Comments on: Hughes not as good as we believed? http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/ A New York Yankees Blog Sun, 27 May 2012 00:09:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: River Ave. Blues » Callis: Don’t judge Hughes on this season http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-47979 River Ave. Blues » Callis: Don’t judge Hughes on this season Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:33:32 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-47979 [...] Callis is echoing what we said on Thursday. It’s quite likely that Hughes is still dealing with issues from the hamstring injury. [...] [...] Callis is echoing what we said on Thursday. It’s quite likely that Hughes is still dealing with issues from the hamstring injury. [...]

]]> By: Callis: Don’t judge Hughes on this season | River Ave. Blues | A New York Yankees blog http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21910 Callis: Don’t judge Hughes on this season | River Ave. Blues | A New York Yankees blog Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:34:52 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21910 [...] Callis is echoing what we said on Thursday. It’s quite likely that Hughes is still dealing with issues from the hamstring injury. [...] [...] Callis is echoing what we said on Thursday. It’s quite likely that Hughes is still dealing with issues from the hamstring injury. [...]

]]> By: Mike A. http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21472 Mike A. Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:37:47 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21472 Excellent point Mike. Life would be alot easier if we got the Tribe in the first round instead of the Angels. Although the prospect of having to face CC & Fausto four times in a five game series scares the shit out of me. Excellent point Mike. Life would be alot easier if we got the Tribe in the first round instead of the Angels. Although the prospect of having to face CC & Fausto four times in a five game series scares the shit out of me.

]]> By: Mike R. http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21468 Mike R. Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:07:28 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21468 I know that this is off topic, but I haven't seen any Yankee blogs focus on this weekends series between the Indians and the Angels. The Angels are currently one game up in the race for 2nd best record in the AL. As we all know if the Yankees hold and win the wild card they would face the team that team. In essence this series could make the difference between an ALDS against Cleveland (A team we've had success with) and one against LA (A team we struggle horribly against). I for one would like our chances for a championship alot better if the road goes through Cleveland. I know that this is off topic, but I haven’t seen any Yankee blogs focus on this weekends series between the Indians and the Angels.

The Angels are currently one game up in the race for 2nd best record in the AL. As we all know if the Yankees hold and win the wild card they would face the team that team.

In essence this series could make the difference between an ALDS against Cleveland (A team we’ve had success with) and one against LA (A team we struggle horribly against). I for one would like our chances for a championship alot better if the road goes through Cleveland.

]]> By: Travis http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21460 Travis Fri, 07 Sep 2007 01:54:33 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21460 Zack, I found your Bob Gibson reference fascinating, so I looked up his stats. Great tidbit! http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/alltime/playercard?playerId=4933&type=1 By the way, check out his career numbers. In 1968, Gibson pitched 28 complete games - and didn't lead the league! He followed that up in 1969, of course, by throwing ANOTHER 28 complete games! Granted, it was a pitcher's era, but that is ridiculous. Zack, I found your Bob Gibson reference fascinating, so I looked up his stats. Great tidbit!

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....038;type=1

By the way, check out his career numbers. In 1968, Gibson pitched 28 complete games – and didn’t lead the league! He followed that up in 1969, of course, by throwing ANOTHER 28 complete games! Granted, it was a pitcher’s era, but that is ridiculous.

]]> By: zack http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21455 zack Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:39:05 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21455 Look at Roger, look at Santana, Schilling, Gator, Cone, Bunning, Catfish, look at almost anyone their first year in the league, no matter the age. Freaking Bob Gibson had an era over 5 in his second year!! I'll take two years of Phil working things together if it means he puts it all together in the third. He'll still be younger than most pitchers BEGIN their careers at. Felix Hernandez, Sabathia, both of them came up younger than Hughes and it took CC3 years, and Felix is still putting it together. Like I said, wouldn't you all gladly take another year or two of Hughes "figuring it out" and "maturing" if he goes on to pitch like, well, CC Sabathia is now? Look at Roger, look at Santana, Schilling, Gator, Cone, Bunning, Catfish, look at almost anyone their first year in the league, no matter the age. Freaking Bob Gibson had an era over 5 in his second year!! I’ll take two years of Phil working things together if it means he puts it all together in the third. He’ll still be younger than most pitchers BEGIN their careers at. Felix Hernandez, Sabathia, both of them came up younger than Hughes and it took CC3 years, and Felix is still putting it together.

Like I said, wouldn’t you all gladly take another year or two of Hughes “figuring it out” and “maturing” if he goes on to pitch like, well, CC Sabathia is now?

]]> By: dan http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21452 dan Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:12:06 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21452 one other was maddux.... im not sure of the other one (this might have been it for all i know), but look at glavine's numbers (especially that K/BB ratio). he didnt have an ERA+ over 100 until he was 25. http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/glavito02.shtml one other was maddux…. im not sure of the other one (this might have been it for all i know), but look at glavine’s numbers (especially that K/BB ratio). he didnt have an ERA+ over 100 until he was 25.

http://www.baseball-reference......to02.shtml

]]> By: Greg G. http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21449 Greg G. Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:50:54 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21449 I think a few things are at play here. It's easy to say he hasn't been the same after his injury, but keep in mind that before his injury he had only 2 starts at the major league level. We're not talking about a huge sample size here. In addition, he's 21, only had 28 IP of AAA experience before coming to the majors and is now pitching in essentially what has been a "playoff" race for the Yankees for the past few months. Not only that, but he stands in comparison to Joba, who has been awesome for 12 innings, but (as zack said above) has the luxury of pitching only an inning or two per game. One more thing: how many other rookie pitchers for the Yankees have had their mechanics so rigorously picked apart in excruciating detail? Of course I'm biased, but I really think Phil's going to be fine. In yesterday's telecast, YES showed a graphic of other really good starting pitchers and their stats in their first year (I remember Peavy and Smoltz, can't recall the others). Each one was not particularly impressive, and I bet none of them at the time had to deal with the NYC media/spotlight/etc. Beware the dangers of extrapolation. Otherwise, one might get the impression that Joba will never give up a run in his entire major league career. Thus endeth my longest-ever RAB post. I think a few things are at play here. It’s easy to say he hasn’t been the same after his injury, but keep in mind that before his injury he had only 2 starts at the major league level. We’re not talking about a huge sample size here.

In addition, he’s 21, only had 28 IP of AAA experience before coming to the majors and is now pitching in essentially what has been a “playoff” race for the Yankees for the past few months. Not only that, but he stands in comparison to Joba, who has been awesome for 12 innings, but (as zack said above) has the luxury of pitching only an inning or two per game.

One more thing: how many other rookie pitchers for the Yankees have had their mechanics so rigorously picked apart in excruciating detail?

Of course I’m biased, but I really think Phil’s going to be fine. In yesterday’s telecast, YES showed a graphic of other really good starting pitchers and their stats in their first year (I remember Peavy and Smoltz, can’t recall the others). Each one was not particularly impressive, and I bet none of them at the time had to deal with the NYC media/spotlight/etc.

Beware the dangers of extrapolation. Otherwise, one might get the impression that Joba will never give up a run in his entire major league career.

Thus endeth my longest-ever RAB post.

]]> By: zack http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21447 zack Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:07:16 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21447 Its not even a debate about whether Hughes has been the same since the injury, just look at his #s. His control is so off and curve isn't breaking like it did. It all screams hamstring to me, and mechanics. These are fixable. The thing with Joba is that he has the luxury of pitching one inning. Its a lot harder to get exposed when you come in and can pump fastballs past hitters as hard as you can throw them, mixing in one or two sliders. Pitching a whole game is a whole 'nother thing. But Hughes's curve WAS better last night. The control, eh. I don't see why Hughes' 90-93 FB won't cut it when Jake Peavy's 91-94 mph FB or Buccholz's or Santana's or whomever's will. Its all about control and the other pitches. And when Hughes is right his control is plus plus as is his curve... Its not even a debate about whether Hughes has been the same since the injury, just look at his #s. His control is so off and curve isn’t breaking like it did. It all screams hamstring to me, and mechanics. These are fixable.

The thing with Joba is that he has the luxury of pitching one inning. Its a lot harder to get exposed when you come in and can pump fastballs past hitters as hard as you can throw them, mixing in one or two sliders. Pitching a whole game is a whole ‘nother thing.

But Hughes’s curve WAS better last night. The control, eh. I don’t see why Hughes’ 90-93 FB won’t cut it when Jake Peavy’s 91-94 mph FB or Buccholz’s or Santana’s or whomever’s will. Its all about control and the other pitches. And when Hughes is right his control is plus plus as is his curve…

]]> By: Mike A. http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed-1090/#comment-21439 Mike A. Thu, 06 Sep 2007 22:11:11 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/2007/09/06/hughes-not-as-good-as-we-believed/#comment-21439 Buttholz....classic. Snapple up the nose on that one. Buttholz….classic. Snapple up the nose on that one.

]]>