 |
| |
|
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rocket science Clemens' passion pushes him to edge of Club 300Posted: Monday May 26, 2003 11:36 AM
With Roger Clemens, there's always the sense that he's tiptoeing on the edge. That he's maybe a second away, a pitch away from ... something. Maybe it's something good. A lot of times, it is. Maybe it's something bizarre. That's happened, too. Often, it's something extraordinary. That's what makes him Roger Clemens. "Yeah," agrees Tom Seaver, the Hall of Fame pitcher. "Fun, huh?" The incomparable Clemens -- incomparable at least in this generation of pitchers -- takes to the mound Monday at Yankee Stadium in a bid to join Seaver and 19 other Hall of Famers as members of the 300-win club. The Yankees' right-hander will face his former team, the Boston Red Sox, in his first try at No. 300. If Clemens, 40, decides to up and retire before the start, he already is assured of a place in the Hall of Fame. His 299 wins, his nearly 4,000 strikeouts and his six Cy Young awards make him a first-ballot pick, practically guaranteed.
And, sometimes, he'll do whatever it takes to get all that done. He is notorious for coming inside on hitters, sometimes unnecessarily. He has been known to challenge an umpire. He thrives so much on strikeouts that all of his children have names that begin with the letter "K." Intimidation is a crucial part of his game. In Game 4 of the 1990 American League Championship Series, while still pitching for the Red Sox, he was so pumped up he was ejected in the second inning of his start for arguing vehemently with ump Terry Cooney. He beaned Mets catcher Mike Piazza during an interleague game once, then famously threw part of a broken bat in Piazza's direction during the 2000 Subway Series. But those incidents detract from the bigger, more accurate picture of Clemens. He is an intense competitor -- no one can deny that -- who wants the ball in the most clutch of circumstances. And he often comes through. He won the American League Cy Young Award and the MVP in 1986. In six World Series starts, he is 3-0 with a 1.56 ERA. He won 20 straight games once, spanning the 1998 and '99 seasons. He's also struck out 20 batters in a game twice, 18 once and 16 batters in a game three times. He is a bully in some eyes, a plain jerk in others. But it's worked for him. "I think he wants to win more than the other guy," says Atlanta's Greg Maddux, the next in line for 300 wins (he stands at 276). "I think he is in total control when he is out there. I really do. Total control." If nothing else, for more than 19 years Clemens has taken the ball. Though he's had some injuries -- including a shoulder injury in 1996, when he finished 10-13, that persuaded the Red Sox to let him sign elsewhere -- he always comes back. Before the season is over, barring injury, he should have more than 600 career starts "If you didn't keep a win-loss total, he'd still want to go out there," says Don Sutton, who won 324 games in 23 years in the majors. "The guy wants the responsibility that comes with being as starting pitcher. 'This is my job.' I love that about Roger Clemens." That is a trait of all the members of the Club 300: the desire to pitch. There are many others, too. "I think they all share a lot of the same characteristics," Seaver says. "Great discipline. Great physical and mental strength. Great work ethic. Great focus." What may separate Clemens, though, is that edge. That intimidation factor. Others have had it. Nolan Ryan, the great strikeout pitcher and a winner of 324 games, had it. But there are few, if any, in today's game that have it to that degree. "I think Roger is one of the fiercest competitors I've seen," Ryan said in a conference call with reporters last week. "It reflects in the way he approaches his job and the way he carries himself on the mound. When he goes out there, his teammates know he's going to do everything in his power to help them win a ballgame." Says Sutton: "If you want to be good at anything, sometimes you have to walk the edge." Winning 300 games in the big leagues has always been special. It used to be lumped together with hitting 500 home runs. But winning 300 is quickly becoming a much rarer feat than hitting 500 dingers. It may soon become outright extinct. Though three players have clubbed their 500th homer in the past couple of years -- Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro -- and many more will soon, Clemens is poised to become the first pitcher in more than a decade to notch his 300th win. Ryan was the last, when he won No. 300 in July 1990 at 43 years old. After Clemens gets his, and if Maddux gets his, there is Tom Glavine (247 wins) and Randy Johnson (225). No one else has more than 200. So what we might see Monday, if Clemens beats the Red Sox, could be the last time we see it in a long, long time. If ever. "I think it's going to be very difficult. Are guys talented enough? Oh, heck yes," says Sutton. "Are the opportunities going to be there, with the five-man staff, with more decisions by middle relievers and closers, with the micro-managing of pitching? I don't know. "Let's face it. To win 300 games, you have to win 15 games a year for 20 years. Not many guys are going to want to pitch 20 years." Clemens has changed over the years, morphing from sheer power pitcher to a pitcher who uses power as just part of his repertoire. He still can crank up a fastball to the mid-90s. But he often relies on location, a nasty split-fingered pitch and guile now. And intimidation, of course. There's always that. That's what makes him Roger Clemens.
• On the other hand, there are those Red Sox, who have the top offense in the American League but a middling pitching staff (a 4.75 ERA). The question, I guess, is can you have too much of a good thing, especially if there's not enough on the other end? • Is there a doctor in the house? Anyone? Anyone? Mo Vaughn would like to speak to you. • Don't look now, but Ken Griffey Jr. is hitting .300 and coming off his first multi-homer game in almost two years. Is he back? I'm not touching that one. • Got a pick at second base for the All-Stars? The NL has three legitimate choices right now -- Florida's Luis Castillo, Montreal's Jose Vidro and Atlanta's Marcus Giles.
This week, you all sound off on baseball marketing (or lack of it), the Yankees (again), the Expos (they're still in it) and umpiring (awwww) ... What I would do if I could tell a team, any team, what could be done to help bring fans in? 1) Lower ticket prices. Owners would "lose" money on the cheaper seat, but if you can double the attendance, you can recoup that in beer/hot dog sales. 2) Scheduled doubleheaders. Once a month, every team should play one. 3) Have a dugout seat giveaway. Attend a game, your seat is entered in a draw. You win, you get a uniform and dugout seat to the next home game. What would be cooler than that? -- Michel Borduas Fine and dandy. Unless it's a seat in the Mets' dugout. Major League Baseball always overlooks the obvious. The best way to get me back to the ballpark is to make it so I don't have to spend $150 for tickets, parking, one drink each, and a snack to take my family of four to a game. I can watch my local minor league team -- the Round Rock Express (Texas League) -- without spending an arm and a leg to go to a game. -- Barry Wright, Round Rock, Texas Got lots of mail from minor league fans, enamored especially with the minor league prices. Like this one, below ... My wife, my two kids and myself went to see the Somerset (N.J.) Patriots and sat 40 feet behind home plate for a total of $32. We got to the stadium, and back, in 25 minutes. And didn't have to deal with vulgar and sloppy drunks. -- Michael Shanker Minor league stadiums do seem a bit more family friendly. I remember seeing the Chattanooga Lookouts a couple of years ago and being so impressed I went up the next weekend and took my family. On a minor-league scale, everything just seems so much more ... manageable. I am a season holder for the D'backs, and have been since their inception. The fact some players sign autographs for 10 minutes before each game is a little deceptive. As I am sure you know, prior to the season, and after Jerry Colangelo laid down that rule, the players and the Union refused to agree with it. Instead, they forced Colangelo's hand and now it's just a handful of 5-6 players or so each time. In my mind the players' reaction to Colangelo's attempt lessened the ties to fans. This is especially true considering they chose a season in which they currently stink to do this. Overall the team's marketing efforts have increased substantially because it realizes fickle fans in this front-running town are losing interest in a sub-.500 team that is old and wise yet plays fundamentally flawed baseball. -- Greg Honig Yeah, Greg, there was some initial reluctance by the players. They claimed that signing for awhile might throw off their pregame routine. But smarter heads prevailed. And, let's remember, at least they're doing that. Should they do more? Sure. Shouldn't everyone? As for your D'backs -- let's not count the old guys out of it just yet, OK? No "marketing genius" trying to give away a box full of bobblehead dolls is going to reverse the trend. That's what makes the response of the teams so interesting. They are completely oblivious. Your article said as much: What the people want is more interaction with the players. A mea culpa, if you will. A way to identify with a group of men who make more money in one season for playing a child's game than most Americans will make in their lifetime. A reason to care. That, in its essence, is the core of the problem. People no longer care. -- Dan McLaughlin Ooooo. A lot of negative waves. True, maybe. But negative. Used car giveaway nite? A pre-paid funeral? A massage? Isn't it sad that baseball has to resort to such measures to sell its "product?" Time was you put a team together that had good starting pitching, solid defense up the middle, some power on the corners and an outfield that could run down the long fly ball and hit a cutoff man. Not now ... "chicks-dig-the-long-ball" has taken over the mindset of most major-league managers and GMs. I hate it. If I want to see that, I'll go watch my local slow-pitch team hit all those moonshots and have beer or two. Put a team on the field that plays the game right, lower the ticket prices and the fans'll come back. At that point you can stop trying new ways to market the product" -- Kevin T. O'Neill It's way true that baseball has lost track of a way to sell its game. Not its parks or what's going on inside them outside of the game. The game itself. The players. Major League Baseball needs to get back to that, and quickly. The game is good, at its core. And there are plenty of good players to build a marketing campaign around. To me, a lifelong fan of the Montreal Expos, it's about the contrary. Non-marketing. Here in Montreal we don't even know if the Expos play, there is no TV deal, no radio deal, no TV advertising and ... well, nothing. -- Jean Leconte Good product there, too. But so, so many things going against it. After bashing the Yankees throughout your entire article, I thought it was almost insulting to conclude with "Now we should make sure that we don't bury them too quickly, either." You're just another Anti-Yankee, and I'm not impressed. I have major issues with another comment you made -- they were swept by the "lowly" Rangers, you say. OK, fine they may not have much of a pitching staff, but please keep in mind they have one of the best offenses in the majors. Their lineup is unbelievable. Two conclusions here: 1) The Yankees will put Boston in their dust after July. 2) You totally underrate the Rangers. -- Michael Johnston, Maywood, N.J. The Anti-Yankee. I kinda like that. You're right, Mike, the Rangers can bop. So they're half a team now. I am sick and tired of every time I open SI.com up to MLB there is a story on the Yankees. Please get over it and write about other teams. As an Astros fan I could care less about the Yankees. Who cares what Joe Torre or Steinbrenner are wearing or what Giambi and Jeter had for supper? It is sickening. You all should be called Yankees Illustrated. -- Eric Trevino, Houston And I was just getting used to being the Anti-Yankee. Darn. I think you're missing something when you say that power-hitting corner outfielders aren't defense-minded first -- they're probably also not outfield-minded. The best overall players are always stacked in the infield. (In youth baseball,) right field is where you sub guys in and out to give everyone a chance to play. The result is that none of the best young baseball players start off with any sort of outfield instincts. If these kids were coached right up front -- and if there wasn't a bias against outfielders at an early age -- maybe we'd see less of this phenomenon. -- Phil Huckelberry, Normal, Ill. Well, not all outfielders are castoffs. Not the best ones, anyway. But you have a ton of them. And when you look at the Mets' outfield ... you got a point, Phil. We need more true outfielders. I just read your column about the strike zone. I agree that fewer strikes are being called this year, and I see this as another of baseball's many problems. The game would be more interesting if umpires called more strikes, prompting hitters to swing more. It would sure speed up the game, something that is badly needed. Another problem, as I see it, is an overall decline in the quality of umpiring. So many of these guys are inconsistent inning to inning. Too many bad umpires with a chip on their shoulder for some reason. -- Roy Griffin, Atlanta Consistency is what the umpiring bosses are working on with this QuesTec system. In my mind, they just have to call a strike a strike, and everyone's strike has to be the same. Simply call more strikes? I dunno. I don't like the sound of that. When is someone in the baseball media going to acknowledge that the Red Sox management never use the term "bullpen by committee?" And when is someone in the baseball media going to talk about the possibility that the Red Sox's bullpen problems pertain more to individuals who are pitching poorly, than the supposed failures of the much maligned concept that the really good pitchers should pitch in the most critical spots of a game? There are far more guys capable of pitching in the ninth than many people realize. Managers simply don't use their heads when selecting the right guy(s) to do the job. And fans and the media doom the process of developing late inning pitchers by not being patient with the young guys who are learning the fine art of slamming the door. Just ranting. Thanks. -- Angus Robertson Rant away. That's why we're here. I don't think the Red Sox are responsible for the BBC tag. And that whole tag is a misnomer anyway, or at least misunderstood. What the Red Sox are doing, as you say, Angus, is trying to get the best pitcher to pitch in what they see as the most critical situation. Problem is, there's not a whole lot of talent out there right now, and there certainly isn't one guy out there that you can count on. Here in K.C., we were worried that our Boys in Blue would come down with SARS. Turns out they have come down with SORs -- Same Old Royals. Well, at least we still have dollar hot dog night to look forward to. -- Aron Long Eat up, everyone. Gotta get your money's worth. How can you say that "As far as hitting against the shift ... if these guys (Bonds, Palmeiro, Giambi and others) could go the other way, other teams would never put on the shift" about Palmeiro? He has 530 doubles. Never mind the boost it gives to his Hall qualifications, that's surely a sign of "hitting it where they ain't" if I ever saw it. -- Jeff G. Elkridge, Md. Palmeiro used to be able to hit to all fields. But now he's a dead-pull hitter, and he's struggling against that shift this year. Why is everyone upset about last year's All-Star Game? Why are we changing it so that it means something? Guess what people, it means nothing! I had friends last year absolutely horrified because it ended in a tie. I said to them, "Who cares? It's a meaningless game." -- Peter Arbeau Don't say that around purists. I said that and almost got drummed out of the office. We can blame it on Eric Gregg, can't we? Wasn't it his 30-inch interpretation of the home plate in the NL playoffs a few years back what really brought attention to the "consistent interpretation" of a strike? For years, I've argued with my Atlanta friends that American League umpires, and the close scrutiny of a national TV audience, are as much a reason for the Braves' postseason frustrations as their lack of clutch hitting. It's no secret here in Atlanta that Glavine and Maddux lived off the plate, and expanded the strike zone as they got deeper into the game. Tighter strike zones in the postseason limited their effectiveness. You could tell by how Bobby Cox set his rotations. As much as I like the "human element," your article makes it appear the game benefits from a consistent, by-the-book strike zone. -- Ron Boggs Sure, it would help. Pitchers would know where to pitch, hitters would know what to look for. Just how they drew it up. The focus, performance and professionalism that the Expos are displaying should be a model for the sport, not ridiculed. I think there are more fans out there than MLB realizes (especially in Montreal itself) who appreciate the Expos, and wish the rest of baseball was just like them. Of course, fans' concerns mean zero to Bud Selig, and that's why the empty seats and bad TV ratings keep spreading. -- J.D. Vercett Sorry, I couldn't include your whole rant against the Expos' front office, J.D. How the Expos are doing what they're doing, under the circumstances, is truly amazing. We'll never really know what goes on in the mind of a major league umpire. Do they feel they need to be in total control? Pitchers can't even show any emotions when a pitch doesn't go their way or they are accused of "showing up" old blue. Angel Hernandez has a strike zone the size of a shoe box. Hunter Wendelstedt is probably the most lenient umpire I've watched call a game. I think the umps need some fixing. If the electronic system will make them shape up, I'm for it. -- Keith Totzke, Spring Valley, Calif. Umps are being scrutinized now more than ever. We'll see if that scrutiny carries over into how the umps conduct themselves during a game, outside of the balls and strikes calls. John Donovan is a senior writer for SI.com.
Comments? To e-mail Donovan, click here.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Mets ... awww, should we keep picking on them? The best of a weekend full of Mets' blunders, as they lost two of three in Atlanta, was (now) right fielder Roger Cedeno taking a lazy fly ball to right -- and thinking, evidently, that it was the third out of the inning. It wasn't. He didn't toss the ball into the stands, but he turned around, with his back to the infield, and loped around for no apparent reason. By the time teammates had yelled at him to get the ball back into the infield, a Braves runner tagged from second and moved to third. The runner didn't score, but it wasn't for lack of the Mets trying.
"I'm glad it's over with."
