"A New York Treasure" --Village Voice

News of the Day – 10/20/09

Today’s news is powered by . . . cellos and Metallica:

. . . And in four career regular-season starts made on three days’ rest, he (Sabathia) has posted a 3-1 record and a 1.01 ERA, averaging nearly a strikeout per inning.

“You know that going on certain rest that you’re not going to have your best fastball,” Sabathia said. “So you’ve just got to stay under control and make sure your delivery is good, and make sure you go out there and throw strikes.”

. . . the Yankees also knew that the benefits would last more than one game. Starting Sabathia on short rest would also allow them to use A.J. Burnett and Andy Pettitte on regular rest in Games 5 and 6, before bringing Sabathia back on regular rest, if necessary, for a potential Game 7 at Yankee Stadium.

. . . Amassing 230 innings in the regular season, Sabathia fell short of his 2008 regular-season total by 23 innings. And so he entered the postseason fresh.

“You look at everything,” Girardi said. “The thing about CC is he doesn’t have the amount of innings that he had the last two years in the regular season. We slowed him down. He’s been able to have extra rest, and that’s why we feel good about it. We wouldn’t ask him to do something that we didn’t think he was capable of, or that he didn’t have a chance to be successful at.”

Rivera’s 36 saves in postseason play are the most in Major League history. The most remarkable aspect of those saves is that 12 of them have been two innings or more. Rivera’s 0.72 postseason ERA — spread over 81 appearances — is also tops for anyone with at least 30 innings.

Girardi got three rings as a player, largely because of Rivera. Now, he hopes to ride his closer to another as manager.

“I think the Yankees have been very blessed to have Mo over this long run that he has had,” Girardi said. “Obviously, if you blow a save during the regular season, you have a lot of time to make up for that. But if you blow a save during the postseason, in a short series, there’s not quite so much time. He has meant so much to this organization and to the success of this organization in the playoffs.”

Scott Boras threw out the ceremonial first pitch in free agency today, comparing Matt Holliday to Mark Teixeira in the impact the agent believes each player can have on a club.

“These guys are blue-collar superstars,” Boras said. “They don’t hit 50 home runs, but they’re complete players. They can give you something without swinging a bat.”

Teixeira signed with the New York Yankees last winter, for $180 million. Boras would not say what his asking price would be for Holliday, but he made clear he considered Holliday’s abilities in getting on base, hitting for power and playing superior defense similar to those of Teixeira.

“There are differences between hitters and complete players,” Boras said. “Matt Holliday is a complete player.

“There is, frankly, no one like him in the market.”

[My take: But Holliday plays a lesser defensive spectrum position, and I don’t think anyone would agree he surpasses Tex defensively irrespective of position.]

  • Dave Collins turns 55 today.  Collins was supposed to be a speed merchant on the bases for the Yanks when he signed as a free agent in ’82.  However, he only appeared in 111 games, had an OBP of .315 and stole a mere 13 bases.  He was quickly dealt after the season.
  • Mickey Mantle would have been 78 today.
  • On this date in 1960, coach Ralph Houk is named to succeed Casey Stengel as manager of the Yankees. He briefly led the team during the season when Stengel was hospitalized.
  • On this date in 1964, Johnny Keane, three days after resigning as manager of the World Champions St. Louis Cardinals, replaces Yogi Berra as the Yankees’ field boss.
  • On this date in 1981, the Yankees take Game One of the Series over the Dodgers 5 – 3. Bob Watson hit a three-run home run in the first inning as pitcher Ron Guidry goes seven innings for the win. Goose Gossage closes down a Dodgers rally in the 8th.
  • On this date in 1996, the Atlanta Braves defeat the Yankees, 12 – 1, in the World Series opener. At age nineteen, Andruw Jones puts himself in the record books as the youngest player to hit a home run in the Series. He hit one homer in the second inning off Andy Pettitte and another in the third. Pitcher John Smoltz gains the win.

Share: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email %PRINT_TEXT


Show/Hide Comments 1-100
1 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:05 am

Actually, if you subscribe to the "defensive spectrum", LF is one rung above 1B. Also, if you subscribe to stats like UZR, Holliday is a better defender at his position than Teixeira is at his. I am sure Boras will be sharing these "facts" with all of Holliday's potential suitors.

2 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:09 am

I thought a night of sleep might mollify my feelings toward Girardi, but alas, it did not. Even with a clear head (or as close to clear as I can get), there remains no excuse for the idiotic way he managed last night. The Yankees could be on the verge of a sweep if they had a competent manager. Sure, many of the players failed as well, but that's part of a very difficult game. Making stupid decisions, however, is not (or at least it shouldn't be). I really hope CC is on his game tonight because otherwise I think the anchor that is Girardi will have finally sunk this steaming liner.

3 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:13 am

As poorly as they performed with RISP, you have to admit that their defense (and awareness) were stellar.

Tex backing up 2nd to nail Abreu ...
Damon backing up A-Rod on the Rivera-mishandled bunt ...
Tex doing his Nettles impression, 1B-style, throughout the game ....

4 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:15 am

I'd love to hear, loud and clear before the game starts, the alternative to CC starting.

And I'd love to hear how the Yankees were going to go undefeated in the post-season with more than half their lineup sporting a sub-.600 OPS.

5 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:17 am

Let's see Holliday hit better than Matsui in the AL before anyone gives him a huge contract. Too bad that ain't happening. No thanks. Five years locked up in a LF? I'd rather they sign Bonds.

6 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:19 am

Meanwhile, if Giradi is an anchor, Scioscia is the Titanic, Torre is the Hindenburg, and Manuel is Apollo 13.

7 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:22 am

I’d love to hear, loud and clear before the game starts, the alternative to CC starting.

The alternative is to start Gaudin. It's a dumb alternative, but it's an alternative nonetheless.

8 Sliced Bread   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:24 am

breaking news from Times Square...
traffic is snarled at the intersection of Broadway & 7th Aveune as Joe Girardi has replaced a perfectly operating red light with Alfredo Aceves.
Girardi plans to use Aceves again later today to replace the George Washington Bridge.

9 monkeypants   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:24 am

[6] That may be, but that does not change the fact that Girardi contributed greatly to the loss last night, as you yourself admitted (by ranking him as high as third on the fault list). Fortunately Torre's foolishness cannot cost the Yankees a game this postseason.

[4] They stood a much better chance of still being undefeated as of today, had the manager not made at least half a dozen very poor decisions (as we discussed last night) nor helped construct the "bench" the team currently features. Hm. better chance of being up 3-0, with CC going today. I'd say that sounds like a better chance to stay undefeated in the postseason than managing very poorly and contributing to a loss, which now precludes staying undefeated.

10 monkeypants   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:26 am

[4] The alternative *was* to start Gaudin, but that alternative only made sense (if at all) if the Yankees were up 3-0. But since the rotation has been set up around getting CC three starts, that is the only viable alternative, as it should be.

11 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:26 am

“There is, frankly, no one like him in the market.” - Boras

He's correct, which is why Holliday's going to cash in. Not saying that the Yanks should sign him, but he should get the fat contract this offseason. Hopefully, he'll stay in St. Louis

12 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:26 am


Thanks ... I needed that ...

13 Sliced Bread   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:27 am

more breaking news from Times Square....
Dick Clark and Ryan Seacrest will not host the New Years Eve ball drop. That honor will go to Figgins & Aybar.

14 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:27 am

I'm about 90% over last night, winning championships is about overcoming adversity and bouncing back when you get hit...no one was ever gonna hand the Yankees a pennant or a ring. If they can't recover from last night, well then they were never that good to begin with.

games like tonight is the whole reason CC is even here, sometimes you gotta earn it a little bit.

15 Rich   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:28 am

I think Torre became an overrated ingrate, but he does have what Parcells's calls "pelts," i.e., four rings. Let's see Girardi get one...this season.

16 Sliced Bread   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:32 am

[12] happy to help. we all need to use an alternate route today lest we land in one of the rivers.

17 Bama Yankee   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:33 am

[8] & [13] Good stuff.

18 flycaster   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:39 am

[2] I'll admit that Girardi is a bit too "La Russa" for me at times, and that last night the obvious "gut" move was to let Robertson pitch to Gehrig, er, Kendrick. But by that time the game had been given away numerous times by player's failure to perform. To focus on the removal of Robertson is to miss the forest for the trees so badly that the only explanation is your total obsession with ridiculing the manager. Now, if we find out that Girardi had instructed Pettitte to throw that horrible "T-Ball" cutter to Vladdy, I'd be willing to place more blame for the loss on him. Or that he instructed Swisher to repeatedly swing and miss at pitches that hit two feet in front of the plate with runners on 3rd and less than 2 out. Or that he had replaced Cabrera's bat with a whiffle bat. But he had nothing to do with these failures, which were entirely responsible for the Yanks failure to prevail last night.

Players win and lose games, and championships. Managers deserve much less blame than many seem to perceive. Why don't you try and enumerate all the wonderful moves he made in the 5 victories that preceded this loss?

19 monkeypants   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:44 am

From Goldman today:

During a National League game in the Division Series round, my Baseball Prospectus colleague Joe Sheehan wrote of a manager working his way through the bullpen trying to find the weakest link. That's what Girardi did today, and it cost the Yankees. It should also be noted that the decision to carry Freddy Guzman again cost the Yankees as Girardi rapidly lost roster flexibility as the game went on.

20 seamus   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:47 am

[19] Emma is still writing? awesome.

21 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:48 am

[18] Yes, the players have to execute, but that doesn’t mean that a manager has to make things difficult by getting in the way.

22 Just Fair   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:51 am

Swisher should have pitched the 11th. It couldn't have been any worse than his hitting. Seriously though, I am more concerned with the inability to score other than hitting the ball over the fence. As opposed to Girardi's decision making. bleh.

23 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:57 am

[18] I'll never understand this argument. Baseball is a very difficult game...players fail all the time. I get that. But, does that mean the manager shouldn't attempt to help his team overcome their shortcomings? It's not like Girardi is being killed for the Yankees losing a 10-0 game. I am sorry, but the manager's role is not irrelevant, and Girardi proved that last night.

Also, Girardi's mismanagement doesn't include only one bad pitching change. After a solid ALDS, he has made several questionable moves in the ALCS. He has only cost them one game of the three, but he can thank Arod and the Izturis for that.

24 flycaster   ~  Oct 20, 2009 10:58 am

[22] Right. A simple fly ball in any of 3 or 4 instances would have resulted in a win, irrespective of managerial moves. And why was including Guzman so fateful? So we lose the opportunity to see Hinske strike out with runners on?

25 monkeypants   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:09 am

[24] Well, including Guzman on the roster is bound up with the comedy of errors that led to Hairston hopelessly chasing the winning drive in LF.

26 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:38 am

This Girardi hate is very, very tiresome. As others have pointed, his "blame" is exceedingly minor in the grand scope. So why don't you let it go?

27 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:45 am

[25] It's funny, but I can remember that many of use stated that the overriding reason for not carrying two pinch runners was because it would give Girardi another reason to overmanage. Cashman should have picked up on this. I am a big Cashman fan, but his failure to better the shortcomings of his manager is definitely a mark against him.

28 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:47 am

[26] maybe it's minor in the game as a whole, but in terms of managing it's pretty major. and i disagree with [18]'s characterization of leaving robertson in as "the obvious 'gut' move." it was the obvious move period. aceves hasn't been good, robertson has been good. the bullpen was already thin because joba and hughes were ineffective (hughes was good until giving up the double, at which point mo had to pitch) and mo couldn't go long again. there was absolutely no reason to go to aceves there. and the argument that his style of pitching is better against kendrick is ridiculous. robertson has a better curveball anyway. so throw him all curves and if he gets on robertson can deal with mathis. it was a terrible decision, and a manager shouldn't make a terrible decision, no matter how poorly his hitters have executed throughout the game.
that said, i think the rest of his moves were defensible (using up 2 lefties in that way was inexplicable, but i didn't mind since i don't really want them pitching in extra innings anyway), and i'm not going crazy about hinske because i don't think he's that good. plus marte has actually done a decent job so far this series. and i'd say that girardi has too, by playing to keep the angels off the scoreboard and letting his team get a win. but then he made a stupid decision. still, chances are the yankees lose that game at that point anyway. so let's just win today and forget about it.

29 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:49 am

also, we can keep blaming girardi for making that move, and ultimately it's his choice, but how is it that none of his coaches saw how stupid it was and warned him against it?
i vote for david cone to replace dave eiland next year.

30 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:51 am

Another thing that doesn't make sense about "not liking that matchup" is how do you then explain lifting Andy to bring in Joba when the first batter was....Howie Kendrick? Doesn't Joba also feature a fastball? Wouldn't you rather have the more crafty Pettitte face him instead? The two moves absolutely contradict each other.

31 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:52 am

[29] Coaches are never going to stand in the way like that...it serves them no good to stick their neck out like that. The way you stay in this game is by being a loyal soldier. Dave Eiland needs the paycheck more than he needs a ring.

32 Ben   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:57 am

Their reported rational for removing Robertson is so weak. It sounds to me like they made a mistake, are aware of it, and are just trying to move on. I wouldn't be surprised if Girardi wasn't a little nervous... He's got so many weapons and he's up against the "amazing" Sciosca. I think he just screwed the pooch on this one. Even managers make errors. Let's hope he learns something.

33 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:58 am

[29] Who knows, for all we know maybe they did.

34 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 11:59 am

People are now stopping me on the street to bitch about Girardi.

I'll say one thing. They damn well better win the world title this year, because people are going to want blood if they fuck this up, and Girardi is the most obvious guy to go after.

35 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:01 pm
36 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:01 pm

[34] Girardi might have been safe with a post season series victory, but after last night, I think he goes if the Yankees collapse here. He made his bed, so hopefully the Yankees make him sleep in it now.

37 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:04 pm

I doubt that Girardi will go after this season, if the Yanks blow the ALCS, or if they make it, don't win the WS.

Hypothetically speaking, if he does get canned, who replaces him?

38 Diane Firstman   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:06 pm


I vote Mattpat 11

39 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:08 pm

[32] He never seems to learn his lesson. Remember when he did that stupid ass pinch run and bunt in Boston, got skewered, threw Melky under the bus, and did it again like two weeks later?

[37] I don't think it matters who replaces him. If the fanbase hates him and he gets no results, there's no reason to keep him.

40 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:09 pm

"The two moves absolutely contradict each other"

Umm, except the result of the first informed the second.

"Even managers make errors. Let’s hope he learns something."

Exactly. But hasn't he shown he's more than capable of learning?

Nah, let's second guess every move he makes and then exclaim "I told you so" when the blind squirrels find one nut.

[36] How many times can you repeat this opinion but with no evidence in support of it?

I suppose when they lose the next three in awful fashion and they don't fire the manager, because there are no decent alternatives, you'll spend all of 2010 calling for Cashman head?

Dear God. Make it stop. Please, make it stop.

41 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:09 pm

[37] commence Valentine/Showalter verbal fellating in: 5...4...3...2...

42 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:10 pm

"Hypothetically speaking, if he does get canned, who replaces him?"

Great question. Maybe today we'll get answer.

43 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:11 pm

[39] Really? Like between 2008 and 2009?

How many bunts has he called for this post-season?

44 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:12 pm

[38] Other than all the obvious reasons why I would be a bad manager, when I get nervous or stressed, I start rubbing my face. The team would be putting on plays that make even less sense than the ones Girardi does.

45 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:13 pm

[43] What happened between 2008 and 2009?

46 ms october   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:14 pm

i will say as a general statement, i don't get that wraped up in the manger during the season- i might criticize, small moves, but whatever. however, in a playoff game where one move is magnified, i am very ready to hold the manager accountable. of course it is so that if the yanks had just hit a bit better with risp, if andy hadn't given up a hr to vladdy, if joba didn't give up a run that i couldn't really see what happened, etc - they might have won.
but to me the point is in the bottom of the 11th the game was tied, and was then lost directly because of several poor moves girardi made.
i also think selecting the correct pitcher is much easier to do than actually hitting and pitching the ball.

now with that said - i am ready for tonight.

47 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:15 pm

[40] i think this comment puts to rest any lingering ideas about paul possibly being bum rush.

i can see how the joba at bat might have "informed" joe's decisionmaking in the 11th, but if so that's even more ridiculous than relying on a 1/2 career matchup. he hit a fastball, so now he has to face a lesser fastball? come on.

48 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:15 pm

[39] He may make some head scratching decisions here and there, but does the fanbase really hate him? And even if they did, I'd find hit hard to believe that the team would fire a manager based on what the fans think.

[41] Yeah, I guess those are the obvious replacements. More Valentine than Showalter, I suppose. Where is Bobby, anyway isn't he supposed to be broadcasting, or have I missed something?

49 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:16 pm

[47] Bum Rush would've flipped out by now.

50 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:16 pm

[37] This time, you hold more than three interviews and treat the job as the prestigious position that it is.

51 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:19 pm

[48] he got hired by ESPN, but just interviewed for the Indians job.

it just drives me nuts how both of them are held up as some sort of managerial panacea whenever Girardi (or anyone else for that matter) makes a questionable move. Buck never won a damn thing (and might have held a few teams back from success) and Bobby re-wrote the book on wacky game decisions. "Be careful what you wish for" is all I say to anyone who pines for them.

52 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:20 pm

[47] [49] I am still suspicious. Paul's first appearance was right after Bum Rush's ban, and his immediate tone was very similar. He also has Bum Rush's way of only showing up after Girardi blows a game so he can then defend him.

53 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:21 pm

[50] Oh, I dunno about all that. How many interviews before Torre was hired? Before Dallas Green? Before Showalter? Dent? Merrill? Martin? Lemon? etc, etc, etc.

54 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:21 pm

[52] when Paul and I get into an argument about JP Ricciardi being a better GM than Cashman, then I'll believe he's Bum Rush

55 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:22 pm

[51] Buck may not have a ring, but he took over two rebuilding teams and brought them to the brink of a championship. His attention to detail is second to none, so if I could be satisified that he has ironed out his player relation issues, I would consider him a top candidate.

56 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:23 pm

[45] He went from being a mediot to media-saavy

57 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:24 pm

[53] Probably not enough...not sure why past mistakes should dictate future ones. The Yankees next manager should be as qualified as possible, and the best way to find that man is to vet as many candidates as possible.

58 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:25 pm

[52] Be that as it may, they have different styles. If they were the same person, it would've come out by now. Everyone has a distinct writing style, and it's near impossible to hide after a while. There's no way that Paul would've remained this civil if he were Bum Rush. Especially after the events leading up to Bum Rush's banning

59 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:25 pm

[52] that is true, and maybe he's toned down the cashman hate to be less obvious, but i doubt it. bum rush hated cashman too much to hide it for this long.

so it turns out that baseball-reference has a split that shows batters vs "power" or "finesse" pitchers (based on how many people the pitcher strikes out and walks). in his career, kendrick has a 109 ops+ vs "power" pitchers and an 85 ops+ vs "finesse" (102 ops+ vs "average"). in 2009, he's 101 vs power, 119 vs average, and 92 vs finesse.

so maybe girardi did have something in that binder. still, it was a bad decision. kendrick isn't a power hitter. chances he hits another home run are slim. and once he gets on base, robertson is better suited to get out of the inning than aceves. and of course, he should have been getting the most possible out of his best remaining reliever, rather than cycling through so quickly.

but i will admit, these numbers make me a little bit less mad because at least it's possible he was going on something, even though i still think it was a stupid move.

60 ms october   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:26 pm

[51] i'm not interested in either one - i agree about bobby v being in that wacky i'm going to do this just to see what will happen mold; and i don't think showalter has it in him to change his personality

61 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

[48] People are angry right now. I'll fully admit that I don't think Girardi brings anything to the table and I have been very nitpicky on some of his moves before, so if you want to throw out my opinion, fine. But when normal people are actually stopping me on the street to talk about what an idiot our manager is (I'm not bringing it up) I think public opinion of the man is very low right now. If they blow this, I can't see it getting any higher.

And if the fans aren't happy and the results aren't there, I see no reason why they would keep him.

62 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

[55] I'll concede his success in '92-'95. But what other rebuilding team did he take to the brink of a championship?

The D'Backs were a second year expansion team who went on a free agent shopping spree, thats not exactly "rebuilding."

He did a fine job with the '04 Rangers, but they were hardly "on the brink of a championship" and he never really followed it up with any kind of success the next couple of years.

63 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

[58] Engage him all you'd like. I am not discouraging you. I just trust my suspicion and would prefer to avoid him altogether.

64 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:30 pm

[57] I suspect that most teams handle their business the same way. They already have a list of candidates in mind when they sack a manager. And who's to say that their past managerial hires were mistakes? Dallas Green & Bucky Dent maybe, but I don't think Showalter was a mistake.

65 ms october   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:30 pm

[59] i think he definitely went off the notion that kendrick is a fastball hitter - and he thought aceves' junk would be tougher for him - as you say it was still not a good decision - for one thing have robertson throw kendrick his curve whic is a great pitch

just to take a step from this, i do think girardi has reasons for doing what he does, he is "thinking" over there - so it is not like he is making decisions just becuase the sunflower seed bag was upside down, the issue is more that some of the decsions are not good

66 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:31 pm

[51] You nailed it. Anyone who pushes Showalter or Valentine has no credibility on the subject. None. There's a reason no team, except the savants at ESPN, has hired them for years. It's not like the managerial ranks are overflowing with talent either.

Who's Bum Rush, and why are you making this about me?

Any case, doesn't it get tiresome for the rest of you with all the Girardi nonsense. I know it's easy to blame the manager, but day after day and harping on it non-stop? I don't know how to judge a manager. But this could do a hell of alot worse.

As for Aceves, here's NoMaas:
"We can only speculate that Girardi made the move because Aceves throws everything but the kitchen sink (only 43% of his pitches are fastballs), whereas Robertson primarily throws a fastball (76% of total pitches) and Howie Kendrick sits dead red, being 9.4 runs above average against fastballs in 2009."

Sure he overmanaged. But the game should have been won by then and Swisher and Melky get my ire far, far worse.

67 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:34 pm

[59] It could very well be true that Kendrick handles power better than finesse, but that would only be relevant in a one batter situation, which this was not. Removing an effective leader to prevent a batter with 12 HRs in about 1,000 PAs against right handers from going yard is the definition of overmanaging. The game did not end with Kendrick.

Of course, one also has to break those splits down further by removing the power and finesse lefties from the equation. Also, if he is using those numbers, how does he justify bringing Joba in to face him?

Finally, those power and finesse categories are based on K/rates and BB/rates, not the pitcher's arsenal, so for example, someone like Edwar could be considered a power pitcher.

68 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:34 pm

[59] b-r defines "power" pitchers as those who strike out or walk 28%+ of batters faces; "finesse" strike out or walk 24%-. in his career, aceves has k'd or bb'd 24.7%, robertson 43.5%

69 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:35 pm

[56] Oh, I'm not sure about that. We still went through the bizarre A-Rod return lies and last nights "I did this but I'm not telling you why because its a secret!"

And like I said, when he just threw Melky under the bus in Boston.

70 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:37 pm

[62] He built the D-backs franchise. Not only did he have a say in picking the players, but he also had his hand in many business areas as well. Who cares if the D-backs opened the pocket books (the Yankees do it). The bottom line is Showalter has had a hand in reviving every team he has managed. His poor people skills contributed to his short shelf life in Arizona and Texas, but again, if he has learned from those mistakes, he would be an excellent hire.

71 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:38 pm

[57] And how does one identify a "qualified" manager?

"Removing an effective leader"

I suppose Girardi gets no credit for turning him to that?

"that would only be relevant in a one batter situation"

You do realize that if Aceves gets the one out he comes back out for the 12th, right?

72 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:39 pm

People are angry right now.

And this too, shall pass...

[62] Even with all that, you would think that teams would be rushing to hire him, no? It's telling that he hasn't had a gig since Texas.

73 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:40 pm

[64] Showalter wasn't a mistake, but in his case, the Yankees knew what they had. Showalter had been with the organization for a while. Regardless, the Yankees should demand the best manager possible. I see no reason why they shouldn't cast the nets as far as possible.

74 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:41 pm

[70] So you want to bring in a guy who rebuilds to a team that just won 103 games?

Meanwhile, that's a huge "if" and no team thinks he has. So the Yankees should give him another shot?

Showalter belongs right where he is. There's a reason every team he's managed won more after he left.

75 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:42 pm

[73] "Regardless, the Yankees should demand the best manager possible"

And how do you determine that? Why won't you answer this simple question? Who's the best manager in baseball right now?

76 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:44 pm

[72] It's only been three seasons...how do you know he hasn't been contacted about some less than desireable jobs?

77 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:44 pm

Since we're in the land of unrealistic hypotheticals: Why do I bother?

Go Yanks! I love CC. Hopefully he silences everyone.

78 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:46 pm

[73] The Yankees knew what they had with every other manager they had in that timespan, only Dallas Green came from outside the organization.

79 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:46 pm

[59] I really don't see how going to an inferior reliever because he throws junk is any different than going to an inferior reliever because he's left handed.

80 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:47 pm

[68] Joba is at 33%, making him a power pitcher by this definition.

81 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:47 pm

[76] How do you know he has?

The plain fact is he's got the same job right now as Buster Olney and John Kruk. They aren't managerial material either.

82 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:47 pm

[72] If they wind up losing?

83 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:49 pm

[78] Which really calls into question some of the decision making at that time. Again, are you suggesting that the Yankees shouldn't interview alot of candidates?

84 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:50 pm

[76] Well, if he's the baseball savant that some claim him to be wouldn't a rebuilding team have him at the top of the list? Wouldn't there be another team that would want him as a GM?

85 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:50 pm

By the way, does anyone else find it troublesome that I ask for a list of the best managers in the game and we get a guy who works for ESPN?

So basically, let's shit all over our manager, but then we can't name one that's clearly better.

Makes sense.

Next time I complain about Cano's defense, someone please bring up Harold Reynolds.

86 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:51 pm

[84] Exactly. Call out Girardi for logical inconsistencies but then throw them out there when they're convenient.

87 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:52 pm

[84] Most recently, the Houston Astros were said to be interested in him. On the Michael Kay show, Showalter said he would not be interested in that job. Buck basically said he would only consider a more established team because his next would like be his last managerial job. I don't know how many other teams have contacted him, but it seems silly to use the fact that he hasn't managed in three years against him.

88 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:53 pm

[83] I'm suggesting that it doesn't happen, for a myriad of reasons, mainly because a GM, or whoever does the hiring already has someone in mind. And it's not just with the Yankees.

For MLB managerial candidates, there really isn't that big a pool, and may explain why so many managers are recycled.

89 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:55 pm

In addition to the Astros rumors, a quick Google search has Olney mentioning that the Nationals have an interest in Buck Showalter. So, there has definitely been at least some interest.

90 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:56 pm

Buck basically said he would only consider a more established team because his next would like be his last managerial job.

Define "established." If by established you or he means "successful", then I guess Showalter is angling to manage the Dodgers, because I don't see (m)any other teams who are doing well looking to make a change.

91 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:56 pm

[87] Sounds like he's going to be waiting a while. And ESPN is the perfect preparation.

92 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:56 pm

[88] I don't disagree...I am stating, however, that it's time for the Yankees to break from that mold.

93 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:57 pm

[89] If he's not interested in the Astros, I don't see him being interested in the Nationals.

94 Paul   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:58 pm

[92] Wait they didn't with Girardi?

This is infuriating. I'm done here. Let's go Yankees!

95 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 12:58 pm

[90] That's what I inferred. He seemed to imply that he didn't want to take over another project, but instead would consider a team that is ready to win or at least able to marshall the resources required to do so.

96 51cq24   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:00 pm

[79] [80] as i said, i still think it's the wrong move, but at least there's some small basis for it. as for going to joba earlier in the game, i don't think any manager has to consistently go by the same exact stats for every single move.
anyway, i still think it was a terrible move.

97 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:00 pm

[93] The rumor was the Nats being interested in him, which counters the argument suggesting he can't be that good because he hasn't worked in a few years.

98 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:01 pm

[92] MLB being what it is, I don't see that happening; that would require radical thinking, that they would go with someone who would be considered "out of the box." Even the two most popular names considered, Showalter and Valentine are out of the "recycled manager" mold and not particularly a creative hire.

99 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:02 pm

A Toronto Star column by Richard Griffin cites circumstantial evidence that new GM Alex Anthopoulos may be interested in replacing Gaston with Showalter.

100 Mattpat11   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:03 pm

[96] Vin Scully would probably have something to say about the basis behind a move like that.

Show/Hide Comments 101-104
101 williamnyy23   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:04 pm

[98] Again, I agree, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't expect better from the Yankees.

If I was Cashman, I would cast a wide net, which would include some traditional names. Of that group, Showalter would be atop the list of people with whom I would like to speak.

102 Raf   ~  Oct 20, 2009 1:15 pm

[82] Same thing; there'll be gnashing of teeth and rendering of garments, but Girardi will probably be @ the helm in '10

[101] The thing is that it isn't about casting a wide net, I don't think it ever was about casting a wide net, and the hiring practices of managers around the league bear that out. There would be a handful of names (some internal, some external), and from that handful comes the next manager. Maybe we should expect better from the Yankees, but we can't even define what makes a good manager.

103 Shaun P.   ~  Oct 20, 2009 3:13 pm

All I have to say is, I am glad there was no Banter back in 1996, because - if yesterday is any indication of how things would have been - I think it would have exploded after Game 1 of the Serious that year.

And if not after Game 1, definitely after Game 2.

104 RagingTartabull   ~  Oct 20, 2009 3:33 pm

[103] I sometimes wonder what it would've been like if the blogosphere were around for certain games.

Imagine the comment thread when Torre left Cone in Game 3...

feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email
"This ain't football. We do this every day."
--Earl Weaver