The ad, called “New Friends/Yankee Fan,” shows a Yankee fan walking around looking for Yankee fans in the city to hand out the tickets to. These seats, which can only be purchased through MasterCard are in the Batter’s Eye section by center field, and the tickets in the 80-person section cost $125 each ($135 on game day.)

The guy handing out the tickets seems to have a very limited vocabulary, using the word “nice” repeatedly: “Nice swing!” “Nice ink!” and making a lot of grunting noises. And his generous act will cost him about $10,000 plus service charges on his credit card bill. But hey, all the strangers he gave tickets to did give him a nice cheer when he showed up at the game. Whoopee.

Mind you, these seats don’t offer free food, or a close-up view to home plate. They are in the outfield, near the two bleacher sections, where tickets are between $5 and $15 dollars. But unlike the bleachers, the seats do have backs. Hope that’s worth the extra money. Besides, anybody in the stadium can get the same “Batter’s Eye” view by walking behind those seats, and standing in front of the Bleacher Cafe.

When I see things like this commercial, or like Christian Lopez, a Yankee fan with six figures in student loans who gave back Derek Jeter’s 3000-hit ball without wanting anything in return, and was praised for his “selfless” (more like stupid) act, I’m appalled. Why is being a sap considered something to be praised and emulated? Why is making poor economic decisions considered cool?

The guy in the ad isn’t even giving these tickets out to friends, which would at least be a little more understandable. He’s handing them to strangers. Why?

Given the tough economic situation in this country, charging thousands of dollars in credit card debt to give tickets away is even more dopey than spending $50 grand at the champagne room in the strip club.  This isn’t a “Random Act of Kindness,” where somebody pays the toll for the next customer so they could feel good for the day. This is random act of stupidity. What happens if this guy can’t pay the bill? Are those “friends” going to help a brother out?

Yes, it may be only a commercial, but it’s pushing a mindset that has helped put many in debt in this country. Hey, don’t worry about financial stability, or saving for tomorrow. Live a little and enjoy the day, even if it means you’ll put yourself in debt to Mastercard for years. Or, if you’re Christian Lopez, it makes you a wonderful person to give away a souvenir worth six figures to the guy who just built a house the size of a supermarket, even though you can’t even afford to move out from your parents’ home. Getting and staying in debt — priceless.

In the article, entitled “Is This Man Too Smart for Baseball?,” writer Paul Solotaroff recounts what happened when Showalter took over the O’s in August. The first two sentences of this passage haven’t been quoted in most of the articles about what Showalter said, but they give context as to what he was trying to do:

After instilling a healthy fear of God in them, he told them to stop playing scared. Don’t give the other team that much credit: Screw the Yankees, screw the Red Sox, he said. “The first time we went to Yankee Stadium, I screamed at Derek Jeter from the dugout. Our young guys are thinking, ‘Wow, he’s screaming at Derek Jeter’ — well, he’s always jumping back from balls just off the plate. I know how many calls that team gets — and yes, he pisses me off.”

Then Showalter went after an icon connected with the other big AL East rival, the Boston Red Sox. He attacked Theo Epstein, perhaps the most beloved figure in Boston, the way Jeter is the most beloved sportsman in New York:

…Showalter’s fine with an uphill fight; in fact, he seems to prefer it. Without him, the Birds were 8–16 against the Yankees and Red Sox; with him, they served notice, going 6–6 against their longtime tormentors. “I’d like to see how smart Theo Epstein is with the Tampa Bay payroll,” he jeers. “You got Carl Crawford ’cause you paid more than anyone else, and that’s what makes you smarter? That’s why I like whipping their asses: It’s great, knowing those guys with the $205 million payroll are saying, ‘How the hell are they beating us?’ ”

I think he’s directly slamming Epstein in that passage, and indirectly slamming the Yankees as well; after all, the Yanks, not the Sox, were the ones with the $205 million 2010 budget. But Boston is second in MLB payroll. And I can’t remember the last time anybody insulted Theo.

Bergen Record columnist Bob Klapisch wrote about some of the more provocative quotes in an article last Saturday (Klapsich is one of the writers quoted in the piece) but the story didn’t pick up steam until ESPN New York wrote about it Thursday. Thousands of readers have commented on it so far, many angry at the perceived disrespect given to Jeter and Epstein.

Even though I’m a Yankee fan, I thought Showalter was brilliant in what he said. He doesn’t have a $200 million payroll, or a team of superstars ready to take it to the next level. What he does have is a Rex Ryan-like ability to talk trash and motivate his team. The Orioles finished 66-96 last year, but they went 34-23 under Showalter. 

Besides, how can any Yankee fan disagree with Showalter’s characterization that Jeter is a bit melodramatic at some pitches and gets the umpires’ calls, especially given the way Jeter faked being hit by a pitch last year against the Tampa Bay Rays when the ball never touched him? Heck, Jeter even called the trainer out that time to make it look real, then fessed up afterwards. I get that this gamesmanship is considered part of baseball, but I also don’t see what’s wrong with Showalter noting the gamesmanship. Also, the Red Sox’s payroll does make a difference, too, as it does with the Yankees.

I believe a crucial first step in turning around a team is being audacious. Rex Ryan swaggered into Jets Nation and turned around a woeful franchise in no small part because of the sheer force of his personality, and his ability to get his team to believe they can win. Players like Curt Schilling and Kevin Millar refused to believe in the Yankees’ mystique and aura, and that sort of attitude helped the 2004 Red Sox beat the Yankees.

Ryan criticized Tom Brady for going to a Broadway show instead of watching the Jets in the playoffs, something that put the New England Patriots quarterback on the defensive before the Patriots/Jets playoff game.  Showalter is trying to do the same sort of thing.

Klapisch wrote that “Showalter admitted he could’ve and perhaps should’ve tempered his remarks — but he nevertheless owned up to them.”  But I kind of doubt Showalter really wants to take anything back. And so far, he’s not going as far as Rex Ryan did with his Super Bowl talk in saying his team was going to the big game. Yes, in his criticism he could be writing a check his mouth — or his team — won’t be able to cash. But that’s the risk he takes in getting his team ready for the next level.

Thames, who signed a $1 million-plus-incentives deal with the Dodgers in January, is expected to platoon in left field and bat against left-handers. He’s not a good defensive player, but he does have some pop in his bat — he hits a homer in every 15.5 at-bats or so. At any rate, Thames is not a make-or-break player for the team.

But Simers, who has a history of using his bully pulpit to be, well, a bully in his spot with the Times, tried to provoke an argument with Thames for no reason. Simers begins his column by lumping Thames in with what he calls “head cases,” without giving any evidence. He then made fun of the way the player pronounces his name (Thames says it is “Tems,” while a Dodgers PR person said it was “Tims”) and calls the player one of the Dodgers’ “stiffs.” The writer then sarcastically wonders if team owner Frank McCourt will start selling tickets to “Thameswood.” A lot of bile for a part-time player, don’t you think?

Simers was just warming up the hate. Without bothering to formally introduce himself, Simers unleashes this opening question on Thames:

“Are you that horrible on defense that teams don’t think it’s worth playing such a home run threat?” I asked by way of introduction.

Maybe somebody else wastes time schmoozing with Tims/Tems, but he’s a one-year rental who has some explaining to do. How bad are you on defense that teams don’t dare risk playing you?

Tims/Tems just smiled.

I didn’t know taking the time to introduce yourself to a player and say hello was “schmoozing.” I thought it was common courtesy. You know, the way it’s also common courtesy to pronounce somebody’s name correctly. And if Simers thinks this is a bad signing, the person with “some explaining to do” isn’t Thames, it’s Dodgers GM Ned Colletti.

As somebody who watched Thames as a Yankee last year, I would acknowledge he is pretty bad in defense. But there was no need to go all Mike Wallace on the guy, especially since he has never had a personal reputation of being anything other than a solid citizen. What, exactly, was the point of trying to antagonize Thames in such a bullying way? Simers’ job is to be the eyes and ears of the fans, not to pick fights with ballplayers because he couldn’t find anything else to write about that day.

It gets even worse. From the article:

I asked again, because I remember my dealings with [Kenny] Lofton, who would never answer the first question. Eventually he would, while also complaining, “You never write down what I say.”

I always told him the same thing. “You’re boring, but I come back hoping one day you might say something of interest.”

When I came back on Tims/Tems, he sat silent. I can see one problem he might have on defense if everyone is relying on him to yell “I got it.”

He said he wasn’t going to talk to me because I hadn’t introduced myself. That would have allowed him to pull out the little card the Dodgers’ PR department provides players advising them how to get a running start on Page 2.

I can’t imagine this is the first time in 10 years that Tims/Tems has been asked why he stinks on defense, thereby limiting his time as a regular player.

Unable to answer, he just stood and walked away.

Simers is the writing equivalent of a fan who spews obscenities at an outfielder for inning after inning, and then throws a hissy fit when the player tosses a souvenir baseball to somebody else. What contempt he shows for his interview subjects.

Aside from the fact that Thames couldn’t have both “stood” and “walked away” at the very same time, how, exactly, was Thames supposed to respond there? Roll up into the fetal position, and cry “you’re right, I can’t field”? The player handled the situation about as gracefully as he could have. If he had offered any sort of response, Simers would have seized upon it to rip him to shreds.

Remember, we’re not dealing with a fair journalist here. We’re talking about a writer who refers to his son-in-law as the “Grocery Store Bagger” and critcizes his young granddaughter’s spelling abilities. A person who made fun of the Los Angeles Sparks reaching out to lesbian basketball fans, griping about “how are the Sparks going to separate the lesbians at the ticket windows from someone like my wife?” and saying that if the Mighty Ducks did a similar promotional effort, “you could have, ‘The Gayest Place on Earth’ right down the road from ‘The Happiest Place on Earth.’” And yes, he gets paid for these offensive attempts at humor.

Simers has a history of player-bashing, too. He is a guy who repeatedly called former Dodger Andruw Jones “the Tubbo,” challenged him to a weight loss contest, then did a faux-outrage column when Jones finally had enough of his attacks. Simers also gave Kobe Bryant the nickname of “Our Ball Hog.”

But here’s the thing that irks me the most. If Simers had bothered to do a little research on Thames, he would have found an infinitely more interesting story for LA Times readers than trying to make the player look foolish.

Marcus’s mother was paralyzed from the neck down in a 1982 car accident, yet she still managed to raise her five children by herself, inspiring her family. Veterine Thames told New York Times writer Jack Curry in 2006 that her health problems “made [Marcus] want to show that he could make something out of himself.” Oh, and she had to have a tube inserted in her throat just to talk to Curry, thanks to having to have a tracheotomy done in 2002. And Thames, who said he was inspired by his mother, joined the National Guard in high school to take care of his family. How many 11th graders do that?

But hey, why actually give your readers real insight about a new player’s life story, when you can just use your press pass and status as a big name with the LA Times to smack him around and try to make him look foolish? Dude’s got issues.

 Yes, I know that the idea of a quote being taken out of context is a bit of a cliché to cover up the speaker’s stupidity, but in this case it’s accurate, especially since A-Rod didn’t even use the actual words Aaron accused him of saying. Put it this way — if Rodriguez actually said what Aaron accused him of, don’t you think there might have been a headline or two about it before Aaron’s comments? We’re talking about a player who made newspaper covers for being fed popcorn at the Super Bowl, for goodness sake!

Rodriguez was simply making the point that this was the first winter in recent years where he was able to do full-scale workouts before the season without having to do physical therapy for his right hip, the hip he had surgery on in 2009. Here’s what A-Rod actually said before the supposed “great winter” quote, according to MLB.com:

In good spirits and largely controversy-free, Rodriguez said he is looking forward to the push for a 28th World Series championship after reporting to camp lighter, having shed about five pounds to drop his weight to 222.

 His healing right hip, the one that required a March 2009 procedure that Rodriguez once feared might be career-threatening, was a major factor.

 Rodriguez said that he visited with Dr. Marc Philippon, the Vail, Colo.-based specialist who performed the surgery, and Rodriguez was cleared to resume full baseball training during the winter.

 ”The last several years, I’ve probably been more 60-70 percent rehab and 30 percent training,” Rodriguez said. “This year he actually gave me the green light to go 100 percent training and get ready to play baseball.”

 Then he said the quote Hank Aaron flipped out over, but used the phrase “good winter” and not “great winter”:

“This is as healthy as I’ve felt over the last several years,” the 35-year-old Rodriguez said. “It’s fun getting back to work. I have a good winter behind me of real work, probably my first since ’07 or ’08. I’m ready to go.”

Rodriguez’s hip was bothering him for some time before the surgery, so it would make sense that he would feel much better, and have a “good winter,” now that he’s fully healed from it. Don’t see anything controversial about what he said, other than in Aaron’s mind.

I don’t know what Aaron’s real issue is with A-Rod, whether it is the steroids, or the dating of movie stars like Cameron Diaz, but to accuse him of not working hard enough is just silly. Not to mention the fact that in Aaron’s day, players not have the workout regimen of today’s stars. Things like weight-lifting were considered counter-productive, and players used their spring training time, not the winter, to get in shape for the upcoming season. Some players, like Aaron himself, even had to work day jobs in the offseason.  

The fact is that A-Rod has been accused of obsessing too much about the game, so it’s kind of bizarre for somebody of Aaron’s stature to accuse him of the opposite. For example, a Los Angeles Times article last summer talked about how Rodriguez and Dodgers coach Larry Bowa found themselves as kindred spirits, despite their very different personalities, because of their shared love of baseball.

The article said that when Bowa was a Yankee coach, Rodriguez would do 7:30 a.m. spring training fielding practice with the coach, with Bowa working Rodriguez “to the point of exhaustion.” The coach said Rodriguez is “one of the hardest workers I’ve ever been around. He’s got so much natural ability, but I don’t think he’d be where he is with natural ability alone. People don’t understand how much time he spends in the cage or taking ground balls.” According to the piece, “on most days, Rodriguez had already lifted weights and run before they took the field together.” Bowa said, “There’s a reason for his greatness.” 

As for Aaron, when Post writer Steve Serby asked him whether Rodriguez was a threat to break Aaron’s home run record, he said, “I think he is. If he puts things where it’s supposed to be at.” He also said, “I think Rodriguez has got too many irons in the fire right now. I think his head’s not level enough to the point where he can have the kind of year that it takes in order to go past all of the records in the book.”

Oy. Even Aaron isn’t immune to the psychobabble so prevalent when it comes to talking about Rodriguez. It’s kind of astonishing for somebody to accuse a three-time MVP who reached the 400, 500, and 600 home run levels quicker than anybody else in baseball history (including Aaron himself) of not yet having “the kind of year that it takes in order to go past all of the records in the book.” Puh-lease.

 Both Aaron and Rodriguez had eight years of 40+ homer seasons, but with a big difference. Hank’s highest per-season total was 47. Rodriguez had a 47-homer season, as well as years with 48, 52, 54, and 57 home runs. But, according to Aaron, A-Rod’s head is still “not level enough to the point where he can have the kind of year that it takes in order to go past all of the records in the book.” He had a 1.069 OPS, hit 54 homers, and drove in 156 RBI, in 2007, the year he was accused of cheating on his wife with a stripper. If that’s not focused hitting, then what is?

Aaron also disaparagingly compared A-Rod’s focus to — who else — Derek Jeter. “When you’re playing baseball, you have to think about playing baseball,” saying that “if his focus would be the same as Jeter, then I think that he can do some great — he’s already done some great things — he can do some even greater things. I think sometimes it wavers. . . . It (doesn’t) stay on the same level.”

Just this week, though, Yankee co-owner Hank Steinbrenner seemed to take a veiled shot at Jeter’s focus, talking about players “concentrating on building mansions,” although Yammering Hank later took the silly criticism back.

But if thinking about baseball is the key, then even Jeter admirers Joe Torre and Tom Verducci would admit that Jeter would lose that contest. The Yankee captain has said more than once that he doesn’t watch baseball games on TV, even when it’s his own team playing.  And there’s an anecdote in Torre’s and Verducci’s “The Yankee Years” book about Rodriguez’s shock to find out that Jeter didn’t have the MLB extra-innings package on his cable TV. Not to mention Hank Steinbrenner’s veiled shot at Jeter about building mansions;

Here’s the thing. I don’t know if Rodriguez will beat Aaron’s – or Bonds’ record — A-Rod has 613 now, and is two years younger than Aaron was at that point. But it has nothing to do with some supposed lack of focus, or him not being like Jeter. It’s all about whether he can stay healthy and continue to hit home runs into his 40s.

Aaron has the right to not respect Rodriguez because A-Rod is an admitted steroid user. But if that’s the case, he should come out and admit it, instead of spewing this psychobabble. At any rate, Aaron owes Rodriguez an apology for distorting what the slugger actually said. There are plenty of dopey things Rodriguez has said in his career, but this wasn’t one of them.

Photo by ConspiracyofHappiness 

Jeter reportedly wanted an A-Rod type contract from the Yankees — an incredible $150 million over six years. Then he lowered that offer to “only” $22-24 million a year over four to five seasons, still way beyond the Yankees offer of $45 million for three years.

Jeter ended up with a guaranteed $51 million over the next three years, which includes $3 million on an option year. This means he will make $16 million a year from 2011-2013, just $1 million a year more than the Yanks’ inital offer. This is a pay cut not just from the $22.6 million he made in 2010, but from the $18.9M average annual value of his last contract with the Yankees.

The most complicated part of the deal is the option on the fourth year, the one big concession the Yanks made. If Jeter turns down the option, the Yankees have to pay him that $3 million. If he accepts the option, he will make at least $8 million. But there are a whole slew of incentive options to raise that year’s salary even further. Jack Curry of the YES Network explains:

Jeter’s contract includes a point system in which he earns points for winning the Most Valuable Player Award or finishing in the top six in the voting, for winning the Silver Slugger Award, for being named MVP in the World Series or the League Championship Series, or for winning the Gold Glove. If and when Jeter notches any of those incentives, he will earn an undisclosed amount of points. After three years, those points will translate to a dollar amount, which will be added to Jeter’s salary in 2014. Jeter can earn as much as $9 million in incentives, so the maximum amount he could earn in the final year of the deal is $17 million. The most Jeter could earn in all four years is $65 million.

Other than maybe winning the Gold Glove (Jeter has won five of them in the past seven years, including a very controversial Gold Glove this year), none of those face-saving incentives are slam-dunk wins for Jeter. He has never won an MVP, and has finished in the top six for the award only four times in his 15-year career. He has won four Silver Slugger awards at shortstop, but given the rise of Alexei Ramirez and Elvis Andrus, combined with Jeter’s declining hitting skills, he may not win another one again.

And surprisingly, given his clutch postseason reputation, and all the playoffs Jeter has been in over the years (he’s played in seven World Series and nine ALCS), the captain has only won one series Most Valuable Player award; the 2000 World Series MVP.

Some of the stories in the New York media about the contract seem to suggest that both sides won; The New York Times says that the fact that the captain is still the highest-paid shortstop in baseball can be “construed as a victory,” while acknowledging that “the Yankees prevailed, too.”

But that’s like saying that the nail triumphed over the hammer because it wasn’t completely smashed into the wall.

Jeter wanted A-Rod money, and he didn’t even come close to getting it. He first asked for $150 million, and ended up with between $56 and $65 million. True, he will get between $11 to $20 million more than the Yankees’ initial offer, but that is a pittance in the scope of things. Even if Jeter ends up making the full $65 million in his new contract, Rodriguez will still make at least $174 million for the rest of his contract – plus up to an additional $30 million in marketing money from the team for reaching milestones in his home-run record chase.

And A-Rod, unlike Jeter, got nearly everything he wanted from the Yankees in his deal. In the summer of 2007, before A-Rod opted out, Scott Boras, Rodriguez’s agent, was looking for a $350 million deal over ten years. When A-Rod directly negotiated with the team after opting out, he asked for $300 million in guaranteed money. The team countered with $275 million, plus an additional $30 million in incentives. This, after the Yankees had vowed never to give him a dime after he opted out.

Yes, A-Rod’s rep took a hit there – not that it was so pristine in the first place – but he got the biggest contract of all time, too.

In Jeter’s case, the extra money he got from the team has to be offset by the damage he did to his pristine reputation over the past month. Even though the Yankee captain has been the second-highest paid player in baseball history, he’s always been depicted as a team-first player, who loved the pinstripes and winning more than money. The media put him on the pedestal as somehow more virtuous than anybody in baseball.

But that image was, if not shattered, cracked a bit with his haggling over the past month. He’s been called “greedy” and “delusional” for wanting so much money, after hitting just .270 last year.

Elizabeth Currid-Halkett, a college professor and author of the book “Starstruck: The Business of Celebrity,” noted that what she calls Jeter’s “average dude” image looked a less pristine with his contract demands:

The haggling over a $45 million contract by a guy who doesn’t seem to care about (and certainly doesn’t need) money is antithetical to our perception of Jeter the everyman. It would be one thing for A-Rod to have a temper tantrum, the public expects such antics from him. But from Jeter, the consummate professional and unpretentious accidental celebrity? Not so much.

Jeter should take note: Those everyman stars who display greediness tend to pay a social price. When Kate Gosselin transformed from an overtired mom of eight living in rural Pennsylvania to a seemingly money-hungry, celebrity-obsessed woman who spends $7,000 on her hair, she went from a sympathetic character to a woman whom US Weekly described as turning from “Mom to Monster.”

Ouch! Getting compared to Kate Gosselin is never a good thing.

I’m not quite sure yet as to exactly how much damage Jeter has done to his brand. I do know that I saw how many Yankee fans in the blogosphere and on sports radio were outraged at Jeter over the past month; a New York Post poll said 3/4 of Bombers fans took the team’s side in the negotiations.

Even the Respect Jeter’s Gangster blog found his contract demands hard to defend, writing, “I can’t defend that number. I can barely even wrap my mind around that number. I understand you might feel like the Yanks owe you A-Rod money, but, and I hate to say this, you’re not A-Rod.”

On the other hand, some of the New York media, like sports columnist Mike Lupica, are already trying to put all this Jeter ugliness down the old memory hole, blaming the Yankees, not the shortstop, for the “insult” of not wanting to give him whatever he wanted.

So it’s hard to say how much Jeter’s image will suffer here. But I do know this. None of this had to happen if the captain and his agent Casey Close had been more reasonable in the first place.

Photo by Keith Allison

Brian Costa of the Wall Street Journal says Rodriguez’s deal as “looms large over the negotiations,” writing, ”For the Yankees, it’s a mistake they are determined to avoid repeating. For Mr. Jeter, it must make the Yankees’ hardball approach especially difficult to accept, even if he has little choice but to eventually do so.”

But what if A-Rod hadn’t opted out? His original 10-year, $252 million deal with the Texas Rangers, which helped Jeter get his own 10-year deal from the Yanks, albeit at $189 million, would have expired the same time as Jeter’s contract. And instead of Jeter and his defenders pointing to the precedent of No. 13′s record-breaking contract, they’d be scrambling to get more money from the Yankees at the same time Rodriguez hit the open market again.

How delicious would it have been to have the two rivals — compared so much to each other over the years — as free agents at the same time? And who would win in such a contract battle? Let’s compare how the two athletes’ numbers match up since 2004, when Rodriguez became a Yankee.

Here are Jeters’s stats (numbers courtesy of Baseball Musings):

Batting Average: .310, OBP: .379, Slugging: .442, OPS: .822, 1083 games, 759 runs, 1380 hits,  107 homers, 530 RBI

Jeter won five Gold Gloves, zero MVPs, and one World Series title during this time period.

And here are Rodriguez’s stats:

Batting Average: .296, OBP: .393, Slugging: .559, OPS: .952, 1028 games,  748 runs, 1137 hits,  268 homers,  841 RBI

A-Rod won two MVPs, zero Gold Gloves, and one World Series title during this time period.

Jeter has the advantage in batting average and number of hits, but the power-hitting Rodriguez has him beat in homers, RBI, and OPS, the stat which adds on-base percentage and slugging percentage. 

Contracts are paid not just on past stats, but for what the player is supposed to do in the future. Although a bad hip has slowed A-Rod down, he still has hit 30+ homers and driven in 100+ RBI every year since 1998, and should continue to do so for at least a few more years. Jeter, a career .314 hitter, hit .300 in 2008, .334 in 2009, and just .270 in 2010. Jeter could have another year like 2009 — or another year like 2010.

If they were on the market on the same time,  who would win? My guess is that Rodriguez would end up with more money than Jeter, because of his power, and because he can move to DH when he can no longer play third base, while there’s no obvious place to put Jeter. And the pro-Jeter forces would lose their top argument, which seems to be that if A-Rod is signed through age 42 at a premium, so should Jeter. At any rate, I can’t see the Yankees — or anybody else — giving either of them more than three-year deals.

Photo by Keith Allison

Close complained to New York Daily News columnist Mike Lupica:

“There’s a reason the Yankees themselves have stated Derek Jeter is their modern-day Babe Ruth. Derek’s significance to the team is much more than just stats. And yet, the Yankees’ negotiating strategy remains baffling.”

Then Close said: “They continue to argue their points in the press and refuse to acknowledge Derek’s total contribution to their franchise.”

It reminds me of the Sports Pickle parody, which joked that Close  would claim:

“[Jeter's] leadership is definitely one intangible,” said Close. “Getting that for $1 million is a huge bargain. His grit, his moxie, his general clutchness. Those are just three more. His musk. He has a natural scent of a champion. That’s a big one. What are we at — $5 million already? The Yankees better stop me because I could quickly and easily get to $100 million a year. He gets a lot of hot chicks to come to the game. $6 million.”

Ha!

Anyhow, I don’t know who in the Yankee front office compared Jeter to Babe Ruth, but it’s a silly comparison on many levels, and it’s even sillier for Jeter’s agent to regurgitate it.  Ruth was the greatest player of all time; Jeter wasn’t even the greatest player — or even the best shortstop — on his own team for much of his career. The Captain is a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but he’s no Babe Ruth.

Close claims that like The Bambino, Jeter’s “significance to the team is much more than just stats.” That is incorrect on the Bambino’s part. Ruth’s significance to the Yankees was that he had an out-of-this-world 1.195 OPS in his 15 years and 2084 games as a Bomber, with 659 homers, a .349 batting average, 2873 hits, 1971 RBIs, 424 doubles, 106 triples, and 1959 runs scored.

In Jeter’s 16 years and 2295 games as a Yankee, he has a career .837 OPS, with 234 homers, a .314 batting average, 2926 hits, 1135 RBI, 468 doubles, 61 triples, and 1685 runs scored.  By nearly every measure other than the total number of hits, Ruth was worlds beyond Jeter as a player. It’s not even close; according to Baseball-Reference.com, Jeter’s numbers more closely compare to star players like Roberto Alomar, Craig Biggio, Frankie Frisch, Barry Larkin, and Alan Trammell, not Ruth.

Albert Pujols, not Jeter, is the modern player whose numbers are most like The Bambino, but because Pujols plays for the St. Louis Cardinals and not the New York Yankees, he doesn’t get the acclaim, the money, or the endorsements that Jeter does.

 Yes, the Yankees were a better team with Jeter on it, but he has reached heights of fame — and money — he would never have received on any other team.

Besides, as ESPN New York’s Wallace Matthews notes, the Yankees cut Babe Ruth’s salary when he was Jeter’s age:

Perhaps Close doesn’t know the history, which is really his only excuse here, but in 1931, when Babe Ruth was 36 years old — the same age as Derek Jeter — he hit 46 home runs, had 163 RBIs and batted .373.The Yankees rewarded him by cutting his salary from $80,000 to $75,000 for the 1932 season. That year, as a 37-year-old, Ruth’s numbers slipped — to 41 homers, 137 RBIs and a .341 batting average. So they cut him to $52,000 for 1933. 

For that miserable production, Ruth was forced to play the 1934 season for $37,000.In 1933, the 38-year-old Ruth was clearly finished: a mere 34 homers, 103 RBIs, .301 batting average. Numbers, incidentally, that Jeter would have killed to have as a 24-year-old. (By the way, some would argue that Ruth’s contributions to the franchise might even have surpassed Jeter’s.)

Anyhow, I really don’t know what Casey Close is complaining about here. What, exactly, did the team do that was so “baffling” to Close? When, exactly, did the team “refuse to acknowledge Derek’s total contribution to their franchise”?

Let’s review. Jeter, who just finished an $189 million, 10-year deal.  has earned $205 million as a Yankee, making him the second-highest paid player in MLB history (Alex Rodriguez is No. 1).  When A-Rod was traded to the team in 2004, he, not Jeter, had to switch positions, even though A-Rod was defensively superior at shortstop.

As team captain, Jeter seems to get all the credit for the five rings in his career, yet none of the blame for the Yankees going from 2001-2008 without a ring, including suffering the worst choke in baseball history.  In many of those postseasons, the Yankees were outplayed by the opposition, and collpased at the first sign of adversity. Shouldn’t the team captain get a little of the blame for that?

Jeter is also the team spokesman, saying farewell to the old Yankee Stadium. He even got to keep Bob Sheppard’s voice announcing his name, a privilege no other player received. At what point has Jeter been disrespected here? Because they’re not giving him a blank check?

Then there’s this — when Yankees GM Brian Cashman pursued free agent pitcher CC Sabathia, the ace had concerns about the Yankee clubhouse, according to this ESPN column from Ian O’Connor:

Sabathia heard the rumors that the Yanks were a house divided, that the tension between their two heads of state, Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez, made for an awkward environment. The recruit told the recruiter he was concerned about his workplace, and Cashman did a funny thing in response.

“I told him the truth,” the general manager said.

Cashman told Sabathia the Yankees needed his help.

“Yeah, we are broken,” the GM told the ace. “One reason we’re committing this money to you is because you’re a team builder, and we need somebody to bring us all together.”

So, Casey Close thinks Jeter deserves a huge contract, even though he just came off the worst season of his career, because of what else he brings to the table besides the stats. And even though no other team would ever pay him close to what the Yankees will.

Yet, as the Yankees’s GM acknowledged, the team was so lacking in leadership even though Jeter was their captain, and so “broken,” that the Yanks had to beg CC Sabathia to step up and bring them together? That doesn’t really compute with the myth of Jeter’s supposed great leadership, where other players are supposedly so awed by him that he makes them all better.

Anyhow, the funny thing is that A-Rod has been accused over the years of envying Jeter. But I think this time around, Jeter is envious of A-Rod, or at least that 10-year, $275+M contract Rodriguez signed after the 2007 season. And Derek and his agent may very consider any offer less than that an insult. To which I say, that’s really, um, ”baffling”!

Photo by Wikimedia Commons

Liam Roybal, one of the Rangers’ youngest fans, dressed up for school as manager Ron Washington last week during Career Day. The seven-year-old Rangers fan, who already wears glasses, had part of his head shaved, and put on a fake mustache to look like Washington.

And after his costume became a web sensation, the seven-year-old was invited to appear on the field with Washington himself at Sunday’s Halloween night game. He even got to do the claw and antlers.

Little Ron Washington charmed Big Ron Washington, who gushed:

“Out of all the people in the world, he chose to dress up as the manager of the Texas Rangers,” Washington said. “That’s really something.”

Roybal, a native of Keller Texas, got to watch the World Series game in the stands with his family. Unfortunately, the Rangers lost Game 4 to put them in a 3-1 deficit against the San Francisco Giants.

So what’s wrong with the Rangers? Little Ron Washington had a few thoughts after the game:

CBS 11’s Carol Cavazos asked him, “So Ron. Do you mind if I call you Ron?” How do you think the world series is going so far?”

“Not good,” he said. “Why do you think the Giants are beating us?” Cavazos asked. “They hit more homeruns,” the mini Ron responded.

If the Rangers don’t start hitting homers — and hits, for that matter — San Francisco will be winning its first World Series ever, disappointing Little Ron Washington and other Texas fans.

Photo by GordonKeith

While San Francisco fans and hardcore baseball fans have known about the wackiness of Wilson for a while now, he’s getting a big national profile thanks to the Giants making it to the World Series. This Wilson is not quite as eccentric as the Beach Boys legend who shares the same name. But the closer still has his moments of silliness. Here are a few:

* Fear the Beard: Wilson started growing the bushy beard this summer, and it’s become such a cult thing, there’s both a Facebook page and a Twitter page devoted to it. With the black color that looks chemically enhanced, the beard has become iconic. When Wilson wears sunglasses, he looks more like Joaquin Phoenix doing his performance art thing than a baseball player. Wilson has denied dying the beard, even though it’s about ten shades darker than his light brown hair. He claims the beard is just “tan” from all the day games the Giants play.

* That certified ninja claim: Wilson told Jim Rome that he is a “certified ninja.” It happened in a dream, he said. Glad he’s certified. Wouldn’t want some unlicensed ninjas running around. Wilson also described himself as a “mental assassin.” Heh.

* Orange cleats: He wore orange spikes to match his uniform, until MLB fined him for the distraction. Wilson claims it was because he he had “too much awesome on my feet” with those “sweet cleats.”

* The man and The Machine: Wilson did one of the greatest practical jokes ever, when he had a bondage-clad man known only as The Machine show up in the background during his regular appearance on Chris Rose’s Fox Sports’ Cheap Seats show. Rumor has it that this character, based on a villain in the Nicolas Cage movie 8MM, is really Giants’ teammate Pat Burrell, according to the website The Fightins.

After the Giants won the NLCS, Wilson promised a return appearance from The Machine, telling Chris Rose, “I think The Machine will say all he needs to say when he makes an appearance again.” Yikes!

Go here and here for video on Wilson’s weirdness.

Photo by photonista

In his latest article, “At current rate, Joe won’t outlast Jeter: Think The Captain’s in decline? Barring change, his skipper could be first out the door,” O’Connor seems to be issuing a not-so-veiled threat to Joe Girardi. He starts his column by writing that “at this pace, Joe Girardi is not going to make it. He is not going to be the manager of the New York Yankees long enough to do to a declining Derek Jeter what Casey Stengel did to a declining Joe DiMaggio.” O’Connor ends it by writing, “the terms of [Girardi's] next contract with the Yankees should involve two more years and one more warning: Change, or we’ll hire someone else to bench The Captain.”

This is the first time I’ve seen Girardi’s job status specifically tied to Jeter. So whether this is the columnist’s opinion, or whether he’s voicing what Jeter thinks behind the scenes, is relevant, especially when he talks about players not liking the Yankee manager.

According its product description at Amazon.com, The Captain: The Journey of Derek Jeter, out next April, features more than 200 interviews with Jeter and others close to him and “takes us behind the scenes of a legendary baseball life and career, from Jeter’s early struggles in the minor leagues, when homesickness and errors threatened a stillborn career, to the heady days of Yankee superiority and nightlife, to the battles with former best friend A-Rod.” Another product description from the publisher talks about how in the book, “we also witness Jeter lose his mentor, Joe Torre and have to grapple with his declining skills and the declining favor of the clubhouse he has always called home.” What does O’Connor mean by “declining favor of the clubhouse”? Is he implying something about what Girardi thinks of Jeter — or vice versa?

The connection makes you wonder, because in this latest column, O’Connor not only has written one of the most searing indictments of the Yankee manager in the press to date, but he describes players’ opinions of the captain.  First, he says that Girardi came across in 2008 as “a Captain Queeg act that turned off the players and the press”:

In front of his stunned players in Detroit, Girardi ran around a clubhouse table at Road Runner speed to show them how to hustle, and half the room thought he was losing it.

While O’Connor acknowledges that the manager lightened up the following season, following the example of New York Giants coach Tom Coughlin, he now writes (emphasis added):

But with the World Series ring granting him some job security, with the wolves no longer at his door, Girardi traded his outer Jekyll for his inner Hyde. The pressure of defending his title inspired the reappearance of a terse and irritable man.

This isn’t a media issue, not when the players constantly measure their manager’s body language and study his every news conference word. And not after they didn’t play hard for him when it mattered most.

A few points here:

* You can’t argue both that winning the World Series granted Girardi “job security,” and that the “pressure of defending his title” got to him. Those are mutually exclusive concepts.

* There’s been reams of ink spilled about the Yankees’ failure in the ALCS, with Girardi, the team’s hitters, and the team’s pitchers getting a fair amount of criticism. I’ve written that Girardi’s management in the ALCS was brutal, and cost the team dearly. But O’Connor’s article is the first piece I’ve seen that suggests that the players “didn’t play hard” for Girardi. If this is indeed the case, then this is a devastating indictment — not  just of Girardi, but of the players themselves.

Is O’Connor making an observation that the players on a team that is supposed to consider winning second to breathing, and the season a failure without a World Series title, tanked it in the postseason? Or does he he have some insider information from Jeter on this? And if that is the case, what does that say about both Jeter’s leadership skills, and his will to win, two essential parts of the Jeter mystique?

* It’s true that Girardi looked gaunt and unhappy as the year went on, but the main issue most have with his managing this year was not that he “treated every May game against Baltimore as Game 7 of the World Series,” as O’Connor writes elsewhere in the piece, but that he didn’t take the games down the stretch seriously enough, spending too much time resting players for the postseason before nailing down the division title. And that he continued this lethargy into the ALCS.

The New York Post’s Mike Vaccaro says that the skipper sent a bad message in an August 1 Yankees-Tampa Bay Rays matchup, where “amid a playoff atmosphere at the Trop, Joe Girardi opted for a JV lineup.” Vaccaro said “it was the nonchalance Girardi expressed at the lineup he had posted — which sounded awfully close to hubris, if not full-blown arrogance — that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.” That’s the polar opposite to O’Connor’s beef with Girardi.

In another recent piece on Jeter, O’Connor suggests that “the Yankees should commit to four seasons in this next contract, take Jeter to his 40th birthday, then go year to year after that,” as Jeter ” has indicated he wants to play until he’s about 43.” Since Jeter made $22.6 million last year, O’Connor writes that the Yankees should give him a raise, even though he had his worst statistical season last year. “There’s no need to diminish him by demanding that he take a pay cut,” O’Connor writes. “If one athlete of this generation deserves to be overpaid, it’s Jeter. A token, thanks-for-the-memories bump to $23 million would suffice.” Again, is this salary O’Connor’s opinion, or what he’s heard from the Jeter camp on how much he will be expecting in the new deal?

O’Connor, one of the most-read and most-respected columnists in New York, certainly has the right to share his insights about the Yankees, including on Derek Jeter, the subject of his upcoming book. But he ought to disclose that book connection every time he writes a column about the captain.

Photo courtesy of Amazon.com