Stadium opener; Mussina

Two things of note:

Mike Mussina's agent, Arn Tellem responded to my weekend email today and said Mike will likely make a decision re: retirement or pitching in 2009 late this week or next week.

The Yankees are officially going to open the new Yankee Stadium with two exhibition games against the Cubs on April 3rd and 4th. The regular season opener is April 16th against the Indians. Tickets are not on sale yet. But if you hear about tix before me, let me know, as my dad (a Cubs fan) might want to go.

Comments (83)

I've always found that tix go on sale in early December. If you get on Ticketmaster's web site, don't open two windows at once thinking you will have a better shot at getting in line, the system will boot you out.

Why can't he make up his mind already? Too much drama and too many options are available to us to sit and wait on a 40 year old pitcher who IMHO won't come close to his 20 win season. He has had weeks to make up his mind. Free agency has started and tI hope this does not screw up the Yanks plans.

He had a great season but smoke and mirrors can't work two years in a row. Yanks just move on and give him a day during the season.

I think he wants to get a better idea of what the 2009 Yankees will look like before he makes up his mind. Mussina has said that if he comes back it will be to win 300. He doesn't want to come back if it's going to take him 3 years to get those wins.

Kat - I can't imagine that someone who wants to retire needs to take this amount of time. I think he really wants to pitch.

Nancy C. makes an interesting point, but I'm sure she's never had the October-November shoulder ache and dead-arm that veteran MLB pitchers tend to suffer.

Moose can just take his time before deciding to return. There's no rush. Yankee fans are smart and know it takes time to make important decisions. Yankee fans are patient and know it's 3 months until spring training. Yankee fans also know that Moose regained consistent control last season and as long as he has that control he will be able to duplicate that success for many years to come regardless of how many MPH is his fastball.

Yeah Im not so sure it was all smoke and mirrors with Moose. I think the previous year was a wake up call that he needed to change his approach to get guys out. No longer could he throw a 1-0 or 2-0 fastball and get guys to pop it up or swing through. His situation was much like what Greg Maddux and Jamie Moyer needed to do late in their careers, get crafty. Sure he gave up hits, but he only walked 31 guys...just 31! Thats is control of a special kind right there. He shut down LHers and even though RHers hit .317 off of him, he only walked 8 in 101 IP...8!!!!! Its not like guys started catching up to him either, his ERA and WHIP were lower after the break and his K rate was much higher while his walk rate remained the same. His worst month was April ( 3-3...4.73 ERA...7 HR allowed....12 K in 32 IP ), from May on he was nothing short of dominant, only 9 HR given up while his K rate went up and his record was 17-6. He was great against everyone in the AL East except Baltimore. His last 3 starts against the Sox he went...3-0...19IP...2ER...12hits...5 BB....14 K. Moose may be older than Andy, but I trust Moose more than Andy to stay healthy over the course of the year and give us close to 190 solid innings. If I had too choose between the two, I'd pick Moose in a NY minute. I think the chance to get 300 wins ( not too many SP will reach that from this point on with the "new way" baseball is played - AKA heavy bullpens ), will be too much for Mike to turn down, I think he makes that call this weekend.


so lets say....


With Phil filling in for Joba and AJ when needed. Not bad at all friends!!!!

Speaking of AJ, the Blue Jays offered him 4 years at 54M. Thats not gonna get it down Jays. Since that's their 1st offer, I bet they are willing to go to 4/60. The Yanks could come in and get him for 4/65...thats 16M a year ( or the cost the Yanks got Andy for last year ). Even with the risk, I think the Yanks would do it. Im still more in favor of Ben Sheets over AJ, but I dont think the Yanks brass is gonna go for it.

So as long as we get CC, ( I think he will sign next Wednesday, and have a VERY Happy Thanksgiving dinner the next day ) I would be happy with some combo of the following rotation....


NO LOWE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


From the last thread...could you please ban Nudge already?

This troll is running amok on here and has no other intentions than trolling. He was almost assuredly the one whom was using other handles earlier this year. As his arguments and wording are exactly the same. I know he will say it was the "troll" acting as him but the troll NEVER used his handle...just all of ours. Plus went on your Live Chats and made a mockery of you and all of us.

I don't have any problem with other team's fans posting or disagreeing with what happens in Yankee land but he goes beyond that in his personal vendetta towards everything in pinstripes. He doesn't even have the courage to display his team of choice while ripping the Yanks and all the fans on here. At least when you are disagreeing with Sully or CO, know where they are coming from.

I am sure he will post after this ripping me and saying his usual that I am "stupid" and incapable of using more than two syllable words while mocking he does everything Yankee. Plus all the same things the troll, who never used his handle, did and complained about the Yankee's spending and fairness in baseball. I really don't care as enough is enough and it is threatening to take this blog down once again. Do as you will but it will only be a matter of time until people leave.

As far as Moose is concerned...

The longer it takes him to decide leads me to believe he is leaning towards returning.

You would rather have Moose than Andy?
I think if Andy Pettitte is healthy, I have to go for him and I think the Yanks should still retain him even if they get CC and AJ.

I think Moose is playing it smart as he is probably waiting to see what the team looks like, at least the pitching staff, for next season before deciding to come back. I think he will only come back if he sees the team as a legit WS contender. Personal goals aside, I think he really wants that ring- at least I hope that is his motivating factor.

Jim - I know it sounds a lil crazy, but after seeing both guys pitch this year, I think Moose has more to offer than Andy...and this is coming from a guy who has an Andy shrine in his basement....I have a lock of his hair too!! ( JK ).

I understand that and to be honest I can't discount the HGH factor with Andy, so it is a very tough call to make.
The problem with Andy having shoulder issues is actually that he didn't need surgery and who is to say the problem wouldn't come back.
Then you have Moose who is 40!

I think they should both be on the staff and I'm sure they will both get some innings in.


I don't have any proof to back this up, but I think the reason Andy's in limbo right now is that there are more than a few decision makers - possibly even Cashman - who are ticked at Andy. I don't think that this has anything to do with how he pitched down the stretch but instead is about the way last off season played out. Not telling the Yankees whether or not he was coming back and then picking up his option days before he was named in the Mitchell Report - as a fan that rubbed me the wrong way so I would imagine it had the same effect on some people inside the organization.

As for Moose - like I said above, I think he wants to know before he signs whether or not this is going to be a playoff caliber team. On the other hand, the Yankees are doing the right thing and operating as if he's not part of the mix.

Lets move on from Andy and Moose and I have no problemo with signing AJ Burnett to the rumored 5 yrs 80million. Andy's agent said he will not take a paycut and Moose was lucky at his age last year to win 20games. The Yanks will have an arm or 2 ready (Hughes, Aceves, Kennedy etc) to fill in for AJ if he misses some starts. If the Yanks have the dough, and are willing to spend it, put the pedal to the medal and get CC and AJ.

DC Yank's right about how long it takes to even find out whether the body is going to come all the way back from the wear and tear of the season as people get older.

And Dru, I agree with you: If I just had to give a simple preference -- Moose or Andy -- I'd go with Moose, too.

BUT, on the other hand I would be happy for Moose -- who spent most of his career having his quirky personality misunderstood, underappreciated, and pointlessly criticized for his dry wit and unwillingness to curry favor -- to go out on a high point! Finally to leave them laughing, at a point while he is still in demand... priceless.

I live in the Washington DC suburbs where the Orioles are the popular team (we're less than an hour from Baltimore) and I watched Mussina grow from a pup to a wiley veteran and I can be 100% honest in telling you that his personality was not misunderstood. He has always been rather picky, prickly and a tad condescending.
However he is still a Yankee as far as I'm concerned and in the interests of never having enough pitching depth, I'd be glad to see him come back.

wow Tom, 5 @ 80? Im sorry but I cant endorse that 5th year unless its a team option year. It does fall within that 16M per year that he will no doubt get, but the back end of the deal could be painful! I was already banking on that 4th year being risky. Look at his track record.

25 - 204 IP
26 - 23 IP ( Tommy John )
27 - 120 IP
28 - 209 IP ( contract year )
29 - 135 IP
30 -165 IP
31 - 221 IP ( contract year )

hmmmmmm, what will age 32 and 33 look like if he follows that same pattern??? Not too good, for a 5 year deal, we would get 1 year of 200 IP. Now I know its not that simple to project his future, but still. For the money and contract length, its a HUGE risk. Thats why I prefer Ben Sheets. When Ben and AJ are at the top of their games, Ben is the better SP. Ben has had just as many injuries as AJ, but did something AJ never has...3 years in a row of 200+ IP. Now Ben hasnt pitched 200 IP since that ( 04 ), so there is a huge amount of risk involved with him as well. What that means though is he will come at a huge discount in dollars and years. I want the Yanks to get AJ, but I dont want to overspend. If the asking price is starting at 5/80, Id pass and work on plan B.....for Ben!!!

good point, 5th year ideally should be an option year. But, maybe the steins don't care about peein away the dough on the 5th year and it takes him away from a main rival. And AJ has proven he can handle the AL East, Sheets is not AL East tested.

Jim A., I hear you -- and I know that Moose is not the first selective, non-ingratiating, and self-respecting smart person to have been viewed critically, especially in sports!

And I agree with you completely on Nudge. He was around for a long time before the recent troll generation messed things up here, and although the troll(s) tried to mimic the styles of various people here, including Nudge, the imitations were not pitch perfect. Nudge is Nudge and some find his posts eminently skippable, but he is not the perpetrator of that ugliness. My advice to those who don't like his helicopter version of participation (drop in from 'on high' and skip out without risking anything) is to scan the left hand margin and scroll on by when you see his name. But don't waste your indignation on the wrong recipient.

Cant argue with that Tom, its been proven time and time again that a SP going from the NL to the AL will see his numbers spike.

(1) PETTITTE- No Go due to age and that now consistently balky elbow
(2) MUSSINA- No GO due to giving up more hits than inn. pitched, and righties batting well over .300 against him in "08".
(3) LOWE- NO GO due to age, NL starting pitchers that are not strikout pitchers get bombed in the AL, and having a groundball pitcher backed up by Jeter, (limited range), and Cano is a recipe for disaster.
(4) BURNETT- NO GO due to just being too plain inconsistent, and the ghost of Pavano surrounds him.
(5) SHEETS- A GO depending on length of contract. 4 years max guaranteed OK.
(6) PEAVY- A GO, only if Yanks don't get both CC and SHEETS. Still a lot of trouble and headaches for Cashman dealing with the Padres over players and Peavy over his no trade clause.

Just one more Mussina note:
here's the link to TyKep's article from this morning's Times on Moose's decision about whether to go out on a high note or try for 300, in case you haven't seen it:

It's unclear (according to Olney) whether the Yankees offered AJ a 5 year deal or 4 years with an option. Either way, it looks like this team is dead serious on making sure the other teams get the message - the Yankees are not going to make it easy for other teams to compete for the players they want. It's proactive, assertive and a complete change from the wading in approach that the team has had over the past few years.

Straight Talker - after the last 4 years with Carl Pavano I'm baffled that anyone would want to sign Ben Sheets.

From Olney on AJ:

He's had three seasons in his career in which he pitched more than 173 innings.

He's had five seasons in which he's thrown fewer than 173 innings. Burnett's overall numbers from 2008 are excellent, but he ranked 75th in the majors in quality-start percentage, just ahead of Jeff Karstens.


Hi, hows your day going?

Straight Talker,

Before you get too high on Peavy, look at his Home/Away splits. He pitches in a pitcher friendly park. If the new stadium is like the old stadium then his home number could take a turn for the worse.


Helicopter........interesting. Misunderstood but interesting.

By the way - I'm not saying that signing AJ is a good thing (or a bad thing) I'm just resigned to the fact that AJ Burnett is going to be a Yankee in 2009. Outside of that I have no opinion on it.

Kids update!!!

11/17 -

- Juan Miranda 2 for 4 with 2 homeruns and 5 RBIs.

In 66 AB's ( no even a full month ) Juan is now hitting .303 with, 5 HR, 17RBI, 6 2B...387 OBP....1.068 OPS. Looking real good so far! The guy seems to improve each month he's been in the system! Mark who?????? lol...jk

- Humberto Sanchez pitched 2 innings of shutout ball, allowing a hit and a walk but striking out 1.

Humberto and Brackman are experiencing control issues since their TJ surgeries, that is expected. They are another year away from the BX.

11/14 -

Phil Hughes got the start and was his "normal" self. In 5 shutout innings of work, Phil scattered 2 hits and allowed 1 walk while striking out 6. He threw 80 pitches, 52 for strikes and pitched to the tune of a 3-6 groundout-flyout ratio.

More on Phil =

Here is a great URL to check the Baby Bombers' stats in the Winter Leagues =

Chip - Carl Pavano wasnt considered a big injury risk when the Yanks got him. He had pitched two years in a row of 200+ IP and was considered a young work horse. Wanna compare someone to Pavano? Check this out!!!

Last year ( contract year )..AJ


Last year ( contract year )..Pavano


Pretty scary huh?

If there is a risk for any of these FA SP's to follow the Carl Pavano formula, its AJ.

Dru -

I agree with you - AJ is an injury risk. But I don't think it's even worth debating. The Yankees want him and he wants to pitch for them so I'm just resigned to the fact that Burnett will be a Yankee and I hope he stays healthy.

For those Tom Verducci inning limit sychophants......CC Sabathia is the prototype for the total disproving of his theory, which the Yankees seem to be adopting. He jumped 49 innings from 2006 to 2007 and subsequently had his 2 best years. So as I have stated in the past, what evidence is there that increasing innings from on year to the next is bad for a pitcher.

Nudge - in response to your rant on the last string.

The Yankees do, in fact, stop contributing into the Revenue Sharing pool with the opening of the new stadium. Until the debt incurred by the Yankees for building the new stadium is paid off, their reported revenues are going to be drastically lowered because their expenses will be higher.

This was posted on at the time the new stadium was being developed:

Working with Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, the Yankees intend to pay for the ballpark by having a local development corporation created by the city and state issue 40-year tax-free bonds. The bonds will cost about $50 million annually for the team to pay off, with the exact depending on interest rates at the time of the issue.

The team estimates its annual stadium expense will increase from $22 million to $68 million, money that will be deducted from its locally generated revenue when calculating revenue-sharing payments to major league baseball.

Assuming the revenue-sharing rules don't change substantially after the current collective bargaining agreement expires in December 2006 (Which they did not), the ballpark payments will cut the revenue-sharing money some teams otherwise would receive.

"They may be the only unhappy people as a result of this deal," Yankees president Randy Levine said.


I don't agree with Verducci - but there are an equal number of pitchers who have broken down after making innings jumps. You gave one example for your point (Sabathia) here's one example going the other way:

Jeremy Bonderman:
2004: 189 IP
2005: 184 IP
2006: 219 IP
2007: 179 IP and ERA jumped from 4.00 to 5.01
2008: Injured 71 innings into the season


I can do math. 2007 the Yankees contributed $98M into revenue sharing. Using your number....which ESPN estimated from 2 years ago.....98-68 = 30! Thats not zero last time I checked. Thats actually $30 million dollars. Now still to be figured is this. After the Yanks contribute their estimated $30M into the gets divided equally between all teams so they MAY get $30M back....or more....or less!

Thats the plan. Thats how it works. There is no clause that automatically excludes a team because they build a stadium.

Now what the Yanks could do is structure their payments in a way to reduce revenues to whatever point they want and not end up kicking in more than they would receive......but that means they would have to effectively increase expenses so it still would not result in them getting extra profit.

What the clause does is allow teams to build stadiums and effectively get subsidized by the other teams.

On the Verducci thing, my point is....its random. Some do OK some don't. Just like changing leagues. Some do well, some dont. Or changing teams or whatever. But you don't change behaviour based on random occurance.....because its not predictable.

Nudge, I think I read that article a couple years ago. 90% of the guys Verducci listed all got injured or were ineffective the following year. Fausto Carmona was last years victim. I dont have time to look up the numbers, but 90% is hardly random. CC may be an exception to the rule, or part of that 10%...we better hope so.

Actually what the rule does is give financially successful teams a choice of how to spend the money they've earned.

You can either use your money to subsidize your competition or you can use it to build a new park which will give you an even greater revenue stream. Gee - which is more attractive? The Yankees can either give a team like the Royals money to sign Alex Gordon to a long term deal or they can put the money back into the team and force the Royals to either use their own money on Gordon or let him become a free agent.

The Royals are not paying for the New Yankee Stadium - the Yankees just aren't paying for the players on the Royals anymore

Actually behavior in the form of decision-making may well be influenced by recognizing the randomness of some of the factors involved. Some very interesting studies have been done on how people manage the risk factor in unpredictable situations. One important aspect is how much they feel in control -- that is, whether they take the risk themselves or are placed at risk by others. The decision-maker is less risk-averse than those for whom the decision is made by others. So the driver is less risk-averse than the passenger who is along for the ride, and I would venture to speculate that the team official may well be less risk-averse than the fan who is along for the ride with no way to get hold of the controls.

Just a thought about how you and Cashman may experience risk-taking differently in unpredictable situations regarding pitchers...

Heres the Verducci article

Here was Jered Weavers 07

Jun 27, 2007: Missed 5 games (right shoulder injury).
Jun 21, 2007: Right shoulder injury, day-to-day.
Apr 17, 2007: Missed 13 games (bicep injury).
Mar 31, 2007: Bicep injury, 15-day DL.

His ERA also jumped a run and a half. Ill take a look at the rest after lunch, but he called it with Sanchez, Verlander, Olsen, Reyes, Bonser and Bonderman too....again, hardly random.


I think his total sample was like 12 players. Thats certainly not even a starting point to do any kind of trend analysis. If the analysis is extended over the course of 50 years including ALL pitchers......the trend suddenly disappears. You cant pick and choose what cases you want to look at if you are doing what is in effect a scientific analysis.

Statistically you get random "clusters" of data points. By insuring your sample size is sufficiently large you emeliate the effects of these random clusters. Verducci....being a writer with no knowledge of statistical analysis, drew a conclusion of insufficient data. Now he is only trying to get readers so he got lots of attention but has moved on as his initial theory smolders on the ash heap.

More radomness...


All had down years or were injured...The only one who did better was Jimenez, but he had another big jump this year, I bet he gets hit in the 09 season.


To explain is more simply......we all know that if we flip a coin there is a 50-50 chance its heads or tails. But if I flip a coin 12 times......I could get 10 heads and 2 tails. That doesn't mean there is a trend that now changes my odds on a coin flip. Its a small sample that balances out after 1000 flips to around 50-50.

Nudge -

If the sample was over a 50 year period it would be flawed. The physical stature of a pitcher in the 1950s or even the 1980s is completely different than the physical stature of a pitcher today. In addition they are throwing different pitches which in turn have different effects on the ligaments.

He compared 12 young pitchers of the same age range who all jumped a similar number of innings. Now I agree, some of it has to do with luck - for example an increased work load in 2007 is not the reason why CM Wang hurt his foot last year. But in some cases the evidence - whether statistical or empirical - is hard to overlook. Take a look at the Chicago White Sox. Ozzie rode his starters to a title - none of those pitchers have been as good as they were since that WS year. Could all of them have just peaked at the same time? Sure I guess. But it's also probable that the work-load they endured that year took a toll on them going forward. Detroit Tigers same thing - Bonderman, Robertson and Verlander have all regressed or suffered injuries since their trip to the WS when Leyland rode the three of them.

And your coin flip statement is idiotic. A coin does not age, doesn't have muscles, tendons or ligaments that are taxed by being flipped. A human body, no matter how in shape it is, is going to suffer from wear and tear.

If you run 1 mile every morning and then decide for a week to jump it up to 10 miles every morning, the odds are greater that you will pull a hamstring or hurt yourself in some other way than if you worked your way up to that 10 mile run (which is why the idea of using Joba as a reliever and then throwing him into the rotation without letting him work up to that pitch count was so stupid - but that's another argument)

One caveat to add to those stats: Carmona hurt his hip, originally while shagging balls in the OF; Gallardo hurt his knee covering first base I believe.

The thing is really simply to me. Baseball is a sport, the more time you play a sport, the greater the odds you will be injured are.


No, your running 1 mile analogy is idiotic. The coin flip analogy explains the basic concept of random clusters which anyone needs to know BEFORE doing trend analysis. Your running analogy is correct only if each game a pitcher pitches 1 inning and suddenly the team wants him to pitch 10 innings every day.

Analogies are not your forte!

But your team is welcome to follow Verducci down the road to a season of no injury and no subpar pitching performances like they did this year......oh, wait....they followed his theory and they got the opposite. I guess thats just a random occurrance.

Jim A,

I won't even get started about the lack of controls on his analysis. It would make everyone eyes roll back in their heads, but it includes the points you made. He never makes any connection to cause and effect. Never looks at what may have caused the injuries or down years. I could make the case that water causes cancer because 100% of the people who have cancer drink water. Thats about the level of thought Verducci puts in.

Nudge -

My point, you nitwit, is that no matter how many times you flip a coin it will retain its integrity. A coin has no variables, it will always weigh the same, doesn't get tired, doesn't get hurt. You can't say that about the human body. It's true, you can blow out your shoulder on your first pitch, but it's also true that the fatigue and strain that come from repeated activity weaken the shoulder and make it more likely that you'll hurt it on your 100th pitch.

True, it's possible that the increased workload will have no effect, but it's also true that it might - the only way to know is to put the player in harm's way. That's no way to protect an investment. Sure, I might be able to control a Lamborghini going 200 mph or I might spin out and die. Which is why I don't do it.

I will give you this though - I loathe the way organizations pamper their pitchers. Says a lot about how little I respect you that I'm willing to argue on behalf of of that practice.

The Yanks should pursue any available SP 32 or younger, with good recent stats, whether it's by trade or the free agent market. This increased inninings pitched stat is interesting, thou nothing more than that. When deciding whether to acquire a player, it's how you feel about him in your gut that is the deciding factor.


You nitwit, that's irrelevant to statistical analysis. It's math knucklehead. Thats what I am talking about. Thats the whole point, that Verducci is performing a mathematical analysis with no math....the same thing you are doing. Stop talking about subjects that your a piker at. Take a freakin statistics course and then you'll understand the importance of the simple coin flip. Statistics 101!! I'm done trying to educate you. Got any comments about the Yankees uniforms for next year? Or maybe the facial hair policy?

All teams overbid for players at times

Boston offered Bernie more money than the yankees

Angels started this pitching mess by giving Bartolo that bizzare contract several years ago.

CC contract is based on Johan Santana's contract

their career numbers are simular.

so in terms of this would'nt the Mets have overbid and set the market on a higher braquet for these types of pitchers?

Nudge -

If by "math" you mean "Verducci is using numbers" then yes you're 100% right. But there's no more math involved than there is in me saying, "I have 2 dogs in 1 house."

Verducci's article is empirical using very limited statistics (such as Pitcher X threw 40 more innings and then got hurt the next year). Only a clueless wanker like you would look at it and say "whoa, Verducci's not using statistics properly."


On point. As I said, the Yanks have all the right to overbid if they chose. Thats their advantage so you can't blame them for using it. We are long past the point of valuing contracts according to anything other than what the person making the offer values it at. The market is what the top bidder says it is.


Theres is nothing more I'll say. You just don't get it.

Ryan Dempster gets 4 year $52 mil to stay in Chicago.

Cubs are said to be targeting Abreu and Furcal.

Bomber - the deal that really sent things out of control was when the Mets gave Kris Benson 8 mil a year. At that point he was considered a 3rd level guy because of his injury history and his mediocre results - that deal led to other middle of the road guys (Jason Marquis, Jon Lieber, Ted Lilly) getting deals from 8 - 11 mil per year. The reliever market was skewed by the Yankees deal with Steve Karsay.


the yankees felt that in order to get CC that they would have to offer a contract to that of the Highest paid pitcher just like the Mets had to give Johan's contract to the then higest pitcher in Zito.

You are right the Yankees have to the value to over bid but they knew coming in that if they stayed in the same park as the other clubs they lose so yes if the other clubs want to pay higher for CC then ok but it woudl not be the fault of the Yankees.

As for the innings issue I agree with that as well that it is bogus

Thats is true Chip I forgot about that deal.


Bottom line is it doesn't matter if the Yanks overpay a bit as long as they make the right choices. If CC comes here and struggles...then it a problem. If he averages 18 wins you won't care how much he gets.


I thought you said previously Abreu was going to the Mets.

Nudge -

Sadly I agree with you on your comment about CC.

And no, I didn't say he was going to the Mets, I said he makes all the sense in the world for the Mets.


No need to be sad. As long as they get him and he performs. Don't worry, be happy.

Can I say that?

Anyone else think they're beginning to see Cashman's master plan for this year?

With this new AJ offer out there (or soon to be) and it being as high as is being reported I'm thinking Cash is trying to lock down 3 reliable ACE caliber pitchers (CC Wang AJ) by $$$ Force $$$...That's excluding whatever Joba does BTW.

He's basically telling the rest of the league to stay out of his way lest they incur a battle they will not and cannot win thus he'll get his guy/guys and right now it appears they're all pitchers.

So hypothetically...



Could that disproportionate amount of talent in the rotation overcome what looks like an offense worse than the 08's?

Here's a couple comparisons for arguments sake.

1. Damon v. Elsbury (Push)
2. Jeter v. Pedroia (RSox)
3. Swish v. Youk (R Sox)
4. Alex v. Texiera (Yankees)
5. Matsui v. Papi (RSox)
6. Nady v. Bay (RSox)
7. Posada v. J. Drew (RSox)
8. Cano v. Lugo (Yankees)
9. Gadner v. Varitek (Push)

CC v. Beckett (Yanks)
Wang v. Dice K (Push)
Burnett v. Lester (Yanks)
Joba v. Lowe (knock on wood)
Andy v. Wakefield (Yanks?)

I think we're literally dwarfed by the Sox offensively but can probably make up for some of that with our hypothetical Rotation and last years Bullpen provided they don't regress but could Cashman basically be planning on shoring up the rotation into a dominant force and waiting till the trade deadline to fix any offense ails?

One of you guys out there know who will be on the trade block this july?

Preferably a number 3 hitter who plays centerfield? HAHA

You can say that - I meant that it was sad for me to agree with you because I feel like Jim Carrey in Ace Ventura when he realizes that Einhorn is Finkel.

You are 100% correct on that one!

We bring up the Zito's and Bensons, Steve karsey pacts due to their struggles basically saying a player would challenge a contract due to the current holder of the highest contract struggles or near identical career numbers. Had Zito Pitched like barry Zito there would be no issue with his contract and in fact Johan would have taken a step back. Arod is an perfect example while he never won a WS he plays and performs well and there is no thirdbasemen OR Short stop that can challenge they want Arod Dollars. At this point the only player that can challenge they deserve at least the 2nd highest positional salary is Albert Pujols.


Do you really think Swisher becomes the #3 hitter? I would think he is more a #6 or 7 guy in a productive line-up. How many Yankee teams have a lifetime .244 hitter is the #3 slot?

I have to give the Lester vs. Burnett matchup to the Red Sox. Burnett, even when good, is not going to be as good as Lester is these days.
Also, if Swisher is hitting 3rd, the Yanks are in trouble.

On the other hand, don't count on Boston having Teixeira.

Hah...this thing took so long to post that Nudge's post beat me to the comment about Swisher hitting 3rd.

This security code nonsense needs to be fixed.

Jim A,

Its a real pain. Since we think similar.......can I entice you over to the Big Blue side?

Nudge, yeah thanks for the statistical analysis info, if you must know I was a Math Major in College, so Ive taken my fair share of Stats classes. The facts are the facts, and this is not a coin flip, as there are more variables to this equation. The fact is that you have a decent sample size of young SPers over the past 3-4 years who increased their work load by X amount of innings and ended up failing 1-2 years after. From that raw data, you can extrapolate that there is a trend starting to form. If you love statistics so much, start to plot the numbers based on those two articles I posted. You are looking at over 90% success rate in two separate instances, with two completely different pools of subjects. Now Im not saying that his analysis should be published in the Royal Statistical Society, but to stare numbers in the face like that and say that they have no relevance, that you can draw no conclusions and that no trend is forming...well I think that would be jumping the gun on your end. Is the ME high, absolutely. The numbers we have now produce a conservative sample size estimate. Maybe a trend is starting, maybe now. As of now, the data points towards a trend starting, so it cannot be ignored.

I have given examples of the failures, while you have yet to give any hard evidence from your end. Care to elaborate on your point of view other than CC?


It's good to see Yankee fans obsess over the Red Sox the way we did over the Yankees

Truth be told, neither your team nor mine won the division nor the pennant last year

And it could be argued that the Blue Jays had the best pitching staff of them all


Join me in song now for Jim A:



The Cowboys, Jim? The Cowboys?

Personally, I think Swisher should hit clean up and the Yanks should bat A-Rod 8th.


On Verducci's initial sample of 11 players, 9 of which fit his "trend" 2 of which dont, the standard deviation is .404 and the mean is .808, which as a math major you then know means the entire data set falls within one standard deviation which means there is not a notable difference betwenn the data points or NO TREND. This is not even using monte carlo techniques which as a math major you know then that would further dissolve any trend line that such a small sample set would indicate(even though it doesn't have any trend).

But as a math major, you should know all this right?


So Dempster is staying, good move on his part. So do the Cubbies also trade for Peavy? I think it decreases it slightly. Ultimatley I think Jake should stay in the NL. The guy is great, but that Park jacked his #'s up. I think once CC decides if he will take the contract or not, ( Next Wednesday!!! ) the rest of the dominoes will fall into place.

Hey Sully...what do you want the Sox to do? Keep Tek? Sign Mark? Bring back Lowe? Tell us what they are saying up in Beantown.

Also...Swisher should not hit any higher than 5th.

MATSUI FOR #3!!!!!!


I think Cano is gonna come back this year with a chip on his shoulder....replace gonna with HOPE!!! I think that lineup is enough to contend if we have the pitching to back it up. We lost Matsui and Posada, Damon and Jeter were banged up 1/2 the year, Arods head was in the clouds, Cano and Melk were lost at the plate and Gardner was green. I think this will be a much better scoring lineup than last year. crack me up, oh so we're using SD and Bell Curves??? please brother. The facts are the facts, we have enough raw data to saw that a trend "may be starting"....dont get it twisted. You still havent given me any examples??? waiting??? Forget math, I dont need to prove anything to you, I want players...

John G,

Good to hear from you. I am enjoying the fall season this year. A bit less stressful than last year. Saw the G-men take down the Ravens last week. Jacobs was an animal.

I was actually glad to see the Giants beat the Ravens. I really, really hate the Ravens for some reason.

John G: The Skins losing to the Cowboys to me is like asking me to make out with Rosie O'Donnell. It just makes me want to start throwing up and not stop.

Man, no wonder we're in an economic down turn, all the accountants and math majors are sitting on this blog all day!

Oh and Nudge, you conveniently forgot the 9 out of 10 players in the 2nd sample group.

Wait...what the hell is going on here? You keep throwing up Stats 101 references and dodging the question? That may work on others, but not on me.

Oh and yes, I have a Math and Finance Degree so you can refrain from your little smart@ss remarks.

Ive stuck up for you before on this blog over the past year, said I knew other Yankee fans just like you. I didnt understand why people hated you....Im starting to understand now. You have a very condescending attitude towards people. But Im not gonna get into any more personal stuff. This is a yankees blog, nothing more.



Johan Santana 2001-2002
Johan Santana 2002-2003
Johan Santana 2003-2004

all 3 years he went up over 30 innings and cut his ERA by 30%

Jake Peavy 2002-2003

Tim Hudson 1999-2000

Adam Wainwright 2006-2007

Barry Zito 2000-2001

Brandon Webb 2002-2003

Dan Haren 2004-2005

Now all cases the pitcher increased over 30 inning with no dropoff the following year.

Im tired of doing stupid searching to disprove what intuitive to anyone who has watched baseball for 40 years.


Who is getting personal?

Mean .857 SD .357 not much better. Still no trend and especially considering he hand picked his sample. Im just happy that there actually is a Math major here so that guys like Chip don't think I am making this stuff up. So I ewmphasized the fact!

haha...see, thats all I wanted were some examples, I knew you had it in you buddy! Believe me, I hope that it is all a bunch of fudging the numbers, If CC fails, I dont think anyone who roots for the Yanks will be happy...proven right or wrong. Lets hope he goes the way of Maddux ( 1986 = 31IP...1987 = 155IP...1988 = 249IP...then went on to pitch 238, 237,263,268,267,202,209,245,232,251,219,249,233,199,218,212,225,210,198,194 ) talk about a BEAST!!!! There are a ton of examples proving that a huge jump at that age does not affect a SP over the long haul. I just wanted to hear it from you Nudgey.

BTW- I was with you on on your stats references, been many moons since Ive actually spoken with someone about the subject. I had a choice...Math teacher, or get into Finance....I chose the Bear and the Bear got Stearned! Maybe I should have been grading papers and coaching football? Now I do neither, Im a Network Engineer for a University/Hospital, I figure not matter what, people get sick and need to learn how to make people better. Live and Learn, oh wait...I guess Im getting personal now.

Love Always,


PS. My wife always tells me that I will argue just to argue...I think she's right.

; )


Good to see you on the blog again also. I haven't had anything worthwhile to contribute so I'm just reading all of the posts. Frankly, until something happens on the FA front or the trade front, there's nothing for me to really talk about. (unless I'm giving my bud, Jim A, the business on his Skins). :-)

I see that you have some "wars" going on with some of the guys LOL.

Yeah, the Jints are doing really good so far and I've actually gotten to see some of the games. They've been on out here for the last few weeks (the Steelers, the Cowboys and the Sunday night game against the Eggles). I didn't see the Baltimore game but I'll get to see them this week against the Cardinals.

Jacobs may be down for this week's game so I'm hoping that Bradshaw and Ward pick up the slack.


Finance is where the $$$ are, if your company can survive. But your right, no matter what medical and college monies always go up. My wife is with your wife. She getting more like me as the years go by and it makes for some spirited dinner discussions.

John G,

The initial report on Jacobs clears him to practice. We'll see how that holds up. They are returning the scene of the "Miracle"

Hey guys. I have been reading the threads for a while and haven't posted but im a diehard yanks fan. Anyway, i believe Mussina might be able to put up comparable and possibly better numbers than Andy Pettite. Although Pettite was on HGH admittedly, he still had a descent season and it cant possibly all be attributed to prior usage. Mussina, yes, had the smoke in the mirror effect last year, but one cant rule out a nice 14-12 season with a 4.30 ERA. That would be worth 10-12 Mill, instead of banking on FA mega deals that might not even happen, then worrying about Hughes/Kennedy. As far as FA's go, I would obviously love to see Sabathia a Yankee and i think this is why he will be a Yankee. 1: Angels, the angels are most likely more concerned with signing Tex long term and if Sabathia is signed, say goodbye to Tex and 2: Dodgers, they have a legitimate pitching staff and especially with the likely departure of Furcal, they want to lock up Manny, and if they sign CC, say goodbye to manny. As for Lowe, i would love to sign Lowe. He will pretty much guarantee a 200+ inning season, injury free, and a 14-16 win season, with a high 3's era. Also, he will come mildly cheap as a possibly 3-4 year deal worth around 40-45 mill; nothing the yanks cant handle. Peavy is most likely out of the question for the Yanks. As well as signing him to an extension if they trade, its what they have to trade i dont like. I mean, Kennedy, and Possibly Melky i really dont mind, but Hughes, i still have faith in and think he can be a stud and it would be a shame to see a homegrown talent like that develop into an ace on another team. I would really like to pursue Ben sheets though. Finally, AJ Burnett. Please, say no, for now. IF the yanks do not sign cc, then obviously AJ would almost be mandatory, but if they do, i really dont know about AJ. He had his best seasons in his career in contract years, and minus the games he pitched VS. US this year, he was 15-10 with a close to "5" ERA! I dont find that appealing especially for $80 mill. I would much rather see them reel him in at a mere $60 mill, that would be a nice catch at around $15MM per season. Alright guys, please respond to my post, and i will definitely be posting in every other thread from hear on out. Please tell me how u think my knowledge is, and so on. Thanks.


One word.......paragraphs.


Now it is evident that the CUBS just spiked the market with the crap deal they just gave Dempster.

Good stuff Seth, I agree with most of what you said. I look forward to reading more of your posts.


Seth might give Dru a run for his money in the "longest post" race.

Welcome Seth! We're just ribbing the newbie.

Good morning. We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything. Help me! Need information about: Bundaberg real estate. I found only this - golf score card. National average level iii commercial real estate loan officer salary range, job career education, unemployment, benefits and job search advice for level. Asset finance debtor funding sale leaseback secondary rentals. Thanks for the help :rolleyes:, Ramsey from Ghana.

Post a comment

Get a 56-hit streak, win $10,000

56-game hit streak fantasy baseball game
  Select a player. If he gets a hit, you stay alive.
  Beat DiMaggio's 56-game streak and win $10K.
Play 56-Game Hit Streak

Search Yankees blog

Recent Posts

Popular Topics

(view all)

Feed Subscription

If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to this blog's feed [What is this?]

Subscribe to feed RSS feed   |   Subscribe to feed ATOM feed