 |
| |
|
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the swing Palmeiro's sweet stroke should carry him to CooperstownPosted: Monday May 12, 2003 11:47 AM
Long after Rafael Palmeiro hangs up his cap and slips quietly into retirement -- quietly is how Palmeiro routinely works -- we will remember the swing. Lefties always look better at the plate. It's an undeniable fact of baseball. Some say it's because lefties, naturally, are so much better at hitting low pitches, and everybody looks better swinging at low pitches than high ones. Some say it's because lefties kind of flow out of the box on their way to first base, the swing, the step, everything moving seamlessly down the line. But Palmeiro's swing is something special, even among lefties. Smooth as a Louisville Slugger straight out of the box. Effortless. Classic. The former singles slapper turned himself into a dead-pull hitter early in his career and, now at 38, has become the 19th player in history to smack 500 home runs in his career. Hall of Famer? Really, can there be any doubt?
Palmeiro's swing, which literally flows out of his smallish 6-foot, 190-pound frame, is as perfect as you'll ever see. That, alone, has separated him from a generation of muscled, hard-swinging, big-effort bashers. But what makes Palmeiro truly special -- what makes him a Hall of Fame first ballot selection -- is his consistency. To hit 500 home runs, a player has to be consistent. Palmeiro, who has never won a home run title in his 16-year career, is nothing if not that. He is the only player to hit 38 home runs in eight straight seasons. After his 10th homer of the season put him in Club 500 on Sunday, nine straight seasons at 38-plus seems a pretty sure thing. There's every reason to believe he'll get to nine straight, too. He has averaged 157 games a season since 1988. He has never -- get this -- never been on the disabled list. Palmeiro is not a one-dimensional slugger, either. He entered the 2003 season as a career .293 hitter. He's averaged 33 homers and 106 RBIs a year. He's never won a batting title, but he's been in the Top 10 five times and twice led his league in singles. He's never won that home run title, but he's been in the Top 10 in extra-base hits every year since 1990. He's never won an RBI crown, either, but only Barry Bonds has driven in more runs than Palmeiro among active players. Palmeiro walks, too. Among active players, only Bonds, Frank Thomas, Fred McGriff and Jeff Bagwell have been walked more. Some will debate whether Palmeiro deserves to be selected to the Hall of Fame. A lot of the questions come because Palmeiro's excellence kind of sneaks up on the unsuspecting. "I don't know how anyone could hit a quiet 500 homers," Cleveland manager Eric Wedge said recently, "but it seems he has." Maybe. But Palmeiro should sneak up on no one any longer. He hopes to play for three more seasons and, at this rate, should reach 600 home runs. He's a few more than 300 hits short of 3,000 hits for his career. He should get that, too. Years down the road, if the only thing we remember is his sweet, flawless stroke, that would be enough. It's that good. It's that beautiful. It's darn near perfect. But the numbers he has put up over the course of his career will be there, too, for everyone to see and digest. And, when all is said and ciphered, they will prove that Palmeiro belongs. Belongs with the best to ever take a swing.
• Four out of six in the last two weekends for the A's over the Yankees. A harbinger of the '03 postseason? You gotta think there's more to be settled there sometime. • Derek Jeter is coming back, or so it seems, Tuesday in New York when the Yanks play host to the Angels. After separating his shoulder in a painful-looking collision at third on Opening Day, Jeter has made an amazing recovery. Let's see if his bat recovers as quickly. • The National League Central has four teams at .500 or better as the week begins, with two games the difference from No. 1 to No. 4. If I'm a Cubs' fan, with that pitching, I'm getting a little antsy that things are that close. • Miguel Tejada climbed over .200 on Sunday for the first time since April 12 -- he's now at .208 -- which shows last year's MVP is starting to get his groove back. As bad as he's been, he's done some good, too. He has eight homers, tied for the team lead, and 21 RBIs, tied for second on the A's.
This week, ganging up on the Mets, talk about changes in the All-Star Game and other assorted rants ...
While I appreciate the fact that you have a job to do, please don't give the Mets any more suggestions about how to improve their team. The rest of us fans in the NL East are truly enjoying this. ... We're almost 1/4 of the way through the 2003 season, and look what's happening. Everyone is finding ways to win except the $117 million, no-longer Amazin' Mets. Could somebody please ask Tom Glavine how he's enjoying his extra millions?
I think that it's become obvious that the Big Apple is becoming a place where overpriced, overpaid, over-publicized prima donna athletes go with the intention of just sitting back and watching while everybody else works for victories (those in the non-millionaire class, that is). If there's a housecleaning in the works at Shea, don't start with the GM; start with some of those prima donnas and make them actually have to work for a living.
You mentioned Tommie Agee coming back; he died in February 2001. Would that it were possible, but sadly, it isn't going to happen. Yeah, a couple of e-mailers mentioned that. I included Agee as a tribute to the great Mets teams past, and the '69 Mets in particular. No disrespect intended.
Is blasting New York at any given chance a prerequisite for writing for a major sports Web site? Now, clearly, you're right about the Mets. They suck. The Hall of Fame second baseman (not anymore?) sucks. The outfield sucks. The first baseman sucks. The shortstop sucks, no matter what his hair looks like. The closer is baseball's answer to Phil Mickelson on Sunday in a major. And the pitching staff qualifies for the early bird senior citizen's special at Denny's. Lots of things about them suck. And not only should the GM go, but your column missed an opportunity to fault the ownership for passing all the blame on to him. Congratulations, Alex! You qualify.
Years ago, I believe the Mets' management was looking to bring in someone from the Yankees' organization to help out with the GM duties. I think the name was Costanza. Any possibility those rumors could resurface? Nope. Dude's too busy hawking chicken, I understand.
Cleon Jones? Wow, I didn't think anyone remembered him. Agee and Swoboda got all the pub, Jones merely hit 340. He was my hero. Remember him on Kiner's Corner? He would be so humble. Thanks for the memory. Cleon killed my Orioles ... when I cared about the Orioles.
On paper, the Mets have an amazing team. Is it really Phillips' fault that the ENTIRE team (both this year and last) hit below their respective career averages? He put together a team of the best players who never performed. Can he help this? It's not all his fault. But as everyone in sports knows, you can't fire the players. Not all of them who deserve it, anyway.
The Mets are only seven games out of first place, yet you and every other so-called journalist have them written off for dead. This is unbelievable to me. The Mets have plenty of time to regroup and if a few key players (Floyd, Alomar, Astacio) step up, we will be playing long into October, and then I will see an influx of articles by you and your cronies about how "amazin" the Mets season turned out to be. True. If they turn it around, I'll apologize.
Keep Jerry Manuel? HELLO!!! This is the third straight disappointing season the White Sox have had led by sleepyv energy-challenged Manuel. Why didn't the Sox go after Dusty Baker? Manuel is always too gutless to bench Frank Thomas. Why should I make a 300-mile roundtrip to see the Sox when they have a manager that has to be shoved out of the dugout to defend his players? Hope the Sox enjoy those 15,000 weekend crowds. Wake up, Jerry, the game is over! Ahh, everybody in Chicago will love him if the players start playing.
It is utterly ridiculous to have to provide additional monetary incentive to play in a game that they should be thankful they are good enough to play in. Furthermore, I don't buy your theory that players from the Tigers, Devil Rays, Padres, etc., won't try hard because they have no shot at going to the World Series. One day, they may be in a position to go to the Series, either with their current team or another team, and will understand that the All-Star Game may mean a lot to their All-Star teammates. In addition, no player wants to face criticism that he was the one that cost his league home-field advantage, especially when millions of fans will be watching with even greater interest (i.e. fans from N.Y., Boston, Seattle, St. Louis, San Fran, etc.) than they do right now. Funny thing about this proposal ... if it's a good game this year, everyone will say it's because these players cared about home-field advantage in the World Series. I'm just not buying that. If it's a good game, it'll be because everyone was awakened last season to the fact that the game had strayed too far afield and was too much about exhibition and not enough about winning. And they wanted to turn it back by playing, and managing, differently.
People ... who can no longer afford to go to a game are the ones who have kept baseball alive for lo these many generations, and nobody who earns their salaries from our love of the game (players, owners, analysts, and sportswriters) seems to care. What will you write under "occupation" on your tax forms when the rest of us "don't go and don't admire?" I care, Matt. I kind of like this gig. My point is, if you are that dead-set against the high salaries, don't help pay them. And if there are enough of you out there that think that way -- and I suspect there are plenty -- hopefully it hits baseball where it matters (in the wallet). Then, maybe, the powers of baseball will do something about making going to a game more affordable. The first step, though, is showing baseball what you think.
Why in the name of a 162-game schedule is MLB not giving home-field advantage to the team with the best record? What does the NFL (except for Super Bowl at a neutral site), the NHL and the NBA know about seeding that Major League Baseball clearly does not? Please help me understand why an MLB team's overall record is not considered when determining home field advantage in the World Series. I think it's just not feasible as far as the logistics go. Baseball simply has to know where the games will be played more than a few days in advance.
So your solution to making the All Star game more meaningful is to give these overpaid prima donnas MORE MONEY to play harder? Give me a break! If they're not already motivated to play hard because of their regular salaries, I doubt whether a few thousand more is going to make a difference. Besides, it's the principle of the thing. Why should we have to motivate them in the first place? You sound like a real suck up and
apologist for the players! The suggestion to pay players in the ASG was made half-jokingly. These guys kinda make enough already, don't you think? The reason I threw it out there was I know what motivates these guys. And it's not home field advantage for something that most of them won't see.
The plan to restore some significance to the All-Star Game through an associated World Series home-field advantage is the only plan that has any merit. Your suggestion to pay the players more money is rather absurd; isn't it fair to assume that the All-Star-caliber players are already sitting on fat contracts? Itıs downright comical to imply that a Barry Bonds is suddenly going to grit his teeth and find an extra gear for a bit of pocket money (by his standards) in the form of a winner's purse. Your other main suggestion was, and I quote, to "instruct the managers to play to win." Did I really read that? Tying the All-Star Game in any way to a potential championship immediately elevates the Midsummer Classic to one of the most important single games of the year for every player chasing that very goal. As a fan, you'd better believe I'm watching it. Look, folks, I don't think the money thing would work, for a lot of reasons. But, again, dollars do get these guys to thinking. As far as the managing of the game ... clearly, Bob Brenly and Joe Torre wanted to win the game last year. Everybody wants to win, whether it's an All-Star Game, a Series game or a pickup game at the local Y. But Brenly and Torre didn't manage it as a must-win game. They managed it like an exhibition, trying to get in all the players and pulling players too early. That mindset has to change. And I think it will.
I'm amazed that people will whine about how much money a baseball player makes for playing their butts off for 162 nights and training year round. But they don't give a second thought to an "actor" like Adam Sandler making $20 million to act no differently on camera than he would among his drinking buddies. Or a "pundit" like Rush Limbaugh to make $25 million to spout knee-jerk pronouncements like any other ill-informed citizen. Or an "entertainer" like Howard Stern to make $30 million to ogle silicone bimbos just like any loner at a Mike Price hangout. I'm no player apologist either, but the salaries they make reflect a supply and demand market.
Problem 1: The All-Star Game has become a meaningless exhibition. Players and managers seemingly don't care who wins. Problem 2: Baseball players are seen by the general public as rich, selfish louts, and MLB is out-of-touch. Solution to Problems 1 and 2: Play the All-Star Game for charity. Each team picks one or more charities for which to play. Corporate sponsors (or MLB itself) puts up a couple million. Winning team's charities get 2/3, loser's 1/3. Everyone wins: The charities (even the "loser" gets around a mil), the players (improved reputations, self-respect), the league (relevance, altruism), and the fans (a well-playe! d game). This idea is a proven winner. I suggested this idea to Selig's office, and never heard a word back. If you like this idea, please endorse it in one of your columns! I like it. I like it a lot. I'm gonna run this up the flagpole to see what happens. Thanks, Jeff. Thanks, all. John Donovan is a senior writer for SI.com.
Comments? To e-mail Donovan, click here.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
You don't need to be a veteran around batting cages to know that you have to watch where you stand. That lesson, evidently, was forgotten by the Dodgers' Brian Jordan. Sunday, leaning on a bar of the cage during a routine pre-game BP, Jordan was smacked on the hand when David Roberts fouled off a pitch into the cage netting. The hand swelled up, Jordan missed Sunday's game and ... well, he won't be standing there any more.
"He was abusive and clearly unprofessional. I would say he was bordering on violent."
