Recently, I’ve been hearing about the “Swisher Effect” on the Yankee clubhouse this spring and I think it’s an appealing development. Dig this, from Ben Reiter’s recent column at SI.com:

The first thing one perceives upon walking into the home clubhouse at George M. Steinbrenner Field in Tampa is the mid-90s hip-hop music — stuff like Warren G’s Regulate and Skee-Lo’s I Wish — blasting from an iPod speaker in the back of the room. The iPod belongs to Nick Swisher. Swisher’s role on the field is still to be determined (he’ll probably play mainly right field, a little left and a little first base), and Cashman says that while his unusually gregarious and enthusiastic nature wasn’t a factor in the decision to acquire him from the White Sox in November, his impact on the team’s dynamic has already been deeply felt. “We’re a little sterile now and then, and we need to be livened up,” the G.M. says. “Swish is just the guy to do it. He’s got a great personality.”

The New York clubhouse has at times seemed businesslike to the point of somberness in recent years, but with Swisher aboard, it’s hard to see that being the case in ’09.

And while you are at SI, check out Tim Marchman’s piece on Alex Rodriguez as well as Joe Posnanski’s cover story on Albert Pujols.

“It bothers me to have been careless on some of these small details, especially when I was painstaking about most others…I trusted my notes and my memory on some smaller details, and there were obviously a few instances in which I didn’t have things quite right. That’s my fault, and I’ll take the blame…But if people are waiting for me to break down and confess that I made everything up, it’s not going to happen.”
—Matt McCarthy, USA Today

Mr. McCarthy has asserted that the Times has “crafted a chronology that simply doesn’t exist.” We did not create any chronology. The chronology already existed and we merely followed the chronology of the season that Mr. McCarthy claimed to be writing about. Obviously, some errors are endemic to publishing. No one understands that more than a daily newspaper such as ours. Rather, what we wrote about were events and quotations attributed to real people that could not possibly have taken place as Mr. McCarthy asserts. Given that many people to whom those events and quotes are ascribed are claiming that they didn’t happen, the examples that we found to be provably false lend credence to those concerns.

Alan Schwarz, New York Times

Last week, Benjamin Hill and Alan Schwarz wrote an article in the New York Times about Matt McCarthy’s recent memoir, Odd Man Out. The piece pointed out a series of factual errors made by McCarthy while calling into question the authenticy of the book.  A second article lists the errors that the Times reporters found.

I read Odd Man Out and enjoyed it.  I also interviewed McCarthy for this site.  Needless to say, I was disturbed when I read the two articles in the Times.  

If he was guilty of embellishing the truth or of flat-out lying, I reasoned, McCarthy deserved condemnation. That said, I was struck by how forcefully the Times went after McCarthy.  I thought it was a stretch on their part to associate McCarthy with James Frey, infamous for his memoir fraud in A Million Little Pieces.  Many of errors that were listed seemed innocuous to me, and suggested sloppiness on the part of McCarthy and Viking, his publisher.  I didn’t find anything malicious behind it.  On the other hand, the sheer amount of mistakes the Times brought to light was troubling.  They had McCarthy placing people in places where they were not, having conversations that could not have occured, at least not as how they have been presented in the book.  

I don’t think McCarthy was trying to be lurid necessarily, but the accumulation of so many errors led me to question his authority as a writer.  I was left wondering, “What was really true?” Whether McCarthy was being naive or arrogant, I can’t say.  But his carelessness, as reported by the Times, did not reflect well on either him or the book. 

As a writer, my greatest concern is how this could potentially make things more difficult on the rest of us, simply by creating a standard of excellence that can’t be met without stretching the truth.

McCarthy toured the country promoting the book last week.   He first responded to the Times’ articles in this piece for the USA Today.   Here is one TV interview McCarthy did later in the week, and another.

I conducted a second Q&A with McCarthy via e-mail this week, and I also spoke to Alan Schwarz.  McCarthy has been amiable and professional with me.  I know other journalists in the industry who think highly of him.  I also know he’s in the business of promoting his book.  I’ve known Schwarz for several years and think he is a first-class reporter, as well as an exceedingly ethical and even-handed journalist. 

I will leave it to you to decide what to make of this fine mess.

BB: Your book has achieved a good deal of early success, but that was marred last week by the New York Times article which reported many inaccuracies in your story.

MM: I stand by the contents of Odd Man Out. The journals I kept were very specific and extremely detailed with regards to dialogue. I was a ballplayer keeping a journal, not David Halberstam, and so I made several mistakes in chronology. But I can say this with absolute certainty: not a single one of them changes the tone or meaning of my story, or makes me doubt the truth of the experience as I wrote it down in the book. The lies James Frey and Herman Rosenblat told were fundamental to and pervasive in their narratives – to compare that with a mix-up here and there in dates in Odd Man Out, which has no true effect on the book’s nature, is at best grossly unfair and at worst sensationalistic on the part of a newspaper.

BB: So do you believe this is an unfair attack on the part of the Times?

MM: It appears to me that Benjamin Hill and Alan Schwarz in the New York Times story are writing a partisan article and acting as advocates for Tom Kotchman et al., and using their lawyer’s letter as gospel truth and accepting their statements as fact. I find it interesting that Benjamin Hill and Alan Schwartz have constructed a detailed chronology of dates, which is 90% of their “error’ argument, when in Odd Man Out I do not use dates. I use only general references (a day later, two weeks earlier). Many of their claims to so called “errors” in the book have been created because Hill and Schwarz assign dates to events that I did not assign dates to. Each of the players and former players quoted in the New York Times piece are naturally nit-picking at minor details since they are not represented in a positive light. They are not going after the fundamental truths in Odd Man Out.

BB: I understand that you didn’t use dates, but since you are writing about a specific season it is easy enough to re-construct one. Why do you think the Times would want to pick on you?

MM: I don’t know if I should be the one to speculate about why the Times wrote their article. But I encourage your readers to check out my book and read the Times article and decide for themselves. I’ve received an overwhelmingly positive response from people who have read both.

BB: You mentioned that you were a ball player keeping journals and not David Halberstam. Still, you were writing a book for publication, and I’m sure that Halberstam, too, needed someone to double-check his reporting at times… Can you understand how people might feel that if the facts that can be checked don’t check out how it throws the rest of the material into doubt, lending credence to the criticisms by Kotchman, etc?

MM: My book contains tens of thousands of details that I recounted from journals I kept. For example, from pages 102-104 I recount my performance against the Ogden Raptors inning by inning (and pitch by pitch in some cases) and it was all accurate down to the type of pitch I was throwing. At one point I write that Manuel Melo popped out to end the inning when it turns out someone else popped out to end the inning. In no way does this oversight change anything material about the book.

BB: Based on the kinds of errors you admit to, why should readers not question the veracity of the remainder of the book?

MM: I have acknowledged several errors related to box scores and chronology. Not a single one of them changes the tone or meaning of my story.

BB: The Times pointed out dozens of errors in their piece. Were they in fact correct on the amount of errors?

MM: No. Numerous situations were taken out of context. Is it an error for me to write “Breslow had something like 9 scoreless innings” when in fact he had 12 scoreless innings? They also consider it an error for me to quote Jon Steitz as saying, “I’ve pitched in 11 games and lost all of them,” despite the fact that he went 0-11 that season. They say it’s an error for me to say Joe Saunders “made batters look silly” because he gave up four runs in a game even though batters were swinging at balls over their heads and in the dirt.

BB: I think it is understandable that you could make some of these errors. However, the more puzzling ones include the incident on Larry King night where a person is placed at a scene where, as the Times claims, he was not. Was the Times correct in pointing out this mistake? And if so, do you see how that could effectively undermine your credibility as an author?

MM: Regarding Larry King Night: I said that King’s kid went around punching a bunch of my teammates in the groin and I mistakenly included Matt Brown in this list. I regret including him in the list, but it doesn’t change the fact that King’s kids were in the clubhouse before the game wreaking havoc on our midsections.

BB: I thought the suggestion that your book was like A Million Little Pieces was a stretch. Still, while a fraud, Fray was writing about himself, while you are being accused of hurting other people’s reputations. Do you regret any misleading characterizations that were the result of an error on your part?

MM: No. This book wasn’t about the box scores. It was about brining people closer to the game and I’ve received countless emails from fans who now feel closer to the game. It’s a great feeling.

BB: Have you had any direct contact with the authors of the Times piece since it appeared?

MM: No. I offered to correct the errors they have attributed to me and the errors that appear in their own article, but they said it wasn’t necessary…

BB: Who at the Times did you contact to correct the errors? Did they give any reason why it wasn’t necessary?

MM: I created a point by point rebuttal and gave it to the head of publicity at Viking who was in frequent contact with the Times authors. She offered them my rebuttal but they said they were going ahead with their story and didn’t need my side.

BB: How did the writing process work with your publisher?

MM: I worked closely with my editor on the organization and the overall tone and message of the book and it went through copy-editing and was vetted by legal.

BB: Looking back on it now, would you have used a fact-checker? Or do you feel that the mistakes that have been publicized are essentially innocuous?

MM: I suppose the simple answer is that I would’ve used a fact-checker.

BB: SI ran an excerpt from the book. What involvement, if any, did they have with the publication of the book?

MM: SI read an early draft of the manuscript and requested the opportunity to excerpt a portion.

BB: I know you faced some criticism even before the Times article came out last week. An Angels blogger left a comment in the thread for our original interview. Still, what was your initial reaction when you read the article in the Times?

MM: There have been a wide range of responses to the book and at some level you prepare yourself for anything.

BB: But how did it make you feel? Angry? Do you feel that in essence, the Times’ article is making legitimate criticisms or do you feel that it is an unfair attack?

MM: You’re upset any time someone takes things out of context, but that’s to be expected and there’s nothing you can do about it but defend your work.

BB: You say that you stand by your book. Would you have changed anything in your process knowing what you do now? What has this taught you?

MM: In hindsight it would have been nice to have gone through the box scores from the 350 to 400 high school, college, and minor league games that I played in.

BB: I read that Viking is considering putting out a revised version of the book. Doesn’t that suggest that they are unhappy with the book, or that they could be facing a lawsuit?

MM: Viking was misquoted in the USA Today article when it says, “McCarthy’s publisher, Viking, said it’s likely a revised version of the book will be released…” There are no plans for a revised version at this time.

BB: How has this controversy impacted sales?

MM: Sales have remained strong- last week the book was number 21 on the New York Times Best Seller List.

* * * *

I contacted Schwarz to get his take on some of McCarthy’s responses. I have set up Schwarz’s answers in paragraph form for easier reading.

Mr. McCarthy’s claims that he was denied an opportunity to, in his words, ‘rebut’ his own errors are not only preposterous but adds to his growing list of outright falsehoods. Our interview spanned more than an hour and was comprised mostly of my describing to him every substantive error — sometimes literally showing him things like transaction logs that proved he had the wrong person involved in some distasteful scene, and a copy of his own original contract that proved one quote-laden episode with Tony Reagins to be completely fabricated — and explaining its relevance to the larger picture. He offered explanations for each of them (and I put the most relevant ones in the article so that his side was fairly represented). This went on for probably 10 or 12 of the most substantial errors, with my explaining at every juncture that, while some were clearly not that big of a deal, they called into question the veracity of many other, less provably false scenes that real people said had not happened as he described.

I said that I would be happy to quote portions of the journals he said corrorborated what he had written in the book; he declined to let me do so. I asked to speak with the teammates he claimed supported him; he declined to say who they were.

At the end of the interview, I asked Mr. McCarthy if there was anything he wanted to add, anything that was important given what the story was going to be about. He thought for a moment and said no. I then told him that if he realized there was anything he wanted to add or clarify, that he had my cell phone number and I would be available to him all day for as long as he wanted. He said OK. I have not heard from him since.

The only person I did hear from, in mid-afternoon, was a call back from the Viking publicist. She said that Matt had given her explanations for each error, and would I like to hear them? I said that, to be honest, I had already gone over the errors with Matt in great detail, and that the purpose of my call was to provide opportunity for Viking to comment itself on the situation, its vetting procedures, et cetera. With no objection or hesitation she continued the interview, answering a few questions and offering a few comments — the relevant ones of which I put in the article. She asked if I had talked to Craig Breslow to seek corroboration of McCarthy’s version of events; I explained that Mr. Breslow, McCarthy’s best friend from Yale, was not on the Provo team and could not possibly speak to what happened in 90 percent of the stories told in the book. I mentioned that I had asked McCarthy for the names of the Provo teammates he said supported him so that I could call them, and that he had declined. At the end, knowing that the story was running that evening, the Viking publicist said she wanted to check with Matt on some things and she would call me back. She never did, which is of course her prerogative.

Mr. McCarthy is now saying that the New York Times told him about his list of rebuttals, and I am quoting him here, “We don’t want to hear it. We’re running our story.” Once again, he is putting words into people’s mouths that are blatantly untrue only to further his distorted (and false) image of reality.

And once again, he has done so forgetting that there is 100 percent proof of his dishonesty — in the form of my recording of his interview and a transcript of my conversation with Viking, which I can make available to any interested party. Last I checked, he still has my number.

Ted Berg has a great head of hair.

New York, back when.

And the sounds of Amsterdam Avenue…

In 1984, Topps printed its final card for Lou Piniella as a player. Even though he was hitting .302 at the time, Piniella realized that he was blocking the way of younger outfielders in the organization and agreed to retire in the midst of that season. The sweet swing, the reliable hands, and the clubhouse agitation—all prominent features of the longtime Yankee—departed the Bronx to make room for a new wave of outfield youth.

Piniella was one of the last remnants of Gabe Paul’s regime as Yankee general manager. After the 1973 season, Paul sent aging reliever Lindy McDaniel to the Royals for Piniella, who had won the American League’s Rookie of the Year in 1969 but had slumped to a .250 batting average and a .291 on-base percentage during his final season in Kansas City. Paul figured that Piniella had endured an off season, nothing more. Piniella fit Yankee needs precisely—given their lefty-leaning lineup—providing them a semi-regular outfielder and DH who would play against all left-handers and occasionally against right-handers, too. In three of his first five seasons in pinstripes, Piniella hit .305 or better while filling in day-to-day gaps in left field, right field, and at DH. He became a vital complementary piece to the world championship teams of 1977 and ’78, culminating in his miraculous “stop” of Jerry Remy’s sun-screened line drive in the tiebreaking playoff game of 1978.

Aside from his one-hop snare of Remy’s drive, I’ll remember two features of Piniella’s game more than others. First, he owned one of the best opposite-field strokes of any hitter I’ve seen. As he took his stance, he kept his hands back, wrapped almost behind his right shoulder. With his left shoulder tucked in and his back visible to the pitcher, Piniella pushed the ball toward right field with the same kind of ease and precision that most players reserve for their pull side. Then there was his reliability in the field. Though he lacked speed and had nothing more than an average throwing arm, Piniella possessed hands of velvet. If he could reach a fly ball, he caught it. And whenever he pounded his fist into his glove, he was sure to make the play.

(more…)

There is a crawl space on the side room over my parent’s garage that is filled with boxes.  Stuff from my two siblings and two step-siblings.  I have a couple of boxes of books there–some filled with notebooks, sketching pads, and others with oversized art books I inherited from my grandfather. 

Of course, I’ve got seven or eight shoe boxes full of baseball cards too.  And a crate filled with classic comics from the Eighties by artists like John Byrne and Frank Miller and George Perez.  There are a few bags filled with more drawing pads.  Growing up, drawing and painting was my thing, not writing.  Even when I kept journals, I used the pads to draw a lot.  I drew comic heroes and action pictures from my sports magazines. I also used them to give updates on the Yankees, my favorite musicians (David Bowie, The Talking Heads, Eric Clapton) and movies that I liked. 

I was up at my ma’s last week and found some of the old journals.  Here’s a couple of random entries. 

November 6, 1984. I was 13 years old.

10:00 pm. In bed. Mom came back today, very tired [from visiting her family in Belgium]. She fell asleep about 2 hours ago. Dad I think was sorry to leave. I enjoyed his stay a lot. Mondale just lost terribly and Reagan won New York state and that SUCKS and so does Reagan. I got an airbrush book from [uncle] Herve and I am thinking of something to airbrush. The Frankie Goes to Hollywood album came out today. I taped it off Gordy.

March 18, 1985.

Today I got to 3rd [base] with Jeanne. I didn’t like frenching that much, maybe because she had Dorito BREATH. Anyway it was beauty.

October 10, 1985. 

Bad week.  I was sick today.  In the last week Rock Hudson died of AIDS, Yul Brenner died of lung cancer, and Orson Welles died of old age.  

“Your mother says that it’s to [sic] late to write.  Your [sic] going to school tomorrow.” –Mom.

P.S.  Saturday is Ali (cousin) and David’s wedding.

                      Score

Blue Jays   2

Royals 0

Doders 1

Cards 0

(Dodgers lead Cards 2-1 in the 4th)

The Cosby Show was GREAT Tonight.

An open letter to A-Rod’s handlers …

To whom it may concern:

In light of recent events where Alex Rodriguez has spoken to the media, in both controlled and extemporaneous settings, it is my belief that you should consider a gag order for your client/relative. (New York Times columnist Harvey Araton agrees.) Certainly, you’ve read the analysis of his press conference performance in this space and elsewhere, and are aware of the dent your client/relative’s credibility has taken. This past week, his comments about Jose Reyes would have been fine if he hadn’t added these 13 words: “I wish he was leading off on our team, playing on our team.” In fact, it spurred the Daily News to run a Top 10 list of dumbest A-Rod quotes last Wednesday.

Now, with the labrum tear in his hip — naturally, people will jump to conclusions that it’s steroid-related, despite reports to the contrary — there are greater questions to ponder. Why do the partial surgery as opposed to getting the whole thing done? Is this short-term solution best for the long term? What led to that decision? Is Alex in consistent pain? Does the hip hurt after extended periods of rest? Sleep? How about walking up and down stairs? While cortisone shots would help, would they have an adverse effect on the healing process? Inquiring fans want to know, provided he can tell us something without inadvertently offending someone and then issue an apology through a publicist. Maybe the Yankees don’t want him to speak and potentially say anything incriminating. Judging from the commentary of how the organization has handled his hip injury over the last 10 months, you have to wonder if Brian Cashman and the rest of the brass are not fully committed to nine more years of Alex Rodriguez in a Yankee uniform.

We know Alex is going to be a target. He’s the highest paid and arguably most talented player in professional baseball. In general, Yankee fans are concerned about his health, mainly because it’s impossible to replace the production he can provide in the lineup. He’s still the most important piece to their offense. We want to see Alex recover, get back on the field and help the Yankees win their first World Series since the turn of the century. What we don’t want to see is him speaking to the media, fumbling his words and giving us more reasons to liken him to Manny Ramirez with a different type of insanity. Some fans are already at that point.

Maybe Bernie Williams is right; time away from the team, and the game, will be good for him.

We hope so.

Regards,
Will Weiss

______________________________________

ELSEWHERE …
• Harvey Araton espouses on the First Amendment, A-Rod, and Selena Roberts in a column published last Monday. For anyone entering Journalism School or interested in reporting and mass communication/media theory, this is a must-read. [Props to Diane Firstman for the recommendation.]

• With A-Rod out, the shift in Yankee coverage is shifting toward C.C. Sabathia and Mark Teixeira. This makes sense, since both will be under even more pressure to perform, now that the team will be without Rodriguez for an extended period of time.

• Though he’s not affiliated with the YES Network anymore on a full-time basis, Jim Kaat shared his thoughts on the PED issue with Kevin Kernan of the Post, and proved once again why he’s one of the classiest individuals you’ll ever meet.

• Maybe this is being nitpicky, but did anyone else notice that the flag patch on the right sleeve of the United States’ World Baseball Classic team’s uniforms had the stars on the wrong side? (It was in the upper right corner, instead of upper left.) Neither Dave O’Brien nor Rick Sutcliffe noticed it on the ESPN broadcast. And nothing I read as far as game coverage noticed the gaffe.

NEXT WEEK: What should the key stories be as we count down to Opening Day, and how would you like to see them covered? Send your submissions here.

Until then …

Alex Rodriguez will in fact have surgery, tomorrow morning, and is expected to miss six-to-nine weeks. It is likely that he will have another surgery after the season as well.

Is it just me, or does it seem the Yankees can’t ever get through spring training without a significant injury to a key player?

Now that I’ve whined about the latest Yankee woes, let’s put the hip injury to Alex Rodriguez in proper perspective. In regards to recent history, major spring injuries are really nothing new to the franchise. While A-Rod will be spared surgery and the disabled list, at least for the moment, several prominent Yankee players of the past have not been so fortunate during the six weeks that constitute spring training. Injuries, along with suspensions, have become a common theme.

*During the spring of 1986, the Yankees’ prized off-season acquisition, left-hander Britt Burns, began experiencing pain in his hip. The news could not have turned out worse. Doctors diagnosed Burns with a degenerative hip condition, one that would require a complete hip replacement. Expected to fill a much-needed void as a legitimate No. 1 starter, Burns never pitched a game for the Yankees. The hip replacement ended his major league career at the age of 26. With Burns shelved, Dennis Rasmussen stepped up and delivered a career year (including 18 wins), as the Yankees finished second, five and a half games behind the Red Sox. With a healthy Burns, the Yankees would have made that pennant race very interesting.

*Three years later, the Yankees received another devastating blow when they learned that Dave Winfield would need back surgery. Although the injury did not end Winfield’s career, it did wipe out his entire season before it even began. The Yankees tried to fill the breach by concocting trades for Mel Hall and Steve Balboni, but those measures helped only slightly as an already flawed Yankee team stumbled to a record of 74-87, the franchise’s worst mark of the 1980s. After recovering from his back operation, Winfield would appear in only 20 games for the Bombers in 1990 before being dealt to the Angels for past-his-prime right-hander Mike Witt.

*This one did not involve injury, but it had the same effect. In March of 1992, the Yankees learned that Pascual Perez had been suspended for one year because of a failed drug test. The flaky right-hander would miss the entire season—and would never again appear in a major league game. Perez likely would have made little difference for the rebuilding Yankees, who would finish with a record of 76-86 as an AL East also-ran.

*During spring training in 2000, MLB announced that Darryl Strawberry had failed a mandatory drug test, resulting in a one-year suspension. Not only did the “Straw Man” miss all of 2000, but he never again played in a major league game, in part because of an ongoing battle with cancer. The Yankees didn’t miss a beat, however. With a deep bench and a healthy supply of DH’s and outfielders, the Yankees won the AL East in 2000 on their way to a third consecutive world championship.

*In 2007, Chien-Ming Wang landed on the disabled list because of a spring training hamstring pull. Wang did not require surgery, but would miss a handful of starts at the beginning of the season before recovering to log 19 wins and nearly 200 innings. (Andy Pettitte also missed Opening Day because of an achy back, but did not have to hit the DL.) Wang’s spring setback turned out to be a harbinger of things to come, as the Yankees endured a wave of injuries to starting pitchers in April and May. The Yankees recovered, somehow, to win 94 games and make the playoffs in Joe Torre’s last season at the helm…

***

In some ways, A-Rod’s injury could not have come at a worse time (unless it had happened in the middle of a pennant race). If the Yankees had suspected Rodriguez’ hip was a real concern six weeks or even a month ago, they could have chosen from several credible options on the free agent market. Ty Wigginton would have been a terrific pickup, while Joe Crede would have been a decent, though risky, alternative (because of his bad back). At this point, there is nothing left on the third base shelf, unless the Yankees consider the possibility of converting one of two free agent second basemen. The underrated Ray Durham and the ageless Mark Grudzielanek are still unemployed, but neither wants to retire. If Durham has enough of an arm to make the third-to-first throw, he could be an option at the hot corner, perhaps a platoon partner for Cody Ransom with A-Rod moving to DH. If Rodriguez can gut out the entire season at third, Durham could still be useful as a bench player, backing up A-Rod and Robinson Cano, while serving as an emergency outfielder. Furthermore, his presence would not preclude the Yankees from making a larger deal, for someone like Adrian Beltre or Garrett Atkins, should Rodriguez have to miss the entire season.

In terms of immediate trade possibilities, let me suggest two low-priced alternatives. My first choice is Braves backup Martin Prado, a slick fielder who is also skilled at reaching base, could fill a potential gap at third base and then assume an important bench role if A-Rod returns later. Prado, 25, can play both third and second. The Braves need outfield and relief help, two areas of depth for the Yankees. (How about Melky Cabrera and Dave Robertson?) Another choice is Dallas McPherson, who is buried behind Jorge Cantu on Florida’s depth chart. McPherson, 29, has defensive limitations and will never be the player that the Angels once forecast, but he has Death Valley power and draws walks. A left-handed batter, he could platoon with Ransom during an A-Rod absence. A Grade-C pitching prospect would likely be enough to entice the Marlins…

***

Former Yankee Tom Sturdivant died last Saturday at the age of 78, the cause of his death not immediately revealed. Though not a household name, Sturdivant made his mark in New York during the 1950s. He’s probably best remembered for throwing a devastating curveball, which earned the right-hander the nickname “Snake,” reflecting the pitch’s extreme and sudden movements. (Strangely, learning about Sturdivant’s nickname made me think almost immediately of “Snake Pliskin,” the hero of Escape From New York.) At his peak, Sturdivant emerged as an important part of Yankee pitching staffs that helped the team win three straight pennants and one world championship from 1955 to 1957. In 1956, Sturdivant won Game Four of the World Series—the game that everyone forgets because it directly preceded Don Larsen’s perfect game.

After a terrific two-and-a-half-year run, Sturdivant hurt his arm in 1958, rendering him to mere journeyman status. Pitching mostly in relief, he bounced around both leagues, making stops in Kansas City, Boston, Washington, Pittsburgh, Detroit, and then a return engagement in New York—this time with the expansion Mets. He called it quits in 1964, ending a ten-year career with a won-loss record of 59-51 and a respectable ERA of 3.74.

The news is in about Alex Rodriguez’s hip injury. And it’s bad news for the Yanks.  According to an ESPN report, Rodriguez’s brother says the Yankee star will have surgery and miss 10 weeks.

So?  Who’ll play third?  Just where is Charlie Hayes when you need him?

This was my dad’s spot.  He went to Elaine’s when she first opened her restaurant uptown in the Sixties, and later hung out at a place called Herb Evans, which was on the corner of 64th street and Broadway.  Then, he and his gang settled on The Ginger Man, which was just down the block from Herb Evans.   The Ginger Man opened in the mid-Sixties and became the place to be around Lincoln Center.

According to everyone that I’ve spoken with who was there back in those days, The Ginger Man made the best hamburgers in New York.  My old man spent many afternoons at the bar in the early-to-mid Seventies, telling stories and getting drunk instead of working.  He was an operator and a dreamer.  At one point, he had his own phone at the bar, the only guy to pull off that stunt. 

Years later, when I was ten, eleven years old, the old man would take my brother and me to the bar.  My twin sister must have come too, but I don’t remember her being there.   It never occured to me that there was anything suspect about a man bringing his kids to a bar.  It wasn’t a seedy place.  It felt sophisticated. 

The place smelled grown up, salty, of olives and alcohol.  The bartenders were all nice and happy to see us–one taught us how to twist a lime around the rim of our glasses.  My brother and I would “get drunk” on Coca Cola.   We ate the salted peanuts at the bar, and, occasionally, warm potato chips that came straight from the kitchen.  We wore Ginger Man t-shirts and felt grown up being there.

My old man remained friendly with Mike O’Neal, who along with his brother, the late actor Patrick O’Neal, ran the place.  Dad got sober in 1983 and lost touch with Mike.  The Ginger Man eventually closed, and the old man later rekindled a relationship with Mike before O’Neal re-opened the spot as O’Neals.    They remained close over the last five or six years of my dad’s life.  

I went to visit Mike last month.  We met on a Saturday afternoon after the matinee rush and spoke for several hours.  I learned much of his story and the history of the joint.   (The brothers also owned O’Neals Ballon, which was directly across the street from Lincoln Center; the last scene in “Annie Hall,” where Woody tells the joke about needing the eggs, was filmed in O’Neals, as was the pick-up scenes in “Sea of Love”).  He was happy to talk about my old man who he misses.  His affection for my dad was genuine. 

When we were finished, Mike walked me to the door.  He uses a cane now.  As I went out into the cold, I looked inside and saw Mike turn around.  A couple moved past me, through the front door, and I heard the man say, “This used to be The Ginger Man.”

There was a piece on Mike and his family–and their wonderful apartment (which is in one of my all-time favorite buildings) yesterday in The Times. 

Dig it.

Our man in L.A., the great Jon Weisman, is a heppy ket tonight as Manny makes like Randy Newman:

Every once in awhile I enjoy tweaking my father-in-law by making a reference to Juan Marichal. The mere mention of the “Dominican Dandy” brings out a few exclamation marks from my wife’s dad. You see, he’s a Dodger fan, going all the way back to the Brooklyn days, and he remembers all too well the time that Marichal decided to take a bat to the head of Dodgers catcher John Roseboro. I try to explain to my father-in-law that Marichal is really a pretty good guy, that he actually reconciled with Roseboro, but he won’t buy that line—not at all.

This 1974 card of Mr. Marichal is one of the last two regular cards that Topps issued for the Hall of Fame right-hander; the other one is part of the Topps Traded series for 1974, featuring Marichal in the colors of the Red Sox. Yes, it is strange to think of him in Beantown after all those years by the Bay, sort of like watching Elston Howard finish up his career in Boston after all those seasons in pinstripes.

Although it has no remarkable monetary value, the regular issue ’74 Marichal encapsulates the lasting image of the great right-hander’s most memorable attribute—not his onetime bat-wielding incident, but an extraordinarily high leg kick that counterbalanced a no-windup delivery. The photographer skillfully manages to catch Marichal’s left leg near its highest point, with the toes of his left foot practically even in height with the tip of his cap. (Don’t try this at home; it’s sure to cause a muscle pull or some other significant injury.) The photo on the card is particularly striking because few pitchers in today’s game use this kind of a motion, in part because of the modern-day emphasis on the slide step and in part because pitching coaches like to teach more compact motions, thereby lessening the possibility of bad mechanics. As distinctive as Marichal’s motion seems in contrast to today’s big league pitcher, it’s hardly the only one of its kind in baseball history. A number of great pitchers have used high leg kicks and—in contrast to Marichal—large, convoluted windups, including Hall of Famers Bob Feller and Warren Spahn. For years, the high leg kick was considered important for a variety of reasons; it added to a pitcher’s velocity, proved distracting to a hitter, and helped a pitcher hide the ball—and his pitching arm— behind his leg.

While one’s eyes naturally tend to gravitate toward Marichal’s front leg, his back leg is also worth a look. In the photo, he’s bending his right knee severely, almost unnaturally, as a way of absorbing all of the weight that the leg kick causes to shift to the back side. The more I look at that back knee, the more my own joints start to suffer.

Other attributes of this card bear exploring. The photograph for the ’74 Marichal was taken during a day game at Candlestick Park, at a time when the old stadium still featured artificial turf—and lots of empty seats beyond the left-field fence. Yeah, those were the really fun days in Frisco, when players not only had to deal with the howling wind and glaring sun at The Stick, but also the rock-hard turf that supplied a pounding to the legs of infielders and outfielders. Of course, the fans didn’t have much fun either while dealing with the Candlestick elements, which kept down the size of the crowds in 1973, the year that this Marichal photo was taken. (The Giants finished a more-than-respectable 88-74 that season, but drew fewer than 900,000 fans, the third-worst figure in the National League.) So even on a day when the popular Marichal pitched, fans showed their apathy in the form of their absence.

Still, for those who had a chance to watch Marichal, he usually entertained with a speckled assortment of breaking pitches and that gymnastically fashioned leg kick. And perhaps that helped him atone for that one incident—one that he probably regretted for years—at least until he finally made amends with Mr. Roseboro.

What a wonderful surprise to turn on the TV at 7:30 on Wednesday evening and find a live baseball game being broadcast from Florida! Not only did the spring training telecast of a Red Sox-Twins lidlifter from Fort Myers signify the start of the exhibition season, but also the coming of age of the new MLB Network. With the Grapefruit and Cactus League seasons kicking off Wednesday, the Network now has a real opportunity to shine. By providing local broadcasts of a variety of spring games, beginning with the Boston feed of that Boston-Minnesota matchup, the network has brought back terrific memories from the early 1980s. That’s when our local cable outfit in Yonkers aired local broadcasts of the Braves (on SuperStation WTBS), the Red Sox (on Boston’s WSBK), the Cubs and White Sox (WGN), and the Pirates. Except for the Chicago clubs, all of those teams have now disappeared from a majority of cable outfits. By airing exhibition games this spring, the MLB Network will not only show us a similarly wide range of teams, but also give us the local flavor of the hometown cable broadcasts. And that’s going to make this one of the more enjoyable spring trainings, even if I’m stranded in 20-degree Cooperstown.

The 24-hour baseball network has picked up a large volume of steam over the last ten days, starting with the unveiling of its “30 Teams in 30 Days” series, consisting of comprehensive hour-long previews of each major league club. The MLB Network also rolled out a fresh set of old-time games a week ago, including Tom Seaver’s 300th win from 1985, Carlton Fisk’s triumphant 1981 return to Fenway Park, and Gaylord Perry’s 300th victory from 1982. Two of those old games involved the Yankees, who found themselves on the short ends of the milestone losses to Seaver and Perry. Even though both games ended in defeat, these are broadcasts that I would like to see the YES Network show from time to time as parts of “Yankee Classics.” There simply is not enough variety currently being offered by Yankee Classics. I mean, how many times can I watch Dave Righetti’s no-hitter, or another game from the 1996 World Series, within the same calendar year? Even as a Yankee fan, I have my limits when it comes to victorious repetition.

Frankly, the sting of those losses to Perry and Seaver wore off years ago. Neither game cost the Yankees a division, a pennant, or a World Series. More importantly, there is historical value in seeing those games. The Seaver game coincided with “Phil Rizzuto Day” on a beautiful afternoon at Yankee Stadium, complete with a pre-game ceremony that saw “The Scooter” knocked to the Stadium curb by an overzealous cow. How great was that? And then the game itself provided us with a chance to watch Rickey Henderson, Don Mattingly, and Dave Winfield—two Hall of Famers and a near Cooperstownian—all on the same stage. As an added bonus, we had the opportunity to see old favorite Oscar Gamble wearing those ghastly red, white, and blue White Sox threads from the mid-1980s. Even the 1982 loss to Perry provided some interesting memories. It was a kick to see the crouching Gamble come to bat as a DH, watch Big John Mayberry wearing Yankee colors, and eyeball Bobby Murcer, who absolutely hated facing Perry’s assortment of puffballs and spitters, as he pinch-hit for Bucky Dent.

Heck, if a tape existed of the final game of the 1960 World Series, the Bill Mazeroski game, I would enjoy seeing that. Even though it ended up as a heartbreaking Yankee loss, it still stands as one of the most theatric games ever played. Besides, it would provide the rare opportunity to see players like Mickey Mantle, Yogi Berra, and Roger Maris in something other than isolated highlights, all the while playing against the nostalgic background of the wondrous Forbes Field.

Now, as for the Pine Tar Game, that’s one I’m still not ready to see…

***
With regard to the current day Yankees, I wonder if the front office might take a flier on veteran infielder Esteban German, who was designated for assignment by the Royals over the weekend (so as to make room for free agent Juan Cruz). The Yankees badly need infield depth, a problem that is highlighted by Angel Berroa’s non-roster presence in Tampa. German, 31, had a dismal offensive season last year, but did well as a part-time player in both 2006 and ’07, when he put up on-base percentages of .422 and .351, respectively. German is primarily a second baseman-third baseman, but has played a pinch of shortstop, too, along with a good measure of left field. If nothing else, German would be an upgrade over the zero-tooled Berroa and could serve as an insurance policy at Triple-A Scranton…

***
Finally, here’s a postscript to my earlier feature on former Yankee Billy Sample. In nine major league seasons, Sample played, rather remarkably, for eight different managers. The cross-section of skippers included Billy Hunter, Pat Corrales, Don Zimmer, Darrell Johnson, the eccentric Doug Rader, Yogi Berra, Billy Martin, and Chuck Tanner. The transition from the laidback Berra to the fiery Martin to the ever-optimistic Tanner must have been sufficiently traumatic. The identity of Sample’s favorite manager might surprise you. That would be Zimmer, the onetime Yankee guru who guided Sample’s Rangers in 1981 and part of ‘82 before being given the boot in mid-season. Sample liked Zimmer’s honesty and directness, specifically his willingness to talk “straight” to his players when questioned about roles and strategy. Unfortunately, that’s a managerial tendency that is becoming more and more outdated.

The original:

The remake:

Groan

New York City schools were closed due to snow yesterday for the first time since 2004. This morning, I heard a little girl on the subway tell her father, “They should close school today. It’s too cold for school.”

When I got off the train in midtown, I caught a headline of one of the local papers out of the corner of my eye: “Recession Deepens, No End in Sight.” The anxiety is almost palpable these days. Even if you have a job, there is no sense of security, no telling how long it will last, if you’ll be the next to go.

I’m happy that baseball has begun because it provides a welcome distraction to these daily concerns.  I’m not one to get especially involved in spring training but it’s comforting to know that somewhere it isn’t cold, and that they are already playing the summer game.  Because it can be as cold as it wants, winter can drag out into the middle of April, but there is no stopping what is coming: the Spring, my favorite of all seasons.

The warm weather, the blossoms, and the skirts will be here soon enough. Which won’t erase our worries, of course. But it will provide more lovely distractions.

Over at The New Yorker, Roger Angell weighs in on the Joe Torre book.  Angell is impressed with the book and he misses Torre:

Floods of media will turn out at Yankee Stadium on April 16th for Opening Day (against the Indians), the official début of the new $1.3 billion park, built largely at taxpayer expense, and also the unveiling of the Yankees’ two brand-new starting pitchers, C. C. Sabathia and A. J. Burnett, signed for a combined two hundred and forty-three million dollars, and a new first baseman, Mark Teixeira, who comes with a hundred-and-eighty-million-dollar price tag. They will be closely watched, but probably not as much as Alex Rodriguez, whose recent admission that he used steroids while with the Rangers in the 2001 to 2003 seasons has dominated the Yankee news in spring training, as it will through much of the summer. Fans and sports columnists and op-edists and bloggers will ceaselessly debate his future as a potential Hall of Famer, when and if he surpasses the lifetime seven hundred and sixty-two homers struck by the tainted Barry Bonds, who is about to go on federal trial in California for perjury. Also on trial, so to speak, will be the new Stadium’s attendance figures in this era of economic anxiety, and renewals on those new corporate luxury boxes (grand luxe, perhaps, at a half million dollars and up per season). When the races begin, the Yanks will have to win in the unforgiving new baseball arena created by the luxury-tax impost on top team payrolls, which has produced fourteen different names in the World Series in the past nine years, and eight different winners, and will make it hard on dynasties, however famous, in the years ahead.

Joe Torre won’t be there, and, come to think of it, he’s better off where he is, away in the wrong time zone. He’s a cinch for the Hall of Fame—as a manager, not a player—whenever he’s ready to retire, and he’s already in the Grownups Hall of Fame, which has a few more members than the one in Cooperstown but tougher admission standards.

A few weeks ago I went to see an old friend who was apartment-sitting on the upper west side.  Before I left, I cheked out what was on the bookshelves.  It was as if they hadn’t bought a book in years, but many standard titles from the Eighties were there: “House,” by Tracy Kidder, “Edie,” by George Plimpton, and of course, “Growing Up,” by Russell Baker.

One book that wasn’t there, but very well could have been, was “The Collected Stories of John Cheever,” a book that I noticed at my grandparents’ apartment as a kid because of the reddish orange cover. 

There was a long piece in the Sunday magazine yesterday by Charles McGrath on Cheever, who lived one town over from where my mother lives in Westchester.  Interesting to see how a reputation changes over time.   

The Times has a wonderful page of articles devoted to Cheever.  Check it out, if you like that sort of thing.

I love the idea of this site and it’s got one of the best names ever. It’s one to keep an eye on. I don’t know if there are any true classics on there yet, but it’s still pretty cool. I like this one.