Around the Yankee Universe: The train keeps rolling

by Ed Valentine on Jul 10, 2009 7:00 AM EDT in News Comment 29 comments

The New York Yankee Victory Train just keeps right on rolling. It swept right through Minnesota, and has barely stopped to refuel at all in the past two weeks as the Yanks have chugged to 13 victories in 15 games.

A little commentary before we search the Inter-Google for stories making the rounds of the Yankee Universe.

I can't believe some of you guys, whining in the Game Thread Thursday afternoon about Phil Hughes not coming into the game in the fourth or fifth inning. Hasn't the argument lately been that if he is going to be in the bullpen he should be the primary set-up man for Mo? That's exactly how he has been used the past two games, and exactly how he will continue to be used.

Why on Earth would you expect Manager Joe Girardi to bring him into the game in the fourth inning? He is only going to pitch two innings at most.

The bullpen did toss 5.2 scoreless innings Thursday, so it got the job done despite all the apparently horrifying choices made by Girardi. The only problem was that David Robertson's shaky outing highlighted the fact that Alfredo Aceves really needs to be the long man. After all, that would have been his spot to come into a game -- and he has excelled at it.

By the way, Hughes got tons of praise after the game. Like here. And here. And here.

Now, let's look at more stories making the rounds of the Yankee Universe.

Tyler Kepner of the New York Times has a great, and I do mean great, story about Aceves. It includes a cool bit about how he proposed to his then-girlfriend during a game last season at AA Trenton. I wonder how the CYC would handle that?
Brian Bruney says he "couldn't imagine" playing somewhere else after spending the last few seasons with the Yankees. Umm ... memo to Brian. Start getting some people out soon, or you won't have to imagine it.
It's amazing, but at least one writer will actually miss the Metrodome. The Yankees might, too, the way they beat up on the Twins the past few days.
For those longing for the days of Francisco Cervelli, Kimberly Jones has the sad story of his parting with the Yankees.
River Avenue Blues reminds us how badly the Yankees wanted B.J. Ryan a couple of seasons ago. Looking back, that would have turned into another Steve Karsay-like nightmare.

0 recs | Comment 29 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

LOL!

YOu can’t believe there’s whining on what Girardi does in the game thread?

There would be e-tumbleweeds in we all couldn’t whine on PSA!

….Girardi made the right decision on that of course. GASP! I said Girardi made a good decision…WHAT TO DO!….FIRE GIRARDI!!!

Winning 13/15 is good. So is being tied for first with those a-holes in red. Kinda funny how the season was lost a few weeks ago cuz of that 0-8. Imagine if the Yanks won a game against them? They’d be ahead in the standings right now!

by FreeBradshaw on Jul 10, 2009 7:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Imagination ... and reality

It’s fun to imagine things that haven’t happened. Imagine if I slept with Megan Fox last night? That would have been awesome.

As for Girardi, I’m just wondering what his plan was for after Aceves reached his 65 pitch limit.

For SOME reason he pulled Hughes with 2 outs in the 8th the night before with a runner on first for christ sake, and rather than bring in his most reliable reliever with the bases loaded (the millionth time Girardi has thrown a reliever into THAT fire) he brought in Robertson.

And Girardi doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt, because he’s the one responsible for filling out lineup cards that include Cody Ransom.

PS: Cervelli Rules.

by New York Sports Jerk on Jul 10, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Everybody, including you, will miss the Metrodome a hell lot

when they have nothing to do but make tons of snowmen during the SNOW delay in the Target Field at the beginning of next season.

by Raven King on Jul 10, 2009 7:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Boy was it hilarious to watch the sux blow that lead yesterday to the royals. . Look on their fans faces when dejesus hit that homer was priceless

by Yankz09 on Jul 10, 2009 7:40 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs

I can’t believe some of you guys, whining in the Game Thread Thursday afternoon about Phil Hughes not coming into the game in the fourth or fifth inning. Hasn’t the argument lately been that if he is going to be in the bullpen he should be the primary set-up man for Mo

I think the retort to that would be: The game was almost blown in those innings. Why not have one of your best pitchers pitch in that situation to avoid something like that?

It is difficult to believe, but some games are not actually decided in the 8th and ninth inning. I know, its crazy, but it’s true. You know how much of a factor Mariano has been in the post season the best 6 years? Zero. Because they were not able to get to him.

I’ll make an analogy to my life: When I eat my dinner, I prefer to save the best parts for last. However, my wife also enjoys the best parts, but she eats them first. And then she begins to eat mine. It is not always prudent, to save my best for last because, oftentimes, it will not be there.

by seanp23 on Jul 10, 2009 9:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My point was

it seemed there was an expectation that Hughes would somehow be able to pitch 3-4 innings. That was not going to happen. Right now he can’t go that far.

by Ed Valentine on Jul 10, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So by your logic...

Mo, being the best reliever in the pen, should have come in during the 4th inning?

by Captain Marvelous on Jul 10, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think so

why give the toughest situation in the game to you’re 4th or 5th best reliever (or even 2nd) when you’re 1st is sitting there available?

by Travis G on Jul 11, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is exactly the point

Coming in the game with no men on, with a three run lead in the ninth inning is rarely the most critical time of the game. Because, Mr. Marvelous, if they give up the lead for good in the 4th, Mariano will never enter the game and what is the point of having “the best reliever in the pen” if he is just going to sit there and watch the Yankees blow a game?

The answer is that it would require managers to actually think during a game and run the risk of being questioned about it. Instead, they will continue to use “closers” primarily in “save situations”, a ridiculously arbitrary set of statistical circumstances.

by seanp23 on Jul 12, 2009 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or, What Travis G said below.

by seanp23 on Jul 12, 2009 9:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

People need to make up their mind

Either you want to setup for Mo or you want him to be thrown at every opportunity that seems a ‘dire’ situation. We need to be able to rely on more than Hughes. I think that the Yankees have finally realized that he is going to fit in just right in the 8th inning slot.

That is not to say they won’t use him for 2 inning stints if the need should arise, but I would count on him being long relief at all.

In fact it would be great if they could stretch him out a little so that we could turn it into a 6 inning game, like they did with Mo in ’96.

If I remember right I think the Yankees were something like 75-1 when leading after 6 innings, and the big reason for that was that they gave the ball to Mo for 2 and then got to Wettland for the closing. Making it a six inning game puts alot of pressure on the opposing team.

by syllk on Jul 10, 2009 11:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

yes

if we really wanna get down to the heart of the matter, the team’s Best Reliever should be used when the game is on the line, whether it’s the 4th or 9th inning. in an ideal (managerial) world, Rivera would’ve come in in the 4th with the bases full.

oh, but then the traditionalists would jump off a bridge because he wouldn’t get to pitch the sacred 9th inning (and get the most overrated stat in baseball, the Save).

who do you have more confidence in go get out of a bases-loaded, 1 out jam, Mo, Hughes or Robertson? Mo. So why shouldn’t he come in there?

Anyway, I could go on and on, but since ‘Saves’ get players money and prestige, our Best Reliever has to be saved for the 9th inning.

Listen to the situational differences between Mo and Robertson yesterday: DR, came in with the bases full and 1 out (4th inning), up by 3. Mo, came in with a runner on 1st, 2 outs (8th inning), up by 2. Who’s in the tougher situation? DR.

But it’s tough to blame Girardi because EVERY manager does this. and imagine the questions after the game: Mo’s not the ‘Closer’ anymore? You trust DR more than Mo? That would’ve been Mo’s 502nd save, wtf?

and as far as Hughes, just switch his name with Mo’s in the preceding comment and it’s the same.

what’s easier, getting out of a bases full jam in the 6/7th inning, or starting the 9th from scratch and not allowing a run?… Yet managers continue to give the team’s best reliever the easier situation there. makes no sense.

to sum up, yes, our best reliever should be brought in when the game’s on the line, no matter the inning, but that guy is Mo – are you really ok with that? (I am.)

by Travis G on Jul 10, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Galactically awesome post

Now, the argument for saving your best reliever for last is the finality of the 9th inning. If a pitcher blows a lead in the 5th, you still have time to come back and win, if he blows it in the 9th, you’re F’d.

So I get that, but they could have held Rivera back for the 9th yesterday and gone with a more reliable option than Robertson with the bases jammed yesterday.

And by the way, does Girardi lead the league in “bases loaded pitching changes?”

by New York Sports Jerk on Jul 10, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen

Yes! I know! (re: girardi leading the league in bases loaded pitching changes)
I’ve given up trying to understand the pitching changes. I dont care anymore what they decide, now i just want them to make a decision. The whole repurposing of their entire pitching staff is driving me insane. It’s like when I’m playing fantasy and instead of looking to see what stats I’m weak in, (ie slugging). I look for the player on waivers to pick up who’s got pretty good across the board stats. Which kills a team in fantasy and will the Yankees in bullpen stuff. If ive got holes in my power, I need the guy slugging 20HRs even if he has a .230 BA. I dont need the guy hitting 10HRs with a .280 BA and 17 SBs and .489 OBP. When the pitching is in this undefined state, just give everyone a defined role.

PS, re: the aceves bit…The CYC would have gotten up and left the game if someone proposed to me at one, then watched the rest of it alone in bar or home, then dealt with the imbecile who thought talking, let alone proposing, while a game was going on, would be a good idea.

by CrazyYankeeChick on Jul 12, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great Idea

So, later in the game, say the 8th with the game 7-6, and a man on 1st and 3rd and 1 out, all you have left is a Henderson or Bruney to bring in. Because, you know that Mo isn’t any more than a 6 out pitcher now adays, so if you bring him in during the 5th all you get out of him is 2 innings and you are stuck with a much worse problem now, because you have a close game at the end without a solid pitcher to bring in.

I understand your argument and I like it and somewhat agree with it, but if you don’t trust your pen to get you out of a jam in the middle innings, how in the world are you going to be able to rely on them in the later innings after you have used up your best guy in the middle? Unless of course you have 2 or 3 Mo’s in your pen then it easy. Unfortunately it isn’t that easy.

by syllk on Jul 10, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can you really

ever make a good argument that a game is “on the line” in the 4th inning? With more than half of it still to be played? I don’t think so. I don’t disagree with the general point, but games are not on the line in the 4th inning.

by Ed Valentine on Jul 10, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

especially

with this Yankee offense. They are never out of a game. If they lose a lead in the 6th or 7th inning even, it’s not over.

by NumberSeven on Jul 10, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

The most important part of a basketball game is the last 4 minutes. The most important part of a football game is the last 2 minutes. Human nature, when backed in the corner the better players shine. Which means in the 8th and 9th there is a sense of urgency to get something done. OUR record would be worse if the Twins and a few other teams had better closers or 8th inning men. You put your BEST reliever in the end, when your team is ahead and the other team has to be shut out.

by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jul 10, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

not necessarily

Say it’s halfway through the fourth quarter of a football game, and the Giants are up by 14, but the other team has 4th and goal. If the Giants can stop them, the game is probably over. If they can force a turnover and return for a touchdown, the game is almost definitely over. Wouldn’t it be crazy for the Giants to have Justin Tuck on the sidelines at that moment? I realize the analogy is imperfect, but the point is that sometimes games are won and lost, in all sports, well before the end of the game. A smart manager/coach uses his personnel to maximize the chances of winning. Except in baseball, where the best reliever is locked into the 8th and 9th innings (if not just the 9th).

by long time listener on Jul 10, 2009 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

Yes of course the whole game is important. But this is where stats are meaningless. You could TECHNICALLY make a case that there should be no such thing as a “Starter” but rather an entire platoon of pitchers that can be plugged in. What are you more afraid of? Being down 1-0 against Boston in the 4th inning with runners on or being down 1-0 against Boston in the 9th with runners on? In the 4th inning you have 5 more innings to recoup if you give up runs. In the 9th you have none unless you’re at home. That is why there is a closer. That is why the closer is for the end of the game, he is the best reliever so therefore his job is to prevent runs in a situation where you have 1 or less chances for your offense to bat.

by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jul 10, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You need starters because you only have a limited number of roster spots. You need guys to give you 5-7 innings on a regular basis. And it’s true that there are many situations where it makes sense to save your best reliever for the 8th or 9th. But there are also some situations where the game is won or lost earlier than the 8th. You’ll almost never see Mariano Rivera before the 8th inning because baseball (not just Girardi, but the game collectively) has decided that he comes in late in the game. For that matter, baseball seems to have decided that there’s such a thing as an “8th inning guy,” which is why you saw Hughes, probably the Yanks’ second-best reliever now, late in the game yesterday instead of in the 4th when the game was won.

by long time listener on Jul 10, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who's to say the game was won in the 4th

Once again you assume that you get out of that inning with your best reliever, but then you come up against a tough spot later in the game, and guess what no MO. I just can’t see bringing him in and then losing him for the rest of the game. You won’t have some one to shut the door on them. Instead you put someone out there who allows the unwanted visitor to stick there foot in the door and maybe sneak one by you.

The only reason you can say that the game was won in the 4th is, because they had no chance to score later in the game. And why is that? Because the best relievers are there to shut the door tight.

by syllk on Jul 10, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no

you MIGHT have a tougher situation later in the game, but you dont KNOW that. the game will LIKELY (not necessarily) be decided when the bases are loaded and you’re up by one.

again, please answer this question: which situation is tougher, bases loaded, 1 out, or no one on, no outs.

and yet you want to bring a lesser reliever into the tougher situation? irrational.

by Travis G on Jul 11, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

Baseball has not decided anything. Logic has decided it. I don’t know how much clearer I can make my point. If you are in a jam in the 4th inning, you still have 5 innings to go to catch up. By putting you BEST reliever in the fourth you now have 5 chances to score and are giving the opposing team 4 chances against lesser pitchers to score as well. I would love to know who “Baseball” is. Logic ALSO decided that your SECOND best reliever should be the bridge to the closer. A prime example would be you have a 1-0 lead going into the 8th inning. 8th inning you are gonna face the number 9 (which will probably be a pinch hitter), number 1 and 2 guys. Well the BIGGEST threats are usually the number 2-4 guys. So you want your best pitcher facing them in the 9th, but the PH-1-2 guy can do some damage as well so you want the next best thing. Which is your SECOND best reliever. Call him what you will, setup guy, 8th inning man. I call him the best guy in the pen not named MO.

by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jul 10, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, sure

if no one ever gets on base then you might as well save the closer. but c’mon, baserunners get on in the 6th, 5th, 4th innings, and when those lesser relievers are brought in in tough situations, THAT’S when the game is lost.

how often did Scott Proctor or Kyle Farnsworth come into the 7-8th inning with runners on and blow it? you have your best reliever sitting there for the TOUGHEST situations and you go with lesser pitchers?! you cant get to 9th with a lead unless you HAVE a lead.

and btw, ‘Closers’ are only held until the 9th because ‘saves’ get them money and prestige, but they would be far more valuable coming in when the game is actually on the line. not for the pseudo-importance of the sacred 9th inning.

by Travis G on Jul 11, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The problem is

you are waiting around for something that may never happen. In which case Mariano will not have been used. i.e. my saving the best for last that I never got to eat because it was gone by the time I wanted it.

Also in your little hypothetical you are assuming quite a bit. 1-0 lead going into the eighth, facing the 9,1,2 hitters and a probably pinch hitter. So here, I’ll do it, too.

Pettitte just walked the bases loaded and Girardi yanks him. Youkilis, Ortiz and Jason Bay are due up next, no outs. Oh, It is the 5th inning. the score is 0-0. Beckett is pitching lights out. Who do you want facing Youkilis?

I mean, you would want the best guy available, right? Not cut of your nose to spite your face just in case there happens to be a save situation later in the game?

by seanp23 on Jul 12, 2009 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like this idea for 2 reasons

First, they’re putting arguably their second-best reliever on the mound for the maximum number of innings. Second, if you still think Hughes’s future is as a starter (which I do), pitching him for two innings (give or take) regularly will build up his innings.

by long time listener on Jul 10, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs