Thrilled that the Yankees listened to people such as myself (and much more influential folks), even if it was months after the fact.
No, he's not Alex Rodriguez's replacement. But that just makes it more of a no-brainer. Less pressure, less money, less risk. For a guy, as NoMaas points out, with a 116 OPS+. You don't get those guys for nothing very often.
That's a higher mark than Miguel Tejada, to name one, and right there with Carlos Beltran. Compare contracts.
Even if in May, we're screaming, get Ensberg the hell out of here, it was still worth it.
And they know how to squeeze every area -- like by doubling the price of parking near Yankee Stadium.
I come in from the north, park at a Metro-North and take the train to the subway to the game, but it's time-consuming and not practical for many. Plus, with the reduction in seats, fewer upper-deck seats and the likely price increase (though maybe not as much as other teams with new digs), the "common" fan is going to be squeezed.
This may be a bad thing. It probably is, in certain ways. But look at the attendance. For decades, those diehards weren't filling up the seats by themselves. For most of the 1990s, that was the case. It was the case, to cherry-pick, when Roger Maris hit his 61st home run. The Yankees were a draw, but not like Broadway, for instance. There, tickets are going to sell and people are going to be disappointed. Therefore, you'll be charged more (and you'll pay more) because you're in a fight for tickets.
The Yankees, until the last several years, were most times a draw, but one in which a ticket was always available. Other activities could take precedence because, hey, I can go to a game anytime. That's no longer the case. San Francisco proved this when they cut capacity on Pac Bell (or whatever it's called now). Sure, the team was good, but it suddenly became much more difficult to get a ticket. The prestige value went up, and so did interest. Yeah, there were undoubtedly many status-seekers who weren't real fans, but it's better than perennial contenders such as Oakland and Minnesota regularly playing important games in half-filled caverns. While those stadiums surely have the diehards (in part because the facilities are terrible), all the empty seats actually imply the fanbase doesn't care, and isn't as worthy of a team as others.
So, let's say there's a loss of fan camaraderie from losing some diehards (an effect that has already happened, from many anecdotal accounts). The net increase in bodies, whether they be bandwagoners or true fans, may be enough to offset any change in demographics.
It's certainly good enough financially for the Yankees, and they are, for better or worse, a team of celebrities. Maybe having an audience of them is the next logical step.
Are interesting. He issues most of these denials through statements, but says he'll go talk to Mike Wallace on "60 Minutes." His case is well-documented, but if one domino falls (the one real witness), the whole theory does.
Yet, who's been proven innocent from among the Mitchell Report dossier? Most of the suspect cases have actually turned out to be correct. What would the odds be that the case that seems most open-and-shut (outside of Barry Bonds) turned out to be false?
Yeah, I'm not holding my breath. But man, the fuel that would give to the Red Sox conspiracy theories.
At first, I thought, what a terrible move by the Yankees, as they seem to be on the cusp of signing him. He was a failed starter, a failed closer -- a clear symbol of the Twins' failed post-1991 rebuilding strategy and the Cubs' failure to capitalize on Sammy Sosa's 1998-2001 historic production.
Then I looked a little further. His career ERA+ is 101, but his marks as a middle reliever are 210, 243, 113, 102, 140.
I suppose he's not a bad gamble, given the price. Still, I'd like to see Joe Girardi keep a tighter lease on him than the others. And I don't feel safe with Hawkins in a big September or October spot.
Hawkins is a story of good and bad, as illustrated above. He had a great year with Colorado this year, but struggled in 2006 in the AL with Baltimore. He's fairly durable but doesn't strike anyone out -- 56 in his last 115 2/3 innings. He handled Coors Field and its lack of atmosphere (2.48 ERA) but struggled on the road (4.44 ERA, .807 OPS).
Still, it's something. I just hope it's not the only something.
Labels: Yankees
All my talk of re-signing Luis Vizcaino looks to be dead, from a number of places.
He was overworked in April, was terrible until the team hit bottom, and then he, Melky Cabrera and Mariano Rivera helped rescue the season. But he wasn't so great after that, either, and again looked worn out.
Basically, he was a league-average pitcher (104 ERA+) after three very good years with three teams. But that league average came in these bizarre splits:
First 54 games: 2-1, 27 G, 28.2 IP, 27 H, 24 BB, 16 K, 6.91 ERA, .255/.388/.453
Next 54 games: 6-1, 28 G, 26.2 IP, 16 H, 9 BB, 25 K, 1.01 ERA, .168/.238/.232
Last 54 games: 0-0, 22 G, 20 IP, 23 H, 11 BB, 21 K, 4.95 ERA, .288/.372/.475
It's even worse if you count Viz's true good stretch:
Games 55-133: 6-1, 41 G, 38.2 IP, 24 H, 15 BB, 36 K, 1.16 ERA
Games 1-54, 134-162: 2-1, 36 G, 36.2 IP, 42 H, 28 BB, 26 K, 7.61 ERA
When he got wild, he also gave up hits and didn't strike out batters. Basically, he was either really good in all three departments or he was awful in all three. While that one half of the season was glittery and spectacular, the differences are disturbing.
He wasn't particularly overworked in the long run, either, with roughly the same number of appearances and innings as he's logged throughout the decade. So what's the problem? Who knows. While I still think he's someone worth keeping, I can see why, along with any potential arm problems, the Yankees are wary.
What's scary, though, is that people inside the organization still like Sean Henn.
Andy Pettitte taking arbitration is no light step, even as the wire report plays it up as a formality.
As this blog has mentioned at least once, the Yankees were foolish to trust Roger Clemens to retire after 2003, and they did not offer arbitration. Of course, Clemens never filed retirement papers, signed with Houston, and quite possibly cost the Yankees a championship by stealing Pettitte away as well.
So kudos to the Yankees for being respectful, giving Andy and his family time to decide, but also covering their asses.
$16 million may be a little much for even a 15-9, 4.05 ERA guy, but he and his innings are probably worth it. He's for sure more valuable at a one-year deal than are all these journeymen at $10-12 million.
Despite an actually interesting NFL season, with the Patriots, a bunch of resurgent teams and the Dolphins' race for 0-16, people are still talking baseball a day before Thanksgiving.
Despite the NBA in full swing, the NHL pretending to be relevant, and snow closer to a regular occurrence for many, baseball's still on people's minds, such as Torii Hunter's and Melky Cabrera's status.
That's not a bad thing at all.
You just hope, if you're a Yankees fan, that baseball is also on Andy Pettitte's mind. Actually, even if you're not a Yankee fan, it's hard to see why you'd want a guy like him out of the game.
Seems everyone is bowing before the might that is the Steinbrenners, Generation II.
After Alex Rodriguez made an (overrated) concession, now it seems Mariano Rivera is going to sign a three-year, $45 million deal.
He's still great, if not omnipotent, and was not a question mark in the postseason, unlike so many others.
But four years for almost any closer is taking a risk, doubly so for a 38-year-old. And, shocking as it may seem, it's A-Rod, Andy Pettitte and Jorge Posada (and even Jose Molina) who are less replaceable than Rivera.
Welcome back to reality, Mo. It's good to see you.
Labels: Yankees
His mouth is getting pretty tiring, too, but he's never been a free agent, so he's obviously enjoying it a bit too much.
As for giving Mo a fourth year, besides the obvious concern -- he'll be 41 in that fourth year -- he showed dangerous decline (or temporary slippage) this year in the areas that were once signs of his unique dominance.
In 2007, Rivera posted a 3.15 ERA. Now, that's not so bad, and it's almost unfair to compare with his 2003-06 run of sub-1.90 ERAs.
But look at the splits. Rivera struggled (relatively) in 2007 without off-days
No rest: 12 games, 13.1 IP, 3.38 ERA, 18 baserunners
1 day rest: 21 games, 23.1 IP, 3.47 ERA, 34 baserunners (including 4 HBP!)
2 days rest: 11 games, 11.2 IP, 0.77 ERA, 11 baserunners
Maybe it's how Torre used him. He was pitching more innings per appearance on short rest versus a comfortable two days. And Rivera struggled most with three days rest (14 games, 13.2 IP, 5.27 ERA, 16 baserunners), which didn't help the bottom line.
Has Mo always been more reliable on two days rest?
Let's look.
2006:
0 days: 16 games, 16.2 IP, 1.62 ERA, 17 baserunners
1 day: 20 games, 26 IP(!), 0.69 ERA, 24 baserunners
2 days: 14 games, 18 IP, 2.00 ERA, 17 baserunners
3 days: 6 games, 6.1 IP, 4.26 ERA, 8 baserunners
2005:
0 days: 23 games, 24.1 IP, 1.11 ERA, 29 baserunners
1 day: 18 games, 20.2 IP, 1.74 ERA, 19 baserunners
2 days: 10 games, 10.1 IP, 0.00 ERA, 4 baserunners
3 days: 13 games, 16 IP, 2.25 ERA, 16 baserunners
In both years, Rivera was at his worst on three days rest, but there wasn't a tremendous difference between other common situations. He was dominant always. If he's lost that dominance on short rest, then he can still be a good closer, but it's tough to bet against further decline over four years.
But 2005 and 2006 were some of the best years ever by a closer! He nearly won the '05 Cy Young!
OK, fair enough. We'll look at Trevor Hoffman, his relative peer in age and saves, and Mo's worst season before 2007, which was 2000.
Hoffman in 2007 (age 39)
0 days: 21 G, 20.1 IP, 2.66 ERA, 22 MoB
1 day: 14 G, 12 IP, 8.25 ERA, 25 MoB
2 days: 7 G, 6.2 IP, 1.35 ERA, 5 MoB
3+ days: 19 G, 18.1 IP, 0.49 ERA, 10 MoB
Hoffman in 2006 (age 38)
0 days: 20 G, 20 IP, 2.25 ERA, 21 MoB
1 day: 15 G, 14 IP, 1.29 ERA, 13 MoB
2 days: 7 G, 7 IP, 3.86 ERA, 8 MoB
3 days: 13 G, 12.1 IP, 0.00 ERA, 9 MoB
4+days: 10 G, 9.2 IP, 4.66 ERA, 11 MoB
Rivera in 2000 (2.85 ERA)
0 days: 20 games, 21.1 IP, 2.53 ERA, 22 baserunners
1 day: 17 games, 20.2 IP, 2.61 ERA, 19 baserunners
2 days: 10 games, 10.1 IP, 3.48 ERA, 18 baserunners
3 days: 8 games, 9.2 IP, 2.79 ERA, 9 baserunners
6+ days: 6 games, 7 IP, 6.43 ERA, 10 baserunners
Rivera just doesn't have a track record of struggles on no rest or one day of rest. That's why 2007 is so troubling. And while Hoffman doesn't have a real pattern from the past two years, he pitches fewer innings and gets preferential rest compared with Rivera.
That's not going to be possible with the Yankees, unless they slip to a mid-80s win level a la the Padres. That may be good enough out there, but it won't work in the American League.
Let's not buy the lie that Alex Rodriguez is truly unhappy with Scott Boras. While Wallace Matthews is never my muse, he's right to see through this.
Baseball teams cannot bar a player from being represented by a particular agent (or other representative). Rodriguez does not have to fire Boras, or even be truly unhappy. He merely must, for appearances, act as if he's been misrepresented to draw the Yankees back into negotiations from their tough, unfortunate, but correct stance of "opt-out, you're out."
Now, maybe his wife, Cynthia, is pulling a Laura Pettitte and threatening his wealth should A-Rod skip town. Even then, it's tough to trust A-Rod, because a gift of some jewelry (a la Kobe Bryant after his Colorado incident) could change his wife's mind overnight.
And hey, it could simply be a personality disagreement. Andruw Jones and Boras survived a similar situation (though one involving $200 million less). But the Yankees can't take that chance.
The Yankees have time on their side. Make A-Rod sweat. Call his bluff; see if he'll really can Boras or cave even further on his money demands. Who else is out there? No one, apparently. It's not collusion, where owners are calling each other and saying, "Let's freeze A-Rod out." But it's clear Boras-style collusion -- that of blatantly lying about other team's offers -- isn't working. That is, unless the Yankees fumble their next move.
It's a matter of starving the beast. It's not for the weak-willed or compassionate. Lord knows that's not what Scott Boras or Alex Rodriguez are. A bit of the flip side may be exactly the medicine needed to bring the slugger back to the Bronx -- with lighter pockets.
For not immediately signing the Yankees' offer of three years, $45 million and worse, demanding more. It's possibly more than he deserves, and he's coming off the worst year of his great career. Plus, he's 38.
For three years, we'd expect at least 90 saves, right?
Historically, two men have achieved that from age 38 onward: Hoyt Wilhelm and Dennis Eckersley. Wilhelm pitched more than 1,000 innings, and Eck only hit 84 saves through age 40, and wasn't under a 4.00 ERA any of the three years.
On the plus side, Trevor Hoffman has saved 88 games in his age-38 and -39 years (though none in games 161-63 of 2007), and Todd Jones has saved, albeit unsteadily, 75 in that time.
Negatively, Jones has had ERA+ marks of 116 and 107, which isn't bad but pales to Rivera's career 194 and '07 mark of 142.
Also, Jose Mesa earned 70 saves from age 38-39. But he did so with NL ERAs of 3.25 and 4.76, and has only saved two games since as a middle reliever.
For Rivera, the negative is that he's appeared in 787 games already, but add in the 117.1 postseason innings, and he's got an extra year and a half on his arm.
So, can Rivera have three great years? Yes, not least because ERA doesn't matter as much for relievers. But it's no sure bet, and it'll require Rivera making history yet again.
Labels: Yankees
The Yankees' history of great catchers:
1928-43, '46: Bill Dickey
1947-60: Yogi Berra
1960-67: Elston Howard
1970-79: Elston Howard
1998-present: Jorge Posada
The Daily News is saying four years, $52 million. Great price, bad terms. But, if they win a World Series in the next two, I'll live with the last two.
Psychologically, it's a great boost to the spirits of the team and the fans. They've realized in the past couple of years -- certainly, in 2007 -- what a special player they're watching.
Labels: Yankees
The N.Y. Times today compares Joe Giradi to Buck Showalter. Not a bad comparison, other than that Buck Showalter had to be replaced for two franchises to win World Series. And A-Rod clearly didn't get scared away by Girardi; he wants money and power. Besides, the Times, like other media, is looking to contrast Girardi and Torre; Showalter is the only example in recent years to also have had a Yankee connection.
This isn't a bad attitude, in general:
Both are savvy and detail oriented, and both like to be in control of every situation that affects their team.
However, that last bit is worrisome. In New York, you can't always control everything. The media, the ownership and even the players are going to exert some control over stories, even if they are silly, inconsequential stories blown up to more than their worth.
More of this temperament, although seen now as positive, is discussed at Bronx Banter and an SI.com editor.
Basically, if Joe doesn't let some stuff roll off his back, he'll be exactly like Showalter. But there's ample reason to believe he'll be able to do that. Or so I think.
Labels: Yankees
Joe Girardi has been groomed to be a manager for years, even when he was still a player. So, of course, we can at least guess how he might be based upon his influences.
Girardi's managers (excluding a couple of midseason replacements):
1989-91: Don Zimmer
1992: Jim Lefebvre
1993-95: Don Baylor
1996-99: Joe Torre
2000-02: Don Baylor
2003: Tony LaRussa
A lot of heavyweight talent, some beloved and some maligned. All have worked in big markets or for high-profile teams, so Girardi got at least a glimpse into how they handled being under the microscope.
With Don Baylor, he got to see another ex-player who was relatively young (44 in 1993) enjoy some success (1995 NL wild card, manager of the year) but ultimately fail. Baylor, being the first manager of an expansion team, was undoubtedly a bigger influence in Girardi dealing with the youthful 2006 Marlins.
From Jim Lefebvre, he learned about mediocrity, I'd say. You could argue he never had the talent Girardi is inheriting, so not much to glean there.
Tony LaRussa, of course, is well-known for his qualities and faults, and Girardi probably has some lessons there he won't share.
Don Zimmer, of course, was also a coach on Girardi's teams from 1993-1999. He is the biggest influence, I would believe, on Girardi's managerial style. Many have pointed in recent years to the departure of Zimmer as Torre's right-hand man as the catalyst for Torre's perceived (or real) decline in in-game managing. Girardi seems to have inherited the no-nonsense, analytical, but somewhat player-friendly style.
What remains to be seen, however, is if Girardi will be the loose cannon that Zimmer has been for years, if not decades. That temper, if he repeats his Florida behaviors (which I've said I believe was a different situation), will doom Girardi's tenure for sure.
Such an inability to censor himself would also cause a black eye for the Yankees' braintrust, as there was no chance of Don Mattingly or Tony Pena being anything but company men.
If we accept that Zimmer is Girardi's biggest managerial influence, then it just remains to be seen which Zimmer -- the old Brooklyn sage or the nut who charged Pedro Martinez -- will dominate Joe's thinking. I'm confident of the final result.
Labels: Yankees
It's worth looking at because troubles with management are why he was fired in Florida.
It's tough to gauge what the Steinbrenners are going to be like. It's hard to imagine them sitting behind the Yankees' dugout yelling at the umpire about balls and strikes, but you never know. The form of action that could irk Joe Girardi is likely to be the public second-guessing that is a trademark of George.
On the bright side, many of the Yankees' battles, whether between management and manager, GM and owners, players and players, players and managers or players and management, are often more about public perception and how it plays in the media. Girardi has ample training in handling that circus from his time as a player in the Bronx, as Torre's bench coach in 2005 and from time spent at the YES network.
In Florida, it seemed there was a genuine, private animosity between him and Jeffrey Loria. Regardless of who was at fault, the owner's going to win that battle.
The lesson, then, for Girardi, is simple: Keep public disagreements superficial, on the back pages, and rise above them. Of course, winning will help everything.
Labels: Yankees
Apparently, that's all of us who repeatedly backed Alex Rodriguez despite his postseason (and all of 2006) clutch woes, his crippling personality disorders and insecurity, problems with teammates and his apparent inability to handle the media before say, June 2007.
NoMaas, which I feel was overzealous in its joy at Joe Torre's dismissal, gets it exactly right here:
We don't blame Arod for opting out. After all, the Yankees traded for him knowing that he had this clause in his contract. Plus, he was treated like crap by the fans and media here. Maybe he just had enough.
However, we blame Arod for not being man enough to even have a conversation with the Yankees, and specifically Brian Cashman. Cashman was one of the few who publicly defended Rodriguez, and denied the countless trade demands made by writers and fans. After telling us repeatedly during the season that he wanted to stay in New York, Alex did not even honor the Yankees' request of a face-to-face meeting. He reportedly broke up with the Yankees in a voicemail left by Scott Boras. No dialogue. No conversation. Can't we be a little more professional than that? Is that how you really conduct business, Alex?
...
What is certain though is that sincerity and professionalism are two qualities which Alex Rodriguez clearly lacks.
Great athletes don't necessarily need sincerity and professionalism in all aspects. But all the greats have been sincere in their desire to win and professional in the way they went about their business. Even a moron like Manny Ramirez is clearly sincere in his love of baseball and professional in his approach to hitting.
No one doubts A-Rod's professional approach to hitting, but it's all superseded -- his play, his love for the game, his desires to win and to be loved -- to a desire, a sincere one, to be the best-paid, dominant figure in sports. To be bigger than anything else.
Are we jumping the gun? Maybe A-Rod comes back. Even if he somehow did, though, hasn't he burnt all his bridges? It would be a Yankee fan's version of Stockholm Syndrome to welcome him back with open arms.
Kudos to Scott Boras, for he's doing exactly what he needs to do, but A-Rod? Hope the money and new city compensates for being the loneliest man in sports.
These include:
Why we can make incredible computers on the head of a pin, and turn almost anything into a fuel resource, and we can clone animals, yet AA batteries don't improve while technology sucks more power from them.
Why casting directors think Lindsay Lohan will make a movie better by her addiction-fueled presence.
How ABC thought "Cavemen" wasn't going to be terrible. I mean, you don't have half-hour commercials for a reason. It's like two-hour movies based on one halfway funny joke that sets up the film in the first 90 seconds. And this happens all the time.
Why Tiny Fey keeps getting better-looking. I'm not surprised, however, that that link shows Conan O'Brien looks just like a "Mary Poppins" girl.
How Tim McCarver has a job on TV.
But mostly, why the Yankees are taking so long to decide on Torre. It's not fair to the organization, the coaches, the players, the fans or Torre. It's also going to hinder relations with pending free agents, whether they be in-house or elsewhere, as well as put more of a spotlight (or bulls-eye, if you choose) on the next manager.
It'd be one thing if the delay, or the interminable negotiations, were of a contract matter. By this I mean talks with Torre on a new deal or Mattingly, et al, to fill the position. But this is merely the talks before the talks.
While one can understand the hesitancy of the younger Steinbrenners and the other Yankee execs to rush the first post-George decision, looking lost won't comfort anyone. Nor will it improve upon the bottom-line, if not entirely fair, blame on Torre for not delivering a champion since 2000.
Labels: Yankees
Keeping him seems to be asking for more of the same. It's not really his fault -- he's been there forever.
I'd write long, but it would boil down to this:
I would keep him over Don Mattingly, or any of the retreads out there (Bobby Valentine included).
The biggest disappointment in the Torre era was 2003, not the last few years. 2003 was the last year the Yankees truly had the best team.
Though Torre had good stretches this year, Jeff Pearlman never should have apologized for this column. Sometimes, when it's time, it's time.
The best manager available was Lou Pinella last year, and they missed that boat.
So, unless it's Joe Girardi (who everyone has confidence in without much to back it up), let's stick with Joe.
Labels: Yankees
On June 21, I was pessimistic about Andy Pettitte's chances of getting 200 wins this season. Yes, it was possible, but his four wins in 15 starts to that point made it a challenge.
Well, here we are. Win #200, 12+ years after the first.
1. Who has more wins than Pettitte (200-112, 391 GS, 3.81 ERA) since the start of 1995?
Greg Maddux (212-122, 436 GS, 3.16 ERA) and Randy Johnson (203-88, 370 GS, 3.00 ERA). Mike Mussina is right behind him at 197. Roger Clemens is seventh with 182.
2. Where does Pettitte stack up among Yankees?
Out of pitchers who predominantly (or only) played for the Yankees, Whitey Ford and Red Ruffing are the tops. Ford won 236 games, all with the Yanks, and Ruffing won 231 for the Yanks and 42 for other teams. Pettitte, with 163 Yankee wins, is seventh, one behind Mel Stottlemyre.
3. How about with 20-win seasons?
Pettitte has two (1996 and 2003). Since Ron Guidry ('78, '83, '85) retired, no other Yankee has won 20 games more than once (David Cone in 1998, Clemens in 2001). And the last three (Andy, Guidry and Tommy John in 1979-80) were all lefties.
4. So how's he do among lefties?
He's the 27th to get to 200. Of those, only six have made the trek to 300, Tom Glavine being the last. Pettitte is 35 years, 3 months and 4 days. Glavine was 34 years, 4 months and 5 days when he hit 200 in a season in which he won 21. So the odds aren't great. What does Baseball-Reference say? His two most-similar pitchers through age 34 are Mike Mussina (not bad) and Dwight Gooden (disastrous). We'll see.
4. But he doesn't complete any games, right?
Nope, but who does anymore? Still, Pettitte has the fewest complete games of any 200-game winner in history, with six fewer than Jamie Moyer.
5. So where does he rank best among 200-game winners?
Well, postseason wins, where he and John Smoltz stand tall. Unfortunately, he does have the sixth-worst regular season ERA of any 200-game winner since 1957 (and probably ever), though guys below him include active pitchers David Wells, Kenny Rogers and Moyer.
Where Pettitte ranks best, and is something for which he'd acknowledge he is lucky, is in winning percentage. His .641 mark is behind only Clemens, Johnson and Martinez since 1957 (Ford, of course, posted a .690 mark).
We all know Pettitte's a very good pitcher who may be a borderline Hall of Fame case because of his affiliation with a Yankee dynasty and a great Houston Astros run. But somebody's gotta be on the mound to get all those wins, and Pettitte is still doing that, all these years later. It's a great day.
Remember all this talk I've had about Phil Hughes and maybe even Ian Kennedy joining the playoff rotation? Apparently, Mike Mussina was upset about it, and decided to post his best performance of the year (by 10 Game Score points, no less).
And while, hey, Joe Torre's going to go with the vets unless he absolutely can't, Mussina still needed to reinstill confidence.
And he has, although he needs multiple quality starts to truly dispel doubt.
However you look at it, the rotation is rounding into shape at just the right time, and it's becoming a, if not feared, then formidable bunch lacking since 2003.
As for closing the gap with Boston and pulling away from Detroit, I've called both races long ago, so while a pleasant development, I'm not going crazy over it. However, as I said months ago, I'd love to be proven wrong about the A.L. East. Thing is, if they are to overtake the Sox, it'll have been because they focused on the wild card and let the rest of life control itself. And that's the difference between this team and say, Boston last year and so many years before.
Last night's game reminded me of my one time in Fenway Park. Neither game changed the outcome of the season (both teams were leading the playoff race each year), but both were wins the Yankees perhaps needed more than the Sox.
There were some familiar faces last night. Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Mike Timlin, Johnny Damon (in the home dugout), David Ortiz, Jason Varitek, Jason Giambi and Hideki Matsui all played July 25, 2003 and last night.
But David Wells and Pedro Martinez were the starters, Jesse Orosco and Armando Benitez came in briefly in relief for the Yanks, and Byung-Hyun Kim took the loss for Boston. Wells had six walks on the season entering the game; he walked five. Pedro walked four, too, and it was obvious no one was happy with the umpiring. Manny Ramirez forgot how many outs there were on a fly ball and was doubled up, and though Rivera blew the save (coming in mid-inning and giving up his traditional broken-bat blooper), he closed the door in the ninth when given a second chance.
Fenway's an amazing ballpark, if so tiny that it's easy to forget it houses a major-league team. But still, it was nice to see this when we got up to leave at game's end.
Labels: Baseball, classic-review, Yankees
That's what tonight's game was, besides a chance to gain ground in the faint hopes of an A.L. East title and distance the Yankees from the resurgent Tigers.
Phil Hughes is on the bubble, I'd think. Ian Kennedy could throw three no-hitters and I still don't think Joe Torre would bench a combination of two of Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina and Hughes to give the rook a playoff start. I may be wrong, but that's my theory going forward.
Clemens, barring injury, will get a start. There's no way you pay him $1 million or more a start, and he's had his moments. Oddly enough, Clemens is fine on regular rest (4-2, 3.23 ERA in 53 innings) and on super-long rest of six days or more (2-0, 2.50 ERA, 18 IP, 19 K), but atrocious in a six-man rotation setup (0-3, 7.29 ERA in four starts).
So it comes down to Moose and Hughes. Phil protected his turf tonight with his typical two runs early, nothing late, but 5.2 innings against the Orioles isn't exactly awe-inspiring. And in a playoff situation, do you want to almost guarantee an early deficit? And even though he settles down, usually, as far as runs scored are, his inning-by-inning OPS splits coming into tonight (.857, .505, .866, .494, .973, .211) suggest he simply is overpowering the weak hitters in a lineup and failing against the better ones.
I'd take Hughes right now, but this may have to be a last-minute decision. Given, of course, the team wins the wild card.
I did my best to try and ignore the Yanks-Red Sox series. Why, despite my earlier love for the rivalry?
Well, the division title was not at stake, as it hasn't been for months. It's always overly hyped, especially at the 19 or so games they play annually, as if each game will make or break a player's psyche, career and reputation in the community.
But what the hell, it's Sunday night baseball, with the affable Jon Miller and the gloriously off-base Joe Morgan. So let's take on this task.
Read more...
Pre-game: NFL highlights still going on. What a busy as hell weekend. Tiger Woods dominating as even he has rarely done; Notre Dame proving it must have really hated Ty Willingham because it would rather be 0-3 than have him; the Giants already quitting on the 2007 season, among a million other NFL subplots; and of course, O.J.
My God, the cojones this man has. He admits he went into the room, with guys he met at a wedding party (loyal friends, I'm sure), as part of sting operation. A sting operation? Who does he think he is, Chris Hansen?
Well, Jon Miller just told us this is Clemens' 200th start at Fenway. I don't know why, but it's not a good sign. I'm seeing headlines like "200th Fenway start should be his last." Joe Morgan told us Clemens is a competitor. So am I, Joe. But I'm not pitching tonight.
1st inning: Talking with my friend Mike, who's noting a huge amount of strikeouts for hitters, but not many for the league leaders. As in, not many guys with 200. I think most of that is the lack of innings pitched. When few guys throw 200 innings, they have to be lights-out every start.
Derek Jeter gets another hit, continuing his stretch of hitting the Red Sox and not hitting anyone else. But nothing comes of it.
Looking at catchers similar to Jorge Posada's career track, and I picked on Carlton Fisk's age 35 year. But I forgot to mention his age 37 season (37 HR, 107 RBI, 17 steals). Damn good.
Now, Johnny Damon loses a ball in the lights. Understandable, but less so because Damon played for a few years in that ballpark.
By the way, Roger Clemens shows his age most when he lets guys steal on him. Old men don't have pickoff moves or fast deliveries. Still, he's a competitor. A competitor who just walked David Ortiz, which is not a bad move considering he's the only truly lethal bat in the lineup.
This inning is not as bad as it could have been, thanks to Dougie M.'s amazing dive to snare the ball and tap the bag. That's not an old man. Notice Clemens wasn't even in the picture frame -- he's not covering that bag.
Epilogue: Well, I did a terrible job of liveblogging past this point because I was talking on the phone and watching instead of typing and watching.
Things that came up, though, some Yankee-related:
1. Fastest-moving Yanks-Red Sox game in a while. Roger Clemens is still a great pitcher, but one who needs more rest than usual. Tonight, against an equally failing, though gifted, ace in Curt Schilling, it's easy to see how he's the game's greatest post-WWII pitcher. And don't bitter Boston fans fool you: Clemens has dominated the Sox in his two starts this year, and the 1999 ALCS disaster against Pedro was a lifetime ago.
Schilling has the Phil Hughes problem in reverse: He doesn't have an out pitch when guys are on base, but he tries to strike everyone out. Except his pitches are getting worse, his velocity is less-debated but terrible, and he's old and in dubious physical condition. He's a smart pitcher, though, and just ran out of luck in the eighth.
2. Derek Jeter since Aug. 12 coming into tonight: .239/.317/.319 5 XBH in 113 at-bats.
Jeter against the Red Sox since Aug. 12: .480/.500/.880 4 XBH in 25 at-bats.
3. Lou Pinella -- Hall of Fame manager? I'd say yes, considering he took a Cincinnati team that did nothing else to a World Series sweep over a good Oakland team defending its title, is the only Mariners manager to lead that team to the playoffs, and has made an imploding Cubs team the most dangerous team in the National League (although that Michael Barrett trade didn't hurt).
4. If Mike Mussina or Roger Clemens don't start an ALDS game, do you want either on the roster? Can Joe Torre drop one of them, though? No, and no. However, Roger looks like he'll be starting somewhere, and it's a tough call to bump Hughes for the Moose. Both are six-inning pitchers, but Moose might not even be that, and he finishes his starts poorly, whereas Hughes finishes strong.
5. Hypothetical: Mariano Rivera continues to struggle, for him, the rest of the year. Maybe even blows a save in the off-season. Then, he and his agent, Fernando Cuza, ask for a three-year contract.
Do you consider saying, it's been great, Mo, but we've got a guy named Joba Chamberlain who's all ready to be a closer, a potentially six-out closer you are no longer? You can't, but should you?
6. The Tigers are worth worrying about, but the Yankees need to worry about their problems with potential playoff opponents. Though Mike insists, and not incorrectly, that the Yankees match up with the Angels better than ever, there's that awful track record.
The Indians, despite their pathetic play versus the Yankees, are a damn good, exciting team. Their ace, C.C. Sabathia, has dominated Johan Santana to the point that there's whispers of A-Rod-like big-spot disappointment. And the Yanks? They haven't faced Sabathia since September of 2004. Ruben Sierra was in that lineup. That's not a good sign. Neither is the potential of facing Sabathia and Carmona four times in five games.
Pick your poison. But first, hold off the Tigers.
7. How bad-ass does Jodie Foster look in that otherwise silly-looking movie where she goes around killing people? Sure, there may (or may not) be a morality lesson there, but really, we just want to see an Oscar-winning chick shooting people.
Anyways, a somewhat failed effort, but some good baseball tonight.
Labels: Baseball, Liveblogging, Yankees
Ian Kennedy is not quite Mel Stottlemyre, but could he be the Yankees' No. 4 starter in a playoff series?
I don't think so, only because Joe Torre would be signing his dismissal sheet (if one exists) by benching 600+ worth of wins in Mike Mussina and Roger Clemens. And there's huge, legitimate worries of starting a rookie who's thrown 60+ innings more than any year post-HS.
But it might be a gamble worth taking.
In other news, Melky, you're killing me in the last month (.263/.307/.316). So are you, Captain Punchless (.256/.351/.329 in the last four weeks).
In tonight's enjoyable romp. Phil Hughes likes to test everyone's patience, don't he?
The man is a legit MVP candidate. It's just too bad his teammate is putting up the league's best numbers since Mickey Mantle roamed center field.
Twenty home runs, 85 RBI and 39 doubles may seem nice, but not great. But he's in his age 35 season and has caught 123 games while posting a .338/.424/.558 and an OPS+ approaching 160.
There's only one comparison: Carlton Fisk, who was actually damn good at 35, with 26 HR, 86 RBI and a .289/.355/.518 line. He caught 133 games.
At 35, Johnny Bench was in his final season, hitting .255/.308/.432 and catching only five games.
Mike Piazza put up decent, but not great numbers at 20/54/.266/.362/.444, catching 50 times.
Yogi Berra hit .276/.347/.446, catching 63 times.
At 35, Gary Carter was injured, playing only 50 games and eking out a .183/.241/.275 line in his last year with the Mets.
Obviously, Posada caught far fewer games before 30 than these men (and Ivan Rodriguez), so he has less wear.
Unfortunately, this puts the Yankees in a tough position this offseason. Posada is NOT this year's Mike Mussina, the veteran who shows the greatness, collects the paycheck and then falls apart. Posada has posted a 119 OPS+ or better for seven of eight years and hasn't had catastrophic injuries. However, how many years do the Yanks give a catcher who's dangerously close to uncharted territory? Given his production and hitting ability, I'd say two, not three. But for those two years, you give him any amount he wants.
The most-successful pitcher and the best hitter in baseball played prominent roles for the Yankees today, and it's those two who are going to make the difference in October (that's right, the wild card is locked up).
Alex Rodriguez's postseason struggles are well-documented over the last two years. Chien-Ming Wang has been bitten by the bad-luck bug -- in 2005, he gave up one earned run in 6.2 innings, but he took the loss because the Yanks had three errors. In 2006, he earned a Game 1 win, but never got to pitch again.
He should have been started on three days' rest instead of the disaster that was Jaret Wright and Corey Lidle. But, as we all know, Joe Torre was secretly betting millions against the Yankees in the 2006 ALDS, so he had to draw up inane lineups, bat A-Rod eighth and not pitch Wang.
Regardless, Wang is going to be even more vital to the Yanks this year. But today was an impressive audition for what might be.
As for A-Rod's home-run chase, he remains three behind Maris through game #143, though Maris started to struggle (understandably) at this point.
Alex Rodriguez has jumped his projections quite a bit in the last few games. He's at 51 home runs now, the same amount Cecil Fielder had in his entire 1990 season and the amount Ralph Kiner and Johnny Mize had to share the 1947 home run title.
Alex is at team game #142. Roger Maris' game #142 was also Sept. 8. He went 0-for-3 after belting a homer on consecutive days. But he already had 55 home runs, and would add another Sept. 9 before going into a mini-slump, belting only four the rest of the way.
So, Alex has his work cut out for him. But there's a chance for the A.L. record, and what some may consider the true, untainted record.
Before his fly out a minute ago, he was hitting .563 over the last seven days. He's been a better second-half hitter for years, and is doing so despite the worry that the Yanks not only wanted him to catch all of their games, but perhaps some for other teams on his off days.
Just a few of his splits (by month):
PA: 83,103,113,103,95
H: 23,37,27,31,23
R: 12,19,10,16,14
2B: 5,11,7,6,7
HR: 3,3,3,3,4 (and 3 this month)
RBI: 15,15,15,15,18
BB: 8,9,13,16,12
At home: .332/.410/.529 On the road: .341/.430/.572
All year, I've been thinking his batting average, etc., has been declining, albeit very slowly. It's more of having two monster peaks -- May and July.
His All-Star break numbers: .325/.398/.503 Post-AS break: .357/.459/.636
The only, slight criticism could be that's he's been ordinary with RISP and has struggled in close and late and 2 outs, RISP spots. But with a tie game, or trailing by 1-4 runs, he's right with his season averages.
I just have to keep emphasizing how fun he's been to watch.
The Yankees are uncertain. Luis Vizcaino has blown up again, Joba Chamberlain is still on the rules, Mariano Rivera is streaky, Roger Clemens and Mike Mussina are creaky, and Melky has also fallen off since I famously pointed out how Cabrera, Vizcaino and Rivera had turned around the Yanks' season. And the Yankees are still at .500 when not playing the Central (28-11 and counting).
But hell, they have a cushion in the wild card and get to play the lowly Royals at a time when the Tigers and Mariners, desperately needing wins, have to beat up on each other. There is no loss here for the Yanks. If Detroit sweeps, Seattle is essentially eliminated. If they split, both could lose ground and a few more days in the season are gone.
Best-case scenario: The Yanks get through the next 10 days, have the wild card all but wrapped up and get to have an abbreviated "rest your team for the postseason" fun period.
I'm optimistic.
Labels: Yankees
Mike Puma, formerly of the Connecticut Post and now of the New York version, makes the case that A-Rod is on the same plane as Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle and Joe D.
One thing he's off on, however, is saying how Ruth's 1927 season (.356, 60 HR, 164 RBI, 158 R) is the gold standard. In popular practice, yes. But really, and this is something no one is expected to touch, it's Ruth's 1921 season, where he put up a .378/.512/.846 line, 59 HR, 171 RBI, 177 R, and 119 extra-base hits.
Tonight, we get a test for Ian Kennedy, who's pitching on the road and against a bad team, but bad teams have caused Yankee letdowns all year. I'm thinking five to six innings, three runs in a slight regression from the hype and excitement of his debut. He's probably better than Chase Wright, Tyler Clippard and Matt DeSalvo, but still. They went 2-0 in their debut starts, pitching 18 innings, giving up but five runs on 11 hits. Their second starts? Only DeSalvo won, and the three pitched 13.2 innings, with nine runs on 18 hits. DeSalvo cratered after that, going 0-3 in five games (four starts) with 24 hits and 16 earned runs in 14 innings.
So not to knock Kennedy at all (especially because he's not a 4A guy like those above), but don't worry if he's not lights-out tonight.
Top Yankees performances in the last 45 years (1962-2007):
HR: 48 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2005, 2007 (and counting)
44 -- Tino Martinez, 1997
41 -- Reggie Jackson, 1980; Jason Giambi, 2002, 2003
RBI: 145 -- Don Mattingly, 1985
141 -- Tino Martinez, 1997
134 (and counting) -- Alex Rodriguez, 2007
130 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2005
123 -- Tino Martinez, 1998; Gary Sheffield, 2005
SLG%: .651 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2007
.610 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2005
.605 -- Mickey Mantle, 1962
.603 -- Paul O'Neill, 1994
OPS: 1.091 -- Mickey Mantle, 1962
1.069 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2007
1.063 -- Paul O'Neill, 1994
1.033 -- Jason Giambi, 2002
1.031 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2005
Adjusted OPS: 181 -- Bobby Murcer, 1971
179 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2007
177 -- Paul O'Neill, 1994
174 -- Jason Giambi, 2002
172 -- Reggie Jackson, 1980
At bats per HR: 10.6 -- Alex Rodriguez, 2007
12.1 -- Jason Giambi, 2006
12.3 -- Darryl Strawberry, 1998
12.5 -- Reggie Jackson, 1980
12.6 -- Mickey Mantle, 1962; Alex Rodriguez, 2005
Did I cherry-pick these stats a bit. Absolutely. But A-Rod is having the greatest Yankee season since the Maris-Mantle home run chase. He's chasing the ghosts of Yankee history, no one else. And look at the comparisons in these lists: Mantle's 1962 MVP season, Reggie's best year in pinstripes, Jason Giambi's best two years in New York, Paul O'Neill's batting title year, and his own 2005 MVP campaign. He's passed all of those, and there's still 20+ games to go.
By the way, how good was Bobby Murcer? OPS+ of 181 in 1971 led the league, and his 169 the next year was second. Career-wise, he's a 124, right there with Jeff Kent, Jorge Posada, Derrek Lee and Derek Jeter.
Wouldn't it be nice? Just as in 2003, the two most-important players to their teams might be Alex Rodriguez and Jorge Posada. Except this year, they play on the same team (with apologies to fine candidate Magglio Ordonez and the ever-relaxed, amazing Vladimir Guerrerro).
If there's been one constant this year with the Yanks, it's that Posada and A-Rod (and Jeter until August) were going to produce or put up a hell of a battle in defeat. Chien-Ming Wang can be added to that, and he, again, is tied for the league lead in wins. He has 36 since the start of 2006. Johan Santana has 33, as does Josh Beckett. Brad Penny has 31. Brandon Webb, Roy Halladay and Carlos Zambrano have 30.
Wang wins. That's it.
Anyway, it was a much better game to watch and write about than the day before, where 601 career wins brought nothing but crap pitching and pathetic hitting.
The Yanks still need to win this rubber match game with the Mariners. A three-game lead will allow for more wild inconsistency; a one-game lead probably won't. Depending on Seattle to struggle isn't such a fun option, either: As I stated July 30, the Red Sox and Indians did not continue to struggle, and though the Yanks' torrid play made up ground on both, it wasn't enough. Fortunately, Detroit fell apart, Minnesota and Oakland never made a run, and Seattle didn't run away with anything.
But the Yankees must continue to win. A lot. And act as if every loss is a dagger. As appealing as backing into the playoffs is, it's not something you can do without a ton of luck. And the Yanks, judging by their Pythagorean stats, are in short supply of luck this year.
And though I hadn't thought of it much, it seems that he doesn't have much of a game plan -- or at least one that's different from when he could throw 93 mph.
Al Leiter was talking about this on the air a few weeks ago, saying how, as he lost velocity in his last couple years, he couldn't make the adjustment. Not all pitchers can. Either they never had the greatest of breaking stuff, or they can't quite reduce speed on the off-speeders to match the decline in the fastball. Leiter is rough on himself: In his next-to-last season, he was 10-8, 3.21, 1.353 WHIP and 5th in H/9, though he dipped below six innings per start.
On the other hand, it only takes one year to make a collapse, and Moose has certainly done that, just as David Cone did from 1999 to 2000.
Ian Kennedy has a tall order ahead. But it's just as much an audition for next year (and for Mike Mussina's future) as it is to aid a playoff run.
His velocity is down, according to GM Brian Cashman here and here.
What does that mean? Mechanics, not enough uninterrupted throwing after his injury, fatigue, or something else. At least the Yankees are noticing it and looking to see what can be done. But it's probably another step in getting a realistic assessment of Hughes.
As Yankees Tonight says, if Hughes complains about it, then it's a real problem. Until then, it's just something to keep tabs on.
As for tonight's game, I refer you to Andy Pettitte, losing-streak stopper.
Other than, please take Mike Mussina out of the rotation? I don't know. Jorge Posada and Derek Jeter had another game of hitlessness, and Sean Henn failed in the only suitable role he has -- mop-up man.
Playoffs, you seem over. But this team is unpredictable with its winning streaks when all hope seems lost and its ability to tank when it has a real chance to change things. The Yanks, either way, have sealed themselves as the most-expensive tease on record.
Michael Kay seems to think so, from what he said on yesterday's broadcast (and Al Leiter didn't exactly put up a fight). Hughes' supporters, some of whom are here, point out he's the youngest starter in the league (except Felix Rodriguez?) and he's essentially gone from Double A to the majors.
Here's what I see: He can't blow anyone away with his fastball. The Yanks, or him, or Posada/Molina, have him not throwing much besides fastballs and curveballs, which means he is getting a lot of strikeouts on the curve. Well, when there are guys in scoring position and two or three balls in the count, you can't throw that in-the-dirt curve. The fastball then becomes closer to a batting-practice pitch than an out pitch, and you depend upon a batter's mistake or superb defensive placement and ability to save you.
But that's not overrated. If anything, it's misplaced expectations, in part created by the six no-hit innings against the Texas Rangers. Even with a B+ fastball, he's still got about a strikeout an inning, something no other Yankee starter has close to matching.
Plus, he's held up under the pressure and not felt compelled to rush or hide his head in shame because he gives up some runs.
What are the solutions to the wall, of sorts, that he's hit?
1. Start throwing changeups and give the fastball the illusion of a 95-mph heater.
2. Become more of a Maddux/Glavine location pitcher. Neither is a strikeout king, but both can get big outs when they need them.
3. Have a natural learning curve and become better through repetition.
The only issue? Time. Doing any of those takes time, as it should, and it probably won't bring magical results this year.
As it is, this Phil Hughes that only has displayed a couple of weapons and a mislocated, misused fastball is a decent pitcher. He's good enough to keep in the rotation and good enough to hope that he and the team find that better path of pitching.
As for him being an ace, Andy Pettitte has never truly been an ace, yet he's had two 20-win seasons, eight seasons of 200+ innings and a career 119 ERA+. I'll take something similar.
After a terrible loss last night, it was good to see the team bounce back, and especially good to see Chein-Ming Wang revert to 2006 form (eight innings, two runs).
The most-surprising thing tonight was not a fully productive outfield (Johnny Damon homer and triple, Melky Cabrera triple, Bobby Abreu multi-hit game) but that the team knocked Jeremy Bonderman around the diamond without a hit from Derek Jeter or Jorge Posada. They went 0-for-1