Damaso Marte
Chan Ho Park
David Robertson
Mark Melancon

=)

[10] The sample size of his work in the bullpen last year is not big enough, granted. I was going off his career to date as a reliever vs. career to date as a starter. I also used the eyeball test. … What some “experts” were saying was that it came down to one mechanical issue: Hughes can repeat his delivery and Joba cannot.

The bottom line is that we don’t know the full story, we likely won’t, and it’s a shame because this should be a dead issue already. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was traded at some point.

The injury may not have “reoccur”ed, but it’s clear that Joba is NOT the same pitcher that came off the mound in Arlington. He threw harder as a starter in 2008 than he has as a reliever since.

Now, I think Joba still has the stuff to be a quality starter (if his stuff hasn’t degraded from where it was in the 1st half of 2009) but the #1 beast that he promised to be in 2007/2008 seems destined to be one of the greatest, most disappointing “what ifs” in my Yankees’ fandom …

[6] In the minors, Papelbon pitched in 58, including 48 as a starter, so I am not sure on what you are basing your argument. Meanwhile, Joba had only 15 starts in the minors. Coming off a relatively abbreviated college career, I don’t think it’s unfair to suggest that Joba as a starter is an experiment. In fact, Joba as anything is an experiment because he really has had little pro or amateur experience in both roles.

[7] The Joba debate really doesn’t bother me. It is, after all, a pretty important topic with merit on both sides. Besides, it’s nice that the Joba’s role is one of the Yankees biggest “problems”. I’d rather debate that topic than I am blue in the face than have to deal with some of the issues facing other teams. Heck, the Joba debate is refreshing compared to the now defunct can the Yankees win the Arod.

Hey now! Whoa nelly! Easy, pardner!

Anyway, as I keep saying I’d be totally onboard with this decision if they hadn’t gone to such lengths last year to prepare Joba to be a “real” starter. If he failed miserably maybe then they’d make him a reliever and there’d be no controversy – or significantly less – because the reasons would be apparent.

The idea that there’s something we don’t know is appealing but if that’s the case why did they even bother putting him through the fifth starter “competition”? No matter how you slice it, like most things Joba-related, there’s something weird about it.

As for the rest of it, I agree, I’m sick of it. Let’s focus on Hughes getting established and worry about Joba if/when a rotation spot opens up and/or next spring.

Not exactly true. Pap was always a reliever that was made a starter for the Sox, probably the same way most teams do so to build innings for young players. His starting was a REAL experiment. Every time someone calls Joba starting an “experiment” I throw up in my mouth a little, cuz the confirmation bias is so strong. He’s always been a starter, and a great one, with true CC Sabathia potential. On other teams this is a no brainer, and if he was traded he would immediately join as a starter. I think Alex is right, there’s stuff we just aren’t privy to.

My first reaction is “the yanks screwed this guy up!” But it could easily be, “the yanks are trying their best with this screwed up guy/shoulder.”

As a result, I’ve come full circle on Javy Vazquez and left field. I assumed Vazquez bumped Joba/Hughes, but it seems now that Joba bumped himself by the end of 2009 and Vazquez was sought to fill the vacancy at the expense of spending $ for left field.

if Joba had been counted on as a cheap starter, I don’t think Brett Gardner would be a starter.