Tuesday, January 04, 2005

Paulie: Good. ARod: Bad.

Where's the love for Chuck Knoblauch? Four rings and only lost one playoff series in his life. Nobody can match that combination of winning% and quantity.

I'll tell you something, Chuck Knoblauch wouldn't let his team blow a 2-0 series lead in the playoffs to the Seattle Mariners like Paul O'Neill did.

Chuck Knoblauch: A True Yankee and a True Winner.

Oh, and at least Knoblauch hit some homeruns in the World Series, with the whole world watching, crunch time, when it all counts. Unlike some ballplayers.

Of course I'm not anti-O'Neill, no Yankee fan could be. I consider the O'Neill-for-Kelly trade to be a godsend, a watershed moment, he was undoubtedly a key figure in the recent Yankee dynasty.

But let's just apply the "Clutch" criteria evenly. O'Neill hit .261 with 0 hrs and 7 rbis in 92 WS at-bats. You didn't know that, you couldn't have. So many writers praise O'Neill so often that you naturally figured he was Reggie Jackson.


Miller's logic is rigged. Why did the O'Neill Yankees win? Guts, talent, and character:

"Oh yeah, and one other thing: Finding the proper, winning mix of guts, talent and character is nearly an impossible task when you're leading with your wallet."

(How does Scott Miller think the Yankees won four World Series in five years? They led with their wallet. How did the Red Sox win last year? They led with their wallet. I'm truly baffled by this pervasive revisionist history. For some reason, the Cone-for-Janzens deal didn't offend Scott Miller.)

When the post-O'Neill Yankees eventualy win the World Series? It obviously won't be because of guts, talent, and character. It's because of the payroll:

"Eventually, the Yankees will win another World Series - because at this rate, they soon will be a barnstorming major-league All-Star team buzzing through a minor-league schedule of Mud Hens, Lugnuts and Beavers each month."


As for the following anti-ARod nonsense? It didn't happen:

"There was a lesson there, one that crystallized when Rodriguez, in the throes of a disappointing October, reached out and feebly -- and illegally -- slapped at Bronson Arroyo on the first-base line as the Yankees were losing to Boston in the ALCS. The guy looked like an old lady slapping at a purse-snatcher."

ARod's "disappointing" postseason included a .421 batting average vs. Minnesota and 2 hrs vs. Boston.

Facts: 11 games, 50 at-bats, 16 hits, 5 doubles, 3 homeruns, 6 walks, 11 runs, 8 rbis.

.320 batting average, .393 on-base%, .600 slugging%.

That's "disappointing" according to Scott Miller. Everybody point at Scott Miller the "Baseball Writer" and laugh at him.

Every baseball fan knows the "slap" was a nice try, a smart play. It was "illegal" like blocking the plate is "illegal," like Reggie standing in the baseline was "illegal." Also, it was obviously a reaction play by ARod and it didn't work, the umps made the right call. But only a playa hata like Scott Miller would think that indicates a lack of character on ARod's part. Or that it somehow cost the Yankees the ALCS. That analysis is pathetic and absurd.

He's entitled to his personal opinions about ARod, I suppose ... "ARod looked like an old lady" ... but can't Miller at least look up the stats? It takes about one minute on the Internet. I know Miller's stupid, but at least be professional about your stupidity.

No comments: