Inbox Inspirations Jason Michael Barker

The offseason is over, the regular season hasn't started yet and all there is to talk about is Darryl Strawberry and John Rocker (again)...must be time to open up the ol' mailbag! Onward...

First up is Sam, responding to my article on how each club has improved or gotten worse this off-season:

You missed a key Braves acquisition, Trenidad Hubbard. Dodgers, or Kevin Malone, are stupid enough to try to send a consistently great back-up to the minors in favor of Dan Naulty and other bags of crap, so the Braves just picked him up. If he can perform as a starter, he just might be another surprise like Gerald Williams.

When I first read this email, I thought Sam was cracking a joke...Trenidad Hubbard? I knew the name but wasn't familiar with his career, and I could have sworn he was a journeyman scrub. Turns out Sam is right on the money, however.

Hubbard is a small man, standing just 5'9", but he has made big contributions each of the past two years. In 1998 he hit .358/.425 (OBP/SLG) in 208 at-bats, filling in at all three outfield positions and third base. Last year he hit .387/.390, playing outfield, second base and even catcher. He's a lifetime .358/.437 hitter, and has also hit well in the minors, but has less than 500 at-bats in his big-league career.

I don't see him winning a starting job with the Braves, but he certainly looks like a good fourth outfielder.

Up next is Joe, writing in on the same topic:

True, baseball is a statistical sport, but you can't base everything solely on stats. I'm glad that you didn't rank the Reds at the top of your list, because they really don't deserve it, but don't count them out, either. This team is based on young, hard working, good character guys who love to play, anybody who has seen a Sean Casey or Pokey Reese smile knows that. As for Bichette, I don't think he wants to get in Larkin's doghouse, and, simply put, McKeon won't put up with it either.

One point at a time:

You're right, you can't base everything on stats. It's just about all I've got, however, since I don't get to spend time in the clubhouse or on the road with a team to witness things like chemistry and leadership.

I'm certainly not counting the Reds out in 2000, but I do see them as the third-best team in the National League Central, behind Houston and St. Louis. Things change, of course, and in any given year a player can surprise you by performing much better than he ever has or you ever predicted, but right now the Reds have too many question marks to be considered the favorite in that division.

"Young, hard working, good character guys who love to play" make for good feelings and a nice story, but those things alone don't win ballgames in any sort of readily observable way, in the manner of on-base percentage or home runs. As for the players themselves, Sean Casey had a great 1999, and should be even better next year. I'm not expecting much from Pokey Reese, however, given his age and minor-league track record.

I don't think Bichette wants to get in Larkin's or McKeon's doghouse either, but his play speaks for itself -- he's not a very good baseball player, and his numbers are going to take a serious dip since he won't get to play half his games in the friendly confines of Coors Field. Jim Bowden seems like a pretty shrewd guy, but trading for Bichette is nearly inexcusable.

Finally we come to Andy, writing about Monday's Rickey Henderson/Barry Bonds article:

I am a lifelong Mets fan who had the pleasure of living in Oakland during many of Rickey Henderson's years there. I've heard him castigated as a loafer, a selfish player, a disinterested annoyance, and worse. Interestingly, most of the criticisms came not when he played in Oakland (where Rickey was generally appreciated and certainly most at home), but in New York (where he had arguably his best seasons with the Yanks). This nonsense continued last year when Rickey joined the Mets.

Year after year, for a very long time now, Rickey has put up incredible numbers: walks, homers (during his prime), runs, OBP, and so forth. And in a whole lot of those years, Rickey's teams have played in the post-season. Is this merely a coincidence? I don't think so.

In closing, I hope my Mets have the wisdom and patience to tolerate and/or ignore Rickey's complaints (so what else is new? and, speaking of Rickey's complaints about being underpaid, is there another $2 million player with his resume who is putting up numbers like his?) for at least one more year. I'm guessing he'll be able to repeat his productive '99, especially if Bobby Valentine ignores the noise and rests him judiciously. I would be delighted to watch Rickey do his thing in New York for one more year, and I hope the rest of the world will realize how unlikely we are to see his equal for some time to come.

All very well said, Andy (and he wrote even more, but I had to trim it a bit for the sake of brevity). To touch on your last point, I think Henderson's reputation makes him a bad bet to be remembered for years to come, at least as he should be remembered.

Down the line, players with great reputations (deserved or not) tend to be remembered as even better than they really were, while players with bad images are remembered as being lesser players. This fate may be in store for Albert Belle, who has had more than his share of problems on and off the field, but who in reality is one of the best hitters of the past decade.

Tying this whole thing together, that's why it's important to keep statistical records -- whether Player Q was a great guy who gave his entire salary to charity or a jerk who cursed out fans and reporters, his .403 on-base percentage or 289 career homers will still stand, untainted, 100 years from now.

about the author

Jason Michael Barker amassed 3125 hot dogs eaten in his big-league career, surely a mark that will stand the test of time. Send giant Tums to jmb@strikethree.com.