David Wells was throwing a simulated game at Tiger Stadium on a hot day in 1994, but it could have been any day in any year. Tigers manager Sparky Anderson sat in the dugout, legs crossed, smoking a pipe and watching Wells throw as he talked breathlessly to a writer. He was watching Wells with one eye; with the other, he looked at the writer, with complete attention to both. "He's throwing great,'' he said. "Great curveball. Oh, he's ready.''
That was Sparky Anderson. He was a great judge of talent, and a great communicator with people, all at the same time, all the time, every day of his life.No manager in baseball history was more true to his nickname than George "Sparky'' Anderson. No manager ever loved the game more than Sparky. No manager did the job with the same relentless energy and enthusiasm as Sparky. No manager smiled as often as Sparky. No manager was more of a gentleman than Sparky. No manager was nicer than Sparky. Late in his career, Anderson asked the media to start calling him by his given name, George, saying no man in his 50s should be called Sparky. But, it never took. He was and always will be Sparky.
Part of his charm was his penchant for hyperbole. He once called Kirk Gibson, "the next Mickey Mantle,'' and said second baseman Chris Pittaro was a "future Hall of Famer'' even though everyone knew he wasn't. A writer once asked him about the great Reds teams that he managed, and Sparky ran his hand through his silver hair, put his two hands out and began counting fingers: "Bench, greatest catcher ever. Rose, most hits ever. Morgan, maybe the greatest second baseman ever. Perez, Hall of Famer. Concepcion, should be a Hall of Famer; Foster, unbelievable power; Geronimo, best defensive center fielder in the game,'' then proceeded to name every player on those teams, with a superlative attached to each.
"What do you think?'' he said. "Give me a team that could beat those teams.''
Anderson fractured the English language, but in an engaging, homespun sort of way. Of his Stengelesque mangling of words, which was comical and harmless, Anderson once said, "Why do you have to know English? It's like 'two.' There are three twos! There's tee-oh. There's tee-doublya-oh, and there's tee-double-oh. Three twos! Now, if I put any one of them down in a letter I wrote, you would know which one it is I am talking about. It's like 'there' and 'their.' What is the difference as long as you know there's a there there?''
When Steve Rushin of Sports Illustrated went to do a story on Sparky, Anderson brought up the hilarious movie, "The Naked Gun," and in full uniform in his office, did his impersonation of Leslie Nielsen as the umpire, complete with the moonwalk and the yelling of Steeeeee-rike threeeee.
Anderson was a simple man who was, at times, embarrassed by the money and the lifestyle of a major leaguer, in part because he grew up in South Dakota in a house that didn't have an indoor toilet.
He once said, "I only had a high school education and, believe me, I had to cheat to get that.''
As the manager of the Tigers, he once said on game days, he would mostly stay in his hotel watching TV. "I loved 'Headline News,'" he said. "I could watch it all day. Sometimes, it was the same show, and I'd watch over and over.'' But his simple approach is what made him such a great manager. He didn't try to out-think the room, as some managers do. He knew, and said many times, that managers win only because of the players. At his Hall of Fame induction speech, he made that very clear.
And Anderson was a great manager. He won 2,194 games, sixth most ever. He won five pennants and three World Series. He and Tony La Russa are the only managers to win the World Series in each league. He is the all-time winningest manager for two franchises, the Reds and Tigers. He was inducted in the Hall of Fame in 2000, and nothing made him happier than going back to Cooperstown each year and shaking hands with the other Hall of Famers.
But, as a manager, he was tough when he needed to be. His other nickname was "Captain Hook" because of his willingness to go to his bullpen as often as he saw fit. Some of his pitchers weren't particularly happy about coming out of a game, but Anderson once said of removing a pitcher, "I'll tell you when you're tired.''
Anderson was 36 years old when he took over the Reds in 1970. That was a good team, a relatively young team, but the veterans tested their new manager immediately, and immediately Sparky made it clear: It didn't matter that he was a rookie manager, or only 36 years old, he was in charge, and the players would do as he said. Quickly, they did. The Reds won world championships in 1975 and 1976. Those teams are considered among the greatest teams in National League history.
In 1979, Anderson took over the Tigers. He was instrumental -- but took no credit -- for helping make Gibson, Alan Trammell, Lou Whitaker, Jack Morris and many others the players they became. In 1984, the Tigers started out 35-5, went wire-to-wire to take the division and won the World Series in five games over the Padres. Anderson wrote a diary of that special season, in which he typically lauded in the players in a book titled "Bless You Boys.''
No Sparky, bless you.
Tim Kurkjian is a senior writer for ESPN The Magazine. His book "Is This a Great Game, or What?" was published by St. Martin's Press and became available in paperback in May 2008. Click here to order a copy.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Friday, October 15, 2010
A century doesn't erase questions surrounding Nap Lajoie's 8-for-8 day
One hundred years ago this Saturday, Cleveland Naps star second baseman Napoleon Lajoie authored one of the greatest single-day performances in a Major League Baseball regular season.
Or did he?
Did Lajoie legitimately go 8-for-8 in a doubleheader against the St. Louis Browns at Sportsman's Park to run down Ty Cobb for a batting title and automobile? Or did the Browns effectively attempt to hand the keys to the car to him -- and start the engine -- with a "defense" that gave up a string of bunt singles?
And was the 8-for-8, regardless of circumstance, actually enough to trump Cobb?
The combination of two legends, high stakes and various shades of gray creates, at the very least, a conversation piece 100 years later.
Entering the 1910 season, Detroit car magnate Hugh Chalmers offered a "Chalmers 30" to who ever finished with the highest average in the game. Owning a car in those days was a big deal.
The Detroit Tigers' Cobb, three-time defending AL batting champion, was the natural favorite to win. Pittsburgh's Honus Wagner and Cleveland's Lajoie were among those expected to be in the mix as well.
Eventually, it became a race between Cobb and Lajoie, who were destined to be enshrined in Cooperstown, N.Y., in the late 1930s. By the final weekend, Cobb seemingly had the fourth straight title in his pocket, especially given his decision not to play the last two games. Cobb claimed that a recurring eye issue dogged him; his long line of haters wondered if he winked through the pain.
The lead of a sidebar in the Sunday, Oct. 9, edition of The Plain Dealer read: "Nap Lajoie's chances of owning the automobile presented to the leading batsman of the country are mightily slim -- in fact, they are practically obliterated unless the 'official' figures prove that 'unofficial' figures are radically incorrect. Cobb, according to The Plain Dealer's estimate, is batting close to .383, while Lajoie's present mark is slightly in excess of .378." (We know now that the lead was .383 to .376.)
The article went on to tweak Cobb for his plans to sit out the final two: "Cobb left the Detroit team Friday night, departing for Philadelphia where he will be a member of the All-Star team that will practice with the Athletics. The Georgian declared that he was not feeling very well. The fact that he was ahead in the auto race and feared that he might take a slump in the two games yet to be played may have had something to do with the sudden decision."
On Oct. 9, about 10,000 fans watched the awful Browns play the sub-.500 Naps in the doubleheader. Most were on hand to see if Lajoie -- aka "The Big French man" or "Larry" -- could mount a challenge to Cobb.
Lajoie tripled in his first at-bat of the opener, then, depending on one's definition of the term, bunted over and over. Lajoie went 4-for-4 in a loss and 4-for-4 with a sacrifice in a victory.
Lajoie kept dropping or pushing or dumping balls in front of Browns rookie infielder Red Corriden, who kept positioning himself ultra-deep, presumably on orders from his manager, Jack O'Connor.
A headline from the front page of The Plain Dealer's Oct. 10 edition stated, "Lajoie Wins Auto In Final Stretch," but acknowledged in a subhead that some thing had smelled at Sportsman's Park: "St. Louis Papers Say Browns Made It Easy for Nap Slugger."
After the writer of the "Special To The Plain Dealer" article described how excited fans were to see Lajoie pile up the hits, the case for the asterisk was summarized:
"But Larry's triumph is tinged with a charge of illegitimacy. St. Louis sporting writers assert that Lajoie was favored by opposing fielders. They say that the St. Louis pitchers pitched the ball where Larry could hit it to best advantage.
"They maintain that Corridon [sic], the Brown third baseman, did not field to the best of his ability when the Cleveland champion drove the ball into Corridon's territory. They insist that other fielders abetted him and aided Lajoie in his race for highest honors. Among others who wrote in similar strain, the baseball editor of the St. Louis Globe Democrat gave the fol lowing description of the St. Louis infield's work:
" 'Every time Lajoie stepped up to the plate, Corridon walked out to the very edge of the grass almost. The Browns' third sacker was virtually playing a short left field for Larry. This always resulted in the same old thing happening, that of Lajoie bunting down the third base line, Corridon rushing in to field the ball and then not throwing because a throw to first would have been useless.'"
The case for shenanigans was bolstered by various reports of pressure having been applied to the official scorer concerning Lajoie's second-game sacrifice. Whether the offender was St. Louis pitching coach Harry Howell or a Naps bat boy or someone else, the goal was to get the sacrifice changed to a hit, because Lajoie needed all the hits he could get. The scorer, possibly offered a bribe, refused to buckle. The play remained a sacrifice/error third base.
If the opposition had, in fact, laid down a Brown carpet for Lajoie, why had they done so? The answer apparently was as simple as ABC: Anybody But Cobb. The Browns were no different than other teams -- including, to a certain extent, the Tigers -- in their dislike for the irascible Cobb. If the down-to-earth Lajoie could be the foil, all the better.
The Plain Dealer's front page Oct. 10 listed how the Cleveland papers calculated the race. The Plain Dealer had Lajoie beating Cobb (.385 to .382), as did The Leader (382.4 to 381.7) and The Press (386.8 to 382.6). The News gave the nod to Cobb (384.15-384.09). Further indicative of the statistical uncertainty of the times was that each paper had a different hit total for Lajoie, ranging from 226 to 229.
A story on the cover of The Plain Dealer on Oct. 11 revealed that American League President Ban Johnson no longer would allow anymore individual contests/prizes as long as he was the league's boss. Johnson was furious about the allegations coming out of Sportsman's Park and promised to investigate.
Lajoie did not flinch. This, from the same story:
" 'It's too close for me to claim the victory and the auto,' said Lajoie at the Grand hotel in Cincinnati last evening. 'Take it from me, I am waiting until Ban Johnson and Robert McRoy tell me whether I have a better record than Cobb or Cobb has me beat. There is such a difference of opinion that I am not counting my eggs before they are hatched or taking a ride in that auto before Johnson and McRoy have poured in a little Cleveland gasoline.
" 'The talk about my not earning those eight hits in St. Louis, though, makes me tired. The first time up I smashed one to the outfield that went over Northen's head, yet some say he misjudged it. Then I hit one that Wallace was lucky to knock down. If that wasn't a hit, there never was one. Then we get down to those six bunts that I beat out. Suppose Corridon did play fairly well back. If he had played in for a bunt and I had swung hard on the ball, I suppose the youngster would have been roasted to a turn be cause he did not play deep."
McRoy was the American League secretary. Upon rechecking the season's stats, McRoy claimed that Cobb was not credited with a 2-for-3 performance from a late-September double header. Adding the 2-for-3 enabled Cobb to edge Lajoie. Johnson signed off on it.
Within a week of the season's conclusion, Johnson announced that Lajoie's 8-for-8 would stand even as O'Connor and Howell had been banished. Johnson also said that Lajoie should have gotten credit for a ninth hit in stead of the sacrifice. Still, according to Johnson and McRoy, Lajoie's perfect day was not enough to overtake Cobb. Johnson declared Cobb the winner of the title and the Chalmers 30. Cobb was credited with going 196-for-509 (.385069) to Lajoie's 227-for-591 (.384095).
Johnson declaring Cobb was entitled to the "Chalmers trophy" did not stop the president from asking Chalmers to provide Lajoie with an automobile, as well. Chalmers agreed; Lajoie, after initially balking, accepted the gift.
Debate continues to this day over who should be listed as the 1910 AL batting champion.
In the late 1970s, researchers Pete Palmer and Leonard Gettelson discovered that Cobb's 2-for-3 had been recorded and, therefore, was mistakenly duplicated. In April 1981, The Sporting News publicized the error but Commissioner Bowie Kuhn declined to alter the history books. In the eyes of baseball, Cobb would remain the 1910 AL batting champion -- part of nine consecutive titles from 1907 to 1915 -- and own 4,191 career hits.
Or did he?
Did Lajoie legitimately go 8-for-8 in a doubleheader against the St. Louis Browns at Sportsman's Park to run down Ty Cobb for a batting title and automobile? Or did the Browns effectively attempt to hand the keys to the car to him -- and start the engine -- with a "defense" that gave up a string of bunt singles?
And was the 8-for-8, regardless of circumstance, actually enough to trump Cobb?
The combination of two legends, high stakes and various shades of gray creates, at the very least, a conversation piece 100 years later.
Entering the 1910 season, Detroit car magnate Hugh Chalmers offered a "Chalmers 30" to who ever finished with the highest average in the game. Owning a car in those days was a big deal.
The Detroit Tigers' Cobb, three-time defending AL batting champion, was the natural favorite to win. Pittsburgh's Honus Wagner and Cleveland's Lajoie were among those expected to be in the mix as well.
Eventually, it became a race between Cobb and Lajoie, who were destined to be enshrined in Cooperstown, N.Y., in the late 1930s. By the final weekend, Cobb seemingly had the fourth straight title in his pocket, especially given his decision not to play the last two games. Cobb claimed that a recurring eye issue dogged him; his long line of haters wondered if he winked through the pain.
The lead of a sidebar in the Sunday, Oct. 9, edition of The Plain Dealer read: "Nap Lajoie's chances of owning the automobile presented to the leading batsman of the country are mightily slim -- in fact, they are practically obliterated unless the 'official' figures prove that 'unofficial' figures are radically incorrect. Cobb, according to The Plain Dealer's estimate, is batting close to .383, while Lajoie's present mark is slightly in excess of .378." (We know now that the lead was .383 to .376.)
The article went on to tweak Cobb for his plans to sit out the final two: "Cobb left the Detroit team Friday night, departing for Philadelphia where he will be a member of the All-Star team that will practice with the Athletics. The Georgian declared that he was not feeling very well. The fact that he was ahead in the auto race and feared that he might take a slump in the two games yet to be played may have had something to do with the sudden decision."
On Oct. 9, about 10,000 fans watched the awful Browns play the sub-.500 Naps in the doubleheader. Most were on hand to see if Lajoie -- aka "The Big French man" or "Larry" -- could mount a challenge to Cobb.
Lajoie tripled in his first at-bat of the opener, then, depending on one's definition of the term, bunted over and over. Lajoie went 4-for-4 in a loss and 4-for-4 with a sacrifice in a victory.
Lajoie kept dropping or pushing or dumping balls in front of Browns rookie infielder Red Corriden, who kept positioning himself ultra-deep, presumably on orders from his manager, Jack O'Connor.
A headline from the front page of The Plain Dealer's Oct. 10 edition stated, "Lajoie Wins Auto In Final Stretch," but acknowledged in a subhead that some thing had smelled at Sportsman's Park: "St. Louis Papers Say Browns Made It Easy for Nap Slugger."
After the writer of the "Special To The Plain Dealer" article described how excited fans were to see Lajoie pile up the hits, the case for the asterisk was summarized:
"But Larry's triumph is tinged with a charge of illegitimacy. St. Louis sporting writers assert that Lajoie was favored by opposing fielders. They say that the St. Louis pitchers pitched the ball where Larry could hit it to best advantage.
"They maintain that Corridon [sic], the Brown third baseman, did not field to the best of his ability when the Cleveland champion drove the ball into Corridon's territory. They insist that other fielders abetted him and aided Lajoie in his race for highest honors. Among others who wrote in similar strain, the baseball editor of the St. Louis Globe Democrat gave the fol lowing description of the St. Louis infield's work:
" 'Every time Lajoie stepped up to the plate, Corridon walked out to the very edge of the grass almost. The Browns' third sacker was virtually playing a short left field for Larry. This always resulted in the same old thing happening, that of Lajoie bunting down the third base line, Corridon rushing in to field the ball and then not throwing because a throw to first would have been useless.'"
The case for shenanigans was bolstered by various reports of pressure having been applied to the official scorer concerning Lajoie's second-game sacrifice. Whether the offender was St. Louis pitching coach Harry Howell or a Naps bat boy or someone else, the goal was to get the sacrifice changed to a hit, because Lajoie needed all the hits he could get. The scorer, possibly offered a bribe, refused to buckle. The play remained a sacrifice/error third base.
If the opposition had, in fact, laid down a Brown carpet for Lajoie, why had they done so? The answer apparently was as simple as ABC: Anybody But Cobb. The Browns were no different than other teams -- including, to a certain extent, the Tigers -- in their dislike for the irascible Cobb. If the down-to-earth Lajoie could be the foil, all the better.
The Plain Dealer's front page Oct. 10 listed how the Cleveland papers calculated the race. The Plain Dealer had Lajoie beating Cobb (.385 to .382), as did The Leader (382.4 to 381.7) and The Press (386.8 to 382.6). The News gave the nod to Cobb (384.15-384.09). Further indicative of the statistical uncertainty of the times was that each paper had a different hit total for Lajoie, ranging from 226 to 229.
A story on the cover of The Plain Dealer on Oct. 11 revealed that American League President Ban Johnson no longer would allow anymore individual contests/prizes as long as he was the league's boss. Johnson was furious about the allegations coming out of Sportsman's Park and promised to investigate.
Lajoie did not flinch. This, from the same story:
" 'It's too close for me to claim the victory and the auto,' said Lajoie at the Grand hotel in Cincinnati last evening. 'Take it from me, I am waiting until Ban Johnson and Robert McRoy tell me whether I have a better record than Cobb or Cobb has me beat. There is such a difference of opinion that I am not counting my eggs before they are hatched or taking a ride in that auto before Johnson and McRoy have poured in a little Cleveland gasoline.
" 'The talk about my not earning those eight hits in St. Louis, though, makes me tired. The first time up I smashed one to the outfield that went over Northen's head, yet some say he misjudged it. Then I hit one that Wallace was lucky to knock down. If that wasn't a hit, there never was one. Then we get down to those six bunts that I beat out. Suppose Corridon did play fairly well back. If he had played in for a bunt and I had swung hard on the ball, I suppose the youngster would have been roasted to a turn be cause he did not play deep."
McRoy was the American League secretary. Upon rechecking the season's stats, McRoy claimed that Cobb was not credited with a 2-for-3 performance from a late-September double header. Adding the 2-for-3 enabled Cobb to edge Lajoie. Johnson signed off on it.
Within a week of the season's conclusion, Johnson announced that Lajoie's 8-for-8 would stand even as O'Connor and Howell had been banished. Johnson also said that Lajoie should have gotten credit for a ninth hit in stead of the sacrifice. Still, according to Johnson and McRoy, Lajoie's perfect day was not enough to overtake Cobb. Johnson declared Cobb the winner of the title and the Chalmers 30. Cobb was credited with going 196-for-509 (.385069) to Lajoie's 227-for-591 (.384095).
Johnson declaring Cobb was entitled to the "Chalmers trophy" did not stop the president from asking Chalmers to provide Lajoie with an automobile, as well. Chalmers agreed; Lajoie, after initially balking, accepted the gift.
Debate continues to this day over who should be listed as the 1910 AL batting champion.
In the late 1970s, researchers Pete Palmer and Leonard Gettelson discovered that Cobb's 2-for-3 had been recorded and, therefore, was mistakenly duplicated. In April 1981, The Sporting News publicized the error but Commissioner Bowie Kuhn declined to alter the history books. In the eyes of baseball, Cobb would remain the 1910 AL batting champion -- part of nine consecutive titles from 1907 to 1915 -- and own 4,191 career hits.
Indians' great Al Rosen on anti-Semitism: 'I had broad shoulders': When They Played The Game
Indians' great Al Rosen on anti-Semitism: 'I had broad shoulders': When They Played The Game
Published: Monday, October 11, 2010, 10:00 PM Updated: Monday, October 11, 2010, 10:17 PM
Editor's note: This is one of an ongoing series of stories catching up with some of Cleveland's best-known sports figures.)
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- About a month into Jackie Robinson's rookie season in 1947, Major League Baseball's first black player beat out a bunt as the throw pulled the hulking first baseman off the bag.
111
Share 13 Comments They collided, dusted themselves off and played on.
Had the fielder been someone other than Hank Greenberg, there may have been a dust-up, not a dust-off. But that day, the 6-4 Greenberg encouraged Robinson to not let the bigots beat him down. Baseball's first Jewish superstar certainly understood what it was like to play under a cloud of hate.
The integration of baseball -- and Cleveland's role in it -- is a familiar slice of history. Two months after Robinson's historic debut, the Indians' Larry Doby became the American League's first black player. In 1975, the Indians' Frank Robinson turned in his lineup card as baseball's first black manager.
The average fan is less aware of the struggles of Jewish ballplayers, although that, too, carries a thick Cleveland vein. Greenberg later became the Indians' general manager under owner Bill Veeck.
And Al Rosen, a Jewish kid from Florida who idolized Greenberg and came within an eyelash of an American League Triple Crown, was one of the Indians' all-time greats.
Their history is told in "Jews and Baseball: An American Love Story," a documentary featured this month during the fourth annual Cleveland Jewish Film Festival.
The audience will learn about players who changed their last names to appear "less Jewish" to escape the insults. How Greenberg, Rosen and others fielded taunts from fans and the opposing dugout. And how New York Giants manager John McGraw sought Jewish players to boost attendance -- and it worked.
"It's not a story about baseball," said producer/director Peter Miller, an '84 Oberlin College grad who grew up a Red Sox fan in Boston. "It's a story about how a people found their way into the mainstream. And there's nothing more mainstream than baseball."
It was through baseball that Rosen assimilated as well.
Rosen recalled that his family didn't have enough money to send him to college. He eventually did earn a degree from the University of Miami, but it was on the sandlots of Miami where he countered the stereotype that Jews weren't good athletes.
"Sports were always my addiction," he said. "I fell in love with the game."
By the time he was through in 1956 at age 32 after 10 seasons, Rosen had driven in at least 100 runs five years in a row and was an American League All-Star four straight times.
His breakout year was 1953, when he stroked 43 homers, drove in 145 runs and missed winning the batting title -- and a Triple Crown -- by one percentage point. He was the league's unanimous MVP.
The following season, Indians manager Al Lopez asked Rosen to move from third to first base for a few weeks until he could trade for another first baseman. Rosen agreed, but broke his right index finger, an injury that ultimately ended his career.
While with the Indians, Rosen lived in Shaker Heights, first on Van Aken Boulevard and later near Canterbury Golf Club, and learned the investment business with the firm formerly known as Bache & Co.
Rosen, now 86, is married and has three sons (all Cleveland-born), a stepdaughter and stepson, and enjoys playing golf and bridge. In a recent phone interview from his home in Rancho Mirage, Calif., he reflected on his time in Cleveland, being Jewish in the big leagues and on his relationship with the late George Steinbrenner.
On being a Jewish ballplayer:
"I can only tell you this, there was anti-Semitism throughout my playing days, and it came from the stands, it came from the managers, the coaches and players. But as time went on, and particularly after the birth of Israel as a nation, I think that a new aura took over and people had more respect for Jewish athletes or Jews generally, because it showed once again that Jews were not to be taken lightly and that they could fight as well as be bookkeepers and accountants and that sort of thing. The kind of taunting and things like that that I heard personally from the benches softened a great deal after 1946."
On whom he turned to for support:
"I have broad shoulders. I took it upon myself. There were times I had to assert myself and other times I just let it roll, but I've always managed to handle it and I thought I handled it well throughout my career."
On how he was treated in Cleveland:
"Cleveland was great for me. I loved every minute of it. During my baseball career I was received warmly and with only laudatory manners. It was just great ... I was just very happy there. My family was happy. We still have relatives there, and my boys still keep in touch with some of their old friends."
On the '54 World Series, in which the Indians were swept by the New York Giants after setting a regular-season win record:
"The Giants had an awfully good ball club. We knew that because we played them in spring training every year. The catch by [Willie] Mays, and Dusty Rhodes getting hot at the right time, that sort of thing, who knows how things may have turned around if Mays hadn't made that catch? It may have been different. But as it was, it was a very disappointing ending to a great year."
On almost buying the Indians with Steinbrenner ... and how the Yankees fell into Steinbrenner's lap:
"We thought we had an agreement with [Indians owner] Vern Stouffer. We were all set to make the announcement from George's office on the 14th floor of the East Ohio Building. The lobby was filled with writers. ... And we thought we had a deal when Vernon called at 5 o'clock Cleveland time and said there'd be no deal. So George had an appetite for baseball now and said to Gabe Paul, who was the [Indians'] president and general manager and myself, 'If you ever hear of a club for sale, let me know.'"
Rosen was flying back to Cleveland from New York with Paul on a Friday after working on Wall Street for a few days, when Paul turned to him.
"Coming home we talked about it. Gabe said there was a club for sale, and I asked him who and he whispered in my ear: 'The Yankees.' I almost fell off my chair, but the Yankees at that time weren't doing well. ... George Steinbrenner, true to the spirit of George, walked in, put together a group and bought the club."
On what he hopes the audience takes away from the documentary:
"Pride, and some additional knowledge. A lot of people are going to see this movie and not recognize the exploits of people like Hank Greenberg and Sandy Koufax. It's going to be something new for them, and they're going to take it with great pride, because both of those men were so exemplary in everything they did."
Published: Monday, October 11, 2010, 10:00 PM Updated: Monday, October 11, 2010, 10:17 PM
Editor's note: This is one of an ongoing series of stories catching up with some of Cleveland's best-known sports figures.)
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- About a month into Jackie Robinson's rookie season in 1947, Major League Baseball's first black player beat out a bunt as the throw pulled the hulking first baseman off the bag.
111
Share 13 Comments They collided, dusted themselves off and played on.
Had the fielder been someone other than Hank Greenberg, there may have been a dust-up, not a dust-off. But that day, the 6-4 Greenberg encouraged Robinson to not let the bigots beat him down. Baseball's first Jewish superstar certainly understood what it was like to play under a cloud of hate.
The integration of baseball -- and Cleveland's role in it -- is a familiar slice of history. Two months after Robinson's historic debut, the Indians' Larry Doby became the American League's first black player. In 1975, the Indians' Frank Robinson turned in his lineup card as baseball's first black manager.
The average fan is less aware of the struggles of Jewish ballplayers, although that, too, carries a thick Cleveland vein. Greenberg later became the Indians' general manager under owner Bill Veeck.
And Al Rosen, a Jewish kid from Florida who idolized Greenberg and came within an eyelash of an American League Triple Crown, was one of the Indians' all-time greats.
Their history is told in "Jews and Baseball: An American Love Story," a documentary featured this month during the fourth annual Cleveland Jewish Film Festival.
The audience will learn about players who changed their last names to appear "less Jewish" to escape the insults. How Greenberg, Rosen and others fielded taunts from fans and the opposing dugout. And how New York Giants manager John McGraw sought Jewish players to boost attendance -- and it worked.
"It's not a story about baseball," said producer/director Peter Miller, an '84 Oberlin College grad who grew up a Red Sox fan in Boston. "It's a story about how a people found their way into the mainstream. And there's nothing more mainstream than baseball."
It was through baseball that Rosen assimilated as well.
Rosen recalled that his family didn't have enough money to send him to college. He eventually did earn a degree from the University of Miami, but it was on the sandlots of Miami where he countered the stereotype that Jews weren't good athletes.
"Sports were always my addiction," he said. "I fell in love with the game."
By the time he was through in 1956 at age 32 after 10 seasons, Rosen had driven in at least 100 runs five years in a row and was an American League All-Star four straight times.
His breakout year was 1953, when he stroked 43 homers, drove in 145 runs and missed winning the batting title -- and a Triple Crown -- by one percentage point. He was the league's unanimous MVP.
The following season, Indians manager Al Lopez asked Rosen to move from third to first base for a few weeks until he could trade for another first baseman. Rosen agreed, but broke his right index finger, an injury that ultimately ended his career.
While with the Indians, Rosen lived in Shaker Heights, first on Van Aken Boulevard and later near Canterbury Golf Club, and learned the investment business with the firm formerly known as Bache & Co.
Rosen, now 86, is married and has three sons (all Cleveland-born), a stepdaughter and stepson, and enjoys playing golf and bridge. In a recent phone interview from his home in Rancho Mirage, Calif., he reflected on his time in Cleveland, being Jewish in the big leagues and on his relationship with the late George Steinbrenner.
On being a Jewish ballplayer:
"I can only tell you this, there was anti-Semitism throughout my playing days, and it came from the stands, it came from the managers, the coaches and players. But as time went on, and particularly after the birth of Israel as a nation, I think that a new aura took over and people had more respect for Jewish athletes or Jews generally, because it showed once again that Jews were not to be taken lightly and that they could fight as well as be bookkeepers and accountants and that sort of thing. The kind of taunting and things like that that I heard personally from the benches softened a great deal after 1946."
On whom he turned to for support:
"I have broad shoulders. I took it upon myself. There were times I had to assert myself and other times I just let it roll, but I've always managed to handle it and I thought I handled it well throughout my career."
On how he was treated in Cleveland:
"Cleveland was great for me. I loved every minute of it. During my baseball career I was received warmly and with only laudatory manners. It was just great ... I was just very happy there. My family was happy. We still have relatives there, and my boys still keep in touch with some of their old friends."
On the '54 World Series, in which the Indians were swept by the New York Giants after setting a regular-season win record:
"The Giants had an awfully good ball club. We knew that because we played them in spring training every year. The catch by [Willie] Mays, and Dusty Rhodes getting hot at the right time, that sort of thing, who knows how things may have turned around if Mays hadn't made that catch? It may have been different. But as it was, it was a very disappointing ending to a great year."
On almost buying the Indians with Steinbrenner ... and how the Yankees fell into Steinbrenner's lap:
"We thought we had an agreement with [Indians owner] Vern Stouffer. We were all set to make the announcement from George's office on the 14th floor of the East Ohio Building. The lobby was filled with writers. ... And we thought we had a deal when Vernon called at 5 o'clock Cleveland time and said there'd be no deal. So George had an appetite for baseball now and said to Gabe Paul, who was the [Indians'] president and general manager and myself, 'If you ever hear of a club for sale, let me know.'"
Rosen was flying back to Cleveland from New York with Paul on a Friday after working on Wall Street for a few days, when Paul turned to him.
"Coming home we talked about it. Gabe said there was a club for sale, and I asked him who and he whispered in my ear: 'The Yankees.' I almost fell off my chair, but the Yankees at that time weren't doing well. ... George Steinbrenner, true to the spirit of George, walked in, put together a group and bought the club."
On what he hopes the audience takes away from the documentary:
"Pride, and some additional knowledge. A lot of people are going to see this movie and not recognize the exploits of people like Hank Greenberg and Sandy Koufax. It's going to be something new for them, and they're going to take it with great pride, because both of those men were so exemplary in everything they did."
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- In ranking the Indians' 40-man roster, I combined what the players did in the 2010 season and what they're expected to do next year.
I studied their stats and their positions in the Indians' pecking order. To try and gauge each players value, I went to baseball- reference.com and checked out the WAR (wins above replacement) statistical study on the Tribe. The stat, developed by Sean Smith of Baseballprojections.com, measures the number of wins a player adds to his team above what a replacement player would add.
OK, I threw a few darts as well. It's not like I watched Ezequiel Carrera for 162 games this year.
Grady Sizemore, Carlos Santana, Anthony Reyes and Hector Ambriz are not technically on the roster because they're on the 60-day disabled list, but they were rated as well. The roster must be adjusted and cut to 40 players by Nov. 19 in preparation for the Rule 5 draft.
1. OF Shin-Soo Choo: Top player on the roster, but he needs lots of help.
2. RHP Chris Perez: Went 2-0 with 16 saves in 17 chances and a 0.63 ERA after the All-Star break.
3. RHP Fausto Carmona: Showed he's capable of being a No.1 starter.
4. CF Grady Sizemore: Indians still consider him an elite player. For their sake, he better be.
5. C Carlos Santana: Manny Acta says Santana was born to hit in the middle of the lineup.
6. DH Travis Hafner: Hit .329 (51-for-155) after the break, but Tribe needs a 500 at-bat season from Pronk.
7. SS Asdrubal Cabrera: Production down because of broken left forearm. Hit .342 (27-for-79) with runners in scoring position.
8. RHP Rafael Perez: Looks like a set-up man again in winning six games.
9. RHP Carlos Carrasco: September is a fooler, but six of his seven starts were rated quality starts.
10. RHP Justin Masterson: He should open 2011 in the rotation.
11. Shelley Duncan: Not sure what this says about Indians talent, but Duncan did everything asked of him this season.
12. RHP Mitch Talbot: Good first half, poor second half. Needs good health and a full season in 2011.
13. SS/2B Jason Donald: Of all the Tribe's young position players who came to the big leagues last season, with the exception of Carlos Santana, he was the most consistent hitter.
14. OF Michael Brantley: He's getting better, but a .296 on base percentage is a concern.
15. OF Trevor Crowe: He plays at 100 mph. If he hit .280 to .290, he'd play a lot more.
16. C Lou Marson: Great arm, bad bat. He can't possibly be that bad a hitter.
17. 2B/3B Jayson Nix: Out of the ashes of 11 errors at the hot corner, did the Indians find a third baseman or a utility infielder?
18. RHP Jeanmar Gomez: He'll help the Indians rotation at some point next year.
19. LHP Tony Sipp: Opposition hit only .218 against Sipp even though he gave up 12 homers, 30 runs and 39 walks.
20. RHP Joe Smith: Tough on righties (.160), weak on lefties (.342). It may cost him.
21. RHP Jensen Lewis: Pitched for his job in September (0.84 ERA, 1 run, 11 strikeouts, 3 walks). Did he do enough?
22. 1B Matt LaPorta: Manny Acta gave him a mulligan for 2010. What do you give him?
23. RHP Josh Tomlin: Started 12 games, won half of them. Good chance to make opening day rotation.
24. OF Nick Weglarz: He has the power the Indians crave, but thumb surgery stopped him at Class AAA Columbus last year.
25. RHP Justin Germano: Manny Acta likes relievers that can go two or three innings. Germano does that well.
26. LHP Aaron Laffey: Not sure if Laffey is out as a starter or not. If he's out, he's a left-handed Germano.
27. RHP Frank Herrmann: He throws the ball over the plate, a good thing for a guy who throws between 95 mph to 97 mph.
28. RHP Hector Ambriz: Rule 5 right-hander who was hurt all year. He'll be down for at least a year following Tommy John surgery on his right elbow.
29. 1B/3B Andy Marte: Good guy, but if he's still here in 2011, it means the Indians have gone backward instead of forward.
30. C Luke Carlin: Did well in a short look.
31. INF Drew Sutton: Ditto for Sutton.
32. C Chris Gimenez: Improved as a catcher, but with Carlos Santana and Lou Marson in front of him, he has nowhere to go but down.
33. RHP Vinnie Pestano: If he proves he can get lefties and righties out, he could steal a spot in the pen.
34. INF Luis Valbuena: He got lost in spring training and never found his way home.
35. OF Jordan Brown: Finally got his big-league shot, but he still needs a change of scenery.
36. LHP David Huff: Went from 11 wins in 2009 to 11 losses in 2010, but don't count him out.
37. RHP Jess Todd: There are a lot of bullpen arms in front of him.
38. OF Ezequiel Carrera: Acquired from Seattle for Russell Branyan. He was a phone call away when Michael Brantley twisted his ankle in late September.
39. LHP Kelvin De La Cruz: Put in a healthy year at Class A and AA after missing most of the 2009 season with elbow problems.
40.1B Wes Hodges: Hard to figure out what Indians think of Hodges after they designated him and then re-signed him.
41. OF Chad Huffman: Claimed on waivers from the Yankees on Sept. 17.
42. SS Carlos Rivero: Homers went from seven to six, errors from 14 to 28 in second year at Class AA Akron.
43. RHP Anthony Reyes: Still trying to make it back from Tommy John surgery.
44. RHP Hector Rondon: He's recovering from Tommy John surgery on his right elbow.
I studied their stats and their positions in the Indians' pecking order. To try and gauge each players value, I went to baseball- reference.com and checked out the WAR (wins above replacement) statistical study on the Tribe. The stat, developed by Sean Smith of Baseballprojections.com, measures the number of wins a player adds to his team above what a replacement player would add.
OK, I threw a few darts as well. It's not like I watched Ezequiel Carrera for 162 games this year.
Grady Sizemore, Carlos Santana, Anthony Reyes and Hector Ambriz are not technically on the roster because they're on the 60-day disabled list, but they were rated as well. The roster must be adjusted and cut to 40 players by Nov. 19 in preparation for the Rule 5 draft.
1. OF Shin-Soo Choo: Top player on the roster, but he needs lots of help.
2. RHP Chris Perez: Went 2-0 with 16 saves in 17 chances and a 0.63 ERA after the All-Star break.
3. RHP Fausto Carmona: Showed he's capable of being a No.1 starter.
4. CF Grady Sizemore: Indians still consider him an elite player. For their sake, he better be.
5. C Carlos Santana: Manny Acta says Santana was born to hit in the middle of the lineup.
6. DH Travis Hafner: Hit .329 (51-for-155) after the break, but Tribe needs a 500 at-bat season from Pronk.
7. SS Asdrubal Cabrera: Production down because of broken left forearm. Hit .342 (27-for-79) with runners in scoring position.
8. RHP Rafael Perez: Looks like a set-up man again in winning six games.
9. RHP Carlos Carrasco: September is a fooler, but six of his seven starts were rated quality starts.
10. RHP Justin Masterson: He should open 2011 in the rotation.
11. Shelley Duncan: Not sure what this says about Indians talent, but Duncan did everything asked of him this season.
12. RHP Mitch Talbot: Good first half, poor second half. Needs good health and a full season in 2011.
13. SS/2B Jason Donald: Of all the Tribe's young position players who came to the big leagues last season, with the exception of Carlos Santana, he was the most consistent hitter.
14. OF Michael Brantley: He's getting better, but a .296 on base percentage is a concern.
15. OF Trevor Crowe: He plays at 100 mph. If he hit .280 to .290, he'd play a lot more.
16. C Lou Marson: Great arm, bad bat. He can't possibly be that bad a hitter.
17. 2B/3B Jayson Nix: Out of the ashes of 11 errors at the hot corner, did the Indians find a third baseman or a utility infielder?
18. RHP Jeanmar Gomez: He'll help the Indians rotation at some point next year.
19. LHP Tony Sipp: Opposition hit only .218 against Sipp even though he gave up 12 homers, 30 runs and 39 walks.
20. RHP Joe Smith: Tough on righties (.160), weak on lefties (.342). It may cost him.
21. RHP Jensen Lewis: Pitched for his job in September (0.84 ERA, 1 run, 11 strikeouts, 3 walks). Did he do enough?
22. 1B Matt LaPorta: Manny Acta gave him a mulligan for 2010. What do you give him?
23. RHP Josh Tomlin: Started 12 games, won half of them. Good chance to make opening day rotation.
24. OF Nick Weglarz: He has the power the Indians crave, but thumb surgery stopped him at Class AAA Columbus last year.
25. RHP Justin Germano: Manny Acta likes relievers that can go two or three innings. Germano does that well.
26. LHP Aaron Laffey: Not sure if Laffey is out as a starter or not. If he's out, he's a left-handed Germano.
27. RHP Frank Herrmann: He throws the ball over the plate, a good thing for a guy who throws between 95 mph to 97 mph.
28. RHP Hector Ambriz: Rule 5 right-hander who was hurt all year. He'll be down for at least a year following Tommy John surgery on his right elbow.
29. 1B/3B Andy Marte: Good guy, but if he's still here in 2011, it means the Indians have gone backward instead of forward.
30. C Luke Carlin: Did well in a short look.
31. INF Drew Sutton: Ditto for Sutton.
32. C Chris Gimenez: Improved as a catcher, but with Carlos Santana and Lou Marson in front of him, he has nowhere to go but down.
33. RHP Vinnie Pestano: If he proves he can get lefties and righties out, he could steal a spot in the pen.
34. INF Luis Valbuena: He got lost in spring training and never found his way home.
35. OF Jordan Brown: Finally got his big-league shot, but he still needs a change of scenery.
36. LHP David Huff: Went from 11 wins in 2009 to 11 losses in 2010, but don't count him out.
37. RHP Jess Todd: There are a lot of bullpen arms in front of him.
38. OF Ezequiel Carrera: Acquired from Seattle for Russell Branyan. He was a phone call away when Michael Brantley twisted his ankle in late September.
39. LHP Kelvin De La Cruz: Put in a healthy year at Class A and AA after missing most of the 2009 season with elbow problems.
40.1B Wes Hodges: Hard to figure out what Indians think of Hodges after they designated him and then re-signed him.
41. OF Chad Huffman: Claimed on waivers from the Yankees on Sept. 17.
42. SS Carlos Rivero: Homers went from seven to six, errors from 14 to 28 in second year at Class AA Akron.
43. RHP Anthony Reyes: Still trying to make it back from Tommy John surgery.
44. RHP Hector Rondon: He's recovering from Tommy John surgery on his right elbow.
Friday, August 6, 2010
CLEVELAND, Ohio — Of all the electrifying moments on the Kenny Lofton highlight reel, none captures the essence of the player any better than his 180-foot dash to glory on Oct. 17, 1995.
It happened in the eighth inning of Game 6 of the American League Championship Series between the Indians and Seattle Mariners at the Kingdome. With the Indians leading, 1-0, and Ruben Amaro on third, Lofton beat out a bunt against Randy Johnson. Lofton stole second. Moments later, Big Unit's pitch got away from catcher Dan Wilson and rolled toward the Tribe dugout on the first-base side.
Amaro, as expected, scored easily on the passed ball. The shocker -- to everyone except the man himself -- was that Lofton hit third base and kept on running. In a blur, Lofton slid in safely, catching Wilson and Johnson sulking/napping. The Indians went on to win the game, 4-0, and the series, 4-2, to advance to their first World Series in 41 years.
"My instincts made that play happen," Lofton said by phone earlier this week. "Once I took off, I knew I had the speed to take me where I needed to go."
Lofton will be inducted into the Indians Hall of Fame on Saturday in part because of his ability to impact games with such speed and daring. He also knew how to swing the bat and catch the ball. Everything was on display against the Baltimore Orioles on Sept. 3, 2000, when Lofton went 4-for-7 with a homer, walk, four runs and five steals in a 12-11 victory in 13 innings at Jacobs Field.
Lofton played for 11 teams in a major-league career that spanned from 1991 through 2007, but he always will be known as an Indian. He had three stints with Cleveland (1992-1996; 1998-2001; 2007) and remains the franchise leader with 452 steals and ranks third with 975 runs. Five of his six All-Star selections and all four of his Gold Gloves came with the Indians.
Lofton retired as a .299 hitter in 2,103 regular-season games overall. He had 2,428 hits, 1,528 runs and 622 steals. He played in 95 postseason games, including 50 with the Tribe, and scored 65 runs.
With the Indians Hall of Fame induction around the corner, Lofton reflected on his career:
Plain Dealer: When you think of yourself as a Cleveland Indian, what is the first thing that comes to mind?
Kenny Lofton: Stolen bases. In Cleveland, I think people look at me as the guy who stole bases.
PD: Highlight of your career?
KL: Having been able to play on a lot of teams that made the playoffs. Having had a lot of opportunities to win a ring.
PD: You played in 20 postseason series in 11 years. Does one postseason stand out above the rest?
KL: The first one, with the Indians in 1995. That will stick out forever, because we were able to go to the World Series in Cleveland for the first time since 1954.
PD: Should the Indians have won the 1995 World Series against the Braves, or did they simply get beat by a better, more seasoned team?
KL: Honestly, I believe we played well enough to win. We put our hearts out there. But to be honest, with the teams and the situations what they were, I don't think we got a fair shot.
PD: Explain.
KL: In my opinion, we didn't get a fair shot from the umpires. The [Tom] Glavine and [Greg] Maddux strike zones were not right. They were getting the calls off the plate and our pitchers weren't. I'm not the only one who says that. You had to deal with it, though. You had no other choice.
PD: Your favorite Indians club?
KL: The '95 team, because of the personalities we had. We did a lot of freelancing. It was awesome.
PD: And you set the tone.
KL: The guys called me the igniter. Once I ignited the flames, everything took off. It was an exciting time.
PD: Which postseason ending in your career stings the most?
KL: The toughest to take is '95 because, as I said, I don't think the umpires were fair. Second is the Giants in 2002 because we were up, 3-2, in the World Series and had a five-run lead in Game 6 but lost to the Angels. We just lost.
PD: You also were on the Cubs when they fell to the Marlins in the infamous 2003 NLCS, during which fan Steve Bartman reached out and seemingly denied Moises Alou a catch late in Game 6.
KL: I've never viewed the Bartman situation as more than what it was -- a fan reached out and didn't get the ball. Those things happen. But the play soon after that, when Alex Gonzalez booted the double-play ball . . . that was the deciding factor. Everyone put it on Bartman, but I saw the double-play ball that didn't happen. Regardless, we still had Game 7. We didn't get it done.
PD: Do you believe in the Curse of Colavito (Indians) or Curse of the Billy Goat (Cubs)?
KL: No. If you put the right team on the field and play the way you should play, there's no curse. Look at Boston in 2004. Everybody said there was a curse, but they had the right team to win it all that year -- and they did. Bottom line: It's what you do on the field.
PD: You were a teammate of Barry Bonds in 2002. How do you view him? Is he a Hall of Famer?
KL: (Long pause) I'll say it this way: With Barry Bonds, for me, you have to be innocent until proven guilty in the Hall of Fame situation. So that's a tough one, because you have to show me some type of proof. I know there are allegations, but there's no proof. So, if the allegations had not come up -- for sure, he's a Hall of Famer. But because the allegations came up, and there's a lot of doubt, it makes it very tricky to say he's a Hall of Famer.
PD: Do you believe Barry Bonds used PEDs [performance-enhancing drugs]?
KL: That's not for me to say. I won't say I believe anything about that, because it's my own personal answer or thought in my head.
PD: Is Alex Rodriguez a Hall of Famer?
KL: I would not vote for him for the Hall of Fame. He cheated the game, he admitted it, and the game acts like nothing happened. It's as if he got a slap on the wrist. There's something wrong with that.
PD: How much baseball do you watch these days?
KL: Not a lot, but more this year than at any point since I retired. I love the game, but I'll be honest with you: I'm upset with the game. I'm upset because I was put out of the game because I wasn't cheating the game, if that makes sense.
PD: It does.
KL: I could have cheated and put up better numbers. Then I could have cheated to stay in the game. But I didn't. I was clean and played by the rules. And I know there are people who cheated, cheated to extend their careers, and it's not right.
PD: So it's safe to say that you, as a clean player, are upset you were forced to compete periodically on an uneven playing field?
KL: Do I have a problem with it? Without a doubt. I have a huge problem with it. It sticks with me to this day, knowing that people were cheating and knowing I was playing against them, with them, whatever. What really ticks me off is that baseball could have done something about it but didn't.
PD: Please elaborate.
KL: It comes back to the emphasis on home runs, when they came out with the commercial campaign of 'Chicks Dig The Long Ball.' Baseball wanted guys to hit homers because it was good for business. Why do you think certain guys started hitting so many home runs?
PD: As a result, your contributions get overshadowed.
KL: When everybody started talking about the long ball, they forgot about the speed, which was my game. It took my impact from close to the top to middle/bottom. Once they emphasized the long ball, I was looked at as a totally different player.
PD: Word association -- '95 Indians?
KL: Outstanding.
PD: Albert Belle?
KL: Intense.
PD: Carlos Baerga?
KL: Had fun playing the game.
PD: Sandy Alomar Jr.?
KL: Very focused.
PD: Mike Hargrove?
KL: (Chuckle) He had a tough job.
PD: Manny Ramirez?
KL: Great hitter.
PD: Jim Thome?
KL: Very strong.
PD: Joel Skinner?
KL: Very technical.
PD: I thought you would say of Skins: 'Never should have held me at third in Game 7 of 2007 ALCS.'
KL: (Chuckle) I can't hold that against him. He was the one who held me up, but I can't blame him, per se. He needed to make a decision; he just made the wrong decision. It's like when a pitcher should have thrown the fastball but throws a curve and the guy hits a homer. It's not about blame.
PD: How did Pat Listach beat you out for AL Rookie of the Year in 1992?
KL: To this day, I don't know how. I'm still trying to figure that out. But it worked out in the end for me. No disrespect to Pat Listach, but if you would have told me that I'd get Rookie of the Year and have my career end like his, I would have said, 'I don't want Rookie of the Year. You can have it.'
PD: On Aug. 4, 1996, you made what many consider the greatest catch in Jacobs/Progressive Field history, scaling an 8-foot wall in center to bring back a potential two-run homer by B.J. Surhoff of the Orioles. Did you amaze even yourself on that one?
KL: I don't know how I did it, but it happened. I don't think people understand the difficulty involved. It was one of the best catches I made and one of the best I've seen on film.
PD: Any regrets about your career?
KL: Not winning the World Series. I wanted it badly, but it didn't happen. My career still was a lot of fun.
PD: Best player you ever played with?
KL: That's where it gets tough. Performance enhancing is what makes it tough for me to make that call.
PD: What made you the player you were?
KL: Focus, determination, love of the game.
PD: You seemed to play with a chip on your shoulder, as if you had something to prove. Is that accurate?
KL: I'm not sure I wanted to prove the doubters wrong as much as I wanted to let people know that, 'Hey, I'm an athlete, I can play this game.'
PD: How do you want to be remembered as a player?
KL: As a guy who played the game right, played it fair. As a guy who loved the game and respected it.
It happened in the eighth inning of Game 6 of the American League Championship Series between the Indians and Seattle Mariners at the Kingdome. With the Indians leading, 1-0, and Ruben Amaro on third, Lofton beat out a bunt against Randy Johnson. Lofton stole second. Moments later, Big Unit's pitch got away from catcher Dan Wilson and rolled toward the Tribe dugout on the first-base side.
Amaro, as expected, scored easily on the passed ball. The shocker -- to everyone except the man himself -- was that Lofton hit third base and kept on running. In a blur, Lofton slid in safely, catching Wilson and Johnson sulking/napping. The Indians went on to win the game, 4-0, and the series, 4-2, to advance to their first World Series in 41 years.
"My instincts made that play happen," Lofton said by phone earlier this week. "Once I took off, I knew I had the speed to take me where I needed to go."
Lofton will be inducted into the Indians Hall of Fame on Saturday in part because of his ability to impact games with such speed and daring. He also knew how to swing the bat and catch the ball. Everything was on display against the Baltimore Orioles on Sept. 3, 2000, when Lofton went 4-for-7 with a homer, walk, four runs and five steals in a 12-11 victory in 13 innings at Jacobs Field.
Lofton played for 11 teams in a major-league career that spanned from 1991 through 2007, but he always will be known as an Indian. He had three stints with Cleveland (1992-1996; 1998-2001; 2007) and remains the franchise leader with 452 steals and ranks third with 975 runs. Five of his six All-Star selections and all four of his Gold Gloves came with the Indians.
Lofton retired as a .299 hitter in 2,103 regular-season games overall. He had 2,428 hits, 1,528 runs and 622 steals. He played in 95 postseason games, including 50 with the Tribe, and scored 65 runs.
With the Indians Hall of Fame induction around the corner, Lofton reflected on his career:
Plain Dealer: When you think of yourself as a Cleveland Indian, what is the first thing that comes to mind?
Kenny Lofton: Stolen bases. In Cleveland, I think people look at me as the guy who stole bases.
PD: Highlight of your career?
KL: Having been able to play on a lot of teams that made the playoffs. Having had a lot of opportunities to win a ring.
PD: You played in 20 postseason series in 11 years. Does one postseason stand out above the rest?
KL: The first one, with the Indians in 1995. That will stick out forever, because we were able to go to the World Series in Cleveland for the first time since 1954.
PD: Should the Indians have won the 1995 World Series against the Braves, or did they simply get beat by a better, more seasoned team?
KL: Honestly, I believe we played well enough to win. We put our hearts out there. But to be honest, with the teams and the situations what they were, I don't think we got a fair shot.
PD: Explain.
KL: In my opinion, we didn't get a fair shot from the umpires. The [Tom] Glavine and [Greg] Maddux strike zones were not right. They were getting the calls off the plate and our pitchers weren't. I'm not the only one who says that. You had to deal with it, though. You had no other choice.
PD: Your favorite Indians club?
KL: The '95 team, because of the personalities we had. We did a lot of freelancing. It was awesome.
PD: And you set the tone.
KL: The guys called me the igniter. Once I ignited the flames, everything took off. It was an exciting time.
PD: Which postseason ending in your career stings the most?
KL: The toughest to take is '95 because, as I said, I don't think the umpires were fair. Second is the Giants in 2002 because we were up, 3-2, in the World Series and had a five-run lead in Game 6 but lost to the Angels. We just lost.
PD: You also were on the Cubs when they fell to the Marlins in the infamous 2003 NLCS, during which fan Steve Bartman reached out and seemingly denied Moises Alou a catch late in Game 6.
KL: I've never viewed the Bartman situation as more than what it was -- a fan reached out and didn't get the ball. Those things happen. But the play soon after that, when Alex Gonzalez booted the double-play ball . . . that was the deciding factor. Everyone put it on Bartman, but I saw the double-play ball that didn't happen. Regardless, we still had Game 7. We didn't get it done.
PD: Do you believe in the Curse of Colavito (Indians) or Curse of the Billy Goat (Cubs)?
KL: No. If you put the right team on the field and play the way you should play, there's no curse. Look at Boston in 2004. Everybody said there was a curse, but they had the right team to win it all that year -- and they did. Bottom line: It's what you do on the field.
PD: You were a teammate of Barry Bonds in 2002. How do you view him? Is he a Hall of Famer?
KL: (Long pause) I'll say it this way: With Barry Bonds, for me, you have to be innocent until proven guilty in the Hall of Fame situation. So that's a tough one, because you have to show me some type of proof. I know there are allegations, but there's no proof. So, if the allegations had not come up -- for sure, he's a Hall of Famer. But because the allegations came up, and there's a lot of doubt, it makes it very tricky to say he's a Hall of Famer.
PD: Do you believe Barry Bonds used PEDs [performance-enhancing drugs]?
KL: That's not for me to say. I won't say I believe anything about that, because it's my own personal answer or thought in my head.
PD: Is Alex Rodriguez a Hall of Famer?
KL: I would not vote for him for the Hall of Fame. He cheated the game, he admitted it, and the game acts like nothing happened. It's as if he got a slap on the wrist. There's something wrong with that.
PD: How much baseball do you watch these days?
KL: Not a lot, but more this year than at any point since I retired. I love the game, but I'll be honest with you: I'm upset with the game. I'm upset because I was put out of the game because I wasn't cheating the game, if that makes sense.
PD: It does.
KL: I could have cheated and put up better numbers. Then I could have cheated to stay in the game. But I didn't. I was clean and played by the rules. And I know there are people who cheated, cheated to extend their careers, and it's not right.
PD: So it's safe to say that you, as a clean player, are upset you were forced to compete periodically on an uneven playing field?
KL: Do I have a problem with it? Without a doubt. I have a huge problem with it. It sticks with me to this day, knowing that people were cheating and knowing I was playing against them, with them, whatever. What really ticks me off is that baseball could have done something about it but didn't.
PD: Please elaborate.
KL: It comes back to the emphasis on home runs, when they came out with the commercial campaign of 'Chicks Dig The Long Ball.' Baseball wanted guys to hit homers because it was good for business. Why do you think certain guys started hitting so many home runs?
PD: As a result, your contributions get overshadowed.
KL: When everybody started talking about the long ball, they forgot about the speed, which was my game. It took my impact from close to the top to middle/bottom. Once they emphasized the long ball, I was looked at as a totally different player.
PD: Word association -- '95 Indians?
KL: Outstanding.
PD: Albert Belle?
KL: Intense.
PD: Carlos Baerga?
KL: Had fun playing the game.
PD: Sandy Alomar Jr.?
KL: Very focused.
PD: Mike Hargrove?
KL: (Chuckle) He had a tough job.
PD: Manny Ramirez?
KL: Great hitter.
PD: Jim Thome?
KL: Very strong.
PD: Joel Skinner?
KL: Very technical.
PD: I thought you would say of Skins: 'Never should have held me at third in Game 7 of 2007 ALCS.'
KL: (Chuckle) I can't hold that against him. He was the one who held me up, but I can't blame him, per se. He needed to make a decision; he just made the wrong decision. It's like when a pitcher should have thrown the fastball but throws a curve and the guy hits a homer. It's not about blame.
PD: How did Pat Listach beat you out for AL Rookie of the Year in 1992?
KL: To this day, I don't know how. I'm still trying to figure that out. But it worked out in the end for me. No disrespect to Pat Listach, but if you would have told me that I'd get Rookie of the Year and have my career end like his, I would have said, 'I don't want Rookie of the Year. You can have it.'
PD: On Aug. 4, 1996, you made what many consider the greatest catch in Jacobs/Progressive Field history, scaling an 8-foot wall in center to bring back a potential two-run homer by B.J. Surhoff of the Orioles. Did you amaze even yourself on that one?
KL: I don't know how I did it, but it happened. I don't think people understand the difficulty involved. It was one of the best catches I made and one of the best I've seen on film.
PD: Any regrets about your career?
KL: Not winning the World Series. I wanted it badly, but it didn't happen. My career still was a lot of fun.
PD: Best player you ever played with?
KL: That's where it gets tough. Performance enhancing is what makes it tough for me to make that call.
PD: What made you the player you were?
KL: Focus, determination, love of the game.
PD: You seemed to play with a chip on your shoulder, as if you had something to prove. Is that accurate?
KL: I'm not sure I wanted to prove the doubters wrong as much as I wanted to let people know that, 'Hey, I'm an athlete, I can play this game.'
PD: How do you want to be remembered as a player?
KL: As a guy who played the game right, played it fair. As a guy who loved the game and respected it.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Andre Dawson - Hall of Fame
"Andre Dawson, the Hawk. No player in baseball history worked harder, suffered more or did it better than Andre Dawson. He's the best I've ever seen. The Hawk. I watched him win MVP for a last-place team in 1987, and it was the most unbelievable thing I've ever seen in baseball. He did it the right way, the natural way, and he did it in the field and on the bases and in every way, and I hope he will stand up here someday."
--Ryne Sandberg during his Baseball Hall of Fame induction speech in July 2005
COOPERSTOWN, N.Y. -- Hall of Fame weekend is always an emotional time for inductees. Just imagine the pressure of standing on a stage in a coat and tie in 90-degree heat, trying to summarize a life and thank all the relevant contributors in 15 minutes or less. It can't be easy with the knowledge that 50-something baseball immortals are squirming in their seats and glancing at their watches directly behind you.
The day is equally poignant for former teammates, who sit among the crowd and reminisce along with the inductee. They're the ones who helped support him through slumps and streaks, on bus rides and plane trips, from rookie year to retirement. They can best relate to the sacrifices a Hall of Fame career entails.
Five years ago, Ryne Sandberg received his Hall plaque and used the forum to deliver a celebrity endorsement. Andre Dawson had barely cracked 50 percent in his fourth year on the ballot, and Sandberg feared his former teammate might become an afterthought in an age of cartoonish, steroid-fueled power numbers. So he took a moment in the middle of his speech to pay tribute to the Hawk, a man who embodied everything he held dear about the game.
"When I talked about respect for the game of baseball, he was the first teammate I thought of who fit that mold," Sandberg said. "I had a fear he'd lose out of going to the Hall of Fame based on the state of the game at that time in the steroid era. I felt like his numbers were being overlooked, and I wanted to put in a good word for him."
This Sunday in Cooperstown, the two ex-Cubs will swap roles. Dawson is entering the Hall along with former big league manager Whitey Herzog and umpire Doug Harvey, and Sandberg will be a spectator. He will not be thinking about the heat or fretting about whether he'll be able to catch a late Sunday flight out of Albany.
"I wouldn't miss it for the world," said Sandberg, manager of the Cubs' Triple-A Iowa farm club. "It'll mean a lot -- the fact that we were teammates and I added him into my speech promoting him for the Hall of Fame. It feels gratifying to be right on that call. Andre is going in, and baseball got it right."
"When I talked about respect for the game of baseball, he was the first teammate I thought of who fit that mold," Sandberg said. "I had a fear he'd lose out of going to the Hall of Fame based on the state of the game at that time in the steroid era. I felt like his numbers were being overlooked, and I wanted to put in a good word for him."
This Sunday in Cooperstown, the two ex-Cubs will swap roles. Dawson is entering the Hall along with former big league manager Whitey Herzog and umpire Doug Harvey, and Sandberg will be a spectator. He will not be thinking about the heat or fretting about whether he'll be able to catch a late Sunday flight out of Albany.
"I wouldn't miss it for the world," said Sandberg, manager of the Cubs' Triple-A Iowa farm club. "It'll mean a lot -- the fact that we were teammates and I added him into my speech promoting him for the Hall of Fame. It feels gratifying to be right on that call. Andre is going in, and baseball got it right."
--Ryne Sandberg during his Baseball Hall of Fame induction speech in July 2005
COOPERSTOWN, N.Y. -- Hall of Fame weekend is always an emotional time for inductees. Just imagine the pressure of standing on a stage in a coat and tie in 90-degree heat, trying to summarize a life and thank all the relevant contributors in 15 minutes or less. It can't be easy with the knowledge that 50-something baseball immortals are squirming in their seats and glancing at their watches directly behind you.
The day is equally poignant for former teammates, who sit among the crowd and reminisce along with the inductee. They're the ones who helped support him through slumps and streaks, on bus rides and plane trips, from rookie year to retirement. They can best relate to the sacrifices a Hall of Fame career entails.
Five years ago, Ryne Sandberg received his Hall plaque and used the forum to deliver a celebrity endorsement. Andre Dawson had barely cracked 50 percent in his fourth year on the ballot, and Sandberg feared his former teammate might become an afterthought in an age of cartoonish, steroid-fueled power numbers. So he took a moment in the middle of his speech to pay tribute to the Hawk, a man who embodied everything he held dear about the game.
"When I talked about respect for the game of baseball, he was the first teammate I thought of who fit that mold," Sandberg said. "I had a fear he'd lose out of going to the Hall of Fame based on the state of the game at that time in the steroid era. I felt like his numbers were being overlooked, and I wanted to put in a good word for him."
This Sunday in Cooperstown, the two ex-Cubs will swap roles. Dawson is entering the Hall along with former big league manager Whitey Herzog and umpire Doug Harvey, and Sandberg will be a spectator. He will not be thinking about the heat or fretting about whether he'll be able to catch a late Sunday flight out of Albany.
"I wouldn't miss it for the world," said Sandberg, manager of the Cubs' Triple-A Iowa farm club. "It'll mean a lot -- the fact that we were teammates and I added him into my speech promoting him for the Hall of Fame. It feels gratifying to be right on that call. Andre is going in, and baseball got it right."
"When I talked about respect for the game of baseball, he was the first teammate I thought of who fit that mold," Sandberg said. "I had a fear he'd lose out of going to the Hall of Fame based on the state of the game at that time in the steroid era. I felt like his numbers were being overlooked, and I wanted to put in a good word for him."
This Sunday in Cooperstown, the two ex-Cubs will swap roles. Dawson is entering the Hall along with former big league manager Whitey Herzog and umpire Doug Harvey, and Sandberg will be a spectator. He will not be thinking about the heat or fretting about whether he'll be able to catch a late Sunday flight out of Albany.
"I wouldn't miss it for the world," said Sandberg, manager of the Cubs' Triple-A Iowa farm club. "It'll mean a lot -- the fact that we were teammates and I added him into my speech promoting him for the Hall of Fame. It feels gratifying to be right on that call. Andre is going in, and baseball got it right."
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Steinbrenner got beginning, ending right
Steinbrenner got beginning, ending right
July, 13, 2010 Jul 134:55PM ETEmail Print Comments6 By Rob Neyer
I've been reluctant to write about George Steinbrenner today. I'm intimidated, just as so many of his employees were intimidated for so many years. Steinbrenner's personality -- not to mention his accomplishments -- seem so large as to crowd out some distant writer's quick summary. Some years ago, I wrote a biographical article about Steinbrenner that consisted solely of quotations, presented chronologically, without any attempt to link them with my own words. That's how big he was, and (in my mind, apparently) still is.
Instead of trying to summarize his 37 years as Yankees owner, let me instead focus on the beginning and the end, because frankly I think that's when George Steinbrenner did his best work. All that ugliness in the middle, including his suspensions -- during which, it might be said, the Yankees were best-ministered -- has been written about before and will be written about again, but perhaps today's not the day.
In 1973, anyone could have bought the Yankees for a song. But it was George Steinbrenner who cut a deal to purchase one of the world's greatest sports franchises for $8.8 million. Sure, it seems obvious now, just as drafting Albert Pujols in the 13th round seems obvious now. But if it was so obvious, why didn't someone else do it? Why didn't someone draft Albert Pujols in the 12th round? Why didn't somone offer CBS $9.8 million for the Yankees? Wouldn't that have been one of the great investments, ever?
So maybe it wasn't so obvious. Maybe George Steinbrenner, for whatever reason, was one of the few men able to see not only what the Yankees had been, but what they could be. That was 1973.
Steinbrenner was suspended in 1974. By the time of his reinstatement in 1976, the pieces were in place and the Yankees won four division titles, three American League pennants and two World Series in five years.
Steinbrenner was suspended again in 1990. By the time of his reinstatement in 1993, the pieces were in place and the Yankees would, in 1994, begin a brilliant run of success that hasn't let up and shows no signs of letting up.
It's not hard to conclude that the Yankees have always been best-served when Steinbrenner's hands were tied ... Or, as in the middle 1990s, when he chose to take a less active role.
Now, about the end. When it became clear that George Steinbrenner, though obviously a force of nature, might not live forever, thoughts naturally turned to King Lear and the perils of succession. Which son-in-law or daughter or son could possibly fill the Boss's gigantic loafers? Who could possibly drive the franchise the way he had driven it?
Nobody, perhaps. But perhaps that sort of driving isn't actually necessary. Perhaps unlimited financial resources combined with steady and intelligent management can accomplish just as much. More, perhaps. Whether George Steinbrenner understood this or not, the fact remains that as he made his slow and steady exit, he somehow left his beloved Yankees in the capable hands of his sons.
George Steinbrenner's been called a lot of things, over the years. But "Boss Lear" will never been one of them. He got the ending right.Share
July, 13, 2010 Jul 134:55PM ETEmail Print Comments6 By Rob Neyer
I've been reluctant to write about George Steinbrenner today. I'm intimidated, just as so many of his employees were intimidated for so many years. Steinbrenner's personality -- not to mention his accomplishments -- seem so large as to crowd out some distant writer's quick summary. Some years ago, I wrote a biographical article about Steinbrenner that consisted solely of quotations, presented chronologically, without any attempt to link them with my own words. That's how big he was, and (in my mind, apparently) still is.
Instead of trying to summarize his 37 years as Yankees owner, let me instead focus on the beginning and the end, because frankly I think that's when George Steinbrenner did his best work. All that ugliness in the middle, including his suspensions -- during which, it might be said, the Yankees were best-ministered -- has been written about before and will be written about again, but perhaps today's not the day.
In 1973, anyone could have bought the Yankees for a song. But it was George Steinbrenner who cut a deal to purchase one of the world's greatest sports franchises for $8.8 million. Sure, it seems obvious now, just as drafting Albert Pujols in the 13th round seems obvious now. But if it was so obvious, why didn't someone else do it? Why didn't someone draft Albert Pujols in the 12th round? Why didn't somone offer CBS $9.8 million for the Yankees? Wouldn't that have been one of the great investments, ever?
So maybe it wasn't so obvious. Maybe George Steinbrenner, for whatever reason, was one of the few men able to see not only what the Yankees had been, but what they could be. That was 1973.
Steinbrenner was suspended in 1974. By the time of his reinstatement in 1976, the pieces were in place and the Yankees won four division titles, three American League pennants and two World Series in five years.
Steinbrenner was suspended again in 1990. By the time of his reinstatement in 1993, the pieces were in place and the Yankees would, in 1994, begin a brilliant run of success that hasn't let up and shows no signs of letting up.
It's not hard to conclude that the Yankees have always been best-served when Steinbrenner's hands were tied ... Or, as in the middle 1990s, when he chose to take a less active role.
Now, about the end. When it became clear that George Steinbrenner, though obviously a force of nature, might not live forever, thoughts naturally turned to King Lear and the perils of succession. Which son-in-law or daughter or son could possibly fill the Boss's gigantic loafers? Who could possibly drive the franchise the way he had driven it?
Nobody, perhaps. But perhaps that sort of driving isn't actually necessary. Perhaps unlimited financial resources combined with steady and intelligent management can accomplish just as much. More, perhaps. Whether George Steinbrenner understood this or not, the fact remains that as he made his slow and steady exit, he somehow left his beloved Yankees in the capable hands of his sons.
George Steinbrenner's been called a lot of things, over the years. But "Boss Lear" will never been one of them. He got the ending right.Share
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)