Wednesday Linktacular

Good morning Fackers. It's been a while since I've pulled together one of these, so grab a seat in front of the Coleman Lifelike Scoreboard (via Neyer) and let's take a trip around the baseballing interwebz.

Some quick Yankee items first before we get to the big stuff.

Here's a nice wrap up of the Yankees' second day of the draft from MLB.com with a video and a listing of all their picks.

Brian Costa of the WSJ took a look at some of the Yanks' late round picks of yesteryear.

Sean from Pending Pinstripes had a great post about giving more than lip service to the concept of "trusting the process" around draft time.

Brett Gardner was removed from last night's game with some discomfort in his thumb, likely stemming from the time that he broke it last year. As anyone who has fractured a digit can attest, pain can flare up at times for quite a while after the initial injury. Gardner said it's happened about 20 times since Spring Training, but it was a little worse tonight. Still, it's probably nothing to worry about.

Jorge Posada started taking catching practice once again, and hopefully should be available to resume that role part-time in the near future.

This isn't exactly news, but Dave Eiland was granted personal leave for an undisclosed reason and is not with the team at present. Bullpen coach Mike Harkey is occupying his role as pitching coach and Josh Paul - the coach of the short-season Staten Island team - is holding things down out in the bullpen for the time being.

Okay, onto the biggest topics of the last two days:

On Monday, Joe Posnanski went to great lengths to put the debut of Steven Strasburg into perspective and in so doing, said this:

But we live in a different time, our Christmas morning time, when expectation is more fun than realization, when potential costs as much or more than performance, when we happily get carried away, when it isn’t so much about that tired cliche of “what have you done for me lately?” but, instead, “what can you do for me tomorrow?”

If anything, Strasburg's jaw-dropping performance only served to increase the impossibly high expectations for him. Had he done something impressive but repeatable like striking out nine while walking two or three, that would have been one thing, but ripping of 14 Ks without issuing a single free pass? You have to go all the way back to 2007 to find any pitcher in the Majors that's done that, let along a rookie, let alone in his debut.

I'd obviously recommend reading through Poz's live blog of the game, but the most entertaining thing I found this morning about Strasmas was Dashiell Bennett's spot on vivisection of Bob Costas' call of the event over at Deadspin:

Bob Costas did more in just nine innings to craft the Legend of Stephen Strasburg then a lifetime supply of Baseball Almanacs ever could. Yet, he wants to use his same breaths to tsk-tsk the big bad media for losing their heads over the man. If you can't restrain yourself, Bob, why should anyone else?

If you think Dash is being harsh, click through for a mash-up of the historical name-dropping and "on the other hand" detachment Costas employs. I'm not saying there was a clear and easy path to walk for this kind of a game - something truly special was unfolding and it's tough to talk about that without going overboard - but it's the tone with which Costas speaks out both sides of his mouth, listing off legends of the game while saying that "others" might be going overboard with the hype, that neatly encompasses why so many people don't like him.

Deadspin was actually right in the middle of yesterday's second biggest baseball story as well - the one about Pete Rose's corked bat. Barry Petchesky did some real journalism and brought together the story of a PR4192 - a stick used in a game by Mr. Rose himself with an unbroken chain of custody - that X-rays show has a 6" piece of cork inserted right into the barrel.

Craig Calcaterra and Kevin Kaduk ask whether we should care about this and does it really matter, respectively. Beyond the story being a thoroughly enjoyable read, I do care and think it does matter.

It's not surprising by any stretch. We've long known that Rose has a shaky moral foundation (to put it kindly) and accusations of him corking date back to 2001. But his play on the field has always been unimpeachable. He was Charlie Hustle and any tarnish on his name had been confined to things he did without a batting helmet on. To my knowledge, no one ever questioned the veracity of his all-time hits record, save for the jab that he probably shouldn't have put himself in the lineup at the end of his career when he was a player-manager.

Even if MythBusters and other empirical research concluded that corking a bat doesn't really help. Fine, but it's still cheating, regardless of how much of an edge is provides. Again, not that this is shocking, but the one last leg that Rose had to stand on, now looks considerably more unstable.

Rays To Connecticut? Not A Chance

Good morning Fackers. As I've mentioned here a few times before, I'm a Connecticut guy, born and bred. The sporting landscape here in Connecticut is an odd one. The entirety of the state is within two hours of either New York or Boston; much of the state is virtually equidistant from the two cities. As such, there's this weird sort of sporting identity here in the Nutmeg State. Baseball fans are every bit as passionate as they are in New York or Boston, but things are far less homogeneous. The state is pretty well divided between Yankee and Red Sox fans, with a small and unfortunate minority pledging their allegiance to the Mets.

But it's slim pickings when comes to teams to call our own. We temporarily hosted the Giants while Yankee Stadium was being renovated and Giants Stadium was being built. The NHL's Hartford Whalers skipped town in April of 1997. The following year the state struck a deal to build a new stadium for the New England Patriots, only to see Robert Kraft use it as leverage to secure a new stadium in Foxboro. We've hosted AA teams for both the Yankees and Red Sox. Currently the state is home to two AHL minor league hockey franchises in Bridgeport and Hartford, and independent Atlantic League ballclub in Bridgeport, the Twins' AA affiliate in New Britain, and as of yesterday, the Tigers' short-season A club in Norwich. None of those squads register much in the consciousness of the locals, who by and large spend their summers following the Yanks, Sox, or Mets, and their winters obsessing over both the men's and women's UConn basketball teams.

All of which is my long-winded way of saying that the unique sporting culture of the state is its lack of an identity to call its own. As much as it galls many of the locals, when it comes to professional sports Connecticut is nothing more than a suburb to the two neighboring metropolises. And there's nothing wrong with that; it's just the way it is. The population of the entire state is just 3.5 million, one million less than the Boston metropolitan area, and less than one fifth the size of the New York City metropolitan area. There is neither the city, nor the people to support a major sports franchise, particularly one located so closely to three of the biggest teams in the game.

So it was with great surprise yesterday that I saw an article from NESN, riffing on a piece from Peter Gammons, speculating that if the Tampa Bay Rays should fail to secure a new stadium, southern Connecticut could be a potential landing spot. We're a few weeks into the dead period of the baseball off season, so it's getting to be slim pickings for news. As such, stories like this will inevitably crop up. And really, this is just an extension of the hypothetical pondering last month of whether New York could support a third team.

But, since this is a slow time of year and since it involves my home state, I'm going to put on my debunking cap and pick this one apart. Here's a look at the cities in southern Connecticut, starting in the east and heading west, and here's why they can't support a Major League team:

• Norwich / New London: The least likely of any southern Connecticut city to host a team. This is one of the most sparsely populated areas of the state; there simply aren't enough people here to support a team, and one certainly wouldn't be enough to draw Red Sox fans from nearby Rhode Island. The Yankees had their AA club in Norwich from 1995 through 2002, before switching affiliations to Trenton in order to have the squad closer to the parent club. Norwich picked up the Giants' AA squad, which left town after last season. Just yesterday the city announced that the Tigers' NY-Penn League club would move from Oneonta for the 2009 season (interestingly enough the Yankees had their NY-Penn club in Oneonta from 1967 until the creation of the Staten Island Yankees in 1999). On the plus side, these cities are located close to the two gigantic casinos in the state, so if Pete Rose is ever reinstated this would be a good spot for him to revive his managerial career.

• New Haven: Another failed minor league city, the last 35 years have seen the New York Giants, two different AHL clubs, a AA Eastern League club, and an independent Can-Am League club leave town. Location wise, the Elm City may be the best location for a club. Centrally located at the junction of Interstates 91 and 95, New Haven is relatively accessible from the state's most populous areas of metro Hartford and Fairfield County.

• Bridgeport: The state's biggest city, Bridgeport has the state's most up to date sports venues in the Arena at Harbor Yard and the Ballpark at Harbor Yard, home to the AHL's Sound Tigers and the Atlantic League's Bluefish respectively. The Ballpark was the site of Jose Offerman's first on field assault. It's also just down the road from Shelton, home of Whiffle Ball. On the negative side, Bridgeport is located in metro NYC, placing it firmly in the Mets' and Yankees' territory. It's not easily accessible from metro Hartford, and it would be an extremely tough sell to get one of the state's poorest cities to build a Major League ballpark a mere decade after the construction of the Habor Yard complex.

• Stamford: The most financially healthy city on the Connecticut shoreline, Stamford is located in the heart of affluent Fairfield County and is home to several financial firms and the YES Network's studios. Unlike the other cities on the list, its best days are not behind it, and there is enough business and industry present to have something resembling a bustling downtown. On the negative side, Stamford is a stone's throw from NYC, making it an unrealistic possibility. Besides, it couldn't even support a Dunder Mifflin branch; how could it support a Major League franchise?

Even if something could be worked out to convince the Yankees, Mets, and/or Red Sox to relinquish territorial rights - an unlikely scenario - there just isn't a city or the people to support in team in southern Connecticut or anywhere else in the state. Even if there were, a Connecticut club would be facing an uphill battle. Part of the reason the Whalers failed was that too many Connecticut hockey fans were loyal to the Rangers or Bruins. That problem would be infinitely greater for a baseball team, as the loyalties to the Yankees, Red Sox, and even the Mets are stronger and have been forged over generations. The Rays, or any other team, would have very little chance of succeeding here. And in the end, I'm sure the Rays will get their new stadium in either Tampa, St. Petersburg, or Orlando.

Jeter, Rose, Rodriguez & Record Projections

The question of whether or not Derek Jeter will pass Pete Rose's all-time hit mark is not a new one. From what I can find on these here internets, Rob Neyer addressed the possibility in a mailbag back in 2006 as Jeter was approaching 2,000 hits and was, like he is now, slightly outpacing Rose based on seasonal age and number of hits accumulated. It came up again in 2008 as he neared 2,500 hits and probably a few times in between.

Since then, essentially nothing has changed except the people who bring up the question - usually not bloggers but relative outsiders who haven't heard it discussed ad nasuem already. Back in that 2006 Neyer mailbag it was a reader named Yehuda Hyman and yesterday it was the pinch hitter at LoHud named Lucas Vanderwarker. Lucas's post got picked up over at Baseball Think Factory and Neyer got in on the action again, adding some new relevant assumptions to the equation:

Now, let's think about how Derek Jeter's career is likely to play out. One, everyone seems to think that Jeter will retire as a Yankee; that they'll do anything keep him around and that he won't be interested in playing elsewhere. Two, he's a shortstop. There's essentially no such thing as a 42-year-old shortstop. Three, the Yankees have Mark Teixeira under contract through 2016, when Jeter will be 42. They've also got Alex Rodriguez under contract through 2017, when Jeter will be 43.

David Pinto also chimed in, offering up Robin Yount as a comparable who, as a 35 year old was over 100 hits ahead of Rose but played only two more seasons and finished with 3,142 in total.

As Rose said Joe Posnanski, "You tell Derek the first 3,000 are easy". Of course, the implication is not that they're actually easy, but they're a lot easier than the next 1,256, which, as every other person ever to have played the game has figured out, is a true statement.

Jeter is 35 and a half years old and although we've seen very few indications to the contrary, the Cap'n is not invincible. No one is.

I learned this the hard way last year when I took issue with Nate Silver's projected home run totals for Alex Rodriguez, which predicted he'd end up with 730. I eventually ventured a guess as to what his career home run tally would be. I used an exhaustive 8 step methodology and arrived at the number 792. That involved a prediction of 42 for the 2009 season.

Much to my chagrin, not even two weeks later A-Rod was out in Colorado having surgery to repair a torn hip labrum, missed over a month of the season and had to hit two home runs in the same inning in Game 162 just to reach 30. Not only that, but his hip injury also cast serious doubt on his long term health.

While it's still a distinct possibility that A-Rod breaks Barry Bonds' Hank Aaron's record, it doesn't seem nearly as likely as it did just a year ago. But the picture is a lot rosier than it was the day after he had surgery. And that likelihood will probably fluctuate countless more times before he either breaks the record or retires.

I understand why fans like to talk about these far-flung possibilities and we are outrageously lucky to have two players on the Yankees pursing perhaps the two most hallowed career offensive records in Baseball. But at the same time, I'm not interested in reassessing what a projection system - using a bunch of players as comparables who, by definition didn't break the record - predicts the odds are that A-Rod or Jeter will reach that milestone every time one of them passes a round number, gets injured or the offseason news cycle grinds to a halt.

Projections can be a very useful tool in the right context but these kinds of records get broken on a very infrequent basis and only then by extreme statistical outliers. And besides, the left side of the infield still has a long, long road ahead.

A-Rod For Sportsman Of The Year?

So, it's official, Derek Jeter won the Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year Award. It's easy to understand why: The Yankees won the World Series this year, he's been an excellent player for a long time and nothing short of a class act.

What I can't possibly fathom, however, is the fact that Joel Sherman thinks that "If the competition were A-Rod vs. Jeter, it is not even close: Rodriguez is the Sportsman of the Year". He elaborates:

Alex Rodriguez should be the Sportsman of the Year. Before you hit me with how that title should go to someone who embodies the best in sports let’s remember that both Pete Rose and Mark McGwire have won the award, and before long we might remember that Tiger Woods has won twice.

Would you like a side of perspective to go along with your triple-stack of hindsight, Joel?

How does what happened with Tiger Woods over the weekend (if even the most salacious speculation is true) in any way alter whether he embodied "the best in sports" or more accurately, as the award says, was "the athlete or team whose performance that year most embodies the spirit of sportsmanship and achievement" in 1996 or 2000 years before he even laid eyes on his wife?

Pete Rose won the award in 1975 when he capped off a great regular season (5th in the MVP voting) by being named the the World Series MVP, ten years before he bet on baseball and almost 15 years before the rumors of those indiscretions came to light. Mark McGwire shared it with Sammy Sosa in 1998, six years before androstenedione was considered to be a steroid by Congress.

If Sports Illustrated had a crystal ball, perhaps they wouldn't have given the awards to Rose or McGwire in '75 & '98 (the Woods assertion is flatly ridiculous), but they need only a rearview mirror to realize that A-Rod was far from the right choice this year.

So what's Sherman's argument for Rodriguez?

Sports are publicly messier these days, and we should not run away from that. Heck, the initial broken story on Rodriguez’s steroid use was published by Sports Illustrated. He also touches on the advancement of sports medicine as he came back successfully from significant hip surgery months after undergoing the operation. And he was again a great player, this time finally in the postseason, as well.

In the end, A-Rod offers a story of second chances and redemption. He was a better teammate and was rewarded with the most positive feedback yet as a person while scoring that elusive championship.

So we should give A-Rod the Sportsman of the Year Award because he did steroids, recovered from an injury and was a "better teammate" (mostly because he was such a shitty teammate before)? How about the fact that Derek Jeter is widely assumed to never have done steroids, was not injured this year and has always been a great teammate?

Sherman has been pushing this story of the faux comeback of A-Rod for quite some time, but in reality, Jeter is the one who improved over last year in ways that can actually be measured.

Jeter raised his OPS+ from 102 to 132 and his UZR from negative to positive. A-Rod played in the fewest games he has since 1995 and had his lowest HR and RBI totals since 1997. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good story, Joel.

The award doesn't say anything about "second chances and redemption" it rewards "sportsmanship and achievement" and both of those things Derek Jeter has - and has had for a long time - in spades.

Pondering What Might Have Been

Last week, the media and the blogosphere dedicated a lot of time to marking the twenty year anniversary of Pete Rose agreeing to a lifetime ban from baseball in the face of overwhelming evidence that he gambled on the game and gambled on his own team. ESPN showed an Outside the Lines piece that actually managed to humanize the insufferable Joe Morgan, who was literally moved to tears over his frustration with the arrogance and stubbornness his friend and former teammate has carried himself with in these last two decades.

This post isn't intended to wade into the quagmire that is the Rose debate. Rather, it's to point out that yesterday marked the twentieth anniversary of the death of former Commissioner A. Bartlett Giamatti, the other principal character in the Greek tragedy that is the Rose banishment. The anniversary of the death of Rose's baseball career passed with much fanfare. The anniversary of the death of Giamatti passed with nary a whisper.

Baseball lends itself to stories and fables and legends and hyperbole. That's the way it's always worked, particularly with the media. As such, the legend goes that the toll of the Dowd Report and the Rose ban killed Giamatti just eight days after the suspension was announced. The truth of the matter is Giamatti was overweight, smoked heavily, and suffered from Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease. I'm sure the stress of the summer of 1989 weighed heavily upon Giamatti, but it certainly wasn't the only cause of his tragic and untimely death.

Last night, as I drove past the sign for the Giamatti Little League Center on my way to my hockey game, I thought about what might have been had Giamatti not died less than a year into his tenure as Commissioner. Several others have had similar thoughts of late. Rose and his camp insist that Giamatti would have granted Rose reinstatement over time. Fay Vincent, who served as Giamatti's Deputy Commissioner and played a major role in the Rose investigation, insists that never would have happened.

In February, following the Alex Rodriguez steroid admission, Yale Magazine ran a piece from Giamatti friend and former U.S. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh. It implied that Giamatti was planning to tackle drug testing head on after the Rose situation was settled, and suggested that perhaps the PED scandal of the last twenty years could have been avoided had Giamatti been successful. And maybe Giamatti would have made an impact. He had the backing of the owners. He had taken a hard line against a union before in his days as Yale President. He had gained a reputation as a disciplinarian in his time as National League President, handing down heavy suspensions to Rose for an ump bump and Dodgers reliever (and former Yankee) Jay Howell for applying pine tar to a ball during the NLCS. But we'll never know if Giamatti would have taken on drug testing nor how successful he would have been.

As for me, I wonder how other things would have played out had Giamatti lived to serve a full term. Would Fay Vincent still have been named his successor? If so, would he have been as overmatched in that role had he been able to spend more than just a few months working in Major League Baseball first? Would the owners still have forced him out? Could the Bud Selig era have been avoided? How about the 1994 strike? The Wild Card and divisional realignment? Would the ridiculous All-Star Game/homefield advantage policy still be in place? Would baseball have expanded twice more? Would contraction have even been discussed? Would the Nationals still be in Montreal? Would the Giants or White Sox have moved to St. Petersburg after all? Would revenue sharing have been put in place sooner? Would it not have been put in place at all?

Recent Yankee history might have been much different as well. In February 1990, Fay Vincent handed George Steinbrenner a lifetime ban for his hiring of gambler Howard Spira to dig up dirt on Dave Winfield and his foundation. The ban was lifted three years later, after Vincent had been forced out of office and Steinbrenner friend Bud Selig was the acting Commissioner. Would Giamatti have handed down the same sentence? If so would he have reinstated Steinbrenner at any point?

It's all useless conjecture, but it's also intriguing to wonder what might have been. While Rose, Vincent, and Thornburgh all knew Giamatti to some extent, none of them can truly know what he would have done had he served longer as Commissioner, and neither do I. What we do know is that Bart Giamatti died too soon, and it was baseball's loss. It's unfortunate that the baseball media didn't see fit to remember that yesterday.

1999 World Series: Game 2

[With the Yankees squaring off against the Braves this week, we thought it would be appropriate to take a look back at the two World Series during which they faced off in the late 90's]

Before Game 2 at Turner Field, Major Leauge Baseball presented its All-Century Team. During the 1999 season, fans were allowed to vote, from a predetermined list of the greatest players of all time, the top 25 players to comprise the team. There were six pitchers, nine outfielders and two players at each infield position. In addition, an oversight committee appointed five other players who they felt belonged to the time.

As FOTB Jason has consistently pointed out, fan voting is a terrible way to select the best players for any sort of team. Case in point, Mark McGuire made the All Century Team at first base, receiving more votes than Lou Gehrig and bumping out blank ink Hall Of Famers Harmon Killebrew, Jimmie Foxx and Eddie Murray. Futher evidence of the short sighted nature of fan voting is that Cal Ripken Jr. was the top vote getter at shortstop, while Honus Wagner had to be appointed by the committee.

Regardless of the nitpicks, it was quite the spectacle. Every living player nominated to the team was in the house, including Ted Williams, Sandy Koufax, and the ostracized Pete Rose. Rose was the subject of a contentious interview with Jim Gray, during which Gray immediately attempted to get Rose to admit to betting on baseball. Rose has since admitted to this very deed, but it was rather foolish for Gray to put him on the spot and expect that after years of denial, Rose would simply admit that he lied during the broadcast of the World Series to millions of viewers. The interview would become a hot topic again before the World Series was over.

After the All-Century ceremony concluded, of all the legendary players in attendance, Hank Aaron, who broke Babe Ruth's home run record while in a Braves' uniform was chosen to throw out the first pitch. Unfortunately for the fans in Atlanta, most of the excitement for them was contained to the pregame festivities.

Kevin Millwood, just 24 years old at the time, was actually the best pitcher on the Braves in 1999. Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine all had relatively off years, while Millwood pitched 228 innings to a 2.86 ERA, a .996 WHIP and went 18-7. Over three starts and one relief appearance in the postseason he had thrown 22.2 IP with an ERA of 2.87.

Things went south for Millwood as soon as he took the mound. He allowed back to back singles to Chuck Knoblauch and Deter Jeter to start the game then Paul O'Neill added another base hit to drive in Knoblauch. With men on first and second, Bernie Williams grounded into a 6-4-3 double play, which looked to be Millwood's stepping stone to getting out of the inning. However, yet another single, this time by Tino Martinez drove in Jeter. A walk to Ricky Ledee allowed Scott Brosius the chance to drive in O'Neill with the fifth single of the inning. Remarkably, without an extra base hit and while grounding into a double play, the Yanks managed to push across three runs.

After being staked to the early 3-0 lead, David Cone never looked back. He didn't allow a hit until the fifth inning, which was immediately erased by a double play. By then, Millwood had already been chased from the game in the third inning before he could record an out and the Yanks led 6-0. Cone did issue 5 free passes, but that single to Greg Meyers in the 5th was the only hit. He went 7 innings, struck out four and didn't allow a run.

The outcome of the game was never in danger but the Braves did get on the board in the ninth, scoring two runs against Ramiro Mendoza and Jeff Nelson. The Yanks had just flipped the script on the Braves. Unlike 1996, it was the Yankees who were heading home with a 2-0 series lead.