The legendary Yankee needs to be paid.
The team would not have won championships without him. The team does not build into a global empire without him. The team is diminished if he is not part of the roster moving forward.
So the Yankees must pay the legend — Mariano Rivera.
Sorry did we rain on all-Derek-Jeter, all-the-time? It is fascinating that the free agency of Jeter has an all-consuming feel to it while Rivera is a backburner issue.
But here is my question: Why shouldn’t Rivera receive anything that Jeter does — and more?
Can you make a case that Jeter has been more important to winning the past
15 years than Rivera? I don’t think so. In general, closers should not be as important as everyday players. But Rivera is no ordinary closer. He is the best ever. And he is greater still in the postseason.
Is it possible the Yankees would have won five championships in the past 15 seasons with a good, not great shortstop? Probably not. But they might have won a few. But how about with even a very good closer rather than Rivera? Not as easy to see those parades, is it?
Rivera never has won an MVP or a Cy Young, but you could say he has been the MVP and Cy Young of the last 15 years; arguably the most irreplaceable piece in the majors.
How about who was better last year? That is not even close. Jeter faded to ordinary. Rivera stayed elite.
Who do you imagine will be more successful in 2011? I would bet Rivera is better, though he is four years older.
In general, that age discrepancy should assure the “younger” player a longer contract. Fine. How about this question: If you could have only Jeter or Rivera signed for the next three years, who would you take?
I am not advocating giving a 40-year-old closer a three-year contract. I am simply wondering why we are obsessing on Jeter and throwing out how to take care of him financially, when it is not all that difficult to make a case that Rivera deserves no less the attention and dollars?
Shortstops tend to get treated better in the financial forums than closers, and the Yankees have built a lot more of their imagery around Jeter than Rivera. But as great Yankees go — past, present and future — I am not sure that Jeter should be considered ahead of Rivera.
As opposed to Jeter, the Yankees may, in the end, get lucky with Rivera, who could decide to go one year at a time rather than ask for a long-term contract.
The Yankees certainly got lucky the last time an organization icon in Jeter’s class became a free agent. That occurred after the 1995 season, which coincidentally was the introduction campaign for Jeter and Rivera in the majors.
➤ Don Mattingly completed a long-term contract in 1995, his play had slipped (especially when it came to power) and the Yankees were anxious to move on, but not look disrespectful in the process. They actually offered Mattingly a contract. But Mattingly saw that the organization was trying to make decisions and he wasn’t ready to work on their clock, so he publicly gave the Yankees the blessing to move forward without him.
The Yankees quickly traded for Tino Martinez. The initial changeover did not go smoothly as Martinez struggled in April and adoring fans pined for Mattingly. But Martinez straightened out, Jeter and Rivera emerged as stars, and the Yankees won the World Series.
Now Jeter is a free agent, and as opposed to Mattingly, he is not going to make life easy for the Yankees.
“I knew it would come to this,” Mattingly said by phone from Arizona, where he was managing the Phoenix Desert Dogs in the Arizona Fall League. “His situation is different. He knows he wants to play, and I didn’t. And, to me, he can still play. I know he had a down year last year. But with Jeter, I would never sell him short. I believe he can still play an important part with that club moving forward. It is a tough situation. I just know this, I can’t see him playing anywhere else.”
➤ It is three weeks into November and you cannot find even a decent rumor about the Mets when it comes to trades or free agency. Which says everything about the current state of the organization:
The most important matter, the organization determined, was leadership. So Sandy Alderson was hired, then he assembled a staff and the Mets finally should get a manager no later than Tuesday. It probably was wise to stretch this all out because otherwise the Mets were going to be non-existent in the news.
The Mets recognize they have little flexibility with a roster filled with hard-to-trade contracts and perhaps as little as
$3 million to $5 million to spend.
My suspicion is the Mets are going to wait deep into the offseason, possibly until after Jan. 1, and see what is left on the free-agent market. Desperation by the remaining players to find employment then moves prices to drop, and I expect the Mets will try to cherry pick a reliever or two, maybe a second baseman and perhaps a reclamation-project starter.
joel.sherman@nypost.com