Interviews

Today we have a Q&A with ESPN's Jayson Stark.  His articles can be found here, and his blog is here.  You can follow Jayson on Twitter @jaysonst.

MLB Trade Rumors: What do you think about Twitter?  Do you find it useful?  Do you think we'll see writers breaking baseball news on Twitter, given the immediacy of it?

Jayson Stark: I love Twitter. I love following my favorite writers, bloggers and media heroes, and being updated all day long. But here’s the debate I have every day: My personal philosophy is that we shouldn’t be tweeting anything of significance that hasn’t been posted on our sites or published in our newspapers/publications first. So while I might fire a stream-of-consciousness statistical tidbit out there, I would never post a news item unless it had already been reported on ESPN.com first. If other people in the industry feel differently, I’d love to hear their thinking.

MLBTR: How many phone calls go into a typical Rumblings and Grumblings column?  Do those columns elicit a lot of feedback from front office people?

Stark: Hmmm. Somewhere between 10 and 1,000, give or take a few hundred. Every week is different, of course. But just looking back at last week’s Rumblings, I’d say we’re talking around 20 phone calls, quite a few emails and a bunch of conversations at the ballpark. I also keep a daily notebook that logs subjects I’m interested in exploring. Not all of them lead to notes, columns or blog items. But they keep me busy, anyway. I don’t know how much “feedback” I get from Rumblings items, but I know people out there are reading it. I’ll put it that way. If someone out there disagrees with my portrayal of his team’s thinking, I’ll often have that person seek me out to let me know how or why he or she disagrees. And I appreciate that. I never want to position myself as someone who isn’t open to criticism or to differences of opinion on any topic.

MLBTR: Was there a moment where you were able to "flip the switch" from Phillies fan to beat writer?  Tell us about that process.

Stark: Well, I haven’t been a “Phillies fan” since I was a kid. So it wasn’t as hard as you might think. Once I got into the newspaper business, the idea was to be a professional, not to be a fan. So I actually felt as though I conquered that barrier without much trouble. Now I did grow up in Philadelphia. So I aspire to cover Philadelphia baseball stories from that perspective, and always have. But I try to explain to people all the time that there’s a difference between being a Philadelphian and being a Phillies fan. I didn’t root for the Phillies to win that World Series, for example. But I understood what it meant to Philadelphia that they did.

MLBTR: What compelled you to leave your job with the Philadelphia Inquirer to write for ESPN.com?  Back in 2000, were there any signs for you that newspapers were headed toward a decline?

Stark: I’m not going to pretend I wasn’t worried about the newspaper industry at that point. But that’s not why I left. I had a great job, and I’d have been happy to work at the Inquirer, doing that job, for the rest of my career. But who in our business wouldn’t want to work for ESPN and ESPN.com? I was lucky enough to be offered that opportunity, and I’d have had to be the biggest knucklehead in history to have turned down a chance like that. ESPN is an amazing place, where the most talented people in our industry aim for greatness every day. I know exactly how lucky I am to work there, especially given the problems out there in the newspaper industry. But I still love newspapers and the newspaper business, so it pains me to see my friends in the business so worried about what the future holds.

MLBTR: Is it imperative that a baseball writer keep up with the latest statistical advancements?  Or should that be optional?

Stark: “Imperative” is a great word. I don’t want to suggest it should be required by law or anything. But our job is to cover the sport and everything that goes with it. Our job is also to understand the sport we cover on every possible level. So I don’t understand why someone who covers baseball would even WANT to ignore the incredible advancements in statistical baseball analysis. The brilliant minds at Baseball Prospectus, Hardball Times, FanGraphs, Baseball Info Solutions, etc. are making a remarkable contribution to our understanding of the sport. Anyone in our business who dismisses that contribution is missing out both on great work and a great opportunity to elevate his or her own knowledge of baseball.

MLBTR: Do we need some sort of baseball media watchdog, in the vein of the now-inactive Fire Joe Morgan blog?  Do you consider that type of criticism all in good fun, or is it too harsh?

Stark: In many ways, mlbtraderumors.com is filling that void. Isn’t it? I know your site is interested almost exclusively in hot-stove type topics. But it’s awesome to have someone keep track of the evolution of all the significant hot-stove stories of the day. Beyond that, though, I do expect someone to jump in and fill the media-watchdog void, or maybe a bunch of someones. At least I hope that’s the case. I think criticism is more than just something that goes with the territory. It’s important that all of us aspire to the highest standards possible, and I have no problem with critics who hold us accountable if we don’t meet those standards. I’m not a big fan of mean-spiritedness. I’ll admit that. So if someone does emerge as the ultimate watchdog voice, I’d prefer that it be someone who performs that job with a sense of not just professionalism, but an understanding of the demands of our job. But criticism is an important, necessary part of our business. We dole it out all the time. So why shouldn’t we be open to folks who disagree with the way we do our jobs?

MLBTR: What's up with Jimmy Rollins this year?  Is this just a good old-fashioned slump?

Stark: For the most part, I’d say yes. But when a funk goes on for over a month, is it still a “slump?” I think there are a couple of forces at work. For one thing, Jimmy was incredibly geared up for the WBC, got himself totally locked in and clearly was the best player on Team USA. Then I think he got back to spring training, allowed himself to downshift for a week or so and then couldn’t find the game-on button when it came time to push it in April. But what’s really surprising  is to see him revert to the kind of impatient, pull-happy hitter he used to be early in his career. I think he’s been so anxious to make something happen, put up numbers and repeat that World Series journey – not necessarily in that order – that he hasn’t allowed himself to exhale, have the kind of quality at-bats he had in his MVP season (or the WBC) and just trust his talent. We often think that winning – and collecting awards – would allow players like this to relax. In his case, I feel as if it we’re seeing almost the opposite force at work.

MLBTR: Your guess at the best starting pitcher who will be truly made available for trade in July?

Stark: At this point, I’d say Jake Peavy. The Blue Jays’ great start makes the Roy Halladay talk moot. I’m skeptical that Drayton McLane would sign off on a Roy Oswalt deal. The Indians hold an option on Cliff Lee, and they don’t have an ace in waiting to succeed him the way they did last year with Lee taking that baton from CC. So Peavy is the one ace out there whose team will have clear-cut motivation to trade him. But here’s my question: Had the Padres been able to pull off that four-team mega-deal last winter that would have involved the Cubs, Phillies and Orioles, they would have gotten seven players back. So doesn’t that Deal That Never Was have to be stuck in Kevin Towers’ head when he listens to offers in July? He isn’t going to get that kind of return in midseason. So it’s certainly possible he’ll wait until next winter to revisit this, hoping there’s a better package out there in December than he’d get in July.

ESPN's Jerry Crasnick recently answered a few questions for MLB Trade Rumors.  You can read Jerry's excellent work here, and pick up his book License To Deal here.

MLB Trade Rumors: What was it like covering the Marge Schott Reds for the Cincinnati Post?  I read that she banned you from the press dining room for printing Tim Belcher's criticism of her dog.

Jerry Crasnick: Between Marge Schott, Pete Rose, and Lou Piniella, Cincinnati was the epicenter of the baseball universe when I was there. Marge had this bizarre notion that mediocre food could be used as a weapon, so she banned several writers from the media dining room for unflattering stories. I got the boot after Tim Belcher publicly complained about Schottzie 02 nipping at players and defecating on the field. Belcher actually had pizzas and sandwiches sent up to the press box the next day with a handwritten note. He signed his name at the bottom with a little pawprint beside it. The letter is in a box somewhere in my basement. Needless to say, Tim Belcher remains one of my all-time favorite players.

MLBTR: Related question…as a beat writer for the Reds and Rockies, did you ever shy away from criticizing the team or players knowing that it might affect your access?  How does a beat writer deal with that issue?

Crasnick: There's a fine line. You try to maintain the lines of communication with everyone, because it's such a long season. But if the cleanup hitter is batting .180 or the manager just messed up a double-switch, the fans all know it. If you're a homer or an apologist as a beat writer, you'll lose your credibility in a hurry. I would try to inject opinions subtly rather than beating people over the head, but that's not for everybody. I remember writing a story once about the late Bo Diaz, and I said that he hated the media so much, "He'd ask for a blindfold and a cigarette if you tried to interview him.'' Judging from his reaction, Bo failed to see the humor in it.

MLBTR: License To Deal was published four years ago.  Have you considered writing another book?

Crasnick: I give it passing thought here and there, but I think it's almost impossible to work full-time and devote the attention necessary to the type of book I'd like to write. I recently read Mark Kriegel's Pete Maravich biography, and I was blown away by the level of detail and the care that he put into it. I'd love to attempt something like that one day, but it's just a far-flung dream at this point. The most important thing is coming up with an idea that you're really passionate about.

MLBTR: How would you describe your role at ESPN?  It seems like you're a jack of all trades with features, hot stove info, chats, and analysis.  Also, any possibility of you joining ESPN's stable of baseball bloggers?

Crasnick: I think we're all jacks-of-all-trades to an extent. Tim Kurkjian writes for the magazine and the Web site. Jayson Stark does everything well. And Buster Olney writes a blog, does Baseball Tonight, works for the magazine, appears on Mike & Mike in the morning and just did a terrific TV piece for "ESPN:60.'' He must sleep about three hours a night. We have such a wide array of bloggers, with those guys, Peter Gammons, Rob Neyer and Keith Law, I really don't know if there's a niche for me to fill. I'd rather not do it just for the sake of doing it.

MLBTR: Which teams would you say failed to address their needs this offseason?

Crasnick: The teams that spring to mind, for me, are the legit postseason contenders who could use one more piece. Cincinnati needed a right-handed run producer to take the load off Votto, Bruce and Brandon Phillips. The Phillies needed a RH bat off the bench. Cleveland obviously could have used another starter. Given the economic climate last winter, I don't know if there's any club (other than the Yankees) that acquired pretty much everything it wanted.

MLBTR: Any sleepers for us that you feel could be traded this summer?

Crasnick: I guess that leaves out Roy Halladay, Jake Peavy and Matt Holliday, right? It's tough to predict in April, because you have no idea where teams are going to be in June or July. If Seattle is out of it, I can certainly see Jack Zduriencik shopping Erik Bedard and Adrian Beltre. And Andy MacPhail with the Orioles is always looking to parlay veteran pieces into long-term solutions. Did somebody say "Aubrey Huff"? Regardless of what happens, I'm sure you'll see Billy Beane's name crop up in the news coverage.

MLBTR: The Winter Meetings seem like chaos for a reporter.  How do you decide which stories to chase?  With ESPN's Winter Meetings blog, what kind of lag is there in you submitting a post and it being published?

Crasnick: The winter meetings blog was a great way for us to take information that we'd gathered in the Bellagio lobby (right near the slot machines), hustle back to the workroom and crank it out. Typically, it was posted on-line within minutes. Years ago, you could go to the meetings and  entertain the thought of planning out a story or two. But there's such a thirst among fans for "real-time'' reporting now, you have to stay light on your feet. When CC Sabathia sneezes or Mark Teixeira clears his throat, everybody wants to know about it. People can't get enough gossip, rumors and instant analysis, and the success of your Web site and so many Internet sites and blogs is reflective of that.

Recently ESPN's Keith Law kindly answered a few questions for MLB Trade Rumors.  Law formerly served as Blue Jays Special Assistant to the GM, and has spent the last few years as the lead analyst for ESPN's Scouts, Inc. branch.  Essential Law links: his MLB draft blog, Stephen Strasburg analysis, his general ESPN blog, and his personal blog The Dish. 

MLB Trade Rumors: On occasion, you've revealed information in chats about a player's off-the-field troubles that was not publicly known or hadn't gotten much press.  How has this been received by your readers, bosses, and front office contacts?

Keith Law: Some readers get annoyed because they don't want to believe it. My bosses know that I'm meticulous about information like that – I only write about these matters if I believe they are substantially or wholly accurate. For example, the Alcides Escobar story – I have a copy of his daughter's birth certificate with his name as the father, I spoke to the attache at the U.S. Consulate in Panama who has helped Escobar's wife, and so on. I think the Brewers would just like the story to go away, frankly, but it's not going to unless it's addressed.

MLBTR: A related question: when you rank prospects, how big of a factor is makeup?  What's the highest number of positions you've moved a prospect on your top 100 (either up or down) due to makeup?

Law: It's only a big factor for me if I think it's really affecting or going to affect the player's production. And even then I would be careful – Robinson Cano had major knocks on his makeup when he was in the minors, and even with his ups and downs he's been a pretty productive big leaguer. If I'd been writing at the time and had given the makeup issues major consideration (he was considered a "dog" by many scouts because he showed little effort, especially in the field), I would have grossly underrated him.

MLBTR: One scout told Buster Olney that Stephen Strasburg is better than A.J. Burnett right now.  Do you agree?  If not, how close is he?

Law: I think that's a bit hyperbolic, but I do think Strasburg could pitch in the majors right now and would be Washington's #1 starter if they could sign him quickly and stick him in their rotation in June. I'm not saying they have to take another starter at #10, but they could have Strasburg, Zimmerman, and another polished college arm like Kyle Gibson in their 2010 rotation. Shore up the defense a little and they could be in line for a pretty significant improvement in W/L record in 2010-11 with that jump in run prevention. 

(Click here for Law's ESPN report on Strasburg, plus video of the young pitcher).

MLBTR: A few years ago you were asked which player you thought would become a star but never did, for reasons unknown.  You answered Carlos Pena.  Since then he's put up excellent numbers, so who takes the mantle now?

Law: I'm asked this sort of question in chats all the time, but since I didn't start scouting amateur players at all until 2003 – and it might be more accurate to say that I started seeing amateur players in 2003, but didn't learn to evaluate them for some time after that – most of my answers would come from the perspective of my old role as a stat analyst. Andy Marte's probably the best answer I can give, especially since I did see him in his first spring with Cleveland and loved his swing, so he's a case where I could offer both perspectives and still missed on him. And do we have a good idea why Jerome Williams never developed?

MLBTR: I have a feeling that your style of writing may generate more angry correspondence from readers than the average columnist.  Have you been able to develop a thick skin?  Is there an occasional email or comment that makes your blood boil?

Law: I'm not thick-skinned or thin-skinned, but I do believe strongly in calling out people who take advantage of the anonymity of the Internet to slander people or generally act in ways in which they wouldn't act if they had to write under their own names. Many people, perhaps most, will back off when they realize that their comments are truly public and that the target might see them and choose to defend himself. And I think most readers are unaccustomed to getting responses like that. If people wrote like they believed their targets were reading, they'd be more civil. And civility is a good thing.

That said, I'm amused by how personally some readers take my comments. Why do you care that I said that Joey Bagodonuts is only going to be a fourth outfielder or a fifth starter in the majors? What I say has zero impact on a player's career path, and if you are worried about my analyses affecting a player's trade value, well, thanks for the compliment, but I'm not sure I believe that either.

MLBTR: What's your favorite major fast food chain?

Law: Five Guys, assuming that's "major." I like In-n-Out, but their burgers are not close to Five Guys', and I like Rubio's as well (I used to like Baja Fresh, and then I tried Rubio's). Peter Reinhart, one of my favorite cookbook authors, has written about the biscuits at Bojangle's, so I need to check that out the next time I'm in the south.

All else being equal, though, I prefer to avoid fast food. I like patronizing local places; I like the challenge of finding those restaurants and I believe in supporting establishments that are serving honest, authentic food, food made from fresh ingredients that either preserves cooking traditions or tries to push cuisine in new directions. And I don't like the way major fast-food chains have sacrificed quality, both in the end product but also in the treatment of animals during the process, in the name of driving down costs. Reducing the cost of a high-definition television is one thing, but reducing the cost of a hamburger? I'd rather eat fewer burgers, pay more when I do, and get a much better end product.

Murray Chass covered baseball for the New York Times for almost 40 years, and now his work can be found at MurrayChass.com.  Chass answered questions for MLB Trade Rumors over email recently.

MLB Trade Rumors: You could be called a trailblazer with MurrayChass.com, as it’s the first time I recall a veteran baseball journalist going independent while continuing to make calls, report, and do newspaper-style stories.  It seems that Tracy Ringolsby and others are following suit…is this the beginning of a trend?

Murray Chass: I think it’s premature to talk about a trend because we don’t know how many newspaper people might follow, but given the state of the newspaper industry and the rapid rate at which jobs and entire papers are disappearing or threatening to disappear, I can see the practice developing.

MLBTR: Why did you create MurrayChass.com?  Given that there is no revenue source, is it the sheer enjoyment of writing?  What is it like to be free of editors?

Chass: You are right about there being no revenue source, although that might be a reason not too many people would follow. In my case, I decided to take the attractive buyout the Times offered because I figured it might not be offered again. I also didn’t like the direction in which the sports editor was going. But I wasn’t prepared to quit writing. I enjoyed writing baseball columns my last four plus years at the Times and I wasn’t ready to stop. Rather than try to hook on with an existing Web site, I decided to start my own site so I could write the kind of columns I wanted to write. Most of the columns on existing sites are geared to where this player or that is going, and that’s not what I wanted to do.

As for editors, I don’t miss them. They can serve a purpose, saving a writer from mistakes, for example. But I see enough mistakes in the Times, which is heavily edited, so editors aren’t the answer.

MLBTR: Has it affected your access, not being affiliated with the New York Times anymore?

Chass: Not at all. The people who know me still take and return my calls, and others who don’t know me but are aware of my name and reputation do the same. The only thing I have changed is if I call someone I have never talked to I identify myself as Murray Chass from murraychass.com and formerly of the Times. I don’t presume that everybody knows my name.

MLBTR: You’ve said you hate blogs.  Is it just certain ones, or do you hate the entire medium?  Do you think that, like Buzz Bissinger discovered, there may be a few out there you would enjoy reading?

Chass: I laugh at the whole blog thing now. I think I objected to blogs initially because my newspaper colleagues and I had worked for many, many years learning and polishing our craft, and suddenly anyone who wanted could write a blog on the Internet with no experience, no credibility and no accountability. I have made mistakes occasionally in my Web site columns — fortunately very few — and I correct them. I don’t know that bloggers acknowledge and correct their mistakes.

I don’t read blogs as a steady diet because I don’t have time. I spend too much time as it is working on my columns, talking to people and keeping up with baseball news and developments. Instead of reading blogs, I’d rather spend my time going to concerts and Broadway shows and doing other things to live a varied life.   

MLBTR: Regarding sabermetrics and the advanced stats used these days…do you believe it’s possible to fully embrace these stats without discounting the human side of the game?  Can a person have full appreciation for both?

Chass: I think the whole statistical analysis thing is generational. Older guys like me have little use for the new-fangled stuff. I’m certainly not the only one. Younger writers go more for the stats stuff. I think baseball people — general managers, for example — have to use all means of evaluation available for their own protection. I would hope that even Billy Beane occasionally listens to his scouts. One of the things I didn’t like about "Moneyball" was the way Michael Lewis put down Oakland scouts. I have great respect for scouts. The good ones are pretty darn amazing.

Perhaps my biggest problem with the stats generation is they ignore the fact that human beings play the game.  I think stats have a place, and I use them to bolster a story when called for, but they are not everything and the newer ones have little benefit to most readers.

MLBTR: Some writers rejected the new advanced stats of recent years.  Were you met with similar resistance when you introduced more detailed coverage of free agent contracts and labor negotiations?

Chass: That’s a very good and interesting question. Contract coverage for sure. People, including some writers, made fun of my use of dollar signs so often, but today you can’t read a story about free agents as well as non-free agents without seeing what the guy signed for or the amount of the guy’s new contract. I, on the other hand, am less interested in contracts, though I use the information when it is relevant (like statistics).

In labor coverage, baseball writers definitely tried to avoid covering negotiations. They were interested only in the games on the field. In the 1981 strike, the New York Daily News had three baseball writers, but none of them wanted any part of the strike coverage so the News used its newsside labor writer. He didn’t know anyone in baseball, and the owners’ chief negotiator quickly saw him as someone he could feed stuff to and get his spin in the paper. The strike was about half over when the reporter discovered he was being used.

During the 1994 strike the two sides didn’t negotiate for months once the strike began and the NBA was negotiating a new labor deal so the Times had me cover those negotiations. I quickly learned that the NBA writers wanted to cover those talks even less than baseball writers wanted to cover baseball talks. I loved covering labor because it was like being a real reporter, and I loved being a reporter.

FOX Sports baseball guru Ken Rosenthal answered questions for MLBTR on Saturday…

MLBTR: I don’t have an official count, but I believe you’ve broken more MLB signings and trades than any other reporter over the past several years.  Is it still a thrill for you to break news?

Rosenthal: Oh, of course. It also hurts to lose. So, you’re motivated both ways. I don’t have much of a temper – at least I don’t think I do – but I will occasionally let loose after getting beat. My wife and kids look at me look I’m nuts. And it’s sort of difficult for me to argue the point!

MLBTR: Hundreds of baseball writers are trying to break news, including perhaps your stiffest competition in SI.com’s Jon Heyman and the ESPN crew.  Do you share information with other writers?  Or is it more of a "every man for himself" situation?

Rosenthal: Everyone for themselves, now more than ever. I don’t share with anyone, and I don’t believe anyone else does, either. Every web site and every newspaper is in competition. And there are so many hard-working baseball reporters, you never know who might come up with something next.

MLBTR: Say you snag a scoop on a signing.  What has to happen before that story hits the FOX website?  What is a typical amount of time between you confirming the info and it hitting the website?

Rosenthal: The turnaround is incredibly quick, especially if I’m able to give our editors a heads-up that something is coming (which isn’t always the case). I’ve never actually timed it, but I would guess that it takes no more than 1-2 minutes for us to post a story. I would imagine this is true for the other web sites and many of the newspapers as well.

MLBTR: If a team source or an agent gives you information that feels like propaganda to you, do you still run with it?

Rosenthal: My job is to inform my readers, not serve the interest of others. I am no one’s stooge, and my sources know it.

MLBTR: A scoop on a signing or trade – do you have to confirm that with multiple sources?  Or is one rock-solid source sufficient?

Rosenthal: Depends. All of us were taught to use multiple sources. However, the business has changed. There are times I will go with a story even if I have only one source. Too often, if you wait for multiple confirmations, you get beat. I do think, however, it is important to be accurate, more important than it is to be first.

MLBTR: These days it seems like every beat writer and national guy has a blog and can publish news instantly.  Does that make your job more difficult?  Have you considered starting up a blog similar to Jon Heyman’s, where you could drop in a few quick paragraphs on a topic?

Rosenthal: Absoutely, the job gets more difficult by the day, with so many writers in competition. I do live updates like Jon’s during the winter meetings, but if I have a news item in other periods, I just turn it into a story. Not much of a difference, really, in my mind.

MLBTR: You have a fairly unique and very interesting job, at least to the average hot stove junkie.  I’ve read that you have three kids – what do they think of their dad’s line of work?  Do they share the same passion for the inside side of the game?   

Rosenthal: My wife and children do not follow baseball. They are not at all caught up in what I do. Which, for me, is fantastic. They keep me very grounded.  My kids are 17, 16 and 13. They’re all busy with their own lives, and my wife is busy keeping them going. C.C. Sabathia, Mark Teixeira, Scott Boras – not on their radar.

MLBTR: Did you enjoy the Winter Meetings this year?  Do you have any suggestions on how MLB could improve this event?

Rosenthal: I don’t know that any reporter "enjoys" the winter meetings; they’re pretty intense! As for improving ’em, I don’t know. Some believe they’re obsolete. Most people in baseball communicate by phone, e-mail or text message. Still, having everyone in one place creates a certain deal-making dynamic, in some cases. The attention is good for the game.