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.