Glavine vs. Damon

So this rare for me to respond to a comment via a new column, but the discussion on yesterday's comment board merits weighing in on. AFOMG and Happy Will have been slugging it out on the comment board, but this argument didn't begin with them.

Quoting anonymous: "How do you reconcile what Tom Glavine did to the Braves with your stance on Damon?"



On the surface, the similarities seem plain enough.

Star player leaves his team for main division rival mainly because of money/length of contract.

I couldn't agree with this more. But that is where the similarity ends. Below are a series of arguments for why Damon's departure is far worse than Glavine's.

1. The rivalries were different.

The Yankees vs. Red Sox was a rivalry on both ends. The Yankees and Sox hate each other. When the schedule comes out every season, each team and their fans know the 19 games when the other is on the schedule. Everyone in America knows cause ESPN won't shut up about it.

Mets fan know when the Yanks are in town. Most know when the Braves are. But do you think the Braves are worried about the Mets in any given year? Maybe in a year like this, where the Mets have a team, but the rivalry there is defined by the opposition being good, not by long-running antipathy.

2. Damon went from David to Goliath, Glavine left from Goliath for David.

Damon took the easy way. He went where all the stars go. He went from weak to strong.

Glavine on the other hand left the Braves for the Mets following the year when the Braves won the division and the Mets came in last.

3. The Damon sweepstakes was between The Sox and Yanks, Glavine was deciding between the Mets and the Phillies.

Glavine made it clear that he wanted a 4 year deal. He wanted 4 seasons to reach 300 wins. The Mets were willing to offer him 4. The Phillies were offering him 4. The Braves would barely offer 3. It was clear cut that Glavine was choosing between the Mets and Phillies and both the Braves and their organization were aware of that.

The Damon situation is far different.

In 2005 he swore he would never become a Yankee. During his negotiation period it was always the Sox and the Yankees. It's not like the Sox did not want him. He chose the Yankees and their 12 million over the Sox. Plain and simple.

4. Damon was a part of the most special moment in the history of his franchise, beating the Yankees.

When the Red Sox beat the Yankees in the 2004 playoffs, it was arguably the biggest moment in baseball history. He was right in the middle of that. While Happy Will argues that Schilling and Ortiz are the faces of the Sox, Damon was the face of the "Idiots," the identity of the 2004 Red Sox.



Glavine never had a single magical moment against the Mets. He owned the Mets for years. They may have been his main division foe, but the Braves' biggest rival was whoever they were playing in the playoffs every year, which was never the Mets.

Hope that clears up some things, at least from my end.

When the Mets signed Glavine I didn't really know how to react. The truth is I wasn't too high on it for practical purposes; mainly I was concerned that the Mets had invested a ton of money in a guy who suffered through a terrible second half of 2002.

But at the same time, the Mets and Braves were not a rivalry at the time. We sucked in 2002. Did bringing in Glavine effect our chances against the Braves in 2003? Maybe a little. But was Shea selling out against the Braves in 2003? How about 2004? 2005? 2006?

It's just a different rivalry. If the Mets and Braves played every year like it was '99 and '00 then Glacine leaving for the Mets would mean more. But up until the first 25 games of 2006, the Braves have owned the Mets for 15 years and Mets fans know this.

VCD,

SM