Torre breaks those Joba Rules!

by John Amato on Sep 23, 2007 7:40 PM EDT in News Comment 11 comments

I thought he was not pitching today. So said the pre-game reports. What a treat to see Joba come in the 8th, slam the door and pick up his first save and inch the Yanks one game closer to the Red Sox and a playoff spot. Torre said that it all depends on his pitch count....Stay tuned...

0 recs | Comment 11 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I hate to broach

this subject (Lord knows, I've gotten it before w/ respect to Joba in the pen v. as a starter), but this guy could win 2 or 3 WS MVP awards as a closer. I sure hope he is lights out as a starter, because if he's treading water in the # 3 slot, I'm going to be rumbling for a return to the pen. It will certainly be interesting to see how he does w/ 6-7 innings a game.

I always feel pressure. What I don't have is fear. -- El Duque

by LateInningRelief on Sep 23, 2007 7:50 PM EDT reply actions

You are opening another can of worms

Are you suggesting that the Yanks let Mo go after this season and not re-sign him?

No matter what happens with Joba, Mo is still the closer and always will be as long as he's wearing pinstripes.

Keeping Joba in the pen means he would be the Mo of '96 until Mo is gone and he assumes the closer role.

That might be 2 years away.

Joba in a setup role is a waste of his talents. This kid already has the best arm and filthiest stuff on the team and you want to make him a setup guy for another 2 years?

No thanks.

I'll want him in the rotation next season and beyond. I want him throwing 180-200 innings instead of 50-70 innings.

by anaconda on Sep 23, 2007 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Not opening any cans o' worms.

I hope he's better as a starter than as a reliver, but if he's not as dominant, I will be making some noise. He's got filthy stuff, no question, and he needs to have the chance to start. But let's see...

After that bullpen debacle on Saturday, it sure was nice to see somebody (not named Mo) shut them down today, no?

I always feel pressure. What I don't have is fear. -- El Duque

by LateInningRelief on Sep 23, 2007 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions

That's true, but....

adding Joba and Kennedy to the rotation is the first step in shaping the rotation and this team's success for years to come.

Yeah, they had Mo in '96 and he was better than Wetteland -- which is why they let him walk after that season and gave the job to Mo.

That won't be the case after this season because they are going to resign Mo and he is going to be the closer no matter what.

I would also point to the Verducci argument that the Yanks starters aren't throwing 7 IP very much like they did from 1998 - 2003.

When the starters are throwing 7 IP a lot more often as they did later in the dynasty years, there is less of a need for a dominant setup guy like Mo in 96.

This is why I strongly believe Joba is much more valuable as a starter next season and beyond than he would be in the setup role. I want him to eat as many innings as possible considering he has the best arm and the best stuff on the team.

by anaconda on Sep 23, 2007 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions

It's an interesting

dilemma. He's been such a huge factor in the Yankees' push for the post-season, there's going to be a lot of pressure on him to put up similarly dominant #s as a starter immediately.

You're right that it wouldn't be fair to give him a short leash in the rotation--and it seems unlikely he would need one--but it does make you wonder if he starts posting #s like Phil Hughes has since his return from the DL.

I always feel pressure. What I don't have is fear. -- El Duque

by LateInningRelief on Sep 24, 2007 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions

Well, I think you're right

It is clear that Joba has the heart, and the stuff to be a great reliever. If the choice is a fair starter or a grear reliever, we should take the great reliever.

There is a hope, at least on Pinstripe Alley, that Joba can be a great starter, an ace. No team ever has enough aces. If Joba can be an ace for the Yanks, I think I want that. Of course you need both. I just feel one or two pitch relievers are easier to find than 3 or 4 pitch starters.

Great pitchers of any kind are precious and rare.

The Opera ain't over til the fat lady sings

by Cbeck3 on Sep 23, 2007 8:57 PM EDT reply actions

Does it seem

that in modern baseball starters have longer careers than relievers?

The Opera ain't over til the fat lady sings

by Cbeck3 on Sep 23, 2007 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions

No

I would suggest the reverse. All the starters who can't hack it either become relievers or find other jobs. Very rarely do poor or mediocre relievers become starters.

"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."

by jscape2000 on Sep 23, 2007 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Hey, good game today

Looking at the Yanks is probably uninformative, but I think I'll look at other teams. While I agree failed starters try to become relivers, I have the feeling relievers burn out fast.

The Opera ain't over til the fat lady sings

by Cbeck3 on Sep 23, 2007 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Hard to do

Good luck. Maybe you can look up all the pitchers from the last couple years who made their MLB debuts who are no longer in the bigs? Relievers are hard to predict (usage patterns and small sample sizes). I suspect there are a lot of serviciable relievers who have been cut loose in favor of a guy with experience. So I guess I misunderstood your first point, and I agree with you.

"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."

by jscape2000 on Sep 23, 2007 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Relievers

actually have very up and down careers. That's why you see so few really great set up men like Scott Shields of Anaheim last. That's what I read from MLB scouts.

by John Amato on Sep 23, 2007 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions