Fox broadcaster Tim McCarver joined the chorus-well, actually he stepped in front of the chorus, grabbed a mike, waved down the band and called for a spotlight-Wednesday, slammingManny Ramirez based largely on the same secondhand stories that have passed around for more than two months.
“[S]ome of the things he did were simply despicable, despicable - like not playing, refusing to play.”
In July, when Ramirez was supposedly “refusing to play,” the Red Sox played 24 games. Ramirez played in 22 of them. This was tied for fourth on the team with J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury. He was sixth on the team in plate appearances (AB+BB) in July. Not quite Lou Gehrig’s numbers, but he helped out a bit more than David Ortiz (six games), and was in the lineup somewhat more often than peers such as Moises Alou (one game). Oh, he didn’t get three days off in the middle of the month-Ramirez played in the All-Star Game.
When he played, Ramirez killed the league. He hit .347/.473/.587 in July. His OBP led the team, and his SLG led all Red Sox with at least 25 AB. The Sox, somewhat famously, went 11-13 in July. Lots of people want you to believe that was because Manny Ramirez is a bad guy. I’ll throw out the wildly implausible idea that the Sox went 11-13 because Ortiz played in six games and because veterans Mike Lowell and Jason Varitek has sub-600 OPSs for the month.
Four days before he was traded, Manny Ramirez just about single-handedly saved the Red Sox from getting swept by the Yankees, with doubles in the first and third innings that helped the Sox get out to a 5-0 lead in a game they had to win to stay ahead of the Yankees in the wild-card race.
If all of the above is “refusing to play,” I would sincerely like to see what “trying” looks like. It would be entertaining to see a player post a .600 OBP or .800 SLG.
On second thought, they’d probably just blacklist him.
Back to McCarver:
“Manny’s doing things that even Manny doesn’t do, [like] scoring on a double to right field from first base.”
I think this is a reference to Game Three of the NL Division Series, in which Manny Ramirez scored from first on a two-out double by James Loney. Is this play terribly unusual, something that Ramirez would not have done prior to the trade from Boston?
I think one of the beautiful things about the 21st century is that when people say silly things about baseball-or for that matter, politics-we’re going to be able to bring actual information out to counter the silly things. Smart people, talented people, like Bil Burke, will be able to go back through the record and prove or disprove statements like the one above.
In his two months as a Dodger prior to postseason play, Manny Ramirez scored from first base on a double to right field. Once. He had two chances to do so, and he did it once.
With the Red Sox this year, Manny Ramirez also scored from first base on a double to right field. Once. He had two chances to do so, and it did it once.
From this we can conclude that Manny Ramirez is doing things in Los Angeles he never did in Boston. Or something like that.
The samples are tiny, but basically, Ramirez didn’t score from first on doubles to right at any different frequency this year than he had of late. One-for-one last year, two-for-four in 2006, one-for-two in 2005. The idea that he hadn’t is just something Tim McCarver invented to sound smart, to make it seem like he knew something about Manny Ramirez that informed his position. And because the people who reported McCarver’s ramblings are dedicated journalists with laminated cards and everything, they fact-checked the claim and…no, wait…I did that. Bil Burke did that.
Not only does Manny Ramirez score from first on doubles to right more often than Tim McCarver thinks he does, and in no different proportion post-trade than he did pre-trade, but he scores from first on doubles to right more often than the average baseball player. The league gets home around 37% of the time, with some of the failures being very costly outs at the plate. As shown above, Ramirez gets home around half the time, and hasn’t been thrown out at the plate on that play since 1999. If the idea is to pick on Manny Ramirez, this is the wrong place to make a stand.
Of course, Tim McCarver doesn’t care, and that’s why this is important. See, come Thursday night, Tim McCarver is going to look into a camera and tell tens of millions of people what he thinks about Manny Ramirez. He’s probably going to revisit this theme any number of times over the following couple of weeks, especially if the Dodgers reach the World Series. When he does, there isn’t going to be a graphic showing Ramirez’s stats during the timeframe when he was supposedly being such a detriment to his team. There won’t be a cutaway to Joe Sheehan in the studio pointing out that Ramirez outplayed most of his teammates and carried two or three of their carcasses while not getting the three-day paid vacation they got. We won’t hear Joe Buck come over the top of McCarver and point out that Ramirez played nearly every day in July.
It will just be McCarver making fact-free assertions, and America listening. That’s wrong.
It’s time that this stops, and all I can do to make it stop is put facts out there and hope that they get to baseball fans, to television executives, and maybe, just maybe, to a TV booth in St. Petersburg. Facts matter. Data matters. Facts and data don’t have agendas, don’t like or dislike individuals, aren’t invested in a particular storyline or protecting their friends and sources. Facts just sit there on the page and dare you to ignore them. There are links all over this article. Click them and verify the claims I make in this piece. That’s what Baseball Prospectus is about: backing up your opinions with facts.
Manny Ramirez played in 90% of his team’s games in July and hit like a beast, coming up huge in a critical division matchup late in the month to help the Red Sox avoid a sweep and sustain their place in the standings. Those are my…no, those are the facts.
"If all of the above is “refusing to play,” I would sincerely like to see what “trying” looks like. It would be entertaining to see a player post a .600 OBP or .800 SLG."
This could be the best thing I've ever read on Baseball Prospectus.
My thoughts exactly. Maybe FJM should pay Joe to write a few pieces. Oh, on second thought, then Joe would be required to write in a more snarky manner, and I think he's hitting the right tone here (righteously indignant back up by facts).
Don't know about quitting or not. You are giving it a very specific meaning, where I don't know it is appropriate. Whatever Tim McCarver says, the point is Manny was making the atmosphere around the Red Sox toxic, without any rhyme or reason beyond his own immature, borderline personality disorder perogative. Or money. Whether he's a quitter or just a complete (expletive), McCarver is just giving him his due.
"Don't know about quitting or not. You are giving it a very specific meaning, where I don't know it is appropriate."
Interesting. Sheehan did not use the words "quitting" or "quit" (nor in fact did McCarver). The uncredited author of the linked ESPN article referred to allegations that Ramirez "quit on his . . . teammates late in his tenure in Boston". The meaning of "quit" (or even "quit on") is not pertinent here.
What McCarver charged (based, as he admitted himself, on hearsay rather than first-hand observation, just as Sheehan pointed out above) is that Ramirez' behavior was "despicable -- like not playing, refusing to play." However you choose to parse those words, Sheehan's refutation was spot on and accurate.
"Whatever Tim McCarver says, the point is Manny was making the atmosphere around the Red Sox toxic . . ."
Sorry, no, that was not the point of either the linked ESPN article nor of Sheehan's response to it (as far as I can see). The point of the article above is that no one should be allowed to just make stuff up. As Sheehan says, "That’s wrong."
I do hope that point is not lost on you.
"Whether he's a quitter or just a complete (expletive), McCarver is just giving him his due."
During NLCS game 1, McCarver mentioned at some point that Phillies catcher Carlos Ruiz partially stands up to receive pitches "too often." And he mentions Varitek as the other culprit, and indeed Ruiz probably picked up this amazing technique from studying Tek. But McCarver, the former catcher, doesn't like it. No facts, no reasons why. Just doesn't like it.
Now...tell me...how many starting catchers are still playing baseball in October? Those two must be doing something right.
Manny was making the atmosphere toxic? How so? Could it be that a few local media and fans blew his idiosyncrasies way out of proportion?
Running into walls in pursuit of flyballs is overrated. Slugging .550 year in and year out is not. You can have all the old school, always hustling (but no-talent) Jerry Remys you want. I'll take Manny and the WS wins anyday.
I have to admit that I read the McCarver article yesterday and though, "I'll have to bring this thing up in Joe Sheehan's next BP chat." Now I don't have to. Thanks for discrediting this trash, Joe.
As for philliesopher1's comment, I have no idea what type of person Manny is in the clubhouse. Maybe you're right and he was "toxic" to the team, and I'm willing to believe there's a pretty good chance he wasn't very fun to have around. But the point is that he didn't "pack it in" come game-time and, like Joe said, if anyone (like McCarver) thinks he did, then we would like to see what "trying" looks like.
Some people made this point on the awful ESPN message boards as well. It has some merit, I think, but if one is going to attack Manny Ramirez, one shouldn't try to do it based on how he hit in his last month in Boston. There are plenty of other ways to do it. Certainly better ones.
One thing data doesn't do is tell you what goes on in the club house, behind closed doors. Once Theo and his staff saw they could get an equal (dare I say better?) player with less BS, they went for it. People forget how close the Red Sox were to not making any deal and, like the past four years, continuing on. Did Manny quit? That's a little harsh. But to say he's carrying himself the same way in LA as he did in Boston is a stretch, to put it mildly.
McCarver seems to be refering to (and conflating) two separate incidents. The first was a fairly reliable report of an altercation between Manny and a team official over complimentary tickets. The second was a less reliable speculation that Ramirez deliberately refused to take the bat off his shoulder, and struck out, in protest over his punishment for the altercation.
The first incident has nothing do to with his peformance as a player and is merely an indication that he is not a very nice person (like many other athletes). I fail to see why McCarver, or anyone else, should expect Manny to behave better than other celebrities (Sean Penn, Naomi Campbell). The second incident is far more serious but seems, as Joe pointed out, to have no supporting evidence.
Stu
The intentional strikeout incident occurred July 6th, a day after Manny had been hit three times. In the ninth inning, with two out, Francona had Manny pinch hit against Mariano Rivera. Three pitches later, Manny was out without removing the bat from his shoulder - no check swings, no leaning toward the plate as the ball was coming in, no motion whatsoever that he was contemplating swinging at any of the pitches. Maybe he was waiting for that first splitter that dove out of the strike zone to go by before he swung.
I've been a Sox fan since before Manny donned the uniform. He rarely seemed to go all out racing for fly balls, he occasionally jogged down the line on ground balls. Otherwise, he seemed to hustle on the basepaths and give his full effort at the plate.
It was reported the team had problems with him in the bowing out of games with phantom injuries (Manny took his 3 days off between July 22-26th). It was reported the team had trouble getting him on a flight during a west coast trip that included Seattle (I think it was the July 20th flight from Anaheim/LA to Seattle). And if he is bowing out of games to encourage the team not to pick up his options in September and October, what recourse do you have?
McCarver probably doesn't make his statement if Manny hadn't hit half as well in Dodger blue as he has. All the numbers dwarf his 2008 Sox campaign. I willing to call the difference the opportunity to face weaker pitching, many pitchers seeing him for the first time, and statistical aberation, but when you develop a reputation of someone who doesn't give his team 100%, doubt seeps into other areas.
Looking at other numbers, Manny has more stolen bases for the Dodgers than he's had for the last three years with the Sox. He recorded more PO/gm for the Dodgers than he had in any season with the Sox. Not sure where to find the stat, but I suspect he has more infield singles with the Dodgers than he's had the last two years with the Sox. His OPS jumped 300 points by moving from the bandbox to the ravine. His DP% was 18.6 last year, 14.6 for the Sox this year, and 10% for the Dodgers. The baserunning stats on BP do not separate Manny's performance in each league, so I cannot use those numbers effectively.
Again, I do not know definitely that Manny has made more of an effort for the Dodgers than the Sox. I think he has. But lets not confusing McCarver being an idiot with Manny making an effort. If McCarver said Bush is a bad President because he isn't throwing enough money to Wall Street, I don't have to argue Bush is a good President to disagree with McCarver's underlying information. Similarly, I don't have to say Manny tried just as hard in Boston as in LA this season just because McCarver's evidence is deficient. And maybe Manny didn't dog it. Maybe he's tried just as hard for Boston in '08 as he did in '04 and '07, but he appears to be trying harder in LA. Manny played well for the Sox and materially better for the Dodgers. I don't know how you mathematically prove/disprove 'trying'.
Joe, you'd like to "see what trying looks like?" .398/.489/.743 (LAN) - your numeric 'projections' were pretty close. The near-Yankee sweep you mentioned included one game Manny bowed out of for soreness, the second Yankee game he bowed out of in July, leaving him with 3 hits and 5 total bases for the series. I'm not sure he put them on his back with two doubles and a single in a 7 run win. Manny made a positive contribution to the 2008 Sox, we don't need to McCarve up the facts to make that very obvious point.
Very good post. There are a lot of firsthand accounts of Ramirez being a clubhouse cancer, including the fight with Youk that everybody is forgetting about. It seems certain that when he stepped into the batter's box, Ramirez was trying, but you can't convince me he was trying when he left it. McCarver's denouncement was a little harsh and lacks support, but he is just vocalizing what a lot of people around the game feel. Every Red Sox fan I know has been saying as much since July.
Well said!
As a long time Red Sox fan; Manny is dead to me!
He will take the Yankees money next year and will eventually go back to "Manny being Manny" which is showing up and giving the half effort in the field and hitting when he wants to. I shudder to think what his stats would have been had he performed like he is now. Mabey, in the top three of all time? No more soap operas. I'm glad the Sox did what they did. Time to move on.
"Looking at other numbers, Manny has more stolen bases for the Dodgers than he's had for the last three years with the Sox. He recorded more PO/gm for the Dodgers than he had in any season with the Sox. Not sure where to find the stat, but I suspect he has more infield singles with the Dodgers than he's had the last two years with the Sox. His OPS jumped 300 points by moving from the bandbox to the ravine. His DP% was 18.6 last year, 14.6 for the Sox this year, and 10% for the Dodgers. The baserunning stats on BP do not separate Manny's performance in each league, so I cannot use those numbers effectively."
Boston hasn't been a running team in years. In every year from 2000-2007, the Yankees had more SB attempts than Boston. So your point illustrates Torre's attitude toward the stolen base more than it says anything about Manny's desire to run. Besides, one of his steals came on the back end of a double-steal.
More put-outs per game? Maybe this has something to do with more outfield ground to cover in LA than in Boston, and fewer balls off the Green Monster? Perhaps the difference between the hitting in the NL West and the AL East?
Lower DP rate? Possibly he was helped having guys like Kemp, Martin and Ethier on base rather than Youkilis and Ortiz?
When parsing Manny's numbers with LA, the number that jumps out for me is his .419 BABIP. Obviously that's unsustainable, as is his .396/.489/.743. But is this really out of the ordinary for Manny? Without going heavy into game logs and just looking at monthly splits, I immediately found two two-month blocks that are comparable to Manny's 53 games in LA.
August thru October 2002 - 53 games, .384/.467/.717 with a .420 BABIP. This included 16 HRs and 50 RBIs.
May thru June 2006 - 48 games, .321/.450/.679 with a 336 BABIP, 16 HR, 42 RBIs. With 9 extra hits to bring his BABIP up to .418, his slashes improve to .376/.493/.733.
I understand I'm using small samples to combat small samples. But the point is Manny is just a phenomenal hitter having yet another hot streak. He's done this before. And instead of focusing on McCarver and Gammons, or attempting to figure out if/when Manny tries, just enjoy it.
Lou Reed had a song on the "New York" record called "Strawman." I think this post on McCarver was what he had in mind.
American I am, but I don't necessarily listen when McCarver speaks. (Matter of fact I tune him out.) But I do tend to listen, with a sensitive ear, to what the set of assumptions and facts below are telling me.
1. I assume that Theo Epstein and the Red Sox front office had access to all these numbers and even more data. That is, after all, how the organization has won two world championships since 2004.
2. And yet they *still* traded the guy *and* two decent prospects *and* agreed to eat the remainder Manny's salary.
I don't mind unconventional thought. I do think it's silly and positively revisionist to suggest that Manny wasn't "hurting" the Red Sox.
I'm staying out of the discussion for now. I just want to mention that I've made a couple of corrections to the piece for clarity, changing some 2:30 a.m. references to "second base" that were supposed to be "first base." Sorry for the errors. I plead the late hour.
Regarding fact #2, the Red Sox effectively traded the prospects and the 2008 difference between Manny and Bay for the right to have Bay for 2009 at $14.5 million, which seems perfectly rational to me regardless of Manny's impacts off the field. I don't see how this trade can be ascribed to the front office's desire to ride Manny out of town; they got a great return.
Thanks Joe. I've been sickened all season by Boston's BS on this. And a big thanks to ESPN for making it so much worse. They must be getting lobbying fees. Manny & Bos got tired of each other. Can we just leave it at that? Manny should be seen as refreshing and honest. I suspect he's as much a 'gamer' as Varitek and the rest.
Speaking of McCarver spreading misinformation, does anybody remember how, during game 4, McCarver went on and on about how the Red Sox went after Lowell because they needed his leadership, presence, etc? I guess he can't remember all the way back to 2006, when the Red Sox grudgingly accepted Lowell because that was the only way the Marlins would give up Beckett.
Kudos to Joe for coming up with some numbers but Manny's effect upon the Red Sox team (like Nomar's) went far beyond the numbers ... Joe is once again ignoring the human element as he frequently does in his analysis .. they aren't Strato cards
He's not ignoring the human element. He's just pointing out that it's demonstrably incorrect that Manny "refused to play." He may have been a jerk, and for that reason it may well have been worth trading him, but he didn't refuse to play.
I don't understand Manny apologists.
Manny played 12 games the previous two Septembers combined. Manny assaulted a significantly older Red Sox employee. Manny said he was hurt when MRIs checked out that he wasn't. Manny took himself out of the lineup in two straight games. Manny had daily press conferences in which he trashed his employers. Manny walked to first base after hitting a potential double-play ball (he was clocked at 8 seconds to first base, double the average time).
Absolutely Manny still hit when he was in the lineup, but that can't obviate the rest of the situation
Some facts here-
1) There is a report that the clubbie had been vocally slamming Manny in front of teammates before the altercation. Can't condone shoving him, but it's important to note the past history, and presumeable shorter tolerance with the clubbie.
2) Tendonitis does not always show up on MRI's. Manny has had tendonitis in his knees for some time now. Many things don't show up on MRI's. For instance, 3 (one arthogram) of them showed nothing wrong with my shoulder. Open it up and wow, look at that, a bone spur, stretched ligaments, and the stability of our economy right now. But yea, didn't show up on the MRI, so there must have been nothing wrong.
3) Manny is greatly criticized for "quitting" on his team. Not only do stats paint a slightly different story, nobody seems to remember a certain Red Sox FO member *literally* quitting on his team, then hiding in a gorilla suit as he made his exit so he wouldn't have to talk to reporters. Who quit on who?
4) Manny's numbers jumped when he went to LA. Because of he was more comfortable, actually "tried" more, weaker pitching? Debateable, I'll take the other (read-more factual road) that his swing began to take more of it's old form. With LA, Manny has had a much more efficient hand path, more efficient load, and has distanced himself from the problems he had in 07 and the start of 08 (I.E. the real reason for his "down" year in 07, not his age). You can clearly see the differences when comparing clips from then and now. It is night and day.
5) Manny was "hurting the clubhouse". The guy has always been a little out there (almost backing out of the Red Sox deal because he couldn't bring the Indians employee who set up the pitching machine with him.....yea that doesn't point to the guy not being all there in the head or anything.) There had been some displeasure with Manny before in the clubhouse, but the "Idiots" (Millar, Damon, Mueller) from a few years ago were actually men about it, showed some nuts, and handled it. No one on this team did. Cowards? I'm not gonna go that far. But, they didn't step up like a man and try to handle it. Most just whined to the FO about "having to answer so many questions about Manny". Seems to be a lack of real veteran MEN in that clubhouse. More whiners and baby faced rookies where the worst thing they've had to deal with lately is how the cook undercooked their tilapia.
6) Red Sox were so upset with Manny that they suspended him a total of ZERO times. 0. If he was that big of a problem, suspend him. Without pay. But they didn't do that.
7) Does anyone really think that the Sox FO was not at least a little bit happy with Manny (and Boras) greasing the wheels for an exit? Do you think they haven't been waiting for a legitimate chance to dump him so they don't have to pick up his 40$mil worth of options? This stuff happened, and they literally own the media market in Boston, and started the spin machine at 50K RPMs to paint Manny as a cross between Manson/Hitler, and get him out of town.
8) The Rivera AB. Not his best effort. But, if you look closer and have an open mind about it (hard I know, because that would mean actually not believing everything you read), Rivera came inside on the first pitch. Something he rarely does to Manny. Manny is well known for being a guess hitter, and that threw off his entire plan. After that, Manny wasn't sure what to look for, and the outer half was as wide open as the Pacific Ocean. But yea, guys who watch 5 AB's of Manny and claim themselves as baseball experts know that "he didn't tense up to swing" means he didn't give an effort. Guys who actually pay attention to Manny saw the beyond rare reaction of "I didn't have a clue what was coming".
9) Boston fans need a life. Loving your team and showing loyalty is one thing, but when the W-L record dictates your life, you need help. A blog/fan meltdown coupled with a double in alcohol sales usually accompanies a 3 game slide.
10) Manny had no chance in this. He was a 'love-hate" guy from the get go. People that were against him were going to jump off the deep end, those on the fence were going to lean that way, and those who defend him (usually the rational ones, ironically) were having a tough time staying 100% behind him. BUT, since the rational ones see through all the BS, make their own judgements, and ignore the hypocrisy/spin of the Red Sox themselves, usually absorb the whole story. Not just bits and pieces and slam Manny for any and everything, including global warming, the war in Iraq, and Enron.
Basically put, this whole ordeal exploded beyond repair, and both parties are guilty. Who's side do you take? That's up to you, but the ones without an axe to grind are usually going to make the more unbiased views. Really, I think everyone in Boston/hater of Manny needs to just get over it. It happened, and you need to move on. It was a bad deal on both fronts, (AND BORAS, DON'T FORGET MUSSOLINI, PEOPLE). He brought you 2 WS titles. Ended your curse. Revived the franchise. Quit acting like Manny is a terrible girlfriend that broke up with you because Brad Pitt swept her off her feet. She wanted a better situation, and the exit hurt everyone. She's gone now, and both parties are better off than ever before. Get over it, move on, and enjoy your new (albeit only 90% as good, which is still pretty good) mate in LF. Yeah, you lost Cindy Crawford, but you picked up Rebecca Romijn. It's still pretty good.
I'm a pretty rabid Sox fan, but can I go ahead and say both sides were wrong in fairly glaring ways? I don't feel like choosing sides; I love the team and the FO, and I have been a fan of Manny since he got here. I'd much rather be glad that Manny's successful -- that I'm still able to watch one of the best hitters ever -- as well as be happy for the Sox being in their current position. I don't need to take sides.
Many Red Sox fans have let the Manny thing drop. We can forget about him, ignore him, move on. The issue comes when, after watching him day in and day out in a Sox uniform, people paying far less attention to him tell us we are imagining things, Manny was being a good soldier, and the Boston front office was planting seeds in the media to pretend Manny was being a problem when he wasn't. Dinosaurs once roamed the Earth, man has stepped on the moon, and Manny was being a pain to get out of Boston. If you deny these facts, you will get a response and it won't be agreement.
Theo 'quit' on the team when his contract expired (or a day or so before hand). If Manny wanted to leave in a monkey suit when his contract expired, that was his perogative.
When was the last time a team suspended a player without pay? Thanks to the strength of the MLBPA, Myers can go drum on his wife's face and get a paid leave. The Sox were going to suspend him without pay for refusing to play because his knees hurt? The best they could have done is suspend him with pay. That'll teach him to not play in a game, we'll make him sit one out. You don't think I know baseball, give me a free year's subscription to this site. Go ahead, I dare you. That's right, then you must agree with me.
Rivera threw him a pitch inside and, shocked because he likes to guess at pitches, he watched two more strikes?! I mean come on, we've heard the apologists and the apologists' apologists, but none of them are going to stand with you on this one. Manny has refused to PH in the past when he was supposed to get a day off. He is a Hall of Fame right-handed hitter, one of the best right handed hitters and history, with about 9000 plate appearances under his belt ... and he struck out because Rivera threw the first pitch on the inside part of the plate? I do not recall Manny striking out on three watched pitches, without a ball, ever. Ever. If he's done that five times in his career, I'll be shocked.
The options for Manny should not be making out to be Beaver Cleaver or Moussolini. He is a Hall of Fame hitter, one of the best hitters of his era (although his laissez-faire attitude has kept him from seriously contending for an MVP), he helped end the 'curse' and bring two championships to Boston, and he made a conscious effort to motivate the Boston FO to drop the options, sign him to an extension, or trade him. The effort infected the clubhouse, upset Francona, was discussed almost daily for over a month by numerous Boston media members, and lost him some love from an overenthusiastic fan base. We are not hanging him by his intestines - McCarver complained. We are not going to forget he helped the team win championships or thought more of himself than his team when his worst case scenario was having to play in Boston next year for $20m.
Sorry if our handling of this experience has bothered you, but I don't expect your input will be altering our fan behaviors.
This isn't Rob Deer we're talking about here. This is a man whose knowledge of the strike zone, opposing pitchers, and pitch-selection is more impressive than virtually any other active player of his generation. If Barry Bonds were right-handed and clean (and a slow, poor defender), he would have been Manny. What Manny is well known for setting up pitchers, something requiring vastly more talent, and something that has made him a legend. A hitter's hitter -- a rarity for a "home run hitter."
McCarver should definitely get his facts straight. No argument there. If it's true that Ramirez said he had a knee injury when he didn't, that is a legitimate reason for criticism. If it's true that he knocked down a club employee over tickets for friends, that is a legitimate reason for criticism. If it's true he wasn't interested in breaking up a no hitter in the seventh inning (or, more importantly, in getting on base), that is a legitimate reason for criticism. Did he do these and/or other things we don't know about to get traded? No idea. But somehow all the "Manny the happy-go-lucky savior of LA" stories ought to be balanced by what led to his arrival in LA.
You can't have this discussion without taking ScottyB's comments into the fold. He didn't play in the previous two Septembers, and if that happened this year it could've cost us the wild card. Also, shoving an old man to the ground has to count for something.
I watched every single Red Sox game and I can tell you that I knew something was up before all this came out. Manny didn't care. You could see it in his face.The story behind Manny not even lifting his bat when he faced Mariano is that Francona asked him to pinch hit and he didn't wanted to do it because it was his day off. After Francona insisted he went out and you know the rest. If those stories were not true the players wouldn't ask the management to get rid of him. If you watched the games you could tell that the pressure on the team was evident. That was the reason why the team didn't do well. Its not a coincidence that the team started playing well after the was gone.
Joe, I don't understand the defense of Manny here. You're right that he's a fantastic hitter, and when in the lineup is a force.
On the other hand... the Red Sox certainly felt he was a problem. Do I think they would have traded him if they didn't get a player of Bay's quality back? Of course not. The fact is, however, Bay's not the hitter Manny is, and his defense can't make up that difference.
The Sox traded him because he was making life difficult in the clubhouse and for their manager, and he was disrupting the team in order to force a trade. It's not that he didn't play; it's that the team in the end decided they couldn't count on him for the remainder of the season (see 2006). We're not part of the organization, so we don't know why exactly they felt this way (though there are reports and rumors), but my feeling is that Manny had made it clear he was going to make the rest of the year miserable in order to get out of the Red Sox picking up his options. For whatever reason, the Red Sox felt a downgrade in talent was worth having a player who they could rely on and wouldn't create a distraction.
2008 Bay wasn't a downgrade from 2008 Manny. 2008 Manny had an OPS a hair over 900 for the Sox and Bay was a hair under 900 for the Sox. According to the 'quality of opposition' stat, Bay faced tougher pitching in a Sox uniform than Manny did (attributable to a scheduling quirk), which can account for most of the OPS difference. If LA Manny were hitting the same as 2008 Bos Manny, we'd feel better about the trade being for equal talent.
Please note that 2008 LA Manny is hitting much, much better thatn 2008 BOS Manny. I tend to believe the "real" Manny is the one in LA now, based on what he's done over his career, and that in Boston you could make an argument he was underperforming.
To be clear, I'm not saying that he was *purposefully* underperforming, just that I think it was a downgrade from Manny to Bay for this year.
You think Manny's true talent level is .396/.489/.743?
His time in L.A. so far has been an outlier -- a tiny sample size. He's one of the best hitters in history, but his performance since the trade is not the "real" Manny. Nobody can hit like that consistently.
Ehh... good point. I should have stuck with the fact that I thought he was underperforming this year in Boston relative to his career, rather than mention that Manny's performance in LA was near his true talent level. He's not a .400 hitter. But I still believe is a better hitter than Bay.
I'm sorry but you can not discount everything that happened off field around this time period. He claimed that he had a knee injury so bad that he would have to be put on the DL, and that he was going to help Boston facilitate a trade of him.
It was the at-bat against Mo that finally convinced me that Manny would do anything to get out of Boston, including intentionally tanking an at-bat with the game on the line. His behavior WAS despicable.
If Joe was/is defending Manny, that's stupid. Joe has no idea what Manny is like, and if his teammates wanted him gone, then that is serious problem. However, I'm not sure that's what Joe is saying (does Joe know what Joe is saying?). It seems to me that Joe is really just pointing out that McCarver is full of shxt, which is absolutely correct.
Hi Joe,
I don't want to defend McCarver or brand Manny as pure evil; in fact as a Sox fan I've argued for years that his value far outweighs his occasional immature antics, but this year the outbursts were far too frequent and unlike in the past, I’m not sure everything was suddenly going to turn around. Previously, among other things, Manny had acted out prior to the All-Star break in (2005?), prompting the Sox to seek a trade, but all was forgiven on both sides when he stepped in the box on August 1st. In 2006 after the Sox fell out of contention, Manny shut down for the year with a questionable knee injury. All that was ok with me because it was either short lived or didn’t matter and his production was well worth it. This year Manny, IMO, was either distressed about his contract situation and acted as someone with the emotional maturity of a 13 year old does or was outright instructed by his agent to ensure that his options were not picked up. I choose to believe the former. That situation wasn’t going away. The Sox weren’t going to act either way on their option until they had to. For me this is the thing that I can’t live with. The contract that made Manny a *very* rich man, gave the Sox two options and those options are part of what they paid $160M+ for over the last 8 years. This kind of behavior is what makes Gary Sheffield one of my least favorite players ever. Threatening to cause problems or actually doing it, in order to force a team to act on your existing contract is not acceptable behavior.
As far as whether Manny shut down the stats show that he performed, however there was more to it than just the stats. Manny only missed two games because Francona and Epstein had seen this act before and they weren’t going to put up with it this time… at least not for long. The two games he missed sandwiched an off day and the 2nd game was the 1st of a three game set against the Yankees. When he showed up that Friday night saying he still wasn’t ready he was sent for an MRI that revealed nothing. I don’t know what Manny felt in his knee, but I can guess from their reactions what Sox management thought about it. Additionally in separate incidents, Manny assaulted both the team’s firstbaseman and traveling secretary. Plus he ripped team management in interviews shortly before the deadline. Individually these incidents aren’t that big of a deal, but one after another over the course of two months they are just too much.
The Bucks and McCarvers of the world try to make this about work ethic and effort, but I agree with you there. That is not it. Manny doesn’t run hard on *every* groundball, but there are not many players who do (JD Drew is one I’d like to point out to the writers in LA that questioned his effort/heart). He’s a bad fielder, but not for lack of effort. By all accounts he works as hard as anyone in the game on his hitting. This is about a man in his 30’s acting out like a spoiled rotten child and getting his way.
Was the Manny trade beneficial because of addition by subtraction? No, it works because Bay is an excellent player and under contract on the cheap for next year. Had that trade not been available the Sox would probably be in roughly the same position they are now, but I had grown tired of Manny’s act and I’m glad I didn’t have to root for him every night. And I bet Kevin Youkilis is too.
Can someone please post the link to anything Manny may have done off the field that no one can verify or verify please? If its on the interent it must be true. Ha!
As a NYer who was subjected to McCarver's insane logic for too many years, I can only say - typical Tim. Does anyone really take his opinion seriously anymore?
Does anyone in the world really think that Manny was a good teammate? Can Manny hit? He's as good as anyone in baseball IF he feels like it. Does he feel like it now? Is he playing for a new contract? Face it, Manny, in Boston, would not have hit like Manny has in LA. I don't care what stats you can throw out. Manny is a pain in the butt when he doesn't get what he wants. Everyone knows that so how can anyone defend him in this situation? Would I like to see him happy and in Boston this post season - HAPPY and in Boston, yes. Not happy and in Boston, no.
It would seem that sometimes paper is indeed superior to pixels.
(Or perhaps it's a user-based phenomenon -- faulty wetware, as it were.)
Be that as it may -- following is an excerpt from an article in the Sept. 2008 issue of Baseball Digest:
"[Ramirez'] goofy demeanor, [his] lackadaisical public persona, are overblown, Red Sox teammate Curt Schilling said.
"'The media has made it up to be a much bigger deal than it is,' Schilling said. 'We all joke around and have fun with it, but the guy works his butt off to do what he does. And that's all I care about.'
. . .
"'He is up -- on the road -- at 10 in the morning, going to the weight room and working out,' Schilling said. 'He'll come over to the ballpark and hit early, work early. Go have lunch and come back. He does things that no one else does. But that's what all the great players I have ever played with do.
"'Cal [Ripken, Jr] was the same way. Cal had a work ethic that was not out there for everyone to see.'"
And on the other hand, McCarver says that the reason Ramirez is a great hitter is because he's "unconventional". McCarver damns him with faint praise, while not giving a whit of credit or acknowledgement to all the work Ramirez puts into being one of the best right-handed hitters in MLB history.
That's an even trickier and falsier lie than flat out lying, imo.
If Manny's goals were to be traded to another team in 08 and sign a huge contract in 09, he's smart enough to know that (especially as a 36 year old) not playing well doesn't help him reach either goal. So he was playing well. That doesn't mean he didn't decide to do things off the field to help him reach his goals. I think he's smart enough to figure out that part too.
regardless of how dumb McCarver is, or what results Manny had in Boston, it doesn't change the fact that:
- Manny indeed has a history of shutting it down at times
- Manny certainly took plays off, which ScottyB referred to
- and most importantly, he almost certainly wasnt trying his hardest this year in Boston. Sheehan can hide behind /// numbers, but it doesnt change the fact that he's paid to give 100%, and he wasnt.
Joe was not arguing that Manny wasn't a jerk, wasn't an off field distraction, wasn't a clubhouse wraith sucking the life out of his teammates. Joe was arguing that the statistics show Manny was playing in games and playing well. Joe is not "defending Manny" as much as he is pointing out the statistics contradict McCarver's statements about Manny's performance.
At its heart, Joe's piece is about Tim McCarver and the poor quality of much mainstream sports journalism. Whether or not Manny is a good guy is not Joe's point, or even a topic.
Also, I don't know if Manny was lying about his knee or not, but a body part can be generating a lot of pain and still have a clean MRI.
Precisely what I was going to post. Manny himself is irrelevant to this discussion. Joe's point is that McCarver a) doesn't have any facts to back up his claims, and b) abused his position as a MSM journalist by making claims the facts simply don't substantiate.
It's one thing for fans to speculate about a player's heart, motivations, etc.; it's quite another for a supposed "journalist" to do it for no other reason than to boost his career.
the problem is that Joe's "analysis" here is incorrect. Manny both played in 22/24 games and quit on his team. they are both true.
he hit well (compared to the average guys) and wasn't trying his hardest. these statements are both true.
but the Red Sox don't pay him to play in most games or hit above an acceptable threshhold. they pay him to give everything he has. he didn't, and in that regard McCarver was right, and Sheehan "well he is still a good player so I don't see anything wrong!" falls dreadfully short.
Joe makes great points here. Professional baseball reporters or broadcasters cannot be allowed to make provable assertions without showing proof.
However, I would still like to know...
Why was Manny traded?
As Joe noted, Manny was producing a lot of offense for the Sox, and there was a decent chance that Jason Bay would not match that production. Bay is not as good a hitter as Manny and he would be moving to a tougher league & division, facing better pitching. So if Manny was not considered a serious problem for the Red Sox, then it would have been foolish to trade him for Bay. The Red Sox are no fools. It's hard to believe they would trade such a productive player for phony reasons about clubhouse morale.
Bay is cheaper, he's locked in for another year, he's probably a couple of wins better than Manny with his glove alone, and he doesn't come with the distractions.
Now, I don't believe that the Sox made this trade simply because they thought it was a good value, but even if they had, it's a defensible trade.
What doesn't get reported here--for reasons that will become obvious later in my post--is that Manny hated--HATED--the Boston media. He was reluctant to come to Boston for that very reason, and in the end I think that's what eventually drove him out of Boston. He has said time and again that he loves the fans of the city--while they could be overbearing at times he loved their passion. But the media constantly derided him for his lack of the Trot Nixon 'dirt dog' attitude. Here's a fun little stat: while they were playing together on the Red Sox, Nixon the dirt-dog averaged 120 games played; Ramirez--being the selfish, lazy malcontent that he was--averaged 141.7. Nixon played in 142+ games in just 2 of those 6 seasons; Ramirez reached that figure 4 times (and he played in 152 games this season).
However, season after season it was reported that Manny hated Boston, was in the lineup on an inconsistent basis and seemingly never tried unless he was in the batters box. Iron man he was not, but he was constantly dealing with hamstring issues that went back to his Cleveland days. Would you rather Manny run out a ground ball that turns into an out 95% of the time, or jog at times, thus limiting the strain on a problem area and allowing him to maximize at bats?
I always reference Ted Williams when talking about Manny. They're not in the same stratosphere as far as hitting prowess (but then again, who is when it comes to The Kid), but it can certainly be argued that Manny is a top-50 All Time hitter and had a similar 'Boston experience' as Ted: at times frustratin--almost comical--to watch in the field and on the basepaths, considered a 'hitting savant' despite hours and hours dedicated to perfecting the art, and constantly at odds with the media. It's a well known fact that Williams and the scribes of Boston were constantly butting heads--with the media saying the team would never win with someone so selfish, so lazy in the field, and Ted flipping them off in reply--and it eventually turned many of the fans against one of the greatest ballplayers to have ever lived. I think that's exactly what happened with Manny in Boston, and while this seasons parting was ugly, I think history will be kind to such a dominant hitter...my only regret in all of this is that it didn't have to end this way, the media didn't have to turn Manny off of such a great and passionate fan base (and also turn the fan base against Manny), and watching him finish his career in a Red Sox uniform would have been a pleasure for everyone involved.
By that logic then Mark Teixeira is also the Anti Christ and a bad teammate. Hell, how could you argue that he was trying in ATL when he put up an OPS of .902 with the Braves then exploded with a 1.081 OPS with the Angels? And don't talk to me about games played or overall effort...Manny played in just four fewer games and had a better pre-trade OPS than Teixeira.
How about this for logic, since we're all clearly being logical with our explanations here: Manny was going from the best division in baseball (a division that was so dominant, in fact, that some have argued that the best 4 teams in baseball resided there) to the dregs of the NL West. Quite simply, he was facing inferior competition in his new Dodger uniform (and before you bring up Lincecum, Webb, etc, just remember that there are also bullpens and #4/5 starters involved...many of whom wouldn't be on AAA teams let alone the major league rosters in the AL East).
Other readers have rated this comment below the viewing threshold. Click here to view anyway.
Nope. He dogged it in Boston and didn't in LA. I know 90% of you agree with Joe and he made great points. But Manny is a dog - plain and simple. No go ahead and push this one below the "viewing threshold" too because I'm not agreeing with BP.
McCarver's rant is simply another example of a member of mainstream "media" (sports or other) spouting a misinformed opinion and presenting it to the American public as fact. It is very sad to me that things like journalistic integrity and fact checking have given way to sensationalism and the "creation" of stories with so many members of the mainstream media. It's refreshing to find that these qualities still exist at places like BP, but it's very sad that a reader has to get away from "popular" media to find the truth anymore. Thanks for your hard work Joe.
Regarding the Youklis incident itself, I recall that the clubhouse was (somewhat) on Manny's side on that one? That Youk's "I made an out I really didn't want to make there! ARGGGHHHH!!!" temper tantrums had become frequent and tantrumish enough such that teammates were fed up with them?
Absolutely. In fact, a number of the team leaders sat Youkilis down and mentioned to him that team members were fed up with his act. The team would be up by 4 runs, Youkilis would strike out in a somewhat meaningless AB, and he'd start throwing helmets and bats in an otherwise jovial dugout.
After the fact, however, the media has once again spun it to a 'Manny the malcontent' moment.
Maybe Manny and his teammates just hated Youk's Jack Parkman butt-shake routine at the plate. It makes the ladies in Cleveland puke (and seeing it made my wife laugh out loud).
I'll take your word on what the media is now doing with it. Sounds like you're alot closer to Boston than I am. My source at the time was the media. Youk is accountably not taking my calls.
Tim McCarver had a long and successful major league career. He reached base more than 2,000 times. Is there any way to see how often he scored from first on a double to right?
In July, when Ramirez was supposedly “refusing to play,” the Red Sox played 24 games. Ramirez played in 22 of them. This was tied for fourth on the team with J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury. He was sixth on the team in plate appearances (AB+BB) in July. Not quite Lou Gehrig’s numbers, but he helped out a bit more than David Ortiz (six games), and was in the lineup somewhat more often than peers such as Moises Alou (one game). Oh, he didn’t get three days off in the middle of the month-Ramirez played in the All-Star Game.
Certainly, Joe, these two ideas are not mutually exclusive. That is, Manny could have played in 22/24 games AND refused to play in the other two. So, this particular fact doesn't really refute what McCarver is saying. I'm not saying I agree with Tim or even know what he has to support his claim, just that citing this stat doesn't get you very far, unless you think that playing 22/24 and refusing to play in the other 2 is OK, as long as your doing more than the rest of your teammates. I don't know or care enough to weigh in on whether such hypothetical behavior is despicable, just pointing out what this particular piece of evidence does (and doesn't) say.
Joe, aren't you the guy who has stated repeatedly that the Red Sox improved by trading Manny for Bay? That Bay had outperformed Manny's production for the Sox in 2008?
Is McCarver saying Manny is a lousy ballplayer? No. He is saying he is an asshole.
So is he? He moved his locker from the back of the room to the middle in order to increase press exposure, and he went from about zero radio intgerviews a week to a near-daily ESPN Desportes interview where he was given a platform to gripe against his employer.
Everyone knew he could still hit. So stats have little to do with it, although again, you are the guy who cites Manny's modest Boston 2008 stats to back your assertion that they improved by trading Manny and getting back Jason Bay.
So, Manny hit well during the two months prior to being dumped is the rationale we are using here to say he didn't quit on the team?? Well, heck, we best usher Joe Jackson into the HoF because he sure hit well during the 1919 World Series.
Joe may be fine with having a player on his team whose best effort to get to first base on ground balls could be best described as a "slow mosey" and who offers all the defensive interest of a rhododendron, but I am not.
Manny wanted out of Boston so he could get out of his option years and get a contract that will pay him more total money. And he did what it took to get it done. Let's not sugar coat this. He willingly signed a contract with Boston and when it became in his best financial interest to get that contract he took the low road. Do you think he would have offered the Red Sox an out if his performance had sucked??
To paraphrase the musical "Evita", "Don't cry for me Bostonians" and they haven't. The lack of defense of Manny by his former teammates is damnation by silence. And it is of the highest order.
The only thing Joe has right is that Tim McCarver may be the worst baseball announcer/interviewer/analyst in the history of the game.
When has any current Red Sox player said anything upon the trade or departure of a teammate? Nomar? Silence. Orlando Cabrera? Silence. Arroyo? Silence. D-Lowe? Silence. Pedro? Silence. Damon? Silence.
Other readers have rated this comment below the viewing threshold. Click here to view anyway.
Has anyone addressed that Manny's own teammates stated that they couldn't trust him on a day to day basis. That alone should be evidence that Manny's efforts were questionable regardless of outcome. Manny is in a long line of athletes that sign a contract and then complain about the contract when it no longer is viewed as "market".
If Manny continued to perform for the Sox the way he has the Sox would have picked up the options for $20M. He would have been paid $40M over the next two years, and probably would still get a 3yr-$45 to $50 at that end of that term. In the end he would have made essentially the same amount of money. But what Manny forgot or doesn't realize is that he now will KEEP less because Scott Boras is going to get a portion of all five years instead of the last two.
"If all of the above is “refusing to play,” I would sincerely like to see what “trying” looks like. It would be entertaining to see a player post a .600 OBP or .800 SLG."
Regardless of what McCarver had to say it's impossible to suggest that there wasn't something "rotten in Denmark" otherwise why would the Red Sox be so desperate to jettison the best right handed hitter in baseball. I'm not defending McCarver for playing loose with the facts but let's not try to characterize Manny as an innocent bystander either.
Manny scored from first on the Loney double because of the reduced drag after he cut his hair. The first opportunity as a Dodger, Bowa wouldn't send him because he the increased drag was slowing him down.
The BoSox scoring play was an aberration and not scoring was the norm before the haircut.
So, yes, as a matter of fact he is doing things that he hasn't done before and it's all because Torre made him cut his hair...not once...but twice!!
A perfect example of the limitations of the Prospectus approach, and Joe Sheehan in particular. McCarver's argument was a visceral, subjective one. He did not mean that Manny *literally* never scored from 1st on a double as a Red Sox. It's bizarre that you think he meant that--shows just how narrow your baseball worldiew is. He was using that to describe the perceived extra effort (and emotion) that Manny has brought with him to LA. It is not reducible to data. It just isn't.
Manny was fined by the team for pushing the team official. Care to explain how that is "second-hand" information? He fought with Youkilis. The team met privately and told management he should go. None of that is relevant in assessing Manny's time with the Sox?
I suppose all that is meaningless, because Manny scored from 1st on doubles more often than McCarver thought. Oy vey. I've been continually disappointed with Sheehan's work this year, and this is just another in a long line of silly arguments.
Ah, so we shouldn't actually believe what a journalist says is what he means, but delve into what they meant. It isn't like it's a journalist job to clearly state a story or opinion. Neigh, they are supposed to obfuscate and rely on hyperbole. Well, thank goodness they aren't bound by the realm of fact.
I agree 1000% with Tuck, provided you replace "limitations" with "value", and delete everything after "in particular".
"He did not mean that Manny *literally* never scored from 1st on a double as a Red Sox."
And yet that's what he *literally* said ("Manny's doing things that even Manny doesn't do, scoring on a double to right field from first base.").
And you're setting up a straw man (to knock down all by yourself) by even pretending that Sheehan interpreted McCarver's remark literally. We all knew (even you) what McCarver meant -- and he was STILL wrong. Recklessly, maliciously wrong.
"Care to explain how that is "second-hand" information?"
ESPN's Bob Ley: "Tim, what did you see of Ramirez in Boston to lead you to use the word 'despicable'?"
McCarver: "Well, it, uh, it wasn't necessarily what I saw, but it was what was reported, uh, in Boston."
This is relevant information, but playing "gotcha" on on an old-school dope like Tim McCarver is pretty easy.
That Manny played more than an injured David Ortiz isn't the point. That he feigned injury for one day defies statistics. That's indefensible.
It's fairly evident that Manny (guided by Boras) was going to make them wish they had traded him if they hadn't. At some point, prior results do not outweigh that the player no longer wanted to be there.
Does anyone actually have hard evidence that Manny faked an injury? No, just speculation? Just going off what you hear from the (RED SOX OWNED, DON'T FORGET THAT) media? Makes sense. I guess making your own rational thoughts about things went out with the Dodo and Speakeasys.
Well, there's that whole thing about Manny's knee (we're not sure which one) being too sore for him to play while in Boston. I believe he's played every game since joining the Dodgers, which should tell you how legitimate this latest "knee injury" was.
Wow, lots of opinions here. My feeling is that Joe was finding fault with making random assertions without the facts to back them up more than that he was being pro or con Manny. The current political campaigns probably make this a hot topic.
Joe, if you'd dropped a comment McCarver had made about the Yankees in here, you probably could have set a high water mark for comments in an unfiltered posts that would have stood for a while.
Joe, thank you for bringing numbers into this discussion. My loathing of Manny's reprehensible behavior (shoving the FO employee that's my dad's age) might only be rivalled by the pompous assertions served up by arguably the worst color commentator in the history of history. I'd rather have the Malcolm McDowell treatment from Clockwork Orange, only with Joe Morgan broadcasts, than listen to Timmy the Windbag for another series. My greatest hope for the World Series is a Dodger victory capped by a Manny reprise of the Deion Sanders ice bath treatment of our pal McCarver once again. Sorry, I don't have any data to back up my ill will towards McCarver, but ancedotally, he's awful, and arrogant, and awfully arrogant.
Thank you, Joe. McCarver must be singing that old Talking Heads song: "Facts don't do what I want them to."
At my blog, I tried to find the origin of McCarver's recent "Manny could not remember which knee hurt" statement. He was saying the same crap back in 2006. I believe it is a complete myth, though it has been gaining traction as an actual fact these past few months.
http://joyofsox.blogspot.com/2008/10/origins-of-manny-forgot-which-knee-hurt.html
That's why I'm rooting for the Dodgers. If the Dodgers make it, we'll once again be blessed with the opportunity to listen to Vin Scully broadcast the World Series. I suppose the same bright bulb that put McCarver in the booth is related to the bright bulb that stopped hiring Scully to do World Series radio broadcasts so many years ago.
102 comments have been left for this post.
"If all of the above is “refusing to play,” I would sincerely like to see what “trying” looks like. It would be entertaining to see a player post a .600 OBP or .800 SLG."
This could be the best thing I've ever read on Baseball Prospectus.
don't forget the punch line!
"On second thought, they’d probably just blacklist him."
Hilarious!