Comments on: Livin’ on a Thin Line

By: BIGAL

BIGAL — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:35:42 +0000

The Yankees season is not over if they don’t win 2 out of 3 in LA, and Girardi’s job is not in danger because of that series either, that’s bull. The Yanks have 11 games left against the Red Sox, those are the telling series for a make or break season. Besides, if they only take 1 game in LA, that’s 5 out of 7 for the current road trip, who in the Yankees front office would not be happy with that.

By: OldYanksFan

OldYanksFan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:08:42 +0000

[15] If you read all the comments (and I have one there), it’s pretty much covered. The (commenting) Yankee fans have assessed Gritner accurately. Bottom line: Average arm.

By: OldYanksFan

OldYanksFan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:06:01 +0000

[11] “Re: Hughes, I think that Girardi is, as he was with A-Rod, faced with the choice between “what is in the team’s best long-term interests” and “how do I keep winning tons of games”. As should surprise no one, he’s leaning towards the winning now goal by keeping Hughes in this ridiculous short-reliever role.”

Shaun – I have to ask… Are these Girardi’s decisions or Cashman’s/the FO’s?
Girardi runs things on the field, but I would think ‘overall strategy’ comes from above. I can’t see Cashman letting Girardi handle Hughes (or any other important issues) in a way that is counter to the ‘overall plan’. Do we give Girardi too much ‘credit’ for these decisions?

By: monkeypants

monkeypants — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:05:22 +0000

[25] Regarding the lineup, at least Girardi is not subscribing to the obligatory day-game-after-night-game rule for starting the back-up catcher. The lineup is weaker today, but crippled.

By: RIYank

RIYank — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:00:19 +0000

[28] [34] Sadly, I hear he doesn’t like to bat so he’s not thrilled about going to the NL.

By: monkeypants

monkeypants — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:59:02 +0000

[28] The key for this effort would be to get Halladay himself to sign the petition, since he has a full no-trade clause!

By: RIYank

RIYank — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:57:14 +0000

[23] Small sample size is indeed something to be wary of esp. with defensive statistics. But stat geeks usually say that 1000 innings is enough, and Brett has 750 or so, which means the projection shouldn't be wildly off. In any case, pleading small sample size here kind of misses the point. If he had a great bunch of games throwing out runners, but it was a small sample, then we could wisely say that he couldn't be expected to keep it up. But what's happening is that the metric tells us that in that small sample he's had an incredibly good arm, and anyone watching him would disagree. That cannot be explained by the size of the sample. I like the suggestion that it has a lot to do with cutting off balls in the gap, thus depriving hitters of extra bases.

By: Shaun P.

Shaun P. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:57:01 +0000

[29] [23] OK, I screwed up the html tags. I think its working now.

By: seamus

seamus — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:56:47 +0000

[25] probably want to limit a-rod on the turf. and sitting Damon doesn’t seem like a bad idea. Not sure what is up with him in left lately. But maybe playing in the dome is a bad idea for Damon right now. Vision problems?

By: The Hawk

The Hawk — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:56:34 +0000

If the Yanks don’t win two of three from the Angels, the season is effectively over. Fire Girardi.

…

I drank too much coffee.