Open Thread: Help Wanted


Do you want to write for RAB? Well here’s your big chance. We’re looking to add one or two weekend writers to our staff. Apparently Steve has this thing called a “life” that’s getting in the way of his blogging time. Doesn’t even sound like a real thing if you ask me.

Anyway, the idea is that you would contribute two posts each week, one on Saturday and one on Sunday, preferably for the 10am or 1pm ET time slot. We’re looking for someone that’ll fit right in with RAB. A casual writing style, no cursing in the posts (family blog), and most importantly some creativity. We don’t want someone that will just blockquote three paragraphs of a MSM article and add two sentences of commentary at the end. Originality is a must. To get an idea of what we’re looking for, just browse through Steve’s archive.

If you want to apply, here’s what to do…

  • Email us at riveraveblues (at) gmail (dot) com and put “RAB Weekend Writer” in the subject line to help us stay organized.
  • Tell us a little bit about yourself in the email. Background info, how long you’ve been a Yankee fan, how long you’ve been writing/blogging, why you think you’d be a good fit for RAB, the usual.
  • Send us samples of your writing, but please no attachments. Just send us a hyperlink (several, preferably) or embed it in the text of the post.

Unfortunately this is not a paid position. The only thing we can offer is a great amount of exposure (~40,000 hits a day and growing) and of course promotion of any of your work found elsewhere. Trust us, we wish it could be more. I honestly have no idea how many people will inquire, so I can’t give you an exact time frame for when you’ll hear back from us. With Thanksgiving coming up I wouldn’t expect to hear anything next week, so the Monday after that (Nov. 29th) is probably the earliest we’ll get back in touch with people. Thanks in advance to everyone that applies, and good luck.

* * *

Here’s tonight’s open thread. The Rangers and Knicks are both in action, but not until a little later because they’re west of the Mississippi. Talk about whatever you want, so have at it.


  1. Hmm, I wonder if I can put together a resume.

  2. Tom says:

    Times like this I curse my small knowledge of the Yankees and Baseball, I blame Britain for not fully embracing the sport.

  3. Kiersten says:

    That picture is seriously creeping me out.

    I, too, have a life, one that usually has me in bed hungover at 10AM on Saturday and Sunday mornings.

    • Accent Shallow says:

      Well . . . the post have to be ready to go up by then. It’s not like they’re written in real time.

      (Or are they?)

  4. first time lawng time says:


    This is kind of a weird question but it has to do with the post:
    This is a very nice blog. Informative, classy, I’ve learned a lot about baseball here and you guys do a nice job. My question is, when/how did the 3 of you (Mike, Ben, Joe)decide to make this blog?

    Kind of a weird question, I’m sorry, but I’m really interested in knowing how all of this got started.

  5. What in the fuck is a life?

  6. I’m a great writer (runs in the family), yet I am not very creative and have no idea what I would write about. Sucks for me I guess.

    I can photoshop a bit, though, I should run away and join NoMaas!:

  7. Matt Imbrogno, TSJC (god would he make some very funny articles), both Rebeccas and basically anyone from the blogs list on the sidebar would be great for this job.

  8. first time lawng time says:

    If you could build a team around any one of these players (for the sake of consistency let’s just say they are all in their primes) who would you choose:
    1. Derek Jeter
    2. Alex Rodriguez
    3. Mariano Rivera
    4. Andy Pettitte
    5. Jorge Posada

    Me? A-Rod. I’d probably stick him at short, too. (Isn’t he a better shortstop than Jeter? I don’t really understand defensive statistics, so I can’t tell for myself, but he won Gold Gloves thereand he looks pretty competent)

  9. Oh and if you’re still here Mike: way to pump George Springer in the chat.

  10. Dax J. says:

    I wish I knew more about baseball. I had a plan of starting a spanish sports blog in DR. Too bad the plans went down the drain.

  11. Kiersten says:

    So this is totally out of left field and would probably never happen, but I think MLB should get rid of the Pirates and move Tampa Bay to Pittsburgh (the team, not the body of water). The Rays deserve a fanbase that will support them and you know, show up for games and the fans of Pittsburgh deserve a team that’s going to you know, actually try to win. You could pull a Browns move and keep the Pirates name just cause of history and all that, but I think the Rays and Pittsburgh would be a great match. Then get rid of the Marlins or somebody and have 14 teams in each league, so that people like Darrell Rasner are no longer major league starters.

    • rbizzler says:

      I applaud your creativity, but the Pirates are actually going to be decent one of these days. They have a solid young core in McCutchen, Tabata, and Alvarez with Tony Sanchez and some pitching on the way.

      With the gorgeous stadium and a fanbase that will support a winner (just not a perennial loser), the Pirates are poised to shed their laughingstock label.

      Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see the Rays out of the AL East, but all is not dire in Pitt.

      • Kiersten says:

        Eh, I don’t know about that. The owners have said that they’d rather lose because that’s how they make money.

        • rbizzler says:

          Have they actually said that or is that what the pundits have said about them with out doing any actual research.

          The Pirates have traded some veterans the past few years, which has pissed off some die hard fans, but when you look deeper at the players that they have actually dealt, you will find the list lacking. We are talking about guys like Jack Wilson, LaRoche (1b), Nady (ha), McClouth, etc., most of whom are lacking as legit contributors. Meanwhile they have invested in the draft and have some young talent in the pipeline.

          As a quasi-Pirates fan, all is not dire.

    • seimiya says:

      This is only in my personal opinion, but if I was a Pirates fan, and my team was contracted and another team put in it’s place, I would HATE that team. HATE THEM. I have no idea if this idea makes sense financially – I really don’t know anything about baseball finances – but I feel like watching your team get contracted and another team put on top of them would suck. It’d be like someone running over your retarded dog you had for ten years and buying you another one saying, “Well, you’ve still got a dog!”

      • Kiersten says:

        Yeah, I see that. I just feel that the fans in Pittsburgh deserve a better front office and the Rays deserve a better fan base.

        Like I said, this would never happen, but it was just a thought.

  12. first time lawng time says:

    I have a question I have wondered for a while and I hear people talking about it all the time (not just here, in general) and I figured here would be a pretty useful place to find out:

    Why do people blend player’s offense and their positions together? I mean, why do some people rate a player’s offense on their positions?

    For example: People say shortstops tend to have poor hitters, good defenders, or 1B is a “power hitting position” or something like that. And then it’s hard to find a good defensive hitter that can hit?

    Or x player is the best offensive player at his position.

    WHy does it matter what position they play? What does that have to do with their offense and how they compare to other players offensive numbers at their position?

    • I’m not sure *why* it falls that way, but because it does, some positions, on average, have less offensive power–ie, a shortstop isn’t going to (usually) hit 50 home runs.

      So if you get a SS that hits like crazy, it increases his value immensley because league wise there’s a lot less depth at that position.

      • first time lawng time says:

        Alright that makes sense. Thanks

      • seimiya says:

        I think it might have something to do with muscle. If you’re looking for a position where a good player has range, they’re likely to be more agile, and I think you can’t be agile AND the Incredible home run bomb Hulk. Take first base – you’ve got your sluggers like Pujols and Cabrera. Not small guys. Not a position that requires a lot of movement. Then second base (lots of movement required) gives you your tiny guys like Pedroia or Rhymes (of the Tigers).

        This might be nonsensical. It sounded good in my head.

    • WHy does it matter what position they play? What does that have to do with their offense and how they compare to other players offensive numbers at their position?

      Because if you play a premium defensive position–C, CF, SS, 2B–and can hit like a RF/LF/1B, you’re incredibly valuable. Go look at the position splits on B-R. Because those positions tend to be more defensively focused, the offensive output isn’t as great. The better you can hit while playing one of those positions, the better you are.

    • bexarama says:

      1Bs, corner OFs, and obviously DHes are generally positions where you can get a lot of offense even at “replacement level” for these positions. Positions like SS, 2B, and C are ones where a lot of players have no bat at all, so a SS or C who hits even okay is valuable.

    • Start with the defensive spectrum. It’s a list of positions ordered by hardest to play:


      Because it takes more skill to defend the positions on the left, you’re stuck with a limited set of players. Those players tend to hit worse, because they’re smaller and more athletic. At the positions that are easier to field, you can afford to have a big burly dude who can sock dingers.

      Then you run into issues of supply and competitive advantage. If you can find a C who can hit, you have an advantage because the supply of them is low. A guy like Joe Mauer hits so much better than the average catcher that he creates a huge advantage.

      You’d do best to have above average hitters on the left side and average guys on the right side. Being above average on the left means more, because it’s rarer. If you’re above average on the right that’s cool, but even the average hitters are much better than the guys on the left.

      Does that kinda make sense?

    • Kiersten says:

      There is a name for it, can’t remember what it is, but it’s a list of positions by difficulty. I believe it’s:

      Center field
      Second base
      Third base
      Right field
      Left field
      First base

      I don’t remember the exact order, but it’s something like that. Basically, the easier the position, the better the hitter is supposed to be. You don’t see a lot of weak-hitting first basemen because it’s the easiest position, so you teach a guy who’s a great hitter to play it. Likewise, if you get good defense out of your shortstop or catcher, you can give up some offense because it’s so hard to find guys who can play those positions well. That’s why it’s such a big deal that the Yankees have had Jeter and Posada all this time, because it’s so tough to find great hitters at those positions.
      This is also why Gardner loses value playing left field over center field, and why A-Rod lost value when he moved to third. Generally, you wouldn’t have a guy like Gardner in left because it’s a power position, but the Yankees can afford to do so because they get premium hitting out of their up-the-middle positions (C, SS, 2B, CF).

    • first time lawng time says:

      Alright thanks everyone.

  13. OldYanksFan says:

    “Unfortunately this is not a paid position.”
    What? Are you f’ing kidding me?
    I’ve been a fan since ’65, and I can write.
    I’ll start with the game where I saw Mickey hit #500.
    So yuz guyz wanna put a bid in?
    I’d say a very reasonable start is 3/$45m.

  14. bexarama says:

    heh, from Mike’s old blog:

    Other names that could be interesting as far as potential Posada successor’s include Atlanta’s Brian McCann (he’s just keeping the spot warm for Jarrod Saltalamacchia)

    I’m sorry, I’m not trying to mock you at all, and the blog’s really good overall and I remember how highly-regarded Salty was, that just made me laugh in retrospect.

    • The “successor’s” is killing me.

    • Dax J. says:

      You lost me at Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

    • Steve H says:

      That’s what everyone thought at the time. Crazy in hindsight.

    • rbizzler says:

      But, just imagine if the Yanks were able to pry McCann away from the Bravos.

      We also get a little lesson in prospecting with Salty, four years later, still trying to establish himself as a legit ML catcher (good luck Red Sox), while McCann is extremely legit.

    • bexarama says:

      There’s also a lot of funny-in-retrospect stuff in there, including this from WasWatching:

      Wild thought of the moment: If New York does become concerned about Jeter’s defense at SS, then sign Julio Lugo after the season.


      I’m not worried about Mo. Never have been, never will be.

      Hochevar was mentioned as a draft target.

      Oh, and apparently NoMaas interviewed Torre at some point? Whoah.

      • bexarama says:

        also, found on a random Power Ranking linked on that blog re: the Blue Jays, from 2006 -

        A.J. Burnett is back, though his control is still on the DL. In his debut with Toronto on Saturday, he threw 57 pitches in his first two innings, 95 over six, gave up a pair of homers to Chicago’s Paul Konerko and took the loss. Still, the Jays are encouraged. After spending $55 million on Burnett, encouraged is all they can be.

        Le sigh

        • Kiersten says:

          Good, now whenever we have people posting about how it’s Island’s fault that AJ sucks or that he’s old or whatever other nonsense, we can link back to this comment instead of repeatedly saying “AJ is who he is.”

          • first time lawng time says:

            AJ Burnett is a fantastic MLB pitcher who just had a rocky season of a few bad starts. I fully expect him to have a spectacular bounceback season in 2011.

            Positce Vibes people.

  15. Lets say something goes crazy wrong and the Yankees and Jeter dont get a contract done. He signs somewhere else

    Hughes + Montero for Hanley Ramirez

    Does Florida say no?
    Do the Yankees do it?

    • Gut reaction, yeah, I do it.

    • I could see Florida doing it but I’m not as high on Hanley as a number of others are. Yeah, I’m weird.

    • Kiersten says:

      I wouldn’t, because then they’d just have another huge hole in the rotation. I’d rather have Hughes in the rotation and a weak-hitting SS for a few years, than have Nova, and god knows who else if Pettitte doesn’t come back, in the rotation.

    • Gonzo says:

      Ok crazy thinking here, but what if you had to make a financial choice of 2 of Jeter, Mo, or Cliff Lee.

      The best team would be Lee (for sure) and Jeter, right?

      • I’ll take Mo and Lee becuase I strongly feel anything more than 2Ys for Jeter would be overkill. Mo and Lee will be worth their salaries.

        • seimiya says:

          Mo and Lee, without even thinking about it. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I love Jeter, he’s the face of the franchise, but the numbers don’t lie, man.

          • Gonzo says:

            You guys do realize that Mo wasn’t worth his salary this year right? He was a 1.7 fWAR player and is in a role that is much easier to replace than SS.

            • bexarama says:

              fWAR really underrates Mo but I agree with your general point.

              • Gonzo says:

                You know, I am not sold on fWAR underrating relievers by that much because releivers are that much less valuable.

                fWAR calculates for reliever leverage. Is there something else that they are missing in calculating fWAR for relievers?

                • bexarama says:

                  It’s not so much relievers in general as Mo. His FIP is always going to be higher because of his low BABIP, but he has a low BABIP because he induces very weak contact. It’s not a fluke with Mo.

                  • Gonzo says:

                    You are probably right, but I would argue not by as big of a margin as you think. I guess that would make Mo a better candidate for SIERA instead of FIP.

                • Kiersten says:

                  I don’t necessarily buy the “relievers are much less valuable” argument. I mean in general, yes they are. Maybe I’m biased from watching Mo my whole life, but having a guy who can shut the door on a 1-run game 9 out of 10 times, especially in the postseason, that seems extremely valuable to me, even if it doesn’t translate to WAR.

                  • Gonzo says:

                    I’ll have to disagree. Mo doesn’t get save a game unless the everyday guys and SP’s do a good job. They are already winning and put Mo in a situation of “not losing” as opposed to winning the game.

                    • Kiersten says:

                      Oh I agree, but Jeter is one of 8 position players responsible, whereas it’s all on Mo to close it out. And I couldn’t even imagine the pressure.

                  • seimiya says:

                    basically this. I know that Jeter is an above-average SS even in a down year (regardless of his defense), but when I think about Mo, I think about him as such an utterly dominant pitcher that it’s really hard not to choose him over Jeter. Like I said – don’t get me wrong, Jeter is great, but I’d pick Mo anyday.

                    This is a gut feeling, not a statistical one, but I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t change my mind anyway. I’m a bad sabr nerd.

                    • Gonzo says:

                      Bad SABR nerd!!! Go back to your room and recite “wins & saves are outdated” 100 times.

                    • seimiya says:

                      Wins are outdated, but saves are a relatively new stat, and they were always dumb.

                      I’m sorry, I can’t not pick Mo over .. like, everyone in the world. I love him too much. He is Mo. The Mo. Our Lord & Savier. etc.

                    • Gonzo says:

                      I kind of feel bad for saves. At least wins enjoyed a long, long run respect. Saves were cool for like only 20 years.

            • first time lawng time says:

              You can’t just judge these things solely based on WAR. I know people here love it and all, but I think it’s a bit overrated.

              I would take Mo over Jeter, because quite frankly, Mo had a better year than Jeter. Not based on WAR or stats, but based on facts. Jeter, compared to his usual self, pretty much sucked. Mo, on the other hand, wwas his usual stellar self (except for that September)

              • Gonzo says:

                Personal assumptions aside, Jeter was an above average SS this year and a great SS last year. He also played way more innings than Mo. I love Mo, but I don’t think any pitcher who logged only 60 innings this year is more valuable than an above average SS.

        • Gonzo says:

          I mean just for this year. I say this because after next you have JoPo salary coming off the books and I just want to focus on 2011.

      • bexarama says:

        In a vacuum: Lee, Jeter. Sorry Mo, you’re the GOAT and I love you deeply, but Lee is obvious and above-average SSs are really, really hard to find.

        • first time lawng time says:

          So are near-perfect closers.

          Yeah I’m biased though, because I really dislike Jeter.

          • bexarama says:

            So are near-perfect closers.

            Aren’t you the one who started shitting on Mo when he blew a save against the Red Sox? Like, to a ridiculous extent? And the difference between Mo and any pretty good closer in any one given year isn’t that great.

            I really dislike Jeter

            Crazy talk. Also, don’t let personal biases lead you to irrationality.

            • first time lawng time says:

              What ridiculous extent are you referring to?

              And isn’t you referring to that last line as “crazy talk and irrationality” a little opinionated and biased?

              • bexarama says:

                IIRC you were whining about how he can’t possibly be the greatest closer of all time because he blew one game and that is ridiculous. If that wasn’t you, sorry.

                Nah, I’m just not sure how you can really dislike Jeter as a Yankee fan. And you said you’d take Mo over Jeter just because you don’t like Jeter, that’s irrationality.

                • first time lawng time says:

                  I said “greatest closer my ass.” It was a heat-of-the-moment comment. That was his 3rd (?) blown save in like 2 weeks, he had a crappy September, the Yankees sucked during that stretch, they were about to get swept by the Red Sox, who had a signifcant amount of injuries on their key players. I was angry. That’s what came. I don’t see anything wrong with it. Should I control my emotions? Yeah. Did people have to reply with “STFU”? No. That’s ridiculous too.

                  I just think he is overrated and gets too much love. And I don’t think that’s irrationality. If someone offers me 2 things and I don’t like 1 of them, I’m not going to choose the 1 I don’t like. (Unlessif the point you’re trying to make is “Jeter is a better player, so I should choose him even if I don’t like him, so that’s irrational if I don’t” then you have a point.)

                  • bexarama says:

                    lol whatevs.

                    (There’s a difference between thinking Jeter’s overrated and gets too much love and disliking him. I think he’s kind of overrated by the media and he gets way too much love about his “intangibles.” I also still love him, a lot. But whatever, liking/disliking a player isn’t rational.

                    But you should be able to make rational decisions about a player aside from whether you like them or dislike them. Think the Moose/Andy debate – Moose is a better pitcher and it’s not even close. This isn’t a 1000000% clear cut decision but when you say you take Mo over Jeter because you don’t like him, well, I’m not gonna think you spent too much rational thought on that.)

                    • Moose is a better pitcher and it’s not even close

                      How many tears did you shed while typing this?

                    • first time lawng time says:

                      Wait, who would you take between Andy/Moose?

                      Me? I’d take Andy for the following (probably stupid, but honest) reasons:
                      1. I think Andy’s better looking
                      2. Andy’s a greay pitcher and I never watched during Moose’s pitching days
                      3. Andy seems friendlier to me. Moose seems kinda unfriendly/doesn’t like to be bothered by people.

                      Those are stupid reasons, yes, but it’s the truth. Also, I’m choosing between 2 very good pitchers, so it’s not like my reasons have to be rational. (I’m not choosing between Melky Cabrera and Brett Gardner even though Gardner is probably the better player for example.)

                    • bexarama says:

                      Wait, who would you take between Andy/Moose?


                      Me? I’d take Andy for the following (probably stupid, but honest) reasons:
                      1. I think Andy’s better looking

                      He is. It’s irrelevant.

                      2. Andy’s a greay pitcher and I never watched during Moose’s pitching days

                      I agree, Andy’s a very good pitcher. Moose was still better over the course of his career and at his peak.

                      3. Andy seems friendlier to me. Moose seems kinda unfriendly/doesn’t like to be bothered by people.

                      Agreed. Also irrelevant to his pitching.

                      I totally get having a personal connection to a player, but Moose was just better than Andy.

                    • first time lawng time says:

                      I know he’s better. But Andy was still good. And I like Andy better.

        • Gonzo says:

          That’s the logic I was using. You could trade for a quality reliever and not break the prospect bank, but if you trade for a quality SS, your farm system is gone.

          • bexarama says:

            Yep. Remember even this year, I think it was in May, when Mo was hurt for a little bit and couldn’t close? We got through it fine. None of those guys were Mo, there’ll never be another Mo, but his role is just not as important as an elite SP and an even-just-above-average SS.

            • first time lawng time says:

              That makes sense. I would just rather have Mo, because, this is probably stupid so forgive me, I have more faith in Mo.

              For example, this past year when Jeter was at the plate, I never expected anything good to happen (towards the latter part of the season). I always expected groundout to short, or double play when we had runners on. When Mo would come in, I would expect him to close out the game, and I felt confident in him.

              That’s probably a stupid reason, but that’s why I think Mo was more valuable than Jeter this past year.

              • Gonzo says:

                One last thing I want to point out. There are some decent closers available either through trade (cheaply) or FA. The FA SS’s consist of:
                Orlando Cabrera (36)
                Juan Castro (39)
                Craig Counsell (40)
                Bobby Crosby (31)
                Adam Everett (34)
                Cristian Guzman (33)
                Jerry Hairston Jr. (35)
                Cesar Izturis (31)
                Julio Lugo (35)
                Nick Punto (33)
                Edgar Renteria (34)
                Miguel Tejada (37)
                Juan Uribe (31)

    • seimiya says:

      Gah. As attractive as HanRam is, I don’t know if I’d give up Hughes with our pitching in flux. If we know Andy and Lee are in pinstripes by the time the Jeter deal falls through, I’d say yes. I don’t mind a rotation of CC-Lee-AJ-Andy-Nova (or however they get set up). Otherwise, I’d be really too concerned about the rotation to lose Hughes.

      The Marlins would say no because Phil Hughes isn’t 6’6 or taller, though. He just misses the “You must be this tall to be a Marlins pitcher” bar.

  16. first time lawng time says:

    So what are everyone’s top 5 favorite thingsabout going to a baseball game in no particular order? (yeah yeah tonight’s “FTLT Poll” is pretty cheesy and stupid but whatever)
    1. seeing the players in person
    2. wearing my hat and jersey
    3. going on a school night and being exhausted when I go to school because it’s a long game and drive but you’re like whatever I don’t care, I went to the Yankees last night! (that probably made no sense, but whatever)
    4. Seeing the stadium, great hall, field, stands, buildings, scoreboard.
    5. Food.


    Oh yeah, you know what this site should really get? A poll on the sidebar updated every few days/week! haha. But probably one with better questions than what I have haha

  17. first time lawng time says:

    Anyone saw/is seeing Harry Potter?

    I saw so many people dressed up as Harry Potter and Hogwarts people today lol.

  18. Teix is the man says:

    For you football fans out there…who should be the first QB taken in next year’s draft-Mallett or Luck? I think Mallett is better, but many of my friends like Andrew Luck.

  19. first time lawng time says:

    If you lived in the following cities/states, which local team would you root for? (and don’t be an ass and say “Yankees!” because that’s breaking the rules, you have to choose one in your city)
    1. LA: Angels/Dodgers?
    2. Chicago: Cubs/WS?
    3. Florida: Marlins/Rays?
    4. Texas: Rangers/Astros
    5. Ohio: Reds/Indians
    6. Missouri: Royals/Cardinals
    7. Baltimore/DC: Orioles/Nationals

  20. Bee says:

    Question re: time slots.

    If one works on Saturday mornings, is it OK to turn in the post on Friday night (between 10PM and midnight)?

  21. Attn FTLT:

    As a pitcher, Mike Mussina > Andy Pettitte.

  22. Mike Axisa says:

    Yep, absolutely. Doesn’t matter when it’s written, as long as it gets published at those times.

  23. Serious suggestion, what about approaching someone who’s stepped away from full time blogging? Jay/Matt at Fack Youk comes to mind, or maybe someone else like that who used to blog daily and has stepped away. Maybe he/she doesn’t have time to blog daily, but can find time for 1-2 pieces a week.

  24. T-Dubs says:

    Kemba. Walker. Matty?

  25. Mattchu12 says:

    Pirates designate Zach Duke, Andy LaRoche, and Delwyn Young.

    Anybody else think Duke would be a very interesting guy for the fifth spot or LOOGY role? I think he’s worth taking a look at. LaRoche is always an interesting bench option.

  26. Yeah, Jetes deserved the gold glove.


  27. jim p says:

    It was a dark and stormy night, runners on 1st and 3rd, two out,…

  28. JobaWockeeZ says:

    KLaw: I would hesitate in trading Casey Kelly for one year of Adrian Gonzalez. He’s not untouchable but he’s pretty darn close.

    SERIOUSLY? I know the dude’s job is basically to rave about the Sox prospect’s and draft picks since Boston loves leaking it’s info but honestly you would have to even THINK about trading a 20 year old who flat out sucked in AA?

    Yes 20 is young and he has a lot of time to put it together but Adrian Gonzalez is a top tiered hitter. One of the best in the league. He may even be a better htiter than Teix and you have to THINK about trading a 20 year old in AA.

    But I’m willing to bet Jesus in AAA at the same age on his early slump got the BUST moniker from KLaw didn’t he?

    Ugh nothing will make my heart warm more if he ends up beeing a LOOGY.

    • All Star Carl says:

      That would be amazing considering Casey Kelly is right handed.

    • mbonzo says:

      Don’t you think you could get Adrian Gonzalez for a little cheaper than a top prospect. Kelly is overrated by plenty of people, but he’s still a top prospect. People are complaining about trading Montero in a package for Upton, where Upton is worth a bazillion times more than Gonzalez. Gonzalez will not bring in a top prospect like Kelly because he’s a first baseman with only 1 year left on his contract. If Teix goes down tomorrow for a full year, would you expect the Yankees to trade their top prospect for 1 year of Gonzalez?

  29. Tom Zig says:

    Why is WHIP considered a new school or sabermetric stat?

  30. cano is the bro says:

    damn who’s that cutie in the picture?

  31. Does that girl work for RAB? If so I’m in!

  32. mbonzo says:

    Anyone think Delwyn Young should be on the Yankees 40 man roster. The kid has proven nothing, but he’s got SO MUCH UPSIDE. Ugh its a long shot gamble but I think he’s worth more than some of the guys they’d protect in rule 5.

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.