Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

In Which the Case for Steve Garvey is Made by a Red Sox Fan

2008_206_0002_steve_garvey_78_1080_medium
via cardboardgods.files.wordpress.com


I was going to write some fake Plaschke to introduce Garvey, but then I realized that there was no need for that.  Josh Wilker* of Cardboard Gods wrote a brilliant piece on Steve Garvey.  One excerpt:

 

Here are two versions of history. Both could be said to follow the logic of dreams.

Version one: Steve Garvey did not go to Vietnam because he was a star. He had been a star in college and he was drafted in the first round by the Dodgers and one year later he made his debut in the major leagues, and once you were in the major leagues there was no more Vietnam. The year he made his debut, 1969, he played in spring training alongside a struggling minor leaguer named Roy Gleason. Gleason had played briefly for the Dodgers in 1963, doubling in his only at-bat, then in 1967 after failing to further distinguish himself in the minors he was drafted into the army, the only man to serve in Vietnam after logging so much as a single moment in the major leagues. He was sent home on a stretcher, wounded with shrapnel from a blast that killed the man standing beside him, his friend Tony Silvo. He left behind in Vietnam some personal effects, including his 1963 World Series ring.

Version two: Steve Garvey did not go to Vietnam because there was no such thing as Vietnam. Look at the card at the top of this page and tell me there was such a thing as Vietnam. Look at that card at the top of the page and tell me there was a place somewhere full of contradictions and ambiguity and needless suffering. Tell me there was a place where America has been defeated. Tell me there was a place that replaced our innocence with the knowledge that we were capable of unspeakable cruelties, that mutilated or killed our young men, that even stole one of our 1963 World Series rings. If you tell me there was a Vietnam I’ll tell you I don’t believe you.

I have another excerpt to include, but first I'll describe Garvey's case for the Lords of the Ravine a bit more.

Star-divide

Where do we begin with Steve Garvey?  From his successful write-in All-Star campaign in 1974, Garvey was a legend and a fan favorite.  He was a key part of "The Infield" from 1974-1981, and during his time as the starting 1B the Dodgers made it to the World Series 4 times, finally defeating the Yankees in 1981.  The BBWAA were probably right in denying him entry into the Hall of Fame; Garvey was a good, but not great hitter, particularly as a first baseman. 

The best-hitting player to ever be the Dodger first baseman was Hall of Famer Eddie Murray, from 1989-1991.  He posted this line in Dodger Blue:

.278/.359/.440, 65 HR, 279 RBI, 125 OPS+

Steve Garvey's line as a Dodger (1969-1982), on the other hand, looks like this:

.301/.337/.459, 211 HR, 992 RBI, 122 OPS+

And if you just count the seasons when he was the full-time starting 1B (1974-1982):

.306/.341/.467, 186 HR, 880 RBI, 125 OPS+

Really not that far off of Eddie Murray's Dodger stint.  Since Fangraphs doesn't have WAR going that far back, I looked at Baseball Prospectus for career Warp-3 as an LA Dodger. Listed here are those with a career Warp-3 of 10 or more as the Los Angeles Dodgers starting first baseman

Garvey 32.9

Karros 21.1

Parker 19.5

Murray 13.4

Looking only at the Los Angeles career saves Garvey from comparison to Gil Hodges, who was easily the best first baseman in the history of the franchise.  Also, most of Eddie Murray's best years were behind him when he joined the Dodgers; 1990 was great, but if you compare Murray's peak years to Garvey's peak years, it's obvious which player is a Hall of Fame guy.  But for our purposes, we're not; we're looking at the best LA Dodger first baseman, and that man is Steve Garvey.

But Garvey's qualifications go beyond that.  The legend of Steve Garvey, from his 1974 write-in campaign for the all-star team and MVP that year, he became the face of the Dodgers.  He was the first name of Garvey-Lopes-Russell-Cey, the kid whose dad drove the bus at Dodgertown.  He went on to inspire future generations, including Chipper Jones.  And he was a leader, the face of the franchise, the guy, the brand, and the guy that got paid to endorse a few brands.

Screw it.  I get it, but seeing as I neither lived in LA, was alive when he was a Dodger, started a blog in his honor and take a moniker where I call him dad, or know too much more about him than what I've read, I'm not the guy to write about him.  Instead, Josh Wilker says it best:

Some years after I first used this card to dream myself into the dream of America, Steve Garvey left the team with the red, white, and blue uniform. The jarring sight of him in nauseous brown and yellow foreshadowed the coming disillusionment that he was at least as complicated and fallible as anyone else. And the devaluing of the myth of Steve Garvey that accompanied revelations that he, as Bill James put it, “couldn’t keep his underpants off the infield” was followed by a gradual devaluing of his accomplishments on the field, former reverence for his ability to collect hits and RBI replaced by notice of his inability to get on base as often or hit for power as effectively as many of his lesser known peers. History has hollowed Steve Garvey.

The again, history says that Ford and then Carter led this country after Nixon’s resignation. But if a whole country is dreaming, couldn’t it be said that the figure nearest the center of that dream is the leader? Couldn’t you make a case that in the amnesiac years where Vietnam ceased to exist, those years between the faraway intimations of defeat and the coming of the supreme amnesiac American Dreamer, Ronald Reagan, Steve Garvey minded the store? Couldn’t you make a case that Steve Garvey, the people’s choice, the write-in candidate, the proud hero, was the leader of America Dreaming?

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you to vote for Steve Garvey.

*Wilker also has a book coming out this April, now available for pre-order.

Comment 34 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I don’t know how to use BBREF for individual games but I can remember a summer where Garvey had been slumping and then went on a tear that even Vin Scully who had seen everything would lose the adjectives to describe how hard he was hammering the ball during his torrid streak. I’ll never forget how impressed Vinnie was with each vicious line drive that erupted from his bat as though squeezed out of his popeye arms.

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen

by Phil Gurnee on Jan 14, 2010 4:27 PM PST reply actions  

Good stuff StolenMonkey

I didn’t notice this was on the front page when I published my Billingsley story, but it is now just below this one in case anyone missed it.

http://www.truebluela.com/2010/1/14/1251994/a-look-at-chad-billingsley-his

by Eric Stephen on Jan 14, 2010 4:35 PM PST reply actions  

45 at bats in NLDS produced a 1.158 OPS
90 at bats in NLCS produced a 1.061 OPS
He hit 8 singles in the 74 WS, no extra base hits. In the 77 Series he crushed the ball to the tune of a 1.025 OPS. Sucked in 78 and after studying the play by play he did not lose one hit to Graig Nettles in that series. In 81 he bounced back with 11 hits, but 10 were singles. Good enough for a .920 OPS.

Made that all-star game every year from 1974 – 1981 and had a slug% of .821 in 30 plate appearances good for 5th best in the history of game. Fifth highest OPS at 1.244. His 23 total bases ranks fourth.

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen

by Phil Gurnee on Jan 14, 2010 4:49 PM PST reply actions  

You’ve done a fine job here, StolenMonkey. Well done.

Of all 18 candidates on the first ballot, there is none more gut-wrenching for me than Steve Garvey. I don’t know which way I will vote on him.

On the one hand, I find his value to the team about the same as Cey’s and Lopes’s. I think Cey deserves a vote, and if Cey, surely I must vote for Lopes, and if both of them, then Garvey, too, yes?

On the other hand, there are so many aspects of his candidacy that I find… well… unappealing, I guess that’s the word. I find him unappealing and I do not wish to honor him.

The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy

by Humma Kavula on Jan 14, 2010 5:09 PM PST reply actions  

Yeah...

Part of what immortalized Garvey were his RBI totals, which, much like this post, depend a lot on the accomplishments of others.

And then there’s the revelation of his off the field problems, with the cheating on his wife and the financial stuff.

But he was a good player. I’d be happy if James Loney could post a 122 OPS+ for the course of his Dodger career.

by StolenMonkey86 on Jan 14, 2010 8:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Your second to last sentence there

is exactly why I would be disinclined to vote for him. Garvey was a very good player, but I couldn’t put him alongside some of the truly great players that are elligable for the O’Malley Suite. That said, I loved your piece and it I think it represents Garvey really well.

by prosellis on Jan 14, 2010 9:15 PM PST up reply actions  

To vote

you need to send me an email. This will not be open to the sbnation public but a private vote, via invitation, however I need to know if you want to vote and the only way to know that is if you sent me an email. Have to say I’m a bit light on voters at the moment.

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen

by Phil Gurnee on Jan 15, 2010 7:16 AM PST up reply actions  

The $64 question is “Can Garvey and Sutton co-exist in the same suite?”.

The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.

by David Young on Jan 14, 2010 6:14 PM PST reply actions  

Is there a concept for how many suites there will be? Whom the second suite will be named for?

As I read all these fine writeups, I actually find myself leaning toward a fairly high degree of exclusivity for the Walter O’Malley Suite. Voting is going to be challenging.

The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.

by David Young on Jan 14, 2010 6:16 PM PST reply actions  

That's a good idea

Maybe we can name the suites after various non-players. I’ll leave it up to Phil, but it might be cool to have a Jaime Jarrin wing or a Nancy Bea suite, etc…

by Eric Stephen on Jan 14, 2010 6:21 PM PST up reply actions  

"Nancy Bea Suite" – does she get royalties every time it’s played?

The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.

by David Young on Jan 14, 2010 6:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Screening

All the voters will need to be screened to see if they have ever cheated on their spouse or have had financial " issues". Only then will they be allowed to cast the first vote…

by Bob Hendley on Jan 14, 2010 10:34 PM PST reply actions  

Garvey should be rated on what he did as a ballplayer, not as a person. Many players in the HOF wern’t exactly role models.

by Bluetrain on Jan 15, 2010 5:11 AM PST reply actions  

Exactly

but they do need to take into account the impact they had on the community when they played and Steve Garvey was the face of the 74-81 team. We may have had better players during that reign but the general fan loved Steve Garvey. Garvey was every bit as good as Cey and Lopes. It a vote is made for anyone of the three I would expect the voter to vote for all three.

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen

by Phil Gurnee on Jan 15, 2010 7:15 AM PST up reply actions  

I don’t know if I totally agree that only “what he did as a ballplayer” should count. If that’s so, then votes for Fernando and Wills may not be justifiable. (FYI, while I haven’t finalized my ballot, I have pencilled both names in.) Both votes for Fernando and Wills depend as much upon fan reaction and emotion as performance. And if we are going to allow reaction/emotion to tip the scales in a player’s favor — and I totally think we should — then I think we must allow reaction/emotion to tip the scales against a player.

As this relates to Garvey:

1. I completely agree with Phil: statistically, Cey and Lopes and Garvey all brought their teams similar value. It should take an extraordinary argument to favor any of these candidates over any other. Most likely, it’s put none in or all of them.

2. That said, considering Garvey’s impact on the community is fraught with peril. Yes, he was the face of the franchise, but he wasn’t quite as good as everyone thought. Yes, he was thought to be Mr. Clean during his playing days, but afterwards was revealed to be living by different rules than those he espoused. That’s my response to Bob Hendley, a few comments up. It’s not that I expect any man to be a paragon of virtue — it is not Garvey’s infallibility that I find unappealing. It’s that Garvey, famously, in a calculated manner, and with an eye toward his future, built a myth around himself that was built on sand. That stinks. I’ve been hypocritical in my life, too, but I think it’s fair to expect more from people who claim to be role models.

Maybe I need to reconsider my position on this. After all, at least one candidate that I plan to vote for and have argued in favor of has earned his share of a negative reputation, but I won’t withhold my vote from him. I will think about that.

At the end of the day, what I expect is this: I think I must vote for Cey, so I will also vote for Garvey. I won’t like it, but there it is.

The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy

by Humma Kavula on Jan 15, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions  

Fernando was

far from being as good as his popularity would warrant. What I meant was, whatever Steve Garvey did after he was a Dodger should not be part of the equation. Only what he did while he was a Dodger, and while he did not become the HOF player some expected he was on his way to being in 1978 he was still one of the top 1st baseman in his era year in and year out.

Interesting how his NL record of games played gets no mention anymore. It was a big deal at the time.

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen

by Phil Gurnee on Jan 15, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

I see what you mean, but...

…does that mean that if Cyndy Garvey had published her tell-all book while he was playing for the Dodgers that those character issues would be fair game, but since it was published in 1989, they’re not?

One of the reasons for Garvey’s popularity, the face of the franchise, and yes, even considered at the time to be one of the top first basemen in the league, was his character. That it would later come crashing down, I think is entirely material.

That said, I’m not sure how far I want to go with this. Like I say, I think I’ll end up voting for him.

The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy

by Humma Kavula on Jan 15, 2010 12:56 PM PST up reply actions  

With a Banjo on My Knee

As a kid, I thought Wills was a fun loving banjo player, as an adult I learned that he had an affair with Doris Day.

by Bob Hendley on Jan 15, 2010 6:47 PM PST up reply actions  

An affair is a little unseemly, but I approve of Doris Day. Heck, she was getting it from Rock Hudson on the side. I don’t know who Doris’ husband was without looking it up, but she was probably a much safer choice than Laraine Day!

The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.

by David Young on Jan 16, 2010 9:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Yep. Maury bedding Doris Day should be celebrated, not shunned! :)

by Eric Stephen on Jan 16, 2010 10:01 AM PST up reply actions  

Its not Maury

its my image of Doris, which has been shattered!

by Bob Hendley on Jan 16, 2010 1:02 PM PST up reply actions  

My Mother-in-Law

I find out from her in the DR this past vacation that how she got photo ops with the Bums in 46/47 was because she was friends with Laraine. She also used to hang with Rubirosa.

by Bob Hendley on Jan 16, 2010 1:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Good write up

Though I’m a little disappointed you didn’t go the Fake Plaschke route. You have a gift for fake Plaschke, share that gift with the world Stolen Monkey!

by Michael White on Jan 15, 2010 8:06 AM PST reply actions  

There wasn’t enough room to mock Plaschke on this topic. Also, I remember when Josh wrote this piece (back in his Baseball Toaster days), and thinking it was a great piece. I used the end, but the whole piece is great. This one on Ramon Vazquez stuck with me a little too.

I never remember to read Cardboard Gods regularly, but I always enjoy reading it in bunches when I do. He’s got a good one on Mark McGwire this week.

by StolenMonkey86 on Jan 15, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I like Garvey’s 1971 card:

You can barely see his face on the 1973 card – his last as a 3B exclusively – but it is a passing of the torch picture:

The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.

by David Young on Jan 15, 2010 5:00 PM PST reply actions  

That 1973 set is notorious for having awful photos, including many players not being the focus of their own card!

Here is the 1972 Garvey card as well:

by Eric Stephen on Jan 15, 2010 7:15 PM PST up reply actions  

Garvey

One must also consider that San Diego’s former GM admitted that under pressure from the other GM’s his withdrew the contract offer that they had extended to Steve Garvery which forced him to retire before he wanted. Otherwise Steve would have had an opportunity to improve his stats. He also lost time with his broken wrist and the strike. With more time he would have made the HOF. (Also consider, that although he threw poorly he caught every errant thrown ball headed his way).

by LaDodgers6 on Jan 19, 2010 1:39 PM PST reply actions  

I don't know about that.

Personally, I think Garvey’s HOF case was about as good as it was gonna get — the only thing that could have helped was to get to 3,000 hits. Could Garvey have gotten there?

Garvey retired after the surgery in his age 38 season with 2,599 hits. To assume Garvey gets to 3,000 hits requires the most favorable view towards Garvey: that (a) he was indeed denied a contract due to collusion, and (b) he could have played for at least two more years and probably more like three or four more years, © he’d have a slow decline, and (d) he would not have missed substantial time to injury over those years.

I just can’t see all of those things happening.

The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy

by Humma Kavula on Jan 19, 2010 2:50 PM PST up reply actions  

Garvey put up OPS+ of 91, 109, and 91 from 1984-1986. He was pretty much done.

by Eric Stephen on Jan 19, 2010 2:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Whoops, deleted the text of my reply!

Personally, I think Garvey’s HOF case was about as good as it was gonna get — the only thing that could have helped was to get to 3,000 hits. Could Garvey have gotten there?

Garvey retired after the surgery in his age 38 season with 2,599 hits. To assume Garvey gets to 3,000 hits requires the most favorable view towards Garvey: that (a) he was indeed denied a contract due to collusion, and (b) he could have played for at least two more years and probably more like three or four more years, © he’d have a slow decline, and (d) he would not have missed substantial time to injury over those years.

I just can’t see all of those things happening.

The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy

by Humma Kavula on Jan 19, 2010 2:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A place for Dodger fans to congregate without spending $10 on parking.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Cal_state_dominguez_hills_logo_small
Opposing Pitcher Preview: 5/25-5/27 Harrell, Norris, Happ
Cal_state_dominguez_hills_logo_small
Opposing Pitcher Preview: 5/21-5/23 Corbin, Cahill, Saunders
Tbj_pin_small
Memories of the past: Dodger Glory.com
Cal_state_dominguez_hills_logo_small
Opposing Pitcher Preview: 5/18-5/20 Lynn, Westbrook, Lohse
Cal_state_dominguez_hills_logo_small
Opposing Pitcher Preview: 5/14-5/15 Kennedy and Miley

Recent FanPosts

Sbn_ds_small
TBLA Challenge Week VII
Cal_state_dominguez_hills_logo_small
Opposing Pitcher Preview: 5/16-5/17 Richard and Volquez
Sbn_ds_small
TBLA Challenge Week VI
Small
Hey NYC Dodgers Fans
Dodgers_small
Dodger Need Help. ASAP!

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Pos No Player 2012 Salary
C 17 Ellis $490,000
1B 7 Loney $6,375,000
2B 14 Ellis $2,500,000
3B 5 Uribe $8,000,000
SS 9 Gordon $485,000
LF 23 Abreu $401,311
CF 27 Kemp $10,000,000
RF 16 Ethier $10,950,000

OF 10 Gwynn $850,000
IF 12 Sellers $481,000
OF/1B 33 Van Slyke $388,197
2B/3B 3 Kennedy $800,000
C 18 Treanor $850,000

SP 22 Kershaw $6,000,000
SP 58 Billingsley $9,000,000
SP 29 Lilly $12,000,000
SP 44
Harang $3,000,000
SP 35 Capuano $3,000,000

CL 74
Jansen $491,000
RHP 52 Lindblom $483,000
RHP 51 Belisario $414,426
RHP 54 Guerra $488,000
RHP 28
Wright $900,000
LHP 57 Elbert $488,500
RHP 60 Coffey $1,000,000

DL 55 Guerrier $4,750,000
DL 6 Hairston $2,250,000
DL 21 Rivera $4,000,000
60DL 36 Hawksworth $495,000
60DL 41 De La Rosa $485,000

AAA 13 DeJesus $86,648
AA 50 Eovaldi $7,885
AAA 56 Antonini $7,869



Manny $8,087,432 deferred


Andruw $3,375,000 deferred


Pierre $3,050,000 deferred
Furcal $3,000,000 deferred
Kuroda $2,000,000 deferred
Garland $1,500,000 option buyout
Blake $1,250,000 option buyout
DFA 66 MacDougal $650,000

Totals
$114,830,268

For more detailed information, click here.

Current 40-man roster count: 42
(incl. De La Rosa & Hawksworth)

Yahoo_full_count

Manager

Eric___ned___reporters_2011_trade_deadline_small Eric Stephen

Editors

100_1427_small Phil Gurnee

Dgy_small David Young

Hanauma_bay_small Chad Moriyama

2501_small Michael White

Raptors_small Brandon Lennox

Img_0103_small CraigMinami