Are you being serious or sarcastic? Hughes’ development has been fine, albeit a bit slow. But that mostly had to do with injuries, and perhaps what I still think was silliness of turning HIM into the eighth inning guy last year (we can thank his lowish innings limit this year to that decision last year; now, maybe that won them the World Series…that’s debatable).

[14] Unfortunately, there’s not. This is the last year they can send him down without passing him through waivers. What’s the chance of that happening? And if they try to pass him through waivers next year, what’s the chance any team wouldn’t put a claim in?

Joba’s development is complete. He’s done being a starter. Now he’ll pitch 60 innings a year.

First, 2007 and even the start of 2008 created unrealistic expectations, which in turn fueled impatience on the part of fans, media, and (I am beginning to think) the organization. In addition, I wonder more and more if Joba-as-late-inning-reliever has stunted his development as a pitcher. Lastly, and related to the first two, the team has frittered away precious development time with him, all the while setting themselves up to be dependent on him in the late innings…both have made it difficult if not impossible to send him to AAA.

So now they are stuck. They don’t dare try “stretching” him into a starter during the season, they can’t really send him to AAA (or a re simply unwilling to), and they increasingly do not trust him in the eighth inning (it seems, if I judge recent comments by Girardi)…and, frankly, they are not in a good position to trade him because they would be selling low.

Now, all this being said, I will be the first to admit that I never would have predicted the way things would turn out, at least as of mid 2008. I am simply observing, from the secure vantage point of hindsight, that things *seem* to have turned out badly by bringing Joba up, in desperartion, as a late inning reliever in 2007.

So what does this all mean? Cashman, Girardi, and Eiland can’t develop young pitchers correctly? Hughes was almost ruined too.

Come on, man…review the posting guidelines and lay off the political stuff.

Prospect A: 19-12, 46 GS, 4.69 ERA, 247 IP, 205 K, 91 BB
Prospect B: 12-7, 43 GS, 4.18 ERA, 221, 206 K, 101 BB

That’s how each pitching prospect began their major league careers as starters. It’s close, but which looks to be the better prospect?

Prospect A = Phil Hughes
Prospect B – Joba Chamberlain

Clearly, Hughes belongs in the pen because his record as a starter has been a “path to ruin”. Setup Guy!111!

It’s not. Three years in the majors means he has to pass through waivers.

Of course we fans are disillusioned with him, Joba held such promise and is now damaged goods that we cannot get behind. Sad for him, and you can see it in his face and body language when he pitches, and he has let himself go fitness-wise.

He stated publicly that he would pick up towels in the club house, if that is what is needed for the team. Well, for the teams sake, and his own…get thee to Wilkes-Barre.

/rant

throwing a rookie “starter” into the pen isn’t always a bad idea (see Price, David).

[4] Developing? Unfortunately they did no such thing. It was Bizarro Developing. It’s like if you ever want to develop a pitcher, look at what the Yankees did with Joba and do the opposite. The kid got 15 starts in the minors. Hughes got 60+. And still Joba was a league average in the majors when they gave him the ball as a starter.

Here, for those writers too lazy to look:

Joba as a Starter:

12-7, 4.18 ERA, 221 IP, 206 Ks, 101 BBs

Hard to see that as a “path to ruin”. In fact, that would be the 4th starter on this year’s team – ahead of two guys making a combined $27 million.

The worst part is they Yanks can’t send him to minors after this year. They never developed him and now they’ll have no chance. FAIL.

[3] I’ll disagree a bit there. His peripherals are just fine (9.9 K/9; 3.2 BB/9). It’s his .381 BABIP that suggests he’s just been unlucky.

ARod’s 500th HR came off KC’s Kyle Davies at home on a Saturday. He’s at 598 now and will face KC’s Kyle Davies at home this Saturday.

you’re trying to preserve something of the original, but each added tweak brings more sand to the ground until you’re left with nothing more than an unrecognizable lump.

One interesting way to look at it: each change has resulted in worse performance, relative to his last time ih that specific role.

2007 > 2008 (rel) > 2009 (rel) > 2010
2008 (sp) > 2009 (sp)

And from what we hear about how he was dealing in MiLB in 2007 as a starter, we could maybe bet that 2007 (MiLB sp) > 2008 (sp).

No matter which way he turns, he produces less.

Isn’t this a bit of revisionist history, given that he was a starter in college and in the minors. Rather, it was experiment to throw him into the pen in 2007. In retrospect, of course, but I think *that* was the great mistake.