Which Ted Williams Card Should I Get?

I realized recently, that I had a gaping hole in my Red Sox collection. I did not have a single vintage card of the greatest player ever to put on a Red Sox uniform. I didn’t have a single card from Ted Williams’s playing days. How could that be? Well, I know how it could be. His cards are friggin expensive. But, what with places like ebay around, I should have tried to get a low-grade version of one of his cards to meet my collecting needs. I’ve decided that I need to do this. But, that leaves one very important question. Which card should I go after?

I decided pretty quickly which ones not to go after. As much as I’d love to have a copy of his 1939-41 Playball cards, those are off the list. In order to fit into my collection budget, those cards would need to be torn in half, and glued together backwards. That’s not the type of card I’d like to add. Same goes for the 1954 Bowman. I don’t need a card that looks like a dog chewed it, just so I can afford it. That really leaves me just where I’d like to be left. Since I am (basically) a Topps collector, it would make sense to have an early Topps Williams. But which one?

A quick look through an old Beckett gives me six choices. I want to stick to base cards. No All-star cards or any other type of specialty card. That leaves me with two choices in 1954, and one each in 1955, 1956, 1957, and 1958. I don’t think I want the 1958. The idea of his last Topps card is appealing. But, Ted played a few more years after this, so it’s not like it would have his career stats on the back. Plus, I think Ted just looks old on this card. It’s sort of an “old Elvis” or “young Elvis” choice. I also don’t think I want the 1957. I’ve said before that I don’t really care for the design. Old cards can either look “classic” or “old.” I think this design just looks old. The same cannot be said for the 1956 version. I think this is a sharp card. It definitely is up for consideration. The 1955 is almost an exact match of the 1956 card. I think the ’56 has a few more bells and whistles in the design though. So, I’ll eliminate the 1955. In 1954, we were treated to two different Ted Williams cards. I have no idea why. I assume Topps was just excited to have signed such a mega-star to be on their cards. So, they put him as the first card, and the last card in the set. I don’t know if one version is considered his “regular” card more than the other. Card #250 uses the same headshot that is found on the 1955 and 1956 cards, along with a smaller action shot, both on a yellow background. It doesn’t really do much for me. Card #1, though, has a fuller body shot along with an action shot on an orange background. For some reason, it just appeals to me more.

So, I have a decision. The 1954 #1, or the 1956? Or, was I too harsh in eliminating one of the other choices?

What does everyone else think?

The Case Against Mariano Rivera

I keep telling Adam_The_Yankees_Fan that one day I’ll put into a post the reasons I discount Mariano Rivera as a Hall-of-Famer. Well, today is the lucky day! Since the Red Sox apparently actually made a run at Rivera this off-season, it’s also not a bad idea to point out the reasons it’s a good thing he returned to the Bronx. It’s actually a fairly easy case to make.

Simply put, for every game an American League manager selects the best player he has available at ten positions. He lists those players as his “starters.” Last year, how many times did Mariano Rivera make that list? Zero. The year before? Zero. The last ten years? Zero. In his career? Ten. That’s it. Ten. If he’s not the best on his team, how is he one of the best all-time? 

But, you’ll tell me. Rivera isn’t a starter. He’s a closer. That makes him just as important as a starter. Bunk. Closers are closers because they aren’t good enough to be starters. Don’t believe me? Look at Joba Chamberlain. He was a very good reliever. Probably could have been the closer of the future. But, the Yankees knew he would be more valuable as a starter, if he could pull it off. So, Rivera’s very own manager made the choice to make his best pitchers starters. Clearly, Rivera is not one of those pitchers. 

But, you’ll complain, closer has become a new position. Just because it is only used at the end of the game, you’ll say, doesn’t mean he wasn’t selected to be the best at this new position. I’d have to remind you, though, that there are still only the ten positions. All a closer really is is a specific substitution. Does Dave Roberts belong in the hall of fame because he was an elite pinch runner? What about Dave Stapleton for his top notch performance as a defensive replacement? Bobby Kielty was a pretty good pinch hitter. Are they now deserving to be an all-time great? Why is this substitution suddenly so important?

But, OK. Just to get on with the post, I’ll let you call closer a new position. Let’s see how Rivera compares to other pitchers. How many times has Rivera led the league in wins? Zero. How many times has Rivera led his league in ERA? Zero. He’s never pitched enough innings to qualify. How many times has Rivera led his league in Strikeouts? WHIP? Any stat of substance? Zero. But, you’re thinking, he’s a closer. He’s the best closer ever. They invented a stat just to let closers earn more money. What about saves? In Rivera’s seventeen seasons how many times has he led the league in saves? Three. Yup. Three. Derek Lowe led the league once. So did Tom Gordon. I’m just saying.

OK. So, maybe Rivera hasn’t had the best season ever. Maybe he’s like Dave Stewart. A top pitcher every year, but always seems to have another person have a better year. What about Rivera’s career numbers? If Rivera’s the best closer ever, he must have the most of that closer stat all-time. Nope. He’s not the career saves leader. Last season, he wasn’t even the active career leader. OK. What about career numbers in other categories? He’s amassed enough career innings that he might qualify for career rankings. And, you’d be right. In his career, Rivera is the active ERA leader, ranking 13^th all-time. He’s also the active career leader in Walks per nine innings, and WHIP. Isn’t that impressive? 

Well, not exactly. 

Remember, Rivera’s a closer. As such, there’s a cap as to how poorly he can perform. Let’s say a starting pitcher shows up to a game completely off. Maybe he’s distracted by a family matter, or injured, or drunk. He could go out and have a terrible start. Carl Pavano once gave up six runs to the Red Sox before recording an out. That will land a big hit to your numbers, and skew them a bit. Just from one bad outing. But, say Rivera comes to a game completely off. He enters the game in the bottom of the ninth with a one-run lead to “save” and gives up a hit to every batter he faces. He’ll probably only give up two runs. Five at the most if he gives up a grand slam. So, Rivera’s poor performances are capped by the fact that he only pitches the ends of games. He can’t give up seven runs in four innings. He’s never out there that long. That’s why relievers always have great numbers. They aren’t in games long enough to let bad days affect them. So, all their numbers are incomparable.

Ok. So, Rivera is hardly ever the best pitcher on his team. Never the best in the league in any one year. He’s near the top in some career stats, once you allow his stats to be skewed. Sound like a Hall-of-Famer yet? Not to me. Ahh. But, the postseason. That’s where Rivera makes his case. Right? The best closer in the history of the postseason, they say. OK. Let’s look at that closer stat again. In his career, Rivera has 42 saves, and he’s blown 4 (or maybe 5). That’s an amazing 91.3% success rate. That’s unheard of. Really? Let’s see. In the 2009 season, Jonathan Papelbon saved 38 of 41 chances for a 92.9% rate. In 2007, Pap converted 92.5% of his chances. In 2007, JJ Putz converted 95.2%. In 2007, Jason Isringhausen converted 94.1% of his chances. And, in 2008 Brad Lidge went 41/41. What’s the point, other than the fact that stats for blown saves are hard to find? Rivera’s postseason career save percentage is about what you’d expect a closer to achieve if you give him 46 chances. Whoop-de-doo. It’s just that other closers don’t get 46 postseason chances.

One last thing about Rivera. Although, this is less about Rivera and more about the perception of him. More about the way people talk and think about the Yankees, as opposed to other teams. I saw a blog once discussing Jeff Bagwell’s Hall of Fame chances. A comment was left by someone saying that he didn’t think Bagwell belonged in the hall because he was a teammate of Ken Caminiti. He wouldn’t consider any of the Astros of that era because he didn’t trust their numbers not to be artificially inflated. That’s fine. That’s his opinion. He’s not the only person I’ve heard express a similar opinion. How can so-and-so be clean if they were teammates with so-and-so? It’s interesting, then, that Rivera has shared a locker room with Andy Pettitte, Alex Rodriguez, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi, Roger Clemens, and Jose Canseco.

So, how can I possibly think Rivera belongs in the Hall of Fame?

Diary of a Red Sox Season By: Johnny Pesky with Maureen Mullen

This book is a glimpse into the personal diary of Red Sox great

Johnny Pesky. It follows the magical 2007 season from the signing of the new ace, Daisuke Matsuzaka, through the hoisting of the World Championship trophy. Along the way Pesky gives his unique insight into the goings on with the Red Sox. He relates the events of the day with events from his own career. He tells stories from the point of view of someone with more than 65 years in baseball. It is a combination of the old with the new. It brings the season to life in a whole new way.

The fact that this book involves the 2007 season raises a question. I have already talked about Faithful, which is a chronicle of the 2004 season. So, that’s two diaries of two World Championship seasons. Are there diaries of the 2006 season out there that the authors scrapped after the team didn’t make the playoffs? Or is it just luck that they both started this project at the start of championship runs. In this case, since it suggests it is from Pesky’s personal diary, it’s possible that he’s been doing this all his life. Maybe he just copied the pages from this season because someone felt it was the most interesting. It’s not a day-by-day account. It does have frequent entries, though. So, you can still follow the season along just by reading the entries. If I had a complaint, it is that the entries are too short. It does, though, give the feel that these really are journal entries. In comparison to Faithful, it feels less like these entries were written with a book in mind. It reads like someone just jotting down some thoughts he happened to have. It gives it it’s own special quality. There are multiple references to Pesky’s career, and his teammates. This, again, adds to the feeling that you’re just sitting and talking to Pesky. I can just imagine him seeing Ellsbury steal a base, and think about himself running the bases with Dom DiMaggio. There aren’t many people who would be able to add the type of insight that Pesky does. It’s a wonderful read.

Rating: 3 bases

I Scored! July 31, 1999

Here’s another game from the great 1999 season. Looking at the top of the card, I can see that this was a great game. A walk-off win against the Yankees. Is there a better type of game? I doubt it.

Starting the game, the Red Sox appeared to be in a hole. It doesn’t show, but the Yankees starter was Roger Clemens. The Red Sox countered with Brian Rose. Not exactly the match-up Red Sox fans would have hoped for. As it turned out, we were half right. A look at the pitchers box shows that Rose got lit up. Five runs and eleven hits in four innings are not usually going to get it done against Clemens. Luckily for the Sox, in this case, it was just barely enough. Clemens wasn’t much better, giving up four runs of his own over five innings. That’s what set up the late-inning heroics.

Is it any surprise that the first Red Sox run was a Trot Nixon homer? Was there a more notorious Clemens killer than Nixon? His homer in the third allowed the Sox to sneak back into the game after an early hole.

I’d be tempted to give Trot the “player of the game” honors, but I can’t. Look at the day Jose Offerman had. He reached base all five times he came to the plate. He scored three runs, and drew three walks. His leadoff triple in the bottom of the ninth was enormous. If you can get a runner at third in a situation like that, it changes the whole dynamic of the inning. It made it easy for Valentin to knock home the game winner.

The goat of the day? Other than Rose? Has to be Brian Daubach. Something about Brians that day. Dauber went hitless in four at-bats on the day, striking out twice. Not exactly what you need from the third hitter in your line-up. (Wow. Daubach was hitting third!) Thankfully the Sox were able to overcome that performance.

So, the Sox won in exciting fashion. They stole a game that they lost easily on paper. They allowed their fans to go home happy, which is always the goal.

And the scorecard shows how it happened.

Where, oh where, is Mike Cameron?

Yes, there’s only a month left! One single month is left to find all the items from the 2010 Section 36 Scavenger Hunt, including a Mike Cameron baseball card.

To find the list of items, click the link above, or the link on the sidebar. and, please note that I have added to the prize. the winner will also recieve 200 cards of their favorite MLB team! Yahoo! Remember, all the pictures are due before 12:36 on February 9, 2011. There’s still plenty of time, but it’s getting shorter by the day.

Keep looking, and keep taking pictures!