This is classic....
Gammons
fans on A-Rod
Yesterday, before taking the field at Fenway, Alex Rodriguez was in need of a friend. Lucky for him he was in Boston, the stomping ground of Peter Gammons.
Rodriguez, who hit a two-run homer in the ninth with the Yanks down eight runs last night, will always have a buddy - and defender - in the ESPN analyst.
That was evident Sunday night, in the seventh inning of Yankees-Mets on ESPN, when Gammons made light of Rodriguez's inability to hit when the chips are down, before launching into a convoluted defense of the $252 million man.
Gammons not only was condescending to discerning Yankee fans (there are a few out there) and other realists, whom he cast in the role of ingrates, but his spiel was ludicrous to all who watched the Shea edition of the 2006 Subway Series.
During his soliloquy, Gammons offered a solution to A-Rod's problem. It was quite creative. The only way out of this mess for A-Rod, according to Gammons, involved turning back time and rewriting history. This was would-of, should-of stuff. For Gammons, it made perfect sense. It also offered him a way out of specifically addressing A-Rod's multiple gag jobs.
Gammons, presenting A-Rod's 48 homers and 2005 MVP as answers to anyone complaining about his lack of clutch hitting, said things would have been different for Rodriguez "if his original deal with the Red Sox" had gone through.
"He wouldn't be in the shadow of Derek Jeter," Gammons said. "He wouldn't have to hear about how he hasn't won a ring - which Don Mattingly didn't, either - and he would be a shortstop, which he played better than anyone else in the American League before the deal (to the Yankees)."
How playing shortstop with the Red Sox could be linked to a cure for Rodriguez's habit of melting under presssure (he stranded 11 runners during the Mets series) is hard to comprehend. And with Rodriguez's lack of production a major issue during the Shea showdown, Gammons failed to provide credible analysis of a major story line.
Instead, he verbally bobbed and weaved, saying that if Rodriguez played shortstop and "approached 500, 600 maybe 700 homers" he would be regarded as one of the "greatest" players to ever play the game.
"As a Yankee until, and if, he's an October hero he will only be compared to monuments," Gammons said.
Poor, poor A-Rod. Cue the sad violin.
This is Gammons' first year working as ESPN's game analyst/reporter with Joe Morgan and Jon Miller. Perhaps he failed to realize that ESPN's "Sunday Night Baseball" audience isn't full of fools lined up behind the velvet ropes for invitations to his pity party. Still, Gammons threw this shindig knowing full well that the Bombers, hit hard by injuries, were in dire need of some timely hitting - and leadership, too.
Instead of stepping up, A-Flopped.
But there was Gammons, telling a national audience that Rodriguez is not getting enough credit for his MVP season, or his 48 home runs. And, gee, if he actually had been dealt Boston where he could've played shorstop, everything would be turned in a positive direction. If anyone, including Gammons, really believes this jive there is one question to be answered.
Who would you rather have standing in the batter's box with a game on the line?
A-Rod?
Or David Ortiz?