I’m in the process of putting the final proof-reading touches on The Best Sports Writing of Pat Jordan. (The book will be released next spring.) I am the editor of the project, which, in many ways, has been like making a literary mix tape. Jordan has long been one of my favorite writers, so it has been an utter joy to read through well over one hundred of his magazine pieces from the past 40 some oddd years and select 25 cherce cuts for this collection.

I’ll have more to say about Pat and the book as the release date approaches. In the meantime, you can check out a bunch of Pat’s New York Times work, which has recently been made available via the Times on-line archive (the only piece that is there that is also in the forthcoming book is the Roger Clemens story).

Here is an excerpt from a piece Pat wrote about clubhouse harmony in spring training, 1989, when both the Mets and Yankees were dealing with “chemistry” issues. I thought you guys would get a kick out of it:

Reporters, however, take the…disturbances seriously. They wonder, in print and on television, if dissension is ripping apart what they perceive as the delicately stitched fabric of clubhouse harmony each team must weave if it is to be successful? They see it all so clearly from their perspective, as men and women who have never been part of such clubhouses. They have always imparted to clubhouse harmony a certain romance of brotherhood they would only laugh at if someone tried to impart it, say, to the boardroom of I.B.M. They see relationships among players in a baseball clubhouse as merely an extension of the child-play relationships they remember from their youth.

In a way, this is condescending to the players, implying as it does a childishness on their part, which, as grown men, they don’t have. What reporters see, then, exists only in their mind’s eye. Which is why the players laugh. They know that clubhouse harmony or the lack of it hasn’t much to do with a team’s success on the field. Players know that good-natured camaraderie in the clubhouse, shared intimacies over a locker, plans to get together with families for a cookout on a day off, all have nothing to do with a team’s success.

…Like most men in business, baseball players compartmentalize their jobs. What goes on across the white lines is infinitely more important than what goes on behind them. A close friend who consistently strikes out with the bases loaded isn’t as much use to a ballplayer as a despised teammate who consistently strokes game-winning hits. The respect a player feels for a teammate’s personal life has nothing to do with the respect he feels for a teammate’s baseball talent. Babe Ruth, Pete Rose and Wade Boggs are three of the greatest hitters ever in the game, and yet not many teammates might envy their personal lives. Yet to a man, every player in the game would want one of those three at the plate if a World Series championship was on the line.

Check it out. There is even a “Rickey being Rickey” line about Henderson, the original Manny.

Who was the first celebrity that you ever had a crush on? I think the first woman whose sexuality overwhelmed me was Deborah Harry. It was intimidating–the red lip gloss, the bedroom eyes. She just seemed so adult, so nocturnal, so foreign. I knew there was something inherently exciting about her, but it was scary too (and if Deborah Harry made me uneasy, then Grace Jones simply terrified me). I’d probably say Bo Derek was the first sex symbol that I was down with. Lynda Carter was there too, along with Valerie Bertinelli, Daisy Duke, Pam Dawber, Julie Newmar and Agent 99 (re-runs). I was hot for Bailey on WKRP too. Later, the first woman I really fell in love with on screen was Jessica Lange in Tootsie.

What about you? And this doesn’t just have to be a straight guy thing.

In New York, the football Giants and the Knicks have not yet been able to wrestle the back page from the baseball boys yet. Nothing really new to report, but after a quick look around, here’s what I got for the daily schmooze:

Tyler Kepner on the Yanks; David Pinto on Miguel Cabrera; Steven Goldman on the Hot Stove; a Miguel Tejada-to-the-Yankees rumor out of Baltimore; Steve Treder digs up some gems from the past over at The Hardball Times;

Oh, and this from Buster Olney a few days ago:

Andy Pettitte had to give the Yankees an answer by Wednesday about whether he was going to opt out, and he did. Most players feel the tug of home, but I always thought he was atypical among players in how he copes with that: He is the only player I can remember openly admitting, after a poor outing at the end of a long road trip, that he was distracted by the absence of his kids. So it would not be surprising at all that Pettitte would retire, at age 35. The accumulation of more wealth and the pull of a possible Hall of Fame candidacy — he does, after all, have 201 victories and could pitch another five or six years, if he really wanted to — mean little or nothing to him. Some within the Yankees’ organization believe Pettitte is going to retire. I’d bet he is going to retire.

But remember, the early part of the offseason is an easy time to embrace the idea of retiring. As the fall turns to winter and players naturally begin to think about picking up a ball and about spring training, his body will feel better. You could set the official odds at 50-50 that he will be back, and the Yankees have told him they are ready when he is to talk about another year.

Drop a Gem on ‘Em

Lastly, in matters unrelated to baseball, here are a few more links:

Roald Dahl’s wicked short story, Lamb to the Slaughter; W.C. Heinz’s classic column, “Death of a Racehorse”; Kenneth Tynan’s colassal New Yorker profile of Johnny Carson; Steven Rodrick’s piece on Judd Apatow from earlier this year in the NY Times magazine; a site devoted to the ‘blurb reviews of the late, great Pauline Kael; hilariously bad impressions from Mel and Albert Brooks.

Before seeing a screening of No Country for Old Men, the new movie by Joel and Ethan Coen, I decided to read the book by Cormac McCarthy. One, because I haven’t read any fiction in years and I figured this would give me an excuse to read a novel, and two, because I get so nervous in thriller movies that I wanted to find out how things turn out in the end before seeing the movie. (There is a twist in the narrative and the Coen’s are faithful to the book.)

But once you know the twist, half of the fun is gone. (Do movies like The Sting or The Sixth Sense ever get better with repeated viewings? Not for me.) I didn’t care for the book, which is written in a minimalist style that I found pretentious, but it felt as if the Coen’s could have written it themselves. It’s right up their alley and the book reads like a screenplay.

The movie is skillfully made. There is some vivid imagery (Roger Deakin’s photography is often stunning) and wonderfully tense moments. The Coen’s use sound very well–the sound of a rotary dial phone, the squeak of a suitcase; in fact, several sequences don’t have any music at all. There are familiar Coen touches–tracking shots of the open road from a car’s point-of-view, ceiling shots looking down on a sleeping character, grotesquely funny-looking yokels, voice-over narration, goofy haircuts, dry dialogue and inside jokes (Mike Zoss Pharmacy–Mike Zoss is the name of their production company).

The movie is terse, and brutal but I thought it was empty. It’s like a B-Movie made with A-Movie talent. There isn’t much pulpy fun in it, despite the trademark Coen humor. It takes itself seriously in that it portends to say something heavy about human nature (Maybe it’s just another bleak film noir–the Coen’s never take themselves too seriously, but the movie felt too serious). As a friend who recently saw the movie said, “it slams you up against the wall and there is no room for your imagination to roam.”

When it was over I just thought, “Why? What’s the point?” I’m sure the Coen’s have their reasons–again, the material is so well-suited to their tastes that perhaps they just couldn’t turn it down.

I won’t be surprised if the movie turns out to be one of the Coen’s biggest commerical hits. But it reminds me of Silence of the Lambs, another technically well-made entertainment that felt soulless. (I don’t think Demme has ever recaptured the funky spirit that infused his early movies like Melvin and Howard, Something Wild and Married to the Mob.) This movie isn’t a departure for the Coen’s, but it feels like an excercise in style. It looks great and delivers thrills, but, again, when it was over, I just shrugged my shoulders and was like, “And…So…?”

The Yankees will offer Alex Rodriguez arbitration. Joel Sherman has more on the story.

Meanwhile, the Yankees met with the Marlins last night to talk about Miguel Cabrera. Joe Girardi, who is at the GM meetings, told the Times:

“He’s a great player, a smart player,” said Girardi, who managed Cabrera in 2006. “He really understands the game of baseball. I was impressed in how mature he was as a hitter at a young age, his approach on a daily basis. I did not have any problems with him. He worked hard for me.”

Cabrera is an amazing hitter and an indifferent fielder who has developed a reputation for being a fat slob who likes to party. That is the major concern. Will he have a great career or become a major disappointment? The Yankees say that they are not interested in moving Joba, Phil Hughes or Ian Kennedy, but why wouldn’t you trade Kennedy (or even Hughes) along with Melky in a package deal for a talent like Cabrera? Unless you think Cabrera is a complete nutcase, isn’t that a trade you have to make?

As I’m sure you’ve all heard by now, Andy Pettitte has declined his 2008 option. Pettitte says that he needs more time to figure out what he wants to do.

“Obviously we want Andy to stay with the Yanks and pitch for us in ’08,” general manager Brian Cashman said last night. “In fact, I’d say I need him to. He’s an important piece for us…I appreciated the fact that he called me directly. He’s not ready to make a decision about playing or retiring yet, and he’s earned the right to take some more time as far as we’re concerned.”
(Feinsand, Daily News)

In 2003, I was all for the Yankees moving on without Pettitte. Now, it’s crucial that the Yankees keep him. Go figure, man.

Following the lead of my fellow Toaster, Jon Weisman, who asked Alex and myself for our thoughts on Joe Torre’s managing, I asked Jacob Luft, my editor at SI.com and a longtime Bronx Banter supporter who just so happens to be a Marlins fan, for his take on Joe Girardi’s tendencies as a manager. Here are the highlights of our resulting conversation:

Jacob Luft: He likes to bunt . . . a lot. He used to sac bunt with Hanley [Ramirez] at first and Dan Uggla up to bat in the first inning. I used to throw a shoe across the room. Hanley at first, who can fly, gets bunted over by a guy with 30 home run power . . . in the first inning!
Bronx Banter: Does he even bunt with middle-of-the order guys?
JL: Yes, with everybody. But the guy is good with pitchers; exceptional with pitching.
BB: Really? How so?
JL: Handling a staff, handling a bullpen . . . excellent. He knows which relievers to go to, gets pitchers in the right mindset.
BB: Is he creative with his use of relievers or does he assign roles to guys?
JL: Everybody assigns roles these days, but i never had a problem with when he brought guys in. He’s also a hard ass, disciplinarian, real drill-sergeant type.
BB: I wonder how much that’ll change given a team of more established players.
JL: It’s a weird fit, but possibly a very good one. The [Yankees] do have young pitchers that will benefit a great deal, but he’s a take-no-shit kind of guy, which really worked with the ’06 Marlins. Fredi Gonzalez came in [in 2007] and it was like a zoo. The other thing with Girardi is he’s got a temper. The guy told his owner to fuck off. I ripped him when he left, but after seeing Fredi let the kids go nuts in the clubhouse this year, I miss the guy. Though without all the bunts our offense went ballistic this year. Girardi is also very smart, he’s a Northwestern grad, so it’s possible he’ll learn to change his in-game offensive strategy.
BB: His entire staff is college guys save Tony Peña, which shows a preference for smart coaches. Any opinion of Bobby Meacham as a third-base coach?
JL: Uh, not really.
BB: That’s a good thing, you generally only have an opinion of the third-base coach if he keeps sending runners into outs.
JL: True.

In other news, the general manager meetings kick off in Orlando, today, so that rumor mill should be a-buzzin’. For the Yankees, they’ll be focusing on inking Posada and Rivera and finding a third baseman. Don’t be surprised if Brian Cashman turns up a reliever or two in the process. Meanwhile, the Yankees will know by the end of the day on Wednesday if Andy Pettitte is coming back.

As expected, the Yankees have picked up Bobby Abreu’s $16 million option for the 2008 season. It was really a rather obvious move to make. Having lost their cleanup hitter, the Yankees could ill-afford to lose their number-three hitter as well and though Abreu had his worst full season last year, which continued a downward trend in his production as he eases into his mid-30s (Abreu will turn 34 during spring training), that was largely the result of a slow start, as Abreu hit just .228/.313/.289 in April and May, but then flipped the switch and hit .309/.396/.520 over the final four months, which was right in line with his career numbers of .300/.408/.500.

Given this year’s weak free-agent class, no team could afford to part with so productive a hitter. The best available alternative would have been Andruw Jones, but Jones is a career .263/.342/.497 hitter coming off his own worst full season (a dismal .222/.311/.413), has a bad reputation as far as conditioning and team chemistry go, and is only three years younger than Abreu to begin with. Sure, Jones is a Gold Glove center fielder rather than a wall-shy right fielder, but Jones’ defense has slipped in the last few seasons. Most importantly, there was no guarantee that the Yankees would have been able to sign him, and, as he is the best hitter on the market (save for hot potato Barry Bonds and the banished Alex Rodriguez), they would likely have overpayed if they did. Instead they have Abreu, whose better than Jones at the plate and an established and popular member of the team both in the clubhouse and in the stands, for one year at $16 million. Not bad at all.

I’ll be back in a bit with a look at how Abreu’s return could impact the rest of the 2008 Yankee lineup.

The Yankees introduced Joe Girardi as the new Yankee manager at a press conference at the Stadium yesterday afternoon and, later that evening, the Dodgers announced that they had signed Joe Torre to a three-year deal worth $13 million. Between the Yankees’ press conference, which provided opportunities the YES crew to interview Brian Cashman and Yankees COO Lonn Trost among others, and Mike and the Mad-Dog’s 20th anniversary show, which featured interviews with Girardi, Torre, and Derek Jeter (as well as Bernie Williams, Darryl Strawberry, and many more of the biggest New Yorks sports stars from the past 20 years), we have plenty of information to put the Yankees’ managerial saga to bed and shift our focus to the team’s pending player transactions, which will begin today with the decision on Bobby Abreu’s $16-million club option and continue with next week’s general manager meetings in Orlando, Florida.

The most important information to come out of the day was the identity of Girardi’s coaches. Pete Abraham, who’s been doing incredible work on this story, be it by simply posting the audio of the team’s various conference calls and press conferences over the past week, or by getting the tremendous Torre-to-L.A. story scoop, got the scoop on the coaching staff as well back on Tuesday. I updated the sidebar here accordingly, but have been reserving comment until the staff was officially announced. That didn’t happen today because some of those coaches still have to sign their contracts, but Brian Cashman did confirm that the staff Abraham posted is indeed the one he’s trying to assemble. Here’s the breakdown.

Bench Coach: Rob Thomson

Not to be confused with former Giants second baseman Robby Thompson, Rob Thomson was a catcher/third baseman in the Tigers system from 1985-1988. After playing just two games in 1988, he became a minor league coach for the Tigers at the tender age of 24. The Ontario-born Thomson has been in the Yankee organization since 1990. From 1990 to 1997 he was a minor league coach and manager, his one season as a manager coming at the helm of the Oneonta Yankees in the short-season New York-Penn League in 1995. Since 1998 he’s been a roving coach and instructor (officially a “Field Coordinator” or “Special Assignment Instructor”), which is technically a front-office position. Thomson was promoted to Director of Player Development in 2000 and again to Vice President of Minor League Development in 2003. He has been the hidden member of the major league coaching staff since 2004 as the Major League Field Instructor, most visibly filling in as a third base coach for Luis Sojo when Sojo was on bereavement leave in 2004.

Brian Cashman and Joe Girardi wanted Don Mattingly to stay on as the bench coach, but Mattingly, at least according to his public statements, didn’t think it would be fair to Girardi to have another managerial candidate in the dugout with him as it would prompt “Fire Joe, Hire Donnie” articles at the first sign of trouble. Girardi didn’t think that would be an issue. Mattingly, who is leaving the organization on good terms with both Cashman and Girardi, will most likely serve as Joe Torre’s bench coach in L.A. Thomson is an excellent second choice given his 18 years in the organization and 20 years of coaching and front office experience.

(more…)

Joe Torre is officially the new manager of the Dodgers. My father would have been delighted. Not so much because he cared about the Dodgers since they left Brooklyn, or because he thought Torre a true class act, but because Torre told the Yankees to screw off and then set out for Hollywood. At least that’s the way Pop would have seen it.

I’m really happy about the news too. I have no idea how Torre will do with the Dodgers but I do feel this: Is there really any other place he could have ended up? It’s perfect. It’s Brooklyn-to-L.A., it’s the Yankees and the Dodgers, it’s celebrity and personality, Broadway-to-Hollyrock. I love it. The Dodgers have a rich history and beautiful home uniforms. Plus, what do I care about the Dodgers? They play in the National League West. I haven’t paid attention to them–outside of what I read at Dodger Thoughts–for years. Torre instantly makes me interested, win or lose.

This is cool.

Jon’s already got some great analysis–thanks to Cliff, Jay Jaffe and Steve Goldman–over at DT. Check it out.

In some respects, that the Yankees were ousted in the first round served as a benefit to the local media. Yes, I called this the “silly season” due to the prevalence of rumors, but there certainly is no shortage of subject matter, and the scribes have been relentless in their stumping, particularly in the past two weeks.

After the writers had their field day with the Joe Torre situation, Scott Boras and Alex Rodriguez notified the Yankees of his opting out during the middle innings of Game 4 Sunday night, giving anyone with a byline something to kvetch about. (I wonder how Commissioner Selig would have disciplined Boras and A-Rod had the Rockies come back and forced a Game 5, since he notified the Yankees before the 10-day opt-out window even started.)

Was anyone surprised by this development? Many friends and colleagues of mine who are either fans of the Yankees or follow the team closely deemed it addition by subtraction.

THE ANGLES OF THE A-ROD STORY
1) He was above the game

The usual suspects like Mike Lupica and Buster Olney discussed the notion of super-duo of A-Rod and Boras putting themselves above the game with their pre-Series-ending announcement. Olney’s commentary was fact-based, solid, and went outside the scope of New York, bringing into account the similarities of his power play in Texas and the history of disingenuousness demonstrated by A-Rod and Boras. Lupica, on the other hand, his argument had more holes than Sonny Corleone at the toll booth. He asked why we as fans should have expected A-Rod to stay, considering he’d have “no loyalty to a manager who batted him eighth” against the Tigers, and when Daisuke Matsuzaka had more RBIs on one hit in a World Series game than A-Rod had in the last three postseasons. The loyalty bit really got me, especially when all year the talk from A-Rod and Joe Torre centered on how they mended their relationship and how Rodriguez enjoyed playing for Torre. Tim Kurkjian reported Monday night on SportsCenter that if Torre gets the Dodgers job (more on this later), that L.A. would be a likely landing spot because he enjoys playing for Torre. Good luck on that ace, Lip.

2) From the files of Captain Obvious … He was greedy
Monday night’s SportsCenter’s teaser: “Greediest move ever?” Who cares? It was greedy. He’s baseball’s version of Gordon Gekko. There were a number of indicators, as Olney pointed out in his column, leading one to believe that A-Rod would not sign an extension in New York.

3) Where will he end up?
The juxtaposition of A-Rod’s opt-out and Mike Lowell’s free-agent status had a certain faction of New York writers salivating about the potential of the third basemen changing places. The majority determined that Lowell would be best-served staying put.

Quick poll: Should the Yankees overpay for two or three years of Mike Lowell?

Wally Matthews opined that the Mets should put themselves in the running for A-Rod, probably to make amends for failing to acquiesce to his demands in 2001. Never mind that reports from Newsday’s Mets beat man David Lennon – the following day, no less – confirmed that the Mets are not interested in trading Jose Reyes or moving him to second base to make room for A-Rod. It’s not a good sign when beat colleagues are covering for columnists’ bravado. As you’ve probably seen over the years, it happens frequently.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Monday was an interesting day as far as the Yankees’ managerial decision was concerned. Around 1 p.m., Pete Abraham posted on LoHud that the Yankees had made an offer to Joe Girardi. I was skeptical about the truth of the matter, until I saw on a ticker later in the afternoon that Don Mattingly announced that he would not return as a coach next season.

As I’ve written in this space and said to many friends and colleagues, I thought the best-case scenario, that would appease fans and help the Yankees save face from a PR standpoint, was to hire Mattingly as manager and bring Girardi on as bench coach. I thought Girardi would be biding his time for the Cubs job when Lou Piniella’s time is up. I was wrong.

THE ANGLES OF THE GIRARDI STORY
1) Girardi is not Joe Torre
The similarities: they were both catchers. They both held broadcasting jobs before managing the Yankees. They’re both named Joe and have Italian ancestry.

The differences: Torre was a talker, a people person. His pregame powwows with the media could last anywhere from five minutes to a half hour. He was accommodating to anyone as long as the questions asked didn’t put him on the defensive. Girardi, while an excellent broadcaster, is very succinct and direct. It’ll be interesting to see how he manages the egoes of the players, and protects them the way that Torre did.

From what I gathered, the Girardi hire was treated as a ho-hum story. SportsCenter dedicated maybe two minutes to it Monday night, playing excerpts from the conference call. The newspapers were not much different in their presentation. Yes, it was headline news on Tuesday, but there were as many articles dedicated to Mattingly and Torre as there were to Girardi.

Since Tuesday, Girardi has been a nonentity in the local papers. Torre still dominates. Newsday’s Ken Davidoff, who was a busy man Monday, had an interesting take on how Torre has become a martyr in New York.

The most striking component of the announcement, to me, was that it came with no pomp outside of a conference call. Two years ago when Torre and Cashman re-upped their deals, a joint press conference was held and broadcast live on YES.

Are the Yankees growing humble? Did they consult Girardi and ask his preference for conference call over a large press conference? Having covered that craziness, I’d imagine that facing the horde in that capacity would be good practice, because in February, it’ll be worse.

2) It’s make-or-break time for Cashman
The Steinbrenner brothers were proved correct. The Girardi decision was all Brian Cashman’s. Many writers cited Girardi’s work ethic, statistical preparation and attention to detail as qualities Cashman admired. As many veteran NY writers noted, if GMS III was still ruling, Mattingly undoubtedly would have been hired.

The commentary on both topics will grow even more intense as the Yankees’ free agent picture comes into focus. The hot stove has a tendency to alter the writers’ brain chemistry.

Over at Slate, Josh Levin has a critical piece about Sports Illustrated. In part, Levin writes:

Let’s begin with SI’s hiring, two weeks ago, of Dan Patrick. The former ESPN host is no man of letters. Take it from his ex-colleague Keith Olbermann, who once called Patrick’s softball-filled jock-talk column “a bi-weekly toe dip in the shallow end of the journalistic pool.” But Sports Illustrated didn’t hire Dan Patrick the writer. It hired Dan Patrick the sports-themed corporation. His magazine column, Web site, and radio show “represent engaging platforms to both sports fans and the advertisers looking to connect with them,” according to SI’s press release. When longtime columnist Rick Reilly departed for ESPN days later, SI’s biggest personnel move in years became, in effect, a swap of TV personalities. Who needs a journalist when you can get a celebrity multimedia empire?

SI’s focus on brand extension is a reaction to the competitiveness of the media environment. Before ESPN the Magazine launched almost 10 years ago, SI had never faced a sustained challenge from the print world. Rather than having faith in its product—curious, well-written literary journalism and vigorous reportage—Sports Illustrated has taken to imitating its younger rival. The result: a magazine that’s as hip as a 55-year-old with his hat turned backward. In 2004, the mag unveiled “SI Players,” a front-of-the-book section filled with lifestyle pieces that could’ve been lifted from a dumpster behind the ESPN offices. The section bursts with reports on Martin St. Louis’ glute exercises (“jump straight up and drive hips forward”) and Jose Vidro’s favorite off-day activity (“washing my cars”). In pandering to the sort of people who (allegedly) care about Dane Cook’s thoughts on George Steinbrenner, Sports Illustrated is allowing market research to masquerade as editorial judgment. Perhaps it’s effective from a business standpoint—the mag has maintained its huge circulation lead over ESPN the Magazine, and a recent industry survey showed an increase of 14 percent in readers between ages 18 and 24 the last two years—but it’s making the magazine an inferior product.

I’m curious as to what you guys think. How many of you still look to SI as a cornerstone of sports reporting? And if SI doesn’t hold that spot any longer, where do you turn for the best sports writing?

Joe Girardi was introduced as the new Yankee manager yesterday while reports have it that Joe Torre has agreed to a three-year deal with the Dodgers. Presumably, Torre would bring Don Mattingly and Larry Bowa to L.A. with him. Lee Maz might jern them too.

Here’s what’s what around the web:

Joe Girardi: Tyler Kepner, Ed Price, and Mark Kriegel.

Joe Torre: Roger Angell, Murray Chass, Mike Vaccaro, T.J. Simers, Bill Shaikin, Bill Plaschke, and Jay Jaffe.

Don Mattingly: Joel Sherman, Filip Bondy, and Kat O’Brien.

Alex Rodriguez: John Harper, Adam Rubin, Ken Rosenthal, Steven Goldman, Nate Silver, and Hank Waddles.

(more…)

Looking at the Yankee roster as the season drew to a close, I didn’t figure this to be a particularly active offseason. Sure, the Yankees needed to solve the Alex Rodriguez riddle, resign Posada, and Rivera, and hope Andy Pettitte would want to come back, but beyond that, first base and the bullpen were all Brian Cashman had to worry about. That was before the team half-assed a contract for Joe Torre and wound up having to change managers, told heir-apparent and favorite son Don Mattingly that he wouldn’t be getting the job after all, and then had Rodriguez bolt town before even beginning negotiations with the team on a contract extension (and, by the way, that’s a done deal, he’s officially filed for free agency). And the latest? Pete Abe broke the story last night that the Dodgers are planning to can Grady Little and hire Joe Torre, and that Mattingly is expected to tag along as Torre’s bench coach (remember that Donnie’s son Preston was drafted by the Dodgers last June). Tyler Kepner and Murray Chass have more in the Times. Throw in the Red Sox’s second championship in the last four years (which sounds like a bad punchline from Back to the Future II), and my head is spinning.

So now the Yankees have to rebuild their coaching staff (Ron Guidry and Joe Kerrigan are not expected to return, Larry Bowa still has an offer to coach third in Seattle, and who knows who else might want to follow Torre to L.A., by which I also mean Rivera and Rodriguez) and find not only a third baseman, but replace Alex Rodriguez’s production (which is actually impossible, but they could compensate with gains on the other side of the ball, which brings it back to the bullpen and the promise in the starting rotation). That likely means a trade is going to happen, and not a small one. Who’s expendable? Melky Cabrera? Ian Kennedy? Alan Horne? Austin Jackson? Perhaps. Who’s not? Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes for sure.

Oh, and Joe Girardi, the man the Yankees have decided to hire as their new manager? He still doesn’t have a deal. Jon Heyman (the man who broke the news about both Girardi’s hire and Rodriguez’s opting out) says the Yankees and Girardi are close to a three-year, $6 million deal, which is up from the $4.5 million/3-year deal initially rumored. Thing is, Girardi’s got the Yankees by the tail. Torre’s pissed, Mattingly issued a statement that reads like a concession speech, and both are likely headed for sunny L.A. The news is out that Girardi’s been offered the job, so unless the Yankees want to burn a third bridge by reopening their search, they pretty much have to pony up and pay the man.

The length of the deal obviously isn’t the issue here. The Yankees wouldn’t offer Joe Torre a second year because they were obviously tentative about moving forward with him, which isn’t an issue with Girardi, and there’s no need to hide that fact. The money is interesting, however. The initially rumored $4.5 million would have been just less for three years than the base salary offered Torre for a single year. I don’t think that’s a coincidence. That Girardi has them up to $6 million total, thus $2 million per year, already makes him one of the six-best paid managers in baseball (tied for fourth with Willie Randolph and Bruce Bochy behind Lou Piniella, Bobby Cox, and Jim Leyland). It will be interesting to see if Girardi can break that tie and if he can push the total value of his contract closer to the $7.5 million Torre earned in 2007 alone.

Of course, what he gets paid won’t affect Girardi’s ability to manage the team, but the fact that the zoo is overtaking the Bronx once more could. Girardi played for the Yankees during their period of greatest calm and stability. He won World Series in his first year in New York and two more before leaving as a free agent after the 1999 season. As a coach, he was here only for 2005, when Alex Rodriguez was an MVP and the Yankees squeaked past the Red Sox to win the AL East. He hasn’t seen the ugliness, but he did have some of his own down in Miami. Girardi claims to have learned from his negative experience with the Florida front office, but I still worry about how he’ll handle even something as simple as another slow start like the ones the team has had in two of the last three seasons. Not because Girardi can’t rally a team–he did a great job with the Marlins, who took time to coalesce like the Bad News Bears–but because of the heat he’ll get from all comers if the team doesn’t come out of the gate looking like the 1998 Yankees all over again. Under ideal conditions, I think Girardi would be the best man for the job, but right now the conditions are far from ideal. Here’s hoping Brian Cashman can help restore order by the time pitchers and catchers report in mid-February. That’s three and a half months and, contrary to what I expected, they’re going to be wild ones.

Alex Rodriguez’s sense of timing should never come as a surprise. He’s able to put himself right smack in the spotlight at exactly the wrong moment. It takes some kind of chutzpah to do what he did on Sunday. According to numerous reports, Scott Boras informed the Yankees yesterday afternoon that Rodriguez will opt out of his contract, thus ending his four-year stint in pinstripes.

“Alex made the decision today,” Boras said. “I thought we should notify the club.”

The Daily News reports:

“We really wanted him back, but obviously he didn’t want to be a Yankee,” Hank Steinbrenner said late last night. “I just think that’s a shame. But if that’s the case, then this is goodbye.”

I’m not shocked that Rodriguez is jetting. You could see it coming. And I can’t say that I’m entirely surprised at how it came out. I knew it would come down to something weird like this. Still, a hell of a way to go, ain’t it? Just another reason to wonder what’s next? But my immediate guess is that this means Joe Girardi will be named skipper today.

Also, congrats go out to the Red Sox and, more to the point, any Red Sox fans who frequent Bronx Banter. The Sox are a deserving champion. Did the Rockies even show up? Wow.

According to the Daily News, the Yankees have made up their minds and will likely announce the new manager either later today or tomorrow. Joe Girardi, reports the News, will probably be their man. Jon Heyman thinks Joe G is the right cherce. He also has details of a possible offer the Yanks could make to Alex Rodriguez:

It is believed that the extensions the Yankees are weighing would be for five or even six years for something close to $30 million annually, or possibly just a couple million short of that. So the extension offer, which hasn’t been finalized yet, could be for about $140 million over five years or $170 million over six years. If the Yankees decide to propose a six-year deal, that would keep Rodriguez in pinstripes until he’s 41 since he already has three years and $91 million remaining on his original Rangers contract. With the $91 million that’s already coming to him, the Yankees could be committing about $260 million to A-Rod if they go the six-year route.

In the Post, George King has a different take:

When Alex Rodriguez agrees to meet with the Yankees, he can expect to receive a four- to five-year contract offer that, combined with the three years remaining on Rodriguez’s deal, will increase his average annual salary of $25.2 million.

Meanwhile, the World Serious is just about done, with Boston holding a commanding 3-0 lead. They are just a much better team than the Rockies, period. As much as I dislike the dude, got to give props to Josh Beckett (and others, of course). I thought he’d be the difference for the Sox this year. But man, has he been tough in October: Dig this.

Nothing much happening in Yankeeland this morning. Unless you want to just cry about how well the Sox are playing, I ain’t got much for ya. So instead, check out the trailer for Joel and Ethan Coen’s creepy new movie.

Over the past several years, I’ve had more than a few skeptical out-of-towners ask me why Don Mattingly is such a big deal in New York. On a superficial level, it’s like asking a Cubs fan why Ernie Banks, or Ryne Sandburg are popular in Chicago: they were all great players on losing teams. Okay, so Mattingly didn’t have a great career, but from 1984-1989 he was a great player. It doesn’t matter that he isn’t a Hall of Famer. Hey, most fans just love guys who hit for a high average and drive in runs without striking out much.

As Joe Posnanski wrote in an e-mail:

He wore the pinstripes, and played Gehrig’s position, and he was all throwback — he wore that black under his eye, and he had that great swing, he came to the park to beat you ever day. I think he’s one of those guys who, had he played in Boston, Cleveland, Texas, Philadelphia, Seattle, anywhere, would have still been everybody’s favorite ballplayer. There really was nothing phony about him. He went up there to hit. He stood off the plate, he walked shockingly little, he drove in bleeping runs. Guy hit .314 with runners in scoring position.

I always got the feeling from friends that Mattingly was the coveted, “One Yankees player you really wish was on your team.” Not because he was good, but because he was a player you liked despite yourself.

The second half of Mattingly’s career was marked by injuries. He also played through some awful years in the Bronx, which helped increase his popularity, but the legend of Donnie Baseball started in his first full year (1984) when he won the batting crown on the last day of the season, and the following year when he walked away with the AL MVP. It is also rooted in the fact that Mattingly was an overachiever–he was a heady player with limited physical gifts, a grinder, just the kind of player fans love, especially white fans.

“By the time his career is over,” said Ron Guidry in the spring of 1986, “he could be one of the best who ever played this game. He may not turn out to be quite what Lou Gehrig was, but he’ll be closer than anybody else.”

“His play, not his words, were the thing,” says BP’s Joe Sheehan. “He was a beacon of dignity in a time when the Yankees were largely undignified.”

(more…)

Tony Pena interviewed with the Yankees yesterday; a decision is expected tomorrow. I expect they’ll hire Mattingly. Hank Stienbrenner spoke to reporters yesterday. Joel Sherman thinks maybe it’s time for Hank to stop talking publicly.

Joe Torre sat down with Bob Costas for the final segment on last night’s REAL Sports With Briant Gumbel on HBO and shed some more light on some of his comments from the end of last week.

One item from the interview that I found particularly interesting, but was somewhat obscured by the fact that it was communicated by Costas in a voice-over segue rather than via a direct quote from Torre, was the fact that Torre disagreed with the organizational mindset that considered anything short of a World Championship a failure. Torre, who made just one playoff appearance in his first 31 major league seasons as a player and manager, still believes (correctly, in my opinion) that simply making the playoffs should be considered, in the words used by Costas, “a significant success.” I can’t image that went over particularly well with the Tampa contingent, however.

Torre also admitted that he had already begun cleaning up his office at the Stadium, “early on [in the season] . . . when I had a bad feeling . . . that I wouldn’t be back.”

The primary revelation, however, was that the single-year term was the real deal-breaker for Torre, as he answered affirmatively when Costas asked him if he would have taken an identical deal–pay cut, incentives, and all–if it had been for two guaranteed years.

Torre’s meeting in Tampa never even got that far, however, as Torre was the first person to speak at the meeting and was met with silence when he was done making his points. Randy Levine broke the silence by pointing out that Torre would actually earn more under the new deal if the Yankees were to reach the 2008 World Series, but, as Torre told Costas, he wasn’t as upset about the cut in his base salary as by the implication that he needed incentives as motivation to succeed in the postseason, pointing out that his last contract already had a million-dollar bonus for a World Series win, anyway.

Going beyond his initial statements that he was “insulted” by the incentives and their implications, Torre told Costas he was hurt by the fact that the front office didn’t attempt to involve him in the decision regarding his return. That’s one reason why he flew to Tampa for a face-to-face meeting despite being told by Brian Cashman that the offer was likely non-negotiable. Torre attempted to involve himself in the decision in that meeting, but was met with silence and a hard-line stance on the contract he was offered, and that contributed to his decision to decline the deal. He felt he had been excluded from the team’s decision-making process.

The juiciest part of the interview came when Costas read Hank Steinbrenner’s remarks to him. One could see the fury in Torre’s face as Costas read Hank’s words (I swear his lip was twitching). Joe took a good swipe at Hank in response, but did it in his usual smooth, laid-back fashion. “For some reason he thought I was disrespectful because I was insulted,” Torre said of Hank, “but the insult came from the incentive-based situation, and unless you understand what sport is all about and how important winning is to you, I don’t think you understand the insult part of this thing.”

As for his refusal to talk about coming back to the Stadium for any ceremonial purposes, Joe continued to refuse to comment. One was able to discern from his dance around the issue, however, that he is upset and would like to tell the Yankees where to stick it, but, true to his reputation, is going to let himself cool off before he makes any public statement about when he might be willing to return. “I’m not saying there’s no anger there,” Torre admitted. “I’m sad. I’m sad.”

(more…)