<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: News of the Day &#8211; 5/27/09</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/</link>
	<description>Development site for Bronx Banter Blog&#039;s upcoming look and feel</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 13:09:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Hawk</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174436</link>
		<dc:creator>The Hawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:22:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174436</guid>
		<description>[45]  Since we agree, I&#039;m confused as to what you&#039;re arguing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[45]  Since we agree, I&#8217;m confused as to what you&#8217;re arguing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174435</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:21:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174435</guid>
		<description>Of course, what&#039;s really absurd is that if the GM wasn&#039;t an utter moron Wang would still be in Scranton working his way back. Someone explain that to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, what&#8217;s really absurd is that if the GM wasn&#8217;t an utter moron Wang would still be in Scranton working his way back. Someone explain that to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174434</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174434</guid>
		<description>@ 43

Great retort! Not!

When they have 6 functioning pitchers it will be something to worry about. They don&#039;t, so I won&#039;t.

Fact is, they switched him mid-season last year - a very atypical move - and he got hurt and it was his throwing shoulder no less. Why should they repeat that experiment again?

@ 44

They could have been waiting to see if Joba would come through his bullpen and start okay.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 43</p>
<p>Great retort! Not!</p>
<p>When they have 6 functioning pitchers it will be something to worry about. They don&#8217;t, so I won&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Fact is, they switched him mid-season last year &#8211; a very atypical move &#8211; and he got hurt and it was his throwing shoulder no less. Why should they repeat that experiment again?</p>
<p>@ 44</p>
<p>They could have been waiting to see if Joba would come through his bullpen and start okay.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174433</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174433</guid>
		<description>[42] If that&#039;s the case, where Wang is the mop-up man, then it&#039;s curious that he wasn&#039;t used a couple of nights ago, when the score was 11-0.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[42] If that&#8217;s the case, where Wang is the mop-up man, then it&#8217;s curious that he wasn&#8217;t used a couple of nights ago, when the score was 11-0.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Hawk</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174432</link>
		<dc:creator>The Hawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174432</guid>
		<description>[38] If Chamberlain gave 6 innings every week you might have an argument. He doesn&#039;t, so you don&#039;t. But it was a very energetic attempt. 

Btw, how do you propose to deal with six starting pitchers? (I&#039;ll give you a heads up here and remind you that I&#039;ve made my argument explicitly stating multiple times this is all in the case that Wang isn&#039;t shot and Hughes remains at least as viable as Chamberlain.)

Interesting point about Chamberlain&#039;s health - now that you bring it up, I think you&#039;re wrong. I think we &lt;i&gt;should&lt;/i&gt; be concerned about it - it&#039;s not theoretical at all. In fact it happened last year. I&#039;m not sure it was the very logically and scientifically-named &quot;herky-jerky of the different roles&quot;, but maybe it&#039;s true..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[38] If Chamberlain gave 6 innings every week you might have an argument. He doesn&#8217;t, so you don&#8217;t. But it was a very energetic attempt. </p>
<p>Btw, how do you propose to deal with six starting pitchers? (I&#8217;ll give you a heads up here and remind you that I&#8217;ve made my argument explicitly stating multiple times this is all in the case that Wang isn&#8217;t shot and Hughes remains at least as viable as Chamberlain.)</p>
<p>Interesting point about Chamberlain&#8217;s health &#8211; now that you bring it up, I think you&#8217;re wrong. I think we <i>should</i> be concerned about it &#8211; it&#8217;s not theoretical at all. In fact it happened last year. I&#8217;m not sure it was the very logically and scientifically-named &#8220;herky-jerky of the different roles&#8221;, but maybe it&#8217;s true..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174431</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:07:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174431</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Did Girardi explain why he went with Aceves over Wang?&lt;/i&gt;

Because he though they had a shot at winning the game?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Did Girardi explain why he went with Aceves over Wang?</i></p>
<p>Because he though they had a shot at winning the game?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174430</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:03:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174430</guid>
		<description>One other thing, I see that Wang hasn&#039;t pitched since Friday.  Did Girardi explain why he went with Aceves over Wang?  Especially since Aceves pitched the evening prior?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One other thing, I see that Wang hasn&#8217;t pitched since Friday.  Did Girardi explain why he went with Aceves over Wang?  Especially since Aceves pitched the evening prior?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174429</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:59:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174429</guid>
		<description>The difference between Hughes and Burnett is their respective trendlines, and that you would expect that Hughes&#039;s performances to parallel a typical learning curve, and they have. There is no comparable explanation for Burnett&#039;s stats.

[24] He did in the mLs. Despite that accomplishment, he has been given very little opportunity to do anything in the MLs.

[10] Thanks, Diane. Apparently, there are other factors that explain Texas&#039; improved DER.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The difference between Hughes and Burnett is their respective trendlines, and that you would expect that Hughes&#8217;s performances to parallel a typical learning curve, and they have. There is no comparable explanation for Burnett&#8217;s stats.</p>
<p>[24] He did in the mLs. Despite that accomplishment, he has been given very little opportunity to do anything in the MLs.</p>
<p>[10] Thanks, Diane. Apparently, there are other factors that explain Texas&#8217; improved DER.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174428</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:58:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174428</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;Thanks Raf, but if you’re arguing that Burnett isn’t as bad, just barely, as a 22 year old, then my point still stands.&lt;/b&gt;

Isn&#039;t so much arguing as presenting information.  As for Burnett&#039;s contract, I&#039;m not going to blast it yet, there&#039;s a long way to go, in both the contract as well as this season.  The Golebiewski part I referenced to see if there was something we could see behind the numbers.  He hasn&#039;t lost velocity, but he&#039;s not striking out as many batters, and is walking more batters.  And hitters are making more contact.

&lt;b&gt;By the way, this argument started with the pen. They wouldn’t have that problem if they signed Looper and were ready to move him to the pen for Hughes.
&lt;/b&gt;

They wouldn&#039;t have the problem either if the pen replicated their performances from last year.  Even so, I&#039;m not ready to give up on guys like Robertson and Melancon.  Regardless, they had too many starters, so even if the pen performed to their potential, we&#039;re still looking @ the same problem with the Yanks trying to find innings for all the young arms on the staff.  Instead of doing it with the parent club, they&#039;d be doing it in the minors.

As for Looper, we don&#039;t even know if he would consider NY, given his last go round with the Mets.  Given that he started the past two years, and is a FT starter with the Brewers, I don&#039;t think he&#039;d want to come to NY as a swingman.  And I don&#039;t see NY taking interest in him as a swingman given the other options they had (Aceves, Giese)

In the end, these pitching logjams usually work themselves out, due to injury or ineffectiveness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Thanks Raf, but if you’re arguing that Burnett isn’t as bad, just barely, as a 22 year old, then my point still stands.</b></p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t so much arguing as presenting information.  As for Burnett&#8217;s contract, I&#8217;m not going to blast it yet, there&#8217;s a long way to go, in both the contract as well as this season.  The Golebiewski part I referenced to see if there was something we could see behind the numbers.  He hasn&#8217;t lost velocity, but he&#8217;s not striking out as many batters, and is walking more batters.  And hitters are making more contact.</p>
<p><b>By the way, this argument started with the pen. They wouldn’t have that problem if they signed Looper and were ready to move him to the pen for Hughes.<br />
</b></p>
<p>They wouldn&#8217;t have the problem either if the pen replicated their performances from last year.  Even so, I&#8217;m not ready to give up on guys like Robertson and Melancon.  Regardless, they had too many starters, so even if the pen performed to their potential, we&#8217;re still looking @ the same problem with the Yanks trying to find innings for all the young arms on the staff.  Instead of doing it with the parent club, they&#8217;d be doing it in the minors.</p>
<p>As for Looper, we don&#8217;t even know if he would consider NY, given his last go round with the Mets.  Given that he started the past two years, and is a FT starter with the Brewers, I don&#8217;t think he&#8217;d want to come to NY as a swingman.  And I don&#8217;t see NY taking interest in him as a swingman given the other options they had (Aceves, Giese)</p>
<p>In the end, these pitching logjams usually work themselves out, due to injury or ineffectiveness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174427</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:39:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174427</guid>
		<description>@ 36

Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Trade 6 innings a week of guaranteed high leverage work (you know when the score starts tied) for maybe 2 to 4 innings of the same. I know you math isn&#039;t too good, but surely you know that 6 &gt; 2 and 6 &gt; 4, right?

If him being the second-best starter is &quot;highly debatable&quot; then debate it. Too bad there&#039;s nothing to debate though. Pettitte isn&#039;t better. Burnett isn&#039;t better. Not Wang. Not Hughes. So who&#039;s better? The Amazing Emaciated Fucking Toad Kei Igawa?

From Goldman yesterday:

&quot;American League pitchers make a quality start just under half the time this year -- the rate has stayed fairly constant since 2005.&quot;

Relievers are a dime a dozen. Crappy, inconsistent starters get $80M. And Joba&#039;s not either.

Go call in to Fat Slob Mike. He&#039;ll love your logic. But people here who love actual logic know there&#039;s nothing to the argument. Worse for your case, the kid hurt his shoulder last year with all the herky-jerky of the different roles. Nah, but why worry about something so theoretical as the health of young pitcher?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 36</p>
<p>Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Trade 6 innings a week of guaranteed high leverage work (you know when the score starts tied) for maybe 2 to 4 innings of the same. I know you math isn&#8217;t too good, but surely you know that 6 &gt; 2 and 6 &gt; 4, right?</p>
<p>If him being the second-best starter is &#8220;highly debatable&#8221; then debate it. Too bad there&#8217;s nothing to debate though. Pettitte isn&#8217;t better. Burnett isn&#8217;t better. Not Wang. Not Hughes. So who&#8217;s better? The Amazing Emaciated Fucking Toad Kei Igawa?</p>
<p>From Goldman yesterday:</p>
<p>&#8220;American League pitchers make a quality start just under half the time this year &#8212; the rate has stayed fairly constant since 2005.&#8221;</p>
<p>Relievers are a dime a dozen. Crappy, inconsistent starters get $80M. And Joba&#8217;s not either.</p>
<p>Go call in to Fat Slob Mike. He&#8217;ll love your logic. But people here who love actual logic know there&#8217;s nothing to the argument. Worse for your case, the kid hurt his shoulder last year with all the herky-jerky of the different roles. Nah, but why worry about something so theoretical as the health of young pitcher?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Hawk</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174426</link>
		<dc:creator>The Hawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174426</guid>
		<description>I wonder what happened to Burnett. Since the Boston game, he&#039;s only pitched well once, and decently once.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder what happened to Burnett. Since the Boston game, he&#8217;s only pitched well once, and decently once.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Hawk</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174425</link>
		<dc:creator>The Hawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 22:21:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174425</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s so simple. The bullpen needs help. You have too many starters, one of whom is on an innings limit and is terrific out of the pen. If Wang stinks forever - keep Joba in the rotation. If Hughes melts down - keep Joba in the rotation. Otherwise at some point he needs to go and do what he does best - for now.

Whether or not Chamberlain is the second-best starter (which is &lt;i&gt;highly&lt;/i&gt; debatable) with just half of his starts being so-called &quot;quality&quot; starts, he&#039;s not exactly tearing it up out there.  Again: Too many starters + too few relievers = Chamberlain to the pen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s so simple. The bullpen needs help. You have too many starters, one of whom is on an innings limit and is terrific out of the pen. If Wang stinks forever &#8211; keep Joba in the rotation. If Hughes melts down &#8211; keep Joba in the rotation. Otherwise at some point he needs to go and do what he does best &#8211; for now.</p>
<p>Whether or not Chamberlain is the second-best starter (which is <i>highly</i> debatable) with just half of his starts being so-called &#8220;quality&#8221; starts, he&#8217;s not exactly tearing it up out there.  Again: Too many starters + too few relievers = Chamberlain to the pen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174424</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 21:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174424</guid>
		<description>Thanks Raf, but if you&#039;re arguing that Burnett isn&#039;t as bad, just barely, as a 22 year old, then my point still stands.

Burnett sucks. And at $16.5 M, he royally blows.

By the way, this argument started with the pen. They wouldn&#039;t have that problem if they signed Looper and were ready to move him to the pen for Hughes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Raf, but if you&#8217;re arguing that Burnett isn&#8217;t as bad, just barely, as a 22 year old, then my point still stands.</p>
<p>Burnett sucks. And at $16.5 M, he royally blows.</p>
<p>By the way, this argument started with the pen. They wouldn&#8217;t have that problem if they signed Looper and were ready to move him to the pen for Hughes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174423</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 21:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174423</guid>
		<description>FWIW, from Fangraphs;
&quot;Burnett’s five-year pact with the Bombers was considered a significant risk from a health standpoint, but he was expected to perform quite well when available. So far, that hasn’t been the case: fresh off a 3.45 FIP with the Blue Jays, Burnett has posted a 5.27 FIP in 58 innings. Some of that is poor luck on flyballs- his HR/FB% is somewhat high at 14.3 percent. Still, his strikeout rate is down (7.76 K/9 in 2009, 9.39 in 2008), he’s walking too many batters (4.19 BB/9), and he’s surrendering far more flyballs this season. His 41.7 GB% is significantly lower than his 48.5% mark in 2008, which in turn was quite a bit lower than his 54.8% figure in 2007. Considering that seemingly innocuous flyballs are whizzing out of new Yankee Stadium at a dizzying pace (1.62 HR park factor), that’s not a positive trend.&quot; - David Golebiewski</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, from Fangraphs;<br />
&#8220;Burnett’s five-year pact with the Bombers was considered a significant risk from a health standpoint, but he was expected to perform quite well when available. So far, that hasn’t been the case: fresh off a 3.45 FIP with the Blue Jays, Burnett has posted a 5.27 FIP in 58 innings. Some of that is poor luck on flyballs- his HR/FB% is somewhat high at 14.3 percent. Still, his strikeout rate is down (7.76 K/9 in 2009, 9.39 in 2008), he’s walking too many batters (4.19 BB/9), and he’s surrendering far more flyballs this season. His 41.7 GB% is significantly lower than his 48.5% mark in 2008, which in turn was quite a bit lower than his 54.8% figure in 2007. Considering that seemingly innocuous flyballs are whizzing out of new Yankee Stadium at a dizzying pace (1.62 HR park factor), that’s not a positive trend.&#8221; &#8211; David Golebiewski</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174422</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 21:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174422</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;Cliff warned us on Burnett. &lt;/b&gt;

IIRC, he also softened his stance on Burnett.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Cliff warned us on Burnett. </b></p>
<p>IIRC, he also softened his stance on Burnett.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174421</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 21:04:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174421</guid>
		<description>Looking @ Fangraphs value rankings

Hughes: $200K
Burnett: $1.8M

Lee Sinins&#039; RSAA totals

Hughes: -6
Burnett: -4

Of course, it should be noted somewhere that Burnett has double the innings than Hughes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looking @ Fangraphs value rankings</p>
<p>Hughes: $200K<br />
Burnett: $1.8M</p>
<p>Lee Sinins&#8217; RSAA totals</p>
<p>Hughes: -6<br />
Burnett: -4</p>
<p>Of course, it should be noted somewhere that Burnett has double the innings than Hughes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174420</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 21:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174420</guid>
		<description>Cliff warned us on Burnett. Awful, awful signing. Just terrible. The guy has never been consistent. And Jays fans were happy to see him go. I will be too...in 2013</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cliff warned us on Burnett. Awful, awful signing. Just terrible. The guy has never been consistent. And Jays fans were happy to see him go. I will be too&#8230;in 2013</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raf</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174419</link>
		<dc:creator>Raf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 20:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174419</guid>
		<description>FWIW FIP&#039;s of the starters

CC Sabathia	: 3.42
Andy Pettitte: 4.78
Joba Chamberlain: 4.91
A.J. Burnett: 5.28
Phil Hughes: 5.83
Chien-Ming Wang: 10.33

Burnett and Hughes aren&#039;t as close as I thought, I looked at the wrong colums</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW FIP&#8217;s of the starters</p>
<p>CC Sabathia	: 3.42<br />
Andy Pettitte: 4.78<br />
Joba Chamberlain: 4.91<br />
A.J. Burnett: 5.28<br />
Phil Hughes: 5.83<br />
Chien-Ming Wang: 10.33</p>
<p>Burnett and Hughes aren&#8217;t as close as I thought, I looked at the wrong colums</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174418</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 20:55:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174418</guid>
		<description>Plus, who would you rather see out there - Burnett or Hughes? Then, when you toss in their value, it&#039;s no contest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Plus, who would you rather see out there &#8211; Burnett or Hughes? Then, when you toss in their value, it&#8217;s no contest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bum Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/05/27/news-of-the-day-52709/#comment-174417</link>
		<dc:creator>Bum Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 20:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=19565#comment-174417</guid>
		<description>@ 27

I like me stats normalized:

Burnett = 87 ERA+
Hughes = 89 ERA+

The difference is negligible. But Burnett is still the worst.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 27</p>
<p>I like me stats normalized:</p>
<p>Burnett = 87 ERA+<br />
Hughes = 89 ERA+</p>
<p>The difference is negligible. But Burnett is still the worst.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
