In his first letter to the Corinthians, some guy named Paul (McCartney? Molitor?) describes the way we see the world as, ‘through a glass, darkly.’ Or, alternately, as ‘though a dim window, obscurely.’ Or: ‘a curved lens.’
I was thinking about this yesterday as I followed the news of the trade involving Manny Ramirez, Jason Bay, and Andy LaRoche. Other players were involved, too, but for the sake of this essay I’ll leave them out of the discussion.
In the rush to pass summary judgments on which teams won and lost during the trades, it seems to me that the media showed a readiness to see yesterdays trade through a glass darkly, and reach conclusions that are, by virtue of that dark glass, distorted.
Manny Ramirez is one of the most talented men to ever play the game of baseball. He is a genius hitter: one of the most talented, intelligent men to ever swing a bat. Not enough, I think, is made of Manny Ramirez’s intelligence: everything else aside, he is an extraordinarily smart hitter: disciplined and tactical. As many articles have stated, he will almost certainly be elected to the baseball Hall of Fame when he retires. He has hit more than 500 homeruns.
These are true statements. Yet when one uses such statements, one distorts our understanding of the event itself: the trade is of Andy LaRoche for Jason Bay for Manny Ramirez is a different thing when one mentions that Manny Ramirez is a future Hall-of-Famer. Suddenly we are considering one of the greatest hitters of all-time, against, well, a guy stuck in AAA. Suddenly it’s 510 homeruns versus 140.
The comments surrounding questions about Manny’s attitude, the possibility that he faked injuries or was trying to force a hand, the news of closed-door meetings and secret player votes, they, too, distort the glass through which we understand this trade. Which isn’t to say that such elements aren’t valid – certainly they are valid questions, and open for discussion. But these elements are unquantifiable: they lay beyond our capacity to understand them. A writer I admire stated emphatically that the Red Sox would not have gone to the postseason with Manny Ramirez on the team. This is merely a hypothesis, an unknown, but the writer stated it as fact.
Certainly, I don’t begrudge sportswriters: they are asked to make predictions, to use the information they have to reach conclusions. And: many of them have access to a world that I don’t have access to. In a way, they are allowed to see nuances that we cannot; contexts that exist away from the field.
Still, knowing such contexts can blur truth.
Certainly, Manny Ramirez is a greater player than Jason Bay. Over their careers, it isn’t close: Jason Bay will never reach the heights that Manny has.
What is also clear, at least to my mind, is that right now, in this moment, Jason Bay is a greater player than Manny Ramirez. He has 17.85 Win Shares to Manny’s 14.81. Jason Bay is +24 as a base runner this year, while Ramirez is a -4. Jason Bay is, by all objective and subjective measures, a better leftfielder.
There are questions about Manny’s motivations, about his commitment. Whether such questions are based on facts, on truths, or if they are based on hearsay and suggestion, such questions exist. I have never heard a critical word said about Jason Bay.
Yet a large portion of the media discusses this trade as “the Red Sox cutting bait.” They made a trade because “they had to.” Such comment, I think, is a stretch. The Red Sox did not have to trade Manny Ramirez: had no team made an offer it is unlikely that the Red Sox would hand him an outright release. Nor was it ‘cutting bait,’ an act that suggests they received nothing in return. Jason Bay is not nothing: he is an All-Star outfielder who has outperformed Manny Ramirez this year.
Going forward, Jason Bay is seven years younger than Manny Ramirez. This seems an important consideration. Take away the names: who is more likely to continue to be an effective player, the thirty-six year old or the twenty-nine year old? Who is more likely to remain an effective player: the player with one specific skill, or the player with a diverse range of skills?
Writers have also suggested David Ortiz will suffer because he no longer has Manny Ramirez hitting behind him. This is absurd on two levels: first, there has never been any concrete evidence that suggests player’s ability is altered by who bats behind them in the batting order. And second, Jason Bay has been a better hitter than Manny Ramirez this year.
But we are used to hearing about Ortiz and Manny: we have been hearing them described as the greatest 3-4 in baseball. They are the Ruth/Gehrig of their generation, the Aaron/Mathews. Subtract Manny from that equation and we don’t know what to make of it. We've had six years of Ortiz/Manny, and set against that we have only the imagined scenario of Ortiz and Jason Bay. One is more compelling, more convincing, even if the other is, by objective measures, more beneficial to the team.
And then there is Andy LaRoche. It is entirely possible, even probably, that the Pirates got the most valuable player in this trade. Not the greatest player, mind you, but the one who possesses the most value to his team going forward.
Consider: in 167 games in AAA, LaRoche has posted a .310/.412/.544 line. In those 167 he walked 101 times, struck out 88 times, and hit 33 homers. He is twenty-four years old, and isn’t eligible for free agency until 2011. He will get a chance to play in Pittsburgh, a chance he was not given in Los Angeles. He has a brother who is a successful major league player, who also plays for the Pirates. What is his value to the Pirates? Does he have greater or less value to that team than a player like Jason Bay?
Of the three players, who is most likely to be an effective major league player in 2009? In 2010? In 2013? Who will be the most cost-effective? Who will be the biggest star?
Come October, we’ll have more clarity on this trade. We’ll know if the Red Sox made a push for the AL East, and whether or not the Dodgers won the NL West. In another year, we’ll be able to see how Jason Bay does in a full year at Fenway Park, and we’ll know if Manny’s option is picked up by LA, or, in testing the free agent market, whether or not he signs with the Yankees. In two years we’ll have a glimpse into Andy LaRoche’s career. In five years, in ten, we’ll have a rich understanding of all of these elements.
But, like that guy Paul said, we see now through a glass, darkly. It’ll take a few years for that glass to become clear.