I’ve never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys. Then what do you get — a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who’s watching your baseball guys?
That’s Tom Ricketts showing his gummy bear-like intellect. Yes, Tom, that is what you get in that situation! So congratulations on that. And also on using the phrase "baseball guy" six times in two sentences.
I promise I’ll get back on the LeBron-train tomorrow, but this article’s too boneheaded and too time-sensitive to let go by. It’s by some guy called Chris Ruddick, and it’s called
Jeter watch is officially on
Thank god we had Chris to make it official. I was starting to worry that all this Jeter-watching was unapproved.
Let’s be honest, it’s not going to be the same if Derek Jeter gets his 3,000th hit anywhere other than Yankee Stadium.
Thank you, Chris Ruddick, for that hard truth that absolutely nobody has been willing to admit. We appreciate your honesty.
That is the situation we find ourselves with, as the Yankee captain sits seven hits shy of the magical milestone with just four games left in the Bronx before a six-game interleague trip.
An interleague trip? Are you kidding me?
Eye kay arr, broski! Fucking Bud. I can’t believe he’s fucking up this moment like that.
You can make the argument that this is going to be the most celebrated milestone of all-time.
You can make that argument, but you won’t be notorious for winning it. Hank Aaron’s all-time home run record (Bonds’ less so, for reasons I believe we’re all familiar with), Mark McGwire’s single-season home run record (Bonds’ less so, for reasons I… wait…), Cal Ripken’s games played streak. Those are three milestones I am willing to guarantee were more celebrated than Jeter getting his 3000th hit. You get back to me when Jeter collects his 4257th hit and we’ll talk.
For one, it’s the Yankees. They do everything big. If you don’t believe me why don’t you relive some of the events leading up to Jeter passing Lou Gehrig for the franchise lead in hits.
Okay. Hit me with some of them. I’m prepared to be blown away by the enormity of Derek Jeter getting within 1256 hits of the all-time record by reliving his exciting chase of Lou Gherig’s franchise record. Which I had, in truth, honestly forgotten about until you brought it up.
So I’m ready. What do you have?
Can you even name other teams’ all-time hits leaders?
What, is that it? That’s an "event" you want me to relive? Strong argument. Well, off the top of my head, I can name the Cubs, Rockies, Mariners, Orioles, Reds, and maybe Marlins and Red Sox. Do I get a prize?
(I looked this up after I wrote this, and I was right about all of them except the Marlins. And almost definitely could have done like eight more if I’d thought about it longer.)
By the time you are done with the video tributes, endless De-rek Je-ter chants, the Yankees will have you thinking he is the only to ever get to 3,000 hits not just the first player in their amazing history to do it, and believe me you’ll hear that little nugget ad nauseam as well.
Well, like Lieutenant Commander Kunta Kinte says, I don’t have to take your word for it. I have already heard that nugget ad nauseam. You’ve told me like fourteen times yourself, and I have a ways to go yet.
This just won’t be a Yankee celebration, though. Major League Baseball will make a big deal about this. He is the face of baseball. He has been since he entered the league on a regular basis in 1996.
No, Cal Ripken Jr. — remember him? He’s the Orioles’ all-time hits leader — was the face of baseball in 1996. Jetes didn’t take over until the early 2000s. Also, MLB made a pretty big deal about A-Rod’s 600th homer last year too, and he ain’t the face of anything. Except a centaur.
You can call him overrated. You can say he was just at the right place at the right time. You can say whatever you want. But 3,000 hits is 3,000 hits. That is one of those numbers that just catapults you to Cooperstown, kind of like 500 home runs used to.
Jeter probably punched his Hall of Fame ticket a long time ago, but this will serve as validation.
Gosh, you think he’ll get in? I’m not sure!
Yea he’s never won an MVP, or a batting title, has been labeled the worst defensive shortstop in the game by some, and consistently appears on baseball’s overrated lists year in and year out.
Derek Jeter got jobbed in 1999 and arguably again in 2006. He should have at least one MVP. Nobody cares about batting titles — I mean, seriously? I remember 2009. You’re telling me that if Joe Mauer had gone 0-for-whatever on the last day of the season, that would improve Jeter’s Hall of Fame case? That’s looney-tunes.
Derek Jeter is stunningly overrated, and this not unrelated to his having five gold gloves while being the worst defensive shortstop in baseball by literally every single metric.
I am not the biggest Jeter guy. Never have been, but even I have to laugh at the overrated thing. I mean really? Are you paying attention at all? Perhaps it’s jealousy. Maybe it’s all the winning or the attention that comes with it, or perhaps it’s the girls he’s been rumored to be with.
Nah. Defense. But thanks anyhow for the weird aspersions cast on the characters of thousands of people you don’t know.
Let’s face it. It’s probably pretty cool being Derek Jeter.
Sure. Rich, famous, idol of millions. One of the best shortstops ever. Is he still boning Minka Kelly? That’s not bad either.
And here we are faced with the fact that Jeter could reach this milestone on the road. In Wrigley Field of all places where the Yankees head for the first leg of the six-game trip that will wind down with three games in Cincinnati, the city that the team named him their 11th captain back in 2003.
Did you just have a seizure? What the hell did you just type?
Is it possible for Jeter to get seven hits in four games.
Is it possible for you to use the correct punctuation at the end of your sentences. Also: seven hits in four games? Possible, sure. He’ll get probably 18 PA or so. But Jeter’s averaging just over one hit per game this year, so it’s not the way to bet.
But I’m sorry. I’m sure you were just about to say that, yes?
Sure. He’s done it countless times throughout his career. He actually had seven hits in a three- game series against Texas earlier in the year. Now he has to do it again.
Oh. Or you could say… that. By the way, as I’m writing this, Derek Jeter has just been pulled from tonight’s game with "an apparent leg injury." Not clear to me what that means, but I’ll bet it impacts his chances of duplicating the legendary seven-hits-in-three-games feat he once performed.
If I had to place money on this happening before the Yanks leave town, I’d bet on Jeter.
I would take that bet. I mean, even if he hadn’t been hurt. His hits/game this year is so far below what he needs to make the cutoff that I’d almost certainly end up one your-money richer.
Why? Because there hasn’t been a player who has embraced the big moment and has been aware of it more than Jeter in my time following baseball.
My friend, you are the kind of man bookies live for. Also, what about this "Big David Papi Ortiz" fellow I’ve heard so much about? I thought "big moments" were supposedly a specialty of his.
The biggest reason I think he’s going to do it, though, is because he always comes through.
Derek Jeter’s 2011 WPA: -1.1. Derek Jeter has cost the Yankees more than one win by not coming through in big situations this year.
That’s why he is such a big deal, because he always seems to deliver in the biggest spots possible.
In the 2001 World Series, Derek Jeter went .148 / .179 / .259 / .438. In game seven, Jeter struck out, flew out, grounded out, and singled. The Yankees lost.
Jeter homered in his first game as a regular, he hit the Jeffrey Maier home run, he became Mr. November when New York as a city was at its lowest point, heck he even passed Gehrig on the eight-year anniversary of 9/11.
No, when New York was "at its lowest point," he did that stuff I mentioned in the last paragraph. But, yes, he does have multiple home runs in his career.
I’m quite sure he is more aware of the fact that the Yanks hit the road for six games after these next four games than you may think.
What? Here’s an article from yesterday — the day before you wrote your… thing — in some obscure regional paper that I expect is from the Japanese city of Usa in which Derek Jeter talks all about how he wants to get his 3000th hit at home. You’re not stumbling on some unknown psychological insight here, clown.
It’s funny that a player whose sole inevitable enshrinement to the Hall of Fame is based mostly on intangibles and team accomplishments, is now going to be celebrated for a statistical achievement.
What?
No, I’m serious: what?
Derek Jeter is one of the best shortstops of all time. This is not based on his "intangibles," or on what his teammates have done, but on the fact that Derek Jeter has been very, very good at baseball for a very long time. Do you know where he ranks among position players in WAR all-time? 55th, which is very good. Do you know how many active players are above him? Four: Thome, Chipper, Pujols, and A-Rod. Do you know how many are shortstops? Six: Arky Vaughan, Bill Dahlen, Robin Yount (for half his career), Cal Ripken Jr., George Davis, and Honus Wagner. Derek Jeter is the seventh-best shortstop of all time, and his career isn’t over — he could still plausibly pass Vaughan, Dahlen, and Yount. No, Derek Jeter’s Hall of Fame case is absolutely built on statistics, because he’s been fucking incredible for a pretty long time. Where are you getting this?
(He’s 25th all-time in offensive WAR, and miles ahead of all other shortstops except Wagner. Derek Jeter is a phenomenal hitter. His poor defense has bitten him in the ass to some extent.)
The ridiculous talk will soon begin of where he belongs among the all-time Yankee greats. I personally don’t put him anywhere near the top. A Hall of Fame player for sure, but he is not even the best Yankee of this generation. That is a spot saved for the great Mariano Rivera, who is not only the best Yankee of this generation, I argue he may be the best player period of this generation. That is a different argument for a different day.
No, let’s have it now.
Mariano Rivera, career WAR: 54.1
Derek Jeter, career WAR: 70
Alex Rodriguez, career WAR: 104.4
Mariano Rivera has been amazing. Best relief pitcher of all time, bar none. But still: he’s a relief pitcher. Jeter and A-Rod have been vastly more valuable than Mo, and Barry Bonds (this will blow your mind) was as valuable as Derek Jeter and A-Rod put together:
Barrold Lamar Bonds, career WAR: 171.8
I mean, sure, you can argue that being the "greatest Yankee" or even the "greatest player" of your generation is not about what you actually do while playing baseball, but, rather, that it’s about your heart, and your intestines, and how much you "mean" to the team and your amazing "moments," such as how Mariano Rivera singlehandedly lost the 2001 World Series to the Diamondbacks, and exploded two nights in a row in the 2004 ALCS to give the Red Sox a pass to their first championship in 86 years. But if you do, I get to call you a lug nut.
You lug nut.
No offense to Jeter, but when it comes to the all-time Yankee greats, he is sitting at the children’s table, while Babe Ruth, Gehrig, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle and Yogi Berra dine in style.
Babe Ruth, career WAR: 190 (1st all-time)
Lou Gherig, career WAR: 118.4 (16th)
Joe DiMaggio, career WAR: 83.6 (49th)
Mickey Mantle, career WAR: 120.2 (15th)
Yogi Berra, career WAR: 61.9 (140th)
And, once again:
Derek Jeter, career WAR: 70 (82nd)
He doesn’t belong in that group? I’m glad it’s not up to me to be the gatekeeper of the official Yankee Greats Clubhouse, because the criteria don’t make any fucking sense at all.
Either way I want the moment. Cal Ripken passing Gehrig was a big deal. Barry Bonds surpassing Hank Aaron should have been a big deal. It turned out to be a sham. This one is going to be nuts, even though it is something that has happened 27 other times.
That might be the dumbest paragraph in your whole article. Petulant, contentless, badly written.
Okay, no. The best one is still the one where you just typed some random nonsense words about Wrigley Field and Cincinnati and captains.
Selfishly I am hoping he either goes crazy and gets it in the next two days or goes into a major slump until about June 23rd, because more than likely I am going to be on a cruise somewhere in the Eastern Caribbean at the time he finally gets it.
Uh. Okay. Have fun on your trip! Don’t think too hard.
It probably serves me right. While I respect everything he’s done, I’ve just never been a big Jeter guy. Although, my kids have about five Jeter shirts and jerseys. So, it’s probably fitting that baseball gods seem to have gotten together in order for me to miss this.
Thankfully there is DVR.
Why are we talking about this? Nobody cares.
But like it won’t be the same if he gets it anywhere other than Yankee Stadium, it won’t be the same watching it however many days after it has already happened.
I see now that the life of a true Yankees fan is a difficult one.
Hate to break up LeBrongate 2.0 for a baseball post, but Kevin Kaduk absolutely loves the idea of divisional realignment in baseball. Loves it. Loves it so much he’s even willing to make up nonsense reasons why it would be great. Such as:
Best realignment possibility? Astros and Rangers sharing a division
Yeah, that’ll be exciting. All twelve of their fans would be thrilled.
ESPN’s Buster Olney stirred things up a bit over the weekend, reporting that Major League Baseball is considering a realignment that would leave each league with an even 15 teams and completely wipe out the divisions. The top five teams would make the postseason and, with an odd number of teams in each league, interleague play would be a constant on the schedule.
I still think that’s pointless and short-sighted, but it’s nice to see somebody finally noticing that two fifteen-team leagues would have to play a ton of interleague games. Even if it is just Olney.
The Houston Astros would be the one team calling the figurative moving vans as it’s presumed they’d be plucked from the six-team NL Central and placed into the now-skimpy AL West (which currently only hosts four teams).
That would be a weird choice, especially since, you know, once they’ve wiped out the divisions there’d be no need to thin the NL Central or pad the AL West, right? Am I the only one who’s noticed this?
Initial positive reaction: Evening out the leagues is a great and necessary idea, though MLB’s schedule-makers are probably already waking up in a cold sweat over the mere thought of reconfiguring the standard road trip.
People love to make this claim. Evening out the leagues is great and necessary why? So the moribund Cubs can be in fifth place in a five-team division instead of a six-team division? Oh, wait, but we’re getting rid of divisions, huh. So it’s really for Great Justice; what we’d be accomplishing is saving the Astros from the indignity of finishing in sixteenth place by moving them into a different league so they can be in fifteenth place instead. Which is obviously more fair. How do you baseball fucks live with yourselves knowing that you’re unfairly depriving the Astros of this privilege?
And as Fox Sports’ Jon Paul Morosi writes, the Astros are the only logical candidate to switch stripes, even if their fans and players say they prefer to stay in the NL.
What? No, that’s wrong. Arlington — where the Rangers play — is only FF miles from Houston. That puts two teams in the same league very near each other and leaves no teams in the other league in or even very near Texas. Milwaukee is the obvious choice (they were in the AL until rather recently, in fact). Though, frankly, if the fans and players really do prefer that they stay in the NL, why don’t we do that instead of smoothing out the aesthetics to suit journalists?
(The one point where I sympathize with their gripe is the time zone conundrum: Those games in Oakland, Anaheim and Seattle will start awful late, though fans of the Texas Rangers have been doing it for years.)
Kevin. Listen to me slowly. This plan involves getting rid of divisions. The Astros would not be playing more games on the west coast, because dummy sportswriters care more about the theoretical unfairness of the unbalanced schedule than about what fans or teams want. That is the whole point of the arbitrary rebuild. Please try to pay attention.
Initial negative reaction: Hate, hate, HATE the idea of nuking the divisions.
Oh. I see. So you like everything about this plan, except for the plan itself. That’s good. Good thinkin’.
While Rob Neyer thinks we’ll soldier on just fine with a "first division" of five teams, I will submit that there’s nothing quite like saying you’re on your way to watch a first-place team. Why would baseball eliminate six races for first and opt for two races for fifth instead? No matter what you think about the value of a division title, we can all agree that no one is going to raise a flag saying they finished fifth one year.
This. This exactly. Fans do not care about the (actually very tiny) element of unfairness in the divisional system. They do care — a lot — about their team being in first or second place as opposed to fifth or seventh place. It’s more fun. Gets people more interested in the game. Rockies fans can be interested in the team — they’ve had a rough start, but, hell, they’re still in third! Only five games out, right? In the "divisionless" NL, they’d be eleventh. And everyone would stop paying attention.
At any rate, combine both of those takes above and we’re left with my ideal situation and a very underrated dynamic that would be created by placing both Texas teams in the AL West.
Oh. I see. So your "ideal situation" would be to get the NL the hell out of Texas, mash the Astros into a league they don’t want to be in, make their fans stay up really late because most of their games would start two hours later, eliminate the Astros-Cubs and Astros-Cardinals rivalries entirely and just hope Astros-Mariners would catch on, and the payoff would be… what, actually? Cui bono?
Think about this for a second: By pairing the Astros and Rangers, baseball will finally create a great regional rivalry in that gaping hole between St. Louis and the West Coast.
Houston: 95°22’W
Kansas City: 94°58’W
Pretty sure Kevin Kaduk just gave a big f-you to the Royals right there.
The two teams are located about 250 miles apart from each other and handcuffing them together would give the Lone Star State — long considered an outpost by the rest of the league — an increased relevance and focus.
To the American League, maybe. It would close it off from the National League altogether.
Dedicated baseball fans in Texas often don’t get enough credit,
They have a hard time getting credit these days given how often they’ve wrecked the truck and then defaulted on Jimbo’s loan.
but a close race between the teams would give them a bigger spotlight, plus an opportunity to needle opposing fans in the flesh. That’s just something that doesn’t happen right now with both teams being the geographical anomaly in their current divisions.
2011 Texas rangers: 36 – 31, 1st place
2011 Houston Astros: 24 – 42, 6th place
That’s something that wouldn’t happen right now regardless.
… is old.
You may recall Murray Chass as the longtime baseball columnist for the New York Times. He got the boot a few years back, and now holds court on the interwebs as the world’s bitterest baseball blogger. He posted a piece today on the draft that is utterly thoughtless and wrongheaded.
Sometimes you have to feel sorry for Bud Selig, just as you would for a child who watches other kids in the neighborhood playing with toys or games he wants but his parents won’t let him have.
Bud Selig makes considerably more money than almost all baseball players. Let that sink in for a second. No, Murray, I don’t feel too bad for Selig not getting everything he wants.
For example, Selig, the baseball commissioner, always wanted a payroll cap and in his zeal to get it, he was a pivotal participant in the ouster of his predecessor, Fay Vincent, and in the owners’ bargaining strategy that killed the 1994 World Series.
But Selig failed to get the payroll cap the other professional team leagues had.
You don’t need a new paragraph for every sentence, man. You don’t get paid by the column-inch anymore.
That said: true, Selig did not get the hard payroll cap he wanted. He did get a soft cap, though. Not to mention his other successes, such as the wild card, the World Baseball Classic, the huge surge in parity and attendance, and the utter ruination of Frank McCourt. So: not looking that tragic.
More currently, Selig wants a hard-slotting system that would reduce the bonuses for players selected in the annual amateur draft, but he faces another fight to get it. This is something the other sports have as well, and Selig says why not us?
In Murray Chass’ world, the fact that Selig has to negotiate with the MLBPA to get what he wants is newsworthy.
Unlike his disastrous experience with the payroll cap, Selig is confident he will get what he wants this time.
Speaking at Major League Baseball’s draft earlier this week, Selig said, "The clubs have voted, the GMs have voted, and everybody’s for slotting."
Pretty sure everybody on that list wanted a payroll cap, too.
The commissioner, however, is a little ahead of himself on two counts. First, everyone in M.L.B. does not favor a hard-slotting system. The Boston Red Sox have expressed opposition to it, and if the Red Sox are against it, you can bet the New York Yankees are, too.
After all, the constant agreement between the Red Sox and the Yankees is well-documented.
P.S.: No periods in MLB, Murray. Or MLBPA. Or like SCUBA, for that matter. Why did you think otherwise?
Second, everybody is not for such a system.
So, if I’m reading this correctly, the two reasons Selig faces opposition are:
1) First, everyone in M.L.B. does not favor a hard-slotting system.
2) Second, everybody is not for such a system.
I think you’ve left some territory unexplored here, Murray. Maybe write a sentence-paragraph about case 3) this system doesn’t appeal to everybody.
The person who would probably be most affected by such a system is Scott Boras, the high-profile agent who often represents many of the top draft choices and has made millions of dollars in agent fees.
Well, no, I’d say the person most affected by this system would be the number one draft pick, who will now get like a $100k bonus instead of several millions of money.
I called Boras to get his reaction to a hard-slotting system and reached him on his cell phone. But I apparently caught him off guard; he must have been expecting someone else.
Boras doesn’t like me – my questions over the years apparently have been too tough for his liking, just as my critical and questioning comments about him have displeased him – and after pausing for a second or two, he stammered, "I’m in a meeting. I’ll call you back."
But Boras did not prove to be a man of his word. Not surprisingly, he did not call me back. (UPDATE: Boras did call back two days later after this column was posted.)
I love this part. Love it. Chass’ self-importance and lack of perspective are utterly amazing. Let’s unpack this and look for meaning.
Scott Boras was not expecting to get a call from Murray Chass. But how can that be? Chass is the regular baseball coumnist for the New York Fucking Times! Oh wait, that’s right — not anymore, huh? Murray, honestly? Boras was surprised to hear from you because he didn’t realise you were still alive. He stopped paying attention to you when you got the axe at the Times.
Scott Boras doesn’t like Murray Chass because of his "tough questions?" How many tough questions does he raise in this post? More likely Boras doesn’t like you because you’re an uppity, self-important dick.
And then he didn’t call you back? What an ass! Doesn’t he know who you are? You’re the regular baseball columnist for a personal blog! Oh, wait — he did call you back! So what did he say?
Murray?
Oh. You’re not going to tell us. Really, you didn’t care; this section’s just in there so you can make some nasty comments about Scott Boras, huh. Stay classy, Murray.
Here’s the great part, though. The date on this post? 9 June 2011. Today. And yet Chass makes that oddball comment about Boras calling him back two days after publication. What the hell does that mean? Is it more bitter sarcasm? Did Murray forget to publish this? Who knows?
But anyhow, the date on the piece is 9 June. Which means that not only did Murray Chass call Scott Boras out of the blue to insult him on a web site, but he did it either right before or actually during the Rule 4 draft! The man should not be this clueless. No wonder Boras didn’t have time to talk to you, dummy; you called him during his very very busiest time of the year just so you could chortle derisively at him on your blog. Yeah, man, he had better things to do.
In researching the subject of slotting, I came across an article by Sean Forman, the editor of Baseball-reference.com, who makes a mistake common to observers who don’t understand the union’s thinking.
Murray Chass did not bother to link to this article or tell us where he found it. So we have no way of knowing how far out of context he’s about to take Forman, a man he hates.
The union, Forman wrote last August, "does not and can not care one iota for players not on the 40-man and does not in any way shape or form represent them. They are the major league baseball players association. Their responsibility is to guys who have made (or will soon) make the show – full stop. "As such, they would love hard slotting (assuming it isn’t a backdoor to the cap) that frees up money for major league vets, and they would love the removal of FA compensation, which only increases the value of existing major league free agents." (Weird quoting is [sic])
Forman, whose expertise is in statistics like WAR and VORP, strayed into unfamiliar territory, failed to see the connection between slotting and capping and demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of how the union overlooks no player, no matter where he plays.
Chass has nothing else to say about this topic. I mean at all — the next sentence-paragraph is about something totally different. But he was so blinded by his hatred of statistical analysis that he had to get one lame jab in. Fortunately for me — since it’s my job to make fun of him — he made like two hundred errors in that sentence-paragraph. Let’s examine a few of them!
Forman’s expertise in VORP might seem odd, since BR doesn’t carry it (it’s a Baseball Prospectus stat). But VORP is Murray Chass’ white whale. "He’s under 60 and thinks he knows about baseball? I’ll shove his VORP so far up his BABIP he’ll be FIPping wOBAs!"
Chass’ assertion that Forman "failed to see the connection between slotting and capping" is beautiful, though. Magical, even. Since not only did Forman positively see that connection, but Chass even quoted him talking about it!
Also, that last bit is insane. "The union overlooks no player, no matter where he plays?" Holy shit, Murray. Suck the union’s dick much? I guess that’s why the guys in AA make less money than I do — the union is looking out for all mankind!
The union apparently is even prepared to agree to a change in the draft rules that would allow teams to trade draft choices as teams can do in other sports. The commissioner didn’t mention that possible development because the clubs have always opposed the idea.
Wait, what? What does this have to do with anything?
For the owners to agree to the trade of draft choices, they would require the union to make one and possibly two concessions.
One would be the hard-slotting system. The other would be an international draft, covering players around the world who always have been signed as unrestricted free agents.
Yeah? Positively would be those two concessions? Even though you said earlier that some of the owners are downright opposed to hard slotting?
Besides the union’s opposition to it, an international draft would have to overcome the geopolitical obstacle of opposition from the countries whose young players it would affect.
Sure. Also: hostility from clubs that have put in the work to develop a decent international operation. Kind of a fuck-you to them, yeah?
Besides, why would the union oppose it? I thought they were looking out for everybody, no matter where he plays. I know I read that somewhere.
With the relationship between the union and the commissioner’s office at its friendliest ever, it’s possible that the two sides could compromise on two or all three of the draft issues.
"I expect the union would look unkindly on the hard slot and the international draft but would look kindly on trading draft choices," the man close to the owners said.
Caution: whiplash ahead!
That combination, though, would not seem to provide the ingredients for a compromise.
Wait, what? Chass has just spent like eleven sentence-paragraphs — many of which I didn’t quote — explaining how sure a thing this compromise is. Then out of fucking nowhere he whirls right around and says it’s impossible. And that’s the last line of the article!
Congratulations, Murray. It takes a truly bizarre bitter, delusional old crank to call bullshit on himself in the last line of his article.
Apparently Sabean is of the opinion that it falls within his job description — which is, if you’ll recall, head bungling yahoo of the San Fransisco Giants — to banish players he doesn’t like from baseball forever. I mean, players on other teams. He gave a boneheaded, macho interview to that effect to KNBR. Here’s Tim Brown to give him the ol’ what-for. My job? Pile-on.
Leave the poor boy alone, Sabean. Aren’t there some valuable young players you should be packaging together to trade for A.J. Pierzynski? Or perhaps you should be figuring out whether to offer Joe Saunders seven or eight years this offseason.
Remember when Marlon Byrd was drilled in the face by Alfredo Aceves? It looked like this. Bad scene.
So here’s what he says today, when some fool asked him if he’d wear some type of goofball face mask when he returns:
I’ll come back and put on a regular helmet and go to work. If I get hit again, it happens. There’s not much you can do.
Suck it, Dave Cameron.
By posting the exact opposite of the column I expected from him. Go read that. He’s 100% right. He’s so right I honestly wonder if he read my column first before he wrote his!
Buster Posey done got hisself messed up right sharp. You heard about this? Scott Cousins running home, Posey blocks the plate, collision, and that’s it for his season; he’ll miss the rest of the year with a broken leg. No bones about it: that sucks for Posey, and it sucks for the Giants. It also sucks for rational, thinking people, who don’t believe that the best thing to do when something bad happens is slam that barn door shut with a bunch of shortsighted new regulations.
Enter Dave Cameron, making the case for people who haven’t thought this out very well.
I’m not the first person to say this today, and I’m sure I won’t be the last, but it’s hard to watch the collision at home plate last night that broke Buster Posey’s leg and think anything besides "that should not be part of baseball."
I left out the link to the clip, because I’m not trying to sell you something by shocking you into accepting it. Unlike somebody I know!
That aside, I was thinking something besides that. I was thinking about, you know, Buster Posey, and how much it sucks to be him. I was not thinking about taking advantage of this opportunity to engineer society for great justice. Unlike somebody I know!
Let’s set aside blame for a second; I’m not here to vilify Scott Cousins, the player’s association, or the rules committee.
Yes you are.
Cousins did what he’s been trained to do, he did it because it’s a legal play by the rulebook, and he was trying to help his team win a baseball game. However, I just don’t see any reason why that play should be allowed in the sport.
In other words: you’re vilifying the rules committee. Which is fine; I mean, blowhards gonna blow hard, y’know? But here’s the key: that play is allowed because there is no sensible alternative. Baseball, David, is not football. There are not coordinated playbooks. The Marlins didn’t have a huddle and decide to put on the ol’ "break the catcher’s leg" play, which I agree would be a super super dick move. See, in baseball, nobody knows in advance where the ball will be. Sometimes, the ball arrives at the catcher without enough time for him to leap like a gazelle out of the path of the runner. Then what? In your perfect baseball world, what happens? The runner is automagically out? The umpires call the play dead? An airbag busts up out of the ground and knocks the runner on his ass? What?
At no other position is a runner entitled to simply run over the defender hoping to dislodge the baseball before returning to touch the base safely.
Not correct. The line belongs to the runner. Defenders may attempt to block it, but they do so at their own risk, and they know that perfectly well. Haven’t you ever seen somebody slide like a sonuvabitch into second base to break up a double play? Believe it or not, it happens all the time.
When Alex Rodriguez tried to swat the ball out of Bronson Arroyo’s glove in 2004 – with his hand, offering no chance at bodily harm to Arroyo – he was roundly mocked and called out for interference.
Sure, because A-Rod actually reached out and slapped Arroyo to try to get him to drop the ball. That is an entirely different situation from Arroyo just planting himself on top of the base to try to keep A-Rod from tagging it and then getting run over for his trouble.
After the game, Kevin Millar said this:
"If you want to play football, strap on some pads and go play for the Green Bay Packers."
Good stuff, Kevin. Funny. Here’s my new plan: let’s all listen to Kevin Millar, because he’s one of the great geniuses of western culture. And totally was not at the time playing for Arroyo’s team. Which is how we can tell he’s not biased!
But I wonder if A-Rod said anything. Anything at all. Oh, look, he did:
"[The umpires] said I should have ran him over, kind of like a catcher, that I can’t go out of my way to knock the ball out of his hand. I was perplexed by the whole situation. I don’t know what I tried do. I knew he was coming, and I know that the line belongs to me. Looking back, maybe I should have run him over."
Oh. So, actually… A-Rod and the umpires both say I’m right and you’re wrong. Damn, Dave. Maybe next time you could interrupt your angst with some research, and then you wouldn’t look like such a fool.
There was very little violence in Rodriguez’s actions, but because he initiated contact to try and dislodge the ball, it was considered a football-like move. Meanwhile, Cousins literally threw his entire body weight into Posey at home plate, breaking his leg in the process, but that’s okay because he was wearing a chest protector?
The level of violence is not the issue. The issue is that Rodriguez, as the umpires said, went out of his way to try to dislodge a ball. That’s illegal. Though I suppose, if Posey happened to be over by the visitors’ dugout at the time, and Cousins jagged off the line and crashed into him just to fuck him up, well, then you have a point.
I was a catcher in high school, and I was trained how to block the plate while trying to keep myself alive. High School isn’t MLB, but I still found myself in a few situations where a significantly larger player was barreling towards me at full speed, and I realized that I had to stop being a baseball player and start being a gladiator. It was ridiculous to me then and is ridiculous to me now.
So… you’re a pussy? Which is fine; I guess that’s why you write dopey hand-wringing internet columns that you don’t fact-check instead of playing baseball for a living. Your decision.
Millar is right – if you want to watch violent collisions, you can watch football. Or hockey. Or MMA.
Ah, now we pass judgment from our High Throne on the aesthetic preferences of all baseball fans everywhere. Classy. I won’t lie, though; the real reason I quoted this section is so I could quote this part:
Millar is right
Because I don’t think I’ve ever seen those words before. Not all together like that, I mean.
There’s no reason baseball needs to have similar kinds of plays; it’s an entirely different sport with a different premise and different rules. Well, at every base but home anyways.
No, Dave, you’re wrong. There is a reason baseball needs to have those kinds of plays, and it has nothing to do with those vulgar fans and their uncouth desire to watch nice kids with gay names have their legs broken. It is this: on a play like this, there is no time for the catcher to step back from the bag to put on the tag. He catches and turns. These plays are inevitable unless you wish to establish a new rule that says that the team on offense should only try to score if it looks safe. No, Scott Cousins! Don’t run for home! Someone could get hurt!
They know the risks, Dave, and they are well compensated. Perhaps they can be allowed to play hard and take those risks, and they don’t need nanny assholes like you lording your own priorities over them.
Major League catchers already endure enough wear and tear on their bodies as is. They break down in their early thirties and have the shortest careers of any position on the field. Why should we also expect them to have to stand in and take hits that no other player on the field has to take?
Because we don’t want our team to give up a shitload of runs by being giant pussies? That’s a reason.
Why do they have to be football players when everyone else gets to play baseball?
Take the melodrama down like eleven notches, dude. The overpowering majority of baseball games involve no collisions at the plate at all. Most of the rest involve very light, "safe" collisions. Somebody gets hurt once a year or so. Somebody gets hurt bad once a decade. This is not "being a football player," unless football’s gotten really soft while I wasn’t looking.
It’s in the best interest of the sport to keep the likes of Buster Posey and Carlos Santana healthy and on the field.
Oh, I forgot! What you want is for the Greater Good of Society! What the fuck is wrong with people that they think shit like this? It’s in the best interest of the Giants for them not to bail on close plays and give up extra runs. Chances of somebody getting hurt are small. Major-league catchers know the risks.
It’s not good for anyone that these guys end up on the disabled list because they were trying to hold their ground.
Sure. Sometimes shit happens. It’s also not good for anyone when overreacting busybodies try to reinvent the whole world when it does.
Just change the rules and make intentional contact with a catcher illegal, and make it illegal for catcher’s [sic] to impede the baserunner’s ability to run directly towards home plate.
Oh, is that all it takes? Just call players out if they ever touch the catcher? Don’t see how that’s a balance issue at all. Shouldn’t have any meaningful impact on run scoring. Oh, but wait! We’ll install a second system to fix the horrible, obvious brokenness of our first one! We’ll just make it "illegal" for catchers to block the plate! And… oh, wait, sometimes they have to catch the ball. So I guess they’ll just have to bail on it, then. Really, this system should be flawless, and will yield the exact kind of baseball you know you all want to see: a game full of runners afraid of running too hard, and defenders afraid of defending, because they can get called out for sinister intent.
It’s a simple fix to a real problem, and there’s no reason why we should continue to delay making this change.
Other than the fact that it will have giant, sweeping effects on the entire game, yeah, can’t think of a reason.
Buster Posey should be the last catcher in baseball history to suffer an injury on that kind of play. L
You should be the last fool in writing history to call for new regulations and not even bother to think it through first. F
You know what else happened while I was busy being carried up to Heaven in a flaming chariot and then getting the tar whupped out of me in Jenga by my new buddy YHWH? Some baseball players got hurt, and some other ones stayed hurt. Doesn’t sound like news to me, but to a man with a deadline? Breaking story.
What passes for parity in the NFL goes by another term in baseball: mediocrity.
Wow, nice move, Jeff. Start the article out with shades of Joe Morgan. Makes my job — being a pale impersonation of people making fun of Joe Morgan — that much easier.
A little past the quarter-pole in Major League Baseball’s season, and 18 teams are within four games of .500. Two have won more than 60 percent of their games (Cleveland and Philadelphia). Two have lost more than 60 percent (Minnesota and Houston).
You know me: I’m nothing if not embarrassed that, over 40 games or so, we don’t see at least twelve teams still undefeated. That is exactly what I always say baseball needs: unstoppable behemoths rolling straight over weak, vulnerable teams.
But you also know that if there’s one thing I love more than baseless assertions, it’s facts. And if there’s one thing I love more than facts, it’s big spreadsheets full of acronyms and numbers. And if there’s one thing I love more than big spreadsheets full of acronyms and numbers, it’s using big spreadsheets full of acronyms and numbers to make professional sportswriters look like fools. Which is why I dug up this.
That, of course, is the detailed standings as of 23 May 2010: exactly one year ago the day Jeff’s article was published. What can we learn from this? We can learn that, at this time last year, there were two teams that had won more than 60% of their games (Tampa and Philthadelphia) and five teams that had lost more than 60% of their games (Cleveland, Seattle, Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Houston). So this was clearly a more exciting season. So what Jeff and I are saying is that we think baseball would be way more fun if it had exactly three more teams that were complete shit. Don’t you think so, too?
For reference: in 2009, it was three teams above .600 and three below .400. In 2008, the same. Seriously, Jeff, did you do any research? This is what the standings look like at the end of May, doofus.
Everyone else remains in a muddled, muddied middle.
Awesome alliteration, asshole.
As always, wheat and chaff will go their separate ways, and in the middle of it all will be the unlikeliest of protagonists. Maybe Scott Sheridan. Or Jamie Reed. Could be Jeff Porter. Perhaps Lonnie Soloff. Possibly Sean Cunningham.
Who?
If you’ve never heard of them, don’t feel bad.
I don’t. Mainly I feel annoyed that you’re padding out your article by flipping through your rolodex and copying down some names.
Certified athletic trainers tend to get as much press as someone selling soft pretzels.
And for the same reason: they’re fucking boring.
Executives from three contending teams this week, when asked the biggest threat to their team, cited neither an opponent nor an on-field weakness. "Injuries," they said in triplicate, presumably rapping their hand on an oak desk simultaneously.
BREAKING NEWS: Injuries are bad! This has been the Internet with an important sports news announcement.
Injuries happen to all but the luckiest teams, and those who survive the season with minimal disabled-list usage often find themselves in a race despite inferior talent.
See, you and Kenny Williams both appear to think that injuries are all caused by players getting struck by random falling pianos. Who could have predicted that Jake Peavy — who was on the DL when the White Sox traded for him — would be injured? Clearly not I! Did anybody seriously expect Joe Mauer to spend any time on the disabled list? Why would we? Oh, and if Kerry Wood gets hurt, you’ll tell me you expected it, I imagine. Whatever, Mr. Crystal Ball.
After sitting out seven weeks with tendinitis in his right knee, Utley will bat second for Philadelphia on Monday. No injury carried as much intrigue this spring as Utley’s, and for a pair of good reasons: He helps define his ballclub, and he refused to define his injury.
One of those reasons might be more good-er than the other. Think about that carefully.
If Jimmy Rollins is the Phillies’ id and Ryan Howard their ego, Utley is the super-ego, the balancing force that ties together the Philadelphia Way.
Ooo! My turn! If Jimmy Rollins is Axl Rose, and Ryan Howard is Izzy Stradlin, then Chase Utley must be Slash: the guitar player with a bitchin’ hat. And I’m assuming Shane Victorino is Duff McKagan, and Carlos Ruiz is Steven Adler. And Placido Polanco is Luciano Pavarotti. And fuck all the other guys anyway.
Before Roy Halladay arrived to set inconceivable standards of work ethic there was Utley, moving about the field in such a practical manner it bordered on mechanized.
Well, sure, and also he hit a shitload of home runs. Worth mentioning? No? Okay, rabbit on a bit about his demeanor and his hustle and swagger and stuff.
That, all the new Phillies soon learned, was him: all substance, no style, reinforced by the substance (L.A. Looks) in his hair that shows a distinct lack of style.
That is a super asshole thing to say, Jeff. Especially since you are a man who appears to believe that emptying an entire bottle of hair gel onto your head will obviate the need to comb. Also, seriously, go back and rewrite that.
The Minnesota Twins without Joe Mauer are like a grilled-cheese sandwich without the cheese: two piece of bread, plain, simple and not very good.
Congratulations, Jeff! I’m nominating you for a Ford C. Frick award in the category of "most tortured metaphor." Because, seriously, man, if you punished that one any more, I’d start looking around for the keycards I need to let it out of the puzzle box.
Very good career hitter against left-handed pitching is Marlon Byrd.
I forgive the Yoda-like phrasing, since I dig that when it’s extemporaneous you sometimes just babble. I don’t forgive the stupidity.
Marlon Byrd, career against RHP: .281 / .340 / .412
Marlon Byrd, career against LHP: .288 / .343 / .451
The difference: .007 / .003 / .039
The correct thing to say is: very small career platoon split has Marlon Byrd. Since, honestly, he hits LHP just the same as he hits RHP.
