What the Mariners Owe Griffey
If nothing mattered in this sport beyond VORP or WARP, this would be simple. In this case, though, we have a human being involved. And not just any human being. A human being who has been one of the greatest players of modern times. And he matters…. People like Griffey can’t merely be crumpled up and fed to the waste-management trucks when they stop hitting. They deserve more. They’ve earned more. Clearly, the Mariners are wrestling with how to afford this particular human what he’s earned. And that means he can’t be just another name in the transactions column.
I don’t have a problem with Jayson Stark; I think he does a fine job. I don’t want to make media criticism a habit, but I do take issue with some of Stark’s comments on the Ken Griffey, Jr. situation in Seattle.
We’ve been over Seattle’s DH situation before, and nothing has changed. Griffey and Mike Sweeney are a waste of time and money in terms of their likely performance. Although I find the notion that Griffey makes up for what he costs in wins with merchandise sales dubious, that is not the issue, either. Hey, maybe there is some sort of CPAP cross-promotion that will give the organization more money to put into player development and free agency. Jokes aside, this isn’t about the “sleeping incident,” either.
This is not another re-hash of Griffey’s performance, (alleged!) clubhouse nap, or the value of the 38 Ken Griffey promotional nights the team still has remaining in the season. The issue is Stark’s moralizing tone. It is as if people are talking about sending Baseball Immortal Ken Griffey, Jr. off to the nursing home or the pound. Ken Griffey, Jr. is a “human being.” What, unlike Pat Burrell, Josh Anderson, Eric Byrnes, or scores of players who are let go (practically speaking) without asking their permission first? Were these violations of their “dignity”? Apparently, Griffey is “not just any human being,” but a certain kind of human being that can’t just be “thrown out,” and one who’s “earned more” and “deserves more.”
Ken Griffey, Jr. has had a great career and is a Hall of Famer. But “earned more”? Ken Griffey, Jr. was last anything like Good in 2005, and that’s about the only time during the FanGraphs WAR era. He was last great, according to Sean Smith’s numbers, in 2000, ten years ago with a 5.8 WAR season. To get perspective on how long ago that was, Yankee quasi-icon Bernie Williams, last seen being angry at the Yankees for not bringing him back for a fifth year of near-replacement performance, was still excellent that season, posting 5.0 WAR in 2000, with a couple very good years remaining.
That’s right — Bernie Williams, who has been out of the game for four years already (and was clearly finished some time before that) was a really good baseball player more recently than Ken Griffey, Jr. It isn’t as if the Mariners would be “throwing him out” as soon as he got bad. Griffey hasn’t been worth having around for a long time, and he hasn’t “earned” his giant paychecks in years. Since 2002, he’s been paid in excess of $60 million dollars by baseball teams (mostly the Reds) while being worth about a quarter of that. Maybe Stark just meant “hitting.” But it isn’t as if Griffey just started now hitting — as DH’s job is just to hit, and Griffey didn’t hit last season despite being heavily platooned.
This isn’t about whether Griffey can still play. Almost everyone agrees that he can’t. But what has he “earned” beyond that? Stark isn’t talking about money, of course. Respect? Dignity? A basic level of human dignity isn’t something earned, it is a universal right. Ken Griffey, Jr. is owed that. So is Pat Burrell. So is Eric Byrnes. So is Milton Bradley. Has anyone complained of such a “violation” when those players have been traded, cut, or DFAed without the players’ endorsement? No.
I don’t deny that the Mariners face a potential public-relations minefield in dealing with the situation, or that they might make decent money from Griffey promotional nights. However, those things have to do with corporate self-interest, not some extra obligation they have regarding Griffey’s “dignity.” Stark invokes some additional moral obligation to Griffey that he’s apparently “earned.”* He thinks Ken Griffey, Jr. is special in his own right, despite Junior last being useful about five years ago.
* Perhaps one could make the case on the basis of Griffey forcing his way out of Seattle in a trade that ended up being utterly lopsided in the Mariners’ favor (since Mike Cameron by himself blew away Griffey’s production in the succeeding seasons), but that isn’t Stark’s angle.
Publicity and performance aside, all the Mariners owe Griffey is what a team owes any player: a basic level of human respect and the prorated remainder of his guaranteed contract.
Matt Klaassen reads and writes obituaries in the Greater Toronto Area. If you can't get enough of him, follow him on Twitter.
The Diamondbacks faced this problem several years ago with Luis Gonzalez. Face of the franchise, hero of the state’s only championship, and also extemely expensive for the level of production he was giving the team in his final years. Most people were, and still are, angry over the decision to let him go, but things have cooled a bit after he took a position in the front office. The front office and ownership took a lot of heat, but I was always fine with it, as the team was trying to cut it’s payroll in an effort to go young, and Gonzo just never fit into the team’s plan.
Thank you for a needed voice of reason for the fans in Seattle.
Griffey is not owed more than other players–if anything, he’s owed less for dumping on the city and his teammates (“where’s my pitching?”) as he blackmailed his way out of town.
The fact that Stark, like virtually every other baseball writer, fails to see through Griffey facade is no reason for him to continue hindering his team’s chances of winning.
Griffey to baseball in 2010 has the same relevance as Coolio to music.
As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I took a look at my life and realize I have nothing left…
which oddly enough might actually have some relevance to Griffey.
I think that Weird Al’s parody of that song might actually be more relevant:
…tonight we’re gonna party like it’s 1699…
Cuz Jr is old, right?
I would like to sarcastically thank the two of you for getting both versions of that song stuck in my head for today.
but what about that smile? the earring? the backwards cap? have we forgotten “the kid”? oh the humanity.
As usual, The Onion has something important to contribute http://www.theonion.com/articles/seeing-ken-griffey-jr-in-backwards-hat-now-just-de,17191/
I couldn’t agree more. At what threshold does one “earn” the extra dignity that wasn’t afforded the previously discarded Byrnes and Burrell? 500 HR? 2,000 hits? 7 years with the club?
Doesn’t the team owe more to its fan base, who would love nothing more than to see a winning team playing deep into October and could be more competitive with a more productive usage of that roster spot and lineup slot, than it does to a single player?
I think the clubs that have employed him have already shown their appreciation for his immense talents by paying him far more than he’s produced on-field in his twilight years. (And by that I mean no disrepect to Griffey, he’s certainly entitled to whatever someone will pay him, and his skills were once legendary, and even after a pretty sharp decline are still better than any of us could hope to achieve.)
Apparently the threshold is greater than 700+ HR and 500+ SB, because Bonds was unceremoniously shown the door once the Giants decided they couldn’t make money off of him anymore. Why wasn’t he owed the dignity?
Oh. Unproven steroid allegations. Right.
Unproven? Do you not believe Bonds’ own grand jury testimony? The only thing up for debate is whether he “knowingly” took stuff not whether or not he did.
If you want to be that portion of people who believe that Bonds was just an unknowing dupe… fine, but the man himself admitted to taking steroids (he just said at the time he didn’t know what they were)
And Aaron, among countless others, used PEDs. Many of them, including Hank, have admitted as much. Others are documented through other means, and many of course still go unknown. It is also known that chemicals now classified as steroids were used by at least a couple HOFers, dating as far back as the 1890s. Even such Baseball Gods as the aforementioned Aaron, the notorious Mays and the lovable Mickey are guilty of the unforgivable.
In the end, who ^&%@ing cares – just another example of double standards and scapegoating by people with agendas. Well, unless you choose to be that portion of people who somehow think Steroids and PEDs were created and introduced in 1998.
Bonds was something less than stellar at cultivating the media, so is it really shocking that they didn’t rally behind him?
“once the Giants decided they couldn’t make money off of him anymore”
Well….let’s at least be accurate here. Bonds was still a good hitter when he was shown the door. The Giants could still make money off him, and teams employing a DH (coughRayscough) could have gained a nice bat in the lineup, too. What we have here is a case of collusion. Unproven, of course. 🙂
B, I was referring to the home run chase. The Giants rode him until he passed Aaron, then cut him loose. And I fully agree he could have helped an AL team in ’08.
The bottom line in baseball, or in professional sports for that matter, is that no one player or team owes anyone anything beyond a contract. Like it or not, that’s how it is. Business. Writers get upset when a player is “disgraced” and let go, despite that player’s previous contributions, while fans hate players that don’t remain loyal to a team (or fan base) that seemingly treated them so well. But none of this matters. It’s about money for all involved, no matter what they might say. The purity of the game is lost as soon as there are paychecks involved. Those of us who follow baseball, especially writers, should know this by now.
Griffey will get the recognition he’s owed in the Hall. He’ll be touted as one of the best players ever and probably remain a legend in Seattle forever. It’s hard to feel sorry for that. I’d trade places with him any day of the week.
What if Griffey were 50 years old and couldn’t muster an OPS over .200? Would Stark argue that the Mariners still owe Griffey a spot on the roster to preserve his dignity?
Ultimately players are in control of their own dignity. He doesn’t need the Mariners to preserve his dignity for him. He can do it himself.
BTW I have not clicked on links to Stark’s articles for 2 years. Waste of time.
I bet if the Mariners put him in Centerfield for 3 games he would get hurt and the problem will work itself out. I mean, what do they have to lose for trying it for 3 games? This would the perfect week to trot him out there. They are playing against the Blue Jays, so losing those games won’t hurt them as much as it would to a division opponent.
Asking a player to do something that you believe is likely to get him injured, with the intent to cause him to get injured, would be wrong. Really wrong.
I understand the point this article is trying to make but comparing Burrell, Anderson, and Byrnes to Griffey is absolutely ridiculous. If you are going to be critical of writers from reputable media outlets, please include information relevant to your argument.
What’s ridiculous about it? What’s ridiculous is deciding how respectfully individual human beings deserve to be treated on the basis of how gifted they are or were at playing baseball.
The expectation that a player who is at least 6-7 years into his post-decline phase is indicative of the general “entitled” attitude that seeps through society. Stark (who is generally good), and other sappy sportswriters, make these cheap emotional appeals on behalf of, they say, the fans that expect Griffey to be treated well.
However, fans are not the slobbering idiots that some sportswriters expect. Ten years worth of fans grew up while Griffey was in Cinci and Chicago that don’t care about them like someone who was 17 in 1999 and might still get nostalgic. A large percentage of the rest recognize last year as a farewell tour, and are probably as equally puzzled as Klaasen as to why there is a need to send someone who’s made $150M in his career ($60M of it for average-at-best production) off with even more bounty for performing terribly. This is not a farewell year; he’s way past that stage.
One thing Griffey does deserve, is an accurate assessment of his last few years.
Last year he was bad but not terrible, probably better than the next best option for Seattle. The year before he was “useful” and in 07 he was good with 30 HR and a 370 OBP.
In 08 he was performing good enough for a mid season trade.
Though I agree now there’s no reason to keep him around, just wanted to mention it hasn’t been so long since he was useful.
You’d be right except for his horrific defense in those years. Seriously, look at his player card. His defense completely negated any offensive contributions he had in those recent years.
Not to mention he’s a multi-millionaire and some minor leaguer would have more money right now if Griffey wasn’t holding on. And, I agree with others. By this logic, Seattle can NEVER let him go. How is letting him go now any better/worse than waiting until the end of the year. Either way you are saying he’s not good enough to be on your team anymore. They owe him nothing more than any other employer does.
Unless Griffey’s prior Mariner contract had a crazy hometown discount, he has been paid everything he has earned, and then some. In any other industry, you are judged on current performance, not what you might have been able to do five years prior but can do no longer.
Just one more example of baseball being crippled by its obsession with nostalgia.
The problem is at the end of 2008, the Mariners knew what type of player he was and signed him to a one year deal. Then, after a year of seeing first hand just what type of player he was, they signed him again. When the Mariners know that Griffey is not going to be any good and they sign him anyway because of his status as an icon, they are telling Griffey that he is deserving of more respect than other players. To then cut him after he plays exactly how everyone expected him to is disrespectful because when they signed him to contract, they implied that everybody “knew what the deal was” in regards to Griffey. Burrell et al. get cut because they are worthless and they play below expectations. Griffey may be worthless but the Mariners can’t argue that he is playing below expectations.
The Yankees let Ruth go when he was washed up. The Giants let Mays go when he was finished. There are many others.
In Ruth’s last year in NY, he posted a 161 OPS+.
In Mays’ last year in SF, he was traded away in the early part of the year and finished with a 131 OPS+.
Neither are very good comps to Griffey’s 2010.
I don’t think it’s so much that Griffey has earned more rights as a human than other players, it’s that, being a local favorite, his situation is much more delicate than Byrnes and his 32 at bat history in Seattle or Burrell’s 1+ disappointing seasons.
It’s not a matter of being an issue of disrespect to the player, it’s an issue of disrespect to the fans.
So yeah, in the eyes of most Mariners’ fans, Griffey has “earned” the right to be handled differently than Byrnes or the others.
The first commenter was close to hitting the nail on the head…after retirement he’s going to get a cush job in a front-office, broadcasting booth, or on a baseball team bench which will give him enough money to have a better pension than any of the Bobby Scales’s of the world. He will be invited to the retirement of his number, the Hall of Fame, and his signature will be more valuable than Jamie Moyer’s (he’ll be able to charge $100, too). People have tried and will try to emulate his swing for as far as we can see in the future. In other words, what the hell is Jayson Stark talking about?
If anything, it magnifies how much more difficult it would be to be a minor league lifer, or a quad-A major leaguer.
Jason Stark stopped being a good writer around the time Sammy Khalifa was retiring from the game.
Stark wants to have it all ways. He wants to rave that Seattle had the greatest offseason ever only because they obtained alot of players who make alot of money. He then wants to blame their entire slow start on Griffey, as if a platoon DH is making the whole team stop hitting and stop pitching like major leaguers. Then Stark wants us all to apologize to him (Stark) for ever thinking Griffey shouldn’t be able to start for Seattle for the rest of all time.
Seriously, Stark is a snivelling twit. Matt, you describe what most bloggers call a strawman. Set up an argument nobody is making so you can waste everyone’s time being right about something that’s not being debated.
This is just another case of sportswriters getting angry at a single player for ruining their dream of pulling improbable baseball predictions out of their heinie, and winning the nobel prize for their prognostication genius.
I think Jason Stark is wrong when he says the Mariners should not give Griffey a uniform, chase him out onto the field in his underwear, and fire him in front of 50k fans. Some ESPN sportswriters feel that level of humiliation would be justified for not fulfilling a sportswriter’s prediction. I, however, disagree with Stark on that point. See? I can do it too.
You are absolutely correct, we don’t owe Griffey anything. Unfortunately, a significant portion of our fanbase appears to feel otherwise, and that has painted us into a corner.
“A basic level of human dignity isn’t something earned, it is a universal right.”
Whoa, slow down there. Last week we had an article talking about the spirit of the law, now this!? Rights are merely legal entitlements.
Jr. WAS a terrific player, but for the most part he’s always been a petulant self absorbed jerk. Now he’s a better person is some small measure, but a shell of his former self as a player. Seattle fans are very loyal… in this case to a fault. They don’t want to remember the immature, selfish, spoiled Jr., only the spider-man catches and tremendous production. That’s understandable… but no longer realistic. I remember clearly his attitude when the Mariners were acquiescing to HIS demands to be traded back ‘home’ to Cincinnati. He made demands that were outrageous. Although in retrospect the Mariners were better off without Pokey Reece. (That may tell you something about his ability to judge talent in others.) In short, he held Seattle’s chestnuts to the fire… and Seattle still got the better of the deal long term. The Mariners would be best to remember that in Jr’s case, it’s addition by subtraction. Dump his ass.
Its a sad reflection on society when everybody “deserves” something. Why is everybody so entitled to this and that? I deserve to be paid more than what I am producing, I DESERVE to keep my job even though I have been late 10 times. This entitlement mentality is so frustrating!
This is a bad case of head stukeeism. Here’s the facts out in the open air..
Griffey asked out of Seattle to get closer to his Florida home. 1800 mile home commute was sufficient. Griffey doesn’t much care for Seattle except as place to rest his busted bones and collect a couple mil dole.
Griffey can’t play. A team with him on his roster is not giving its best efforts toward winning, a gross attack on the integrity of the game.
The players who ratted out Griffey’s sleeping on the job were probably trying to give the ownership a way out…a way to get him off the roster either by cut or buyout with reduced fan backlash.
The team proved it was a collection of imbeciles when it exploited the incidence as a cause celebre foe the team to ?rally around,” led by also useless carcass remnant Sweeney, by attacking the working class reporter just doing his job.
A player who refuses to go away has earned less, not more. If Griffey wanted dignity, he would just retire already.
He chooses to be a burden to his team though, declining dignity and instead forcing the team to do something about it.
The M’s should offer him a retirement package, offer him the chance to bow out gracefully, and offer his job to someone with actual skills. If Griffey refuses it, dump him and release a statement to the effect of “we did everything we could to ease the situation, but our offers were declined and we needed to move forward for the betterment of the organization”
Because Seattle has an obligation to 25 major league players, hundreds of minor league players, thousands of organization employees and millions of fans – not just one guy who refuses to think of anyone but himself.
Griffey did not refuse to go away. The Mariners decided they wanted him back for 2010 and offered him a contract. He signed it.
oh, so he hasnt pitifully been trying to hold onto this idea he can still play?
Look, they want to keep him happy and with the organization for the betterment of both; he can be the face of the club well after retirement. But Griffey, instead of being realistic, keeps acting as if he can still play the game like he used to. When he is saying he wants to play, should they have then said “no you cant play anymore” and let their face walk away from the organization; possibly with hard feelings? That is where it gets to the question of, is he that clueless that he think he’s helping the Mariners by sticking around?
The Mariners are between a rock and a hard place – trying to keep their franchise’s face happy and his refusal to do anything other then weigh down a roster.
Has it occurred to anyone that Griffey’s steep fielding decline likely had a lot to do with the impact on his knees of playing centrefield on the astroturf at the Kingdome? As “sabr-minded” (whatever that means) fans, I think that we ignore the externalities of playing.
Using “traditional” positional adjustments, it’s fairly simple for us to credit catchers for the stress that squatting for half of every game causes, so why aren’t there different positional adjustments for playing on turf that likely causes the same stress (and injuries) long-term?
The same way that Andre Dawson and Vlad Guerrero’s careers were hampered by playing in Montreal, I wouldn’t be surprised if Griffey’s was hampered by playing in Seattle in the early 90’s. I wonder if the Mariners feel — in at least part — responsible for this.
Maybe they simply don’t want to toss the greatest player in their franchise history out the door quite yet. Maybe they look at it as a sunk cost and want to keep him around in a “player-coach” type role. Maybe they realize they suck either way and keeping him helps them out on a PR front.
Nobody but Seattle’s FO knows the answers to these questions.
The mariners have been so bad that keeping Griffey at this point isn’t going to make things much worse. If Figgins, Lopez, Kotchman, Wilson, and Johnson don’t get their collective OPS about 150 points higher very soon, they have no chance, with or without Griffey. And I think there’s little chance of that.
Might as well keep Griffey and avoid compounding the losing with an ignominious departure of a franchise icon.