Derek Jeter Biographer Ian O'Connor Defends His Subject -- Again

ESPN New York's Ian O'Connor has written yet another column lauding the merits of Derek Jeter, without bothering to mention that he has written an upcoming book on the Yankee captain with the cooperation of Jeter and his friends and family. That makes at least a half-dozen times since the fall that O'Connor has written such a pro-Jeter column without even a cursory disclaimer about the book.

And that's problematic, especially given that the book is billed as being written with inside access to the captain. O'Connor's publisher's blurb says that in the upcoming book "The Captain: The Journey of Derek Jeter" O’Connor" draws on extensive reporting and unique access to Jeter that has spanned some fifteen years." BN.com's promotion for the book says O'Connor "draws on unique access to Jeter and more than 200 new interviews."

I first wrote about this conflict of interest back in October, and then again in November (twice) and in December. And here we are in March, and O'Connor is still writing fawning articles about Jeter, without the simplest of disclaimers. Given that he has a financial stake in the subject, he should tell his readers about the book, and how he got inside access from Jeter for it.

O'Connor doesn't just write slobbering columns on the captain, but he has positioned those columns as being the inside view of Jeter. In one of them, he said Jeter wanted to play until 2017 (!) and that Jeter's trainer, Jason Riley claimed that "the desire to be the greatest can never be turned down by Father Time."

In another one last fall, O'Connor pushed for the Yankees to give Jeter a four-year, $23 million deal, saying those dollar figures would be "fair," and writing:

"There's no need to diminish him by demanding that he take a pay cut. If one athlete of this generation deserves to be overpaid, it's Jeter. A token, thanks-for-the-memories bump to $23 million would suffice.

There are a lot of pro-Jeter writers in this town, but nobody else in New York suggested such a ridiculous new contract for the captain.

O'Connor's most recent Jeter article says that he "desperately wants a dignified endgame to his career, and he knows that being a New York Yankees icon never guarantees you one." O'Connor also writes that "Jeter wasn't hurt so much by the tens of millions of dollars that the Yankees wouldn't give him. He was hurt by the public nature of the quarrel with his employer, and by the fact he was sucked into a swirling A-Rodian drama he couldn't control."  Well, is O'Connor speculating on the emotions here, or did Jeter tell him that's the way he felt? And if it's the latter, why did he share that with O'Connor? Is it because of the book?

Not to mention that O'Connor completely neglected to note that Jeter's agent Casey Close helped make this situation public, when he whined about being "baffled" by the Yankees stance, and compared his client to Babe Ruth. For some strange reason, that didn't make it into this article.

O'Connor also writes in the most recent piece that:

If he needs to be taken out of the leadoff spot and, ultimately, deposited near the bottom of the order, that will be a huge, franchise-rattling story. If he needs to be moved from shortstop to who knows where, the coverage of that demotion will be defined by an apocalyptic tone.

For now, Jeter is still Jeter, a future Hall of Famer who just needed some extra face time with the hitting coach, Kevin Long. With the contract done and the footwork adjusted, the smart money says the captain will make something of a comeback this year.

If Jeter needs to be moved down in the lineup, or switch positions, he will only have to do what every single superstar eventually faces. Is O'Connor suggesting that Jeter be held to a different standard?

I personally think Jeter will have a very good 2011 -- the anger over the contract talks this winter will motivate him, I think -- but this article is so filled with spin, it's like a washing machine or something. And you have to wonder if some of that spin is due to O'Connor's new book on Jeter.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Some compromise: Derek Jeter and his Neiman-Marcus negotiating style

After Bill Madden leaked the "$25 million over six years" figure that Derek Jeter wanted from the Yankees, it took all day for Casey Close to deny the number, finally saying at 4 p.m., "The recently reported terms of our contract proposal are simply inaccurate." Then  it came out, according to the New York Times, that instead of $25 million, Jeter "only" wanted between $23-24 million over 4-5 years. Whoopee.

Instead of focusing of how out of line Jeter's demands are, the Times' Michael G. Schmidt thinks this shows an area where the they cans split the difference:

"Still, the current offers — three years at $15 million a year by the Yankees and a maximum five years at $23 to $24 million by Close — suggest an obvious compromise in which the two sides would settle at four years and, say, $19 million a year."

Puh-lease. What a deal -- for Jeter. He's still be in the top-10 highest paid players, when he's barely in the top-10 most-productive shortstops, let alone players, any more.

This reminds me of my experience shopping at any Neiman-Marcus store. The prices are so high for most of the items, like $1100 for a dress, that when you see a markdown, like in one of the Neiman-Marcus Last Call stores, you start to think "oh, $250 for a pair of jeans isn't quite so bad." It is, but when you're seeing so many ridiculously-high prices, it distorts your idea of what you should spend, and what is reasonably priced.

I wonder if that's the Jeter/Close strategy here. Remember, Bill Madden said he got his figures from sources in the Jeter/Close camp. Did they want this to leak out, so they could deny it,  and then leak more "reasonable" figures? It sounds like a dopey strategy to me, but given how poorly the Jeter camp has handled this so far, it wouldn't  surprise me in the least.


It's amazing how much the most popular sports figure in the city has taken such a tumble, due to his greed. Today's New York Posts has a poll where almost 3/4  of their readers say that the Yankees' current offer is "fair." And Daily News readers in their site's poll aren't exactly supporting the captain in overwhelming numbers as well -- only 26% support Jeter, with 44% against him, and the rest blaming both sides equally.

At any rate, I never want to hear Yankee fans tell me again about how Derek Jeter is all about the team, and  A-Rod is all about money. If the pinstripes really meant so much to Jeter, he would have signed that very generous offer already, instead of being fixated on being paid like A-Rod.


What do you think? Tell us about it!

Is Ian O'Connor Derek Jeter's media mouthpiece?

According to ESPN New York columnist Ian O'Connor's most recent piece, not only will Derek Jeter play until 2017 (!), but he'll be doing it at the highest of levels, too, with most of those years at shortstop. At least, that's what Jason Riley, Jeter's paid personal trainer, says to the columnist.

O'Connor, the writer whose upcoming book about Jeter has the full cooperation of the captain and the people around him, devotes a full column to letting Riley have his say, with very little in the way of tough questioning or skepticism.

Oh, and by the way, O'Connor is still not disclosing that Jeter book in his ESPN writings, a potential conflict of interest that raises a whole lot of questions. Like, is Riley a source for his book? Did Jeter direct his trainer to speak for him, and let it be known that he wants to play until he's 43? And does the 2017 number have anything to do with Alex Rodriguez being signed through that season?

We don't get answers to any of those questions -- heck, we don't even get any appropriate amount of skepticism about Jeter's undeserved 2010 Gold Glove -- in O'Connor's article. But we do get tidbits like these:

Speaking from inside a Jeter camp that rarely opens a public window on its soul, especially during contract negotiations, Riley mentioned George Blanda, George Foreman, Dara Torres and Brett Favre as athletes who thrived after turning 40. The trainer believes Jeter will join those golden oldies in Mariano Rivera's bullpen.


"The desire to be the greatest," Riley said, "can never be turned down by Father Time."...

"I don't think anything can hold Derek back other than himself. If he decides to hang it up before [he turns 43], then that will be his decision. If Derek decides at 41 he's already given his best years, then that's where it will end. But if he decides to go until he's 43, he'll do everything in his power to play the game at a high level and help the team through that time. I think there's so much determination inside of Derek that he can do it."

What nonsense. Brett Favre may still think he's like a kid out there, but age has caught up to him. As it does to everybody eventually. If all it took was determination to succeed, then why would any elite athlete ever need to retire? You don't think Michael Jordan -- one of the greatest competitors of all time -- wouldn't still be out there on the basketball court at age 47 if all it took was inner drive?

When Jeter's trainer is asked about the shortstop's disappointing 2010 season, Riley responds:

"I won't speak on whether it was worse, the same or better," Riley said, "but I've definitely had conversations with Derek about what our thoughts are on this past season. We're looking into it and we're really going to evaluate it. I've got a lot of people, my staff around me, who are evaluating this.

Better? Come on now. Was Riley one of the Gold Glove voters or something?

Riley continues:

"It's a long season, and your body gets beaten up, and we have to find a way to keep Derek fresh over 162 games. It's a work in progress."

As for finding "a way to keep Derek fresh over 162 games," how about the captain agreeing to a day off once in a while? Mind-blowing, I know!

More from the trainer:

"You can't put an age on the heart of an athlete, and Derek's got one of the purest hearts in sports," Riley said. "He's not going to allow himself to have another down year, if he even considers 2010 a down year. His internal drive separates him from others. I've worked with very few people who go after the game like he does."

If Jeter doesn't consider 2010 a down year, he is delusional, not determined. Many players going for a new contract have a great year, like A-Rod and Jorge Posada's terrific 2007 seasons. Jeter has the worst season of his career in a walk year, but I guess there's nothing to worry about because of his pure heart and internal drive or something? C'mon now.

In an odd way, this piece kind of fits in with a Keith Olbermann blog entry this week about Jeter, about how he was apparently in such denial over his slump this year that he wouldn't begin to start to change his approach at the plate until September:

The question various Yankee non-players had been asking Jeter since the spring, as the ground balls multiplied and the extra-base hits vanished, was a simple one: Do you realize you are about to be 36 years old? Do you understand that what's happening to you isn't some failure of strength? Are you getting the hint that you have to change your approach at the plate? It was asked in any of a dozen different forms by possibly as many would-be helpers, and only when the well ran dry as the dog days approached did Jeter finally accept the possibility.

At any rate, between this piece, and the Casey Close whinefest in today's Mike Lupica column, which seems to consist of "Waaaaah, waaaaah, the Yankees said Jeter was the modern-day Babe Ruth, but they won't give him a gazillion dollars," Jeter's strategy this year is terrible. Doesn't he realize that the longer this goes on, the worse he -- and not the Yankees -- look?

As Ken Davidoff writes today in Newsday:

If these last few weeks of the "Jeter vs. the Yankees" saga have taught us anything, it's that the Yankees' captain is human.

Which, you know, runs contrary to much of the mythologizing we've absorbed in the last 15 or so years....

If Jeter were to live up to his own myth, he'd shrug, say "I've been far more lucky than unlucky in my professional life" and sign what the Yankees offer him, which stands as much more than any other club appears prepared to give him.

But the pride and competitiveness that help make him such a great player? They don't take the winter off. After all, if Jeter really cared about absolutely nothing besides winning, he wouldn't have contributed to the tension with A-Rod that didn't dissipate until A-Rod's 2009 comeuppance.

And he wouldn't bristle about any questions concerning his future spot in the lineup or position. He may give you the "nothing matters besides winning" line, but good luck getting the "whatever is best for the team" line.

Jeter's not doing anything that any other star in his position wouldn't do. The difference is, we've been told for so many years that he is above such things.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Will Jeter play until age 42? And what will the Yankees be getting for their money?

A day after Hal Steinbrenner warned that "there's always the possibility that things could get messy" with negotiating with Derek Jeter, Sports Illustrated's Jon Heyman wrote that New York Yankees shortstop could be asking for an additional six years so he could play until age 42. That just happens to be the same age that teammate Alex Rodriguez is signed through. Here's what Heyman said:

jeter could take awhile. #yanks may be thinking 2-3 yrs. but industry sources suggest he could ask to stay 'til hes 42 (6 yrs), a la arod.

What Heyman wrote that the captain would be asking for would not surprise me. ESPN's Ian O'Connor, who Jeter is cooperating with on a book, wrote this summer that Jeter wants to play into his forties.
But what will the Yankees be getting for paying Jeter for so long? Even Jeter's agent Casey Close didn't promise that Jeter in the future would be anything more than a Yankee icon for that time or salary. Here's what he told AOL Fanhouse:

"While it is not our intent to negotiate the terms of Derek's free-agent contract in a public forum," Casey Close told FanHouse, "we do agree with Hal's and Brian (Cashman, the GM)'s recent comments that this contract is about business and winning championships.

"Clearly, baseball is a business, and Derek's impact on the sport's most valuable franchise cannot be overstated. Moreover, no athlete embodies the spirit of a champion more than Derek Jeter."

Really. No other athlete "embodies the spirit of a champion more than Derek Jeter"?  You have to be kidding me. Just on a Yankee basis, is Jeter more of a winner than Yogi Berra with his ten rings, or Babe Ruth, or Joe DiMaggio. or Lou Gehrig, or Mickey Mantle? Why does Jeter, who has won exactly one ring in the last decade, (incidentally, the same number as A-Rod, the player who suffers in comparison to him), who was captain of the team that had the worst postseason collapse in baseball history, and whose team got outplayed this year by a team with 1/4 the payroll, "embodies the spirit of a champion" more than these Yankee legends do? C'mon now.

And in other sports, forget about Michael Jordan, or Bill Russell, or Kobe Bryant, or Magic Johnson, or Larry Bird, or Tiger Woods, or Martina Navratilova, or Roger Federer, or Joe Montana, or Terry Bradshaw. No, Jeter's more of a champion than any of them, according to Close. Puh-lease.

Unlike Mike Francesa, I'm not saying Jeter should be moved off shortstop for 2011 -- even with his down year, he still is one of the better offensive shortstops in baseball. And I don't even have a problem with the Yankees paying him big bucks for, say, three years, although he already has already been rewarded quite handsomely ($189 million in his last contract) for his impact on the team.

But there has to be a limit on how much the Yankees keep on paying him for past performance. Even Jeter's own agent seems to be suggesting that Jeter should be paid on his value as the face of the franchise over the last fifteen years, not on his current playing abilities.

And a new six-year deal is a long time to pay for the past. Unless you're ageless like Nolan Ryan or Jamie Moyer, or chemically enhanced like Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds were, what you're going to get at age 42 in even a superstar ballplayer isn't going to be very good. Remember the sadness of a 42-year-old Willie Mays stumbling around the field in the 1973 World Series?

And before you ask, yes, I expect A-Rod to look just as terrible at 42. But just because the Yankees made one dumb move with him, doesn't mean they have to do it again with Jeter. Three years is enough.

What do you think? Tell us about it!