Ripken Baseball

By Gregory Shamus, Getty Images

By Cal Ripken, Jr. | April 13, 2011

Most baseball fans out there are hearing a lot of opinions this morning about the play that resulted in an injury to the Rangers’ Josh Hamilton.  The Rangers and Josh are under scrutiny and taking criticism for the play.  I see it another way.

First and foremost, it was a good play. He did not put himself at any greater risk than sliding into third on his triple, or when he stretches a single into a double and goes head first like he did against the Red Sox. The risk on this play is very similar to a wild pitch or passed ball where the pitcher is covering home. This play was only “stupid” because it ended in an injury.

Just because this situation is rare, does not mean the judgment was not sound. There was a good chance to score on this play as evidenced by how close the play was at home. What if there was a wild pitch and it squirted away from the catcher and Josh tried to score and slid to avoid the tag and got hurt, would that be a stupid risk? It would be more the norm and probably accepted right away. 

All this fits within the Ranger philosophy of running aggressively on the bases and putting pressure on the defense. Remember last year when the Rangers scored two runs from second base on ground ball plays to first in the playoffs against Tampa Bay? Remember the double steal the Rangers pulled off against the Yankees?  Is that putting Elvis Andrus at risk by stealing home? You cannot turn this on and off, you either believe in it and practice it every day, or you play another way.

Should Hamilton change his style of play? I don’t think so. He is a big strong man who has great speed. That is an advantage and makes him the player that he is. It would be “stupid” not to take advantage of all his skills. Should he stop stealing bases? Should he stop scoring from first on a double because there could be a play at the plate? Should he try not to score from second base with two outs on a hard base hit to an outfielder?

Discretion can be used without changing his overall style of play. As a base runner he has a choice of sliding head first or feet first. Feet first is generally safer, especially when sliding into home with the catcher wearing all that protective equipment. As a base runner you have a choice on breaking up double plays. You could have a football flashback and look for big contact or you could slide in and disrupt the footwork of the pivot man. As a base runner he has a choice of running over the catcher or sliding when he is dead out at home. 

Defensively he has choices as well. He has the choice of diving at full speed to make a catch or pulling up and holding it to a single. The game situation dictates when to take that chance, but it is the outfielders’ judgment and choice. Josh has a choice of crashing into the wall or pulling up and playing the ball off the wall. Derek Jeter had a choice of diving into the stands or not on that famous catch he made a few years back.

In the end discretion is managing your risk.  There should be a little risk management as a part of everyone’s game. 

The risk for this play was no different than the many risks that Josh normally takes on the bases. 

It shouldn’t be criticized but rather applauded and accepted as good baseball.

Follow Ripken Baseball: www.Twitter.com/RipkenBaseball

On Tuesday, the baseball world mourned the loss of one of the most notable baseball figures of the last century. New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner passed away at the age of 80 from a heart attack.

“The Boss” was one of the most successful owners in baseball, leading the Yankees to seven World Series championships and 11 pennants in his 37 years owning the team. He’s one of the main reasons the Yankees were a juggernaut in the late 70s and 90s, and revolutionized the way owners ran teams. The Yankees are the richest team in baseball (and maybe in all of sports), thanks in large part to Steinbrenner doing whatever it took to field a winner.

Steinbrenner also always kept things interesting, both for positive and negative. His hirings and firings of Billy Martin, his “hands-on” approach to ownership, and his rants and tirades will also always be remembered.

But what many may not have known about Steinbrenner was his philanthropic side. He gave millions to charities around the country. He contributed so much to Tampa, where he owned a home, that the city named a high school after him.

Steinbrenner will be remembered for different things to different people. But what everyone can agree on is that he loved baseball, loved the Yankees, loved New York and loved to win.

The MLB All-Star Game is designed to showcase baseball’s best players at the mid-way point of the season. Of course, this may not always be the case once the rosters are selected through a vote by fans and players, and additions by the respective league’s managers. That said, it’s still an important piece of our nation’s favorite pastime.

The All-Star Game has been trending towards younger players over recent years, and I like that shift. Younger guys like Evan Longoria (Tampa Bay), Ryan Braun (Milwaukee), Ryan Zimmermann (Washington) and players who have been on a major league club just three years are now making the team. This is very different from the days when my brother and I played. Back then, guys like Call were perennial All-Stars and the teams seemed to be made up of the same players every year.

While I like this younger trend and think the game is headed in a great direction, I do wish there was a way to honor the veteran ballplayers…even if they’re going through an off-year. A great example is Atlanta Braves’ third baseman Chipper Jones. A 17-year MLB veteran, Jones is one of the best switch hitters of all-time, with a career batting average of.306. If he decides to retire after this season, it will be a shame that he wasn’t on the National League’s All-Star roster in his final year. A quality veteran like Jones deserves a spot on the All-Star team, even if his numbers aren’t quite what they once were.

Every year there are going to be guys who get snubbed. But I would like to see the rosters expand so guys like Jones get a chance to play. I may have a lot of ideas about the game, but I’ll admit that I certainly don’t have all the answers or the solution on how to make this happen. I just think it’s the right thing to do for the veterans who have put in their time. Besides, what’s the worst that could happen?

So the NL Cy Young Award winner is headed to arbitration. That’s a road I would not want to go down if I were the San Francisco Giants.

Tim Lincecum comes to the table asking for $13 million, a number he’s definitely worth, especially considering the amount of success he has had in his first three years. Tell me, how can the Giants straight-face an arbitrator and say that Lincecum is worth just $8 million?

Typically, in the arbitration process, a player’s salary is put up against his peers. Lincecum is a 3-year player, so usually we’d be stacking him up against other guys entering their fourth season to determine a reasonable salary. But how many other 3-year players even compare?

Tim has separated himself from the entire league. He’s led the league in strikeouts the past two seasons, has a career ERA of just 2.90, and owns the last two Cy Young Awards.

That just screams to not have this go to an arbitrator. In the arbitration process, the club will have to try to prove that Lincecum isn’t worth $13 million – and going down that road can breed a lot of ill feelings between the Giants and a young ace that could be the future of that franchise.

If I were the ownership, I would do everything I could to end this process now, before an arbitrator gets into the mix. Why not meet in the middle and offer Tim $10.5 million. That’s reasonable. Or better yet, put this problem to bed for three years and throw Tim a 3-year, $40 million deal.

Then just let Tim go out there and win another Cy Young.

I’ve held onto this for a few days. On Monday, Mark McGwire admitted to using steroids during his career, and I wanted to take some time to fully absorb what I had heard. Not because this news came as a surprise, but because of the specific statements Big Mac made regarding his reasons for using PEDs and his defense of his personal achievements on the field.

First and foremost, I want to clarify that I am not here to bash Mark McGwire. I always respected him on the field. In my interactions with Mark, during short visits at first base, he always seemed like a nice guy.

But I take offense to some of the statements McGwire made on Monday.

First, Big Mac explained that he only used PEDs to speed his recovery time from various injuries during his career. Okay. I’m fine with that thought process, but the problem lies in the fact that he took things that were not administered by team doctors. McGwire took a back alley approach to recovering faster, rather than going through the proper resources and getting help the right way.

Second, I’m offended by the mere fact that McGwire claims PEDs had no effect on his performance during the decade he used them. That just defies my way of thinking.

I’ll agree that no pill or injection is going to help a ballplayer’s hand-eye coordination. But you can’t tell me the size and strength that McGwire gained from PEDs had zero impact on the number of balls he sent sailing out of the yard. If you’re playing clean and you just miss the ball and hit it 390 feet, then you get on the juice and develop enough strength where you’re just missing the ball and launching it 420 feet – then that stuff definitely helped you hit some home runs.

Finally, McGwire said he wished he had never played in the “steroid era,” and that one really bothers me. It just feels like he’s passing the buck, putting the emphasis on the time in which he played rather than on his own decisions.

I played in that same era and I happen to strongly believe that the users of steroids were in the minority. The majority of us played au naturel.

McGwire can’t blame the steroid era because there is no era without him. His home run chase defined the steroid era. He is the poster boy. When people look back and think “steroid era,” they will always think Mark McGwire first.

Think what you want of Scott Boras, but he gets his job done. Better than anyone else in his industry.

He always gets top-dollar for his clients, and in the case of Matt Holliday’s recent signing with the St. Louis Cardinals, Boras has elevated his status to another level.

Not only did Holliday’s contract blow away Jason Bay’s—who you could argue is the better player of the two biggest free agent outfielders of this off-season—but in the end, Holliday finds himself in a much better situation than Bay.

Bay is certainly getting paid, having signed a $66 million, four-year deal with the Mets. While he’s getting close to top-dollar, he’s also now playing for a team that lost 92 games in 2009.

Over in St. Louis, Boras landed Holliday a seven-year deal for $120 million with the Cards, a team that typically doesn’t delve deep into its pockets for free agents.

In the end, both Bay and Holliday will be making comparable money on a yearly basis: Bay at about $16.5 million per year, Holliday at about $17 million per year.

Boras’ super agent ability is what makes the real difference though. Bay will be playing for a struggling franchise trying to rebound from a dismal season, while Holliday finds himself returning to a team that just came off a playoff run and has a very good chance to return to the playoffs in 2010. Not to mention the fact that Holliday finds himself in the same lineup as Albert Pujols, and the reality that St. Louis is a much more relaxed playing atmosphere than New York.

Who has the better chance of bringing home a World Series Championship during the life of their new contract? That’s a no-brainer.

Looking beyond fiscal numbers, there’s no doubt Boras got Holliday the best deal possible.

We all know Boras always seeks top-dollar for his clients, regardless of where that money comes from. But with the Holliday deal, Boras has achieved perfection. He placed his client in the best possible atmosphere and earned him the biggest paycheck, and that’s never easy when you’re looking for top-dollar in the major leagues.

With the Winter Meetings concluded, a lot of the big-name free agents still remain on the market. Not Randy Wolf though, and I think he deserves a lot of credit for how he handled his free agency.

Randy didn’t let his eyes wander around the league, looking at all the other deals being made or discussed. He knew what he wanted, he found a situation and an offer that fit him well, and he jumped on it. Good for him. There aren’t many guys around anymore who will go into free agency and accept the first fair deal that comes their way. No, they’ll test the waters and wait for some team to hurl up an enormous offer.

Raul Ibanez made a very similar deal last year. The Phillies made him a fair offer coming out of the ’08 Winter Meetings. Ibanez took it and he went out and played quality baseball for a great team.

Take a fair deal and go play your game.

The Wolf deal should serve as a heads up to the remaining free agents, an example they should consider following. Don’t get too greedy, don’t worry about anyone else in the league, and don’t wait around for the absolute perfect deal. That’s not to say the $30 million that Wolf is going to get over the next three years is anything to shake a stick at, but many guys in his position might have turned down the Brewers’ offer in favor of finding an even better deal – something that may never have come along.

It was a two-way street. The Brewers didn’t step beyond their means. Instead, they stayed within themselves and filled their need for a quality left-handed starter, and they accomplished that goal early-on in the off-season.

My advice to the remaining free agents – worry about yourself, ignore all the other deals being made and just look for one that fits you. You don’t need a blockbuster deal to find your place on the diamond.