October 19, 2000
I was surfing the Atlanta Journal-Constitution site yesterday and found a poll they were running. The question was "Will you watch a Subway Series?" Apparently it won't go over big in Atlanta, as 68 percent of respondents voted "No." There was no indication of how many times John Rocker voted.
I have to admit I'm not that excited about it, either. Maybe I'm just disappointed because my Mariners didn't make it. So close, but yet so far. Now they face a difficult offseason, which will be a painful one if Alex Rodriguez leaves as a free agent. At least there's some hope for the black hole in left field, with the news that Ichiro Suzuki will play in the major leagues next season. I'll be surprised if he signs with anyone other than the Mariners.
Should I be excited about that? I think so, but not everyone agrees . . .
Once again there is speculation that Ichiro Suzuki is coming to the major leagues. My question is, why is a player whose performance is routinely matched by foreign Four-A players getting so much attention?
Take this year as an example. His OPS was .999. In Japan, Sherman Obando's was 1.052, Frank Bolick's was 1.000, Nigel Wilson's was .972, and Roberto Petagine's was 1.045. If Frank Bolick were looking to sign with a major league team this year, would teams be clambering to bid millions for his services? Also, why do I keep reading that the pitching in Japan is comparable to the pitching in the major leagues? Given their performance in the Olympics and considering that Nate Minchey, Melvin Bunch and Darrell May were among the best pitchers in the Japanese leagues this year, this seems ridiculous.
As a related question, why are Cuban players so overrated? It should now be clear that "superstars" like Orestes Kindelan and Omar Linares have permanently had their baseball growths stunted by not being allowed to play against the best available competition. They never will surpass the level of play of the Ernie Youngs and Craig Paquettes of the baseball world. Pitchers seem to be able to develop more fully without facing the best available competition, but when I read on this site that Jose Contreras would command Kevin Brown type of money, I have to laugh. No matter how many times the Cuban national team loses to minor leaguers, it seems we still must hear how great they all are.
Mike Sullivan
Bridgewater, N.J.
There are a few issues in this e-mail; some of them are valid. The problem is, you can't dismiss individuals based on a generalization of the ability of their entire league (or race).
I don't think it's a slam dunk that Ichiro will come to the United State and be a superstar. His game is not really the power game that exists in the big leagues today. But when a guy wins seven batting titles in a row and is widely regarded as the best player in the entire country of Japan, I think he's worth taking a shot on.
It's true that there have been several players who haven't broken through here than have gone to Japan and posted tremendous numbers. But that doesn't invalidate what the top Japanese players are doing over there. That goes for pitching as well. I wouldn't go as far as saying the pitching in Japan is comparable to that in the United States. There are some pitchers, however, who have come here and been quite successful. Hideo Nomo and Kazuhiro Sasaki, for example. So there are definitely major league-caliber pitchers there.
As for the Cubans, I agree major league teams seem to be hypnotized by the word "Cuban." They have showed a willingness to overpay in certain situations, and a lot of that may be based on the mystique of Cuban baseball. I'm not going to argue that Jose Contreras should get Kevin Brown money, but it's possible he would if he defected. (Then again, should Kevin Brown be getting Kevin Brown money?)
Orestes Kindelan is on the downside of his career. That doesn't negate what he accomplished in his prime. In the 1996 Olympics, at the age of 31, Kindelan hit .442 with nine home runs and 18 RBIs in 43 at-bats. Omar Linares, then 28, hit .476 with eight home runs and 16 RBIs in 42 at-bats. In an average game they each hit a homer and drove in two runs. Do you want more than that? To say they will never surpass the level of play of the Ernie Youngs and Craig Paquettes of the baseball world is a complete joke. They did. And they sustained that level of play for years. Linares could step in and start at third base for a number of major league teams if he defected this winter.
When Castro leaves power and Cuban players are once again free to play in the U.S. without having to defect, I have no doubt we will see an influx of talent. All you have to do is look back through the history of the game, at Cubans such as Minnie Minoso, Tony Oliva, Camilo Pascual, Tony Perez and Luis Tiant. There’s already talent trickling here from Cuba one defection at a time. When the doors open, they’ll be joined by a number of others.
I am writing to you not to ask you a question but really more of a response to recent news that I have come upon that over 30 percent of major league baseball players use anabolic steroids. This obviously explains the offensive explosion that has occurred within the past few years. This is upsetting news to me because now it seems that all these records that are being shattered don't mean anything because they are most likely being broken by players who are on steroids.
As a high school baseball player I hope to someday play in the major leagues and it is not going to be easier for me or for any other not player not taking steroids to compete against guys who do. I hope that you can address this issue and hopefully help in trying to get the MLB players union to test their players and band this substance. Thank you for your time.
Frank Nunez
Ridgefield, N.J.
It's almost hard to remember what baseball was like before the offensive explosion took place, but the reality is, it wasn't that long ago. In 1990, the American League as a whole had a .388 slugging percentage and teams averaged 128 home runs. This season those numbers were .443 and 192. To put the difference into some context, in 1980, the AL average was .399 and 132. Maybe things were down a little in 1990, but they're sure as heck up now. I, for one, don't like it.
There are a lot of explanations tossed around for the offensive explosion in the game, and I think there are numerous contributing factors: the pitching, ball-strike calls, smaller parks, different style of hitting, the balls, expansion. There are half a dozen more. But I'm starting to suspect the biggest reason is the popularity of steroids.
In 1990, 12 major leaguers hit 30 or more home runs. This season, 46 did. That's nearly four times as many 30-homer guys in the big leagues in nine years. Even when you adjust for the addition of four new teams, the home run inflation is rampant.
I don't think the pitching has gotten that much worse in that time span. Heck, a lot of the guys pitching now were around back then. Some of them are even better these days than they were in '91.
But the hitting has changed. I'm not saying that every guy who hit over 30 home runs has steroids raging through his body. But I'll bet you at least a few of them do. There have been numbers thrown around recently by players, trainers and others in the game accusing a third or more of the hitters in baseball of using steroids. If you want to learn more about steroid use in baseball, check out an article I found on the Denver Post Website while looking for information on the topic. It goes into a lot more depth and is a worthwhile read.
I wish the union weren't so against testing for steroids, because it's not healthy for the game and in the long run it's not healthy for the players. I'd love to see a ban on steroids that was enforced by testing. My prediction would be a sudden decrease in offensive numbers across the board.
There also would be a legitimacy to the home runs that were hit. It's hard to get that excited about all of the home runs now, knowing that many of them are tainted in a way.
I can't see a downside to getting steroids out of baseball.
I realize that Rafael Furcal has won Baseball America’s Rookie of the Year award, but is he a better choice long-term? In this day and age of the longball, I can't see how a leadoff hitter with speed and no power is better than a pure hitter who can hit for both power and average. Is it right to assume that Furcal's steals and defense are better to have than Burrell's power and average?
Kevin O'Toole
Norton, Mass.
Just to make it clear, our Rookie of the Year award is based on what the players did in 2000, not what they'll do down the road.
As for Furcal vs. Burrell long-term, what does your team need? If you're looking for a middle infielder who can play outstanding defense, get on base and run like crazy, then Furcal is better. If you need a middle-of-the-order hitter who can play left field or first base, Burrell's a better choice. Neither can do the other's job, though, so there's obviously a place for both of them in the game, perhaps even a spot for both on the all-star team.
Touching on the previous question, if there were no steroids in major league baseball right now, a player like Furcal would be even more valuable than he is today.
I'm not implying that Burrell is one of the steroid users. He too would be more valuable if steroids were eliminated, as would all power hitters who continued to produce without the assistance of illegal substances. But suddenly the little guys who flash some leather and make things happen on the bases would find a new appreciation in a game with less emphasis on the home run.
Share with your friends: |