Archive for Rants
About that Burnett-Posada rift
Posted by: | Comments
So by now you’ve heard all about this little problem AJ Burnett and Jorge Posada had on Saturday, and it’s the early favorite for Stupid Internet Story of the Week. Howeva, if you don’t know what I’m talking about, basically the two couldn’t get on the same page with regards to pitch selection over the weekend and AJ got lit up like Times Square. Amazingly, small little stuff like this manages to become a big story because the team is kickin’ so much ass right now that there aren’t many problems to complain about. ESPN even managed to devote five whole minutes to this nonsense during the broadcast last night.
First off, just because Burnett and Posada had a problem on Saturday does not mean they have a perpetual problem. Mark Feinsand already laid out the recent success the two have shared, so I’m not going to bother regurgitating it here. Just head over and check his post out. Sure, Burnett’s AVG, OBP, SLG, and OPS against are all higher with Posada behind the plate than any other catcher this year, but the sample sizes aren’t meaningful. Are we really going to compare 400+ batters faced with Posada to just over 100 with Molina? Or 56 with Cervelli? Really? Why don’t they just trade for Paul Bako then?
Most of the blame was hoisted on Posada’s shoulders over the weekend, but he’s not the guy making the pitches. Burnett has to execute, otherwise even the finest game calling in the history of the universe won’t do anything. Burnett’s a pretty simple pitcher, he works with a fastball and a curveball, and his stuff is plenty good enough that he can throw fastballs in fastball counts and breaking balls in breaking ball counts and still dominate. You’d think it wouldn’t be hard to map out a gameplan given the need for only two signs, but apparently it is.
Here’s the thing: Posada is going to catch everyday in the playoffs. Every single inning of every single game. And if he doesn’t for any reason other than injury, Joe Girardi should be fired because that’s like, Managing 101. Posada’s arguably the best catcher in baseball (NMD) and the team is much better with him in the lineup than Jose Molina or Frankie Cervelli or Joe Girardi or Mike Stanley or pretty much anyone. And because of his, Burnett and Posada need to use the rest of the season to get on the same page.
Not to jinx it or anything, but the Yankees are all but a lock to make the playoffs at this point. Baseball Prospectus gives them a 99.72271% chance of playing in October, Cool Standings has it at 98.6%. If the team bombs and doesn’t make the postseason, then they have way bigger problems than AJ Burnett and Jorge Posada not getting along. Anyway, because of this comfortable cushion, the team can afford to let Burnett and Posada work through their communication issues in AJ’s eight or so remaining starts.
We’re not talking about Gary Sheffield learning to play first or anything crazy like that, it’s just a set of battery mates needing to improve their communication. The answer isn’t separating the two for the rest of the year just to win what will probably amount to a few meaningless tack on games. If having Posada and Burnett matchup the rest of the year costs them a game at some point in September, so be it. It’s something that needs to be done in order to put the team in the best position to win in October. We’ll just have to deal with the noise in the meantime.
Photo Credit: Sipkin, Daily News
On being a fan (and not being Jeff Pearlman)
Posted by: | CommentsWhat does it mean to you to be a fan? The specific response will vary from person to person, but I think we can all agree on one aspect: we root for the laundry. There are some bandwagon fans, sure, but I’d think the heavy majority of people reading this will be with the Yanks through thick and thin — through the dark days of the late 80s and early 90s before the championship run of the late 90s. We might not like certain players as much as others, but we’ll always cheer them when they come through in big spots.
Some people apparently do not understand this. Jay from Fack Youk found one such person: Jeff Pearlman. In essence, he calls us Yankees fans inhuman. No, really. To wit:
In other words, how can anyone with a human head actually attend, say, a Yankees-Royals or Yankees-Orioles or Yankees-Rays or Yankees-A’s or Yankees-Mariners or Yankees-Rangers or Yankees-Twins or Yankees-Anybody Except The Red Sox or Mets game and truly, strongly, lovingly, audibly root for the Yankees to win?
Look, I’m a fan of the game. I buy MLB.tv every year, hooking up a second monitor to my laptop so I can work while having a game on. I have an extensive RSS reader with general baseball blogs which talk about all 30 teams with relative parity. But when it comes to what really gets me riled up, it’s the Yankees. They’re my team. They’re your team. We live and die by them, and that’s what makes baseball all the more interesting. Not only is there an enormous set of data for us to pore over, analyze, and evaluate, but there’s the emotional level of rooting for your team. It’s always been part of the game.
Apparently, Jeff Pearlman can’t understand this aspect of the game and instead wonders how I am a human being. He then goes on to describe baseball in terms of movies, which I don’t think works. Movies are scripted. They’re supposed to make you like a certain character. No one rooted for the Empire? No shit, Jeff. That’s the way the movie was written.
Baseball is not scripted. It’s not an isolated experience, like a movie. It spans days, weeks, months, seasons, generations. The Star Wars story ended. Baseball does not. It makes for allegiances, and as men of integrity we don’t just run out on our team. And we most certainly do not find them “boring” when they’re the best team in baseball. In fact, that’s quite exciting.
Of course, we can expect this kind of talk from Pearlman at this point. After all, we need only throw his own words back at him: “Oddly, I like their moves more than the Yankees. Penny and Smoltz could easily win more games than Sabathia and Burnett.” Yes, that’s verbatim from his website. Let’s see that again:
“Penny and Smoltz could easily win more games than Sabathia and Burnett.”
Brad Penny and John Smoltz? Win as many games as CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett? This one deserves another appearance.
“Penny and Smoltz could easily win more games than Sabathia and Burnett.”
Of course, the Yankees have had recent field days with both of those pitchers. A few weeks ago the Yanks smoked Smoltz, and the Sox DFA’d him the next day. Last night they laid into Penny. Two guys who Pearlman thought could work out as well for the Red Sox as Burnett and Sabathia did for the Yankees.
(For more afternoon amusement, check out the rest of Pearlman’s predictions.)
So, what did we learn with this? That Jeff Pearlman questions the humanity of anyone who doesn’t enjoy the game like he does. Which is like a movie. Also, he’s terrible at predicting things. Embarrassingly bad. There’s no shame in rooting for the Yankees, even though it makes for some embittered narrative.
The “Joba is babied” line is tired by now
Posted by: | CommentsI’m not mincing words here: I am sick and tired of people claiming that “Joba is babied.” Honestly, I think it’s just something to complain about now that the Yankees are consistently winning. There’s no other explanation for it. Why would anyone complain that the Yankees are taking precautionary steps to protect a player whom they view as a future top-of-the-rotation performer? Why put him at obvious and considerable risk just to “push him to his limits”?
Look, I’m not saying the Verducci Rule is the be-all, end-all in this conversation. There is plenty more that goes into it, which is why the Yankees aren’t capping Joba at exactly 30 innings more than his previous season high. They’re working through a plan they devised in order to not drastically increase Joba’s workload and put him at risk for injury. That’s to the benefit of the team’s long-term outlook. It might hurt the short term, but that’s sometimes the price you have to pay to cultivate an ace.
Think about it this way. If you’re going to start lifting weights, you don’t go in and lift as much as you can the first day. You don’t lift as much as you can the second time in. If you do, you’re going to burn yourself out or get hurt. Instead, you work yourself into a routine, adding a bit more weight each time to make sure your muscles can handle the load. It works this way in many facets of life. The Yankees are simply building Joba up so he can handle the workload of a starter, rather than taking the chains off instantly.
This is a direct response to Mike Silva, who has been on the “Joba is babied” bandwagon for a while. He offers nothing but anecdotal claims to back up his position, while completely ignoring the physical realities of pitching in the modern era. As Joel Sherman noted, things have changed a bit since then.
[Bob] Gibson never faced hitters who watched their at-bats against him before and during games to pick up patterns. Gibson did not face an era of players steeped in the value of the long at-bat and drawing walks. Gibson enjoyed a larger strike zone and — at times — a higher mound. He did not use a more tightly-wound ball against lighter, whip-like bats designed to zip through the zone for more damage. And we haven’t even mentioned steroids yet.
Yet we should treat pitchers the same as we did back then? It seems a bit absurd after reading that Sherman paragraph, no?
Silva does offer one name as a comparison: Tim Lincecum, last year’s NL Cy Young winner at age 24. Why was he able to pitch 227 innings last year with little ill effect? Because he was built up to that point. He pitched through his senior year in college and racked up over 330 innings with the University of Washington. The year he was drafted, 2006, he threw 180 innings, 125 in college and another 31.2 in the minors. When the Giants called him up in 2007, he finished the year with 174 innings. This made the jump to 227 innings the next year a bit easier.
Yes, that’s a considerable jump, 47 innings from the career high he set the previous year. But it was a work up. Entering 2008, he’d had about 550 innings of pro and college ball under his belt. That’s considerable experience. Joba does not have this type of experience. According to The Baseball Cube, Joba pitched just over 200 innings at the University of Nebraska over two years. He did pitch some winter ball to augment his 89.1 innings at Nebraska in 2006, the year he was drafted, and worked up to 112 innings the next year.
Unfortunately, Joba succumbed to injury last year, limiting him to just 100 innings of work. So, entering this season, Joba has never pitched more than 127 innings in a season. In college and pro experience he had just 458 innings of experience over four years. When the Giants allowed Lincecum to pitch 227 innings in 2008, he’d thrown 551 innings over the past four years. That’s nearly 25 extra innings per year that Lincecum could build up.
Like any kind of physical work, Joba needs to work up to full capacity, rather than being allowed to just run his way into a wall. The 121.2 innings he’s pitched this year is just shy of his previous total, which came three years ago, and a decent start today could put him at or over that total. His 22 games started, 23 once he throws the first pitch today, is already the greatest number of games he’s started in his career in one season. Yet there’s still a month and a half left in the season, plus the playoffs. You really want him to go full bore in personally uncharted territory? In a pennant race? When he has so much to offer over the next four, five, six years?
To advocate allowing Joba to throw 200 innings this year is to completely eschew the long-term for the short-term. Yes, we all want Joba to keep pitching on a regular schedule this year, but physical realities render that a poor choice. You can bang the drum of Nolan Ryan, Bob Gibson, Tom Seaver, and all the other greats who pitched when men were men, but it does no good. The modern game is different. Babe Ruth once ended a season with more individual home runs than any team combined did. That doesn’t happen any more. In the same way, pitchers tossing 250 innings in their rookie years doesn’t happen. You can either be patient and accept it, or complain about it. In any case, the Yankees are making the right move by not letting Joba go into the gym and load up the bench press with eight 45 pound weights.
The most important fifth starter in the history of the universe
Posted by: | CommentsSince when did fifth starters become so dire? It’s amazing, you’d think pretty much any team in the league would kill for a front four of CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett, Andy Pettitte, and Joba Chamberlain, but no. Yankee fans never have enough. I understand how important it is for the team to add a starter because Joba is eventually going to have to move to the bullpen to control his innings, but please, let’s not act like it’s the end of the world because the Yankees didn’t acquire Brian Bannister, Jon Garland, Doug Davis, or some other career back end starter who’s never lived the AL East life yesterday.
The more pressing issue right now is that the team is making too many mental mistakes. You can live with Andy Pettitte or Sergio Mitre slipping on the infield grass, or Robbie Cano throwing a double play ball wide of first because the runner was right on top of him, that stuff happens. It’s part of the game. It’s when Melky Cabrera throws to the wrong base to show off his arm. It’s when there’s not even someone on second for Melky to throw to the right base to in the first place. It’s when Alex Rodriguez coasts out of the box and gets thrown out by ten feet on second trying to stretch a double. Stuff like that is inexcusable.
Every team loses three of four at some point in the season, multiple times in fact. But the Yankees have looked flat and seemingly disinterested at times during those loses. The roster is loaded with veterans from top to bottom, and these guys should know better, but when they fall into these collective lapses the coaching staff has to step up. You can bet the fifth starter issue will be addressed this month and Mitre will go the way of Tim Redding, Darrell May, and Scott Erickson. That problem will be addressed. But if the team doesn’t get their heads out of their asses, they’ll be looking up at the Red Sox when they come to town next week.
If Sanchez can do it, why not Hughes?
Posted by: | CommentsMost of the baseball world looked on last night as Giants starter Jonathan Sanchez polished off a perfect game no-hitter (thanks, Juan Uribe) against the punchless Padres, returning to the rotation with a bang. Sanchez struggled as a starter earlier this season, posting a 5.62 ERA and a .836 OPS against in 65.2 IP before being shifted into the bullpen. After two effective relief outings, an injury moved him back into the starting rotation and the rest is history. I think you know where I’m going with this.
Phil Hughes posted numbers similar to Sanchez while working as a starter (5.45 ERA & .868 OPSA), albeit in a smaller sample, then was moved to the bullpen where he’s been wildly successful in a bigger sample. Yet when the opportunity came to move him back into the rotation due to injury, the team didn’t act. Instead he remains in the bullpen indefinitely, with no apparent plan to move him back into a more valuable role. Al Aceves, who was just as effective as Hughes in the bullpen, got the call for Thursday’s spot start because “he was more stretched out.” Aceves lasted just 3.1 IP thanks to his pitch count.
Now, am I saying Hughes would throw a no-hitter if they moved him back in to the rotation? No, of course not. That’s crazy. All I’m saying is that there’s precedence for a starter shifting to the bullpen, gaining confidence and honing his craft, then moving back into the rotation and being effective. Sanchez is just the latest example. Dan Haren also did it. So did Zack Greinke. And Adam Wainwright and Chad Billinglsey and countless others. Why can’t Hughes?
Phil may or may not be able to translate his success as a reliever into success as a starter, but how will you ever find out if you don’t try?
What the umpires said
Posted by: | CommentsPreviously on What the umpire saw: Derek Jeter tries to steal third base with no outs in the first inning. While the throw beat him to the base, his hand touches third before the tag. Umpire Marty Foster calls him out. “I was told I was out because the ball beat me, and he didn’t have to tag me,” Jeter alleges, and crew chief John Hirschbeck, who called Jeter “the classiest person I’ve been around,” promises an investigation….
When last we saw Monday’s umpiring crew, things were looking bleak for Marty Foster. Hirschbeck had refused to make him available to the media, and Derek Jeter was adamant in his critique. I blamed Foster for the bad call at third, and Cliff Corcoran slammed the umps for four bad calls. The men in blue were on the wrong end of a lot of scorn.
On Tuesday, though, this story took a turn for the bizarre. With the same crew working the Mets-Dodgers game, New York reporters had their second crack at Hirschbeck and Foster. Again, Hirschbeck declined to make Foster available to the media. The beleaguered umpire refuses to face the fire. Meanwhile, Hirschbeck has apparently changed his story after speaking with Foster.
According to the 25-year veteran, Foster told him that Jeter was wrong. According to Hirschbeck, Foster said, “The ball beat you, and I had him tagging you.”
To reporters, Hirschbeck defended Foster without reneging on his praise of Jeter. “I don’t see a problem with that,” Hirschbeck said. “Sometimes when tempers flare, you don’t hear everything that’s said.”
Tempers, though, didn’t flare until after Foster allegedly told Jeter that he would be out as long as the ball beat him regardless of the tag. Meanwhile, prior to the game — and prior to Hirschbeck’s discussion with the media — Jim McKean, an MLB umpire supervisor who liaises between MLB and the umpires, spoke with the crew. Do I sense a conspiracy afoot?
Right now, this story is just plan weird. Two members of the Yankees — their widely respected captain and manager — claim the umpire said something outrageous while the crew chief, after having enough time to get his story straight, said the polar opposite. We still haven’t and probably won’t hear from Marty Foster.
The calls for instant replay aside, this is a prime example of a problem with the current system. The umpires have become the story. ESPN has rebroadcast Jeter’s slide hundreds of times by now. The entire nation knows that he was safe. Yet, Marty Foster called him out, and John Hirschbeck seems to be sweeping this story under the rug.
We don’t need a full investigation. We don’t need some Watergate-level special prosecutor to turn up. What we need is for Marty Foster to step forward and tell us the honest-to-God truth. If he really thinks that Scott Rolen placed a tag on Derek Jeter, then so be it. He missed the call, and bad calls are just a part of the game. If he actually said that Jeter was called out regardless of the tag because the throw beat him, he shouldn’t be umping Major League Baseball games.
Either way, this has devolved into a “he said, he said” battle. Right now, I believe Derek. This latest development from Hirschbeck is far too convenient for my tastes.
Added by Joe: Since this is probably the last we’ll hear of this, I figured I’d add this tidbit. Apparently Joe Girardi didn’t get tossed on Monday for arguing the Jeter play at third. Erik Boland says it was because of a call from Sunday. Marty Foster was at home plate on Sunday for the play where Raul Chavez tagged Mark Teixeira with his glove, but the ball was in his other hand. Personally, I find that call more egregious than the one at third.
What the umpire saw
Posted by: | Comments“Yer blind, ump. Yer blind, ump. You must be out of your mind, ump,” goes part of the refrain from the opening number to the Broadway musical Damn Yankees. Don’t we know it.
On Monday afternoon, in the first inning of the final game of the Yanks-Blue Jays set, Derek Jeter tried to steal third with no outs in the bottom of the first. While we can argue — and have — the baseball smarts behind the decision to steal, Jeter was seemingly safe at third. The throw from Toronto catcher Rod Barajas arrived at the base before Derek did, but the Yanks’ short stop snuck his hand around the incoming tag from Scott Rolen. Replays clearly showed he was safe.
Marty Foster did not agree. He called Jeter out, and the normally placid captain erupted at the explanation. As Jeter said after the game, “I was told I was out because the ball beat me, and he didn’t have to tag me. I was unaware they had changed the rules.”
According to Jeter, Foster, the third base umpire, actually said to him, “He didn’t have to [tag you]. The ball beat you.” Joe Girardi got himself ejected arguing the call and tempered his critique. “I didn’t care for the explanation,” Girardi said. “Just leave it at that. There has to be more to it.”
Of course there has to be more to it than that. It’s the rulebook. A player not forced out has to be tagged out. He isn’t out if the ball gets there first; he’s out if he’s tagged with the glove holding the ball or just the ball before safely reaching the base. That is not what happened today.
After the game, the press wanted to speak with Mr. Foster, but he pulled a cowardly move and didn’t show up. Instead, he asked John Hirschbeck, the crew chief and representative umpire to the press, to talk to the reporters. Hirschbeck was lukewarm in his support of Foster. He called Jeter “the classiest person I’ve been around” and noted that Derek doesn’t argue unless he feels wronged. “It would make his actions seem appropriate if that’s what he was told,” Hirschbeck said of Jeter’s reaction to Foster.
In the end, Hirschbeck said he’d chat with Foster about the call later and weakly called the whole thing a learning experience. “Marty asked me to handle things today,” he said. “We hopefully learn from our experiences. It’s the only way we get better at what we do.”
Hirschbeck and Foster will have their talk, and then Major League Baseball will probably discipline Foster behind closed doors. We’ll never know what happens, and the Yanks won’t get a chance to play out a game they could have won had the right call been made. In an age of instant replay, in an age of DVR, that’s just not an acceptable solution.
Umpires have long been under attack from technology. While traditionalists like to promote the “human error” aspect of a baseball game, the truth is that we root for our team to win fair and square. We don’t want to see the histrionics of the umpires, and we don’t want their perception of a play — the nostalgic idea that the ball arrived first so the player is out — to cloud what really happens when we know that what really happened isn’t what the umpire called.
Baseball has options. They could institute a form of limited replay review. Contrary to what the naysayers naysay, review doesn’t slow down the game any longer than Joe Girardi’s on-field protestations do, and reviews of plays such as the one at third today don’t impact the sacred integrity of the game — which, by the way, is sacred only because the technology didn’t exist when the first ump took the field.
While I see the merits in Beyond the Boxscore’s call to use pitch f/x to call the games, I don’t want to see the human element completely removed from the field of play. There is something to be said for having people and not computerized cameras call the game. Still, what happened on Monday and the subsequent explanations are not acceptable. Foster should have to face the press, and no team should have to put up with the explanation he gave Derek Jeter at third base today.
Time For A Reality Check
Posted by: | Comments
Even though the Yanks walked away with a win yesterday, neophyte righthander Joba Chamberlain labored through yet another start, struggling with his command and failing to put hitters away with two strikes. After the game Joba said he thought he did pretty well and there wasn’t much he could do, but the most damning quote was: “At the end of the day, the sun comes up and I still have a job.” That’s beyond delusional, because at this point in his career Joba isn’t guaranteed anything. All he needs to do is look across the clubhouse at Phil Hughes for an example of that. Joe Girardi commented that they’ve been working with Joba on improving his tempo and plan to continue doing so, but we’ve seen absolutely zero improvement in five starts now.
Yet because Joba is the darling that he is, fans blamed grumpy old veteran Jorge Posada for his struggles, pumping out excuses about his inability to call a good game and work with pitchers. Meanwhile, the pitching staff went from allowing 5.27 runs per game to 4.15 runs per game after Posada returned from the DL on May 29th. So whatever problem Posada has working with pitchers, it appears to be confined to Joba. Either that, or the rest of the staff is just better at overcoming those problems. The most likely explanation: Joba is the problem.
In hindsight, calling Joba up and moving him to the bullpen in 2007 was the worst possible thing the organization could have done. Oh sure, the Yankees wouldn’t have made the playoffs that year without Joba’s stellar relief work, but as is often the case with the Yanks, they mortgaged part of the future for the present. Joba was thrust into the spotlight far too soon; he had New York eating out of the palm of his hand thanks to his triple digit fastball and explosive fist pumps before he was ready for it. First there were the “We want Jah-Ba! clap clap clapclapclap” chants, then there were the Joba Rules shirts, then there were Phiten and Modell’s commercials. But it was all too soon.
Don’t get me wrong, Joba was more than ready physically. His stuff was unbelievable and the results were astonishing. But mentally, Joba was still just an immature 21-yr old kid unprepared for the spotlight. He came into camp in 2007 and promptly missed the first month of the season after catching a spike during PFP and pulling a hammy. After just seven dominant starts with High-A Tampa, he was bumped up to Double-A Trenton. Six starts later, Joba was in Triple-A readying himself to come out the bullpen. He didn’t have enough time to even catch his breath all season, let alone learn how to get by on days when he didn’t have his best stuff or deal with failure. He was rushed and everyone is experiencing the consequences now.
However, it’s not to late to correct that. It’s time to ship Joba to Triple-A. Call up Sergio Mitre, move Phil Hughes or Al Aceves into the rotation, do whatever has to be done to soak up those innings, but right now it’s best for Joba to pitch in an environment that’s geared more toward development than production. Make him carry around his own bags and twiddle his thumbs on the bus. Make him watch 35-year-old Jason Johnson pitch with a torn labrum just because it might be the last chance he gets to chase his dream. Have him sit and watch good friend Ian Kennedy rehab from an aneurysm that could have potentially ended his career. Give him a dose of reality, and let him realize just how fortunate he is.
Again, don’t get me wrong. I love Joba as much as the next guy, and I look forward to watching him anchor the Yankees’ rotation for the next decade, but at this point a demotion is what’s best for him. Have him start every five days and work on his command, his tempo, his everything. Let him face experienced hitters in Triple-A and learn how to attack them. Simply put, it’s time for Joba to make up for the development time he missed out on by being rushed to the big leagues back in 2007. For once, the Yankees should put long terms plans ahead of short term gains.
Note: This goes beyond Joba as well. Young players are being rushed to the big leagues more than ever these days, even though almost all of them need more innings/at-bats in the minors to hone their craft. It’s not just about production and physical gifts, the mental part of the game also needs to be developed. Remember that the next time you want Jesus Montero moved to the outfield or some young kid promoted after he hits a few homers or strikes a bunch of guys out.
Photo Credit: Kathy Willens, AP
Olney’s premature obituary for A-Rod
Posted by: | CommentsYesterday, Buster Olney wrote a premature obituary of sorts for A-Rod. Noting that A-Rod’s numbers are way down this year, Olney speculated that the post-steroid-confession, post-surgery A-Rod isn’t anything close to the late-20’s A-Rod of five or six years ago.
With a premise like that, can you guess where this is going? Olney alleges that A-Rod is no longer as marketable as he once was. But first he drops this bombshell with the help of a few anonymous scouts:
The question is this: Is Rodriguez, a month from his 34th birthday, much less of a player because he presumably no longer takes performance-enhancing drugs?
It’s a question that can never be answered, but it’s a question that will continue to be asked, probably more within the Yankees organization than anywhere else. And really, if you want, just consider the question in terms of money.
The Yankees are still on the hook for about $250 million in the next eight-plus seasons. The player who will receive that money can never give them quite what they paid for, in a sense, because A-Rod, as a marketing tool, is damaged forever. They would settle for paying him just to hit well, field effectively and run the bases as well as he did for 15 years — doing all the things on the field they needed him to do when they signed him to the highest salary in the game.
The quotes are even better. “He looks old. He’s a first baseman. How many years does he have left on the contract?” one said. “He looks like a record playing at a slower speed,” said another.
For Olney, this is all about steroids. He writes, “Now he is the best player to admit past steroid use, and that has made him something of a lab rat. His performance will be dissected as talent evaluators continue to ask the question that can’t be fully answered.”
It’s a hackneyed piece that devolves into some steroid talk but it’s based on a solid premise: Can the Yankees get their value out of A-Rod? Now, from an on-field perspective, the answer is probably yes. Since resting for a day and a half over the weekend following six straight weeks of baseball after a major surgery, the A-Rod of old has emerged. He’s 5 for his last 16 with 8 RBIs and 4 walks. He says his legs feel stronger, and the Yankees are stressing health and rest as they approach A-Rod’s hip.
In reality, A-Rod’s slump was just that. He had a bad stretch brought about by fatigue in his hip. Yet, despite that reality, despite the surgery, we’re going to get eight years of badly written columns about A-Rod’s decline, A-Rod’s being a shell of his former self, A-Rod’s no longer steroid-filled physique. Forget the natural decline brought about by age. Forget talent. That’s the baseball world in which we live. Olney, though, should know better.
A review of MLB’s instant replay
Posted by: | Comments
Click the image above. It gets very big, and I promise it’ll open in a new window. The play is a bit of a blur, but what do you see?
I see Mark Teixeira with his glove firmly around a strong throw from Alex Rodriguez and his foot planted on first base. I see Cristian Guzman still in the air above first base. I see unequivocal evidence that Guzman was out, and yet, a split second later, the umpire called him safe.
For a blown call, it was both monumental and underwhelming. It was monumental because Nick Johnson, the next hitter for the Nationals, blasted a two-run triple (not helped by a ill-conceived dive by Melky) that plated Cristian Guzman. It was underwhelming because, while the bleachers saw the replay and booed, it generated what looked more like a polite protest rather than a heated discussion from Joe Girardi.
Generally, when the umpires get it wrong, they don’t do so in such an obvious fashion. Bang-bang plays, slightly missed tags, balls that are just foul or kick up maybe a milimeter’s worth of foul line chalk — those are tough to see. This one, on a routine play at first, isn’t, and considering that umpires often listen — for the ball hitting the glove, for the foot hitting the bag — to make this call makes this worse.
Last year, Major League Baseball became the last major sport to institute instant replay review. It drove the purists nuts, but MLB had to embrace what has become a day-to-day technology in every broadcast of its events. When regional sports networks can replay bad home run calls to death, something has to give.
The way they implemented it, though, was entirely arbitrary. Only home run calls — fair, foul, over the fence or not, fan interference — would be subject to review. In a way, MLB modeled review after the NHL’s review of disputed goals, but the analogy lays bare the problem with it. Home runs may lead directly to runs, but baseball is a sum of its parts. A bad call at first base can be just as important as a home run. Why should one get special treatment while the other is subjected to bad calls?
Last night’s play at first base was unavoidable, and while critics of instant replay bemoan the time it takes to review plays, that is simply a red herring call. I got home, fired up the game archive on MLB.tv and zipped ahead to the 5th inning. Twenty seconds later, I had that screenshot and an unequivocal view of an obvious out that an umpire ruled safe. While Joe noted that the game probably unfolds differently if Guzman is out, we can’t dispute its impact on the Yanks’ loss, and I’d be happy to sit through a short 20-second review in exchange for the right call.
Right now, I don’t have a better solution. MLB can’t open instant replay to every ball and strike, to every close play. But when an umpire gets something so wrong and it changes the game, something has to give.
