From The Free Seats

Knicks are out, but the future is still bright

2011-04-24T18:49:00.001-05:00

Alright, the rollercoaster ride that was the New York Knicks season is over. The Boston Celtics made sure that the Knicks didn’t even get a game, and walked off the court at Madison Square Garden with visions of an NBA Championship dancing in their head.
For the Knicks, the end is certainly a huge disappointment. While I don’t know many people who thought New York would win the series, everyone figured they would be good for a game or two. While they certainly had their chance to push the issue in games 1 and 2, it was not to be. Boston moves on, New York begins the long summer.
But, this shouldn’t really dampen what was a transcendent year for the Knickerbockers. For almost a decade, this team was a non-factor. There wasn’t a reason to go and cheer in MSG. Even going to boo was a futile point. The Knicks were just bad.
Now, there is hope.
Carmelo Anthony had two HUGE games in the series against the Celtics (games 2 and 4). Amare Stoudemire had a terrific game 1 and was injured from that point forward. Both are stars. Anthony is, in my opinion, one of the top five players in the league and Stoudemire might be one of the most skilled big men to ever play in the NBA. There is a foundation there for the next several years. There is a future.
Now, the question is, where do you go from here?
Well, considering the only players under contract for next year are Melo, Amare, Landry Fields, and Toney Douglas, there promises to be, yet again, more turnover.
The big question will be, do the Knicks bring back Chauncey Billups and pay him the $14.2 million, or let him walk and pay him $4 million? A few weeks ago, I would have said there is no question they will bring him back. However, after a couple of injuries and some less than stellar play down the stretch, you have to wonder if the Knicks will want to pay him $14 million, even if it is only one year.
Here is something to consider: if you operate under the assumption that the Knicks will not be in a great position to trade for a point guard this offseason (the only assets they have under contract is Landry Fields) then the only opportunity would come in free agency. A quick look at that crop isn’t very inspiring. In fact, there isn’t one free agent point guard that would peak the Knicks interest except for Rodney Stuckey, who the Pistons will almost surely look to keep (he’s a restricted free agent). However, the following year, the market would be flooded with potential point guards.
Forget the big two (Chris Paul and Doron Williams), here is a list of some other restricted and unrestricted point guards who are scheduled to hit free agency in 2012: Kirk Henrich, DJ Augustin, Baron Davis, Jason Kidd, Raymond Felton, Eric Gordon, Russell Westbrook, Jameer Nelson, Steve Nash, and Andre Miller (note: I didn’t mention Derek Rose because, well, let’s face it, he won’t be available).
Look at that list. Even if half those guys sign, even if the biggest names come off, there is a lot from which to choose. Heck, the Knicks could even look to bring back a guy like Felton, who thrived in New York, under the system, and could fit well in the system.
That’s why I think the Knicks bring back Billups. There isn’t anything out there in free agency this year that makes sense and 2012 offers the possibilities of either Paul or Williams, but even if they are not available, a lot of quality guys will be. Let Billups run the show, let Douglas get a good amount of playing time, and hope the old veteran stays healthy.
So, let’s say your starting lineup next year includes Amare, Melo, and Billups. That, to me, means the Knicks need to add a center and a shooting guard. I know some will say “what about Landry Fields?” I think Landry is the perfect sixth man. I think his most value is coming off the bench. I would rather see the Knicks get a shooting guard and let Fields come off the bench with the second unit, which would also include Douglas.
That means the Knicks must look at a big man and a shooting guard. Who should they target?
Here are a few names:
*Samuel Dalembert - Sam is a big body at 6’10” and 260 pounds. He isn’t a huge scorer but, let’s face it, the Knicks won’t need a huge scorer at center. They need a big man with some athleticism who can rebound, block shots, and play defense. That is Dalembert in a nutshell. He’s tough minded and ready to compete on the inside, and his presence would allow Stoudemire to move to his natural power forward position and freelance defensively.
*Nene Hillario - This would officially make the Knicks Denver East. Nene was a teammate of Melo and Chauncey with the Nuggets, and he is one of the most athletic, active big men in the league. Plus, at 29, he seems to be coming into his own. The problem: one would assume Nene will cost, and you wonder if the Knicks would be willing to anti up for Nene with the idea of signing Paul or Williams in 2012 ever present.
*Tyson Chandler - Somewhat like Nene, Chandler is one of the most athletic big men in the league, however, he doesn’t have the offensive moves Nene does. He’s a better defender and rebounded, though, and he would be a handful to deal with. Plus, in a Mike D’Antoni system, Chandler might become a more consistent offensive threat because he can get up and down so well. Like Nene, though, one assumes Chandler will come with a fairly sizeable price tag.
*Mike Dunleavy - I think Mike Dunleavy has always been expected to be too much. First, he isn’t a small forward. He’s a shooting guard with small forward size. At the three, he gets beat up and pushed around. At the two, he can be a mismatch. I’m not exactly sure if Indiana would want to part ways with him since the Pacers are excited with the team they have assembled, but I also think the Pacers could afford to let Dunleavy go, and the sharp shooter would provide D’Antoni with that three point two guard he loves.
*Nick Young - Young is young (like that?), athletic, and an unrestricted free agent on the Wizards. They might bring him back. They also might let him walk. If they do, the Knicks would be smart to explore him at the two.
*Sam Young - Another Young, just with less of a resume than Nick. I like Sam Young a lot. He’s a very good shooter, far more athletic than people give him credit for, and he played at Pittsburgh in college, so you know he’s tough. Young plays on a team that seems to have shooting guards all over the roster, so it might be that the Grizz decide not to pick up their team option. If not, he might be a steal for the Knicks.

Finally, the Knicks do actually have a draft pick in the first round this year. It’s hard to know who will be available at pick 17, but in looking at the early mock drafts (useless, I know, but it’s all I got to go on) there seems to be a crop of players that will be available around there. Of course, there’s a chance that the Bronx’s own, Kemba Walker drops to the Knicks, and that would be great for both parties, but that is highly unlikely. So, here are a few names the Knicks could consider: Markieff Morris, Tristan Thompson, Nolan Smith, Kenneth Faried, Chris Singleton, and Klay Thompson.
Of course, there is an outside chance one Jimmer Fredette falls to the Knicks, and then they would have a real choice to make, but I think that crop mentioned above would be what the Knicks are looking at.
Nothing in there would make you call the MSG box office for tickets to the finals, but as has been stated before, with Melo and Amare, what you’re looking for isn’t stars, you’re looking for real quality players and the Knicks could certainly find that out of such a crop.

So, if I had my way, what would the Knicks look like next years?
PG Chauncey Billups
SG Nick Young
SF Carmelo Anthony
PF Amare Stoudemire
C Nene Hillario

Second unit:
Toney Douglas
Landry Fields
Bill Walker
Kenneth Faried (draft)
Jared Jeffries

I actually like that team, right?

Better Late Than Never..........MLB Predictions

2011-03-31T18:53:00.003-05:00

I have decided to put my revulsion for MLB's decision to schedule Opening Day on a Thursday, which has all the magic of a visit to the dentist for a moller checkup, behind me and focus on one main theme: from this point through the end of September, baseball is back and will be with us, everyday, like a friendly pet meeting us at the door.

It might be sleeting out my window right now, and temperatures might not want to rise above 50 for the next three weeks, but baseball signifies the end of bad weather, the beginning of warm spring and summer days, cookouts, and weekends at the beach. The elevator music to all of that......is baseball.

As I write this, it is 12:52 p.m. and Yankee/Tigers is about 15 minutes from starting up. What better time to do my predictions for MLB 2011?

I actually began this a while ago, but my adult ADD kicked in bigtime when Uconn went on a magical run and I ended up going on vacation to Las Vegas. March Madness combined with Sin City will help you lose a couple of weeks.

But, there is no time like the present, so without further ado, here is my MLB preview:

American League East

Red Sox

Yankees

Blue Jays

Rays

Orioles

Division overview – Look, everything inside of me screams when I write “Red Sox” in first place, but let's be honest here; this version of the Sox has few weaknesses. Sure, Josh Beckett and John Lackey could be extraordinarily mediocre, and Jonathan Paplebon could become a problem both on and off the field, but that would only knock a few wins off this team's season. The truth is, that team was pretty darn good even having been nailed with injury after injury last year. If they are healthy, the team's additions (Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford) will turn that offense into a juggernaut.

Feel free to count out the Yankees if you want, but, with the addition of Rafael Soriano, they have one of the best bullpens in the majors and their offense, if they get expected bounceback years from Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Mark Teixeira, and everyone else not named Robinson Cano and Nick Swisher, the offense will be every bit the equal of the Sox. The question? The pitching. Anyone who tells you they know what AJ Burnett, Phil Hughes, and Ivan Nova are going to do in 2011 are lying. No one knows. If they all pitch lights out, the Yanks have a chance for number 28. If they all spit the bit, it will be a tough 162. Only time will tell.

I think both the Blue Jays and the Rays will be in it most of the year. I am taking the Jays over the Rays for third. I love their pitching (Brett Cecil and Ricky Romero) and the offense should be better, even assuming a lesser year from Jose Bautista (no way he gets close to 54 homers in '011). I am not in love with their bullpen, and I just don't trust them enough to nip the Yankees, but I think they are good enough to hold off the Rays.

As for Tampa, look, their pitching has a lot of good young talent. David Price is my early pick for Cy Young. I love Wade Davis, and Mark Hellickson seems like the real deal. But, they have no bullpen and a very, very shaky offense. Sure, Evan Longoria is a top, top player, and I actually am a Ben Zobrist fan (he'll be more like his 2009 self than 2010). But, after that, are you really confident Manny Ramirez and Johnny Damon are both going to spit in Father Time's eye? They will have to in order for the Rays to be similar to what they were last year. I don't think they fall into irrelevancy, but I think they fall to fourth.

Baltimore finds itself in its usual spot: fourth place. I was all ready to root hard for the O's this year (except when they play against the Yankees, of course) but then Buck Showalter made those asinine comments about Jeter and Theo Epstein, and it got me back on the Orioles haterade train. Honestly, I think the O's have some things to feel good about. I believe Adam Jones is ready for a breakout year, as is Matt Wieter behind the plate, and I believe that Mark Reynolds is going to put up prodigeous home run and strikeout numbers playing at Camden. I like the lineup, but I am not a believer in the pitching. I know they love Brian Matusez, who looked good down the stretch, but I've never seen the kid pitch once and thought “that is electric stuff.” Can he be a good pitcher? No doubt. Is he carrying a rotation or winning a Cy Young? No way. After that, who knows.

The future is brighter for the O's, but they'll have to find those glimmers of hope staring up, once again, from last place.

American League Central

Tigers

Twins

White Sox

Royals

Indians

Division overview — I like the Tigers. Call me a sucker for Jim Leyland and his brand of old school baseball. I just love their offense, believe that Miguel Cabrera and Magglio Ordonez will have big years, love the Victor Martinez addition, and I like their rotation more than most. Justin Verlander won 18 games last year, and I didn't even think he was that great. Wayne Scherzer showed promise as a good number two starter behind Verlander and Ricky Porcello is a perfect fit for the number three hole (he could be a top of the rotation talent, but no worse than the third best pitcher on the team). The bullpen will sport Joqium Benoit as its closer, finally moving away from waiting for a healthy Joel Zumaya, and the rest of the arms are suspect, but I just think, in the back-and-forth atmosphere of the AL Central, it is Detroit's turn to shine.

I know a lot of people are high on the White Sox, but I am taking the Twins to finish in second. This pick is mostly about the Twins. How can you count them out? I don't know how to read the Justin Morneau concussion thing. It really took him a year, a whole year, to rebound from that? I know we are all suppose to treat concussions like gunshot wounds now, but it seems a little much that Morneau is still talking about “getting there” when it comes to health. This happened 10 freakin months ago. Get over it. Yet, I think Morneau will have a productive year, and I think Joe Mauer will have more of a power year than he did last season. Their offense is multi-dimensional and they play great at Target.

I just don't trust the pitching. Everyone in the rotation is solid. Franciscon Liriano, if he doesn't get traded, is the only one who has the chance to be special, and he is too spotty in the big game to be a legit ace, for my money. After that, it's a bunch of “okay” pitcher. I am banking on okay not being enough this year.

As for the White Sox, I know they have Adam Dunn, Paul Konerko back, people are high on Gordon Beckham having a breakout year, and they won 88 games last season. Why would they be worse? First, I don't believe in Ozzie Guillen. I think he can turn a tough year into a miserable year quicker than anyone. Second, I don't like their pitching. Jake Peavy was suppose to be the difference maker, the ace of the staff. Who knows what you'll get from him now, with all his injuries, but I think his inability to be the “ace” of that staff makes the White Sox an “ehhh” team rather than a “wow” team.

After that, give me the up-and-coming youth of the Royals over the Indians, especially since I think Fausto Carmona, the Indians best pitcher, will be calling someplace new home before the end of July (the Bronx, maybe?).

American League West

A's

Angels

Rangers

Mariners

Division overview — I am a weird dude. I hate moneyball, Billy Beane, and the new trend to disregard actual, tangible stats (like ERA and RBI) for these weird, pseudo stats (WAR, VORP). Yet, I always find myself liking Oakland teams. Same goes for this year. I love the Oakland pitching. Brett Anderson, Gio Gonzalez, Trevor Cahill, even Dallas Braden and his stupid “not on my mound” routine have won me over. Trust me when I say, they had a lot of winning over to do considering that offense (Coco Crisp might be their most explosive player). I just like the way they are going to pitch and play small ball and, personally, I think this is more of an example of how weak the AL West is, rather than how strong Oakland is.

No Rangers in the playoff hunt? I personally was never sold on the Rangers. They, to me, are the same team they were two years ago when they didn't sniff the playoffs. Last year, the stars aligned, they plucked an ace like Cliff Lee away from the Mariners, and guys like Colby Lewis shined for them. They are still going to score runs, but not enough to make up for woeful pitching.

That's why, to me, I will stick the Angels in the second spot, with a chance to win the division.

This is not a great team. I hated the Vernon Wells deal. Tori Hunter is a nice player, not great. Who knows about Kendry Morales, and Howie Kendrick may just be a nice player, rather than the future superstar everyone envisioned. What will keep the Angels in it will be the pitching. Jared Weaver is one of the best in the business, Dan Haren is as underrated a top hurler as there is in the game, and Ervin Santana is reliable. Add in the fact that I think Scott Kazmir is due for a bounceback season, and count me a tempid believer in the Angels. Remember, it was only two years ago this team had a stranglehold on the West division.

Bringing up the rear, the Mariners. The only time you'll hear about the Mariners this year is when people ask whether they will be willing to trade King Felix Hernandez. By the way, if they are even considering trading a young man with that much talent, who has four years left on his contract, they should fold up shop and move the team to Portland, or any other city where an ownership group would support the team.

American League Wild Card Winner – Yankees

I think the Twins will be in the hunt, I think the Blue Jays and the Rays will be in the hunt, but I think the Yankee offense, plus their ability to pick up a pitcher mid-season, will put them over the top.

National League East

Phillies

Braves

Marlins

Mets

Nationals

Division overview — Count me in as one of those people who thinks the Phillie could struggle a little this year. In fact, when I was doing my over/unders for the season, I kept looking to take the Phillies at the under for 97 wins. Then, I would just have this vision of Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, Roy Oswalt, and Cole Hamels all high-fiving each other after every game and thought “nahh.” Will an offense that is anchored by the strike-out happy Ryan Howard and extremely overrated Jimmy Rollins (when was the last time he was an elite player?) be shaky, especially if Chase Utley remains injured? Absolutely. Is a bullpen without Brad Lidge for six weeks to begin the season suspect? Yep. But, the rotation is so good, do potentially dominant, they could have all the before mentioned problems and still be the cream of the division.

I don't like them to win 97 games, but I like them to win the division.

I love the Braves this year. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Braves push the Phillies for all they are worth. Tommy Hanson is set for a breakout year, as is Jason Heyward, who, as a 19-year-old rookie, was considered a disappointment with a .277 average, 18 homers, 72 RBI, and 83 runs scored. That's a career year for some guys. Brian McCann is an underrated top offensive catcher, and Dan Uggla is going to hit the cover off the ball from second. What I don't like is the bullpen, but they will be in the hunt all the way through.

The Marlins? They are young and fun. I love Josh Johnson, Aninal Sanchez, even Ricky Nolasco have talent and strike-out stuff. Hanley Ramirez is one of the best players in the game, and despite some “holes” in his swing, Mike Stanton has superstar written all over him. Could the Marlins jump up and surprise with a wild card birth? Of course. That's the way they do things in Florida. However, I am going to be conservative with them, especially since I love the Braves this year.

As for the Mets and the Nationals, this will be a legit race for fourth place. I hate almost everything about the Mets. They have no pitching, and even when Johan Santana gets back it will be a while before he pitches like Johan Santana. Mike Pelfrey is a third starter in this league, at best, and their offense is a bunch of question marks. The Nationals arn't much better, but at least they have hope for the future. I'll take the Mets to squeeze out enough crappy wins to keep the Nationals in the cellar.

National League Central

Reds

Brewers

Cardinals

Cubs

Pirates

Astros

Division overview - At the beginning of 2010 I felt like the Reds were a year away. I was prepared to pick them for the top spot in the division in 2011, but they jumped the gun. Is the Big Red Machine back for round two? I doubt it, but considering I don't love what anyone else in the division did, and I think the Reds have built one of the best young teams in the league, I see them repeating as NL Central victors.

I think Cinci is actually underrated. Joey Votto is the reining NL MVP, Brandon Phillips is one of the best second basemen in the league, Jay Bruce could be in line for a breakout year in 2011, Scott Rolen found the fountain of youth, and Edgar Renteria is coming off a year where he helped the Giants win a World Series. That's not even counting Drew Stubbs and Johnny Gomes, both of whom put up solid numbers last year and are the exact top-quality role players all good teams need. They also have depth in the pitching staff, with Edison Volquez healthy and ready to go, Johnny Cueto coming off an impressive year, Bronson Arroyo providing valuable veteran leadership, and Homer Bailey still looking to tap into his treasure trove of talents. And, of course, the bullpen will be, at least for a time, solidified by Ardolis Chapman, whose stuff looked every bit as good as advertised. Could he be a starter by the end of the year? Absolutely. Could he be the closer? Certainly. Either way, the Reds have hitting and pitching depth. Usually a good combo for success.

Behind them I am picking the Brewers. I LOVE their pitching. Think of facing this foursome when you walk into Milwaukee in 2011: Zach Greinke, Yovani Gallardo, Shawn Marcum, and veteran Randy Wolf. That aint bad at all. Consider that the Brewers will throw three pitchers, back to back to back, who were the best on their team a year ago (Greinke in Kansas City, Marcum in Toronto, and Gallardo for the Brewers). I also love Axford as the closer, taking over for retired Trevor Hoffman, who was no where near his dominant former self with the Brewers. The real question is going to be, what does Milwaukee do with Prince Fielder?

The hefty first baseman is going to get a big contract at the end of the year from someone outside of Milwaukee. They know this. Do they just hang onto him, try and win this year, and take take the draft pick at the end of the year, or do they trade him now, get something back in return to lessen the blow of losing their best power hitter? My guess is they keep him the whole year, hoping that an offense of he, Ryan Braun, Cory Hart, and Rickie Weeks is enough to make the playoffs.

I am down on the Cardinals and the Cubs. The Cards are still a scary offense, with The Man Albert Pujols, Matt Holiday, Colby Rasmus, and Yadier Molina, and even though I am not in love with Lance Berkman playing the field, I have a sense he will hit well in St. Louis. But, I have never been in love with Ryan Franklin as a closer and even with Adam Wainwright and Chris Carpenter both battling for Cy Youngs, the Cards rotation is thin. And I just feel like the Pujols contract situation is going to hang over this entire team, all year.

As far as the Cubs, I just don't trust this team. You can make an argument that the offense is going to have a big year, with an energized Carlos Pena looking to prove his poorous 2010 average was an abberation and Tyler Colvin coming into his own. But I just feel like there are too many guys well on the back end of their careers, like Alfonso Soriano, the oft-injured Aramis Ramirez, and even Marlon Byrd. There are a lot of mid-30's guys with injury trends on this team that will ultimately determine the team's fate.

As far as the pitching staff, I like the addition of Matt Garza but have no idea how long Carlos Zambrano will remain on the team, or how effective he will be. Ryan Dempster is a good pitcher, but not an ace, and the Cubs are going to need an ace-quality guy. Again, on paper the Cubs aren't terrible. If their older players produce at a younger level, if Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster form a top-notch 1-2-3 in the rotation, and if the tandem of Kerry Wood and Carlos Marmol shut down the 8th and 9th, maybe the Cubbies surprise some people. I'm betting no.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time on the Astros and the Pirates. I am picking the Pirates simply because I think their "improvement" has to be measured in moving up from the bottom, rather than challenging for the top. Plus, I love Andrew McCutchen, Jose Tabata, and Pedro Alvarez making up a core of young, talented players the team might build on. But, that pitching is dreadful.

Houston is up for sale, meaning Carlos Lee is out as soon as an American League team determines it needs a DH. I actually like the top of their rotation, as Wandy Rodriguez is a top-quality pitcher, Brett Myers sort of reinvented himself, and J.A. Happ is a young lefty with the potential to pitch at the top of a rotation, in my opinion. Yet, that lineup is essentially Hunter Pence and a bunch of "who is that guy?" and the bullpen is completely unproven.

NL West

Giants

Dodgers

Rockies

Padres

Diamondbacks

Division overview - I am going to say, right off the bat, I don't love this pick. The Giants, to me, were the perfect case of a team getting on a magic carpet ride during a down baseball year. All the big horses were down. Even the Phillies never seemed to have “it” when it came time for the playoffs. The Giants had great pitching and timely hitting, and they won a bunch of one-run games. I have a hard time believing that will happen again.

So, why am I picking them? Here's why:

Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are still on the team, and I love what Madison Bumgarner might bring after a little more big-league seasoning. Not much was done in terms of the offense, but the continued growth of Buster Posey and what has to be a better year from Pablo “Kung-Fu Panda” Sandoval will pay dividends, while I expect that Miguel Tejada will add a good, veteran bat to a team filled with good, but not great, hitters. Since no one in the NL West really improved all that much, I think Sandoval coming back to form could make up for some lost magic by the Bay.

In truth, however, I could see almost anyone winning this division. I like the Dodgers a lot, but I am slotting them in at third place primarily because there is such turmoil in the organization it is hard not to see that trickling down to the field. However, their lineup is solid, with Andre Ethier becoming a star, Matt Kemp looking for a breakout season, and Juan Uribe providing the double-whammy of helping the Dodgers and hurting the Giants. I also think a full year of Rafael Furcal will make a big difference.

I also like what they have done with their rotation, and they are now solid one through five with Clayton Kershaw at the top, Ted Lilly healthy and in the third spot, and Jon Garland adding a veteran presence and innings eater. If Chad Billingsley can find some consistency, they can be very good.

I like the Rockies as well but, for some reason, I feel a let down year coming. Is Ubaldo Jimenez going to be as good again in 2011 as he was in 2010? Is Carlos Gonzalez suddenly a perennial MVP candidate? Does Todd Helton have anything left in the gas tank?

Look, if the Rockies landed themselves a Michael Young to plug in at second or short, this team would be looking really good, but, again, I just don't quite buy them over the long haul. Of course, I say that almost every year, and almost every year the Rockies are sitting there battling for the division.

The team I think really falls off the map is the Padres.

We could get into the team's players, how Orlando Hudson will help at second base, how the team's young pitching might be able to duplicate what it did last year (I highly doubt it), and how Cameron Maybin is still only 23 and capable of being the impact star he was expected to be when he was in the minors. Truthfully, however, when the Padres decided to trade their best player to the Red Sox for non-MLB ready players, they should have sent their region's most famous anchorman out to make the announcement.

“I'm Ron Burgandy. Go F**k Yourself, San Diego.”

As for the Diamondbacks, as a Yankee fan I can tell you the following statement says everything you need to know about the team: the starting left fielder is scheduled to be Xavier Nady, the starting first baseman is slotted to be Juan Miranda, and the number one starter is rumored to be Ian Kennedy. If you're a Yankee fan, you know how bad things are in Arizona.

National League Wild Card Winner - Milwaukee Brewers
Yeah, I know, I am picking two NL Central teams to make the playoffs. Well, I just have this feeling about the Brewers. If they weren't in the same division as the Reds, I would fully expect them to win the Central outright, but since I love the Reds, I have to slot them in for the Wild Card. However, I think this last spot in the playoffs will live up to its reputation. Look for the Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Marlins to all be in there for a seat at the playoff table.

The Yankee Braintrust Farts It Up Once Again

2011-03-25T23:46:00.000-05:00

I wasn't on board with the Russell Martin signing for the Yankees. I get a team like the Yanks not wanting to hand the starting catcher job over to a rookie right after the bat. I get that, I really do. What I don't get is bringing in a guy whose upside can be described as "ahhh" and whose downside is probably similar to one of the young kids taking on the role.
Martin hasn't been good in two years. Last year, not only was he bad, he was injured. That injury is still a concern. It was a concern when the Yankees signed him. It was a concern coming into spring training, to the point where Martin didn't even play for the first week or so, and it remains a concern today. So, not only is Martin suspect talent wise, he is suspect health wise.
If you were going to opt for the veteran rather than the rookie, wouldn't you have gone for the sure thing catcher? If not, why not either let Posada catch, or give one of the kids a shot?
Okay, you made your move, committed to Russell Martin. Fine. So the Yankees come into spring with the backup catcher spot up for grabs. The candidates? Francisco Cervelli, last year's backup to Posada; Austin Romine, the defensive-minded catcher whose bat is yet to come; and Jesus Montero, the stud offensive prospect whose defense remained a question mark.
Right off the bat, Cervelli got injured, essentially taking him out of the mix. That left Romine and Montero. The opinion was, one of the two was going to win the backup spot. Why was that the opinion? Mainly because Joe Girardi and Brian Cashman all but said that was the case. Would having a top prospect serve as a backup stunt growth? Not at all, Joe Girardi insisted. In fact, it might help that growth. How else are you suppose to learn. Was a possible jump by Romine from AA to the majors a concern? Of course not, the little general insisted. In fact, Girardi had made that very same jump in his career and been fine.
All signs pointed to one of the two kids winning a spot.
Now, at the end of March, it appears a darkhorse has taken the lead for the backup role - Gustavo Molina. Not familiar with Gustavo, the pride of Venezuela? Here is a brief bio: Molina is 29, has played a total of 23 games over 3 seasons in the majors (he didn't play in 2009 for some unknown reason), has a total of five hits and 10 strikeouts. Pretty impressive. Oh, and by the way, Molina is currently hitting .077 this spring. He has had 13 at bats, he has one hit. Say hello to your backup catcher, Yankee fans.
I can't even begin to express what a fucking disaster of a decision this is. Let's start with Molina. He stinks, pure and simple. He can't hit. Actually, it's worse than that. He's an automatic out. Maybe his defense is solid but, honestly, how solid could it be? He has played in 23 games in 3 seasons, and sat out the 2009 season seemingly because no one wanted him. If he were a good defensive catcher, and above-average backstop, wouldn't someone, somewhere, have given him a backup role already? The answer is yes. Taking Molina to New York to backup Martin is sort of like making Lawrence Taylor Charlie Sheen's new life coach. It makes no sense. If you have a catcher with injury problems and the possibility of stinking up the joint, do you really want the backup to be someone you KNOW can't fill in as a starter? Hell, Molina has no business being a backup, let alone a hamstring away from catching in the Bronx five out of seven days. It's actually a joke that the Yankees even have this kid on the roster. It is a testament to how bad Brian Cashman is at life.
Another ridiculous angle to this story is how the Yankees treated this entire thing. They flat out TOLD Montero that he didn't have to worry about hitting, just had to worry about catching, then Girardi made constant comments that Montero was looking better behind the plate. Suddenly, a week ago, both the manager and general manager decided to denegrate Montero's catching (it didn't seem much had changed) and made a big deal out of the fact that the young man wasn't hitting (remember, they told everyone they didn't give a shit if he hit AT ALL in the spring). Okay, so you have an official mindfuck going on with your best prospect. Yet, the Yankees weren't content with that. Next up on the chopping block - Austin Romine. Romine has hit a little bit, played very good defense. When it became clear that the powers that be had soured on Montero, Romine seemed to move to the front of the class. That feeling was solidified even more when Girardi made it a point to say that a jump by Romine to the majors from AA wasn't any big shakes. Yet, somehow, Romine, like Montero, has somehow lost his chance to make the club because an average (at best) catcher, with NO bat, who has played in 23 games in the majors, is on the squad. What a fucking joke.
So, now you have successfully shit on your two best catching prospects. You told Montero he didn't need to hit, then killed him for not hitting. You kept making a big deal about how well he was playing behind the plate, then said he wasn't really all that good back there, to be honest. For Romine, you made a big deal out of his defense and said his AA experience wasn't a big deal, then said he need more time in the minors before making this kind of jump. Now, Montero goes back to AAA, a league he DOMINATED in the second half of last year, and Romine goes back to AA, seemingly a MILE away from the bigs. And why? Not because another catcher outplayed them. Because your douchebag manager and asswipe general manager somehow decided that 23 putrid games in the majors counts for something more than proof that someone doesn't belong. How much you want to bet both get off to shitty starts down in the minors this year?
Again, I don't mind the Yankees not handing a spot to Montero or Romine. However, if you're going to send them down to the minors, make that decision right away. If not, then give them a chance to win the spot. Yeah, neither Romine or Montero hit much at all. Here's the thing........Molina is FUCKING WORSE!!!!!! In reality, BOTH Romine and Montero outhit that shit kind Molina, even with their .220 averages.
My major problem? What the fuck is the upside to having Molina on the team? There is none. It's not a zero, it's a -10. He will almost definitely be a detriment to the team. He will do nothing to help. What is the upside? He doesn't fucking kill someone on the field. Simple as that.
The downside to Montero or Romine? Can it be worse than Molina? Nope. The upside? HUGE! Either Montero or Romine could simply take off. Either one could tap into the talent that has had them ranked as two of baseball's best prospects. Montero could be an impact bat, even at 20 years old. Romine could be a top defender and a good bat.
There is a lot to hate about Joe Girardi and Brian Cashman. If I were a player, what I would hate the most is that both are, simply put, liars. They set the bar, then move it. Remember a few years ago, when Melky Cabrera and Brett Gardner were fighting for the center field spot? Girardi announced that Gardner would be the starter. Within a few weeks, he was out and Melky was in. Girardi's word that Gardner would be the starter, even if he struggled, was good for about 2 minutes. That's the type of franchise Cashman and his little toady Girardi runs. This year, they tell Montero to focus on defense and forget about hitting. He does. Then, you decide hitting matters.....A LOT! Girardi states that Montero's development wouldn't be stunted if he made the major league squad. Then, he says he wants Montero to play everyday in the minors so they don't "stunt his growth." Girardi says defense is top priority for a backup. He then points to an inferior defensive player in Molina to play over Romine.
Here's the rule: if Joe Girardi's mouth is moving, he isn't being truthful. He's a fucking liar.
I can't tell you how much I despise Joe Girardi. The backup catcher fiasco is the first of what, I have no doubt, will be a series of shitty decisions by the manager and the general manager that will result in an bad year in the Bronx.

A Melo State Of Mind?

2011-02-20T14:05:00.001-05:00

There are a few different things at work when it comes to this Carmelo Anthony situation. First, I think we can all agree that Anthony is kind of a bitch in this silly passion play. He is pushing to go to a team that has been a doormat for a decade and leave a team that, despite not going to an NBA Final since he arrived, has been a competitive team that has shown the ability to build a quality squad around their star player. Even though the Knicks are in a significantly better situation now than they were a few years ago, and you could make the case that New York, over the next year or two is in a better shape to win than Denver, it still doesn't discount a few obvious facts: Denver has a better coach in George Karl who actually values defense, rather than Mike D'Antoni and his "just score" mentality; the East, with the Big Three in Miami, a rising team in Chicago, an always talented yet head-scratchingly erratic Orlando, and the ever-present Boston might offer a tougher road to the finals over the next three years than the West, with an aging Lakers and Spurs, and no GREAT team waiting in the wings; and, though the Nuggets front office is new and hasn't established any kind of resume, the Knicks appear ready to usher in the Isiah Thomas 2.0 era, and how could that be anything other than shitty?

Carmelo wants the Knicks because they are in New York. Pure and simple.

The second thing at play here is Denver. It seems to me like they may end up trading Carmelo for more than anyone originally thought (to the Knicks, that is) yet, are they burning bridges in the process? Everyday we hear they have a "deal in place" with someone, then it seems they move the goalposts a little further down the field. They also seem to be using the Nets to get more from the Knicks, something I can't imagine is making the Nets all that happy.

Look, if the Nuggets have a bonafide, frachise-changing piece ala Carmelo, teams will deal with them. Teams will deal with anyone when that is the case. You think anybody WANTS to spend time with Scott Boras when it comes to baseball negotiations? Of course not. But, when he represents the best of the best, you have to talk. Where I think all this back-and-forth could hurt the Nuggets is when they are trying to move smaller pieces to improve their club. Will other teams be reluctant, seeing how they treated both the Knicks and the Nets, and seemed hell-bent on not just getting a good deal, but using any means necessary just to pick up a few more assets? If they need to shed some salary, will other teams shy away from deals? Who knows, but Denver certainly seems to be willing to jerk a lot of people around, all in the name of adding fairly insignificant pieces. It almost seems as if the Nuggets are looking to hurt the other team in the deal as much, or more, than help their team.

The final thing at play here is how, if the Knicks pull this deal off, they might be in a position to build a "super team" in the East to join Miami. It isn't hard to imagine the Knicks could clear enough space to sign Chris Paul after the 2012 season, if they have a 2012 season. That would give them an even more balanced all-star team than Miami. That will certainly be good for New York, and a good team in New York will certainly be good for the league, but is that healthy for the league?

People can complain about baseball all they want, screaming about the lack of a salary cap and the haves and have nots of the sport. Yet, baseball is a game played by nine individuals. You can add whatever piece, even two pieces that you want and if you don't have good talent at all spots on the team, you're not winning, pure and simple. In basketball, one or two players can DOMINATE, and it usually means a monopoly on winning.

Look at these numbers: In the last 20 years, 13 different teams have won the World Series. In the NBA, six different teams have won a championship. More than twice the amount of teams have won a championship in baseball than in basketball. Also, consider this: in the NBA, you had teams win two or more straight championships five times while, in Major League Baseball, only the Blue Jays and Yankees won multiple championships in consecutive years.

The point? In basketball, dominant teams DOMINATE. Over a period of years, a team that builds a top contender usually wins multiple times in a row. The Bulls under Jordan won six titles in nine years. The Rockets, with Hakeem, won back-to-back. The Lakers won three straight with Kobe and Shaq, then just won two straight with Kobe and Gasol. That doesn't even take into account the fact that San Antonio, with Dave Robinson and Tim Duncan, than the Duncan, Parker, Ginolbli combo, has won three championships in that time, just never back-to-back.

If the Knicks get a Chris Paul to go along with Melo and Amar'e, is there any doubt the East will be dominated by two or three teams for the next decade or more? Say goodnight if you're the 76ers, Bobcats, Pacers, or anyone else. You won't sniff an Eastern Conference Final.

But, in the end, this comes down to a trade. Would you, if you're the Knicks, make the trade that has been proposed: Raymond Felton, Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Eddy Curry (expiring contract), and a first-round pick) acquired from Minnesota for Anthony Randolph) for Melo, Chauncey Billups, and a few throw-ins to make the math work.

My answer: absolutely. Even if the Knicks have to include Timothy Mozgov, I would run for that deal. Yeah, it's a lot, but the way I look at a trade, I have to ask "who is leaving, who is coming, and who is irreplaceable?" By that account, the Knicks get back the only irreplaceable player in the entire deal: Carmelo. If the deal includes Gallinari (there is some talk that the Knicks would be willing to include Mozgov but would then replace Gallinari with Fields), Melo replaces Gallinari. Big win for the Knicks. Billups is older and his best years are behind him, but he is still a valuable player and you would have to consider a Felton, Billups swap a push, especially considering Felton probably wasn't a long-term solution at point guard anyway. The Knicks won't get anything back to replace Chandler, a valuable sixth man, but is he an irreplaceable talent? No way. And, since the Knicks don't have a first-round pick next year, anyway, there would be nothing gained, nothing lost in giving one up if acquired for Randolph. Even if the Knicks replaced Gallo with Fields and included Mozgov, again, there would be nothing in that deal that wouldn't be replaceable either through the draft or free agency.

Just think about it. Here are the two potential starting fives for the Knicks if they pull off one of these two deals:

Billups PG

Fields SG

Melo SF

Amar'e PF

Mozgov C

Billups PG

Gallo SG

Melo SF

Amar'e PF

Touriaf C

Now, I don't think either of those two teams beats the Celtics or the Bulls, but either one is better than the Felton, Fields, Gallo, Amar'e, Mozgov starting five right now. The two biggest problems for this year, in which the Knicks will probably go to the playoffs, is that a.) the new guys won't be familiar with the D'Antoni system and b.) there won't be much of a bench. But, again, the Knicks weren't winning a championship this year, anyway. Why not put Melo with Amar'e and start building around that now?

Personally, I like the second grouping, even though Fields has become a fan favorite very quickly and Movgoz has shown much more talent as of late. Teaming Melo with Gallo and Amar'e could keep the Knicks dangerous for this year. Their second unit would be pretty aweful, but their first unit could be a lot of fun to watch.

In the end, the Knicks just don't have a lot of GREAT things on their roster, so even though they would be giving up a lot, nothing is so precious as to stop a deal. This is more about quantity than quality. There is no potential superstar leaving New York in those proposed deals, and what the NBA is all about is superstars. It is much easier to add good players to a core group of great talents than to add great talent to a core group of good players. In baseball, where any one player is simply one of nine, and history shows that, usually, different teams win every year, trading half your roster for one top player isn't smart. In basketball, where one or two players can mean so much (see Cleveland minus LeBron James), gutting the roster for a premier talent is the right way to go.

Update: It appears the Knicks have drawn a line in the sand when it comes to their deal for Carmelo. I get the point. You don't want to continue to be held over the coals. But, as I stated in the post, there isn't one player on the Knicks roster not names Amar'e that is worthy of holding up, or ultimately squashing, a deal for Melo. Even if you deplete much of your team, you don't really set yourself back all that much. There isn't anything there you can't replace. There isn't anything there you can't find in the draft or free agency. If you blow up the roster for Carmelo, so be it. Here is my prediction. If the Knicks added Timothy Mozgov to this trade, and gave up Felton, Gallo, Chandler, and Mozgov, while also trading Anthony Randolph and Eddy Curry, they would be BETTER than the Nuggets in a year and would be one of the best teams in the Eastern Conference in the next two years. Not getting Carmelo is more of a hit than giving up all this. I get the sense this "line in the sand" is almost more about pride than it is about basketball because, really, unless the Nuggets mentioned Amar'e there isn't anyone on the roster the Nuggets could ask for where you wouldn't say "yeah, sure, why not?"

NL Central Preview

2011-02-14T20:18:00.000-05:00

Let me say something about the NL Central. If MLB is going to realign, the Central has to be the pivot point. Why? For some reason, the NL Central has six teams whereas every other division in baseball, except the AL West, had five teams. There are only four teams in the AL West.
I'm sure there is a reason for this but, honestly, I don't get it. Why the hell is there one division with six teams and another with four?
Since I LOVE to move teams around, here would be my solution, which probably has nothing to do with a fairly complicated realignment proposal I made last year. Here's what I would do to even things up. It's very simple:
Move the Houston Astros to the NL West, move the Arizona Diamondbacks to the AL West.
A move to the NL West would be fine for the Astros and it would give the West divisions in each sport a team in Texas. The Diamondbacks are still relatively new in baseball so moving them isn't as dramatic as moving a team that has deeper roots in the National League. Plus, you're taking two teams that have been stuck in a rut for a while, a move would be good for both of them. And, you wouldn't have any more weird divisions, which just annoys me on a practical level. Pisses me off, actually.
Yet, until Bud Selig wakes up to my suggestions (for which I hope to be handsomely paid), the NL Central remains as is.
Without further ado, here's how I see the division breaking down:
NL Central
Cincinnati Reds
Milwaukee Brewers
St. Louis Cardinals
Chicago Cubs
Pittsburgh Pirates
Houston Astros

At the beginning of 2010 I felt like the Reds were a year away. I was prepared to pick them for the top spot in the division in 2011, but they jumped the gun. Is the Big Red Machine back for round two? I doubt it, but considering I don't love what anyone else in the division did, and I think the Reds have built one of the best young teams in the league, I see them repeating as NL Central victors.
I think Cinci is actually underrated. Joey Votto is the reining NL MVP, Brandon Phillips is one of the best second basemen in the league, Jay Bruce could be in line for a breakout year in 2011, Scott Rolen found the fountain of youth, and Edgar Renteria is coming off a year where he helped the Giants win a World Series. That's not even counting Drew Stubbs and Johnny Gomes, both of whom put up solid numbers last year and are the exact top-quality role players all good teams need. They also have depth in the pitching staff, with Edison Volquez healthy and ready to go, Johnny Cueto coming off an impressive year, Bronson Arroyo providing valuable veteran leadership, and Homer Bailey still looking to tap into his treasure trove of talents. And, of course, the bullpen will be, at least for a time, solidified by Ardolis Chapman, whose stuff looked every bit as good as advertised. Could he be a starter by the end of the year? Absolutely. Could he be the closer? Certainly. Either way, the Reds have hitting and pitching depth. Usually a good combo for success.
Behind them I am picking the Brewers. I LOVE their pitching. Think of facing this foursome when you walk into Milwaukee in 2011: Zach Greinke, Yovani Gallardo, Shawn Marcum, and veteran Randy Wolf. That aint bad at all. Consider that the Brewers will throw three pitchers, back to back to back, who were the best on their team a year ago (Greinke in Kansas City, Marcum in Toronto, and Gallardo for the Brewers). I also love Axford as the closer, taking over for retired Trevor Hoffman, who was no where near his dominant former self with the Brewers. The real question is going to be, what does Milwaukee do with Prince Fielder?
The hefty first baseman is going to get a big contract at the end of the year from someone outside of Milwaukee. They know this. Do they just hang onto him, try and win this year, and take take the draft pick at the end of the year, or do they trade him now, get something back in return to lessen the blow of losing their best power hitter? My guess is they keep him the whole year, hoping that an offense of he, Ryan Braun, Cory Hart, and Rickie Weeks is enough to make the playoffs.
I am down on the Cardinals and the Cubs. The Cards are still a scary offense, with The Man Albert Pujols, Matt Holiday, Colby Rasmus, and Yadier Molina, and even though I am not in love with Lance Berkman playing the field, I have a sense he will hit well in St. Louis. But, I have never been in love with Ryan Franklin as a closer and even with Adam Wainwright and Chris Carpenter both battling for Cy Youngs, the Cards rotation is thin. And I just feel like the Pujols contract situation is going to hang over this entire team, all year.
As far as the Cubs, I just don't trust this team. You can make an argument that the offense is going to have a big year, with an energized Carlos Pena looking to prove his poorous 2010 average was an abberation and Tyler Colvin coming into his own. But I just feel like there are too many guys well on the back end of their careers, like Alfonso Soriano, the oft-injured Aramis Ramirez, and even Marlon Byrd. There are a lot of mid-30's guys with injury trends on this team that will ultimately determine the team's fate.
As far as the pitching staff, I like the addition of Matt Garza but have no idea how long Carlos Zambrano will remain on the team, or how effective he will be. Ryan Dempster is a good pitcher, but not an ace, and the Cubs are going to need an ace-quality guy. Again, on paper the Cubs aren't terrible. If their older players produce at a younger level, if Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster form a top-notch 1-2-3 in the rotation, and if the tandem of Kerry Wood and Carlos Marmol shut down the 8th and 9th, maybe the Cubbies surprise some people. I'm betting no.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on the Astros and the Pirates. I am picking the Pirates simply because I think their "improvement" has to be measured in moving up from the bottom, rather than challenging for the top. Plus, I love Andrew McCutchen, Jose Tabata, and Pedro Alvarez making up a core of young, talented players the team might build on. But, that pitching is dreadful.
Houston is up for sale, meaning Carlos Lee is out as soon as an American League team determines it needs a DH. I actually like the top of their rotation, as Wandy Rodriguez is a top-quality pitcher, Brett Myers sort of reinvented himself, and J.A. Happ is a young lefty with the potential to pitch at the top of a rotation, in my opinion. Yet, that lineup is essentially Hunter Pence and a bunch of "who is that guy?" and the bullpen is completely unproven.

Best Player in the NL Central: Albert Pujols
Best Pitcher in the NL Central: Zach Greinke
Breakout Player in the NL Central: Ardolis Chapman
Comeback Player in the NL Central: Carlos Pena

Let's Begin Those Pesky Predictions With....the NL West

2011-02-12T09:38:00.001-05:00

I can't wait. There's too much freakin snow on the ground. It's too damn cold. I'm too damn depressed that I'm so damn excited it's going to be 40 degrees this weekend. Forty-freakin-degrees and I feel like throwing on some shorts and going for a jog.

I would say that only those in the northern parts of the country know what I am talking about, but I am pretty sure winter decided to ruin the lives of every single American citizen this year. From Dallas to Bangor, Maine, you know what snow, sleet, ice, and freezing rain look and feel like. For most of us, the world still looks like an igloo.

So, while a season preview of baseball seems almost ludicrous on February 11, a few days from when pitchers and catchers are required to report, more than a month from the beginning of the baseball season, and probably two months from when the weather will actually be good, I don't....freakin.....care.

This isn't for you, it's for me. I need this. I am cold, from my gonads to my hair follicles, and I would all but guarantee that winter hasn't finished with us just yet. The 14 inches of ice on my lawn (down from 24 inches just a week or so ago) will have some additional covering before it is all said and done, and I won't see grass or dirt until sometime in June.

So, where to start? Usually, I decide to begin with the AL East because those are the teams I know the best. The Yankees are my team so the rosters of the Sox, Rays, Jays, and O's are pretty well known to me. But, this time around, I am going to start with someplace warm. I bet today, the weather is nice in San Diego, and I want to dream about gorgeous women in tight outfits getting a tan right now. That seems pleasant to me.

So, let's begin with the NL West. Lasy year, I predicted a Colorado Rockies victory. I also made the statement that the only team I couldn't see winning the division was the San Diego Padres. For the record, I picked the San Francisco Giants to finish third.

The point?

My predictions are, for the most part, as valuable as those made by the experts.

NL West

San Francisco Giants

LA Dodgers

Colorado Rockies

San Diego Padres

Arizona Diamondbacks

I am going to say, right off the bat, I don't love this pick. The Giants, to me, were the perfect case of a team getting on a magic carpet ride during a down baseball year. All the big horses were down. Even the Phillies never seemed to have “it” when it came time for the playoffs. The Giants had great pitching and timely hitting, and they won a bunch of one-run games. I have a hard time believing that will happen again.

So, why am I picking them? Here's why:

The team I think really falls off the map is the Padres.

“I'm Ron Burgandy. Go F**k Yourself, San Diego.”

Best Player in the NL West: Justin Upton

Best Pitcher in the NL West: Matt Cain

Breakout Player in the NL West: Madison Bumgarner

Comeback Player in the NL West: Pablo Sandoval

Is Liriano The Solution?

2011-02-10T20:03:00.001-05:00

So, you might have heard that the Yankees are a little thin when it comes to the starting rotation? Well, only if you think the upcoming spring training battle royale for the fourth and fifth starter spots between Ivan Nova, Freddy Garcia, Bartolo Colon, the re-animated corpse of Mark Prior, Sergio Mitre, and any slightly inebriated bleacher creature who happens to show up early for a game in Tampa, won't result in World Series-caliber hurling. Ah, only a few days until pitchers and catchers. Catch the fever.

For two months, ever since Cliff Lee gave a big ol'Philidelphia-style middle finger to the Bronx, Yankee General Manager Brian Cashman has preached patience. There wasn't anything of great value out there to be had so sit back, relax, and see if anything crazy happened, like Felix Hernandez demanding to be traded only to the Yankees for Ramiro Pena and Francisco Cervelli.

But, nothing crazy did happen. No front-line starters materialized out of thin air and landed in Cashman's lap. As he collected scrap heap arms, like Garcia and Colon, the last best hope for a solid top-to-bottom rotation disappeared when Andy Pettitte decided the comforts of Houston were too much of a Siren song to ignore, and retired.

Cashman and the Yankees have said all the right things, but everyone involved has admitted that the rotation is weak. The problem isn't just with the backend. The problem is that, after CC Sabathia, there are a lot of “I don't knows” in the pitching staff.

Is Phil Hughes the 1.68 ERA fireballer he appeared to be out of the gate last season, or the over-5 ERA guy he was to the middle-end of the year? I don't know.

Can AJ Burnett ever harness his talent for even one season and put together a consistently brilliant campaign? Can he at least return to his heady 13-9, 4.07 ERA 2009 season form, or will he continue to sink under the weight of his own consistency? I don't know.

Will the Yankees ever allow one of their prized pitching prospects — Manny Banuleos, Andrew Brackman, and Dellin Betances — to take a stab at the rotation or will they keep them in the minors at all costs? Again, no clue.

When four-fifths of your rotation elicites a shoulder shrug anytime someone asks for a performance prediction, October seems like a long way off.

Sure, the lineup should be fine, with bounceback seasons possible for A-Rod, Mark Teixeira, Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, and Curtis Granderson, and the addition of Rafeal Soriano to an already formidable bullpen should shorten a lot of these games, but a team's success and failure usually rests on the arms of its starters, and that's where the least amount of certainty lies.

Enter the Minnesota Twins.

See, it was reported this week by the Minnesota Times-Tribune that the Twins are more than willing to part ways with lefty starter Francisco Liriano. The 26-year old starter will be a free agent after the 2012 season and, coming off a year when he posted 191 innings, 201 strikeouts, and a 3.62 ERA, the Twins, according to the article, feel like now would be the best time to deal their star pitcher.

The question is, would the Yankees jump into the fray?

Here are the positives:

*Liriano is a lefty with strikeout stuff, which has become even more valuable considering all the lefties Boston has asquired the last year.

*Liriano is still young, only 27-years old.

*Liriano pitched well against both the Yankees and Red Sox last year, though he was bombed in two starts at Fenway Park.

*Liriano still appears to be learning and, at 27, his best years may well be in front of him.

Here are the negatives:

*Liriano is still an injury risk, having suffered from arm problems in the minors, then requiring Tommy John Surgery after the 2007 season, forcing him to miss the entire 2008 campaign.

*Liriano has not been impressive in his postseason appearances.

*Liriano is looking for a multi-year extension, with the rumor being that he asked the Twins for a three year, $39 million contract ($13 million per year).

*The Twins believe Liriano is at the height of his value, so they would probably demand a lot in return.

That last “negative” is, to me, the most interesting. I'm not that concerned about Liriano's injury concerns. Several pitchers have had Tommy John Surgery, many early in their careers, and they haven't missed a beat. Liriano seemed to follow the progress of most pitchers off Tommy John: struggle through the first year back, excell in that second year. Plus, the Twins claim to be concerned about Liriano's health, yet just re-upped with Carl Pavano, who should have a shrine erected to him in the Injured Players Hall of Fame.

I'm also not that concerned about any extension for Liriano. First, he will only make $4.3 million this year and probably not a tremendous amount more than that in 2012. After that, he can become a free agent. If the Yanks bring him in and the lefty pitches well, they will be happy to pay him. If he pitches poorly, they can let him walk. If he pitches only so-so, then the Yanks could decide to bring him back, but have much more room to maneuveur away from a three year contract worth $13 million per.

No, to me the major question is not finances or injury concerns, it's prospect cost. What would the Twins want?

The strange thing is, the Twins are one of the more unique cases in all of baseball, as they don't need what the Yankees have in abundance. Almost every team with a player to trade will run to the Yankees because they have three top-quality catching prospects, a truly rare commodity in baseball. Jesus Montero is thought to be the top hitting prospect in the entire minor leagues, Austin Romine has been touted as a pure combination of hitting ability and defensive acumen, and some believe that Gary Sanchez, who hasn't played above A ball yet, might be the best of all of them.

Yet, the Twins have themselves the top catcher in major league baseball: Joe Mauer. He's young, durable, and getting a lot of money over a lot of years. If there is one team that doesn't need a catcher, it's Mauer.

That might not matter in the case of Montero. Many believe he is destined for another position, anyway. His size and somewhat shaky defensive skills have had many wondering whether anything from firstbase to DH is in his future.

Maybe the Twins take Montero, move him to DH or the outfield, and hope his bat translates the way so many believe. The question is, would the Yankees be willing, or be wise, to give up Montero?

I have a hard time believing that, as good as Liriano is, he is worth Montero. I wasn't willing to give up on Montero for Cliff Lee, let alone Liriano. With the question marks that surround him, I would be willing to give up a couple of A- guys, not A+ guys.

How about Andrew Brackman, Joba Chamberlain, and Eduardo Nunez? Brackman is a top pitching prospect, Chamberlain has a load of talent and could be a closer or a starter, and Nunez appears to be a solid option at short stop, a spot that is somewhat weak on the Twins right now. Would that do the job?

Considering that Liriano is not a sure thing, I think that is a somewhat fair deal. Chamberlain and Nunez are major league-ready right now. Brackman is another strong-armed lefty who could be up and ready to pitch at the major-league level by the end of the year.

The question is, what kind of premium would the Twins put on selling to the Yankees because, you know, they are the Yankees?

Even if the Yanks had the best offer on the table, would the Twins bite? Would they want to help strengthen a team they could conceivably face in the playoffs, a team that has handled them with ease in the past?

It might be that the Twins would demand Montero as a part of the deal to even consider the trade. The thinking might be that, if the Twins got a bat as potent as Montero then trading a potential top-of-the-rotation guy to a league rival would be palatable. Without that overpay, the Twins might be inclined to take a lesser deal from a less formidable foe, or ship him off to an NL team looking to improve their rotation (the Mets would be a prime candidate, except for the fact that they have nothing to give in a trade).

I think the Yankees would and should jump all over Liriano, if he becomes available. How much better does a rotation of Sabathia, Liriano, Hughes, Burnett, and Nova look? It takes pressure off everyone: Sabathia doesn't have to be perfect, Hughes doesn't have to be a top performer, Nova can progress naturally in the last spot in the rotation, and if Burnett comes back to form, wonderful, if not, it doesn't devastate your rotation. Also, that has a lot of potential for the future. Sabathia is 30, Liriano 27, Hughes 24, Nova 24. If Liriano stays healthy, Hughes and Nova progress, and the Yankees hit on one of their top pitching prospects, Burnett can essentially become an afterthought. In two years, you could have a rotation of Sabathia, Hughes, Liriano, Nova, and Manny Banuleos. Would you sign up for three hard throwing lefties in your rotation right now, with three of your pitchers being homegrown? I would.

I don't know how realistic this whole thing is. The Twins may decide to hang on to Liriano through the season and explore a trade next year. They may may deal him at the trade deadline, and they may decide that, under no circumstances is Liriano finding himself onto the dreaded Yankee roster.

They may also decide to ship Liriano as a part of a deal that lands them Michael Young, the star infielder for the Rangers who wants nothing to do with DH'ing and has asked for a trade. The Rangers, like the Yankees, are looking for a top starter after losing out on Lee and while Liriano doesn't provide the guarantee Lee did, he is a very nice second option. With Young in the lineup, joining Denard Span, Justin Morneau, Joe Mauer, and Michael Cuddyer, the Twins would suddenly have a formidable lineup to go along with an always solid rotation. It might be their best choice.

Yet, despite any challenges, Liriano's availability is the first piece of interesting news to arrive at the Yankee doorstep. There would be a reason to get excited in the Bronx. There would be a reason to imagine the Yankees going toe-to-toe with the much improved Red Sox.

Real GM's don't have to wait for sure things to fall into their laps. They make their money not by simply throwing the owner's money around, but by finding a way to pry pitchers like Liriano away from their clubs without burning down the minor leagues.

The most notably thing Cashman has done this entire offseason is dress like an elf and scale down the side of a large building. Perhaps, if he pulls off a Liriano deal, he can retain what is left of his dignity and his credibility.

Goodbye Andy Pettitte!!!

2011-02-06T11:25:00.001-05:00

There has never been a player in my lifetime that proved the “know what you have until it's gone” mantra better than Andy Pettitte. See, for years, I was a lot like former owner George Steinbrenner, who never seemed all that enraptured by Pettitte. He was good, of course, but he wasn't “great,” and New York is about “great.” Pettitte was always somewhat of an afterthought. There was David Cone and David Wells pitching perfect games and coming up big in big games. There was the arrival of Roger Clemens, argueably one of the top five pitchers in the history of the game (until the whole steroids era was flushed out). There was El Duque, Orlando Hernandez, with his quirky delivery, his slow-motion breaking ball, and his ability to fool the best hitters in the biggest games.

Through it all was Andy, in the background, taking the mound every fifth day, getting hitters out.

Andy didn't strike a lot of guys out. He didn't pitch two-hitters. He didn't finish the season with eye-popping results. He just won.

Unfortunately, on a team that “just won,” his consistency seemed boring. There was no flash there, no pomp and circumstance that surrounded his game. He was just there, doing his job, and doing it at a very good clip.

Of course there was the Game 5 in the 1996 World Series, the duel with John Smoltz where Pettitte blanked the Braves to send the Yankees home with an improbable three games to two lead in a series where they had dropped the first two contests at home. It was his signature moment. In fact, it remains his signature moment. But, it wasn't enough to outshine all the stars and personalities that surrounded him.

After the 2003 season, the Yankees let Pettitte go. The details are sketchy. The Yankees and Brian Cashman insist that Andy wanted to return home to Houston and play closer to his family. Pettitte has made it clear he never felt wanted by the Yankees and didn't return because no offer was ever made. The Yankees state they made an offer. Who knows the truth. All we do know is that the Yankees, and George Steinbrenner, had the same view of Pettitte as I did: good but not good enough to break the bank over. If he left, no big deal.

Now, I didn't want Pettitte to go. I didn't understand why the Yankees weren't willing to offer one of their own a contract. But, if I am being honest, I wasn't devastated. This wasn't Derek Jeter or Mariano Rivera. This wasn't an iconic Yankee. This wasn't someone who was irreplaceable. I would have liked to have had Pettitte back, but life goes on.

Besides, the Yankees, before the 2004 season, made a bunch of splashy moves that had all Yankee fans, like me, admiring the shiny new toys in the Steinbrenner collection.

There was Kevin Brown, the veteran righty who broke bats with his devastating sinker. There was Javier Vazquez, one of the bright young pitching stars in the game, who had wallowed in obscurity in Montreal long enough. Then, of course, there was Alex Rodriguez, the $260 million man, considered the best player in the game at that time, who was coming over to play third base for the Bombers because no one was moving Jeter from his perch at short stop.

Pettitte was gone but, let's face it, who was gonna miss him?

If you're a Yankee fan, or (gulp) a Red Sox fan, you know what happened in 2004. The Yankees murdered the Red Sox in three straight games in the ALCS. Then, performed one of the most infamous choke jobs in the history of the sport, losing four straight, including a disasterous game 7 where the new and shiny Yankee toys, Kevin Brown, Javier Vazquez, and Alex Rodriguez, all helped in the collossal failure.

It was one of the most heartbreaking loses and Yankee history, one to this day I have a hard time believing happened, but it did, and when the final out was recorded, and the Sox celebrated their ALCS victory on the mound at Yankee Stadium, the first thing I thought was “this wouldn't have happened if Andy Pettitte were here.”

He returned in 2007 and played in Pinstripes four more years, winning another World Series, and never, not once, having to deal with a fanbase ungrateful for his efforts. We had seen life without Andy Pettitte. We had seen what a series, what a season, could look like without someone with grit, guts, a will to win, and an ability to just go out there and “get the job done.” What had seemed boring in his first go-around with the Yankees was suddenly an exilar for all that ailed a group that looked more like a fantasy team than a championship squad.

Between 1996 and 2003 I must have seen Pettitte pitch 20 times. It was just the way the schedule would work out. When my buddies and I would pick a game to attend, driving down from Connecticut for the day, it always seemed to fall on the day Pettitte was scheduled to take the mound. It became a running joke for our group.

“Who's pitching?” one would ask.

“I don't know, but good money is on Pettitte,” the other would respond.

“God, anyone but Pettitte.”

That's the way we felt.

Now, in 2011, I treasure having seen him as much as I did and wish, fervently, I had a few more opportunities before now.

Pettitte is officially retired. He is leaving the game the way most great players should, on his own terms and still in demand. At 38, the Yankees wanted him back. More than that, they needed him back. But Pettitte felt the pull of family more keenly now than he ever did before, and he decided to call it quits. Good for him.

Conversation has already begun about the Yankees' shaky rotation going into 2011 and columnists have already bantered around about Pettitte's Hall of Fame credentials. Those debates should be saved for another day. What this does to the Yankees now, and what chances Pettitte has of going to Cooperstown in five years, has no bearing on the days events.

Today, Yankee fans everywhere should simply say “thank you.” Pettitte conducted his life, and his career, with class. Even his poor decision to use steroids to help heal from an injury was handled with dignity and honesty, and true remorse, even though Pettitte was never accused of using the drug to enhance his own performance or change his body, the way so many of his contemporaries had done.

Pettitte was a big-game pitcher in a city that demands big-time performances. He was a top-flight pitcher and person.

For a Louisiana boy who called Texas home, Pettitte will forever be viewed as a New Yorker. He won over a city that is used to bright lights and big personalities with quiet consistency and grace. And he won, period.

So, from a very grateful Yankee fan, who never realized how important Pettitte was until he was gone, I say “thank you” and good luck in your retirement.

Who could the Yankees actually get in a trade?

2010-12-18T14:01:00.001-05:00

The Lohud Yankee Blog had a good post this morning where they looked at the top of the rotation type guys on each team and tried to decide if any of them would be available. As you can imagine, on almost all the top-flight guys, the answer was a resounding "NO." But, I think all of us Yankee fans fully expect that the team is going to have to look at second-tier players rather than high-end guys, at least at this stage of the game. So, instead of talking about pitchers the Yankees wouldn't be able to pry away from their current team, let's look at guys that might be available.
This is a very short list of guys that might be available on teams that might deal with the Yankees. Most have flaws, most have high-end rewards. It all depends on what the other team wants, and what the Yanks are willing to give up.

Fausto Carmona (Cleveland Indians) - Carmona has probably been the most prominent name mentioned when it comes to possible trade chips. He's 27, has $5 million coming to him next year, is locked up through 2014 for a very reasonable price, and put up a good year last season with a 3.77 ERA. Any Yankee fan worth his or her salt remembers Carmona from 2007, when he dominated the Yankees, ended Joe Torre's tenure in New York, and looked like a special pitcher that was just coming into his own. If you take 2007 and 2010 and combine them, they tell the story of a top-caliber pitcher who throws a hard sinker, ala Cien Mien Wang, only with a few more strikeouts. The problem is the two years inbetween.
In 2008 and 2009, Carmona was, to put it mildly, ineffective. He was even sent down to the minors at one point to try and figure things out. His good is very good, his bad is very bad.
So, if the Yankees were to inquire about Carmona, there would be a natural tug of war between they and the Indians. On the one hand, the Yankees would be reluctant to give up top-quality prospects for a guy that has as many terrible years as good years to his name as a starter. Can you imagine how much justifiable venom would be directed at Brian Cashman if he traded, say, Austin Romine and another player for Carmona and, in two years, Carmona was pitching to a 5 ERA and Romine was doing his best Buster Posey imitation? Not fun times.
On the flip side, however, the Indians are in need of good players, are in the middle of rebuilding, have a young, affordable pitcher coming off a very good year. Why in the world would they hand the Yanks this guy for, say, a few second-tier prospects, or even high-risk, high-reward guys like Joba Chamberlain?
Carmona only makes sense for the Yankees if the cost is reasonable, because there is too much of a risk that he reverts back to 2009 numbers. But, it might not make sense for the Indians to trade a 27-year old pitcher with good talent off a top year for a "reasonable" price.

Gavin Floyd (Chicago White Sox) - Here is another name you've heard bantered around. I am still unclear as to why the White Sox, who picked up Adam Dunn and seem to believe they can make a run this season, would trade Floyd, but the rumors have been persistent enough to make you believe there is some fire near the smoke.
I like Floyd a lot. He's 27, like Carmona, owed only $2.7 million this year, had a 4.08 ERA last year, and ever since he was made a full-time starter three years ago, that's been about his norm. A lot of people thought Floyd would be a top-end of the rotation guy, so maybe the White Sox willingness to trade him stems as much from disappointment that he hasn't reached that full potential as it does from anything else. But, if the Yankees could secure him, he would give them a viable #3 starter and, at 27, a guy who could be a fixture in the rotation for years. And, at 27, there is still a possibility that he can fulfill his potential. Maybe different scenery could help.
Yet, the question as always is, what, exactly, are you looking to give up? Would the White Sox demand an Austin Romine, or a top-end pitcher? Maybe they would be interested in Chamberlain as either a reliever or a starter, as a part of a package, or course. They need some help up the middle, so maybe the Yankees could entice them with an Eduardo Nunez? For a guy like Floyd, you really couldn't justify top prospects, but some second-tier guys might be able to do it.

Jonathan Sanchez (San Francisco Giants) - No rumors have circulated about Sanchez, but if the Giants are looking to upgrade offensively, Sanchez might give them the best option to secure some hitters without giving up one of their prized pitchers in Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, or youngster Madison Bumgardner. Why would the Yankees want him? Well, he's 28, makes $2 million, had a 3.07 ERA last year, is a lefty with strikeout stuff, and pitched almost 200 innings last season. He also had, for the most part, a good postseason and helped the Giants win a title.
Why would the Giants trade him? As I said before, Sanchez, because of the Giants depth of pitching, is expendable if they want to bring back a good hitter. The Giants won last year with great pitching and timely hitting. Problem is, that timely hitting isn't always going to be there, especially when the guys playing the field have a less than impressive resume to their name. That offense was deemed to be lacking last year, when they started their magic carpet ride. It's hard to imagine they could conjure that kind of magic again. Trading Sanchez gives them the chance to get better offensively and stay at the top, pitching wise.
Why it wouldn't work? Well, again, who would the Giants want? Jesus Montero aint being traded for Jonathan Sanchez and the Giants already have Buster Posey behind the plate. Would the Yankees consider Nick Swisher in a deal? Doubtful. Would the Giants give him up for not-MLB-ready talent? Doubtful.
There is also the fact that Sanchez had a breakout year this year. Before this, he had been a hard-throwing disappointment who had about a 5 ERA, on average. Is Sanchez just coming into his own, or is he Oliver Perez? When there is a chance he could be Ollie, you probably wouldn't be comfortable trading top talent for him.

Anibal Sanchez (Flordia Marlins) - The Marlins aren't trading Josh Johnson, but Sanchez is an underrated young pitcher (26) who probably won't make an untouchable lists. He had a 3.55 ERA last year and was probably the team's second best pitcher.
I threw his name on here because, if the Yanks were going to make a deal for a Marlins pitcher, he makes sense for them over Johnson (unavailable) or Ricky Nolasco (no good) but, in reality, I would shocked if the Marlins would give him up. He's affordable, good, young - why would you trade him?

Scott Kazmir (Anaheim Angels) - This, to me, could be the most interesting guy. I have no idea of the Angels would be interested in trading him, but Kazmir is extremely talented, has pitched, and pitched well, in the AL East before, and is still only 26. He's owed $8 million and he's coming off a God-awful year where he had a 5.94 ERA and only pitched in 150 innings.
Here are the reasons to be turned off: he's had a lot of injury problems already and he might be just a 5 or 6 inning pitcher; he was bad last year, really bad; I have no idea what his medicals look like, or what affect those injuries have had on his velocity, the key to his success.
Here are the reasons to be intrigued: as everyone knows, when he is on, there is no more talented pitcher in baseball; he's a lefty; he has a GREAT track record against the Red Sox, especially in Fenway; you could get him cheap (if he's available) considering the risks that come along with him.
Everyone has mentioned Zambrano as high-risk, high reward, but Kazmir, to me, is just as intriguing because he doesn't make as much money, is younger, is a lefty, and is a proven winner in the AL East. And how great would it be for Kazmir to resurrect his career in New York with the Yankees, not the Mets?

So, if it didn't matter, what was the point?

2010-12-17T22:35:00.000-05:00

t never ceases to amaze me how quickly the tone, and narrative, can change in sports. A week ago, today, New York Yankee brass, especially GM Brian Cashman, were fawning over now-Phillie pitcher Cliff Lee like a love-sick 13-year old girl hanging boy-band pictures on her wall. Did you ever think you would hear a grown man say things like “he's worth the wait,” when talking about a free agent? I mean, come on Cash-man. Have some dignity. He might as well have said “Lee completes me.”

The fanbase was little better. Lee was a forgone conclusion to most, and a quick check of the blogs and message boards would have found most fans lining up exactly how the rotation should look on opening day, and who the fifth starter should be on the off-chance Andy Pettitte did not return.

Seven days ago, Cliff Lee was the answer, the antidote to AJ Burnett's rollecoaster ride of a career, to Phil Hughes' stunted growth, to the possible retirement of Pettitte, and so on.

Now, on Dec. 15? Ahhh, who needed the bum, anyway.

One can hardly blame Cashman for moving on as quickly as Sarah Palin when a question about geography comes up. He's the General Manager, not a fan, and he has to refocus quickly because there suddenly aint a tremendous amount of time to get things done. But, the fans, and mouthpiece media personalities, have been more enjoyable since Tuesday morning.

Here is the new narrative:

*Lee is 32, and a 7-year contract would have been outrageous (it amazes me how many Yankee fans have suddenly taken an interest in Yankee budgetology)

*Lee didn't want to come here anyway, so fine (a legitimate point, probably the only one that's been brought up in the last 36 hours)

*Lee isn't that good, anyway (might as well be followed by “and he's ugly, and smells like cabbage”)

*Lee got blown up in the World Series, proving he isn't automatic in the big spot (and Michael Jordan missed plenty of last-second shots, does that mean you would have wanted Bill Worthington taking the shot?)

*Lee has a bad back (certainly something to be worried about, but it didn't seem to affect him in any way in the postseason when he was spanking the Yankees around)

*The Yankees have a good enough team without Lee (then why in the hell was everyone from Brian Cashman to the concession stand attendants at Yankee Stadium willing to wait until the Beatles reunited for Lee to make a decision?)

Let me expound a little on two points made above: the budgetology fixation by Yankee fans, and the idea that the Yankees are “just fine” without Lee.

First, I have never, and will never understand the interest some fans have in the Yankee payroll. There is no cap in baseball. The Yankees can spend whatever they want, and they usually do. The only time fans should care about contracts is when a.) there is a cap (see NFL, NBA) or, b.) when they root for a small market team. If I'm a fan of the Cleveland Indians and my team is looking to offer a 7-year, $138 million offer to ANYONE, I get interested. Why? Because I know my little team only has so much money with which to play. Spend too much money on one guy, and it might be him and eight minor leaguers running out there every summer day.

But, as a fan of the Yankees, or Red Sox, or, now, the Phillies, why worry? You don't know anything about their finances so you have no idea what their cutoff point would be to begin with. No one can gauge when their payroll becomes a burden because they change that number all the time. The Yankees say they won't go over $200 million, then skate by that when necessary. The Red Sox claim they won't go over the luxury tax number, but then speed by it when Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzelez come to play. The Phillies, as late as Friday of last week, were saying it would take a small miracle to work Lee into their budget. Hallelujah, heaven be praised cause that miracle came true.

See, those teams have A LOT of money. Are you really “concerned” as a fan about what kind of constraints a Cliff Lee deal was going to put on the Yankee budget in seven freaking years? Really?

“Well, Bob, Lee would help win the Yankees a championship next season, but I am really concerned about 2016.” Seriously? Who the hell cares? You don't think that, by that time, the Yankees will have figured out how to absorb that bad contract? They have every other time.

Budgetology, to me, is like sabermetrics: it focuses on things that don't really have to do with the sport. For some people, I guess, sitting down and trying to figure out what the long-term player personnel costs will be for the Yankees between 2015 and 2020 is fun. To me, it's a collossal waste of time.

The second point is that the Yankees are fine without Lee.

Let's just say that, if the Yankees honestly believed they were “fine” without Lee, they wouldn't have willingly bent over for the last three weeks hoping that he wouldn't jam anything up there (which, of course, he did). I'll say it again, Brian Cashman acted like a lovesick cheerleader with a crush on the quarterback. Do you think he would do that if he felt great about Ivan Nova and Sergio Mitre anchoring the final two spots in the rotation?

But, if you needed a little more indepth analysis as to why the Yanks are not better off without Lee, or even “just fine,” here you go:

*AJ Burnett is still a Yankee — That's your number two starter, folks. The Burnett train is in the station and ready for departure, prepare for the very real, all but certain chance that you'll be going off the rails on some point during your journey.

Look, the Yanks can say all the right things about Burnett having a “bounceback” year and recharging his career, and they can also try as they might to paint his first year with the Yankees as some sort of pitching clinic put on for the benefit of the baseball world. The truth is, Burnett has only had one year in his career (2008) that justifies him being thought of as anything other than a number 3 or 4 starter. Okay, want to say his 2009 season, with a 4.07 ERA and 13-9 record was more of a number 2 starter type of year, maybe, but that's pretty much the pinnacle for Mr. Face Cream Pie maker. Now, suddenly, at 34, our buddy AJ is gonna become a front-line starter? Again, let's review: AJ Burnett, in an 11-year career, has won more than 13 games just once. In his two years with the Yankees, his record is 23-24. Think about that for a second. AJ Burnett, playing for a team with one of the best offensives in baseball, has a below .500 record and found a way to lose 15 games last year. He's your number two starter.

*Phil Hughes is just OK — Look, I will readily admit that I have been down on Hughes for a long time. I just don't see the "greatness" that was predicted. Several of my buddies are big Hughes fans, and they will rightfully point out in these discussions that Hughes, in his first full year as a starter, won 18 games and had an ERA that was just over 4. I give him credit for that, I really do. However, is that all we can expect from The Franchise?

Forget the fact that the Yankees consistently refused to trade Hughes for better MLB-proven talent over the years (you don't hang onto the guy if you think his ceiling is Jon Garland), without Lee in the picture, and with an aged, perhaps less than excited Andy Pettitte maybe returning, you NEED Hughes to be better. Let's face it, you need him to be your second guy in the rotation, simple as that. Can he do it?

I won't string up Hughes the way I did Burnett, and tie his resume to his throat, because unlike Burnett who has more than a decade of futility to prove he isn't a front-line starter, Hughes has only one full year as a starter and a few other years of bouncing around between the rotation and the pen. However, I will say this: when your fastball tops out at 93 MPH and is straight as an arrow, when your curveball doesn't fool a stick ball player in the streets of Brooklyn, and when you can't throw a third pitch to save your life, well then, it's kinda hard to predict greatness, especially in year two. Instead, the best bet is that Hughes essentially is the pitcher in 2011 that he was in 2010. With Lee, that's just fine. Without Lee, that's a problem.

*Andy Pettitte is old and maybe not all that into baseball - We don't even know if Andy is gonna come back but, seriously, how much can you expect from the man? He's almost 40, dealt with two fairly significant injuries last year, and is having probably the most difficult time ever deciding whether to come back or not. It's a lot to expect that he is gonna go out there, pitch 200 innings, post 15+ wins, and record a 4 or lower ERA. And, at some point, a $200 million team can't continue to put the fate of the rotation on the shoulders of a 40-year old man, right?

*In-house options kinda suck - I like Ivan Nova a lot, I really do.I think he has some big-time stuff. But, he has had less than a month of experience at the major league level and, in that month, showed that, while the talent is there, the maturity isn't. In almost every game he pitched last year, Nova imploded after the fourth or fifth inning. Considering Burnett imploded after the third inning most days, that aint that bad of a record, but you can't send that kid out there over the course of the season.

Sergio Mitre? I don't think I need to explain why Sergio Mitre is not a viable solution for a championship-caliber rotation, right?

The Yankees have some really good young arms in the minors, including Manny Banuelos, who seems to have become somewhat of a superstar in the Yankee system, much heralded Andrew Brackman, and Dellin Betances are all top-quality arms, but none of them are ready for the big time right now.

*Trade for who? - Okay, Lee is gone, the chance to simply spend money is out the window, and the only thing left to do is trade for someone. So, who's out there?

We've already heard that King Felix Hernandez aint going no where, it's hard to imagine the Giants will be interested in giving away any of their arms, considering they just used them all to secure a championship for the first time in 50+ years, and unless I am very wrong, the Red Sox probably aren't proposing a Jon Lester for Brett Gardner deal in the near future. That means the Yanks either go into next season much like they ended the last one, or they trade for a low-grade option, considering the royalty they were just in the running to land.
Maybe the Indians are willing to part with Fausto Carmona for a collection of mid-level prospects. Maybe the Cubs need to part ways with Carlos Zambrano, and maybe Big Z would like a reunion with his old pitching coach. Maybe Ricky Nolasco is a lot better than his record, or talent, indicates. Maybe Freddy Garcia is more than a medical marvel whose arm might literally be made of jelly at this point.
You get the drift. There isn't one sure thing in the group. At this point, the Yankees, and their fans, would be THRILLED with high risk, high reward pitchers like Carmona and Zambrano, guys who would have had the fan base screaming on talk radio if they had been mentioned before Lee turned tail and ran for the City of Brotherly Love.
So, you see, signing Lee was kinda important. It was important because the Yankees spent their whole offseason waiting on his decision, an offseason that saw needed bullpen help pass them by as they sat by the phone like a jilted college coed. It was important because the Yankees now enter next year with a whole lot of question marks in the worst place in which to have them: the rotation and pen. It was also important because, now, even if that front-line starter does become available, it will probably require them to trade Jesus Montero, their prized prospect and the best hitting prospect in all the minors, to complete the deal.
This isn't just about next year, this is about the next five years, as the Yankees won't have the luxury to just throwing money at a pitcher to bring them in,
But, like so many Yankee fans have said the last few days, who needs him....

Thank you, Joe. You're welcome back here anytime.

2010-09-18T09:44:00.000-05:00

I know Joe Torre wrote a book that really bothered a lot of people within the Yankee organization. I know Brian Cashman wasn't pleased that he was protrayed as a guy who became beholden to the designer stats of the day and, in the end, refused to stand up for Torre the way he had in the past. I know the Steinbrenner family was upset that Torre essentially outed how sick The Boss, George Steinbrenner, was by the time the 2007 season ended. We all know that Alex Rodriguez isn't a fan of Torre after his book painted the slugger as a self-absorbed prima donna who obsessed over Derek Jeter and couldn't come through in the clutch.
All of that is valid.
And, I know Joe Torre continues to hold a grudge against the Yankees for essentially forcing him out, but not having the guts to outright let him go for fear of the inevitable public relations backlash.
Again, valid.
However, if Joe Torre is truly done as a manager, and will now retreat to a job on television or, perhaps, with Major League Baseball, it is my hope that all old hard feelings subside and Torre can once again find a home with the Yankees.
Joe Torre is one of the great New York Yankees in history, as far as managers go. He led that team to four world championships. He was a part of a golden era for the Yankees, a dynasty, not just a string of good teams.
Some of his best managerial jobs came when the Yankees didn't even get out of the first round of the playoffs. If you have a chance on a slow Saturday afternoon (or a slow day at work) go check out the roster of the 2005 and 2006 teams, especially the starting rotations. Joe Girardi would have had a hard time winning 88 games with Aaron Small leading the way for half a season.
It's gotten somewhat foolish on the YES Network these days. Torre has been all but expunged from the Yankee history. There are no Yankeeography specials broadcast anymore. No more highlights of Torre crying after the 1996 championship. It's as if the Bombers managed themselves between 1996 and 2007.
But, what happens in the next six years when the Yankees want to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the '96 championship (my God, has it been that long) and everyone from Paul O'Neill to Tino Martinez, to Bernie Williams, to perhaps a recently retired Derek Jeter, show up at the stadium. Is Joe Torre going to be forgotten, even then?
Yogi Berra swore he would never set foot back in Yankee Stadium after George Steinbrenner calously fired one of the great Yankees of all time after only 17 games in 1982, and didn't even have the decency to speak to him personally. In 1999, he returned. Joe Torre is a Yankee icon. I hope for all our sake, and for his, this petty squabbling can be set aside and he can be welcomes back with open arms. The Yankees handled his departure about as poorly as possible. Torre perhaps could have been more diplomatic in his book about the Yankee years. Both share some of the blame for the split. Neither side did something so egregious that it should detract from what was acheived during those years. Joe Torre cannot be wiped off Yankee history. He had too much to do with writing that history, no matter what a schmuck like Michael Kay wants to believe.

A quick note about Donnie Baseball taking over as the Dodgers manager next year. I hope for his sake that the Dodgers get good again, and fast. I love Donnie and believe he will make a great manager. He knows the game, knows the players, and is one of the most respected guys in the sport. The idea that some Triple A guy in the Dodgers organization should have gotten the call over Mattingly is, to me, absurd. Donnie has been a long-time coach in this league, and was, at one time, one of the best players in the league, a guy who would have punched his ticket to Cooperstown easily had it not been for his back injuries. You honestly believe that some no-name Triple A guy is going to command more respect in the clubhouse than Don Mattingly? (yes, I'm looking at you when I say that, Edurado Perez)
What concerns me is the Dodgers. Frank McCourt is going through his blitzkrieg of a divorce and much of the speculation is that, for a team with talent, there will be little done in the offseason to compliment that talent and help the Dodgers regain NL West-leading form. If Donnie is given the right roster, I believe the Dodgers can once again be a contender. However, if the McCourt family's woes prevent any kind of action, I have no idea how, exactly, Donnie can turn that team around.
It will be tough, though, if Donnie starts to win, to see him celebrating in Dodger blue. Can we trade managers? Is that possible? Girardi for Mattingly, straight up?

Put the Phil Hughes Cy Young Winner celebratory cake on ice for a while.

2010-09-05T12:52:00.000-05:00

I have not been a fan of Phil Hughes.
Part of my issue with him really has little to actually do with Hughes. He couldn't control how the Yankees promoted and hyped him, how they called him the "next Roger Clemens" (one assumes without the steroids), and how they refused to trade him for anyone. Listening to the breathless description of him as a pitcher, I was expecting to see a combination of Sandy Koufax and Jesus.
But, even though Hughes was lower on my favorite player totem pole, and even though I had serious arguements with my friends about The Franchise as a pitcher, I couldn't deny how Hughes started the season. April looked like the culmination of everything I had heard about Hughes. His fastball was exploding, his curve was 12-6, and he had great control. Unlike the other overhyped Yankee phenom, Joba Chamberlain, who was given his chance to start last year and failed, Hughes was efficient and effective every time out. My friends who insisted Hughes would find his feet crowed and I, as the Hughes detractor, admitted that I might have made a mistake. Maybe Hughes really was the next superstar pitcher in waiting.
Then May hit and things went back to normal.
In his first six starts of the season, Hughes was utterly brilliant, going 4-0 and producing a wonderful 1.38 ERA. Then, on May 17, he got bombed by the Red Sox and things have gone down hill from there. His June ERA was 5.17, his July ERA even worse at 5.52. In August, Hughes bounced back from being miserable to just being okay with a 4.22 ERA. As I write this, Hughes is making his first start in September and, so far, it is a normal Hughes start of three innings, two runs.
He has won 16 games because of the amazing run support he has received from the Yankee offense, almost 7 runs a game (the highest in the majors) and because the bullpen has, with the acquisition of Kerry Wood and the emergence of Boone Logan (who was finally given a chance to perform by the ever-inept Joe Girardi), become one of the best in the league.
Hughes supporters can talk about his wins all they want. They can also continue to insist that 24 is somehow too young to judge what a pitcher is or will be. The truth is, there is nothing on Phil Hughes' resume that would suggest he will ever be anything other than, at best, a third starter in this league.
His stuff is pedestrian. His fastball is 92 and straight, with a delivery that doesn't involve any deception at all. His curve is nice but certainly not devastating. His changeup, the pitch that supposedly earned him a spot in the rotation, doesn't exist, and his cutter is usually just a flat fastball.
I am not suggesting the Yankees trade Hughes (although I don't believe he or Joba should be untouchable) but it seems clear now that the most coveted Yankee pitching prospect in years is no more than Jon Garland in waiting. Considering they had a chance to trade for Johan Santana if they gave up on Hughes, Melky Cabrera, and Ian Kennedy, it would appear the Yanks sorely misread yet another prospect.

Looking ahead, for the heck of it

2010-08-19T21:55:00.000-05:00

Trust me, I get it.

The Yankees are tied for first place in the AL East and for the best record in baseball.
If you had to rank the likely World Series winner at this point in the season, you'd be hard pressed to slide anyone ahead of the Bombers.
Long story short, there is a whole heck of a lot to be interested in this season, like:
Will Andy Pettitte come back healthy?
How are the Yankees going to handle Phil Hughes and his innings limit in the midst of a pennant race?
Will AJ Burnett and Javier Vazquez find some consistency or continue to struggle?
Will Derek Jeter end the season on an up note, salvaging some of what has been his worst season as a professional?
Will Joba Chamberlain, Dave Robertson, and Kerry Wood make for a sturdy bridge to Mariano Rivera?
Will Joe Girardi's tendency to over manage cost the Yankees in September of the playoffs?
There are 40 plus games on the schedule that will help answer all of those questions.
Now, however, is right smack dab in the middle of August. These are the dog days. Pitchers have dead arm. Hitters seem to be slumping. Guys are getting rest, even when they might not need it. Everyone seems a little dinged up. What better time than to take the MAJOR leap forward and start to look at next year's roster. Who will be back, who will be gone, and who will be coming in. We'll take it position by position, looking at the starters, what chance they would be back, and who might replace them if their Yankee days are numbered.

First Base – Mark Teixeira
Chance of returning: 100%
This is as certain as it gets with the Yankees. He has a huge contract, so even if you wanted to move him, you can't. But, trust me, you don't want to move him. Teixeira is having a down year by his standards and is still on pace for very good run-production numbers. He shed the first three months of the season, where he fluctuated between mediocre and God-aweful, and has been one of the Yankees best hitters through the summer. Add on the fact that he is a gold glover at first and Tex will be a Yankee for a long, long time.
Possible replacement: No one.

Second Base – Robinson Cano
Chance of returning: 100%
Again, like Teixeira, this is a no-brainer. Cano has cooled off a little since his torrid start, and talk of him winning an MVP or batting title has subsided, but he is still unquestionably the best second baseman in the American League and probably only Chase Utley (when healthy) is comparable through the entire majors. And, he still has room to improve. You don't normally get the type of middle-of-the-lineup production Cano
produces from your second baseman, and the Yankees won't let go of their superstar middle infielder for anything.
Possible replacement: No one.

Short Stop – Derek Jeter
Chance of returning: 100%
Yes, he is having the worst statistical year of his career. There is no reason to even run down the numbers. Everything, across the board, is down, except maybe his defense.
Yes, he turned 36 this year and many players see their careers come to a quick and abrupt end around this time of life. Baseball might be a tough too fast for the Hall of Famer at this stage of the game.
Yet, we all know Jeter will be back in a Yankee uniform next season, and there are three very good reasons why: First, Jeter is iconic. You can make the argument that he is the most popular Yankee since Mickey Mantle, maybe even Joe Dimaggio. He remains one of the most marketable athletes in the world and that, in and of itself, makes any large contract for Jeter more than economically for the Yankees. There isn't a person in the front office, from Cashman on down, that wants to be remembered for letting Derek Jeter finish his career in another uniform.
Second, while the Yankees are paying A-Rod millions for each home run milestone, the true chase will be next year when Jeter rapidly approaches 3,000 hits. Right now, he is 14 away from 2,900 for his career. Considering there are 40 games to go, you can at least assume Jeter to average around a hit a game. That would put him at 2,926, or 84 hits away from the magic number. While home runs have been stained by the steroid era, 3,000 hits remains a magic number and a guaranteed place holder in the Hall. Add in the fact that no Yankee has ever gotten 3,000 hits and it will make his run that much more interesting and special.
Third, and finally, Jeter deserves a mulligan. Even Ty Cobb had a really bad year during his career. Granted, Jeter's age, and the wear and tear on his body after so many games over so many years, makes it more likely this is a downward trend rather than a bump in the road, he deserves the chance to prove he can rise to his level one or two more times before he calls it quits. He has been a great Yankee for 15 years. He has earned that right.
Possible replacement: No one.

Third Base – Alex Rodriguez
Chance of returning: 100%
Like Jeter, there are warning signs associated with A-Rod. He is 35. He is a step slower. His power numbers are way off, even with his three-homer explosion the other night. After years of being a iron man on the field, he is becoming more and more banged up. Yet, A-Rod is still a feared power hitter who drives in runs and keeps the wheels of the Yankee offensive machine churning. He still gives the Yankees both power and speed out of their fourth-place hitter, and he can devastate a game like no one else.
Also, like Jeter, A-Rod has been too good for too long not to throw this year out as an “oh well, it happens” kinda season and expect a bounce-back next year.
And, who are we kidding, even if the Yankees were desparate to get rid of Rodriguez, his contract (what's that for, 100 years?) makes it an impossibility.
Possible replacement: No one.

Catcher – Jorge Posada
Chance of returning: 30%
Before you start stomping up and down, screaming about how stupid it is to assume that Jorge will not be coming back, understand that the 30% represented what I believe to be Posada's chances of playing as the Yankee everyday catcher next year. I know Jorge is coming back, but I believe that, at this point, he will be coming back as the DH.
Look, it's no secret that most of the pitchers prefer to see someone else behind the plate. His defensive skills, never Johnny Bench-esque to begin with, have become woefully inadequate, and not just in terms of throwing baserunners out. He has a hard time blocking balls in the dirt, has had an inordinate number of passed balls and wild pitches scoot by this season, and the position just bangs the heck out of him. He still has a really good bat, one that remains important to the Yankee offense, but playing behind the plate doesn't do he, or the team, any good going forward.
Possible replacement: Jesus Montero
I just can't see the Yankees trading Montero this offseason, or keeping him down in the minors for another season. Yes, he started off very slowly, but he has been absolutely on fire the last month and a half of the season, devastating AAA pitching. This kid seems to be the real deal, a legit offensive superstar. As far as his catching skills, I can't comment on that, nor can most people because they haven't watched him day-to-day. He supposedly has a cannon for an arm and can call a good game. A lot of the criticisms have been about his size, but Joe Mauer is a big guy, as is Matt Wiener, and both of them seem to be turning out just fine. Montero could be just what the doctor ordered for the team offensively while continueing to progress under the tutelage of a veteran catcher at the major league level.

DH – Lance Berkman
Chance of returning: 10%
I don't see the Big Puma coming back to the Yankees after this season. He hasn't done very well since coming over but I have to believe someone out there will believe in Berkman and his home run potential enough to offer more than a Nick Johnson-esque one year, $5 option. Plus, I think the Yankees will be looking to slide someone else in there come next year.
Possible replacement: Jorge Posada

Right Field – Nick Swisher
Chance of returning: 90%
Swisher is just shy of 30, is cheap, has a few more years left on his contract, plays a good right field, and is having his best offensive year overall. So, why would the Yankees ever think about getting rid of him?
The truth is, I can't imagine Swishalicious going anywhere. He has become a fan favorite and, quite frankly, when you look at his numbers compared with other players at that position, he is more than holding his own.
But, Swisher is also not Teixeira or Cano (superstar caliber), nor is he Jeter or A-Rod (iconic legends). So, because of that, Swisher is only a 90% return kinda guy because, while he is likely to stay put, he isn't untouchable and the Yankees have proven over the years that, if you aren't untouchable, you are very much replaceable.
Possible replacement: No one jumps to mind, but, if the Yankees were to make a move it would have to be for a guy that trumps Swisher in all categories. Since no one really appears on the horizon in terms of free agency that fits such a description, you would have to think it would only be for an upgrade.

Center Field - Curtis Granderson
Chance of returning: 80%
I thought the Granderson trade was the steal of the offseason, but the Grandy Man has had a.......well......it's been a bad year. His average against lefties could only go up from the .174 he was hitting last year, but his just above .200 mark isn't exactly impressing the stat heads. Also, a lot of people thought, after Granderson smacked 30 homers playing half his games in the cavernous Comerica Park in Detroit, that 40 was a distinct possibility once he saw that short right porch in the Bronx. That, like so much else, hasn't materalized.
Yet, Granderson is a terrific center fielder, has provided some of the only speed on the team, and, since reworking his mechanics with Kevin Long, has been on a tear.
Granderson's year puts him on the "maybe" list of guys who could be moved in the right deal. He hasn't lived up to the potential, but who else are the Yankees going to get? Plus, with his new swing and new confidence, Granderson is poised to finish the year strong and one would have to feel confident he would bounce back next year with a much more Granderson-esque season.
Possible replacement: Brett Gardner
I could see this happening if the Yankees dealt Granderson away and brought in another left fielder. That would put Gardner back at his natural position in center. However, I don't buy this as happening. I think Granderson gets another shot at this. He has too much talent, too much potential, and I don't think you mix and match yet again, even off of a disappointing year.

Left Field – Brett Gardner

Chance of returning: 50%
Gardner is perhaps the hardest regular Yankee on which to get a read. Let's assume for a second that Granderson is back, and that Gardner does not simply make a move in positions. It comes down to whether the Yankees want to go into next season, and perhaps beyond, with His Grittiness in the outfield.
Reasons why Gardner will be back: he has had a very nice year with the bat, has gotten a lot of big hits for the team, has played very good defense in the outfield, and, with the aging legs of both Jeter and A-Rod, Gardner and Granderson real provide the only speed on the team, with Gardner being the only exceptionally fast player on the squad.
Reasons why Gardner will be gone: his good year has also ensured that he would be a valuable trade chip if the Yankees needed another player (especially a pitcher) and couldn't do it via free agency, his numbers have dropped off somewhat at the end of the year which could mean a late-season swoon might be in the making (not the type of last impression you want to make on your team), and he is playing the position of a guy a lot of people, including the Yankees, might covet in the off season (we'll talk about him in a minute).
If this were my team, Gardner would be back, but he fits the bill of the type of player always seemingly available in the Yankee system: good enough to warrant interest from other teams, not good enough to be a star so always on the chopping block.
Gun to my head, I say he is back.
Possible replacement: Carl Crawford
Crawford, finishing up his final year with the Tampa Bay Rays, will be a free agent. He has said as much and the team has all but admitted they don't plan to retain him (don't get me started on what a waste of a team it has become to allow a franchise to remain in Tampa). He is a better player than Gardner, pure and simple. He can steal the same amount of bases, hit for more power, hit for a higher average, and play just as good a left field. He also is still in his prime (29 years old) and buying in on guys who are proven but just entering their peak years (Teixeira, Swisher, CC Sabathia) has proven to work out well for the Yanks the last few years.
So, why would the Yanks pass?
A couple of reasons; first, the Yankees don't need a huge infusion of power into the lineup. They get A+ power numbers from first, second, third, and have the potential to get more out of center and short, if both guys have bounce-back years. Swisher in right provides plenty, himself, and Posada at DH is still capable of 20 or more homers, as might be youngster Montero, if given a chance. If you take the power away, Gardner and Crawford are much closer players. Second, while Crawford is one of the best players around right now, he plays a very aggressive, physical style, and has been doing so at the major league level for a while. His speed, which makes an exceptional player, might not last for much longer. Third, and perhaps most importantly, I don't believe the Yankees are going to splurge on two high-priced free agents and I honestly believe their focus will be on pitching. They are going to have a bigger need for it come next season. While Crawford, any way you shake it, would be an upgrade over Gardner, it would count more as a want rather than a need.
Because of that, I believe the Yankees pass on Crawford (who might end up in Boston) and go after another lefty ace in free agency, whose name may rhymn with knee.

Starting pitchers – CC Sabathia
Chance of returning: 100%
He is the ace of the staff and one of the best in the business. Rather than being scared off by the short Yankee Stadium porch in right field, he has made his home ballpark a true advantage, becoming almost unbeatable in the Bronx. He is a workhorse, has what seems to be a rubber arm, and gets better the bigger the moment. And, as Johan Santana struggles a bit with the Mets over in Queens, it looks like Brian Cashman may have made the right choice in passing on a trade for that lefty pitcher and, instead, targeting the big man.
Possible replacement: No one

Phil Hughes
Chance of returning: 100%
Of the three young starters the Yankees touted a few years ago (Hughes, Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy) Hughes has turned out to be the most productive. While it still remains to be seen if Hughes will be the ace-quality starter he was in the early part of 2010, or the middle-of-the-rotation guy he has appeared to be for much of the rest of the season, his age, his price tag, his overall health, and his maturation in the system already, makes him a lock to be back next year.
Possible replacement: No one.

AJ Burnett
Chance of returning: 95%
This is probably 100%, but the Yankees might get so frustrated with Burnett and his on-again, off-again outing that they might be willing to eat most of his contract to get him off the roster. Yet, even though the Yankees are the only team in baseball capable of doing something like that, it is highly, highly unlikely. Burnett, after this season, has three more years left on what now seems like a odious $85 million contract. Who would be dumb enough to take that on, even if the Yankees were picking up most of the bill? The answer is no one.
Plus, on the positive side, Burnett remains one of the most talented throwers in the game and is perfectly capable of pitching a gem, or getting on a roll towards the end of the year and being one of the team's best performers. Because of that, it is highly unlikely the Yankees would be willing to part company.
Possible replacement: Ivan Nova
I personally believe the Yankees will look to add two new pitchers this offseason already (which I'll explain in a moment) so, if they traded Burnett, I think they would keep it cheap and promote from within. Nova is having an excellent year at AAA and would be in line to get a chance at the number 5 spot in the rotation.

Andy Pettitte
Chance of returning: 30%
If you had asked me this question eight weeks ago, I would have told you this percentage would be at about 80%. However, Pettitte, who has flirted with retirement for what seems like a decade straight now, always said he would pitch as long as he was healthy. Well, he was healthy all last year and through the All Star break this year. Now, however, he seems to be dealing with a groin injury that won't go away and the veteran lefty has shown real frustration when speaking about his rehab. Even if Pettitte comes back and pitches well at the end of the season, his current injury is probably enough to keep him from trying it again next year. At his age, the body might be telling him to shut it down.
Possible replacement: Ted Lilly, Joba Chamberlain
The Yankees were rumored to be interested in their former left handed pitcher at the trade deadline but backed away. As a free agent, and a little older, Lilly could be a nice stop-gap for either a youngster in the minors or another free agent pitcher down the road. He's a left hander, has pitched in New York and the ÅL East in the past, and would probably be amenable to coming back to where it all started for him. As far as Chamberlain, it is a possibility only in a pinch, in my opinion, but it is an option. The Yankees spent a lot of time “building” his arm up last year and he has remained injury free this season, albeit in the pen. I think they would look to keep him in his current role, but, if they needed to, he could be swung back into the rotation.

Javier Vazquez
Chance of returning: 3%
I don't have a lot of faith that Javy is coming back to the Yanks. His return has been okay but not triumphant. He is still shaky in the big game and he isn't exactly a fan favorite. Plus, Javy is going to be 35 and his stuff, including his velocity, has seemed to be down this year from even last year. Considering his track record would probably be enough to command a larger contract, both in terms of money and years, than the Yankees are willing to give up, it's hard to imagine the Vazquez experiment lasting more than a season.
Possible replacement: Cliff Lee
Is there a worse secret in baseball than that Cliff Lee wants to be a Yankee and the Yankees want Cliff Lee?The Bombers had a deal in place this trade deadline to bring Lee to the Bronx in exchange for Jesus Montero, so you know they are serious. Sabathia, who is one of Lee's best friends, has also not been very couy when asked whether Lee will want to sign with the Yankees come this winter. I think the Yankes, with Pettitte and Vazquez coming off the books, will have one big contract splash in them, and Lee, still only 31 and one of the best in the game, will be wearing pinstripes next season.

Closer – Mariano Rivera
Chance of returning: 100%
Unless Rivera wants to walk away after this year, he is coming back.
Forget the contract. Like Jeter, there is no way anyone is letting Rivera walk in the twilight of his career to another team. He will be back and, unless shown otherwise, will be just as good as always.
Possible replacement: No one.

Couple of notes here: I didn't tackle the bench players at all because they are fairly expendable. I doubt Austin Kearns comes back, wouldn't be surprised if Marcus Thames has a second go-around, and think that Pena would probably be back as your jack of all trades in the infield. Francisco Cervelli is an interesting case as his situation will be determined by how committed the Yankees are to Posada as their everyday DH, and how much rope they give a kid like Montero. As far as the pen, the only really interesting guys are Joba and Kerry Wood. I can't see the Yanks giving up on Robertson, although, if he were requested in a deal the Yankees desperately wanted, I doubt it would be a breaker, and I think Boone Logan might have secured a chance to be that lefty reliever the Yankees like to have. With Wood and Joba, I think Wood is gone, only because someone will offer him a closer roll, and I think Joba stays, although he will be offered in the right deal. In the end, Joba's talent is still enough to keep the Yanks coming back for more.

Some random Yankee thoughts

2010-07-17T13:26:00.001-05:00

For some reason, I have been wrapped up in the Knicks/NBA off season, but now that it is the second half of the baseball season, focus shifts back to the Yanks. It has been a weird week for the Yankees and a lot of things come to mind.

*I feel bad about George Steinbrenner and Bob Shepard but neither one was by any means a shock to the system. Shepard was 99-years-old and in bad health. Steinbrenner had reportedly had a series of strokes over the last few years, was all but hidden away from public view and, by all accounts, was somewhat out of it when people saw him (Bill Madden, while promoting his George book recently, all but stated that, when Jeter and Girardi went to deliver the world series ring to Big Stein before opening day at the Stadium this year, he didn't even really know who they were).
I have no problem paying tribute to both men, especially Steinbrenner. He was one of the most dominate sports figures of the last 40 years and someone who has changed baseball, and sports in general, from his treatment of free agency as a tool to redefine ones team to his establishment of the YES Network.
However, it seems that there was little middle ground when it came to Steinbrenner. I read only a handful of columnists who got the balance of business and owner visionary and impulsive and sometimes cruel owner who, at times, did as much to undermine his own team as he ultimately did to establish it as the greatest sports franchise in the world.
And, the coverage on YES was just over the top. I wouldn't expect YES people to discuss Steinbrenner's bad side. He owned the network, his sons now own it, and a sense of diplomacy and even reverance was appropriate. Considering how open the YES Network has been in allowing different points of view about the team and ownership, especially with the likes of Mike Francesa on the air, you would afford them a little bias when it comes covering the death of their founder.
But, it is one thing to focus on the good aspects, quite another to distort the record. In praising The Boss, Yes Network personnel went too far. Michael Kay glossed over the fact that Steinbrenner had tried to trade Any Pettitte on numerous occassions and was willing to let Bernie Williams walk to the Boston Red Sox before being convinced to sign his star outfielder when discussing the relationship the two players had with the owner. The memorial also replayed a Yankeeography of Steinbrenner, where it mentioned that he had "stood behind his new manager (Joe Torre)" when tabloid papers questioned the move. Such a statement is ironic considering it is now well known that Steinbrenner traveled to former manager Buck Showalter's house after having let him go and hired Torre to see if Showalter would return. Considering that, if Showalter had said he would have had to fire Torre before the man ever took the field, it is hard to comprehend how anyone could, with a straight face, pretend that Steinbrenner had "stood by his new manager."
Like I said, no one is asking the YES Network to spend 45 minutes on Howie Spira, but disfiguring the facts to hide the truth behind the man is a blantant abdication of journalistic responsibilty.

*A friend of mine made a very good point last night after watching Nick Swisher line a single into right field to win the game in the ninth: it wasn't that long ago, probably less than 12 months actually, where, had there been an emotionally charged game, the importance obvious to all, on the line in the ninth, Derek Jeter would have lined a double into right-center to end the game. Last night, after Tampa reliver Dan Wheeler delivered two meatballs that Jeter fouled away, he struck out on a pitch in the dirt.
Jeter is having argueably the worst season of his professional career. He is batting .270, nearly 50 points lower than his career average. His home runs and RBI are about on target, but his OBP is a paltry .336, again about 50 points lower than average, and his SLG is holding at only .386, 70 points off his normal numbers.
Even more disturbing are his splits. Jeter started the year in usual fashion, with a .330 average in April. A late surge helped salvage Jeter's May, where he hit .280, but June saw his swoon continue hitting on .243. Things have gotten much worse in July, where he is batting only .178 and only has two multi-hit games the entire month.
To give you a sense of how bad this season has been so far, in 2004 when Jeter got off to his historically slow start and was hitting only .220 by the end of May, he was up to .281 by July 17 after a torrid June where he had hit .396, and all of his numbers were significantly higher. Jeter's July and August were average after that, but his September was fantastic and he finished with a .292 average and above average power numbers.
So far this year, a long streak of great hitting has been nonexistent and there is no burst of power, as there had been in 2004, to mitigate the slow start.
I don't know what to make of it at this point. On the positive side, 2004 showed that Jeter could suffer through inconsistency and still play to the back of his baseball card at the end of the year. Also, after a very mediocre 2008 campaign, when some began to question his status as an elite player, Jeter rattled off a 2009 season that was one of his career best. With half of July, and then two months of baseball to go after that, Jeter's numbers could be fairly even when all is said and done.
Yet, he is 36, has played in more games and put his body through more beatings than most because he has been in the playoffs all but one of his professional careers, and eventually ever player begins to show his age.
Jeter has earned the right to play until he wants to sit down, and has also earned the benefit of the doubt that he will turn it around. But, you would have to be blind not to be concerned about this slump and what it could mean for the Yankees. Jeter has always been extremely important to the Yankee offense. They are not the same without him producing. If he is now going to be a .270 hitter, that doesn't bode well for consistency against the better teams.
Here's to hoping the Captain still has it in him and that this is a hiccup.

*I, for one, am glad the Cliff Lee deal failed for two reasons: first, while I care little for the opinions of the Yankee-haters in this country, getting Lee would have been overkill the likes even a fan like me would have been hard pressed to defend. You can make an arguement the Yankees need a bullpen arm to bridge the gap to Mo. You could even make somewhat of an arguement for another bat to take on the DH role because it is hard to feel confident that Nick Johnson will be anything other than a spectator this season. But a rotation ace? The Yankees don't need him. Getting him simply would have incensed the entire league for nothing. I am all for the Yankees being the best they can, but it is better for baseball that some of the other great players play in a different market.
The second reason is Jesus Montero. This kid could be special. Taking a look at him in spring training told everything you needed to know. He could be Manny Ramirez. He could be Miguel Cabrera. He could be a homegrown slugger the likes of which the Yankees haven't produced on their own in years.
Sure, there are questions about his defense, but those question marks seem to always be raised by people with limited knowledge of his abilities. What the heck does Joel Sherman know about this kid behind the plate? How many Scranton games and, before that, Trenton games do you think Slimy Shermy took in the last two years? My guess would be under one.
Montero is 20-years-old. He is the full-time AAA catcher. He started off slowly and everyone seemed ready to say "goodbye" because he wasn't producing prodigeous numbers.
Yet, he is still batting .262 with 8 homers and 39 RBI and, in his last 10 games, he is batting .350 with very good power numbers. That's at AAA. That's at 20.
I don't think you give up on a kid like that, even for Lee. This team isn't getting any younger out in the field. Posada probably has, what, another year left? Jeter may already be slowing down. A-Rod should remain at the top of his game for at least a few more years, but he will begin to see a decline sooner rather than later as well.
The Yankees will get top quality out of Teixeira and Cano for years to come and I believe that Granderson will show himself to be a part of that younger core before the end of the year. But, they are going to need to bring along another big bat and Montero can be that guy to join with Cano and Tex to keep the potent lineup going for years.

*If Montero does become that kind of top offensive player, it will allow the Yankees to do what I believe they should: avoid going after Carl Crawford and hang on to Brett Gardner.
Crawford is the better player and he has the resume to indicate he is a consistent player rather than a flash in the pan. But, look at Gardner's numbers this year compared to Crawford:

Crawford - .322 11 50 ..380 .519 31BB 31SB 70 runs
Gardner - .307 5 29 .398 .412 39BB 25SB 57 runs

Crawford has the clear advantage when it comes to power, with more homers and a better SLG. Forget the RBI because Crawford hits at the top/middle of the lineup while Gardner is at the bottom. But, look at everything else. The batting average is about the same, Gardner has a better eye and better OBP, both guys are on pace to score over 100 runs, and both guys are about the same when it comes to stolen bases. Plus, this is Gardner's first full year in the majors and he is almost 3 years younger than Crawford.
As I stated above, Crawford is the better player, but the gap between the two is by no means as pronouced as their salary will be next year. Crawford will geta BIG contract. Gardner is making $452,000 this year.
For what the Yankees need, is Crawford enough of a lift to justify the money? Another team might need him as a table setter or as a three-hole hitter, but the Yankees don't need that. They need what Gardner brings.
I would prefer that, next year, Gardner be your left fielder and the Yanks focus on Lee, who might be more needed next season as Javier Vazquez will probably be allowed to leave via free agency and Andy Pettitte might retire.
Keep gritty, gutty Brett Gardner as a starter. He's younger, cheaper, and he might even have room to improve and close that gap between he and Crawford even more.

Looking for leaders, not followers

2010-07-17T13:26:00.000-05:00

On Saturday, Carmelo Anthony, the 26-year-old Brooklyn native and current Denver Nugget small forward, got married in NYC. Some usual suspects, including one Lebron James, showed up to take part in the festivities.
The New York Post had a few shots of the wedding, and the litany of stars that showed up.
A couple of thoughts came to mind.
First, Lebron evidently ignored all questions from reporters and all shouts, good or bad, from fans as he entered. The pictures shown of him tell the story. He looks a lot more like a guy that just got charged with a felony, rather than one "ready to make history" in South Beach.
It was somewhat amazing considering not just two days before Lebron had orchestrated his own media circus, all with the express intent of promoting himself. I guess, when you don't get to hand pick the people who will ask you questions and dictate terms, it isn't as interesting to deal with the media.
But, besides Lebron, the spectacle got me thinking.
Are there any leaders in the league anymore, or just followers?
We know Kobe Bryants not a follower, or any of the real Big Three in Boston. And, we know that Dwayne Wade was only taking people to his team, not following anyone to theirs.
But, who else?
Is Kevin Durant a guy who wants the attention, the bright lights and the big stage, and the responsibility of leading his team, and talented teammates, to a championship? How about Chris Paul? He was one of the guys who came in the car with Lebron to Melo's wedding. Does Paul look at the marriage of Wade, Lebron, and Bosh and think "all right, I am going to beat their asses when we play" or is he thinking "I wonder if there's a way they could clear some more cap space for me?"
Do you think Derrick Rose was itching to have Lebron or Wade come to Chicago to lead them to victory or do you think he was quietly sitting back stewing at the notion that anyone would have to come in and help "hold his hand" while leading him to the promise land?
And while neither guy has enough time in the league to warrant such questions, it will be interesting to see if Tyreke Evans and John Wall are basketball killers or simply pretenders.
That leaves Carmelo Anthony.
I have a feeling that Melo is the most lilkely player to be dealt this offseason, and the Knicks the most likely suitor.
It makes sense. The Nuggets are on the downward spiral. Two of their most important players - Chauncey Billups and Kenyon Martin - are on the wrong side of 30 and both have shown downward decline. They can both be productive players for a few more years, I'm sure, but not as the focus of the offense. The mix on the team has seemingly gone bad, with JR Smith and Carmelo exchanging jabs last year in the playoffs against Utah. Above all else, it is uncertain as to the future of George Karl, who is battling cancer, and it has to be a concern of Carmelo's that Karl will not return, or will for only a short time.
Plus, with Anthony coming up on free agency next year, and the Nuggets having just "witnessed" the spectacle of that process this year, it is doubtful they would want to go through something similar.
While they have insisted that they have no intention of trading their best player, if Melo continues to balk at their contract extension offer, wouldn't it be only smart for them to make a trade now and get something good back?
So let's say the basketball gods smile on New York after losing Lebron, and the Nuggets give Donnie Walsh a call to play a round of "let's make a deal." It would, no question, makes the Knicks one of the best teams in the East, but my question would be, is Carmelo a Kobe or is he a Lebron?
Like with Chris Paul, another extremely talented player who may be on the Knicks radar screen, the question remains, how does Carmelo look at what just happened in Miami? What was his response when he saw his buddy, Lebron, at his wedding? Did he ask about cap space on the Heat roster? Did he question what kinds of villas are available on the beach in Miami? Or, did he walk up to Lebron, pat him on the shoulder, congratulate him, and then say something to the effect of "but, if you guys see me in the playoffs, you're gonna be waiting for that ring a long time."
After the Lebron saga, that remains my biggest question about current athletes. If there was ever a player who should have been wired with the same Jordan, Bird, Magic, Russell, West kind of hardware, it should have been Lebron. He should have wanted to beat Wade's brains out, not run and follow him like a scared puppy. He should have watched Kobe in the finals, watched as the world debated whether he was the greatest Laker or not, and thought "I am gonna be in that kind of conversation one day." Instead, he chose some sort of frat party, South Beach free-for-all with his buddies, in his buddies town, on his buddies team, than carving out some sort of legacy.
Is Melo different? Is he a killer? Is he the guy who wants to build something special on his own or does he want to follow the crowd, look to share the responsibilty, deflect the blame, and ride a winning player's coattails to a ring?
It's hard to tell whether Anthony is a "big game" player or not. He has been in the playoffs every single year he has been in the league, getting knocked out in the first round in each of his first five years in the league. Last year, the Nuggets went all the way to the conference finals, getting knocked out by the Lakers. This year, it was another first-round knockout at the hands of the Jazz.
The results have not been great. However, the Nuggets have been sent home by the Lakers twice, and Melo has progressively gotten better in the playoff runs. It is also difficult to tell how good Carmelo could be considering he really only got help in the form of Kenyon Martin and Chauncey Billups two years ago while, before that, it had essentially been a one-man show for Melo.
Perhaps Anthony is a fader; a guy who shrinks away when the heat (no pun intended) is turned on. But, maybe he is a caged lion, waiting to get a chance to control his own destiny.
What I would want to know at this point, if I were the Nuggets or the Knicks, or even the Nets, is does Melo even want the responsibilty of finding that out? Is he ready for the challenge, or does he want to join Lebron and Dwayne in easy-ville.
I hope, for the league's sake, Melo is one of the guys who wants to establish his own legacy. I hope Durant and Paul and Wall and Evans and any of the other soon-to-be stars of the league do as well. I hope we get a time when rivalries are established, when players are less friendly and more competitive, and when "team" means more than three buddies playing alley oop for paychecks.
We'll see what the Knicks do in the coming months. What I want to see, what I want to hear from anyone at all, is for someone to stand up and say "oh, that's nice for the Heat. Now I'm going to go out there and beat the sh*t out of them."
Anyone ready to step up to the challenge?

Gilbert played his own part in Lebron mess

2010-07-12T14:45:00.002-05:00

I find Lebron James to be about as vile a testament to self-absorption and unprofessionalism as there possibly could be in our society.

His one-hour ESPN farce to announce where he was taking his “talents” showed him to be a 12-year-old boy in a 25-year-old man's body, and revealed the once revered athlete as nothing more than a egotist either unaware or uncaring of what his actions might do to others.

His refusal to take on the challenge of being the focal point of a championship run in Cleveland, New York, or Chicago show's him to be a basketball follower, ready to hand the responsibility of winning a ring to his friend Dwayne Wade. But, his decision to not even look his former employer, Dan Gilbert, in the eye to inform him he was leaving the Cavaliers after seven years where James was treated like a god, given every perk he could imagine, and paid hansomely for his services, reveals him to be a coward. The fact that he didn't even give the team a heads up before his “surprise” announcement and had a lacky hanger-on call Gilbert only minutes before announcing it live to the world, is further evidence that Bron Bron doesn't have the stomach to stand face to face with another man and deliver difficult news.

In response, Gilbert delivered what will go down in history as one of the most explosive rants against a former player. The message was so rambling, cutting from accusations against Lebron that he quit on games to calling down curses and hexes from the heavens, that it appeared at times to have been a stream-of-consciouness email that was never intended for the light of day. In fact, ESPN reporters were forced to do something they hadn't bothered with for more than a month: they confirmed the letter actually came from Gilbert before releasing its contents.

In one way, I understand and applaud Gilbert. That was a letter that represented Cleveland fans everywhere. Gilbert, the owner, said what his paying customers were feeling. As a football Giants fan, myself, the most encouraged I have been in my team was when, after last year's collapse at the end of the season, owner John Marra came out and essentially said “we will never see something like that happen again while I am here.” Too many owners check data sheets and bottom lines at the end of the season. It's why franchises like the Pittsburgh Pirates in baseball, or Detroit Lions in football, have wallowed in mediocrity for so long. Owners rarely show the type of emotion Gilbert did last week and when it is revealed that ownership cares as much about winning as the fans, it is heartening.

However, there is also a part of me that looks at Gilbert and wonders if he understands the part he may have played in what transpired last week.

From all accounts, Lebron James was essentially given free rein to do whatever it was he wanted to do while with the Cavs. He had little or no rules which had to be followed. Unqualified friends were given high-paying jobs within the organization, and other Lebron lackies were allowed to fly with the team, and live the NBA life, all to appease The King. While no specifics have been provided, it is believed that Lebron influenced player acquisitions, pushing for certain guys to be signed or even traded. That kind of ill-informed influence may have ended up putting the Cavs in a position where their roster was both shaky and inflexible, making winning a difficult proposition.

The more glaring problem is the attitude that was cultivated under Cavs management. By allowing Lebron to “rule the roost” it also allowed him to essentially remain perpetually a teenager. He was living his high-school life. No one was there to smack him on the hand and say “no.” If he wanted a new teammate, he got one. If he wanted a job for a buddy, they got one. If he wanted anything, Gilbert and the Cavs bent over themselves to make it happen.

While Gilbert might have thought such actions would engender loyalty or appreciation, all it did was empower Lebron to feel even more indispensible and entitled. Considering James had been handed everything he could want since his days in middle school, it didn't take much cow-cowing on the part of Gilbert to turn him into self-absorbed monster.

There's not a doubt in my mind that Gilbert would have had a better chance of keeping Lebron if he had played father rather than brown-nose friend. James has enough of those and could easily discard one and pick up another like he were going through Kleenex. If Gilbert had layed down the law, put some shackles on Lebron, brought in some respected veterans to show the “kid” right from wrong, and made it clear that greatness was inside Lebron, but with that came great responsibility, it seems far more likely he would have been showed a level of respect James, on his own, was incapable of showing.

Gilbert's letter, while striking a cord with so many that found the Lebron spectacle utterly distasteful, and while being thuroughly entertaining, also can't be taken that seriously. It reaks of a scorned lover, who showered praise and gifts upon their partner, only to find that person escaping to the arms of another.

Gilbert fed the Lebron ego. He catered to it. He never questioned it or tried to contain it for fear that any dissent would force James and his entourage out the door. Yet, after all that was handed to him, he still left because, just like it was with the Cavs, it was about James and no one else in the end.

Two trade the Knicks should make

2010-07-11T16:58:00.000-05:00

It seems all the focus has been on the Knicks either trading for or signing Carmelo Anthony the last few days in Knicks land, as the attention slowly moves from the 2010 free agent debacle to the future possibilities.
However, I would still prefer the Knicks trade for Chris Paul and I think it could be done.
Now, both the Nuggets and Hornets have said their top stars are off limits, however it may become very clear that neither team can surround their guys with the types of teams that will convince them to sign extensions in the next month to a year. The Hornets seem to be more cash strapped than the Nuggets, and Paul has been the more vocal about wanting to "see something" from his front office or possibly demanding a trade. Something just tells me that Paul might be the first one to make such a stink about leaving, the Hornets have no choice but to listen.
If that happened, here is what I would do:
I would trade Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph, and Eddy Curry for Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending the Hornets about $18.6 million and getting back $26.3 million.
Why would the Hornets do this?
It gives them two very good young players in Gallinari and Randolph, but guys around 20-years-old who have a lot of upside, a solid young guy in Chandler, and the expiring contract of Eddy Curry. It gives them salary cap flexibility. They also have Darren Collison, who was sensational last year when Paul was out, so it would allow them to cushion the blow of losing Paul by promoting Collison as a possible star in his own right.
Why would the Knicks do this?
They get the best point guard in the league, when healthy. Under Mike D'Antoni, Paul could equal Steve Nash in terms of production and maturation. His numbers could be off the charts, and one could only salivate at the thought of Paul and Amare Stoudemire running the pick and roll to perfection game in and game out. Plus, it gives the Knicks their face of the organization. Paul, by all accounts, is a good guy with a killer desire to win and a tendency to get intimately involved with the community. You could plaster Paul's face all over the city and he would instantly become one of the biggest sports stars around.
You would also get a borderline all star in Okafor. I had thought Okafor would be a better player by this time, putting up Al Jefferson numbers of 20/10 on a regular basis, but, besides last year in New Orleans, he has been a 14/11 guy with two blocks a game. In D'Antoni's offense, Okafor wouldn't get a lot of looks, but he is a terrific rebounder, very good defender, and he can easily run the floor in a high-powered offense (he comes from Uconn, which was a transition-style offense in college, where he helped win a national title). He is also a great put-back offensive player and would probably average a double-double in a more up tempo offense.

Bringing in Paul would mean that newly-signed Raymond Felton wouldn't have a position (he doesn't shoot it well enough to play the two) so I would follow the Paul trade with this:
Trade Raymond Felton and Ronny Turiaf for Andre Igudola and Marreese Speights. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending $15.3 million to the 76ers and getting $13.8 million in return.
Why would the 76ers do this deal?
While the 76ers would be taking back more money then they would be sending, Felton's deal is only for two years so, in the long run, it would provide more cap flexibility as the Igudola contract is for, I believe, another four years. Plus, it would allow the 76ers to move everyone to their more obvious spots on the floor. Jrue Holiday, slated to be the point guard, is a more natural two, as is Igudola. This trade would allow the 76ers to play Felton at the point, Holiday at the two, and top draft pick Evan Turner at the three. Since Holiday and Turner are similar in style and size, they can move back and forth between the two and three, depending on matchups. It would also give them a tough, veteran center to play along side Elton Brand at power forward.
Why would the Knicks do this deal?
Felton becomes expendable once Paul joins the team. Turiaf is a nice fit for the Knicks but, with Okafor, the only thing the Knicks would need is a serviceable big man to spell him and, perhaps, play some power forward, which Speights would provide.
With Igudola, he was billed in Philly as the go-to option, but he hasn't shown the kind of consistency to do that. However, with the Knicks, he would slide in as the third option on the team, an athletic two-guard to complement Paul and Stoudemire. He is a slasher, is wonderful in the open, and would thrive in the run and gun style of D'Antoni.
Under this scenario, the Knicks would be a few hundred thousand beyond the salary cap, which could easily be maneuvered around by Walsh (a little cash sent here, there, and that should be fine). It would leave the bench suspect unless guys like Tony Douglas and Jerome Jordan showed they were top players, but the starting five would be Chris Paul (PG), Andre Igudola (SG), Keleena Azubuike (SF), Amare Stoudemire (PF), Emeka Okafor (C). Your bench would be Tony Douglas (PG), Bill Walker (SG/SF), Jerome Jordan (PF/C), Marreese Speights (PF/C), Andy Rautins (SG).
Like I said, the bench on that team is suspect, although I like what you saw from Douglas last year and Walker, both of whom could be major contributors. However, that starting five could be as explosive as any in the entire league, and I believe could challenge for a spot in the East Finals. You would worry a little about defense, although Igudola would be a terrific defender and Azubuike can be a top defender as well, but it would be hard to name teams better than that squad.

Goodnight, NBA

2010-07-10T13:08:00.000-05:00

Could there have been a worse couple of weeks for the NBA than what we just "witnessed"?
It sounds strange because, for the first time since Shaquille O'Neill decided to abandon Orlando for the Lakers, we were talking about The Association in the beginning of summer.
Usually, around this time of year, the NBA would be mentioned only as an afterthought, with the occassional trade news or extension announcement. Instead, from the end of the playoffs till now, it has been all NBA, and all free agency, all the time.
But, despite pithy cliched sayings to the contrary, not all publicity is good publicity.
In America today, it is fairly easy to single out the NFL as the most popular sport in the land. It is the nation's passion. It is an every-Sunday event in the fall and winter, and no other sport comes close to matching its interest at the national level.
Coming in a strong second is the nation's passtime. Baseball, despite the much talked about "competitive imbalance" generates interest at an astounding rate, especially in the nation's biggest markets and cities. Despite a lagging economy, ratings remain high, attendance has not bottomed out, and people still follow their teams every move.
The NBA has been wallowing in third place, a distant third, in terms of interest, for a long time.
The nation's overall apathy has been linked to several different factors over the years. Some claim that the departure of Michael Jordan, who took the baton of excellence from Larry Bird and Magic Johnson and kept the NBA interesting and provocative, set the league back and a lack of another "successor" to that excellence has made the sport less interesting. Others point to a more insidious reason, believeing that white America remains turned off to a sport that is dominated by African American players.
Whatever the reason, the NBA has remained a strong presence in American sports, and its top players have continued to be marketable and recognizable, but the sports overall popularity has trailed the other two leagues.
There has been great hope at the end of the tunnel, however.
The Lakers have remained a dominate force, employing, first, the charismatic big man Shaq and, now, the controversial yet splendidly talented Kobe Bryant. The Celtics pulled off one of the great double moves of all time, and paired Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, and Paul Pierce together to form an incredible threesome that brought the stories Celtics team back to prominence. Oh, by the way, the Lakers and Celtics, by far the best rivalry in the NBA, have played against each other in two of the last three finals.
And then you had the new face of the NBA.
Lebron James was the basketball playing version of The Natural. His talents are off the charts. He is a 6'9" freight train with shooting touch and one of the great finishing moves the game has ever seen. There is both a grace and a brutality to his talent that makes him unique.
He also has been relatively free from controversy in his seven years in the league. Unlike Kobe Bryant, who appeared surly and selfish on the court, and had a dark allegation thrown at him off the court, James appeared to be the epitome of unselfish, team-first play on the court, a good teammate and model citizen off it. Add to that his "home town boy makes good" story and his supposed allegiance to Cleveland, a city that has known nothing but sports heartbreak, and it was easy to root for Lebron.
Though Kobe has proven time and time again that he, not Lebron, is the guy you want taking the last shot and playing in the big game, Lebron remained the most popular and well-liked, and ultimately marketable, player in the sport, and one of the most recognizable celebrity faces in the world.
That was yesterday.
Today, in the NBA, is very different. Lebron is no longer the face of the NBA so much as he is the villian. His decision, and more consequentially the process by which he came to his decision, has cast him as everything wrong with sports while, for so long, he was depicted as everything right with them. His playful attitude now, suddenly, seems self indulgent and borderline unprofessional.
Perhaps it was inevitable that, after choosing Miami over Cleveland, the negative stories would emerge. The Cavs painted Lebron as the "savior" and their near divine worship of his talents were punctuated by the semi-insulting "We Are All Witnesses" billboards that lined their city's skyline. So, when we hear that Lebron was a "quitter" or that his actions were always selfish and narcissistic, one has to wonder how much of the information is true and how much is sour grapes.
Yet, after the display of the last few weeks, it is difficult to give Lebron the benefit of the doubt. The stories of Lebron's influence on the Cavs decisions, and his insistence on special treatment for he and his friends, seem to fit nicely in the story we have watched unfold before us.
Whatever the case, no one is truly in a position to WANT to believe the best about Lebron now, anyway. So, the face of the NBA, the needed successor to Michael Jordan, both in wins and popularity has been more than stained: he has been utterly dismantled.
If you add to that the shaky performance of Dwayne Wade, who made the same comical tour of franchises, though it appears likely now that he had no intention of leaving Miami, introduced his family as an element in his decision making process, then seemed to forget all about that factor when resigning with Miami, and hired a documentary crew to follow he and Chris Bosh around as they made their "decision," and argueably the NBA's two most likeable stars presented themselves as the most egotistical of athletes the nation has ever seen.
There are obviously practical problems for the NBA latent in Lebron's decision.
The lack of James in Cleveland all but devastates the Cavaliers and basketball in that city, and nearly does the same in New York, the NBA's biggest and argueably most important market. It puts two of the top three or four players in the league on the same team. And, in a sport so completely dominated by stars, it pitches the balance of power substantially in one direction, and onto a team and a city that has little basketball tradition and a notoriously apathetic fanbase.
Some will say that this move is little different than the Yankees and their "all star at every position" philosophy in baseball, but the difference is pronounced. In baseball, the playoffs are a crapshoot every season. Being the best team guarantees nothing. Despite their talent, the Yankees or Red Sox or Rays or Phillies could easily be picked off by a "lesser" team, especially if they have top starting pitching and reliable bullpen guys.
In basketball, the better, more talented team almost always wins. That's why, in a league that has designed, both in terms of the draft and salary cap structure, to help small markets compete with big ones, there is little parity in terms of competition. While it is rare teams win back-to-back titles in baseball, and almost unheard of in football, basketball produces back-to-back champs on a fairly consistent basis. In the last 30 years, there have been 13 separate occassions where one team has one two or more straight titles, and, even more startling, in those 30 years only seven different teams have won titles.
Compare that to baseball where, in the past 30 years, 20 different teams have won, and it becomes clear that the best team, with the most talent, rarely loses in the NBA.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, and if the Heat can turn a fantasy league lineup of three guys into an actual "team," but there is a good chance this group could dominate, and do so for a long time.
Considering the tarnish that is now on Wade and Lebron, how many people are going to care that the Heat are the beasts of the NBA in two years? No one outside of Miami, and that isn't exactly exciting news for David Stern.
Perhaps this lights a fire under certain teams. Maybe the Knicks, after licking their wounds from not getting Lebron, make a deal to bring in Chris Paul and build a team that can topple the Heat troika. Maybe Derrick Rose, sick of being referred to simply as a piece that would help James or Wade attain greatness, helps the Bulls mature into a juggernaut. Maybe the allure of playing in his hometown of Brooklyn entices Carmelo Anthony to join the Nets, with their cast of young players, and maybe the Celtics old guard has one more run in them and Kobe and the Lakers show that it takes more than just three guys to win.
Regardless, what has happened here will seriously dampen any momentum the league had obtained over the last few years, and it won't take long to notice. Stern and his minions might have been dancing over the extraordinary interest their league generated, but it will have been a very large price to pay.
If you want to know why, in three years, the NBA is talking about having to regenerate interest in its league, look to June 22-July 8 for the answer.

No matter what, this isn't a positive for the NBA

2010-07-08T18:24:00.000-05:00

The current word, which follows so many meaningless and mind-numbing words that have come before, is that Lebron James is joining Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh in Miami for some sort of South Beach career party, that is expected to begin tonight in Greenwich, CT, and end sometime in June 2011, with a Championship parade.
That's the word.
Now, if you've been following “the word” over the last several weeks, you'll know that the current word probably doesn't carry any more water than the previous word. It is just another in a long line of unconfirmed rumors about where King James might play next. People are using the phrase “done deal” for what might be the 300th time in this process,. We have heard it was a “done deal” Lebron was headed to Chicago, then back home to Cleveland, now to Miami. The only time this will be “done” will be when James announces it all himself.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say Lebron has made up his mind to go to Miami. Let's say he is joining Wade and Bosh. How will that come off tonight?
It makes a man who has represented himself as a meglomaniacal middle-school kid look more like a heartless villian, and a coward.
No matter where Lebron decides to go, if it isn't the Cavs, he will justifiably be crucified for holding an hour-long special just to break the hearts of Cleveland faithful. This has been detailed already. It's one thing to decide Cleveland no longer is the place for him. I can understand that. It is another thing to break your former fans' hearts on national television, after letting them twist in the wind for weeks. It is more than just childishly self-absorded. It is mean spirited. No matter how full of oneself a person is, they have to recognize how their actions will effect others. In this case, it would be obvious that James just doesn't care.
Now, the other team in this mix, the other franchise that has done all to land Lebron, is the Knicks. Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni sold an entire New York fanbase on the idea of a two-year plan that would involve blowing up the roster more times than a scene from The Hurt Locker in order to clear cap space. While a Lebron snub wouldn't devastate New York the way it would Cleveland, they are a close second. Chicago has Derrick Rose, Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, and just added Carlos Boozer. The Nets have a talented group of young players, a new billionaire Russian owner, and a pending move to Brooklyn. The Clippers never really thought they were in this to begin with.
The Knicks, on the other hand, have literally no where to go if Lebron chooses somewhere else.
Now, what would make the snub even worse is the site of tonight's nonsense. If you don't plan to spend the next decade of your life trying to bring a championship back to New York, why in the world would you hold the press conference in Greenwich, which is literally miles away from the Knicks home and might as well be a suburb of New York? Why come to that team's backyard just to pledge allegiance to the Heat? Why rub in the overwhelming disappointment in that way?
The idea that, well, Carmelo Anthony's wedding is in New York this weekend, so he was coming here anyway is absurd. This is a multi millionaire. If he had plans to come to the New York area this weekend, he could have held his press conference in Akron, or, heck, in Des Moines, and been on a plane to the Big Apple before midnight struck. Why does this need to be in Greenwich if he doesn't intend on playing anywhere near Greenwich in the future? (Oh, and by the way, there are plenty of Boys and Girls clubs in the country to choose from, so landing at that one isn't an excuse either.)
If, tonight, Lebron announces it's Miami, he will have needlessly insulted the two fan bases that have suffered the most in anticipation of his decision. The Cavs would be devastated. The Knicks would almost equal in their despair. Both cities would have little on which to hang their hope. And, by Lebron doing this so publically, and doing it from such a telling location, it would be the ultimate slap in the face.
But, that's about Lebron the man. What about Lebron, the player?
To me, going to Miami would be the ultimate coward move.
It is gutless.
Is there a bigger “I can't be the man” statement than running after your buddy, Dwayne Wade, to let him do all the heavy lifting in a run to the championship, while you sit back, collect a few double-doubles, and high-five Chris Bosh when Wade makes a clutch shot?
And please, spare us the “this proves Lebron only wants to win” nonsense. If he had guts, he would go someplace and compete AGAINST Wade and Bosh, try and carve out his own niche, and not try and ride on their coattails.
This isn't the NFL or MLB. In those sports, one guy doesn't make the difference. The Pittsburgh Pirates would still be a woeful team, even if they signed Albert Pujols tomorrow. The Cleveland Browns would maybe win a few more games, but not a playoff game, even if they signed Tom Brady. You have to build teams there.
In the NBA, one player can make a world of difference. Put Lebron on ANY team in the league and they are a winner. That's how much one guy can mean.
Now, great players are well within their right to demand some help. As has been said numerous times, Jordan didn't win without Pippen, Bryant didn't win without Shaq or Gasol. You need that second guy, and then role players, in order to truly be a championship team.
No one should blame Lebron if, ultimately, he either left Cleveland, or demanded action in Cleveland, in order to play along side another top teammate. But, running after someone who is argueably just as good, another alpha dog, to his city, to try and ride his coattails to victory? That is simply resignation to the fact that you will not be able to do it as the main cog. That is turning in your Batman outfit for the Robin yellow and red because it is a lot less stressful.
So, if Lebron announces Miami tonight, what do we know?
We know he is an egotist the likes of which would make Terrell Owens blush. We know he is heartless because, with his one-hour special and designated location, he will have willfully, and unnecessarily middle fingered the two organizations who sacrificed the most to try and earn his services, and we know he is gutless because he will have tamely followed his championship-pedigree friend to Miami to try and pick up a few championships as they fall from Wade's fingers.
What a sad day for the NBA if Lebron is making South Beach his home.

Teams that should be good.

2010-07-04T13:25:00.000-05:00

Before I get to my main point, let me say one thing about the Lebron James sweepstakes. I hope, with all my heart, that he leaves Cleveland and goes someplace else.
I can't tell you how utterly absurd I find the Cleveland "pitch" to Lebron. Essentially, the Cavaliers have said "come back to us, or you'll have blood on your hands." Their entire sales pitch to this man has been to try and guilt him into coming back, as if Lebron owes Cleveland or the Cavs something.
To me, Cleveland is now that mentally unstable girlfriend (or boyfriend, depending on who is reading this:) who senses the breakup is coming, so threatens to do bodily harm to his or herself if it does happen. The relationship continues, not because both sides want it, but because one side is afraid of "hurting" the other.If Lebron returns to Cleveland, I fully believe it will be because, and only because, he has been convinced he "has to do it" for the sake of the town. What a despicable way to try and appeal to someone.
Obviously, they can't appeal to their roster, or their ability to make moves because, well, they don't have a great roster or the ability to make moves. They also don't have a city that has ever shown an ability to not only build a championship team, but sustain such a team. So, when all else fails, try and make the person feel so bad about leaving, they end up staying. You know how long that works? It works right up to the point where guilt turns into resentment.
I have wanted to see Lebron head East because, if he played for the Knicks or the Nets, it would make the NBA a whole lot more interesting for me. I can't really tell you that, if the Knicks trot out Amare Stoudemire and Tony Parker next year, along with Mike Miller, that I will suddenly be looking into season tickets.
But, after hearing how pathetically desparate the Cavs pitch sounded, and how they seem to be the only team to use guilt (and also the only team seemingly willing to disparage other teams and their officials) I hope he goes anywhere else. Sign with New Jersey, Knicks, Chicago, Miami, heck, even the Clippers. Just, don't go back to Cleveland, Lebron. Don't let the NBA equivalent of the psycho girlfriend win your services.

Okay, enough of my rant.
The Lebron thing got me thinking about teams looking for a new start. See, the Knicks are a team that has been down on its luck for a very long time now, yet is an essential part of the NBA landscape. The Knicks have the history, the arena, and the fan base. What they haven't had is the success.
So, I began to contemplate which teams are in most need of a turn around in each of the major American sports. If I sat Roger Goodell, David Stern, Bud Selig, and Gary Bettman down in a secret room and asked them "which teams would you most like to see back on top" I think they would all have a list of teams.
For this post, I have limited it to the two franchises per sport I believe are most important to the league, and more in need of improvement (along with some honorable mentions).

NBA

1.) New York Knicks - The Celtics are good and should be at least for a few more years. The Lakers are at the top of the league. The Bulls are up and coming and could improve dramatically this offseason. The Mavericks always seem to be one break, or one personnel move away from being a top team.
The NBA has had a revival of sorts lately because a.) for the first time in years their young, talented players have been interesting and charismatic (and relatively free from any off-the-court problems) and b.) they have some very good teams in large markets.
Yes, the NBA is star-driven, meaning that they don't necessarily have to have their big market clubs succeed in order to prosper. However, despite the fact that Tim Duncan is one of the all-time great players in league history, and Dwight Howard is as exciting a young player as we have seen in years, the league ratings, especially in the playoffs, have been hurt by having smaller market clubs dominate.
That's why, despite what David Stern might say publically, it is hard to believe that, privately, he isn't rooting for the Knicks to come up winners in this free agent sweepstakes. Cleveland is a nice city and all, but the NBA has survive quite nicely over the years by having a less than competitive team in that area, as has every other sports league. Let's face it, few, if any analysts have ever uttered the words "the league could really use a big-time team/player in Cleveland."
If Lebron James were to defect to New York, people would lament the death of basketball in the Cleveland area, and villify James for "taking the money" in New York. However, after a few weeks, it would become clear that everyone in the league was doing hand stands.
New York is the biggest market in the world, Madison Square Garden one of the most famous in sports, and the Knicks are one of the teams, even after years of futility, that springs to mind when talking about the NBA. Having exciting games in MSG come May and June would be a huge boon to the league. You can have your Oklahoma City's and San Antonio's and Utah's playing top basketball, as long as your big markets are also at the top. The league needs the Knicks and, for their sake, hopefully they get a nice Fourth of July present this season.

2.) Philadelphia 76ers - It hasn't been that long since the 76ers were a playoff team, but it feels like it. The team made the playoffs in the 2004/05 season, but were swept out by the Detroit Pistons. Since then, and the trade of Allen Iverson to the Denver Nuggets, Philly has been devoid of basketball excitement and, just as important, devoid of any big-time players.
Philadelphia, even though they have not won a championship in many years, has been the home to some of the greats of the game. Wilt Chamberlain was a 76er, as was Moses Malone, as was Charles Barkley, as was Allen Iverson. These are not just nice players who put up good numbers, these are, all of them, hall of famers who helped shape the league at different stages of its maturation.
Having the 76ers struggle now for the league is somewhat like having the Celtics struggling, as they did, a few years back. Now, the C's are one of the two signature franchises in the sport, so having them on track is of utmost importance, but getting the 76ers back up to speed would certainly help as well.
We will see whether Evan Turner, Philly's most current draft pick, helps to rebuild the franchise or if he turns into a nice piece to the eventual puzzle, but the NBA is certainly hoping that, in the next few years, there is, once again, excitement for basketball in Philly.

Honorable mentions - Indiana Pacers (not a big market, but nothing says basketball like the state of Indiana), Portland Trailblazers (well on their way to being a contender again), New Orleans Hornets (after the success of the Saints in the NFL, no doubt the NBA would love to see its product turn into a success in the Big Easy).

NFL

1.) Oakland Raiders - We all know that the league still hates Al Davis. There are a bunch of former coaches and players who hate Al Davis. There is a good chance that God hates Al Davis. However, for the biggest, most successful sports league in perhaps the world, having a bad team in the Los Angeles/California Bay area is not good.
The Raiders are one of the most marketable and recognizable teams in the NFL. That skull and bones logo, by itself, is enough to ship a few million jerseys and hats. Yet, since John Gruden left and Rich Gannon retired years ago, the Raiders have become a laughing stock. Their draft picks have been utterly useless and the latest disaster, JeMarcus Russell, joins Ryan Leaf as perhaps the worst draft pick of the last 30 years. There might a little excitement now that the Raiders grabbed a decent quarterback, Jason Campbell, who might bring stability to that offense, but they still seem a long way from being major national contenders.

2.) San Francisco 49ers - What is amazing is that, when I contemplated the teams to include on this list, a good amount came to mind, which really tells you how teflon the NFL has become when it can thrive on teams like the Indianapolis Colts being a top draw. For the NBA I went East-Coast centric, here is is West Coast.
The 49ers might make the jump back into promience this season but, for a team that went from Joe Montana to Steve Young without missing a beat, and dominated the league for more than a decade. Now, they have to find a way to turn Alex Smith into a top quarterback and get their offense running smoothly. It might end up happening this season, but the NFL would sure love some exciting games in Candlestick in the near future.

Honorable mentions - Washington Redskins (this was my other obvious choice to make the top two, but I went with the 49ers instead), Chicago Bears (were in the Super Bowl a few years later, so avoid top two consideration, but still a team looking for a return to dominance), Miami Dolphins (they have been a playoff team a few times here, but haven't been a franchise challenging for a title in many, many years).

MLB

1.) Chicago Cubs - There is no stranger team in sports than the Cubs. Think about it; their entire history is one of losing. They are the Clippers or, before recently, the Arizona Cardinals of the NFL. They are a team going on 102 years of futility.
Yet, they are one of the most popular, and important teams in baseball. They, along with the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox, are the team you think of when major league baseball is mentioned in passing.
If the Cubs could ever become a team challenging for a title every year, what a boom that would be for MLB. The interest in the team is already there. How much more would it shoot up if they were actually good?
MLB did, in my opinion, a horrid thing a few years back when it essentially blocked Mark Cuban from buying the organization. Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, has proven to be one of the best business men in sports, a players kind of guy willing to spend to help a team win and, ultimately, make himself money. Is there any doubt Cuban would have turned the Cubs into a winner?
Instead, the Cubbies are left out to dangle with another "corporate" ownership group which is likely to run the team with a constant eye on bottom line.
What a shame.
The Red Sox got their championship after nearly 100 years of futility, as did the White Sox. The last kid on the loser block remains the Cubs. Baseball would love to see them get off the hump.

2.) Baltimore Orioles - Couple of teams to choose from for the second selection here, but I am going with the Orioles for a couple of reasons. First, they have a great baseball town, one of the best in the sport. Second, they still have one of the best ballparks in baseball that, when the team is good, will be sold out every single time. Third, they are in a market that should support a team producing a high payroll. Fourth, this is a team with a lot of history.
There are certain teams in baseball that, in my opinion, are in a desparate need of relocation (Rays, A's), but the Orioles could be easily successful right where they are. They are a product of horrid management and decision making and the people of that terrific baseball season deserve a lot better.

Honorable mentions - Kansas City Royals (the years of George Brett seem a long time ago and, despite their inclusion in the small market discussion, should be able to support a much better team), Pittsburgh Pirates (17 years of futility, but a good baseball town, great park, and a tradition of winning), Seattle Mariners (not a team you think of as being one of the traditional powers, but another team in a very good market, great city, great ballpark, great fanbase, and one that could easily have consistent success if run correctly).

NHL

1.) New York Rangers - I will readily admit that this is the sport where I have the least historical knowledge, but it doesn't take Bobby Ore's son to know the Rangers don't exactly have a stacked trophy case when it comes to Lord Stanley. Yet, as 1994 showed the world, the Rangers being a top team and winning can do wonders for the NHL as a whole.
Also, for a sport desparate to grow its product, not having the largest market in America is not something easily overcome. The NHL needs New York in play in order to kick start any emergence. That probably won't happen with the Panthers or the Ducks leading the way.

2.) Edmonton Oilers - I know they went to the finals in 2006, but it has been 16 years since the last time they had reached that stage, and it has now been 20 years since the team Wayne Gretzky made famous in the late 70s, early 80s won a title. NHL hockey is as much, or more Canada's game as it is Americas, and having a top teams in that part of the world is important to the league's overall success. They need big markets in America, and their Canadien teams to be good, and the Oilers are one of those teams that has tradition and fan passion. Having them return to the point where they routinely challenge for a title would be nothing but good for the league.

Honorable mentions - New York Islanders (Long Island's only team has tradition and brings with it parts of New York which, as already explained, is important), LA Kings (Gretzky's second home, would potentially bring the LA market).

(Note: only went with two because some of the leagues most important teams, such as the Boston Bruins, Montreal Canadiens, Philadelphia Flyers, and Chicago Blackhawks, all had big runs in the playoffs this year, so it was impossible to rate them as teams that "need to improve.")

What about Joba?

2010-07-03T12:09:00.000-05:00

Joba Chamberlain has been anything but mesmorizing this season. He is sporting an above-5 ERA, has given up 37 hits in 33+ innings or work, and batters are hitting a whopping .334 with runners in scoring position off him. Those aren't exactly the types of numbers you want to see from a guy expected to pitch only one inning at a time, and routinely secure relatively small leads.
But, Joba's struggles are not unique to this season. It isn't as if Chamberlain fell off a cliff once the calendar shifted to 2010. Joba's performance has been on a steady decline ever since he left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1, 2008, with an injury.
In 2007, Chamberlain was a phenom. He came in throwing 100 MPH, hitting the black on the corners, and dropping a wicked slider that seemed to drop off the end of the Earth. He was a main reason why the Yankees, looking to solidify their bullpen at the time, was able to make the playoffs.
In 2008, the Yankees decided on what I believe to be an ill-fated program to "transition" Joba from the pen to the rotation in the middle of the season, at the MLB level. I firmly believed that Joba needed to be tested as a starter, since starting pitcher remains the most valuable commodity in baseball, but doing it in some haphazard way, in-season, was just peculiar.
In April of 2008, while in the pen, Joba pitched to a 1.92 ERA, giving up 2 runs in 11.1 innings, striking out 14. In May, he pitched to a 2.92 ERA, mostly based on one bad outing where he gave up 3 runs, and struck out 16 batters in 12 innings. In June, the transition began, and Joba began his quest for the rotation with a 2.1 inning stint on June 3, and finished the month with a 6.2 inning effort on June 25. All in all, his assention had gone well up to that point, with a 1.80 ERA in 25 innings of work, where he recorded 26 strike outs and gave up 22 hits.
In July, it appeared everything was on the right track. Joba, in 6 starts, failed to go less than 6 innings only once, and had a 2.52 ERA in the month, pitching 35.2 innings, striking out 43, walking 10. Then, he was injured on Aug. 1.
When Joba returned, he headed back to the bullpen. His numbers were fine (2.32 ERA, 11.1 innings pitched, 14 strike outs) but he did give up as many hits as innings pitched for the first time as a reliever and his velocity seemed far more inconsistent during each outing. Instead of living at 98-100, he seemed to be at 94 or 95 some nights, at the most.
Then came Chamberlain's 2009 season, which he started in the rotation. Gone was the explosive fastball. Gone was the pinpoint control. Gone was the intimidating presence 60 feet, 6 inches away from each batter. The numbers, by the end, were pedestrian: 4.75 ERA, 157.1 innings pitched, 167 hits, 133 strike outs, 76 walks, and 21 home runs allowed. Joba had gone from one of the prized young pitchers in the game to a huge question mark, and the debate over his useage raged.
Many, who had firmly believed Joba was misused in the rotation, argued that his true talent lay in the pen. There, those who wanted Joba as a reliever argued, he would regain the aura he had a few years before. But, what Flaherty and others refused to accept was that, for whatever reason, Joba was no longer the same pitcher. Whether he was in the rotation or the pen, one only got small glimpses of the original power-pitcher that had so taken the city by storm in 2007. Joba to the pen promoters turned a blind eye to the fact that his relief appearances, which dominated his September, when he was transitioned away from the rotation to keep his innings down (a horrendous idea that hurt every bit as much as his transition to the rotation the year before) took on the same feel as his starts. In September, where he averaged about 3 innings a game, he pitched to a 7.15 ERA.
In the playoffs, those wishing for the Joba Reliever, got their wish, and he was placed back in the pen. However, it was obvious manager Joe Girardi didn't have a tremendous amount of faith in him, only allowing him to pitch a full inning only three times, and while Joba ended up only giving up 2 runs in 6.1 innings, he allowed 9 hits. Not exactly dominant.
This year, the decline has been even more pronounced, and it doesn't appear he is getting any better. While his fastball stays at about 96 MPH, it no longer crackles with the same explosiveness and is routinely hit hard, even by mediocre players. His control remains elusive and his aggresiveness within games waivers, a problem he has acknowledged now more times than I am sure anyone would care to remember.
Simply put, since Joba Chamberlain left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1 2008, he has been ordinary. This year, you can make the case he has been downright bad.
Joe Girardi, who never fails to try and imitate a soccer mom after games in defending his players, continues to insist that Joba "has gotten the job done" more times than not and that his struggles "are going to happen." There is something so annoying about Girardi's simplistic yet condescending explanation for players struggles as "something that happens." We all understand that players will struggle. We get that. But, there is a difference between struggling and not being able to perform up to par. There is a difference between struggling and getting pummeled. When you have a 5.4 ERA as a one-inning-at-a-time reliever, where people are hitting .334 off you with runners in scoring position, that's not isolated struggles, that putrid performance on a season-long scale.
Girardi's comments are even more frustrating when one ponders what he views the job of the manager to be. All players are going to struggle. Isn't the job of the manager, and coaches, to get players out of those struggles as quickly as possible, or to manage those players in a way that shields the team from their problems as best as possible?
Girardi continues to put Joba out there despite his now year and a half resume which suggests he isn't up to the task. Perhaps Girardi sees himself as a minor-league manager worried about the psyche of younger players above all else. However, Girardi is there to win games, and Joba isn't helping do that at all.
Something needs to change. In three months, it is absolutely inexcuseable that the Yankees have not addressed their pen. The idea that they continue to run Chamberlain and Chan Ho Park out in important games is absolutely mystifying. The fact that some younger pitchers have not been brought up to try and prove themselves is equally inexcuseable.
Girardi likes to throw his hands up and say "this is what we have." Well, then change what you have. Try Dave Robertson in the eighth. It might fail, or it might work. Get rid of Chan Ho Park, who doesn't have a resume which would suggest he is doing anything other than what you would and should expect. Bring up some younger relievers and give them a chance. You might catch lightning in a bottle.
Continuing to trot these guys out there is on the manager, and within he and Brian Cashman's power to change. And, realizing that Chamberlain is who he is, and has been for some tome, would help everyone involved.

On the eve of free agency, Knick fan panic alert levels on standby

2010-06-30T19:49:00.000-05:00

If you look at my post from a few days ago, you can see I certainly am not in the camp that believes Lebron to Chicago or Miami is a "done deal." Who cares what other executives say? Why would they know anything more than media types? The only folks who know are the players, player managers, and teams, that's it. All this "an executive from another club, who has no intimate knowledge of the situation, said" nonsense is exactly that.
But, it got me thinking: what is the best case and worst case scenario for the Knickerbockers? To help, I wanted to use the terror alert color scheme. This, I believe, will accurately depict the feelings and emotions of the Knick fan.

Color Level Green - This is serene, wonderful, perfect. This is the ultimate. This is mana from heaven. This is Lebron James, Chris Bosh, and trading the Eddy Curry contract for another big time player, and life is good. This is exactly what the Knicks envisioned when they started heaving guys, and money, over the side of the ship two years ago. This is what Donnie Walsh imagines at night when he's having a hard time sleeping.

Color Level Light Green - Okay, this isn't a real terror color code (or maybe it is, who really knows) but this is the slightly less, but still near perfect scenario. Under this situation, Dwyane Wade leaves Miami for New York, joins with Chris Bosh, the bloated body of Eddy Curry is shipped off for some really good parts, and Knick fans spend the next three months convincing themselves that Wade was a better option than Lebron. Deep down, there would still be a little sadness that James went somewhere else, but Wade would quickly become the greatest consolation prize ever.

Color Level Blue - Here is where people start to become upset. Lebron gives the Knicks the proverbial middle finger and Wade gets all huggy-kissy with Pat Riley. With the two most exciting free agents off the market, fans will immediately go into anger/depression mode. However, all may not be lost. If the Knicks can convince Bosh that he needs no stinkin ring leader to make him a superstar and that New York is perfect for him to establish himself among the elite in the game, and then sign Joe Johnson, the team would have an elite big man and a terrific, albeit somewhat "shaky in the big game" shooting guard to build around. This is the definition of Plan B, but Bosh, who has a lot of Kevin Garnett in him, would be a great fit and is good enough to be a top dog himself. Johnson, under this scenario, would be a fine signing since he wouldn't have to carry the team and could settle comfortably into a number 2 role. Is it the ideal? Is it color green, or even light green? No way. Level Color Blue would have a lot of people tearing up the airways, but there would soon be some excitement mixed in with the disappointment.

Color Level Yellow - You know in the movies, when you begin to hear that loud monotone sound and everyone starts running as a computer dryly announces "this ship will self destruct in 10 minutes"? Well, Yellow is about when the warning alarms start going off in Knick land. This is the scenario sort of being floated right now, which is the Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudemire tandum. There aint no Lebron, Wade, or Bosh in this story, only two guys who have a habit of disappearing in big games; two guys who don't really inspire alot of excitement. This would anger Knicks fans in a few ways, the first, and obvious being that Lebron isn't involved, the second being that it would probably entail giving these two players max contracts when most people don't necessarily believe they are deserving, and finally that these two players are, not shockingly, the ones who played under Mike D'Antoni before. I'm sure there will be a lot of fans who smell a rat in this scenario.
The only saving grace will be that, under this scenario, the Knicks would be a much improved team. Johnson and Stoudemire both have flaws, and neither one is a transcendant player like James or Wade or, potentially, Bosh. However, they are very, very good players and, if you add in a player or two you get back from Eddy Curry, the Knicks would be a playoff team and, potentially, a few lucky breaks away from an Eastern Conference/NBA Finals appearance. It wouldn't quell the anger at first, but it would start to turn people in the middle of the season.

Color Level Orange - This is after all the attempts by are heros to stop the self-destruct countdown has failed and there doesn't seem like enough time to escape. This is when the Knicks sign one, and only one, of Johnson or Stoudemire. You know how this plays out. They get shut out of all but one of the big guns, end up overpaying for another good, but certainly not great player, introduce their second-tier star as the guy they targeted "all along" and start to leak stories to the press about how they really wanted to jump into the fray of free agency next year. They'll come out of it with a good player, be an improved team, maybe even make a run at the playoffs, but when it comes time to select a championship caliber team, no one will be throwing in with the Knicks. They'll have a piece to the puzzle, but they'll still be looking for a real star come 2011 and beyond.

Color Level Red - Red means stop. It also means "Sonofabitch" or "Oh sh*t" in a lot of languages. This is the Knicks striking out on all the major players. This is Knicks fans staring at Dwyane and Amare in Miami, Lebron and Bosh in Chicago, Joe Johnson on the Nets, and the Knicks trying to convince the world that Carlos Boozer or Rudy Gay is the answer. This is where any love affair with Donnie Walsh and Mike D ends and ends tragically. This is the nightmare scenario and I don't know how they pull themselves out of it if they end up here.

For my two cents, I think green is a much more likely color outcome than red. Someone is going to be enticed by the idea of resurrecting the Knicks in New York. Someone is going to want their likeness on a building overlooking Broadway. I think it's Lebron but, even if not, someone really good is coming, and I think the Knicks will be a player next year, a serious player.

Can't exactly put my finger on it, but something seems off with Yanks.

2010-06-27T15:20:00.000-05:00

The Yankees have the best record in baseball and, yet, there seems to be something missing with this team, doesn't there?
I have tried to put my finger on it, but I can't come up with one singular thing that makes me say "oh, that's it." I think it is more a combination of that,flaws that, when gelled together, make you feel less confident that their record should indicate.
Here are a couple of things that have me worried:

The Bullpen - This is probably the biggest "uh oh" for the team right now. Take Rivera out of the equation, as we always do, and who do Yankee fans feel is a "lock" to get big outs? Dave Robertson is pitching very well as of late, but he isn't far enough removed from having pitched poorly to make you confident the corner has been turned permanently. Using Chan Ho Park in any meaningful situation is almost akin to sabotage, and Boone Logan's only saving grace is that he has a terrific Sci-Fi hero name. Besides that, his pitching is kinda crappy.
If and when Alfredo Aceves comes back, he should stabalize a portion of the back-end of the pen, but the larger, more important question will be whether Joba Chamberlain improves or stays the inconsistent tight-rope walker he has become.
Last year, Phil Hughes stabalized the set-up role and allowed the Yankees the opportunity to save Mariano for only one-inning stints. This year, Joba was suppose to return to the role and be just as good as Hughes last season and the Joba 2007 version. It hasn't happened.
The problems that plagued Joba in the rotation last year plague him in the eitghth inning. He can't locate. He can't keep his velocity consistent. His fastball goes straight all too often and become hittable right in the middle of the plate.
Sure, there are those moments when he dominates, but there have been way too many where he has walked in and turned three or four-run leads into one-run deficits. Joe Girardi likes to treat questions about Jobas struggles as reactionary or uninformed, reacting to questions with dismissive comments like "we wish everyone was perfect all the time, but it's not going to happen," or "he struggled, and that happens to everyone. It happens to the best." That's all nice and fine, but great players don't have 6 ERAs, especially out of the bullpen pitching one inning. Great pitchers rattle off great outing after great outing, not one great outing for every two bad ones. That's not a great pitcher, or even a reliable pitcher. That is a powder keg ready to go off any eighth inning.
If Joba can become not just good but close to lights out, that puts everything else in line. It makes Damaso Marte a lefty specialist for late-inning matchups, instead of possible setup man. It makes Robertson that seventh inning place-holder or middle-inning, big-moment stopper, rather than someone constantly being moved around like a chess piece. And, it allows for the Yankees to either stay away from Park or Logan in big spots or move them out and give younger pitchers a chance without fear of putting inexperienced guys in pressure-cooker situations.
However, if Joba continues to be a one good game, one bad game pitcher, it puts a lot of pressure on everyone else and probably puts the Yanks in serious trade talks for a reliever.

The Offense - Look, the Yankees are going to score runs. They have too many good players not to. And, I'll be the first to admit that, if one were so inclined, they could look at the offense as a "glass half full" symbol rather than a cause for concern. If you remove Robinson Cano from the arguement, you can make the case that there isn't one Yankee regular having what could be considered a top year, let alone a career year. Okay, maybe Nick Swisher and Brett Gardner fit the bill, but the big bats of Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Jorge Posada and Curtis Granderson have been mediocre at best and Mark Teixeira has looked like a shadown of himself through almost three months of the season. You have to expect that a few, if not all of those All-Star caliber players will produce at a much higher level from this point forward, right?
What concerns me is the lack of fundamentals I've seen in the Yankee offense as a whole. They don't move runners over. They don't get them in from third with less than two outs. They routinely strand runners after doubles and even triples. They ground into a lot of double plays and they run themselves out of innings with some bonehead base running from time to time.
Last year, one through nine knew how to play small ball and big ball. They hit homers and pounded pitchers, yes, but in tight games, they knew how to "manufacture" runs.
I believe that such "manufacturing" can be overrated a lot. With the type of hitters the Yankees have, your offense shouldn't really hinge on bunts and sacrifice flys. You should be able to keep the runners moving with doubles and homers. That's why so many of these guys get paid so much.
But, against good teams with good pitching, you have to be able to produce runs in different ways. If your leadoff man doubles, you have to be able to get him to third, then home, without the benefit of a hit. It is a must. Chances are you won't pound out 10 or 12 hits against the better teams, so runs are at a premium. Yes, I expect a lot of these guys to hit better from now through the rest of the season, and that might correct some of these fundamentals. Jeter has been uncharacteristically sloppy with his at bats, failing to take walks, swinging wildly at bad pitches, and not producing in those "situational" hitting moments. Considering he is one of the most fundamentally sound players in history, an improvement on his end would improve the team. However, sometimes teams develop a personality, and that personality stays with them throughout the year. Last year, it was that comeback mentality that prevailed. This year, the team's personality seems far less encouraging.

AJ Burnett - The reason why Burnett's monumental struggles represent a bigger problem than just personal statistics, or a tough matchup every five days, is because of the uncertainty of Javier Vazquez and Phil Hughes. Hughes has been wonderful all year, and Vazquez has been brilliant since April, but neither can be looked upon as givens in big games down the stretch or in the playoffs. Vazquez could just as easily blow up against top competition as shut the other team down, and Hughes has never taken the ball in a playoff spot as a starter and been asked to go 7 or 8 big innings against a formidable lineup (plus, Hughes was very shaky in the playoffs last year in his setup role, which doesn't bode well for his ability to handle pressure situations).
As absolutely frustrating Burnett can be, he is an ace-quality starter when right. He can handle any lineup, and hitter. He was a collection of good and bad in big games last year, but he did manage many clutch performances.
If he continues to be dreadful, it gives the Yankees no room to manuvear. It ensures that Hughes and Vazquez have to be top shelf every time out. It means at least one of the two has to be big in big games. It means less depth. It means more strain on the pen. In short, it means a lot of bad things.

Joe Girardi - I don't think I have been shy in saying I am not the biggest fan of Girardi. I'm sorry, I know he won a championship last year, but there are a lot of mediocre to down right shaky managers who have a ring on their finger. Is it any wonder why Bob Brenly isn't managing a team any longer, despite his run with the Arizona Diamondbacks in 2001?
Girardi, to me, has little feel for the game. He always seems to be making the wrong decision, in that his moves more times than not turn out to produce a negative result. He pinch hits and nothing happens. He pulls pitchers before they are done, and hands it off to ineffective relievers. Or, the next time, he leaves his pitchers in too long and they give up the house. It's almost as if Girardi is constantly trying to find the standard, the book answer: "In this situation you do the following, always an unequivically." Well, in baseball it doesn't always work that way.
You have to be able to have a gut, a natural feel for moments, and Girardi doesn't have that. He also seems to manage scared a lot more than someone in his position should, making what seem to be panic moves. In fact, his entire demeanor in the dugout, at times, seems to indicate an uneasiness, as if he is always waiting for the next shoe to drop.
As a fan, the manager is always an easy target. I criticized Joe Torre when he was bringing championships to New York, and still believe he had a difficult time handling a bullpen when it wasn't full of clutch veteran performers. And, I'll admit, Torre's grandfatherly approach seemed disconnected when the team wasn't winning, as opposed to stalwart and even-headed when they were. However, in the 12 years he was manager, I had more moments where I admired his ability to get something out of nothing than I did to criticize his approach. For a refresher course, go back and look at the teams Torre took to the playoffs in 2005 and 2006. There were a lot of holes on tjose rosters because of injury and underperformance. He was able to piece a lot together and get the most out of players.
Girardi, to me, is a guy much better suited for a younger team. His "always be positive" attitude seems to be more in line with a up-and-coming group than a veteran club that might need a swift kick in the butt from time to time. His inability to challenge and ultimately discipline Robinson Cano in 2008 until the season was lost showed a lack of back bone, his constantly juggling of his lineup to keep guys "fresh" or "ready" reeks of little league everyone-plays rules rather than smart strategy, and his "smile and a pat works better than a snarl and a smack" routine doesn't seem to hold people as accountable as one would like.
Last year, there was a magic to the team that, in my opinion, helped them overcome his quicky managerial style and his often counterproductive moves. I don't get the sense they can do the same this year. His moves have already helped to compound bad situations, and in a tight pennant race with Boston and Tampa, that could honestly be the difference.

Still like New York's chances

2010-06-27T11:45:00.000-05:00

To quote one of my least favorite bands, "wish you would step back from that ledge, my friend."
That, of course, is directed to all my Knick fan bretheren who have been told over the last few days that the golden child, Lebron James, once thought to be a lock for Madison Square Garden, will soon be following in Michael Jordan's footsteps in Chicago. That's because Chicago, by trading away Kirk Henrich and their draft pick away to the Washington Wizards on draft night freed up enough cap space to offer two max contract players agreements this off season. Up until that point, the Knicks remained the only team with such maneuverability.
The logic behind Chicago's assumed victory when it comes James is that the Bulls can offer too much in terms of talent for him to turn down. Chicago, with their cap space, could legitimately offer James a lineup of Derrick Rose, Lebron James, Luol Deng, Chris Bosh, and Joakim Noah, plus a young and decent bench, a roster that probably puts the Bulls at the top of the list for championship favorites.
However, here is why I still believe Lebron is coming to New York: Eddy Curry.
There was a report a while back that Lebron had met with Eddy Curry, and it got people wondering whether James would like to play with Curry, who is represented by Lebron's agent. However, I doubt there is much thought in Lebron that he wants Eddy Idle as his teammate for the next however many years. Curry's lack of motivation is now notorious and, even if he were motivated by his reported debt and pending free agency, and the fact that this year is a must, in terms of performance, if he is to have any hope of regaining his career, what are the chances good play would last far beyond this year, and those factors? If Curry were to play well and earn another pay day, it stands to reason he would quickly be back to his old ways.
So, I don't hold out any hppe that Curry is an attractive piece for the Knicks to sell to Lebron. However, I believe his contract is what continues to give the Knicks an advantage over every other team, including the Bulls.
See, Curry's deal has been a weight tied to the neck of thise franchise for years now. No one wanted it and no one wanted him. Now, however, Curry's $11.3 million is good for this year only. That gives the Knicks what has become the NBA equaivalent of the Willy Wonka Golden Ticket: an expiring contract. If you're a team with a high-priced player, but no where near winning, and in need of cutting payroll, Curry is your ideal. He clears space and is off your books once next season starts. He is instant flexibility. Plus, considering everything I just mentioned, he might be an asset for a team in a backup role.
So, when the Knicks sit down with Lebron, yes they are going to tout New York, the glitz, the glamour, the marketing opportunities and the business connections he can make, and yes, they are going to market the fact that Lebron can join with Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire or Carlos Boozer right when the year starts, and yes, you're going to tout Danillo Galinari as a top young player who can shoot it from a mile away and grab some rebounds in the process. But what you can also offer is the chance to nab another top-flight player as early as mid-season or, at the latest, next season.
There are a lot of teams that would be looking to dump salary come this season. One can forsee the Suns, Warriors, Hornets, Rockets, and Pistons, to name a few, who would be interested in clearing space, and all of them have deals that would most certainly be attractive to the Knicks. You could also see a team like the 76ers being interested in the contract, as they look to build around newly-drafted Evan Turner. Names like Andre Igudola, Baron Davis, Emeka Okafor, Tayshaun Prince, or Al Jefferson should pretty much all be in the mix in terms of trades, and all would be a great compliment to Lebron. There is also the outside chance that Chris Paul could be on the market come the trade deadline, and Curry's contract would allow the Knicks the flexibility to be in the bidding for that. Also, if you were to add in Wilson Chandler's contract, which is about $1.3 million, you could imagine multiple player trades.
Let's look at some possibilities, in terms of Knick starting five, assuming they trade Curry: Lebron James, Andre Igudola, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Chris Bosh, or Baron Davis, James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, or James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Okafor, or (perhaps most attractive) James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Al Jefferson.
I would put those teams up against the possibilities for the Bulls any day of the week.
Now, I'm sure other players will come into the mix and, as I said, if you threw in Chandler, you could probably get a multiple deal done. If you traded Curry and Chandler to the Hornets, for instance, you might get Okafor and Darren Collison back. In that scenario, the Knicks would add a sharp-shooting, quick point guard and a tough, rebounding, good defensive center who can get up and down the court. I have to say, if the Knicks team at some point next year were Darren Collison (PG), Lebron James (SG), Danilo Gallinari (SF), Chris Bosh (PF), and Emeka Okafor (C), I'm liking that team a lot. They might run into serious problems with Dwight Howard, who gives Okafor fits, but at least they would have a guy who could compitently guard Howard one-on-one. It would also give Lebron two sharp-shooters to play with (Collison and Gallinari) along with the great player in Bosh. Wouldn't you be looking at that Knicks team, right there, to compete with the Celtics and Orlando as the best team?
Look, no one knows what is happening in Lebron's mind right now, except, I believe, Lebron. This weekend I have read the following reports: he is a lock to go to Chicago and he still doesn't want to play in the shadow of Jordan; his business manager and trusted friend want nothing to do with the Knicks, and that his best friends still insist that his desire, from the outset, has been to play in New York and that "nothing has changed." In essence, all of these teams vying for Lebron's services are pretty equal, in my opinion. You can create lineups and rosters for all of these teams that put Lebron in a position to win. If he goes to Chicago, his lineup could be the one mentioned above. If he goes to the Knicks, you can create several different lineups that give him a terrific chance to win. If he goes to the Nets, he can join his buddy Jay-Z, be plugged into a Russian billionaire, and can play with young, talented players. A lineup of Devin Harris (PG), James (SG), Terrence Williams (SF), Derrick Favors (PF), Brooke Lopez (C). That is pretty darn attractive in its own right.
Since one can only speculate, we all seem to simply project what we would do in his shoes. So, I'll offer my two cents. If I were Lebron, my top choice would be the Knicks, second would be the Nets, third would be the Bulls. I wouldn't want to play in the shadow of Michael Jordan, nor would I look at Rose as being an ideal compliment to his game. If I were he, I would want a terrific big man in the middle (Bosh) and another really good player on the wing, but no one who is looking to be the "big dog" on his own one day, and one can't imagine Rose being happy being the third wheel.

Upon further consideration................

2010-05-24T17:03:00.000-05:00

I am not going to comment on the debacle in Queens this weekend. When your starting pitching goes in the tank like that and your hitters all take a collective break, you're gonna lose, even to a bad team like the Mets (especially when they throw their two best pitchers at you during the series). I could talk about how badly Teixeira has been playing, how little power A-Rod has showcased this year, and how the collective slumping of Jeter, Cano, and Gardner has hurt the team, but I would rather take the high road and wait it out. Let's see how they react against the Twins this week. If they can win a few there, they can easily settle into a very accomodating June schedule. Let's see if someone can help right the ship here.
Instead, I want to talk about my second favorite subject on this blog over the last few months and that is Lebron James. A few weeks back I wrote that Lebron would be a New York Knick if he knew what is good for him. I still think the Knicks have a compelling case to make. They are the only team that can bring in two max free agents, meaning that Lebron can essentially pick with whom he would like to play for the next 10 years.
However, after further review, I have decided to amend my earlier statement. Yes, I believe Lebron is leaving Cleveland. Yes, I believe he is coming to New York. But, I believe when he arrives, he'll be wearing a Nets jersey (pun intended).
Why?
Looking at it, I believe there is really only one hurdle (a big one) that prevents New Jersey from being the absolute, prohibitive favorite when it comes to the James sweepstakes: their home for the next two years. I can't believe that playing in Newark seems like the answer to an NBA dream for Lebron, and it is a mountain that has to be climbed. Granted, playing in Newark for the next two years, before moving on to Brooklyn, is better than playing in the IZOD center, the Tropicana Field of the NBA, but it still represents a lateral move in terms of cities when it comes to Lebron. And, if the move were coming in, say, a year, then I would say it wouldn't be as big a problem, but two years? It doesn't seem like much, but in sports two years can be a lifetime.
That being said, I still believe Lebron ends up in Newark with the Nets. There are ways around the geography, other things that will come into play, that will make it easy for James to accept a new, temporary home in Newark.
1.) It is temporary - Lebron, in signing with the Nets, wouldn't necessarily be committing to Newark. He would, instead, be committing to Brooklyn. If all were to go as planned, the Nets would move into the Barclay Arena in Brooklyn in the 2012/2013 season. Lebron, by that time, would be 27 years old. He would still have the best five or six years of his career ahead of him, if not more (Lebron could easily be a 35 or 36-year old playing at a high level).
Playing in Brooklyn, bringing professional sports back to that area, has got to be appealing to Lebron. Brooklyn has been pining for something since the Dodgers left what seems like a million years ago and basketball seems like a perfect fit. No, the wait isn't ideal, but the final destination ultimately is.
2.) Mikhail Prokhorov - What everyone keeps focusing on is that the NBA's version of Donald Trump has a whole lotta money. That's true, and that is a huge factor in why Lebron would choose the Nets. Unlike Cleveland, whose owned by a run-of-the-mill milionaire, Prokhorov is worth billions. Lebron needs his owner to splurge for a new small forward down the road, so be it. Need your owner to go well beyond the salary cap for not just two or three years, but 10 years? You found your man.
But, Prokhorov's fortune goes beyond just simply his ability to sign Lebron and put some high-priced pieces around him. It is also about what he can offer the budding superstar. Lebron wants to be an international star, beyond what he already is, and there is no owner in the NBA that offers a greater opportunity to promote that brand worldwide than Prokhorov. Also, the Nets are a minority owner with the Yankees in the YES Network, the most successful regional sports channel around. Having Prokhorov and the Yankee-run Yes Network behind him would seem more than a small step towards truly promoting his brand. Finally, it offer Lebron options in terms of a contract I can't imagine he would get anywhere else. What is going to stop Prokhorov from including provisions within Lebron's contract, or striking a second contract outside the lines of a normal NBA performance agreement, that would allow Lebron to take advantage of certain aspects of his empire that no one else has. I can imagine that, if Lebron really wants to eventually be a billionaire and owner of a team, that kind of a connection and possible partnership, one that can't be duplicated in the NBA, is invaluable.
3.) A little talent never hurts - It would seem somewhat comical to talk about talent and a team that won 12 games last year in the same breath, but the Nets are in a better roster position than most teams looking to bring in Lebron. First, if Lebron wants to sign outright with the Nets, he would join a team with Devin Harris, Brooke Lopez, and a very talented young player in Terrence Williams. That is a threesome Lebron could join right now that would provide for athleticism and talent, and plays well into Lebron's strength. There is no one that sports the potential big man like Lopez, and Harris is a very good distributor and jump shooter, while Williams adds a load of athletic ability. Lebron could rack up triple doubles with those guys without even breaking a sweat. Also, don't forget that the Nets have Yi Jianlian, who isn't as dominate a presence as a lot had hoped, but is an excellent spot up 3-point shooter, something Lebron despertaley needs.
Also, while the Nets didn't land the number 1 pick and John Wall, they did land the number 3 pick. Let's say that pick ends up being Derrick Favors from Wake Forrest. This is a 6-10 kid, 7-2 wing span who will be able to block shots and dunk on the world right out of college. If his offensive game comes around, he could be terrific (some are saying he has the raw tools to end up being the best player to come out of the draft in the next 5 years). That would add another big time talent to the Nets. Let's also not forget the Nets have the cap room to sign another top-talent player to the mix. Since Lebron could use a good spot-up jump shooter to go along with Yi Jianlian, what about signing the veteran Rip Hamilton? I think Detroit is looking to go in the direction of Ben Gordon anyway. Hamilton is 32, which makes him a young old. He is the perfect "run him off screens and get open" kinda guy. He can hit threes and, perhaps most importantly, he has won a championship, which means he can be a good influence for Lebron.
A team of Lebron, Harris, Hamilton, Favors, and Lopez, with Jianlian, Williams, and Courtney Lee off the bench, seems pretty darn good, doesn't it? If Favors ever became the type of player his talent dictates he could be, that is one special kinda team. Harris suddenly becomes option three, Hamilton option four, and Favors, in his rookie year, is simply asked to be athletic, rebound, block shots, and dunk when Lebron or Harris throws him an alley-oop.
The depth also allows the Nets to be major players if Lebron wants a sign and trade with Cleveland. This would allow him to sign the full contract with the Cavs but then move on to the Nets. Now, you might ask why the Cavs would do this: simple, because, if you know Lebron is outtie 5,000, why not accomodate him and get something back in return? In that scenario, it's hard to imagine that the Nets offer with Harris as the centerpiece wouldn't be extrememly attractive.

Listen to Kevin, Bron Bron

2010-05-15T14:47:00.000-05:00

Hey Lebron, welcome to the best, weirdest, and certainly most hyped summer of your life. I hope you weren't planning any trips to Disney or some international jaunts with Ricky Williams, cause you aint gonna have time.
Chances are, you're gonna spend a lot of time in Chicago and New York, with a trip over to Newark. Heck, you might even decide to venture over to LA LA land and talk with that second-class citizen team, the Clippers, just for a free trip to Hollywood and a chance to hang with Halle Berry one night.
This is your summer, and I have no doubt you plan on soaking it up.
The truth is, everyone with a pulse and an interest in basketball is going to give you some advice. Heck, even the President and the Mayor of New York have already chimed in. I'm sure your phone is going to ring more than Tiger Woods' when his wife was out of town for the weekend.
Well, since I don't have your number, let me offer this piece of advice from the comfort of my own home: don't walk, run from Cleveland as soon as you can.
Look, people are going to try (heck, they already are trying) to box you into Cleveland for the next several years of your life by strapping you to the word loyalty. In the eyes of so many fans and media personalities, you "owe" Cleveland and the Cavaliers something. You "owe" them a career. You "owe" them the best years of your professional life. The reason you "owe" them? Well, that's where things get a little foggy, but it seems most believe your loyalty should simply stem from your place of birth: you were born in Cleveland so, I guess, you should die in Cleveland (at least career-wise, anyway).
Brush these idiotic rumblings aside as you pursue your goals.
Look, you don't owe anyone anything, other than yourself. You have been in Cleveland for seven years. In that time, you have played with heart and soul and taken your team to heights they wouldn't have even been able to imagine had you not been on the roster. Rarely, considering the amount of money you athletes make, does a player give a city and a franchise more than he gets but, in your case, it's the truth. In the annals of sports, you are probably the most underpaid athlete that has ever taken a breath, considering what you have done for that town.
You played all seven years of your contract. You didn't "demand" anything. You didn't force the team to hirer or firer any coaches based on your preferences. You didn't "demand" they get player X or Y because you guys were buddies. You didn't spend your time throwing your general manager of owner under the bus, even when they made obviously bad moves that hindered your ability to win.
You were the best show on earth for seven years in Cleveland and, not once did you demand to leave.
You have fullfilled everything required and, now, you can leave with your head held high.
The truth is, Lebron, Cleveland has already essentially made your choice for you. Had they surrounded you with another superstar player and a roster of winners, then your exit would be more difficult. Then, it would appear as if your were abandoning winning for big-city glory. Then, it would truly appear that championships took a back seat to image in your world.
Yet, in seven years the Cavs have failed to even remotely develop a roster worthy of your talents. Look at the teams still competeing for a championship, Lebron: the Celtics, the team that just beat you, has three hall of fame players (Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce), a rising superstar in Rajon Rondo, and gutty players like Kendrick Perkins and Glen Davis to even out the roster. Your buddy Kobe Bryant will play the rest of his years with All-Star caliber players Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, and Andrew Bynum, not to mention talented players like Sheldon Brown and a terrific veteran point guard in Derek Fisher.
Orlando? Talent oozes out of that team, so much so that they cruised through their first round with their best player, Dwight Howard, essentially a non-factor. And Steve Nash has Amare Stoudemire, Jason Richardson, and Grant Hill to back him up. Now, for fun, take a look at your roster, this juggernaut of a team the Cavaliers have surrounded you with: the rumor of Shaquille O'Neill, the overrated Antwan Jamison, and Mo Williams, who wouldn't start for any of the teams I mentioned previously. Those are your top options. That is the "winning" group this franchise put around you. Not exactly the 1986 Celtics or 1988 Lakers, huh?
Look, you won 67 games this year, mainly because you were completely and utterly brilliant each and every game. That record fooled a lot of people into believeing that there was some talent around you, but I doubt it conned you the way it did so many media types. You had to have known that once you ran into a really good team, you were toast, right? You had to have known that Mo Williams wasn't gonna do it for you in a big spot, right?
That's why it is time to leave, my friend. That's why the Cavs, with seven years of "plugging holes" instead of developing a champion has all but asked you to leave. They haven't surrounded you with a team, they've surrounded you with a bunch of guys they expect you to make better than they really are. They've surrounded you, for seven straight years, with a cast that can't stand on its own two feet unless you are behind them, holding them up. They haven't handed you the reigns to a Ferrari, they have given you the keys to a Gremlin and asked that you turn it into a Bentley. Then, when you don't, no one comes running to your defense to say "hold on, now, this guy is as good as it gets and we stand behind him."
You don't owe Cleveland anything, Lebron, they owed you, and they failed to do anything other than act like they were putting together a great team.
If you're going to stay, you have to ask yourself whether you think it is going to get any better. Is this team going to bring in that second gun? I doubt it. How can they. They have already locked themselves (and, subsequently you) into a bunch of bad, inconceived contracts all in an effort to throw enough garbage at the wall to see if something sticks. It hasn't, and it isn't going to next year or the year after.
Kevin Garnett the other night talked about your youth. He talked about how, had he to do it over, he would probably have moved on from Minnesota sooner. In other words, he wouldn't have allowed some antiquated sense of "loyalty" to all but ruin his career. Now, towards the end of his career, KG has gotten redemption, but the best years were spent trying desperately to singlehandedly bring another down-on-its-luck city at the time, Minnesota, something to cheer about. It shouldn't have been his cross to bear and it shouldn't be yours, either.
You have options. You have tremendous options. You have the chance to determine the course of your career. Don't let others decide what you should or shouldn't do, when they probably wouldn't adhere to their own advice in a similar situation. Listen to KG. Understand that this is your time. Understand that this is a chance for you to make your mark. You can do that in New York, which will hand you the keys to one of the flagship organizations in the NBA, and all but let you pick your roster for next year and beyond. You can go to the Nets, who are about to bring professional sports back to the burrow of Brooklyn, and who has a cavalcade of talent either on the roster or coming via the draft and free agency. You can go to Chicago and join Derek Rose and Loul Deng and perhaps another great free agent player. You can instantly walk on to a team next year that has more talent and more ability than the Cavs did this year, and you can hitch your wagon to a franchise that is willing to spend (over the cap) as much as is needed to bring you the rings you crave.
Go to New York, Lebron. Go to New Jersey/Brooklyn, or to Chicago, or even to Miami with your buddhy Dwayne Wade. Only, don't let a city or a media tie you to Cleveland. It's your life, my friend and your career. Don't let both die there.

Realignment? Some things make sense..........some things don't

2010-05-10T21:01:00.000-05:00

I like Buster Olney, but every time I read one of his blogs he seems to make mention of how baseball MUST realign and usually gives a AL East-centric example as to why that's the case. Last week, Olney brought up the Toronto Blue Jays as the latest casualty of AL East inequality:

The latest example of why realignment needs to happen: The 2010 Toronto Blue Jays. The interest in the franchise is withering, and with the Rays and Yankees crushing opponents, it's hard to imagine folks in Toronto will look at the Jays as a serious contender at any time this season. That's too bad, because the Jays have gotten off to a good start and certainly would be good enough to be the front-runner in the AL West; if only there was a different alignment of teams, the Blue Jays -- who have the ninth-best starting pitching ERA in the majors -- would be looked at as a playoff candidate.

There is a lot not to like about this comment. First, unless you're a fan of the asinine notion of "floating realignment" where baseball would become like soccer, with a first tier and second tier of teams constantly moving up and down based on how they performed the year before, you don't get to choose which league in which you play. Sorry, you just don't. If that was the case, I'm sure the Yankees would LOVE the NL West, where 86 wins makes you a juggernaut. Second, anyone else feel a real sense of irony that Olney is talking about how unfair it is that the Blue Jays are in the same division as the Yankees and the RAYS??? Weren't the Rays the posterchild for the small market teams that just can't win, no matter what they do? Now, the Rays are too good, so much so that it's just unfair for everyone else? Now I've heard it all. Lastly, no one in the world expected the Blue Jays to be any good this year and, quite frankly, it will be a shock if they are still in it come June. So, let's not exactly cry for them just yet. Plus, they still have a bunch of games against division leaders, so they have a chance to make up some ground if they are good enough.
But, let's assume that baseball is going to realign. It seems like that is the consensus right now. Everyone wants to see something different.
What makes the most sense?
I am not of the belief that you get rid of the divisions. I like the divisions. I am also not of the belief that you in any way mess with the traditional rivalries that have existed for decades. That means you leave the Yankees with the Red Sox, the Dodgers with the Giants, and the Cardinals with the Cubs.
There are, however, some things you could do:
*Move the Rays and the Blue Jays - This is what I like to call the whine effect. Essentially, the Rays and Jays have complained so freakin much it is time to move them out. Squeaky wheel gets to go to the NL.
All kidding aside, the Rays and the Jays have shown over the years an ability to sneak up and bite the Yankees and the Red Sox. The Jays have proven that, given the right situation, they will spend money, just not the same type of money as the Yanks and the Red Sox. The Rays, as we all know, have great young talent but not the necessary revenue to retain all of them all of the time.
The verdict? I would take the Rays, move them to the NL East, and move the Nationals to the AL East. I would then take the Jays, move them to the NL Central, and I would move the Pirates to the AL East.
Pros - The Rays move to the more manageable NL East, where they only have to deal with the poor man's version of the Yankees and the Red Sox in the Phillies and the Mets, two teams that will spend money, but not break the bank. Plus, it would set up a natural rivalry with the Marlins, another young team that will have a new stadium coming next season. Perhaps both teams could push one another to be better and rule the region. For the Nationals, it puts them in a division with a natural rival as well, the Baltimore Orioles, and it allows them to fill their park several times a year as, no doubt, Yankees, Red Sox, and Orioles games will draw a lot of interest. Also, if and when the Nationals get their footing, they have a chance to be a mid-market team that can spend. They have a decent market which means they might get beat by the Yankees and Sox in terms of payroll, but shouldn't be steamrolled ala the Rays (an added bonus might be that it forces the Orioles to finally get its act together, considering what a great market they have squandered over the last 15 years).
For the Blue Jays, they move to the manageable NL Central where their ability to spend could put them in contention every year. On the flip side, the Pirates have been utter brutal now for so long, they have completely relinquished the right to complain about where they land. They couldn't compete against the teams in the NL Central, so who cares if they are in the same division with the Yankees, Red Sox, and potentially two medium market teams who could have nice payrolls in the Orioles and Nationals? Hey, at the very least, they are gonna pack the stadium every time the Yanks and Sox visit, right? (BTW, the only way this becomes a REALLY good move for baseball is if they relocate the Rays. You can complain all you want about the Yankees and the Red Sox, but if the Rays are intent on keeping a low payroll each year, it won't matter where you stick them. Orlando? Charlotte? Somewhere is anywhere but St. Petersburg)
*Everything is bigger in Texas - Two teams that could really benefit from a geographical rivalry, in my opinion, are the Rangers and the Astros. But, how to get them in the same division when one is in the AL West and the other is in the NL Central? Very simply, give the AL West the extra team and take it away from the NL Central. So, take the Astros and throw them in to the AL West.
Pros - It evens out the divisions in the AL and NL. You would then have five teams in each division. You would put the Astros in the same division as the Rangers and increase their gate each year.Brew
*Brewing some rivalry - I feel like I might be picking on the NL Central a little too much, but my last realignment move would be to take the Brewers and swap them with the Kansas City Royals. Again, this just makes sense from a geographical standpoint.
Pros - The Royals go to the NL Central and can develop a natural rivalry with the St. Louis Cardinals, which are right next to each other. Same thing with the Brewers and the Twins and, in that case, you really end up creating what could be a fun rivalry with the Twinkies and the Brewers. It keeps the White Sox and the Tigers in the AL and in the same division, and you have everyone pretty much fighting all around one another.

So, at the end of the day, here is what my new divisions look like:

AL East
Yankees
Red Sox
Orioles
Nationals
Pirates

AL Central
Twins
Brewers
Tigers
White Sox
Indians

AL West
Rangers
Astros
Athletics
Mariners
Angels

NL East
Phillies
Mets
Rays
Marlins
Braves

NL Central
Cardinals
Cubs
Blue Jays
Royals
Reds

NL West
Dodgers
Giants
Rockies
Diamondbacks
Padres

Thoughts on th NFL draft

2010-04-26T21:07:00.000-05:00

A couple of quick thoughts on the 2010 NFL Draft:

*I wasn't a fan of the move to primetime by ESPN and I am still not 100 percent sold on the new format. Look, I watched on Thursday like everyone else because I love the NFL, and the league got an absolute gift when former Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen and former Texas quarterback Colt McCoy dropped out of the first round. It gave everyone a day to talk about where these two standouts would go and, in the case of Clausen, dragged his Greek tragedy out over a period of 24 hours instead of two, as it would have been under the old format.

But, waiting through the day on Friday just to get to the second and third rounds seemed somewhat protracted and the overkill on the draft just got ramped up into overdrive. Plus, Thursday night, there are other things on to watch, so you really don't get the opportunity to just focus on the draft the way you do on Saturday. In fact, maybe just out of habit, I ended up turning on the Saturday telecast and watching throughout the afternoon.

*I really don't think it was all that shocking that the Broncos moved up to get Tim Tebow in the first round, or that he went ahead of Jimmy Clausen. None of the quarterbacks in this draft, perhaps besides Sam Bradford, should project out to anything other than average players in the league. Clausen is a decent player, but everything about him screams average: he has an average arm, average accuracy, average mobility in the pocket, and average decision-making abilities. When you couple that with his supposed maturity deficiences (wasn't the greatest teammate or most beloved in the locker room at Notre Dame, had a tendency to blame others for his mistakes, has an air of superiority about him) it isn't earth shattering that teams would be willing to take a pass. When you have exceptional talent, those personality flaws can and will be overlooked. When you are simply a “good” quarterback, they weigh you down.

McCoy didn't have any of those personality flaws attributed to Clausen, but he is small for the position (certainly not a deal breaker, but does make it more difficult to project him as a big time QB), has probably the weakest arm in the draft overall, and, despite the fact that he is an aggressive player who scrambles and uses his legs to make plays, he must also be deemed a little fragile overall. I mean, what amounted to a stinger in his right arm prevented him from going back into the National Championship Game in January.

Now, is Tebow a prototypical quarterback? Absolutely not. Is he going to have to learn a lot to be the starter in Denver? Absolutely. But, look at Tebow's skill package: he has an okay arm, he has cleaned up his mechanics so that he doesn't have as long a delivery with the ball, and he has okay accuracy. That pretty much sounds like the other two QB's, doesn't it? Now, factor in this: he is by far the most athletic quarterback available who can create something out of nothing with his legs; he is a winner who played his best games against the biggest competition (save his very average game against Alabama at the end of last year) and he is a proven leader. You know he is going to put in all the time necessary to get better and has the intelligence to get better. Plus, you know he can become the face of your franchise and you can feel confident he won't be answering questions about police investigations or providing statements through attorneys about assault charges.

When you factor all of that in, and consider that none of these guys are anything but projects, why wouldn't you take a chance on Tebow?

*I liked everything the Oakland Raiders did on draft day, but I have to laugh when I hear people say, almost without hesitation, that Jason Campbell is going to be GREAT now that he is in Al Davis land. Yes, we all know that Campbell has had, what, six different offensive coordinators since he began his time in Washington. But, what no one seems to mention is that one of the reasons why so many coaches and coordinators have been moved out over the years is the inconsistent play of Campbell. Had he stepped up and shown real signs of progress at any point in his “development” it's hard to imagine the Redskins would have been moving people in and out like they were attached to a conveyor belt. At no point has Campbell shown the ability to lead his team, every Sunday, to consistent performances. He is an absolute stick in the pocket, he has a long delivery, and he doesn't throw a particularly accurate deep ball, even though he has a good arm. Is that all coaching?

Also, if stability is the elixar that is destined to cure all of his ills, Oakland probably isn't the perfect landing spot. Is anyone all that confident that Tom Cable is the coach of the Raiders for the long haul? Rumors were that Davis was hell bent on firing him after the season, spent three weeks looking under every stone for a coaching candidate he liked that might be interested in taking the job, and then finally committed to Cable for the upcoming season. Let's say the Raiders get off to a slow start this year, and there is turmoil in that locker room; does anyone believe that Cable will survive? Campbell went from one reactionary owner to another, so everyone looking for Campbell to come into his own now that he will have some “consistency” must have a very short memory.

*After a few days to digest the Giants draft, I have come to a very simple decision: this is all on Jerry Reese and Tom Coughlin now. I was in favor of taking Derrick Morgan over Jason Pierre-Paul (JPP, or JP-squared, if you like) in the first because he is a more polished player who is good against both the pass and the run. Plus, he was the defensive player of the year for the ACC, while JPP only started seven games for University of South Florida in the Big East. But, if I am going to pat the Broncos on the back for taking a reach on Tebow over some players who might be deemed more NFL-ready, I can't then turn around a slam the Giants for taking a reach with a kid everyone seems to believe could turn out to be the best player in the entire draft.

What I like about him: he seems like a good kid, hard worker, and quick learner, who got better as the season went along. He also seems to have somewhat of a mean streak in him, which you like on defense.

What I don't like about him: whenever you hear words like “upside” or “raw” or “still learning to play,” it sets off alarm bells because, let's face it, most of the players who turn out to be busts have the exact same labels coming out of school. JPP fits the bill of the combine warrior, a guy who, in tanktops and shorts, looks like a game breaker. Put a 100-yard dash in front of him, a high jump, an agility test, and he beats his competition time in and time out. But, as we all know, those things end up having little to do with overall football success. Hopefully, JPP ends up becoming a football player with freakish athletic ability and not just a guy who can do back flips on YouTube,

The most interesting guy taken by the G-Men, in my mind, is middle linebacker Phillip Dillard from Nebraska, who will have to play tough and smart football in his career to avoid inevitably being labeled Phyllis Diller. Dillard, a fourth round choice, has elicited a lot of different takes. Some have said that he could come in and be a starter right now, taking over a leadership role almost immediately. Others I have heard have labeled Dillard a career backup who won't be an impact player at the NFL level. Who to believe? I have no idea. All I do know is that Reese has found some sleepers in the past and, with this draft, his talent evaluation will be put to the ultimate test.

LeBron will be a Knick, if he knows what's good for him

2010-04-18T09:55:00.001-05:00

New York.

The name itself evokes images of the night sky lite up like a Christmas tree, taxi cabs honking on Broadway as a swath of people move along the sidewalks and across the street, and the blaring sound of a city that never sleeps moving through time, carrying the hopes and dreams of eight million people on its back at any given time like a never-ending wave.

There is no place like it in the world. Not Boston. Not Los Angeles. Not Paris. Not Rome. It is the greatest city in the last super power on earth. New York has become the epicenter, and sports has become its heart beat.

I don't know LeBron James. I have never met the man before. I don't know how he feels about Ohio, Cleveland, and his current team. Maybe staying with one franchise his entire career means something. Maybe bringing a championship, even multiple ones, to a battered and beaten midwest town is his white whale, his obsession. Maybe the thought of leaving his home state and team is utterly inconceivable.

But, too many people have ignored what New York means when talking about James' upcoming decision on his future in the NBA. Analysts have talked about money (Cleveland can offer James the most, over the length of a contract) and competitiveness (the Cavs are one of the best teams in the country while the Knicks remain one of the worst) when deciding what a man they know little about will choose to do next year. What few talk about is legacy.

LeBron James is destined to go down as one of the greatest players in the game when he decides to retire. Unless something extraordinarily tragic happens to him, he will win at least one or two championships in his career. He will be remembered as a complete player. He will be remembered as a freak of nature who combined speed and power in a 6'9” frame like no one ever has before, and may not after.

Having said that, his legacy would be different if he became all of that in New York.

Why? Because LeBron has a truly unique opportunity when it comes to the Knicks. He has the ability to come to one of the NBA's greatest franchises, with a rich tradition and a HUGE following, and cement himself as the best player to ever done the uniform. That is something only the Knicks can offer.

Think about the great franchises in the NBA. No matter how great LeBron is, if he went to the Celtics tomorrow he would never supplant Russell or Cousey or Larry Legend in the hearts, minds, or history of the franchise. They are the top. Likewise, if he went to the Lakers, would anyone ever say that LeBron was better than West or Chamberlain or Magic or Kareem? Lakers fans insist that Kobe is the best player in the NBA right now.

Chicago? Forget it, Michael owns that realm and always will. Detroit? The Bad Boys, with Isiah and Rodman and Lambeer, headed by Chuck Daly, are revered to this day. Philadelphia? No doubt, 76ers would annoint LeBron as a basketball God, but a guy by the name of Dr. J once played for that proud franchise, and LeBron would probably always be placed behind him.

The Knicks offer the chance for LeBron to become the “face” of the franchise. As beloved as Willis Reed and Walt Clyde Frazier and the greats of the 70s championship teams remain, and as much as fans might now appreciate Patrick Ewing's winning ways, LeBron would be able to trump them all. He would have the chance to return winning to New York, something of a rarity when it comes to sports.

Think of Mark Messier, The Captain of the New York Rangers who had already established himself as one of the greats before coming to Madison Square Garden in the early 90s. He won five championships in his hometown of Edmonton, Canada. He was well on his way to being a hall of famer.

When he came to the Rangers, the team hadn't won a title in five decades. They were not one of the elite teams in hockey. Yet, Messier and a new group helped transform that, and when he helped the Rangers win the Stanley Cup in 1994, he forever became connected to that team. Now, when people speak of Messier, they talk about 1994 and his game 6 guarantee, and his hat trick, and his ultimate victory. The Edmonton years, though far more successful and the reason for his hall of fame status, are relgated to second when it comes to his career. That one success in New York trumps it all.

LeBron has to realize it would be the same for him.

The Knicks haven't won a championship in 37 years. For those of you keeping score at home, that is nearly four decades of futility. The team also hasn't had an elite player to call its own since Ewing was traded, and the last five years have been the most abysmal in franchise history.

The moment he steps on the court, LeBron changes all of that. He immediately OWNS Madison Square Garden. Not a bad piece of property to call home. He immediately takes his place among the New York elite athletes. In fact, depending on how much success he has, LeBron could push Derek Jeter aside as the King of the City.

Can you put a price tag on that? Can you even factor that in when it comes to a contract?

That's why, when the Knicks open the 2010/2011 regular season next year, I believe LeBron James, and a few other notable signees, will be taking to the court wearing orange and blue. Its because he understands what it means to be the King of the City that Never Sleeps. It's because he understands that he can become the best basketball player New York has ever seen. The mantles for best baseball, football, and hockey players have been locked up for decades.

If LeBron wins in Cleveland, he will be hailed. If he wins in New York, he will be revered like no other.

Want the parade down Canyon of Heroes, LeBron? Want to hang out with CC Sabathia and Derek Jeter? Want Giants tickets at the 50-yard line? Want Jay Z and Alicia Keys to dedicate a song to you? Want to one day be called the greatest that ever played, ahead of Michael, Magic, Larry and the rest? There is only one place for that and, with all due respect, it isn't in Cleveland.

and now for those darn predictions

2010-03-28T21:31:00.002-05:00

You know what I love about March in the Northeast? That it is a blatant, unapologetic prick half the time. Last weekend in Connecticut, it was 70 degrees, sunny, breezy, and everyone brought out the cargo shorts and tank tops. This week, December and rainy. That's just the way it goes. That's life in the Northeast. That's why we are not always the nicest folks on the face of the earth. If Mother Nature played groin tap with you the way she does with us come March and even early April, you'd be a little prickly as well.

I had a much longer MLB prediction post ready to go but blog spot wasn't in the mood to allow me to save and I lost much of it. Oh well. What will be will be.
So, here is my abbreviated version of what I expect to happen this season:

AL East
New York Yankees
Tampa Bay Rays
Boston Red Sox
Baltimore Orioles
Toronto Blue Jays

Thoughts: The Yankees, quite simply, are the best team in baseball. They have the most balance and the most talent. I honestly think they wrap up the East sometime in early September.
I'm going with the Rays over the Sox for second, and for the wild card because I just get the sense they are hungry and ready to (somewhat) repeat their 2008 campaign. Is anyone going to bet against Evan Longoria winning an MVP, BJ Upton having a huge comeback year, or Carl Crawford and Carlos Pena playing for pay this year? Me neither.
The Sox will be good as always, and could easily muscle the Rays out, but I just think they have a lot of questions now in the lineup. Everyone's favorite plumber Kevin Youkilis and the happy midget Dustin Pedroia will probably put up their usual numbers, but I am betting on David Ortiz's best years (and best use of steroids) to be behind him and you suddenly have a lot of guys (Adrian Beltre, Mike Cameron, JD Drew) who strike out a lot. They have great pitching, but so do the Yanks and Rays. I don't think they will score consistently with those two teams.
Baltimore is on the right track and Toronto has a few young players coming up, but both teams promise to be stops along the way for the top three in this division.

Best Player in the Division - Evan Longoria
Best Pitcher in the Division - CC Sabathia
Breakout Player in the Division - Adam Jones
Comeback Player in the Division - Vernon Wells

AL Central
Minnesota Twins
Detroit Tigers
Chicago White Sox
Kansas City Royals
Cleveland Indians

Thoughts: Like the East, i think this will be a three-team race. I think the Tigers are really underrated this year after, perhaps, being overrated last season, and the White Sox, top to bottom, has the best pitching. But, I like the Twinkies.
I know they lost Joe Nathan. That's a big loss. But, you can survive if you're Minnesota because they always have quality arms in the pen. Plus, while their rotation doesn't have a top-of-the-line pitcher (unless you are ready to go all in on Francisco Liriano coming back to form), each of their five starters are very solid and should provide good innings. What separates them, in my opinion, is the lineup. That group is as good as any this year, with Mauer and Morneau making up perhaps the best 1-2 punch in the majors (that would be a good debate, wouldn't it? maybe a future post right there).
Kansas City continues on its two-decade rebuilding program and has yet to produce more than a handful of really quality major leaguers during that time (how in the hell is that possible?) and Cleveland is a couple of years away.
If any one of the top three win this division, I won't be shocked, and I think all three will remain in the hunt for a wild card spot as well, but the Twins are the odds-on bet.

Best Player in the Division - Miguel Cabrera
Best Pitcher in the Division - Zach Greinke
Breakout Player in the Division - Austin Jackson
Comeback Player in the Division - Grady Sizemore

AL West
Texas Rangers
LA Angels
Seattle Mariners
Oakland Athletics

Thoughts: This is my "out on a limb" pick. I think the Angels are rip for the picking. They didn't just lose their top pitcher and leadoff hitter this off season. They lost the heartbeat of their team. They lost the guys who, over the years, refused to let the team go down without a fight. Without Chone Figgins and John Lackey, this is a different team.
Can they still win? Absolutely. But, all good things must come to an end, and think this is the end of the line (at least for one year) for the Angels.
Why the Rangers?
Three reasons: one, I can't imagine how in the world the A's will score ANY runs to complement their pitching, two, I think the Mariners come in as the most overrated group in baseball (adding Figgins and Milton Bradley doesn't exactly strike fear in the hearts of opposing pitchers) and, three, I think the Rangers will be able to club their way to a division title.
They aren't winning 96 games, but they won't have to. I expect this team, with its great offense and good young arms, to get just enough pitching to win, what, maybe 89-91 games. That, I believe, will be enough to put the Rangers back in the playoffs.

Best Player in the Division - Ichiro Suzuki
Best Pitcher in the Division - King Felix Hernandez
Breakout Player in the Division - Brandon Wood
Comeback Player in the Division - Vladamir Guerrero

AL East Winner - Yankees
AL Central Winner- Twins
AL West Winner - Rangers
Wild Card Winner - Rays

League Winners - Yankees

NL East
Philadelphia Phillies
Atlanta Braves
New York Mets
Florida Marlins
Washington Nationals

Thoughts: If the Yankees are the class of the AL, the Phillies are clearly the class of the NL. If Cole Hamels comes back and pitches well, this team could win 100 games, and I think Cole Hamels is going to pitch very well. They have the best lineup in the league, perhaps in the majors, and they have proven winners. What could derail them? Just some sort of inner conflict and the strange mind of Charlie Manuel who proves that, in baseball, you can sometimes have a manager that is simply along for the ride.
I love the Braves this year. They have the best 5-man rotation in the division. Just consider that Derek Lowe will be the team's number 4 starter this season. Not too damn shabby. If Chipper Jones can stay healthy and this kid Jason Heyward can be even half as good as projected, the Braves will produce a really well balanced team. I like them for the wild card.
After that, I think both the Marlins and the Mets will battle to stay in contention all season long but will both fade. I don't believe in the Marlins because of their lack of depth (have some great starting lineup and rotation talent, but they are top heavy) and the Mets pitching has the chance to be utterly atrocious (plus the fact that no team in baseball is a better candidate for an implosion, considering the whispers about the future of the manager and general manger should start right........about...........now).
The Nationals? Let's check back with them in about two years.

Best Player in the Division - Chase Utley
Best Pitcher in the Division - Roy Halladay
Breakout Player in the Division - Jason Heyward
Comeback Player in the Division - Tim Hudson

AL Central
St. Louis Cardinals
Milwaukee Brewers
Cincinnati Reds
Chicago Cubs
Pittsburgh Pirates
Houston Astros

Thoughts: This is the obvious, boring pick, but when you have Albert Pujols and Matt Holiday and Chris Carpenter and Adam Weinwright, how, exactly, do you pick someone else? I am not in love with the Cardinals because there are plenty of little holes you can find (Ryan Franklin closing games is kind of like watching a cat step on a hot plate) but they are the class of an otherwise weak division.
I am going with Milwaukee over the Reds for second place because of their offense. I think the Brewers are going to make a commitment (via trade) at some point in the season to prove to Prince Fielder that they intend to try and challenge for the playoffs on a fairly consistent basis, and I think that will put them ahead of an up and coming Reds team that, in another year, if everyone stays healthy and they jettison the human shoulder rupture in Dusty Baker, could be right there with the Cards.
This won't please Cubby fans but I am not high on Chicago at all. I think Carlos Zambrano is more likely to enter a dog fighting match, himself, then have a big year, I am not sure is Alfonso Soriano is ever going to have the same offensive impact as he has before. that bullpen is just screaming out for 5 and 6-run eighth and ninth innings, and Lou Pinella's lower intestines might pop out at one point this year and try to strangle one of his pitchers. Not fun times at Wrigley.
After that, well, the only interest will be when the Astros trade Roy Oswalt and to whom. Neither Houston nor Pittsburgh is going anywhere, as the Pittsburgh general manager tries desperately to convince his long-suffering fan base that trading affordable good young players and using revenue sharing and luxury tax money to pay down team debt is something to get excited about. Hey Pittsburgh, only 160 more payments before your team gets out of debt. Catch the fever.

Best Player in the Division - Albert Pujols
Best Pitcher in the Division - Chris Carpenter
Breakout Player in the Division - Andrew McCutchen
Comeback Player in the Division - Scott Rolen

NL West
Colorado Rockies
LA Dodgers
San Fransisco Giants
Arizona Diamondbacks
San Diego Padres

Thoughts: The only team that I can't see winning this division is the Padres. All the rest have a shot. I'll take the Rockies. Why? Because I didn't believe in them a few years ago and they bit me in the ass. Then, I wrote them off before last year and they did the same freakin thing. I just think they have the right balance of offense and defense, and decent pitching, to pull out a narrow victory. Plus, I think the Dodgers took a step back and I don't think the Giants added enough offense to jump to the top of the division. Now, both the Dodgers and the Giants are probably in better positions to make big trade deadline acquisitions, and that would put the Rockies in a tough spot, but as constituted right now, with Hawpe and Tulowitzki leading the offense, and Aaron Cook anchoring the pitching, I think they take it.
I like Arizona a lot, and could see them possibly getting on a run, but the D-Backs have burned me too many times in the opposite way. How many years am I going to wait for Stephen Drew and Connor Jackson to actually have big years? Of course, with Justin Upton and Mark Reynolds stepping up, and Edwin Jackson joining Dan Haren in the rotation (with Brandon Webb expected back at some point) they have a little more balance than many of the other teams. In fact, I am almost talking myself into the D-Backs here, but I will stick with the Rockies. The D-Backs are just begging me to jump on the bandwagon again so they can flip it over on top of my f*cking head.

Best Player in the Division - Matt Kemp
Best Pitcher in the Division - Tim Lincecum
Breakout Player in the Division - Kyle Blanks
Comeback Player in the Division - Manny Ramirez

NL East Winner - Philadelphia Phillies
NL Central Winner - St. Louis Cardinals
NL West Winner - Colorado Rockies
Wild Card Winner - Atlanta Braves

NL Champion - Atlanta Braves

World Series - Yankees/Braves
Yankees win in 7

Baseball is on the verge of disaster yet again........because the Yankees won

2010-03-21T11:23:00.002-05:00

For the first time in nine years, the New York Yankees won the World Series in 2009. What does that mean, besides a November trip down the Canyon of Heroes? It means another winter of discontent for the baseball world, where every Bob Costas disciple comes out of the woodwork to complain that baseball resembles Saudia Arabia, where the rich live in golden palaces and the poor rummage through dumpsters to try and feed their family.
What I always find fascinating about this type of hand ringing is that it only, only takes place when the Yankees win. A few years ago, when the Red Sox rolled over the Rockies with a payroll that more than doubled their friends from Colorado, no one even made a peep. We didn't hear cries for salary caps or "floating realignment" and no one ran to the Tampa Bay Rays to ask them how they felt being in the same division with the high priced team from Boston. In fact, all the way through 2008, the year the Yankees actually missed the playoffs, all you heard was that baseball was experiencing a kind of renaissance. Ratings were good, attendance was up, and people were actually logging in on the Internet to watch the boys of summer.
A year later, nothing seems to have changed except the world champions, but now, instead of birds chirping and Bud Selig singing arias, everyone is predicting the demise of the sport.
Before everyone gets too carried away screaming that baseball doesn't provide the same type of parity as the other sports, let's look at some facts. In the last 30 years, more than 20 different teams have won championships, which is more than any other sport (NFL, NBA, NHL) in America. Also, let's not forget that baseball, by its own choice, has the stingiest playoff roster of all the other sports. In the NBA, eight teams in each conference make the playoffs, which is the same for the NHL. The NFL is a bit more selective, allowing six teams in, but, out of 30 MBL teams, only eight total make the playoffs per year. If baseball were to have decided to add two more playoff teams per league in 1999, here is how the playoff tallies would have added up for AL and NL teams: ]
AL
New York Yankees - 10
Boston Red Sox - 9
Tampa Bay Rays - 1
Baltimore Orioles - 0
Toronto Blue Jays - 2
Cleveland Indians - 5
Chicago White Sox - 7
Minnesota Twins - 7
Detroit Tigers - 3
Kansas City Royals - 0
Texas Rangers - 2
Seattle Mariners - 5
Anaheim Angels - 7
Oakland Athletics - 8

NL
New York Mets - 5
Philadelphia Phillies - 6
Florida Marlins - 3
Atlanta Braves - 7
Washington Nationals/Montreal Expos - 0
Chicago Cubs - 5
Houston Astros - 8
Cincinnati Reds - 1
Milwaukee Brewers - 1
Pittsburgh Pirates - 0
St. Louis Cardinals - 7
Los Angeles Dodgers - 6
San Francisco Giants - 7
Arizona Diamondbacks - 5
San Diego Padres - 3
Colorado Rockies - 2

Couple of things that jump out at me from that list: if the sport had expanded its playoffs, only four teams total in the last 10 years would not have made the playoffs, and only three teams would have had a single appearance. The rest of the teams all would have made the playoffs multiples times. Another thing is how successful supposedly small market teams, like the Twins and Diamondbacks, have been almost every bit as successful putting themselves in playoff position as larger market teams like the Mets, Phillies, Angels, and White Sox. Obviously, the Yankees and the Red Sox would dominate the playoff scenario if it were expanded, but so would the Braves, A's, and Giants. And, in this projection, there is no way to predict how teams would have reacted to being in a playoff hunt all season long.

Then, there are "market size" issues. Take a look at this article from a few years back by Al Streit, where he shows the market size of each team. I found it to be absolutely fascinating in a number of ways. First, there are obviously teams crying small market that actually exist in perfectly equitable markets in which to generate revenue. I'll give the Nationals a pass right now because, as a relocated team that had to suffer through a few year of having Jim Bowden as its GM, one can't expect them to immediately spend money. They are building from the ground up, and that is the appropriate thing to do.
However, what, exactly, is Baltimore's excuse for failure?
In terms of market size, the Orioles have a larger base from which to draw than the Red Sox, yet the Sox field a winner every year and the Orioles are lumped in as one of the "have nots" in baseball. How is that fair? How is that about "market" and not about terrible ownership and shotty decision making? Simply put, the Orioles, if run effectively, should be a team that competes against the Yankees and Red Sox every year.
The other team that really seems to be undercutting its fans are the Oakland Athletics. Granted, the A's have to share their marketplace with the Giants, and one could make the claim that the Bay area of California isn't solid enough to support two teams, but why have the Giants been able to field a team with a decent payroll and the A's consistently sell "Moneyball" as their only way to compete? Again, would better management and ownership have a chance to turn the A's into a franchise that can compete, payroll wise, in the AL West each year?
Another couple of obvious observations is that Major League Baseball seems to have completely missed the boat when it expanded into Tampa Bay. The Rays ownership has been extremely vocal and crying "foul" about having to compete against the Yankees and the Red Sox, but they find themselves in a market that is only above the Pirates in terms of possible fans. Yet, that isn't the biggest factor in the team's inability to generate revenue. What remains a larger hurdle, in my opinion, is that Tampa has notoriously been the retirement home for Northeasteners who are already avid Yankee, Red Sox, Mets, and even Phillies fans. There isn't a large base of unattached fans in which to draw from.
Plus, even if you were capable to siphoning some fans, how in the world can you expect to entice them to come to Tropicana Field? On television, the place plays like a dungeon, without the charm. I can't imagine being a Floridian, with all the possible opportunities for recreation that comes with being in a warm-weather climate all year long, trudging out to depressing Tropicana Field on a June afternoon to watch Rays, Tigers play inside that dome.
In fact, my bet would be that the Rays would probably have more luck drawing fans from what appears in the article to be a smaller market in Orlando, yet it seems to be a better sports town in general, and is a more centrally located Florida city. I also think baseball, in the next few years, should think considerably about some other markets, like Portland (perhaps future home of the A's) or Charlotte (Rays) for relocation. Portland would already seem to be a viable baseball city and Charlotte is a growing metropolis. Instead of allowing teams to stay where they are not succeeding, why not send them to places where revenue and interest might be more pronunced?
The last thing I take from this article is that ownership has as much or more to do with success than anything else. The Angels are listed as being in a market that shares nearly 17 million potential fans with the Dodgers. Yet, before Art Mareno bought the team, the Angels were never considered one of the "big boys" in terms of payroll. Now, they consistently have one of the top payrolls in the sport.
On the flip side, the Dodgers should be nearly on par with the Yankees, yet its owner, with his marital problems and penny-pinching ideas on business, has been reluctant to actually push the payroll envelope.
The Cardinals are technically in a smaller market than the Indians, yet consistently produce a competitive payroll. The same could be said of the Twins as opposed to the Marlins or the Diamondbacks. And the Blue Jays would also seem to have more revenue streams available then they currently let on.
While we are on the subject of payroll, another interesting take on team spending could be found on The Biz of Baseball . The article is yet another indictment of baseball's low revenue teams screaming that they "just can't compete." The crux of the article is simple to digest: the teams that receive the highest amount of revenue sharing are also the most profitable. What does that mean? I think it is simple: these teams, which produce low payroll and non-competitive teams each year, are taking the profits they make from ticket sales and revenue sharing and either pocketing the money or putting the money into non-baseball related functions, such as paying down debt.
That's exactly what the Pirates, the poster child for small market teams, has been doing for years, and as the article points out, it would seem quite clear that, despite ownership's insistance that paying down debt will "help the team in the future," it is far more likely that paying down the debt is a necessary step in making the team more valuable for when they eventually decide to sell.
The Marlins are another team that really jump out at you, simply because ownership always complains that it can't keep its main players because of salary constraints. Yet, this year, when pressure was finally applied by MLB and the players' union, the Marlins anti'd up and paid Josh Johnson and Dan Uggla and will eventually pay Hanley Ramirez. Why were they able to do that? It's because, as the article shows, the Marlins have been extremely profitable.
So, while everyone cried foul on the Yankees, the Rays, Marlins, Pirates, and A's are allowed to take their money, line their own pockets, collect a profit, and blame the large market teams for their inability to compete.
Am I missing something here?
Facts have a funny way of getting in between people and their beliefs and, as such, are usually discarded. So many people have bought into the haves/have nots debate in baseball that they most likely would be unwilling to admit that the MAJOR problem for the MLB is not the high spending clubs but the clubs who all but tank each year in order to bleed one more cent out of the stone.
Look, money obviously matters. The Yankees and Red Sox and the like have a lot of recources to retain top players and plug yearly holes with other top talent.
But, the luxury tax has worked as a salary cap for almost all of baseball except for the Yankees, who have even adhered more to a budget these past two years than they had previously. And, what the articles mentioned above show is that there are a myriad of with many of these teams that go beyond simple market size.
If baseball is serious about closing the gap somewhat, there are a few things I believe it can do: raise the amount required on the luxury tax. Right now, I believe it stands at about 40 percent on the amount above the current level ($170 million, I believe). Raise that to 50 percent or maybe even 55 percent. Trust me, even the Yankees will start cutting payroll if that kind of money is required.
Demand a "floor" in baseball, which could be a compromise for the players' union which would allow them to agree to a more tightly controlled luxury tax (which could easily act like a salary cap, without actually calling it one). Ensure that teams have to spend at least $60 to $65 million per year, which would seem to be more in keeping with the actual revenue sharing structure.
Disperse some of the luxury tax money to low-income teams, seriously consider relocating low-income teams to more profitable areas and encourage owners unwilling or unable to support a franchise to sell to interested parties capable to producing a profitable winner. Also, revamp the way in which teams can acquire foreign players.
Finally, add a wild card to each league (just one) and have the two wild card teams play a best of three series with the three division winners waiting for the outcome. That would add more teams to the playoff race without destroying the credibility of the division races.
I also would not be completely adverse to realignment in some capacity, as long as it made sense and kept in tact natural rivalries. The Yankees and Red Sox, despite both being top spending teams, must be kept in the same division. The same for the Dodgers and the Giants, the Cubs and the Cardinals, even the Mets and the Phillies, which is becoming an interesting and nasty rivalry.
The truth is, much of the whining recently simply stems from Yankee hatred. Baseball remains profitable and is by far America's second most popular sport, right behind the NFL. Coming in to spring training, a majority of teams have a chance to earn a birth in the playoffs this year. Look at each division and ask, which teams' fan bases believe that the playoffs are attainable? Here would be my list, per division:
AL East
Yankees
Red Sox
Rays

AL Central
Twins
White Sox
Tigers

AL West
Angels
Mariners
Rangers

NL East
Phillies
Braves
Mets
Marlins

NL Central
Cardinals
Cubs
Brewers
Reds

NL West
Dodgers
Giants
Rockies
Diamondbacks

By my count, that is 21 of 30 teams that come into the season with the "belief" that things could fall their way, and that is considering the miniscule amount of squads that end up being allowed to play into October. You would be hard pressed to convince me that any other sport could do much better than 21 of 30 teams, even with significantly more playoff spots opened.
Baseball is never going to adopt a "hard" salary cap, and a "floating realignment" scheme ranks as one of the dumbest baseball ideas ever broached, right up their along with Disco Night at Comiskey Park and The Mitchell Report. Parity can be achieved and smaller market teams can have success. Baseball just needs to be smart about how it approaches the problem, and begin to demand that owners spend to succeed.

Someone is doing a little shopping this off season. Yes, I'm looking at you Brian Cashman

2009-12-22T21:14:00.003-05:00

A couple of years ago, I could be counted as one of the most vocal critics of Brian Cashman after he refused to give up a package including Phil Hughes for Johan Santana and then refused to even consider a trade for Dan Haren because reportedly they were asking for Ian Kennedy. My main point: Cashman was far too much "in love" with his own prospects, believing that his personally rebuilt farm system was nearly untouchable.

Fast forward to this off season.

I can't even remotely make that kind of a statement with a straight face anymore. Cashman has shown a wonderful ability to target his top prospects (Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Jesus Montero, etc.) and keep them in the organization, and then make other top prospects available for the right player.

Austin Jackson has big upside and could eventually turn around and be a major player. However, Cashman wisely determined that Jackson's upside probably wasn't much higher than what Curtis Granderson is right now, so he traded the kid. Same thing with Ian Kennedy. There is a wonderful chance Kennedy, with pinpoint control and a nasty changeup, develops into an above average pitcher, but what were the chances of him doing that in the AL East as a Yankee? Cashman made the decision that it was highly unlikely. So, out the door he went.

Now, Cashman has traded for Javier Vazquez and international super spy, Boone Logan (officially the greatest name in sports right now). To get the former Braves, the Yanks gave up Melky Cabrera, Mike Dunn, and some double A pitcher who, evidently, has some talent (let's face it, if Atlanta wanted this kid, he must be pretty good since they don't usually swing and miss on many pitching prospects).

It is yet another example of Cashman playing the right chips with the right cards. Reportedly, when the Tigers and Yankees were discussing Granderson, Mike Dunn's name kept coming up. Cashman refused to give up the hard-throwing lefty and the Tigers finally relented, accepting Phil Coke instead. That made everyone assume that Dunn had reached a level of top-tier, almost untouchable status. I mean, if you're not going to trade Dunn for an All Star like Granderson, who, exactly, would you trade him for?

Well, Cashman answered that, and picked up a starter along the way.

Trust me, my first reaction to hearing that Javier Vazquez was coming back was to nearly black out when disturbing memories of game 7, 2004 ALCS, came streaming into my consciouness, but the truth is Vazquez is a pretty darn good starter and has been the majority of his career. He is usually good for 200 innings, high strike out totals, and double-digit wins. You just can't argue with that type of consistent production, especially considering the Yankees didn't give up one top-echelon player.

I think there were some questionable decisions this off season, like replacing Hideki Matsui with Nick Johnson, but, for the most part, Cashman has hit a home run. And, when you consider that the Yankees still have Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Jesus Montero, and pretty much all of their top lower-level prospects, along with a few mid-level guys who might be able to help the team even next year, his decisions have been even more impressive.

Quick thoughts on the Yankee moves

2009-12-17T22:01:00.002-05:00

Just a few quick thoughts on the Yankee off season so far.

*I LOVE the Curtis Granderson deal at every level. One, Granderson is a top player, he really is. He is a good defensive center fielder, better than any they have on the team now, he has power, he has speed, and he has a high baseball IQ. Yes, he strikes out a lot. Yes, he doesn't hit lefties extremely well. But, he does A LOT more to make up for the flaws. Plus, if he is hitting 35 or 40 homers, you can deal with the strikeouts.
Second, you didn't give up anything dramatic to get him. Look, Austin Jackson might end up being a really, really nice player. But, is he ever gonna be significantly better than an All Star like Granderson? Probably not. Ian Kennedy might end up being a good pitcher, but not for the Yankees and not in the AL East. Phil Coke, I always liked. But, as much as I enjoyed Phil, you can always replace a lefty reliever. There isn't a world in the universe in which Phil Coke will hold up a trade for Curtis Granderson.
Finally, this fits right in with what the Yankees have been doing the last year and a half. Instead of paying guys for what they have done in the past, the Yankees are now acquiring guys in their prime. Teixeira, Sabathia, Granderson, even Swisher are all under 30, all ready to come into the best years of their career, essentially meaning that, by the time their contracts are up, the Yankees will have gotten their best years. That's pretty darn good.
Where would I hit him? Honestly, I have no idea. It looks like the Yankees will have themselves a new #2 hitter (we'll talk about that in a second), so Granderson's ultimate destination will not be up in the lineup. It appears that 1-4 is set. So, is Granderson a 5, 6, or 7? Ideally, Cano would be at the point to step into that #5 hole. He hits for power, average, and he has a little speed. I doubt he will be able to handle the upgrade to a run-producing situation, but let's dream for a minute. Then, I would go Posada, then Granderson, then Swisher, then Melky.
Either way, though, he will add another dimension to this team, and you gotta love it.

*Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui are evidently out, Nick Johnson is in. Umm........what?
don't get this at all. Look, the Yankee excuse for essentially severing all ties with Matsui and treating him like a man trying to bring a small pox virus into Yankee Stadium was that the team wanted to get younger, more athletic, and more flexible at the DH spot. In other words, they wanted a guy who could do a little more than DH. That's why it was assumed the Yankees preferred Damon. No, he wasn't even a decent fielder anymore, but you could run him out there when needed, DH when needed, and give a day off when needed. He wasn't going to "clog up" any one position.
I even get the Yankees moving on from Damon at this point. If he is really looking for 4 years, $13 mill a year, then you say "night night" to positively Damonic and look somewhere else. You just KNOW that Damon is gonna be a regular on the DL in the next two or three years, so don't blame the Yankees for being smart and saying no. Rather let go now than hang on too long.
But, what I don't get is how in the world the Yankees can justify letting Matsui go and bringing in Johnson. Yes, Johnson is younger, but that is in years only. Johnson's body is might be more broken down than Yogi Berra's at this point. Is there an injury he doesn't have? If you looked at Johnson's injury report and didn't know what sport he played, chances are you would choose hockey, with no pads. But, what about athletic? Well, let's be honest, the Yankees are on the verge of signing the only guy who is probably less athletic than Matsui. In fact, I doubt there was ever a time in Nick Johnson's life where his name and "athletic" ever shared in the same sentence.
So it must be the versatility of the player and the flexibility it provides. Nope, wrong again. Johnson's only position on the field is first base. Guess what, Mark Teixeira plays first and he is pretty good. Not only is he pretty good, he never gets hurt. So, Johnson becomes the same "clogger" for the DH spot that Matsui was feared to be.
Again, someone has to explain the upgrade. Matsui was one of the clutch players on the team. Johnson's only flirtation in big games ended not so good. Matsui hit 28 homers last year. Johnson hit 8 and has only hit 20 or more homers once in his career.
Again, I ask, what is the benefit to going with Nick Johnson over Hideki Matsui?

So.....now what?

2009-11-08T11:11:00.004-05:00

For some reason, blogspot wasn't posting my World Series waxings. Ashame. I had some insights that would have made Michael Kay raise an eyebrow or two (and none of them involved my favorite late night snack or with whom I would like to be trapped in a foxhole).

So, to quickly summarize the Keats-esque poetry I contributed to the Yankees 27th world championship run that didn't get posted.............they played really well.

The thing I appreciate most about this current group is how much they all seemed to embrace the atmosphere that comes with playing in the Bronx. Yes, the fans are crazy and the media is so far over the top they make Enquirer reporters look like Walter Cronkite disciples. Games in May and June are treated like October baseball and every win and loss, every winning streak and losing streak, every slump or hot stretch is overanalyzed.

But, that's the fun of it.

So many of the guys who have come through New York in the past four or five years have treated being a Yankee like being some sort of political dissident, put on trial each night for crimes they didn't committ. Randy Johnson, who is a no-doubt first ballot hall of famer and one of the most dominating pitchers in the history of the sport, seemed to memorize the phrase "kept my team in the game," as if the Yankees had brought he and his resume in simply to give a third-starter quality outing. Gary Sheffield, who has created a fake persona of mental and physical toughness, folded when New York criticism came his way, doing nothing but embarrass himself in the playoffs two straight years, and then lashed out at everyone from Joe Torre (whom he called a racist) to Derek Jeter (whose mixed ethnicity was questioned by the ever classy Sheff).

Even bit players, like Kyle Farnsworth, reacted to fan interest and media scrutiny with a combination of disdain and dread. It showed that money couldn't purchase success unless that money was spent in the right places.

This year, however, those dollars and cents were finally put in the proper spots. Every single player the Yankees brought in understood the pressures of New York and embraced them. CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett didn't hide behind "quality" starts when they lost a game, they told New York they expected more out of themselves. Mark Teixeira, who was booed in the beginning of the season after getting off to an abysmal start, said that he would have booed, too. Nick Swisher seemed to be a kid in a candy store, thrilled to be out of Chicago and away from Ozzie Guillen and willing to do whatever it took to help the team win. Remember, Swisher had originally thought he was coming to the Yankees as the everyday first baseman, the position he freely admitted was his best overall and the one where he felt most comfortable. Then, the Yanks swooped in and grabbed Tex, turning Swisher not only into an outfielder overnight, but a platoon outfielder at best, as the Yankees had Xavier Nady and Johnny Damon penciled in as their starting corner outfielders.

He didn't say boo. He didn't complain. He didn't run off to some tabloid columnist looking for a story and scream about how Brian Cashman and Joe Girardi lied to him. He walked into spring training ready to work and, because of injuries and his own play, Swisher not only became the Yankees everyday right fielder, he secured the position for the forseeable future.

While this team wasn't your brother's Yankees - buttoned down and businesslike - it had one very important trait in common with the dynasty teams; the players came to win each and every ball game and they took losing as hard as the fans, never wanting to relinquish their "W" for that day. Yes, there were pies in the face and more laughing and joking on the field, but there was also a complete committment to winning EVERY SINGLE GAME, and that came with the exceptance that New York pressure is something to be used and even nutured rather than discarded or avoided.

This was a fun team to root for, with good guys who happened to be great players. As hard as it might have been in the past to root for Gary Sheffield or even Roger Clemens, it was that easy to root for CC Sabathia and Mark Teixeira. The new guys showed that it was possible to have fun, show emotion, and have a distinct personality without ever crossing over into the land of the Red Sox or even the Mets, where such actions commonly included showboating (exhibit A would be Jonathan Paplebon's gyrations towards the opposing dugout anytime he ended a game with a strikeout).

The Yankees are the darlings of the city again, and this team will one day be honored along side the other champions, and will take their rightful place in the annuals of pinstripe lore.

So, now what?

Well, I, personally, will turn my attention to the NFL (where my Giants are looking like the Jim Fassel edition lately) and college basketball (with Uconn looking at a very interesting and unpredictable year). I am also going to try my luck at some NBA this year, as I enjoy the Celtics and I am going to be interested to see how the LeBron James watch goes throughout the year (I still don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that the Knicks land Bron Bron. Seriously, you don't think LeBron wasn't watching that Yankee parade? You don't think he saw his buddy, CC Sabathia, riding on that float? And while the Knicks won't do anything this year, they should have a high draft pick, money to spend on a player in addition to LeBron, and two players with outstanding potential in David Lee, who is a double-double every night and is a better big man right now than any LeBron has played with, Shaq included, and Danilo Gallinari, who is just beginning his NBA career and is showing signs of being that long-range assasin needed to win championships).

But, there is no better time than the present to look ahead at some of the moves the offseason might bring for the Yankees. Remember, because the baseball season is now almost 24 months long, pitchers and catchers report in a mere three months. We're lucky the series ended before Thanksgiving.

The strong points:

This team just won the World Series, so most of the points are strong ones. What I especially love about this team right now is that the Yankees are paying guys for what they are going to do, not what they have done. Let me explain: for about seven or eight years it seemed the Yankees traded or signed for guys who had logged their best years for other teams. While the salaries matched the previous performance, the quality of the work was considerably lower. Randy Johnson was paid like the Randy Johnson from 2001, but he pitched like a third starter. Gary Sheffield had one good year with the Yankees and then one lost season, and got paid richly for both. Carl Pavano barely even put the uniform on, yet he walked away, four years later, with $40 million without even logging what would have been one year's worth of starts for the team. Kei Igawa? Dear God, that man is still being paid for what he did in a different league in a different country. The list goes on.

Now, however, the Yankees have some guys who promise to have the best years of their career ahead. CC Sabathia is 29 and promises to perform at an ace-quality level for a very long time. Mark Teixeira put up argueably his best season ever in 2009 and one can see an MVP performance in the future. Even Nick Swisher, only 28 himself, could easily establish himself as a power-hitting corner outfielder and produce some big years as he goes forward.

AJ Burnett is older than that group, but he put together back-to-back 200 inning years for the first time in his career, which either means he and the Yankees were lucky in 2009 or he has figured out how to keep himself healthy. And then you have Robbie Cano, only 26, who was a star this year and seems to get better each season. If he simply produced as he did in 2009, he is one of the best three or four second basemen in the entire league. I think he has more in him.

Couple that with the fact that the left-side of the infield, in Jeter and A-Rod, show no signs of slowing down on their path towards Cooperstown, and this team has a nucleus of players that should be producing big numbers years down the road.

Another strength going forward, in my opinion, will be the bullpen. David Robertson was a diamond in the rough this year, and he showed an amazing ability to get swings and misses even though his fastball isn't topping out at 95 or 96. Damaso Marte was exhibit A for Brian Cashman haters as the example of bad trades and bad signings. No one thought much of him going into the season, and even less was thought when he somehow made the post season roster (I, for one, thought he should have never made the spot). Well, count me as a convert because Marte looked like an untouchable cog in that pen, becoming one of the most trusted late-inning guys for Joe Girardi. Marte and Robertson should join Alredo Aceves, Phil Coke, and perhaps even Brian Bruney, if he can get back on track, as nice pieces to the pen. Add in Mark Melancon, who might be ready for a more impressive role next year with the big club, and the Yankees can bring some heat out of that pen.

And, of course, you have CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett holding down the rotation. While Burnett might not be as much of a given as Sabathia, he still showed an ability to stay healthy this year and put together an impressive run of games, from about June through July, that had him pitching at a "best pitcher in the game" level.

The question marks:

This team won 103 games and didn't face elimination once in the playoffs. That means it didn't have many question marks.

But, there are a few areas of concern for the Yankees as they enter 2010, and the biggest question, for me, is whether the Yankees still believe in their young guns for the rotation.

I, quite frankly, can't think of anything more tiring than the Joba debate. I could literally watch 24 hours of Jon and Kate Plus 8 analysis on the E' Network over one more minute of Chamberlain to the pen or rotation nonsense.

At this point, I don't even care. I personally believe it still makes the most sense to keep him in the rotation considering how much time was spent last year "building him up" and watching his every move in order to ensure that, this upcoming year, there would be no limitations. To throw that all away because he wasn't "spectacular" seems a waste.

But, he did rediscover his fastball in the pen and his mentality might be better suited for the pen after all.

Regardless, the Yankees need to make a decision. If they are sending Joba to the pen, they need another starting pitcher, no question. Phil Hughes, who we all believe will be in the rotation to begin the year, is going to be Joba Redux. He will have the same, if not more stringent rules and regulations attached to his year than Chamberlain last season. And, one would assume he would experience the same, if not more "growing pains," meaning Phil Franchise would, most nights, be good for a couple of innings and a couple of runs.

Plus, the Yankees last year got by with almost no major injuries to their starting squad, besides Chien Mien Wang. Burnett has never gone over 200 innings in two straight years, until now. Will he hold up for an entire year next season and make it three 200+ innings in a row? And how about Pettitte, who is assumed to be back this coming year? Andy is going to be 38. As good and consistent as he has been, 38 is an advanced age. Anything can happen. You have to at least be ready for a possible injury or simple loss of stuff. To believe that Andy is good for his usual production is wide eyed at best.

For the sake of arguement, let's say you move Joba to the pen, make Hughes your fifth starter. I, if running the Yankees, would turn my attention to getting at the very least a number 3 quality starter. Perhaps Edwin Jackson could be had for the right price. Perhaps Joel Pinero would be a good fit in pinstripes. That would be my focus. This way, you protect yourself against injury (if either Burnett or Pettitte go down, you still have three starters you can count on), against sudden diminished results (if Pettitte only has fourth starter stuff, no big deal), and protect against being desperate going into next season when one of your starters (Pettitte) will most likely be lost to retirement.

I don't believe you need to go trade for Roy Halladay, as much as I would love to see it. Halladay will cost too much in every way, and the Yankees already have the stud in CC and the enigmatic, can be as good or as bad as anyone in the sport, AJ Burnett. Even if the unthinkable happens and the Red Sox land Halladay, and team him with Beckett and Lester (and Dice K), the Yankees would still have an almost equally formidable rotation if they plugged in a Jackson or Piniero and went CC, Burnett, Piniero or Jackson, Pettitte, and Hughes. Not too shabby, especially considering the Sox would most likely have to relinquish their best prospects to get a Halladay deal done.

Another weak spot will be catching. I believe the Yankees need to seriously consider phasing Jorge Posada out of the full-time catching duties and handing more over to Francisco Cervelli. Cervelli showed enough of a bat to, I believe, be a competent back-up/part-time catcher, and his skills behind the plate are unquestioned. Simply put, Posada's time behind the plate is quickly becoming a hinderance to the Yankee's future success.

Taking a break from sports for some spooky musings

2009-10-25T20:15:00.000-05:00

How they got here..............

2009-09-27T20:30:00.002-05:00

It has been a while since my last post, partly because the Yankees have essentially been on cruise control since sweeping the Sox in that four game thrashing in early August, and partly because work is, well, work, and the idea of writing on the weekends seemed somewhat............disheartening.
But, today, on the 27th of September, after a well-earned sweep of the Sox yet again, the New York Yankees have clibched the American League East and the best record in the AL, meaning homefield advantage throughout the playoffs (including the World Series, if they make it that far. Thanks All Star Game!). So, I thought this would be a good time to rank the most important factors to the Yankees success this season. Without these different parts all coming togther, the Bombers never, ever would have gotten to where they are now.

5.) Nick Swisher - It is easy to overlook the Swish man on this team because he isn't an all star, nor is he one of the big guns at the top of the lineup. But Swisher's presence on this team has been one of the more important additions of the year.
First, look at the numbers: Swisher is batting an umimpressive .250, but he has 27 homers (most of which were not hit at homer-happy Yankee Stadium), 79 RBI, 80 runs scored, a .370 OBP, and 93 walks. By the end of this season he could have 30 homers and 85 RBI, with close to 100 walks. I would bet anything that, if one were so inclined, they could research all of the corner outfielders in the league and one would find that Swisher is comparable to all but the top, top performers. It is the type of year the Yankees were PRAYING to get out of Xavier Nady. It is the type of season good teams get out of their second-tier players.
Add in the fact that Swisher has gotten consistently better defensively in the outfield and has batted almost everywhere in the lineup effectively, and the strange and often baffling Nick Swisher has been a huge, underrated reason why this team has been on such a roll.

4.) Team Bounceback (Jorge Posada, Hideki Matsui, and Robinson Cano) - Coming into the season, none of us had any real idea how this threesome would do. Posada and Matsui were coming off of injuries that all but destroyed their 2008 seasons, and Robinson Cano had played such lackluster, uninspired baseball the previous season it was anyone's guess as to whether he would live up to his natural talent or fade away into a mediocrity. Well, the verdict is in, and all three would have to be ranked as unmidigated successes. Posada never really re-established himself as a top-notch defensive catcher, and his days behind the plate appear to be quickly coming to an end (especially with Francisco Cervelli looking like the real deal), but his offensive skills returned to form as he quickly reaffirmed why he has always been a middle-of-the-lineup type of hitter.
At times early in the season Matsui looked to be all but cooked, running on a stumpy leg that seemed to actually age him from game to game. Then, the old man proved that it doesn't take two legs to swing one bat. Big hits and pressure spots have been Matsui's specialty again this year, and it would take a super computer the likes of Joshua from Wargames to calculate how many big hits the veteran batter has gotten over the last six months.
Then, we come to Robinson Cano, who was one bad half of baseball from being shipped out of town. Cano, last year, became the symbol of the ills that plagued the Yankees all year long. He didn't seem to hustle or play with the desire that would be consistent with Yankee teams of the past. He also didn't seem to play smart baseball, always making the wrong choice at the worst possible time. And his entire demeanor seemed to scream Manny Ramirez.
So, with everything to prove, Robby C seemed to come into this season with a purpose. With a week left in the season, Cano is batting .321, 24 homers, 80 RBI, 100 runs scored, 47 doubles, and 200 overall hits. It is the type of season you should expect to see many, many more times over the course of Cano's career.
But, perhaps most impressive has been Cano's defense. He would have to be given major consideration for a gold glove and he has solidified the Yankees as one of the best infield defenses in the league. Coming into the year, most of us felt that Cano was either going to become a star or a bust. Well, the light is shining brightly right now for 24.

3.) Phil Hughes (and the entire bullpen) - It must have been somewhere around late May when, one day, I tuned into Mike Francesa on WFAN and his rotundness was spouting off that the Yankee bullpen would NEVER be any good unless the Yanks wised up and moved Joba back behind those walls. The guys just weren't there and, Francesa screamed, you can't just move anyone into the pen and have them be a success. A while later, the Yankees decided to move Phil Hughes from the rotation to the pen, slotting poor, lonely Chien Mien Wang into the rotation. Again. Francesa was incredulous about the move, stating as FACT that Hughes would be one step bellow dog dung in such a roll.
How's that prediction looking now, Mikey?
Phil Hughes hasn't just become a shut-down eighth inning guy, bridging the infamous "bridge to Mariano" as well as anyone in the past 10 years. He has become one of the most dominant relievers in the game, instilling confidence that is usually reserved for Rivera. Hughes has been every bit as good as Joba was in 2007, striking guys out on a consistent basis, and doing it with a quiet swagger that exudes intimidation. His blazing fastball (which now clocks at 95-96), combined with a 12-6 curve and a newly-rediscovered slider, makes him, at times, untouchable.
And his dominance has also translated to overall success for the entire bullpen. Everyone has been slotted into their appropriate roles. Phil Coke, Dave Robertson, Alfredo Aceves, and Brian Bruney have all stepped their game up knowing that they have ownership of certain moments and times in the game. Girardi seemed in love with the idea of sticking different guys in different roles on an almost everyday basis. Today, you might be a long man, while tomorrow you'll be the eighth inning guy. That just didn't work. Now, everyone has a role, and Hughes' success is what has allowed such consistency. Without it, one could see Girardi still trying to force such a hodgepodge approach to the pen.
Hughes may eventually live up to his billing as a top-quality starter (though I think all of us shutter at the thought of the Phil Rules replacing the Joba Rules) but, for now, he has been the backbone (along with Mo, obviously) of one of the, if not the best bullpens in the entire league.

2.) CC Sabathia - Yes, the entire rotation has been important. I agree. And, one can make the arguement that CC has simply been the pitcher Mike Mussina was for this team last year, when the Yanks missed the playoffs. But as GREAT as Moose was, Sabathia has been an ace. The big lefty has been tremendous, especially in the second half of the year when, in my opinion, he became the Cy Young award winner (Zach Greinke's numbers are startlingly good, but one has to give consideration to the fact that the next big, important, pressure-packed game in which Greinke pitches will be his first. Pitching for something meaningful in high-pressure situations has to count for something, right?).
Sabathia's dominance at the top has allowed the team to weather terrible stretches by both AJ Burnett and Joba Chamberlain and inconsistent starts from the likes of Sergio Mitre and Chad Gaudin. He has also pitched well against the team's biggest rivals (Sox and Angels) and has matched up with the likes of Justin Verlander, always seeming to win that battle.
Having CC as the ever-present win, especially in the second half, has been invaluable, and having a player the caliber of CC, who signed for such a huge contract in the offseason, live up to expectations, has been even more important.

1.) Mark Teixeira Speaking of living up to expectations....................Tex gets my top slot for two very important reasons: first, he has been the main cog in the offense since the middle part of May, when Alex Rodriguez returned and teams couldn't pitch around him constantly. He has the most RBI's in the league, is second in homers, and is batting .294 with a .380 OBP. Teixeira lengthened the lineup the way Jason Giambi and Gary Sheffield never could, and unlike those guys, who became all or nothing hitters towards the end, Teixeira has proven to be not only a great power hitter but also a terrific situational hitter, a great baserunner, and a hustler on every play (anyone remember Luis Castillo dropping that ball in the Subway series? It would have meant nothing if Tex wasn't busting it from first the entire way).
But, what makes Tex so special is his defense and his obvious ascension, already, as a team leader. How many errors has he saved with his glove? It would be hard to measure, but I doubt one could make an accurate count only using two hands. Forget the obvious scoop plays and high snags on throws that appear to be going astray, how about the errors that were saved simply by his mere presence? Don't you get the sense that Jeter, A-Rod, and Cano are all more confident and comfortable throwing to first knowing that, if one gets away from them, they have a guy there more than capable of cleaning up the mess? That kind of confidence has probably made them more accurate, simply by removing the fear of overthrowing or underthrowing the guy standing on the bag.
It is that kind of immense influence he has had on both the offense and the defense and it is why I believe Tex is the most important piece to the Yankee puzzle this season.

Honorable Mentions - Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez

I still hold out some hope that Jeter will be able to sneak in as the MVP this year, just because the future hall of famer has deserved the award, in my opinion, two other times. His year has been amazing from beginning to end and he has been the sparkplug of the team all year long. His play in the field and his overall offensive game (running, hitting, stealing) has been a joy to watch.
A-Rod has been the most impressive I have ever seen him. No, his numbers don't compare to his 2007 season, but forgive me if look at that year with a somewhat jaudiced eye, considering his admission this year that he used steroids.
Nope, this year, after missing 5 weeks, he has been brilliant. He has come up with HUGE hits, played very good defense, run the bases extraordinarily well, even when still hampered by his hip inury, and has played great defense. And, he has stayed off the back pages and truly become "one of the team."
The only reason I didn't include these two on the top list is because, in large part, these two future residents of Cooperstown (I think A-Rod will still get in) are doing what you would expect. They are great players playing great.

The Joba Rules............are you kidding me?

2009-08-30T11:45:00.002-05:00

I just have to vent about the stupidity of the Joba Rules and how, now, they have taken on a new definition. Supposedly, after the Yankee cracker jack team of investigators realized that giving him sporadic starts with different days of rest wasn't working out too well (they might have been tipped off by his 9 ERA in those outings) the braintrust that has done everything to stunt and stymie this young man's growth came up with another set of "rules" to go by. Now, Joba will be treated, for the foreseeable future, as really a starter in name only. Essentially, he is going to "start" games but not really look to finish them in any way. Will he go three innings? Will he go five innings? No one knows except for, well, Joba and the coaching staff.
Am I the only one that thinks this whole thing is utterly ludicrous?
I understand the premise behind these actions and, in a way, I agree with it. I do believe that stretching relatively young kids out well beyond what they have been accustomed to is dangerous and we have seen that starters who have jumped up, especially into the 200 inning mark after coming no where close the season prior have had arm issues and performance problems.
But when is enough enough?
Joba is currently at about 130 innings pitched. The Yankees decided that they want him to pitch somewhere around 160 or so innings this season. Let's say that Joba has 6 starts left (it might only be 5 but we'll say 6 to be safe) and let's make a HUGE assumption and say he were to average 7 innings in those 6 starts. That would mean he would pitch an extra 42 innings this regular season, not counting the playoffs, where it would be impossible to predict what kind of innings he would receive (would he be moved to the pen, in which case he would only be asked to pitch one inning at a time, or would he be kept in the rotation as a fourth starter, in which case he might not be needed at all in certain series?).
We know that Joba wouldn't average 7 innings, so let's say he averaged 6, which would be an added 36 innings, which would put him right in line for the "innings limit" they have set up.
Are you telling me that, if Joba went 172 innings as opposed to 165 innings, his arm would fall off? Are these guys robots? Is there no pitcher in human history who has seen their innings go over 170 and live to tell about it? Really?
Just let the freakin kid pitch.
He isn't good enough to threaten this dreaded innings limit anyway. Plus, what no one has talked about is that Joba's inning limit, to me, is a joke anyway because the concern isn't the innings but the pitches. Joba's 40 pitch innings, I am sure, put far more stress on his arm than a 8 inning, 90 pitch game ever would. How many of those games has he had already this year?
And all of this ignores the fact that Joba has not, in any way, proven that he should remain a starter for his career. In the best of circumstances, he hasn't shown the ability to conserve innings, pitches, and go deep into games. He hasn't shown that he can be the pitcher the Yankees want him to be.
Now, I still believe he has that type of talent, but he has to be allowed to show it before any of us can say, categorically, that he is the next great thing in the rotation.
And how unfair has all of this been to Joba?
I get as frustrated with Joba as anyone, mostly because I still firmly believe he can be a great pitcher, but when you consider how much they have juggled this kid and played with his head, it is really a miracle he has done as well as he has. Think about it: Joba, who has been starter all of his young career, was brought up and turned into an eighth-inning reliever in 2007; in 2008, as if still trying to figure out what to do with the young man, they started him in the bullpen then "transitioned" him, in season, to the rotation, doing something similar to what they are doing now in limiting his innings and trying to "build him up"; because of that strange decision to transition Joba in the majors rather than the minors, he hurt his arm, was placed on the DL, and when he returned he was placed, again, in the pen; start of the 2009 season he was announced as a starter, but he was essentially only allowed to go 100 pitches (if that) per game and, after a very onconsistent first half, he came back in the beginning of the second half and pitched lights out, only to have the Yankees decide to begin their "Joba Conservation" plan in between starts, which has now morphed into the new Joba Rules.
Pitchers are creatures of habit and Chamberlain's entire season has seemed more like a laboratory experiment rather than a season focused on winning baseball games. It hasn't been fair to him and it hasn't been fair to the team. I said this about Phil Hughes and I'll say it about Joba Chamberlain: the Yankees do not exist to ensure that they develop as seamlessly as possible. Chamberlain and all the young players exist to try and help this team win.
Keeping an eye on their health and trying to do what is best for them in the future is fine, but the Yankees seem to be overdoing it a bit, don't you think? Instead of treating these kids as professionals, they seem to be treating them as youngsters on a little league soccer team. Maybe Joba's arm is stronger than what the yankees are assuming, or maybe he is like Francisco Liriano, who never came close to exceeding some innings limit because his arm exploded well before it. Maybe Joba is CC Sabathia or maybe he is Mark Prior. The point is, numbers on a page don't tell you that, only time and experience does.
All I know is I am as sick of the Joba Rules as I am of the "Joba to the pen" arguement. Maybe, one day, they'll treat the kid like a professional. If they don't plan to do that, send him down to the minors because people at MLB should be there to help the team win, not learn.

A tally of right and wrong calls here in the dog days..........

2009-08-16T13:55:00.003-05:00

I have tried posting a couple of times over the last month but, for some reason, blogspot hasn't been very receptive to my desire to opine about all things Yankees, so I'll try it one more time.
Really, things have settled down in Yankee land. In fact, it is the first time in several years where it feels like the dynasty days where, as a fan, you expect the team to win every time they take the field.
So, with the Bombers rolling and the dog days officially here, I thought it would be a good time to take stock of some of the "predictions" I have made throughout the year and see how I'm doing. There is still plenty of time for me to be right or wrong, but August seems to be a perfect time to really see where I stand.

What I was right about:

Oh, the list is so long..............:)
First, the thing I am most proud of is my early championing of Phil Hughes to the pen. While such beat guys like Sweeney Murti and Peter Abraham poo-pooed the idea from the get go, and resident blowhard Mik Francesa emphatically professed that Hughes "won't be good in the pen at all," Franchise has taken to relief work like Lindsay Lohan to a Vegas cathouse. The eighth inning and the "bridge" to Mariano has never been more secur, and Hughes is the biggest reason why. Only required to throw two pitches, Hughes' fastball has added life and his curve is devastating. And there is a swagger about him on the mound that has not been there before. He looks almost annoyed when someone gets a hit or he gives up a walk.
Second, I was right about the pen in general. WHile everyone was suggesting that the pen would NEVER be the equal of other teams' relievers, I predicted the Yankees were not that far away from having a very capable group. Did I know they would be this good? No way. But I saw the talent in Phil Coke, Alfredo Aceves, Brian Bruney, and even David Robertson, all of whom have become valuable commodities in a pen that is about as shut down as you're going to get. Bully for me.
Third, while I can't give myself that much credit for this, I'll take a bow none the less. While the likes of Joel Sherman (another moron making comments with little knowledge to back it up) were suggesting that Derek Jeter was simply a "singles hitter" now and others were typing in their calculations to prove that Jeter was the worst fielder since Todd Hundley ventured out to left field, I quietly predicted that Jeter would have a return-to-form season, which would be a prelude to next season (contract year), which promises to be even better. Right now, Jeter is at .320, 15, 53, 20 stolen bases, and a near .400 OBP. He's on pace for 20 homers, 75+ RBI, 30+ stolen bases, 200 hits, 100 runs, and his best defensive season in the last five. And, yes, I saw it coming.
Fourth, I believe it was me who saw Damon's contract year coming. Of course, a lot of other people did as well, so I'll just add my name to the list. But, remember, it is a list of people who were right about something.
Fifth, I was right that the Yankees were the best team in the East and that the Rays would be the odd ballclub out.

Joba teaches a reminder course.........

2009-07-19T20:46:00.002-05:00

Here is the thing about Joba: he is so damn talented, and burst on the scene with such an amazing display of electric stuff, it is impossible to lower the impossible standards to which he is subjected at this point.
Before the All Star Game Yankee fans had essentially done a 180 on Chamberlain. The most beloved young player on the Yanks was being booed and, once Roy Halladay's name was mentioned in trade rumors, everyone was wondering how much gas it would cost to drive Joba to the station to make the exchange.
But this afternoon, Joba reminded us of a few important facts.
Joba reminded us that he still has the stuff to be one of the best pitchers in the game. He reminded us that his fastball hasn't gone the way of the dodo bird and that, when his slider is diving in and out of the strikezone, he can go on an extraordinary run of creating swings and misses.
He also reminded us that he is 23 years old, something we have a tendency to forget, and while all of us would love for him to have matured to the point of consistent dominance, sometimes these things take a while.
It was pretty darn interesting to watch Joba duel Edwin Jackson this afternoon, considering where Jackson is in his own maturity as a pitcher. At 23-years old, while with the Rays, Jackson, in his first full season as a starter, went a terrible 5-15. He went 161 innings and gave up 195 hits, accounting for a 5.76 ERA. Last year, at 24 and a full season under his belt, Jackson lowered his ERA to 4.42, nearly 1.5 runs per game better, winning 14, pitching 183 innings and giving up 199 hits.
Now, in Detroit at age 25, Jackson has begun to fully realize his outstanding potential. He is projected to win anywhere between 13 and 15 games with an ERA under 3, going 230 innings and striking out 182. He made the All Star team for the first time and is establishing himself as one of the best young pitchers in the game.
Can you imagine if Jackson had put up those kinda numbers for the Yankees early in his career? He would have been shipped off to the next available team for a bag of balls.
Joba, in New York, at 23, has a 4.05 ERA, is on pace to pitch 169 innings, give up 178 hits and strike out 153 while winning 10 games. For his first full season as a starter in the majors, after having only 150 innings at the minor league level, that isn't too bad, is it?
Look, Joba can be absolutely infuriating to watch pitch, and I am sure he will pop up another sub-par performance before too long that makes us all scratch our head, but for today Joba was able, with his 97 MPH fastball and devastating slider, to collectively slap us all across the face and remind us that the talent is there and, sometimes, you do have to wait a little while for it to come around. The Rays didn't and they handed the Tigers a guy who could be a top pitcher for 10 years. The Yanks can't make that kind of mistake.

It isn't going to happen, but if it did, here's what I would do

2009-07-17T11:02:00.002-05:00

Okay, let’s get this right out in the open right now: I don’t believe for one second that Roy Halladay is being traded to either the Yankees or the Red Sox. Seriously, folks, put yourself in the shoes of Blue Jay’s GM J.P. Riccardi; how would you justify trading your best player and the face of your franchise to one of your division rivals for prospects?
Hey, we may all know who Jesus Montero, Austin Jackson, and Phil Hughes are, but do you think a Blue Jay fan knows, or cares one wink, about those names? If you do, here is a pop quiz: who is the best prospect in Toronto’s system? If you asked the three hard-core Jays fans in Toronto that question, it would roll off the tongue, but damned if I know. So, if the Yankees traded CC Sabathia or Derek Jeter for one of those guys, or even three of them, would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Of course not.
The Halladay deal is going to be painful for fans no matter what. Trading him in division is like spitting in their face while you’re signing the agreement.
BUT…………….
Alright, let’s play in media fantasy land for a second and say that Toronto would trade Halladay to the Bronx. Who would I be willing to give up in that kinda trade?
Well, let’s lop off some names right off the bat: Jeter, Posada, Teixeira, A-Rod, Matsui, Sabathia, Burnett, Pettitte, and Mariano. Those guys are either a.) too old, b.) making too much money, c.) aren’t available, or d.) all of the above. Whichever letter you pick, it means no go.
Two guys who are highly unlikely but just missed making that list are Robinson Cano and Nick Swisher. Cano is young and is tremendously talented, but his inability to hit in the clutch makes him a prime candidate for “can’t handle New York” status once more is asked of him and his easy-going style of play can rub some New Yorkers the wrong way. Problem with trading him to the Jays is this: he is getting paid $42 million and they already have a pretty darn good second baseman in Aaron Hill.
All sides point to no on Cano.
Swisher? Well, again, I highly doubt the Jays would take on his contract and .242 average, but he does have power, is only 28, and can play multiple positions. That makes him more attractive than the other guys, but still a long shot.
No, this comes down to the younger guys who are either already on the team, or expected in the next few years. Of course, if the Blue Jays are worth their weight in gold they know the Yankee system better than I, so I’m sure there are names they know and like that I won’t be mentioning. But at least a few of these guys will HAVE to be included, one would think.
Let’s start with the guys I would ABSOLUTELY be willing to give up in a Halladay deal: Melky Cabrera, Phil Coke, Dave Robertson, Andrew Brackman, Austin Jackson, Zack McAllister, Dellin Betances, Brett Gardner, and Mark Melancon.
I don’t think there is any shocker in there except for Austin Jackson.
First, I buy into Jackson, I really do. I like the kid A LOT. Anyone catch some of the minor’s All Star Game last night? Jackson hit a triple off the right-center field wall that he absolutely crushed. It was an opposite field rocket shot and he was motoring. And, supposedly, he is a very good fielder as well.
I think the power will come, but not in 35-4- range, probably the 20+ range, which is still pretty good for a kid who might steal 40+ bases.
But outfielders are probably the easiest commodity to get on the market and the Yankees have some decent ones already. Save a sweep to the Angels before the break, the Yankees were essentially tied with the Red Sox for the division with an outfield of Brett Gardner, Johnny Damon, Nick Swisher, and Melky Cabrera. You can win with that outfield, although it is, I admit, not ideal.
Plus, if you let Jackson go, you would undoubtedly hang onto Gardner, and I am a big fan of the little man. I think he might be the type of rugged, hustle player the Yankees have been looking for. You need those kinda guys. That, to me, makes Jackson somewhat expendable.
If, for some reason, the Jays want Gardner, than Jackson is your man in center, but you have a surplus there, making him expendable.
Also, while I like the upside of Melancon and am not scared off at all by his poor performances when called up, he is a reliever. You can find, or make, relievers if you have to.
Here are the three guys I would think about but would be VERY reticent to give up: Franscico Cervelli, Austin Romine, and Phil Hughes.
I know, Cervelli probably doesn’t deserve to be on this list considering he hasn’t been touted as a big-time prospect and was only in the majors for a limited time. But you had to be impressed with this young man. He has superior defensive skills and his offensive game was a lot better than I think most people realized. I like him a lot but would probably be willing to part with him, although I admit it would be tough.
Romine is supposedly a more refined catcher than highly touted Jesus Montero and his power numbers are not that far off either. But none of us have ever seen the young man on the big stage and the Yankees are stocked at the catcher position. With so many options (Cervelli, Montero, and young prospects at the lower levels) coming at catcher, giving up Romine would be a possibility.
Now to the big debate.
Here is how I look at Hughes versus Joba (and, in my mind, that’s the debate): Hughes has two legit pitches right now while Joba has three with a coming-along changeup that will make four; Hughes was shaky at best while in the rotation while Joba, aside from his last three starts, has been solid; Hughes was throwing 91-92, touching 94 while in the rotation, then amped it up when he went to the pen, while Joba has been averaging 92-94, touching 96 on good days; Hughes has been far more injury prone than Joba; Hughes, while having wonderful early success in the pen so far, hasn’t shown it over a long stretch, while Joba has, meaning he could be put back in the pen and excel; and Joba is just simply more seasoned at this point.
Trust me, I am a converted Hughes denier and I believe the young man will be very good, but I like Joba more. If it came down to Hughes or Joba, I would part with Hughes first.
Now, here are the two guys I wouldn’t touch: Joba Chamberlain and Jesus Montero.
I just explained my “Joba over Hughes” theory but I think it also needs to be pointed out that Joba, up until three weeks ago, was the most untouchable player on the team and Hughes, a month ago, was so shaky people were questioning what you could get for him on the open market. Only in New York could that change overnight.
Joba has the stuff to not just be good but to be great. You don’t trade that simply because of some bad starts and stupid post-game press conferences.
And Jesus Montero? This kid has the chance to be a Manny Ramirez-type hitter, I honestly believe that, and I don’t think you pass up on that kind of talent.
He is big, he has power, he has patience, and he is only 19. This could be one of the most special players the Yankees have produced in YEARS.
For everyone worried about whether he will be a catcher or not, I have an easy solution: move him to one of the corner outfield spots.
Seriously, the kid is 19 and, from what I have seen, can run a little bit. He doesn’t have to be a DH or a first baseman. Move him there now, let him make his mistakes, then stick him in left field for his career. You already have Cervelli, a great defensive catcher, and Romine, who might be every bit as good with more offensive upside. Put Montero in a position of need. The Yankees don’t have power-hitting outfielders waiting to come up. Make him your Manny Ramirez without the steroids. Don’t let that kind of player go.
I have heard some people suggest that the Yankees “bite the bullet” like the Red Sox did a few years back when they traded Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez for Josh Beckett. Couple of points to remember about that: first, Beckett was significantly younger than Halladay is now and had a proven track record in the postseason, something Halladay, who has mostly pitched meaningless games in his life, doesn’t have; second, the Sox didn’t already have some proven pitchers and young studs on the way. I doubt they would make that same trade today, given the depth and talent they have now; finally, the only thing that makes that trade palatable is the fact that the Sox won a championship. What if they had fallen short? Hanley Ramirez has become a superstar. Jesus Montero could be the same way.
Like I said, it doesn’t matter because they aren’t trading in division, if at all, but if I were giving up my players, my only two off limits would be Joba and Jesus.

Furture is so bright, I gotta wear shades

2009-07-17T11:02:00.001-05:00

One of my favorite bits on the old Late Night With Conan O’Brien show, before he went over to the dark side of the Tonight Show was “The Year 200,” where O’Brien and a guest would look into the future.
I know most of us in baseball land see the future as existing only within the next few months, but I thought it would be fun, as we turn our attention to the second half, to look beyond that………all the way to the year 2010.
What will the Yankees look like in another year? Well, here’s what I would like to see when the Yankees begin the 2010 season.
First base: Mark Teixeira — There are gonna be a few pretty obvious names on this list and Tex leads off the bunch. He has been a little more streaky than you would like, starting off horrible, heating up to nuclear levels, then going 90+ at bats without a homer and watching his average fall below .280. But you can already tell that he is good for a .280 - .300 average, 30+ homers, 110+ RBI each year while playing excellent defense. Barring injury, he’ll end up being worth the money.
Second base: Robby Cano — I know we all go hot and cold on Robby, but consider his numbers right now for a second baseman: .308, 13, 46, 61 runs. If he kept up at that pace, he would score 113 runs, drive in 85, and hit 24 dingers. That’s the kinda production from second almost no one else this side of the Phillies and Chase Utley can touch.
Yes, sometimes it seems like he’s watching clouds, or counting his steps to first. Yes, he looks like a freshman on his first day of high school when he comes up with men on. Yes, he tried to bunt being up 3-0 in the count. He aint the sharpest tool in the shed. But, again, where are you finding a second baseman with his talent, his production, at his age? Thank you.
Short stop: Derek Jeter — Hey, anyone notice the old man Jeter is having one of his best years ever? The veteran captain is on pace for over 20 homers (aided by the new Stadium) 30+ steals, 100+ runs scored, and, of course, over 200 hits and a .320+ batting average. Oh, and his defense has been pretty darn good as well.
The rumors of Jeter’s baseball death seem to have been greatly exaggerated.
Third base: Alex Rodriguez — Some days it looks like that $3 billion contract the Yankees gave the man is worth every penny. Other days, it looks destined to be ranked as one of the great financial mistakes not headed by Bernie Madoff. Only time will tell, but this much we do know: A-Rod is gonna be your happy-go-lucky third baseman in the Bronx for a long, long time.
Catcher: Francisco Cervelli — Here is when things get interesting.
Is Cervelli the real deal of Shelley “Shrek” Duncan with a cooler accent? Only time will tell, but you can’t fake that kind of defensive prowess. He has an absolute gun for an arm, and it’s accurate as all hell. He likes throwing behind runners and daring them to try and steal. While I love Posada, as a fan, your heart sinks every time a speedy runner gets on first. With Cervelli, you are almost hoping they try and run. It is sort of like watching a great shot blocker in basketball. You want the other team to go inside as much as possible because you know he is going to regulate that area.
Will he ever be a good enough hitter to make him an every day catcher in the league? I think so.
Look, he isn’t going to be Jorge Posada. Few catchers are. Jorge has quietly amassed a Hall of Fame-caliber career and is an elite offensive player. Cervelli won’t be that, but could he hit .260+ with a few homers, few RBI? Sure, why not? He essentially did that while up with the club before.
With this offense, you should be able to have a great defensive catcher play everyday as long as he is solid offensively. I think Cervelli will hit more than enough to justify his spot on the team.
Right field: Alex Rios — The Yankees need a corner outfielder with pop. The Blue Jays are going to be looking to dump payroll and no one is going to take Vernon Wells. The Yankees’ tenuous situation in the starting rotation right now makes a deadline trade for a bat unlikely as their offense is flying, but in the off season, why not put together a deal for Rios? He’s 28, has a gun for an arm, plays virtually every day, steals 20+ bases, and has pop, which should only be more useful in the new stadium. Plus, while in Toronto he is expected to be a great player, in New York he would be able to fit in a little neater. If he hits 22 homers and drives in 85 RBI for the Jays, he is a disappointment. Ironically, in the ever-harsh atmosphere of Yankee Stadium, those numbers would be perfectly acceptable.
I look at Rios and I see the Yankee answer to Jason Bay and, because he is owed a good chunk of change, I don’t think the Bombers would be forced to give up HUGE prospects to get him.
Center field: Brett Gardner — He’s spunky, he’s gritty, and he is exactly what the Yankees have needed now for a while. Gardner, after working out the kinks early in the season, has become the type of hitter the Yankees were hoping for. He’ll bat .280 because, well, he’ll beat some plays out and get enough in the gaps to create some pain for other teams. He puts extreme pressure on the opposition’s defense. I can think of a few times (the Alex Cora wide throw to second) where his speed was a major reason for an important error. And, given a full season, he’ll steal 40-60 bases, guaranteed (I’m not sure he has even learned HOW to steal as of yet).
He has a Chad Pennington arm in center, but he catches up to balls and is taking much better routes now than early in the season. And he is fearless.
You win with players like him on the team, and they need that.
Left field: Jesus Montero — This one is actually right out of left field, but I think this young man is going to be special. He destroyed A-ball, was moved up to AA, had about a week’s worth of adjusting, and is now destroying that league as well. He’ll be in AAA in another few weeks and then, after that, why not the majors? Everyone is so worried about “rushing” kids, but if Montero is as special as he seems, why not bring him up and let him learn at this level?
Now, about the position change: Montero is a catcher, but he is a big, big kid and, while he has a gun for an arm, he evidently isn’t making Johnny Bench sweat. The Yankees have Gardner, Austin Jackson, and Melky Cabrera as good outfield options (Jackson and Gardner could potentially be exceptional) but they are all center fielders with little power. Montero has the power to be a corner outfielder easily. And since the Yankees are (surprisingly) stacked at the catcher position (Cervelli and Austin Romine), moving him would make the most sense.
Montero should be moved by the end of this year and then allowed to play winter ball as an outfielder. By next season he should be ready and, if not, a month or two extra in the minors, as someone holds down his spot (Melky?) should be just fine.
DH: Jorge Posada — I know he won’t want to do it but Posada needs to be moved to the DH spot by next season for two very good reasons: 1.) he’s not a good defensive catcher anymore and there are MUCH better options in the system and, 2.) Posada is far too valuable offensively and he needs to be rested more than he is now.
Posada at the DH spot would be allowed to focus solely on hitting and, since he hasn’t shown any signs of slowing down with the bat, his numbers should remain consistent, even at his elevated age.
There is a far better chance that Posada remains an offensive force for the next two years of his contract if he is moved to DH than if he insists on staying behind the plate.
Take a cue from your coach Jorge and help one of the new kids move into the role.
Bench: Melky Cabrera, Austine Romine, Ramiro Pena, Nick Swisher.
Starting rotation, #1 spot: CC Sabathia — He’s a horse who will only pitch better the second half than the first. You would have liked to see him step up in two specific spots this first half (third game against Boston at Fenway and third game against Angels in Anaheim, both to stave off sweeps) but, overall, you can see why the Yankees paid him what they did. Look for big things second half and next year when he is more comfortable.
Starting rotation, #2: AJ Burnett — Has been on a roll since losing to Boston and has the best stuff on the team. When he is going right, he is virtually unhittable. The question is, can he stay healthy and avoid meltdown games?
Starting rotation, #3: Joba Chamberlain — I am going out on a limb and saying that, by this time next year Joba will be your bona fide #3 starter. First, he doesn’t get traded. Second, he turns it around in the second half and pitches better. Third, by this time next year he will have had a full season under his belt and have matured. He’ll be your man next year, making for a deadline 1-2-3 in the rotation.
Starting rotation, #4: Erik Bedard — I know people don’t like him as a person, and he is an injury risk, but it is the reason the Yankees will be able to get him on the cheap and slip him into the rotation. If he stays healthy, the Yanks have a steal, as he has the ability to be one of the best lefties in the game. He is also only 30, meaning he has a chance to turn his last two years around and pitch for a long time. Upside? Very up. Downside? He breaks down. But, by next year, some of your younger pitchers, like Zack McAllister and (gulp) Ian Kennedy, along with Andrew Brackman and Dellin Betances, should be closer to making a contribution.
Starting rotation, #5: Phil Hughes — If everyone pitches as expected, he’ll be allowed to grow into the job and the experience he is gaining in the pen right now will prove to be invaluable.
Bullpen, closer: Mariano Rivera — You have a better chance of winning powerball 5 straight weeks than you do in predicting when Rivera will slow down.
Bullpen, rest: Phil Coke, Brian Bruney, Alfredo Aceves, Damaso Marte, Mark Melancon, BJ Ryan.
This is how you do a pen, you pull guys off the scrap heap. Ryan was really, really bad for the Blue Jays this year, but last year, in 60 innings, he was great. In fact, other than this year, when he has been healthy he has been great. Can he stay healthy? That’s a question, but it won’t cost you anything to find out, and if he ever got some of that electric stuff back, how good with that bullpen be?

So what does this team need now?????

2009-07-12T13:04:00.004-05:00

Alright, I get that the actual, numerical mid-point of the season came a few days ago. There are more games behind us than ahead of us here in the 2009 season. We all get it. Let's move on.
Because, really, the All Star break is the mid-point of the season in terms of assessment. By this time, a lot of the pretenders have fallen away, a lot of the contenders have established themselves in the race, and most importantly, everyone should have, by now, assessed their needs.
The Yankees are significantly better than they were last year and, before the last two games in Anaheim, were rolling along, looking like world beaters. The Angels have a tendency to change that view for the Yankees, but it still doesn't change the fact that the first half for the Yankees was a successful one.
So, what do the Yankees need to take the next step? I have put together a small list of needs and possible ways to fill those needs.

*Win Today Baby!!!!!!!!!!!

The Red Sox are going to win this afternoon. They just are. The Royals are impossible to respect. They just don't seem to compete. So, a win today, with CC Sabathia on the mound, would keep the Yankees 2 games out going into the break, prevent a 3-game sweep where the team legitimately could have won the first two, and would right the ship before a little vacation.

*Get the hell out of Anaheim.

Is there a place in baseball Yankee fans hate more than Anaheim? My God, it is a house of horrors, it really is. If the Yankees get the win, they should sprint to the plane and give the pilot extra to speed out of that area. Just horrid.

*Address the rotation with real solutions.

This has become the biggest problem area for the team, no question, and the the pivot point remains Chien Mien Wang. Coming into the season there was some question as to whether Wang or AJ Burnett would actually be considered the team's number two pitcher. Burnett's stuff is electric but Wang's consistency and resume suggested he was deserving of such accolades.
At the break, Wang's entire season is in jeopardy and, even if he were to return from the DL healthy, his shaky-at-best first half makes him a real question mark. That means that one spot in the rotation, right now, is in complete limbo. Alfredo Aceves, in my opinion, is needed in the bullpen, you don't want to touch Kei Igawa with a 20-foot pole, and unless someone has been really, realy wrong on the future for Sergio Mitre (which is always a possibility) he doesn't seem to be a long-term answer for this team either.
What makes the conversation even more tricky is that Joba Chamberlain and Andy Pettitte have both been experiencing recent struggles. But, in all honesty, what can you do with either one? You aren't gonna move Phil Hughes into the rotation and move out Joba. Why? First, because Joba still, despite his troubles and his surreal post-game press conferences where he seems to be in the beginning stages of true denial, deserves more of a chance to struggle through and prove himself as a starter. Seventeen starts this season isn't enough of a sampling and his recent struggles shouldn't overshadown the fact that, for the most part this year, he has been pretty good. If he can get back to what he was a month ago, he will be valuable to the Yankees.
Second, there is no guarantee that Hughes would be significantly better than Joba in the rotation. It wasn't like the youngster was coming off three shutouts when he was moved to the rotation. Third, Hughes is finally, for the first time since that game in Texas in 07, showing the type of stuff and ability that had the Yankees refusing to trade him for Johan Santana a few years ago. Do you really want to ping-pong this kid back and forth and threaten his arm? Fourth, Joba, right now, has a problem with his control, with his velocity, and with the big inning. That doesn't sound like a recipe for success in the pen. Whatever is ailing him right now, it is foolish to think it would be solved by a move to the pen. His lack of control and lack-luster velocity could make him a liability at the end of close games. Fifth, and finally, moving Joba doesn't solve the other two problems, so why do it?
If Wang can't come back and Pettitte remains this inconsistent, the Yankees will need to make a move for a pitcher.
Who?
Forget, and I mean FORGET, Roy Halladay. I don't think they are moving him in Toronto anyway, but if they did they aren't sending him packing to a team that would show up in their home ballpark 9 or 10 times a year. Cliff Lee? The Indians would probably be willing to move him for a steep price and it is hard for me to believe that Brian Cashman, who two years ago wouldn't part with Hughes for Santana or Ian Kennedy for Dan Haren, would be willing to give up a lot for an older Cliff Lee.
No, I think, if the Yankees were going to make a trade for the starter, it would be in the vein of a Jon Garland, who has pitched well over his last 6 starts for the Diamondbacks. Some other notables who might be available come the end of the month:
Jason Marquis, Colorado: The Rockies recent resurgence might mean Marquis is off the market, but if not, he has the type of stuff the Yankees could use (sinker) and has pitched in the Rockies, so the new launching pad in the Bronx wouldn't be a shock to the system to the 30-year old righty. However, it might take more to get him than some other, more expensive options.
Erick Bedard, Mariners: Here are the positives - Bedard is a hard-throwing lefty, he has pitched, and pitched well, in the AL East before, he has top-quality stuff, and after a terribly disappointing year last year he has been very good this year, pitching to a 2.58 ERA, 73 strikeouts in 69 innings, and only allowing 56 hits. Here are the negatives - he has already spent time on the DL this year after an injury plagued season last year, he is 30 so, while not old by any means, he isn't a kid, and perhaps most disturbing, no one seems to like the guy. His "character" issues seem to be very real.
But, he does have a large contract and the Mariners might be willing to take less to get him off the team. If the Yankees could find a reason to believe Bedard is not as bad a guy as some have painted him, it might make for a great trade for the team as Bedard, when right, can be as good as anyone.
Jonathan Sanchez, Giants: Sanchez is a lefty, has great stuff, is only 26, and just threw a no-hitter. But Sanchez's no-no only helped him lower his ERA to 4.68, so it isn't as if Sanchez has been a show stopper this entire season. The Giants might ask for more, in terms of a potential bat, for Sanchez now that he threw the no-no than they would have before, but it is still likely that the price wouldn't be all that high. Erik Hinske is looking pretty good right now, isn't he? How about Hinske, Juan Miranda, and a throw in for Sanchez. I would do that trade. Would the Giants? Perhaps. Would Sanchez be better than what the Yankees have now? If nothing else, it would give them yet another live lefty arm that is under 30. If he ever figured it out for the Yanks, it could potentially be a steal.

*Let's look at the outfield, please.

The offense has been fine, but I am still very wary of running Nick Swisher and Melky Cabrera out there on a day-in and day-out basis. I think Swisher would be best suited as a part-time player - someone with some pop off the bench, who can play all outfield positions and, when needed, first base. Melky could be used as trade bait now that he has played well enough to, I'm sure, raise some team's interest, and the Yankees could really use someone in right field that would be a fixture. Swisher's defense is shaky at best and Melky just doesn't hit for enough power, in an outfield devoid of power when Swisher sits, to constitute more playing time.
Who would work for the Yankees?
Vernon Well, Toronto: I know, I know........Wells contract is HUGE. I get that. But what if the Yankees could convince the Jays to eat SOME of the contract? For instance, Wells right now will be owed $98.5 million over the length of his contract (through 2014). Would the Jays be willing to pick up $40 million? Would that be enough to make a trade worth it for the Yankees? That would essentially mean the Yankees would be paying $58.5 million for Wells for 5 years. That averages out to about $11.7 million per year. For the Jays, that would average out to around $8 million per year. Would they be willing to do that, considering that, right now, they would be paying Wells an average of $19.7 million over the next five years.
Here is why I would consider making the deal: He is only 30 years old, which means he isn't near the end of his career; he is a very good defensive player and, at this point, could be moved to right field where he would be an elite corner outfield defender; last year, in 108 games, he hit 20 homers and drove in 78 RBI, while this year he is on pace for 16 homers and 68 RBI, 20+ steals and 41 doubles; he is only 2 1/2 years removed from a 32 homer, 106 RBI season; if you take into account the way the ball jumps out of Yankee Stadium, his power numbers might jump; because of his salary, even if the Blue Jays ate some of the contract, he would essentially cost no major prospects.
Is it worth the money to take on a great defensive player, good clubhouse guy, only 30 years old, who could still have special years ahead of him?
I know it aint my money but it could be worth the risk, and since the Yankees seem to be adverse to giving up their prospects, money deals are what they will be left with.
Probably won't happen, but worth the discussion.
Alex Rios, Toronto: I am a big fan of Rios and this is probably more doeable than the Wells idea I had. Rios is 28, a very good right fielder, has always killed the Yankees, steals some bases, hits for a decent amount of power, and is getting paid top dollar while only producing at a second-tier level. Rios is owed another $6o million by the Blue Jays, meaning they would look at this as a salary dump more than anything.
The problem with this is simple: Rios is younger than Wells, probably at this point a little better, and is owed less money. That means that more teams will be in on any potential deal. While it is fiscally smarter to try and trade for Rios, Wells would only cost you money. Plus, with more teams involved in Rios, it is likely the Jays would choose to trade him outta devision, whereas Wells could probably be had by anyone who showed some serious interest.
Matt Holliday, Oakland: Holliday can be had and everyone knows it. However, how good is Holliday anyway? For instance, if you're the Yankees, why wouldn't you go after Wells as opposed to Holliday? Look at what he has done this year away from Colorado: .276, 8, 43, .373, .419.
Wells' numbers are every bit as good, and he's only a year older. Yet, everyone assumes Holliday is in line for a huge pay day, courtesy of being a Boras client, and some have even suggested the yankees will be bidders for his services. Why?
I would avoid Holliday at all costs.
David DeJesus, Kansas City: He's a New York native, good defender, having a bad year. He isn't gonna hit for a lot of power but he'll do the little things to help a team win.
Ryan Garko, Cleveland Indians: Garko is the team's first baseman right now, but he has played 11 games this year in the outfield and made one error while out there. I can't speak intelligently about how good Garko is or can be in the outfield, but the Indians have soured on the 28-year old and he might be easily gettable.
He has more power, has a good eye, and doesn't strike out a lot. It might be worth a shot.

*More Brett Gardner, please.

Gardner appears to be entrenched in center field right now, but in the ever changing world of Joe Girardi you never, ever know. The speedy Gardner is a better defensive player than Melky and he makes more things happen with his legs. Melky has more pop and a better arm, but neither advantage is so pronounced that it should give him playing time over Melky.
I think Cabrera might be a valuable fourth outfielder on the team and, if the right deal came along, could be someone's center fielder, but Gardner brings more and should be allowed to show that for the rest of the season.

So now what?????

2009-07-04T15:32:00.002-05:00

Just as I write that the Yankees needed to committ to Chien Mien Wang for the year, he goes and gets himself hurt. In case you missed it today, Wang left in the sixth inning with what is being called "shoulder strain," which seems a lot more ominous than the usual "shoulder stiffness" or other initial, "get the press off my ass" releases.
Who knows, maybe the Yankees give Wang an MRI, everything looks good, and the righty is back on the hill in 5 days. Or maybe Wang is about to take a long, extended turn on the DL (remember, he has had shoulder surgery and missed almost the entire second half of the season in 05 with shoulder problems).
So, let's play doctor for a second and say Wang has seen his last turn in the rotation for a long, long time. What do the Yankees do?

Option 1: Move Phil Hughes back into the rotation.

This would seem to be the most likely and logical choice. Hughes had pitched okay before being removed from the rotation in the beginning of June. He had pitched a gem against Texas, going 8 innings of shutout baseball, and had gone 5 innings, giving up 4 runs and striking out 6 against the Indians on May 31, his last start. Not nearly as impressive as he has been since going to the pen, but serviceable none the less, and his start against Texas showed the flash of brilliance the Yankees have been looking for.
Of all possible internal options the Yankees have, moving Hughes back to the rotation would seem to have the most upside and possibilty for big gains.
The downside?
For one, Hughes has been utterly dominate since moving to the pen, and he is as big a reason why that part of the team has gone from a minus to a plus. Hughes, Coke, Bruney (when healthy), Aceves, and even the talented yet still learning Dave Robertson, really give the Yanks a lot of different looks and a lot of quality to play with. If you remove Hughes, it creates a void that isn't easily solveable.
The second thing is that Hughes would join Joba in the rotation, creating a scenario where the Yankees would have two young, inexperienced hurlers on pitch and innings limits going every five days. That could ultimately put a lot of strain on your bullpen and a lot of pressure on your top three pitchers to ALWAYS give quality and length. Will Hughes be able to translate his stuff and confidence from the pen to the rotation? If so, it's a no brainer. If not, it creates problems all over the Yankee pitching landscape.

Option 2: Keep Hughes in the pen and move Aceves to the rotation.

Alfredo Aceves has been a starter his entire professional career. In the few spot starts he made last year he looked pretty good. There is no reason to believe he would not be a competent starter for the Yanks.
Here are the drawback: like Hughes, it moving Aceves would hurt the pen. Granted, Aceves has been pushed back a bit since Hughes' arrival, but he is still very valuable and very much trusted out there by Girardi. Also, Aceves has never pitched consistently as a starter at the major league level. You have no idea what you would get from him every fifth day. Finally, as nice a pitcher as Aceves is, he does not give the Yankees the type of upside that Hughes does. His stuff just isn't electric enough.

Option 3: Leave Hughes in pen and trade for another starter.

You could do this. The Yankees have some trade chips to put out there for possible consumption. They have some nice young arms. The Yankees could try to pull off a deal for a mid-level pitcher. Maybe you're not getting Cliff Lee or Roy Oswalt, but maybe you can swing a deal for a Jonathan Sanchez? Not that I would be in favor of Sanchez (a 5 ERA in the NL West doesn't bode well for the AL East) but that is an option at this point for the team.
Problem with that? It costs money and talent for someone that might not make the difference between winning and losing. Want to take on Barry Zito's contract and his 5 ERA? Want to try and put together a trade for Jake Peavy and give up the king's ransom it would take to get him?
Maybe this makes sense if you can pry a Zach Duke away from the Pirates for prospects, but other than that it seems like a last resort for the Yanks.

Option 4: Trade for a pitcher, move Hughes back to the rotation, move Joba to the pen.

I figured I would throw this out there because, well, the debate can never die. I have been a proponent of Joba being in the rotation, but I do believe that he has to begin to show an ability to be more than just an average-at-best starter. Hughes has a highes inning's limit than Joba, meaning that, with his current stint in the rotation, he probably would be able to pitch the remainder of the season in the rotation without going over the limit, while Joba is on pace to hit that limit well before the season ends. It could also help Joba regain some of his swagger.
I don't think this is going to happen, but it could if Joba didn't begin to progress and the Yankees could pull off a deal for a good arm to put in the rotation.

Happy Fourth of July from The Free Seats

2009-07-04T11:57:00.003-05:00

It has been a while since I have had a chance to sit down and post. I'm sure the 1.5 people who actually view this site on a semi-regular basis has been lost without regular updates. Well, June was dedicated to work, work, and more work (and in today's day and age, I aint complainin) but now July seems to have settled down a bit, hopefully meaning more regular contributions.
But enought about that................there is a LOT to talk about in Yankee land and around the world of sports, and in honor of America's 233rd birthday, we'll start with what I believe the Yankees, their coaching staff, and their players, should declare.

Joe Girardi should declare not to bat Robinson Cano fifth, continue to hang Chien Mien Wang out to dry, and continuously make stupid comments that are then not backed up:

I am not a big, big, big fan of Girardi. In fact, I'm not a fan at all. As a person, he seems top quality. As a manager, he seems overmatched in New York. Let's not forget that Joe Girardi came to the Yankees after only ONE year of managerial experience with the Florida Marlins. Assuming Girardi could manage in New York because he did it in Florida is sort of like assuming that I could lead a battalion of men into battle because I'm the captain of my church softball team. They are two different animals.
Of late, the above "issues" have really been bugging me when it comes to GI Joe. First, continuing to bat Cano in the five hole. I get that Cano is a terrific hitter, but being a terrific hitter with no one on base, and being a terrific hitter when you're expected to produce runs are two different things (go look at A-Rod's numbers in close and late situations over his career with the Yanks). Cano's numbers with runners in scoring position are putrid. They are actually embarrassing. He is batting over .300, and batting barely .200 with men on base. He goes up hacking at anything like he has tickets to Cirque Du Solei, essentially looking to hit anything that even remotely approaches the plate, meaning that in the tenses portion of the game for the pitcher, Cano does not demand that they make quality pitches to get him out. How many rallies has he killed? How many moments to break a game open have been wasted? Just look at yesterday: bases loaded, one out, Cano up, chance to completely blow the game open, and Cano grounds to second with the infield in, resulting in an out at the plate, no run scored, second out recorded, and new life provided to pitcher. Just horrid.
Now, the Yankees don't have a great option in the five hole if not Cano. Nick Swisher? Hideki Matsui? Neither one of them is a true candidate. But Posada is a much better option in that spot when he's in the game, and the fact that Girardi refuses to recognize Cano's run-producing problems speaks to his lack of feel for the game.

The Wang thing is even more puzzling to me. The Wanger is a two-time 19 game winner, was on pace for the same record last year before being injured, and yet he continues to get less than a slap on the back from his manager now that he is seemingly healthy and ready to pitch. Why? What are the better options? Who has the resume to demand such respect other than Wanger?
Phil Hughes has established himself as a terrific member of the Yankee bullpen and looks like a different pitcher. Girardi himself has all but annointed Hughes as a major, late-inning component to the team. What is the plan if he wants to take Wang out of the rotation? Move Wang and his sinkerball into the pen? Move Hughes back into the rotation where, by all intents and purposes, he wasn't much better than the current version of Wang and has never proven he can be a big-time winner in this league? And, with trade rumors circulating out there that the Yankees might even be interested in moving Wang, how does insinuating that he might not make his next start, or hasn't earned the right to keep his place in the rotation, increase his possible value? Doesn't that only diminish his value?
This team is considerably better with Wang out there, pitching well, and his resume has at least earned him the right to retain his spot in the rotation at this point and the fact that Girardi continue to treat him differently than any other starter makes no sense. If Joba Chamberlain is going to get a permanent spot in this rotation, so should Chien Mien Wang, and Girardi should be able to offer him that type of assurance.

Then, you have the Girardi double-talk problem. One day, Girardi has no roles in the pen other than Mariano Rivera. Then, he annoints Brian Bruney as the "eighth inning guy" and pulls Phil Hughes out of a game after Hughes had pitched lights out the inning before - a move that almost cost the team the game.
After the game, Girardi angrily insisted that Bruney would be his "eighth inning guy," and yet, only a day later, in a tight game in the eighth inning, it was Phil Hughes and Phil Coke out there trying to nail it down.
That is just one example of the man's constant ping-pong match with honesty and consistency. A-Rod is going to get a few days off a week, Girardi stated, before the man came off the disabled list. Then, when A-Rod did come back, he played in 45 straight games and had to enlist the help of his general manager to ensure a day off. Since those two days off? No rest for the weary.
Brett Gardner, earlier in the year, was the Yankee center fielder and Girardi told the world that wasn't going to change, even if he went into a slump. So, Gardner slumped early in the year and, guess what, Melky Cabrera was suddenly the every-day center fielder.
If you don't plan in sticking to your guns, don't say anything, Joe. It just makes it that much more unbearable to listen to you speak as you try and explain why you weren't flip-flopping on an issue. And, with that type of back and forth, how could any player truly believe what the manager has to say? I wouldn't.

Joba Chamberlain should declare to finally begin to pitch more aggressively to retain his position in the rotation.

Trust me, Pete Abraham, I am not jumping off the "Joba in the rotation" bandwagon in any way, but there is no denying that watching Joba pitch a ballgame has literally become excruciating. Runners are all over the place, he walks the ballpark, he never attacks with the type of stuff we saw previously, every count is 3-2, and by the 5th inning, Joba has 100 pitches. No, he never gets lit up, which speaks to his stuff, but I have always believed that Joba should be in the rotation because he can be special in that role, not competent. Joba, right now, looks like, at best, a third or fourth starter in the league. If that's the case, then moving him back to the pen, where he can be an A++ closer (potentially) makes a lot more sense. If he can find himself in the rotation and move towards being at least an AJ Burnett-esque type of pitcher, than his place in the rotation should be cemented.
But someone needs to put some expectations on the young man. Going out there and giving five innings, three runs, four walks, five strikeouts, and 100 pitches or more is just not cutting it. Yes, you can deal with that start as long as you continue to see progress. There hasn't been any progress in a while.
I want Joba to be the Yankee's future Josh Beckett, but I also want someone to express to Joba that, eventually, he has to SHOW that ability on the mound with more consistency. Stop shaking catchers off. Stop nibbling on the edges against 9th place hitters or guys batting .220. Attack. That's what earned Joba a spot on this team in the first place.

Brian Cashman should declare to begin to really stock the Yankee system with position players, not just pitchers.

Okay, I'll admit, the Yankee future in terms of position players seems much brighter now adays. Francisco Cervelli has been so impressive since being called to the majors that many, including myself, believe that he could be a viable, everyday option behind the plate once Posada is forced to take over everyday duties as the DH. Brett Gardner has played well of late and, if he could hit .280 as a regular, would be unbelievably valuable to this team going forward. Cano, despite his RISP numbers, has re-emerged as a TOP young player in this league, Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain have a tremendous amount of talent, and the Yankees two best prospects in the minors (Austin Jackson and Jesus Montero) are tearing up AAA and AA respectively. The Yankees also seem to be the front runners to land the Cuban defector Adiros Chapman, a young lefty who has been clocked at 100 MPH. But if Jackson and/or Montero don't pan out, and Gardner and Cervelli aren't able to hit enough to retain everyday jobs, there isn't much else coming in the pipeline to give the Yankees hope. There is no heir apparent to Derek Jeter at shortstop in the minors and, besides Jackson, no outfield help on the way. And while a stock pile of young pitching may help the Yankees secure trades for future needs, Cashman has seemed reluctant to part with ANY of his prospects even for proven major leaguers (lost in the Johan Santana discussions is the fact that the A's asked for Ian Kennedy in exchange for Dan Haren and were told no - a move that is probably more inexcuseable than not trading for Santana at a high price) and many of the pitching prospects have had serious arm issues that have either stunted or completely derailed their growth (see Andrew Brackman, Kennedy, and Humberto Sanchez).
The Yankees are old at certain positions and need prospects. They have pitchers, now they need some future stars to score those pitchers some runs.

Some other Fourth of July notes:

*I get people are tired of the steroid discussion. I am too. But that doesn't explain the "open arms" treatment Manny Ramirez has received, especially from Dodger fans, upon returning to baseball this weekend. The guy was suspended for 50 games because he cheated, and if he cheated this year why wouldn't he have cheated in previously years - years where he built his Hall of Fame resume?
Maybe we are past demonizing these guys for their actions, but we shouldn't be to the point where we cheer them for having cheated the game.

*Is Jorge Posada a future Hall of Famer? How come we never really ask that question? Name three better catchers than Posada during his career? Mike Piazza was perhaps the best hitter at the position ever, but Posada was, and is, more durable and a better defensive catcher. Ivan Rodriguez is argueably the best, but we also noticed how quickly Pudge went from being a middle-of-the-order force to a skinny, has-been player once more steroid testing was inacted. After that, who would even enter the discussion? I would argue no one. Posada's offensive numbers have been terrific, he has caught game-winners in the World Series, has caught a perfect game, and made big plays in big games. I don't know if he will make it, but Posada's career is often overlooked.

*If you're the Knicks, wouldn't it behoove you to, at some point, try and put together a team that would attract LeBron James rather than simply dump salary in a quest to clear enough cap space to offer the world to King James? I get that money talks and everything else takes a hike, and the Knicks might simply believe that offering a fortune, along with the trappings of New York, will be enough, but the Cavs just brought in Shaq and, I'm sure, have a few other tricks up their sleeve to try and convince James to stay. And, oh, by the way, he's gonna get a lot of money from Cleveland as well.
It just doesn't seem like the Knicks would be all that attractive to LeBron, does it? Heck, I think the Nets might be offering more of a future at this point.

*Staying with the NBA, all of the focus will be on James next year, but if he can stay healthy, someone is gonna land Dwayne Wade and get a SUPERIOR player. I mean, world class player. If the Knicks or Nets lost out on James and brought in Wade, it might end up being a push. He's that good when he's healthy. The problem? Wade has shown a disturbing tendency for getting injured over the last few years, and he plays with such abandon that trend might not change. For his sake, and for the NBA's sake, you hope he figures out how to keep his body healthy.

Finally, I do want to say Happy Fourth Of July to everyone. I love this holiday. Not because of the barbecues or the fireworks, which are nice in and of themselves, but because I love the history and the meaning of this date. The founding of this nation remains a magical period in human history and I believe completely in the ideals represented in the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
If you get a chance to learn more about the men who made this dream of America a reality, I would highly suggest you do so. They were, all of them, complex and filled with contradictions (and extreme character flaws) however, they were also brilliant and spoke of this nation in ways we rarely hear any more. So, watch the fireworks, listen to the music, but also think about the meaning and purpose behind it all. And have a very safe and wonderful holiday.

The Joba arguement. Let's get this outta the way here...........

2009-05-31T11:52:00.002-05:00

Let's get this out of the way: I believe, and still believe, that Joba Chamberlain should remain in the starting rotation. I have written about it a few times on this mighty blog and I ultimately believe it to be the best option. But, instead of arguing one way or the other, I have decided to give my best impersonation of Cybil (multi-personality) and argue BOTH sides of this debate with passion. The "Joba should stay in the rotation" side will be argued by me, John Rook, genius of the sporting world, while the "Joba should be in the pen" side will be argued by a new addition to this blog, who will be called Fike Mancesa, a 350 pound, bespectacled blowhard who, from time to time, can make a good point or two.
So, without further adieu, let's get down to the debate:

John Rook: "First, let me just say what a thrill and honor it is to be invited to participate in this debate on the best sports blog in America. Some will say that I was only invited because I run the blog, but I still consider it an honor.
So, the reason I am here is to debate, once again, the Joba Chamberlain question. I can't get enough of this arguement. I mean, how much fun is it to debate the same topic, with no new insight, no new evidence, no new information, and no new interest, over and over again? This debate is proof positive that the best things in life stem from talk radio, where dead issues are resurected like Jason Vorhees in another Friday the 13th movie.
Why should Joba remain in the rotation? For all the reasons that have already been mentioned one trillion, eight hundred million times before. Instead of getting indepth, let me simply list them for you: Joba has four major league quality pitches, with a fastball and slider that, on most nights, are A++ pitches, a very good curveball, and a changeup that is quickly getting to be a major weapon; he is 23-years old, has made only 22 starts in his career, and has an ERA in that time under 4 and a strikeout to inning's pitched ratio that is terrific; for the majority of this season, Joba has been the second best pitcher on the team, with his last start (4 innings, 4 runs) being the only time he hasn't given the Yankees a legitimate chance to win; starting pitching is the most important asset to any major league team and your best pitchers should be used where they can make the most impact (please, Fike, don't bring up Mariano. Mo is the BEST releiver in the history of the game, but he is FAR from being one of the best pitchers on the team. Mo could NEVER start, nor could he go through a lineup two or three times with only one pitch. He is a great RELIEVER, but it is the only role he could have on a team); you can always move Joba to the pen a year or two down the road without repercussions but moving him from the pen to the rotation would be virtually impossible if you essentially "skipped" this year as a starter; bridging the gap between the starter and Mo is not the impossible task some have made it out to be, illustrated by the fact that the likes of Brian Bruney and, more recently, Alfredo Aceves, have done the job quite admirably (and no offense to either one of those pitchers, both of whom are very good, but neither have electric stuff or special talent. You can find those types of pitchers around baseball. You can't find Joba's around at all); and, finally, you don't steal from one part of your team - the most important part of your team - because you either can't handle the pen effectively or can't handle the pen properly. Brian Cashman, with his rebuilt farm system and almost infinite cash revenues, should be able to build a pen that is productive without putting Joba in.
I have said this before and I will say it again, you have more of an arguement turning Phil Hughes into your eighth inning, future closer guy than Joba. Hughes has only two major-league ready pitches while Joba has four. Hughes has been much more injury prone in his young career than Joba. Hughes seems to lose something as the game goes on while Joba's problems have been early in games (forget what he did in 07. That was two years ago now. Joba would not be a candidate for late-inning work because his biggest struggles come early in games. To assume that somehow he will simply channel 2007 and become that short-inning dominant force is naive at best). And, flat out, Joba's stuff is flat out better. He has the chance to be a superstar starter, something Hughes has shown only flashes of being as a major leaguer.
Finally, I don't think that there is much of a discussion to be had in regards to where Joba helps the team best. Only baseball ignorant people honestly believe that relievers are more important than starters. But this "debate" has become so patently unfair to Joba it is hard to imagine. It has almost taken on the feel of a political debate, where being winning the arguement ends up being more important than being right. Those wh advocate Joba going back to the pen have all but ignored his good starts and his obvious improvements in order to create this narrative where the Joba "experiment" as a starter is breaking down all around the team. Little real coversation was had before Joba's last start because, aside from his first inning troubles, he had pitched well (and at times brilliantly) as a starter. The "back to the pen" crowd treated that as if it really wasn't happening, then waited for a bad outing and pounced.
So, Joba is expected to be good EVERY time, in every circumstance, or his time as a starter will be useless and unproductive for the team? Who is held to that kind of standard?
Certainly not Phil Hughes, who has been allowed to fail time after time, but once he pitches two games that are pretty good, he is annointed as being solid enough to solidify the rotation and move Joba to the pen? Hughes still has far more bad games to his name than good ones, and assuming that he would be as valuable in the rotation as Joba just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. As I am writing this, Hughes, in the fifth inning, has given up 3 runs, thrown close to 90 pitches, and has runners on first and third with no one out. If this were Joba, it wouldn't be treated as "taking his lumps" but rather as evidence that he can't be a starter.
Jba Chamberlain has the stuff and the makeup to be a dominate starter in this league. Moving him to the pen would be an absolute waste.
Fight me off, Fike. Do your best."

Fike Mancesa: "Alright, let's just say I am not happy at all right now because, when I walked in for this debate, someone had gotten me a diet Coke instead of a diet Pepsi. Not happy, my friends, not happy at all.
Joba should be in the pen, case closed. It's the only way the Yankees will win this year, no question. I don't know why I have to debate this. I told everyne how things should be and my word should be law. I saw Mickey Mantle play baseball, for God sakes. Joe Torre sends me tea every week, in cases. I don't even HAVE to pay for the good seats at Yankees Stadium, they give them to me because I am such a genius (even though, trust me, if I had to pay for them, I could afford it. I like people to know I am super rich).
Considering I haven't made a decent point as to why Joba should go back to the pen as of yet (mostly, I've embarrased myself by saying that the Yankees can't "wait" to develop a pitcher or that the eighth inning is more important than being a starter) let me bring up the only real arguement that holds any water: Mariano Rivera is a human being. That is a hard truth to come to grips with, but it's true. Mo will, eventually, not be able to pitch at the highest possible level. It is also possible that Rivera, a family man who has other interests outside of baseball, might very well decide to step away from the game, even while he is on top. Either way, the Mariano Rivera era is coming to a close sooner rather than later.
Put the blame anywhere you would like, but the Yankees do NOT have an heir apparent ready to go. Mark Melancon has the stuff, but he continues to wait for his chance in the minors, having gotten a shot in late April, early May with shaky results at best. It would be hard to imagine Brian Bruney as a top-notch closer, Phil Coke gives up too many homers at this point, and the trade/free agent closer market never seems to deliver good results for team.
Joba's 2007 season in the pen would make you think he could easily take over the roll of closer when Rivera decides to call it a career. His high-90's fastball, coupled with his devastating slider, could make him one of the more unhittable closers in the game. It would give the Yankees their end-of-the-game guy for years to come - their answer to Jonathan Paplebon.
If Phil Hughes can continue to improve, and Chien Mien Wang can come back and return to form, the Yankees would have (going forward) a solid rotation of Sabathia, Burnett, Wang, and Hughes, with Joba in the pen. Then, you could either go get a veteran pitcher to fill the gap in the rotation, or hope that one of your other young guns (a healthy Kennedy or Andrew Brackman) could take the reins.
Joba to the pen isn't about the eighth inning this year as it is about the ninth inning the next 10 years. The young man has the stuff and, most importantly, the make up, to be the closer of the future for the Yankees. For now, he can be an impressive 1-2 punch with Mo, lenghtening the bullpen and making that part of the team a strength. In the long run, he can move into the role and be dominate.
Joba needs to move to the pen now. Case closed."

Thanks to both our guests for coming out to participate in this debate tonight. For my money, I side with John Rook (shocker there) and HOPE the Yankees stay smart and keep Joba in the rotation. If the Yankees are so concerned about the closer spot AFTER Rivera retires, move Hughes into that role right now and have him be the eighth inning guy, eventually taking over as your closer. Hughes can still be a good pitcher in the rotation, but Joba can simply be special, and I would always rather have an ace than a top closer, even Mo. The Yankees have had Mo for the last 8 years and they haven't won a thing. That's because their starting pitching has simply been mediocre to terrible. A closer is NEVER as valuable if the rotation isn't top notch.

Let the new debate begin: Franchise to the bullpen?

2009-05-17T17:27:00.003-05:00

Good win for the Yankees. Yes, it is not a good sign that the Yankee hitters couldn't figure out a jiggsaw puzzle like Kevin Slowey and ended up in another do-or-die game with a midling pitcher, but a win is a win, and their ability to come back and win late in games has been impressive. While they might not have gotten AJ Burnett a win, they got a very good performance out of him and didn't squander the performance.
But the trio of Michael Kay, Paul O'Neill, and David Cone (mostly Cone and O'Neill) raised a fascinating question during the broadcast, one I would like to address right now.
With Wang seemingly ready to rejoin the team after a very good performance at Scranton on Sunday, what do the Yankees do with Phil Hughes?
Both Cone and O'Neill suggested the Yankees put him in the bullpen and, I have to say, I completely agree.
What is gained by sticking Phil Franchise back down in the minors? Does he need to prove yet again that, against minor leaguers, he is a dominate starter? Please!!!!! In the immortal words of Mr. Watori from Joe Versus The Volcano (top ten in underrated movies of all time) "I know he can get the job, but can he do the job?"
So what are the arguements against a Hughes move to the pen? I'll take the liberty of addressing what I believe would be their best arguements.

It will stunt Hughes' growth.

This is the most tiring arguement of all. Hughes apologists.........ahmmm............supporters protest that the young man cannot be expected to perform at the major league level because he has had such limited professional work. But the truth is that Hughes has, by comparison with many other top pitchers, had more than enough time to hone his skills at the minor league level. Phil Hughes has had, to date, 329 innings at the minor league level. By comparison, Chad Billingsley had 404 innings in the minors, CC Sabathia had 232 innings in the minors before going to the majors at 19, Josh Beckett had 216 innings in the minors, King Felix Hernandez, 306 innings, Barry Zito, 170 innings, Cole Hamels, 201 innings, Ben Sheets (not counting rehab starts) 179 innings, Tim Lincecum, 62 innings.
The idea that 600+ innings is essential for any major league pitcher to be decent is just a myth. All of those pitchers were able to come to the majors, learn their trade, and flourish without much experience at the bottom levels. If Hughes is truly going to be a "special" pitcher, he learns how to apply his craft to major leaguers, not just build up innings at the minor league level for the sake of doing so.

Hughes has no experience in the pen. How could you be sure he would be successful in such a role?

There is no guarantee that he will take to such a role, but it might be just what he needs. The two most impressive professional appearances Phil Hughes has made in his career were the almost no-hitter against Texas when he was injured in 07 and then, later in that year, the relief appearances he made against the Indians. In fact, one could make the case that his "stuff" was more impressive out of the pen than when he was in the rotation.
The young man needs to learn how to get major league hitters out. True, it would be in a different role than as a starter, but getting guys out is the same no matter what. There is nothing else to learn at the minor league level for him.
Plus, while there is no way to know whether he will take to the pen, one can deduce that it might actually be the perfect place for him. One of the reasons why the arguement for Joba to go back to being a reliever is suppose moronic is because he has four plus pitches. His fastball and slider at A+ pitches, his curve is a A pitch, and his changeup is at least B+ and getting better. He can mix and match throughout a start, showing different looks to batters throughout the course of a game. Hughes, however, has yet to perfect even a third pitch. He has an average fastball and an above average curveball. After that, he has been working on a cutter which isn't there just yet, and his changeup hasn't improved at all. As a reliever, he can simply rely on his fastball and curve, and won't have to worry about conserving on either pitch. For Joba, cutting back on velocity means going from 98 to 95. For Hughes, pacing himself through a game means the difference between throwing 95 to 90 or 91. That's a big difference. It also makes a difference to his curve, which isn't as nasty when the hitter can simply foul it away and wait on the average fastball coming in.

What happens if and when another starter goes down? Who do you turn to then?

You can still turn to Hughes. Why not? If, God forbid, one of the five went down with a serious injury, Hughes would simply move into the rotation. If someone had to miss a start, you could still use him in that role or spot start Alfredo Aceves. And, it would be more beneficial to the Yankees because you would be turning to guys who were already in the majors. They wouldn't have to worry about the game, and the pace of the game, being a shock to the system.

You're wasting Hughes in the pen.

This is the arguement used by people like myself for why Joba shouldn't be in the pen. It doesn't apply to Hughes. So far, despite his numbers in the minors, Hughes has shown little if any signs that he is destined to be a special pitcher in the majors. Joba has shown time and again that his talent and his makeup is unique. This is all about what is best for the team, not what is best for one player or another. Right now, with Wang coming back, the place where Hughes makes the most sense and can best help the team is in the pen. The place where Joba makes the most sense and is best to help the team is in the rotation. That's it. If Hughes doesn't like it, he should have pitched better over the last year when given a chance in the rotation. He hasn't just had growing pains, he has been non-competitive in many of his starts. Right now, at best, you could say Hughes is an average major league starter. Maybe he could be more in the pen.

He needs to pitch more innings to build up arm strength.

So, is the point help the team or further Phil Hughes' career? Right now, the Yankees NEED quality pitchers in their pen. They have gone too long with Jose Veras and Edwar Ramirez. Would you rather those two or Hughes and Aceves? Which tandem gives the team a better chance to win on a day in and day out basis? It would be hard for anyone to convince me that Phil Hughes helps this team more by pitching every 5 days in Scranton at this point. He is what he is against minor leaguers. No more growth is necessary.

The fact is, I don't expect the Yankees to make this move because they care more about "development" and "growth" than helping the team win. But the truth is Hughes' true value might end up being in the pen. As I wrote about before, Hughes, right now, is a two-pitch pitcher. He can get by with that out of the pen, not starting. Shuttling him up and down does nothing for him and it does nothing for the team.
Let him see what he can do. Let him take over as potentially a bridge to Rivera. Let him help solidify the pen. If he is needed in the rotation, the move can always be made in season. If not, he can help the club win and he can learn at this level. There is no baseball excuse for sending him down and keeping Veras and Ramirez up, none at all.

Big game for Burnett and Yankees

2009-05-17T12:08:00.002-05:00

One of these days the weekend here in the Northeast is going to bring with it some good weather. There is nothing more depressing than watching the sun shine through the window of your office at work for five days and then get to Saturday and not be able to leave your house because of the gale force winds threatening to blow your roof to another county.
Maybe that's why I'm not in a good mood this weekend. Maybe it's because of the weather, the long hours at work, or the fact that I have five days of work before the long weekend for Memorial Day comes up. Let's face it, I need a vacation (or that winning powerball ticket, whichever one comes first).
That bad mood has prevented me from truly enjoying the recent good play of the Yanks. I don't know what it is but it just seems like there is still something missing from this club. Do you honestly have confidence in this group to string together a big stretch of good baseball? The bullpen is still shaky at best, the starting rotation seems to be coming around but they always seem to throw a stinker in the middle, and the offense continues to leave a small third world country on base through every game. When is the last time you looked up in the fourth or fifth inning and saw the Yankees with a 4 or 5 run lead?
And maybe I am not being fair to Mr. Joe Girardi, but the man seems to be absolutely intent on trying to clutch defeat from the hands of victory in every game. The fact that he still uses Jose Veras and Edwar Ramirez in games that count is grounds for immediate firing, in my opinion. But GI Joe has as good a job security as possible because his owners probably haven't seen a full game of baseball all year long.
But this game today, with Burnett on the mound, will go along way to brightening my blues and making me a believer in the team. First, AJ "pie in the face" Burnett needs a good game. His tough-guy, biker attitude is starting to really get on my nerves when, in each game, you see him fall apart when he isn't dominating the opposition (just like the flaky, step to the beat of his own drum Nick Swisher is rubbing me the wrong way now that he has become a strikeout machine).
Burnett was paid to be at least a number 2 pitcher for this team, and this is the type of game a top-end of the rotation pitcher wins. You don't want to see him out of this game after 6 giving up 4 or 5 runs, walking 5, striking out 7. That's not a line you need.
In addition, the team is facing Kevin Slowey. Have you seen this man's numbers? Forget the 5-1 record. The guy has pitched 40 innings, given up 58 hits, and opponents are batting .337. I mean, Phil Hughes looks like Satchel Paige compared to that disaster of a season. If the Yankees don't have 5 or 6 runs within the first half of the game, there needs to be an investigation. Or, at the very least, we can begin to rethink the "modern-day genius" label people have attached to Kevin Long over the last two years, right?
If I have to watch one more below-average pitcher throw like a superstar against this team, I am turning off the TV, throwing on some Jazz, and beginning the process of picking my favorite MLS soccer team because I am finished with baseball. Kevin Slowey better not be in the sixth inning of this game, that's all I am saying.
And while I am in a bad mood, let me throw a few more bombs at Joe Girardi. Robinson Cano gets the day off today. He gets the day off against Kevin Slowey, a man who has been absolutely KILLED by lefty batters. A guy who is always around the plate. A guy who has given up 18 more hits than innings pitched. Tomorrow (Monday) the Yankees go against lefty Glen Perkins, who doesn't do a tremendous amount right except get lefties out. Why not play him today to try and get him back on track? Why rest him today against a guy he SHOULD be able to handle and then, if needed, rest him against Perkins, the lefty, tomorrow? And why is Cano getting the day off but Swisher, who looks like a poor-man's Mark Whitten up there right now, is in the lineup? He is 1 for his last 19. I would bet my life that, of those 19 at bats, 16 have been strikeouts. He is on track to obliterate Ryan Howard's homerun totals for the season, without any of those pesky homerun or RBI numbers the big Philly firstbaseman puts up each year.
And why isn't Gardner playing today? He needs a rest? Why is this lineup always changing? Why does everyone need a rest? Why is Joe Girardi still managing this team? I swear to God, someone needs to send the man a memo and let him know this isn't a 12 and under soccer team he is coaching where everyone needs to play. Set a freakin lineup and GO WITH IT!!!!! The man is insistent on NOT getting the best out of players. He consistently puts his players in positions where it is more difficult to succeed. Simply put, he's a terrible manager - great guy, terrible manager.
Okay, now that I have that out of my system, let's hope that Burnett steps up and that the Yankee bats don't go asleep against this joke of a pitcher.