Former hockey player (and Washington Nationals) Nyjer Morgan turned “chippy” in Milwaukee last night after striking out against Cardinals’ starter Chris Carpenter. Morgan had battled through the ten-pitch at bat and was headed back to the dugout when he said something to Carpenter and tossed his chewing tobacco at him. Albert Pujols sprinted down the line to confront Morgan and the benches emptied, but no punches were thrown. Morgan was tossed.
“I just got in the middle to make sure that Morgan didn’t jump on Carp,” Pujols later explained. “The last thing you want is our guy that’s trying a shutout game to lose his focus. I actually like that guy. I don’t mind having a guy like that on my team. He brings a lot of energy to the ballclub, and you want to have a guy like that. But sometimes I think he goes (a little overboard) and tries to put too much energy.”
After the game, Morgan claimed that Carpenter had cursed him from the mound, and Morgan returned the favor before tossing his tobacco and shouting at him. The Cardinals won the game, a pitchers’ duel that pitted Cardinals’ hurler Chris Carpenter against Milwaukee’s Zach Greinke. Carpenter pitched a beauty, blanking the Brew Crew 2-0 on a four hitter. But the Cardinals still trail Milwaukee by a wide margin in the N.L. Central.
Morgan seemed to shrug off the incident after the game . . . but wait, wait — there’s more. Later, on Twitter, “Tony Plush” talked about Pujols — as if the game was the baseball version of Hockey Night in Canada. “Alberta couldn’t see Plush if she had her gloves on!!!” he chirped. “Wat was she thinking running afta Plush!!! She never been n tha ring!!!” Ugh.
The incident overshadowed a very, very fine game. With St. Louis struggling to catch the Brewers in the N.L. Central, the team needed a good outing from Carpenter, and they got one. He struck out five and threw a complete game, despite being up and down (he’s 9-9 on the season), during the 2011 campaign. As important, perhaps, was that Carpenter threw this magic while facing Zack Greinke, who was nearly as effective (seven innings, two earned).
Aaron Boone and the BBTN crowd over at ESPN were asked the three things they would do now, if they were the Cubs, and they talked of clubhouse character and finding good talent — all of it good advice. But transforming the Cubs will take more than adding good players at reasonable prices, and saying that the team needs to “change the culture of losing” doesn’t help. What exactly does that mean? So here, unbidden, are our three simple ideas of what the Cubs can do.
First, show some patience. The best pitcher in the Cubs system is now in Tampa Bay — and his name is Chris Archer. The 6-3 righty was traded, with a packet of prospects, for Matt Garza last winter. Garza is plenty good, but Archer could be a lot better. The Cubs will never know, because they got impatient, and Garza looked attractive. This is an almost genetic habit of the North Side Drama Queens. Enough already: develop players and hang on to them. Like they have done (finally, blessedly) with Starlin Castro and Darwin Barney. Listen (you stupid jerks), instead of shipping out Josh Vitters (he can play third, for Aramis Ramirez — who’s going to get injured again, any minute now) and Tyler Colvin, play them. And when they don’t play well, play them anyway . . .
The Washington Nationals showed that they can win tough one-run games on Friday — with Jason Marquis providing an epic one man stand in the 6th inning to lift the Nationals to a 2-1 win over the San Diego Padres. The pitching heroics took place after a double, a single and a walk loaded the bases with one out. Marquis then walked in a run.
But just as the Nationals were expected to collapse, Marquis showed what a veteran pitcher can do, striking out uber phenom Anthony Rizzo and inducing veteran Jorge Cantu to ground out. The tough sixth inning proved enough to lift the Nationals, as Tyler Clippard came in to throw two get-em-out innings and Drew Storen provided the save. The victory was badly needed — giving the Nationals a possibility of splitting (or winning) the series. (more…)
Here’s one way to grab a headline: write an article speculating that Albert Pujols will become Washington’s first baseman in 2012. That’s what Tyler Kepner did yesterday in the pages of the New York Times, fueling a kind of baseball mini-industry that is one misplaced quote away from becoming a national obsession. “By signing Jayson Werth for seven years and $126 million in December,” Kepner wrote, “the Nationals showed they will spend serious money. Adding Pujols to Werth and Ryan Zimmerman would give them an intimidating middle of the order. And the No. 1 overall draft picks Stephen Strasburg and Bryce Harper would presumably be in their superstar prime before Pujols’s deal runs out.” Of course Kepner’s article was speculation, but he has a point: if Pujols doesn’t sign in St. Louis (baseball’s fourth smallest market), then anything is possible — including the presumably impossible. But is Pujols-to-D.C. likely?
Adam Kilgore thinks so. Or did. Writing a follow-up to the Kepner article on his blog yesterday, Kilgore noted that the “Nationals’ money and their malleable first base situation makes them an intriguing potential suitor. Yes, they signed Adam LaRoche to a two-year contract this offseason. But in the pie-in-the-sky event they can land Pujols, they could easily trade him or just eat LaRoche’s contract and consider it part of the astronomical price to acquire one of the best hitters in baseball history.” Hmmm. Well, maybe. But a much more likely scenario (as Kilgore, in a second-thought moment, noted today) is that Pujols stays in St. Louis. That, or (as Phil Rogers says) the rich get richer and he ends up in New York or Boston.
None of this would be all that exciting except that the Pujols mini-industry is headline news in St. Louis and, of course, in baseball. There are internet sites focused solely on the Pujols contract, a handful of fan clubs vie for the allegiance of his followers, on-line artists play endlessly with his image (note: above) and notebook toting reporters follow him wherever he goes. Pujols has been on six SI covers, is the lead advertising card for Topps and fills the seats in St. Louis. All for good reason: if Pujols were to retire today he’d be a shoo-in for Cooperstown — and he has at least eight years to play. Still, the numbers are sobering. Pujols will command a $300 million contract, half the total value of the St. Louis franchise and nearly as much in one year (at $30 million) as the Pirates spend on their total payroll. Pujols is destined to make, in his lifetime, more money than any other ballplayer in history.
This is where the calculations get tough. Would you rather have Albert Pujols (and his tremendous talent) for one year, or Ian Kinsler ($22 million) for five? Would you rather spend $30 million for one player, or the same amount of money for three — let’s say Kinsler ($6 million in 2011), Hanley Ramirez ($11 million in 2011), and Alex Rios ($12 million in 2011). Pujols gives you a Hall of Famer at first, Kinsler, Ramirez and Rios give you a team that’s strong-up-the-middle and (arguably) an automatic contender. So Kepner’s right: adding Pujols to Werth and Zimmerman would be wonderful! And he’s wrong, because that trio (with Strasburg and Harper), couldn’t possibly last.
No one can read Mark Lerner’s mind, but I would bet that sooner or later, Nats’ fans would end up with an aging Hall of Famer at first — and not much around him. Which is only to say: the Nats would love to have Pujols (who wouldn’t?), but there’s a limit. The implications of a Pujols signing for any team (with the exception of the very richest franchises) is that the tried-and-true rule of building a contender (short term sacrifice, long term gain — and develop pitching) goes out the window.
Sixty-three years ago this monthStanley Frank Musial entered spring training to prepare for what would be his greatest season in baseball. That year, his seventh (he missed 1945 when he was in the Navy), he hit .376, had 131 RBI and a slugging percentage of .702. He was selected to the 1948 All Star squad and won MVP honors for the third time in his career. It was a performance that most pros only dream about.
Legend has it that Musial’s prowess on the field was matched by his modesty off it. In 1969 his baseball exploits were honored in Cooperstown. And earlier this week, the actions and demeanor of the simple kid from the Pennsylvania coal country were rewarded at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue when the President presented him with the Medal of Freedom. The remarks made about Musial, who was wearing his trademark Cardinal-red sports jacket, noted that he was receiving the award because his “humility and decency remain a model for all Americans to this day.” With apologies to Leo Durocher, it seems that sometimes nice guys do finish first.
Which brings me to Mr. Pujols — who’s greatest season was 60 years after Musial’s. In 2008 Albert hit .357 with 116 RBI and slugged .653, receiving an All Star and MVP nod as well. The comparison of the two seasons provides some awesome numbers: in 1948 Musial hit .376, slugged 39 home runs and drove in 131. Pujols numbers are nearly identical: .357, 37 HRs, 116 RBIs. You can claim that Musial’s 1948 numbers showed he outperformed Pujols’ 2008 numbers, but Pujols was walked more, and outdistanced Musial on OBP. But the two are itchy close — and both deserved the plaudets they gained. And they were nearly identical in age: Musial was 27 in 1948, Pujols was 28 in 2008. There’s a squeaky difference in the numbers, and sixty years of baseball history in between.
There are other comparisons. Pujols, like Musial, is known for his lunch box attitude toward the game. He prepares, puts on the spikes and plays hard but clean. No show-boating, no bragging, no bull. Perhaps in 60 years or so Albert will also be in the White House receiving medals for what seems to be an outdated idea: sportsmanship.
Yesterday, on “Mike and Mike in the Morning,” the question was raised: for what possible reason would the Cardinals even consider giving Pujols a 10-year deal for A-Rod money ( given that he’s 31 years old)? “Aren’t his best years behind him?” Mike Greenberg asked, incredulous at both the idea of the length of contract and amount of money being discussed. Well, probably. And I thought he had a point until I looked at what Musial did from age 32 to 41. During that span he averaged .313 at the plate (he hit .330 when he was 41), 88 RBIs per season and his OPS was .937.
Can Pujols do that? No one knows. But don’t forget, Albert’s got some fresh legs from playing first base all these years and he doesn’t get hurt. Are Musial’s numbers worth A-Rod’s salary? Maybe not. But they’re worth one hell of a lot. Add to that Pujol’s work ethic, leadership qualities and demeanor and those deserve, in my opinion, a premium. I don’t know what Pujols should get in terms of years or money, but the Cards would be absolutely crazy to let him get away. Don’t they know they have Stan Musial playing for them?
Nationals fans got a glimpse of the team’s future double play combination on Friday against the Pittsburgh Pirates, as Danny Espinosa got the starting nod at second base. After spending most of three years in the minors (with stints in Vermont, Potomac, Harrisburg and Syracuse), Espinosa cashed in on his early-September call up by launching his first home run (in the top of the third inning) into the right field seats at PNC Park and turning a seamless double play at a position that he will play well into the future. The Desmond-Espinosa combo is likely to be the opening day up-the-middle defense for the Nats in 2011. Espinosa’s exposure at second base was the only piece of good news for the Nats on Friday night, however, as the Pirates beat up on steady starter Livan Hernandez, touching up the right hander for eight earned runs in just 4.1 innings. Hernandez was philosophical about his outing: “It’s not happening sometimes,” he said. “When it’s not your day, it’s not your day.”
Those Are The Details, Now For The Headlines: We had plenty of responses from readers on our posting on Albert Pujols and Lou Gehrig, including complaints that we are “N.L.-centric” and that we purposely left out “the one guy who puts Albert to shame.” The reader went on a screed, saying that “Alex Rodriguez has better numbers, plays for a better team, has more awards and plays a more difficult position” than Pujols. “Pujols is a very, very good player,” the reader said. “But he’s no Alex Rodriguez.” So we checked the numbers. Rodriguez has 604 home runs in 17 seasons (Pujols has 401 in ten), has a career BA of .303 (Pujols is at .332), has a career OBP of .387 (Pujols is at .425) and has won three MVPs — the same number as Pujols. Albert doesn’t play for the Empire, but he’s played in two World Series, while Rodriguez has played in one. Pujols lags behind Albert in games played (of course), but all that this means is that Pujols (who’s played in 1530) has about 700 games (Rodriguez has played in 2278) to catch the pride of the Gothams in career home runs — and at this rate (of about 33 per year) he will. By our reckoning (and at the current rate), when Pujols has played in 2200 games, he will have hit just over 610 homers. The reader is right: Alex Rodriguez is a great player. In fact, he’s the second best player in baseball today.
It’s possible to pitch to Albert Pujols — but you do so at your peril. Scott Olsen knew this of course (every major league pitcher knows it), but that didn’t keep him from missing an up-and-in pitch to the St. Louis powerhouse, who promptly deposited it in the left field seats. That was home run number 35 in the slugger’s season, a plus-30 total that he has now reached in each of the last ten seasons. The Pujols’ dinger (number 401 of his career, after he hit number 400 on Thursday) was not the difference in the Cardinals’ 4-2 victory on Friday night, but on a day that saw Washington’s top pitching prospect announce that he would undergo Tommy John surgery, the appearance of Prince Albert at Nationals Park might prove reason enough for Nats fans to make the trek to Half Street.
How good is Pujols? A 2008 manager’s survey named him as the most feared hitter in baseball — and for good reason. The slugger’s numbers draw comparisons to Willie Mays, Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Frank Robinson, Babe Ruth — and Lou Gehrig. The Gehrig comparison seems appropriate: both Pujols and Gehrig won one batting title when they were under 30, and Gehrig stroked thirty home runs and hit over .300 for nine consecutive seasons — a mark broken by Pujols last year. In truth, Prince Albert has already matched Gehrig’s greatness (a claim that is heresy in New York), for while Gehrig was an RBI machine (175 in 1927, 184 in 1931), Pujols is arguably the better slugger: Gehrig stroked over 40 home runs five times in his 17 year career, while Pujols has hit over 40 six times in ten years. If Pujols stays health, he’ll add to that record next year and quite possibly for many years after. Additionally, Pujols’ slugging numbers are breathtaking: he has led the league four times in ten seasons, Gehrig did it twice.
Stan “The Man” Musial remains the most iconic Cardinal (as Pujols readily admits), but he never had Pujols’ power (Musial stroked 475 home runs in 22 seasons, Pujols has hit 401 in ten), or his RBI potential — Musial had ten seasons of plus-100 RBIs, which Pujols has already equaled. But what Musial lacked in power he made up for in hits: he led the N.L. in hits in six seasons, Pujols has led his league once. Pujols’ power is Willie Mays’ power: Mays hit 40-plus home runs six times in 22 years, Pujols has done it five times in ten. Pujols’ strike out rate compares favorably with Henry Aaron’s and his power is similar. Aaron hit 30-plus home runs in 15 of his 22 seasons, a mark that Pujols could equal (with that important caveat — if he stays healthy) in five years. And Pujols hits for a higher average.
While feeding a comparison compulsion is a pastime for baseball fanatics, it has its rewards — it compels us to understand just how great the truly great were: Ted Williams led the majors in walks six times, Pujols has never done it once, though Pujols will undoubtedly eclipse Williams’ RBI totals. Then too, while pitchers fear Pujols, they were petrified by Williams (who led the A.L in walks eight times); that, or Williams had the better eye (or both). But Pujols (on the other hand) has a much better eye than Frank Robinson, who sported high OBPs — but absolutely hated to walk. Robinson won the MVP twice, Pujols has done it three times. Mel Ott (underrated and below-the-radar Mel Ott) was a horse, playing and playing and playing without injury year after year. Pujols will outhit Ott, but he’ll have to stay healthy to equal his total games mark. Oh, and Ott knew how to walk and (arguably) had a better eye at the plate. But just barely. And while Pujols does not have the power of Barry Bonds, he could add something (and this year) that Bonds never had — a Triple Crown.
So while Nats fans justly mourn the loss of a potentially great pitcher (and a pitcher for the Washington Nationals, no less), they might take modest solace that — at least when the St. Louis Cardinals visit D.C. — they can watch one of the very greatest players who ever played the game. Pujols is so good that he is not only drawing comparisons to Ruth and Gehrig and Musial and Williams (and maybe half-a-dozen others), he has already equaled or surpassed many of their more celebrated stats. Albert Pujols is already the Lou Gehrig of St. Louis and he already has Hall of Fame numbers — and he’s only getting started.
