Fan Confidence Poll: May 11th, 2009


Before we get to this week’s recap, I want to point out some recent additions to our Commenting Guidelines:

10. Do not post the same comment in multiple threads. If you post something just before a game thread is closed, feel free to repeat it in the spillover thread, but do not abuse the privilege. Any repeat comments will be deleted, and if you continue to repost comments you’ll be banned.

11. Do not post false breaking news. This is a zero tolerance item. You will be banned immediately if you are caught making up information. Breaking news should be emailed to one or all of use so we can start a thread with a new post.

Thanks for continuing to make RAB the best blog community out there.

Record Last Week: 2-5 (30 RS, 40 RA)
Season Record: 15-16 (172 RS, 193 RA), 5.5 GB
Opponents This Week: @ Toronto (3 games), vs. Minnesota (3 games)

Top stories from last week:

Please take a second to answer the poll below and give us an idea of how confident you are in the team. You can view the Fan Confidence Graph anytime via the nav bar above, or by clicking here. Thanks in advance for voting.

Given the team's current roster construction, farm system, management, etc., how confident are you in the Yankees' overall future?
View Results
Categories : Polls


  1. Thanks for continuing to make RAB the best blog community out there.

    RAB™: A proud member of the YES Network® Blogging Network©

  2. Jamal G. says:

    Still an “8″, yo.

  3. Confidence Level = down to 9.

    (just too many guys hurt. I love Frankie “Pasta Fagiole” Cervelli, but I doubt he keeps this up, he’s bound to struggle like every young guy does. And, we need Bruney and Marte back.)

    New Silver Lining regarding the Yankees bullpen:
    Casey Fossum has a 0.97 ERA in 19.2 IP (3 ER), with 18 K and 8 BB (0.97 WHIP)
    Zack Kroenke has a 0.60 ERA in 15.0 IP (1 ER), although he’s got a shitty 9:9 K/BB ratio (1.13 WHIP)
    WLDR has a combined 0.90 ERA in 20.0 IP (2 ER), with 26 K and 5 BB (0.95 WHIP)
    Chris Garcia has been throwing the baseball for over a month now and hasn’t injured himself

    One of these guys could end up in the 2009 pen in the second half and contribute, maybe taking the spot of Edwar or Veras or Tomko once they’re permanently banished…

  4. LiveFromNewYork says:

    Maybe we should have a rehab watch each week as part of the confidence poll. It’s hard to vote on confidence without all the information. With so many important guys on the DL I can’t keep up sometimes.

  5. Double-J says:

    The Good: A-Rod, Johnny B. Goode Damon, C.C. turning it on, Joba after the first inning, Cervelli’s two legs, Phil Coke, Nady possibly coming back, Bruney hopefully back soon.

    The Bad: Joba’s first innings, Phil Hughes’ jekyll-and-mr.hyde impressions, Swisher’s throwing arm, Kevin Cash on the 25-man roster, Molina injured.

    The Ugly: 0-5 vs. the Sox, making bad pitchers look good, making mediocre pitchers look great, JoPo going down.

    • A.D. says:

      Cervelli hopping on one leg could be faster than Molina down the line

    • matt b says:

      I think the most under the radar issue affecting this team right now is if/when/whether they get back Bruney (and if he looks like he did in April) and a healthy Marte who resembles the reliver he’s been for alot of years.

      Posada and Wang’s return are more important, but everyone knows that. You get back a dominant Bruney and the normal Marte, and your pen is pretty instantly transformed. Mo, Coke, Bruney, and Marte–you start with a four like that, you can move some pieces around to cobble together quality service from the other three spots.

      Incidentally, if I’m Brian Cashman, I shuttle Edwar (who I believe has an option), bring back Melancon and tell him that he is here, and that in the absence of Bruney/Marte, he and Coke will share primary set-up responsibilities, and I give him regular work and don’t panic if he gives up a run here and there.

      I think Edwar is a pretty known quantity right now–he’ll strike out a ton, but walks and homers=a guy you simply can’t depend on.

      If I were really feeling bold, I’d DFA Veras and basically give Robertson the same speech as Melancon–you’re here, you’re gonna get work, we’re going to give you some time. Veras is tricy for me, because my eyes, and last year, want to say give him some time and don’t give up that kind of stuff. But then I look at his career numbers, wherein last year was clearly the aberration–and Joe G. sure loves him, so it may be you’ve just got to take away the option.

      I think one big issues that saves Veras is that no current active reliever sans Mo can get righties out.

      One guy that interests me is Aceves. Now I think Aceves is very possibly going to end up in the rotation at some point this year (if Hughes is going to be this erratic, and Wang never gets right, he’s your guy) and I might be able to live with that. And I also think he has value as a long man. I think he’s capable of success as a back of the rotation starters and I know that generally, you don’t put guys good enough to start in the pen. But I’d be curious to see if he could have any value as a situational, 1-2 inning reliever. Not blow you away stuff, but he does have a diverse array of pitches, and he throws strikes–I’d just be interested to see it.

  6. Jorge Steinbrenner says:

    Steady at “7.” Confident in the 25 guys on the field, and the guys on deck, but not confident in the management, or that needed changes are going to be made. Yesterday was another perfect example of a management structure that doesn’t look to move forward but, rather, feels like watching “Groundhog Day,” with one too many guys throwing one too pitches one too many times.

    • UWS says:

      You have a valid point, but I fail to see how yesterday’s game illustrates it. Do you think Joba or Coke was left in too long? Because then I’d have to disagree.

    • steve (different one) says:

      Yesterday was another perfect example of a management structure that doesn’t look to move forward but, rather, feels like watching “Groundhog Day,” with one too many guys throwing one too pitches one too many times.

      wait, whaaaaa?

      yesterday’s game was managed PERFECTLY.

    • OmgZombies says:

      Huh yesterdays management. this isnt a Baltimore fam confidence poll.

  7. Reggie C. says:

    Still a 7. But i strongly considered a 6.

    The offense worries me. What happened to putting up a sequence of walk-single-double in a single inning? I can’t remember the last time this offense managed that sequence. The Yankee lineup goes punchless for far too many innings , which has allowed AVERAGE opponent SP to pitch deep into games.

    Bullpen has become a major concern given Mo’s inconsistent showing and reports of a weak arm. I like the Aceves addition to the ‘pen, but Albie and Edwar give me too many headaches, and I don’t like the way Joe G. used the more talented Melancon and Robertson. Joe G. has to prioritize the better pitchers.

  8. Tim says:

    My confidence stands at 7 but may be in for a drop. Among other things, I am losing confidence in Dave Eiland. I want to feel good about Dave but there are just too many issues coming up. A few of the things I have seen that raise concern about big Dave are:

    1. Identification of injury – thinking of Wang this year and Hughs last year with the rib injury. Both were allowed to pitch for too long with physical issues.
    2. The overall poor performance of the staff this year – it has really been across the board.
    3. A lot of out pitchers seem to fall into serious mechanical issues – this is not all Dave’s fault but doesn’t this have something to do with his job
    4. Joba first inning syndrome – it has been strange that it happened twice in a row, if it keeps cropping up then it will be a serious problem

    I may be too hard on Dave but he is just not inspiring me at this point.

  9. tim randle says:

    could i get some comments and opinions on these thoughts? thanks.

    1) abreu vs swisher (at the plate only, especially pitches seen)
    2) we like long, but not eiland?
    3) JoPo turns out to be DL’d for 60 days, and ‘Pasta Fagioli’ keeps up the pace…he stays and Molina goes when Jorgie comes back?
    4) Before every fifth game, Sergeant Fistpump throws a simulated first inning to Jeter, Damon, Tex and Arod to get it out of his system.

    please, no oaktagging. These are serious questions.

    • steve (different one) says:

      1) Swish has seem 4.47 pitches/PA vs. 4.05 for Abreu
      2) i don’t know
      3) seems doubtful, but Cervelli could play himself onto the 2010 team
      4) let’s wait and see if this is actually a “problem” or simply that he gave up a HR to a red hot Jason Bay

    • 1)
      Swisher: 4.47 pitches per plate appearance, .270/.398/.620, 18 XBH, 20 BB, 31 K, 0 SB
      Abreu: 4.08 pitches per plate appearance, .309/.389/.355, 5 XBH, 15 BB, 17 K, 12 SB

      We like trying to ascribe deep meaning to random occurrence. Eiland is the current whipping boy beacuse the pitching sucks. If the pitching were awesome and the hitting sucked, we’d be whining about Long.

      Whenever Jorge and Molina come back, they resume their spots as catcher #1 and catcher #2. I could see Cervelli sticking around on the roster, though, and the team carrying 3 catchers with Posada rested more aggressively and DH’d more (although, with Matsui and Nady the DH spot is already crowded.

      No. It’s not all that workable of an idea, and frankly, Joba needs to find out how to not be crappy in the first inning rather than us try and trick him into thinking the 1st inning is the second inning.

      • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

        On point #4, I think Joba tries to heed the “AJ Advice” of not trying to throw the ball through a wall. This advice works well for AJ because he has crazy movement on his pitches. Joba needs to just be Joba. Throw the ball through the wall, attack the hitters and don’t nibble.*

        *I am not a professional pitching coach. So my advice could very well be a crock of caca.

        • matt b says:

          I totally see your point on this, but I sometimes wonder if the opposite is true, i.e. whether Joba starts out the game too worried about efficieny, too worried about conservation and pitching to contact–i.e. he’ll repeatedly begin his starts sitting 89-91 and nibbling. I’d say it’s just as likely he’s being too careful as opposed to overthrowing. Now I certainly don’t mean to go in the extreme the other direction and say he should be coming out at 96 and shoot his whole load in order to work a clean first–but I think he needs to rely on his stuff from the get go, and pound the zone at 93-94, forget the two seamer early on.

          I’d also argue that for a guy like Joba, it’s well worth it to try and get through the first inning or two relying primarily on his fastball–b/c if he get six guys out without even really showing the slider or curve, it gives him a ton of weapons to get through the lineup the next couple times.

          I just think he’s got it mixed up–but seeking efficiency, he’s pitching inefficiently.

          I also do wonder if it’s a question of his warm-up routine being adjusted.

          Don’t get me wrong–my point is not that I think Joba needs to constantly sit 95-97 to be an ace. But in my view, there’s virtually no reason for him ever to be nibbling 89-90 as a matter of strategy (and as said above, if it’s not strategic, but rather physical, they need to try and chance his warmup plan).

          Joba’ given up 15 ER on the year–7 have come in the first innings of his last two starts. There’s gotta be a remedy for that.

          • steve (different one) says:

            or maybe it’s just a coincidence.

            • matt b says:

              Certainly could be, awfully small sample size, though I’d argue it’s pretty undeniable that, again within the small sample size, that his FB velocity doesn’t really get going until maybe the third inning, and that seems like it’s either by plan, or because he just doesn’t feel ready to amp it up until a bit later in the ballgame.

              Certainly the runs allowed in the first could a coincidence, and it’s only happened twice, so I agree, it’s way too early to assume that that’ll be an ongoing problem.

              But what I do think is evident is that in a bunch of his starts, there finally comes a moment–an evident moment–where Joba becomes Joba again. Not saying he can do it all the time–he just may not be physically capable of it. But something to keep an eye on.

              And don’t think for a second I’m knocking Joba generally. He’s already a darn fine starter in the toughest division in baseball and he’s without a doubt outpitched luminaries such as Josh Beckett and Josh Lester the entire year.

    • ledavidisrael says:

      Wow were is the normal rabid rab reads who jump down a dudes throat, with arms up in the air screaming USE GOOGLE, for asking a question, I guess cause dude isnt a hebrew he gets treated differently around here. We cant ask one question. BUT A DUDE GETS TO ASK 4??? SMH. Not that i m anti questions. I think its the key to progress.

  10. JackC says:

    I have a tough time believing the coaches make a huge difference either way in the short run — e.g. slumps and streaks. Having said that, it’s tough to argue the club hasn’t underperformed for all of Girardi’s tenure. Has he been really hard hit by injuries? No question, but they often look listless. I’m not for firing anyone, but the notion that that idea is knee-jerk and irrational and a non-starter in a serious conversation is an attitude I can’t understand. If consistently lackluster performance isn’t, on some level, attributable to the coaches and manager, then what exactly is attributable to them, ultimately?

    • Having said that, it’s tough to argue the club hasn’t underperformed for all of Girardi’s tenure. Has he been really hard hit by injuries?

      Yes, he has. He really, really has.

      • Ok, sorry for being the snarky-response police this morning, but if ever a comment was mocked after being taken out of context, this is it. You cut off two very important words after the question mark: “No question.”

      • Mattingly's Love Child says:

        No question the team has been smacked around with injuries. But there are lots of other clubs that have dealt with some pretty crappy runs of injuries. A manager cannot cause his players to play above their talents (that is just luck, I’m looking at you LA Angels), but they can manage the players they have to take advantage of their strengths. I’m not willing to give up on Girardi yet, I was 100% for hiring him. Last year I thought he did a nice job with the bullpen (of course he could have done anything with the bullpen and been better than Torre with it). But there have been enough head scratchers this year that he may be part of the problem (the initial thought of Nady over Swisher, the questionable bullpen management, the wanting to have CC throw 200 pitches per start in April, okay so that is all I can think of right now). I’m not giving up on him, but I’m concerned that he may not be as great as I thought he was.

        • steve (different one) says:

          the initial thought of Nady over Swisher

          i don’t really get this complaint. Nady out OPS’ed Swisher by 150 or so points in 2008 and then AGAIN in Spring Training.

          so Girardi started off with Nady, but by the 3rd game of the season, Swisher was starting every day.

          in other words, his initial judgement was fairly well supported (at worst, it was a tossup), but then he immediately backed off when Swisher came out red hot.

          what is wrong with the process there?

          he did the exact same thing with Melky/Gardner.

          is our threshold for criticism really at 100% perfection for every single game? it took Swisher 2 days to win a starting job, and it took Melky about 2 weeks.

          i don’t see the problem.

          i also think many of the “head scratching” decisions have later been explained by injuries we were unaware of.

          overall, you make some valid points. Girardi is probably more “by the book” then we were initially lead to believe. but that doesn’t make him a bad manager. he’s shown some ability to think out of the box (flipping Damon/Jeter) so i think there is a lot of potential there.

          it’s hard to be patient with the manager when the team is floundering, but it’s also hard for the manager to do much when your starter is spotting the other team 4 run leads every day this week, your HoF closer serves up back to back HRs, it’s revealed that said closer isn’t really available for 2 inning stints yet, etc….

          • Moreover, the other two complaints (bad bullpen management and CC throwing 200 pitches per start) are B.S. as well.

            He’s managed the bullpen poorly because basically every single one of his bullpen options that he’s turned to has either shit the bed or been hurt.

            And CC has thrown 96, 108, 122, 112, 99, 119, and 112 pitches in his 7 starts. I don’t think any of those numbers are indicative of either too many or too few pitches in any of those starts. I’ve been totally happy with how deep CC is pitching into games in his starts.

            • steve (different one) says:

              yeah, you could argue he left CC in too long in that Oakland game, but b/c of that decision, it has now become a meme….so when Girardi left Sabathia in to lose that game against Anaheim, even though it was a perfectly justifiable decision, he gets ripped for it, i.e. “here we go again….”

              same thing with Pettitte the night before. RAB criticized Girardi for not pulling Pettitte with a 4 run lead and 2 men on base in the 6th inning. given the state of the bullpen, wasn’t it worth the gamble that Pettitte could get out of the inning with the lead?

            • Mattingly's Love Child says:

              My feeling is that Girardi pushed CC too far in the following games:

              4/16 Indians Home Opener 122 pitches in 5 2/3 innings. He obviously wasn’t sharp, but gutted through 5 innings. It seemed excessive to me at the time.

              4/22 Athletics 112 pitches in 6 2/3 innings, obviously the wheels fell of the wagon.

              5/2 Angels 119 pitches in 6 2/3 innings, again not sharp but getting the job done through 6…pushed it for the 7th.

              My problem isn’t CC’s workload overall. I know he’s a big strong freak of nature. I know the bullpen has been terrible or hurt so pushing CC maybe the next most logical option. I just worry about the intelligence about doing this stuff in APRIL in the 1st year of an enormous contract. I’d rather he were a little more careful with that investment right now.

            • Mattingly's Love Child says:

              Furthermore, if this workload stuff was August, I’d have no problem with it. Once guys are fully up to speed by mid-May, I believe you can take the kid gloves off them (assuming that they’re a pitcher with little history of injury).

              So to me, its questionable.

              • matt b says:

                Look, coming from the guy who constantly screams at Joe on TV, “one batter too late, asshole” it’s alot easier to say in hindsight.

                And I also realize that Girardi has a third rate pen out there right now–and I’m of the view this team cannot win with the pen as currently constituted (and no, I’m not touching Joba, and yes, if they get Bruney and Marte back and they’re right, IMHO, the pen goes from glaring weakness to potential strength: Mo-Coke-Bruney-healthy Marte is a great front four, and you can work with the back of the pen–the issue right now is that Alby and Edwar are primary set-up men, and that’s a joke).

                But I also tend to agree, but one nitpick is Joe’s hook not being nearly quick enough when he’s got a starter with clearly nothing. I give him a pass on CC–CC’s a horse, he wants to be in that spot, and there’s never a time I’d rather see Alby than CC on the hill.

                I think more to some of the Wang games and particularly to the Hughes game the other. In the top of the second with the bases loaded, I said to my buddy I didn’t think Hughes would get another out–he did get one, but at the expense of either 4 or 5 more runs (I forget exactly). Now the first balls that inning weren’t hardly hit. I’m not saying you have the pen up there. But a batter or two later, hell yes. Hughes never should have been around to face Huff, never. He clearly had no out pitch to speak of–how many times did he get to 0-2 only to give up a rocket. Girardi’s all kinds of nuts if he thinks he’s getting out of that spot.

                And incidentally, right now this club is carrying both Aceves and Tomko–so who do we go to in the second inning, hey, how about Edwar. Yanks probably don’t win that game anyway, but Joe didn’t give them a chance. And he did the same thing in the Cleveland 22-4 game.

                My point is not to have a quick hook with your CCs and your AJs or even your Andy’s (though I thought Joe’s handling of Andy’s start at home against Anaheim was atrocious–you have to either get him a batter earlier or leave him out there, awful job to run Melancon into that spot). My issue is when its not a guy you particularly trust, who hasn’t shown the ability (at least this season in Wang’s case) to get out of jams, you make that move, unless you’re just making a managerial decision that we’ll get killed today to save the pen.

                • steve (different one) says:

                  And incidentally, right now this club is carrying both Aceves and Tomko–so who do we go to in the second inning, hey, how about Edwar. Yanks probably don’t win that game anyway, but Joe didn’t give them a chance. And he did the same thing in the Cleveland 22-4 game.

                  this isn’t fair at all considering they did not know if Joba would make his start yesterday b/c of the blood vessel on his hand.

                  it made all the sense in the world to hold back Aceves. and Girardi specifically said that Tomko is not stretched out to be a longman.

                  as for the Cleveland game, i am confused who was supposed to come in and pitch. Aceves wasn’t on the team.

                • matt b says:

                  Again, good points, and I had a brain freeze about the blood vessel–and I suppose it’s also reasonable that Tomko’s not stretched out right now, in which case, I frankly have no idea what he’s doing up here–besides the point of our back and forth here, but the notion of Brett Tomko as a situational reliever, without ever really giving Robertson or Melancon a fair shake is mind boggling. It’s one thing to bring up Tomko because everyone else is failing–but Robertson’s ERA is under 4 with a sick strikeout ratio–too many walks no doubt, but tough when you work once a week. Same goes for Melancon–I’m not sure I saw anything that said to me, wow, what he needs is more work at AAA. More, wow, what he needs is a chance to get acclimated to the big leagues. Maybe he’s not ready, but we sure as hell would have no way of doing based on 3.1 IP. But besides the point.

                  My mistake on why they didn’t use either Tomko/Aceves yesterday, but I’ll stick with my guns, that if you can go to Edwar in the second anyway, they should have gone to him several batters earlier if they were trying to win the game. And maybe they weren’t–not saying they were trying to lose of course. But it’s a long season, and sometimes you write the game off–in which case, incidentally, maybe you let Hughes go 3 or 4, and try to make something positive out of the day.

                  But I don’t even see this one as a second guess–I thought at the time it was readily apparent that Hughes would be lucky to get another out after the Swisher airmail. My issue again, is know who’s out there. If that’s CC, you don’t get him. If it’s Phil Hughes, I think you do, unless you decide it’s more important to save the pen and not really do everything possible to win the game today.

                  As to the Wang game, I had no problem with Clagett coming in. I derailed myself by forgetting about the blood vessel issue, because I didn’t mean my major point to be the choice of the reliver, more that the hook, in those particular situations, should’ve been quicker–Wang never should have been allowed to give up 8 runs in that Cleveland start, esp. given he was already on thin ice, potentially confidence shot and clearly physically not really himself velocity-wise. If it were me in that game, I would’ve gotten Wang after he have up the three run shot in the 2nd and then put his next runner on. Given how bad Clagett turned out to be, they probably still lose, and Wang bears 95% of the responsibiltiy for them not being competive that day, but I do think some of it goes to Girardi.

                  I’m not talking about the games where guys have shown some ability to get outs–I’m talking about the games where it’s pretty clear, as a first guess, that the particular stater isn’t going to last an inning.

                  I tend to write these long endless posts, but I should emphasize that this is more of a nit-pick–I wouldn’t dream of arguing that this is fireable or anything of the sort. Overall, I give Girardi maybe a B- on the year. He’s done nothing to impress me, but nothing that makes me think, my gosh, he simply must go today.

                • steve (different one) says:

                  fair enough.

                  and even though i find myself constantly having to defend Girardi, that’s about where i would grade him as well for this season.

                  the problem is that there are a large number of people here who would give him an F-, and i don’t really think that’s fair.

                  (i responded to the wrong post below)

          • Mattingly's Love Child says:

            i also think many of the “head scratching” decisions have later been explained by injuries we were unaware of.

            In some instances this has been the case. I won’t argue that. But far too often he seems to pull relievers after 1 inning, or 2/3 of an inning, when they pitch well. He may very well be trying to build confidence, but the more pitchers that you have pitch in a game the greater the likelihood one is not going to have their stuff that day. Edwar, Veras, and Albie have been either all or nothing this year. I know that makes it difficult to make the same decisions Girardi would have made last year when the bullpen was pitching well. Maybe Girardi trusted the hot hand more last year because more guys were pitching well, but I’d be more inclined to let someone go for more than one inning if they didn’t have to work hard in their 1st inning and they were effective.

            All of this is moot if the damn starters could stop giving up a 4 spot in the 1st…

      • ledavidisrael says:

        could it be the tougher spring trainings? or did he tone down the running this spring training?

    • jsbrendog says:

      the lineup and bullp[en management. there is nothing else, save for bunting/hit and run a manager can do.

    • matt b says:

      As a (hopefully) rational fan, I believe that managers affect ballclubs entirely on the margins–maybe affecting 5 games a year.

      What I don’t know–and I don’t think anybody can know unless you’re in the clubhouse–is whether Giradi, is, as idiot Sherman always alleges “too tight.”

      I think one can argue reasonably that the dynamic of this club has changed to an extent–more of a team that seems to be on its heels, not necessarily expecting good things to happen. Of course, any team that’s below .500 is going to have that look, and it’s tough to say that even if the difference is real, that it necessarily stems from the manager’s vibes.

      I read some fool on Lohud, who, when the team was 13-15, blurted out “Torre never would’ve leave this team spiral so far out of control.” That dude I guess misremembers 11-19 and 30-32 in 2005, and 22-29 and 42-43 in ’07.

      But I don’t think the point can be entirely dismissed–though no doubt alot of that conflates the fact that every year of Torre=playoffs, first year of Girardi=no playoffs, nevermind that we’re talking about 13 distinct ballclubs over those years.

      I had issues with Joe T. believe me–but I think I do concede that I don’t necessarily have the feeling when I see Joe G. that “everything’s going to be alright.’

      Girardi may be a better strategic matter than Joe T. (highly debatable in my view, I think Torre gets short shrift here), but whether he has the ability to do the biggest thing a manager needs to do–guide the clubs across the peaks and valleys of a 162 game season (and I judge my managers on the regular season, don’t talk to me about Torre being no good cause he lost a few 5 game division series).

      I think last year, he largely did a pretty good job–the club was decimated by injuries, yet after the break, they were 58-45 and had put themselves right back in position to contend, and 89 wins given the lineups they threw out alot of those nights isn’t half bad.

      I guess what I do think though, is that I see little in Girardi than I was so excited that I thought I was getting–not much outside the box, not much creativity–that’s where he was supposed to be different than Torre. Certainly, his options have been badly limited.

      I said at that outset of the post, I’m a rational fan–and I don’t want Tony Pena managing this club long term. But the irrational side of me does kind of have visions of Pena taking over and this team getting awfully hot.

      Shit, sorry for this ramble, I usually have much more set views–on this one, I’m pretty conflicted.

      • steve (different one) says:

        I think one can argue reasonably that the dynamic of this club has changed to an extent–more of a team that seems to be on its heels, not necessarily expecting good things to happen. Of course, any team that’s below .500 is going to have that look, and it’s tough to say that even if the difference is real, that it necessarily stems from the manager’s vibes.

        is this true though?

        during that 4 game skid, the Yankees went down 3 or 4 runs early in every game. every game they scraped and came back and got back into the game, only to see the pitchers give it away late.

        wouldn’t a team that is “back on their heels” just have rolled over and died in all 4 of those games?

        i’m not saying you are wrong, but i think the RESULTS of last week’s games is underselling how much resilience they DID show.

        the one exception was after Mo gave up 2 HRs, they looked (somewhat understandably) shellshocked.

        • matt b says:

          You make good points, and of course, they didn’t look back on their heels during the great comebacks against the Angeles–and I thought that on the first road trip of the year, they actually looked like an awfully confident team, particularly in the TB series.

          And it is a knee jerk reaction to say “back on the heels” after the miserable homestand–and I do agree, that the offense showed some resiliency, it’s def not last year where once they got behind, the game is over.

          And also in Girardi’s defense, I should note, I believe they won the season series against both TB and Bos last year–so it’s not like he’s got the club at a place where it just rolls over against those teams.

          I think I’m mostly reacting to being 0-5 against Boston and the way those losses went down. And part of that has to do with, as much as I hate to admit it, Boston is good, and reminds me way too much of the dynasty Yankee teams.

          And even if they are “back on their heels” as I alleged, that doesn’t mean it’s Girardi. Some of this is me just being the son of two shrinks and I’m probably reading too much into it–but when I watch Jeter, Mo, and Jorge in particular, the guys who have been here, I’m not sure Derek really believes than any of the ghosts are still left. Maybe that’s not true. Maybe it is, but it has nothing to do with Joe G.

          I guess I feel like even though they haven’t won in awhile, this team should still have some swagger, esp. vis-a-vis Boston. The ’04 collapse notwithstanding, the Yanks were better than Boston in ’05 and ’06, and I think can make a case that Boston’s awfully lucky Cleveland knocked us out in ’07. The disparity’s simply not that great, and bottom line, this is an exceptionally talented team. Decimated by injuries for sure–and too much inconsistency from the starters and flat out awful job by the pen.

          I just hope that the guys look around that clubhouse and see that there is undoubtedly the makings of a terrific baseball team there. This club gets a healthy Jorge back in particular, and also Bruney and Marte, they’re winning 90 plus games.

          • steve (different one) says:

            fair enough.

            and even though i find myself constantly having to defend Girardi, that’s about where i would grade him as well for this season.

            the problem is that there are a large number of people here who would give him an F-, and i don’t really think that’s fair.

  11. ledavidisrael says:


Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.