Michael Young retired recently. Good for him. He was a very good player while he was in the majors. His reputation as the consummate team player is still intact, kept alive by beat and national writers who worship the ground he walks on. This despite the fact Young has demanded a trade twice in his career. I have detailed two of the idoltastic (yep, that's not a word) columns written on Michael Young here and here. I don't dislike the guy, but the perception of him as a team player seems to be a little bit different from his actions as a team player...at least at certain times this is true. Well, Richard Justice writes a column in memoriam of Young's career and it's just a little bit revisionist for me. The sub-title of the column is "Former Rangers fixture leaves a team-first legacy." As long as you don't include his overall grumpiness at being asked to move positions and his trade demands, then yes, he was a team player. I think that has to be a part of his legacy and not something that gets quickly mentioned and glossed over.
I feel like a lot of my criticism of Michael Young is of the "I'm just saying..." variety where Young says something about moving positions or a beat writer says Young is a team player and I feel obligated to point out there are some non-team player aspects to Young's career. For example, recently Michael Young said this.
Yes, he really isn't saying very much. He just says he wonders what could have happened if he had played second base his entire career. The problem is I know he was bitter about having to move to third base when Elvis Andrus came along and bitter about moving to DH when Adrian Beltre/Mike Napoli joined the Rangers as their starting third baseman. So I probably read some bitterness into his comment that may or may not be there. It sounds bitter to me though. It sounds like, "If the Rangers had not moved me then I could have done great things," which sounds selfish and doesn't seem to jive with the fact every time the Rangers made Young move positions it improved the team. I don't know if a team-first guy would make comments like this that don't sound incredibly team-first. Every time the Rangers asked Young to move it improved the team, so his comment that could be innocent could come off as a little selfish. Anyway, on to the Richard Justice column.
Michael Young
won a Gold Glove playing shortstop for the Texas Rangers in 2008, and
even if you didn't know a single other thing about him, the story behind
that award gets to the essence of most of what he came to stand for
among the teammates, managers and especially the fans who absolutely
adored the guy.
Just read the comments on this column. Michael Young is adored. Obviously I feel like I'm an asshole if I bring up the essence of what happened when the Rangers asked Young to move to third base and then later requested he become a primary designated hitter.
Young announced his retirement on Thursday, saying simply that the time had come to get on with the next chapter of his life.
I imagine if Young's wife asks him to move the living room couch to another room in the house then Young will demand they purchase another house.
But a combination of factors -- distance from family, playing time and
perhaps changing teams again -- appears to have nudged him toward the
door. He leaves as a career .300 hitter and a seven-time All-Star. He
won a batting championship in 2005 and is the Rangers' all-time leader
in hits with 2,230.
Quit killing time. Let's get to the story about how unselfish Young is so I can be an asshole.
Between 2002 and '13, he averaged 155 games per season and never spent a day on the disabled list.
And Terence Moore says there are no iron men anymore.
He's also the only player in at least 90 years to have started 400
games at second, short and third. Which brings us back to that 2008 Gold
Glove Award.
The Rangers traded their shortstop, Alex Rodriguez, to the New York Yankees at the beginning of Spring Training in 2004. In return, they got Alfonso Soriano, who they thought would replace Rodriguez at short.
When Soriano showed up at Spring Training, he made it clear he didn't
want to play short. He'd been a full-time second baseman for three
seasons with the Yankees and didn't like the idea of moving.
What a selfish immigrant. It's a good thing the border to Mexico is close to Texas because Soriano could just jump the fence back to Mexico if he doesn't like how things are run here in America.
Before the situation had a chance to get ugly, Young showed up one
morning, stepped into Rangers manager Buck Showalter's office and closed
the door.
"I'll play short," he said.
This was a team-first and unselfish move. I won't bash him for this.
To make that kind of switch would not be the easiest of adjustments.
Soriano had experience playing shortstop and Michael Young really didn't. This was the first of three position changes for Young and also the only position change he accepted without demanding a trade first. Of course, Richard Justice glosses over that in an effort to eulogize Young's career and make him seem like a completely team-first guy.
Young told reporters at the time he did it because he liked the
challenge of playing short. Yet, what virtually every teammate -- and
Showalter -- knew was something else. He did it to make the new guy's
transition smoother and the Rangers better.
Making the new guy's transition smoother and the Rangers better is something Young was resistant to the other two times he was asked to change positions. It's not bashing Young, but a simple recitation of a fact. Painting Young as this guy who is always team-first just isn't factually correct. Hell, Young is still reminiscing about his career if he didn't volunteer to play shortstop and had stayed at second base.
Here are some quotes from when Young was asked to move to third base to make room for Elvis Andrus, a move that would make the Rangers a better team:
"My focus is playing for the Rangers, playing for a winning club and
playing the best third base that I can," Young said. "Yes, I was adamant
about staying at shortstop. But at the end of the day, after looking at
everything, the chances of being traded were slim and the team wasn't
really pursuing a trade.
"They wanted me to play third base and I didn't want this to drag on. I
don't want my focus to be on anything but being ready for Spring
Training. I'm focused on having a big year and the last thing I wanted
to do was have anything take away from that."
Young agreed to move because his trade demand wasn't fulfilled or the Rangers weren't actively looking to trade him. Either way, he wants to be ready for the season (which is admirable), but he wanted to be traded rather than switch positions (which is a direct contradiction of Richard Justice's "Team-first" and "He wants the team to be better" point of view as it relates to Young) positions.
"This is the way it was going to turn out. There was no trade in sight so once I thought it over, it was time to get to work."
The decision ends four days of controversy that erupted on Sunday night
when Daniels announced that the Rangers had requested Young to move to
third base. Young publicly responded that he was being forced to move to
third base and wanted to be traded instead.
I give Young credit for playing rather than continuing to demand a trade, but the fact is Young only stopped demanding a trade because his wish to be trade wasn't being fulfilled, not out of the goodness of his heart.
Here are some quotes from when Young was asked to move to DH to make room for Adrian Beltre and Mike Napoli, a move that would make the Rangers a better team:
Then Texas signed Mike Napoli and announced he would also play as the Rangers designated hitter.
That was the last straw.
Michael Young asked for a trade.
“The suggestion that I had a change of heart and asked for a trade is a manipulation of the truth,” Young said. “I asked for a trade because I’ve been misled and manipulated and I’m sick of it.
Young ended up getting 631 at-bats during the 2011 season, while starting 69 games at DH, 39 games at third base, 36 games at first base, 14 games at second base, and 1 game at shortstop. So he was lied to, in that he wasn't being asked to be a DH for the majority of the games he started.
"This has been a long time coming based on things that occurred off the field,” Young said. “I’m sick of it. It hit a point where I felt it was unfair to me and my family.”
Did Young's $16 million paycheck bounce? It didn't? Well then I'm sure he would get over being lied to and manipulated.
I understand the Rangers asked Young to move positions three times in his career and it is perceived as unfair to him. Part of the reason it is perceived as so unfair is because he made such a big deal out of the last two times he was asked to switch positions. Other baseball players have switched positions and the position switch wasn't a huge deal because it wasn't made a huge deal. Young's trade demands had fans taking positions on whether what the Rangers were asking him to do was fair or not. Chipper Jones moved to left field to make room for Vinny Castilla. He didn't like it, but he didn't make a huge deal out of it to where he demanded a trade. Alex Rodriguez probably would rather have played shortstop with the Yankees, but he knew if he played for them then he would have to play third base. Even Alfonso Soriano eventually moved away from second base to play left field after being traded to the Nationals. It's not an issue unless it is made an issue.
While I respect Young, the idea he is team-first just isn't completely true. He was team-first the initial time he volunteered to move to shortstop, but after being asked to move positions again, he demanded a trade and wasn't team-first. It's possible for Young to be in the right to refuse to move, while also acknowledging this refusal to move doesn't mean he is a team-first player. These aren't mutually exclusive positions. Young was sort of jerked around by the Rangers, but by demanding a trade this meant he wasn't exactly being team-first because his moving positions made the Rangers a stronger team.
"Typical Michael Young," Showalter said. "He's one of those guys who'll
do whatever is best for the club. You don't find a lot of guys like
that."
But this statement wasn't true for Young's entire career.
Young emerged as the Rangers' most popular and productive player. At a
time when the franchise was in a 10-season postseason drought, Young set
a tone in the clubhouse for professionalism, work ethic and doing
things right.
See? I'm not bashing him. Young played the game the right way, with grit, hustle and a team-first attitude as long as being team-first fit his needs and wants. He was the face of the Rangers franchise and should be remembered that way. Attributes that Young possessed don't need to be fictionalized for him to have a rich legacy as a Texas Ranger.
When the Rangers finally emerged from the darkness to win the first of
two straight American League pennants in 2010, Young did a pretty good
imitation of the happiest man on earth.
Of course, if Michael Young had his way then he would not have been on the team that won the first of two straight American League pennants nor on the team that won the second straight American League pennant. He would have been traded to a team that would allow him to play shortstop.
By then, he'd been asked to change positions a couple more times. He moved from short to third in 2009 to make room for Elvis Andrus and then agreed to move here, there and everywhere when third baseman Adrian Beltre was signed before the 2011 season.
And there we go. The gloss-over has occurred. To leave out two trade demands in an article where Richard Justice is putting Young out there as a team-first guy is simply bad writing. If it's not bad writing then it is a fictionalized version of real events. It's impossible for me to fathom how an article about Young being a team-first guy could be written while completely ignoring his two trade demands and the fact he wouldn't have been on the 2010 and 2011 Texas Rangers team if it weren't for the fact his demand request wasn't accepted and executed.
By then, he'd long since established himself in the hearts and minds of Rangers fans. They'll forever remember him as a guy who was both a tremendous player
and a tremendous person, someone who thought being a Major League
Baseball player was about more than simply playing.
Sorry, I"m choking on cliches and sentiment right now. Again, I think it's possible to remember Michael Young as a great baseball player who was jerked around by the Rangers in a way, while also acknowledging Young's trade demand wasn't team-first.
But he was there when they turned the corner,
Even though it was initially against his will.
and his fingerprints are all over everything they've accomplished.
Which was partially accomplished because of the players the Rangers acquired which caused Young to demand a trade twice.
In the end, that's a legacy with which he can take pride.
Young should absolutely take pride in his career. Richard Justice should not take pride in writing an article that whitewashes part of Michael Young's history with the Rangers. It's clear from Young's quote about playing second base for his whole career that he hasn't forgotten he was asked to move positions and anyone writing about Young being a team-first player shouldn't forget either.
Showing posts with label texas rangers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label texas rangers. Show all posts
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Monday, March 25, 2013
8 comments So Apparently Mitch Williams Has a Blog
There are times in everyone's life when he/she/it wonders "How the hell did I miss this?" Today is one of those days for me. Mitch Williams, or "Wild Thing" as he was better known as a baseball player, has a blog where he uses the English language and a not-firm grasp on logic to talk about baseball-related topics. To Williams' credit, at least he acknowledges it is a blog (ahem, Murray Chass). Thanks to Cory (again) for sending me the links to these. I will cover two of Mitch Williams' posts today. I'll start off first with the continuous, never-ending Jack Morris-Hall of Fame discussion because there's no way anyone is tired of talking about it. Then I will delve into Mitch Williams' column about how Jon Daniels doesn't have enough baseball experience to effectively run the Rangers franchise. Daniels isn't a great GM like that "baseball guy" Andrew Friedman.
But first, Mitch talks about Schilling and Morris.
The Hall of Fame voting is coming up on us and there are a few people that I don’t quite understand what Hall induction is supposed to be based on. I hear arguments that Jack Morris should not be voted in, and I have heard arguments that Curt Schilling should be.
It's all very confusing isn't it? Both players have memorable postseason performances, so which memorable postseason performance is better? Isn't that what Jack Morris's candidacy is all about? Game 7 of the 1991 World Series?
Let’s clear this up. Inclusion in the Hall of Fame is in recognition of an outstanding career. It is not based on Postseason performance.
Great then, it's settled. Neither player gets in the Hall of Fame
(Bengoodfella starts packing his bags and walking out of the room)
If we compare Jack Morris’ numbers to Schilling’s and we remove the Postseason — where Schilling was 11-2 and Morris was 7-4 — and we get down to the career numbers, I think you will see what I’m talking about.
I'm going to spoil the conclusion for all of you. Mitch Williams uses some deducing to tell us that Jack Morris should be in the Hall of Fame, while Curt Schilling should not. Before I get to this comparison more in-depth, let's go back and look at perhaps the most ironic comment I've read in reference to Jack Morris being inducted into the Hall of Fame.
It is not based on Postseason performance.
I'm not exaggerating when I make this statement. I have not read a pro-Jack Morris column where Game 7 of the 1991 World Series was not mentioned at least once. I know a pro-Jack Morris column without a mention of the 1991 World Series exists and I know this because Mitch Williams rambles his way through one right now. Still, saying the Hall of Fame is not based on postseason performance is ignoring the fact 95% of pro-Jack Morris Hall of Fame columns at some point mention his postseason record or Game 7 of the 1991 World Series. Some writers (Jerry Green) seem to base Morris' induction solely on that game. So the idea Mitch Williams is excluding postseason performance when determining Morris should be in the Hall of Fame has blown my mind and I will struggle to go on.
Won/Loss: Morris 254-186, Schilling-216-146
Wins are dumb. Using wins to determine if a pitcher was any good or not is dumb.
Career duration: Morris 18 seasons (all in the AL), Schilling 20 seasons (14 in the NL where there are only eight hitters in the lineup)
ERA: Morris 3.90, Schilling 3.35 (4.00 during six seasons in the AL)
3 things worthy of mention:
1. Mitch Williams' best years all occurred in the National League. If he is bashing the National League then he is bashing his ability as a relief pitcher.
2. A closer criticizing a starting pitcher for "only" facing eight hitters in the lineup is just too rich for me. The guy who faced 3-4 batters if he did his job correctly is the one criticizing Curt Schilling for not facing enough quality batters while playing in the National League.
3. Cory in his email to me makes this point better than I do. I can make these points myself, but he makes them pretty well. Since I'm using his email to me, I want to give his blog a shout-out too. He writes at http://corygb.blogspot.ca/.
''ERA: Morris 3.90, Schilling 3.35 (4.00 during six seasons in the AL)''
The 2nd quotation requires more in the way of critical thought
Yes, Schilling did have a higher career ERA in the American League. Fun fact though: His first tenure in the AL (1988-1990) lasted all of 69 IP for the Orioles, where he amassed a 4.54 ERA (85 ERA+)
In his 2nd tenure (2004-2007), Schilling pitched 675 AL innings, posting a 3.95 ERA (120 ERA+)
I also believe it is relevant to note when comparing the numbers of Morris and Schilling in the American League that Schilling only pitched in the American League during the beginning and end of his career. Schilling pitched in the American League when he was 21-23 years of age and 37-40 years of age. I would venture a guess that his career statistics in the American League would have been better had he pitched in the American League anywhere near the prime of his career. Back to the point Cory is making,
Both quotations also indicate Mitch Williams (flawed) belief that it's fair to compare the American League of the 70s and 80s to the NL of the 90s, where runs per game were almost identical.
The photo attached has Runs Per Game averages during Morris's American League career (1977-1994) and Schilling's National League Career (1991-2003)
From roughly 1993 to 2003, runs per game in the National League were either on par or exceeding the American League yearly averages of 1980 to 1991 (the meat of Morris's peak)
So basically, Mitch Williams has no point. National League teams scored 4.56 runs per game from 1991-2003. American League teams scored 4.50 runs per game from 1977-1994. It's important to remember that Schilling pitched right in the middle of the Steroid Era. Knowing 'roided-up batters were putting up historically great numbers during the Steroid Era has to be factored in when comparing the American League from 1977-1993 and the National League from 1993-2003. So over the time Morris pitched in the American League and Schilling pitched in the National League, the National League teams actually scored more runs per game. This is what happens when a knee-jerk reaction is made without doing research.
Innings Pitched: Morris 3,824, Schilling 3,261
Complete games: Morris 175, Schilling 83
Shutouts: Morris 28, Schilling 20
These are good numbers, but I still lean towards neither player entering the Hall of Fame. Comparing Morris to Schilling and believing Morris to be the superior player doesn't mean Jack Morris should be in the Hall of Fame.
This all speaks to my point. The Hall of Fame is recognition of a career, not Postseason stats! Postseason stats don’t count towards MVP or the Cy Young Award.
And yet, very few pro-Jack Morris voters fail to leave out Morris's postseason record.
If the people who vote on this induction only care about Postseason performance, then Greg Maddux one of the best pitchers in the history of our game, wouldn’t be a Hall of Famer! He was just 11-14 in his Postseason career!
Great point. If we just used assumptions that pitching in the American League was more difficult because a pitcher has to face 9 hitters instead of 8 hitters a pitcher faces in the National League then the result would be what Mitch Williams has written here.
If they come up with a Postseason Hall of Fame, Curt Schilling is a first ballot Hall of Famer!
Why is Mitch Williams using exclamation points excessively? Is he is a 12 year old girl?
But until they do, he was a good pitcher, but his career is not Hall of Fame worthy.
This also happens to be the perfect rebuttal to a person who claims Jack Morris deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.
One final point on the Hall of Fame: the fact that Lee Smith has not been voted in is, in my opinion, a joke!
A joke like a "haha" joke or a joke like "why is this guy using exclamation points at the end of every sentence, he must be fucking with us" joke?
And his career ERA — which for a closer is a stat that can be very easily inflated for the season by one bad outing — was 3.03.
A closer's ERA can also not be inflated because he often comes in the game with no runners on-base and only has to face three batters if he does his job correctly.
The telltale sign for me would be poll the players. Ask all the hitters that faced Lee, Trevor and Mo who they would have rather faced in the ninth. Trust me, Lee Arthur would be last on that list!
Thanks Mitch! I'm glad you used a poll of ex-MLB players that you never actually took to prove your point! It's very persuasive for you to make up the results of a poll and then use them to support your argument! This is analysis and very persuasive!
Most likely you know why Mitch Williams doesn't think Curt Schilling should be in the Hall of Fame? Because he doesn't like him. (Go to the 2:35 mark...and again, this was sent to me by Cory)
At least Williams is unbiased, right?
Now Mitch Williams discusses the shakeups in the Rangers front office and tells people to not tell others how to do their job. Williams goes about this by telling the Rangers front office how to do their job.
Today we learned that the job of President of Baseball Operations with the Rangers has been taken away from Nolan Ryan and given to the team’s GM, John Daniels.
This is the problem plaguing our game.
Without knowing the next sentence, I would have no clue what "the problem" here is. It's not readily apparent. Is the problem GM's trying to have too much responsibility within an organization? Is the problem baseball "experts" like Mitch Williams who believes he is informed enough on a topic to comment on that topic, but he isn't really informed enough to spell all the names of the concerned parties correctly? John Daniels is not the Rangers GM. Jon Daniels is the Rangers GM. A small mistake, sure, but given Mitch Williams is paid to cover MLB and seems to carry a strong opinion about Jon Daniels...
I have all the respect in the world for these young front office people that come out of Harvard or Yale — or in Daniels’ case, Cornell. I respect them when they know what they are good at: business, finance, or organizational skills — those sorts of things.
The amount of idiocy that Mitch Williams is spewing right now is amazing. So being the General Manager of a MLB franchise doesn't require business, finance or organizational skills? It sounds to me like Mitch Williams isn't quite intelligent or informed enough to be making these criticisms that he is making. Being a General Manager requires business, finance and organizational skills. Anyone who doesn't believe this is true is an uninformed moron.
Also, I like how graduates from Cornell/Harvard/Yale are good at only these three things and should not look for a job that requires other attributes. Mitch Williams graduated from West Linn High School in Oregon, perhaps they are famous for learning their young ones on how to be a baseball analyst? Because otherwise, it sounds like graduates of West Linn High School should know what they are good at...and I'm not sure it is writing.
Where I tend to lose respect for them is when they decide they know how to evaluate baseball talent better than people like Nolan Ryan! When they so that, they do their players a disservice, as well as their fan base and the entire organization.
Yeah I know! It's not like Jon Daniels is the GM of a baseball team that he has helped build into a franchise capable of making back-to-back World Series or anything. What does he know, other than he was able to replenish the Rangers farm system and make them competitive again? Leave the baseball stuff to guys like Nolan Ryan (insert exclamation point here)
I can’t speculate what the problem is down in Arlington between Nolan and Daniels
Mitch Williams can't speculate but he knows the fault is on Jon Daniels. There you go, that makes sense.
I was a Ranger back when going to a game was something a fan did when there was nothing else to do that night in town. Over the last four years, they have done something I never thought would be possible, and that was take away fans from the Dallas Cowboys.
And the reason the Rangers have had such success is because they have won baseball games. Should the credit for putting a team together that won games and made the World Series go to the President/Owner of the Texas Rangers or the General Manager of the Rangers? It seems to me like Jon Daniels put this Rangers team together, so he should get at least 50% of the credit. What do I know though? I'm not a scrappy, competitive, ex-baseball player like Mitch Williams. He clearly knows what he is talking about when he is talking about John (Jon) Daniels. Daniels needs to stick to what he knows best, like business, finance, and having them organizational skills. Leave the running of the Rangers' business, dealing with the Rangers' budget, and organizing the organization to run as effectively and efficiently as possible to those who who are qualified to do such things...which obviously isn't a graduate from a Ivy League school.
Also, the Rangers haven't really taken away fans from the Dallas Cowboys. It's not an either/or situation since each team plays a different sport. Fans can cheer for both teams.
I don’t know Daniels, but the way that Michael Young was treated there was just wrong.
You mean the part where Daniels gave Young an $80 million contract extension? Boy, that was an asshole thing to do.
Young changed positions four times for the good of the team. He became an All-Star at three different positions, then demanded a trade after the signing of Adrian Beltre.
Michael Young demanded a trade nearly every time he was asked to switch positions. I have discussed it before on this blog and the bottom line is the Rangers replaced Young with a better player each time he was asked to move. There have been plenty of MLB players who have moved positions repeatedly and not made a peep, but for some reason the media insists on making Michael Young a martyr.
One thing I can say for sure is that as soon as a GM starts to think he can evaluate talent better than someone like Ryan without anywhere near the baseball background, he is giving himself too much credit.
The Rangers have been to the World Series two of the last three seasons. Jon Daniels doesn't think he can evaluate talent well, he knows he can evaluate talent well. Whether he is a better judge of talent than Nolan Ryan, who's to say, but having played baseball doesn't mean Nolan Ryan is a better judge of talent than Jon Daniels. Nolan Ryan threw a baseball well. Throwing a baseball well doesn't mean Nolan Ryan can judge talent better than Jon Daniels can judge talent.
The problem I see in Texas is that they have power arms in their rotation, and all of them are trying to become sinker ball pitchers.
It is harder to command a sinker than it is a four-seam fastball.
I forgot about Mitch Williams credentials as a pitching coach. After not being retained as the pitching coach for an Independent League franchise early in the 2000's I know he is turning down pitching coach offers left and right. It's funny how Mitch (in just a minute) will say people who tell others how to do a job they can't do themselves are ignorant. Hopefully Mitch was looking in the mirror when he wrote this.
So if you can’t command it, it becomes a 91-MPH hit-me pitch. Trust me.
I don't trust you. You have shown through the misspelling of Jon Daniels' name and your inability to understand running a baseball team requires organizational and business skill that you have very little clue of what you are talking about. But hey, Mitch Williams throws a baseball well, so he believes that makes him qualified to do anything baseball-related. I'm really good at driving a car so that means I could own a NASCAR team, right?
I think that has to change. I think they need to let these guys who can throw 95 to 98 go out and do it, and use a sinker only in spots where it is needed.
I would remind Mitch Williams that Nolan Ryan is on record as being the guy in the Rangers organization who has had the most influence on the Rangers pitching staff. So these changes Mitch criticizes the Rangers for not making, well, he is basically criticizing his boy Nolan Ryan. Nolan Ryan is on record here, here, here, here, and here as having a great effect on the Texas Rangers pitching staff. It doesn't shock me that Mitch Williams doesn't understand he is essentially criticizing Nolan Ryan when he criticizes how the Rangers pitchers are pitching.
I also enjoy how Mitch is trying to blame Jon Daniels for the pitchers the Rangers have acquired and developed, but doesn't give Daniels credit for any of the success the Rangers have had over the past five years.
I will point to an organization that has a very smart GM: Tampa. Andrew Friedman is very smart. I believe he is smarter than any other GM out there right now, because I believe he surrounds himself with very good baseball people and trusts each of them to do their job,
Mitch Williams should not be writing any of his thoughts down. He contradicts himself, he doesn't really make sense and I get a feeling he doesn't have a firm grasp on the point he is trying to make. Let's compare the backgrounds of Jon Daniels and Andrew Friedman. One guy Mitch Williams likes because he is "very smart" and the other guy Mitch thinks needs to leave running a baseball team to baseball guys.
College
Jon Daniels- Cornell University
Andrew Friedman- Tulane University
Major in College
Jon Daniels- Applied Economics and Management
Andrew Friedman- Management with a Concentration in Finance
First Job out of College
Jon Daniels- Business Development for Allied Domecq (They operate wine and restaurant businesses)
Andrew Friedman- Analyst for Bear Stearns
First Baseball Job
Jon Daniels- Internship with the Rockies in 2001 and Assistant, Baseball Operations for Rangers in 2003
Andrew Friedman- Director of Baseball Development for the Rays in 2004
Now if you can tell me how based on their backgrounds Andrew Friedman is a "baseball guy" and Jon Daniels is not, then you are lying. Both guys have very similar educational and baseball backgrounds, but Mitch Williams thinks Jon Daniels can't run a team because he isn't a "baseball guy," but Williams likes Friedman and seems to accept him as a "baseball guy." In related news, Mitch Williams has no idea what he is talking about and isn't consistent with his criticism.
I don’t know about y’all that are reading this, but I don’t for a second think Friedman is making any decisions involving talent without consulting his baseball people.
Don't think for a second that Jon Daniels makes any decisions without consulting his baseball people.
In my opinion, you are only ignorant if you try and tell someone how to do their job if you aren’t qualified to do that job.
You mean sort of like how you just told the Rangers organization how they need to encourage their pitchers to throw the baseball despite having no experience despite having no experience as a pitching coach at the major league level (Williams was a pitching coach for an Independent League team for 2002 and 2003, but his contract wasn't renewed)? Or does Mitch mean like how he is calling Jon Daniels not a "baseball guy" and stating he doesn't have the knowledge necessary to do Nolan Ryan's job, despite the fact Mitch Williams has no experience as a scout or baseball executive?
This whole column is basically Mitch Williams telling Jon Daniels how to do his job and what job to stick to.
I don’t think I’m going to get to many people calling me to do their taxes or represent them in court. Just as I am not going to argue with someone who does a job that I have no clue about.
You mean like being the General Manager of an MLB team? Mitch seemed to argue with the qualifications of Jon Daniels to do Nolan Ryan's job and Mitch doesn't seem to have a clue that being an MLB GM requires business, finance and organizational skills...which are all strengths Mitch admits Jon has due to graduating college from Cornell.
If the Rangers lose Ryan, they will be headed back to where they were before he got there
I don't think the Rangers should lose Nolan Ryan, but it is incredibly premature and uninformed to state the Rangers will be a bad team if Ryan no longer has an affiliation with the Rangers organization.
Much like Mitch seems to dislike Curt Schilling and this drives his belief Schilling should not be in the Hall of Fame, Mitch doesn't like Jon Daniels not being a "baseball guy" (unlike Andrew Friedman...mind. blown.) and so he thinks Daniels can't do his job as Rangers GM without Nolan Ryan around.
I wish Mitch Williams wrote more blog entries because his blog could be a gold mine.
But first, Mitch talks about Schilling and Morris.
The Hall of Fame voting is coming up on us and there are a few people that I don’t quite understand what Hall induction is supposed to be based on. I hear arguments that Jack Morris should not be voted in, and I have heard arguments that Curt Schilling should be.
It's all very confusing isn't it? Both players have memorable postseason performances, so which memorable postseason performance is better? Isn't that what Jack Morris's candidacy is all about? Game 7 of the 1991 World Series?
Let’s clear this up. Inclusion in the Hall of Fame is in recognition of an outstanding career. It is not based on Postseason performance.
Great then, it's settled. Neither player gets in the Hall of Fame
(Bengoodfella starts packing his bags and walking out of the room)
If we compare Jack Morris’ numbers to Schilling’s and we remove the Postseason — where Schilling was 11-2 and Morris was 7-4 — and we get down to the career numbers, I think you will see what I’m talking about.
I'm going to spoil the conclusion for all of you. Mitch Williams uses some deducing to tell us that Jack Morris should be in the Hall of Fame, while Curt Schilling should not. Before I get to this comparison more in-depth, let's go back and look at perhaps the most ironic comment I've read in reference to Jack Morris being inducted into the Hall of Fame.
It is not based on Postseason performance.
I'm not exaggerating when I make this statement. I have not read a pro-Jack Morris column where Game 7 of the 1991 World Series was not mentioned at least once. I know a pro-Jack Morris column without a mention of the 1991 World Series exists and I know this because Mitch Williams rambles his way through one right now. Still, saying the Hall of Fame is not based on postseason performance is ignoring the fact 95% of pro-Jack Morris Hall of Fame columns at some point mention his postseason record or Game 7 of the 1991 World Series. Some writers (Jerry Green) seem to base Morris' induction solely on that game. So the idea Mitch Williams is excluding postseason performance when determining Morris should be in the Hall of Fame has blown my mind and I will struggle to go on.
Won/Loss: Morris 254-186, Schilling-216-146
Wins are dumb. Using wins to determine if a pitcher was any good or not is dumb.
Career duration: Morris 18 seasons (all in the AL), Schilling 20 seasons (14 in the NL where there are only eight hitters in the lineup)
ERA: Morris 3.90, Schilling 3.35 (4.00 during six seasons in the AL)
3 things worthy of mention:
1. Mitch Williams' best years all occurred in the National League. If he is bashing the National League then he is bashing his ability as a relief pitcher.
2. A closer criticizing a starting pitcher for "only" facing eight hitters in the lineup is just too rich for me. The guy who faced 3-4 batters if he did his job correctly is the one criticizing Curt Schilling for not facing enough quality batters while playing in the National League.
3. Cory in his email to me makes this point better than I do. I can make these points myself, but he makes them pretty well. Since I'm using his email to me, I want to give his blog a shout-out too. He writes at http://corygb.blogspot.ca/.
''ERA: Morris 3.90, Schilling 3.35 (4.00 during six seasons in the AL)''
The 2nd quotation requires more in the way of critical thought
Yes, Schilling did have a higher career ERA in the American League. Fun fact though: His first tenure in the AL (1988-1990) lasted all of 69 IP for the Orioles, where he amassed a 4.54 ERA (85 ERA+)
In his 2nd tenure (2004-2007), Schilling pitched 675 AL innings, posting a 3.95 ERA (120 ERA+)
I also believe it is relevant to note when comparing the numbers of Morris and Schilling in the American League that Schilling only pitched in the American League during the beginning and end of his career. Schilling pitched in the American League when he was 21-23 years of age and 37-40 years of age. I would venture a guess that his career statistics in the American League would have been better had he pitched in the American League anywhere near the prime of his career. Back to the point Cory is making,
Both quotations also indicate Mitch Williams (flawed) belief that it's fair to compare the American League of the 70s and 80s to the NL of the 90s, where runs per game were almost identical.
The photo attached has Runs Per Game averages during Morris's American League career (1977-1994) and Schilling's National League Career (1991-2003)
From roughly 1993 to 2003, runs per game in the National League were either on par or exceeding the American League yearly averages of 1980 to 1991 (the meat of Morris's peak)
So basically, Mitch Williams has no point. National League teams scored 4.56 runs per game from 1991-2003. American League teams scored 4.50 runs per game from 1977-1994. It's important to remember that Schilling pitched right in the middle of the Steroid Era. Knowing 'roided-up batters were putting up historically great numbers during the Steroid Era has to be factored in when comparing the American League from 1977-1993 and the National League from 1993-2003. So over the time Morris pitched in the American League and Schilling pitched in the National League, the National League teams actually scored more runs per game. This is what happens when a knee-jerk reaction is made without doing research.
Innings Pitched: Morris 3,824, Schilling 3,261
Complete games: Morris 175, Schilling 83
Shutouts: Morris 28, Schilling 20
These are good numbers, but I still lean towards neither player entering the Hall of Fame. Comparing Morris to Schilling and believing Morris to be the superior player doesn't mean Jack Morris should be in the Hall of Fame.
This all speaks to my point. The Hall of Fame is recognition of a career, not Postseason stats! Postseason stats don’t count towards MVP or the Cy Young Award.
And yet, very few pro-Jack Morris voters fail to leave out Morris's postseason record.
If the people who vote on this induction only care about Postseason performance, then Greg Maddux one of the best pitchers in the history of our game, wouldn’t be a Hall of Famer! He was just 11-14 in his Postseason career!
Great point. If we just used assumptions that pitching in the American League was more difficult because a pitcher has to face 9 hitters instead of 8 hitters a pitcher faces in the National League then the result would be what Mitch Williams has written here.
If they come up with a Postseason Hall of Fame, Curt Schilling is a first ballot Hall of Famer!
Why is Mitch Williams using exclamation points excessively? Is he is a 12 year old girl?
But until they do, he was a good pitcher, but his career is not Hall of Fame worthy.
This also happens to be the perfect rebuttal to a person who claims Jack Morris deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.
One final point on the Hall of Fame: the fact that Lee Smith has not been voted in is, in my opinion, a joke!
A joke like a "haha" joke or a joke like "why is this guy using exclamation points at the end of every sentence, he must be fucking with us" joke?
And his career ERA — which for a closer is a stat that can be very easily inflated for the season by one bad outing — was 3.03.
A closer's ERA can also not be inflated because he often comes in the game with no runners on-base and only has to face three batters if he does his job correctly.
The telltale sign for me would be poll the players. Ask all the hitters that faced Lee, Trevor and Mo who they would have rather faced in the ninth. Trust me, Lee Arthur would be last on that list!
Thanks Mitch! I'm glad you used a poll of ex-MLB players that you never actually took to prove your point! It's very persuasive for you to make up the results of a poll and then use them to support your argument! This is analysis and very persuasive!
Most likely you know why Mitch Williams doesn't think Curt Schilling should be in the Hall of Fame? Because he doesn't like him. (Go to the 2:35 mark...and again, this was sent to me by Cory)
At least Williams is unbiased, right?
Now Mitch Williams discusses the shakeups in the Rangers front office and tells people to not tell others how to do their job. Williams goes about this by telling the Rangers front office how to do their job.
Today we learned that the job of President of Baseball Operations with the Rangers has been taken away from Nolan Ryan and given to the team’s GM, John Daniels.
This is the problem plaguing our game.
Without knowing the next sentence, I would have no clue what "the problem" here is. It's not readily apparent. Is the problem GM's trying to have too much responsibility within an organization? Is the problem baseball "experts" like Mitch Williams who believes he is informed enough on a topic to comment on that topic, but he isn't really informed enough to spell all the names of the concerned parties correctly? John Daniels is not the Rangers GM. Jon Daniels is the Rangers GM. A small mistake, sure, but given Mitch Williams is paid to cover MLB and seems to carry a strong opinion about Jon Daniels...
I have all the respect in the world for these young front office people that come out of Harvard or Yale — or in Daniels’ case, Cornell. I respect them when they know what they are good at: business, finance, or organizational skills — those sorts of things.
The amount of idiocy that Mitch Williams is spewing right now is amazing. So being the General Manager of a MLB franchise doesn't require business, finance or organizational skills? It sounds to me like Mitch Williams isn't quite intelligent or informed enough to be making these criticisms that he is making. Being a General Manager requires business, finance and organizational skills. Anyone who doesn't believe this is true is an uninformed moron.
Also, I like how graduates from Cornell/Harvard/Yale are good at only these three things and should not look for a job that requires other attributes. Mitch Williams graduated from West Linn High School in Oregon, perhaps they are famous for learning their young ones on how to be a baseball analyst? Because otherwise, it sounds like graduates of West Linn High School should know what they are good at...and I'm not sure it is writing.
Where I tend to lose respect for them is when they decide they know how to evaluate baseball talent better than people like Nolan Ryan! When they so that, they do their players a disservice, as well as their fan base and the entire organization.
Yeah I know! It's not like Jon Daniels is the GM of a baseball team that he has helped build into a franchise capable of making back-to-back World Series or anything. What does he know, other than he was able to replenish the Rangers farm system and make them competitive again? Leave the baseball stuff to guys like Nolan Ryan (insert exclamation point here)
I can’t speculate what the problem is down in Arlington between Nolan and Daniels
Mitch Williams can't speculate but he knows the fault is on Jon Daniels. There you go, that makes sense.
I was a Ranger back when going to a game was something a fan did when there was nothing else to do that night in town. Over the last four years, they have done something I never thought would be possible, and that was take away fans from the Dallas Cowboys.
And the reason the Rangers have had such success is because they have won baseball games. Should the credit for putting a team together that won games and made the World Series go to the President/Owner of the Texas Rangers or the General Manager of the Rangers? It seems to me like Jon Daniels put this Rangers team together, so he should get at least 50% of the credit. What do I know though? I'm not a scrappy, competitive, ex-baseball player like Mitch Williams. He clearly knows what he is talking about when he is talking about John (Jon) Daniels. Daniels needs to stick to what he knows best, like business, finance, and having them organizational skills. Leave the running of the Rangers' business, dealing with the Rangers' budget, and organizing the organization to run as effectively and efficiently as possible to those who who are qualified to do such things...which obviously isn't a graduate from a Ivy League school.
Also, the Rangers haven't really taken away fans from the Dallas Cowboys. It's not an either/or situation since each team plays a different sport. Fans can cheer for both teams.
I don’t know Daniels, but the way that Michael Young was treated there was just wrong.
You mean the part where Daniels gave Young an $80 million contract extension? Boy, that was an asshole thing to do.
Young changed positions four times for the good of the team. He became an All-Star at three different positions, then demanded a trade after the signing of Adrian Beltre.
Michael Young demanded a trade nearly every time he was asked to switch positions. I have discussed it before on this blog and the bottom line is the Rangers replaced Young with a better player each time he was asked to move. There have been plenty of MLB players who have moved positions repeatedly and not made a peep, but for some reason the media insists on making Michael Young a martyr.
One thing I can say for sure is that as soon as a GM starts to think he can evaluate talent better than someone like Ryan without anywhere near the baseball background, he is giving himself too much credit.
The Rangers have been to the World Series two of the last three seasons. Jon Daniels doesn't think he can evaluate talent well, he knows he can evaluate talent well. Whether he is a better judge of talent than Nolan Ryan, who's to say, but having played baseball doesn't mean Nolan Ryan is a better judge of talent than Jon Daniels. Nolan Ryan threw a baseball well. Throwing a baseball well doesn't mean Nolan Ryan can judge talent better than Jon Daniels can judge talent.
The problem I see in Texas is that they have power arms in their rotation, and all of them are trying to become sinker ball pitchers.
It is harder to command a sinker than it is a four-seam fastball.
I forgot about Mitch Williams credentials as a pitching coach. After not being retained as the pitching coach for an Independent League franchise early in the 2000's I know he is turning down pitching coach offers left and right. It's funny how Mitch (in just a minute) will say people who tell others how to do a job they can't do themselves are ignorant. Hopefully Mitch was looking in the mirror when he wrote this.
So if you can’t command it, it becomes a 91-MPH hit-me pitch. Trust me.
I don't trust you. You have shown through the misspelling of Jon Daniels' name and your inability to understand running a baseball team requires organizational and business skill that you have very little clue of what you are talking about. But hey, Mitch Williams throws a baseball well, so he believes that makes him qualified to do anything baseball-related. I'm really good at driving a car so that means I could own a NASCAR team, right?
I think that has to change. I think they need to let these guys who can throw 95 to 98 go out and do it, and use a sinker only in spots where it is needed.
I would remind Mitch Williams that Nolan Ryan is on record as being the guy in the Rangers organization who has had the most influence on the Rangers pitching staff. So these changes Mitch criticizes the Rangers for not making, well, he is basically criticizing his boy Nolan Ryan. Nolan Ryan is on record here, here, here, here, and here as having a great effect on the Texas Rangers pitching staff. It doesn't shock me that Mitch Williams doesn't understand he is essentially criticizing Nolan Ryan when he criticizes how the Rangers pitchers are pitching.
I also enjoy how Mitch is trying to blame Jon Daniels for the pitchers the Rangers have acquired and developed, but doesn't give Daniels credit for any of the success the Rangers have had over the past five years.
I will point to an organization that has a very smart GM: Tampa. Andrew Friedman is very smart. I believe he is smarter than any other GM out there right now, because I believe he surrounds himself with very good baseball people and trusts each of them to do their job,
Mitch Williams should not be writing any of his thoughts down. He contradicts himself, he doesn't really make sense and I get a feeling he doesn't have a firm grasp on the point he is trying to make. Let's compare the backgrounds of Jon Daniels and Andrew Friedman. One guy Mitch Williams likes because he is "very smart" and the other guy Mitch thinks needs to leave running a baseball team to baseball guys.
College
Jon Daniels- Cornell University
Andrew Friedman- Tulane University
Major in College
Jon Daniels- Applied Economics and Management
Andrew Friedman- Management with a Concentration in Finance
First Job out of College
Jon Daniels- Business Development for Allied Domecq (They operate wine and restaurant businesses)
Andrew Friedman- Analyst for Bear Stearns
First Baseball Job
Jon Daniels- Internship with the Rockies in 2001 and Assistant, Baseball Operations for Rangers in 2003
Andrew Friedman- Director of Baseball Development for the Rays in 2004
Now if you can tell me how based on their backgrounds Andrew Friedman is a "baseball guy" and Jon Daniels is not, then you are lying. Both guys have very similar educational and baseball backgrounds, but Mitch Williams thinks Jon Daniels can't run a team because he isn't a "baseball guy," but Williams likes Friedman and seems to accept him as a "baseball guy." In related news, Mitch Williams has no idea what he is talking about and isn't consistent with his criticism.
I don’t know about y’all that are reading this, but I don’t for a second think Friedman is making any decisions involving talent without consulting his baseball people.
Don't think for a second that Jon Daniels makes any decisions without consulting his baseball people.
In my opinion, you are only ignorant if you try and tell someone how to do their job if you aren’t qualified to do that job.
You mean sort of like how you just told the Rangers organization how they need to encourage their pitchers to throw the baseball despite having no experience despite having no experience as a pitching coach at the major league level (Williams was a pitching coach for an Independent League team for 2002 and 2003, but his contract wasn't renewed)? Or does Mitch mean like how he is calling Jon Daniels not a "baseball guy" and stating he doesn't have the knowledge necessary to do Nolan Ryan's job, despite the fact Mitch Williams has no experience as a scout or baseball executive?
This whole column is basically Mitch Williams telling Jon Daniels how to do his job and what job to stick to.
I don’t think I’m going to get to many people calling me to do their taxes or represent them in court. Just as I am not going to argue with someone who does a job that I have no clue about.
You mean like being the General Manager of an MLB team? Mitch seemed to argue with the qualifications of Jon Daniels to do Nolan Ryan's job and Mitch doesn't seem to have a clue that being an MLB GM requires business, finance and organizational skills...which are all strengths Mitch admits Jon has due to graduating college from Cornell.
If the Rangers lose Ryan, they will be headed back to where they were before he got there
I don't think the Rangers should lose Nolan Ryan, but it is incredibly premature and uninformed to state the Rangers will be a bad team if Ryan no longer has an affiliation with the Rangers organization.
Much like Mitch seems to dislike Curt Schilling and this drives his belief Schilling should not be in the Hall of Fame, Mitch doesn't like Jon Daniels not being a "baseball guy" (unlike Andrew Friedman...mind. blown.) and so he thinks Daniels can't do his job as Rangers GM without Nolan Ryan around.
I wish Mitch Williams wrote more blog entries because his blog could be a gold mine.
Sunday, September 23, 2012
6 comments ESPN Writer Says Josh Hamilton Lacks Mental Toughness, Commenters on Column Apparently Free to Roam in Society
Jean-Jacques Taylor thinks Josh Hamilton lacks mental toughness. Apparently beating drug and alcohol addiction and having to deal with the temptation of his addiction for the rest of his life doesn't require mental toughness. Part of what I like about this column, outside of the obvious stupidity of it, is how the commenter react to the column. I rarely read comments on articles because...how do I put this without sounding elitist?...people can be fucking idiots and they try to infect others with their idiocy using the written word in comments to articles. It makes me appreciate the commenters on this blog. Even in disagreement there's very little stupidity. Maybe we should just be happy Jean-Jacques Taylor didn't suggest Josh Hamilton could learn something from Whitney Houston. Still, I don't think Josh Hamilton isn't mentally tough, no matter what the author and less eloquent commenters believe on this issue.
This whole article should be read interactively with the Arnold Schwarzenegger soundboard. Jean-Jacques Taylor should use Arnold's voice after each paragraph to implore Hamilton to "Stop whining" or to tell him "You must be proud of yourself" for sitting out a game when he had a sinus headache.
Last week, Adrian Beltre stormed into Ron Washington's office, demanding the manager write his name into the lineup.
Now, let's examine Josh Hamilton's actions one night after an off day and an appearance on "Jimmy Kimmel Live."
Adrian Beltre signed a 5 year $64 million contract with the Seattle Mariners at the age of 26 and then repaid them for signing him to this contract by hitting .266/.317/.442 over the lifetime of his contract.
Now, let's examine how Josh Hamilton had beaten drug and alcohol addiction at the age of 26 and then repaid the Reds and Rangers for taking a chance on him by hitting .304/.364/.551 over the next six years.
Further in Josh Hamilton's defense, his sinus headache very well could have been caused by having to listen to Jimmy Kimmel's jokes. Did you know Bill Simmons used to write for Jimmy Kimmel? He has a ton of stories about Jimmy Kimmel and even hangs out with him all the time. Let Bill tell you this slightly slanderous story about what a whore Charlize Theron is.
Hamilton, two weeks from completing an MVP-caliber season with 42 homers and 123 RBIs, left an important game against the Angels with a sinus headache.
Has Jean-Jacques Taylor every had a sinus headache? They are pretty freaking painful. To make matters worse, Hamilton has a history of drug use, so he may be a bit nervous to start popping pills to help alleviate the pain.
We're talking about something a couple of tablets usually knocks out.
Which is something a person could easily do as long as that person doesn't have a long history of drug and alcohol abuse...which Josh Hamilton just happens to have.
This is the dude who says he can't figure out why his impending free agency is so complicated.
I'm pretty sure Josh Hamilton does know why his impending free agency is so complicated, but for purpose of negotiations he is pretending he can't figure it out. Hamilton is quite aware of his drug and alcohol history and the work a team will have to put in to make sure Hamilton isn't tempted to slip.
What general manager wants to spend more than $100 million on a guy who can't play through a sinus infection in September?
Says the writer who probably would call in sick to work if he had a sinus headache that didn't allow him to see his computer screen or read words on the computer screen without feeling pain. I'm sure Hamilton would have no problem hitting a 90pm fastball with a sinus infection.
This isn't about pain threshold, because last year Hamilton spent the playoffs playing with a groin muscle nearly ripped off the bone.
So Josh Hamilton lacks mental toughness, but this isn't about pain threshold? I'm confused as to how this makes sense? If Hamilton lacks the mental toughness to play through a sinus infection, isn't that about pain threshold?
Michael Jordan once played through a bout of the flu so bad he could barely stand and scored 38 points in Game 5 of the 1997 NBA Finals.
That was a bad hangover that Michael Jordan had.
And don't forget that Dirk Nowitzki played through a torn tendon and the flu in the 2011 NBA Finals to help the Mavs win their only title.
These are both NBA Finals games and not a regular season game. There is a difference.
That's what champions do.
Hamilton's departure seems more about mental toughness.
Right, the same guy who pushes away temptation on a daily basis isn't mentally tough. I get it. I've always loved it when sportswriters call out athletes from the comfort of their own couch or pressbox. A sinus infection or sinus headache, whatever Hamilton had, is often accompanied by dizziness. I'm not a doctor, but I'm guessing if Hamilton was having vision issues and some dizziness he didn't need to be batting against major league pitching unless he absolutely had to.
Remember that Taylor brought up Hamilton playing in last year's World Series with a groin muscle nearly torn off the bone? Was he not mentally tough then as well?
He knew the Rangers had a big division lead over the Angels, and Texas was leading the game 3-1.
He didn't feel good, so he opted to take the rest of the night off. He'll have a good excuse today and maybe even a note from a doctor or his parents.
Because Hamilton is nothing if not a huge wimp. His mom has to write him a note saying he gets out of work for the day because he has an ouchie boo-boo. That's how big of a wimp Josh Hamilton is. Everyone point and laugh at him.
We saw one more example Tuesday night why his time here is nearing an end.
Thank God. Thank God the Rangers will get rid of Hamilton's .300 batting average, .360 on-base percentage, and 30+ home runs. The Rangers will be a better team for it.
Now I was going to share some the comments on this article to show the crazy just doesn't stop with Jean-Jacques Taylor. For some reason I decide to read these comments and they made me me laugh/worry about the world.
Good article -- can't argue with its premise. Hamilton's decision sure didn't pass the smell test last night, and it's not doing much better this afternoon.
So his decision didn't pass the smell test, meaning it was all a lie and Hamilton really wanted a day off without asking for it?
Hopefully Hamilton's endless ailments will hold off until he helps get us a World Series winner; then he's free to do/go wherever he wants.
Makes sense because you want to get rid of the guy who apparently is very important to the Rangers winning a World Series. Those are the guys you want to be rid of as soon as possible.
So....the fact that JH has 42 dingers and over 120rbi and is an MVP candidate is totally overlooked right? Now, if this was a playoff game, I'm pretty sure JH would have sucked it up and played it out. It's writers like JJT, what kind of name is "jacques" by the way,
It's French.
who need to get some press so you pick on a guy who has delivered ALL SEASON LONG!
here's your sign!!
OH! A Bill Engvall reference. Just what the comments were lacking. That's not at all an out-dated reference to an unfunny phrase.
wow...the dude battled with a life altering addiction to drugs and booze...and has since won an MVP and been the cornerstone player on a team that has been a top team the last 3 yrs...if you threw Jason Garrett's name in there instead of J-HAM im all for it...gotta practice what you preach...sorry but i will never forgive you for icing our own Kicker..ever...you dont give a 16yr old with a drivers permit a Ferrari and let him go nuts so why give a fresh face new coach the reins to the largest franchise in Football...players get a chance to develop, not coaches...wait never mind none of this matters Jerry is still the GM...
I don't know either why Josh Hamilton told Jason Garrett to ice his own kicker and then bought a Ferrari for a 16 year old because Jerry Jones told him to. Great point.
Great article JJT. I met Hamilton once with my family at a restaurant and the immature punk actually tried to talk about religion with us. Me and my family are staunch atheists and we told him to get the hell out and to keep his nose clean.
The immature punk isn't the guy who writes under the screen name "DieFeldmanDie." This story doesn't sound like it made-up at all. I'm sure Josh Hamilton came up to this guy's family unprompted at a restaurant and started talking about religion. Athletes often go out in public, and unprompted, seek out attention from fans.
I like people who describe themselves as "staunch" atheists. They are people who have a deep and abiding belief in believing in nothing.
Josh Hamilton, Christians moreso, make me sick and I cannot wait for Hamilton to get the hell out of Dallas.
In a way, Hamilton by (supposedly) talking to this guy's family about God and his own personal beliefs IS trying to get the Hell out of Dallas. This is an incredibly relevant and not at all trolling point to make while discussing a column about a sinus headache.
Atleast we arent in the Angels shoes... they still have 9 more years of Pooholes. They will be bottom feeders come the end of that contract just like the Rangers were with ArodGreat point and the author of this comment shows what a diehard Rangers fan he truly is. The Rangers traded Alex Rodriguez three years into the contract they signed him to, so he never even played for the Rangers close to the end of his contract. The Rangers were bottom feeders during A-Rod's time with Texas though, and that was mainly A-Rod's fault of course. He was the only player on those Rangers teams who didn't perform at a high level.
It is hard to project Pujols nine years from now, but if the Angels become bottom feeders it isn't because of Pujols' contract. If the Angels are bottom feeders it is because other players on the team haven't played well either. The Angels are a large market team, so they can absorb the cost of the contract if Pujols struggles more than other teams could. But at least the Rangers aren't in the Angels shoes and have to put up with a power hitter who is actually under contract after this year. Plus, it must be quite a bear to have Mike Trout play for your team.
JJT- What I have read is that he was also suffering from a migraine headache due to sinus issues.Tsutxn02 has had sinus issues before. He even has some symptoms right now. Here are some of his symptoms...
Have you ever had a migrain,
They cause the inability to spell...
it can blurr your visionSinus issues may cause you to add extra letters at the end of words...
so how do you play a game that is dependent on crystal clear vision so much that you can read the seems
They also make you write run-on sentences, then end the sentence by misspelling a very easy word to spell.
on the ball to determine rotation/trajectory?
The trajectory of the ball? That's not so hard to figure out. The ball is coming right at the batter, that's the trajectory.
Genuine, real , ball players play through this kinda stuff.
WWJD? What would Jeter do? He'd play through this injury. Jeter is a real, genuine ball player. Not fake ball player like that bum Josh Hamilton.
Josh is the pampered, spoil brat with a guard/nurse maid keeping him straight and sober. Enough Mr. Hamilton, take your crap somewhere else I am tired of you and your immature attitude. No more bats in the stands, no more jack $@% smiles at the plate,
Yes, mock Josh Hamilton for needing someone to help keep him sober, but don't write the word "ass" because that's over the line. We have to keep some decorum during this discussion. It can't just turn into a name-calling session.
no more three pitch outs, no more running into the wall and breaking,"and breaking," like Hamilton runs into the wall and his body literally breaks apart? I must have missed that highlight.
no more of your crap period.Hamilton is well known for playing poorly when he is having his period. That crap period has been the cause for so many of Hamilton's struggles.
No more All-Star centerfielder, no more 30 home runs, and no more MVP-type seasons. That's a good a thing for the Rangers.
Haha--everyone's all mad about the article, yet the poll results agree with JJT's premise that Josh lack mental toughness.And few polls are more accurate than any poll ESPN chooses to run. robert-myers
Let Josh jump over to the NL where we dont have to deal with him. He will demand a prince/albert deal and some California team will sign him.
Hamilton will demand a Prince Albert deal in his next contract where he gets free genital piercings for life upon signing with his new team.
JJT is DEAD ON!!!! The DFW market gives this guy a pass all the time and why? BC he has "demons"? Because he's a good voice in the community?? Please. That's extra stuff. Look to teachers, pastors and community organizers for a voice. I want my athletes to hit, catch or shoot the damn ball and win. That is all.Well conveniently Josh Hamilton can hit and catch the ball, not to mention the Rangers win with him on the team. Perhaps Hamilton gets a pass because he is an athlete who hit and catch the ball, plus his team wins games. I'm not sure what this guy's complaint is about in regard to Josh Hamilton. It seems Hamilton matches all the criteria "rob52575" is looking for in an athlete.
I've tortured us enough for the day with comments from ESPN commenters. Hopefully Josh Hamilton will gain some mental toughness soon. Apparently beating drug addiction and trying to stay clean isn't mentally taxing enough.
And of course, after I write this Evan Grant tweets this. I'm sure it is all a result of Hamilton lacking mental toughness.
This whole article should be read interactively with the Arnold Schwarzenegger soundboard. Jean-Jacques Taylor should use Arnold's voice after each paragraph to implore Hamilton to "Stop whining" or to tell him "You must be proud of yourself" for sitting out a game when he had a sinus headache.
Last week, Adrian Beltre stormed into Ron Washington's office, demanding the manager write his name into the lineup.
Now, let's examine Josh Hamilton's actions one night after an off day and an appearance on "Jimmy Kimmel Live."
Adrian Beltre signed a 5 year $64 million contract with the Seattle Mariners at the age of 26 and then repaid them for signing him to this contract by hitting .266/.317/.442 over the lifetime of his contract.
Now, let's examine how Josh Hamilton had beaten drug and alcohol addiction at the age of 26 and then repaid the Reds and Rangers for taking a chance on him by hitting .304/.364/.551 over the next six years.
Further in Josh Hamilton's defense, his sinus headache very well could have been caused by having to listen to Jimmy Kimmel's jokes. Did you know Bill Simmons used to write for Jimmy Kimmel? He has a ton of stories about Jimmy Kimmel and even hangs out with him all the time. Let Bill tell you this slightly slanderous story about what a whore Charlize Theron is.
Hamilton, two weeks from completing an MVP-caliber season with 42 homers and 123 RBIs, left an important game against the Angels with a sinus headache.
Has Jean-Jacques Taylor every had a sinus headache? They are pretty freaking painful. To make matters worse, Hamilton has a history of drug use, so he may be a bit nervous to start popping pills to help alleviate the pain.
We're talking about something a couple of tablets usually knocks out.
Which is something a person could easily do as long as that person doesn't have a long history of drug and alcohol abuse...which Josh Hamilton just happens to have.
This is the dude who says he can't figure out why his impending free agency is so complicated.
I'm pretty sure Josh Hamilton does know why his impending free agency is so complicated, but for purpose of negotiations he is pretending he can't figure it out. Hamilton is quite aware of his drug and alcohol history and the work a team will have to put in to make sure Hamilton isn't tempted to slip.
What general manager wants to spend more than $100 million on a guy who can't play through a sinus infection in September?
Says the writer who probably would call in sick to work if he had a sinus headache that didn't allow him to see his computer screen or read words on the computer screen without feeling pain. I'm sure Hamilton would have no problem hitting a 90pm fastball with a sinus infection.
This isn't about pain threshold, because last year Hamilton spent the playoffs playing with a groin muscle nearly ripped off the bone.
So Josh Hamilton lacks mental toughness, but this isn't about pain threshold? I'm confused as to how this makes sense? If Hamilton lacks the mental toughness to play through a sinus infection, isn't that about pain threshold?
Michael Jordan once played through a bout of the flu so bad he could barely stand and scored 38 points in Game 5 of the 1997 NBA Finals.
That was a bad hangover that Michael Jordan had.
And don't forget that Dirk Nowitzki played through a torn tendon and the flu in the 2011 NBA Finals to help the Mavs win their only title.
These are both NBA Finals games and not a regular season game. There is a difference.
That's what champions do.
Hamilton's departure seems more about mental toughness.
Right, the same guy who pushes away temptation on a daily basis isn't mentally tough. I get it. I've always loved it when sportswriters call out athletes from the comfort of their own couch or pressbox. A sinus infection or sinus headache, whatever Hamilton had, is often accompanied by dizziness. I'm not a doctor, but I'm guessing if Hamilton was having vision issues and some dizziness he didn't need to be batting against major league pitching unless he absolutely had to.
Remember that Taylor brought up Hamilton playing in last year's World Series with a groin muscle nearly torn off the bone? Was he not mentally tough then as well?
He knew the Rangers had a big division lead over the Angels, and Texas was leading the game 3-1.
He didn't feel good, so he opted to take the rest of the night off. He'll have a good excuse today and maybe even a note from a doctor or his parents.
Because Hamilton is nothing if not a huge wimp. His mom has to write him a note saying he gets out of work for the day because he has an ouchie boo-boo. That's how big of a wimp Josh Hamilton is. Everyone point and laugh at him.
We saw one more example Tuesday night why his time here is nearing an end.
Thank God. Thank God the Rangers will get rid of Hamilton's .300 batting average, .360 on-base percentage, and 30+ home runs. The Rangers will be a better team for it.
Now I was going to share some the comments on this article to show the crazy just doesn't stop with Jean-Jacques Taylor. For some reason I decide to read these comments and they made me me laugh/worry about the world.
Good article -- can't argue with its premise. Hamilton's decision sure didn't pass the smell test last night, and it's not doing much better this afternoon.
So his decision didn't pass the smell test, meaning it was all a lie and Hamilton really wanted a day off without asking for it?
Hopefully Hamilton's endless ailments will hold off until he helps get us a World Series winner; then he's free to do/go wherever he wants.
Makes sense because you want to get rid of the guy who apparently is very important to the Rangers winning a World Series. Those are the guys you want to be rid of as soon as possible.
So....the fact that JH has 42 dingers and over 120rbi and is an MVP candidate is totally overlooked right? Now, if this was a playoff game, I'm pretty sure JH would have sucked it up and played it out. It's writers like JJT, what kind of name is "jacques" by the way,
It's French.
who need to get some press so you pick on a guy who has delivered ALL SEASON LONG!
here's your sign!!
OH! A Bill Engvall reference. Just what the comments were lacking. That's not at all an out-dated reference to an unfunny phrase.
wow...the dude battled with a life altering addiction to drugs and booze...and has since won an MVP and been the cornerstone player on a team that has been a top team the last 3 yrs...if you threw Jason Garrett's name in there instead of J-HAM im all for it...gotta practice what you preach...sorry but i will never forgive you for icing our own Kicker..ever...you dont give a 16yr old with a drivers permit a Ferrari and let him go nuts so why give a fresh face new coach the reins to the largest franchise in Football...players get a chance to develop, not coaches...wait never mind none of this matters Jerry is still the GM...
I don't know either why Josh Hamilton told Jason Garrett to ice his own kicker and then bought a Ferrari for a 16 year old because Jerry Jones told him to. Great point.
Great article JJT. I met Hamilton once with my family at a restaurant and the immature punk actually tried to talk about religion with us. Me and my family are staunch atheists and we told him to get the hell out and to keep his nose clean.
The immature punk isn't the guy who writes under the screen name "DieFeldmanDie." This story doesn't sound like it made-up at all. I'm sure Josh Hamilton came up to this guy's family unprompted at a restaurant and started talking about religion. Athletes often go out in public, and unprompted, seek out attention from fans.
I like people who describe themselves as "staunch" atheists. They are people who have a deep and abiding belief in believing in nothing.
Josh Hamilton, Christians moreso, make me sick and I cannot wait for Hamilton to get the hell out of Dallas.
In a way, Hamilton by (supposedly) talking to this guy's family about God and his own personal beliefs IS trying to get the Hell out of Dallas. This is an incredibly relevant and not at all trolling point to make while discussing a column about a sinus headache.
Atleast we arent in the Angels shoes... they still have 9 more years of Pooholes. They will be bottom feeders come the end of that contract just like the Rangers were with ArodGreat point and the author of this comment shows what a diehard Rangers fan he truly is. The Rangers traded Alex Rodriguez three years into the contract they signed him to, so he never even played for the Rangers close to the end of his contract. The Rangers were bottom feeders during A-Rod's time with Texas though, and that was mainly A-Rod's fault of course. He was the only player on those Rangers teams who didn't perform at a high level.
It is hard to project Pujols nine years from now, but if the Angels become bottom feeders it isn't because of Pujols' contract. If the Angels are bottom feeders it is because other players on the team haven't played well either. The Angels are a large market team, so they can absorb the cost of the contract if Pujols struggles more than other teams could. But at least the Rangers aren't in the Angels shoes and have to put up with a power hitter who is actually under contract after this year. Plus, it must be quite a bear to have Mike Trout play for your team.
JJT- What I have read is that he was also suffering from a migraine headache due to sinus issues.Tsutxn02 has had sinus issues before. He even has some symptoms right now. Here are some of his symptoms...
Have you ever had a migrain,
They cause the inability to spell...
it can blurr your visionSinus issues may cause you to add extra letters at the end of words...
so how do you play a game that is dependent on crystal clear vision so much that you can read the seems
They also make you write run-on sentences, then end the sentence by misspelling a very easy word to spell.
on the ball to determine rotation/trajectory?
The trajectory of the ball? That's not so hard to figure out. The ball is coming right at the batter, that's the trajectory.
Genuine, real , ball players play through this kinda stuff.
WWJD? What would Jeter do? He'd play through this injury. Jeter is a real, genuine ball player. Not fake ball player like that bum Josh Hamilton.
Josh is the pampered, spoil brat with a guard/nurse maid keeping him straight and sober. Enough Mr. Hamilton, take your crap somewhere else I am tired of you and your immature attitude. No more bats in the stands, no more jack $@% smiles at the plate,
Yes, mock Josh Hamilton for needing someone to help keep him sober, but don't write the word "ass" because that's over the line. We have to keep some decorum during this discussion. It can't just turn into a name-calling session.
no more three pitch outs, no more running into the wall and breaking,"and breaking," like Hamilton runs into the wall and his body literally breaks apart? I must have missed that highlight.
no more of your crap period.Hamilton is well known for playing poorly when he is having his period. That crap period has been the cause for so many of Hamilton's struggles.
No more All-Star centerfielder, no more 30 home runs, and no more MVP-type seasons. That's a good a thing for the Rangers.
Haha--everyone's all mad about the article, yet the poll results agree with JJT's premise that Josh lack mental toughness.And few polls are more accurate than any poll ESPN chooses to run. robert-myers
Let Josh jump over to the NL where we dont have to deal with him. He will demand a prince/albert deal and some California team will sign him.
Hamilton will demand a Prince Albert deal in his next contract where he gets free genital piercings for life upon signing with his new team.
JJT is DEAD ON!!!! The DFW market gives this guy a pass all the time and why? BC he has "demons"? Because he's a good voice in the community?? Please. That's extra stuff. Look to teachers, pastors and community organizers for a voice. I want my athletes to hit, catch or shoot the damn ball and win. That is all.Well conveniently Josh Hamilton can hit and catch the ball, not to mention the Rangers win with him on the team. Perhaps Hamilton gets a pass because he is an athlete who hit and catch the ball, plus his team wins games. I'm not sure what this guy's complaint is about in regard to Josh Hamilton. It seems Hamilton matches all the criteria "rob52575" is looking for in an athlete.
I've tortured us enough for the day with comments from ESPN commenters. Hopefully Josh Hamilton will gain some mental toughness soon. Apparently beating drug addiction and trying to stay clean isn't mentally taxing enough.
And of course, after I write this Evan Grant tweets this. I'm sure it is all a result of Hamilton lacking mental toughness.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
7 comments I Suppose Michael Young Could Rob a Bank and Immediately Be Forgiven For It
Some of you may remember Murray Chass's ode to Michael Young earlier this year. Murray found the trade-demand machine, otherwise known as Michael Young, to be a great player who was an even better teammate, despite constantly demanding a trade when a superior player is brought in to take his position. It appears Jen Engel has joined the chorus to praise the consummate professional who bitched about his playing time in the offseason after Mike Napoli and Adrian Beltre joined the Rangers team. I think Michael Young is a great player, but I can't believe how bulletproof he is. A disgruntled player is usually looked upon by the media as a problem, but Young received an MVP vote from Engel for being disgruntled.
I realize Young had a great year, but how the hell is he a consummate professional by constantly bitching about players being brought in to supplement the Rangers team? How is this professional? He still got 689 plate appearances this year and he played very well in those plate appearances. The Rangers clearly aren't looking to take him out of the everyday lineup and they told him this during the offseason. So Jen Engel has decided she thinks Young should come in second in the AL MVP race. Why? Because he is a professional who doesn't let things get to him and still performs well and leads the Rangers team, which doesn't explain how complaining to management publicly about your playing time is being professional.
I'm convinced at this point Young could rob a bank or commit a triple homicide and everyone would immediately forgive his actions. He can do no wrong.
If I had an American League MVP ballot and voting privileges, my vote would be easy.
1. Justin Verlander
Why I would have the Rangers’ super utility infielder as runner-up, when so many consider him not a worthy candidate at all, is because of what Mike Napoli did Saturday.
Naturally. Nothing proves Young's value to the team than the on-the-field exploits of another player on Young's team.
"You see that home run Nelson Cruz hit? Michael Young inspired him to hit that home run."
We love stories like that, tales of tribulation and redemption. However, the truth is there was nothing easy about the Rangers, at least not in the beginning of the season. Just ask Young.
I know! I am sure none of these tribulations were caused by Young's offseason behavior. How dare the Rangers go out and get Adrian Beltre? Didn't they see how acquiring a guy who can hit .296/.331/.561 with 32 home runs would reflect on Michael Young? This is why Young demanded a trade at the beginning of the season for the second or third time in his career. He's so unselfish he doesn't want the team to succeed if it means he has to switch positions.
But Napoli was the final straw in a simmering feud that quickly snowballed into an ugly offseason word brawl between Young and the Texas team he has been the face of for years.
The ugly offseason brawl went like this. The Rangers signed a good third baseman in free agency and Michael Young didn't want to switch positions. Then the Rangers traded for Mike Napoli and Young was afraid Napoli would take away his at-bats the DH spot in the lineup. Incidentally, Young complained he didn't want to be the DH when the Rangers signed Beltre, but then when the Rangers traded for Napoli he complained this would take away at-bats at the DH spot he didn't want to play anyway. He is a consummate professional. The moral to this story is that Michael Young enjoys demanding a trade and being difficult when he can be. He became difficult when he was moved to third base for Elvis Andrus and I know he is a great leader, but I'm not sure he is the best team player when what is best for the team hurts him personally.
This could have gotten toxic, and fast.
But it didn't get toxic because Young was able to demand a trade and whine about his playing time in a professional manner. I'm assuming he didn't stomp his feet or sit Indian-style on the carpet and refuse to move until he was guaranteed playing time and that is what makes him a consummate professional.
Why it did not is because Young did what he always does: play good ball and be a better teammate.
I realize Young had a great year, but how the hell is he a consummate professional by constantly bitching about players being brought in to supplement the Rangers team? How is this professional? He still got 689 plate appearances this year and he played very well in those plate appearances. The Rangers clearly aren't looking to take him out of the everyday lineup and they told him this during the offseason. So Jen Engel has decided she thinks Young should come in second in the AL MVP race. Why? Because he is a professional who doesn't let things get to him and still performs well and leads the Rangers team, which doesn't explain how complaining to management publicly about your playing time is being professional.
I'm convinced at this point Young could rob a bank or commit a triple homicide and everyone would immediately forgive his actions. He can do no wrong.
If I had an American League MVP ballot and voting privileges, my vote would be easy.
1. Justin Verlander
2. Michael Young
3. Ellsbury, Bautista, blah, blah, blah.
Yes, "blah, blah, blah..." let's throw in the players who have great statistics right behind Michael Young. Suppose we switch Jose Bautista with Michael Young this year and each would play for the other's current team. Think the Rangers would be a better team and the Blue Jays would be a worse team? I would think so.Why I would have the Rangers’ super utility infielder as runner-up, when so many consider him not a worthy candidate at all, is because of what Mike Napoli did Saturday.
Naturally. Nothing proves Young's value to the team than the on-the-field exploits of another player on Young's team.
"You see that home run Nelson Cruz hit? Michael Young inspired him to hit that home run."
We love stories like that, tales of tribulation and redemption. However, the truth is there was nothing easy about the Rangers, at least not in the beginning of the season. Just ask Young.
I know! I am sure none of these tribulations were caused by Young's offseason behavior. How dare the Rangers go out and get Adrian Beltre? Didn't they see how acquiring a guy who can hit .296/.331/.561 with 32 home runs would reflect on Michael Young? This is why Young demanded a trade at the beginning of the season for the second or third time in his career. He's so unselfish he doesn't want the team to succeed if it means he has to switch positions.
But Napoli was the final straw in a simmering feud that quickly snowballed into an ugly offseason word brawl between Young and the Texas team he has been the face of for years.
The ugly offseason brawl went like this. The Rangers signed a good third baseman in free agency and Michael Young didn't want to switch positions. Then the Rangers traded for Mike Napoli and Young was afraid Napoli would take away his at-bats the DH spot in the lineup. Incidentally, Young complained he didn't want to be the DH when the Rangers signed Beltre, but then when the Rangers traded for Napoli he complained this would take away at-bats at the DH spot he didn't want to play anyway. He is a consummate professional. The moral to this story is that Michael Young enjoys demanding a trade and being difficult when he can be. He became difficult when he was moved to third base for Elvis Andrus and I know he is a great leader, but I'm not sure he is the best team player when what is best for the team hurts him personally.
This could have gotten toxic, and fast.
But it didn't get toxic because Young was able to demand a trade and whine about his playing time in a professional manner. I'm assuming he didn't stomp his feet or sit Indian-style on the carpet and refuse to move until he was guaranteed playing time and that is what makes him a consummate professional.
Why it did not is because Young did what he always does: play good ball and be a better teammate.
Unless you think a player demanding a trade when a superior player is signed to play his position is not being a good teammate.
Look, I get Michael Young’s position. It sucks to get replaced and a little bit of whining or complaining is to be expected. Privately this can happen. What’s irritating is the Rangers moves that involve Young moving positions have consistently made the team better and Young made his demands public. That’s even fine to make your trade demands public, but how the hell do you get lauded for this behavior? Jen Engel thinks Young should be MVP because he didn’t cause a huge ruckus when the Rangers replaced him with Adrian Beltre and took away some of his time (though it didn’t take away his time) at first base by trading for Mike Napoli. He is getting credit for accepting with only some complaining what other players accept with no public complaining.
The truth: There is no easy redemption of Napoli without the consummate professionalism of Young.
First, Napoli didn’t need to be redeemed. He should have gotten more playing time in Anaheim. He never hit like he did in Anaheim like he has for Texas, but he deserved 500 at-bats per year in Anaheim, not to split time with Jeff Mathis. So couching what Young “did” in terms of Napoli’s necessary redemption is already a contrived narrative.
The fit Young threw, and he did throw a fit, when Napoli was traded for is not the sign of a consummate professional. Frankly, Young is lucky this didn’t affect the team more than it did. He went public with this demand and felt the Rangers misled him about his role with the team.
And yet just watch, everybody will skip Young's role because, frankly, it involves intangibles,
It also involves Young no longer being a baby and realizing having Napoli and Beltre on the team makes the Rangers a better team and he would get the at-bats he requires to keep his ego happy. I wouldn’t say Young accepting the Rangers have improved with the addition of these two players is a positive intangible necessarily. He didn’t continue to throw a fit throughout the year and that's great. A consummate professional would not have thrown one in the first place.
and what cannot be measured no longer matters in baseball, or so we have been told.
This article would not be complete without a shot at “Moneyball.”
“It could have been a huge distraction. He could have been a pain in the …” Washington acknowledged Saturday. “But Michael Young is not that kind of guy.
Except Young was a pain in the ass when he first learned about the acquisitions of Beltre and Napoli. It just happened he learned about these acquisitions during the offseason so everyone had time to cool down before the season began. I give credit to Young for finally getting over it, but he doesn’t deserve a second-place MVP vote nor any other form of excessive credit.
he is teaching so many guys how to be a baseball player, and so I knew he wouldn’t let it get in the way of his teammates.”
Mike Napoli’s great season can easily be considered a by-product of Michael Young teaching him how to be a baseball player. For years, Napoli just considered himself as a guy who hit a baseball with a wooden bat, but this year with the help of Michael Young he learned to be a baseball player.
Young being a pro’s pro. Because when the Rangers first traded for Napoli, so closely on the heels of third baseman Adrian Beltre being signed to a big contract to play Young's position, the face of the franchise became apoplectic,
Let’s think. Is this something a pro’s pro would do? Did Kevin Youkilis shit a brick and demand a trade when the Red Sox signed Adrian Beltre or traded for Adrian Gonzalez or Victor Martinez? Did he cry when Mike Lowell got time over him at third base? No, he didn’t. That’s being a pro’s pro. Becoming apoplectic for the second or third time in your career and then eventually getting over it is not being a pro’s pro.
kind of at the team and most definitely at GM Jon Daniels for what he felt were broken promises and poorly handled communication.
Part of what makes Young so valuable is his versatility. These moves made by the Rangers made the Rangers a better team and took advantage of Young’s versatility. He got angry and now he is getting credit for not ruining the season. I don’t get it.
Sides were taken. Angry words were exchanged through reporters. A trade was demanded.
A pro’s pro. Getting angry and demanding a trade through the media if you are Michael Young not only causes the media to defend you, but also give you MVP votes. It’s crazy. It is like he can do no wrong and be forgiven for demanding a trade, when if quite a few other players did this they would get crucified.
And when none materialized, questions surfaced about whether Young would report for spring training and what mental state he’d arrive in if he did.
Pro’s pro. You ask what that means? That means a person who demands a trade and then leaves a question out there as to whether he will report to spring training or be pissed off and cause problems if he does report.
What Young did instead was establish himself as the Rangers’ MVP and a dark horse AL MVP candidate, by virtue of numbers everybody can see — career highs with a .338 average and 106 RBI —
He had a fantastic year. He should be considered an MVP candidate for those reasons, not because he didn’t ruin the Rangers season as may have been expected of him based on his actions and statements during the winter.
And sure enough Young’s fingerprints were everywhere on Saturday’s season-saving victory —on a Rangers offense that finally came to life, on young winning pitcher Derek Holland,
Young has hit .133/.188/.133 in the ALDS. It is a small sample size but I thought this should be mentioned when determining his effect on the Rangers 2011 postseason outside of his performance in one game.
and even on Napoli, who never once felt any of Young’s frustration.
Well it is fine then. Since Napoli didn’t feel any of Young’s frustration maybe Michael Young deserves the AL MVP and Cy Young Award.
Young was not booted, not in that way, yet he basically was being told that at age 34 his best days were behind him and his numbers were statistically likely to keep declining,
Not at all. What Young was being told is the Rangers had a chance to improve the team by trading for Mike Napoli and signing Adrian Beltre. There are injuries to players throughout the season and Young would still get playing time, just not at one particular position. It wasn’t a knock on Young any more than it was a vote of confidence for his versatility, while attempting to improve the team’s roster.
and that he had switched from second base to shortstop to third base did not really matter.
It doesn’t matter. Young gets paid the same no matter what position he plays, so the Rangers shouldn't shy away from improving their team because Young doesn't want to change positions again or is worried about his playing time. He's proven he deserves the playing time he undoubtedly will continue to receive.
This is the danger of judging athletes only by attributes you can assign a number to, like a few in the Moneyball crew do.
This whole “Michael Young should be the second-place finisher in the MVP vote” thing has nothing to do with “Moneyball.” This is the fallback excuse for sportswriters when there is no factual backing for the position they are taking. This fallback excuse is to say Young deserves second-place MVP votes based on intangibles and then will blame statistics or “Moneyball” for the people who disagree with this position. It is the sportswriting equivalent of a teenager screaming his parents will never understand him/her and then running out of the room.
But there is also value in a guy who can stand up in the clubhouse and say “I am behind our manager. He’s my guy”
Maybe this decribes Michael Young. So where is the value in a guy who can stand up in the clubhouse and say “I don’t want this team to improve if it involves me having to change positions again, I am not happy with how I am being treated and I want to demand a trade…yet again”? Because that guy is Michael Young too. Granted, he didn't do this in the clubhouse. I will assume the other Texas Rangers are literate and heard or read about Young's anger with the Rangers team over the last offseason. So undoubtedly his teammates were aware of the situation.
Moneyballers hate Young, mostly because they do not value batting average, do not feel he walks enough and place less value on intangibles.
Most likely this is because by the very definition of the word intangibles have no value or their value is very hard to determine. That’s why it is so easy to just fallback on saying a player like David Eckstein or Darin Erstad have intangibles, because it is nearly impossible to prove incorrect because as is stated time and again, we aren't in the locker room to know about these intangibles firsthand.
Young was one of the guys calling him all offseason, helping him build back his confidence and teaching him by example how to be a pro. There is no number for this. There is no replacement for it either.
I’m not denying Michael Young is a good leader for his teammates. He just happens to be a leader who also demands a trade whenever he is unhappy. I need it explained to me why he constantly gets a free pass for this.
“I am a big Michael Young man,” Rays manager Joe Maddon said… Every team would love to have one of those.”
Who wouldn’t want a versatile player who is perpetually unhappy when asked to play a different position in order to take advantage of his versatility?
Everybody, it seemed, except the Rangers. Or at least this is how it felt to Young when Beltre and Napoli were acquired.
Oh ok, so I get it. Michael Young was justified to feel the way he did because the Rangers dared to improve their team and because Young's feelings were hurt. I forgot that team’s leaders let their personal feelings overrule what is good for the team.
They were genius moves for which JD and his crew deserve credit. But they were made smarter by Young, by how he handled himself since the day he arrived at spring training, and by how he has played every day since.
So I guess we just conveniently gloss over his trade demands prior to spring training as if this isn’t a part of Michael Young’s personality? So Young gets credit for how he has handled himself since spring training, but deserves no criticism for the Rangers wondering if he would show up at all for spring training or show up with a bad attitude? I don’t get this.
It is not fully accounted for on any stat sheet, but its influence was all over Saturday's outcome and it made everything easier. And in my mind, that is the very definition of what is most valuable when trying to win baseball games.
No one is denying Young’s great year. The big mystery is why Michael Young gets a pass for his behavior in the offseason. He should not be the MVP or get any MVP votes simply because he stopped demanding a trade long enough to not have it affect the team. Quoting Young's positive intangibles isn't the reason he should get MVP votes, especially when the negative intangibles are conveniently dismissed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)