Gehrig vs. Pujols

[rasputin]

Well, in the time period I was talking about, when the Jeter's the Clutchest Hitter of All-Time train was just leaving the station, there's no question Nomar was the better shortstop (Tejada, you're right, now that I look back at it). From '98-'02, Garciaparra had an OPS of .961 (142 OPS+), which I would imagine has to be one of the most underappreciated 5 year periods for any shortstop ever, due to the fact that ARod was still easily eclipsing him. During that time he hit 111 homers, had 189 doubles and drove in 450. And he missed basically all of 2001. Jeter, over the same period, playing five full seasons to Nomar's 4 1/5, had a dozen fewer homers, less doubles, drove in less runs, and had an OPS above Garciaparra's 5-yr. average once (and an OPS+ 14 points lower). I don't care what the fielding comparisons were, Jeter was clearly an inferior player at the time. He just happened to reside on one of the all-time juggernauts of a team and add to his ring collection over that period while Nomar was with the still snakebitten Bosox. Those weren't anomalous years for Jeter, either. He's been remarkably consistent throughout his career, in fact.

I certainly won't disagree with you on the overall A.L. MVP commentary (Twins fan here). Unless the definition of "value" is set in such a way as to essentially disqualify players on teams who don't make the playoffs due to no fault of their own, there's just no way to argue Mauer's value this season is less than that of any other player in the league, and by a wide margin. Anyone think the Twins, if they could go back to the beginning of the season, would trade Mauer for Texeira? The fact they have Morneau may at first glance appear to make it an invalid question, but in fact it proves the point even more.

Mal, are the figures you quoted above for Jeter vs. Nomah adjusted for their respective ballparks?

[Mal]

Not the raw numbers, but the OPS+, yes. I took the numbers from the baseball-reference calculator function, and I believe their OPS+ is an adjusted number. Raw OPS difference over the period is 80 points, so it'd need to be an awfully big adjustment to even out, anyway.

[Olympic Fan]

Well, in the time period I was talking about, when the Jeter's the Clutchest Hitter of All-Time train was just leaving the station, there's no question Nomar was the better shortstop (Tejada, you're right, now that I look back at it). From '98-'02, Garciaparra had an OPS of .961 (142 OPS+), which I would imagine has to be one of the most underappreciated 5 year periods for any shortstop ever, due to the fact that ARod was still easily eclipsing him. During that time he hit 111 homers, had 189 doubles and drove in 450. And he missed basically all of 2001. Jeter, over the same period, playing five full seasons to Nomar's 4 1/5, had a dozen fewer homers, less doubles, drove in less runs, and had an OPS above Garciaparra's 5-yr. average once (and an OPS+ 14 points lower). I don't care what the fielding comparisons were, Jeter was clearly an inferior player at the time. He just happened to reside on one of the all-time juggernauts of a team and add to his ring collection over that period while Nomar was with the still snakebitten Bosox. Those weren't anomalous years for Jeter, either. He's been remarkably consistent throughout his career, in fact.

Mal, you wouldn't happen to be Dean Smith would you?

The only reason I suggest that is that you just tried to pull a mathematical sleigh of hand on par with what Dean pulled in 1989 with SAT scores.

[For those of you who don't remember, Dean was offended by some signs at Duke that said "JR can't Reid." He told reporters that his two black big men -- JR Reid and Scott Williams -- had a higher combined SAT score than Duke's two white big men -- Danny Ferry and Christian Laettner. Factually, he was correct. But what he said was extremely misleading. The fact is that Williams had an extraordinarily high SAT (around 1400), while Ferry and Laettner were both around 1100. JR had the lowest score of the bunch -- just over 900 -- but since Dean was trying to prove that Reid was the victim of racism and was in fact as smart as Duke's big men, he had to link his low scores with Scott Williams' high one]

Back to Nomar. When you say: "From '98-'02, Garciaparra had an OPS of .961 (142 OPS+), which I would imagine has to be one of the most underappreciated 5 year periods for any shortstop ever."

Factually, you are correct. But the real truth is that Garciaparra had three (not five) spectacular offensive seasons and you've linked those three great years with two good, but not great ones.

Year by year from 1998-02, his OPS-plus was 140 (great), 153 (greater), 155 (greatest), 113 (good for a shortstop, but nothing great) and 127 (very good for a shortstop). I'm not sure why you stopped at 2002 ... his OPS in 2003 was 121, which is still very good for a shortstop.

Actually, we should throw out 2001, since Nomar played just 21 games that season.

Just for the record, Nomar was on par with Jeter defensively. He had below average range factors (although better than Jeter) and was below the league average in fielding percentage (Jeter is above average) and in DP rate (Jeter is above average). I would argue that overall, Jeter was a superior defensive shortshop (especially during the period when we're talking about) -- but I would also agree with you that the two are close enough defensively not to make this a major factor.

So was Normar a greater offensive force at short than Jeter? The answer is yes -- for a short time. During his prime, Normar's OPS plus was 123, 140, 153, 155, (essentially missed the next season), 127, 121.

During the same span, Jeter's OPS plus was 103, 127, 153, 128, 123, 111, 125. Funny, Jeter was actually dead even in 1999 (153 to 153), but over the entire period, Nomar was the superior offensive player.

So why tout Jeter as the greater shortstop?

Because longevity is a factor. Garciaparra was unquestionably a greater shortstop in the three-year span from 1998-2000. He was somewhat better than Jeter in the seven-year 1997-2003 span (although keep in mind, that's actually a six-year span, since Normar missed almost all of the 2001 season).

As of this moment, Nomar has played just 1055 games at short. For his career, he's had six 120 OPS-plus seasons at short (he had one more as a first baseman), Jeter had played well over 2,000 games at short and while he's had just one 150 OPS plus season (to Normar's two), he's had nine seasons of 120 OPS plus (plus five more 100 OPS plus).

Tejada doesn't make the debate. His best season was 131 OPS Plus and he's had just four 120 OPS plus seasons. He's not only played almost 300 less games at short that Jeter, his career OPS-plus is 111 -- 10 points lower.

He's a good shortstop, but clearly not as good as Jeter or Garciaparra.

[Mal]

Ahh, but I've done nothing of the sort. I suspect your Yankee fandom is making you overly sensitive here, and, I dare say, has you fighting a straw man. Had I been trying to argue that, all things considered, Garciaparra's the better player, you'd have a point, but that's not where we've been going at all here.

Please read again from the beginning of my posts on this subthread: I started by noting the disconnect between the early Jeter Era hype coming out of the media and Yankee fans, and his actual performance (sympathetically, in fact, as I then stated that over time, through his 13 or so years of remarkably consistent performance, he's outlasted his early competitors to have had a better career as a shortstop). If I recall, I said he arguably wasn't even in the top 3 SS's in the AL at the time. For what it's worth, I then, in a subsequent post, retracted the statement to the extent I had included Tejada, having gone back and actually looked at his numbers. My recollection far outstripped his actual production.

Anyway, my point was simply that, at the time Tim McCarver and ESPN reached their most obnoxious levels of slobbering over Jeter, he was not only not the best shortstop in baseball, but he wasn't the best shortstop in the American League, and, in fact, he wasn't even the best shortstop in the American League East. He was an excellent player all the same, but it was silly to think, circa 2000, that there was no question he'd have a better overall career at SS than Garciaparra and ARod, when the decline of the former and the move to 3B of the latter weren't even on the horizon.

The chosen span of years for comparison with Nomar corresponds, to my memory, with the beginning and heyday of the rampant Jeter overhyping that led to a fan backlash against him ever since. It also corresponds with his coming into his prime as a major leaguer, as well as Garciaparra doing the same. Obviously, Nomar's production started dropping off quickly after 2002 or 3. That's part of the point I was trying to make w/r/t longterm respect for Jeter.

Nomar's injury-riddled 2004 and onward have no bearing on my original thesis, which is that there was justified annoyance at the turn of the century at the level of hero worship thrown at Jeter when viewing him outside the bubble of the Yankee dynasty.

You also misrepresent a bit when you say that of the five year period I highlighted, Nomar had three great seasons and two basically average or decent ones. He has to get an "Incomplete" for one of those, wherein he was limited to 31 games. Points to Jeter, I guess, for being healthier in his mid-20's, but it's not like there were three overwhelming statistical years pulling up two crummy ones. And post-injury, Garciaparra was back to hitting just fine in '02. But, go ahead, limit it to back when the Yankees were actually winning World Series before the new millenium, when Jetermania was at its red hottest. Including those later seasons actually diminishes my argument, but I included them for the sake of seeming a bit more evenhanded by having a more statistically significant sample size.

And don't you ever compare me to Dean Smith again or I'll cyberhate you forever

[Olympic Fan]

You also misrepresent a bit when you say that of the five year period I highlighted, Nomar had three great seasons and two basically average or decent ones. He has to get an "Incomplete" for one of those, wherein he was limited to 31 games. Points to Jeter, I guess, for being healthier in his mid-20's, but it's not like there were three overwhelming statistical years pulling up two crummy ones. And post-injury, Garciaparra was back to hitting just fine in '02. But, go ahead, limit it to back when the Yankees were actually winning World Series before the new millenium, when Jetermania was at its red hottest. Including those later seasons actually diminishes my argument, but I included them for the sake of seeming a bit more evenhanded by having a more statistically significant sample size.

Who is misrepresenting who (or is it whom?)?

You write: "You also misrepresent a bit when you say that of the five year period I highlighted, Nomar had three great seasons and two basically average or decent ones."

What I actually wrote was: "the real truth is that Garciaparra had three (not five) spectacular offensive seasons and you've linked those three great years with two good, but not great ones."

That's "two good, but not great" seasons -- not "two basically average or decent ones."

In a way, I DID misrepensent ... your five year period included three spectaclar seasons, one good season and that year he largely missed with injury.

I will point out that I provided the raw OPS-plus numbers for each year, so readers could form their own conclusion.

As for your real point -- that Jeter-mania exploded during a period when A-Roid and Nomar were essentially better players, I suspect you are letting your own Yankee hate color your perception of the period. I'm not quite sure when the deification of Jeter began, but during the period of Yankee dominance (four pennants in five years between 1996 and 2000), I recall him getting a lot of praise, but hardly the "Jeter is the best shortstop in the game" hype that would have been so inappropriate. Instead, it was more like "Jeter is the heart and soul of the best team on the planet."

Is there anything wrong with that?

He certainly wasn't overly hyped in 1996 when in his first full season the Yankees win their first pennant in 15 years. I think some of it may have come in 1999, when he hit .349 with 24 HR and 102 RBIs on a team winning its second straight world title (and third in four years). Normar's raw numbers are very slightly superior in 1999, but because of the park effect, both shortstops had exactly the same OPS plus.

I think the Jeter hype started to build in 2000, when he won both the All-Star Game MVP and the World Series MVP (as the Yankees won a third straight pennant).

I personally think the moment when Jeter was elevated from the status of sparkplug and a very good shortstop to Godhood came in the 2001 playoffs -- when he made that unbelievable defensive play to save the game and the series at Oakland. He followed that up with some clutch hitting on the stage of the World Series -- his Game 5 game-winning homer earning him the adoring accolate as "Mr. November".

I think the perception that Jeter was the greatest thing from sliced bread -- all the ungodly adoration -- stems from that postseason. It had been growing, but hell, some admiration was deserved -- are you suggesting that the best, most consistent everyday player -- and the acknowledged team leader -- on a team that wins five pennants and four world championships in six years doesn't deserve considerable praise?

I agree that in the last few years, the level of adoration has reached ridiculous levels. Look, I'm the biggest Jeter fan out there and I think his defense is better than his detractors will admit, but his three Gold Gloves (2004, 2005, 2006) are absurd. If you had tuned into ESPN last night to watch him tie Gehrig for the all-time Yankee hits lead, you'd have gone into sugershock.

But you'd have also seen the numbers that as a shortstop, Jeter has more hits, and the third best on-base percentage and the fourth best slugging percentage of anybody who has ever played the position.

I'm not sure when Jeter's adoration went over the top (like I say, I think it was in the 2001 postseason), but if he was overpraised in his early years, he's certainly justified that praise with his remarkable consistency. The fact that he's hitting .330 at age 35 and on pace to have his 14th straight 100-plus OPS-plus year is remarkable (the remarkable consistent Cal Ripken never had more than 10 straight such years ... and just 14 total).

As I suggested earlier in this thread ... I think he'll wind up as the third or fourth greatest shortstop of all time -- and, except for his steroid tainted teammate, he's the greatest shortstop of the modern era.

All that said, I don't agree with turning the 2009 AL MVP Award into the Irving Thalberg Lifetime Achievement Award. I think he's in the top 2-3 (and ahead of Texiera), but I don't see how you can't give it to Joe Mauer.

Come to think of it, I want to ramble about the MVP vote over the years, but this post is long enough and we're already wa-a-a-y off the original topic, so I'll start a new thread so those of you I'm boring with all this can avoid it.

PS -- Mal, I'd appreciate it if you'd justify one thing you wrote: "If I recall, I said he arguably wasn't even in the top 3 SS's in the AL at the time."

I realize you were talking about that period in the late 1990s. I understand that A-Roid and Normar were better AL SSs in that era. But who was the third guy who was inarguably better? Not Ripkin -- he not only was in clear decline by 1996 when Jeter made his debut, but he moved to third base full time in 1997. Tejada was just starting out(his first outstanding offensive season was 2002 -- Jeter was clearly better during the period in question). Visquel was winning the gold gloves (with range factors that were rarely more than the league average), but was a subpar offensive player. Who then was the No. 3 shortstop in this period? Mike Bordick? Royce Clayton?

[Mal]

As for your real point -- that Jeter-mania exploded during a period when A-Roid and Nomar were essentially better players, I suspect you are letting your own Yankee hate color your perception of the period. I'm not quite sure when the deification of Jeter began, but during the period of Yankee dominance (four pennants in five years between 1996 and 2000), I recall him getting a lot of praise, but hardly the "Jeter is the best shortstop in the game" hype that would have been so inappropriate. Instead, it was more like "Jeter is the heart and soul of the best team on the planet."
...
I think the Jeter hype started to build in 2000, when he won both the All-Star Game MVP and the World Series MVP (as the Yankees won a third straight pennant).
...
I'm not sure when Jeter's adoration went over the top (like I say, I think it was in the 2001 postseason), but if he was overpraised in his early years, he's certainly justified that praise with his remarkable consistency. The fact that he's hitting .330 at age 35 and on pace to have his 14th straight 100-plus OPS-plus year is remarkable (the remarkable consistent Cal Ripken never had more than 10 straight such years ... and just 14 total).

So, in essence, then, we're just disagreeing on perception and memory? Don't the performances of '98 to '00 precisely define what the impressions were of the quality of various players in '01, anyway? Anyhoo, I recall Jeter being deified pretty early on, and it reached insufferability sometime around 2000 (certainly, the Oakland series raised it to another level, but I think it was already insufferable). I remember distinctly watching the 2001 Series, in which Jeter went 4 for 27 with one RBI to follow up on his 2 for 17 against the Mariners in the ALCS, and groaning every time he grounded out and Buck and McCarver acted shocked and dismayed. To recap, Yankees fans and ESPN dub him Mr. November after the Oakland series, and he proceeds to go 6 for his next 44 and the Yankees lose the World Series. But the name stuck, anyway (acknowledging here that his playoff performances the next couple years were excellent, so long as you acknowledge he's stunk the last two times they've faced the BoSox in the postseason).

Yes, the lavishing continued to further escalate for some time, and continues in some veins today, but the backlash started earlier. You can trust me on that, as a non-Yankee fan. And I'm not an irrational hater, thank you; please note my various praise for Jeter longterm throughout every single post in this thread. Nonetheless, obviously, the sensitivities of New Yorkers and everyone else about Yankee media praise are somewhat different.

And, yes, of course some of the Jeter fatigue was tied up with general overexposure of the Yankees during their dominance. I don't buy the argument, however, that all we heard was Jeter was the heart and soul of the best team on the planet. What we heard was endless effusive praise for his aw shucks attitude and All-Americanness, as though that was a critical element in the Yankees success, despite the presence of Roger Clemens, Mariano Rivera, Paul O'Neill, Tino Martinez, and Bernie Williams on the team, and as though those intangibles were more than enough to overcome the fact his raw numbers weren't equal to those of a couple other guys at the same position. That came off as an implied argument of "yeah, maybe Rodriguez or Garciaparra have better stats, but this guy's just a winner." Which somehow magically made him better than those guys, and meant that when he didn't play well it didn't matter because his Jeterness was still enough to help the team win.

PS -- Mal, I'd appreciate it if you'd justify one thing you wrote: "If I recall, I said he arguably wasn't even in the top 3 SS's in the AL at the time."

Geez, touchy on this subject? I've twice now (this will be the third and final time) noted that that initial numbering on my part incorrectly included Tejada. I've mea culpad that inclusion enough, don't you think? I mean, immediately after the language you quote above, I went on to note that I had since retracted the statement to the extent it included Tejada - I think that's implicitly the same as amending the original statement from "3" to "2." I had done so even before you re-entered the conversation.

Let's leave all this, shall we? I'll see you on your new MVP thread.

[Olympic Fan]

Mal, I'm also willing to let it go -- after I make one small correction in your last post. Your are wrong about the following:

"To recap, Yankees fans and ESPN dub him Mr. November after the Oakland series, and he proceeds to go 6 for his next 44 and the Yankees lose the World Series."

Jeter wasn't nicknamed "Mr. November" after the Oakland series. He won the nickame in Game 4 (not Game 5 as I erroneously posted earlier) of the 2001 World Series against Arizona.

The game was played on Oct. 31 ... but when the Yankees tied the game in the 9th, it went past midnight into November 1. With two outs in the bottom of the 10th, Jeter -- who indeed had a subpar series overall -- won the game with an opposite field homer. It was the first November home run in baseball history.

I think this illustrates the dangers of perception ... you resent Jeter and you remember that the nickname was awarded for an undeserved performance in a preliminary series in which he doesn't hit well. In actuality, it was awarded for a specific homer run at a specific (and unique) moment in history -- and was also a bit of a tongue in cheek twist on Reggie Jackson's self-proclaimed nickname "Mr. October."

Feel free to take the last word if you want ... but I'd suggest we could sum up our disagreement this way. I THINK we agree:

1. Jeter is a legimately great player.
2. Jeter has come into an inordinate and often ridiculous amount of praise.

Where we disagree is the moment when the praise for a great player went over the top ... my view is probably warped by my admiration for Jeter and the Yankees ... your view is equally warped by your dislike of Jeter and the Yankees.

I can understand where you are coming from -- I felt the same way about the overhyped Cal Ripken ... a great player, sure ... but not as great as his admirers made out. I wonder who will be the next player to inherit the idol role (David Wright? Evan Longoria?)

It is interesting to see the difference in perception between Jeter and his almost exact contemporary, Chipper Jones. I would argue that Jones has almost exactly the same status among third basemen in Major League history as Jeter does at SS (maybe better ... he's a slightly better than average defensive player with the best OPS and the second-best OPS-plus of any third baseman in baseball history). Plus, his teams have won almost as much as the Yankees -- maybe not as many world titles, but almost as many pennants and division titles.

Yet, while Jones is respected, Chipper is hardly deified the way Jeter is. Not saying he should be ... but just that he's at a lower place on the national radar than his equal -- Derek Jeter -- is.

Anyway, I'll post my MVP column later tonight and we can go at it again.

[Mal]

All fair enough, good sir. I think, for my last word (thanks for the offer!), I'd just note that my resentment and dislike is reserved here not for the player himself but for the treatment he's received. I actually sympathize with the guy - he's a class act in addition to everything else, and he never asked to receive the inordinate praise he has, but he's suffered for it in the minds of many. It's more of an eye rolling thing for me than a "Gawd, I hate that guy" thing.

Wasn't Reggie actually dubbed Mr. October by a joking Thurman Munson? I thought that happened prior to his three HR performance to win the Series, when he was hitting putridly. They got the dual benefit of it being ironic and funny at the time, and then shortly thereafter a perfectly apt moniker. When a large part of the over-the-topness w/r/t Jeter comes from hyping his postseason performances, I think any tongue-in-cheekness is sort of lost on the non-NYC'ers. Whatever.

-----------------------------

I think one part of the explanation for Chipper's PR problem is the media attention black hole that was the Maddux/Glavine/Smoltz machine. No one else on the Braves mattered, unless they were married to Halle Berry, until that gang was broken up (which probably didn't happen until Smoltz left town, not just the rotation), even if they won an MVP in 1999. Although they've been good, they also haven't been back to the Series since '95 or whenever it was, and the NL has fallen on hard times, too, so that hurts him as well.

Another factor may be that during the past two seasons, which have contained some of his best hitting, he's been dinged up a good bit. There were quite a lot of accolades running around when he was threatening .400 last August, but he finished 12th in MVP voting mainly because he played less than 130 games. In '07, he led the league in OPS and OPS+ but didn't rack up the counting stats as much because he missed some time and games, so he finished 6th. That's just pure bad luck, I think, but had he played 152 games in either of those years and won another MVP we might not feel the same way about his perception vs. production gap.