Interview With The Yankeeist

We'll have a full batch of links coming up in a little while, but we wanted to direct your attention towards an interview that Larry from The Yankeeist conducted with Matt and me.

We've linked to the excellent Q&A's Larry has done with Was Watching, RAB, Bronx Banter, The Replacement Level Yankees Weblog, and TYU and we are extremely pleased that he was interested enough in our blog to ask some really thoughtful and thought-provoking questions of us.

The interview runs over 7,000 words, so it's long enough that you might want to print it out, but we think there is a lot of interesting stuff in there. If you want to know more about the background of the blog or where Matt and I are coming from, please check it out.

13 Days Until Spring Training: Mike Pagliarulo

Baseball players have long been a superstitious bunch: don't step on the foul lines, don't talk to the pitcher during a no-hitter, keep your routine, eat your chicken before every game, virtually every action Turk Wendell ever took, etc.

So given triskaidekaphobia, fear of the the number 13, it's no surprise that the Yankees had been wearing uniform numbers for more than eight full seasons when rookie Spud Chandler became the first to wear it in 1937 . Even at that, it was one of three different numbers Chandler wore that year. The next year, journeyman Lee Stine wore it, and despite appearing in only four games, he too managed to wear two different uniform numbers during that time.

It would be ten years before the number was worn again, this time by rookie outfielder Cliff Mapes. He had begun the year wearing number 3, the eighth and final Yankee to wear the number after Babe Ruth. But with the Babe being terminally ill, the Yankees retired his former number on June 18th. Only then did Mapes switch to number 13, and by 1949 he had switched to number 7, perhaps making him the only man to share uniform numbers with not one but two different Yankee legends.

The number didn't emerge again until 1970. It was worn by Curt Blefary for a season and a half, then after a two year break, by Walt "No Neck" Williams for two more. It went back into the mothballs for five years, until bit players Bobby Brown and Keith Smith wore it for two seasons each, amassing just 174 games between them. Through 57 seasons of numbered Yankee uniforms, 13 had been worn sparingly by just eight men who either couldn't get rid of the number fast enough or whom the club couldn't rid themselves of fast enough.

In mid-1984 the Yankees recalled Mike Pagliarulo from Columbus. Issued the same number Don Mattingly wore in his first two seasons, 46, Pags quickly established himself as the starting third baseman. For 1985 he switched to number 6 and slugged 19 home runs in his first full season.

The following year, Roy White rejoined the coaching staff. He had worn number 6 for the final eleven years of his playing career, as well as during his previous stint as a Yankee coach. Pags relinquished his number to White, and donned the seemingly unwanted number 13. He went on to hit 28 home runs that year, then led the team with 32 in homer happy 1987. Elbow injuries soon began to sap him of his power at the plate and his arm strength in the field, and he was traded to San Diego in mid-1989.

Pags was a fan favorite during his five years manning the hot corner for the Yankees. He was the first Yankee to wear the supposedly cursed number for any extended period, but has since been surpassed by another third baseman as the most successful Bronx Bomber to don the number. Pagliarulo was kind enough to agree to an interview with us last summer. You can revisit it here and here.

I Know That Face: McGwire, A-Rod and Posnanski

I didn't really want to talk about this subject, but for some odd reason, I've been thinking a lot about Mark McGwire over the past two days. The reason of course is obvious, but it's odd because I've never really cared much about McGwire before Monday. When you say "baseball" and "1998" the first thing that comes to mind is the unstoppable version of the Yankees that won 114 games and the World Series. I never really cared that Big Mac took steroids, but I still consider the single season home run record to be 61 (although Maris' 1961 campaign obviously comes with its own set of caveats). Basically, I was fairly indifferent about the guy and still am about steroid use in general.

But then I read the part of his statement where he said "wished he never played during the steroid era" and quickly realized this wasn't going to be an actual apology. Then I watched the interview with Bob Costas on Monday night and listened to McGwire refuse to acknowledge that there might be some connection between him taking steroids and hitting lots of home runs and I grew more disenchanted. My first mistake was expecting a real apology in the first place. My second mistake was watching the interview.

At that point I was ensnared in the story. I read reaction after reaction yesterday, some echoing the disapproval Tom Verducci and Ken Rosenthal showed on the MLB Network after the interview and some questioning why McGwire's apology wasn't good enough for us. Even those who claimed not to care were adamant in their apathy.

While no one was particularly surprised by McGwire's admission, the story still got huge and reached a point of ridiculous oversaturation. Basically everyone with a voice in the baseball media offered their opinion and there were responses to the interview and also retorts to those responses.

Well, here I am with a rebuttal to a retort to the responses. When you are a media bottom feeder like myself and you wait 36 hours to give your opinion on a story like this, all that's left is the backwash of the backlash. So here goes nothing...

If you don't read Joe Posnanski's blog, you are truly missing out. If there was a sports writers draft tomorrow, he would be snatched up with the first pick. He weaves together disparate topics with ease and makes seemingly uninteresting things worth reading about. His posts are long and nuanced and are meant to be read in full, but I'm going to blockquote him here (and take him out of context) to make a point.

From his reaction to the McGwire interview (or more accurately, his reaction to other's reactions):

I didn't agree with or even follow everything McGwire said, but I never thought that was the point. I never thought apologizing was an Olympic sport with stoned-faced people judging how straight his toes were pointed and if he made too big a splash. McGwire is not a public speaker. He's not a philosopher. He's not a politician. He is not even an especially open person. He is a guy who dedicated his life to hitting baseballs hard. Expecting him to become Hamlet doesn't seem fair.

This is a valid viewpoint. I happen to disagree, but two people can watch the same lengthy interview and come away with completely different perceptions of what just took place. There's a lot of wiggle room in 54 minutes of two-way conversation.

But look at Posnanski's reaction to A-Rod's interview with Peter Gammons last year:

I thought Alex Rodriguez’s ”apology“ was one of the most absurd shams of recent memory. I thought it was so pathetic that, for the first time, that ”A-Fraud“ moniker finally made some sense to me. As a baseball fan, I wasn’t mad at A-Rod when the steroid story broke. As a baseball fan, I was furious at A-Rod when he and his handlers put together this infomercial apology.

To me that sounds like Joe judging A-Rod's apology, something that "wasn't the point" when it was McGwire's turn in the hot seat. Again, there is a lot of room for interpretation and there are significant differences between the two situations and subsequent interviews (namely the interviewer), but it's hard to reconcile those two statements.

Both of these guys had handlers and given the attention that they were bound to garner by admitting to using steroids, they should have. The biggest difference was that McGwire's team had a month to orchestrate his PR offensive while A-Rod found out that he was going to have to face the music three days prior while he was running on a treadmill and confronted by Selena Roberts.

Poz goes on to suggest (about A-Rod):

That this is a PR campaign ordered up by a very rich man who got caught and the only goal was to admit as little as humanly possible and make excuses for the little he does admit.

McGwire didn't get caught, but the only reason that he's admitting this now is that he wants to be the hitting coach for the Cardinals and he knows he has to pay his pound of flesh to the media and get this out of the way now. But his PR campaign was far more calculated than A-Rod's was and similarly unbelievable.

If you're Mark McGwire, you don't pay the big bucks to a "crisis-communications company" to tell the whole truth. You hire them to conveniently confine your steroid usage to the smallest believable window, and claim you used them only to recover from injuries. You flatly deny Jose Canseco's account because he still doesn't have any real credibility despite the fact that most of the stuff he said was true. You say that you only used steroids in "very, very low dosage". You don't acknowledge that they might have made you a superhuman home run machine, because that would be cheating, you see? You just took them to get back to where you were. Heck, talk about the "backspin" you put on the ball and act like you unlocked some key to hitting. You're going to be a hitting coach after all!

When you hire a crisis-communications company, they feed you lines like "walking M*A*S*H unit" that you repeat over and over again. They find a way to spin your bungled appearance in front of congress in 2005 so it looks like it wasn't your fault. They make sure you don't incriminate your former coach and future boss by saying he had knowledge of your steroid use. They remind you to say that you "wish you never played in the steroid era". Because like A-Rod being naive and trying to live up to the expectations of a giant contract in Texas, you were a victim of circumstance - an injury-plagued slugger who just happened to play in the steroid era.

I don't like being lied to. I don't appreciate the fact that, not only does Mark McGwire think that he was a better home run hitter than Babe Ruth because of his "God-given ability", but that he is also smarter than everyone else and thinks he can pass off a partial admission because he hired a company to calculate exactly how much he had to admit.

The problem is that a story gets this big, and the mainstream media reaction becomes the villian. Everyone needs a take and no one wants to hear you repeat what Tom Verducci said 10 seconds after the interview concluded.

The one common thread between Posnanski's take on McGwire and A-Rod is that he says that he's shocked that he disagrees with everyone's else's reaction in both. I don't find that surprising at all. I think the best writers make a living on the opposite end of the spectrum (our pal Craig Calcaterra comes to mind). Not to say that they don't believe their own opinions, but the guys I most enjoy reading typically come down diametrically opposed to the majority reaction when a story like this breaks. They are good at finding something about conventional wisdom to disagree with and that makes their opinion interesting to read.

Well this time, I think the original consensus was right. I think McGwire's "admission" was, in many ways, just as bad as A-Rod's. I'm not willing to believe that he really took steroids just to get healthy and I think deep down he knows that they made him better.

If you grant that the truth lies between what Jose Canseco said and what McGwire did, well McGwire's lying because he said there was "absolutely no truth to that whatsoever". And what good is an apology if you're not going to tell the truth? Besides, I wasn't asking for an apology anyway. McGwire did this for himself. Which shouldn't be a surprise, because if he was doing it for everyone else, it would have happened years ago.

Wasn't Reading

Larry from the Yankeeist continued his Yankee blogger interview series yesterday with Steve from Was Watching and I'm again going to link to it. Unlike the other times though, I've got a few comments to make about this one.

As always Larry did an excellent job with his interview. He made attempted to address the things that really separate Was Watching from other Yankees blogs - the persistent pessimism towards the team and the anti-Brian Cashman bias - which many interviewers might have avoided. What I want to comment on are some of the ridiculous generalizations, comical inaccuracies and hypocritical things that the interviewee says.

Observe:

We live in a microwave society now where people want things short and quick. And, personally, I cannot stand bloggers who prattle on with 1,000 word entries. Hence why WasWatching.com is "laconic commentary from a Yankeeland zealot." Further, I'm pretty sure that studies have shown* that people who read things on the internet will not read things that take them more than a few minutes to scan through, etc.

*Studies conducted at the Was Watching Institute of Laconic Zealotry. Sample Size of (n=1).

This post is 900 words. One hundred and twenty six of them were written by Steve Lombardi, the other 674 were copied and pasted from an article by Nick Carfado. Apparently Steve thinks people will read a long post only if you quote a gigantic amount of it from another writer.

And of course the notion that people won't read 1,000 words articles on the internet is ridiculous. This post from Mike at River Ave. Blues is over 1400 words long, features only one short quote (and the rest original material) and has 186 comments on it. And ohbytheway, have you ever heard of a guy named Joe Posnanski?

People, whether they are reading on the internet or anywhere else, like things that are interesting, regardless of their length. There might be diminishing returns after a certain length but the cutoff point certainly isn't 1,000 words.

Back to point, I suspect that someday, maybe soon, we'll look at blogging as some trendy thing that was hot around 2007 and then went the way of the mood ring and the pet rock about eight years later.

Mark it down on your calendars, folks. In 2015, blogs will be like Pogs! Nevermind the fact that the two things he listed came and went because they were devoid of intrinsic value. Fairly quickly, even the dumbest people figured out that a pet rock was just a rock and a mood ring didn't actually indicate their mood. Blogs may evolve into something different eventually, but being able to provide a stream of content on a website which you can update continuously isn't a fad, it's an advance in technology.

At this time, I'm still mulling some changes to the future format of WasWatching.com -- and I may elect to have some additional writers added to the blog (to join my voice). But, I'm not certain, at all, that I will go this way. I still find myself going back to the question of: "Did Leonardo da Vinci [sic] have some others help him paint the Sistine Chapel?"

But on the contrary, look at how many people Abraham Lincoln brought in to help him write the Constitution!

Baseball Think Factory is a daily stop -- and a great source of information -- although many of the commenters there, in my opinion, are veiled ivory tower elitists who like to come across as tough guys by taking shots at others.

It's called Baseball Think Factory, it would be a pretty bad site if there were just a bunch of anti-intellectual dummies talking about how much they agreed with every Ken Rosenthal rumor or Wallace Matthews article. And don't worry, aside from what he just said about the people at BBTF, Steve never takes shots at anyone else:

On the whole, Brian Cashman took a team that was a three-peat World Champion and turned them into a team that would finish first and then lose in the LDS…and then into a team that would no longer finish first but would win a Wildcard (and lose in the LDS)…and then into a team that would not make the post-season at all. Notice the trend here?

In addition, there’s a long list of moves made by Brian Cashman that suggest he’s clueless when it comes to evaluating talent...

Listen, Steve's been in this game a lot longer than I have and I respect that, but he's like the grouchiest newspaper columnist on Earth stranded on a blogger's website. I tried reading WW regularly a while back but I frequent enough baseball sites that I don't need another one that's content with linking to stories I've already read and surrounding a 500 word blockquote with a paragraph and a half of "analysis". I'll take the one that "prattles on" for 1000 words at a time and includes some "original thought" and "research", thank you very much.

Q & A Round Up

When the flow of baseball news slows to a trickle over the offseason in the absence of game action, it becomes a challenge to maintain a stream of interesting content. After we baseball bloggers are done debating not whether the awards voting was poorly done but whether we should even care about it to begin with, we are left with a few means of filling content aside from playing whack-a-mole with an RSS reader until something intriguing finally materializes. One of those techniques is to keep hitting "refresh" over at MLBTR and pray the word "Yankees" appears (something we generally avoid), while another is to scroll through the newsblog over at BBTF and hope something strikes our fancy.

Of course, there's another common method of finding something to write about that doesn't require aggregators to deliver the typically baseless speculation of Ken Rosenthal or Jon Heyman, or the work of other columnists and bloggers. The more enterprising of us internet scribes go out and drum up interviews with well-respected writers and bloggers to carry us through the cold winter months.

Since we have yet to secure any interviews this offseason, we took the liberty of rounding up some of the better ones from around the baseball-related interwebz:

• We linked to Larry at the Yankeeist's interview with Alex and Cliff from Bronx Banter a while back and he has continued his efforts to interview the cream of the Yankee blogosphere by talking with all three guys from River Ave. Blues and SG from the Replacement Level Yankees Weblog. Larry has done an excellent job in these pieces and you won't be able to read them without finding out something new and interesting about their subjects.
  
  
• DRay's Bay has also done several excellent interviews this offseason. They talked to Jonah Keri (who is in the process of writing a book which culminates with the run of the 2008 Rays) about some of the economic realities present in the MLB and also some more specific topics about the AL East and the Rays' future plans. They also (digitally) sat down with Rob Neyer and picked his brain over the course of 16 questions.
  
  
• Our buddy Jason from IIATMS got to ask Darrell Rasner some questions about him time playing in Japan.
  
  
• Via Jason, Pete Toms from the Biz of Baseball has a great conversation with sports economist Roger Noll who is also a professor emeritus and Senior Fellow at Standford.
  
  
• Similarly, the Braves blog Chop-n-Change asks some questions of Sabernomics blogger J.C. Bradbury.

How Not To Conduct An Interview, By Mark Grace

On the Bats Blog at the New York Times, Richard Sandomir points out something that never ceases to annoy me about the postgame interviews conducted by network reporters:

Fox needs a question coach for Mark Grace. One of the failings of many sideline/stadium reporters is that they do not jot down good, solid, clear questions to ask the stars of a game.

There usually isn’t much time to prepare, but coming up with three pertinent thoughts to frame as questions, or as leading statements, shouldn’t be as hard as a nervous Grace made it when he interviewed Jimmy Rollins after the Phillies’ 8-6 win against the Yankees in Game 5 of the World Series on Monday.

Sandomir uses Grace as an example and transcribes some example from last night, but you could easily switch his name with Kim Jones, Ken Rosenthal or countless other reporters. (Here's a clip of the Rosenthal & Grace interviews from last night). It seems as though, in the cutthroat world of TV journalism, interviewers are constantly trying use their queries to display how smart they are as opposed to asking questions that lead to good responses.

Since the best baseball players - the ones most likely to be interview after the game - are interviewed so frequently during the season, they answer the questions - or in many cases weak leading statements - with relative ease. The player knows what the interviewer is getting at and usually obliges them with the type of vague and vapid answer they think they are looking for.

ESPN has actually tried to correct this problem by hiring an interview guru named John Sawatsky to conduct seminars on the proper way to interview (sort of like the "question coach" Sandomir suggested). Here is an 8 minute radio segment and accompanying article from NPR from back in 2006 on that very subject.

Sawatsky is a full time employee in Bristol and has his own office, complete with a giant question mark on the door. Max Kellerman used to talk about the "Sawatsky Technique" on his old radio show on 1050AM in New York, but would struggle to take the advice, like he did in his botched interview with Floyd Mayweather after the Juan Manuel Marquez fight.

In the seminars, Sawatsky uses interviewers like Barbara Walters and Larry King as examples of exactly what not to do. Don't ask long-winded questions (or worse, make long-winded statements) or pose inquiries that only demand a "yes" or "no" response. Ask only one question at a time. Try to learn, not validate your own opinion. Don't try to insert yourself into the interview, because the interview isn't about you:

The best questions, argues Sawatsky, are like clean windows. “A clean window gives a perfect view. When we ask a question, we want to get a window into the source. When you put values in your questions, it’s like putting dirt on the window. It obscures the view of the lake beyond. People shouldn’t notice the question in an interview, just like they shouldn’t notice the window. They should be looking at the lake.

Makes sense, doesn't it? No one wants to hear Ken Rosenthal or Kim Jones awkwardly attempt to interject their observations on what just happened. They want to hear what the player was thinking. Typically the athletes don't really have anything interesting to say either, but maybe if the people interviewing them could put some effort into crafting questions that would provoke some thoughtful responses, that wouldn't be the case.

An Interview With Kevin Long

We couldn't get any face time with the Yankees' hitting coach, much less during a playoff run, but the folks over at Locker Blogger did get a chance to pick Long's brain for a bit.

In the interview, Long discusses the nuances of coaching a slew of great veteran hitters like ones the Yankees have, their use of video as an instructional tool and how Jorge Posada acts as a second hitting coach.

(If you are reading via RSS, you might have to click through for the video)

Say what you will about Jorge's ability to call a came (although I recall the staff performing pretty well with him behind the dish so far this postseason) but the guy obviously knows a whole lot about hitting. Perhaps he doesn't always bend to the pitcher's will like Jose Molina but I'm sure he can see exploitable tendencies in opposing hitters that pitchers are much less likely to pick up on.

Keep an eye out for Locker Blogger as well. They've already recruited David Cone, Darryl Strawberry, Tino Martinez and Don Mattingly to contribute to the site so you can expect more Yankee-related content from them in the future.

Joba And The Media

Much has been said about Joba Chamberlain's reaction to his start yesterday. It's a rare occasion when the tabloids pass up a good opportunity for fear mongering about the Yanks 5.0 game (gasp!) lead to point out just how delusional Joba has been in regards to poor performance. This is nothing new. Back in early July we compared his comments to Ian Kennedy's shortly before he was demoted in August of 2008.

However, the difference now is that Kennedy's was a one-off incident and Joba has made these types of comments over and over again, every time he's grilled about his poor starts.

If you listen to the audio that PeteAbe provided, Joba first starts off by acknowledging that other people are going to be disappointed with him start, "I let my teammates down, you know, pretty much embarrassed them with what I did. You know, not being able to pick my teammates up and get out of here with the series win. That's the frustrating part." But then immediately says, about his stuff "You know, it was all working, surprisingly" and claims that if you take away one or two pitches, it's one or two runs.

With each question, you can hear the incredulous tone in the reporter's voices starting to sharpen. "When you say it was all working, but you give up 7 runs, how does that work in your mind?" Kim Jones said. PeteAbe then asked, "Joba, you said you want to take a positive out of everything. What positive can you take out of today?"

Like we've acknowledged before, there isn't a perfect correlation between throwing the ball well and having good outcomes on the mound. The batter, luck, the defense and the home plate ump all have a lot to do with it. That said, Joba's inability to take responsibility for his poor performances makes him seem even younger than 23. Like 12.

Joba treats the media like prying parents, demanding contrition for the mistakes he's made. He admits that he let his teammates, who are his peer group, down but sees the media as the authority figure in this case, the one who wants him to be accountable for what happens.

Is this a media story or a baseball story, though? Are we saying that Joba's refusal to face his failures head on makes him a poorer pitcher? Is it necessary that he admits his mistakes in order to pitcher better? Perhaps the fact that he doesn't let his bad starts bring him down is actually an asset. Maybe the fact that he's getting smeared in the papers is more of a personal vendetta against him by the writers whose questions he won't answer directly.

Along with the media, the fans also want their pound of flesh. They've been embarrassed too, and when they see or hear or read comments from the pitcher who just ruined their chance to watch their team win, it's not very endearing to hear him compliment the other team's batters and say how great his stuff was. The media is the conduit to the fans and some of the blame has to go to the organization for not conveying this dynamic to him better.

Let's just hope Joba pitches better against the Red Sox at home the next time out. He's much less delusional when he doesn't suck.

Interv-YOOOOOUUUUK

Clones! Our boy Youk was on the internet radio show of a certain ESPN-affiliated blowhard who I'm not going to name here. Since his site is behind a pay wall, he probably wouldn't take too kindly to me ripping the interview and posting it on this site, but I'm going to do it anyway. Just for you. So let's keep this between us, alright?

Some highlights:

• If you don't already know whose radio show this is, he says his name about 4 seconds into the clip.
  
  
• Youk addresses the Yankees' recent run of success at 3:53
  
  
• They get to the Rick Porcello incident around the 5:00 mark. He claims that he "wasn't being selfish", he was just "making a stand for [him]self", which sounds kinda selfish.
  
  
• The subject of David Wright's helmet pops up at 7:45 which leads Youk to say "I always say that 95% of the reason why people can't play baseball is because they're scared of the ball", which is kind of like saying that 95% of people can't play football because they are scared of getting tackled. Yeah, that and the minor ingredients of athleticism and genetic physical prowess. But you're right, Youk, that can't make up more than 5%. You're just so much braver than everyone else. Dick.
  
  
• Youk refers to the fake Twitter feed that was pretending to be him at 12:40. I'm an idiot.
  
  
• It's long but actually a pretty good interview so have a listen.

Pags Interview Part 2

As we mentioned earlier this week, former Yankee third baseman Mike Pagliarulo recently agreed to an email interview with us.

Part One ran yesterday and focused on Pags' time with the Yankees from 1984-89.

Here's the conclusion, covering Pags' playing career after leaving the Yanks as well as what he's been up to in his post-playing days.

Once again, our thanks to Pags for taking the time to do this. Don't forget to check out Dugout Central, backed by Pags' Baseline Group, for more baseball coverage.


Matt Bouffard: In July of 1989 you were traded to San Diego. What was that experience like for you after having been in the Yankees organization since being drafted in 1981?

Mike Pagliarulo: I did not like leaving New York. I felt it was my home, and the place that gave me a professional baseball life through an opportunity. I’ll never forget that, and I’ll always be grateful to the Steinbrenner family and the personnel working for the Yankees. I would not have wanted a start to my career any other way.

MB: After your stint in San Diego, you found yourself with Minnesota for the 1991 season. You had a great post-season, batting .308 with a pair of home runs, including an extra inning game winner in Game 3 of the ALCS. What are your lasting memories of being part of that championship team, and playing in one of the most memorable World Series ever?

MP: Everyone from Little League to the Majors always talks about teamwork. The best companies in the world use team building characteristics during their interview process every day. Playing in that series I felt the meaning of teamwork. I mean, I felt the true essence of its existence. From trust, coordinating plans, and investigating the opposition, I realized what the true value of “team” meant. I was also aware of the elements and characteristics of skill. By the way, none of these points are illustrated or represented by data anywhere yet they are the most significant factors of skill and how baseball is played. Funny thing, I can describe it to millions of people and they’ll understand exactly what I’m talking about. But in the game of baseball today, that particular description is considered subjective because it doesn’t fit into someone’s formula.

MB: You spent the 1994 season playing in Japan with the Seibu Lions. What were your impressions of the Japanese game? Did you encounter any anti-gaijin sentiment?

MP: I appreciate the Japanese way of playing baseball but more thananything else, I respect their approach. In Japan there are no standards of play yet all the players practice basically the same technique. They are very disciplined as a culture; we could learn a lot from them. It’s no surprise they’ve won the WBC twice. They prepare better.

MB: What sort of connections did you make in Japan? How did it help in starting your Pacific Rim scouting group?

MP: The Japan teams need the same type of help the MLB teams need. The only difference is that in Japan they’re losing talent because the American teams steal their players. American teams are losing talent because they forgot how to develop players. I merely bridge the gap of cultural differences and assist in combing the needs of the two biggest baseball markets to make everyone benefit.

MB: Some Yankee fans have been critical of your group's role in theKei Igawa signing. What's your side of the story on this issue? Do you think Kei Igawa could succeed as a Major League pitcher, perhaps outside of the AL East?

MP: Let me correct you on that. Yankee fans know exactly what they’re looking at because they love researching the players. I suggest they weren’t real Yankee fans. Because in this instance, those same people don’t know how Matsui was acquired and they probably think I had nothing to do with Matsui either! I did the work and got all the information on Matsui and advised on all the other Japan negotiations. That’s a fact. It saved the Yankees about $8 million and helped developed the relationships they currently have there too. When the front office wanted little Matsui (Kaz Matsui) I was the only one who said no, and with good reason. I’ve got a good reason for all my decisions.

Then they changed the process for signing Pacific Rim players when Igawa was available: no more conference calls and no more collaborative meetings. Kei Igawa could succeed as a Major League pitcher. Keep in mind my business is consulting and players have roles determined by the various MLB teams. Igawa could play, but not for the New York Yankees. Igawa could play for a second-division type club and on the back end of the rotation. His success would not be good either. But, if you look at the talent out there and you’ve got pitchers in their forties getting extensions because the talent development isn’t like it once was, he (Igawa) can most definitely play.

The rest is history. My group has projected more than $350 million of player contract value and has never been wrong. We are the foremost leader in projecting risk of injury and talent for championship roles. I’ve got data to back all research findings for risk of injury and skill value. Assigning a player to a role is a piece of cake. Do you actually think I’d still be working if I was wrong about a player when millions of dollars are on the line? Our prediction models and research far exceeds most MLB teams because it’s all we focus on. We have to be right, so we don’t scout. We use a unique system capable of measuring performance and projecting risk. I’m really not sure with all those millions why other teams aren’t doing the same.

MB: What's going on with the Baseline Group these days? What are your plans for the future of the organization?

MP: The plan is to help support the foundation of baseball. That is done by understanding the core elements of how the game was built, and then protecting those interests: Ownership, fans, players. Leadership provides the environment. Players compete at a high level of skill to provide unique value. Fans justify that value. The focus is those areas and they’re all connected. They are the most significant part ofthe game; to think otherwise would be a mistake. The future looks very bright, and with a little help we’ll be able to purchase a minor league team and implement development as owners so that other ownership groups can benefit. The main benefit would be to create transparency for owners. I believe things are the way they are because the metrics associated with measuring value stinks. Baseball is the only industry that is unable to value the core assets of its businesses; that is a shame. The owners, fans, and players deserve more and it doesn’t start with money because everyone doesn’t have money. It begins with respect.

MB: At the Closing Ceremonies for Yankee Stadium last year, you were featured in the montage of former Yankee third basemen. Were you watching that night? What was that honor like for you?

MP: I missed the ceremonies last year, I’m sorry to say. But I have fond memories always. That day might have been the greatest but it comes second to the people I was able to share baseball and friendship with all around the Stadium. Honestly, I can see that batting cage as clear as a bell, and feel the fans along the third base line, and picture The Boss pacing around his suite; pacing because he always wanted to win so very badly. Those memories will never fade, because the fans won’t let it. I thank them for the great honor of recognizing me and keeping those thoughts in the front of my mind. I’m reminded today everywhere I travel by New York Yankee fans. It’s the greatest feeling.

MB: What's it like being a former Yankee living outside Boston these days? You get any flack for that? Didn't you grow up as a Yankee fan, and if so, how did that come about, and what was it like to be a Yankee fan in Medford during the 1970s?

MP: My dad was the biggest Billy Martin fan ever. We grew up in Boston and everyone was a Red Sox fan except him. When I was a kid I always thought my father was right except when it came to the Yankees. Well, after my first big league spring training where I met the big league guys for the first time; I said, “Dad you were right again!” The Yankee organization was built on class and respect and everyone I met there was the same way. Back in Boston I still caught heat, but nobody gives out that much crap without being scared!

Mike Pagliarulo Interview: Part One

Mike Pagliarulo was selected by the Yankees out of the University of Miami in the sixth round of the 1981 Amateur Draft. Recalled in July of 1984, Pags served as the Yankee third baseman for the next five years before being traded to the San Diego Padres. He won a World Series with the Minnesota Twins in 1991, and played for the Baltimore Orioles, Seibu Lions in Japan, and the Texas Rangers before retiring at the conclusion of the 1995 season. A fan favorite during his time with the Yanks, Pags has been a frequent guest at Old Timers' Day since his retirement.

Since retiring, Pags has worked in scouting and consulting. He founded the Baseline Group, which seeks to provide business solutions for baseball, and recently started the non-profit start-up Baseball Institute of Development.

As we mentioned Tuesday, Pagliarulo graciously agreed to an email interview with me in July. Much of the interview was posted at River Ave. Blues Tuesday, but as promised, we'll run the full interview in its entirety here. Part One is below; we'll finish it up tomorrow.

Matt Bouffard: Rickey Henderson was inducted into the Hall of Fame this summer. He's one of baseball's most colorful characters. Do you have any good Rickey stories from your years as his teammate?

Mike Pagliarulo: I spent five years as his teammate. Plenty of stories, but most are kept under wraps. I will say that he was the most incredible athlete I’ve played on the same team with. Bo Jackson was the best I’ve ever played against but Rickey was the best on my teams. His body fat was something like 3.9% and his God-given ability was second to none. When Rickey wanted to do something, he did it. He could control a baseball game. I just can’t imagine having to pitch to him five times a day! Never forget one year, my good friend Donny Mattingly wasn’t swinging the bat very well during the first few months of the season yet he was one of the league leaders in RBI. Every time Donny got to the plate it seemed there was one out and Rickey was on third base. All Donny had to do was make contact and he had an RBI. Funny thing was, Donny usually did more than just make contact.

MB: After coming up in mid-1984, you're first full season with the Yanks was 1985. That was a tumultuous year: Yogi Berra was fired just 16 games into the season and Billy Martin returned for his fourth stint as Yankee manager. You guys spent all summer chasing Toronto, clawed back into the race, and went north of the border for the season's final weekend needing a three game sweep to force a playoff. What was that pennant race like for you and what was the let down like getting eliminated that Saturday?

MP: Tumultuous is a word associated with New York. And it’s not a bad word. I’d like to refer to playing under certain scrutiny and pressure as the way it is supposed to be! We aren’t babies and people pay lots of money to see you play. I hate it when tabloids side with the poor player who’s under so much pressure while making 10 million dollars. That doesn’t appear to match.

1985 was the year in which I learned more about Mr. Steinbrenner than any other. I never realized how much he wanted to win until the last month of the season. One example was during September when we returned from a night game in Milwaukee. The game was late and the flight was delayed. We’d got into Newark airport about 6 AM and the Boss had limos waiting for everyone to take them home. We had a game that night. I couldn’t believe that such a cool and generous thing could be done without being in the press.

MB: Follow up question to that: after being eliminated, Phil Niekro won his 300th career game on the season's final day. What was it like to be a part of that?

MP: That was one of the best games I’ve played in. Knucksie was a true professional and I was so happy for him. Funny thing about that game, he didn’t throw a single knuckleball until the last pitch of the game.

MB: Those years probably weren't quite as wild as the Bronx Zoo years of the late 70s, but they were by no means calm. What was it like playing for George Steinbrenner in his heyday? Any thoughts on him stepping to the background now and allowing his sons to take over?

MP: The Boss was the best, no question. He was the best at taking care of his investment. He was the best at checks and balances, and he always knew what he had in the system - and that’s a much different scenario than today. Back then, we had the most players in the Major Leagues (coming from the Yankees’ system) and we had the best player development system in the world. Facts that are indisputable even with the abundance of players, fields, training methods in the industry today.

I believe the family will do just as good a job because they are all incredibly intelligent and driven; that’s kind of in the blood. I truly wish them the best of luck. Funny thing is, I feel so grateful that the Boss gave me the opportunity to put my kids through college. If he were to ask me to do anything in the world, I’d do it, and wouldn’t ask for compensation. The Steinbrenner family has no idea what it means to me that I can provide for my children and I’m so fortunate and forever grateful. That’s what the Boss means to me.

MB: In your Yankee career you played for three of the most interesting and well-liked men in Yankee history: Yogi, Billy, and Lou Piniella. What was it like playing for them? Were Billy and Lou as temperamental as they seemed? Lou was just getting his start as a manager then, how much of his style did he borrow from his mentor Billy?

MP: Billy and Lou were very much alike. I loved playing for both of them. Tremendous offensive managers and they could see the field so well. Both Lou and Billy had game plans and it was pretty difficult to outsmart them. Yogi was different in that he didn’t scream and holler as much. But to me, they were all in the same category of baseball knowledge and gamesmanship. I was lucky to have played for such great men.

MB: Follow-up: Is it true that Billy tried to get you to bat right handed at some point? I can't seem to find any record of that happening in a game.

MP: Yes, I batted right handed once against Detroit. In 1985, we played a simulated game at Yankee Stadium for one of our pitchers, Marty Bystrom, who was on the DL. Simulated games normally take place at 3 PM, prior to batting practices. On this day Scott Bradley (now the Princeton baseball coach) was the left handed hitter and we needed a right handed hitter. So I volunteered.

Simulated games, if done properly, are helpful and the coaching staff at the time, which included Billy, didn’t want me to do it. They wanted the game to be very serious. After I reassured them I was serious and that I’d switch hit in high school, college, and my first year as a pro, they let me hit right handed off of Bystrom. Well, I got something like four hits with a ball off the right field wall.

The coaches couldn’t believe it and Billy was pissed at me. He said I should stay right handed and continue switch hitting. The real reason for that was Billy liked me in there every day as he felt our team defense was much better with me at third base.

The next road trip was to Detroit and in a tie game in the sixth inning, he handed me a helmet for a right handed hitter. I honestly didn’t want to do it because I didn’t feel I was prepared but I didn’t want to get taken out of the game either. I ended up doing it and struck out. Billy caught a ton of crap for that, but I know what he was thinking. It wasn’t a bad move if I’d have been prepared and actually, it was quite ingenious.

MB: After belting 28 HRs in 1986, in '87, you led the team in HRs with 32, besting teammates Don Mattingly and Dave Winfield. What was that like for you? And when did you suffer the elbow injury that sapped your power in later years?

MP: I never bested a teammate at anything. As a team we finished second and third those years I think. I had two elbow surgeries in a row; 1987 and 1988. The second one was a killer, ulnar nerve surgery; that has a 9-12 month rehab. After having the surgery in November of‘ '88, I tried to play that spring training. Couldn’t throw and had to change my swing. I really believe that if Lou Piniella stayed in the organization I would have gotten back to my old form. He was one of the best hitting coaches and a big reason why I hit those HRs in Yankee Stadium.

MB: Speaking of injuries, didn't you once break your nose on an HBP and return to the line-up the next day? Tell us a little about that.

MP: On a Friday night in Oakland I was hit in the face by a Curt Young fastball. Actually the ball glanced off my wrist first as I tried to block it. It wasn’t Young’s fault, it was mine. A good lesson for young kids is knowing how to turn on the ball coming from the pitcher. I turned the wrong way when I opened up attempting to hit an inside fastball, but the ball just chased me and knocked my nose from one side to the next. It was pretty ugly actually.

I remember Lou Piniella was the manager and he was the first person I saw when they took the towel from my face. After about 10-15 minutes on the ground, they stood me up and took the towel away from my face. I first saw Lou and he said “Oh my God” then turned away. Young had a three run lead and got sick to his stomach; he had to be taken out of the game. Then they took me on a stretcher to the training room and then to the hospital until 2 AM.

Saturday was a day game and I was still bleeding from my mouth and nose. I couldn’t stay on the bench; I guess I was too much of adistraction. On Sunday I was very anxious and requested to play. I didn’t care how I did, my goal was to simply get back in the flow. Lou put me in the lineup and they pasted these bandages on my face for the game. Well, the bandages helped because it actually fixed my alignment at the plate and improved my swing. After that, I went on a pretty good tear.

MB: Any favorite story or memory from your Yankee years that you'd like to share?

MP: Sure, I’ll give you the one that’s the best. A few years ago they asked all the former Yankees, “What was your best day as a Yankee?” Players were reminiscing about their 5 for 5 days and near no-hitters. But, mine was easier than that. It was my first Old-Timers game when I was a player on the team. Joe DiMaggio was in my locker and Whitey Ford was right near him. Yogi, Hank Bauer, Moose Skowron, etc, etc. DiMaggio was talking to me but I couldn’t say a word. It was Joe DiMaggio for God’s sake.

Then there was a quiet in the locker room as Billy Martin and Mickey Mantle came walking through the middle of the place. All of a sudden, all everyone could hear was Mickey’s voice as he lifted his arm and pointed his finger at me, “Hey Billy, is that the guy?” Well, I wasn’t sure what I did wrong but I was ready to apologize for anything. When the god of New York says something to you, you shut up and listen. Then they walked towards me and I felt a feeling of panic set in and didn’t know what to do. Mickey Mantle reaches his arm around my neck and gets me in a headlock. He was wrestling me to the ground! Then he pulled me into the trainers’ room which was across the locker room and began to hit me with light punches in my sides. Just then, he and Billy began laughing as Mickey said, “Hey kid what’s up? How are you? Love the way you play and glad to have you on board.”

Mickey Mantle had just wrestled me to the ground and pulled me out of Joe DiMaggio’s locker (which was mine) to tell me he liked the way I played baseball. Can there ever be a better day than that?


[We'll be back with the conclusion of the interview tomorrow]

An Interview With Mike Pagliarulo

Mike Pagliarulo was the Yankees' third baseman from July of 1984 until he was traded to San Diego in July of 1989. He was one of my childhood favorites.

Pags' Baseline Group backs the website Dugout Central, where I contributed before joining Fack Youk. He agreed to an email interview with me last month. We'll run the full interview in a few parts later this week, but a sneak preview with some of the highlights is currently posted at River Ave Blues.

If you're reading here, you're likely already reading at RAB, but if you're not, you really should be. Either way, head on over and give it a read. And be sure to check back here later this week for the full interview.

(Photo from the NY Post)

Roger Clemens Would Like You To Know That He Is Still Delusional

[Update: Here is the interview]

This morning, Roger Clemens appeared on Mike and Mike in the Morning, to react to the book American Icon: The Fall of Roger Clemens and the Rise of Steroids In America's Pastime which was released today. And by "react to", I mean "hammer the same trite talking points that no one has bought since this information came out". Another amusing aspect of this is it only serves to raise awareness of the book well beyond its authors or publishers ever could have hoped to do themselves.

If he wasn't such a defiantly arrogant prick, you might almost feel bad for the guy. He comes on a nationally syndicated radio program and aside from Rusty Hardin, he might be the only person who actually believes what he is saying. For a more complete synopsis of the main points of questioning and Clemens' reactions to them, check out what Jason at IIATM,S posted.

Right out of the gate, he busts out with two painfully contrived stunts. First, he makes it clear that this is the only interview he is going to be able to do because he is supposedly going away for a week.

Clemens: I'm gettin' ready to go out of town, err, out of the country for a week... 

[...]

RC (About a minute later): Deb and I are getting ready to go out of town, err, out of the country for a week.

The fact that he instantly corrects himself both times and makes a point to say that he is leaving the country, would indicate that it was a talking point fed to him by Hardin or one of his other advisers. Why would it be important where he is going (unless he wanted to make it look like he wasn't dodging other interviews)? He came on Mike and Mike because he know they weren't going to be overly aggressive with their questioning. They did a pretty good job, but let him off the hook repeatedly. Has Clemens ever even left the country (aside from playing in Toronto)?He doesn't really strike me as much of an international traveler. Where is he going? Obviously not Mexico...

However, it was the second one I found most egregious.

RC: [Talking lowly away from the phone]

Mike Greenberg: Roger, are you still with us?

RC: [Still talking away from the phone, but audibly now] Okay buddy, I'll get ready to take you to school in a minute.

Are... you... fucking... kidding... me? This is your first interview in over a year, and you couldn't get your wife or one of your fifteen advisers to watch your kids for 10 minutes? I'm calling bullshit. This just happened to occur withing the first minute of the interview? His youngest child is no less than TWELVE YEARS OLD. It's not like he's got some clueless kindergartner wandering around the house.

Clemens also provides another iron clad reason that he couldn't have possibly used steroids: People in his family have suffered from heart conditions. He lists off two people who have suffered heart attacks, one of which was his stepfather. Roger Clemens - Nobel Prize Winning Geneticist.

RC: Our family has a history of heart conditions. My brother had a heart attack in his late 40's, my stepdad died of a heart attack... Uh, I mean, it would be suicidal for me to, even think about taking any of these dangerous drugs. 

No. No it would not. This is the worst defense you could possibly put forth. How could I have done this, it would have been inadvisable for me to do so?1?! Never mind the possibility that he could have resurrected his entire career, profited nine figure sums, won multiple World Series, and achieved international fame and athletic glory. But for him to potentially take a few years off of his life would have prevented him from doing steroids. Nice try, but I don't think so. 

A few other notes:

• Throughout the interview, Clemens refereed to the book as "piling on". Does he want to us to feel sorry for him? "Piling on" doesn't imply that what is being said is false. 
  
  
• He did later refer to McNamee's accusations as "totally false" and "impossible". Roger, your trainer, Brain McNamee injected your wife (not a professional athlete) with HGH. It is certainly not impossible, much less implausible that he did the same to you, considering that you had the world to gain by letting him so do.
  
  
• Still says that Andy Pettitte "misremembers" and they are still friends
  
  
• Danced around A-Rod and Manny questions, saying he didn't know the details about Manny's test and that he watched only a portion of A-Rod's interview with Peter Gammons and none of his second press conference.
  
  
• Constantly talked about "the kids" and how he has been throwing batting practice to them, how steroids are bad for them, etc. 
  
  
• Claimed he has been getting "great responses" in all of the cities he has been traveling to. 
  
  
• And finally, at the very end of the interview when Golic asked him whether he was finished playing, he compared himself to Brett Favre and said that if Favre comes back, he might have to start "pounding the pavement". 

I hadn't thought of the comparison, but it's certainly interesting one, with the most glaring similarity being that I wish both of them would take the millions of dollars they have made from playing professional sports and fucking dissapear forever. 

Greatest Interview Ever

Adam "Pacman" Jones was just interviewed by James Brown on CBS. There will definitely more on this but here is possible the greatest interview question ever asked in the history of... um... the fucking universe.

JB: You were in an incident at a strip club in Las Vegas and Atlanta. What is it about strip clubs that you can't stay away from?

Pacman: Ya kno man, da strip club b lik da reglar club, nawmeen.