This is not another reminiscence about Derek Jeter diving into the stands to save a game against the Red Sox on July 1, 2004.
This is a post about what happened the next day.
Derek Jeter played baseball.
The Yanks were running through a ridiculous string of doubleheaders and games without an off-day. The team was battered and bruised. So the battered and bruised captain suited up.
Derek Jeter started the game at shortstop. He stayed in the game even after Mike Mussina—who I realized once-and-for-all that night, would never win a World Series with the Yankees or anyone else—put the team in a 5-0 hole after two innings. Jeets stayed in the game until the 8th inning, with the Yankees trailing 11-2.
He didn't have a great game. Three plate appearances, two walks and a groundout. A stolen base and a run scored, two assists—including the start of a DP—in the field. Nothing to write home about, by Derek Jeter standards. But he set an example.
Which was not Gleyber's fault. Nor was it Gleyber's fault that he sat against the Mets last night, until a late, pinch-hitting appearance. Ma Boone chooses the lineup, and I'm sure if he had penciled-in Torres, he would've played.
But that's not the way you build the next Derek Jeter.
After Torres had suffered an inexcusable brain freeze to cost the Yanks a game with Boston two nights earlier—and after another critical error had almost cost them a game with the Mets the night before—the last thing that Gleyber needed was a manager who would hide him on the bench.
What he should have had was a skipper who quietly brought him into his office, put an arm around his shoulder, and explained, "Son, we can't have that."
He needed to tell him to look around, and say, "Gleybs, baby, half the team is hurting or home. We need you to step up. We need you to play like it was 2019 again, and show what you can do. We need you to concentrate on every play, every at-bat out there. We need you to play, well, as if you were Derek Jeter."
But he didn't do that. And it's one more reason why I doubt they will ever get close to being the new Derek Jeter they were hoping for.
Last night's loss was a witch's brew of all the problems we've seen plague the Yankees in recent years. So many overaged and overrated players on this team. The poorly constructed roster. The growing inability of Small Game Cole to pitch effectively past the sixth inning.
Not to mention the manager. I'm sure this was another example of Aaron Boone's idiotic, "It's not a day off unless you have two days off" philosophy on preventing injuries (One that has failed so signally, as many of us have pointed out, to prevent injuries.) Or maybe it was because Gleyber had never had a hit off Justin Verlander in 10 at-bats. (He was hitting all of .133 against Scherzer, who he faced the night before.)
Whatever. It's inconceivable that, in a key game, Derek Jeter would ever have been benched in favor of a slumping, probably injured, .236 hitter.
If the Yanks are still serious about Gleyber Torres, he should not have sat, either.
Posts
44 comments:
0 for 3 with two walks would be considered a good game these days, for these Yankees.
Yes, I don't get sitting Torres. So he was 0 for 10 against VerFluffel, maybe he's due. Must have been the thing with the two off days in a row. You don't want to get your third best hitter overworked.
They're doing this in an all hands on deck kind of situation right now. Yankee management is so cavalier about everything. And then they'll miss the wild card by two or three games and complain about the injury bug and how they came oh so close despite all the injuries. What a load of bull shit. They'll miss by only a few games, true, but those games might as well be Mount Everest. They're not going to make it.
I'd like to ask, why do manager still go by the "Verducci effect" theory , terrified of crossing the 100 pitch threshold when starters get hurt anyway? And how well conditioned are these young men if they can't play 5-6 games a week. You would think that the training staff was trying to keep a team of power lifters healthy and optimized.
As opposed to Volpe, the man that HC66, duque, and Cashman have anointed as the next Jeter-- a guy who has never shown an ability to hit well above the level of A-ball (not counting spring training, which is a statistical outlier that does not reliably predict future performance).
No one on this blog is an orthopedic surgeon.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/increase-in-tommy-john-surgeries-among-major-leaguers-may-be-rooted-in-youth-ball/2014/05/02/51acee80-d20d-11e3-a714-be7e7f142085_story.html
Horace, I came to dislike Mussina over the years, the vibe, the inability to win 20-25 games a year given his reputation and the teams that he played on. But I spent most of my life in Miami, never got to the Stadium, listen to fan radio pundits, or have access to as much press coverage as many here on this blog. I've caught some remarks that you have made regarding Mussina, but no punches were pulled today. So what was the deal with Mussina? I've been, ahhh musing about him for years and nothing has ever quite added up for me. THX
And, we shouldn't forget his truly great performance in game 7 of 2003 ALCS in relief of Clemens. Moose stopped the bleeding, threw up zeroes through the middle innings and allowed for the comeback. His finest moment as a Yankee.
Pithing wins, like RBIs, are a team stat and are not a reliable indicator of effectiveness. Whitey Ford did not win 20 games until 1961. I guess he was a chump until then. Here is copious evidence that wins do not necessarily correlate with pitching effectiveness:
https://newenglishd.com/2013/07/06/the-nine-worst-20-win-season-in-mlb-history/
Sorry, Hammer, I put that badly: Jeter was actually 0-1 that day, with two walks, the stolen base, and the double-play.
And yes, a banner evening for most of the Yankees' lineup recently!
I do think that, in general, one should be cautious with pitchers, Kevin. Particularly when they are young. There's considerable evidence that guys could be over-pitched at a young age; I think a number of pitchers, such as Warren Spahn and Whitey Ford, actually benefited by losing early years to different wars.
For the Yankees, it also helped that they had brilliant managers in Joe McCarthy and Casey Stengel who took advantage of the organization's great depth by deliberately limiting starts. There were several years when Stengel, for instance, kept Ford back to pitch against the better teams in the AL.
Whitey's starts went from 17-33 a year under Stengel, from 1954-60; then 36-39 from 1961-65, under Houk, Berra, and Keane. And that was in conjunction with Ford growing older. Stengel also pitched Ford more often in relief, which was also common then: 2-7 times a season.
Was that on his throw days? Don't know, but it doesn't seem to have impeded Whitey. Of course, Ford was a great; his lifetime ERA (for a completed career) is still the lowest of any starter who began pitching after 1919...
...Cole, who is 32, SHOULD be able to throw longer than he does.
Ford threw as many as 18 CG in a season, and averaged 11. He also threw as many as 8 shutouts in a season, finishing his career with 45.
Cole has 7 CG and 4 shutouts LIFETIME. This reflects how the game has changed—but it also reflects different approaches. Ford had over 200 strikeouts once. He was obviously pitching to contact much of the time.
Cole has had over 200 strikeouts 5 times already, including as many as 326. That's great—but it means fewer innings and a fried bullpen. Last night, the Yanks desperately needed him to go 7. Either he or Boone decided he couldn't. The cost of that isn't free, it will mean a pen that's less effective down the stretch and in October.
Relief pitchers usually have short stints and so can see frequent action with less risk of arm injury. Brilliant idea to keep pushing Cole--you'll end up with another Jacob de Grom with a hundred years left on his contract. In the "good old days" you didn't have everyone throwing 95-98, wih the attendant arm stress. Take a look at all the mileage Cole has logged on that appendage. Times change, but old-timers on blogs don't. They always want it to be 1957.
Publius, I might be too hard on Mussina. But it wasn't just the Yankees. He pitched for two of the hardest hitting teams of the modern era, and did not manage to win 20 until that last season—a year when nothing was at stake, and he went 10-3 from July on.
Yes, there was that heroic relief effort in 2003. But that seemed typical. Mussina was always good against Pedro—when no one expected him to win (including that game). But he'd already been clocked in two losing starts that ALCS. He was strong in his World Series start that year; maybe if we'd got to Game 7, he'd have won, been the Series MVP, and our feeling about him would be different.
But there were too many starts in the playoffs where he couldn't hang in, couldn't keep a lead, sometimes even a big one: against the Angels in 2002, Boston in 2004, Detroit in 2006...
As to how much 20 wins means, Publius? Obviously less today. And it's hard to say who "deserves" a 20-win season.
Vic Raschi, who won 21 games 3 years in a row with the Yanks, and ERAs from 3.27-4.00, used to say that when he got a big lead, his priority was finishing the game—so what if he let up a couple more runs?
Allie Reynolds, who won 20 games for us just once—in part because he also pitched a bunch of relief—claimed that if a guy would not hit his pitch, he didn't mind walking him. Something that probably hurt his overall stats...but not his winning percentage...
Mussina? Last day of 2008, meaningless game against Boston, pitched 6 shutout innings and came out.
Five relievers came in to carry his win through. The last of them was Mariano, who had been hurt that season, but still came in to pitch 1 2/3 innings of scoreless relief, and nail down Mussina's one-and-only 20-win season.
Shortly after the season, Moose retired. Shortly after that, he told reporters that the reason he felt the team had never won a ring with him there was because of...Mariano Rivera.
Fuck that guy.
Hoss,
Did Mussina *really* say that? I hadn't heard that. Never really on his bandwagon, but sheesh! If he actually said that, I'd put him in the total fucking asshole category. Or did I miss Mariano losing a lot of games????????
Stengel from what I have read, would hold Whitey back to face opponents best pitcher, which limited his starts and wins.
But I obviously didn't state my question clearly judging from your response and others. No, my question related to your comment regarding that Mussina would never win a title with the Yankees or anyone else. What did you mean by that? When I made my comment that I had soured on him because he didn't win 20-25 games/year I didn't quite mean that literally (there was enthusiastic talk along those lines from many pundits). But he did have some hellacious lineups behind him. He "should" have had more wins, and I almost forgot about his bullpen. So were you referring to a character flaw or a gut feeling?
I would love to argue the merits of win totals for pitchers and RBI numbers for hitters and how they have been overly devalued by some. Unfortunately I have had the migraine from hell, so that is for another time. Ciao!
My migraine must be worse than I thought. Horace I somehow missed your commentary regarding Mo (fucking mind-blower), although that occurred after the fact of Jeter in the Stands Day.
I know. Everybody knows.
Never heard that about Moose ragging on Mo. Moose was a bright guy. Stanford trained engineer, if memory serves with a low tolerance for bullshit, especially from jock sniffing scribblers looking to make trouble. They didn't care for him much either, and it surprised me they voted him in the HoF. Anyway, if the story has a kernel of truth, I'd bet some reporter asked him about never winning a ring, Moose answered in some way mentioning they were very close in 2001, but then Mo threw the ball into centerfield. Then the reporter wrote simething like "Moose blames Mo for no ring". Something like that. Factually true, probably shouldn't have said it though, and reported by sleazy scribe in worst possible way.
No one has "devalued" RBI or pitching wins. People have merely pointed out the obvious: that they are team stats, not individual stats, i.e., dependent on what your teammates are doing.
The thought that Moose should have been more successful because of the lineups on his side does have a flip side. For instance, Moose's long awaited memoir is reportedly titled:
"Just Out Of Reach: Pitching In The steroid era AL East with Ripken and Jeter at Short"
What kind of migraine, Kevin?
(Symptoms?)
Publius, lol!
EBD, I would think that baseball people would have had a firm grip on the idea by 1910 at the latest. However, fans and writers incapable of nuance almost certainly got into heated arguments regarding MVP voting, or "my guy is better than yours" because of let's say, a ten to thirty ribbie difference (it would be stated better by yours truly if expressed in percentage values, but I'm currently unable to think in such depth of math). I've actually read some books contemporaneous with Cobb and Friends and found that there were some people more sophisticated in baseball and social issues that were quite surprising, at least to me. Like most people I grew up to believe that Enlightened thinking on a vast array of topics didn't begin until My Time. Fortunately there are many books out there, and I thank God for them. I didn't set out to lecture, the discussion about ribbies took me into the idea of how we look at things, and how perceptions tend to oscillate. Peace out.
Above Average, cervical migraines. Twenty-five years of them, they suck, but I fear the surgeon 😱😰
Guys, check out mlbtraderumors.com
The top story highlights how shrewd our Brain really is! Don't miss out!!!!! 😲
Kevin, thanks for the heads-up! Great article! I not only feel a twinge of guilt for wishing Judge and a few (dozen?) others return soon; I almost wish all the "healthy" guys would go down with...not injuries. Maybe just a collective raging case of the Fuckits. It sure would be nice to see that noble little GM really get to flex his wits free from the constraints of talent and intelligence which currently encumber him. It'd also be wonderful to read Darragh McDonald's articles as Cash's gold nuggets sail meteorically toward replacement-level competence. It's coming soon and it's going to be great!
MJ, too funny!
Kevin -- you intimate a vast erudition acquired from the reading of mountains of unnamed books, but you never specify any titles, just as you seldom provide examples or data to support your augustly declaimed generalities. If you grew up thinking that enlightened thinking began with your birth, you must have cut a month's worth--at least--of your high school and college history lessons on the intellectual breakthroughs during the apogees of ancient Greece and Rome, not to mention the Elightenment of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. So as usual, I have no idea what you're blathering on about, and frankly I suspect you don't either--but any incoherent filibustering will do for you when it comes to belittling analytics. Baseball GMs since the BC epoch of the national pastime have been using traditional stats like RBIs, BA, ERA, and so on in contract talks to beat back requests for raises--often quite unfairly; Enos Slaughter, for example, had his salary cut in 1941 because his BA the year before had dropped to .306 from .320 the previous year, even though his OPS--then an alien, unknown category--had gone up 14 points. So if your point is that most or all of the insights of analytics are nothing new, that is a preposterous notion, but no more so than most of the stream of unconsciousness you perpetrate on this blog.
Kevin,
Is there any way that you can transfer your next 25 years of migraines to Cashman - so you can be free of them and not fear the surgeon?
Asking for a friend.
"Baseball GMs since the BC epoch of the national pastime"
Nice
Kevin - Don't you wish you had a vat of acid at your disposal to dispose of things you really wish you could dispose of?
Asking for a friend*
*Vincent Price and Christopher Lee
Kev, sorry about the migraines. Hope I didn't trigger them...
Publius, was that really a crack about the fielding abilities of Ripken and Jeter? Oh, man, is that shibboleth never going to die? Right, every hit Mike Mussina ever surrendered was a ground single past those Hall-of-Famers.
For the record: Mussina had a 3.88 ERA for the Yanks, and surrendered 1,565 hits and 318 walks in 1,553 innings. He also surrendered 166 homers in 8 years, or over 20 a year. But I guess they were all hit through the shortstop hole and rolled to the wall.
Oh, and regarding that Mussina quote, Publius?
Here it is.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/120143-mike-mussina-clears-up-comments-on-mo
Along with Mussina's efforts to walk it back. Which he does not really try to do. And by the way, for the record, Mo did NOT throw the ball into CF in 2001. A lot of factors went into that fateful 9th inning, among which was Joe Torre's insistence on ALWAYS trying to use Rivera for 2 innings in the playoffs, after he had pitched one inning as a closer all year...
Same as regards 2004. Save for this: it surely didn't help that, after a year in which he had made a career-high 74 appearances, and a quick trip to Panama and back for the funerals of two close relatives who had died in a tragic accident, that Rivera had to come in and get a four-out save in Game 1 of the ALCS, because MIKE MUSSINA could not get through the 7th with an 8-0 lead.
Later, in Game 5, MIKE MUSSINA could not get out of the 7th inning with a 4-2 lead—but Rivera "blew" the game because the first batter against him hit a game-tying sac fly in the 8th.
Was Mike Mussina a Stanford engineer? Yes, he was.
Was Mike Mussina a conspicuously smart guy who was always doing the crossword in the locker room? Yes, he was.
Was Mike Mussina a thorough-going asshole who choked in one big game after another and blamed others for his failures?
Yes, he was. These different propositions are not mutually exclusive.
Mussina also hated having to get pummeled in the Tokyo Dome by the Rays back in 2004.
Sports fandom -- a wondrous cathartic spew of demonic, irrational malice toward complete strangers--Ohtani one day, Mussina the next, the entire city of Boston this coming weekend, and so on. Team rooting is the set of training wheels before moving on to tribal warfare with real guns and bombs. It's odd that duque should have derided the tribalism of the World Baseball Classic -- which is at least rooted in centuries of organic family and cultural connectedness and tradition -- while fostering the very same dark impulses among nothing more than competing corporate brands.
Above Average, Scream and scream again! I'm thinking of the acid in the "Dr. Phibes" movies😈😈
Above Average, did Price autograph that photo for you?
Kevin - I was thinking of the vat of acid in Scream - but that serpent spike out of the telephone handset into the ear and through the brain isn’t too bad either :). Sort of Migraine like
Yes - one Scream and one Phibes
Horace, the reasons for not liking Mussina are coming back to me. Yeah,a prince among men.... I noticed that of his eight seasons with the Yankees he had three years of an ERA+ was below 100, only two seasons in which he received any Cy Young votes, his first and last, One season of 200 SO, and EIGHT SHUTOUTS. In his time with the Yankees I would argue that he wasn't an ACE. In the Glory Years, if I had to pick a pitcher to pitch for my life, he ranks behind Duque, Pettitte, Cone, Wells, and Clemens.
Every time I go back and look at the 1996-2000 rosters I'm always surprised that in all but maybe one season the team was not stacked with a crazy scary starting lineup, nowhere close to those middle seventies Reds teams (ok, how many teams did
?). But their rosters both position players and their pitching staffs were insanely deep with good players which rendered that group of teams to be virtually impervious to suffering greatly from a few injuries. There is a lesson to be learned here, but man, maybe I'm blinded by the enlightenment that today's analytics bring. I'm sure that I'll get absorbed and Enlightened. Scotty where are you lad?
Very, very true, Kevin. I think the 1998 Yanks were the greatest major-league team ever (for reasons I've pontificated on at length here before), but the interesting thing indeed is, as you say: very few, out-and-out superstars, just lots of very, very good players, playing very professionally.
And Publius, sorry, didn't mean to go off on you so much. My lingering hatred of Mussina brings it out. I started off all this saying that maybe I was unfair to him. And maybe I was. It's just that he was mediocre for a number of years, generally bad in big games...but took no responsibility for any of it.
He would have been a good No. 3 pitcher. Called on to be an ace, he mostly couldn't do it—and then flipped the blame on others.
(Also wasn't great that the Yanks chose to sign him in 2001 over Manny Ramirez. Oy.
I probably hate Ramirez more than you hate Mussina, HC.....
I like to think the joke reflects at least as poorly on Mussina as on Jeter and Ripken.
Post a Comment