouncer.

Lewis concludes:


But he has his own moment, this fellow. When he sits down to write his column he knows in his heart that he speaks for a lot of people who work just off the field of play. He may belong only to the women's auxiliary of the Club, but his views of the game reflect those of the actual members. A lot of people who make the decisions about building baseball teams think the way he does. That's why it's possible for a team with no money to win so many games.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it.