"A New York Treasure" --Village Voice

The Hangover

Despite struggling with his command and walking four, two of those free passes forcing in a run in the second inning, Phil Hughes managed to pass a 2-1 lead (courtesy of a Jorge Posada solo homer in the top of the fourth) to his bullpen after 5 2/3 innings and 109 pitches. Unfortunately, the Yankee bullpen coughed up three runs before getting the final out of the sixth. Boone Logan walked the only man he faced, and David Robertson, after getting ahead 0-2 on Ty Wigginton, hit the Orioles’ replacement second baseman in the backside, then gave up a trio of RBI singles to the bottom three men in the Oriole lineup before finally striking out Adam Jones to end the inning. Alfredo Aceves took over in the seventh, but in the eighth Derek Jeter booted a leadoff groundball by Wigginton and Jorge Posada threw a rainbow into center field when pinch-runner Julio Lugo attempted to steal second with two outs, setting up a crucial insurance run.

Baltimore starter Kevin Millwood was similarly inefficient, but lefty Alberto Castillo and righty Jim Johnson held the Yankees to just two hits over 2 2/3 innings, handing a 5-2 lead to newly promoted Alfredo Simon in the ninth. A Nick Swisher one-out single and a pinch-hit walk by Nick Johnson set up, sandwiched between strikeouts of Curtis Granderson and Derek Jeter, set up a pair of two-out Yankee runs, the first of which scored on an error on a groundball by Brett Gardner (which, curiously, was also how the first Yankee run of the game scored), but after Mark Teixeira got the Yankees within one and pushed Gardner to third with a first-pitch single, Alex Rodriguez’s hopper up the middle was corralled for the final out of a 5-4 Oriole win, their fourth of the season.

Hughes’ performance was actually quite encouraging. He allowed just one run on two hits despite having far from his best stuff, but he was undermined by sloppy play around him. In addition to Logan and Robertson’s failures in the bottom of the sixth and Jeter and Posada’s errors in the eighth, the Yankees gave away two outs in the top of the sixth when Robinson Cano, who has been thrown out on 54 percent of his stolen base attempts in his career, followed a leadoff single by being caught stealing. Jorge Posada followed Cano with an ironic walk, then with two outs was caught rounding second too far on an infield single to the left side (Nick Swisher singled off Miguel Tejada’s glove, and Tejada wrangled the ball before Posada realized he never had a prayer of making it to third base). The Yankee offense also failed to score a run with the bases loaded and one out in the third when Alex Rodriguez lined out and Cano flied out.

I’m tempted to chalk this one up to a hangover from the team’s big day at the White House on Monday (Michael Kay said during the broadcast that he had never seen Joe Girardi look more exhausted than he was Monday night). Hey, Randy Winn got his first Yankee hit, so that’s . . . something. Of course, he also slipped when attempting a throw home in the bottom of the sixth, resulting in a throw that barely trickled into first base from shallow right field. It was that kind of game.

In other news, Johnson, who has reverted to number 36 which he wore in his first stint with the Yankees, should be in the starting lineup Wednesday night, but Chan Ho Park was unable to throw off flat ground and thus seems no closer to returning to the Yankee bullpen.

Categories:  Cliff Corcoran  Game Recap

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


1 OldYanksFan   ~  Apr 28, 2010 5:24 am

That was a very, VERY depressing loss.

2 Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO   ~  Apr 28, 2010 6:03 am

[1] I'm over it. But can't afford to let the Sox catch up again, Rays too good to have to fight off both of them...

3 OldYanksFan   ~  Apr 28, 2010 7:07 am

Posada's bat is still awesome... but every other aspect of his game is scary. He's VMart on Steroids! We need a 'Designated Runner' rule. You would think a guy who has been a Catcher for 15 years would have at least a tiny concept on how to run the bases.

Jete's boot, Posada's throw and running, Winn's throw.... just depressing. To give a team this bad the game is just depressing.

And doesn't ARod constantly launch missles right into someone's glove? His liner with the bases loaded almost knocked Tajada's glove off or knocked him over. It always amazes me how many of Jeter's 4 hoppers find a hole when ARods SCUDS find leather.

Have I mentioned this game really depressed me?

4 OldYanksFan   ~  Apr 28, 2010 8:08 am

From ESPN:
ST. LOUIS -- Atlanta Braves manager Bobby Cox has an idea of how much St. Louis Cardinals slugger Albert Pujols should get in his next contract: $50 million a year.

$50 million a year. I guess all limits on sanity are gone.

Albert, thru age 30, looks to be good for an 8.0 - 8.5 WAR/yr. At $4.5m/WAR (which I think is too high), he may be worth $38m.
Of course, as a FA at 32, that assumes no injury or decline, and my guess is his next contract is for at least 6 years.

ARod is listed at 6'-3"/228. ARod appears to be all lean muscle mass... a swinmmer's body.
Albert is listed at 6'-3"/230. He appears to be a big, solid dude.
Are these 2 guys really the same weight?

Will Albert age as well as ARod? Certainly he's not a Mo Vaughn/Big Sloppi type, but I can't call him lean.

A question is, regardless of worth, how much a non-Yankee team can afford for 1 player. Even at $30m/yr, it seems that would be a stress on the Cards... or any other team.

My guess is 6/$170m to 7/$225m.

5 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 8:34 am

[4] I would not spend much time refuting Bobby Cox's general-managerial and financial acumen. He is a fine manager, though.

6 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 8:34 am

Weird game that got away from them. No worries. Yer right, Cliff, Hughes was encouraging. I'd add "very" to encouraging. I love that kid. The lettermen CC & AJ can still pull out this series.

I'm also happy that the schedule is finally settling in to the 7pm weeknight groove. After all the matinees and west coast start, this is the first 4 game stretch of 7pm starts, which is the best time for me to catch them.

7 rbj   ~  Apr 28, 2010 8:46 am

[4] David Pinto has a post where someone actually crunches the numbers and, if Howard is worth $25 million/year then Pujols is, in fact, worth $51 million/year.


Yankees are set at 1B, but what about the Mets or Red Sox or Dodgers? Not sure many teams can even contemplate $30 million/year plus have money to field a competitive, post season going team. If the Cardinals are smart, they'll have a lot of deferred money + post career personal services for big bucks contract.

As for last night's game, I got in to see the fifth inning onward. Frustrating. You've got the lead, need one more lousy out in the sixth, and then the team decides to gift wrap the game to the Orioles. The O's are the one who are supposed to have a bullpen that coughs up games -- and they nearly did.

8 Alex Belth   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:09 am

I think Posada is the worst base runner I've ever seen. Worse than Bernie. That was the first time I raised my voice this season last night. Frustrating loss. Ah, let the season begin!

9 OldYanksFan   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:30 am

[7] if Howard is worth $25 million/year...
However, he himself says Howard is NOT worth that... but more like $19m/yr. Howard appears to be worth 4-4.5 WAR/yr, so at $4.5m/WAR, that's around $19m. Since Pujols is produces about twice that WAR, he would be worth around $38m/year.

I believe a Replacement Level team Wins 60 games
To be a Penant Winner, we might assume 96 Wins are needed... so a Replacement Level team would need to 'buy' 36 Wins.
At $4.5m/Win, that would be $162m. So..... if you believe it should cost around $160m to put a Winner on the Field, $4.5m/WAR is a valid value. At an even $4m/WAR, those 36 Wins would cost $144m.

Last year, the Yankees were the ONLY team with a payroll over $144.
This year, maybe there are 3 teams?

So anyway.... IMHO, $4.5m/WAR seems a bit much.
Of course, my numbers aren't absolute. Teams make the playoffs win 90 Wins, although I think most people who want to 'tie up' their Division, would want more then 90 Wins.

By the by, ARod has been worth a around 7.5 WAR/yr over the the last 8 years. Even at $4m/WAR, ARod is EASILY worth $27m/yr (but of course NONE of the WAR values assume injury or rapid decline).

So.... compared to the 'vastly overpaid' ARod.......
Pujols produces 15% more WAR, so he might be worth $31m/yr
Howard produces 60% of ARod's WAR, so he might be worth $16+m.

We seem to compute value based on WAR (is there a better way? And ARod probably generates income beyond his performance on the field), REAL value has always been determined by supply and demand. An ARod/Pujols is worth more to a possible PS team, as those few additional Wins (above a good player) might make the difference between making/performing in the PS.

I mentioned in a previous thread, IMHO, Howard was way overpaid. While some say Howard is more valuable then Teix, Teix has been worth 4.6 WAR over the last 7 years, so they are very close in value. So Teix is a bit overpaid ($22.5 AAV), and Howard is even more overpaid.

On a 'demand' level, I can't see Pujols getting much more then $30m/yr (except on a very short contract), and even $30m is a strain on almost any team. Hell... even if we moved Albert to LF, I'm not sure WE could afford him.

A last thought would be, on a PR level, can the Cards let Albert go? Can the Cards afford more then $30m/yr? (last year, their payroll was under $100m). I'm sure Albert wants more then $27.5m AAV (wonder why?). It will be interesting to see how much more he gets.

10 Cliff Corcoran   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:31 am

[8] Baseball Prospectus introduced a baserunning stat a few years ago and Posada did indeed rank dead last in it. I believe BP08 is the book with the essay introducing the stat and proving leaderboards.

11 The Hawk   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:34 am

This was a good example of why you need length from your starters. Six innings as a basis for a quality start has always seemed questionable to me anyway.

I liked what I saw from Hughes though. In terms of fighting through without completely losing it, it was a success. He "battled", I guess. Yeah he battled himself, the ump and Posada.

12 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:44 am

[8] Not even close!

Bernie had speed, but no instincts. Fortunately, he was aware of the latter, so while he frequently passed up an opportunity to take an extra base, he wasn't thrown out too much.

Posada has no speed and no instincts, but seems to think he has both, which is a recipe for the mayhem he often causes on the basepaths.

13 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:52 am

[9] All of these analysis (not yours) ignore some basic economic principles, not the least of which is declining marginal utility. In other words, all wins are not created equally. The studies also ignore the fact that wins are not the only measurement of value. Ryan Howard is probably one of the more popular Phillies. His image contributes to the value of the Phillies brand. Unfortunately, that is more of an intangible, but a factor nonetheless.

What teams need to consider in setting a salary is what impact would losing the player have on the team. Then, they can factor in things such as the player's relationship with the organization (there is something to the idea of a team overpaying as a reward to a player, something the Yankees will likely do with Jeter).

As much as some would like to think, the MLB labor market is not transparent. You simply can not use a formula to come up with a price

14 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 9:56 am

yeah, Posada runs the bases like he's on nighttime flu medication, always has, but does anybody really think he's become a liability? He's not. He's consistently one of, if not the best hitting catcher this side of Joe Mauer.

15 Cliff Corcoran   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:01 am

[14] Steve Goldman had a great line once, something about Posada running the bases like a man trapped between two cupcakes and not knowing which one he wants to eat first.

16 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:01 am

[14] He is not a liability, but his defense and baserunning do seriously mitigate the value he provides by being a very good hitter.

17 rbj   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:02 am

[9] "[7] if Howard is worth $25 million/year…
However, he himself says Howard is NOT worth that… but more like $19m/yr."

True. However, the fact that the Phillies gave him $25 mil/year means they value him at that level. Stupid, but that's what they think. Sort of like people vastly overpaying for housing, leading to a real estate bubble. At the moment, the house is worth that much more money to those buyers.

[8] Thanks again for the beet recipes, can't wait to try them. In the past mom has served gloppy, canned beets -- yuck.

And 15 year MLers should be fined for such baserunning blunders. This ain't A ball.

18 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:08 am

[15] Goldman's great, and cupcakes is a funny word.

[16] call me fanboy, but I just don't think any aspect of Posada's game is worth complaining about. We're still fortunate to have him.

19 Chyll Will   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:12 am

[17] Maybe they got spooked that he would walk at the first opportunity with no one to replace him with his level of production on the horizon. John Kruk (of all people) made a point that Howard had been held down in the minors longer than anticipated because the team had gotten vets to play his position and still didn't anoint him the starter for a while when he came up. He/I may be wrong, but if true, then Ryan's smart for letting the team think he'd bolt the moment the time came; in effect they're compensating for past "transgressions" and paying him not to leave as well.

However, how that effects their ability to hold onto others like Jason Werth remains to be seen. But I think if Philly can toss this much money at Howard, they can't really complain much about their overall ability to spend.

20 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:12 am

[18] It may not be worth complaining about Po's base running, but surely it at least warrants the occasional chuckle, or even raised eyebrow? He does very strange things on the ol' base paths.

21 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:18 am

[20] I know, I know. Just sticking up for our guy. For whatever reason, I'm completely humorless about his struggles.

22 weeping for brunnhilde   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:19 am

[20] It's worse than a chuckle, imo. Between the base running and the "catching," he's becoming a serious concern. How bad do those two elements have to be before he actually becomes a liability? (Not a rhetorical question.)

23 Alex Belth   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:20 am

12) Couldn't have said it better myself. Spot on, Sir.

24 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:21 am

[11] I agree that starters should be expected to go longer than six innings, but that is what the game has become. Last year in the AL, pitchers averaged only 5.8 INN/GS, and only 33 pitchers (about 20% of pitchers who logged starts in the AL) averaged more than 6.0 INN/GS. For those who started at least 20 games, only 26 out 52 starters averaged more than 6.0 INN/GS.

I was listening a week or two ago to Sterling or some other numskull opining that the manager needed to get the BP arms regular work. I wonder how much today's expanded BP (itself the product of shorter starts by starting pitchers) is now a driving force behind further shortening the typical start?

25 rbj   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:26 am

[19] Interesting theory. But that negates the whole idea of keeping someone in the minors longer in order to control costs, if you are going to have to over compensate later. The Phillies management has been smart the last few years, producing a winning team, but perhaps they were trying to be too clever by half with Howard.

I do think Albert is the one player with a legitimate shot at the triple crown, which would boost his price by more, I'm just not sure there are many teams that could afford him at even $35 million.

26 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:26 am

[22] I would imagine that base running has to be truly awful, on a historic scale, before it would really mitigate a good offensive player's values. After all, how many times does base-running really directly impact plays over the course of a season? One the one hand, players not taking an extra base here or there may cost a run. On the other hand, a subsequent HR (for example) erases a previous failure to take a base.

Also, very bad base runners tend not to steal, so that eliminates one means for the opposing team to exploit their bad base-running.

I'm just guessing, though. I'm sure someone has run numbers on this type of thing.

27 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:28 am

[22] on balance he's still an asset, and next thing you know *Jesus will be knockin on our door. However, I agree with those who say if we continue to get not much out of the DH spot, Posada should start getting the bulk of his at-bats there.

*Montero, that is.

28 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:30 am

[27] They would have to get absolutely nothing out the DH spot to move Po there FT this year, because that would mean adding Cervelli FT to the line-up, and I am not convinced that Cervelli > Nick Johnson, even if the latter is only drawing walks. Also, this would probably tempt the team to carry a third catcher...and that individual this season will not be Jesus or Austin.

29 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:38 am

[28] I'm not convinced either, but I wouldn't be opposed to testing the Cervelli > Nick Johnson theory if Po's defense gets much worse . Cervelli's defense is big plus in my book.

30 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:40 am

[28] also, I don't think I'd make Posada a fulltime DH, just a couple more games per week.

31 The Hawk   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:50 am

[24] It's just that I hear a lot of credit given to a guy when he gives up say two runs over six. I mean it's decent, but there are still three innings left which you're handing it over to god knows who.

32 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:50 am

[30] A couple more games a week would mean that he was not catching something like 4 or 5 times a week. That would make Cervelli the starting catcher and Posada some sort of platoon DH.

It would also make it difficult to PH for Cervelli, since managers are usually loath to lose the DH.

33 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:53 am

[31] I hear what you're saying. But 6 innings at 2 runs would be an ERA of 3.00, well below league average these days. And a six inning start would be longer than league average. In the context of today's game, your hypothetical would be a well above average start!

Sadly, this is what the game has become.

So I repeat my call from last night: Go Nolan Ryan!

34 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:55 am

[18] Is it worth complaining? Probably not. However, it is definitely worth noting. There is nothing gained by ignoring the obvious. Unlike most, I am more than willing to allow guys like Mo, Jeter, Posada and Andy play one year too many than one year to less. Still, that doesn't mean you ignore their shortcomings when they arise.

35 RIYank   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:57 am

Quick note on the astounding valuations of Pujols:
The person that David Pinto [7] cites is J. C. Bradbury. Bradbury is an economist, and so is very unlikely to be ignoring declining marginal utility!
I don't believe there's any evidence of declining marginal return on Wins, actually. Market pricing seems to indicate the opposite, if anything -- huge stars are paid more per Win, I presume because once a team is at 88 wins it's harder to find upgrades.

But of course, Bradbury didn't mean to be predicting that Pujols will get $50M/year. He mainly meant to be dramatizing the extent to which Howard is going to be overpaid, and partly to speculate that the market price for Wins may be rising.

Yeah, okay, this isn't a "quick note", but I won't change the intro clause.

36 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:57 am

[32] Posada would either catch or DH. Wouldn't sacrifice his bat for either Cervelli or Nick. It would just mean fewer at-bats for Nick, and more catching time for Cervelli.

[33] speaking of Ryan, I heard on the radio this morning he makes $8 mill a year. For what?!

37 Chyll Will   ~  Apr 28, 2010 10:57 am

[25] Yes, it negates the control theory in general, but would you consider Ryan's case an outlier to that theory in that he has more or less maintained a higher level of production than most at that stage of his career; there have been plenty of flash-in-the-pan types and he certainly isn't one of them. The Mets, despite their protestations, could've easily bid on Ryan and dusted the Phillies in the proceedings, and Ryan would likely be receptive to that given how he was perceptibly treated at the beginning of his career.

38 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:05 am

[36] OK, but my point is that having Posada "DH a couple more times a week" means, effectively, making him the starting DH because he is already not catching about two times a week. In other words, he would be not catching about 4 times a week (in your scheme, DHing rather than sitting). In turn, that means making Cervelli in effect the starting catcher.

Given the construction of the team this year, I think this (1) will never happen because no manager is going to regularly play with no BUC on the bench, and (2) should not happen because (a) over the long hall Cervelli will simply not match NJ's production, and (b) to go this route would almost certainly mean carrying a Chad Moeller type as the double secret emergency BUC.

39 rbj   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:08 am

[35] I wonder if part of the equation is milestones. People will pay to see a declining Pujols still chase A-Rod's home run record (assuming he breaks Aaron's/Bond's record). You might not be getting the full production from the aging superstar that you used to, but you make up for that with talented young guys, while the fannies are in the seat to see The Chase.

[32] Or else it means you carry a third catcher, who would merely be taking a roster spot, waiting for an injury at catcher. And that severely limits what a manager can do, so I'd be against a full time third string catcher (as opposed Ramon Pena? being the emergency catcher)

40 RIYank   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:08 am

[38] Hm, if Posada is DH-ing, he can't be moved into the C spot if Cervelli goes down? He can, right? (But you lose the DH, maybe?)

41 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:09 am

[38] And yes, I realize that is a 'my dog did not bite you because he has no teeth and anyway I don't own a dog' argument.

42 Chyll Will   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:11 am

[36] Yeah, how about that? I used to hit rocks all the time, too. I don't get $8 million a year. My mother should have chosen a more reliable banker...

43 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:12 am

[40] Right, you lose the DH. Now, in reality that is not that big of a deal, but managers tend to avoid such a maneuver unless very desperate, and very late in the game.

44 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:15 am

Now, if the team were willing to take a shot with Montero behind the plate for a couple of weeks, I would be intrigued by that experiment: send Cervelli to the bench, call up Montero to start at C most of the time, DH Posada.

45 The Hawk   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:17 am

[33] That's exactly the point, that what is actually iffy is considered above average. Or really, what is decent is considered excellent.

I realize it's the standard now, but the consensus here seems a bit off-the-mark simply because the more pitchers involved in a game, the more likely you're gonna come across one having a "bad day". I just think WHIP and ERA are telling, but IP per game should be used more often to put those numbers into context for starters. Come to think of it, so should the ol' W-L, god forbid.

46 The Hawk   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:22 am

I'm pro-Cervelli. He's my new Melky, maybe - the "intangibles" guy, the energetic youngster. But also, he's good behind the plate, seems to handle the pitchers well, and has hit pretty well thus far. He's a work in progress to be sure, and his batting may go south but I'd like to see him play more.

In other news there was a fly ball hit by Gardner last night that floated through the air like a balloon.

47 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:31 am

[36] If Nolan Ryan can convince one organization to push starters a little more, and this radical idea catches on across the league...I'll contribute to the fund that pays him.

48 RIYank   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:33 am

[46] I knew it!
Brett Gardner is not hampered by the laws of physics. Once we fully accept this fact, everything else about Brett will make perfect sense.

49 monkeypants   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:37 am

[48] Right! That explains his ability to get on base by hitting the ball at IFs (like last night), to get base hits almost exclusively without getting the ball out of the IF (last week), to hit HRs that don't leave the park (last year). The man is a walking (running?) paradox!

50 The Hawk   ~  Apr 28, 2010 11:40 am

[47] There's a Nolan Ryan fund???

51 Chyll Will   ~  Apr 28, 2010 12:13 pm

[50] Sponsored by the Committee for Unwritten Rules...

52 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 12:13 pm

[35] You'd think so, but I'd like to see his numbers. I also linked to him because he is credible, but I'd be curious to see his method. If he is factoring in marginal utility, it would be groundbreaking for these kinds of valuations. In fact, for his Howard valuation, he stated that he assumed the Phillies would be an average team, which definitely discounts his valuation.

As for your point about there not being declining marginal utility for wins, well, I find that very hard to believe. Just about everything has marginal utility. Just because superstars get paid more doesn't disprove the notion. If you ignore all other factors, when owners pay players they are buying expected wins. Each marginal win has a unique value to a team. The Pirates probably don't value a marginal win in the same way the Cardinals do, for instance. The reason is because that extra win isn't as likely to drive greater revenue opportunities. It's a very complicated concept, which is why I don't really like the idea of trying to assign a dollar value to statistics.

53 RIYank   ~  Apr 28, 2010 12:35 pm

[52] What's likely is that the marginal value isn't constant, but doesn't decrease monotonically, either. An extra W probably gains most revenue for a team that's already at about 90 wins. Plainly a theoretical team at some ridiculous level, say 140 wins, would add almost no revenue by moving to 141 wins; by the same token it seems likely that a team winning only 50 games wouldn't gain much by adding one more.

You might think that the marginal value of a W would depend heavily on the market of the team. That is, suppose an extra W makes fans more excited. That generates much more money for the Yankees, you might think, since they have far more fans who'll spend more money when more excited than, say, the Cardinals have. But it turns out empirically that this is not born out. I think Bradbury gives his theory of why in his book, but I can't remember the specifics.

54 williamnyy23   ~  Apr 28, 2010 12:56 pm

[53] Marginal utility isn't a one way concept. It can increase and decrease. That's why it is foolish to assume all wins have the same value to every team.

As for your second point, I'd like to see the explanation because the value of a win should somehow be related to the revenue opportunities it creates (unless the team has an owner who is only interested in the sporting angle).

55 Sliced Bread   ~  Apr 28, 2010 1:25 pm

[38] I hear ya. good points all around. Fortunately, Posada's bat is carrying the rest of his game right now, so we don't need to worry about such scenarios.. yet

[44] agreed.

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