Sixth in a 10-part series
In a recent interview with Batter's Box, Toronto Blue Jays General Manager J.P. Ricciardi was characteristically blunt about his relationship with the media.
"I really don’t care what the writers say about me," Ricciardi said at the time. "Because in the end, they don’t really count."
While it's true that anyone who lives in the public eye -- as Ricciardi does -- has to turn a blind eye to the criticism offered his way or risk being drowned in it, it's also true that the work of those writers he "doesn't care about" is often the first and only line of communication between the team and the fans.
Both Toronto Star Blue Jays beat writer Geoff Baker and columnist Richard Griffin have had plenty to say about "the Ricciardi Regime" since former G.M. Gord Ash left town -- some quite good, and some extremely critical.
"Ricciardi and Keith Law have articulated their approach to reporters better than the Ash administration did," says Baker. "Especially since they felt it would be a tough sell." What would be such a tough sell? The "sabermetric" approach to running a team, of course.
Good News, Bad News
"The new regime has made it a point to hammer home to the media some of the vital statistics that do influence a baseball game more than the traditional ones," explains Baker. "We were using the OPS stat at the Star when Ash was still here, especially when evaluating the production of Carlos Delgado, but it was nice to see someone else emphasizing the importance of things like on-base percentage and slugging in team notes and on the scoreboard during games," he says.
Still, Griffin expresses some concern with the current G.M.'s approach to gathering players. "Ricciardi saying 'makeup can be more important than ability' is like Baywatch saying 'I.Q. is more important than looks,'" says Griffin. "They drafted or signed Trever Miller, Corey Thurman and Aquilino Lopez sight unseen, using computer generated stats ... I think that a player sticks with the club on the basis of personality and character, but that he is acquired on the basis of stats and cost."
While not disagreeing with Griffin's stats/cost bottom line, Ricciardi defends his statement, saying, "After being in this game for a long time, evaluating every day, I can say that a player's makeup can be more important than his ability."
For example, says Ricciardi, "Chris Woodward has twice the skills [Mike] Bordick has, but Mike is able to overcome his limitations and do things you can't learn just by watching. Delgado's that type of guy. He plays through a lot of pain that people don't see, but he wants to be in the lineup every day."
It sounds like Griffin and Ricciardi might be -- gasp! -- agreeing that stats and makeup are complementary components in evaluating a player, and anyone from a G.M. to a columnist to a fan might jump to an unjustified conclusion based on numbers or early results.
Baker points out one example. "Hailing Jose Cruz Jr. or Raul Mondesi as successes in April [this year] would have been too soon, given their histories," says Baker. "And both ultimately fell to more earthly norms."
"Likewise though," he continues, "predicting the Jays offensive production would tail off this year without Shannon Stewart was a no-brainer and you didn't need months worth of a post-trade sample size to prove it. Stewart is historically a proven, year-round run producer while the Jays replaced him with players who have yet to endure a season as full-time big-leaguers."
Continuing that single line of argument, Baker says, "Maybe Bobby Kielty, Reed Johnson or someone else will develop into a similar, full-time run generator, but the Jays don't have one now and the drop in run production is no surprise."
Yet, he recalls, "there were still people insisting in June that Stewart could be dumped with no harm done to the offence."
Critical Analysis is Key (Uh, Not Jimmy)
It's this type of critical analysis that makes many pro-Ricciardi fans uncomfortable with Blue Jays coverage in the Star, and might be the kind of analysis that leads Ricciardi to say, "I don't worry about what the writers say, because they're never going to agree with what we're doing, and they're never going to see it the way we do."
In fact, says Baker, "Sometimes, being consistent in that critical analysis means applying the same standards to the new J.P. Ricciardi regime, which has yet to exceed Ash in any on-field results."
Baker continues, "It's not realistic for a team in a four-newspaper market to say 'We'll contend by 2006' and then expect you to sit back for three more years and question nothing. My biggest concern would be Ash reading our paper and thinking we picked on him while giving his successor a free pass."
Is it fair to say the Star has been fair to Ash and Ricciardi by being equally critical of both? Baker compares the two by even-handedly pointing out strengths and weaknesses of both front offices.
"Ricciardi can be very upfront and honest about goals and objectives, while Ash seemed more defensive and closed," says Baker. "One thing though, is that Ash could always be reached, day or night, for important things and always returned calls, sometimes answering his own office phone."
That might not seem like a big deal to the casual fan, but think for a moment about the feelings of frustration and anxiety that arise when you try to call the bank and can't reach a "live person." It's Ricciardi's -- or anyone's -- right to not take a call, of course; but the attitude of the beat writer or columnist can't help but be affected when accessibility rules change with an administration.
"Ricciardi did not give reporters his cellular telephone number or his office line when he took the job -- screening all calls instead through an administrative assistant," recalls Baker, who admits, "he has gotten better at it this season."
Playing the PR Game
Accessibility issues point out another difficulty of dealing with the Ricciardi regime, remembers Baker.
"Last October, we couldn't get a hold of Ricciardi anywhere in the days before his contract extension," he says. "But he was being quoted in Boston newspapers ... [so] I've had to read stories written by reporters in Boston, or elsewhere in the U.S., to find out things that were not being told to reporters [in Toronto] by Ricciardi."
Then in July, Baker recalls, "there was a Rob Neyer column [on ESPN.com] in which Ricciardi said the Jays realistically might not contend until 2006 or 2007. An honest assessment in my book -- although the Jays had always spoken of 2004 or 2005 as being realistic contention dates when dealing with Toronto media."
This presentation of one story multiple ways to various sources -- though quite common in the public relations game -- reveals one of the Ricciardi team's weaknesses, says Griffin, who calls it, "the tendency towards paranoia."
Griffin knows a little something about this PR game. "It's a very difficult thing for a PR department to create positive press," he says. "In Montreal, we went the extra mile to accommodate and influence the major U.S. media, suggesting story lines and colour pieces to ESPN, Sports Illustrated, the major papers, etc. to make our players larger than Canada," he recalls.
"When the U.S. major markets were positive about the Expos, the fans, in turn, believed they had something good," says Baker. It's the same story, Griffin says, as Jim Carrey, Lorne Greene, Shania Twain and William Shatner going to the U.S. to find success.
"The current Jays regime also goes to the U.S. press," he says. "But mostly to complain about how little the fans and the media in Toronto know. That's no way to build positive press in Toronto, by ripping [the city] abroad."
But like Baker, Griffin sees both the positive and negative in the Ricciardi front office approach. "The biggest strengths of the current regime are in not choosing to sign the Brian McRaes of the world," he says, alluding to the outfielder with impeccable bloodlines and a .727 career OPS.
However, Griffin says, "It's hard to define weakness until you see what they can do with, say, Carlos Delgado's salary. They tried to throw a bunch of pitchers against the wall and see who stuck, but that's no way to build a winner."
Ah, the pitching.
Pitching Help's Just Around the Corner (Again)
"Our pitching still has a way to go," admitted Ricciardi to Batter's Box. "We feel we're two drafts from having enough pitching where we can see the results, that if one guy goes down, we have another guy coming."
Of course, in that instance, Ricciardi is referring primarily to homegrown pitching, something that outside of Roy Halladay, recent Blue Jays teams have not had terrific luck in developing. And, says Baker, that actually might not be the way to go.
"Believe me, I understand the Jays have a long-term plan," says Baker. "But every team in baseball claims to have super-stud mound prospects. Some work out, some don't." To increase the odds of success, he says, "you have to pay for established pitchers with a track record. That costs money."
For instance, says Baker, "Pinning your contention hopes on Jason Arnold or Dustin McGowan means waiting years more for them to develop. Look at how long Kelvim Escobar, or even Halladay took to become an effective starter, never mind a 15- or 20-game winner."
And there are no guarantees, he points out, "as we've seen with 'can't miss' Chris Carpenter, who has yet to win 13 games in a season."
But how does the team acquire these "pitchers with a track record"? One approach, Baker thinks, would be to wait for Carlos Delgado's $19 million contract to come off the books after 2004. "But we have no proof [the Blue Jays] will re-invest that money into team payroll," he says. "Plus, they will have a big offensive hole to fill at that point. So, I don't see how they'll 'succeed' for many years without upping payroll."
Remember, Griffin Was an Accounting Major
Ricciardi points out his frustration with public perception and payroll in saying, "The biggest disappointment with the writers in general is that they don't understand that the payroll here is $50 million, going to $48 million."
The G.M. explains, "we're trying to compete in a division with the Yankees and Red Sox. They [the writers] don't understand the decisions we have to make based on finances."
Not surprisingly, Baker disagrees. "I don't feel that [the team] has to outspend the Yankees or Red Sox to win the AL East, or the wild-card," he says, even tossing a compliment the G.M.'s way in saying, "especially with Ricciardi around."
However, believes Baker, "I do feel the team has to spend a higher percentage of what their rivals are [spending] if they hope to contend. And not in three more years. That's silly. No one ever really knows what will happen with minor league pitching prospects and the Jays can't bank their entire future on that."
Baker adds, "You still have to offer fans something in the interim. A team shouldn't expect fans to go from 2002 until 2006 or 2007 without offering them any short-term hope of contending beyond June. That's essentially what is happening here."
Ultimately, says Baker, "Until the standings change -- whether the Jays win 85 or 75 games this year -- any arguments to the contrary simply aren't supported by the facts."
Like a Shortstop: No Margin For Error
Still, says Ricciardi, the missing element from that analysis is the margin for error. "We're going to have to outwork other people. We'll have to be better at our scouting and player development," he says.
"The thing about the position we’re in is, if we make a mistake, it sets us back," adds Ricciardi. "When the Yankees or the Red Sox make a mistake, it doesn’t set them back. We're working on a very thin wire."
It's true, says Baker, that "Ricciardi has built a very good, low-cost offence." But now, he adds, "[Ricciardi] says he has no money for proven free agent pitchers and must take years to develop his own arms. That sounds an awful lot like Ash, who spent more money on his offence but also couldn't get any added dough from [management] to bolster his pitching staff when needed."
That's unfortunate, says Baker, "because history has shown that the top-spending teams have been #1 and #2 in the AL East for six straight years. It doesn't matter that the ineptly-managed Orioles spend a lot, too. What does matter is that the teams ahead of Toronto are well-managed and have the cash."
The only difference, claims Baker, "is that Ricciardi's Moneyball approach has saved millions of dollars for [the owners] in building the latest third-place team."
Despite consistent criticism of Ricciardi from the Star, Griffin says he has been misrepresented at least in his initial commentary on the Toronto G.M. "[Blue Jays president and CEO Paul] Godfrey made the right choice [hiring Ricciardi instead of Dave Dombrowski]," says Griffin, "given the circumstances of downsizing payroll and trying to maintain the team's consistent six-year mediocrity."
Griffin admits that "Dombrowski had been my choice and I [have admitted] that he would not have been the right man for this circumstance." Unfortunately, says Griffin, "the headline writers -- as they often do -- took liberties and made it look like I was putting the Griff stamp of approval on the Ricciardi regime."
No, that stamp of approval has not been forthcoming from Griffin, Baker or the Star. Not yet.
Doesn't matter, says Ricciardi. "I've always had thick skin."
https://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20030915030736999