Dec
17

Mo wins 2009 Pro Athlete of the Year Award

By

Mariano Rivera doesn’t need awards. His performance speaks for itself. He still receives them, of course, and the latest on his mantle is the Sporting News’s 2009 Pro Athelete of the Year Award. This isn’t his first time winning that award. The Sporting News awarded it to the entire 1999 Yankee team. Strangely, Joe Torre won the award in 1996, despite not actually being a pro athlete. Make sure to check out Anthony DiComo’s story on the award — not for the information, really, but for the accompanying video.

Now, if only the baseball writers had awarded Mo the Cy Young in 2005…

Categories : Asides
  • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster)

    Meh. We all know that Mo is the pro athlete of the forever anyway.

  • http://twitter.com/tsjc68 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Archimedes Torquemada

    Now, if only the baseball writers had awarded Mo the Cy Young in 2005…

    (thinks)

    … no.

    • V

      Well, it shouldn’t have been Colon, that’s for sure (zOMG 20 wins!!!). I say Santana.

      • http://twitter.com/tsjc68 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Archimedes Torquemada

        That.

        1) Santana
        2) Randy Johnson (seriously, go check it out. Man didn’t get a single vote, but he deserved to be the runner up)
        3) Kevin Millwood

        • http://bronxbaseballdaily.com Matt ACTY/BBD

          Johnson could’ve (arguably should’ve) won in:

          1993
          1994
          2004

          • Steve H

            Ben Sheets should have been #2 in 2004.

          • http://twitter.com/tsjc68 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Archimedes Torquemada

            1997 was a crazy-sick year for him too:
            29 starts, 213 IP, 2.28 ERA (196+), 1.052 WHIP, 291 K, 5 complete games, 2 shutouts, 20-4 record.

            Unfortunately for him, Roger Clemens was a freaking buzzsaw for the Blue Jays.

            34 starts, 264 IP (ZOMG!!) 2.05 ERA (221+), 1.030 WHIP, 292 K, 9 complete games, 3 shutouts, 21-7 record.

            That’s a “tough luck” loss.

        • steve (different one)

          1. Johan
          2. Mark Buerhle

          • http://twitter.com/tsjc68 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Archimedes Torquemada

            Also an excellent choice.

            Johnson had a lower WHIP, though, and many more K’s. He also pitched in a tougher division than Buerhle and Millwood in the AL Central.

            Frankly, though, any ordering of Millwood, Buerhle, Johnson, and Cliff Lee for spots 2-5 would have been fine with me.

            Mariano’s #6 and Colon is #7. At best.

    • http://bronxbaseballdaily.com Matt ACTY/BBD

      Definitely should’ve been Johan.

  • Salty Buggah

    Mo wins Mo wins the 2009 Pro Athlete Mariano Rivera of the Year Award

    • Salty Buggah

      Damnit, take the first “Mo wins” out

      • http://twitter.com/tsjc68 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Archimedes Torquemada

        FACT: It’s impossible to ever take the phrase “Mo wins” out of anything. FACT.

        • Salty Buggah

          Heh, even if its said twice in a row?

          • http://bronxbaseballdaily.com Matt ACTY/BBD

            Mo’s winning > grammar.

  • Tank the frank

    MLB Network kicks ass.

    • http://theyankeeuniverse.com Moshe Mandel

      Yup. Leiter is fantastic in that setting. I learn something every time he breaks down a pitcher.

  • Salty Buggah

    That pitch at 0:09 in the video is crazy

  • Tank the frank

    Mo’s cutter is so nasty, it spins and rotates at an increasing rate until it develops it’s own gravitational pull. While the pitch is traveling in midair, it is coalesced with other particles in the air around it and – rotating under the natural gravity created by the cutter – becomes what is referred to as a “white dwarf” and begins to burn it’s own energy by the process of nuclear fusion.

    By the time his cutter reaches the catcher, it has used up it’s energy and become so dense that it’s gravity literally forces it to collapse upon itself with a blinding, split-second flash called a “supernova.” Of course, this happens so quick that it is impossible to see with the naked eye (or pitch FX). The cutter turned supernova has now ejected all of it’s surrounding matter. All that is left is a mass so dense, with gravity so strong, that it consumes even the light around it. That’s right, Mo’s cutter, once it reaches the catcher, is now a black hole.

    The opposing batter is in fact swinging at a black hole and therefore stands no chance of hitting the pitch. It’s science.

    It can then be theorized that the stars in our galaxy and in other galaxies are cutters, thrown by Mo, as he facilitates the continued existence of the universe in it’s intrinsic expansion.

    Mo’s cutter = star, to supernova, to black hole
    Mo = God
    Your mind = blown

    Thank you and goodnight.

    • steve (different one)

      IETC

    • Angelo

      Bravo Frank

    • MJ

      And this is exactly why I love this Yankee blog.

    • JMK THE OVERSHARE’s Milton Bradley Fat Park Factor

      I found that a shallow, inaccurate description of matter.

      Signed,

      Neil deGrasse Tyson

      Kidding. Nice work, Frank.

      • Tank the Frank

        The funny thing is that only two conclusions could be drawn from my post.

        1. I am a genius
        2. I’ve only watched a couple episodes of “The Universe”

        You went with option two…and you were exactly right.

        …And it pisses me off.

    • pete

      the actual physical truth is even more mind-boggling: mo’s cutter spins with such force that it eventually builds up so much velocity in the air particles that are moving due to the seams spinning that the ball moves in the direction of increased fluidic velocity (the velocity actually increases on two sides of the ball, but as one is upwards and the other downwards, it moves downwards). The reason this occurs is because the pressure of a moving fluid is less than static fluid, which is due in part (i think, or assume anyway) to two main factors: one is that particles moving in a (more or less) uniform direction would have less random movement than static fluid, and random movement creates pressure, and the other argument would be that movement is kinetic energy, while pressure is potential, so kinetic energy would be the alleviation of some potential energy, in this case pressure. I’m not sure about that though, because I think pressure is caused by kinetic energy to begin with. In any case though, there is less pressure in the moving air than in the static air, so the ball moves in the direction of the moving air.

      This, of course, is true of all breaking balls, and also is the reason why roofs fly off houses during hurricanes (weird to think about it, but they are actually pushed off from the inside, not pulled off from the outside). There are actually two reasons why mo’s cutter is so spectacular:

      a) the sharpness of his cutter is a result of its moving so fast that it physically cannot break until it is within only a few feet of the plate. This means that despite applying the extraordinary amount of lateral energy that it takes to make a baseball “break” in less than 60 feet of air time, Mo is still able to apply 90-94 mph worth of strictly forward kinetic energy. In other words, he gets that amount of velocity even though a great deal of the work done by his fingers (which for most pitchers contributes wholly to their velocities, which are generally in the Mo-range) is lateral, and does not contribute to velocity. In other words, it’s like a regular fastball, speed-wise, except it moves a lot. (Phil’s cutter, for example, is generally around 88 mph. His FB is 95. AKA, Mo throws HARD).

      b) despite throwing the ball very hard AND generating a lot of movement on the pitch, Mo has SPECTACULAR command, and truly gets how to pitch past the point of adaptability. Much of Mo’s success is predicated on the fact that people who have spent their whole lives making their muscles react to pitches cannot suddenly change their approach for one hitter. Not because they don’t want to, but because there is not enough time for your brain to tell your hands to swing somewhere other than where your hand-eye has told you where to swing. The other part of it, though, is that he CONSTANTLY throws pitches that simply cannot be hit well. A hitter must be incredibly comfortable and very much in his own groove to be able to hit 90+ MPH fastballs, so altering their approach for one at-bat, in-game, would wildly decrease their likelihood of success. Thus lefties can’t simply swing at the lower outside corner when the ball appears to be coming 3-4 inches outside, and righties can’t swing at a pitch that looks like it’s going to be 3-4 inches inside. Mind does not, in .5 seconds, triumph over instinctual hand-eye coordination.

      • andrew

        are you drunk? im drunk