<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, February 25, 2004

Armageddon, cont'd
Left Field: Ramirez vs. Sheffield


I've been procrastinating on this one. Frankly, picking among these two rosters is often like getting lunch at a really tasty Thai restaurant. It's lunch, you can only choose one item, and you're expected to make the perfect selection. Right...

Anyway, I've used up a fair amount of space rhapsodizing about Manny Ramirez in the past. He is a marvel to behold at the plate, a guy you can't pitch to any particular way without knowing that pretty soon, he will get you. He hits all types of pitchers the same. He approaches every moment in the batters box the same, be it spring training or World Series. And he accumulates about the same statistics every year: 1.000 OPS, on base over .400, 100+ RBIs, and of late a run at the batting title. Everyone says A-Rod is the best player, but at least at the plate, Manny matches him stroke for stroke. And in the field, well... he's trying, I will give him that. However silly he may seem at times, when it comes to his game, he makes the effort.

And Sheffield? Depends what numbers you want to believe. The guy has been in the league 15 seasons, so long you'd think his listed age was in some other animal kingdom's accounting system. Remember the novelty of Dwight Gooden's nephew coming along on his uncle's heels, flashing a mean glove and some raw but impressive bat skills? If it doesn't ring a bell, perhaps you were too busy listening to your Wham! records.

Over the long haul, Sheff has found his hitting stroke, and introduced many a pitcher to his little friend. National League pitcher, that is. He's been in the senior circuit since he left the Seligs for dead in Milwaukee. Injuries have generally limited him to less than 120 games a year on average, but in that time he's stroked 25 or more homers 8 times, with 6 seasons over 100 RBIs. He typically hits right at .300, gets on 40 percent of the time, and posts an OPS of .920 or so. He could have his 400th major league homer by the all-star break.

But to focus on his averages is to sell Sheff short. Three of his last four campaigns have been Manny-like: OPS over 1.000, with highs of 43 homers and 132 RBIs. Close to 100 walks, and under 70 strikeouts. Last year he stole 18 bases. And he has a cannon for an arm. Take him in good health, and he is the choice. Even over Manny.

But picking a Yankee over Manny has left me feeling cold and clammy, so let me throw in a few caveats. As usual, Manny has been kicked around this past six months, from his phantom charge at Clemens to his phantom release, to the potential Texas trade. But try and find anyone who thinks this will affect Manny on or off the field. The same character traits which get him in trouble are responsible for the series-winning homer against Oakland: he is unshakeable.

Is Sheffield? He hasn't been in the AL since sometime around when it became legal for him to buy a drink. He is not merely changing scenery, he is changing universes, leaving behind Atlanta's laid-back, mindless, moaning, arm-rocking faithful for a gaggle of screaming, anxious, demanding lunatics. And that's just the owner's box. Is he ready for the big time? How the hell should we know? The guy has played in Florida, San Diego, Atlanta, LA and Milwaukee. Some statistics: he hit .292 in the 1997 World Series for the Marlins, with a homer and 5 RBIs, but has hit .143 and .063 in his last two post-seasons with the Dullsville Nine in Atlanta.

Then there is BALCO. With the full weight of the Oval Office behind them, the prosecutors are honing in on potential violations of baseball's integrity courtesy of steroid use. And Sheff and Giambi can share a cab on the way over to the trial from the airport. Will this blow up in mid-season and prove a distraction? Apparently, if the president has anything to say about it. This is an election year, after all, and cleaning up baseball is just what the economy needs.

Frankly, I am a lawyer and I still do not understand what the legal issues are. Not that I've tried, but aren't steroids relatively legal, if frowned upon, or at least were they not until recently? So what crime has been committed by the people who used them? Usually, to incriminate someone you need a rule that proscribes their behavior, like, say, don't bet on baseball. So in the strictly legal sense, was there no ban on steroids? If so, what are these guys potentially guilty of, bad moral character? If that were the measuring stick, baseball would have contracted down to about 16 teams by now. And what advantage does the user gain anyway? I guess more muscle mass can translate into batting speed. Nobody gets the lumber through the hitting zone faster than Sheff, except maybe Bonds. So they used steroids, right? Again, how would I know? There's nothing stopping these guys from building muscle mass at home, safely and naturally, by hitting the weights.

Anyway, without further ado:
Advantage: Yankees

Sunday, February 22, 2004

Armageddon Pt. 2: the Infield

I originally meant to proceed one position at a time, but it occurs to me that I can dispense with half the infield very quickly, in a manner that doesn't justify separate postings, so let's get a move on, ne?

Shortstop: Nomar versus Jeter

I wrote 38,000 words about this back in November. The answer then was Nomar, unless his wrist goes haywire. Since then, Nomar has been publicly dangled in a trade, lowballed with a long term deal, and been ushered toward his walk year. There are mutterings about signing him, but if that is truly in the works, it's being kept quiet. Jeter, meanwhile, has adopted A-Rod as his mate on the left side of the infield, though not without a certain cattiness as to who plays in the hole. None of this changes anything, though, since these guys aren't the type to get distracted easily. Slightly more relevant is the chorus of sportswriters, in the aftermath of the A-Rod deal, who insist Jeter's fielding has deteriorated. I hate to take the word of the knights of the keyboard, but judging defense is a completely subjective endeavor, and these people watch Jeter more than I do. Choice remains Nomar.

Advantage: Sox

Third Base: Rodriguez versus Mueller


Moving right along...

[I will add that much has been made of Mueller having had a career year, which he cannot be expected to repeat. Yes, he had a career year, in a few respects. His 19 homers nearly doubled his previous best, his .326 batting average, .540 slugging, and .938 OPS were all new heights. But his on-base percentage was pretty much what you would expect. And if you throw out 2002, which he split with the Cubs and Giants, his power and averages have been increasing steadily for three seasons. So maybe he has simply arrived. Maybe something clicked in his brain. Maybe he paid a visit to Bonds' trainer. Or maybe it was luck. If the answer is anything but the last one, there is no reason he can't stay at or near his 2003 level. Having said that...]

Big Advantage: Yankees

Second Base: Enrique Wilson versus Pokey Reese


In Pokey's last full season, 2002, he did what he normally does: got on roughly thirty percent of the time or so, walked half as many times as he struck out, stole a noticeable number of bases without hardly ever getting caught, and played second base the way it was meant to be done. [Last year he got hurt May 13 and never returned.] His bat has been compared to overcooked pasta, but in reality he is a defensive specialist who has averaged 71 runs and 50 RBIs on some mediocre teams. If he gets on base at a .320 clip and fields the way he is expected, Sox fans should soon forget Todd Walker's big bat. Hell, despite his post-season heroics, which cannot be overstated, Walker only registered a .333 on base average and fielded his position with the agility of a young Steve Balboni. Welcome, Porky Reese. [Not a typo -- he got Pokey from his oversized baby belly, something I know a great deal about.]

And then there was Enrique. When he's not facing Pedro Martinez, he actually does appear to be hitting with overcooked pasta. His career high in homers is 5, but if anyone ever let him play 162 games, he would have six homers, 22 doubles, and a pathetic OBP of .296. I've yet to hear anyone who should know if he can play much D, nor have I heard anyone predict he will be the second baseman all season. So until the Yankees locate a name player,

Advantage: Sox

First Base: Giambi versus Millar


Oh, Kevin Millar had a solid year in his first go-round in the American League, establishing career highs in homers, RBIs and walks. Sure, his OPS dropped 120 points after the all-star break, his slugging was its lowest mark since 1999, and his defense will only be mentioned in conjunction with gold glove awards in sentences like "it looks like he's wearing a gold glove award on his hand out there." But a line of 25 homers, 96 RBIs and a .346 on base average made him a productive member of the team, beyond his clubhouse antics.

Of course, that still left him 16 homers, 11 RBIs (!) and .080 on base average behind Giambi, who had been putting up MVP numbers regularly through 2002. But, before we declare the obvious winner here, let us at least pause momentarily to consider the strange case of Jason Giambi. Last season he led the majors in both walks and strikeouts. Has this ever happened in history? Do people keep records for fewest balls hit into play per plate appearance (minimum 350 ABs)? In 156 games, he struck out 140 times, and walked 129 times. He has a good enough eye to lay off most bad pitches, but apparently not to make contact with many of the good ones.

What has happened to this guy? Since leaving Oakland he has lost 92 points off his batting average (then: .342, now: .250), his OBP has dropped from a godly .477 to a merely superhuman .412, and his strikeouts have increased 80 percent (from 83 to 140). The fact that he walks as much as ever indicates he still has a great eye. And he catches up to as many meatballs as ever, those 41 homers being just two off his career best. So why have fifty of his hits been replaced with strikeouts?

I can think of three possible answers. The most generous is that pitchers no longer throw him any strikes, so he gets bored or frustrated and goes fishing. If he is the same person in mind and body that he was in Oakland, this is plausible... but it doesn't make sense. Why would he see fewer pitches to hit in New York, with Matsui and Bernie, and Posada gettin' his back, than in Oakland where he enjoyed the protection provided by his brother, or Frank Menechino, or whomever else. The next explanation is that he is hurt. Apparently his knees are aging in dog years. Perhaps the degree of interference they offer is a day-to-day issue. The last is that he hasn't enjoyed the weight of the contract/uniform too terribly. Nobody who hits .250 and strikes out almost once a game should get to keep $18 million a year in salary. Unlike the fun-lovin pose he struck with his Oakland buddies back in the day, with the Yankees baseball is dead serious. Giambi looks and sounds like a guy who hasn't laughed in some time. Do I know what's really going on inside the head of a complete stranger? No, but I can't see how else he could fall back to Earth so fast. Still...

Advantage: Yankees

Wednesday, February 18, 2004

Star Wars, Scene 1: the Backstops

First, a little preamble. Red Sox fans are kidding with this "woe is us" nonsense. The Sox are loaded, in part because they spent the most of any reasonably normal team on putting a championship-caliber team on the field. Sometimes I think the fans are the biggest problem with this franchise....

That said, I disagree with nothing that John Henry said yesterday about the Yankees' comparatively massive spending being bad for the game, and find Steinbrenner's insulting "nyah nyah" response to be his usual infantile blathering. Henry called it like it is: the Yankees are threatening to buy an all-star team and an all-star bench as a means to guarantee success. I didn't find what he said to be especially partisan, but Steinbrenner doesn't tolerate honest criticism.

Anyway, on to today's subject:
Yankees versus Red Sox: Round One -- Catchers

Jorge Posada is an original member of the Torre gang that got rolling in 1996, and has blossomed into perhaps its keystone member, at least among regulars. Face it: Jeter and Williams are going backwards, Tino, Brosius and Paul O'Neill are gone, and Shane Spencer is still trying to justify a seat in the dugout. Posada is not only still going strong, he is coming off his best year yet: .923 OPS, his first time cracking 30 homers and 100 RBIs. Generally lauded for his defense and handling of the staff. All at age 32.

But nobody should be surprised by this: catchers very often do not hit their offensive stride until comparatively late in life. For every insta-star Piazza type, there are 10 Darren Daultons, plugging along for eight years before breaking out. Why is this so? Surely the Stats Inc. people have some theories, but the best anyone can do is point out the unique aspects of the job, which is that it requires constant concentration and physical exertion on defense, and since the catcher figures defensively in every pitch that isn't hit, it's fair to assume you can't make the roster until you can really catch. Catchers also tend to be slow-footed, burly power hitting types, another skill that takes time to develop. My money's on the former as the real reason. You think outfielders have to take time out of BP to concentrate on their defense?

Anyway, Posada has nice power numbers and decent averages hitting in a lineup that has offered him ample protection over the years. But his numbers keep improving, even as his protection started to break down last year. Then there's this little gem: his on-base percentage last year was .405, and has ranged from .363 to .417 the last four seasons. On 23 different teams, he'd be a candidate to hit leadoff. Hell, the Yankees could use someone like him in the top spot.

Then there's Jason Varitek. At 31, a year younger than Posada, Varitek is nearly -- but not quite -- Posada's equal in every category. Five fewer homers (25) and 16 fewer RBIs (85), 60 points lower on the OPS due entirely to Posada's ability to draw walks -- they both slugged .515. Both switch hitters, intense competitors, and solid backstops.

Looking backward, the numbers mandate choosing Posada, because those extra 42 walks create runs. Looking forward, the choice is more difficult. Varitek is in his walk year, recovered from his elbow fracture of 2001, a year younger and with 180 fewer games logged on his body. Like Posada and so many others, he is clearly blossoming as a hitter, particularly from the right side where he slugged a Ruthian .610 and got on base like, well, Posada. His importance to the Sox is more like Jeter's place among the Yankees. If the division had more lefty starters, I might prefer Varitek, even in an objective moment.

But I can't, not yet. Not til he proves he can do it every year. Advantage: Yankees, but purely a de minimis one.
What was gained?

Hottest topic in the last A-Rod news cycle is the notion that, all dollars aside, the Yankees didn't gain much by exchanging Soriano for Rodriguez. In the most meaningful sense, I beg to differ. I think A-Rod is about 25 percent better than Soriano.

A-Rod's OPS hovers around 1.000 because he walks about 75-100 times a year, whereas Soriano carries an OPS in the .870 range and his career high is 38 walks (including 7 intentional passes). That gives A-Rod about 60 more points alone in on-base percentage, and his 45-50 homers per year give him the slugging advantage too. Other stats: A-Rod led slightly in strikeouts (126 to Soriano's 130), average (.298 to .290), runs (124-114), and RBIs (118-91). Also, A-Rod doesn't field his position as if it were mined.

But despite my earlier argument that Soriano can't hold A-Rod's jock, and that he is at a crossroads in his career, I must at least acknowledge (liking the sound of it) the punditry's argument that Soriano is no slouch, and at age 26 is just getting started. He out-stole A-Rod by a factor of two (35-17), and isn't far off in homers (47-38), average, runs or RBIs. Moreover, he compares very favorably to A-Rod in his third season, or thereabouts. Finally, both players are probably changing positions, so the defensive comparison is out the window.

I am not sold on Soriano or this argument... but then again, it's not like the Yankees added A-Rod to their lineup at no cost, like their only other alternative was to take an out every time Aaron Boone's number came up in the batting order. No, they got A-Rod for Soriano, a decent but not dramatic upgrade in the lineup, at the low low price of an extra $20 million (or $12 mil, after you subtract Hicks' share).

What does this mean to their relative environments; in other words, which player gets better or worse in their new home, and then how do they compare? It will be interesting to examine this after the season; for now it's hard to say because they hit in different slots for different teams. Did Soriano represent a brief respite in facing a strong Yankee lineup to a pitcher who knows how to strike guys out, whereas A-Rod will not? If so, advantage New York, because the exchange will have a ripple effect through the batting order. But is it true? A-Rod struck out almost as often in Texas, where he played in a good pitching division but also had some decent protection in the lineup. So maybe they are more or less the same player?

The one difference I know of now is that pitchers won't approach A-Rod in the Yankee lineup the way they did Soriano. A-Rod will be the Guy You Don't Give Into, at least for most pitchers, whereas Soriano was not. I would argue, given his league-leading strikeout totals, that last season Giambi was the Yankee hitter pitchers wouldn't give into. With A-Rod either before or after him, Giambi should see better pitches to hit. But A-Rod won't, and hitting in Yankee Stadium, with unparalleled pressure and a deep left field, I predict now his power numbers will drop. But the rest of the Yankee lineup will improve.

Hey, they had better. With no lefty pitchers and a right field porch twenty feet behind first base, the Yankees will need all the runs they can get. The Red Sox alone can throw five tough lefties out there every day -- Damon, Ortiz, Nixon, Varitek, and Mueller -- and Manny Ramirez, who hits the same whether you're righty, lefty, fastball, junker, Swedish, Venezuelan, whatever. This is my favorite secret factor out there... how did this happen? For 75 years the Yankees' strategy has been to load up on lefty pitchers and hitters, and use the ridiculously short porch to punish the fact that most people throw and/or bat right-handed. The only matchup advantages the Yankees will have is on righties Nomar, Manny and Millar. Not exactly guys you can make a living off beating.

Anyway, good pitching beats good hitting, but at this point it's hard to say who has more of it. That's why they play the games.

Coming soon: position by position, Sox versus Yanks. Tomorrow: the catchers.

Monday, February 16, 2004

One final thought

Try to imagine the conversation between Steinbrenner and his staff on the day the Yankees, despite buying five more all stars during the season, are eliminated from the playoffs. As awful as it would be to see them win, the thought of what would happen if they fall anywhere short is enough to make me wish for spring training to start.
Murray Crass

Oh, excuse me, Chass. Either way, I felt compelled to reply to his article in the New York Times suggesting somehow that the Yankees taught Boston a lesson in the A-Rod deal. Keeping in mind the need to sound like a Times reader, I wrote the following:

To the Editor:

Murray Chass's front-page column "Summer or Winter, the Yankees Show the Red Sox How To Win" is either a very poor or very cynical headline choice. The only reason Alex Rodriguez went to New York and not Boston, which Mr. Chass refuses to acknowledge until the jump to the sports section, is that the Red Sox could not pay Rodriguez' astronomical salary and the Yankees could. What have the Yankees taught the Red Sox, or anyone else, about winning? Moreover, with all due respect to Brian Cashman, who among even the lowest echelons of baseball executives couldn't swing deals like this with the game's only bottomless bank vault to draw upon? As a lifelong Sox fan I grudgingly respected the Yankee teams of the late 90s for winning with creativity and hard work, but their crass attempt to build an all star team with nothing more than money demands nobody's respect. Chass's suggestion that the Yankees somehow outfoxed the Red Sox is insulting.


What I really meant to say is, Murray Chass is a fatuous idiot, and his half-baked analysis of the deal is a bad mixture of boosterism and ignorance. But then, Yankee fans always believe their organization is simply superior to the rest, especially Boston's, simple as that. No need to consider the money aspect of things. Reminds me of a Molly Ivins quip about Bush, that he's the kind of guy who runs up the wrong baseline to third and thinks he hit a triple. Steinbrenner can be credited for making lots of money, a truly noble endeavor, but he can't be credited for doing anything noteworthy for baseball. If anyone tries to compare their success to the Patriots, I reserve the right to hurl on them.

Or at least get Sage to do it.

Saturday, February 14, 2004

Yanked

Lots of ifs and buts as of Saturday but it looks as though A-Rod is going to the Yankees for Soriano, prospects, and a bag of baseballs. It's hard to say how this will impact the AL East just yet -- though that won't prevent me from trying, below -- but so far the clear losers are in Dallas. Soriano can't hold A-Rod's jock; this trade was made by the comptrollers. But, hey, any business built by George W. Bush is bound to go down the toilet eventually, so the Rangers are just another Harkin Energy.

But who cares? Dallas is a football town, and the serious baseball is left to the northeast. And maybe Seattle, if I am lucky to be so entertained; I can't get home at 4 every day to watch the Sox on the internet. Amyway, here are Five Reasons for Sox Fans to Hate This Deal, and Six More Not to Worry.

Hate this deal because:

1. The message being sent to the league in general, and the Sox in particular, is Steinbrenner is buying the next world series, and nobody is going to stop him. If it succeeds, it's going to be ugly and depressing.

2. A-Rod is five times the player Soriano is. After three full seasons Soriano appears to be who he is: a slugging middle infielder who steals bases like Maury Wills and strikes out like Rob Deer. His typical OPS is around .850, and he has flopped in the postseason three straight years. Maybe he'll be the league's first steady 40-40 player, but he looks more and more like a rotisserie specialist. Good pitchers strike him out, period, and there doesn't seem to be much he can do about it. Look it up: Pedro struck him out 13 of 31 at bats; Zito got him 8 of 18 ABs, Hudson 5 Ks in 24 ABs, Halladay 17 times in 42 ABs, Moyer 7 of 25 ABs.... Sure, good pitchers are harder to hit, but these numbers are astounding. And, watching him in the playoffs I just got the sense that he has no command of the plate, so he swings at pitches outside the strike zone. Well, good pitchers throwing good stuff know they don't even need to throw him a strike, and he's toast. I seriously think he is at the crossroads. They say hitters either know the zone early on or never; very few players learn the strike zone while playing in the majors. He's never going to get it, and it may be getting demoralizing. Going to Texas might be good for him since he won't play a meaningful game after Memorial Day and he can concentrate on monster numbers. But then again, Seattle, Oakland and Anaheim can all pitch.

I've said enough about A-Rod in the past. He's not my MVP, but he's close.

3. A-Rod isn't coming to Boston. Might have been fun to flaunt that at Yankee fans. Instead, expect Yankee fans to hone their smugness to greater extremes, if you can imagine that.

4. Manny is here for the duration of his deal, which means someone (and this is where Francona earns his salary) has to make him the player the fans will accept. I wish Sox fans had the pragmatic just-get-it-done mentality of a Kerry supporter, but I think they're more demanding than that.

5. The momentum swings back southward, and the pressure rises on Yawkey Way. Who calls Tellem to surrender? Theo, of course. You didn't think this job would be all pleasantries, did you?

Accept this trade and move on because:

1. Steinbrenner's been trying to buy the planet the last three seasons, and he just seems to dig the hole deeper and deeper. Stat-sheet guys will never say this, but I will: every time he buys a star, he destroys the team karma. Mussina was a great pickup, but he came on board and they lost their hold on the World Series. Then they bought Giambi, and flopped out in the first round. Last year it was Contreras, Matsui, and I can't even remember who else, and they escaped death at our hands only to exit meekly from the World Series. Now he's bought everyone in sight... so why should this work any better than his shopping sprees of the last three years?

There is a right way to do things and a wrong way. Steinbrenner's is the latter, the province of Danny Snyder wanna-be types who guess right in the stock market, assume they are geniuses, and make themselves sports GMs. It's ego, combined with a lack of subtlety, which in turn keeps them from understanding things like "chemistry" which can't be quantified in dollars and cents. The right way to do it was the '96 Yankees -- the closest thing to the New England Patriots baseball has seen recently. They played great as a team because they built the team together; they were invested in each other and they complemented each other on the field, and presumably off it. The current Yankees fit together about as well as the cast of Cannonball Run.

3. Status quo is good as far as the Sox' lineup is concerned. Although I was in favor of the A-Rod for Manny trade because of the personalities involved, it's just as well it didn't happen as far as the Sox' offense is concerned. Manny is a classic #4 hitter and Nomar a classic #3; Manny-for-A-Rod was a wash, statistically speaking, and Nomar's fielding is just a shade below A-Rod's. Plus, Nomar's one of ours (see comment #2). And Manny is a sheer joy to watch hit. And, when you break offensive records, you should probably stick with your current offense.

4. It's no guarantee A-Rod will help them win. He's never led a team anywhere meaningful, and he's been stuck in last place since the waning years of the Clinton Administration. Now he's joining a cast of stars who are expected to win, and are supposed to publicly flagellate themselves after each loss, and bake a cake for Mr. Steinbrenner for losing back-to-back games. He wanted out of Texas to play with a winner... but I never understand why these stupid athletes always want to get traded to the best team. What satisfaction is there in showing up on the mountaintop to help a bunch of strangers defend it, with noplace to go but down, when instead you could join a smart, energetic challenger and help ascend to the top? Jeter, Williams, Mariano... they must look around at all the pricey new guys and think, you weren't there in 1998-2000. The real glory, Patriot fans and players will tell you, is making the climb up. Is anyone out there more satisfied by the second Super Bowl than the first? A-Rod will not know the thrill of achievement in New York; only the pressure not to fail, and if he's lucky, a sense of relief at the end. How fun is that?

5. A-Rod's OPS in Yankee Stadium is off by about 20 percent. Now, granted, it has something to do with him facing Pettitte, Mussina, et al. But he's supposedly changing positions, moving to a new place, playing in a stadium that is cruel to all hitters except lefty pull hitters. How will he adjust? He's been a rotisserie player himself the last few years, arguably through no fault of his own, but then he hasn't done much to change it either. Can he get the big hit, or is he too used to hitting homers in meaningless 12-7 games? Jury's still out here. Guys like Jeter, Mariano, Schilling... winners. A-Rod? Prove it.

6. A-Rod can't pitch.

6 and a half. A-Rod is boring. Nomar may be guarded but at least he had a celebrity marriage.

Thursday, February 12, 2004

SB P.S.

Peter Van P writes, "Where's the Super Bowl analysis of an originality we've come to expect from FBBTTPL? How can Pats bloggers be silent at a moment like this? And where's that $50 you owe me?"

Not all excellent questions, but I can answer the former easily: I was busy, as I've lamented already, and what more can be said about the Pats than was already said by the usually dormant mainstream media? There is one interesting story emerging -- the Pats as a potential dynasty -- but I wrote a long, tedious piece on December 20 about how Belichick had cracked the NFL code. [Ok, that was shameless, but my point isn't that the mainstream sports media is stupid -- they are, but that's not my point. My point is, back in December such talk was rightfully confined to fan sites.]

The only interesting subject in the football universe was the talk of high school kids being eligible for the draft. But this is nothing, right? Sure, the NBA can't help themselves when a teenage 7-footer comes available, because the NBA title is won by the team with the best 2-3 individuals, with an emphasis on 7-footers. Yeah, it's a physical game, but the kids usually grow up in time, and you can spend their tutelage filling out the roster with other high draft choices. Right, Joe Dumars?

Football is completely different. First, it's brutally physical; secondly, it's hopelessly complex -- players always talk about the speed at which things happen, referring not only to the raw speed of the players but the complexity of schemes and the need to hurry up and recognize them. Would any high school player stand a chance out there? Some have speculated that a few skill position guys might pan out, presumably WRs and RBs or DBs isolated out on the perimeter. I still say no way. If I'm Ty Law and some skinny 19-year-old lines up in the slot, why would I not just nail him at the line over and over til he cries? If you've got a 19-yr-old at left corner, I'm putting my biggest WR on him to catch jump balls over him all day. It's not impossible for a kid that age to be physically and mentally tough enough, and skilled, and smart. But it's pretty damn unlikely.

And finally, the NFL is a team game, de-emphasizing stars everywhere except at QB. After what Belichick has done to the NFL, I can't see anyone with half a brain wanting to experiment with these kids in the high rounds of the draft. The Pats won with tough mudders who are flexible and experienced -- not stars, just playmakers who are not prone to mistakes. Rosters turn over in large quantities every year, leaving little or no time for long-term development project. Am I missing something here? Why would a coach want a teenager around, no matter how talented he is? And why would these kids peddle their potential for low-round or NFL minimum money when they can be stars in college? No doubt a few pioneering teens will try going pro in the next few years, but when all their lives are ruined, people will start sending their boys back to college for a couple years at least.

Sunday, February 08, 2004

p.s.

Check out Gammons' AL East preview from Feb. 1 -- didn't this space say earlier that nobody besides Mueller had career years? You can look it up! Coming soon: an analysis of Jason Giambi, as well as analysis of Sox versus Yanks at every position, and a column on lefty-righty splits -- now that there is only one lefty starter in the AL East. Oh, and Ellis Burks rocks!
Checkin in

We made it to Seattle but there are mounting details to confront before this site can resume its old schedule. Look for more by the time spring training gets into gear. I promise.
Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?