View Full Version : The Official Hank Steinbrenner Performance Thread
Rocketbooster
03-03-08, 06:52 PM
Bernie Williams and Don Mattingly had nearly identical lifetime stats. Bernie got on base more often, Donnie hit for a little more power. Overall, probably a slight edge to Mattingly.
But Mattingly played 1B, which is the least valuable position on the field (although he played at a GG level). Williams was, for the most part, an adequate centerfielder, which is a much more valueable defensive position.
Hard to choose between them strictly in terms of baseball value.
It's not hard to choose - doesn't matter about how the stat lines. If they are about equal, it's because Donnie's back betrayed him. Bernie was never as good a hitter as Donnie, not even close.
As for defense, Mattingly was simply a joy to watch in the field - he made it an art form and I loved watching him. He made it a valuable position by saving plenty of runs.
Ynkcpt23
03-03-08, 07:35 PM
It's not hard to choose - doesn't matter about how the stat lines. If they are about equal, it's because Donnie's back betrayed him. Bernie was never as good a hitter as Donnie, not even close.
As for defense, Mattingly was simply a joy to watch in the field - he made it an art form and I loved watching him. He made it a valuable position by saving plenty of runs.
I loved watching Donnie play first base, just effortless he was so talented. I scoff at the Keith Hernandez backers--Donnie baseball was a machine at first base. Maybe my favorite Yankee moment (pre-Series domination) was watching Donnie pound the turf at the Sky Dome when the Yanks clinched a playoff berth in '95...still chokes me up.
That said, I loved watching Bernie as well. In his prime he patrolled center field like no Yankee since Dimaggio. The comparison breaks down when you look at Bernie at his position as compared to Mattingly at his. Bernie had a weak arm, which was exposed more and more as he aged. Tremendous clutch post season performer, but Donnie Baseball was the very best, if for a very short time. I have to go now, I'm verklempt...
Bernie was never as good a hitter as Donnie, not even close.
Mattingly's career high OPS+ was 161.
Bernie's career high OPS+ was 160.
Rocketbooster
03-03-08, 10:16 PM
Mattingly's career high OPS+ was 161.
Bernie's career high OPS+ was 160.
I'm the wrong person to throw stats at, Sahara, because those figures don't mean anything to me. I saw Mattingly play with my own eyes and Bernie, too, and Mattingly was by far the superior player; it's not even close. Bernie was never considered amongst even the top ten players in baseball at his best while Mattingly, for a tantalizingly short time, was a first ballot HOFer.
FYI - I'm not saying you didn't see Mattingly or that I was the only one to do so - my point is that I don't need stats to tell me who the better ballplayer was.
The Q Bomb
03-03-08, 10:28 PM
I do have to agree with both Rocketbooster and Rajah about Donnie at his peak being one of, if not the best player in the game, which Bernie never was. That does give Donnie the edge even though their statistics are very similar. I always feel that is a criteria for getting into The Hall of Fame - not only that you compile good stats, but that at some point in your career you were among the best for a few seasons.
I do not think Bernie had it easier because he was on a winning team. I do not hold that against him any more than I think less of Mattingly because he never played on a Championship team. Yankee fans have a skewed view of that accomplishment. It does add another dimension to a player who has competed and exceled in the post season and has contributed to a World Championship, however, we (Yankee
The Q Bomb
03-03-08, 10:30 PM
I do have to agree with both Rocketbooster and Rajah about Donnie at his peak being one of, if not the best player in the game, which Bernie never was. That does give Donnie the edge even though their statistics are very similar. I always feel that is a criteria for getting into The Hall of Fame - not only that you compile good stats, but that at some point in your career you were among the best for a few seasons.
I do not think Bernie had it easier because he was on a winning team. I do not hold that against him any more than I think less of Mattingly because he never played on a Championship team. Yankee fans have a skewed view of that accomplishment. It does add another dimension to a player who has competed and exceled in the post season and has contributed to a World Championship, however, we (Yankee fans) give that aspect of a player's game too much weight. You watch a player over 162 games a year and see how he competes in each game and you realize you may have a "winner" who never gets the opportunity to play in The World Series due to factors beyond his control, i.e. - the rest of the team; how good other teams are during his career; and pure luck.
Rocketbooster
03-03-08, 10:58 PM
I do have to agree with both Rocketbooster and Rajah about Donnie at his peak being one of, if not the best player in the game, which Bernie never was. That does give Donnie the edge even though their statistics are very similar. I always feel that is a criteria for getting into The Hall of Fame - not only that you compile good stats, but that at some point in your career you were among the best for a few seasons.
I do not think Bernie had it easier because he was on a winning team. I do not hold that against him any more than I think less of Mattingly because he never played on a Championship team. Yankee fans have a skewed view of that accomplishment. It does add another dimension to a player who has competed and exceled in the post season and has contributed to a World Championship, however, we (Yankee fans) give that aspect of a player's game too much weight. You watch a player over 162 games a year and see how he competes in each game and you realize you may have a "winner" who never gets the opportunity to play in The World Series due to factors beyond his control, i.e. - the rest of the team; how good other teams are during his career; and pure luck.
Oh, I would never hold it against Bernie because he won WS and Donnie didn't. Bernie had his own *** to deal with (Mel Hall, George wanting to trade him). He's a very unusual ballplayer, Bernie - sort of a Renaissance Man in pinstripes.
Nothing beat the feeling when Donnie hit that post-season HR against the Mariners. If ever a player deserved that, it was he.
CaptainCargo
03-04-08, 09:08 AM
It's not hard to choose - doesn't matter about how the stat lines. If they are about equal, it's because Donnie's back betrayed him. Bernie was never as good a hitter as Donnie, not even close.
As for defense, Mattingly was simply a joy to watch in the field - he made it an art form and I loved watching him. He made it a valuable position by saving plenty of runs.
Both guys have amazingly similar stats and I loved em both.
I ain't choosin between either of them, they were great beloved Yankees. It would be like being asked which one of your kids you loved more.
TEPLimey
03-04-08, 12:35 PM
Donnie's statistics from later years were lessened due to his balky back. Mattingly was a far superior player to Bernie when comparing them both healthy and in their prime.
I'm the wrong person to throw stats at, Sahara, because those figures don't mean anything to me. I saw Mattingly play with my own eyes and Bernie, too, and Mattingly was by far the superior player; it's not even close. Bernie was never considered amongst even the top ten players in baseball at his best while Mattingly, for a tantalizingly short time, was a first ballot HOFer.
FYI - I'm not saying you didn't see Mattingly or that I was the only one to do so - my point is that I don't need stats to tell me who the better ballplayer was.
Simply not true. Bernie was in the top 10 of MVP voting twice, and from '96 - 2000 he was probably the best player on the best team in baseball, during one of the greatest runs in baseball history.
Donnie's peak years were a bit better than Bernie's peak years, but the fact is Mattingly was an elite player for only about 5 or 6 years, and was the best player on a decidely mediocre team. Bernie carried the Yankees during his peak, and was instrumental in their championship run.
Their career stats are almost identical -- but Bernie put up his numbers at a more valuable position and is a postseason legend, and was a better player relative to the rest of baseball for a longer time than Mattingly was.
Personally, what I think it comes down to is this:
Both are all-time Yankees. But Donnie is a sentimental favorite for being a tragic figure, while Bernie is a sentimental favorite for being a heroic figure.
Yankees13
03-04-08, 01:08 PM
Simply not true. Bernie was in the top 10 of MVP voting twice, and from '96 - 2000 he was probably the best player on the best team in baseball, during one of the greatest runs in baseball history.
Donnie's peak years were a bit better than Bernie's peak years, but the fact is Mattingly was an elite player for only about 5 or 6 years, and was the best player on a decidely mediocre team. Bernie carried the Yankees during his peak, and was instrumental in their championship run.
Their career stats are almost identical -- but Bernie put up his numbers at a more valuable position and is a postseason legend, and was a better player relative to the rest of baseball for a longer time than Mattingly was.
Personally, what I think it comes down to is this:
Both are all-time Yankees. But Donnie is a sentimental favorite for being a tragic figure, while Bernie is a sentimental favorite for being a heroic figure.
Very good post, I think you hit on all the relevant points.
Mattingly was a far superior player to Bernie when comparing them both healthy and in their prime.
Again, simply not true.
Bernie put up 5 years of >140 OPS+, Donnie put up 4.
And Donnie at his best was only slightly better than Bernie at his best.
Bernie: 160, 149, 147, 141, 140
Donnie: 161, 156, 156, 146
Career OPS+
Bernie: 125
Donnie: 127
127 from a 1B is certainly not as valuable as 125 from a CF.
I defy anyone to tell me that he was as good a hitter as Mattingly. In fact I dare you...anyone?
That's easy. Bernie was as good a hitter as Mattingly.
Not only that, Bernie was more valuable over the course of his career to the Yankees than Donnie was.
I think people see Mattingly in a different light because he was by far the best player on a good but not great team (possible exception of 1985). Bernie Williams was just one of 3-4 great players on really great teams, with Mariano and Jeter equaling or bettering his star power
That's easy. Bernie was as good a hitter as Mattingly.
Not only that, Bernie was more valuable over the course of his career to the Yankees than Donnie was.
Which is borne out by their respective career Win Shares:
Bernie: 311
Mattingly: 263
Bernie Williams was a stud. Mattingly was a stud. Some of Mattingly's years ('85 for example) stood out because they were so far beyond what other players had produced for some time. 145 RBI may be more commonplace now, but it was freakish back then. And as pointed out, for many of his years he was not only a stand out on his team he was arguably the best player in baseball. But, as also pointed out... Bernie played CF and could swipe a few bags too. Mattingly being second fiddle to Bernie or vice versa isn't an argument I want to have. They are two of my favorite players and I'm damn glad they were both Yankees for their entire careers.
Ynkcpt23
03-04-08, 03:20 PM
Bernie Williams was a stud. Mattingly was a stud. Some of Mattingly's years ('85 for example) stood out because they were so far beyond what other players had produced for some time. 145 RBI may be more commonplace now, but it was freakish back then. And as pointed out, for many of his years he was not only a stand out on his team he was arguably the best player in baseball. But, as also pointed out... Bernie played CF and could swipe a few bags too. Mattingly being second fiddle to Bernie or vice versa isn't an argument I want to have. They are two of my favorite players and I'm damn glad they were both Yankees for their entire careers.
Good work there, False. 145 rbis in Donnie's day was unheard of. Bernie had great range in the field and was a good baserunner, but his base stealing ability was greatly overrated. With his long legs it took him too long to get going to be very effective. Maybe nitpicking a bit, I'm just glad that we kept Bernie...what a nightmare if he'd ended up with the @#$@%#@ Sox.
ohioyank
03-04-08, 05:19 PM
You just have to love the passion for winning.
Rocketbooster
03-04-08, 05:21 PM
Simply not true. Bernie was in the top 10 of MVP voting twice, and from '96 - 2000 he was probably the best player on the best team in baseball, during one of the greatest runs in baseball history.
Donnie's peak years were a bit better than Bernie's peak years, but the fact is Mattingly was an elite player for only about 5 or 6 years, and was the best player on a decidely mediocre team. Bernie carried the Yankees during his peak, and was instrumental in their championship run.
Their career stats are almost identical -- but Bernie put up his numbers at a more valuable position and is a postseason legend, and was a better player relative to the rest of baseball for a longer time than Mattingly was.
Personally, what I think it comes down to is this:
Both are all-time Yankees. But Donnie is a sentimental favorite for being a tragic figure, while Bernie is a sentimental favorite for being a heroic figure.
I respect your opinion, but I honestly disagree with everything you wrote.
OldYankeeFan
03-04-08, 06:43 PM
You just have to love the passion for winning.
And both had that, I'm a big fan of both and will not try to tear down one to make the other look better. But if #23 is retired, they are both too close in what they meant to the Yankees to not retire # 51 also.
My guess is if the Yankees retired three players (Munson, Guidry and Reggie) from the 77-'78 team, the '96-2001 dynasty with arguably the best team ever (1998) will have at least that many... Bernie, Mo, Jeter, most likely Pettitte and depending on how he finish out his career Posada.
I guess Hank is just a lightning rod for discussion. It really was just an innocent comment that started the debate.
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Hank Steinbrenner said there’s not an official plan yet, but former Yankees center fielder Bernie Williams will be honored by the team. “Obviously, Bernie is special to us,” Steinbrenner said. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Rocketbooster
03-04-08, 07:12 PM
And both had that, I'm a big fan of both and will not try to tear down one to make the other look better. But if #23 is retired, they are both too close in what they meant to the Yankees to not retire # 51 also.
My guess is if the Yankees retired three players (Munson, Guidry and Reggie) from the 77-'78 team, the '96-2001 dynasty with arguably the best team ever (1998) will have at least that many... Bernie, Mo, Jeter, most likely Pettitte and depending on how he finish out his career Posada.
I guess Hank is just a lightning rod for discussion. It really was just an innocent comment that started the debate.
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Hank Steinbrenner said there’s not an official plan yet, but former Yankees center fielder Bernie Williams will be honored by the team. “Obviously, Bernie is special to us,” Steinbrenner said. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Well Bernie should be honored - not by a retired #, but he should have a day. Why the heck not? This is the part of baseball that I love - the fact that you can bring back old timers for a day and honor special ballplayers that mean something to the franchise. They don't do that in other sports......or, if they do, it's just not the same.
I don't want to tear into Bernie - I love the guy. Hopefully he and the Yankees will mend fences soon.
Ynkcpt23
03-04-08, 07:15 PM
And both had that, I'm a big fan of both and will not try to tear down one to make the other look better. But if #23 is retired, they are both too close in what they meant to the Yankees to not retire # 51 also.
My guess is if the Yankees retired three players (Munson, Guidry and Reggie) from the 77-'78 team, the '96-2001 dynasty with arguably the best team ever (1998) will have at least that many... Bernie, Mo, Jeter, most likely Pettitte and depending on how he finish out his career Posada.
I guess Hank is just a lightning rod for discussion. It really was just an innocent comment that started the debate.
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Hank Steinbrenner said there’s not an official plan yet, but former Yankees center fielder Bernie Williams will be honored by the team. “Obviously, Bernie is special to us,” Steinbrenner said. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Bernie, Mo, Jeter, Pettitte (Game 5 vs. Braves in '96 WS vs. Smoltz, unbelievable..)and probably Posada, but I have a soft spot for Paul O'Neill. Paulie just did all the little things to win games and his passion for the game was boundless. Those guys were the heart and soul of the best baseball team I've seen in my lifetime--the 1998 Yankees.
Well Bernie should be honored - not by a retired #, but he should have a day. Why the heck not? This is the part of baseball that I love - the fact that you can bring back old timers for a day and honor special ballplayers that mean something to the franchise. They don't do that in other sports......or, if they do, it's just not the same.
I don't want to tear into Bernie - I love the guy. Hopefully he and the Yankees will mend fences soon.
Just giving him a day without a retired number puts him on par with Bobby Murcer. I love everything about Bobby Murcer, but he was nowhere near Bernie as a player.
I think for some people the last few years of Bernie's career are coloring his actual contributions to the Yankees over his full career. For the first 2/3 of his career, he was an elite player, anchored the lineup, and was truly the offensive linch-pin of the team for quite a long time. In a nutshell, he was the greatest Yankees CF since Mickey Mantle.
I'm actually shocked that anyone who has watched the Yankees consistently over the past 20 years wouldn't think Bernie is a no-brainer lock for Monument Park. For me, he shares the "lock" status with Jeter, Mo, and Torre. Posada is making an increasingly strong case for himself as well.
Mantle'sMutt
03-06-08, 10:11 AM
Just giving him a day without a retired number puts him on par with Bobby Murcer. I love everything about Bobby Murcer, but he was nowhere near Bernie as a player.
I think for some people the last few years of Bernie's career are coloring his actual contributions to the Yankees over his full career. For the first 2/3 of his career, he was an elite player, anchored the lineup, and was truly the offensive linch-pin of the team for quite a long time. In a nutshell, he was the greatest Yankees CF since Mickey Mantle.
I'm actually shocked that anyone who has watched the Yankees consistently over the past 20 years wouldn't think Bernie is a no-brainer lock for Monument Park. For me, he shares the "lock" status with Jeter, Mo, and Torre. Posada is making an increasingly strong case for himself as well.
We are getting w a y off the thread topic but, WORD THAT!
frostdude1
03-06-08, 12:11 PM
Hank hasn't said anything in 24 hours ... im starting to get worried
Just giving him a day without a retired number puts him on par with Bobby Murcer. I love everything about Bobby Murcer, but he was nowhere near Bernie as a player.
I think for some people the last few years of Bernie's career are coloring his actual contributions to the Yankees over his full career. For the first 2/3 of his career, he was an elite player, anchored the lineup, and was truly the offensive linch-pin of the team for quite a long time. In a nutshell, he was the greatest Yankees CF since Mickey Mantle.
I'm actually shocked that anyone who has watched the Yankees consistently over the past 20 years wouldn't think Bernie is a no-brainer lock for Monument Park. For me, he shares the "lock" status with Jeter, Mo, and Torre. Posada is making an increasingly strong case for himself as well.Completely agree with all of this. And if I had to choose between players having higher numbers on the back of their jerseys ten years from now and players like Bernie not getting their just recognition, that's an easy choice for me.
Get a read of this - http://riveraveblues.com/2008/01/29/when-bernie-williams-nearly-left-new-york-2061/
Completely agree with all of this. And if I had to choose between players having higher numbers on the back of their jerseys ten years from now and players like Bernie not getting their just recognition, that's an easy choice for me.
Get a read of this - http://riveraveblues.com/2008/01/29/when-bernie-williams-nearly-left-new-york-2061/
EXACTLY. Who cares what numbers are left? People talk all the time about retired numbers being diluted -- they aren't being diluted, the team is just continuing to create history, and it recognizes those achievements as time progresses.
When you have a history as rich as the Yankees', you have to recognize a disproportionate number of greats. It should be considered a nice "problem" to have, in my opinion.
Of course, there are a few dubious recipients. But just because there are some mistakes we shouldn't become reactionary and undo all of the history the franchise has made, nor should we punish those who are or will be worthy just because so many greats came before them.
Bottom line: Bernie Williams is among the all-time great Yankees and deserves to be recognized as such.
Why can't a player be honored without having their number retired?
OldYankeeFan
03-06-08, 03:59 PM
Bottom line: Bernie Williams is among the all-time great Yankees and deserves to be recognized as such.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that #51, #2, #42 and #6 will never be worn by a Yankee again.
roblyo33
03-06-08, 04:01 PM
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that #51, #2, #42 and #6 will never be worn by a Yankee again.
And, that is as it should be.
OldYankeeFan
03-06-08, 04:07 PM
Why can't a player be honored without having their number retired?
They can be, it just is not as meaningful.
They can be, it just is not as meaningful.
The converse of that is that retiring so many numbers of players that aren't HoFers reduces its meaning.
btw, It's no big deal to me either way.
27IsNext
03-06-08, 04:22 PM
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that #51, #2, #42 and #6 will never be worn by a Yankee again.
#42 can't be worn either way due to it being retired by MLB for Robinson.
hellonewman
03-06-08, 04:26 PM
Why can't a player be honored without having their number retired?The University of North Carolina basketball team actually does this. They "honor" numbers — you get a tribute day, and they raise a banner to the rafters with your name and number on it, but they keep using the number.
The University of North Carolina basketball team actually does this. They "honor" numbers — you get a tribute day, and they raise a banner to the rafters with your name and number on it, but they keep using the number.
Go Tar Heels. ;)
OldYankeeFan
03-06-08, 04:31 PM
#42 can't be worn either way due to it being retired by MLB for Robinson.
LOL. I knew that and was about to skip over #42 for that reason. Then I thought of the firestorm it might cause leaving out Mo and it being interpreted by some that he doesn't belong in the same category as Bernie, Jeter and Torre, and figured the Yankees will find a way to retire #42 again.
yankeebot
03-06-08, 06:17 PM
The University of North Carolina basketball team actually does this. They "honor" numbers — you get a tribute day, and they raise a banner to the rafters with your name and number on it, but they keep using the number. The Toronto Maple Leafs do this as well. They have retired two numbers due to special circumstances and 99 is retired throughout hockey but other numbers are honored, not retired.
Ynkcpt23
03-07-08, 09:22 PM
The University of North Carolina basketball team actually does this. They "honor" numbers — you get a tribute day, and they raise a banner to the rafters with your name and number on it, but they keep using the number.
I'm a Duke grad, but I have always admired the tributes that UNC gives to the jersey numbers of past greats (though not necessarily that they hang them like back yard laundry :P ) Good luck tomorrow night by the way, but back to the more important things in life....Yankee baseball!
I don't know how we could change things at this point, the numbers that are retired are amazing in their finality--no more 1, 3, 4, etc. will ever be worn by a Yankee and that's a breathtaking thing for a Yankee fan, the history is astonishing. Last summer I walked by a guy (in NC no less) wearing a navy yankee tee--expected to see "Jeter/2" on the back, it was "Mantle/7" I looked at my wife and said in excited tones "I must have that!!" She rolled her eyes. Oh well. Guess I'll just stick with the Jeter and Rodriguez tees I have...
Anyway, I wish we could find a way to honor the accomplishments of Bernie, Paulie etc. without retiring their numbers--they were great Yankees and a proud part of our recent success.
OldYankeeFan
03-16-08, 08:52 AM
"I don't want these teams in general to forget who subsidizes a lot of them, and it's the Yankees, the Red Sox, Dodgers, Mets," he said. "I would prefer if teams want to target the Yankees that they at least start giving some of that revenue sharing and luxury tax money back. From an owners point of view, that's my point.
I'm not sure how he comes up with some of this stuff, but Hank can take swipes as well as A-Rod takes swings.
Reggievision
03-16-08, 09:09 AM
I'm not sure how he comes up with some of this stuff, but Hank can take swipes as well as A-Rod takes swings.
It helps that he's 100% correct. There are swipes, and there are statements of fact, and the Yankees' role of subsidizing half the league thanks to the confiscatory billionire welfare scheme of "Budshovism" is an indisputable statement of fact.
OldYankeeFan
03-16-08, 09:55 AM
It helps that he's 100% correct. There are swipes, and there are statements of fact, and the Yankees' role of subsidizing half the league thanks to the confiscatory billionire welfare scheme of "Budshovism" is an indisputable statement of fact.
Hey, I agree. His swipe was justified. It just struck me at how willing and good he is at taking them. Wouldn't surprise me if the Yankees monetarily punish the Rays next ST by NOT playing them and helping them sell out their ST home games when we visit them...unless an understanding is agreed regarding the intensity with which the games should be played.
ST should have a No-Contact rule similar to youth baseball. Either slide, avoid or give yourrself up like A-Rod did yesterday. If MLB doesnt do it the Yankees (because of their drawing power) can demand such a rule be agreed by the teams they play or schedule with teams that will.
Why I <3 Hal:
http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-sphal235623508mar23,0,5054331.story
Every major decision must be agreed on by the two brothers, Hal said.
And if they can't agree?
"I think we've just decided we won't do it," Hal said. "If it's raising more debt, if it's making a capital expenditure, if it's raising ticket prices, if it's having a $100-million contract on the baseball side, I think the family agrees that we both need to be on board. And it worked really well in the offseason."
The one thing Hal was famously against was trading for Twins ace Johan Santana, who wound up going to the Mets. The Twins were asking for centerfielder Melky Cabrera, righthander Phil Hughes and righthander Ian Kennedy, and a hefty contract extension for Santana also would have been necessary.
"I was against it, there's no doubt about it," Hal said. "Personally, for me, it was an easy decision to say no to. Economically and financially, there were reasons I'm not going to get into. But even from a baseball standpoint ... I'm no expert on baseball matters, believe me, but I didn't want to get rid of the centerfielder, and I didn't want to get rid of Hughes."
Ian Kennedy says ouch.
*zing*
Or maybe it means that the deal could have been done without IPK?
Ynkcpt23
03-23-08, 07:54 PM
*zing*
Or maybe it means that the deal could have been done without IPK?
Considering what the Mets eventually sent to Minny, I think Igawa, Karstens and a Jeter rookie card would have been enough, forget about IPK... :P
johnmvp
03-28-08, 08:19 PM
No worries, the rumors aren't true. The Stein's will not be selling the Yankees.
johnmvp
03-28-08, 08:32 PM
Sorry I didn't quote what I had to say on my blog:
Despite rumors of sale, Hal Steinbrenner and brother Hank reiterated that they are not looking to sell the Yankees. “That’s the plan,” Hal Steinbrenner said. “There are no plans to sell, though I know there’s been speculation. This has been in our family a long time - longer than we’ve been in Tampa, even. That’s not going to change.”
1936-1939JoeNLou
04-13-08, 10:20 PM
How long till we hear from Hank?
27IsNext
04-20-08, 09:37 PM
New Boss Wants Chamberlain in Rotation (Now)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/sp...ts&oref=slogin
With the Yankees off to a 10-10 start, and two of their young starters struggling, the Yankees co-chairman Hank Steinbrenner said there was one thing in particular he would like to change.
Steinbrenner said he wanted Joba Chamberlain, the Yankees’ hard-throwing setup man, to move into the rotation.
“I want him as a starter and so does everyone else, including him, and that is what we are working toward and we need him there now,” Steinbrenner said Sunday by telephone. “There is no question about it, you don’t have a guy with a 100-mile-per-hour fastball and keep him as a setup guy. You just don’t do that. You have to be an idiot to do that.”
Steinbrenner said the Yankees were working on easing Chamberlain into the rotation, but he would not be specific on a timetable for the move.
“The mistake was already made last year switching him to the bullpen out of panic or whatever,” Steinbrenner said. “I had no say in it last year and I wouldn’t have allowed it. That was done last year, so now we have to catch up. It has to be done on a schedule so we don’t rush him.”
[...]
The Mouth has spoken...and he didn't bash MLB for the stupid Farnsworth suspension, so color me disappointed.
Retire21
04-20-08, 09:58 PM
Hank needs to watch himself here, saying you'd have to be an idiot to keep him in the bullpen. He's pretty valuable in the bullpen. If Girardi continues to leave Joba in the pen, he (Hank) might have to reconcile that comment.
I had to laugh at his comment that he wouldn't have allowed Joba to be in the bullpen last year- does he realize that we don't make the playoffs without Joba in the bullpen last year?
Rocketbooster
04-20-08, 10:14 PM
Hank needs to watch himself here, saying you'd have to be an idiot to keep him in the bullpen. He's pretty valuable in the bullpen. If Girardi continues to leave Joba in the pen, he (Hank) might have to reconcile that comment.
I had to laugh at his comment that he wouldn't have allowed Joba to be in the bullpen last year- does he realize that we don't make the playoffs without Joba in the bullpen last year?
Hank is clueless and I don't think his new manager and GM are going to cotton to the idea of being told how to run the team.....I'm not worried because there is as much chance of me becoming President as there is of the Yankees deviating from their plan. Ok, Hank can now crawl back under the rock he was under and not come out for another several months.
President Kennedy
04-20-08, 11:53 PM
I think Hank is absolutely right. It would be beyond idiocy to keep Chamberlain in the pen. Good for Hank.
Hank needs to watch himself here, saying you'd have to be an idiot to keep him in the bullpen. He's pretty valuable in the bullpen. If Girardi continues to leave Joba in the pen, he (Hank) might have to reconcile that comment.
I had to laugh at his comment that he wouldn't have allowed Joba to be in the bullpen last year- does he realize that we don't make the playoffs without Joba in the bullpen last year?
Let me preface my comments by saying that Generally I hate Hank opening his mouth because every time he does he gives the opposition an advantage.
But I disagree on a couple of points here. Joba did a great job last year, but it's not certain that we wouldn't have made the playoffs without him in the pen. As for Hank having to reconcile his comments, he really doesn't. This is mostly because he owns the team, and Girardi works for him. This is something Joe G learned the hard way at his last job.
I think Hank is absolutely right. It would be beyond idiocy to keep Chamberlain in the pen. Good for Hank.
He's mostly right on substance, but wrong on style. Case in point:
“The mistake was already made last year switching him to the bullpen out of panic or whatever,” Steinbrenner said.
Now, on some level I agree with that because I feared that if he did well, it would make it harder to return him to being a starter, but that move was made because it was the only way to bring him up without having him exceed his innings cap, so it wasn't done out of panic. By saying that, he is dissing Cashman, which is tactless at best.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 04:23 AM
I agree with everything Rich said and another thing that bothers me with Hank's comments is that he has now caused another distraction this team doesn't need to deal with at the moment. In short, he's not helping his team opening his mouth right now.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 05:58 AM
I agree with everything Rich said and another thing that bothers me with Hank's comments is that he has now caused another distraction this team doesn't need to deal with at the moment. In short, he's not helping his team opening his mouth right now. I have yet to see any evidence that anything Hank says will affect the team. The entire "it's a distraction" thing is so blown out of proportion on this board.
I don't know is we would have made the playoffs last year without Joba or not. Phallacy of the predetermined outcome and all that but if Joba had not been moved to the pen, he should have been able to pitch closer to 150 innings last year (30 more than his previous high of 118) and, in theory, he'd be in much better shape to help us in the rotation this year. Who knows.
As for it dissing Cashman, not worried about that either. I'm sure he's developed a thick enough skin to not let something that trivial bother him and I'd also bet that the conversations that Hank and Cash have go much deeper than a NYT quote. I doubt Hank's feelings come as either a surprise or a concern.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 06:01 AM
I have yet to see any evidence that anything Hank says will affect the team. The entire "it's a distraction" thing is so blown out of proportion on this board.
I don't know is we would have made the playoffs last year without Joba or not. Phallacy of the predetermined outcome and all that but if Joba had not been moved to the pen, he should have been able to pitch closer to 150 innings last year (30 more than his previous high of 118) and, in theory, he'd be in much better shape to help us in the rotation this year. Who knows.
As for it dissing Cashman, not worried about that either. I'm sure he's developed a thick enough skin to not let something that trivial bother him and I'd also bet that the conversations that Hank and Cash have go much deeper than a NYT quote. I doubt Hank's feelings come as either a surprise or a concern.
I don't want my manager nor Joba having to deal with this crap at the moment when both of them have their plate full which is exactly what Hank's comments have caused them to do now.
Joba's Rings
04-21-08, 06:05 AM
I don't want my manager nor Joba having to deal with this crap at the moment when both of them have their plate full which is exactly what Hank's comments have caused them to do now.
So you spoke with them, I take it.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 06:09 AM
So you spoke with them, I take it.
Yes, they text message me their concerns.
jnewmark
04-21-08, 06:16 AM
I agree with everything Rich said and another thing that bothers me with Hank's comments is that he has now caused another distraction this team doesn't need to deal with at the moment. In short, he's not helping his team opening his mouth right now.
Like father, like son? ;)
I have yet to see any evidence that anything Hank says will affect the team. The entire "it's a distraction" thing is so blown out of proportion on this board.
I don't know is we would have made the playoffs last year without Joba or not. Phallacy of the predetermined outcome and all that but if Joba had not been moved to the pen, he should have been able to pitch closer to 150 innings last year (30 more than his previous high of 118) and, in theory, he'd be in much better shape to help us in the rotation this year. Who knows.
As for it dissing Cashman, not worried about that either. I'm sure he's developed a thick enough skin to not let something that trivial bother him and I'd also bet that the conversations that Hank and Cash have go much deeper than a NYT quote. I doubt Hank's feelings come as either a surprise or a concern.
He had 88 in the minors and 24 in the bigs
I don't think that counts the Hawaiian league innings, so he was probably close to his limit anyway I think.
In Mo I Trust
04-21-08, 06:58 AM
At least Hank realizes how stupid it would be to keep Joba in the pen.
Rocketbooster
04-21-08, 07:05 AM
I think Hank is absolutely right. It would be beyond idiocy to keep Chamberlain in the pen. Good for Hank.
And the Yankees don't plan on keeping him in the pen; ;they have stated that time and again. I don't see what exactly is so right in what Hank said. He came out and blatantly lied about why Joba was put in the pen and he's trying to tell his GM and manager how to run the team. Joba never would have been up with the big club had there not been a need in the bullpen and then Hank would very likely have had no clue as to who Joba was. There is still the matter of the innings issue, which is why Joba is in the pen now. Obviously Hank is completely clueless about this.
Rocketbooster
04-21-08, 07:08 AM
At least Hank realizes how stupid it would be to keep Joba in the pen.
I'm not even giving him that - why would I? Unless I had reason to believe Cashman was lying for a year and a half. There has never been a doubt in my mind that Joba was moving out of the pen - I trust in Cash's plan and that is part of Cash's plan. No, Hank gets no credit for having a big mouth and calling out his GM in a rude, obnoxious manner. Oh well, I guess the big guy will always have his fans.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 07:11 AM
He had 88 in the minors and 24 in the bigs
I don't think that counts the Hawaiian league innings, so he was probably close to his limit anyway I think.
I was looking at his college innings as a starting point. 118 in 2005, 89 plus 30 in Hawaii in 2006. :dunno:
yankeebot
04-21-08, 07:20 AM
I don't want my manager nor Joba having to deal with this crap at the moment when both of them have their plate full which is exactly what Hank's comments have caused them to do now. What is it they have to do to "deal with it?" I've yet to see any reason to believe that either one of them are so mentally weak that they would be affected adversely by a comment that I consider pretty insignificant. I guess just give them a little more credit than you apparently do. Frankly, I think it's a bit insulting to think their psyche's would be so easily damaged.
Dog Named Fred
04-21-08, 07:36 AM
Hankenstein is sounding more and more like a man who is going to force a trade of young talent for aging veterans at the trade deadline in an ill-advised attempt to win the division this year at the expense of the next few.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 07:45 AM
Hankenstein is sounding more and more like a man who is going to force a trade of young talent for aging veterans at the trade deadline in an ill-advised attempt to win the division this year at the expense of the next few.
Wow. I don't think it would be possible for us to interpret his words any more differently. I'm getting the exact opposite feeling.
Wow. I don't think it would be possible for us to interpret his words any more differently. I'm getting the exact opposite feeling.
Yeah, am I reading a different article or something? Plus, I don't think Cashman or Hal would be into that.
I Heart Jeter
04-21-08, 07:56 AM
Has Hank had anything to say about the Farnsworth suspension?
Dustin563
04-21-08, 07:59 AM
I'm tired of Hank speaking out. It creates nothing but problems. I honestly cringe when I read his comments. It's only 20 games in. Let Girardi handle things. I think the Yanks are on a slippery slope if stuff like this continues.
Martini6196
04-21-08, 08:06 AM
This whole Hank blow up is funny because Cash/Girardi also agree that Joba should be in the rotation. This has nothing to do with whether or not they want him in the bullpen. It has to do with innings limit and Hank should know that. If they put Joba in the rotation now he won't make it to the end of the season.
I have yet to see any evidence that anything Hank says will affect the team. The entire "it's a distraction" thing is so blown out of proportion on this board.
I don't know is we would have made the playoffs last year without Joba or not. Phallacy of the predetermined outcome and all that but if Joba had not been moved to the pen, he should have been able to pitch closer to 150 innings last year (30 more than his previous high of 118) and, in theory, he'd be in much better shape to help us in the rotation this year. Who knows.
As for it dissing Cashman, not worried about that either. I'm sure he's developed a thick enough skin to not let something that trivial bother him and I'd also bet that the conversations that Hank and Cash have go much deeper than a NYT quote. I doubt Hank's feelings come as either a surprise or a concern. Exactly. A-rdo being out and Posada not bneing able to catch are true dsitractions. This is nonsense.
But Hank's right on substance, though he shouldn't have gone public like this. I don't think it's going to matter though. If Kennedy, Hughes and Mussina continue to be this ineffective, having Joba pitch 75 innings in relief will be seen as the folly it is when he could pitch 170 as a starter. Those innings have to get pitched one way or another. Why not have you best pitcher pitch more of them?
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
I'm not even giving him that - why would I? Unless I had reason to believe Cashman was lying for a year and a half. There has never been a doubt in my mind that Joba was moving out of the pen - I trust in Cash's plan and that is part of Cash's plan. No, Hank gets no credit for having a big mouth and calling out his GM in a rude, obnoxious manner. Oh well, I guess the big guy will always have his fans.
Hank clearly doesn't. I don't see how his comments say anything other than the SP is a disappointment and it isn't the staff he wanted. And that Joba belongs in rotation sooner rather than later, and should have been there all along.
Which means this: He wanted Santana. To get Santana, we would've had to trade Hughes, Kennedy, and Melky. There goes Cash's plan right there. He wanted a rotation of Santana, Pettitte, Wang, Moose, and Joba. Bye-bye youth movement. Hello big $140mm contract.
Hank is firing warning shots over the bow right now, and Cash is captain of that ship.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 08:14 AM
If Kennedy, Hughes and Mussina continue to be this ineffective, having Joba pitch 75 innings in relief will be seen as the folly it is when he could pitch 170 as a starter.
Joba can't pitch 170 innings this year. That is why he is starting in relief.
Constantino24
04-21-08, 08:17 AM
Keeping Joba in the bullpen basically makes every game where he and Mariano make an appearance a 7 inning game, much like the 96' Yankees with Mariano/Wetteland. You know exactly what you are getting when Joba comes out of the bullpen (a 100 MPH fastball with a dangerous slider) but you don't know what you are getting out of him as a starter. There is no way that he can go into the 7th inning throwing in the upper 90's unless he wants to blow his arm out his first full season.
I say keep him in the bullpen because eventually the starting rotation will work itself out. Let's just look at our record 10-10 with our currently shaky starting staff, a handful of injuries that have inhibited our play, and our lacking offense. We are still 10-10. This is the roughest patch of the season that we are going to go through and we are still managing to play some decent baseball.
Everything will correct itself so let's just let the knee-jerk reactions (Joba as a starter) subside and everything will level off soon enough.
OldYankeeFan
04-21-08, 08:19 AM
It was refreshing to finally hear from Hank again. It's been too long.
All I read into the quotes is that he's a little frustrated, sees Moose getting crushed by the RS and can't wait to see Joba take his place in the rotation. I don't think he's now looking to trade away some youth (he would need Hal's ok to do that). It's much easier to be patient with youth than it is an 84 mph aging vet who refuses to back anyone off the plate.
And I really don't think his statements have any effect on the team other than the pitcher who might be replaced in the rotation. And I don't see that as a bad thing. So I for one am glad to hear from Hank again and him reaffirming that Joba's days as a setup guy are numbered.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 08:21 AM
I'm tired of Hank speaking out. It creates nothing but problems. I honestly cringe when I read his comments. It's only 20 games in. Let Girardi handle things. I think the Yanks are on a slippery slope if stuff like this continues.
What specific problem did this comment cause?
Joba can't pitch 170 innings this year. That is why he is starting in relief.He can't because he would miss 5 or 6 of the 35 or so starts he could make had he been in the rotation on Opening Day. If the Yanks need him to pitch in September, they aren't going to shut him down as long as he's healthy. This innings limit thing was predicated on the Yanks locking up a playoff spot easily, and that isn't looking very likely as of today. He's still a pitcher, not a piece of china.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 08:38 AM
He can't because he would miss 5 or 6 of the 35 or so starts he could make had he been in the rotation on Opening Day. If the Yanks need him to pitch in September, they aren't going to shut him down as long as he's healthy. This innings limit thing was predicated on the Yanks locking up a playoff spot easily, and that isn't looking very likely as of today. He's still a pitcher, not a piece of china.
I honestly don't know what you are trying to say. Your first sentence almost made my head explode.
Joba's long term health is much more important then what the Yankees as a team accomplish this year. The Yanks aren't likely to make a playoff spot because they are 3 games back in Mid-April? Jesus Christ.
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 08:40 AM
I've pretty much been a Hank apologist since he moved to the forefront, but I find these comments pretty sh***y.
He is basically questioning his front office (Cashman, mostly) and outwardly calling them out for making mistakes. Talk about no class. How are you going to call out your people through the media?
Even worse, he straight up disses Mussina. Wth? "He just needs to learn how to pitch like Jamie Moyer." Are you kidding me? He's just bashing the guy; a 250+ game winner who has given a lot to this team, and has pitched pretty well so far this season.
Hank isn't showing any resepct or loyalty to his team here.
PocketAces12
04-21-08, 08:50 AM
Although many people like to say Hank is a better baseball guy than his father, and how he checks the minor league reports daily, etc., I must say the comments from him are extremely amateur-like. He sounds like a little kid who doesn't want to wait until Christmas day to open his presents. Seriously, how do all of us who lead our daily lives that have nothing to do with the Yankees organization understand Joba's inning limit and the need for him to be in the pen awhile more than the owner of the team?!
The comments about Moose needing to learn how to pitch like Moyer is something you hear an idiot at a bar say during a game. Hank, attempt to resemble some semblance of a baseball owner...
fritz kekich
04-21-08, 08:50 AM
What is it they have to do to "deal with it?" I've yet to see any reason to believe that either one of them are so mentally weak that they would be affected adversely by a comment that I consider pretty insignificant. I guess just give them a little more credit than you apparently do. Frankly, I think it's a bit insulting to think their psyche's would be so easily damaged.
Its not a question of being "mentally weak." Its a question of "the boss wants it this way. Do it this way or work somewhere else." Even if they think the boss' way isn't necessarily the right way. Sperm-lottery winner Hank want Joba in the rotation. One more craptastic performance from the unmentioned Mussina, and he'll want him in the rotation NOW. Cashman (and maybe Girardi) think that isn't really in the team's best interests, to have 3 guys with less than 100 MLB innings in the rotation at the same time.
Who wins that argument? It is unconscionable for an owner to publicly announce that something his GM is doing is "stupid." Also to announce that "if I had my way" we'd have Santana. Way to support the help, nitwit.
In 6 months, Hankie has convinced me that he just isn't a very smart person. He, like George did for a while, thinks that he is really responsible for the team's success. He will run Cashman out of town, hire a toady, and make certain that the 20-teens see Oscar Azocar, Jr roaming the outfield.
It is within his rights as the owner, however.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 08:55 AM
Its not a question of being "mentally weak." Its a question of "the boss wants it this way. Do it this way or work somewhere else." Even if they think the boss' way isn't necessarily the right way. Sperm-lottery winner Hank want Joba in the rotation. One more craptastic performance from the unmentioned Mussina, and he'll want him in the rotation NOW. Cashman (and maybe Girardi) think that isn't really in the team's best interests, to have 3 guys with less than 100 MLB innings in the rotation at the same time.
Who wins that argument? It is unconscionable for an owner to publicly announce that something his GM is doing is "stupid." Also to announce that "if I had my way" we'd have Santana. Way to support the help, nitwit.
In 6 months, Hankie has convinced me that he just isn't a very smart person. He, like George did for a while, thinks that he is really responsible for the team's success. He will run Cashman out of town, hire a toady, and make certain that the 20-teens see Oscar Azocar, Jr roaming the outfield.
It is within his rights as the owner, however. No no no. My comment about being mentally weak was in reference to Hank's remarks being a distraction for the team. As much as Hank has had to say, there has been no indication that he is going to interfere with on-field decisions. None. Nada. Zip. He just doesn't seem to have a filter and I don't think it's nearly the problem that people are making it out to be. When he actually does something vs just talk about it, I'll be concerned.
As for it dissing Cashman, not worried about that either. I'm sure he's developed a thick enough skin to not let something that trivial bother him and I'd also bet that the conversations that Hank and Cash have go much deeper than a NYT quote. I doubt Hank's feelings come as either a surprise or a concern.How are you sure? Even if he has thick skin calling it a "panic" move publicly is baseless and pointless. I'm sure most of us have worked for belligerent bosses and have thickened the skin, but that doesn't mean you don't care when your boss makes a jacka$$ comment about you to the entire industry.
Outside of his public negotiations I have less of a problem with what he says than how he says it. He could have made his point (although I still don't see the value in what he had to say) without jack stomping Cash and Moose.
PocketAces12
04-21-08, 08:59 AM
Also to announce that "if I had my way" we'd have Santana.
That's it right there though...no one listens to him. He just rants about whatever is making him mad while everyone else rolls their eyes. I picture Hal sitting there looking over financial numbers with Cashman while Hank is stomping back and forth screaming "Just make the trade already!! We need Johan, he is God!!" all the while cash and Hal never even look up. I truley believe Hank has no real say in anything that goes on in baseball operations, fancy title or not.
No no no. My comment about being mentally weak was in reference to Hank's remarks being a distraction for the team. As much as Hank has had to say, there has been no indication that he is going to interfere with on-field decisions. None. Nada. Zip. He just doesn't seem to have a filter and I don't think it's nearly the problem that people are making it out to be. When he actually does something vs just talk about it, I'll be concerned.
When you are the head of a billion dollar company, publicly insulting your management team, creating separation between yourself and the decisions that team has made/is making, and using the media to apply pressure to your employees is indeed "doing something" in most industries.
Bostonsfavson
04-21-08, 09:00 AM
It definitely seems that Hank is unhappy with the current starting rotation. It's of course open to interpretation, but it seems as though he's pretty much saying, "I wanted Santana, we didn't get him, and look at how things are going." On a side note, is the way Hank is acting how George was back in the day? I'm 25, and therefore missed him at his "prime." Just wondering.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:03 AM
When you are the head of a billion dollar company, publicly insulting your management team, creating separation between yourself and the decisions that team has made/is making, and using the media to apply pressure to your employees is indeed "doing something" in most industries. Show me any evidence that he has done anything that affects the team on the field and I'm on board with you. Until then, I don't think he's causing the problems that are being suggested here. I generally find attempting to compare baseball to "most industries" to be rather futile.
It definitely seems that Hank is unhappy with the current starting rotation. It's of course open to interpretation, but it seems as though he's pretty much saying, "I wanted Santana, we didn't get him, and look at how things are going." On a side note, is the way Hank is acting how George was back in the day? I'm 25, and therefore missed him at his "prime." Just wondering.So far less bark and much less bite. But he's showing the same inability to sit back and let baseball people do their jobs within running interference in the press. I honestly think he saw his dad capitalize on keeping the team in the press and creating a celebrity owner and he's just trying to fill that void.
I typically hate joint accountability scenarios and diluted accountability (we wouldn't have two managers, would we?) but I imagine we would be seeing/hearing a lot worse if Hal wasn't around as a check and balance.
On a side note, is the way Hank is acting how George was back in the day? I'm 25, and therefore missed him at his "prime." Just wondering.
Not yet.
PocketAces12
04-21-08, 09:05 AM
When you are the head of a billion dollar company, publicly insulting your management team, creating separation between yourself and the decisions that team has made/is making, and using the media to apply pressure to your employees is indeed "doing something" in most industries.
I disagree that it's "doing something". In baseball that usually refers to making a personnel move such as a new manager, G.M, or even making a trade. Saying that you're unhappy with a non-trade and the preservation of one of the best yankee pitching prospects in a long time is far from "doing something" in my opinion.
I think Hank is absolutely right. It would be beyond idiocy to keep Chamberlain in the pen. Good for Hank.
So then what's your time frame when do you switch him over. 2007 he had 112 IP total in the minors anything over 145 IP this year is tempting fate. He really should be in the minors getting his innings in throwing all four of his pitches because that's the other problem with him being in the bullpen he won't be mixing his pitches as much as a starter needs to. In the minors they could have him throw nothing but change ups for 2 or 3 innings if that was a pitch he needed to work on. The kid is a very good ML late inning reliever and may be a very good to great starter, we won't know until he actually does it. He deserves the shot as a starter but I'm not sure if the management has the patience to do this right without increasing his chance at getting hurt or stunting his growth as a complete pitcher. Young pitchers under Giardi in Florida got hurt, I don't know if it was his fault but he bears watching.
Edited because I suck at math
SassySelective1
04-21-08, 09:09 AM
What are the chance that Hank is sandbagging everyone, and playing the town idiot, to draw all the attention his way instead of the team, and take all the pressure of the new manager, the star players etc?
Could be be a genius playing a fool?
Show me any evidence that he has done anything that affects the team on the field and I'm on board with you. Until then, I don't think he's causing the problems that are being suggested here.
It is way too soon to see the consequences of Hank's bluster -- and it likely won't manifest itself in an "Aha! There it is!" kind of way until/unless he starts firing people. It will likely be a more insidious slow burn that eats away at the fabric of Cashman and his plan.
What are the chance that Hank is sandbagging everyone, and playing the town idiot, to draw all the attention his way instead of the team, and take all the pressure of the new manager, the star players etc?
Could be be a genius playing a fool?
Not likely. I don't see how his approach insulates Cashman, Girardi and the team from the media's harsh glare -- it shotguns the issues directly into their laps.
I honestly don't know what you are trying to say. Your first sentence almost made my head explode.
Joba's long term health is much more important then what the Yankees as a team accomplish this year. The Yanks aren't likely to make a playoff spot because they are 3 games back in Mid-April? Jesus Christ."Made you head explode" that they would expect a 22-year old bull to pitch 170 innings over 6 months? A plyoaff berth is not a given this year. You apparently didn't bother to read further down "as long as he's healthy". Understand, as long as he's healthy this whole inning count is going to go out the window if a AL East title or WC spot is on the line late in ths season,within bounds.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:16 AM
It is way too soon to see the consequences of Hank's bluster -- and it likely won't manifest itself in an "Aha! There it is!" kind of way until/unless he starts firing people. It will likely be a more insidious slow burn that eats away at the fabric of Cashman and his plan. Or it won't. I just don't buy into the sky-is-falling mentality without at least something a bit more concrete.
Saying that you're unhappy with a non-trade and the preservation of one of the best yankee pitching prospects in a long time is far from "doing something" in my opinion.Read his quotes again and tell me that's what he said.
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 09:17 AM
When you are the head of a billion dollar company, publicly insulting your management team, creating separation between yourself and the decisions that team has made/is making, and using the media to apply pressure to your employees is indeed "doing something" in most industries.
It sounds like you've twisted these comments past their breaking points. If anything, it sounds like Hank is just repeating what guys like Cashman have said continually. This is all much ado about nothing, and the continued determination by some in the fan base and media to turn Hank into "George Jr." is becoming off-putting.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:17 AM
"Made you head explode" that they would expect a 22-year old bull to pitch 170 innings over 6 months? A plyoaff berth is not a given this year. You apparently didn't bother to read further down "as long as he's healthy". Understand, as long as he's healthy this whole inning count is going to go out the window if a AL East title or WC spot is on the line late in ths season,within bounds. That would be incredibly penny-wise and pound-foolish and everything the organization has said has supported the fact that they value the longterm careers of all these young pitchers more than that.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 09:18 AM
"Made you head explode" that they would expect a 22-year old bull to pitch 170 innings over 6 months? A plyoaff berth is not a given this year. You apparently didn't bother to read further down "as long as he's healthy". Understand, as long as he's healthy this whole inning count is going to go out the window if a AL East title or WC spot is on the line late in ths season,within bounds.
It doesn't matter if he is capable of doing it this year, the 60 inning jump in IP from the previous year would vastly increase the chance of injury, the Yankees will not allow Joba to pitch 170 innings.
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 09:23 AM
It sounds like you've twisted these comments past their breaking points. If anything, it sounds like Hank is just repeating what guys like Cashman have said continually. This is all much ado about nothing, and the continued determination by some in the fan base and media to turn Hank into "George Jr." is becoming off-putting.
I actually thought his comparison was valid. Hank is not repeating what Cashman has said, he's questioning Cashman's past decision making. He's also implying that Joba should be moved to the rotation NOW, despite what his manager and GM might think is the proper time frame. I also cannot remember Cash outwardly bashing one of his player's in the media.
That would be incredibly penny-wise and pound-foolish and everything the organization has said has supported the fact that they value the longterm careers of all these young pitchers more than that.
Except for this:
“The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone,” Steinbrenner said.
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 09:27 AM
I actually thought his comparison was valid. Hank is not repeating what Cashman has said, he's questioning Cashman's past decision making. He's also implying that Joba should be moved to the rotation NOW, despite what his manager and GM might think is the proper time frame. I also cannot remember Cash outwardly bashing one of his player's in the media.
I didn't read the article that way. Steinbrenner said they have a time table, he just bemoaned Joba going into the pen last season, and he may have a point. I don't like that he would reveal the inner workings of the team, but his comments put some things into perspective. Joba's innings were actually cut last season to accommodate a move into the bullpen, so it looks like Hank was right and it was a panic move.
I'm sorry, I just don't read all of the dire, Hank-is-crapping-on-Cashman's-head storylines that some are being conjured up here. I read the same stuff back during the winter, with people proclaiming the whole farm system along with the naming rights to the new stadium would be traded for Johan. Those people were wrong too.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 09:27 AM
And this:
It has to be done on a schedule so we don’t rush him.
DisabledMess
04-21-08, 09:28 AM
Hank wants Joba to start now. I'm wondering if Cashman will pressure Girardi to start Joba, "now" or will they remain on course of what they were planning to do.
the_coach
04-21-08, 09:28 AM
I know he has every right to speak his mind, but shut up Hank...please.
OldYankeeFan
04-21-08, 09:28 AM
No no no. My comment about being mentally weak was in reference to Hank's remarks being a distraction for the team. As much as Hank has had to say, there has been no indication that he is going to interfere with on-field decisions. None. Nada. Zip. He just doesn't seem to have a filter and I don't think it's nearly the problem that people are making it out to be. When he actually does something vs just talk about it, I'll be concerned.
I agree, and what many forget is that Hank is NOT the owner who can do whatever he wants. He needs Hal's OK on any major decision and Hal seems to side with Cashman on most things. I also agree he doesn't have a filter and that is what I like about him. I'm soooo tired of all the guarded, sanitized, prepackaged, quotes. Baseball is entertainment and for me Hank adds to that. When asked a question, he actually tells the reporter what he thinks. I can agree or disagree with his statements, but I like the fact he is unfiltered, and have seen NO evidence whatsoever him speaking out has actually hurt the team.
I also believe that the rest of Yankee management and the players understand that Hanks bark is MUCH bigger than his bite and that he can really do nothing to back it up without the approval of others.
And this: <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">It has to be done on a schedule so we don’t rush him. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
But that is only a concession to the reality of how to undo what the "panicked idiots" did last year. It is hardly an endorsement of how Joba has been handled, or how the SP staff has been structured.
I agree, and what many forget is that Hank is NOT the owner who can do whatever he wants. He needs Hal's OK on any major decision and Hal seems to side with Cashman on most things. I also agree he doesn't have a filter and that is what I like about him. I'm soooo tired of all the guarded, sanitized, prepackaged, quotes. Baseball is entertainment and for me Hank adds to that.
I also believe that the rest of Yankee management and the players understand that Hanks bark is MUCH bigger than his bite and that he can really do nothing to back it up without the approval of others.
So, in other words, he is just a pathetic, impotent, blowhard?
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:33 AM
Except for this: What are you talking about? What he wanted for the starting rotation at the beginning of the year was Johan Santana. What does that have to do with valueing the longterm careers of the young pitchers?
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 09:35 AM
I don't think the big issue with the article is the Joba thing (if there's a big issue at all).
If anything, it's the way he kicks Mussina in the mouth with a steel toed boot:
“I think once Hughes and Kennedy get plenty of starts and get Joba back, and with Wang and Pettitte, we will be fine,” Steinbrenner said, referring to the Yankee starters Chien-Ming Wang and Andy Pettitte.
He also said he thought Mike Mussina, who is 39, “just needs to learn how to pitch like Jamie Moyer,” the Phillies’ 45-year-old starter, suggesting that Mussina shouldn’t try to rely on his diminished fastball to get hitters out.
“The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone,” Steinbrenner said.
Hilarious.
PocketAces12
04-21-08, 09:36 AM
Read his quotes again and tell me that's what he said.
Are you serious? I have a better idea. Since you obviously didn't read the article I'll pull the quotes out for you:
"I want him as a starter and so does everyone else, including him, and that is what we are working toward and we need him there now ..."
"The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone."
I'm honestly confused to why you asked me to reread his quotes. They reaffirm exactly what I said. He doesn't care about preserving Joba all season because he wants him to pitch now like he said above. If he cared he would understand that Joba needs to stay in the pen to limit his workload and then finish the season off in the rotation...
What are you talking about? What he wanted for the starting rotation at the beginning of the year was Johan Santana. What does that have to do with valueing the longterm careers of the young pitchers?
How exactly would he have acquired Johan without sacrificing the young pitchers you are saying he values?
If he got his way and traded for Santana, we likely wouldn't have Hughes and Kennedy right now.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:37 AM
But that is only a concession to the reality of how to undo what the "panicked idiots" did last year. It is hardly an endorsement of how Joba has been handled, or how the SP staff has been structured. Who are you quoting when you say "panicked idiots?"
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 09:39 AM
I don't think the big issue with the article is the Joba thing (if there's a big issue at all).
If anything, it's the way he kicks Mussina in the mouth with a steel toed boot:
Hilarious.
Whats the big insult? Moose should pitch like Moyer?
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:39 AM
How exactly would he have acquired Johan without sacrificing the young pitchers you are saying he values?
If he got his way and traded for Santana, we likely wouldn't have Hughes and Kennedy right now. My quote was in response to "this whole inning count is going to go out the window." Are you really having this much trouble following the conversation? Or just grasping for anything that you can twist to support your argument?
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 09:40 AM
How exactly would he have acquired Johan without sacrificing the young pitchers you are saying he values?
If he got his way and traded for Santana, we likely wouldn't have Hughes and Kennedy right now.
I'm sure Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy will somehow manage to overcome any shots to their pride by suggesting they were worth one of the very best starting pitchers in the game today.
cajunyankee
04-21-08, 09:42 AM
I know he has every right to speak his mind, but shut up Hank...please. Wrong.
You need to get inside the NYY ownership's collective mind. Can't you imagine a reason the team might want to have as much media attention as possible (good or bad) drawn its way over the next ____ months?
Hank will sacrifice personal credibility by playing family buffoon to further the greater good. Staging a jersey exorcism? Calling out Cash/Girardi over Joba?
Why?
Think hard........
So then what's your time frame when do you switch him over. 2007 he had 112 IP total in the minors anything over 145 IP this year is tempting fate. He really should be in the minors getting his innings in throwing all four of his pitches because that's the other problem with him being in the bullpen he won't be mixing his pitches as much as a starter needs to. In the minors they could have him throw nothing but change ups for 2 or 3 innings if that was a pitch he needed to work on. The kid is a very good ML late inning reliever and may be a very good to great starter, we won't know until he actually does it. He deserves the shot as a starter but I'm not sure if the management has the patience to do this right without increasing his chance at getting hurt or stunting his growth as a complete pitcher. Young pitchers under Giardi in Florida got hurt, I don't know if it was his fault but he bears watching.
Edited because I suck at math
I think his point is that he could have been stretched out more lat year if he wasn't used in the pen.
In '05 @ Nebraska, he had 118 innings
In '06 between Nebraska and Hawaii, he had 119
He could have been bumped up last year to 148, which would have given him a cap of 178 this year
It's a hard call given the state of our pen last year
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 09:45 AM
Whats the big insult? Moose should pitch like Moyer?
“I think once Hughes and Kennedy get plenty of starts and get Joba back, and with Wang and Pettitte, we will be fine,” Steinbrenner said, referring to the Yankee starters Chien-Ming Wang and Andy Pettitte.
Basically, things aren't good because Moose is in the rotation. I think his "this isn't the rotation..." thing was also aimed at Moose, but that's just me. His omission when discussing who will be around when things are fine was more direct in my view.
My quote was in response to "this whole inning count is going to go out the window." Are you really having this much trouble following the conversation? Or just grasping for anything that you can twist to support your argument?
You asked me this:
"What he wanted for the starting rotation at the beginning of the year was Johan Santana. What does that have to do with valueing the longterm careers of the young pitchers?"
How is asking you how he would have been able to keep the young pitchers you say he values while still acquiring Santana not following the conversation? Unless you are saying the only young pitcher Hank values is Joba, but that's not what I got from what you said.
It seems to me my post was a direct response to your question -- I don't see how asking how to reconcile two conflicting positions is twisting anything. He can't say he wanted Santana, didn't want the rotation we have today and also stake out the position that he values the young pitchers we've retained.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 09:48 AM
I'm not even giving him that - why would I? Unless I had reason to believe Cashman was lying for a year and a half. There has never been a doubt in my mind that Joba was moving out of the pen - I trust in Cash's plan and that is part of Cash's plan. No, Hank gets no credit for having a big mouth and calling out his GM in a rude, obnoxious manner. Oh well, I guess the big guy will always have his fans.
I sure as hell don't. Cashman has been nothing but brutal when it comes to pitching. I love that these guys are pitching for us, but Cashman needs to let someone else handle the pitching evaluations and negotiations. When it comes to pitching all I can think of when it comes to Brian Cashman is: Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown and Jaret Wright. Nothing but trouble. I want the team young and exciting and that's what we're getting...but when it comes to pitching Cashman needs to step away.
Hughes, Kennedy and Joba will be alright. Hughes and Kennedy are getting their lumps already and I'm alright with that...that's expected...I'm not worried.
I don't think the big issue with the article is the Joba thing (if there's a big issue at all).
If anything, it's the way he kicks Mussina in the mouth with a steel toed boot:
Hilarious.
I think it's stupid for him to voice it publicly, but he does have a point
Moose has gotten into trouble ( Manny and others ) when he's tried to use his 84 mph FB as he used to use the 90 mph version.
yanksphan
04-21-08, 09:49 AM
Hank's a bad apple.
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 09:50 AM
You asked me this:
How is asking you how he would have been able to keep the young pitchers you say he values while still acquiring Santana not following the conversation? Unless you are saying the only young pitcher Hank values is Joba, but that's not what I got from what you said.
It seems to me my post was a direct response to your question -- I don't see how asking how to reconcile two conflicting positions is twisting anything. He can't say he wanted Santana, didn't want the rotation we have today and also stake out the position that he values the young pitchers we've retained.
This is incredibly shallow thinking. Many of us wanted Santana, but we no less appreciate the potential we have in the kids. We still don't know if passing on Johan was right, as a matter of fact. But to insist one can't desire a great SP and the kids you have is remarkable.
Your hyperbole and vitriol where Hank is concerned has gone off the charts. I don't even understand your point anymore because none of it comes across rational.
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 09:51 AM
I didn't read the article that way. Steinbrenner said they have a time table, he just bemoaned Joba going into the pen last season, and he may have a point. I don't like that he would reveal the inner workings of the team, but his comments put some things into perspective. Joba's innings were actually cut last season to accommodate a move into the bullpen, so it looks like Hank was right and it was a panic move.
I'm sorry, I just don't read all of the dire, Hank-is-crapping-on-Cashman's-head storylines that some are being conjured up here. I read the same stuff back during the winter, with people proclaiming the whole farm system along with the naming rights to the new stadium would be traded for Johan. Those people were wrong too.
I guess we'll have to agree that we interpret his comments differently. Regardless of whether or not Hank has a point about Joba going into the 'pen last season, you don't make the point by implying that your front office "panicked." Imo. In addition, given Hank's and his father's desire to win, I find it a bit disingenuous for him to say that "it wouldn't have happened" if he were calling the shots last year. If it came down to missing the playoffs due to injecting Joba in the rotation, I doubt he would have started a game. Besides, Joba came into being as a phenom due to his role as a set-up man last year. It's silly to suggest Hank would have altered the approach with an unproven commodity.
You might not read Hank's comments as condescending, but other people do. I think you're being a tad too apologetic in this case, but that's fine; I was very apologetic during the whole Johan debacle myself. I'm just a tad more irked here because I feel Hank's comments are indeed disrespectful to the organization and some of it's player's.
OldYankeeFan
04-21-08, 09:52 AM
So, in other words, he is just a pathetic, impotent, blowhard?
Pathetic? I don't see that at all.
Impotent blowhard? Yeah, but an entertaining one who as another forumer put it happened to hit the genetic lottery.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 09:52 AM
Hank's a bad apple.
Yes, I fully expect his comments this weekend to lead to the total destruction of the New York Yankees organization.
I'm sure Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy will somehow manage to overcome any shots to their pride by suggesting they were worth one of the very best starting pitchers in the game today.
I don't recall commenting on the psyches of either of those guys. That may be the point others here are making, but I haven't even touched on that.
And for what it's worth, Hank isn't saying they were worth Santana -- he is saying he wishes he had Santana instead of them.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 09:54 AM
You asked me this:
How is asking you how he would have been able to keep the young pitchers you say he values while still acquiring Santana not following the conversation? Unless you are saying the only young pitcher Hank values is Joba, but that's not what I got from what you said.
It seems to me my post was a direct response to your question -- I don't see how asking how to reconcile two conflicting positions is twisting anything. He can't say he wanted Santana, didn't want the rotation we have today and also stake out the position that he values the young pitchers we've retained. The reference to valueing the pitchers was in response to innings limits. You countered with “The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone,” Steinbrenner said." Your response had nothing to do with them protecting their arms which is the only thing I referenced. I never said anything about protecting them from being traded. Context is everything. Once again, you're distorting and spinning.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 09:57 AM
“I think once Hughes and Kennedy get plenty of starts and get Joba back, and with Wang and Pettitte, we will be fine,” Steinbrenner said, referring to the Yankee starters Chien-Ming Wang and Andy Pettitte.
Basically, things aren't good because Moose is in the rotation. I think his "this isn't the rotation..." thing was also aimed at Moose, but that's just me. His omission when discussing who will be around when things are fine was more direct in my view.
Meh, I didn't really take it that way. Wang and Pettitte have been great, Hughes and Kennedy need more experience. The omission of Moose's name maybe means he is an unknown, and I don't think that is a surprise or insult to anyone, including Mussina.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 10:01 AM
Meh, I didn't really take it that way. Wang and Pettitte have been great, Hughes and Kennedy need more experience. The omission of Moose's name maybe means he is an unknown, and I don't think that is a surprise or insult to anyone, including Mussina.
How can Moose be surprised to hear any of this with his 85-87mph fastball? :lol::P
This is incredibly shallow thinking. Many of us wanted Santana, but we no less appreciate the potential we have in the kids. We still don't know if passing on Johan was right, as a matter of fact. But to insist one can't desire a great SP and the kids you have is remarkable.
Your hyperbole and vitriol where Hank is concerned has gone off the charts. I don't even understand your point anymore because none of it comes across rational.
Vitriol? Where have I attacked Hank in this discussion?
And how exactly would we have acquired that great SP while still retaining the kids?
What is so remarkable about asking how to reconcile the inherent inconsistency in what you claim his position to be?
It is clear -- at least to me -- that Hank would rather have Santana than Hughes, Kennedy and Melky. If that's indeed the case -- and Hank's own words support that position -- then it follows that he doesn't share Cashman's vision for the future of the ballclub.
To assert otherwise one would have to ignore Steinbrenner's own words.
Where is the hyperbole in that?
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 10:03 AM
I think it's stupid for him to voice it publicly, but he does have a point
Moose has gotten into trouble ( Manny and others ) when he's tried to use his 84 mph FB as he used to use the 90 mph version.
Oh, I agree, that's why I said it was hilarious in my first post.
I just think it's really poor managment/PR skills.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 10:04 AM
And how exactly would we have acquired that great SP while still retaining the kids?
Oh c'mon now. You know the way we always bought our Championships....with the old mighty dollar. Per the rest of Major League Baseball and their fans. ;)
The reference to valueing the pitchers was in response to innings limits. You countered with “The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone,” Steinbrenner said." Your response had nothing to do with them protecting their arms which is the only thing I referenced. I never said anything about protecting them from being traded. Context is everything. Once again, you're distorting and spinning.
I missed that context then.
But there certainly are those who are arguing parallel to your comments that Hank is on the same page with the organization's stated long-term youth-movement, while his own words say exactly the opposite.
If I wrongly lumped you into that group, I was mistaken. But my underlying point holds, and nobody has reconciled the contradiction for me yet.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 10:08 AM
Vitriol? Where have I attacked Hank?
And how exactly would we have acquired that great SP while still retaining the kids?
What is so remarkable about asking how to reconcile the inherent inconsistency in what you claim his position to be?
It is clear -- at least to me -- that Hank would rather have Santana than Hughes, Kennedy and Melky. If that's indeed the case -- and Hank's own words support that position -- then it follows that he doesn't share Cashman's vision for the future of the ballclub.
To assert otherwise one would have to ignore Steinbrenner's own words.
Where is the hyperbole in that? First, there was never any confirmation that Hank was willing to give up Hughes, Melky and Kennedy. Second, just because Hank wanted to acquire the best starting pitcher in baseball doesn't put him at odds with Cashman's plan. It simply means they disagreed on an isolated move. One that from a baseball pov, was not a bad one. It doesn't follow that he doesn't share Cashman's vision for the future at all. Once they pulled Hughes off the table, Hank has been nothing but supportive of Cash's plan yet you seem determined to twist and turn and spin every statement to mean otherwise.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 10:10 AM
Hank The Tank, Hank The Tank, Hank The Tank!!! :)
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 10:18 AM
Vitriol? Where have I attacked Hank in this discussion?
So, in other words, he is just a pathetic, impotent, blowhard?
And how exactly would we have acquired that great SP while still retaining the kids?
So you mean if one wanted Johan Santana, we forever give up the right to enjoy any potential benefits from Hughes or Kennedy? What kind of reasoning is this? When there were reports the Yankees were sniffing around the SF Giants' two stud SP's and Matsui's name came up, I allowed myself to get a little excited. Since nothing happened, however, I refuse to take back any cheers for Hideki's contributions to the team since.
What is so remarkable about asking how to reconcile the inherent inconsistency in what you claim his position to be?
There is no inherent inconsistency. You've used an illogical framework to make a point and demanding that people accept it as fact. I don't. It's your framework that's flawed, not Hank's rationale.
It is clear -- at least to me -- that Hank would rather have Santana than Hughes, Kennedy and Melky. If that's indeed the case -- and Hank's own words support that position -- then it follows that he doesn't share Cashman's vision for the future of the ballclub.
To assert otherwise one would have to ignore Steinbrenner's own words.
Where is the hyperbole in that?
You mean besides your assertion that Hank was willing to give up all three of those players in order to acquire Santana? You're just grafting your own interpretation on Hank's comments and insisting there can be no other reasonable intent derived from them. Hank's words most certainly don't support that position and you have no way of knowing the innerworkings of those talks. considering what the Twins ultimately wound up getting, it actually suggests that they weren't going to be able to stick with a Hughes/Kennedy package. But that's an argument for a different day.
First, there was never any confirmation that Hank was willing to give up Hughes, Melky and Kennedy. Second, just because Hank wanted to acquire the best starting pitcher in baseball doesn't put him at odds with Cashman's plan. It simply means they disagreed on an isolated move. One that from a baseball pov, was not a bad one. It doesn't follow that he doesn't share Cashman's vision for the future at all. Once they pulled Hughes off the table, Hank has been nothing but supportive of Cash's plan yet you seem determined to twist and turn and spin every statement to mean otherwise.
An isolated move? Seriously?
You are telling me I'm twisting and turning and spinning, yet at the same time you claim that the decision whether or not to acquire Santana wasn't a move that would chart the course of this team for the future? The potential Santana move wasn't a simple case of whether or not to acquire him -- it was a decision that affected the potential make-up of this team for years, and involved the very bedrock of Cash's vision for the future. You can't look at the Santana decision as an isolated move.
And I really don't agree that publicly saying this isn't the rotation he wanted, that he really wanted Santana instead of what he has now, and that he wouldn't have allowed putting Joba in the bullpen last year is being "nothing but supportive of Cash's plan".
OldYankeeFan
04-21-08, 10:36 AM
But there certainly are those who are arguing parallel to your comments that Hank is on the same page with the organization's stated long-term youth-movement, while his own words say exactly the opposite.
Although Hank has publicly stated previously that he is behind the youth movement and disagreed with his fathers trading away the youth in the past, that doesn't mean Hank can't or won't change his mind. The point is it doesn't really matter what he says or wants because the team is run by Cashman with Hal's backing (Hank's an impotent blowhard ;) ).
For there to be any change there has to be agreement by BOTH Hal and Hank and that will not happen. Cashman knows this and for the money he makes and will be making, will put up with the blowhards remarks to see his vision through.
So you mean if one wanted Johan Santana, we forever give up the right to enjoy any potential benefits from Hughes or Kennedy? What kind of reasoning is this? When there were reports the Yankees were sniffing around the SF Giants' two stud SP's and Matsui's name came up, I allowed myself to get a little excited. Since nothing happened, however, I refuse to take back any cheers for Hideki's contributions to the team since.
There is no inherent inconsistency. You've used an illogical framework to make a point and demanding that people accept it as fact. I don't. It's your framework that's flawed, not Hank's rationale.
You mean besides your assertion that Hank was willing to give up all three of those players in order to acquire Santana? You're just grafting your own interpretation on Hank's comments and insisting there can be no other reasonable intent derived from them. Hank's words most certainly don't support that position and you have no way of knowing the innerworkings of those talks. considering what the Twins ultimately wound up getting, it actually suggests that they weren't going to be able to stick with a Hughes/Kennedy package. But that's an argument for a different day.
OK. Let's say I'm wrong about all three being packaged for Santana and it was instead just one of either Hughes/Kennedy, plus Cabrera and some other smaller parts. That doesn't undercut my point that making that trade still undermines Cash's vision for the future. You're latching onto one small potential inaccuracy, calling it hyberbole, and then inflating it to the point that you claim it invalidates my basic argument. It doesn't.
The point is it doesn't really matter what he says or wants because the team is run by Cashman with Hal's backing (Hank's an impotent blowhard ;) ).
For there to be any change there has to be agreement by BOTH Hal and Hank and that will not happen. Cashman knows this and for the money he makes and will be making, will put up with the blowhards remarks to see his vision through.
Only time will tell.
27IsNext
04-21-08, 10:51 AM
How exactly would he have acquired Johan without sacrificing the young pitchers you are saying he values?
If he got his way and traded for Santana, we likely wouldn't have Hughes and Kennedy right now.
FWIW, Hank went on the record in saying he wouldn't have traded both Hughes AND Kennedy for Santana.
FWIW, Hank went on the record in saying he wouldn't have traded both Hughes AND Kennedy for Santana.
Thanks. I've acknowledged that in a later post. My questions and basic point still hold, though.
yankeebot
04-21-08, 10:57 AM
OK. Let's say I'm wrong about all three being packaged for Santana and it was instead just one of either Hughes/Kennedy, plus Cabrera and some other smaller parts. That doesn't undercut my point that making that trade still undermines Cash's vision for the future. You're latching onto one small potential inaccuracy, calling it hyberbole, and then inflating it to the point that you claim it invalidates my basic argument. It doesn't. No. It may undercut one aspect, Phil Hughes. And if Johan Santana were 33, you might have a better point. Supporting Cash's vision does not mean they cannot disagree on individual points. The only person that seems to be latching onto one small inconsistancy is you. And, you may have noticed, for all the bluster, the plan is still intact. Johan is pitching for the Mets if you missed that.
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 10:57 AM
OK. Let's say I'm wrong about all three being packaged for Santana and it was instead just one of either Hughes/Kennedy, plus Cabrera and some other smaller parts. That doesn't undercut my point that making that trade still undermines Cash's vision for the future. You're latching onto one small potential inaccuracy, calling it hyberbole, and then inflating it to the point that you claim it invalidates my basic argument. It doesn't.
Sure it does, and you're still doing it. You're insisting that Cashman in no way would ever have made a Hughes+ or Kennedy+ trade for Santana, and that's not so black and white. If we go by what we've read, the organization sounds like it was pretty split on the deal, meaning it simply wasn't Hank vs. The Baseball People. I recall Gene Michael even suggesting he'd trade Hughes for Johan. In fact, I certainly hope Cashman was willing to do a Kennedy+ for Santana, because otherwise I'd question his intelligence as a major league GM. Cash has made statements in the past to the effect that you don't develop your farm system solely to promote players, but also to create valuable chips to acquire other team's good players.
I also take opposition to the notion that trading for a 28 year old elite SP is a short-term move. But again, that's an argument for a different time.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:09 AM
Nobody likes quoting me. :mad:
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 11:10 AM
Also FWIW, I'm almost positive Cashman stated that there never was a Kennedy+ deal available for Johan. In an interview he said that it was either Hughes/Kennedy+, or a deal that involved either Cano or Wang. Of course, none of these deals were viable for Cash.
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 11:11 AM
Nobody likes quoting me. :mad:
QFT. ;)
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:13 AM
QFT. ;)
If I think I know what you're saying, then....:mad: :mad: :mad:
YESSIR!
04-21-08, 11:16 AM
If I think I know what you're saying, then....:mad: :mad: :mad:
Haha, nah man, it was just a knee-jerk reactionary-post. I wasn't implying anything about your contributions :)
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:22 AM
Haha, nah man, it was just a knee-jerk reactionary-post. I wasn't implying anything about your contributions :)
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT!!:mad:
:D :P
Sure it does, and you're still doing it. You're insisting that Cashman in no way would ever have made a Hughes+ or Kennedy+ trade for Santana, and that's not so black and white. If we go by what we've read, the organization sounds like it was pretty split on the deal, meaning it simply wasn't Hank vs. The Baseball People. I recall Gene Michael even suggesting he'd trade Hughes for Johan. In fact, I certainly hope Cashman was willing to do a Kennedy+ for Santana, because otherwise I'd question his intelligence as a major league GM. Cash has made statements in the past to the effect that you don't develop your farm system solely to promote players, but also to create valuable chips to acquire other team's good players.
I am? I thought I was saying that regardless of the actual deal that was on the table, Cashman was opposed to it because it wasn't consistent with his vision of building young pitching from within.
And that by Hank saying he wishes we had pulled that trigger, he is casting doubt as to whether he truly supports Cash's vision.
Zimmers' Helmet
04-21-08, 11:25 AM
Hank should just shut up and stop publicly undermining his braintrust.
His latest rantings only prove that he has no understanding of what it takes to develop young talent.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:30 AM
Hank should just shut up and stop publicly undermining his braintrust.
His latest rantings only prove that he has no understanding of what it takes to develop young talent.
But Brian Cashman does? Especially with his background of pitching? We can give the props to Damon Oppenheimer for getting us these awesome pitching prospects. I wouldn't trust Brian Cashman with a pitching staff. Do you remember his wonderful trades? Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown....he then went on to get Jaret Wright...Pavano was a no-brainer though...nobody knew he was going to be the invisible man and the man that fell apart.
But if you say that about Hank, then Cashman shouldn't get a pass either.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 11:32 AM
My quote was in response to "this whole inning count is going to go out the window." Are you really having this much trouble following the conversation? Or just grasping for anything that you can twist to support your argument?
Why are you being so nasty?
yankeebot
04-21-08, 11:32 AM
I am? I thought I was saying that regardless of the actual deal that was on the table, Cashman was opposed to it because it wasn't consistent with his vision of building young pitching from within.
And that by Hank saying he wishes we had pulled that trigger, he is casting doubt as to whether he truly supports Cash's vision. That implies that the only way Cash wants to build pitching is from within. Where has he said that? Personnally, I think Cash didn't want to pull the trigger on Santana because he had fallen too much in love with his own top prospect vs his vision but that's a different argument for a different time.
I think his point is that he could have been stretched out more lat year if he wasn't used in the pen.
In '05 @ Nebraska, he had 118 innings
In '06 between Nebraska and Hawaii, he had 119
He could have been bumped up last year to 148, which would have given him a cap of 178 this year
It's a hard call given the state of our pen last year
All innings are not created equal though, MiLB >College and MLB >>>MiLB as far as leverage factors go the original studies on young pitchers references only jumps in MLB innings it's just been extapolated to include MiLB ball. But it also begs the question as to whether he and the team were better served with him in NY or on the farm last year.
Why are you being so nasty?
That's what I've been wondering, too.....
President Kennedy
04-21-08, 11:40 AM
I am? I thought I was saying that regardless of the actual deal that was on the table, Cashman was opposed to it because it wasn't consistent with his vision of building young pitching from within.
But this isn't a fact. As I said previously, Cashman has alluded to the notion that you don't build a farm system strictly for promotion. This is you making something up and alluding to it as though it's beyond argument.
And that by Hank saying he wishes we had pulled that trigger, he is casting doubt as to whether he truly supports Cash's vision.
Sure he is. Between mimicking everything Cashman has said about building the farm, to Joba's ultimate destination as a starter, Hank has just been undermining Cashman at every turn. Oh, and then there was the deal he forced Cashman to make for Johan Santana that further proves your point.
Zimmers' Helmet
04-21-08, 11:44 AM
But Brian Cashman does? Especially with his background of pitching? We can give the props to Damon Oppenheimer for getting us these awesome pitching prospects. I wouldn't trust Brian Cashman with a pitching staff. Do you remember his wonderful trades? Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown....he then went on to get Jaret Wright...Pavano was a no-brainer though...nobody knew he was going to be the invisible man and the man that fell apart.
But if you say that about Hank, then Cashman shouldn't get a pass either.
I'm not giving Cashman a free pass; I have been critical of Cashman's ability to evaluate pitching talent; or lack thereof. Brown, Igawa, Pavano and Jaret Wright were all bad acquisitions, but last I checked it was also Cashman who put Damon Oppenheimer in charge of scouting and the amateur draft; and it was Cashman who finally learned from his mistakes and decided to go in another direction in regards to how he is going to acquire pitching. Sure Oppenheimer has done a fabulous job, but it's only because Cashman gave him that position so you have to at least give Cashman credit for that. It was Cashman's decision to start developing our own pitching instead of overpaying for veterans and it is certainly the right decision.
For Hank to publicly state that putting Joba in the pen last year was a panic move is ridiculous; especially when you consider that doing so probably saved the team from missing the post-season, and also allowed the kid to get his feet wet in the majors without risking his long term health.
It's funny how Hank had no problem with that move before Hughes and Kennedy started struggling this year. In stating that he wants Joba in the rotation right now, he doesn't explain how this is feasible without blowing out Joba's innings cap and putting his long term health at risk.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 11:47 AM
I'm not giving Cashman a free pass; I have been critical of Cashman's ability to evaluate pitching talent; or lack thereof. Brown, Igawa, Pavano and Jaret Wright were all bad acquisitions, but last I checked it was also Cashman who put Damon Oppenheimer in charge of scouting and the amateur draft; and it was Cashman who finally learned from his mistakes and decided to go in another direction in regards to how he is going to acquire pitching. Sure Oppenheimer has done a fabulous job, but it's only because Cashman gave him that position so you have to at least give Cashman credit for that. It was Cashman's decision to start developing our own pitching instead of overpaying for veterans and it is certainly the right decision.
For Hank to publicly state that putting Joba in the pen last year was a panic move is ridiculous; especially when you consider that doing so probably saved the team from missing the post-season, and also allowed the kid to get his feet wet in the majors without risking his long term health.
It's funny how Hank had no problem with that move before Hughes and Kennedy started struggling this year. In stating that he wants Joba in the rotation right now, he doesn't explain how this is feasible without blowing out Joba's innings cap and putting his long term health at risk.
Excellent comments!
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:51 AM
I'm not giving Cashman a free pass; I have been critical of Cashman's ability to evaluate pitching talent; or lack thereof. Brown, Igawa, Pavano and Jaret Wright were all bad acquisitions, but last I checked it was also Cashman who put Damon Oppenheimer in charge of scouting and the amateur draft; and it was Cashman who finally learned from his mistakes and decided to go in another direction in regards to how he is going to acquire pitching. Sure Oppenheimer has done a fabulous job, but it's only because Cashman gave him that position so you have to at least give Cashman credit for that. It was Cashman's decision to start developing our own pitching instead of overpaying for veterans and it is certainly the right decision.
For Hank to publicly state that putting Joba in the pen last year was a panic move is ridiculous; especially when you consider that doing so probably saved the team from missing the post-season, and also allowed the kid to get his feet wet in the majors without risking his long term health.
It's funny how Hank had no problem with that move before Hughes and Kennedy started struggling this year. In stating that he wants Joba in the rotation right now, he doesn't explain how this is feasible without blowing out Joba's innings cap and putting his long term health at risk.
I just don't really like Brian Cashman. He's done nothing that great.
Hank said when the trade never went through that he trusts Cashman, but he'll be pretty pissed once the losing starts and it has started.
Zimmers' Helmet
04-21-08, 11:51 AM
Excellent comments!
Why thank you sir, :)
Zimmers' Helmet
04-21-08, 11:53 AM
I just don't really like Brian Cashman. He's done nothing that great.
Hank said when the trade never went through that he trusts Cashman, but he'll be pretty pissed once the losing starts and it has started.
Ahh the irony...especially when I read your comments and then I read you sig..
teknetic
04-21-08, 11:54 AM
Ahh the irony...especially when I read your comments and then I read you sig..
So obviously oblivious.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:55 AM
Ahh the irony...especially when I read your comments and then I read you sig..
I want the kids! I just don't like Cashman...his moves are suspect and most haven't worked out. I'll say it again...Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright....
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 11:55 AM
So obviously oblivious.
Now you're judging my posts? Oh, the irony of that.
PocketAces12
04-21-08, 12:04 PM
I want the kids! I just don't like Cashman...his moves are suspect and most haven't worked out. I'll say it again...Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright....
I swear to God if you mention those three pitchers again...We get it, he messed up on them. Let it go..
That implies that the only way Cash wants to build pitching is from within.
It does? How so?
The deal didn't happen. Cashman is on record as saying the reason the deal didn't happen was they have a plan and he didn't want to deviate from his plan.
So when Hank says he wishes we had done the deal, it doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me to question Hank's commitment to Cash's plan.
Torre Must Go
04-21-08, 12:11 PM
Francesa going nuts about Hank's comments.
TheBamTino24
04-21-08, 12:12 PM
I want the kids! I just don't like Cashman...his moves are suspect and most haven't worked out. I'll say it again...Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright....
Brian Cashman has been mediocre when you factor in the huge advantage he has over every other organization in terms of resources. Of course he's safeguarded often because of the fractured state of management that NYY was following the 2001 World Series.
I am not of the opinion that he's some kind of genius. For example, I feel Gene Michael has made a much bigger imprint on this organization than Cashman, and with lesser resources at the time. Realizing that we had to rebuild the farm system and pitching staff with youth wasn't exactly hard to see. I'm glad they are finally doing it. But it's not like this has never been done before. Michael did it.
Point is, Chamberlain should be a starter. Hank is right.
TheBamTino24
04-21-08, 12:13 PM
Francesa going nuts about Hank's comments.
This is a man who thinks Mariano Rivera was the most essential part of the 4 titles. Ignoring the other 7-8 innings played before he even got into the game.
But this isn't a fact. As I said previously, Cashman has alluded to the notion that you don't build a farm system strictly for promotion. This is you making something up and alluding to it as though it's beyond argument.
"I can't talk about another team's player," said Cashman, "but I can say that I'm committed to our young players."
It was not a surprise, as baseball sources have said it was Cashman who talked part-owner Hank Steinbrenner out of doing the deal for Santana as far back as the winter meetings, preferring to hang onto young pitchers Phil Hughes, Joba Chamberlain and Ian Kennedy.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2008/01/26/2008-01-26_brian_cashman_prefers_yankee_youngsters_.html?ref=rss
Cashman made that clear again this week, when he refused to depart from his long-term strategy and passed on the Minnesota Twins (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/minnesotatwins/index.html?inline=nyt-org) ace Johan Santana (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/johan_santana/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who went to the Mets (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/newyorkmets/index.html?inline=nyt-org) instead.
The Yankees would have traded Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/melky_cabrera/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Jeff Marquez for Santana on Dec. 2, but the Twins asked for Ian Kennedy, too. The Yankees said no, and the next morning, Andy Pettitte (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/andy_pettitte/index.html?inline=nyt-per) announced that he would return to the team.
The Yankees soon pulled their offer and never made another, resisting again Tuesday when Minnesota asked for Cabrera, Kennedy, Marquez and Chien-Ming Wang (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/chienming_wang/index.html?inline=nyt-per). Cashman has made his stand, and Santana may be across town to remind him of what might have been.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/baseball/01cashman.html?ex=1359522000&en=c8caa4bf131f1180&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Did I make these up?
ICEBERG18
04-21-08, 12:21 PM
Francesa going nuts about Hank's comments.
Who cares.
effdamets
04-21-08, 12:23 PM
Francesa going nuts about Hank's comments.
Is that in between the bites of his hero sandwich?
ARoDfan4life
04-21-08, 12:24 PM
Francesa going nuts about Hank's comments.
fatboy is always b.....in' about something.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 12:25 PM
Francesa getting bent out of shape only reinforces my opinion that the comments were much ado about nothing.
ARoDfan4life
04-21-08, 12:26 PM
just listening to their reasoning is a pain to listen to.
Cashman and Hank are publicly in different places on this. Here's what Cashman told Wallace Matthews (Newsday) this morning:
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/blog/
“If you had bet on the kids doing great out of the gate, it wouldn’t be necessarily a safe bet,” Cashman said by phone, “but we’re betting on them in the long-term, not necessarily in the short-term, and so that’s all I can say about that.Joba’s staying in the bullpen right now. That’s where we’re at. That’s (Chamberlain moving to the rotation) not something that’s going to happen here early on, and he (Steinbrenner) knows that. We’ve talked about it.”
This can't be good internally, and certainly can't be good for Joba. He's the rope in a tug-of-war.
ARoDfan4life
04-21-08, 12:30 PM
Cashman and Hank are publicly in different places on this. Here's what Cashman told Wallace Matthews (Newsday) this morning:
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/blog/
“If you had bet on the kids doing great out of the gate, it wouldn’t be necessarily a safe bet,” Cashman said by phone, “but we’re betting on them in the long-term, not necessarily in the short-term, and so that’s all I can say about that.Joba’s staying in the bullpen right now. That’s where we’re at. That’s (Chamberlain moving to the rotation) not something that’s going to happen here early on, and he (Steinbrenner) knows that. We’ve talked about it.”
This can't be good internally, and certainly can't be good for Joba. He's the rope in a tug-of-war.
keyword
TheBamTino24
04-21-08, 12:30 PM
We're 20 games in. Imagine what could happen later in the season when the pressure mounts and the games lessen. If we lose 4 in a row in late August, maybe give up the lead in some race, will Hank erupt and start calling out players?
He's going to test Girardi's patience.
Ynkcpt23
04-21-08, 12:32 PM
We're 20 games in. Imagine what could happen later in the season when the pressure mounts and the games lessen. If we lose 4 in a row in late August, maybe give up the lead in some race, will Hank erupt and start calling out players?
He's going to test Girardi's patience.
Hank's opening his mouth, somebody go get the industrial strength ibuprofen...:P
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 12:34 PM
Let's see what happens, if word comes that Joba is going to be sent down before the June timeframe originally stated, then those that think Hank is doing harm to the team and has excessive power will have a point. If Joba goes down in June as planned, then it will just be an overtalkative owner.
Toaderly
04-21-08, 12:35 PM
I want the kids! I just don't like Cashman...his moves are suspect and most haven't worked out. I'll say it again...Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright....
Bobby Abreu, Corey, Lidle, Alberto Gonzalez, Chad Moeller....
Originally Posted by PYanks
Cashman and Hank are publicly in different places on this. Here's what Cashman told Wallace Matthews (Newsday) this morning:
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/ba.../yankees/blog/ (http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/blog/)
“If you had bet on the kids doing great out of the gate, it wouldn’t be necessarily a safe bet,” Cashman said by phone, “but we’re betting on them in the long-term, not necessarily in the short-term, and so that’s all I can say about that.Joba’s staying in the bullpen right now. That’s where we’re at. That’s (Chamberlain moving to the rotation) not something that’s going to happen here early on, and he (Steinbrenner) knows that. We’ve talked about it.”
This can't be good internally, and certainly can't be good for Joba. He's the rope in a tug-of-war.
keyword
“I want him as a starter and so does everyone else, including him, and that is what we are working toward and we need him there now,” Steinbrenner said Sunday by telephone.
Keywords.
Are you serious? I have a better idea. Since you obviously didn't read the article I'll pull the quotes out for you:
"I want him as a starter and so does everyone else, including him, and that is what we are working toward and we need him there now ..."
"The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone."
I'm honestly confused to why you asked me to reread his quotes. They reaffirm exactly what I said. He doesn't care about preserving Joba all season because he wants him to pitch now like he said above. If he cared he would understand that Joba needs to stay in the pen to limit his workload and then finish the season off in the rotation...Quite serious. You forgot these gems in your two posts on the topic.
The mistake was already made last year switching him to the bullpen out of panic or whatever,"Good looking out Hank.
"I had no say in it last year and I wouldn't have allowed it.Good looking out Hank. Flex.
"I think once Hughes and Kennedy get plenty of starts and get Joba back, and with [Chien-Ming] Wang (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7502) and [Andy] Pettitte (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5331), we will be fine,"Ooops. Where's Moose?
"[Mussina] just needs to learn how to pitch like [45-year-old Phillies pitcher] Jamie Moyer (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=3932)," Yeah, I'm sure every player wants to be compared to Jamie Moyer. Not to mention that Moyer had a 92 ERA+ last year and has a 1.7 WHIP so far this year in appearances against the Nats, Cubs and Mets. Moose had a 87 ERA+ last year and has a 1.4 WHIP against the Sox (twice), the Rays and Blue Jays. Yeah, he really needs to dig deep and bring on Moyer Time.
"The starting rotation is not what I would have chosen at the beginning of the year, but that is not a big news flash to anyone," Right. It's not a news flash, so let's stop drudging it up. You didn't get Santana. Let's allow the organization to move on, shall we?
So back to your quote:
Saying that you're unhappy with a non-trade and the preservation of one of the best yankee pitching prospects in a long time is far from "doing something" in my opinion.Yes, if that's what you got from the article I stand behind my suggestion to read it again.
I want the kids! I just don't like Cashman...his moves are suspect and most haven't worked out. I'll say it again...Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright....
Jaret Wright wasn't a Cashman move and while Jeff Weaver didn't work out, most people, including myself, loved the logic and intent of the move when it happened.
Sometimes good moves don't work, sometimes bad ones do. It's about the process put into a move.
But Brian Cashman does? Especially with his background of pitching? We can give the props to Damon Oppenheimer for getting us these awesome pitching prospects. I wouldn't trust Brian Cashman with a pitching staff. Do you remember his wonderful trades? Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown....he then went on to get Jaret Wright...Pavano was a no-brainer though...nobody knew he was going to be the invisible man and the man that fell apart.
But if you say that about Hank, then Cashman shouldn't get a pass either.Ok, so Cashman gets all the blame for his role as GM for the FA signings (which have been debated endlessly in terms of how much say he had in those) but none of the credit for developing the farm? Gotcha.
BTW - at the time the Jeff Weaver deal looked awesome. I have no idea why people keep bringing that up as if Cashman had his head up his duff when he pulled the trigger on that one.
Yankee Fan in Boston
04-21-08, 12:44 PM
Let's see what happens, if word comes that Joba is going to be sent down before the June timeframe originally stated, then those that think Hank is doing harm to the team and has excessive power will have a point. If Joba goes down in June as planned, then it will just be an overtalkative owner.
An overly talkative owner who put his manager, GM, and young pitcher (not to mention Moose) in a difficult spot. There is much made about how important it is to Girardi's job to deal with the NY media, but Hank needs some help in that area as well.
And if he does go down sooner -- who is going to talk to Hank in September when he has reached his innings cap?
yankeebot
04-21-08, 12:44 PM
Keywords. Huh. See, I thought the keywords were "It has to be done on a schedule so we don’t rush him.”
Huh. See, I thought the keywords were "It has to be done on a schedule so we don’t rush him.”
The original poster is the one who highlighted the words "right now", not me.
An overly talkative owner who put his manager, GM, and young pitcher (not to mention Moose) in a difficult spot. There is much made about how important it is to Girardi's job to deal with the NY media, but Hank needs some help in that area as well.
And if he does go down sooner -- who is going to talk to Hank in September when he has reached his innings cap?True. And I wonder how many times a day now Girardi will have to field questions about this nonsense. Twenty games into the year fer criminysakes.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 12:52 PM
Bobby Abreu, Corey, Lidle, Alberto Gonzalez, Chad Moeller....
Corey Lidle was a toss in with the Abreu deal.
Sorry but you can't throw Gonzalez and Moeller at me just yet because it's 20 games in and when they're really making a major impact on the team, then we can talk.
Bobby Abreu is a hitting machine and was an obvious move Cashman made. Ok, he's made 1 perfect move. The Randy Johnson trade was another obvious move...plus Johnson wanted out of NY anyway.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 12:53 PM
Jaret Wright wasn't a Cashman move and while Jeff Weaver didn't work out, most people, including myself, loved the logic and intent of the move when it happened.
Sometimes good moves don't work, sometimes bad ones do. It's about the process put into a move.
Cashman is the GM and has a say in what goes on with the team. I put blame on him. You loved the logic and intent of the Jeff Weaver deal? Getting a guy who was unproven and a mental case?
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 12:55 PM
An overly talkative owner who put his manager, GM, and young pitcher (not to mention Moose) in a difficult spot. There is much made about how important it is to Girardi's job to deal with the NY media, but Hank needs some help in that area as well.
And if he does go down sooner -- who is going to talk to Hank in September when he has reached his innings cap?
The GM is an adult, and I didn't hear anything Hank say that the pitchers wouldn't agree with. He didn't blast them, didn't criticize him just said our starting pitching isn't where they want it to be. I'm not sure how pointing out the obvious is going to make it harder for Brian or Joe to do their job. Could he use some PR lessons, of course, but if this is going to do any harm, we have the wrong people in the jobs. There is nothing in there that is harmful. And again, IF Joba goes down in May, then there's something. And I think it's hard pressed to say that we don't need Joba in the rotation.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 12:56 PM
Bobby Abreu, Corey, Lidle, Alberto Gonzalez, Chad Moeller....
Don't forget the Justice, Clemens and Arod trades.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 12:57 PM
Ok, so Cashman gets all the blame for his role as GM for the FA signings (which have been debated endlessly in terms of how much say he had in those) but none of the credit for developing the farm? Gotcha.
BTW - at the time the Jeff Weaver deal looked awesome. I have no idea why people keep bringing that up as if Cashman had his head up his duff when he pulled the trigger on that one.
Cashman has say in the deals and signings. He gets credit for developing the farm to an extent.
Yeah, the Jeff Weaver deal looked real awesome. An unproven pitcher...well he was proven, but proven to lose.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 12:58 PM
Don't forget the Justice, Clemens and Arod trades.
I give that to Cashman...but his PITCHING deals were atrocious...that's what I keep saying...hitters are good, but the pitchers are pure garbage. FACT, TRUE STORY!
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 12:59 PM
Cashman is the GM and has a say in what goes on with the team. I put blame on him. You loved the logic and intent of the Jeff Weaver deal? Getting a guy who was unproven and a mental case?
Cashman has publically acknowledged that he made a mistake with Weaver because he failed to consider the mental aspect of the player's ability to handle NY and the pressure associated with it. He stated he won't make the same mistake again about not checking a player's mental toughness before acquiring him.
Cashman is the GM and has a say in what goes on with the team. I put blame on him. You loved the logic and intent of the Jeff Weaver deal? Getting a guy who was unproven and a mental case?
Except he didn't want Wright. He didn't get a say. Pavano was his fault, blame him for that, but Wright was not.
I (and many others) thought Jeff Weaver, at his age and with his stuff, when the only thing we were giving up was really Ted Lilly (the As are the ones who got taken in that move, IMO) was a great move. That deal just didn't work out... but it doesn't mean it wasn't okay when it was done.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:03 PM
The GM is an adult, and I didn't hear anything Hank say that the pitchers wouldn't agree with. He didn't blast them, didn't criticize him just said our starting pitching isn't where they want it to be. I'm not sure how pointing out the obvious is going to make it harder for Brian or Joe to do their job. Could he use some PR lessons, of course, but if this is going to do any harm, we have the wrong people in the jobs. There is nothing in there that is harmful. And again, IF Joba goes down in May, then there's something. And I think it's hard pressed to say that we don't need Joba in the rotation.
Cashman can take care of himself, but I just don't like Hank spouting off and making news when his ballclub is trying to get themselves going. His remarks might not harm anything, but they don't help either since Cashman, Girardi and Joba now have to answer media questions about Hank's comments. Hell, it's on the main page of ESPN now. Those words are going to get blown out of proportion because of who Hank is.
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 01:04 PM
Cashman has say in the deals and signings. He gets credit for developing the farm to an extent.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Hilarious.
"To an extent."
I love it. I hope you post openly and often.
I give that to Cashman...but his PITCHING deals were atrocious...that's what I keep saying...hitters are good, but the pitchers are pure garbage. FACT, TRUE STORY!
If the pitchers are pure garbage, you need to change your sig.
They wouldn't be around if it wasn't for Cashman.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:07 PM
Cashman has publically acknowledged that he made a mistake with Weaver because he failed to consider the mental aspect of the player's ability to handle NY and the pressure associated with it. He stated he won't make the same mistake again about not checking a player's mental toughness before acquiring him.
Did he do that with Kevin Brown, Javy Vasquez, and Jaret Wright? I'm a little confused. :o ;)
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:09 PM
If the pitchers are pure garbage, you need to change your sig.
They wouldn't be around if it wasn't for Cashman.
I never said the 3 were garbage. I am so damn excited that we kept all 3 kids...
Well if it wasn't for Oppenheimer, we'd be the same old Yankees...getting older, etc.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 01:09 PM
Cashman can take care of himself, but I just don't like Hank spouting off and making news when his ballclub is trying to get themselves going. His remarks might not harm anything, but they don't help either since Cashman, Girardi and Joba now have to answer media questions about Hank's comments. Hell, it's on the main page of ESPN now. Those words are going to get blown out of proportion because of who Hank is.
I would prefer that he not mouth off either, but I'm just disagreeing with the notion that some seem to have that it's going to harm the team. As I said above, he does need some PR lessons, no doubt, but I highly doubt that this is going to be the crapstorm the media is making it out to be.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:10 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: Hilarious.
"To an extent."
I love it. I hope you post openly and often.
Do you know Damon Oppenheimer?
I will post openly and often. If you don't like my opinion...read over my posts and move on...thanks in advance...just sayin'
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 01:10 PM
I never said the 3 were garbage. I am so damn excited that we kept all 3 kids...
Well if it wasn't for Oppenheimer, we'd be the same old Yankees...getting older, etc.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Awesome stuff. Keep it coming.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:10 PM
Did he do that with Kevin Brown, Javy Vasquez, and Jaret Wright? I'm a little confused. :o ;)
Actually he did except for the Wright signing which wasn't his, but the former Tampa Mafia. IMO, the Vasquez trade was a good trade that just didn't work out and most of us on this forum agreed with it. The Brown trade saved the Yankees money and got rid of Weaver to boot.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:10 PM
Oppenheimer has the eye for talent...Cashman is a bookkeeper in my opinion.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:11 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: Awesome stuff. Keep it coming.
Hardy har har....
Well if it wasn't for Oppenheimer, we'd be the same old Yankees...getting older, etc.
You're missing something.
The primary reason Oppenheimer (former member of the Tampa Faction) can work on finding the talent he does now is because Brian Cashman fought for and implemented changes to do so.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:13 PM
I would prefer that he not mouth off either, but I'm just disagreeing with the notion that some seem to have that it's going to harm the team. As I said above, he does need some PR lessons, no doubt, but I highly doubt that this is going to be the crapstorm the media is making it out to be.
Rocket,
It's just another distraction the team doesn't need right now because anything Hank says in the press is going to be headlines because they desperately want Hank to be another George Steinbrenner.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:13 PM
You're missing something.
The primary reason Oppenheimer (former member of the Tampa Faction) can work on finding the talent he does now is because Brian Cashman fought for and implemented changes to do so.
I'm not missing anything at all. I understand Cashman was the reason for Oppenheimer being around...but it wasn't Cashman who picked the talent...it was Oppenheimer...
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:14 PM
I'm not missing anything at all. I understand Cashman was the reason for Oppenheimer being around...but it wasn't Cashman who picked the talent...it was Oppenheimer...
Oppenheimer didn't pick Hughes that was the prior head of amateur scouting.
BxBomber44
04-21-08, 01:15 PM
i can see girardi and hank struggling similar to how girardi and the marlins owner did. we shall see... hope its not the case.
a2ruYankee
04-21-08, 01:15 PM
Cashman and Hank are publicly in different places on this. Here's what Cashman told Wallace Matthews (Newsday) this morning:
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/blog/
“If you had bet on the kids doing great out of the gate, it wouldn’t be necessarily a safe bet,” Cashman said by phone, “but we’re betting on them in the long-term, not necessarily in the short-term, and so that’s all I can say about that.Joba’s staying in the bullpen right now. That’s where we’re at. That’s (Chamberlain moving to the rotation) not something that’s going to happen here early on, and he (Steinbrenner) knows that. We’ve talked about it.”
This can't be good internally, and certainly can't be good for Joba. He's the rope in a tug-of-war.
I expected this out of the gate. 10-10 is actually allowing them to hold their own as a team.
You dont keep a guy like Joba in bullpen because he throws 100mph? I disagree. We had Mariano setting up for Wetteland.
Did Steinbrenner really imply that Girardi was an idiot?
I have heard the whole story.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:16 PM
Oppenheimer didn't pick Hughes that was the prior head of amateur scouting.
But he sure did pick Joba after everyone didn't want him.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:16 PM
i can see girardi and hank struggling similar to how girardi and the marlins owner did. we shall see... hope its not the case.
I don't...Girardi knows what he got himself into.
Cashman is the GM and has a say in what goes on with the team. I put blame on him. You loved the logic and intent of the Jeff Weaver deal? Getting a guy who was unproven and a mental case?Seriously?
When the Yankees picked him up he was a 25 year old with good stuff coming off of two full seaons of 110+ ERA+, eating a ton of innings and doing so with a reasonable contract. Not to mention the 133 ERA+ in 17 starts the season the trade was pulled off.
Incidentally, it's ironic that you also besmirch Cash for the Kevin Brown trade, since the player used to fund that trade was none other than... Jeff Weaver. Not to mention that Kevin Brown just came off a 169 ERA+ the season prior and two seasons of 150+ ERA+ in the prior 3 seasons.
Easy to look back and see that those were bad moves, but I wouldn't really bang on him too hard for either of them frankly.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:17 PM
But he sure did pick Joba after everyone didn't want him.
And who picked Oppenheimer?
What does Hank accomplish crying to the media about stuff like this? He comes off like a spoiled brat.
But he sure did pick Joba after everyone didn't want him.
That's an outrageous stretch. He was the 41st pick overall.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:20 PM
Furthermore, who lobbied the ownership to increase the budget for spending more money on amateur scouting and signing of those players?
That's an outrageous stretch. He was the 41st pick overall.
And had both health concerns and an over-slot cost. It was a very possible and great Yankee signing because of the guy who did this:
who lobbied the ownership to increase the budget for spending more money on amateur scouting and signing of those players?
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 01:20 PM
It's so funny to see people attributing the bounty of the draft to Oppenheimmer because it's the only name they know. It's unfortunate that they don't relize it's a complete team effort in scouting, comprimising cross-checkers and local scouts, and other important names like Donny Rowand, Kendall Carter, and Rick Williams.
Oppenheimmer only has authority because Cashman's reconstruction of the organizational philosophy gave it to him, and as GM he has gone to great lengths to protect the team's existing draft picks and garner new ones. To say that the development of the farm system is in any way not 100% the result of Cashman's efforts is to not see the truth. Cashman constructed that scouting department and made the decisions about who to hire and fire. He basically gutted the whole thing when he signed his new contract, and brought in all new players (save for Oppenheimmer) to make sure his idea of "growing his own" was able to succeed.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:21 PM
And who picked Oppenheimer?
I already acknowledged that Cashman was the one. BUT CASHMAN ISN'T PICKING THE TALENT!!!
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:23 PM
It's so funny to see people attributing the bounty of the draft to Oppenheimmer because it's the only name they know.
That's a joke right? No kidding that it's a team effort of scouts, etc. Oppenheimer is the main guy if you haven't read a NY newspaper.
Yankees1962
04-21-08, 01:25 PM
I already acknowledged that Cashman was the one. BUT CASHMAN ISN'T PICKING THE TALENT!!!
Yeah and who is supplying Oppenheimer the budget to sign those players?
That's a joke right? No kidding that it's a team effort of scouts, etc. Oppenheimer is the main guy if you haven't read a NY newspaper.And Cash would be Oppenheimer's "main guy."
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 01:27 PM
That's a joke right? No kidding that it's a team effort of scouts, etc. Oppenheimer is the main guy if you haven't read a NY newspaper.
I can't read. I'm just stringing letters together on the keyboard and hoping they form words in a meaningful order.
Cashman made this farm. If it wasn't Damon, it would have been someone else. It was Cashman's decision to change the organizational philosophy, and he was going to reconstruct the farm to be a high-priced, high-powered feeder system, regardless of who was overseeing it.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 01:28 PM
Rocket,
It's just another distraction the team doesn't need right now because anything Hank says in the press is going to be headlines because they desperately want Hank to be another George Steinbrenner.
Agreed, but that being said, if this affects our W-L at all, then maybe we have the wrong GM, Manager and players. I think people should know coming in that to play in NY there will be more to deal with. I wish he wouldn't say it, but at the end of the day if this distracts them then something is seriously wrong.
JavyVazquezIsSick
04-21-08, 01:28 PM
I can't read. I'm just stringing letters together on the keyboard and hoping they form words in a meaningful order.
:lol:
Agreed, but that being said, if this affects our W-L at all, then maybe we have the wrong GM, Manager and players. I think people should know coming in that to play in NY there will be more to deal with. I wish he wouldn't say it, but at the end of the day if this distracts them then something is seriously wrong.We have to consider if this affects next year's W-L though too, in terms of whether Cash stays around, whether Girardi has enough patience for a meddlesome owner (which he didn't in Florida), whether FA's will either avoid NY (which was the talk when George was at his peak) or at a minimum will make outrageous contract demands, etc.
YankeePride1967
04-21-08, 01:33 PM
We have to consider if this affects next year's W-L though too, in terms of whether Cash stays around, whether Girardi has enough patience for a meddlesome owner (which he didn't in Florida), whether FA's will either avoid NY (which was the talk when George was at his peak) or at a minimum will make outrageous contract demands, etc.
True, and as I said I wish he didn't say it, but so far each time he's opened his mouth there have been those predicting doom and gloom and so far none of that has occurred. And I'm not so sure what he said today was contradictory to what the plan was all along. He indicated that Joba is needed in the rotation now, not that he would be moved there now.
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:34 PM
I can't read. I'm just stringing letters together on the keyboard and hoping they form words in a meaningful order.
Cashman made this farm. If it wasn't Damon, it would have been someone else. It was Cashman's decision to change the organizational philosophy, and he was going to reconstruct the farm to be a high-priced, high-powered feeder system, regardless of who was overseeing it.
I can see that.
In all honesty, all I see is "blah blah blah." Cashman sympathizer.
PhilHughesFan
04-21-08, 01:43 PM
Cashman: Sorry Hank, Joba's staying in bullpen (http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spjoba0422,0,3448353.story)
That's Brian Cashman's message to the Baby Boss, Hank Steinbrenner, who last night stamped his foot and demanded that the 22-year-old set-up man with the 100-mph heater be inserted into the Yankees troubled starting rotation immediately, if not sooner.
"I want him as a starter and so does everyone else, including him," Hank Steinbrenner said in a story posted on the New York Times website last night.
Well, almost everyone else. "Joba's staying in the bullpen right now," The Yankee GM told Newsday in a telephone conversation this morning. "That's where we're at. [Putting him in the rotation is] not something that's going to happen here early on, and [Hank] knows that. We've talked about it. I don't know what set him off."
I really hate how Hank makes this come out through the media. Why can't he just talk to Cashman over the phone like a normal person?
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:48 PM
Cashman: Sorry Hank, Joba's staying in bullpen (http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spjoba0422,0,3448353.story)
I really hate how Hank makes this come out through the media. Why can't he just talk to Cashman over the phone like a normal person?
:lol: He is a Steinbrenner, you know.
Hank Ur The Boss.....fire His A;) ;)
Snatch Catch
04-21-08, 01:52 PM
In all honesty, all I see is "blah blah blah." Cashman sympathizer.
I was joking about not being able to read, but in all honesty, if that's all you're seeing there are programs that can help make sense of all these vowels and consonants. PM me if you need help finding one. :)
teknetic
04-21-08, 01:53 PM
Now you're judging my posts? Oh, the irony of that.
:lol:
Judging =! laughing.
I can see that.
In all honesty, all I see is "blah blah blah." Cashman sympathizer.
Strong argument. Well constructed.
Oh, and blah blah blah, blahbity blah blah.
b-ball-lunachick
04-21-08, 01:59 PM
I can't read. I'm just stringing letters together on the keyboard and hoping they form words in a meaningful order.
:lol: :lol:
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 01:59 PM
I was joking about not being able to read, but in all honesty, if that's all you're seeing there are programs that can help make sense of all these vowels and consonants. PM me if you need help finding one. <?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><v:path o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></v:path><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 11.4pt; HEIGHT: 11.4pt" alt="" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href="http://forums.nyyfans.com/images/smilies/smile.gif" src="file:///D:\DOCUME~1\A5GOODMA\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape>
I need help. ;)
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<v:shape id=_x0000_i1026 style="WIDTH: 11.4pt; HEIGHT: 11.4pt" alt="" type="#_x0000_t75"> <v:imagedata o:href="http://forums.nyyfans.com/images/smilies/icon8.gif" src="file:///D:\DOCUME~1\A5GOODMA\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image002.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Judging =! laughing.<o:p></o:p>
:mad:
Strong argument. Well constructed.
Oh, and blah blah blah, blahbity blah blah.
At least you know where I'm coming from. ;)
YankeesAce4Life
04-21-08, 02:00 PM
Multiple quoting just doesn't work for me. :(
PhilHughesFan
04-21-08, 02:00 PM
Hank Steinbrenner 'misunderstood' re: Joba Chamberlain (http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04/yankees_hank_steinbrenner_misu.html)
"My point is not to overrule anybody," Steinbrenner said. "The fact of the matter is, Joe (Girardi, the manager), Brian (Cashman, the GM) and everybody in the organization has always thought Chamberlain was a starter. And the goal has always been to get him back to that point."
"If I had been in charge last year, he wouldn't have moved to the bullpen," Steinbrenner said. "That put us behind."
"That's definitely what we want, not just me but everybody," Steinbrenner said. "It's definitely what I want, and in the end that's what matters. But I'm still going to go by what my best baseball people tell me."
Look at the bolded part for anyone who thinks Cashman is in control.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
0