If you “get” that headline, then you are at least as old as me and share my eclectic taste in music.

So the breaking news (hat tip to Isuzudude, who probably should be running this blog lately) is that Rudy Jaramillo will not be the Mets hitting coach in 2008.

According to Omar Minaya:

“I love Rudy like a brother, but it would be totally unfair to bring him in after I interviewed him as manager,” Minaya said. “It wouldn’t be fair to HoJo, who did an outstanding job as hitting coach. If you look at the numbers, everything in the second half of the year we were up in.”

On the one hand, I’m very surprised that Omar didn’t jump on Jaramillo. On the other, I’m pleased with Omar’s decision to bring back Howard Johnson, who in my mind did make an impact on the offense (except for Jose Reyes) and did earn the position for 2008. I feel it would have been a slap in the face to usher in Jaramillo and move HoJo to base coach — even third base coach. He did a fine job and who knows — maybe 3-4 years from now people will be talking about HoJo’s skills as a batting coach in the same way they talk about Jaramillo.

The only puzzling thing is this: to my knowledge, Jaramillo is still under contract with the Rangers, and will be until October 31st. So is Minaya allowed to comment on another team’s personnel? Probably not worth arguing, considering that it’s a dead issue.

Loyal reader “Isuzudude” has posed a great topic:

All are welcome to answer this question, but in particular I’m looking to get the opinions of those among us who really keep track of this stuff. Discounting anyone who has played in triple-A or with the Mets (i.e. Milledge, Gomez, Humber, etc), who are your top-10 prospects within the Mets organization? When answering, could you also name the current major leaguer that most resembles the type of player you think the prospect will turn out to be?

Thanks in advance, guys (and gals?)

As Linda Richman might say … “discuss!”

No, it’s not Mets news (necessarily), but it’s the biggest news in baseball … and sports for that matter.

Proof? The Cleveland Indians might clinch their first World Series appearance in 60 years tonight, but not one sports columnist, talkradio jockey, or other pundit is mentioning their potential elimination game tonight against the Red Sox. So I guess it’s OK to give the un-rehiring of Joe Torre some play on MetsToday.

Though, we’ve already glossed over the potential domino effect of Joe Torre not returning to pinstripes in 2008. Now that it’s reality, and after having thought about it for about a week, I’m not so sure that a new Yankee manager will affect the decisions of Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada. The way I see it, both players may be upset that Torre’s not returning, but in a few weeks any disgruntlement will likely wear off. Plus, after losing Torre, I can’t imagine that Brian Cashman and the Steinbrenners would allow either Posada or Rivera walk away as well.

First, there is public opinion — to which George Steinbrenner is sensitive. He knows that the majority of Yankee fandom is not happy with the Torre decision, but also knows that there are enough ambivalence to get through the situation. Steinbrenner is justified, after all, by the $225M payroll — as much as anyone loves Joe Torre, a logically thinking individual has to know that the Yankees’ success over the last dozen years was more due to the willingness to spend money than the “genius” of Torre.

But if Torre leaves AND Mo Rivera and Jorge Posada also walk away? That’s not going to fly with Yankee supporters. If anything, Rivera MUST be retained — he is after all the greatest closer in the history of baseball, and god forbid Boston gets their dirty paws on their beloved, legendary icon. Further, I believe the Yankees will do just about everything necessary to retain Posada as well — partially because he’s nearly as beloved as Rivera, and partially because, as we’ve seen, there isn’t a suitable replacement on the market. For the Mets to obtain either of these Yankees, they would likely have to make an unbelievable, fiscally unsound offer — and that’s not the Wilpons’ style.

Now, what about the vacancy in the Yankees dugout? I’d thought that Don Mattingly was a foregone conclusion, but the words of Brian Cashman suggests otherwise:

“There may be some surprising names that show up of people expressing interest that you wouldn’t even think about. To be quite candid, we have not started a process of looking for a new manager.”

Hmm … surprising names, eh? Well what the hey … if it’s NOT going to be Mattingly, then who? And if they are serious about the position being one that has to be incentive-driven, then whomever they hire to replace Torre MUST also have the postseason bonus bucks written in — otherwise the Yankees are true scoundrels. It’ll be a few weeks before the “official” list of candidates surfaces. In the meantime, here is my wildly uninformed prediction of potential successors (if it’s not Donnie Baseball):

Bobby Valentine
Yes, he’ll wear out his welcome — and most of his players — within two years, but he’s the closest thing to Billy Martin available. And whether you love him or hate him, you have to admit he’s one of the best in-game strategists on the planet. Any doubts (or short memory)? Simply take a look at the 2000 Mets team he guided into the World Series. And yes he’ll be a media nightmare from the Yankees brass’ perspective, but his hogging of the spotlight will take the pressure off the players.

Bobby Cox
Here’s a crazy idea if you ever saw one, huh? Bear with me … first, Braves GM John Schuerholz has stepped down, which could affect what Cox does. Cox only played two years in the Majors — with the New York Yankees, so there’s a tie-in of sorts. The Yankees have the money and the wherewithal to get “the best” of everything, so why not try to pry away arguably the best manager in baseball of the last 15 years? And hey, why not bring in the “best” pitching coach in baseball, old pal Leo Mazzone, while you’re at it? The 67-year-old Cox probably will only manage another 2 or 3 years, and would be the ideal tutor for bench coach Mattingly. It makes great sense: Mattingly, with no managerial experience, would have an immense task to a) follow Torre’s legacy; b) be expected to get to the World Series; and c) do a & b as a first-year manager. Better to groom him another year or two under a genius, and let the legend of Torre fade away, before pushing him into the fire.

Joe Girardi
A lot of Yankee beat writers seem to be high on Girardi leading the Bronx Bombers. I’m not seeing it any more than Tony Pena. I get the feeling the Yanks want to bring in a BIG name, and though Girardi is known, he’s not “big”. For this exact reason, I don’t buy into the notion that Trey Hillman is a serious candidate.

Larry Bowa
His managerial review is mixed; critics feel his Phillies underachieved, supporters say he wrung everything out of them. He’s a candidate because he’s been around the Yankees for two years and gained the respect of players and management, and because his fiery disposition is the exact opposite of the calm Torre — and maybe the Yankee brass wants an “excitable boy” to put the pressure on their perhaps too-relaxed players. And before you dismiss his .522 winning percentage and second-place finishes, consider that Torre had a similar resume before donning the pinstripes.

Tony Pena
He has previous managerial experience, and though his career .410 winning percentage is abysmal, he put together an unbelievable 83-79 record for the 2003 Kansas City Royals — which was essentially a collection of trash. I think he’ll be considered to satisfy the Yankees’ need to interview one or more minority candidates. Along that line of thinking …

Don Baylor
A former Yankee, though hardly a legend and not . His record as a manager was very “eh” — under .500. But he does have a very nice-looking visual presence — what with those broad shoulders and chiseled facial features — and could fit right into the do-nothing, monotonous, stoic role that Torre made famous.

Cito Gaston
He was widely heralded as one of the best managers in baseball after winning back-to-back World Series Championships with the Blue Jays in the early 1990s. But after a 72-87 season in 1997, he never got another job. Why? Maybe ten years is too long to be out of the hot seat, but he could be a long, long, longshot.

Any other wild ideas to throw out there, before the “official” search begins? Post your candidates below.

There’s been much ballyhoo over last week’s comments by John Schuerholz in regard to his opinion of the value of Alex Rodriguez and the demands presented by Scott Boras.

Specifically:

“I think it’s obnoxious . . . for someone to suggest that this is a valid salary level for a professional athlete, no matter what kind of voodoo economics they can do in analyzing the books of MLB, it’s absolutely asinine . . .

“When he presented us with that kind of offer with Andruw Jones, we found it so ridiculous and obnoxious we didn’t even respond. It didn’t even rise to the level of requiring a response. It’s just idiotic.”

Piles of people are roaring with approval of Schuerholz’s brash words for the “evil” Scott Boras and his outlandish demands. Boras is the bad guy, isn’t he? He’s terrible for baseball, he’s ruining the game, he’s greedy, he’s crazy, etc. After all NO BALLPLAYER should be making $30 million in one season. It’s ludicrous. Doctors save people’s lives, they don’t make that kind of money. Teachers do much more for the world than a baseball player does, yet doesn’t make that kind of money in ten lifetimes, much less one year!

Boras = Bad Guy. Boras’ Demands for A-Rod = Idiotic, Asinine.

Huh. Sounds more like sour grapes to me, coming from a guy whose boss refused to part with profits for the last four years. If Ted Turner were still running the Braves, and not some faceless conglomeration of corporate accountants with an eye specifically on the bottom line, I wonder what Schuerholz would be saying? I wonder what he’d be paying?

From 1999 to 2003, the Braves’ payroll jumped from $75M to over $106M. Immediately after Ted Turner gave up controlling interest, that payroll went down, down, down — as MLB profits went up, up, up. Their 2007 payroll was down to $87M, and figures to keep dwindling after Andruw Jones and his “asinine” demands leave town.

But who, really, is the idiot here? Is it Boras, for taking full advantage of the American way of free enterprise and capitalism? Is it Schuerholz, for getting into a situation where the Braves will pay $35M between now and the end of 2009 for Mike Hampton (or another way to look at it: $50M over three years)? Or is everyone “asinine”?

Here’s the way I see it: back in the 1970s, when Reggie Jackson signed an “outlandish” million-dollar contract, he justified it by saying “I put fannies in the seats.” He was right — he did. People PAID to see Reggie Jackson. People turned on the TV to see Reggie Jackson. People bought T-shirts and jerseys with his name on it. They bought “Reggie” candy bars, for crissakes! And when a guy can bring in revenue, doesn’t it make sense to give him a fair share of the proceeds?

Without question, Alex Rodriguez puts fannies in the seats, and adds significant value to a team. I’m not necessarily on board with the arithmetics of Boras’ “voo doo economics”, but you have to agree that A-Rod = revenue.

However, what about Chris Woodward? He made $850,000 in 2007. How about Aaron Sele? The Mets paid him a cool million. Did you, or anyone you know, EVER turn on the TV to see Chris Woodward hit? Do you think anyone (other than his parents) bought a ticket to a Mets game to see Aaron Sele?

Yet, their million-dollar (or nearly million-dollar) salaries are dismissed by everyone. No one talks about Miguel Cairo getting a seven-figure contract, because, in relation to the A-Rods and Andruws and the Chippers and the Beltrans, it’s chump change. The value is lost because of the astronomical salaries around them.

But tell me: how many teachers make $850,000 a year? How many doctors make $2.5M, which is what Bobby Kielty raked in to be a fourth or fifth outfielder for the Athletics (before being released!). Why is there such an uproar about the salary demands of an uber-superstar, the greatest baseball player of all-time, yet not even a squeak about Jose Mesa making more money in one season than most of us will see in a lifetime?

I did some browsing at Cot’s Baseball Contracts and picked a few players at random and their salaries (you can click on their names to see their stats on Baseball-Reference.

[TABLE=27]

Again, remove yourself from whatever you think about $30M for a baseball player. Look at these guys independently as the bench warmers, has-beens, and valueless players they are in relation to their exorbitant salaries. If need be, compare one of their salaries to YOURS … in fact, compare one salary for one season to your salary over the next ten years. Do you honestly believe that a backup catcher or a middle reliever is worth more money than what you can give to this Earth over the next ten years?

Now again, who is the idiot?

The owners, for allowing utility infielders and fifth starters to make in excess of three, four, five, six, seven million dollars or more in a season — or Scott Boras, for trying to get top dollar for one of the few guys who can “put fannies in the seats” ?

There was a time I also believed that Scott Boras was the devil, but that thought has changed considerably. What I realized is this: the owners have the dough, so if they don’t spend it on an A-Rod, or an Andruw Jones, or some other star, it will go in their pocket. Say all you want about the Yankees spending $225M on payroll, but at least they are pushing their profits back into the business. Can the Braves say the same? Or are they talking about how much money the shareholders will be getting as a result of their outstanding fiscal management of the baseball operations this past quarter?

Boras is constantly looked upon as the bad guy … and yet we’ve never heard a report of him putting a gun to an owner’s head to agree to a contract.

Are the salaries for baseball players insane? Absolutely. Is it Scott Boras’ fault? Hardly.