Mets: Smart. Yankees: Stupid.

"George Steinbrenner talked to Pedro and his agent, at their request. Maybe there is real interest there, maybe not, no one knows what Steinbrenner thinks anymore, certainly not anybody outside the Yankee bunkers in Tampa and the Bronx; the only time he talks to the public is through Howard Rubenstein, mouthpiece to the stars. More likely, Steinbrenner thought a meeting like that would make the people running the Red Sox go all weak at the knees. And Martinez must think that having the Yankees in play gives him more leverage with the Red Sox, which it surely does not.

Into the middle of that action comes Minaya, a GM on the make, one who clearly wants everybody to know he is in town. Does he look a lot like Steve Phillips on this one, going for a big name and a big headline? You bet. You know what Minaya thinks? He is going for the best free-agent pitcher out there and who's Steve Phillips?"

Do I even need to comment on this? It basically speaks for itself. In two simple paragraphs, Mike Lupica just codified his own stupidity and hypocrisy.

Steinbrenner is a clown with ulterior motives when he speaks to Pedro (he thought it would make the people running the Red Sox go all weak in the knees?), Minaya is a genius (he wasn't merely trying to intimidate the Red Sox or the Braves, he's just a kewl kat doin' his Shizea thizang).

Lupica is not the sole voice to okay the pursuit of Pedro, but he was the sole voice to praise the Kazmir trade and he was the sole voice to praise the alleged pursuit of Sammy Sosa. Hmmm ... that's kind of odd. I think I figured it out. The Mets GMs are smart no matter what they do. It's a corollary to the Lupica theory that the Yankees are always stupid.


I'm also amused by the following:

"They didn't want to hear all the reasons why the Mets couldn't afford A-Rod, or why they didn't think one of the best players in the world would fit in at Shea Stadium." ARod is suddenly one of the best players in the world? Hasn't Lupica spent the last year explaining how ARod is an overpaid sissy who strikes out too much (and who shouldn't bat second)? How can Lupica's opinions change so effortlessly when it suits his needs?

"I think he'll stay in Boston, unless he leaves a great situation over money the way Jason Giambi did." The way Jason Giambi did? You mean the way Tom Glavine did. The way Ivan Rodriguez did. The way David Cone did. The way Miguel Tejada did. The way Roger Clemens did. The way Mike Piazza did. Too many to mention, actually. Just about every free agent over the past few decades is all. Let's single out Jason Giambi because he's a Yankee ... and he'll therefore have to endure the Scorn of Lupica.

Winning cures all ills.

The Red Sox are the first major professional squad and just the third team overall to win the annual award "for symbolizing in character and performance the ideals of sportsmanship."

Ummm ... what?

Is it really necessary for Felz to find all the SI articles that rip the character of Pedro, Manny, Lowe, etc.?

The Red Sox won and winning is good. But I fail to see how the 2004 Red Sox symbolized the ideals of sportsmanship.

Isn't there a one-armed mountain climber somewhere who's more inspirational than a $130 million team winning the World Series?


"We are naming the Red Sox the Sportsmen of the Year because of the way they underline the connection between a team, a franchise, a town and the fans," SI managing editor Terry McDonell said.

Fair enough, I suppose. It was probably the biggest story of the year in sports, the Sox certainly have a lot of devoted fans.

But ... you know ... I still ain't seeing the whole "character" and "sportsmanship" angle.

Dirty helmets? Check.

Came back to beat the Yankees? Check.

Long hair? Check.

Character and sportsmanship? Nope. Still don't see it.

Pedro suddenly "worth a short risk."

The schizophrenic New York Daily News is officially on record as pro-Pedro if he comes to the Mets and anti-Pedro if he comes to the Yankees (no word on their position if Pedro returns to Boston, which seems the most likely scenario).

I find it difficult to read the following without laughing out loud:

"But let's take the emotion out of the question of whether Pedro would be worth the headaches he'd cause, not to mention the money he'll command over the next three years, and examine it objectively."

Examine the issue objectively? What a freakin' concept for a newspaper. These New Yorkers with their high-fallutin' so-called jernylists and whatnot.

Can you imagine? A sportswriter who gets paid actual money to write about baseball? Performing an objective analysis of a baseball issue? Provide a more thoughtful analysis than some housewife from Kew Gardens who watches 15 games per year and hates Pedro becaues of his hairstyle?

You know, I'll admit that I hate Pedro. But it's for different reasons. I hate good players on non-Yankee teams, basically. Rick Helling, I don't hate so much, he can pitch against NYY any time.

As for all this "Who's Your Daddy" nonsense, open up your eyes. Pedro always pitched well against the Yankees, regular season and playoffs. The Yankees find a way to beat him because they match his excellent pitching performance. It's just obvious if you watch the games.

Maintaining their high journalistic standards, the News then conducts a poll of a handful of anonymous baseball people that basically concludes that Pedro is among the top 10 or 15 starters in baseball. Which you knew already. Unless you only receive your baseball information from the New York Daily News.

Conclusion:

"In other words, baseball people seem to agree that Pedro is still one of the elite pitchers in baseball. But perhaps not for much longer."

Well, gee. Thanks for the news flash, newspaper. Same can be said for Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling, for what it's worth.

In any case, it's pathetic that the Daily News won't even bother conducting such a simplistic Pedro analysis until the Mets get into the discussion.

Why does the Daily News wait so long to perform this baseball-oriented analysis? Because they have to build some sort of foundation for their pro-Pedro platform, in case the Mets actually sign him.

I understand the different approaches to covering the Yankees and the Mets, the different expectations of the fans. It's fair to reflect these differences in the general coverage of the respective teams. The Yankees get more back covers, the Yankees get more scrutiny. Though I think the anti-Yankee, anti-George, anti-payroll (anti-ARod?) angle has warped much of the coverage to the point where it loses its credibility and usefulness, I am not expecting a World Without Bias.

But it's completely nonsensical to evaluate Pedro Martinez differently depending upon which team is talking to him. It's stunning, actually, to witness the Daily News embarrass itself in such a manner. By simply talking with King Midas Minaya, Pedro Martinez is no longer a cancer in the clubhouse.


"Still, who's kidding whom? If this were just two years ago, and Pedro was a free agent coming off a season in which he went 20-4 with a 2.26 ERA, those same Yankee fans surely would be more forgiving. "

This is not true. Because if you're the type of fan who favors personalities over performance, then you hated Pedro two years ago. Deep down, I don't believe that fans really value personalities over performance. But if it's your shtick, it's always your shtick.


"Perhaps they'd be thanking Alex Rodriguez for trying to recruit Pedro over dinner in Miami recently rather than gagging over the very thought of it."

I wasn't gagging over the very thought of it, but that's just me.

Who knows? I can't say I speak for every Yankee fan, but certainly most Yankee fans I know. We weren't gagging over the thought of Pedro Martinez off the Sox and on the Yankees; we were salivating over the very thought of it. It's better than Thanksgiving turkey.

Crazy Mets GM Makes Outrageous Offer to Over-The-Hill Prima Donna.

That's odd.

When George Steinbrenner meets with Pedro Martinez, Pedro Martinez is a washed-up worn-out five-inning pitcher who's a head case.

When Omar Minaya meets with Pedro Martinez, Pedro Martinez is transmogrified into a three-time Cy Young Award winner world champion with marquee panache.

Now, when Alex Rodriguez meets with Pedro Martinez, Mike Lupica is outraged, naturally:

"We find out now that Alex Rodriguez was recruiting Pedro Martinez in Miami not long ago and I guess my question goes something like this:

Who asked him?"

Who asked Alex Rodriguez to meet with Pedro Martinez? My guess would be Brian Cashman, Joe Torre, or George Steinbrenner. Or perhaps he met with Pedro without being asked, hoping to recruit him for his team.

Who does Alex Rodriguez think he is? A True Yankee? How dare he try to recruit players for Mike Lupica's team.

Mike Lupica's Brain Just Exploded.

"Alex gave Pedro the pitch, he told him what the Yankees are about, how Joe Torre runs things, about the clubhouse atmosphere and what's expected," Martinez' agent Fernando Cuza said.

Now there's a real five inning pitcher.

It wouldn't shock me if the Yankees signed Leiter and tried him out of the bullpen instead of starting. Or maybe they'll start him, though I don't know who he'd replace in the rotation at this point.

But the next time somebody tries to convince you that 217-IP Pedro has been reduced to a relatively ineffective five-inning pitcher ....

Bob Raissman's "well-embedded moles" reveal good news and bad news.

Speaking of broadcasters, one of the best parts of watching YES, even in the offseason, is just to hear Phil Rizzuto call some classic Yankee moment. Just the other day, I happened to see Mattingly homer in his seventh consecutive game. Scooter's call went something like this:

"The Angels missed a good chance to score last inning and ... did he get all of it? ... Holy Cow! ... Holy Cow! ... Holy Cow! ... Mattingly is unbelievable! ... Holy Cow!"

Then, Bill White has to interject what is actually happening in the game. You know, stuff like Mattingly hit a homerun and the score is such-and-such and the homerun went to left field.

Damn, I miss the Scooter. Great stuff.

Anyway, on to the revelations of Raissman's "well-embedded moles":

Good news ... "Steiner, the Yankee radiocaster whose contract has expired, has emerged as the leading candidate to replace Ross Porter in the Dodgers' broadcast booth."

Actually, I'm being unfair. I kind of like Steiner. I don't mind his Rizzuto-esque flubs, and he's definitely less irritating than Michael Kay (Poor Michael Kay can no longer bore us with his detailed descriptions of team uniforms, since he's on television). In fact, like a lot of baseball fans, I prefer to turn down the volume on the TV and listen on the radio.

Unless ... "Suzyn Waldman, YES' Yankees reporter, likely would move into the WCBS-AM radio booth to work with John Sterling."

Yikes!

If that occurred, then I'd have to turn down the volume on the TV and also turn down the volume on the radio.

I'd have to watch the game on TV and, for commentary, listen to the voices in my head.

Don't forget Dick Howser in 1980.

I thought the Great Bob Klapisch was finally ready to open up his eyes and see the Truth:

"Against a back-drop of November-angst, Steinbrenner has shocked the baseball world by firing ... no one."

Didn't shock the Felz. I know that the Fonzbrenner is one kewl dude in a loose mood.

Maybe The George deserves some criticism for firing / hiring Billy Martin a million times, or maybe for firing Down / Showalter, but even those moves did not really smack of desperation or wild-eyed fury.

That's about it, though. Dick Howser was unfairly fired for sure, but that was 24 years ago.

Wow, how refreshing. Bob Klapisch is a good man to lead the Revolution in NY sportswriting. The tired, ancient, absurd angle that Mt. Steinbrenner always overreacts is finally ready to be buried forever.

Klapisch, I knew I could count on you.

Next sentence?:

"The Yankees' owner has instead chosen to redirect his frustration into his bank account. Although no final budget has been approved yet, team officials are resigned to the inevitability of a record-setting $200 million payroll. Of course, obsessive spending is nothing new to Steinbrenner; it's written in his DNA coding."

Blink.

"The Boss' firing-muscles may have atrophied, but Cashman is nevertheless bracing for a familiar offseason sensation -- being squeezed by the Boss' long, decision-making tentacles. Which begs an obvious question: is keeping one's job always a reward in the Bronx?"

Sigh.

Back to Square One.

Klapisch, what are you doing, man? New rule: If it sounds like Mike Lupica would have wrote it, then write the opposite.

It's unanimous! We Hate Pedro!

I'm still waiting for the first writer to rip John Olerud for sitting out the last four games of the ALCS. Why isn't Olerud a warrior? Paul O'Neill would have played.

Anyway, John Harper leads the anti-Pedro charge with this incredibly nonsensical article.

Here are some annotated lowlights:


"Business is business, and all that, but shouldn't the current crazed state of the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry count for something with the players? It did for Andy Pettitte, who admitted he couldn't have looked his old Yankee teammates in the eye if he had taken the Red Sox up on their offer for him last winter."

Mr. Pinstripe Pride had no problem turning down $42 mill and jumping ship for Houston. But that's, you know, a different way of expressing loyalty.


"Even Yankee fans would have more respect for Martinez if he said he couldn't switch sides now, not after all these teams have been through the last two years."

Speak for yourself. I respect winning.


"It's more than fair, considering that Pedro is little more than a six-inning pitcher anymore, as his post-100 pitch meltdowns the last couple of years are by now as much a part of the Boston culture as Paul Revere's ride. Or that his history of arm injuries over the years says he'll break down at some point before his next contract runs out."

Is he still talking about Andy Pettitte?

Seriously, you take that chance with just about any pitcher. It's quite likely that Pedro would break down at some point. Duh. Like Kevin Brown, Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, Randy Johnson, Eric Milton, Jon Lieber, or practically every pitcher in MLB.

Also, just examine the facts. Pedro threw 217 innings last year and came through like a champ in the playoffs.

His legendary "post-100 pitch meltdowns" includes one legendary post-100 pitch meltdown, in another game where Pedro pitched like a champ, at Yankee Stadium, Game Seven of the 2003 ALCS (we all remember that game, don't we?).

Now, revisionist history aside (Pedro "melted down" in Game Seven? Please.), I think it's fair to say that Joe Torre would handle Pedro Martinez a little differently. You know, the same Joe Torre who never allows his starters to finish a game and whose bullpen set every record for "appearances" that you can think of.


"People who know Pedro believe he is really just trying to jack up his price with the Red Sox by meeting with the Yankees. But either way it's a less than honorable way of doing business."

Heaven Forfend. Less-than-honorable negotiation tactics in major league baseball. John Harper blanches at the thought.


You know what? This is dumb. I could criticize just about every sentence in Harper's stupid article.

If you don't want Pedro on the Yankees, at least make a decent argument that has something to do with baseball.

Think of Boston's starting rotation without Pedro, without Lowe, with Schilling on the DL. Yankees sign Unit and Pedro, maybe they lose Vazquez and Brown in the process (Boston can have 'em for all I care). But the Yankees refuse to do this because Pedro is a prima donna and he sometimes doesn't talk to the press? Then John Harper has the nerve to call George Steinbrenner an obsessive idiot?

Let me be the alternative voice of the True Yankee Fan. I don't care about personalities and clubhouse chemistry and whether or not a player talks to the press. If you pitch well, you are my hero. I am not inviting you to a tea party, I am watching you on the TV screen. When you play well, I am happy. When you play poorly, I hate you.

Now, shut the heck up, sign Pedro, and win the World Series.

2004 AL MVP Comparison

At last, We vote differently than Them.

I think We were better.

I'm also wondering why it takes so long for MLB to announce the awards. Just announce all the awards on one day.

Them		Us
Name....................	Points..........	Name.....................	Points..........
Vlad Guerrero	354	Manny Ramirez	17
Gary Sheffield	254	Miguel Tejada	11
Manny Ramirez	238	Gary Sheffield	9
David Ortiz	174	Vlad Guerrero	6
Miguel Tejada	123	Ichiro Suzuki	6
Johan Santana	117	David Ortiz	3
Ichiro Suzuki	98	Michael Young	2
Michael Young	92	Johan Santana	1
Mariano Rivera	59	Jason Varitek	1
Ivan Rodriguez	36
Curt Schilling	14
Joe Nathan	12
Derek Jeter	11
Mark Kotsay	8
Alex Rodriguez	8
Johnny Damon	7
Paul Konerko	7
Hank Blalock	5
Melvin Mora	5
Mark Teixeira	5
Torii Hunter	4
Victor Martinez	4
Erubiel Durazo	3
Francisco Cordero	2
Lew Ford	2
Carlos Guillen	2
Travis Hafner	2
Hideki Matsui	2
Chone Figgins	2
Eric Chavez	1
Jason Varitek	1

217 innings is a lot.

Too funny. When the Yankees go after the best free agent pitcher available, a pitcher who also pitches for their arch rival, then "It's a situation that probably concerns some Yankees officials: At a time when the club needs to get younger and is locked up in long-term contracts with older players, Steinbrenner is wooing a 33-year-old right-hander who has shown signs of wear-and-tear in recent years."

How many Yankees threw 217+ innings last year? Zero.

How many AL pitchers threw 217+ innings last season? Eight.

How many MLB pitchers threw 217+ innings last season? Fifteen.

Oh, and his ERA would have been the best ERA on the Yankees last season.

There is no doubt that Pedro has shown "signs of wear-and-tear" in recent years. Compared to, say, 1999 Pedro, which might have been the best season a pitcher ever had.

While Boston's offer of two-year, $27.5 million presumably demonstrates Theo Epstein's business acumen, the thought of Steinbrenner possibly offering four years demonstrates Steinbrenner's madness.

Forget ERA, forget innings pitched, forget strikeouts, forget baseball entirely.

Olney thinks the only reason that the Yankees would go after Pedro is because "Steinbrenner loves stars, has always been enamored with the idea of taking stars away from the rival Red Sox"

Ignoring the facts even further, Olney thinks that Pedro would merely be another feather in Steinbrenner's cap: "based on his record of dominance, he is virtually a lock to be voted into Hall of Fame one day."

You know, Steinbrenner probably lays awake at night trying to get NY on as many Hall of Fame caps as possible. That's the ticket.

2004 NL MVP Comparison

Some pointless Felz observations:

• Juan Pierre comes in sixteenth in their poll, fourth in our poll.
• Mark Loretta comes in ninth in their poll, fifth in our poll.
• The guy with the most strikeouts in MLB history got 2 MVP points.
• Jeff Kent, Jeromy Burnitz, and Armando Benitez combined for 24 MVP points while no current Met got any.
  

Them		Us
Name....................	Points..........	Name.....................	Points..........
Barry Bonds	407	Barry Bonds	21
Adrain Beltre	311	Adrian Beltre	5
Albert Pujols	247	Scott Rolen	5
Scott Rolen	226	Juan Pierre	3
Jim Edmonds	160	Mark Loretta	2
J.D. Drew	114	Jack Wilson	1
Lance Berkman	100
Roger Clemens	61
Mark Loretta	50
Aramis Ramirez	42
Eric Gagne	30
Carlos Beltran	20
Jeff Kent	18
Steve Finley	15
Moises Alou	15
Juan Pierre	9
Todd Helton	9
Johnny Estrada	8
Randy Johnson	7
Jim Thome	7
John Smoltz	6
Miguel Cabrera	5
Armando Benitez	3
Jeromy Burnitz	3
Bobby Abreu	3
Vinny Castilla	3
Roy Oswalt	3
Adam Dunn	2
Carlos Zambrano	2
Phil Nevin	1
Jimmy Rollins	1

Phil Pepe always good for a laugh.

Bigmouth David Cone is hardly the first person to suggest that Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher of all time. (By whom, where, why, when, and how is David Cone always being asked his opinion?)

It's very difficult to compare the stats of the modern-day, 200-inning, five-man rotation starter to the old-school, 1,000-inning, one-man rotation, both-games-of-a-doubleheader, no-bullpen starter. But when you're trying to figure out the greatest pitcher of all time, that's what you have to do.

Clemens did all of his work (prior to 2004, of course) in the modern-day AL. Low mounds and steroids and DHs and small ballparks. It takes about five seconds of research to conclude that the past 20 years have been a high-scoring era in baseball, but Pepe dismisses all of these factors because "his entire career occurred when competition was watered down by the era of expansion." Yeah, expansion of the hitter's biceps is more like it.

Which is fine, I suppose. It's an odd opinion to suggest that Clemens barely belongs in the top ten, but opinions regarding this matter are bound to vary wildly.

But guess who's the greatest pitcher of all time? Sandy Koufax and his 165 wins.

"Koufax was the unwitting victim of a nonsensical rule in baseball at the time that sought to discourage wealthier teams from cornering the market on talent. It was decreed that a player signed for a bonus of at least $4,000 had to remain on the major league roster for two years, thereby taking up a valuable spot on a team's 25-man roster, and at the same time, depriving the young player of plying his trade in the minor leagues.

Koufax never pitched in the minors, and it took him three years to become a serviceable major league pitcher. Once he did, he was the most dominant pitcher of his time and he finished his career with what may be the greatest six-year stretch in history."

What was the question, again? Pepe seems confused.

Brian Cashman on Bernie Williams.

Cashman being brutally honest: The Yankees hold a 2006 option on Williams for $15 million, but GM Brian Cashman said yesterday "it's unrealistic that that would be exercised."

Cashman being brutally dishonest: "Right now, we don't anticipate reducing his role anyway, so that's hard for me to speak to."


One of Cashman's jobs is to spin and he has no particular obligation to talk to the press. But I just find it very curious that, with all the attention being paid to Beltran & Bernie, everybody seem to ignore the 500-pound elephant follow-up question.

Bernie is going to play a major role on this team? Okay.

Ummm, where?

2004 AL Cy Young Comparison.

Even though I think it's amusing that Mike Lupica rips the Yankees for being patient ... and predicts the firing of Brian Cashman for the hundredth time ... and inexplicably worships Theo's one big money ring while ridiculing Cashman's four big money rings ... and sticks with his Crazy Steinbrenner angle even though Fonzbrenner keeps acting differently ... I've decided to post the AL Cy Young results instead.

Stupid Lupica. You won't get to me this time. You won't make me point out how stupid it is to compare ARod to Soriano when ARod is clearly better in every way ... always has been and always will be ... maybe Gary Sheffield is not better than David Dellucci if that's your logic ... how stupid it is to claim reclamation project Jaret Wright is a "star" (even though he got beeyotch slapped in the playoffs) while you ignore reclamation projects El Duque and Jon Lieber ... how stupid it is to praise the Dave Roberts acquisition when you claimed that the mid-season Yankee trade for Aaron Boone sucked the joy out of the entire season.

I'm not making it up. In this article from August, 2003, Lupica actually claimed that the acquisition of Aaron Boone "sucks the joy out of the season, whatever Yankee fans say" and incorrectly predicted that "if the Yankees don't win, one of the suck-up guys from the Crack Baseball Committee, Tampa branch, will have the title of general manager before next season."

A year later, he's recycling the same article, and he still doesn't understand anything about baseball or the Yankees or Yankee fans.

Like I promised, I'm not going to talk about Mike Lupica, I'm just going to talk about the AL Cy Young:

Them		Us
Name....................	Points..........	Name.....................	Points..........
Johan Santana	140	Johan Santana	25
Curt Schilling	82	Curt Schilling	13
Mariano Rivera	27	Mariano Rivera	6
Pedro Martinez	1	Felix Heredia	3
Joe Nathan	1	Pedro Martinez	3
Frankie Rodriguez	1	Orlando Hernandez	1

Trade Bernie.

Actually, I don't think I want the Yankees to trade Bernie, he's probably my favorite player of all time.

But what choice do they have if they sign Beltran? Isn't anybody giving this any thought whatsoever? Causes and effects?

So they have the same agent. So what? Who cares? I've read it in three NY papers now.


I'm reaching this conclusion based on the following assumptions:

1. Giambi will not be able play first base full time.
   
2. Giambi is untradeable.
   
3. Bernie is worth more in trade value than he is sitting on the bench as a fourth outfielder and occasional DH.
   

If Giambi can play 1b full time, then it's a non-issue. Beltran cf, Bernie dh, Giambi 1b. Even when completely healthy, Giambi is a pretty bad fielding 1b. Torre sticks him out there because he thinks that it keeps Giambi's head in the game and helps him at the plate. Whatever. I can't seriously foresee Brain Tumor Giambi returning to full time 1b.

Giambi will not be traded. He has 4 years and $80 million left on his contract. Assess the situation. You think it's a big risk to wait and see if he gets healthy and partially lives up to his big contract? You think it's a big risk to wait and see if he ever returns to form? It's a much bigger risk to trade him and pay $60 or $70 million of that contract just so he hits 45 hrs and drives in 120 for another team.

Most realistically, Beltran will play cf, Giambi will dh, Olerud or somebody else will play 1b. So where does that leave Bernie? Fourth outfielder and pinch hitter? Is that really what the Yankees want? Is that really what Bernie wants? What's the point?

Oh, and let me add another bullet point: 4. Bernie can not play first base.

Holy moley. What the heck have you people been watching the past ten years? Look, I love Bernie, but this guy plays with his head in the clouds. The idea of Bernie Williams in the infield, a mere 90 feet from the batted ball ... I shudder to think.

How's this for a realistic win-win: Bernie, Vazquez, and Brown to AZ for Unit and Quinton McCracken.

I don't know about the legalities and no-trades that would have to be waived, but I think that's a somewhat realistic trade. Bernie has slipped noticeably from his prime, but he's still a very good offensive cf. AZ wouldn't want Giambi, he clearly belongs in the AL, and they've already got Richie Sexson.

Emotionally, I have mixed feelings about the notion (yes, I really do have "emotions" sometimes). Bernie belongs in Pinstripes. But does it do anybody any good to put Bernie in Pinstripes and give him 150 at-bats over the course of the season?

If you love something, set it free. If it comes back, it's yours to keep. If it doesn't come back, it was never yours in the first place.

Born free / As free as the wind blows / As free as the grass grows ...

Fly, Bernie, fly! Spread your wings and fly!

2004 NL Cy Young Comparison.

The baseball writers vs. a poll of me and my friends:

Them		Us
Name....................	Points..........	Name.....................	Points..........
Roger Clemens	140	Roger Clemens	16
Randy Johnson	97	Randy Johnson	8
Roy Oswalt	19	Jason Schmidt	8
Jason Schmidt	13	Eric Gagne	3
Carlos Zambrano	8	Ben Sheets	3
Carl Pavano	6	John Smoltz	1
Eric Gagne	3
Brad Lidge	1
Ben Sheets	1

The table looks sloppy, I don't quite get how to format a table on this thing. Me and my friends voted in a similar manner as the sportswriters. It was very close.

Gosh. I never knew me and my friends were such idiots.

Mt. Steinbrenner Erupts!

The much-anticipated fallout from the ALCS defeat: "Rob Thomson is a candidate to replace Gary Tuck as catching instructor."

For the Millionth Time, Eric Milton is Overrated.

Why won't anybody listen to Felz?

My hunch is that Eric Milton is overrated because he's an ex-Yankee prospect, his status partially the result of an unending desire to ridicule Steinbrenner, in this case for the Knoblauch trade. Steinbrenner panicked and ruined the team, like he always does, like he's going to do again.

He traded away "all stars" like Guzman and Milton. Boy, the Yankees could sure use Milton now!

I don't even particularly want Milton back on the Yankees. He's 29 years old and his career stats are 71-57, 4.76 era.

Not that baseball-reference.com has the answer to everything, but if you don't think Milton's overrated with his $9 mill contract, take a look at the players to whom he's "Most Similar":

Brett Tomko
Armando Reynoso
Chris Carpenter
Mark Clark
Curt Young
Sterling Hitchcock

Laugh at the guy from the '86 Mets.

2-for-25 is not gritty, but it's something that rhymes with gritty.

What is "2-for-25"? You don't remember?

That's odd, because you probably remember Winfield's 1 hit in the 1981 World Series that the Yankees lost. "Mr. April" and such.

You probably remember ARod's 2-for-17 or so in the last four games of the ALCS this year. It's big news.

You probably scorn Scott Rolen for his oh-fer in the World Series, and perhaps he deserves your scorn.

Because we're all about the playoffs in New York. "Eleven wins in October."

But you say you don't recall Tino going out like a punk in 2002 with the Cardinals? 0-for-11 vs. Arizona and 2-for-14 vs. the Giants? Gritty. Is this really the "type of player" the Yankees need?

But we don't care about the Cardinals, we care about the Yankees. Right?

Well, this is where I lose faith in my fellow Yankee fans. I remember Tino, I liked Tino, I rooted for Tino when he replaced Mattingly. Tino was a great player for the Yankees, almost won the MVP in 1997, probably has a six-year period with the Yankees that matches up quite nicely with Mattingly's best six-year period with the Yankees. (In fact, talk about a guy who deserved a couple of gold gloves, especially while diving all over the place after Knoblauch "throws" ... )

But Tino consistently stunk in the playoffs and it was a big deal. He tightened up, the theory went, and maybe it was a valid theory. Tino was even benched in favor of Fielder in the 1996 playoffs and that was a pretty big deal at the time, though apparently completely forgotten now.

Tino had two big playoff moments: The WS grand slam vs. SD and the ninth-inning hr off Kim (who didn't hit a ninth-inning hr off Kim in that WS?).

It does not change the fact that Tino stunk in the playoffs. Give a guy 350 at-bats and he's bound to have a big hit or two.

Tino's overall playoff career is bad, and it's right there in black and white for all to see: 348 at-bats, .239 ba, 9 hrs, 38 rbis. The worst stats might be the .326 on-base% and .359 slugging%. For a first baseman, in particular, that's downright awful.

Jason Giambi has a bad rep, but his playoff stats are much much much better (.421 on-base% and .481 slugging%, as a quick comparison).

But my gripe is not with Tino or even the notion of bringing Tino back to the Yankees. He's still a good player, he could definitely be a good backup to Giambi, maybe even a preferred starter over Olerud. I'd have been happy in 2002 if the Yankees had just signed Tino long-term to play 1b and Giambi long-term as a DH.

My gripe is with the notion that his presence on the field (or even on the bench?) could somehow magically restore Yankee Magic and help them finish out in October and win some more rings. Tino has a good glove, but he's not going to reel in Johnny Damon's grand slam in game seven.

My gripe is the inconsistent application of "True Yankee" criteria.

Giambi's a bum for not winning a ring? Fine. Then Mattingly's a bum for not winning a ring, and he had thirteen years to do it.

The 2004 Yankees are stat compilers in the regular season who squeeze the bat too tightly in the clutch? Fine. Then so are Tino and Girardi, who are your Favoritest True Yankees this side of Paulie.

It's very unfair and stupid to assess Tino's entire career and character because of his last 25 playoff at-bats ... and it's similarly unfair and stupid to assess ARod in a similar manner.

If anybody thinks that Tino is the answer just because he won some rings, then they may as well propose bringing back Andy Fox to restore that '96 Magic. AFox has more Championship rings than ARod and he also has a nice, gritty jawline.

Spike Owen wins a gold glove.

Despite the fielding stats, Derek Jeter is still a great fielder. This fairly common and fairly ridiculous notion is presented this morning by the Daily News:

"Jeter rarely has gotten much praise for his fielding, perhaps because there have always been several other slick players at his position. Omar Vizquel had a nine-year stranglehold on the Gold Glove award before A-Rod won it in 2002 and 2003, while Nomar Garciaparra and Miguel Tejada have - at points in their careers - been perceived as better fielders than Jeter.

Statistically, Jeter was fourth among AL shortstops in fielding percentage and errors, though he did record the most putouts. Critics often point to his rank in categories such as range factor (putouts plus assists divided by innings, in which he was ranked eighth) and zone rating (the percentage of balls fielded in a player's "zone" as defined by STATS Inc., in which Jeter finished sixth) and say Jeter does not field his position as well as many believe. But the managers and coaches who voted on the award apparently ignored those theories."

Stats are not theories. They are a good reminder and a good gauge of a player's abilities over the long run. Jeter's thrilling catch vs. Boston on July 1 does not mean he deserves the Gold Glove. That would be like marvelling at Mark Bellhorn's game-winning homerun vs. St. Louis in the World Series and concluding, "Did you see that homerun? Mark Bellhorn is ... he's the ... he's the best homerun hitter in the American League!"

Look, Jeter is a great player, blah blah blah, nobody is disputing this. Start molding the Cooperstown plaque. But why do "managers and coaches who voted on the award" need to throw him a gold glove bone, thereby (further) corrupting the veracity of the Gold Glove award?

It's hardly the first time this has happened, it happens all the time, perhaps most notoriously when Rafael Palmeiro won the 1b gold glove despite playing most of the season as a DH. Bernie Williams won undeservedly a few years ago, as another example.

The AL gold glove middle infield for 2004 is supposedly Derek Jeter and Bret Boone. Think about that for a minute. Imagine being the GM who's trying to shore up his infield defense in some kind of imaginary fantasy draft and you had to scout the best middle infield in the whole league. You can pick anybody you want and you decide to go with Derek Jeter and Bret Boone instead of, say, Bobby Crosby and Orlando Hudson. You'd be fired on the spot.

It's the Gold Glove. It's supposed to reward good fielding. Why bother if you're just going to vote for the best overall player, or the most popular player, or the best offensive player? That approach is downright stupid and it's the main reason the Gold Glove award is basically meaningless.


Steven Goldman of the Pinstriped Bible is pretty darn good.

Here is what he said about Jeter on October 20th:

"Finally, for those who have argued about whether the statistics that showed Jeter to be a poor shortstop were actually true, his play in this series has amply demonstrated that the emperor has no clothes — or at least needs a new glove."


This is Goldman on October 25th, and I could have written this gem myself:

"It's okay if you don't accept the stats. Fielding stats are notoriously unreliable. Just use your eyes. Jeter misses many balls that more rangy shortstops reach. His intelligence and instincts on the field only make up for so much. The concession the Yankees made to Jeter's ego in keeping him at short when A-Rod came aboard was the first nail in the championship coffin."


Goldman wrote these criticisms before Jeter won his Gold Glove, but it's not Goldman who looks ridiculous, it's the managers and coaches who voted for the Gold Glove in the AL.

"Just use your eyes," indeed.

Hear! Hear!

Well, she did get naked in "Poison Ivy 2."

"From a makeup standpoint, Carl is capable of handling the New York spotlight," said Scott Shapiro, Pavano's South Florida-based representative. "Some of the pressures that might bother others, he wouldn't mind. He's been in the media spotlight before - in the World Series in 2003 and he's dated a high-profile actress (Alyssa Milano)."

I don't know how that would help him pitch to Dmitri Young in a big spot, but at least Pavano might have an inside track to a much-coveted appearance on the Tony Danza Show.

The last time I remember seeing Alyssa Milano in anything was her dead-on portrayal of Amy Fisher in a high-profile rerun of "Long Island Lolita" on the high-profile USA Network.