Weird take from MLB analysts shows Anthony Volpe apologists exist outside of Yankees

Former New York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez recently warmed fans' hearts when he said what we're all thinking about Anthony Volpe. In a moment of clear-eyed truth-telling, A-Rod appeared on WFAN and blamed the Yankees' hitting program for failing to develop Volpe.

"It’s hard to impact winning when you’re striking out 150 times and you’re hitting .212," Rodriguez saidwith gusto. "So I think if you zoom out, it’s an organization hitting philosophy that is absolutely broken, and until they fix it, I don’t think they win big.”

The comments drew widespread praise from Yankees fans who are sick of hearing the club and its front office continue to talk about Volpe as if he's on the verge of perennial All-Star seasons. Yet, even amidst the wave of positive feedback aimed in A-Rod's direction for the realness of his remarks, there were analysts who went in the complete opposite direction.

Kevin Pillar and Erik Kratz of Foul Territory just threw shade at Alex Rodriguez for exposing the Yankees' handling of Anthony Volpe

During a recent episode of Foul Territory, respected MLB analysts Erik Kratz and Kevin Pillar went in on Rodriguez for his comments.

Kratz characterized A-Rod's criticism as "kinda weak" on the premise that Rodriguez hasn't spent any time "in the cage" with Volpe. So, hold on, are we now saying that an MLB analyst doesn't have the right to find fault with a player unless that analyst has literally met with the player, developed a relationship with the player, and coached the player to help improve their game? This is an outrageous premise from Kratz.

There were two further problems with Kratz's take, the first being his notion that Volpe decreasing his strikeouts from 167 (rookie year) to 156, and then to 150 last year, combats A-Rod's point. Rodriguez never denied that Volpe is working on his weaknesses; he's saying that, despite that work, the strikeouts remain a problem. This would be like if Kratz applauded a chemistry student for raising their test score from an F to a D, with A-Rod simply pointing out that the student still lacks a competent understanding of the material.

Another issue with Kratz's take is that he's flat-out denying that Volpe took a step back last year. Kratz's attempted logic here points to Volpe's shoulder injury, as if that moves the goal post for what is deemed a productive season. Sadly, the cold reality that destroys Kratz's point here is that players and teams in pro sports aren't given any credit for playing injured. The Yankees weren't given any extra wins, and Volpe's numbers weren't inflated to account for his messed up shoulder, nor did anyone decide that Volpe's multiple horrid slumps in '25 simply didn't count.

Kratz's insistence that Volpe "didn't really have a dip in his production" in 2025 makes sense if you look at Volpe's OPS (.663 compared to .657 in 2024 and .666 in 2023), but it doesn't make sense if you look at batting average (down to .212 from .243) and on-base percentage (down to .272 from .293), which supports A-Rod's point.

All in all, Kratz's support of Volpe here isn't entirely rational, and it continues the trend of intelligent baseball minds standing behind Volpe despite there being an overwhelming amount of evidence and reasons not to. The difference here is that we usually hear Volpe apologists declaring their sermon from a Yankees-branded pulpit, whether it's been Brian Cashman or Aaron Boone over the past three years.

The continual Volpe defense from Yankees leaders has only gotten more deranged as time has advanced, with weaker and weaker legs to stand on. But to hear analysts like Kratz and Pillar join in on the Volpe apologist tour makes you start wondering what it is about Volpe that activates people's inner sympathies in such a strange way, such that their eyes and years of baseball knowledge get relegated to the backseat.