Mission [NOT] Accomplished


Shock and Awe! The Boston regime has been vanquished by our amazing offensive weaponry and our Bullpen Busting Bombers. (Thank goodness for that giant military budget.) It is tempting to declare major combat operations over. Very tempting. But those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Insurgent forces lurk—in Detroit, in Oakland, in Chicago, in Queens, yes, even in New England. Beware, Pinstriped Army, of ambushes in Seattle and Anaheim. Go forth. Be Strong. And continue in your building of Yankee Nation.

119 comments… add one
  • YF, your mention of insurgent forces only serves to strengthen the enemy. It’s as if you want the Yankees to fail. Why do you hate them so much?

    Sam August 22, 2006, 9:56 am
  • Who is the Yankees’ secretary of defense, and does he need to be replaced?

    SF August 22, 2006, 10:00 am
  • Wondering: if people think the bloom is off the Theo Epstein rose, then what’s up with their thoughts on the JP Ricciardi one?

    SF August 22, 2006, 10:11 am
  • “Yankee Nation”? If you’re that superior, get your own nickname. Yeesh.

    beth August 22, 2006, 10:14 am
  • Personally, I like “Yankee Principality”.

    SF August 22, 2006, 10:21 am
  • I think Ricciardi is in big trouble. One 1970s-style fight with a clubhouse malcontent is one thing; two incidents and you need to ask why the clubhouse atmosphere is so bad in the first place (especially given that Hillenbrand’s predictions of doom turned out to be correct). And how many managers does Ricciardi get? Couple that with the boatload of $$ they spent to wind up in exactly the same place (this year), and I think Ricciardi may not have much longer.

    Dr. Manhattan August 22, 2006, 10:22 am
  • Nation? Principality?
    No new term needed.
    The operative phrase is “Empire,” sometimes used with the adjectival modifier “Evil.”

    Hudson August 22, 2006, 10:25 am
  • What kills me is that we will come back, just close enough to make us all sweat again, giving us hopes and dreams of the promise land. We will hear the words…
    “Hey, if we can just win 3 of 4 in NY, we will only be X back, then….”
    The more things change, the more they stay the same.
    GO SOX!

    LocklandSF August 22, 2006, 10:37 am
  • “Ka-Broom!” is pretty good, I’ll give ’em that.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 10:52 am
  • Yeah, the Yanks already have their nickname, whether they like it or not. And the insurgents were the good guys in those movies…
    Yeah, at least Theo’s won the Series and has the Ortiz pickup and Schilling trade to his credit. Ricciardi got Ryan, but as we have seen, a top-notch closer gets you only so far…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 10:55 am
  • The bat shattering the Red Sox logo is pretty good too. I’m sure the Post — always living up to the highest journalistic standards — didn’t do anything to doctor that photo…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 10:59 am
  • I agree about this upcoming road trip, which has always posed problems for the Yanks. Hopefully, they can keep their intensity level up and “survive” it by winning at least one of the two series.
    Red Sox fans can hope all they want but the AL East is the Yankees’ to lose. Unless the RS can find, at the very least, a competent lefty reliever to handle Damon, Abreu, Giambi and Cano, I don’t see them making up significant ground in a head-to-head scenario. They remind me of the Texas Rangers of the late 90s: a ton of offense, shaky starters and no bullpen.

    lp August 22, 2006, 11:00 am
  • Can’t believe I’m even bothering to ask this, but…
    When do Tek and Wakes get back?
    The only (slim) hope I can see is if they are returning soon, *and* Foulke’s excellent performance last night was not a fluke.

    Hudson August 22, 2006, 11:20 am
  • The problem is that Foulke has done this before — twice in this year, as a matter of fact. He started the season strong, then faltered and went on the DL. He returned strong, then faltered and went on the DL again. Now he’s returning strong. I have little confidence he won’t falter or re-injure himself in a month, unfortunately…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 11:25 am
  • But yet, two years ago, Keith Foulke was on par with Rivera, right?

    lp August 22, 2006, 12:16 pm
  • I have a question that maybe those who know a clubhouse better than I do can answer: it seems to me that Abreu has had a huge impact on this lineup. Is that just because of his at-bats, or do you think the other Yankees are taking their cue from him? Or perhaps, once he joined the staff, Donnie took the hitters to one side and told all of them to be more like Bobby?
    Also, Melky’s July and Aug stats are very encouraging. Next year: Melky = LF, Matsui = DH!

    Sam August 22, 2006, 12:26 pm
  • For one postseason, Foulke was better than Rivera.
    For most of a year, Papelbon has been a little better (but not much) than Rivera.
    Rivera is the best closer of all time.
    Such antagonism, lp. Why do you bother when we just go in circles?

    Devine August 22, 2006, 12:28 pm
  • “But yet, two years ago, Keith Foulke was on par with Rivera, right?”
    Two years ago he was on par with Rivera, and even better in the playoffs. That’s why Paul said “this year”. This year, and the last, is a totally different story. At this point it appears Foulke is being held together by duct tape.

    Brian in S.F. August 22, 2006, 12:30 pm
  • Abreu is a perfect hitter for this Yankees lineup. He wears pitchers out. Giambi already wore pitchers out. Damon sees a ton of pitches. Jeter is no slouch. Add in A-Rod and that top 5 can possibly turn any starting pitcher into a six inning max hurler. It’s fearsome. I think Abreu is more of the same for the Yankees: a patient, professional hitter.

    SF August 22, 2006, 12:33 pm
  • Where does Joe Lieberman stand on Yanks-Sox?

    YF in DC August 22, 2006, 1:50 pm
  • Good question, YFDC. He’s from New Haven. That would lead me to guess Yanks…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 1:52 pm
  • Devine,
    In a previous thread, a couple of weeks ago, Paul SF insisted that it was appropriate to compare the two. At that time, he did not qualify the statement and, to my knowledge, he still stands by it. So I will remind him how fallacious such a comparison is. Qualifying the statement with a small sample size of stats (ie one year or less) is meaningless.
    And in the big picture, there is a tendency amongst (too) many Sox fans to make comparisons between their flavor of the month and Yankees who have delivered over the long haul. Nomar/Jeter, Arod/Ortiz, Papelbon/Rivera, Foulke/Rivera etc. etc..
    In each instance, small samples sizes are used to compare players that history would never lump together. It’s lame that we live in an ESPN world that has very little perspective beyond this season and last season.
    If it’s antagonistic to remind you of the big picture, too bad – we’ll just go in circles.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:15 pm
  • You’re really generalizing there, lp. I never like the tendency of either fanbase to say, “It is the tendency of [Yanks/Sox] fans to…” You’re basically saying, “Sox fans are stupid” when (too) many Yankees fans have done the same thing (cherry-picking data) thousands of times. It’s so, so dumb to say one fanbase is dumber or more irrational than the other.
    Arod to Ortiz is not a dumb comparison. We have a year by year comparison possible from 2004 on when they’ve been with our respective teams at the same time. That’s almost four years’ worth. That’s not invalid.
    A-Rod, I think, deserved the MVP last year, so that’s not my argument. I’m just saying it’s not stupid for a Sox fan to compare Ortiz to Arod.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:22 pm
  • Sorry, three years’ worth.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:24 pm
  • I wouldn’t really call Nomar or Papi “flavors of the month”.

    T-sf August 22, 2006, 2:27 pm
  • lp, I’m going to dispute you on that. I’ve never said Papelbon and Rivera should be compared in a general sense. That would be idiotic and is idiotic. That you could even think a Sox fan would seriously engage in such a discussion without giving the nod to Rivera shows more of your bias than mine…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 2:28 pm
  • Nomar was a superior shortstop, offensively and defensively, from 1998-2003, injured seasons aside. Absolutely not a “flavor of the month.”

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 2:31 pm
  • Devine, Papi’s career doesn’t begin when he joined your team. That’s my whole point. If you want to compare Arod to Ortiz, both have been in the majors long enough to look at their entire careers.
    In your comparison you are deliberately omitting years that have unfavorable stats vis a vis your overall point. That is the defintion of cherry-picking.
    If you evaluated a player like, say, Preston Wilson and just looked at his numbers when he was with Colorado, you’d get a very skewed and inaccurate view of him as a player.
    Similarly, Ortiz has played elsewhere and in different lineups and in different home ballparks. His Twins years must factor in any evaluation of him as a player. And, in reality, it could be said of Papi that he’s nothing special outside of Fenway and Manny Ramirez. And in that light, he’s not comparable to Arod.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:36 pm
  • Nomar/Jeter also made it to the majors within a year of each other and spent 8+ seasons as rival SS’s on both clubs. At no time during that period was it not apt to compare the two, and the sample size was plenty big.

    T-sf August 22, 2006, 2:36 pm
  • A-Rod’s better than Papi. No one’s disputing that either, lp. But Papi is more dangerous in important situations than A-Rod, and ARod appears to have trouble with pressure.
    I’ve Google searched our site, and all threads I found with Papelbon and Rivera both mentioned during this season are in reference to specific games or comparisons for this year. So, lp, I call BS on your bluff.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 2:39 pm
  • Regarding Jeter vs Nomar:
    1. If you look at them now, there is no comparison.
    2. Injuries are a apart of the game. You cannot dismiss them by saying, “Injuries aside”
    3. I do not think 50 years from now the baseball world will be comparing the two, unless Nomar is able to pick up where he left off in the 90s – which is highly unlikely.
    4. Is Nomar a HOF candidate? Is Jeter?

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:41 pm
  • HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I love that rationalizing, lp. “Ortiz is nothing special because he’s got Fenway and Manny!” Oh man, that’s a real killer.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:42 pm
  • Paul,
    Re: my “bluff”
    If you read my post above you’d see that I don’t care that you qualify with a small sample size. It’s still BS!

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:44 pm
  • Once again, lp, no one’s disputing that Jeter NOW is better than Nomar, but for nearly a decade, Nomar was far better yet you dismissed him as a “flavor of the month.” Stop distorting your own and others’ arguments, and please address the actual points we make…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 2:45 pm
  • Paul SF how can you say that Nomar wasa superior SS to Jeter both offensively and Defensively from 1998 – 2003? In 1999 alone Jeter was a candidate for MVP.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 2:46 pm
  • Devine,
    Show me where Ortiz has been something special outside of a Boston Red Sox uniform. Those Twins numbers are really impressive, aren’t they?

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:46 pm
  • So, lp, then it’s wrong to say a Sox player is having a better year than a Yankee player? Is that it? If Paul’s not claiming Papelbon is better than Rivera (he isn’t), where is his fault?

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:46 pm
  • “Nomar was far better” Paul-SF

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 2:47 pm
  • I’m still laughing, lp. It’s just such a damned funny thing to say.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:47 pm
  • Paul,
    Do you think Jeter will make it into the HOF, or Nomar? Both? Neither?

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:47 pm
  • And Devine, I’m still waiting for you to show how potent Papi was when he was in a Twins uniform.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:48 pm
  • And I’m still waiting for your argument to make sense.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:49 pm
  • Show us some numbers Devine instead of wasting space.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:51 pm
  • I think most statisticians would dispute that April-to-August qualifies as a small sample size. Comparing players with the same job during a given year is a legitimate exercise. Using that year to extrapolate value over a career is not.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 2:53 pm
  • Was Ortiz worse with the Twins than he is now? Yep. Does it make sense to say one player and one ballpark transformed him into a monster? Nope. Does every mediocre player become a giant when they move to a better hitter’s ballpark and have a good hitter on their team?
    I’m still waiting for you to tell me what’s wrong with what Paul said.

    Devine August 22, 2006, 2:54 pm
    1997 MIN 15 49 10 16 3 0 1 6 2 19 0 0 .327 .353 .449 .802
    1998 MIN 86 278 47 77 20 0 9 46 39 72 1 0 .277 .371 .446 .817
    1999 MIN 10 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 12 0 0 .000 .200 .000 .200
    2000 MIN 130 415 59 117 36 1 10 63 57 81 1 0 .282 .364 .446 .810
    2001 MIN 89 303 46 71 17 1 18 48 40 68 1 0 .234 .324 .475 .799
    2002 MIN 125 412 52 112 32 1 20 75 43 87 1 2 .272 .339 .500 .839
    2003 BOS 128 448 79 129 39 2 31 101 58 83 0 0 .288 .369 .592 .961
    2004 BOS 150 582 94 175 47 3 41 139 75 133 0 0 .301 .380 .603 .983
    2005 BOS 159 601 119 180 40 1 47 148 102 124 1 0 .300 .397 .604 1.001
    2006 BOS 122 464 93 133 24 1 44 117 87 98 1 0 .287 .400 .627 1.027
    It’s a world of difference between Boston and Minnesota.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:56 pm
  • I obviously disagree with you Paul on the sample size in terms of evaluating a ballplayer. One season is the absolute minimum that you could go by. And certainly, ommitting years that exist is complete garbage.

    lp August 22, 2006, 2:57 pm
  • And Paul, you didn’t answer my Jeter/Nomar HOF question.

    lp August 22, 2006, 3:01 pm
  • Now, again: where is the fault in saying, “I think Papelbon is having a better year” and not saying “Papelbon is better than Rivera”?

    Devine August 22, 2006, 3:03 pm
  • hey lp– why don’t you pull up the same numbers on nomar vs jeter 96-03 (which is the ONLY timeframe in which anyone ever said “nomah’s bettah”) and then show all of us how the two were never comparable.

    T-sf August 22, 2006, 3:06 pm
  • Oy, the old “Nomah’s better” debate. So tiresome. Yankees fans will never admit that there was a time (and yes, there was an extended period of time) where Nomar was second only to A-Rod in being a feared offensive shortstop, and also a great fielder, better than Jeter. If I remember, many Yankees fans always used “but who has the rings?” as their standard retort. If you looked at the numbers, lp and Bozo, you’d see that Nomar was, in fact, the superior statistical player for a five to six year stretch, which is statistically quite significant.
    Now, of course, Jeter easily has the claim on the better career, and he’ll be in the Hall of Fame, while Nomar won’t. But there’s no dignity in trying to belittle what Garciaparra was able to accomplish in Boston, as both a ballplayer and a beloved icon, for an extended period of time.

    SF August 22, 2006, 3:13 pm
  • Yes, but is Melky better than Matsui in LF? That’s the most important issue right now…

    Sam August 22, 2006, 3:19 pm
  • Until you Sox fans threw him under the bus in 2004, and basically said getting rid of him was the reason that the Sox won in 2004. This after the team tried to get the despised AROD to replace him that spring.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 3:20 pm
  • Nomar was so great that Sox fans were salivating at the idea of replacing him with AROD.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 3:21 pm
  • I believe Feeding the Monster backs up the assertion that Nomar was a problem in the clubhouse in 2004, and his injuries/dogging it in the field were hurting the club to the point where they porobably could not have won with him on the team.
    How is this “throwing him under the bus?” It’s merely recognizing the reality of the situation. The time had come when it was best for the player and the club to part ways. It ultimately benefited both.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 3:22 pm
  • Bozo, You still haven’t gotten over 2004, have you. That’s one of the more pathetic and uninformed retorts that we’ve seen on this site. Surely you can do better.

    SF August 22, 2006, 3:23 pm
  • Bozo, that’s true. And A-Rod would be respected and admired in Boston like Nomar was — unlike the reception he gets in New York.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 3:24 pm
  • C’mon you Sox fans sold him out. The Front Office showed him no loyalty. That would never have happened to Jeter. And didn’t.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 3:25 pm
  • bozo– and that has what exactly to do with his numbers vs. jeter’s from ’97-03?

    T-sf August 22, 2006, 3:25 pm
  • Rather than revisit the whole, who-was-better debate (and there was more to the Jeter side of the equation than rings), let’s just say that for a good long run they were standard bearers of their franchises and great rivals. I’m not sure this site would have been started without Nomar-vs-Derek, so at the very least we can be thankful for that. Way back up thread, someone asked whether we would even remember Nomar (and his “competition with Jeets”) in 50 years. I definitely will. I loved watching Nomar, that neurotic genius, and it was a hollow day when he was dealt, though obviously that move worked out well for the Sox. You don’t have to be a HOFer to be remembered. Just ask your local Dodger fan about Gil Hodges.

    YF August 22, 2006, 3:25 pm
  • “C’mon you Sox fans sold him out. The Front Office showed him no loyalty. That would never have happened to Jeter. And didn’t.”
    Bozo, that’s just asinine. You clearly were not following the Red Sox in 2004 — or if you were, it was through some simplistic New York Post/ESPN forum, so please stop talking about machinations about which you are clearly uninformed.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 3:27 pm
  • The Front Office showed him no loyalty
    No, they didn’t. Bozo is right (though that doesn’t make his comments any less moronic). Had they shown him “loyalty” the Red Sox wouldn’t have won a World Series (remember Orlando Cabrera, Bozo?). Thank God for their lack of loyalty.
    YF is right: were it not for the rings vs. stats debate (I reduce this for sake of drama; Jeter obviously is statistically accomplished, but for 1997-2003 he wasn’t as accomplished as Nomah) this site would still be in email format on our local PCs. Though I don’t want everyone to think that all we discussed were Derek and Nomar.

    SF August 22, 2006, 3:36 pm
  • *Ahem.* Statistically better, meaning a higher OPS achieved playing in Fenway. *Ahem*
    Nomar was a superior defensive shortstop. (There. I said it.)
    I will no longer engage in this debate. But for one minor point:
    Sorry. Kidding. Will go self-medicate now…..

    YF August 22, 2006, 3:43 pm
  • In 1997, Nomar won Rookie of the Year
    In 1998, he finished second in the MVP voting
    In 1999 and 2000, he led the AL in Bating Average
    In 2001, he was injured
    In 2002, he set the MLB shortstop record with 56 doubles
    Nomar’s minimum totals from 1997-2003 — which took place in 2003 — were .301/.345/.524
    Certainly not a “flavor of the moment,” by any means. By comparison, Jeter’s toip MVP finish was third, he’s never won a batting title, and he hit below .300 twice in that span. Jeter’s best season, 1999, wasn’t as good as Nomar’s 1999, and Nomar’s 1999 was nowhere near as good as his 2000.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 3:43 pm
  • I missed some stuff dealing with work. Sorry.
    YF, Paul,
    Despite the allocades Nomar has earned, who do you think will make the HOF, Jeter or Nomar? It’s a fair, bottom-line question that goes to historical greatness.
    I think Jeter will go, Nomar will not. The difference between the two is that Nomar fans need to cherry pick seasons, while Jeter fans do not.

    lp August 22, 2006, 3:54 pm
  • Paul: There are plenty of metrics that place Jeter above Nomar in some of those years.

    YF August 22, 2006, 3:56 pm
  • lp, Jeter will go, Nomar will not. But comparing a stretch of seven or eight consecutive seasons without interruption that make up the entirety of the Jeter/Nomar debate as it pertains to this site is not “cherry-picking.” Even accounting for Nomar’s one injury-plagued season, Nomar Garciaparra was a better player than Derek Jeter durring his time in Boston. Period. Live with it.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 3:57 pm
  • LP: Nomar fans = baseball fans, imho. A great player, felled by injury, just like Donnie.

    YF August 22, 2006, 3:59 pm
  • What I just don’t get is how easily Sox fans accepted the way the front office destroyed than threw away Nomar. It was all Nomah’s great, Jeter sucks, then poof he was gone and Sox fans were happy about it. That doesn’t happen with Jeter.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:02 pm
  • Yes I remeber the “OC” then they dumped his *ss after the great job he did for them, and for who, Edgar Rent-a-error, er I mean Renterria.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:04 pm
  • Wow, Bozo, you are really in denial of 2004 if you can’t answer your own question.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:05 pm
  • I don’t know about other Sox fans, but I wasn’t happy about it when it happened. The direct result of that trade (and other factors) was a World Series ring, so yes, that made me much happier with the trade…
    But Bozo, if Jeter was injured for roughly half of two seasons, became a clubhouse problem, sulked and began failing on the field because of his attitude, then was traded for key parts that spurred the Yanks to a World Series win, something tells me you wouldn’t exactly be screaming for Jeter anymore.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 4:05 pm
  • I have some ideas for a new handle for you, Bozo, but for some reason I just can’t do any better than “Bozo”.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:06 pm
  • Here’s my first post from the day after the Nomar trade:

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:08 pm
  • You can see that I get certain things right, certain things terribly wrong. About the norm for me, I guess. But Bozo’s BS generalizations about us Sox fans should just be ignored.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:10 pm
  • Paul, Jeter’s 1999 was better than Nomar’s. Front office genius in residence, Bill James, called Jetes the best player in baseball that year. For a five year period, during which time Nomar played most of his games in a hitter friendly park and Jeter played most of his games in a pitcher’s park, they put similar numbers. Nomar outslugged and had a better avg most of the time while Jeter was on base more often. They were both great offensive shortstops. To me it’s a toss up who was better. Period. Live with it.

    Nick-YF August 22, 2006, 4:10 pm
  • Interesting.
    I especially like this paragraph:
    “As for Loaiza for Contreras, is there any more evidence needed that Kenny Williams may just be the worst GM in all of baseball? Not that Loaiza is Cy Young, but Contreras is barely a major league pitcher, and at least Loaiza has shown, for a couple years now, that he belongs in the first 3 of a rotation. Good move for the Yanks, more proof that if you keep calling morons they’ll eventually answer the phone.”

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 4:12 pm
  • Nick, no reason to tell Paul to “live with it”. He’s not the one making asinine arguments about Jeter vs. Nomar and the “cherrypicking” of data. Paul’s using the actual stats to argue that Nomar was a better player for a six year period and making no extensions of that argument for the careers of these two players. That is a subjective and defensible position. It’s LP and Bozo who need to “live with it”, who are in denial of Nomar’s greatness during that extended period. I think you should be directing such blunt orders towards them.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:13 pm
  • The thing about that post that I made is that I read through like 26 pages of SoSH responses to the trade, and the general tenor was the exact opposite of what Bozo asserts: Theo took a reaming for dumping an icon.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:14 pm
  • SF/Paul,
    Two points:
    1. When you begin to attack the person instead of his argument, well we all know what that means.
    2. The fact remains Jeter would never have sulked, all those intangibles Sox fans always derided, would have prevented it. So while Nomar was a little better statistically from 1996-2003 or for his whole career, that is why Jeter in my opinion is and was the better baseball player. You’ve made my point for me. Thanks.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:15 pm
  • SF,
    Not once did I say Nomar was not a great player. He was. He was just unceremoniously dumped like he wasn’t. And that’s a fact. Live with it.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:18 pm
  • Wow, a Jeter vs. Nomah debate. It brings me back years and years… to I think the 2000 or maybe 2001 season. I argued for hours at a bar with a Red Sox fan friend of mine. It started with a discussion I started about a Red Sox/Yankees only all-star team.
    I argued for Nomar as starting SS, he argued for Jeter. Heh.
    In the end, though, I remember switching to Jeter for one reason: I figured Jeter managed to play in more games, and that the ability to stay healthy was worth something, mitigating Nomar’s superior hitting. And that was before Nomar really started having trouble staying on the field.

    Rob (Middletown, CT) August 22, 2006, 4:21 pm
  • Enough, Bozo. You can’t or won’t back up your case statistically, something Paul has already done. It’s a subjective argument, who was better during those 6/7 years from 1996-2003, but at least Paul has made a case for his opinion. Nobody’s argued here, from either side, that Jeter has had a lesser career than Nomar at this point. We all agree, as far as I can tell, that Jeter will be a Hall of Famer and Nomar won’t. So move on.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:21 pm
  • And for all you stat heads out there:
    Don’t you think the Sox miss more than just Johnny Damon’s stats?

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:22 pm
  • He was just unceremoniously dumped like he wasn’t.
    Last time: do you recall what happened in 2004? To this point I cannot tell.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:24 pm
  • SF,
    Don’t take this as a personal attack, I must admit that you wouldn’t defend Nomar so much if he hadn’t meant as much to you as Jeter does to Yankee fans. I’ll bet you would have rather won the Series with him than without him. I just don’t think that getting rid of him was the reason or even a large part of why the Sox won that year. Some Sox fans are more willing to accept it than I am. I think if he is on that team and he is healthy they still win it all that year.

    Bozo August 22, 2006, 4:27 pm
  • SF, I was joking about the live with it comment (preceded by the “period” statement.) Or rather I was using Paul’s definitive language for my purposes to support an argument that acknowledges the greatness of both players while not coming to any definitive conclusion about who was better.

    Nick-YF August 22, 2006, 4:28 pm
  • Papi has teh ring.
    E-Rod has none.
    Just sayin’.

    Hudson August 22, 2006, 4:32 pm
  • Yes, but Papi wasn’t that good with the Twins, Hud.

    SF August 22, 2006, 4:35 pm
  • “lp, Jeter will go, Nomar will not.”
    Just wanted to get that straight, Paul. And that is based on the career numbers, not a cross section that only Sox fans think is relevant.
    SF, you can be as sarcastic as you want (telltale signs of a weak argument) but the fact is it’s about the career numbers with any player and you’re cherry-picking by definition if you just draw from the years he was on your team or just the good seasons. Can’t respect that and won’t ever concede a stat argument that’s based on selective recall. No one needs to cherry-pick Jeter’s career.
    Live with that.
    And YF, Nomar is a class-act and my favorite Red Sox player from that era. If the Yanks had room for him, I’d love to root for him as a Yankee flavor of the month.

    lp August 22, 2006, 5:40 pm
  • Yes, but what’s wrong with saying Papelbon is having a better year than Rivera and not saying he’s a better player?

    Devine August 22, 2006, 5:55 pm
  • lp, you are conflating two arguments, as far as I can tell. First, there is the “who has had a better career” argument. I don’t think there’s any question that Jeter is the choice here, from SFs. We all attest to that within this thread. Second, there is a different and more focused discussion of who was better during the time that Nomar was on the Sox, which was a huge source of conversation back then, and it’s still ripe for discussion now, obviously. And that period of time is more up for debate than you seem willing to admit. Those are the two courses of discussion, as far as I can tell. Both are legitimate.

    SF August 22, 2006, 5:57 pm
  • YF mentioned Mattingly earlier in the thread. When I was in college, there was a huge debate about “Boggs or Mattingly”. Mattingly’s backers said that he was the man, he had better power numbers, he was a better fielder, he was the choice. Those who chose Boggs cited the insane ability to get on base, the work ethic, the otherworldly hitting ability, the fielding that improved significantly over time. That was at the height of both players’ powers. It would seem that there were years that Mattingly was the superior player, but that for a career Boggs was obviously the more successful one, at least in hindsight. This too is a great debate to have, and could probably occupy 100 comments too, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with looking at Mattingly’s run of great years and comparing them to Boggs’, and looking at the entirety of their careers with respect to each other. Those who proclaim Mattingly to be the better hitter based on his best run of seasons might have a good case, though I also might disagree. But I don’t consider that “cherry picking” the way it’s been pejoratively termed here.

    SF August 22, 2006, 6:14 pm
  • SF, I’m not involved in the ‘who was better over x number of years’ debate. I have said repeatedly in this and other threads that I look at the entire career when comparing players. I’m not concerned with anything less.
    My overall point is this: Back when you were arguing (during the era you bring up) that Nomar was better, it was a shortsighted argument. History has shown, and you’ve conceeded, that Jeter, overall, is a better ballplayer.
    That will probably be the case with people like Papi and (where this all began) Papelbon. In the case of the latter, he doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with you know who simply because he has his entire career ahead of him. The odds are stacked against Papelbon having a similar, elite career. Injuries, off-field issues, etc. will all play into his legacy – if he lasts beyond next season. How will he fare as a starter? Will he ultimately even be a starter? How does he handle October?
    All of these are unknowns that should preclude anyone from proclaiming a rookie’s greatness in the same context as a proven veteran and future HOFer.
    The only way it’s being done is by pulling a small sample of stats and making the comparison of those skewed numbers.
    I respect consistency over the long haul in terms of baseball. There are plenty of guys, especially closers that are here today, gone tomorrow – for whatever the reason. That’s what I meant the other day by “earning his stripes”. To be compared with a 10 year future HOFer on any level, you have to put in quality time.

    lp August 22, 2006, 6:37 pm
  • I find that a narrow method of analysis. Based on your own criteria, we can’t discuss anyone until careers are over, and we have the proper hindsight with which to determine who was better. In fact, I find that a most uncritical method.
    You again write a falsehood: there was no talk about Papelbon being on par (“in the same context”, your words) with Rivera beyond the context of this year. You don’t understand this, frankly, and it’s not even a subtlety.

    SF August 22, 2006, 6:56 pm
  • Overall, Papelbon has had a better year than Rivera, even though he seems to have hit a wall recently. There, I said it.
    However, in terms of being the better player, it’s obvious that Rivera and Pap is like heaven and earth, and most SFs agree. In 10 years from now, we might change our minds.

    yankeemonkey August 22, 2006, 7:06 pm
  • Oh, and the Indonesian Parliament ™ is presiding, apparently.

    yankeemonkey August 22, 2006, 7:07 pm
  • Jeter’s “below .300” seasons:
    97: .291. obp .370. 23 SB 190 hits
    02: .297 obp .373. 32 SB 191 hits
    04: .292 188 hits, 44 2B, 23 SB, 23HR.
    Ringz schizzles!

    walein August 22, 2006, 7:10 pm
  • This year is Papelbon’s only year – that’s the entire point. You have no other year in which to evaluate Papelbon. Can’t you see that your perspective on him is warped because he’s only been in the bigs for five months? He shouldn’t be compared to anyone except other rookies.
    Re: narrow method of analysis
    I don’t know how looking at someone’s entire career and ALL associated stats is narrow? That’s a new one.
    Also, you have yet to make a case for excluding data when data exists and what the criteria is for that exclusion.
    From what I can tell your criteria for exclusion/inclusion is when that player was in Boston. Fenway isn’t exaclty a neutral park in terms of hitting, so already things are tilted. If you want to look at splits, like away numbers, fine. But, that should be over an entire career, not just when a player was on your favorite team. That’s just homerism.
    And in terms of my “uncritical method”, you have yet to put forth a consistent means of evaluating a ballplayer. Thus, you have no method.

    lp August 22, 2006, 7:10 pm
  • Work made me miss most of the rest of this conversation, but I agree with SF whole-heartedly (which is not always a given). I guess we have to hold off on any debates involving Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. I guess also we can’t say Damon is better than Crisp. We’ll just have to wait another 10 or more years to figure that one out…
    That’s a shame too. It really removes a lot of the fun of being a baseball fan when you just look at it that way…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 7:16 pm
  • I think we can say that Mariano is better than Papelbon and that Damon is better than Crisp.
    I’d rather have the formers over the latters in any game this season.

    walein August 22, 2006, 7:21 pm
  • lp, I can’t fathom how looking at Nomar’s seasons on the Sox — which is when the “who’s better” debate raged — is somehow arbitrary. That makes no sense to me whatsoever. It clearly defines the years of comparison, they are a significant stretch of time, they are especially appropriate to this site, and they are exactly the years to which YFs were referring when they said that Jeter was better.
    The debate has been nonexistent because Nomar isn’t even in the same league (literally, NL vs. AL). It’s only natural that we argue this debate now on the grounds on which it was fought then. Yankee fans said Jeter was better during the years Nomar was on the Sox. All we’re saying is, No. He wasn’t.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 7:22 pm
  • Incidentally, in Nomar’s seven-plus seasons with the Sox, including the injury year, he beat Jeter in OPS+ five times (1997, 1998, 2000, 2002 and 2004). OPS+ is park adjusted, and the years Jeter beat Nomar, the largest margin was nine points (2001, the injury year). Nomar beat Jeter by 19 points in 1997, 16 points in 1998, 35 points in 2000, 19 points in 2002 and 2 points during his Sox half of 2004.
    I think that about does it.

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 7:26 pm
  • I’m sorry, 11 points was the largest margin.
    Nomar is the first column, Jeter the second.
    1997 123 104
    1998 142 126
    1999 152 161
    2000 158 123
    2001 114 125
    2002 132 113
    2003 121 127
    2004 118 116

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 7:28 pm
  • I don’t know how looking at someone’s entire career and ALL associated stats is narrow? That’s a new one.
    It’s not narrow, in and of itself. But you said that’s the only way you will analyze players in comparison to each other. Hence my terming it “narrow”, correctly so. You forbid us from understanding a great deal about baseball when debates are limited to the terms you prefer. One of the great beauties of baseball is that it is not a sport of absolutes; there is no one way to measure ability and/or greatness. The variables come in multitudes. I can only conclude that you don’t really seem to understand this, or if you do, you don’t care. Unless it suits your chosen position, of course.

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:40 pm
  • Interesting how you didn’t mention Jeter’s injury in 03 Paul.
    Jeter also played in more games every single season than Normar did (excepting the injury year of 2003).

    walein August 22, 2006, 7:41 pm
  • Honestly LP, you probably have the worst arguing ability of anyone I’ve ever (not) met. You’re basically attempting to skew things so only Yankees can ever be better. The Nomar/Jeter debate is irrelevant to me. Obviously I’m biased. I’m too young to have seen much of Mattingly/Boggs, but that debate for sure makes things clearer. Is Boggs a superior player over a career and an obvious HOFer? Yes. Did Donnie Baseball have some amazing seasons in which he put up similar if not better numbers than Boggs? Yes. Mattingly’s career was cut short by injury, but that doesn’t make him less of a player in terms of a period of time.
    It doesn’t make Nomar less of a player either. Jeter’s career has been better, but that doesn’t mean Nomar wasn’t better during some stretch. Each had their years, each had their value to their respective teams. Each was the face of his club and this face was definitely not interchangeable.
    3-4 years is plenty of data, and I think Ortiz is a different player now so the debate vs ARod is an apparent one.
    How can you even compare a lifetime of Rivera to Papelbon? You can’t. Most of the SFs here are HOPING he can be what Mo is to the Yanks. Just like they did with Foulke. If Paps keeps it up for a few years, I’m sure ESPN will give him the Gagne treatment. Mo doesn’t need to make the news or the front page, because he’s so great he’s beyond that.
    Melky for President.

    RichYF August 22, 2006, 7:44 pm
  • Yes, but look at these numbers:
    Nomar 520
    Jeter 440
    Nomar 570
    Jeter 500
    Jeter 420
    Jeter 490
    I think that does it. Nomar scored better on his math and verbal SATs the first time he took them, compared to Jeets (the top two pairs). But Jeter obviously got more cumulative points, but that’s only because he took them two times (the bottom pair being his retest). Now can we PLEASE move on?

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:48 pm
  • The funny issues of sports are that a lot of announcers will say this kid is the next (insert great athlete’s name here).
    Papelbon and Rivera in the same sentence is not a fair comparison. Rivera has done what he is doing for years with ONE pitch. Papelbon may be a HOF closer by then end of his career. I say again may be.
    Papi’s numbers in Minny are not a fair assessment given the fact that the staff there tried to get him to be a opposite field hitter and not what he truly was, a power hitter. However those are his stats in B&W.
    Jeter and Nomah at one time was a great debate because they both were so damned good. However injuries diminished Nomar and Jeter continued upwards. Jeter had the luck of playing on some great teams that worked together. The Sox in that same period found a way to break up good teams internally with the squabbling and some bad FO moves.
    If you judge a person solely on numbers of a career Kirby Puckett had a shortened one and is in the HOF. Mattingly should be there based of that fact.

    Rob August 22, 2006, 7:48 pm
  • Oh, and thank you, Rich. I think you have summed it up very, very well.

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:49 pm
  • Rap the gavel SF

    Rob August 22, 2006, 7:49 pm
  • Please, walein, let’s be reasonable.
    Jeter’s injury allowed him to play 119 games in 2003. Nomar was limited to 21.
    In every other year except 1999 (in which Jeter was clearly better anyway and during which Nomar suffered another injury, limiting him to 135 games), Jeter’s advantage is no greater than eight games and in 2003, it was a whopping one. That’s a false argument designed to evoke Jeter as some sort of Ripken-esque figure when in afct both players in their primes missed about the same number of games…

    Paul SF August 22, 2006, 7:51 pm
  • I don’t think typepad lets me lock threads. But shouldn’t the SAT score comparison do it? I mean, Derek was a higher scorer over his career of test-taking, but Nomar had the bigger one-time result. I think we can officially move on.

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:51 pm
  • Paul: DISENGAGE!!!!

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:52 pm
  • I think the problem with this debate is that Nomar and Derek had different responsibilities as hitters on their teams.
    Both were suppossed to be “Team Leaders” and obviously Jeter won that battle.
    Jeter has spent most of his career being a #2 hitter or a lead off hitter. Nomar played as a #3 or #4 hitter. The needs of those places in an effective lineup are different.
    Is it Jeter’s fault that there were others who could better be relied upon to hit lots of homeruns?
    Is it Nomar’s fault that being on the Red Sox dooms you to a life of misery?

    walein August 22, 2006, 7:53 pm
  • LOL….
    Indonesian Parliment in session…..

    Rob August 22, 2006, 7:53 pm
  • Is it Nomar’s fault that being on the Red Sox dooms you to a life of misery?
    hahahahahahahahaha. best line of the thread. now I have to go in the other room and cut myself.

    SF August 22, 2006, 7:54 pm
  • “You’re basically attempting to skew things so only Yankees can ever be better.”
    By including all of their numbers? That makes loads of sense Rich. In fact it’s utterly retarded.
    Anytime “if” is in your case, you have a really weak one.

    lp August 22, 2006, 8:41 pm
  • just for sh.. and giggles, NESN is showing Nomars’ 10RBI game against the Mariners when he hit 3hrs including 2 GrandSlams…

    TonyC.25 August 22, 2006, 8:51 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Next post:

Previous post: