The Orioles' hitters "have no idea what they're doing," right fielder Nick Markakis told The Sun yesterday, in an interview grappling with the question of how a club that looked solidly mediocre and due for improvement on paper has become the worst team of 2010 and potentially the worst team of modern times:
"You need guys in there who have a plan, who have a clue and who know how to execute that plan and get on base. We don't need every guy in this lineup trying to hit home runs. We're paid to get on base and figure out how to score and drive in runs. You look at the Yankees. They have guys who can hit home runs, but everybody in that lineup can get on base."
Markakis said the team's offensive woes shouldn't be attributed to longtime hitting coach Terry Crowley, who is known for advocating an aggressive approach at the plate.
Crowley "has 110 percent nothing to do with the way we are going about our business at the plate or on the field right now," Markakis said. "You can have anybody come here, and you still are going to have a couple of guys who are not going to change their approach and fix it. It's worthless. You can point your fingers here and there, but it is what it is. You're in the big leagues. You have to change your approach on your own. This is the best of the best, and if you go up there clueless, you're going to come back [to the dugout] clueless. It's that simple.
This is nice and diplomatic, but the Orioles are a stain on baseball, and Markakis' defense of the hitting coach makes no sense. Bless Terry Crowley for his years of service to the club as a player and coach, but he needs to have been fired weeks ago. The team is full of players, and especially young players, who are doing everything wrong at the plate, and are getting worse.
Yes, the players are at fault. But if Terry Crowley is not also at fault, then what is Terry Crowley's job, as hitting coach?
The Orioles are awful hitters. No one wants a baseball team to hit the way the Orioles hit. Suppose Markakis is right, and Crowley "has nothing to do with the way we are going about our business at the plate." That would mean Crowley is completely useless.
No one else appreciates a season-opening victory quite as much as Baltimore Orioles fans of a certain age do. And it was delightful to see the Orioles on television after having been out of the country for so long (wow, George Sherrill is fat!).
My two favorite moments of the game:
1. Bottom of the third, Orioles trailing 1-0. Newly purchased Yankees ace C.C. Sabathia falls behind 3-0 to newly purchased, defense-only O's shortstop Cesar Izturis--career on-base percentage: .299--before Izturis singles on a 3-1 pitch. Izturis then steals second while Brian Roberts works Sabathia for a walk. So there are fast runners on first and second with nobody out, and the pitcher is visibly laboring to find the strike zone.
Adam Jones then steps to the plate and bunts the first pitch foul. Up in the booth, whoever is co-hosting with Jim Palmer begins to jabber about the tremendous importance of being able to execute the fundamentals of baseball properly. Let's pause here for a word from Weaver on Strategy, by Earl Weaver:
Sacrifice means you are giving up something. In this instance, you're giving up an out to the opposition. There are only three an inning, and they should be treasured....You have to know that the one or two runs you're bunting for will win the game. If not, it doesn't make much sense to bunt. Bunting in the second or third inning is beyond me. No one alive knows that early in the game if his pitcher is only going to give up one or two runs or five runs.
So, having failed to give away a free out to a struggling pitcher in the name of Fundamental Baseball, Jones swings away at the next pitch--and blasts it into the right-center alley, where it short-hops the fence for a two-run triple. Nick Markakis then gets Jones in from third with a fly ball. 3-1 Orioles
2. Bottom of the fifth, Orioles leading 3-1. Runners at the corners, nobody out, after an over-the-fence double and an infield hit. Nick Markakis swings and hits a feeble topper to shortstop--or rather, toward the shortstop position. But at the first movement of the bat, Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter had already broken backward and toward second base, scurrying away from where the ball would go.
In the long-running debate over Jeter's defensive skills--prosecution brief: he is a genius at making highlight-reel improvisations on broken plays, but his range and basic technique are so poor that he consistently fails to get to routine balls--the discussion has lately turned actuarial. Rather than trying to convince Jeter's supporters--pro-Jeter brief: he's totally clutch, you pencil-necked stats morons--that the shortstop spot leaks like a sieve, the Jeter critics have begun to argue that he's already old for a shortstop, and he'll be 37 by the end of his contract, and can't everyone agree that it would be a good idea to move him to a less taxing defensive position before he gets that old?
That's fine, except plenty of 34-year-old shortstops could have charged Markakis' grounder and tried to make a play at the plate. Jeter didn't run away from the ball because he's old; he ran away from the ball because he's not good at playing shortstop. So the ball trickles slowly across the middle of the infield, and the Orioles score their fourth run, and C.C. Sabathia is charged with another base hit, and the Yankees lose. Yankees lose! Theeeeeeeeeeeeee YANKEES LOSE!
