[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

This makes it sound as if Tony Fernandez was the Yankees' only option at short. Tony Fernandez was a place-filler, as it made no sense for the Yankees to go out and get a better shortstop because they had Derek Jeter a year away from the majors.

To disregard Jeter because he had a long career, or because he played on the Yankees, to me, is ludicrous. He had 200 hits 8 times in his career, and 190+ hits three more. That's quite a feat regardless of how many at bats he had. His lifetime OBP was .379 - an impressive number that puts him ahead of Pete Rose, despite Rose having 800 more hits. While he never won an MVP, that's an arbitrary award that, to me, means nothing - he should have won it in 2006 and could have won it in 1998 and 2009. It's like saying Ted Williams wasn't any good because he never won a World Series.

Whoa, wait a minute. Nobody here is disregarding Jeter because he had a long career. You're reading into something, and putting words in my mouth that simply aren't there.

The year before Jeter was a full time player, it is a fact that Fernandez was the starting shortstop for the New York Yankees. They may have had other options, but Tony got the majority of playing time, and by a wife margin. The aim of my statement was that there was no incumbent superstar that was keeping Jeter from finding playing time. When he came up, he was able to win the starting job, and keep it for two decades. If anything, I think I mentioned that Jeter deserved credit for holding on to the position for two decades. Staying in the game for even ten years is an accomplishment, as younger and stronger guys are always coming along to try and take your job. But to last for twenty years, and to do it playing for the greatest baseball franchise in history...that's really a phenomenal accomplishment. I recognize Jeter's greatness. He's the kind of guy that you could put on any team, and he'd make any team a contender. I mean that. He isn't showy on the field. But he is a leader. His confidence instills confidence in his teammates. His work ethic is unrivaled. So when it seems I am being critical of Derek, I am because he is being compared to the immortals of the game, and when that happens, he should have to prove himself. There is a difference between being a great player, and one of the best to ever play the game.

Back to the longevity topic. Any great player that ends up in the top 10 of hits, or home runs, or RBIs all time had to have had a long career. That kinda goes without saying. But the second time he led the league in hits was more a product of the sheer number of at bats he had than it was his "great year". He wasn't hitting .350 or .360 to get those hits. He hit .316. Certainly a very good year, but nobody ever won an MVP Award on the strength of hitting .316 alone. And truth be told, .316 is a little bit of a let down for Jeter. I'm betting he would be the first to admit it.

And not winning an MVP Award is nothing like not winning a World Series. Winning a World Series is always a team accomplishment. While one player can play out of their mind, and seemingly carry their team on their back, it is still a team effort. An MVP Award is an individual recognition. It is awarded to the best player in the league. While there will often be some disagreements, a great player will typically win at least one MVP in their career. I don't think Jeter should have won the MVP in 2006. Since WAR has been brought up in this discussion (not by you), I should point out that Jeter's WAR in 2006 was only a 5.5. His WAR was only ninth best in the American League. While it's hardly an exact science, a 5 + WAR is considered All Star level, with an 8 + WAR being MVP level.

But it must be said that while I use it in discussions because it gets to the point a little more quickly, I am not the biggest fan of WAR. And while Jeter didn't have the highest WAR in the AL in 2006, or the second highest, or the third...or the eighth, I don't think anybody could say those other guys ahead of him were more impactful than Jeter. Justin Morneau had a sensational season, and he was a tough opponent to go up against for the award. But WAR would have me believe that he was a bigger part of Minnesota's success than Jeter was a part of New York's success.

I don't know if I buy that. While I don't think Jeter was the AL MVP that year, at least I don't at this moment without further reviewing the season, the standings, and how the nominees, so to speak, compared. But I sure as hell don't think he was the 8th or 9th most important player in the AL in 2006. So, is WAR wrong here? It seems so, doesn't it?

I tell you what, Al. Let me look more in-depth tonight at the 2006 season, and I will give you an honest, educated, well thought out response. It may very well be that I agree with you, and Jeter may have deserved the MVP that season. We shall see.

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

There's no question that Jeter belongs in the list of all-time greats, and all-time great shortstops as well.

I absolutely agree.

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

And there's also no question that, steroids or not, obnoxious personality or not, and choking in the postseason or not, Alex Rodriguez had better numbers than all of them but one. As such, if I were to put together such a list, it would probably look like this:

1. Honus Wagner
2. Alex Rodriguez
3. Pop Lloyd
4. Jeter/Yount (virtually interchangeable in my mind)
6. Ernie Banks
7. Arky Vaughn
8. Joe Cronin
9. Cal Ripken
10. 10 is tough, but I probably put George Davis there.

Just underneath I would have Bill Dahlen, Luke Appling, Barry Larkin and Alan Trammell.

Fun discussion, made me look up a whole bunch of shortstops while I should be working.

-Al

I like your shortstop list. I would move Ripken up a little, move Jeter down. I think in his prime Yount was a better player than Jeter, but that, of course, is my opinion, though the numbers bear that out. But Jeter also played the position at a high level for a really long time. When you consider that as recently as two years ago he was having an MVP caliber season at age 38, that says a lot about him.

I want to make it clear that I have nothing but the utmost respect for Derek Jeter. He's a true professional, and worthy of the Hallowed New York Yankees Captain designation.

When I enter into one of these discussions, I try to stick to facts as the basis of my debate as much as possible. Of course, all we're left with are a bunch of numbers, and the opinions of other baseball fans, with their own agendas, and favorite players, to fill in the holes for players that we never saw.

I've watched more baseball in my life than I should have. I've seen all the great players in the last 30 years. While an MVP isn't the only way of recognizing greatness, and keeping in mind that mistakes have been made with the award, I have over the years been able to look at a player, and gauge which ones of them have been what I would consider MVP worthy. And there have been some great players that were elected to the Hall of Fame that never won an MVP, and I don't know if I ever looked at them as being the best player in baseball, or at least their league. Paul Molitor is one player that I compare a lot to Jeter. The same kind of game. Molitor was a good shortstop and second baseman who could also play third, and even the outfield if need be. But he was not an exceptional glove man. His main path to greatness was his bat. Like Jeter, he had some power, but that manifested itself more in the form of extra base hits. Like Molitor, Jeter has been the spark plug that got his team going. A guy that could lead off, or bat second, and get on base with a really high batting average. A guy that could steal, and score on a single. A guy that had an incredible eye at the plate. Yet Molitor never won an MVP. Like Jeter, some of Molly's best years were later in his career. Molitor hit .341 with 225 hits and 113 RBI at age 39. Molitor had 2,000 hits after age 30 because he suffered so many injuries early in his career. Three of his four 200 hit seasons came after age 33. Like Jeter, Molitor had great speed. Jeter had 356 swipes, Molitor had 504.

One negative about Jeter has stuck out for me a little. And that's been his number of strikeouts. While he certainly wasn't striking out 200 times like Mark Reynolds, he did strike out over 100 times in a season 9 times. But when you consider Jeter only has 259 home runs, he shouldn't be 14th on the all-time strikeout list. Only two other guys on the all-time strikeout list ahead of Jeter have under 300 home runs: Bobby Abreu, who is right in front of Jeter, but has 29 more home runs in 2,500 fewer at bats, and Mike Cameron has 278 home runs but some 4,200 fewer at bats. All the other guys on this list have at least 400 home runs. That's a minor gripe, a nitpick, really, because again, Jeter is a career .311 hitter, and when you maintain that kind of average for two decades, into your forties, you're a special player.

Jeter will be a first ballot inductee, and I will cheer for him when he gets in.