Daily Archives: October 28, 2003

Aaron Gleeman evaluates the past four post-seasons only to discover that Derek Jeter may not be so “clutch” after all. Jeter fans: brace yourselves.

Rob Neyer has a column on the history of hating the Yankees over at ESPN. You mean everybody doesn’t adore the lovable and huggable Bronx Bombers? What gives? I’m shocked.

In the final analysis, here is Neyer’s take:

I would suggest that people hate the Yankees for one reason: they win. Yes, there’s some hometown antipathy, and management could show a bit more humility when the Yankees do win. But how many people hated the Yankees in the late 1960s or the late 1980s, when they were struggling? I don’t remember paying them any mind at all; they were just another overpaid, under-performing team that happened to wear pinstripes.

So, yes, for most of us it’s simply the winning. Sour grapes. For me, though, it’s more than that. I honestly believe that when the Yankees win, it’s unhealthy, because when the Yankees win that becomes the topic of conversation. The Yankees haven’t won since 2000, and yet people still tell me all the time how horrible it is, that the Yankees win every year.

…There’s a fine line between hating the Yankees and hating what the Yankees mean. I don’t exactly know which side of the line I’m on, but I do know that Josh Beckett is going to be one of my favorite pitchers for a long, long time.

Before Yankee fans get too steamed here, just remember that Rob roots for the Royals.

I’ve made no secret about how much I appreciate Jason Giambi’s game. But in the wake of the World Serious loss to Florida, the big lug continues to have his character besmirched by the local press. Yesterday, John Heyman blasted Giambi in Newsday. According to Heyman, the Yankees need to:

Finally pry Jason Giambi’s “personal trainer,” Bob Alejo, and Giambi’s father, John, out of the clubhouse.

“They just legitimize his failures,” a Yankees official said of the soft Giambi.

… “The guys who struggled in the postseason were the selfish guys, plus Aaron Boone, who just panicked,” another club official said.

… When the heat is on, Giambi melts. This October, he rarely hit when it mattered, and never with anyone on base. Also problematic, he’s like a single entity in the clubhouse, he and his enablers. “He’ll strike out, then go back into the clubhouse and look at smut magazines,” one club official complained about an in-game passion Giambi copped to earlier.

I have no way of knowing whether or not any of this is true or not. I wouldn’t be especially shocked if it were true either. But the little kid in me is sticking by my boy. I know the alarmists–or realists—have a point: Giambi is now a gimpy DH with many years remaining on a bloated contract. His decline could start sharply. He will most likely not return to the form he displayed in Oakland. But I will have faith until further notice, and I’m expecting Giambi to be a great hitter again next season.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the management of the Boston Red Sox have decided not to bring Grady Little back to manage the team in 2004. Little took a beating in the Boston Press after the Red Sox lost Game 7 of the ALCS and he knew last week that it was all but over for him in New England. There was a shrill cry for his head in Red Sox Nation too.

Is this the right move? Has management under-appreciated Little’s contributions? Regardless of whether or not you hold Little accountable for Boston’s Game 7 loss, he had two terrific seasons in Beantown. The 2003 team showed the kind of resolve and determination that kept Yankee fans up at night all season long. But as Gordon Edes notes in The Boston Globe, Game 7 isn’t the only reason Little won’t return:

The Sox no longer want to discover, to their dismay, that the manager, according to a team source, failed to hold a hitters’ meeting before the Oakland playoff series, wasting countless hours of traditional scouting work and sophisticated video and statistical analysis that was done ostensibly to give the Sox an edge.

…The Sox, who as of last night had not contacted or asked permission to interview any candidate, plan to go beyond the traditional, just-show-up-in-a-coat-and-tie-and-answer-our-questions evaluation process. They will want hard answers, using specific situations, perhaps even using video, on how a manager handles the game within the game. No more guesswork on whether the manager will know that he should bring in Alan Embree to face Jim Thome, not only because the stats are weighted in Embree’s favor (0 for 7, 5 whiffs) but because Embree’s strengths are best suited to exploit the weaknesses in Thome’s swing.

It was not Little’s managerial style to meticulously anticipate every game situation that might arise, and, armed with the best possible information — some statistics-oriented, some not — react to those situations in a manner that would satisfy an owner as mathematical in his world view as a John W. Henry. That is why the Sox are not being dishonest in their insistence that Little was not being cashiered because of what happened in Game 7 of the ALCS. They had reservations that extended back to his first season on the job, which is why they did not exercise his contract option this spring, according to one of the team sources.

The Sox are looking for the ideal manager to fit their sabermetric-run organization, and that’s fair enough. Edward Cossette for one, trusts in Theo (Edward hits the nail on the head when he talks about the animosity that exists between the media and The Bill James Gang). Maybe the Sox won’t skip a beat. Hell, they might even improve—though how much better can you do than 95 wins? But imagine the pressure the incoming skipper will feel. If he falls short of making the World Serious, the season will be deemed a failure. If not in the eyes of management–and the more sympathetic and patient fans like Cossette, and Ben Jacobs—than at least to the general public and the press. Jeez, who do the Sox think they are: The Yankees?