FJM has gone dark for the foreseeable future. Sorry folks. We may post once in a while, but it's pretty much over.
You can still e-mail dak,Ken Tremendous,Junior,Matthew Murbles, or Coach.
In the Oct. 13 The Sporting News, somebody put together a panel of 16 former major-league shortstops and asked them some questions.
First I'll list the 16: Biancalana, Bordick, Burleson, DeJesus, DeMaestri, Elster, Foli, Fregosi, Harrelson, Joost, Kasko, Kubek, Larkin, Maxville, Menke and Petrocelli.
Second, the relevant question on the table: "Jeter or A-Rod?"
Survey said:
Jeter 11 Too close to call 3 A-Rod 2
And with it runs a quote from Menke: "A-Rod will end up breaking some records, but Jeter is a winner."
Interesting. I have just conducted my own survey. The question on the table: Biancalana, Bordick, Burleson, DeJesus, DeMaestri, Elster, Foli, Fregosi, Harrelson, Joost, Kasko, Kubek, Larkin, Maxville, Menke, Petrocelli or Logic and Reason?
I think everyone pretty much knew where I was going with that right from the beginning, which is why it delighted me to actually type it out and make you read it.
Back to
Many people reported this quote from Fire Joe Morgan favorite Joe Morgan, but Rob C. is the one I happened to flag, so he gets all the credit and the rest of you can suck it:
Just driving home from work with ESPN radio's call of the game on. Morgan talking about Beltran's great playoff performance in '03:
"I read an interesting article that talked about how scouts will look at a player's performance in postseason games to see how his mental makeup is, if he can handle playing under pressure. I think that makes sense to a degree, but you can't put too much weight into it, because we all know that the playoffs are a very small sample size. You don't want to put all your marbles in one basket."
I almost drove off the road.
This really does make me feel as though something has been accomplished, somewhere, by someone(s). However, lest you think for one second that Mr. Morgan has come to his senses in like a large-picture worldview kind of way, peruse this little beauty from just the other day, sent in by 1.4 million of you, quoted here from Clark:
Joe Morgan just did a location spot during which he asserted -- repeatedly -- that "they [Red Sox] cannot beat them [Rays] by outscoring them."
And here I'd thought that was the *only* way to win a game.
Oh, Clark. You silly man. There are plenty of ways to win baseball games. Outscoring your opponent...not un-outscoring them...doing the un-opposite of not un-outscoring them...the list goes on.
Alexander points us to a special video presentation here at Gallimaufry Time, which includes Matt Stairs and what can only be described as unfortunate phraseology:
"You want to rephrase that, Matt?" "Yes, I do. Ahem. When you get that nice celebration coming in the dugout, and you're getting your weiner diddled by the guys--" "Okay, thanks. That's enough."
And now, a special Golf Note, from Chad, who, after a lengthy and kind series of compliments about our site, writes:
A note from the Ryder Cup: Johnny Miller stated, "the US will miss Tiger, as he is one of the two greatest clutch putters of all time. The other being Jack."Guess who is in the top 5 in career putting statistics. Yup, Tiger and Jack. The fact that they are better tee to green than anyone else AND were/ are great putters is why they are the two greatest GOLFERS of all time! They had more chances to make "clutch" putts because their long games gave them more opportunities. They made more "clutch" putts because they are GREAT putters! Remove the word clutch from Johnny's statement and it is true.
Clutch is bullshit! Tiger and Jack have made more non-clutch putts, too! Once again, because they are great putters!
I digress. Thank you again for your work. I thoroughly enjoy it!
Now, you might be thinking, "How did this mildly interesting note about golf make it into the Gallimaufry?!" I'll tell you why. Because at the end it says:
Sent from my iPhone
That is insane. Chad typed that whole thing on his iPhone, people. Including the all-caps words. And not one single typo. It probably took him eleven hours. That's dedication.
As long as we're going multi-media today, here are the Built Ford Tough Keys to the Game from NLCS Game 3, sent in by Daniel:
Phillies: Win this game too, like you won the other games, at the other place Dodgers: Try to do the things you did 6 weeks ago, when you won a baseball game
I like the idea that "Remember August 30!" is a "Remember the Maine!"-style battle cry for Dodger fans.
Sporting freshly trimmed, thick braids for the NLCS, Ramirez went 2-for-4. Not quite the torrid hitting the Dodgers were used to from him since he joined the team...
Finally, we close with some more bad news for Mets fans. Here's your new manager, on the first day of his new deal, talking about how to take his team to the next level:
On his first full day as the Mets' long-term manager, Manuel forcefully attacked the SABR-type mathematical analysis some have fixated on in recent years.
"You get so many statistical people together, they put so many stats on paper, and they say, well, if you do this and you score this many runs, you do that many times, you'll be in the playoffs," he said.
"That's not really how it works, and that's what we have to get away from. And that's going to have to be a different mind-set of the team in going forward. We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people. We have to win because we have baseball players that know and can understand the game."
Congratulations to the Phillies, for winning the 2008 NL Pennant. Congratulations to the 2009 Phillies, Braves, Nationals, and Marlins, for all of the easy victories you will have over the 2009 Mets.
Ozzie Guillen Wants Derek Jeter Inside His Hypothetical Daughter
It's come to this: Ozzie Guillen saying out loud that he wishes he had a daughter so Derek Jeter could fuck her. In the already crowded Hall of Fame of Jeterbole (you can figure that portmanteau out), this is going to get its own wing. "I keep saying the best [Yankees] player who ever happened—bigger than someone else, but I'm not going to say the name here—is Derek Jeter," Guillen began, perched in the Sox dugout.
Is "best player who ever happened" some weird, different category from "best player ever"? It certainly must have nothing to do with, I don't know, being good at baseball. Because Derek Jeter is terrific, spectacular, amazing at baseball (mostly). But he's nowhere near the best Yankee ever. I know it's tough, but I've always tended to think Mr. Babeland Ruthlor was the best. That's probably because I've always got my head buried in a book full of computers!
"Derek Jeter has everything in his life. He's got money. He's got rings. He's got …"
Guillen paused, because timing means everything in comedy.
"He's not married."
Well, yes. I suppose money should factor in the discussion of best Yankee who ever happened. In which case, I nominate whoever plays 3rd space base for the Intergalactic Space Yankees in the year 30-Space-40. He will make 3 alpha credits per year, which is a ton of alpha credits if you know anything about that sort of thing.
"At the All-Star Game (where Guillen managed him in 2006), I looked around to see if he has anything I don't like. No. He's the perfect man. Too bad I don't have a daughter."
Calling out Ozzie Guillen for saying crazy things is like calling Robin Williams out for being ... really really funny! I love you, Robin. Big fan of RV. Anyway, here's the part where Ozzie talks about wishing he had a daughter so Jeter could get all up in that hot mess. I always sort of thought Ozzie would raise his daughter to like guys with shittier OBPs, though. Then little female Ozzie could rebel and date Jack Cust or something.
Let's also not overlook the fact that Ozzie went all the way to "He's the perfect man" to describe Jeter. We've reached the point where you can't outdo other Jeter-praisers with talk of baseball or sports or sportsmanship or leadership. You have to go to overall quality of personhood. I look forward to the day when Time Magazine crowns Jeter "Invention of the Millennium."
"He's the best thing ever in the game. He's got everything he wants. He lives in New York. Even [ George] Steinbrenner loves him. Nobody is better than Derek Jeter in the game. Nobody."
There's one thing Derek Jeter doesn't have: true love.
For reals question: would Jeter's life be better, in the eyes of Ozzie and people like him, if Jeter had a super hot wife? Like Alba or someone? Or is the mystery and majesty of widespread single-dude starlet/model boning so vicariously alluring that it's an essential part of his celebrated Jeterdom?
You know what I'm talking about. Three days into the season, a sportswriter disembowels a player for "hitting .028!!! He's killing his team!!!!" Then a month or two later, it's completely forgotten because baseball's season is eternal.
Exhibit A, NUMBER ONE, AWESOME today: Wallace Matthews in Newsday.
Reyes, do you want to be a Jeter or a Rey Ordonez?
We're 18 games in, Wallace. Please don't use statistics -- which I'm sure you claim not to trust anyway -- to crucify a guy who is 24 years old and in all likelihood is going to be fine.
I'll summarize the intro for you: Derek Jeter is a supergod amongst gods, like all Titan-style, like Cronus and shit. Rey Ordonez was a bust. Jeter rules, Ordonez drools. Et cetera, ad nauseam.
Here's the meaty part:
This year, you [Reyes] are hitting only .280.
I'm excited to do this. Are you?
Jeter: .277.
You have drawn a mere four walks,
Jeter: 2 walks.
stolen only three bases in five tries,
Jeter: 0 steals.
scored only 12 runs.
Jeter: 7 runs (!)
Your OBP, .313,
Jeter: .309.
is worse than all but three other NL leadoff hitters.
-- but better than the living embodiment of heroism, Derek Jeter. Even Rickie Weeks, batting .192 at the top of the Brewers' lineup, is getting on base more often than you.
And Jeter. Don't forget the man whose face I am nominating to adorn the next dollar coin, Derek Jeter.
Jeter is a terrific hitter. Jose Reyes is a terrific player. Wallace Matthews is driving an Underwater StupidTank to Uninformed Thinking Island if he believes that either of their starts is indicative of what their career values will end up being.
Sure, sometimes it seems like we've said everything there is to be said about EqA and VORP and why batting average and wins are for stupids. We're repetitive, redundant, reiterative, repetitious, redundant, redundant and redundant. We get it.
Then we take a step back and remember that 99.999992% of baseball fans think like the people in this article:
YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING! STUDY SAYS DEREK JETER'S THE WORST
No, nobody is kidding. This is old news, of course, to the other 0.000008% of us.
February 17, 2008 -- How's this for junk science - even with three Gold Gloves, Yankees captain Derek Jeter has been labeled the worst fielding shortstop in baseball.
I'm so happy the New York Post is out there doing its thing -- being angrily, outrageously, passionately wrong about everything. Rare is the institution you can rely on day in and day out, but you can set your watch by the Post. Whatever time the Post says, you're guaranteed to know: it's wrong.
Gold Gloves are a m.-fucking joke. Although I've learned nothing yet about this junky "science" study and of course I will learn nothing further by reading the rest of the article (thank you, Post!), I already trust it infinitely more than Gold Gloves, because Gold Gloves are liars. They are no-good cheating liars, and I would not let my fictional daughter marry a Gold Glove.
But the numbers prove it, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania said yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in (of course) Boston.
Yes, these researchers from the University of Pennsylvania meticulously altered their data, fudged everything they'd worked on for months, slandered Jeter and praised A-Rod, all because they had a meeting once in Boston. Never trust a scientist! All scientists are Sox fans! Post!
Post BREAKING NEWS: SCIENCE PLAYS FOR BOSTON!
Using a complex statistical method,
for nerds with calculators and pocket protectors and Daily News subscriptions,
researchers concluded that Alex Rodriguez was one of the best shortstops in the game when he played for the Texas Rangers.
This is an interesting finding. I wish I knew more about how the study worked. Just kidding: give me what Mike Birch has to say on the matter. Mike Birch works at Lids, the hat store.
"I don't know what they're smoking down at Penn," said Yankees fan Mike Birch, 32.
Take that, complex statistical study. Birch is insightful and funny. One time he sold me a sweet lid with the Under Armor logo on it. "I don't know what they're smoking"! Classic. Classic Birch.
"That's preposterous. I completely disagree. Jeter's a clutch player."
In one corner: "The method involved looking at every ball put in play in major league baseball from 2002 through 2005 and recorded where the shots went. Researchers then developed a probability model for the average fielder in each position and compared that with the performance of individual players to see who was better or worse than average."
In the other corner: Mike Birch. Watches three innings a week, occasionally while sober. Listens to Mike and the Mad Dog "except when they talk too smart and shit." Watches "Rome Is Burning" with the sound off. I.Q. of 175. Graduated from Cambridge University. Fields Medal winner.
I know who I'm taking.
"It's ridiculous," said fan Jay Ricker, 22. "Jeter is all-around awesome.
"I agree," said Science, 424. "Fuck me, that is a good argument. I might as well not exist. That's it. I'm taking 500 Darvocets. Humans, welcome your new overlord, Jay Ricker, 22. He is all-around awesome."
He's better than A-Rod any day. Character has a lot to do with it. He's out there for his teammates, not just himself. He does it for the good of the team. That's the kind of guy you want on the field."
Yes. You would never, ever want a guy scientifically proven to be dramatically better at fielding. That is not the kind of guy you want on a field. No fielders. Just team guys.
Ricker added that "A-Rod's only out for the money. For him it's not about baseball, it's just about banking."
Studies have shown that A-Rod is, incidentally, the league's best banker. A lot of people don't know this, but he was heavily recruited by Blackstone and Goldman coming out of high school. Jeter is genetically incapable of using an ATM; he in fact only understands those letters to be the abbreviation for ass to mouth.
Fans said Jeter's greatness goes beyond the numbers he produces on the field.
"He has intangible qualities that can't be measured with statistics," said East Village bar owner Kevin Hooshangi, 28.
Fans repeated a thing they had heard innumerable times on the TV and radio.
"I can't change my mind about this," despaired Kevin Hooshangi. "My whole worldview depends on it being true. Jeter has intangibles. Jeter has intangibles. He does. He does!" Hooshangi continued to chant about Jeter, tears streaming down his face. "I know he does. He has them. Intangi...(unintelligible sobbing)..." "He's the ultimate teammate. It doesn't matter what his percentages are when he's making big plays in big games. He's the one with four World Series rings."
However, Frank Angelo, 50, gave A-Rod his due. "He's the best shortstop in the American League playing third base," Angelo said.
Then Angelo realized what city he lived in, and what newspaper he was talking to.
But Jeter as one of the worst?
"That's not true," Angelo said. "He's a good fielding shortstop." He even said he would keep Jeter at short. "Jeter's the captain, he was there before A-Rod," said Angelo.
By this logic, Jeter never should have taken over for Tony Fernandez. Fernandez was there before Jeter. Jeter should've had to slide over to third. But wait, Wade Boggs was at third. No go. Already there. But hey, should Boggs have even been there? No! He took over for Charlie Hayes. That never should have happened.
NO ONE SHOULD HAVE CHANGED POSITIONS EVER. After the original roster of the 1903 New York Highlanders died, all baseball should have stopped being played forever. Thanks, Frank Angelo. But as Yankee fan Brittnay Thompson, 32, said, it's about who's good in May, and who's good in October.
"In big situations A-Rod drops the ball, no pun intended," said Thompson.
Thompson added, "Are you awake, FJM guys? We're still out here. Morons, I mean. We totally outnumber you. We're loud, we're close-minded, and we dominate the media. We'll never stop being dumb about baseball. Never. We'll always keep the idiot ball rolling. Is that a pun? If it is, I didn't intend it."
Alex Rodriguez's brown eyes were moist and bloodshot, obvious evidence of how he had reacted on a gloomy night. You know what A-Rod could have really used? A couple drops of Derek Jeter's CalmEye from Visine.
He watched the Yankees lose to the Cleveland Indians, 6-4, to end a potentially memorable season and perhaps end his career, too.
Wait -- what? End his career? Quoi?
Yes, Rodriguez singled with the Yankees trailing, 6-1. Yes, he drilled a homer against Rafael Perez with the Yankees behind by four runs for his first homer and first run batted in across the last 16 playoff games. He also popped out in the ninth. But Rodriguez's first two at bats, those uncomfortable at bats, will stick with him. Especially if this was his last game as a Yankee.
To put a Juniorian twist on it, let's rewrite that paragraph as if Jeter, not A-Rod, had gone 2-5 with a tater:
After being fooled like so many of his teammates by Paul Byrd in his first two at bats, the Captain's bat awoke when his team needed him most. Jeter punched a gutsy single to left in the bottom of the fifth, only to be stranded. And in the seventh, the Truest of Yankees crushed a Rafael Perez offering deep into the Bronx night towards monument valley where someday, his stately calm-eyed countenance shall join the likes of Ruth, Mantle, and DiMaggio. Like so many of his home runs before, this hit was perfectly timed; down four with their backs against the wall in the series, his team had never needed him more. Sadly, the rules of baseball prevented HRH Number Two from batting more than one other time (a most un-Jeterlike pop-up in the ninth), and his teammates could only muster one other run before time ran out. As Cleveland celebrated, and the home team walked off the field for the last time until April, one thing remained certain: Derek Jeter was the real hero of 9/11.
Do you think they had this paragraph written before A-Rod homered?
The Yankees came in streaking, overcoming a 21-29 start to win the AL wild card. But they were done in by poor pitching, an insect invasion and the latest October vanishing act by Alex Rodriguez, whose bat was quiet until a solo home run in the seventh inning.
Alex Rodriguez started the series 0 for 6 in the first two games in Cleveland, but when the chips were down and his team needed him most, he dug down deep and bounced back with four hits in Games 3 and 4, including a gargantuan home run Monday night that drew his team within striking distance. Despite these herculean efforts from the best player in the game, the Yankees could not overcome a late, dramatic GIDP by series goat Derek Jeter, his third of the series in only seventeen at bats. Jeter, a reliable on base presence in the two hole during the regular season, looked uncomfortable all series long, never getting into a groove and finishing with a 0.176 OBP with no walks in the series.
** EDIT **
New version: good job, AP. They've added a section about A-Rod's home run and even a sentence about Jeter's GIDPs! Congrats.
Tuesday Night "Monday Morning Quarterback" Quarterback
I am way, way behind on my e-mail reading, and to those of you who have sent in tips and gotten a wall of angry silence in return, I apologize. I've been out for three days straight celebrating James Spader's Emmy win. But I'm back now, and sobering up, and will post more soon.
I tend to subscribe to the "three dogs barking" theory of internet interest, and even though I feel like picking on Peter King's "10 Things of Things I Think I Think Are Things" column is like shooting fish in a barrel with a barrel-sized fish annihilation laser, enough people sent this quote to me I feel almost a civic duty to link it:
Never a good idea to pitch to Derek Jeter if you could pitch to Bobby Abreu instead. I don't care what the stats say. Ask Curt Schilling if, with first base open, he'll ever want to pitch to the best player of my lifetime again.
Forget OPS match-ups and career stats (most/all of which favor Abreu). Let's just focus on the fact that Peter King, born in 1958, thinks that Derek Jeter is the best player of his lifetime.
With reader Matthew's help, that's a big old handful of f-you to:
Barry Bonds Albert Pujols Mickey Mantle Vlad A-Rod Willie Mays Hank Aaron Gary Sheffield Pete Rose Joe Morgan (just for fun) Rod Carew Tony Gwynn Mike Schmidt Reggie Jackson
Every time -- and this is not an exaggeration; I literally mean every single time -- a sportswriter writes an article about whether Player X is good enough to make the Hall of Fame, and that sportswriter has decided that: no, Player X is not quite good enough to make the Hall of Fame, the sportswriter smugly and anti-humorously writes some variation of the sentence: "It's not called the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Some incarnations include:
Classic: "It's the 'Hall of Fame,' not the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Positive: "He belongs in the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Sarcastic: "Maybe he'd get my vote for the 'Hall of Very Good.'" Dickish/Cowherd-ian: "Um...hello? It's not called the 'Hall of Good.' It's called the 'Hall of Fame.' Fame, as in famous. 'Fame' is part of the equation!!!!! I am bad at my job!!!!!!!!'"
The #1 thing (out of eighteen or so total things) that bothers me about this, is that it's a purely semantic argument. If it were called "The Hall of 500 Homers" and a guy ended with 496 homers, then you could write an article where you sneeringly said, "Sorry -- it's not called the 'Hall of 496 Homers.'" But in this case, the term "Hall of Fame" itself is a vague, ill-defined phrase that is not clarified or elucidated in any way by contrasting it with the equally odd and ill-defined "Hall of Very Good." (Indeed, one could argue, there are already a lot of only "Very Good" players already in the Hall of Fame, so the whole thing is moot, and certainly should not be argued in the snide/condescending way in which it is frequently argued.)
Not exempt from this crew -- again, because there are literally no exemptions -- is Jean-Jacques Taylor of the Dallas Morning News, who wrote this little number about whether Craig Biggio belongs. Let's get right to the trite:
Biggio is in the Hall of Very Very Good.
Cue the band. Release streamers. Exit to your left.
The article isn't really offensive -- he merely argues that the old benchmarks of 500 HR and 3000 H might need to be adjusted as "shoo-in"-type numbers to account for steroids and the offensive explosion and so forth. Fine. But at the end, he writes this: (and this is the complete list. I have made no edits).
HALL OF FAMERS?
No Question:
Roger Clemens: Best pitcher of "live ball" era.
I agree.
Ken Griffey Jr: Injuries cost him a shot at Aaron's record.
Well, congratulations, Ramiro Mendoza, Andy Pettitte, Tino Martinez, Bernie Williams, El Duque, Chuck Knoblauch, Gene Tenace, Dal Maxvill, Don Gullett, Bump Hadley, Luis Sojo, Mike Stanton, and Snuffy Stirnweiss -- you're in!
Mariano Rivera: The most dominant closer in the game.
I'd vote for him.
Alex Rodriguez: The game's best player.
Him, too.
WE NEED TO DISCUSS
Wait -- there are other no-brainers. Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux...no?
Craig Biggio: I love the consistency, but where is the greatness?
I guess that depends on how you define "greatness." He did play two very difficult positions, and a third, easier position... plus, 3000 hits is nothing to sneeze at. He stole 400+ bases at a 77% success rate. That's pretty good. I don't know. His career OPS+ is only 113. He's very definitely borderline. Unlike...
Jose Mesa: Don't laugh.
Too late.
If we don't adjust the standard, you must consider him because he has more saves than Bruce Sutter (300) and Goose Gossage (310).
He also has a career ERA+ of -- wait for it -- 101. He is 1% better than the average pitcher of his era, ERA-wise. His career WHIP: 1.473. He has about 1000 Ks in 1500 innings.
For comparison: Bruce Sutter had a 1.14 WHIP and a 136 ERA+. 800+ Ks in 1000 IP. He was a weird choice, but he's way better than Jose Mesa. Goose: 1.23 WHIP and 126 ERA+. 1500 Ks in 1800 IP.
I must not consider him. For anything. Saves are dumb.
Gary Sheffield: Will steroid allegations slow the only man to represent five different teams in the All-Star Game?
I don't know. I do know that he has a .926 OPS and a 146 OPS+ in 20 seasons and is still probably the best or second-best hitter on his team at 38. If he keeps hitting this way for a few more years, his numbers will be indisputable. They probably already are. As far as steroids go, I don't know why, but I kind of believe him when he says he didn't know what they were when Bonds gave them to him. He is so crazy, he might have actually believed they were flaxseed oil.
Oh -- also, the All-Star Game is stupid and should not be used to discuss a player's Hall of Fame candidacy. And the fact that he represented five different teams is probably a strike against him, if you take the "character" issue into consideration. (Not saying you should, but if you do, he's clearly a son of a gun, this guy.)
Frank Thomas: The former two-time MVP fell so low, he has also been Comeback Player of the Year.
How dare he...win three awards?
Frank Thomas has a .984 career OPS (11th highest all-time). He has a 158 career OPS+. He has a .422 career OBP. He has 500 HR. He has a .341 career EqA.
This is not really a question. Or if it is, it is pretty easily answered.
Jim Thome: Is he an overrated, one-dimensional player?
Thome needs a few more good years to solidify his bid, but he has a 149 career OPS+. He will go if he stays healthy for a while longer. He's definitely not overrated as a hitter.
And that's it. Those are the only people he mentions, for either category.
There are so many people to talk about. Manny, Bonds, Chipper, Glavine, Smoltz, Piazza, Trevor Hoffman, Helton, Vizquel...
Yawn. Larger Than Life: Today's Future Legends by Eric Neel
DEREK JETER, SS, NEW YORK YANKEES ...His numbers (despite some serious and legitimate questions about his defensive effectiveness, particularly as it applies to range) are outstanding, but he can't be reduced to statistics because every swing, every throw, comes to us laden with aura -- with some preternatural, supernatural composure that never fails to amaze (even if, it must be said, it also rarely manages to charm) us.
Laden with aura. Preternatural. Supernatural. Composure. Barf.
That's par for the course, I guess. No real crime here except Kool-Aid Consumption. This is the real doozy:
(Remember: the subject is: Future Legends)
DAVID ECKSTEIN, SS, ST. LOUIS CARDINALS In a country that loves gritty and gutty, he is the grittiest, guttiest cat of them all.
He has the averagest, most perfectly mediocre .260 career EqA of any gritty, gutty cat in the world.
He barely can throw the ball across the infield,
Not a good quality for a MLB SS.
and he chokes the bat like a T-baller.
The very definition of "neither here, nor there."
But he comes up big,
He had two good WS games last year. Congratulations. He also has a .358 lifetime SLG.
comes up swinging, and is humble and gracious about every miraculous accomplishment.
He does seem like a nice person. I will grant that.
The guardians of days gone by like to think they have the market cornered on gamers, but this generation has its Eck. And though little, he stacks up.
For two years now, even as he compiled (literally) MVP-level statistics, the press has been asking: "What's wrong with ARod?" They based their ideas that something was wrong with ARod on his performance in a very very small number of games in October, which is like basing John Gielgud's acting career on "Arthur 2: On the Rocks."
Yes, he swiped the ball from Arroyo's glove, and yes, he failed to come through in the "clurmtch," or whatever that word is. But so did every other Yankee. Sheffield popped the ball up in key at bats. Matsui K'd a lot. Giambi forgot to take his medicine and turned back into a pumpkin. They all fell apart, but only ARod got blamed. And in the 2005 postseason, when he went 1-14 (the very definition of a small sample size) the press was all over him like a cheap suit.
Now he's off to a torrid start, and the new fun story to write is "ARod Finally True Yankee!!!!" But whom are they going to blame now, based on a tiny sample size?
Not...surely they wouldn't...oh my God...Run!!!!!!!!!!
Time to ask ... what’s wrong with Jeter?
As A-Rod's fortunes soar, Yankee captain down in dumps
By Mike Celizic
MSNBC contributor
Mike Celizic
Alex Rodriguez has undoubtedly had many moments — some of which could be timed with a calendar — during which he wished he were Derek Jeter. This is not one of them.
The Yankee captain and New York’s favorite baseball player since Don Mattingly has been having a rough go of it this year. It’s not so much his hitting, although his average is sinking fast after a torrid start and he’s got just three RBI in 12 games, but his fielding that’s been a problem.
Jeter has made a lot of errors so far. But so has Mike Lowell. And unlike Jeter, Lowell is actually a good fielder. Freaky things happen in small sample sizes. That's why after a week Ian Kinsler is 2nd in HR. That's why people say things like "At this pace, Garth Iorg will have 300 RBIs!" and then he ends up with like 34. You really can't tell anything about a player's year after 40 AB or 10 games in the field.
For the record, the reasons Jeter has made a lot of errors are probably: (a) it's been really crappy playing conditions, or (b) he's never been that good a defensive SS, or (c) it's a complete fluke.
Jeter has won three Gold Gloves, but he’s not on his way to winning a fourth. Through 12 games, he has six errors, the most in the major leagues.
For the millionth and final [sic] time, Gold Gloves are 99% meaningless.
Everybody’s writing about his problems catching and throwing, but no one’s trying to run him out of town. Yankee Stadium with him would be like the Sistine Chapel without Michelangelo’s ceiling work.
I’d ask you to imagine A-Rod in the same situation, but you don’t have to, because we’ve seen what would happen...He was booed at every opportunity and flayed daily by the talk-show guys and the columnists, many of whom suggested the only way for him to fix things was to take the first plane out of town. I was one of them, and I don’t apologize for it.
You should. It was insane. In 2005-06 he hit 83 HR, drove in 251. He walked 181 times. His OBPs were .421/.392.
SLG .610/.523.
EqA .354/.319.
His WARP3s were 13.0 and 7.5 (same as Troy Glaus in 2006, BTW), and if he had been able to play his natural position on the field, they would probably have been much higher, all things being equal.
Even when he had his legendarily "terrible" year, when everything "fell apart," when he hated New York and was a "head case" and everyone in the world wrote about how he didn't fit in with the Hallowed Pinstripery of New York, he was an awesome, awesome baseball player. Who in his right mind can think differently?
He had come to the Yankees as the best player in baseball.
By last season, he wasn’t even the third best third-baseman.
J'accuse, Monsieur de Chapeau!!!
And the worse it got for A-Rod, the better it got for Jeter. Every bad throw, every late-inning out, every clumsy attempt to explain himself made A-Rod look more misplaced and Jeter more the true Yankee hero.
Jeter had a great year last year. ARod had a very very good year that looked bad only in comparison to his outstanding previous years. It happens.
So this year, A-Rod showed up wearing high stirrups and after a couple of games to warm up started hitting — for average and power, in early innings and late, by day and by night.
I don't think this makes cognitive sense. "...after a couple of games to warm up started hitting." Does that mean, "after taking a couple of games to warm up?" Also, the part that comes after the dash reads like a weird parody of "Paul Revere's Ride."
After three years of waiting for him to do his part, he was suddenly doing everybody’s part.
He has been doing pretty much what he did in his 2005 AL MVP Season, when he went .321/.41/.610 with 48 HR, a .354 EqA and a 13.0 WARP3. This didn't come out of nowhere, people. He has always been this good. He was this good even while you were all talking about how bad he was.
But there’s something wrong with this picture — the Captain’s early-season slump, especially in the field. The SABRE folks will tell you that Jeter has never been a particularly good shortstop despite the Gold Gloves, but his teammates, his manager and anybody who watched him every day will differ.
"The facts will tell you some information. Some casual anecdotes will contradict this. Your choice."
There are some things the stats don’t tell you, and unless you watch the guy every day, there’s no way to tell you about them.
I've seen somewhere in the vicinity of 500 Yankee games, I'd say. And I think Jeter is vastly overrated as a fielder by every anecdote-toting sportswriter and fan out there. Twice a year he goes deep into the hole to his right, stabs a backhand, jumps in the air and gets the guy at first by a step. It's very impressive and flashy, but it doesn't nearly make up for the fact that he gets nothing to his left. He has what people often call a "high baseball IQ" in that he is very alert and smart when the ball is in play -- I will give him that. He takes relays well and is very athletic. But he is nowhere near the league of the Vizquels, Everetts, or even Cabreras of the world.
But there’s no denying he’s killing his team in the field right now, and his hitting isn’t that great either. Come to think about it, he’s not even stealing bases with his normal ease — just one-for-three on the season.
He's not off to a great start, but his OBP is .390, which tells you his patience is still there. And it's been like 50 AB. In 2004 Jeter had an 0-32 in April, and ended up having a fine offensive year.
It’s as if he and A-Rod are two yo-yos that are out of synch. When A-Rod was down, Jeter was up. And now that A-Rod is tearing the cover off the ball, Jeter is down. It’s a little spooky. It’s as if he thrives on A-Rod’s negative energy and is being sapped by A-Rod’s success.
Or, alternately -- and I don't mean to disparage the Yo-Yo/Vampire-Energy-Suck Theory, which seems air-tight -- ARod has always been awesome, Jeter had a mediocre first 50 AB, and this is all pointless and stupid.
I’m sure — well, pretty sure, anyway — it’s just an aberration, that Jeter’s problems are just a slump that will pass and not the result of him trying for the first time since A-Rod arrived, to keep up with and outdo his teammate.
Yeah, probably. Or -- and bear with me here -- what if ARod, brimming with jealousy and malice, is secretly poisoning Jeter with a magic serum that causes him, Jeter, to have a slightly mediocre first 50 AB of the season and be slightly worse in the field than normal? Could such a serum exist? Get on this. Pronto.
You never thought of Jeter as needing to outshine anyone. He’s shared the stage with plenty of great players, and it’s never stopped him. On the other hand, in the three years that A-Rod’s been playing next to him, he’s always been the leader and A-Rod the guy trying to keep up.
The roles are reversed right now. Jeter says it’s just a slump. So do Joe Torre, his manager, and Brian Cashman, the team’s G.M. They’re probably right.
But what if they’re not?
I said get on this! Visit every witch doctor in the city! Search ARod's home for boiling cauldrons! We will get to the bottom of this, fair readers. That I promise.
My theory is that for years, Joe Torre has been secretly feeding Jeter an experimental Awesome Serum concocted by a Haitian witch doctor in Queens. This season that witch doctor has gone missing, perhaps kidnapped by his mortal enemies, the yakuza.
So you see, KT, the real problem here is the absence of a serum rather than the presence of one.
The Gold Glove is probably the most meaningless award given out in sports. Ergo, the All-Time Gold Glove Award is the All-Time Most Meaningless Award in Sports.
Exhibit A: Derek Jeter, a mediocre-to-bad fielder, is a candidate for all-time greatest fielding SS.
I urge you all to vote for him -- seriously -- as a kind of nihilistic, Duchampian-urinal-type artistic expression of the meaninglessness of life.
Recently, the Yankees Captain has been hit with some misguided criticism that he should come out stronger in his defense of Alex Rodriguez...
"That's exactly what I said," Jeter calmly explained. "I said the only thing I wasn't going to do was tell the fans who they should boo and who they shouldn't boo."
Then Jeter took the opportunity to stand up for Giambi, who was booed so loudly after he struck out in the eighth inning it was hard to hear public address announced Bob Sheppard announce the next hitter. Jeter implored Yankees fans to stop booing Giambi.
"The fans have to start cheering for him," Jeter said. "If you're a Yankee fan, you want us to win and we need Jason ."
One more time: 2006, re: ARod:
"I said the only thing I wasn't going to do was tell the fans who they should boo and who they shouldn't boo."
And 2005, in re: Giambi:
Jeter implored Yankees fans to stop booing Giambi. "The fans have to start cheering for him," Jeter said. "If you're a Yankee fan, you want us to win and we need Jason ."
I wonder if its pure objective analysis, or a fetish for contrarianism that's led us to the conclusion that 2006 Jeter = great tangibles, weak non-tangible things.
Every day in my hotel I get a little distilled edition of the NY Times slipped under my door. Today I read it as I sipped my coffee and watched "Tommy Boy" on F/X Buenos Aires. (It loses something in the translation.) And today, my NY Times distillation had an article about the AL MVP voting (which had not yet happened). The title of the article was "Jeter Looms as an MVP Candidate."
In the distilled article, there was a quote from worthless pontificator Tim McCarver, who believed that Derek Jeter should have been MVP. Why, you ask? WARP3? VORP? WPA? EqA? Probably EqA. That's McCarver's like go-to stat. I can't quite remember...well, let me just re-read the article and refresh my memory as to why Jeter should be MVP.
"Derek Jeter is different from all the other power guys," said the Fox broadcaster [sic] Tim McCarver..."It's not like he doesn't do anything from a numbers standpoint; he does a lot of things. But he's different, and you have to consider him differently. If Phil Rizzuto can win the MVP in 1950, Derek Jeter can be a candidate 56 years later."
Now, if any of you loyal readers out there ever question again why we at FJM despise Derek Jeter, or Tim McCarver, please just read that quote.
Derek Jeter is different. You have to think of him differently.
Yikes.
Now. It's possible that what McCarver is saying here is:
"Derek Jeter is different from the power guys. You have to take his position into account. You have to realize that the numbers he puts up as a SS are perhaps more valuable than the numbers Justin Morneau puts up as a 1B. Therefore, let's use things like VORP and WARP and stuff to determine exactly how valuable this guy is to his team."
I don't think that's what he is saying, though. I think he is talking about intangibles, here.
Perhaps that is a leap for me to make, here, in Argentina. But look again at that qualifier: "It's not like he doesn't do anything from a numbers standpoint; he does a lot of things." He brings up how Jeter has good numbers, which leads me to surmise that when he talks about how Jeter is "different," he is not actually talking about numbers at all, or about comparitive numbers among players at different positions. Plus, I have heard McCarver talk about Derek Jeter so often, and so miserably faux-poetically, that I'd be willing to bet 10,000 pesos (about $3500 US, give or take) that McC is saying that in a metaphysical, poetic, intangible way, we have to think of Derek Jeter differently.
And to that extrapolated exhortation from McCarver I say: no, sir. No we do not. We do not have to think of him differently. We have to think of him exactly the same as we think of any baseball player. We have to consider his position, yes. But when it comes to evaluating his contributions to his baseball team, we absolutely do not have to think of him "differently".
He does not possess superhuman powers. He is not physically handicapped. He is not a warrior-poet. He is not blessing us with his very presence. He is not a wizard. He is a baseball player.
He should have been the MVP because of how good he is at baseball. Not because of his calm eyes (a phrase McCarver, I believe, invented) or his intangibles or his steely gaze or his charisma or his elegant gait or his composure or the fact that he's currently schtupping Jessica Biel.
The thing that really bugs me is, McCarver is right about the Rizzuto-in-1950 comparison, but not the way he thinks he's right. Rizz had this line:
Phil Rizzuto, 1950:
.324/.418/.439 122 OPS+ 7 HR 112 RC .296 EQA
And there were certainly bigger power guys, like Larry Doby and Vern Stephens and stuff. (Teddy W. would assuredly have won the award if he hadn't played in only 89 games due to Korea -- he hit 28 bombs and had a .338 EqA in those 89 games. Also, did you know he had a farking .419 EqA in 1941? I mean, holy shit.) But, Rizzy had a 12.3 WARP3 because he played SS. Much the way Calm Eyes McGee had a 12.1 this year. Although, to be fair, DJ is a way better offensive player than Rizzy ever was.
I might have actually given the 1950 award to Yogi Berra, who had a 10.5 WARP3 and a .303 EqA, going .322/.383/.533 with 28 HR. But really, I would have given it to him because in 597 AB he struck out TWELVE TIMES. Look it up. That is batshit insane, my friends. But I digress.
The point is, Tim McCarver is a dumb dummy. And he is right about Rizzuto/Jeter for exactly the opposite reason that he is arguing. And no one should ever think of Derek Jeter, or anyone else, "differently" when evaluating him/them.
And if McCarver says tomorrow that all he was talking about was VORP and WARP and RC and FRAA and EqA, I will take this all back. And I will eat my sombrero.
A Spanish language grammar correction from beloved reader Pandrew.
Hey Sr. Tremendous.
The word "noche" in Spanish is feminine and is accompanied by a female article: la noche triste, for example. Thus, the greeting is "Buenas Noches," as both adjective and noun must agree on a gender.
Qué tienes buena suerte en Buenos Aires.
Let me just say that I am proud to be a poster on a blog that gets grammar corrections in two languages.
A little correction on beloved reader Pandrew's Spanish:
One would say "Que tengas buena suerte en Argentina."
1. there is no accent over the e on Que because it is not a question marker.
2. When you use que to wish someone well, the verb it precedes should take on a subjunctive ending (further explanation would be long and boring). Anyway, there you go.
Okay…not the best choice anymore. Hafner seems like the best choice so far, maybe. Or Ortiz. But let’s keep going. Because I love Derek Jeter, and I really want to believe that he was the best offensive player in the league this year.
IsoP, AL, 2006
1. Hafner .350 2. Ortiz .349 3. Thome .310 4. Dye .306 5. Giambi .305 Then there's a really long run of dudes who stink, like Kevin Millar and stuff, and then... 50. Pierzynski .141 51. Iguchi .141 52. Jeter .140
Huh. Now I'm definitely iffy on Derek Jeter being the best offensive player in the AL this year. Let's keep going.
SecA, AL, 2006
(This takes into account Jeter's SB, remember)
1. Hafner .570 2. Ortiz .565 3. Giambi .556 4. Thome, .529 5. Ramirez (Bos.) .519 (Then there's a long list of dudes, including Johnny Damon and Jorge Posada and Alex Rodriguez and, yes, Kevin Millar again, and then we get...) 28. Millar .302 29. Jeter .297
Ugh. This is looking more and more like Derek Jeter didn't deserve this award. Sorry I put in the thing about how Millar was in the long list of dudes who came before Jeter and then also wrote in Millar's place on the list right above Jeter, but I really wanted to hammer home the insane fact that Kevin Millar had a higher SecA than Derek Jeter in 2006.
Well, at least Jeter led the league in OPS. Check that -- he was 15th. Hafner was first.
No matter. I'm sure he was at the very least the best offensive player on his own team. Oops -- hang on. Giambi was way better in every single stat except BA and SB. And ARod was 13th in OPS. (Surprising -- I thought that guy sucked, based on what people who are professional sportswriters have told me.)
Well, okay, fine, whatever -- Jeter was definitely the very very best offensive SS in the AL. Except arguably Carlos Guillen, who had a higher OPS, more HR, more 2B, and more walks, in 80 fewer AB.
But look, everyone -- Jeter was second in VORP in the AL. So he's not a bad choice.
Of course, Hafner was first in VORP in the AL.
Travis Hafner is a better hitter than Derek Jeter. So are lots of other people. Jeter might deserve the MVP, because he put up his very very good stats from the SS position, which makes those stats very very valuable. But the Hank Aaron Award is not the MVP.
So there you have it, folks. Derek Jeter. Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.
There have been some very angry blog-o-types -- my favorite kind, as I myself am an angry blog-o-type -- who have chastised me for using SecA and IsoP in the same breath as VORP, EqA, etc. Just to clarify: I am not equating these stats. The umbrella stats -- VORP, EqA, etc. -- tell the big picture story, and the smaller, more specific stats -- SecA, OPS, IsoP -- tell the details of the story. And the story is: Travis Hafner -- and probably Ortiz, Thome, and a few other dudes -- all had better offensive years than Derek Jeter.
Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.
is an exaggeration. Just having a little fun.
But Giambi had a better year. And ARod (.311 EqA to Jeter's .316) was basically equal.
As I have clearly seen, from the barrage of electronic mailings I received after touting Derek Jeter for AL MVP a few days ago -- mailings which ranged from begrudging agreement to violent assailments on my character -- reasonable (and unreasonable) people can disagree on season-ending awards. Partly because the criteria are so vague. Partly because statistics and anecdotalism more often clash than mesh perfectly. And partly because institutionally-designated recognition is a dicey business in any arena. (Remember when "Crash" won Best Picture?)
But even the most unreasonable person would not, in a season-ending round-up of award suggestions, deny that Travis Hafner had a great year, right?
Thanks to a tip from reader Sean, we can see that SI's Jon Heyman thinks the top 20 for AL MVP are:
Johan Santana, Frank Thomas, Derek Jeter, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau, David Ortiz, Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon, Carlos Guillen, Jason Giambi, Chien-Ming Wang, Mariano Rivera, Justin Verlander, Torii Hunter, Michael Cuddyer, Joe Nathan, Jim Thome, Joe Crede, Vladimir Guerrero, Paul Konerko, Nick Swisher.
Granted, Haf only played in 129 games. But in those 129 games he did this:
He also had a Pujolsian .363 EqA, and an 8.9 WARP3.
Just...I'll pick one person from his top 20 at random. Torii Hunter is a lovely man, a fantastic defensive CF, a great baseball player. A great baseball player who did this:
.278/.336/.490. .280 EqA, 6.2 WARP3.
All of Heyman's top 20 might deserve top-10 votes. But come on, people.
Okay, so he only picked dudes from teams that either made the playoffs or came close.
What I don't get is how you separate, say, the Angels from the Indians? What's the arbitrary line you draw in the missing-the-playoff sand? Six games back? Eliminated within the last week of the season?
What sort of "value" is there in missing the playoffs by 4 games that missing the playoffs by 18 games doesn't give you? Ticket sales?
Also -- tangent, sorry -- have you noticed how often people say things like "like it or not, the MVP goes to a team in contention." Or "maybe it shouldn't necessarily go to a team in contention...but it has for the last 60 years! So my vote's for Chump X from Good Team Y!"
I don't get it. I don't get why the MVP isn't the best player award. That makes the most sense to me. I see zero in the criteria listed by the BBBBWWAAA that should lead voters to vote for teams from playoff teams vs. non-playoff teams, ceteris paribus.
Reader Kevin chimes in, with some thoughtful zazzle:
...Did you catch the fact that [Heyman] ranked Morgan Ensberg as his least valuable player in all of the NL? Sure, Ensberg didn't have anything close to his 2005 season, but he did this:
.235/.396/.463/.859 (walked 101 times) with 23 HR, a .295 EQA, and 6.3 WARP3. He was, by my count, 48th in the NL in VORP.
What the hell is Heyman talking about? Seriously. That is a very, very solid year. Like I said, it wasn't his 2005, but it's good. And he's the Least Valuable Player over, say, Clint Barmes and his .220/.264/.335/.598 line (at Coors Field) or his teammate Adam Everett and his .239/.290/.352/.642 or David Eckstein and his .292/.350/.344/.694? Oh, that's right. David Eckstein is scrappy, does all the little things right, knows how to play the game, and has a huge heart. Silly me.
A lot of you got all up in it after I said Derek Jeter is a terrible choice for MVP. I was hoisted on my own petard, as e-mail after e-mail slammed me with VORPs and WARPs and even a few Win Percentage Added arguments, which is getting really hard-core nerdy, and God bless you all for it.
I stand by my assertion that to give Derek Jeter the MVP this year -- even for the first half -- is dumb. However.
On Mike 'n Mike in the Morning today, Eric Kuselias and Buster Olney played "Are the Fans Right?" with all-star predictions. Kuselias, who is, by ESPN Radio standards, a friggin' genius, said that Michael Young should be the starting SS for the AL. Why? More 2B than Jeter, more RBI than Jeter, and, in part because, and I quote: "He won the batting title last year."
He won the batting title.
Last year.
Derek Jeter 2006 OPS: .882 Michael Young 2006 OPS: .817
Derek Jeter 2006 SecA: .317 Michael Young 2006 SecA: .211
Derek Jeter 2006 RC27: 7.53 Michael Young 2006 RC27: 5.53
Now, Baseball Prospectus actually has Young above Jeter in WARP1, 4.3 to 3.6, largely because they list him at 12 FRAA and Jeter at -2 FRAA (take that, people who yelled at me). But come on. Jeter is the choice.
Now stop e-mailing me and telling me I am biased against Derek Jeter, that overrated, overpaid, iron-gloved, pretty-boy turd muncher.
I think I said something to my bride the other night that I never thought I'd say about a New York Yankee. As many of you may have divined from this column over the years, that's not my favorite franchise on earth. Anyway, I said to her: I'm not sure about this, but I think when Derek Jeter retires, I will say he's the best baseball player I ever saw.
I know this is subjective, but: Peter King graduated from college in 1979, so I estimate he is 49ish. If we can assume he has been watching baseball since the age of, say, eight, in 1965 or so, that means he has been able personally to see these people play baseball: Willie Mays, Frank Robinson, Albert Pujols, Barry Bonds, Hank Aaron, Alex Rodriguez, Willie McCovey, Mike Schmidt, Willie Stargell, Ken Griffey, Jr., Harmon Killebrew, and Reggie Jackson. He has also seen: Tim Salmon, John Olerud, Ryan Klesko, J.D. Drew, Chipper Jones, Bobby Abreu, Larry Walker, Jim Edmonds, and Scott Rolen, all of whom have a higher OPS+ than Derek Jeter.
Living in Jersey, I see the man come to bat maybe 300 times a season, and I watch him in the field maybe 40 percent of his innings. But Jeter personifies effort every time he puts on the uniform; there is never anything but 100 percent effort.
A lot of baseball players exhibit this quality.
Every at-bat is quality.
Fair enough. He does put together nice at bats.
Every ball hit to him, and some only close to him, are gobbled up with certainty.
Although defensive metrics are problematic and often rudimentary, every single one of them lists Jeter as one of the worst defensive SS in the last ten years. The Baseball Prospectus book "Baseball Between the Numbers" calculates that he moved up to the middle of the pack in his first gold glove year, but overall, he is quite weak.
And the way he carries himself ... He is baseball's Tiger Woods. He is this Yankee generation's DiMaggio. And I think he'll go down as better than Mantle, because though Mantle was truly great, he also squandered much of his ability through wild living.
Oh boy.
He is not baseball's Tiger Woods. Given that baseball is a team sport and golf one of individuals, I'm not even really sure what that means, but assuming it means he is a great champion and clutch player and something like "he's at his best in big moments," or something, I'll dispel this wild assertion simply by saying that in the exact same number of AB in the postseason, Jeter's own teammate Bernie Williams has more HR, way more RBI, a higher SLG, and, obviously, the same number of rings.
"This Yankee generation's DiMaggio" is actually an apt description of Jeter, since DiMaggio, for most of his life, got far more praise than he actually deserved. Not that he didn't deserve praise -- he is obviously a HOFer and a wonderful hitter, but tell me exactly how it is that people agreed to call him "The Greatest Living Ballplayer" when Mays, Williams, Aaron, Bonds, Robinson, and about fifteen other guys were still walking the earth? DiMaggio and Jeter are both very very good baseball players -- DiMaggio was far better -- who get too much praise relative to their peers because they play in New York.
And as for the idea that Jeter will go down in history as a better baseball player than Mickey Mantle...there are maybe a thousand statistics I could lay down to prove him wrong, but I'll just give you one.
Derek Jeter Career RC/27: 6.45 Mickey Mantle Career RC/27: 8.78
A team of 9 Mickey Mantles would beat a team of 9 Derek Jeters by more than two runs per game. The end.
I'm really sorry about this, but I was re-reading old posts on this (delightful) compendium of insanity, and I came across this sequence from a previous Joe Morgan chat:
Sean (Washington DC): Joe, you mention "intangibles" Do you think that most players understand and believe in them (such things as clubhouse chemistry, baseball IQ, etc. because I do and I think a lot of fans do but there seem to be quite a few analysts and reporters who think they are overrated. What's your take?
Joe Morgan: Well, Sean, I agree with YOU. Those intangibles ARE important. To hear people downplay them, means to me that they don't understand them. The computer age that we are in does not look for intangibles or reward them or recognize them. It's a definite plus when a guy brings more than a batting average to the table. Derek Jeter is the best example that you can get of a guy that helps you win championships with his intangibles. I've played the game for a long time and I've been an analyst and I know just how important those intangibles are. I couldn't agree with you more
Now, look. I don't want to beat a dead horse. But everyone who is stupid talks all the time about how undervalued "intangibles" are, and how there are guys who do things that "don't show up in the box scores" and all that stuff, and they argue, these idiots, that these "intangibles" are just as valuable to a team as actual baseball skills, and that no one rewards these people for their "intangibles."
But the thought just hit me: first of all, contrary to what Joe says here, EVERYBODY recognizes Derek Jeter's intangibles. People can't fucking shut up about Derek Jeter's intangibles. Ironically, there are dozens of sportscasters and -writers who talk incessantly about how nobody talks about Derek Jeter's intangibles. This, then, nullifies one part of Joe's "point." And second, in re: Joe saying that nobody rewards Derek Jeter's intangibles: Derek Jeter makes $18 million a year. Think about that. A guy who is, by any measure, a less-than-average shortstop, and who every year has like an .825 OPS or whatever (I don't have the energy to look it up) makes more than Bobby Abreu, and Adam Dunn, and Vlad Guererro, and even Pujols, and a whole lot of guys who are flat-out better players. So, what is he being paid for, if not "intangibles?"
In fact, if you decide to be crazy and take the approach that "intangibles" are a quantifiable aspect of baseball, like OPS or RC27 or anything else, then you would have to say that "intangibles" are among the most *over-appreciated" and *over-valued* of all skills. Because Derek Jeter is wildly overpaid, and everyone who is insane agrees that Derek Jeter does the most "intangible" things to help his team win.
And there are other guys, who don't make nearly as much money, but who are nonetheless overpaid, seemingly because they provide their team with intangibles. Jason Varitek is the best catcher in baseball right now, but will he be when he is 37? Because he'll be making like $10 million when he's 37, and a big part of the reason is his "intangibles."
It seems to me that if you want to make a lot of money as a baseball player, you should stop working out and taking extra BP and stuff, and work on your intangibles.
And also, since it's late and I am riled up, let me add the oft-made point that if Derek Jeter played for the Tigers, and had put up the exact same numbers and said and done the exact same things on and off the field, no one in the fucking world would ever have mentioned his name and the word "intangible" in the same sentence. And if Carlos Guillen had patrolled SS in the Bronx from 1996-2000, Joe Morgan would lie awake at night screaming at the ceiling that nobody recognizes how many intangibles he brings to the table.
In conclusion, I'd like to thank everybody here at the Institute for the Advanced Study of Preaching to the Converted.
when JM finally does publish everyone in the league's "intangibles" stats in the Joe Morgan Anecdotal Abstract, i'd be interested to see how they break down along racial lines. it seems to me that baseball's "intangibles" stat is analagous to basketball's "heart" stat of the bird/magic era.
it's amusing to me that JM believes he has special privy to the world of "things that don't show up in the box score." well, sabrmetrics was invented to fix shortcomings in box scores and traditional statistics -- to invent more accurate and more useful stats than batting average, wins, etc. yet JM will reject sabrmetrics for traditional stats and box scores -- the very things he routinely calls into question whenever the intangibles debate comes up. it's almost as if he senses that the inaccuracy of batting average and wins are what allow him to speculate stupidly that the gaps are filled in not by quantifiable numbers, but by derek jeter's nutsack, which he hopes to grasp tightly and fondle some day.
Good points, Jimmy. I would also add that the term "throwback" is almost always applied to white guys. Chipper Jones, Jim Thome, Paul Molitor, Trot Nixon, Roger Clemens, etc. Right now, I'd say guys like Juan Pierre, Dontrelle WIllis, and even, say, Mike Cameron, are all throwback players, yet you never hear them referred to as such. Why is that?
Hey, when are you going to get a blogger account and start posting here? Or are you worried that if you use your real blogger ID, we'll find your Warcraft III slash fiction blog?
