How do you reconcile your like of an individual player versus your desire to see your team do the best it possibly can? What happens when your favorite player just isn’t that effective any more? There are some guys (like Cal Ripken Jr., for example) who are clear Hall of Famers, clear “one team” guys. There was no way in heck the Orioles would ever let him go, no matter how poorly he played. Then you’ve got the guys who are Hall of Famers and are fan favorites, but do something to alienate or turn off the fan base, like Sammy Sosa with the Cubs. Then you’ve got the guys who are clearly NOT Hall of Famers, so it generally doesn’t matter. Some are fan favorites, but you mourn their loss for a few months in the offseason, give them a standing O the first time they come back to play in your ballpark, and then you’re over it.
But then you’ve got the borderline guys. The guys who are very good and have a longstanding relationship with your team, but maybe not quite at Hall of Fame level and clearly declining. Bernie Williams was one of these guys. The Yankees decided to cut him loose (probably one or two years after they should have, speaking in terms of performance) and it was met with a lot of backlash from the fanbase.
I know this guy isn’t as universally loved as Williams was in NY, but Garret Anderson is that player for me. He’s had a great career. With several more good seasons, he could wind up with 3,000 hits. In these days of OBP emphasis – which should only increase in the next 10 years until GA is eligible for Cooperstown – I’m not sure that will be enough for Garret. He’s been allergic to walks since he was a rookie, and that has never changed. At the end of the day, he could wind up with 3,000 hits (impressive), 550 doubles (top 25 all time), 320 homeruns (top 100 all time), and at least one World Series ring (hopefully at least two!).
I’m not going to go into all of the other statistics, but let’s just say they won’t help his case. So let’s call him a borderline Hall of Famer, for our purposes.
I like him. I’ve liked him since he came up for good in 1995 and should have won the Rookie of Year (effing Marty Cordova – where are you now, huh?). He was a line drive hitter who eventually hit some homeruns (even winning the Homerun Derby in 2003!), and then went back to being a line drive hitter. He wasn’t what you would call “gritty” or “hard-nosed,” in fact he has the opposite reputation amongst some fans who think he doesn’t ever hustle, but he always got the job done. He stayed on an even keel, to use another cliché. You never heard him associated with steroids, or contract disputes, or off-field issues or anything like that. He came to the park, played well, and went home to his family. When I finally got an Angels jersey a couple years ago, it was between Garret and Salmon, and I decided to go with Garret. That’s a big decision, because I’m almost definitely not going to buy another jersey any time soon.
So we have this great relationship, Garret and I. We’ve been through one devastating year (1995), a bunch of lean years (1996 – 2001, 2003), several very good years (2004 – present), and one glorious year (2002). Garret never sent me a Christmas card, but I knew we were pals.
That may be coming to an abrupt end this year. The Angels have a team option they can choose to decline. They either pay Garret $3 million to end his contract, or $14 million to keep him around for one more year. Like I said earlier, I’m not going to do any statistical analysis on this. I could probably come up with a few reasons to keep him around (namely, the Angels don’t have a legitimate OF prospect, although Morales could probably play there, and getting rid of him means I would have to see GMJ out there more often – yuck), but $14 million is a lot of money for GA’s level of production.
I’m putting aside all of that and saying I want him to stay, regardless. Sign him for 4 more years. If he has a shot at 3,000 hits, I want to see him do it in an Angels uniform. I want to see Garret be the first Angel to hit 300 homeruns with the team. If the Angels win more World Series’, I want Garret to be there. I want him to retire as an Angel. If he has a shot at Cooperstown, I want it all to be as an Angel. I don’t want to see him playing for another team. Forget logic, this is all about sentimentality. I watch baseball because I love the sport, and I enjoy watching people who are good at it. Garret Anderson has been good at it for a long time, long enough to make an impact on me. So I’m eschewing reason, statistics, economics, and common sense and saying, in plain English, resign the man. That would mean more to me than seeing the Angels be a win or two better. Plus you never know, there may still be some clutch RBI’s in that bat.
But then you’ve got the borderline guys. The guys who are very good and have a longstanding relationship with your team, but maybe not quite at Hall of Fame level and clearly declining. Bernie Williams was one of these guys. The Yankees decided to cut him loose (probably one or two years after they should have, speaking in terms of performance) and it was met with a lot of backlash from the fanbase.
I know this guy isn’t as universally loved as Williams was in NY, but Garret Anderson is that player for me. He’s had a great career. With several more good seasons, he could wind up with 3,000 hits. In these days of OBP emphasis – which should only increase in the next 10 years until GA is eligible for Cooperstown – I’m not sure that will be enough for Garret. He’s been allergic to walks since he was a rookie, and that has never changed. At the end of the day, he could wind up with 3,000 hits (impressive), 550 doubles (top 25 all time), 320 homeruns (top 100 all time), and at least one World Series ring (hopefully at least two!).
I’m not going to go into all of the other statistics, but let’s just say they won’t help his case. So let’s call him a borderline Hall of Famer, for our purposes.
I like him. I’ve liked him since he came up for good in 1995 and should have won the Rookie of Year (effing Marty Cordova – where are you now, huh?). He was a line drive hitter who eventually hit some homeruns (even winning the Homerun Derby in 2003!), and then went back to being a line drive hitter. He wasn’t what you would call “gritty” or “hard-nosed,” in fact he has the opposite reputation amongst some fans who think he doesn’t ever hustle, but he always got the job done. He stayed on an even keel, to use another cliché. You never heard him associated with steroids, or contract disputes, or off-field issues or anything like that. He came to the park, played well, and went home to his family. When I finally got an Angels jersey a couple years ago, it was between Garret and Salmon, and I decided to go with Garret. That’s a big decision, because I’m almost definitely not going to buy another jersey any time soon.
So we have this great relationship, Garret and I. We’ve been through one devastating year (1995), a bunch of lean years (1996 – 2001, 2003), several very good years (2004 – present), and one glorious year (2002). Garret never sent me a Christmas card, but I knew we were pals.
That may be coming to an abrupt end this year. The Angels have a team option they can choose to decline. They either pay Garret $3 million to end his contract, or $14 million to keep him around for one more year. Like I said earlier, I’m not going to do any statistical analysis on this. I could probably come up with a few reasons to keep him around (namely, the Angels don’t have a legitimate OF prospect, although Morales could probably play there, and getting rid of him means I would have to see GMJ out there more often – yuck), but $14 million is a lot of money for GA’s level of production.
I’m putting aside all of that and saying I want him to stay, regardless. Sign him for 4 more years. If he has a shot at 3,000 hits, I want to see him do it in an Angels uniform. I want to see Garret be the first Angel to hit 300 homeruns with the team. If the Angels win more World Series’, I want Garret to be there. I want him to retire as an Angel. If he has a shot at Cooperstown, I want it all to be as an Angel. I don’t want to see him playing for another team. Forget logic, this is all about sentimentality. I watch baseball because I love the sport, and I enjoy watching people who are good at it. Garret Anderson has been good at it for a long time, long enough to make an impact on me. So I’m eschewing reason, statistics, economics, and common sense and saying, in plain English, resign the man. That would mean more to me than seeing the Angels be a win or two better. Plus you never know, there may still be some clutch RBI’s in that bat.
2 comments:
We went through the same in Kansas City with Amos Otis. He was a fan favorite, and star in the World Series and holder of most offensive records at the time.
After 14 years, they cut him loose. Then made the playoffs the next year and finally won it the year after.
He wasn't HofF material, but he was important to us.
I say we don't pick up the option but then resign him for a few years for less money. That wouldn't damage his ego, would it?
Post a Comment