yeah great. and a 3.0 era for a starter is great. a 3.0 for a short reliever/closer...ummm very dangerous....and it aiont even 3.0 as a reliever, im being generous
Given the fact that, aside from a dozen or so guys, middle relievers are pretty much up and down every single year, it's rather common for an unknown (even a rookie) to debut in the majors and have success as a reliever.
In the AL East, if you're a middle reliever who can eat innings and provide an ERA under 4, you're more than doing your job.
Looks like Boston's run is coming to a screeching halt. First the Patriots lose, then Rutgers women give Connecticut their first loss the next day (close enough to Boston, it is norther CONN.) Now it looks like Schilling may miss the year. If the article is right Boston is already trying to void his contract...lol. (Not that I think anybody outside of Boston expected much from him anyway. This happening when it did may have kept them from a serious run at Santana though) http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/02/07/schilling.injury/index.html
The amount of material you need to forget in order to be so down on this year's bullpen/team is staggering. It's not like 2007 season was that long ago, but apparently, all these nay-sayers have wiped the relevant parts from their mind. The bullpen before Joba was much less stable, true. But how much of that was because we had one of the worst bullpen managers in the major leagues? How much of that was because the Yankees didn't have a starter who could get out of the fifth inning for the first month and a half of the season? How much improvement can you expect to see when you have five guys who can keep you in a ball game, as opposed to having Karstens- and Igawa- type pitchers as your #4 and #5 starters for a good chunk of the season? How much more impact will Chamberlain be able to deliver as a starter, over the course of an entire season, instead of just offering 24.0 innings of dominant relief at the end of a season? Sure, those were 24 ridiculous innings, and they seemed important because it was the end of the season... but how do you feel about getting six times as many innings from him? How many more games will be handed over to a bullpen with a 6-2 or 7-3 lead, instead of a 7-6 lead? In other words, who cares if the bullpen ERA is over 5.00 if the starters can usually get them the ball with only 1-4 runs on the board after six innings instead of the 5-8 runs after three or four innings that Igawa or Karstens et al posted on at least a dozen different occasions last season? How many more wins would that translate to? And how come people are biting their fingernails over the loss of Vizcaino? Are they forgetting that his ERA was OVER 5.00 before the All-Star Break, and that he complained of a "sore shoulder" at the end of a year in which he made more appearances than almost anyone not named Scott Proctor? He did well when used correctly, but I don't think I'd be very excited about his chances of performing well this year. Hawkins isn't a shutdown reliever (or, at least, I don't have much faith in him to be one)... but he's not trying to replace Chamberlain. He's replacing Vizcaino, and there's at least a decent chance he can perform as well as Viz, if you consider the big ol' turd that Viz left on the field from April-July. And there are a lot of other pieces that can/will hopefully be used effectively this upcoming season (i.e. they won't get Torreed). Guys, the Yankees started last season 11-19, which was due to a perfect storm of injuries, poor play, and just plain old shitty luck (if you believe in the validity of adjusted standings). So unless you believe that the difference between Vizcaino and Hawkins and/or the difference between Josh Phelps and Shelley Duncan and/or losing those 24.0 innings from Chamberlain is so awful as to doom the Yankees to a worse showing than last year, then I have to think that you're not looking at this rationally. Because you have to ignore a lot of positive material in there to believe that, and you have to expect the worst-case scenario to play out in nearly all circumstances. Do the Yankees have question marks. Of course. All teams do. Are there more or less question marks than last season? I'd say about the same. The difference is that this year could provide far more upside than last year's Yankees.
I think the point is this. If the Yankees don't win the division (and I certainly think they can. They were the best team in the AL once they got healthy and it wasn't even close.) then they will be contending with a bunch of other teams who got much better this winter for the wild card. Seattle, LA and Detroit to name a few. These were the teams they chased all year and they are all better now. If the young pitchers don't pitch as well as everyone hopes then we may not even make the playoffs this year. All three of them will be on limited pitch and inning counts so the bullpen this year will be more important then ever.
So Don, you'll admit that you're only concerned with this year, regardless of the after effects into the future? That has been the mistake of the Yankees over the past almost decade. Win today, worry about tomorrow when it gets here. Cashman has finally brought the forward-thinking attitude that created '96 back to the organization. Why don't we give a year or two to see if it actually works? Not to mention we look pretty good in the first place. Besides, have the past 7 years been so great that we need to repeat the outcomes? I'll take missing the playoffs altogether this year if it means that we go out in '09 and win the Series, rather than yet another first round exit this year.
as much of an idiot that torre was, what exactly were his options in the pen? girardi will look like the same idiot if everyone in the pen sucks...as far as your point about the innings- youre simply wrong. why? well lets see.....we either have andy pettitte who is old and breaking down or three kids on pitch counts. charlie chan is the only guy who can eat up eatings....so how is it that you think we're not gonna be in the pen a lot? we are going to be in the pen in the 6th consistently....so day in and day out, who in thispen is gonna pitch all those innings effectively......you guys are forgetting how much a part of the formula the bullpen was during our dominance.....our bullen sucks guys.....10p10 is banking on the random emergence of a couple middle relievers just because it seems to happen every year? cant count on that. dierking is banking on the fact that we basically wont need a bullpen very often. very strange and pretty nonsensical.......alio is counting on latroy hawkins pitching like he did 4 years ago which he thinks was his rookie year(hadda take a shot at ya pal)...and Im being portrayed as a nay sayer because I have the nerve to look at the guys' performances and wonder how we're gonna get by........not to mention...not to mention...shudder the thought.....what if Mo takes a step back this year??????
now heres just one guys opinion but it furthers my point about innings and I think we can all agree that kennedy and hughse and joba if he starts arent going to be able to go out and pitch 210 innings....check out whos first on this guys "look out" list.....not to mention hughse for all intents and purposes didnt even pitch last year he missed so much time... Not every team showed such restraint, though. I have identified seven cases last year in which a team pushed a young pitcher at the major league level into the danger area of increased workload. Here they are, the seven young pitchers most at risk for injury or a significantly higher ERA in 2008, ranked according to greatest innings increase: 1. Ian Kennedy, Yankees, 23 (+61 IP) Kennedy sailed through three minor league levels and reached the big leagues last year, his first full season in professional baseball. The Yankees allowed him to ring up 165 1/3 innings at age 22, after he threw 101 2/3 innings at USC in 2006 and 2 2/3 innings at Staten Island after signing. Kennedy was shut down late in September and left off the postseason roster because of what was described as mild back soreness. Kennedy's path may recall how the Angels pushed Jared Weaver, another college stud, by 56 innings in 2006. Weaver started 2007 on the DL with shoulder soreness and saw his ERA rise by 1.45. One caveat: Kennedy's jump is not as alarming as first blush indicates. The Yankees did give him an extra 30 1/3 "unofficial" innings of winter ball in 2006 (see Carmona below); not your high-stress big league innings, but still good incremental training. If you count that work, his jump of 30 2/3 innings barely pushes him into the danger zone. 2. Fausto Carmona, Indians, 23 (+56.1) Cleveland did have Carmona start a few games in winter ball after the 2006 season in anticipation of his move from the bullpen into the rotation, innings that are not reflected in his YAE evaluation. But including the postseason Carmona logged 230 innings in 2007. Like Kevin Millwood in the 1999 World Series for Atlanta (another YAE victim), Carmona looked gassed at the end. 3. Ubaldo Jimenez, Rockies, 24 (+41 2/3) The good news? Jimenez helped the Rockies get to their first World Series. The bad news? They pushed him to 201 innings and a seventh month of pitching to get there. Colorado must hope that his body type, which includes a strong lower half, will help minimize the effects of the workload. 4. Tom Gorzelanny, Pirates, 25 (+40 1/3) I cringe when I see pitchers with non-contenders show up on this list. The Royals were guilty for years of pushing young pitchers without the excuse of a pennant race (Chris George, Jose Rosado, Runelvys Hernandez, etc.). Gorzelanny was 1-3 with a 5.77 ERA in September while throwing 639 pitches, his second-highest monthly total (by only five pitches) of the season. While Gorzelanny was passing his career high in innings, the Pirates let him throw 105, 118, 107, 107 and 117 pitches in meaningless consecutive September starts. Why? 5. Dustin McGowan, Blue Jays, 25 (+38 2/3) The Jays pushed McGowan to 191 2/3 innings last year, a leap of 80 1/3 innings from 2006, when he pitched out of the bullpen. But it's not as bad as you might think. McGowan did throw 152 1/3 innings at age 21 in 2003. In fact, McGowan's risk factor is somewhat diminished by his age being on the outside of the cautionary window (he turns 26 in March) and by having already pitched eight seasons as a professional. 6. Chad Gaudin, Athletics, 24 (+36) Gaudin has handle-with-care written all over him, because he's just 5-foot-11, 165 pounds but whips his fastball in the low to mid-90s. (I can vouch for it, having popped up against him in my week with the Blue Jays in 2005 spring training.) But the A's pushed him in September, when he made six starts (only one on extra rest) and was 1-4 with a 6.46 ERA. Now you can officially mark him down as the first YAE victim of the class of '07: He underwent surgery in December on his left hip and right foot. 7. Yovani Gallardo, Brewers, 21 (+33) Good thing Milwaukee didn't make the playoffs. Pushing a 21-year-old pitcher to make a 33-inning jump to 188 total innings was risky enough; Gallardo didn't need another 20 or so innings on the arm. His jump is reminiscent of what the Twins did with Francisco Liriano in 2005: +34.2 at age 21. Liraino turned out to be the worst-case scenario for YAE: He blew out his elbow the next year
No, I'm worried about every year. This year is here now so that's my current concern. We really know nothing about Hughes, Kennedy or even Joba as starters. Posada will certainly not come close to the year he had in '07 and in my opinion we have done nothing to improve the team. Hopefully they will all do fine and the patchwork bullpen will be able to get some outs. I'm just keeping a healthy amount of skepticism until they do.
I think you two are too high-stress to be Yankees fans this year. I've already accepted that there is a very good chance we won't be in October at all. You guys are stuck in late-90s mode. I'm looking toward the twenty-teens and seeing lots of light at the end of the tunnel. I'm hopeful of this year, but I don't really care that much.
2013 is 5 years away bro...you think the yankees will stay in this mode for 5 years waiting for kids and not making playoffs? have you been at the hooch this morning?
So last year's bullpen is something to pine for, but Torre didn't have any options? I don't get it. ETA: By the way, you want to know what option Torre had? Don't use a guy for the third straight day when you have a five run lead. That's a pretty good option, if you ask me. So you ARE looking at the worst-case scenario. Figures. Pettitte is old and "breaking down" based on what, exactly? A hunch? Wasn't he the workhorse of the staff last year? And those three kids might have inning limits. Not in game, but for the season. And those innings that you DO get are likely to be of a far higher quality, on average, than anything that Karstens, Igawa, or guys like Henn gave the Yanks last year. As washed up as Moose might be, he's still a better sixth starter to come in and take those spot starts while conserving Joba's innings (which will have Joba in the pen, by the way) than anyone else. It happens every year... but you can't count on that. I love it! :rofl: And what you are missing (or conveniently ignoring) is that you are STILL better off than last year by nearly all accounts. There is more depth to the team than we've ever seen. And since relievers are often "discovered" year in and year out, depth=better chance of finding one. Is it a 100% guarantee. No. But last year wasn't, either. I'm willing to bet anyone a reasonable amount of money that this year's bullpen will outperform last year's (using WHIP as the yardstick.)
cappy try to follow. first of all when I said it happens every year, i was paraphrasing 10p10, which I thought was obvious but apparently not. so youre little dude rolling on the floor is idiotic. as far as the kids go, if you figure on 170 innings over 30 starts thats what about 5.5 innings per start? That means we're in the pen all year long. even if you get lucky and we find some good relievers simply by throwing a bunch of shit against the wall(which is basically your proposal in the above post) theyll be burned out just like torre burned them out..Pettitte ill give you, i did not realize he pitched that many innings last year. although i think we all know that elbow can go at any time but its not fair to speculate injury
It would be quite an embarrassment to everyone connected to the Yankees if in their final year at the old stadium and with a 200+ million dollar payroll they don't make the post season. I am really surprised you could think that way. Well, Teixeira will be a FA after this year. Timing is great.
I also dont agree with your stance that the yankees are so deep cappy......they have ONE legit outfielder defensively. ONE in melky.....no true 1b. back up catcher cant hit 210. and shit off the bench. which has been a problem for a few years now, also unadressed
Okay, a couple things. Jonnyd, you can't dog Cappy for taking what you said literally when you did it to me shortly before that. Did you really think I meant I was okay with waiting 5 years for the Yankees to get their act together? One year, that's the leeway. Now Don, why would it be an embarassment? Even Hank admitted he had to give Girardi time before this team was on track again. We might not make the playoffs. Shit happens. It's not like the Yankees own the friggin' league. No wonder people are always ready to rip into Yankees fans. Some of us just have ridiculous visions of grandeur. Do I want to win every year? Damn straight. Do I expect it? Of course not. This is one of those years I expect to struggle. I don't know how old you are Don, but I know jonny is old enough to remember the 80s. THOSE were tough times. We haven't been like that in more than a decade. That's an insane feat. I'm more than willing to take a step backward in order to avoid an eventual return to those days.
Yes, I get that you were paraphrasing him... but the reality is that it DOES happen every year. You can't count on WHO it's going to be. But middle relievers are a dime a dozen. Or, if you'd like to put it in more tangible terms... of all the positions in baseball, middle relievers' salaries (i.e. what teams think they are worth) correlate most weakly to their actual performance. You can't predict any individual's performance with great success. You can improve your chances more by having a large number of people ML-ready to fill the role, as opposed to one guy that has done well in the past (e.g. a Scott Linebrink or something). Your comment is like saying that if I flip a coin thirty times, I can't count on it coming up heads once. Well, gee... you're right. But chances are that I'll see a heads come up once in there. And chances are that one of the people the Yanks try to use in the pen (in ADDITION to the innings that Chamberlain will provide... which will likely be MORE than the 24.0 he provided last year) will perform at or above the level of Vizcaino last year. And I still haven't heard an argument for what the alternatives were to improving this pen (short of the idea of keeping Joba in the pen, which I immediately dismiss as worthless). No, it doesn't. Because the Yankees have already stated that there are contingency plans in place for those young guys. Kennedy should be able to throw 190 or so. Chamberlain is looking at around 130, but some of those will be in the pen. Hughes should get around 150 or so. The problem is that you're assuming the three of them will be making 30 starts each, and only going 5 innings in each start. That's not what is going to happen. Moose and/or one of the other prospects will probably take up the rest of the starts, allowing Hughes/Kennedy/Chamberlain to pitch as far into any given game as they are able. They're not going to save Hughes for September by keeping him on an intra-game innings limit. They're going to save him for September by skipping some of his starts. Kennedy, as a #5 starter with 190+ innings available, should be fine all year long. This is what you need to understand: it's not "getting lucky." It's playing the percentages. The Yankees have a large pool of guys with decent talent/potential to use in the bullpen. Whichever one of them has their shit together at a given time (and with a large enough pool, it is LIKELY, not "lucky" that one or two of them will perform well) is the guy who gets the innings. And you STILL haven't said anything about the fact that the innings from the starters are very likely going to be of a higher quality, which means that it really doesn't matter if the bullpen has an ERA over 5.00. Three things: 1. What is a "true" first baseman, in your eyes? Someone like Andy Phillips? Josh Phelps? Doug M.? Betemit can play first. I think Betemit will be just fine given ample playing time. Ensberg was a great, low-risk signing who can also play first. 2. OMG! THE BACKUP CATCHER ISN'T THAT GOOD! WE'RE TOTALLY SCREWED! Name me ONE... just ONE other team who has a backup catcher who's actually good. There's a reason they are backups. (By the way, Molina has a career line of .243/.279/.345, and for the Yanks last year, posted a line of .318/.333/.439. Yeah, that's horrendous. ) 3. Between Duncan, Betemit, Ensberg, and the possibility of adding Kevin Mench (who I hope they get), I don't see how you can say this has been "un-addressed." Betemit can play all infield positions. If they have Mench, he's a backup OF, in addition to whichever of Matsui or Damon isn't playing out there. If you have a bench consisting of Giambi/Damon/Matsui, Duncan/Betemit/Ensberg, Mench, backup IF... um... what's the problem there? That seems pretty damn deep to me.
