High and In-Tight 09.26.06

Posted by Ian Smart on 09.26.2006

February 16, 2004 and all of its infamy...

Hello and Welcome to High and In-Tight, the baseball column that never quits, just like Notre Dame, who came back to devastate the Trojans on Saturday. Emerging 3-1 from the schedule of death is not ideal, but it could have been worse.

The baseball season is coming to a close, and it's crunch time for many teams that will have the their playoff futures decided in the coming days, and as fans, it is an exciting time of the year to watch, because the games have the aura of importance.

With that being said, let's get to the mail:

Voices From The Crowd

Although a life-long Red Sox fan I absolutely agree with your analysis of David Ortiz as a one-dimensional player. What has baffled me are the misguided opinions of many over the last few years who compare Ortiz's recent seasons to the performance of Yaz in 1967. As an all-around player credited with one of the greatest single season performances in baseball history, I am unsure if people are simply not knowledgeable about baseball back beyond 2000 or if they are simply escalating the Ortiz hyperbole. Any opinion?
Thanks

Mark Presutti

Hey Mark,

I am glad you agree.

I think both of your explanations are correct. Sports fans, in general, are remarkably inept when it comes to comparing the accomplishments of players in different eras. Yaz's '67 season was miraculous (he won the Triple Crown!) and few single season performances can compare to what he was able to accomplish. Off the top of my head, only Mantle's '56 campaign (also a triple crown year) could be considered better. To be able to hit over forty home runs and hit over .320 is something that David Ortiz is just not capable of doing. Not to mention that Yaz could play defense, and quite well I may add; in the '67 season, he won a gold glove (1 of his 7).

Ortiz is a good story, and in the age where 99% of 'Sports' fans watch Sportscentre every morning and see nothing else of a game, Ortiz looks incredible (nowhere near as good as Yaz in '67 though).

And from the other side of the spectrum…

You are an Idiot! David Ortiz is the shit! No one in baseball hits like he does. The man is the ENTIRE Red Sox team. I can't believe you think Manny is a better hitter. Ortiz hits more home runs, and drives in more runs than Manny. You said Manny was good in the field. Do you even watch baseball? He messes up all the time. Ortiz is the best hitter anyone can ever imagine, and he will win the MVP, and should have won last year. Jeter has a great lineup around him, but Big Papi has to carry the Red Sox every game. Without them, the Red Sox are nowhere.

Peace,

Danny


Danny,

First off, thank you for the kind words; they are always appreciated. Secondly, there are many batters who put up better numbers than David Ortiz. For instance, Ryan Howard has more RBI's, Home Runs, and a better average than Ortiz. Alfonso Soriano, only trails Ortiz by seven in terms of home runs, but has also stolen 40 more bases. I mention these two, because anyone must concede that Ortiz is better protected in the Red Sox line-up than either of these two men in their respective line-ups.

To say that Ortiz carries the Red Sox line-up is a grossly erroneous statement, and wholly disregards the fact that unlike Ortiz, the rest of his team contributes in both the bottom and tops half of innings. It is a statement that also neglects to mention that had Boston not taken a chance on him after he was released by the Twins, and batted him in front of the American League's most dangerous hitter, you wouldn't recognize Big Papi if he walked into your room and hit you with a sign that said "Hi, I'm David Ortiz".

Finally, I never said that Manny Ramirez was a good outfielder. What I said was that, unlike Ortiz, Manny is capable of being put in the field.

Ian,

If you had to pick any baseball player in the MLB today to start a team around, who would it be? I would pick David Wright or Jose Reyes, because they are young, and already the best in the league at their position.

Kara

Kara,

First off, congratulations on being the second female to write in.

Second, I cannot say that I differ on your opinion. My first thought was José Reyes. I would add to the mix two Marlins, Miguel Cabrera, and Hanley Ramírez. Of the four, I would say that in order of preference, I would pick:

1. José Reyes
2. Miguel Cabrera
3. Hanley Ramirez
4. David Wright

My rational being that third base is a deeper position than shortstop, and because I think there is something about Miguel Cabrera that makes me believe that he already has a plaque in Cooperstown.

The Delivery

The baseball world was a buzz last week, due to Sports Illustrated's article profiling Alex Rodriguez, and his troubles in New York. A continuation of what has been a season long soap opera, chronicling the roller coaster ride of emotions that has seen the Yankee faithful both love and loathe their third baseman. Beyond that, A-Rod is painted as self-centred, driven only by personal accolades, and in no uncertain terms, a flake. There is no point debating the validity of any of these claims, but it does conclusively prove one thing:

February 16, 2004 represents an historic moment in baseball when a trade occurred, involving the best player in baseball, in which both sides lost, and the odd man out won.

During the off season, the Texas Rangers feverously tried to offload the bloated salary of one Alex Rodriguez. By all accounts Tom Hicks woke up one morning, and in a moment of divine clarity, came to the realization that he was paying $ 22 million to one guy (albeit the best baseball player in the world at the time), had no pitching staff, and had finished the season in last place for the fourth consecutive year. Hicks knew what he had to do; trade the reigning AL MVP, this offloading his salary, and try rebuilding his team. Hicks set out to find any suitor who was willing to foot the bill, and provide reasonable compensation.

At first, Hicks thought that he had found a suitor in the Red Sox, and in reality, he had. The Boston Red Sox, fresh off another disappointing post season, were eager to grab a player of A-Rod's calibre to push them over the hump (the Yankees). Boston worked out a deal with the Rangers, but the MLBPA vetoed the trade. The grounds on which the veto was based? The MLBPA vetoed the deal because as a condition of the trade, Alex Rodriguez would have to voluntarily reduce his salary, something which the MLBA would not allow. The principle deal was squashed. But there was still hope; because the start of the season was still months away and the two teams had ample time to work out a deal. Right? Wrong!

Upon hearing the news that the Boston Red Sox were looking to acquire Alex Rodriguez, George Steinbrenner did what only he can afford to do; he traded for a player simply to deny the Red Sox his services. The Yankees already had Mr. Yankee Derek Jeter at short, and in order to get Alex Rodriguez they had to give up Alfonso Soriano, an arguably more valuable player, because there are few second baseman that are even comparable to Soriano. The rationale for the trade from the Yankees perspective was simple; sacrifice to ensure that the competitor does not gain anything. It is simple realist thinking – John J. Mearsheimer weeped happily- preventing the relative gains of your opposition effectively increases your own strength. There is no other explanation for the trade. If the Yankees wanted a third baseman to replace Aaron Boone, they could have traded for any number of players, they chose to swallow A-Rod's colossal salary, and convert him to a third baseman to effectively swindle the Red Sox. So at the end of the day, the Yankees upgraded their third baseman, but at the cost of drastically downgrading at second base, swallowing an enormous salary- but they deprived the Red Sox of the player they coveted. That's a win…right? Wrong!

Despite the Yankees meddling with the Red Sox's plan to acquire the best player in baseball, Boston won the World Series- that is a loss in the worst way. The Yankees paid $16 million, and gave up on the best second baseman in all of baseball to deny the Red Sox A-Rod, but they still lost in October. A-Rod has since been a lightning rod for criticism ever since game four of the 2004 ALCS. The criticism around A-Rod has only been magnified this year, but even as far back as October 2004 A-Rod's ability to perform in the clutch was questioned. His struggles this year have been well documented, and need no further attention, but all the while, Alfonso Soriano has galvanized himself as baseball's all-around best player; eclipsing the man he was traded for.

So the Rangers won? Not by a long shot. The Rangers acquired Alfonso Soriano, which helped them initially, but they still did not fix the two fundamental problems that had plagued them, and served as the genesis for the A-Rod deal.

The Rangers agreed to pay $67 million of A-Rod's remaining contract, which means that, on average, the Rangers pay A-Rod $9.5 million a season to NOT play for them. The Rangers also shipped Soriano off to Washington in exchange for Brad Wilkerson, and Terrmel Sledge, who is now a Padre, and can be seen night-in and night-out filling water bottles. In the end, the Rangers ended up paying a large portion of A-Rod's salary, and got no pitching in return for A-Rod, or Soriano.

The only real winner in the whole fiasco is the Red Sox, who at the time seemed to be the real loser. A-Rod never came to Beantown, which saved the Sox money, and also the steep compensation that the Rangers would have demanded. At the time, it was believed that the Rangers wanted Manny Ramirez, who ended up being the 2004 World Series Most Valuable Player.

In essence, Red Sox nation can thank Steinbrenner's asinine decision in February of 2004 for their World Series Championship, their salary flexibility, and for sparring them the embarrassment associated with ‘the A-Rod slap'.

Got feedback? Want to charge the mound? E-mail me at [e-mail]