Who cares about Hank

Sublett keeps up the hot hitting
An early look at the 2009 AAA rotation

Tom Fornelli of AOL’s Fanhouse wrote about the Hank Steinbrenner outburst yesterday. The short of is that Hank, in an interview with The Post, claimed that he was the one in charge of the Yankees and everyone else was just a lowly employee of him. It was clearly Hank’s sad effort at imitation. George Steinbrenner, he is not.

So here’s my question about Hank: Why do so many Yankee writers and bloggers get into a tizzy when he opens his mouth? Sure, there’s an economic argument to it; Hank’s stupid comments sell newspapers and generate site traffic. But does anyone really think this guy is still serious? After all we’ve seen over the last few months, does anyone actually believe he’s in charge of the Yankees? I know I don’t.

Sublett keeps up the hot hitting
An early look at the 2009 AAA rotation
  • Steve

    You piss-ant sissy boys just don’t get Hank. He’s the last of the Mohicans, a general without a war. Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way. You touchy-feely little girls just dont appreciate a REAL man like Hank.

    • Steve


      THE LAST, I TELL YOU!!!!

  • Geno

    On the whole, the media are a very lazy bunch. The easy thing to do is just re-run all their old George stories, replacing his name with Hank’s.

  • Corey

    He wasn’t even at the last game at the stadium

    • http://www.new.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/profile.php?id=594331910&ref=name Jamal G.

      He was watching it with his father, at his father’s house. I think that’s pretty special inofitself.

      • radnom

        mmm. That was the right place to be then.

      • http://www.riveraveblues.com Mike A.

        Okay, but what about the other 80 games he didn’t attend?

        • cult of basebaal

          including the all-star game, where it was hal that rode with steinbrenner around the field

  • whozat

    If Hank really thinks that having Johan Santana would have allowed the Yankees to go deep into the post-season, I dearly hope that this is all bluster and that he’s not in charge. If your team consistently fails with RISP, you’re not going ANYWHERE no matter how good your pitching is.

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi

      Hate to defend Hank but you should read the article, he says the opposite.

    • http://www.new.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/profile.php?id=594331910&ref=name Jamal G.

      If your team consistently fails with RISP, you’re not going ANYWHERE no matter how good your pitching is.

      That’s not true. The Tampa Bay Rays were the worst hitting team with RISP in the American League (.246, no other A.L. squad hit worst than .257); they are three wins away from a World Series berth. On the other hand, the Minnesota Twins were the best hitting team with RISP in the American League; they didn’t even qualify for postseason play.

      Just to show how completely and utterly useless hitting with RISP is (in regards to Batting Average), the four A.L. teams with the highest BAw/RISP all did not qualify for postseason play. Also, the Yankees had a better record than all of them (Yankees ranked 10th in the 14-team American League).

      1. Minnesota Twins: .305, 88-75
      2. Baltimore Orioles: .287, 68-93
      3. Texas Rangers: .287, 79-83
      4. Kansas City Royals: .286, 75-87

      • RichYF

        This is an interesting argument. I’m going to look it up in a minute, but I’d like to know who had the most chances in baseball with RISP. I can imagine the Rays and Yanks had more than their fair share of opportunities (compared to say the Twins/Orioles/Rangers/Royals).

    • mustang

      “team consistently fails with RISP, you’re not going ANYWHERE no matter how good your pitching is.”

      To be more direct it’s when your 4TH and 5Th spots fail with RISP. Especially when your team is built around that 4TH spot.

      • whozat

        Very much this. Also, it’s more about percentage of scoring opportunities converted than raw AVG w/RISP.

        I mean, if there’s a guy on 2nd with no one out, and you score him with a pair of grounders to the right side, that’s better than hitting a dinky single to move him to third and then grounding into an inning ending DP.

        Better pitching helps, yes. But…the Yanks had a softer lineup than they are used to, AND chronic problems delivering on scoring opportunities. Also, better defense makes all your pitchers better. A deep rotation helps more than one guy, frankly.

        Yes, Hank admitted that the lack of Wang made it unlikely that Santana alone would have taken the team to the post-season. But, frankly, with the way the offense failed to come through, I don’t think they’d have gotten very far even WITH Johan and Wang.

  • Mike Pop

    Im saying it would be awesome to have Johan but I never wanted to give up Hughes and still dont.. but if we coulda had him for Kennedy Melky and Marquez we fucked up… I dont think that was the deal tho wasnt it those 3 plus Wang

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=15305165&ref=profile Doug

    I’m one of those dudes who doesn’t care. It’s “LOL @ Hank” every time. Like when Wang broke his foot running the bases and Hank blamed the entirety of the NL. That was a good one.

  • mustang

    “George Steinbrenner, he is not.”

    Take it from me Hank is George the sequel. Most of you did not have the “joy” of living with the early years of George Michael Steinbrenner III.
    George managed the same kind of reaction that Hank does and the media loved to hate him for it. For what it’s worth if Hank can lead the Yankees to 10 pennants and six World Series titles I don’t care what he does.

    • Mike Pop

      With ya on that bro

      • Marc

        I want to love the kinda team that I know the owner loves. Yes, the Steinbrenners have always loved the Yankees and showed it in terms of money. I love having an owner that will shoot from the hip and rant and rave about how much the NL sucks!! Hank rules!

        • mustang

          Even if I don’t agree how they do things sometimes the Steinbrenners hate to lose and are willing to do what it takes to win.
          I love that.

          • Chris C.

            If they really wanted to do what it took to win, they’d hire the right people, then dissappear.

        • Chris C.

          You love having a guy who acts like a 10 year old run your favorite team? That’s just weird. Wait till you get older, and realize how pathetic the guy is.

    • Chris C.

      Don’t kid yourself, pal.
      The Yankee WS teams were built when Steinbrenner was suspended. The only place Steinbrenner ever “led” the Yankees was to overpaid, overhyped, underperforming seasons.
      Stop making it sound like he was some kind of motivator. His only positive contribution to the Yankees was his wallet. Regading everything else, he was noting more than a rich guy who constantly got in the way of winning.

      If he just paid players and kept his mouth shut, the Yankees would probably have about 12 championships under him.

      • mustang

        I’m not a Steinbrenner lover, but his wallet helps. How many owners in baseball pocket the money rather then putting some back into their teams?
        And if you think that George did not have his hands on the Yankees during his suspension then I have bridge to sale you too. He learned from his mistakes.

      • mustang

        “Regading everything else, he was noting more than a rich guy who constantly got in the way of winning.”

        Ok. You forgot he was a guy who took over a struggling Yankees organization on January 3, 1973 and lead them to World Series titles in 1977 and 1978. That’s 4 years from shit to the top not bad for someone who “constantly got in the way of winning.”

  • aaron

    they guy is a joke. i mean cant we have a team without a stupid owner shooting his mouthoff, when they really know nothing about anything (at least anything having to do with baseball)? I was hoping that when george went down we could finally have a ballanced ball club run by baseball people…perhaps this is too much to ask?

  • http://yankeesetc.blogspot.com/ Travis G.

    why? bc it’s interesting. and this was probably the craziest outburst (yet).

    outgoing/interesting owners have been always been a part of baseball history (Bill Veeck, Branch Rickey, Charlie Finley, etc).

    • Ivan

      Branch Ricky was more GM/scout than owner.

      • http://www.pinstripealley.com Travis G.

        at one time, he owned as much of the Dodgers as O’Malley. he also had the title of ‘President’. he certainly did a lot of things we associate with GMs, but he was still a primary owner.

  • Luke

    He is absolutely a joke, but it is entertainment and I view Hank from that perspective, even if he does embarrass me as a yankee fan sometimes.

    To address the question, Is he really in charge of the yankees? I think he sort of answered this question in the article, by saying “I should have pushed harder for santana” unless he was pushing against Hal. Anyway, I don’t really believe he is running the yankees right now, it seems like the organization has made some smart decisions of late. And I don’t think Hank is really that smart.

    What scares me is that he could take complete control whenever he wants? And I am certainly frightened of that. But heck, if we wins like george, who cares?

  • ortforshort

    Forget Santana. I’m wondering where the Yanks would have been with Dice-K on the mound, Beltran in center and Guerrero in right. Let’s hope that Hank and his minion, Cashman, put a bit more effort into getting Teixeira and Sabbathia this winter than they did into acquiring those three.


    Next news conference Hank has, he should punch a reporter in the face…or at least stab someone!!!!

  • Pingback: River Avenue Blues | Some Hank Steinbrenner musings