Around the Yankee Universe: Phil Hughes edition
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 11:41 AM EDT
in News
59 comments
OK, so when do you guys start screaming that Phil Hughes should be the 8th inning guy? or ... gulp! ... that he should stay in the bullpen forever.
We all know Hughes' future is as a fixture in the Yankees' starting rotation. Debating otherwise is really silly at this point. But, he sure has been fun to watch coming in as a reliever.
Over his last five outings, Hughes has thrown 7 1 /3 innings of scoreless baseball in relief. He has struck out nine and walked just one. And 66 percent of his pitches have been strikes.
His fastball hit 96 at one point Sunday night and his stuff has improved during the transition to the bullpen -- normal for any starter making the move, Yankees manager Joe Girardi said.
"He's been really, really good down there," Girardi said.
So good, in fact, that he is being forced to begin answering questions about whether or not he might want to stay there.
Hughes has relieved seven times this season and has a 1.50 ERA and a .122 batting average against. In his last five outings, he is scoreless over seven innings with three hits, one walk and nine strikeouts. Maybe this is just a short run of success, though Alex Rodriguez said, "[Hughes] is throwing the ball as well as anyone on our staff. He is a total asset."
Would anybody be surprised if in the not too distant future it is Hughes -- not Brian Bruney -- who is doing the main set-up work for Rivera? And is it possible that it will be Hughes, rather than Chamberlain, who is the heir apparent to Rivera?
"Yes, I want to be a starter still," Hughes said, sounding quite like Rivera 13 years ago. "But it wouldn't be bad to have Mariano Rivera's career. I want to be pitching in the major leagues. That is what is important to me. I think too many guys are too picky."
Hughes, 23, did not find the adjustment difficult.
"I really haven't had much trouble adapting going to the bullpen," Hughes said. "Sometimes you hear guys who it takes getting used to. But for me, it's just pitching. Every time out there, I just need to throw the ball well and not worry about what my role is."
Along with Bruney, David Robertson, Alfredo Aceves and Phil Coke, Hughes has been a huge part of the revamped and resurgent bullpen.
He might stay there the rest of this season, you never know. My take on it, though, is that the experience will simply make him a better starter in the long run. In the short term, it might just help the Yankees win big.
0 recs |
59 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Well geez I don't know
When do you start screaming that he’s always been a starter and that 150 innings of Hughes is more valuable than 75?
Did I get that right?
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know, look at what I wrote. I’ve always liked the “idea” of Hughes being a starter but his history at the pro level shows a pitcher that is dominant early and then becomes incredibly hittable as hitters see him more than once in a game…. so, maybe, 75 solid innings are better than 150 mixed ones.
by Vincent Caramela on Jun 30, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Although this is all still very early and Hughes is still developing and young… so maybe I should refrain from making such snap judgements but in terms of this season – I think I like Hughes in the pen.
by Vincent Caramela on Jun 30, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In a way
Why mess with success? It’s working right now, that’s all I know. The time will come when Hughes is needed in the rotation.
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of things were working...
…that you wanted changed.
Hughes in the rotation and Wang in the bullpen was working too. You couldn’t have that.
Look, just admit that you’re making a hypocritical argument here for keeping Hughes in the pen when your logic and words have said that doing such a thing is wrong in Joba’s case.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Andy is gone next season. That spot in the rotation is for one man and one man only and that Phranchise. I am hoping our boys pull it out this season, I am just excited about our rotation for the next few seasons. CC, AJ, Wang, Joba, Hughes, all getting comfortable and in sync. That is going to be a pretty damn good starting 5 for years to come.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unacceptable...
…we “Joba bullpen” people have been ripped unmercifully even though our opinions were formed based on Joba’s initial Major League bullpen experience.
That’s exactly what you’re doing with Hughes. Joba had ZERO major league starts on his resume when the Yankees (and you, apparently) decided he was going to be an ace starter.
Hughes is younger and has a far more impressive resume as a starter in the minors than Joba ever had.
I’m just waiting for someone to admit the hypocrisy of this very argument.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not really
trying to make an argument here at all. He’s succeeding, which is good. He is helping the team, and we should be happy. No argument, no fight, no debate. Not from me.
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not arguing
I’m just pointing out that it’s so easy from that side of the discussion for you to never have to admit a mistake.
With Joba, if he fails as a starter longterm, you can simply say, “ok you had to try it, but now put him back in the bullpen.” There’s culpability there.
Now with Hughes, the choice of bullpen/rotation is again presenting itself, and you’re coming down on the other side of it.
Answer a simple multiple choice question for me:
A pitcher with the ability to start or relieve should…
a) start unquestionably
b) relieve unquestionably
c) Pizza
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's great...
…can’t even stand behind your own words.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He should A) Start Unquestionably until injury or ineffectiveness force him back into the bullpen.
This kid is 23 years old. He’s been a starter throughout his career. He’s had some setbacks, yes, and some poor performances, but he’s shown a lot of promise in the rotation this season. Clearly, it’s not surprising that he’s done well in the bullpen, but we already have plenty of bullpen guys – Aceves, Coke, Robertson, Bruney, and hopefully soon, Melancon – and so it doesn’t make sense to take one of your best young pitchers, who was drafted and developed as a starter, and permanently turn him into a reliever until he’s proven definitively that he can’t handle starting.
The bullpen is a way for Hughes to help the big league club this season, so it makes sense. But, his success this year also virtually guarantees that Andy Pettitte won’t be back next season.
by 3460kuri on Jun 30, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least...
…you have the decency to stand behind your convictions.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
mmmmm. Pizza.
Pizza in Mass. SUCKS!
Im calling PAPA JOHNS DAMMIT!
by FreeBradshaw on Jul 1, 2009 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As far as I'm concerned,
the argument is very simple. A good starter who pitches 200 innings is more valuable than a great reliever who only pitches 70. Mariano was a bad starter who became the greatest reliever ever. Joba and Hughes are already good starters and should be starters for the long term. (Though I have no objection to Hughes being in the pen for the time being.)
by DocBrown82 on Jun 30, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahhh ... a voice of reason
And, I’m not still not arguing. My boxing glove, sword, knife, whatever are all put away. Let’s all be friends.
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ummm
As of right NOW as a starter:
Hughes has started 28 games
He is 8-9
Whip 1.376 (That is including his great relief stint of late)
Joba has started 26
He is 10-5
Whip 1.255 (That is including his great relied stint of past)
Hughes is is 9 months younger. So what? They are both < 25 which makes them babies
He was a better starter in the minors? You mean the same place where Shelly Duncan does awesome and everyone say that minor league numbers mean nothing in the Show?
Right now:
Joba > Hughes
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
…many were convinced Joba was going to be an ace before he so much as took the mound as a starter in the major leagues.
That was my point.
Try reading for comprehension sometimes. It can really help.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
Do you really have to rip people all the time? Your comment would have made the same point without the last paragraph. There’s just no need for the insults whenever someone disagrees with you. Please.
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was just a suggestion
I figured I’d help him out.
I also don’t see the insult in what I said. If I’d called him a “stupid illiterate moron” that would have been an insult.
I couldn’t care less if he disagrees with me, but would it kill him to actually grasp what I was saying before disagreeing?
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You two
Just need to agree to disagree. You come at things from vastly different perspectives. Doesn’t make either one of you right or wrong.
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mmmmm
Douche levels at critical mass. First off, your contention is that it is hyporcritical for people who feel Joba should not go back to the pen now be proponents of Hughes going To the pen. Well it is not hypocritical at all. Here is why:
JOBA:
A) Joba was in the pen and did excellent, but starters are more important than relievers.
B) Joba has two A+ pitches, 1 B pitch and a C+ pitch, which automatically makes him a candidate as a starter
C) Joba has been successful this year in the starting five, so his ROLE right now benefits the Yankees as a team more
.
HUGHES:
A) Hughes has been unsuccessful as a starting pitcher thus far. He WILL be a starting pitcher when Andy leaves the Yankees.
B) Hughes has been succesfull in the pen, but NOT at the cost of his arm in the rotation.
C) Hughes’ development as a starter does NOT supercede the Yankees necessity to straighten out Wang which means SOMEONE has to leave the starting five.
Wang is NOT a relief pitcher, nor will he ever be SO that means he stays in the 5 until he proves he is hurting the team. That leaves 5 other starters that can go to the pen:
CC>AJ>Andy>Joba>Hughes. So therefore Hughes going to the pen is because there is no SPOT and because Hughes starting has NOT been effective.
So the two are not equal by any stretch of the imagination and your call of hypocrisy is poorly founded.
As for your insulting attitude, well since I am in a good mood and have promised to be a little easier on the boards I will let my position stand for itself and let your doucheyness speak for itself.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unbelievable...
…let’s try this again.
The “Joba the ace” people have been trumpeting that idea since BEFORE HE EVER MADE A MAJOR LEAGUE START.
I’m trying like hell not to mock your inability to grasp that simple point, but you’re making it damn near impossible. For what it’s worth, Ed’s sarcastic tone at the beginning of this post started the whole thing.
For someone who wants people to respect the opinion of others, he has a funny way of showing it with condescending crap like that.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are tripping all over yourself
And masking your flawed logic by jawing out of your ass.
Your Contention:
It is hypocritical for people to be adamant about Joba starting but not being adamant about Hughes starting. Here is your quote:
“Look, just admit that you’re making a hypocritical argument here for keeping Hughes in the pen when your logic and words have said that doing such a thing is wrong in Joba’s case”.
My Contention:
These two scenarios are mutually exclusive and are vast different circumstances. Why? We have 6 pitchers for 5 roles. Wang is NOT a reliever nor is he going to be and the best way to get him sorted is for him to start. Until his starts cause the Yankees to risk the postseason, that is where he stays. So with that, the choice is between Joba and Hughes in the pen. Joba has proven he can start, and can be successful. Hughes has not had any real success as a starter. So therefor the easiest solution is let Hughes get his innings in the pen or ship him down.
Conclusion:
Joba is in the starting five because he EARNED it. Hughes is in the pen because he EARNED it. Having them both succeed in both their respective roles is beneficial for everyone. Hughes is a starter in the wings, Joba has already earned his spot. So your contention about hypocrisy is WRONG. Situations are different. VASTLY different. Just because you have a man-crush on Hughes does not mean anything. Joba’s potential and current level of play as a starter is of greater value than his role as a reliever. Hughes potential and current level as a starter is of lesser value than his role as a reliever.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They are different now...
…but they weren’t different before Joba made a start at the major league level.
The decision to move Joba to the rotation was based on his potential, shown at the minor league level. People who supported that decision used that potential as a defense for their position.
Hughes also has excellent potential as a major league starter, and despite an injury that hampered his development, has shown the ability to perform at this level already.
You’re just taking this position because you’re Wang’s cousin or whatever and can’t stand the notion that he’s on the downside. His starts have already put the Yankees postseason chances at risk, unless you consider his 1-6 record a benefit in the standings.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
QUOTE
“The decision to move Joba to the rotation was based on his potential, shown at the minor league level”
Wrong. He proved it based on his success against ML hitters and his number of quality pitch types. Everything pointed to him being the next starter.
QUOTE
“Hughes also has excellent potential as a major league starter, and despite an injury that hampered his development, has shown the ability to perform at this level already.”
Hughes has had every opportunity as a starter and has been mediocre. So you can excuse Hughes based on an injury but you cannot excuse Wang based on a much more severe injury even though Wang has a professional record of 55-26 compared to Hughes record of 8-9. So who exactly is being hypocritical?
You fail.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hughes had had every opportunity?
Really? 28 starts before his 24th birthday is "every opportunity?
By that logic, Joba Chamberlain has had far more than a fair chance to become the ace you all promised he would be.
Does that mean I get to call you “wrong” every time he is done after 5 innings with 100 pitches? That’s not too ace-like, right?
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once again
You are getting away from your original point and instead of using facts you are reverting to just talking out of your ass. Joba and Hughes has roughly the same amount of starts thus far. Joba has been better. Plain and simple. It is not even close. Joba earned his spot and is succeeding and hopefully one day all his talent and work will make him a great starter. Right now, Hughes has lost his starting spot because of a combination of circumstance and ineffectiveness. I actually think of all the people on this thread it is YOU who are the hypocrite. You demand Hughes start over Wang because he has “Potential”, at the same exact time excuse his faltering because of an injury. Yet Wang’s “Potential” is a record of 55-26, but you cannot excuse his much more devastating injury. So either you are just a Hughes fan drinking from the kool-aid or you have something against Wang. Wang DESERVES these starts to get him back on track. Hughes DESERVES nothing right now other than getting him some innings up in the ML level. And with that I am done with your silly swiss-cheese logic and histrionics because I think I have pretty easily blown a hole in every one of your contentions.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My original point...
“When do you start screaming that he’s always been a starter and that 150 innings of Hughes is more valuable than 75?
Did I get that right?"
You’re so far up Wang’s ass it’s pathetic.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lets see
Who is the homer?
I want Wang to come back and succeed because he has an impeccable record in his young career. His returning to 2008 form = Yankees have a better chance of winning a title now and for years to come.
You want Hughes to be a starter because for some reason, even though every fact and circumstance dictates right now he is better suited in the pen, your love of him is based on nothing other than maybe a desire to caress his man chubby.
So once again:
Me = based on facts, logic and circumstance
You = based on your desire to taste Hughes chowda
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is that a fact?
Which pitcher has given the Yankees a better opportunity for the Yankees to win in 2009?
Wang, with his ERA of 3 million.
Or Hughes, who was an effective if not overly impressive starter, and has been an excellent reliever.
There’s no facts involved in what you’re saying, unless you consider it a FACT that Wang will return to 2008 form. Based on everything he’s shown this season, that’s more of a pipe dream than a fact, unless you were blown away by his last start against the Mets AAA affiliate.
You also seem to have an unhealthy obsession for homoerotica. Is it that you want to watch me with Hughes?
I can’t help you out there, but I’m sure you have a frequent shopper card at the all-male burlesque near your house.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know
You are good at being douchey, you kinda fail at being funny. Well you kinda fail at a lot of things but anyhow:
Hughes career:
8-9 ERA: 4.93
Wang career:
55-26 ERA 4.14
I bet if you replace Wang with Halladay and Halladay was trying to recover from that injury and lost 6 games you would be the biggest supporter of getting him straightened out. Hmmmmmmm. Do you just not like asians?
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And with that I bid you farewell
Threading with you and your inane, aggressive, douchey posts has been fun but I got stuff to do.
Cheers!
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OH good job...
…accuse me of being a racist then leave.
As if being critical of Wang is impossible if not for the fact that he’s asian.
I don’t care if he was my brother, he’s been dogshit this year.
by New York Sports Jerk on Jun 30, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joba is a 5 inning pitcher, Hughes is better, put Joba in the Pen!!
by pedro316 on Jun 30, 2009 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol at Hughes NOT being a 5 inning pitcher
by FreeBradshaw on Jun 30, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you would rather have Joba be an average starting pitcher , 4 or 5 starter, than a dominate set up man/ future closer?? I know if I am a GM I would rather have the later. Hughes is as good as Joba as a starter so stop wasting him away!!
by pedro316 on Jun 30, 2009 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can obviously
find a setup man in the future.
FInd next highly touted prospect, insert in bullpen, get results.
You can’t say Joba would be a good closer. No one knows he would do as well there.
This argument is old.
Its even worse whenever it comes up when Joba has a game like this.
Where the hell were you with the game against the Braves? How come with he deals for 6 and a third you don’t want him in the pen?
by FreeBradshaw on Jun 30, 2009 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he is going to be the next big thing like the front office says he is hten he needs to prove he can go 7 or 8 innings at least a few times but he can’t. He is a 5 inning pitcher who starts to break down in the 6th if not earlier….. that is what you call a #4 or #5 starter which is what he will always be in the rotation. Plus he walks way too many guys. When he comes out of the bullpen he would bring so much energy to the team which is what you need at that point in the game. And look at Brain Bruney…. I mean the guy has some good stuff but he is NOT a setup guy.
by pedro316 on Jul 1, 2009 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hughes IS
a setup guy. He will be there before the season ends.
This argument is tired, but here. If Joba is still doing this after 3-4 years of starting, then MAYBE put him back there.
The greatest setup men are only good for 3-4 years anyway, so why throw the guy’s career away?
by FreeBradshaw on Jul 1, 2009 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because
Most Yankees fans have no patience. Thy get at angry that the microwave is taking so long to heat their HotPocket let alone let a potential great pitcher establish himself. Joba becoming a star starter = Yankees dominance for years to come. Hughes eventually becoming a star starter = Yankees dominance for years. I gotta go and yell at my luke warm Hot Pocket.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jul 1, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Furthermore
To be even more simplistic:
Why I wanted Joba in the starting five in the first place:
1) Too talented with too many pitches
2) A great starter > a great reliever (except MO, he is not human)
3) The Yankees NEEDED another starter to flesh out the five. At that POINT in time between the two pitchers, Joba or Hughes, Joba was the ONLY one that had any success at the ML level between the two
Why I want Hughes to be in the pen
1) Getting Wang back to winning is paramount. Just because you are a typical “What have you done for me lately”, you would rather just give up on him. Luckily the Yankees are smarter than you.
2) Hughes has been given every opportunity this season to shine as a starter. He has not. He has been pedestrian. His chance will come again. But right now he is the least valuable of the remaining 5 starters.
3) He IS successful in the pen, which means he is helping the Yankees more in the pen than he did in the rotation.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eric Hinske
Just heard Yankees acquired Hinske. Any knowledge of this anyone?
by Mondoas on Jun 30, 2009 12:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Phil Hughes
I have not seen Hughes pitch enough to be sure about this, but he certainly appears more dominant at this point on the mound than Wang. Wang’s sinker is still not happening, and his pitches are up consistently. Only the fact that the Mets are depleted offensively prevented another disastrous outing for him. He seems to be strong for about 2 innings. So why don’t the Yanks put Hughes in the starting rotation, and move Wang to the set up role until he gets his sinker back?
by jackorion1 on Jun 30, 2009 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That is probably the worst idea
I have heard since Han shooting first. Do you REALLY want someone with control issues who is trying to battle back from confidence issues who is also a pitch to contact pitcher trying to get 3 outs in the 8th? No thanks, I love Wang. He is fine where he is until he isn’t. Hughes is fine where he is until he isn’t.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i would rather see bruney as the setup man than wang, and i don’t want to see bruney in the 8th
by theintz on Jul 1, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hinske
Nice move to acquire Hinske to replace Nady. Good stick has a better glove than he has been given credit for. To me this means that they can’t carry 3 catchers so Cervelli is going to have to go to minors or they will have to trade Molina now.
chandler knight
by ae2cdk on Jun 30, 2009 3:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Trade Molina
I love the guy and the only reason I would say trade him is so that maybe he can go to a team where he could get more starts. As of right now Cervelli is the heir apparent so you want him with Posada and the pitching staff to get as much time behind the plate as possible.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hughes = Joba 2007
Anyone in their right mind knows it makes no sense to make top SP prospects into full time relievers.
Everyone also knows Hughes’ future is in the rotation. So while Hughes isn’t throwing 100mph and getting all the fans tingled up, he’s still very effective.
This is how it used to be (not that long ago either, see Halladay and Santana as two very nice examples)
The Yankee rotation is full, much like it was with Joba (and also there was and kinda still is a late inning need).
Joba has struggled a bit, tho magically through that struggle he’s statistically the Yanks 2nd best starter (Id throw out AJ and Andy before him tho).
So like Joba, Hughes gets his chance to shine in the pen.
by FreeBradshaw on Jun 30, 2009 6:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Hughes has potential. He was given starts and has been relatively mediocre. Let him earn his way on the rotation like Joba did. If Wang HAD come back with his 2008 form this wouldn’t even be a discussion. Hughes would have either still been in AAA or in the pen. Hughes IS Andy’s replacenement, no one is arguing that. But to be honest, Joba has come closer to executing to his level of potential than Hughes has thus far. I am a huge Hughes fan.
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 30, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Joba
is a 5 inning pitcher, he struggles after 5 innings on good night…. put him in the bullpen!!
by pedro316 on Jun 30, 2009 8:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting argument
I think Hughes has great potential to be a starter. let me kick it old school – back in the day when a young pitcher was called up the team used him carefully in relief situations so he could gain confidence then at some point he transitioned to starter – that formula worked well for decades. He is only 23 give him time to get big league hitters out.
Now, as much as I would love to see Hughes go back to starting so he could get shelled mercilessly while Wang (who the FO and Mgr brought back too early and threatend him with his stating job) languishes in the pen and the Yankees continue to lose…
Wait, clearly the best course of action is to continue to develop Hughes in relief situations while Wang continues to return to form and I think your recent W-L bears witness to that point…
FROM A LIFETIME SOX FAN…
by Dave D on Jun 30, 2009 9:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Geez
A Sox fan actually making sense about the Yankee pitching. What is the world coming to?
by Ed Valentine on Jun 30, 2009 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ed thank you
EVery once in awhile I jump over here to see what you are buzzing about. Love the game – and yeah we melted last night. But like the great Martin Luther of the Reformation said – “if you are going to sin, sin big.”
by Dave D on Jul 1, 2009 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- D12: Don Mattingly says he could be Torre's successor in 2012
- Why is this Cuban baseball player chasing another with his bat?
- Location, location, location: Lee likes where he's at with Mariners
- Bravo! Jim Hendry tells Milton Bradley to look in the mirror
- Random photos from the archives: Nomar Garciaparra
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
