Top Billin

By Cliff Corcoran

When my gracious host, Alex Belth, first asked me to contribute a guest column to his spring training preview, he assigned me a profile of then Yankee second baseman Alfonso Soriano. I cranked out about 3,000 words and was in the home stretch when, on the day after Valentineís Day, Soriano was shipped to the Texas Rangers in exchange for Alex Rodriguez. Despite having spent the preceding week vigorously gathering evidence with which to defend the then 26-year-old Soriano against his critics, I was no less delighted at the news of the trade. The Yankees had just picked up the best all-around player in the majors and a man who is challenging for the title of the best shortstop in the history of the game. Well, that was my initial reaction.

As the trade sank in, official word came down that Rodriguez would be moving to third base, and I began to picture Miguel Cairo as the Yankees starting second baseman, I began to think about A-Rodís place in history a bit more deeply, as well as his ranking among the best active players in the game. The three primary questions I had were:

1) How exactly does Rodriguez measure up against the greatest shortstops in history, and how would this status change should his move to third be permanent?

2) If his move to third base is permanent, how would A-Rod measure up against the gameís greatest third basemen, should he continue to produce at his established levels with the typical decline of a player of his skill level?

3) Where exactly does Alex Rodriguez rank among the top hitters in the game today, and when speed and defense are taken into account, how much further would he move up the list of the games greatest players?

So letís try to answer these questions.

First letís take a look at how Rodriguez measures up against the gameís greatest shortstops. Itís widely acknowledged that if A-Rod has any competition for the title of the greatest shortstop ever, that competition comes in the form of one John Peter “Honus” Wagner. As Wagner played the entirety of his career in the dead-ball era (he retired in 1917 at age 43) the comparison between the two men is almost impossible to make based on counting stats alone. Even traditional rate stats fail us, as a large part of Rodriguezís value is derived from his slugging, which by definition is difficult to compare to that of a player from the dead-ball era. As a result weíre forced to turn to some slightly more advanced metrics. Namely OPS+ (adjusted on-base percentage plus slugging, which adjusts for park factors and is expressed in comparison to a league average of 100) from Baseball-Reference.com, and four stats from Lee Sininsí Sabermetric Baseball Encyclopedia: RCAA (runs created against average, the difference between the runs created totals for the given player and a league average player based on outs), RCAP (runs created against position, same deal but measured only against players at the same defensive position), OWP (offensive winning percentage, the projected winning percentage of a team composed of a league average defense and pitching staff and an offense comprised of clones of the given player) and RC/G (runs created per game, simply the number of runs scored per game by an offense consisting solely of clones of the given player

Pedro Martinez and Nomar Garciaparra are at Red Sox camp and are in the papers today. Martinez is sporting an (unintentionally) amusing hair style which looks like it requires a steady diet of activator–Cookie Head Jenkins, eat your heart out. Prince Pedro was his usual, uncompromising self, while Garciaparra admits that the Alex Rodriguez trade talk over the winter was troubling.

Meanwhile, at Yankee camp, a jolly George Steinbrenner respects the Red Sox team, but can’t seem to get Theo Epstein’s name right:

“I think they’ve got a great lineup,” he said. “I think Esposito has done a great job for them, like Cashman has done a great job for us. I think they have more stability in their pitching staff. I think we have a few question marks.”

The tweaking continues. As does Alex Rodriguez’s apprenticeship at third base. Fortunately, Rodriguez has good teachers in Graig Nettles, Luis Sojo and Willie Randolph.

Wrapping up, the Yankees have finally signed Travis Lee, and in light of Jon Lieber’s aching groin, may be looking for an extra starting pitcher. In addition, Joe Torre and Mariano Rivera ponder their future in pinstripes.

The Odd Couple

By Richard Lederer and Alex Belth

With Andy Pettitte leaving New York to pitch for the Houston Astros, only four Yankees remain from the 1996 Championship team: Bernie Williams, Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada, all products of the Yankee farm system. Although it may seem as if the Yankees are a candidate for the TV show “Extreme Makeover”, no other team can claim a quartet of players who have been together longer.

Rivera has been an ace closer and one of the greatest postseason pitchers of all-time. Posada is among the premier catchers in the game and arguably the Yankees’ best since Yogi Berra. Williams and Jeter have been the two most valuable everyday players during the Joe Torre Era, yet they are rarely paired like Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig or Thurman Munson and Reggie Jackson, let alone Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio. Perhaps the reason why Williams and Jeter have not been linked to the same degree as Bagwell and Biggio is because they have not developed a catchy nickname like the Killer B’s. Regardless, they will be associated together even less now that Alex Rodriguez has joined the team. It’s going to be all about DJ and Alex; Bernie Williams will be by himself in the corner strumming his guitar. Over time, the connection between Jeter and Williams is likely to lose even more relevance.

But Williams and Jeter—along with Rivera—symbolize the current Yankee run. Williams is a product of the transition period during the early nineties and the championship years of the late nineties. Jeter is symbolic of the Yankee Dynasty under Joe Torre. Both players have been serious-minded professionals in the quiet Yankee tradition of Gehrig, Roy White, Willie Randolph and Don Mattingly as opposed to flashy stars like Hal Chase, Ruth, and Jackson. And yet they are entirely different players. Williams looks like a wandering gazelle in the outfield—grounded, but perhaps lost in a daydream—while Jeter is the stalking cheetah or a preening peacock in the infield. In that sense, Williams is the typical outfield personality and Jeter is the ultimate infielder.

Jeter is a major star, a sex symbol. Williams looks like a bookworm and is a family man. Jeter is Spiderman and Bernie is Peter Parker. Jeter is the cool extrovert and Williams is the thoughtful introvert. Jeter does little things that get noticed while Williams is easy to overlook. Recall the infamous Jeffrey Maier game against the Orioles in the 1996 ALCS which made the rookie Jeter a household name. It was Williams’ home run in extra innings that actually won the game for the Yanks, but who remembers that? Many of us just remember that’s the night that some lucky kid made another lucky kid a star.

Since his rookie year in 1996, Jeter has been a relentless and driven competitor. For Yankee fans, his enthusiasm has been contagious. Jeter smirks. He smiles. He engages the fans while he’s on the on-deck circle. No matter how tense the situation, he looks like he is having a good time out there. Watching Jeter, you feel invited along to enjoy in his fun. (If you hate the Yankees, it makes it easier to despise Jeter.) Jeter is a natural. It’s as if he were built to be a ballplayer–mentally, physically and emotionally. Jeter personifies Tom Boswell’s description of “a gamer.”

Baseball has a name for the player who, in the eyes of his peers, is well attuned to the demands of his discipline; he is called “a gamer.” The gamer does not drool, or pant, before the cry of “Play ball.” Quite the opposite. He is the player, like George Brett or Pete Rose, who is neither too intense, nor too lax, neither lulled into carelessness in a dull August doubleheader nor wired too tight in an October playoff game. The gamer may scream and curse when his mates show the first hints of laziness, but he makes jokes and laughs naturally in the seventh game of the Series.

Jeter has an edge, too. He’s just careful to keep it in check, but it’s definitely there. It was evident in Jeter’s unforgiving treatment of Toronto catcher Ken Huckaby last season, as it will likely crop up again in relation to Alex Rodriguez and who should play shortstop. But it is this edge, Jeter’s icy arrogance that has gotten him this far. And it serves him well on the field. Leo Durocher once asked:

If a man is sliding into second base and the ball goes into center field, what’s the matter with falling on him accidentally so that he can’t get up and go to third? If you get away with it, fine. If you don’t, what have you lost? I don’t call that cheating; I call that heads-up baseball. Win any way you can as long as you can get away with it.

Jeter has not only been a “heads-up” player from the get go, but he has also been a realiable one, participating in 148 or more games every year except 2003 (when he suffered a dislocated left shoulder on Opening Day). Only Garrett Anderson, Chipper Jones, and Rafael Palmeiro have had more seasons of 148 or more games since Jeter’s rookie year in 1996.

Although Jeter’s defense leaves a lot to be desired (placing at or near the bottom of his peers in almost every advanced metric), he has been one of the three best offensive shortstops in baseball over the course of his career. Since 1996, Jeter ranks first among shortstops in on-base percentage (.390), third in slugging (.462), and third in OPS (.853). Derek is fifth on the all-time Yankees list (500 games or more) with a .317 batting average, behind only Ruth (.349), Gehrig (.340), Earle Combs (.325), and Joe DiMaggio (.325).

The Yankee shortstop had a career year in 1999, leading the league in hits (219) and times on base (322), placing second in runs scored (134), and fourth in total bases (346). In the area of rate stats, Jeter finished second in batting average (.349), third in on-base percentage (.438), fifth in OPS (.989), and second in OPS+ (161). He was clearly the team’s best player, playing an important defensive position and ranking at or near the top in every offensive category. Jeter, in fact, became the first shortstop in club history to hit 20 home runs in a season in 1999.

Jeter’s reputation may have peaked the following year, becoming the first player in Yankee history to be named Most Valuable Player of the All-Star game and capping off another magnificent season by capturing MVP honors in the World Series. Derek led the Bronx Bombers to their fourth World Championship in his first five seasons, batting .409 with two home runs in the five-game subway series with the Mets. That year, Jeter became the third Yankee to compile three consecutive 200-hit seasons, joining Gehrig (1927-1929) and Mattingly (1984-1986). He also reached the 1,000 hit mark at a younger age than any Yankee not named Mickey Mantle.

Jeter is generally thought of as a “clutch” hitter, a player who elevates his game during the postseason when the stakes are highest. Does the perception match the reality?

In comparison, here are Bernie Williams’ regular vs. postseason rate stats:

Jeter’s numbers are freakishly close, and while Williams trails Jeter in postseason batting average, he nudges him out in OBP and SLG. What’s truly remarkable about Jeter isn’t that he is such a clutch hitter after all; rather, it’s that he is so consistent. (Rob Neyer made the point that neither Williams nor Jeter are necessarily clutch performers, but that Rivera is most certainly Mr. Clutch.) Derek is a steady ballplayer who plays at a high level during the regular season and the postseason. The simple fact that he performs on Broadway rather than some community playhouse theater is what brings Jeter the notoriety and the favorable critical reviews. He is the biggest star the Yankees have had since Reggie and probably the most beloved since Mantle. But according to baseball historian Glenn Stout, the author of Yankee Cenutry, Jeter is more like DiMaggio:

I think Jeter is the quintessential Yankee for his time, just as DiMaggio was. Like DiMaggio, he was the precise player the Yankees needed for his time, the player who made the Yankees the Yankees—and so was Mantle. Another interesting point with Jeter is that, like DiMaggio, he gives very little of his personality off the field, so that we tend to consider him totally and completely for what he does on the field, which sort of makes it easy to project special qualities onto him. He’s “touched” in a way very few athletes are in a way that transcends any way of measuring it—it’s not that Jeter’s play doesn’t reach statistical thresholds, but that stats just don’t contain him, or the right stat hasn’t been created yet.

Jeter is not an icon at this point, but the DiMaggio analogy is apt. It’s hard to blame sportswriters for being duly impressed. Furthermore, Stout hits on what people love and others hate about Derek Jeter. You can’t judge him entirely with quantitative analysis. His value is more far-reaching than that. The irony is that Bernie Williams is often under-appreciated because he lacks the same qualities that make Jeter famous. But his numbers more than compensate for his demur disposition; perhaps that explains why he’s popular with sabermetricians. In fact, when compared directly with Derek Jeter, here is what Bernie’s career averages (per 162 games) look like:

And if you compare their average seasons since the start of the Yankees championship years in 1996, Williams looks even better:

If this is the case, then why has Williams been overlooked? Is it that he just doesn’t have the personality of a big star? In a recent telephone interview, television analyst Tim McCarver said:

Bernie’s a track star playing baseball. And Bernie will tell you that. [As a hitter] Bernie has very powerful hands, and that allows him to almost read the ball at the last minute, to pick the ball up at the last instant. Very few people can do that. They have to start earlier. But as far as his effect on the team, Bernie is just a wonderful guy, but in no way does he have the leadership characteristics that Jeter does. He’s just not that kind of player.

Williams is somewhat like Roy White, a player who, according to Glenn Stout, “by himself couldn’t really turn the team around, but who got better and whose talent was more appreciated when surrounded by better players. Like Bernie, when White was young there was a lot of bitching about what he wasn’t rather than what he was.” Bill James has another take on why Williams is underrated in

What has Alex Rodriguez done for his teammates thus far? Well, according to Joel Sherman, if he’s made Derek Jeter’s life more difficult, but he has certainly eased the pressure that is on Gary Sheffield and especially, the man of the hour, Jason Giambi:

No other club has two players this large ensnared in the BALCO case, though Giambi’s size is in question. If you think he came up small by asking out of the World Series Game 5 lineup last year, you should see him now.

Giambi claimed he has lost only four pounds, from 232 to 228, but the clubhouse consensus was at least 15. A four-pound loss on Giambi would be near imperceptible, but he looked as if someone stuck a pin in him and let out the air, so noticeably streamlined was he in all areas, including his face.

I’ve spoken with several baseball writers recently, and all of them agree that the BALCO affair is going to get ugly this season. If and when players are named—and I have no idea who those players would be—this will be the biggest scandal in a generation (or as one person put it, it will be the Pete Rose fiasco plus the 1984 drug trials put together). I’ve already got a knot in my stomach just thinking about it. Talk about a way to ruin a season. Oy.

In other Yankee news, Jon Lieber had to cut short a session due to a sore groin.

Walk On: In Defense of Giambi

By Steven Goldman

Take one look at Jason Giambi. Shirtless, if you can achieve it. The fellow’s got so many tats that he looks like a biker version of the Sistine Chapel. Michelangelo’s mural as done by Harley-Davidson: that’s a pretty good analogy for Giambi the ballplayer — the sacred and the profane all wrapped up in one big pile o’ muscles, said muscles come by honestly or not.

Considering the man’s achievements, not to mention his bulk, you’d figure he could hold his own without needing defending of any kind by third-party armchair columnist types. This ain’t Jason Giambi: Singin’ with the Dixie Chicks, or Jason Giambi’s Passion (there’s the sacred and the profane again), or even Jason Giambi: Enterprising Young Man of Halliburton. Still, some of the more misguided camp followers seem less than pleased with the Man Who Would Not Be Tino.

Catalog all the things Giambi is not and you make the old Sears doorstop look like an anorexic Reader’s Digest. He is not as swift as Mercury, or even, well, grandma. If baseball was a fair game, he’d be allowed to take the bullpen car from first to third. Not that there are bullpen cars anymore; they were crowded out by all the LOOGYs, for what they’re worth. Buddy Groom or a Volvo: who you gonna trust?

Giambi is not slick with the leather. He strikes out more than your divorced older brother Scott does at the local happy hour gender mix. Last season he didn’t hit lefties any better than John Ashcroft hits righties. In all likelihood, he does not appreciate the avant-jazz stylings of Ornette Coleman and is more of a Candy Dulfer-dude. These things are important to discerning NYC baseball fans, because. well, just because. These are the profane parts of “sacred and,” the flaws in Giambi’s game.

Alarm clock: time to go cold turkey on these lesser matters because they don’t count for much. The difference between a good glove and an average glove (Giambi isn’t Dick Stuart — he’s serviceable) is minute. Speed has been deemphasized in our home run-happy era— no need to run rabbit run when you can trot around the bases because even the bat boy has 25-homer power. Speed isn’t exactly irrelevant, but it’s a whole lot less important to the scoring of runs than the average cat might think.

What is important, when you strip away all the different ways one can model offense on his tablet PC while still wearing pajamas, is getting on base. That’s all there is. When Michael Stipe sang, “You are the everything,” he was referring to getting on base. Huckleberry Finn is the great American novel about getting on base. Picasso’s Guernica is about getting on base (take that, Picasso’s Guernica!).

Every baseball game has its 27-out battle with mortality: score one more than the other guy in those 27 and you win, one less, you lose (and sometimes it rains). Players who do the most to push off the inevitable end are the ones to build your offense around. Jason “The Only” Giambi accomplishes this as well as anyone in baseball today because he has the humility to take a walk. Other ballplayers are too good to let a pitcher throw four wide ones. Not Giambi, who learned his devoirs from Mark McGwire and knows that to each batter he faces a pitcher will make some pitches with murderous efficiency, some with suicidal ineptitude. During his two seasons in the Bronx, Giambi has taken 238 walks; the average American Leaguer has taken 99. His Yanks OBP is .423, .090 above the average AL player. In both 2002 and 2003 he ranked third among AL leaders in on-base percentage. Among active players he ranks sixth (behind Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, Todd Helton, Edgar Martinez, and Brian Giles, ahead of Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, and Jeff Bagwell). In 2003 he led the AL in walks drawn. In 2002 he was second to Thome. Though Giambi lacks what Casey Stengel called

For Starters: Mike Mussina

By Ben Jacobs

In the grand scheme of things, Mike Mussina is a lucky man. He has an ability that an employer is willing to pay millions of dollars for the services of, and he enjoys using that ability in the manner in which his employer asks.

So, it’s hard to feel too bad for Mussina. However, in the baseball world, his luck hasn’t really been good and the public’s perception of him hasn’t really been fair.

Mussina is generally a reserved guy who avoids talking to the media whenever possible, which means the only way he draws attention to himself is with his performance on the field. That performance has consistently been very good throughout his career, but it hasn’t really captured the attention of most fans.

The reason is simple: while he’s always been good and often been great, he’s never been the best. He’s finished in the top six in Cy Young award voting eight times, but he’s never actually won the award. He’s finished in the top 10 in ERA nine times, but he’s never led the league. He’s finished in the top 10 in wins eight times, but he’s never won 20 games.

That last item is probably the most damning. There is a special aura attached to winning 20 games in a season. Once you do so, you’re forever a “former 20-game winner.” Mussina has never done so, but it’s not really his fault. You see, Mussina isn’t just some pitcher who’s never won 20 games in a season. He’s the best pitcher who’s never won 20 games in a season.

In 13 seasons, Mussina has a career record of 199-110 with a 3.53 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 2126 strikeouts (7.17 K/9IP), 597 walks (2.01 BB/9IP) and 278 homers allowed (0.94 HR/9IP) in 2668.2 innings. For his career, the average batter facing him has hit .247 with a .288 OBP and a .391 SLG (.679 OPS).

So, Mussina has obviously been a very good pitcher. In fact, his career ERA+ of 129 is tied for 38th among all pitchers who have pitched enough (1,000 innings and 100 decisions) to be listed on the leaderboards at Baseball-Reference.com. That he’s never been able to win 20 games in a season isn’t his fault.

Mussina has won 19 games twice, 18 games three other times and 17 games two more times. In fact, with better timing, he wouldn’t even have needed better luck to join the 20-win club.

In the strike-shortened 1994 season, Mussina went 16-5 in 24 starts. Had the season not ended 50 games early, Mussina could have made 10-12 extra starts and would have had a good chance of getting those four extra wins. In the strike-shortened 1995 season, Mussina went 19-9 in 32 starts. Had the season not started 18 games late, Mussina would have made three or four more starts and likely would have won at least 20 games.

Had the strike never happened, or at least happened at some other time, it’s almost certain that Mussina would have won 20 games in at least one of those two seasons.

Now to answer the question of whether or not he really is the best pitcher who has never won 20 games, as I said he is. The answer to that particular question might not be yes. There is one pitcher who could currently be considered a better pitcher and who never won 20 games.

According to Baseball-Reference, there are nine pitchers with a better career ERA+ than Mussina who have never won 20 games in a season. None of those pitchers, however, were primarily starters. Five of them (Dan Quisenberry, John Franco, Bruce Sutter, Lee Smith and Kent Tekulve) never made a single start and two others (Doug Jones and Jesse Orosco) made just four career starts. Of those seven pitchers, only Tekulve (1436.1 innings) pitched more than 1300 innings in his career. One of the other two pitchers was John Hiller, who made 43 career starts but pitched just 1242 innings.

Since none of them came close to pitching as many innings as Mussina has, I’d have a lot of trouble calling any of them a better pitcher than Mussina. That leaves just Hoyt Wilhelm.

Wilhelm made 52 starts in his career and pitched 2254.1 innings. He finished with a 146 career ERA+.

In 21 seasons, he went 143-122 with 227 saves and a 2.52 ERA, 1.12 WHIP, 1610 strikeouts (6.43 K/9IP), 778 walks (3.11 BB/9IP) and 150 homers allowed (0.60 HR/9IP). He won 15 games twice (once strictly as a reliever and once when he made 27 starts in 1959) and 11 or 12 games three other times.

He pitched about 400 fewer innings than Mussina has, but his ERA+ is much better and he probably pitched more “crucial” innings than Mussina has.

Quite frankly, however, I don’t care whether or not Hoyt Wilhelm was a better pitcher than Mike Mussina is because, while it would answer the question, it wouldn’t answer the interesting question.

It’s not interesting to learn that Wilhelm never won 20 games in a season because you wouldn’t have expected him to ever win 20 games in a season. So, let’s modify the question so that it’s interesting.

Is Mike Mussina the best pitcher who has primarily been a starter in his career to not win 20 games in a season?

The answer to that question is definitely yes.

Of all the pitchers with a career ERA+ of at least 125 who have made at least 100 starts in their career, only two have never won 20 games in a season. One is Mussina and the other is Max Lanier. Lanier pitched from 1938-1953, mostly with the Cardinals, and went 108-82 with a 3.01 ERA (125 ERA+), 821 strikeouts, 611 walks and 65 home runs allowed in 1619.1 innings.

You’ll notice that I didn’t provide as many statistics for Lanier as for Mussina and Wilhelm. That’s because you don’t need as many statistics to see that Lanier wasn’t nearly as good a pitcher as Mussina has been. Especially if you consider that Lanier’s best seasons (including his career-high 17 wins in 1944) came while many of the best baseball players were serving in World War II.

If you look at all the pitchers who have an ERA+ better than 120, the list of players with at least 100 starts who never won 20 games in a season has four additions — Kevin Appier, Jimmy Key, Dave Stieb and Johnny Rigney. Rigney only played for eight years, making 132 starts and pitching 1186.1 innings, so he can be eliminated from the discussion immediately.

Appier, who won 18 games with the Royals in 1993, just had a horrible season, but he’s had a pretty nice career. He has a 121 career ERA+ and he’s 169-136 with a 3.72 ERA, 1.29 WHIP, 1992 strikeouts (6.92 K/9IP), 930 walks (3.23 BB/9IP) and 232 homers allowed (0.81 HR/9IP) in 2591.1 innings.

As you can probably tell, he’s not as good a pitcher as Mussina. He’s pitched fewer innings with a higher ERA, higher WHIP, lower K/9IP and higher BB/9IP. The only thing he’s done better than Mussina is keep batters from hitting home runs.

Key, like Mussina, may have been robbed of a shot at a 20-win season by the last strike. Key had 17 wins for the Yankees when the season was canceled in 1994 and he probably would have gotten 10 or so more starts that season. As it is, his career high in wins was 18 in 1993.

Key went 186-117 with a 3.51 ERA (122 ERA+), 1.23 WHIP, 1538 strikeouts (5.34 K/9IP), 668 walks (2.32 BB/9IP) and 254 homers allowed (0.88 HR/9IP) in 2591.2 innings. Like Appier, Key is clearly not as good as Mussina. He pitched fewer innings and, although his ERA was about the same as Mussina’s is, Key retired before the offenses really started going crazy (hence his worse ERA+). Hey also didn’t strike out nearly as many batters as Mussina and walked more.

Stieb won 18 games twice and 17 games three times. For his career, he was 176-137 with a 3.44 ERA (122 ERA+), 1.25 WHIP, 1669 strikeouts (5.19 K/9IP), 1034 walks (3.21 BB/9IP) and 225 homers allowed (0.70 HR/9IP).

This might be a lot closer if Stieb had retired after the 1991 season, but he pitched 169 bad innings (5.11 ERA in his final three seasons) after that. Had he retired, he still would have pitched more innings (2726.1) than Mussina has so far, his career ERA would be 3.33 and his ERA+ would be at least somewhat closer to Mussina’s.

Instead, Stieb has a better ERA, but worse ERA+ (thanks to the recent offensive increase) and had many fewer strikeouts and many more walks. He did allow home runs much less frequently, but that can probably be partly attributed to the seasons in which he pitched as well.

So, it seems pretty clear that Mussina is, in fact, the best starting pitcher (however you want to define that) who has never won 20 games in a season.

Fortunately for him, he has at least a few more years to try and pass that mantle on to somebody else. In fact, he could very well win 20 games this season.

Mussina is still a very good pitcher from whom you can expect at least 200 innings and an ERA in the low 3.00’s, and he has a very good offense behind him. It’s not like he “doesn’t know how to win” or something either. He has 52 wins since joining the Yankees, with at least 17 wins in each season.

The only pitchers with more wins the last three years than Mussina are Mark Mulder, Jamie Moyer, Barry Zito and Curt Schilling. Mussina obviously doesn’t have any of the18 20-win seasons that have happened in the last three years, but no pitcher besides Mussina has won at least 17 games in each of the last three seasons.

The fact of the matter is that wins are an overrated way to measure a starting pitcher. Fans shouldn’t harp on the fact that Mussina’s never won 20 games and they certainly shouldn’t say that he pitches just well enough to lose in big games. Instead, they should enjoy watching a future Hall-of-Famer, because that’s exactly what Mussina is.

In fact, Mussina is a lot like a former teammate of his who is also underrated, and for the same exact reason. Mussina and Rafael Palmeiro are both future Hall-of-Famers, but neither has ever been the very best at his job. They’ve both merely been among the best at their jobs for a very long time.

When trying to figure out whether or not a player deserves to be in the Hall of Fame or not, two of the things you should look at are his black ink and his gray ink. Black ink measures how many times the player has led his league in various stats while gray ink measures how many times the player has finished in the top 10 in those categories.

Mussina’s black ink count is 11, while 40 is average for a Hall-of-Fame pitcher. However, his gray ink is 210, while 185 is average for a Hall-of-Famer. Similarly, Palmeiro’s black ink count is eight, while 27 is average for a Hall-of-Fame hitter. However, his gray ink is 181, while 144 is average for a Hall-of-Famer.

There are two types of Hall-of-Famers once you get past the very best of the best: those who were exceptional but not for as long as you’d like and those who were at the top of their game for a long time but were never truly exceptional. Mussina and Palmeiro are both the second type, but do not doubt that they will belong in the Hall of Fame when they call it quits.

Actually, it might not be a bad thing for Mussina’s legacy if he never wins 20 games. He could go down in history as the first major-league starting pitcher in the Hall of Fame who never won 20 games in a season. Right now, the only Hall-of-Famers without at least one 20-win season are relievers Wilhelm and Rollie Fingers and Negro Leaguer Hilton Smith.

If I were a Yankees fan, and I’m not, I’d rather have Mussina than a legendary Yankee hurler who was noted as a winner. The difference is that Mussina has consistently been very good, while Allie Reynolds had one very good year (1951) and one amazing year (1952).

In that amazing year, Reynolds went 20-8 with a 2.06 ERA in the regular season and 2-1 with a 1.77 ERA in New York’s World Series victory over Brooklyn. It was a truly great season for Reynolds, and he finished second in the MVP voting.

But would you rather have a pitcher who comes in and knocks your socks off for a year or two or a pitcher who you can count on to help carry your team each and every season? I know which one I’d rather have, and Mussina falls in that category.

If you still don’t agree with me, consider the following. After Mussina’s outstanding 1992 season as a 23-year-old, Washington Post columnist Thomas Boswell wondered whether Mussina’s career would end up more like Mike Boddicker’s or Jim Palmer’s. Eleven years later, we have more information about the answer to that question.

Palmer finished his career with a 268-152 record and a 2.86 ERA in 3,948 innings. That gives him a .638 winning percentage and a 125 ERA+. To refresh your memory, Mussina’s 199-110 record gives him a .644 winning percentage and his 3.52 ERA gives him a 129 ERA+. For the record, Boddicker finished 134-116 with an ERA+ of 107 in 2,123.2 innings. To say that Mussina has passed him by would be an understatement.

Aside from pitching six more seasons and almost 1,300 more innings, Palmer also differed from Mussina in that he was a three-time Cy Young award winner and an eight-time 20-game winner. Palmer’s 313 win shares are also almost 100 more than Mussina’s 215.

Still, if Mussina can finish his career with as many seasons pitched as Palmer (19), he could end up with more wins, more win shares and a better ERA+. I’m not saying Mussina’s as good as Palmer was, but Bill James ranked Palmer as the 17th-best pitcher in history in the New Bill James Historical Abstract.

The fact the two pitchers are at all comparable should tell you something.

Play Ball

I wanted to do something fun to preview the 2004 Yankee season, but for a long time, I didn’t know how to go about it. Writing a preview-analysis or coming up with a series of predictions are the obvious routes, but I’m not an analyst and no prognosticator. Besides, there are good writers out there who will do a terrific job with that kind of stuff anyhow. Instead, I’ve enlisted a few of my favorite writers to help me profile different Yankee players. Ben Jacobs, Rich Lederer, Bronx Banter correspondent Christopher DeRosa, Cliff Corcoran, Jay Jaffe and Steven Goldman are all pitching in. Each day this week, there will be an original piece here at Bronx Banter. (Lucky me=lucky us.) Then on Sunday, we’ll tie the room together with a Roundtable Discussion, previewing the coming season with a group of experts. I’m sure I’ll find some time to link-up the latest articles from spring training too. In the meanwhile, I hope you enjoy. Like Robert DeNiro said to Paul Sorvino and Ray Liotta in “Good Fellas,” “It’s gunna be a good summer.”

Steve Bonner has a wonderful post over at The Midnight Hour about what it is that he really loves about baseball (hint: it’s a line drive). Bonner then hits on a topic that is close to my heart:

There is a disconnect in the way different people (and even sometimes the same people) view, understand or appreciate baseball. Most of the baseball blogs that I read and enjoy, spend great time and care evaluating baseball from a super analytical vantage point. The sabermetricians see through the lie of the casual fan’s vision and memory. Derek Jeter may have made a season saving play by ranging from his position at shortstop, to cut off an errant throw in foul territory up the first base line, but be not deceived gentle reader, Derek Jeter is an atrocious shortstop because he range factor is at the bottom of the list.

I must admit I am fascinated by the new analytics. It gives insight and understanding where before we had to rely on the musings of Tim McCarver and Joe Morgan to tell us how good a player was. But sometimes I wonder what the point of it is. Do I derive less satisfaction from watching Jeter go to the hole and do that jumping throw thing of his? No, it’s still a thing of beauty just like the game itself. So to some extent I don’t want to know what his zone rating is and I don’t want to know that Soriano’s OBP is lousy because I just want enjoy the grin on his face when he makes sweet contact, I want to enjoy the beauty of the game.

Next, Bonner tells a great story about how he taught himself how to play the guitar when he was a teenager, and writes about how he is thankful that music isn’t evaluated in the same fashion that baseball is:

But seriously I’m happy that music isn’t deconstructed with the same dispassionate verve that we apply to baseball.

I feel simpatico with Bonner’s feelings about the humility that comes with learning an instrument—or any of the fine arts for that matter—but I have to disagree with him here. Go ahead and read some Jazz criticism. Unless you are talking about Nat Hentoff, you’ll find it to be significantly more dispassionate and academic than anything you see on Baseball Prospectus. I’m sure some of the more worldly Rock and Roll fans out there would be able to point out some pretty dry Rock criticism as well.

Or so said a t-shirt worn by Curt Schilling yesterday. Something tells me that this line will come back to haunt Mr. Schilling before all is said and done in 2004.

I’m off early this morning to help my brother move, but I thought I’d leave you with some links to the morning papers before I bolt. Hope everyone has a great weekend. Bronx Banter will be running a week-long Yankee Preview next week; I’ll be back tomorrow with more details…Meanwhile, here’s the skinny:

Jack Curry has an early report on Curt Schilling at Red Sox camp—so does Dan Shaughnessy—and Tyler Kepner checks in on Jon Lieber at Yankee camp. Speaking of pitching, Ken Davidoff profiles Kevin Brown in Newsday, and John Harper covers all of the Yankee starting pitchers in The Daily News. Mariano Rivera has again expressed his desire to remain a Yankee when his contract expires at the end of the 2004 season. And lastly, our man at The Post, Joel Sherman, speculates that the Yankees may have been able to pull-off the Alex Rodriguez deal without trading Alfonso Soriano, while the Yankee captain, Derek Jeter has some candid comments for Michael Morrissey.

Me, Myself and I

Baseball is a lonely game. But for Yankee pichter Jose Contreras, the loneliness he has experienced since leaving his family behind in Cuba has been nothing short of devastating. The Yankee starters lined-up for the first time in spring training, and there are several stories on the soporific Cuban in the local papers today. Contreras told Tyler Kepner in The Times:

“When you have a bad day and go home to your wife and, in my case, daughters, that helps you a lot and takes your mind off of it a little bit,” said Contreras, 32, who has been married almost 16 years. “But now, if I have a bad day, I go home and I’m by myself. I really have no choice but to think about it. There’s no one to distract me or take attention off of my work.”

The Yankees are interested in bringing another Cuban pitcher, Orlando “El Duque” Hernandez to the Yankees, ostensibly to help ease Contreras’ mind as well as to serve as a spot-starter. But El Duque, who received political support in getting his family to the States, is remaining true to his obstinate form, and turned down the Yankees’ initial offer. Hernandez is being pursued by several teams, including–would you believe?–the Boston Red Sox.

Gary Sheffield has never been shy about talking to the media. (Expect him to grace the backpages of the New York tabloids on a regular basis this year.) A day after his name was once again linked to the Balco affair, Sheffield told reporters:

“The bottom line is that I did purchase vitamins from that company, being out there and working out with Barry Bonds,” Sheffield said. “Besides that, I don’t know what else can come with that. I’ve been an honorable guy. I’ve been outspoken about testing guys. And anybody that wants me to say I’ll take the challenge of taking a test, I’ll be the first guy up there.”

…”I’ve been guilty by association my whole life,” Sheffield said. “My uncle with his drug problem and I’ve been under investigation for that since I was 17 years old. And now I’ve been listening to the news and they’ve been trying to link Barry Bonds to things and everybody knows that I’ve been outspoken about training with the guy, so, obviously, they’re trying to put two and two together and say, `We got something.’ “

So long as he hits as well as he flaps his gums–which is highly likely–I think Yankee fans will tolerate whatever this future Hall of Famer has to say to the media.

Everbody Loves the Sunshine

Andrew Zimbalist has an article in The New York Sun (subscription required) today about the economics of the Rodriguez trade:

The Yankees’ financial clout had next to nothing to do with landing A-Rod. Over the past month, the Yanks have rid themselves of nearly $10 million in salary obligations to two of the organization’s former third basemen — Aaron Boone and Drew Henson — along with the $5.4 million they would have paid Alfonso Soriano in 2004.
Add it all up, and the team has saved roughly the $15 million they will need to pay A-Rod. There’s also a $1 million deferred payment, but the balance is being handled by Texas owner Tom Hicks, who will pick up $67 million of the remaining $179 million on the last seven years of A-Rod’s contract. The point being that any team could have afforded to trade for A-Rod under such financial circumstances.

Not only that, but Rodriguez is going to make the Yankees a good deal of money to boot:

A-Rod’s appeal for Mr. Steinbrenner is clear. It is impossible to know with any precision, but the above numbers suggest that Rodriguez’s arrival may boost the Yankees’ local revenues somewhere around $20 million, and perhaps more. That’s the good news for Mr. Steinbrenner. The bad news is that under MLB’s new revenue sharing system, he will have to give approximately $8 million of that back to MLB.
Overall, the Yanks probably will pay revenue sharing and payroll luxury taxes to MLB of between $70 and $75 million in 2004. Mr. Henry in Boston will likely make payments in excess of $40 million. No wonder he’d prefer a salary cap to the present system.

Tim Marchman also has his latest column in The Sun today. Marchman praises the Dodgers for hiring Paul DePodesta. And while he’s duly impressed with rational thinkers like DePodesta, Marchman points out that you might not necessarily want to hang out with them:

If I were in a bar and I overheard the fresh-faced, clean-cut De-Podesta talking about “implementing” anything, I’d grimace and edge my way to the other side of the room. It’s fashionable right now to decry the leathery old scout, and I’ve done it myself because I think that for a team to win in the modern game, it needs to value someone like DePodesta at least as much as that scout, and probably a great deal more.
But with whom would you rather have a drink? Who’s more engaged in the world, who’s more vivacious, and, to be honest, who is more interesting? The man who plays by his instincts and his experience and sizes up young athletes like a horsebuyer on the Kazakh plain? Or someone in a suit using words like “leverage”? There doesn’t seem to me to be much doubt. It looks like baseball is getting a good deal more efficient, and a great deal more boring.

In order to get the best of both worlds, the answer seems obvious enough. You’ve got to go down to Florida and have a beer with Earl Weaver.

Again with Alan Schwarz? Yup. Schwarz reprints an interview he conducted with Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter in the summer of 1997 over at Baseball America. It’s worth taking a peek at, if you like that sort of thing. And Chris Isidore, senior writer at for Money magazine, writes about why the Rodriguez deal is ultimately good for baseball.

Graig “Puff” Nettles, a wonderful defensive third baseman–who was also an effective offensive player–will be in Tampa to help Alex Rodriguez make a smooth transition to the hot corner. Meanwhile, Bernie Williams is saying all the right things about competing for the job in center field, and Gary Sheffield is mum on the Balco scandal. (The same can’t be said for Sheffield’s uncle, Dwight Gooden.)

Greg Maddux returned to the Cubbies yesterday, and should win his 300th game this season for Chicago if he remains healthy. Alan Schwarz has a terrific piece on Maddux over at ESPN detailing the early scouting reports on the future Hall of Famer.

Aaron Gleeman had a good piece yesterday about Paul DePodesta, the new general manager of the L.A. Dodgers. Actually, Gleeman’s column was a scathing critique of Bill Plaschke–a journalist for The Los Angeles Times–who wrote an uniformed and snide article about DePodesta the other day. The most valuable aspect of Gleeman’s article is a link he provided to an article Branch Rickey wrote for Life magazine in 1954 about baseaball statistics. Thank you, Mr. Gleeman.

John Henry’s critical comments of the Yankees yesterday was like serving George Steinbrenner a meatball right over the fat part of the plate. What? Did you think that the Boss could resist this one? Come on, now. The Yankees’ principal owner issued the following statement:

“We understand that John Henry must be embarrassed, frustrated and disappointed by his failure in this transaction,” Steinbrenner said. “Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston. It is understandable, but wrong that he would try to deflect the accountability for his mistakes on to others and to a system for which he voted in favor. It is time to get on with life and forget the sour grapes.”

As Bill Madden writes this morning:

Crazy as this might seem, Henry and fellow Red Sox honcho, team president Larry Lucchino, have managed to make Steinbrenner look almost like a sympathetic character in all this with their cries of foul and outrage over his snaring of A-Rod. How foolish did they look, lobbying Selig to block the A-Rod deal to the Yankees – especially after the commissioner had threatened to intercede in their behalf to keep their deal for A-Rod alive after Orza’s kiboshing of it?

In his statement yesterday, which concluded, “Baseball doesn’t have an answer for the Yankees,” it was as if an exasperated Henry was laying down the gauntlet and saying: “Okay, George, take your best shot!”

Or as Dan Shaughnessy opines:

Hang your heads, Sox fans. It’s a sad day in the Nation when George Steinbrenner sounds like the reasonable party.

Joel Sherman adds:

The only insanity, however, was Henry thinking he could go bluster for bluster with the king of the art form. By late afternoon, George Steinbrenner had issued a statement so biting and cunning in return that Joe Torre, face in hands, literally was caught between chuckle and grimace as the words were read to him by a reporter.

Bud Selig later spoke with both owners and told them to behave themselves like big boys. Joe Torre, a genuine grown up, was having himself a fine day in Florida. Still high off the Rodriguez trade, Torre has had several good conversations with his boss over the past couple of days and there is even a possibility that he will want to continue managing the Yankees after his contract runs out at the end of the season.

In “Annie Hall” Woody Allen quotes the old Groucho Marx line, “I would never want to belong to any kind of club that would have someone like me as a member.” (I’m paraphrasing.) Any self-respecting, self-loathing individual loves that line. The self-hater in me wishes I could say that about the All-Baseball team, which now has a new-look as well as some new writers (the writers aren’t new to blogging, just new to the fold here at All-Baseball): Jon Weisman (Dodger Thoughts), Bryan Smith (Wait Til Next Year), Peter White (Mariner Musings), and Rich Lederer (Rich’s Weekend Baseball BEAT). But I can’t. I do want to belong to this club, and I’m proud to be associated with such a crop of lively talent.

I know I mostly write about the Yankees, but I do like to cover other stories around the league sometimes as well. But instead of stressing out about not having the time to cover the Paul DePodesta story or the Greg Maddux signing, I suggest you go right to the Dodger and Cubs sources here at All-Baseball and let the experts take you through it.

LIAR, LIAR

Ken Rosenthal has an entertaining column up today in which he blasts…well, just about everybody. But he says his best for Alex Rodriguez. Bob Klapisch weighs in on the Rodriguez circus, and so does John Henry, owner of the Red Sox. Anyone got a tissue for Mr. Henry?

Let the mishegoss commence. With Alex Rodriguez being introduced as a Yankee in the Bronx yesterday, the storylines are predictably plentiful in the New York papers this morning. Joel Sherman is gearing up for an eventful season:

No one covering the Yankees this year will ache for storylines. That is for the poor suckers assigned regularly to the Mets.

…We have come to think Joe Torre could extinguish any fire; however, this team is so big now that we are not talking blazes in The Bronx Zoo, but infernos in the Amazon.

Jack Curry reports that Joe Torre may consider sticking around after his contract expires at the end of this year:

“It certainly is a possibility,” Torre said. “I’m not closing the door to anything. I’m just not ready to commit to that. That’s the only thing.”

Interestingly, Torre’s value as a soothing manager who succeeds under stress and duress in the Bronx has surely been strengthened by Rodriguez’s acquisition from the Texas Rangers. Teflon Torre, who was bruised by Steinbrenner’s public criticisms last year, looks sturdier.

The Yankee front office didn’t include Torre in the Rodriguez deal. The manager was informed of the trade last Friday night:

Torre was not annoyed by the snub and showed that being humble, at times, has helped him thrive. When a reporter related that Cashman had said Torre would make the lineup decisions, an incredulous Torre said: “It’s my decision? Well, he’s playing third.”

Naturally, the “Who’s on Third?” controversy was a hot topic too. And it will remain one for a long time. Yesterday, Joe Sheehan of Baseball Prospectus suggested that Rodriguez won’t play 160 games at third this season, but I’m not so sure. While moving Jeter may make the best baseball sense, I don’t think you can underestimate the human element here. It’s easy to say that Jeter simply needs to get over himself and relinquish his position, but as Jamey Newberg mentioned to me in an Instant Message this morning, playing shortstop is like being a quarterback. It’s a tough spot to walk away from. I think Jeter is smart enough to do what is right in the long run. It just may take some time.

Mike Vaccaro points out that it would behoove Jeter to move:

The burden of selflessness falls on Derek Jeter now. Soon enough, the cue cards will be shredded and life around the Yankees will go back to being strictly improv.
That’s when Jeter truly begins to earn his captain’s “C.”

Steven Goldman adds:

Everyone who swears fealty to Jeter at short is undoubtedly sincere, but the baseball season creates exigencies, moments where sentimentality and saving face comes second to winning. Jeter misses an inning or two, Alex Rodriguez slides over and makes a few good plays and voila, the truth will out. At least, this happens in principle. It doesn’t always happen on the Yankees, who sometimes — despite the franchise’s cutthroat rep — nurture players they like ahead of players who are good.

As has been written in this space many times, none of this should be construed to mean that Jeter is not an exceptionally valuable ballplayer. Even if he remains at shortstop, the singles that elude his glove are compensated for by the many singles that come off of his bat. A-Rod is no Ozzie Smith, so the difference between them may be small potatoes. Still, the best alignment should be arrived at through competition, rather than by fiat.

Until then, as the old Jellyfish song goes, the king is half-undressed. No longer the best shortstop in town, no more the biggest star — heck, Jeter plays in the same town as Mike Piazza, so for all we know, he might not even lead the league in SMATA (Stylish Man About Town Activities). What remains now is for the second-best shortstop to be the biggest man.

Still, so long as Joe Torre is the skipper, Jeter and Bernie Williams–who got some support from George Steinbrenner yesterday—will receive the benefit of the doubt. Right or wrong, that’s just the way it is.

In addition to the events at the Stadium, it turns out that Alfonso Soriano is not really 26, but 28. The Yankees were informed of this last summer and the Rangers knew about it before the deal was done. According to Brian Cashman:

“Sori’s a good guy and it was something on his mind,” Cashman said. “He wanted us to know first, before it got out. It would’ve been updated in our media guide this year.

“We never would’ve known about it if he didn’t want to tell us. He told us when he was young, he did something stupid. A two-year difference in a 40-40-type player (homers and steals), you look at the numbers and it’s not that big of a deal.”

Gary Sheffield also made the papers this morning, in relation to the Balco affair, which has conveniently been bumped off the backpages in recent days.

Meanwhile, Greg Maddux has signed a three-year deal with the Cubs (!), and Mets fans are still smarting over watching the Yankees land Rodriguez. So is Mets pitcher, Al Leiter:

“I don’t think salt in the wound describes it enough. It’s more like rubbing salt, and then pouring hydrogen peroxide and rubbing alcohol and rust in there at the same time.”

Ouchie.

I watched most of the Alex Rodriguez press conference from my desk at work. Torre, Jeter and Reggie Jackson were there. Rodriguez looked sharp and was predicatably smooth answering questions. He answered several of them in Spanish which I thought was cool. You know my daily subway commute takes me through Washington Heights. I tend to see more Red Sox hats than Yankee gear in that part of the world thanks to Manny and Pedro. I wonder if that will soon change.

Rodriguez tells Tom Verducci that moving to third is not going to be an issue:

“I look at it as a new challenge. I won two Gold Gloves and an MVP at shortstop. I thought I achieved just about everything personally at shortstop. Now it’s time to win. I’ve always thought of myself as a team player. Playing third base is the ultimate team move.”

Like I said, smooth. Then again, what is he going to say? That he’s the straw that stirs the drink and that Jeter only stirs bad? Oh, that’s a different era, excuse me.

Where does this leave Soriano? Early reports out of Texas have him moving from the infield out to center. Soriano could have great success hitting in Arlington, but both David Pinto and Lee Sinins are skeptical. In his ATM report today, Sinins writes:

It is no secret that I am not optimistic at all about Soriano’s chances of
long term success. I believe he’s already peaked and it will be downhill
from here. The Yankees are gambling that people like me, who have been
saying trade Soriano, he’s currently not as good as his hype and his peak
is going to be real short, are correct. The Rangers are gambling that
everyone calling Soriano one of the best young players in baseball are
going to be right.

Pinto agrees:

I think we’ve seen the two best years we’ll see from Soriano offensively. He’s had OBP the last two years of .332 and .338. That just doesn’t cut it, especially if he’s used as a leadoff man. Maybe Showalter can get him to lay off the outside pitch. But at some point, he’ll hit a HR off one and fall in love with it all over again. Pitchers realize this. There’s no reason to throw the man a strike to get him out.

It will be interesting to see if Sori’s best years were in the Bronx. What do you think?