Big Stein

Earlier this week the Yankees unveiled a monument to their late owner, George Steinbrenner. It's the sixth such monument out in Monument Park, joining the likes of Miller Huggins, Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Lou Gehrig, and Babe Ruth. Like him or not, Steinbrenner has left an indelible mark on the Yankees and baseball. Though he initially said that he was against free agency and that it would ruin baseball, he changed his tune and signed pitcher Catfish Hunter away from the Oakland A's in 1975 for $3.75 million, and that was only the beginning of his uncontrolled spending on free agents. Steinbrenner's spending forced the other teams in Major League Baseball to open up their coffers as well in order to compete. One of the biggest reasons the Yankees have been able to spend as they do in recent times is the development of their own regional cable network, an innovation spurred on by Steinbrenner. The revenues generated by the YES Network, which are not shared with the other major league teams, provide a distinct advantage to the Yankees that few, if any, teams can match. Following the success of the YES Network other teams have developed their own regional cable network, or acquired an existing one; the New York Mets launched the SNY Network and the Boston Red Sox acquired NESN, New England's regional sports network. Since Steinbrenner purchased the Yankees in 1973 for $8.7 million their value has grown to be conservatively valued at $1.6 billion, according to Forbes magazine and under Steinbrenner the Yankees have 11 American League pennants and 7 World Series championships. There is no mistaking his impact on the game as we know it today, and if the Yankees want to honor him with a monument that is up to them.

I have no problem with the Yankees honoring Steinbrenner with a monument; however, the monument in honor of Steinbrenner seems to lack perspective. The monument is significantly larger than the monuments honoring Huggins, Mantler, DiMaggio, Gehrig, and Ruth, which gives the impression that Steinbrenner's contributions to the game are greater than those of those other 5. As I mentioned above, Steinbrenner has made significant contributions to the game of baseball, but are they that much greater that they deserve a monument which dwarfs the other 5? I say no, sir! DiMaggio won 9 World Series championships, hit in a record 56 consecutive games, a record which has not been seriously threatened since it was set in 1941; Huggins led the Yankees to 3 World Series; Mantle was a 3 time MVP and perhaps the greatest switch-hitter of all-time; and Gehrig was as durable as they come and is one of, if not the greatest first baseman of all-time. Now, Steinbrenner may have made a bigger contribution than those 4, but there is NO WAY that Steinbrenner is bigger than Ruth. Ruth is a player that revolutionized and saved the game. Following the 1919 Black Sox scandal, when the Chicago White Sox took money from gamblers to throw the World Series, the game needed a savior, and that savior was Ruth. Ruth hit home runs at such a prolific pace, often hitting more home runs than entire teams, that the fans came back to see the Babe hit his mammoth home runs. (The game's integrity was also restored by the game's first commissioner, Judge Kenesaw Mountin Landis, whose hard line stance against the players involved in fixing the World Series helped restore the game's public image.)

So, while Steinbrenner has made significant contributions to the game and has certainly changed the economic aspect of baseball forever, there is no way that he can, or should, trump the accomplishments of Ruth, the greatest player to ever play the game. Besides, Steinbrenner traded away Jay Buhner for Ken Phelps!