Thursday Night Open Thread


Here’s your open thread for the night. The Knicks are playing and that’s pretty much it, but talk about anything here. enjoy.

Categories : Open Thread


  1. Austin Aunelowitzky says:

    Did Callis say what drove the #11 ranking of the farm system? Was it the strength of the “Core 4 II” TM, overall depth at the lower levels or something else?

  2. Jacob The OG (formerly Jacob) says:

    So I am totally going to skip the hal thread. I pray for you trollfighters that got called in to fight that fire. in other new my handle was jacked, guess that is what happens when you use your own name lol

    • jjyank says:

      Just using a first name is common enough that it’ll get jacked eventually. I didn’t really do much “troll fighting”, but I did have to defend myself from Hoss who called me a “lemming”. He seems to think that everyone that disagrees with me, I consider a troll. To which I told him that’s not the case, and then he stopped responding.

      Apparently I also shrug too much. Not my opinion, however.

      • Jacob The OG (formerly Jacob) says:

        Sounds like it was a mess of fun. I rarely ever see you call anyone a troll directly, it is usually in a general sense like me. And we disagree you never called me a troll lmao.

        • jjyank says:

          I never called Hoss a troll either, which makes it all the more amusing.

          • Jacob The OG (formerly Jacob) says:

            He probably calls himself a troll and blames it on others.

            • Hoss says:

              No. I was trying to point out that people who express opinions against Yankee management/FO are often labeled as trolls. In this case, it was before the discussion began. There are better things to discuss.

              • jjyank says:

                “Often” is a strong word. And you should acknowledge that I have levied no such labels on people to disagree with anything, as long as it is respectful and rational. Yourself included. Remember that the next time you call supporters of the front office “lemmings”.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                There is a complete false equivalency going on here.

                APF often expresses contrary opinions. Forensic often does. I consider those two guys to be more on the negative side of the spectrum than I am. I can have a discussion with both of them on this team without resorting to calling them trolls (OK, there was, like, a two-week period in which I took it too far with Forensic, but I honestly regret that.)

                There are places in the threads even this morning in which there was thoughtful response to opinions different than mine….or jjyank’s, or Pat D., or whatnot.

                There is a chasm of difference between that and the type of exaggerated hyperbole we have to read through on here every day. How is that not crystal clear?

                I don’t know what percentage of those folks are trolls, but a whole lot of them come on here with no intention of having any serious discussion themselves. You don’t think the sky is falling? Then you’re a Pollyanna, drinking the Kool-Aid, and not a discriminate fan. You don’t yell loud enough? You just don’t have an opinion.

                I don’t know someone doesn’t see the difference.

                End of rant.

                • Pat D says:

                  Oh, R-Tils, you like me, you really like me!

                • forensic says:

                  You bastard!!! ;-)

                  Seriously though, I don’t even necessarily remember that, unless it was about something with my bothering to reply to Ted.

                  I freely admit that I’m a bit more on the pessimistic end of the spectrum (it comes from my personality and my career), but I also acknowledge good things and am optimistic on other facets. This is why I prefer to refer to myself as ‘realistic’, in that I see both sides whereas other people only acknowledge one or the other.

      • MannyGeee says:

        virtual shrugging, a la the interweb? Or are you web camming something we are not aware of…

        JJYank’s Facebook is all pictures of him shrugging in different places in DC

        – Shrugging at the Library of Congress
        – shrugging at the white house
        - shrugging at the Lincoln Memorial…

        Someone photoshop this, that would piss Hoss off…

        • jjyank says:

          Haha. No, not really. LK, Havok, and myself were having a pretty reasonable discussion. The only thing about LK’s replies to me that I didn’t quite get was his focusing on my using the word “shrug” to illustrate my opinion on the $189 plan.

          I WANT the Yankees to spend a shit ton of money. But if I owned the Yankees under the new CBA, I would probably do the same thing. And I still believe the team will be good. Good enough to make the playoffs, and who knows what happens after that. As for 2014, who knows? 2015? Who knows times two. I have no control over it, and I don’t have a crystal ball to see how getting under the budget will actually affect the team, so my response is just a big, fat, exaggerated shrug right now.

          I got the feeling there was some implication that this reaction didn’t make me a “real fan” or some such nonsense. This isn’t an attack on LK in the slightest, his views on the budget are rational and well reasoned. I just thought the shrug thing dragged on a bit, when it was supposed to just signify my indifference with an obvious fiscal decision by business owners.

          • Now Batting says:

            That’s what made George so unique. For better or worse he was the only owner (outside of the Dodgers now apparently) who wouldn’t do the same thing, new CBA be damned.

            • jjyank says:

              And I loved George, but he’s getting posthumously glorified a bit too much. The Dodgers are not a comparable. They’re a franchise trying to go crazy to bring back fans and be flashy. The Yankees aren’t in a position to add tons and tons of payroll for players on questionable contracts.

              • Now Batting says:

                Regardless of their reasons I’m just saying the Dodgers are the only team in baseball willing to go above $189 for the new CBA at the moment.

                • Steve (different one) says:

                  The Yankees would likely be willing to go over as we’ll if they were going over for the first time as well because the Tax is still manageable for those that go over the first few time. Go over every year for a decade, though, like the cheap Yankees have done? Well, then it’s 50%.

                  The situations are not the same.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                I spent probably my entire life until the of 21 hating George Steinbrenner. People really don’t get what an absolute jackass many fans thought he was through the 80′s, the Winfield shit, etc.

                • Pat D says:

                  I loved George. I still haven’t forgiven him for the Winfield shit, being that Winfield was my favorite player.

                  It also prevented Winfield from wearing a Yankees hat on his HOF plaque, which irks me.

                  • Robinson Tilapia says:

                    It took 1996 for me to forgive him for Doug Drabek and Bob Tewksbury.

                  • Coach Potato says:

                    Winfield getting a cushy front office job with the Padres (Executive VP, Senior Advisor)might have had more to do with that.

                    • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                      The Padres could keep Mr May. Never liked the guy even for a second.

                    • Pat D says:

                      Yea, that certainly helped, but I also think the lingering bad feelings, even though he and Steinbrenner had apparently made up, had something to do with it.

                      And Fibula, you are dead to me for the next 24 hours!

      • Juke Early says:

        Going by a webrats definition, all the signees of the Declaration of Independence were trolls.

        Being a NYY for half a century might qualify me for senility in that same BB brain dictionary. But it won’t change the fact that Steinbrenner the Next Generation only care if they win, not tthe Yankees or their fans.

        Now I gotta go a trawling in my trawler.

    • MannyGeee says:

      I will also skip the thread… I might get dizzy and vomit from all the grave spinning implied.

      • Mike HC says:

        I actually think Big George was able to rest in peace in that thread. Not much grave rolling if any. Although I think George did develop a pimple on ass named Hal.

    • Get Phelps Up says:

      Yeah, I didn’t even bother reading it after I read the article and saw the comment count. I do however think that the title could have done without the last 11 words, it seemed too…inviting (if you know what I mean) but then again I didn’t read the thread.

      And yes I think they can be a good team with a 189M payroll, maybe less so at first, but definitely when the ARod, Tex and CC contracts expire and I’m sure that if Mike Trout or someone hits the market, they’ll make him priority number 1. $189,000,000 it at no worse the 3rd highest payroll in baseball.

      • Get Phelps Up says:

        Well I went and read it, and it actually wasn’t that bad…but really, whatever happened to taking what FO people say with a grain of salt?

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          That was the old crew. Meet the new crew.

        • Havok9120 says:

          Again I say, that’s one of the things getting me. Why is everything Hal or Cashman says/does that implies budget cuts the Cardinal rule? Meanwhile anything they say/do that implies otherwise is just posturing to placate the fans.

  3. Blake says:

    @Ken_Rosenthal: Sources: #Dbacks’ Justin Upton invoked his no-trade rights to reject a deal to the #Mariners. Story with @jonmorosi: http://t.co/I7RHjAk2

  4. Scully says:

    Here’s a random Bernie question… i thought it slightly unfair that he didn’t get enough HOF votes to stay on the ballet. I don’t think he’s a hall of famer but i do think he’s good enough to get more than 3% of the vote. Anyway, my question is… if Bernie had 2 more seasons where he put up prime numbers in his career, would that have been enough to get him in? His career stats are:

    H – 2336
    2b – 449
    3b – 55
    HR – 287
    RBI – 1257
    BA – .297
    SLG – .477
    OBP – .381
    OPS – .858
    OPS+ – 125
    WAR – 46

    Two more years of peak production puts him over 2700 hits, over 300 HR, over .300 and probably close to 1500 RBI and 55+ WAR. Just speculation of course and something to amuse yourself during the knicks game.

    Of course, as the saying goes, “if my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle.” Or maybe 2 more peak Bernie years just makes him a slightly poorer man’s Andruw Jones.

    • jjyank says:

      I’m very much biased as Bernie goes. He is my all time favorite player, and was my hero as a kid. Hell, I still have a poster of him in my closet, tattered as it may be. I’d like to think that 2 more peak years would do it, but I’m not sure that’s enough to get 72% more of the vote. Who knows though.

      I do agree that he’s probably not a Hall of Famer, but should have gotten more than 3%.

    • Jacob The OG (formerly Jacob) says:

      I agree with you on everything here. But I think I would rather have bernie than andruw jones.

    • Pistol Pete says:

      Love Bernie, I’ll take the four rings. I always felt Bernie deserved better. He played on hollowed ground manning the most difficult position and all he did was switch hit his way to four world championships batting cleanup on the greatest baseball dynasty since the Yanks of the fifties. He played through the steroid era and there was never a whiff of foul play from Bernie. Check his stats versus Kirby Puckett and Andre Dawson. I’ll take Bernie.

    • Pat D says:

      Maybe, maybe not. As David Schoenfield pointed out in recent days, HOF voters seem to be as harsh on center fielders as they have been on third basemen. Just ask Kenny Lofton.

  5. Alkaline says:

    Alright, so a radio show titled something like the free beer and hot wing show was talking about the Hall of Fame today, to which one of the guys made a comment to the extent of, “who goes by ERA, look at all the wins he had! You go by the win loss column! when talking about Morris. Dear god.

  6. Alex's Rod says:

    In other news Jonathan Singleton, Astros top prospect was suspended 50 games for failing a drug test, in which he was caught with marijuana in his system.

  7. Robinson Tilapia says:

    I just replied in the Hal thread. What was the big fucking deal about anything he said again?

    • Hoss says:

      I think it was the part about enlarging the monument to his father. Apparently, they can’t see it from the Space Station.

    • jjyank says:

      In my opinion, absolutely nothing.

    • MatUk says:

      My problem isn’t the cutting, it’s more the timeframe. They should have done this the past few years with trades etc. It’s laughable considering they’re trying to save money yet dished out those horrible contracts.

      • Get Phelps Up says:

        All the big contracts came before the new CBA was in place.

      • Cris Pengiucci says:

        The new CBA changed the rules. Had they known what would be in this CBA, they may have done things differently in the recent past. Doubt they could have had any clue about it when the signed A-Rod after he opted out. (I also doubt that Hank new anything about baseball contracts at that point.)

      • Robinson Tilapia says:

        Those horrible contracts got you a championship in 2009.

    • Havok9120 says:

      Nothing. It’s what was “implied” or what we can “assume will happen” that has most people in a tizzy.

      Other people seem to think spending any less, ever, is the problem. Taken in a vacuum they are, of course, correct. But no one operates in a vacuum.

  8. Andy Pettitte's Fibula (formerly Manny's BanWagon) says:

    Hopefully Hal will be willing to go above $189 if necessary to put a championship caliber team on the field rather than being more concerned about the bottom line.

    I agree you don’t necessarily need a $220 million payroll to win but I definitely think you’re at least a little more likely to win with a $220 million payroll as compared to $189 million.

    • Mattchu12 says:

      What I took away from what he said was, “We need to spend smarter and be more efficient with our money,” which I’m 100% on board with.

      It means less of these insane albatross contracts that take up huge junks of payroll like A-Rod, Teixeira, what AJ Burnett was, what Cano will be. Hopefully it means a bigger emphasis on scouting and putting more thought into our signings. Did we need to negotiate against ourselves with A-Rod? Hell no. Did we need to signed Teiexeira with Montero on the way? I don’t think so. Did we have to go big on Burnett? Probably not. I don’t want to let Cano go, but should we go insane? I’d rather not.

      Yeah, we don’t win 2009 without Teix and AJ, but I would trade 2009 for winning in the future because I think we’d have a better chance with Montero at 1B than Teix, because that’s a ton of money we could’ve used for Swish instead of the Ichiro/whoever platoon right now. I think it’s more of a statement of HOW we spend money going forward.

      Just my two cents.

      • jjyank says:

        The new CBA with harsher penalties didn’t exist when they signed those players. Doesn’t mean they were all smart signings, but it’s not as relevant to the new budget plan.

        As far as trading away 2009? Fuck no. Are you crazy? I apologize if that comes off as mean or insulting, but nothing is guaranteed dude. Take the championship. Trading 2009 for “winning in the future” could very well get you zero rings. Never, ever, ever, ever, trade in a ring. No offense, but this is part of the reason so many fan bases hate the Yankees. Most would kill to get a World Series Championship, even if it meant suffering a few years after. Take the ring. Cherish it. Enjoy it.

        • Hoss says:

          Agree with you, jj. Championships are like nothing else… well, almost nothing. And if someone had locked Cashman in a closet for the 2009-10 offseason, we might have had another one in 2010.

          • jjyank says:

            I dunno about that last part. I assume you’re referencing Vazquez? He was coming off a top 5 NL Cy Young year, had been remarkably consistant, and none of the pieces the Yankees gave up amounted to much so far. Or maybe you mean Granderson. In hindsight, losing Jackson kind of sucks, yeah. But Granserson himself has been very valuable outside his first year.

            If we’re talking about the Yankees’ chances in 2010, the Mariners pulling out of the Cliff Lee trade might have more to do with it than Cashman’s moves.

            • Hoss says:

              Offseason moves ripped the heart from a championship team, including Matsui and Damon. Replaced by Nick Johnson and Randy Winn. Vasquez was a bust, and Melky would have been useful (PEDs aside, that was 2012), and Logan got off to rough start. Granderson also had rough first year, while Jackson was nearly RoY, Kennedy is top of rotation starter and Coke is a useful lefty in the pen. Chan Ho Park signing was a mistake, as was giving Marte a 2 year deal (he repeated that mistake with P. Feliciano…).

              • Get Phelps Up says:

                What did Matsui and Damon do in 2010 that made them desirable? (and I’d say Granderson replaced Damon, not Winn.)

                And Melky was probably the worst player in baseball that year.

                It’s hard to get upset over a guy like Park, and Coke was easily replaced by Logan.

                • Get Phelps Up says:

                  And Kennedy had a 103 ERA+ in the NL West, hardly a “top of the rotation” starter.

                • Hoss says:

                  What did Johnson or Granderson until he woke up in mid-August do that was worthwhile? Both Matsui and Damon had good years, typical of their careers, and would have fit in fine for another year in NY.
                  Melky had a rough transition to Atlanta, but did pretty well in KC. But I’d take Melky back if we could get rid of what Vasquez did for us in 2010. Awful doesn’t come close to describing it.
                  We’ll feel the Granderson trade for years to come as Jackson and Kennedy play in All-Star games.

                  • Get Phelps Up says:

                    Melky was worse than Vasquez in 2010.
                    And if you go by fWAR, the Yankees “won” that trade.

                    And you’d be singing a different tune about Jackson after 2011 when he struck out 181 times and hit 10 homers.

                    • Get Phelps Up says:

                      I’m not saying the Vasquez trade was good just that it is pretty silly to get upset over it seeing how it turned out.

                      Plus, the Yankees got a useful lefty reliever.

                  • Mike Axisa says:

                    There’s a very, very good chance Granderson will play in more All-Star games with NYY than Jackson and Kennedy will with the Tigers and D’Backs. He’s already got a nice head start.

                  • Steve (different one) says:

                    You aren’t making a cohesive argument and you are moving the goal posts around. You don’t like the Granderson trade? Fine. That’s a legit position.

                    But you originally said they would have won the WS in 2010 without their offseason moves. Ok. But then you complain that Granderson didn’t do anything before August. but the Yankees still made the playoffs, so that’s kindof irrelevant. And in the playoffs, Granderson raked and raked.

                    The Yankees did not miss the WS in 2010 because of Granderson. If anything, Granderson maximized their chances to win the WS that year.

                    Again, that doesn’t mean it was a good trade. But that wasn’t your original argument. So if you want to make an honest argument, you need to acknowledge how f’ing awesome Granderson was in the 2010 postseason.

                    He hit .357/.514/.607 for f’s sake. Please, Johhny Damon wasn’t doing that no matter how much “heart” he had.

              • jjyank says:

                Whoaa there. Okay, step by step:

                Matsui and Damon needed to be let go. They were done.

                Vazquez was a bust, but that’s hindsight speaking there. The only piece to become of value was Melky, and you’re getting your timing mixed up here. Melky was one of the WORST players in all of baseball the year following the trade. The Braves released him, he was so bad. What he did in 2011 and 2012, well, could have been PEDs, or it could have been a re-dedication to the game after being release. Who knows? But he had been trending downward for the Yankees for a couple years. At the time, it seemed like a no-brainer (to me) to trade him while he still had some value.

                Jackson was barely replacement level in his rookie year and was well below average in 2011. As far as Kennedy goes, he took a step back in 2012, and his “top of the rotation” status wouldn’t have held up in the AL East anyway. Let’s not forget Granderson’s MVP caliber season in this discussion as well.

                Coke may be useful. But so us Logan. So that’s moot. Chan Ho Park was a minimal signing. Who cares? Ditto Randy Winn and Nick Johnson.

                I’ll give you Marte and Feliciano, but making mistakes with middle relievers is hardly what cost the Yankees a 2010 World Series, as you seem to claim.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                There were some shit moves that year. Sure. I can agree with that.

                I don’t think the ones we’d agree on were completely irreversable, though.

                I have no issue with the Granderson trade.

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              Javy Vazquez can suck my left nut for an eternity.

              Everything about that trade sounded logical except for the “I hate Javy Vazquez” part.

              This TRX class I went to a couple of hours ago is doing weird stuff to my adrenaline.

              I’d do the Granderson trade ten times out of ten.

      • JobaWockeeZ says:

        Burnett was a bad contract I’ll give you that. And before someone screams hindsight I’ll link you to unhappy commenters on the deal.

        However Teix would have been worth it if he put up superstar numbers that everyone thought he would put. I don’t blame them shelling out for Teix because they though they’d get a top 10 hitter for years. We got that for one…But I still can’t blame them.

        In fact Nick Swisher since 2009 has the same exact wRC+.

        • Steve (different one) says:

          Agreed. I have NO IDEA wtf has happened to Teixiera, but I think people forget how good he was when he hit the market. He was under 30, switch hit, played GG defense, hit for average, hit for power, got on base.

          I’d prob say that Teixeira’s descent into “averageness” is about as perplexing as anything I’ve seen over the last 10 years or so.

          Teixeira was a very attractive FA. Certainly more attractive than Josh Hamilton, the guy the Yankees were “too cheap” to sign.

          • Pistol Pete says:

            Tex was a big time juicer, since ped’s are gone there’s been a steady decline in his numbers.

            • Steve (different one) says:

              Except Teixeira raked for 4-5 years after testing was in place.

              Got any proof, or are you just making shit up?

              • Mike Axisa says:

                The MSM has spent so much time and energy telling everyone PEDs automatically make you good that most people don’t know any other way to rationalize a player’s decline now.

                • Robinson Tilapia says:

                  Ben and Joe were on PEDs in 2009. FACT.

                  • Pat D says:

                    I would take PED’s in an instant if I thought they’d help me in going back to school. Can I get that shit that Bradley Cooper took in Limitless?

                • RetroRob says:

                  Totally. And they ignore that most of the players who have been caught taking PEDs showed no increase in performance.

                  Here’s a shocking thought. Texeira’s career path is consistent with a player who doesn’t take PEDs. He’s just getting older.

            • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

              PED testing began in 2004, covering every year of Tex’s career except for his rookie year (which was his worst offensive season).

              Try again.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      That’s 100% (or 189%! Tip your waitress) what I read from his comments – the limit is there as long as they continue to field what they think is a championship-caliber team.

  9. Yogiism says:

    The match has been lit with Justin Upton. Good chance he is traded soon. The Mariners were rejected. I’m exhausted from today, but can anyone tell me if the Yanks could legitimately factor him and Cano for 2014 and beyond in their budget? It seems possible as I remember reading that Upton would be valued at about $9.5mm per AAV when it comes to the luxury tax. Doable. Yanks have the pieces. I wouldn’t hand over much.

  10. Exiled in Santa Fe says:

    Perhaps I’ve been in the hills of NM for too long, but as a Bronx-born-and-bred Yankee fan whose first and last hero was Mickey Mantle, maybe someone can tell me: Where’s the beef?
    Mike, let me begin by commending you on the job you do here; River Ave Blues is my go-to website for inside dope on the Yankees. The presence of your abundant and generally well-reasoned analyses help prevent withdrawal pangs. In this case, however, there’s so much wrong with your Hal post that I can’t adequately respond in this limited format, so I’ll try posing several questions: What exactly was it that Hal said that was in any sense “wrong”? Don’t you believe that $189 million – or the $220+ million figure he also cited – are indeed enough to field a “championship caliber” team, given solid, intelligent management? Specifically, what free agents would you have signed that the Yankees haven’t, due strictly to their self-imposed financial constraints rather than being driven by a sober assessment of value and an unwillingness to overpay for talent, most of it marginal? Didn’t Hal actually say that if the current strategy fails to produce a highly competitive team, that the goals would be reassessed? Are you longing for the (not so) good ol’ days of George, when throwing too much money at the wrong players, perpeutal impetuousness, instability, and overall mismanagement resulted not in championships, but in years of wandering in the wilderness out of playoff contention? Is it possible this younger generation of Yankee fans has become almost absurdly spoiled by all the winning, facilitated by the Yankees’ ability to absorb huge payrolls? Are Yankees fans’ feelings of “entitlement” to a championship team each year a)justified in any sense; or b)something that sucks all the life and fun out of being a fan, since expectations are consistently unreasonable, with “failure” attached to any season a team doesn’t win the Series? Finally: As a team in transition – with the last of the last generation of Yankee greats at the end of their careers – shouldn’t we all have some patience, know that some down years are possible if not probable, and encourage Yankee ownership and management to do what’s necessary for a rebuilding, knowing that new core players must be developed or collected and that “retooling” may no longer be enough?

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      You live in one of the most amazing cities on this earth, FWIW.

      • RetroRob says:

        More importantly, thoughts on Bowie’s new pending CD and single?

        I didn’t even know it was in the works.

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          I’m so fucking excited.

          The single’s already up. Very similar to what he was doing on “Heathen,” etc. His voice definitely sounds weathered.

          I’m just thrilled there will be more music from the man. I’d kill for a show.

          • Pat D says:

            I have the Best of Bowie double CD set, and a few of his classic albums. I tend to like his older stuff more. Space Oddity, The Man Who Sold the World, Changes, Life on Mars?, Moonage Daydream, Oh You Pretty Things, Queen Bitch, All the Young Dudes, Suffragette City, Fame and Heroes all rank pretty high up on my list. I also really like Cat People, at least the version that is on the Best of Bowie that Tarantino used so surprisingly effectively in Inglourious Basterds.

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              “The Man Who Sold the World” is an incredibly underrated album.

              My five favorites would probably be:

              1. Station to Station
              2. Low
              3. Ziggy
              4. Diamond Dogs
              5. MWSTW

              The 80′s were rough, although there’s some gems on those albums. I think anything from “Outside” on was a real renaissance for him. He just has never stopped pushing himself, even after he turned 60. He never stopped evolving.’

              Without a doubt, my favorite artist of all time, and I think I paid him one hell of a tribute. A few of you know what I mean.

          • RetroRob says:

            I heard the single. That’s how I heard he also had an album coming. I’m a minor leaguer in my Bowiedom compared to you as I only have about ten if his CDs. So I was wondering if you knew he was in the studio. It’s been over a decade.

            Beyond that, I wasn’t sure half way through the song if I liked it but then decided I did. His voice doesn’t sound as strong yet I’d have to hear more. Last, all I thought of when I heard about the new set was let this be a sign he wants to go on your. I am so there.

            Now if Led Zep will go on tour I will tap my bank accounts to go see them.

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              He wasn’t supposed to be in the best of health, but supposedly looks great if you see him walking down the street. Lives on Lafayette and Houston, for those keeping score. Penthouse apartment.

              I had no clue until a friend sent me a link yesterday.

              • RetroRob says:

                I forgot he bought a penthouse in the city at the Turn of the Century. (I like using that terminology, since it meant something very old school and very long ago a little more than a decade back, where now it’s something very recent.)

                The fact you didn’t know until yesterday makes me feel better. Totally took my by surprise. A pleasant one, at that.

                • Robinson Tilapia says:

                  I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows him.

                  My wife gets her hair done at a trendy place in the LES where the receptionist is some roadie-looking dude who’s friends with Marc Bolan’s son, as well as Tony Visconti, Bowie’s old producer. He actually got me David’s address.

    • Havok9120 says:

      So, this post got eaten by the off topic comment pyramid underneath it. Despite that, it’s one of the best posts I’ve read on this site. It asks virtually every question I have of the people who got ticked at Hal’s comments, AND IT’S STILL CIVIL.

      Most of the commenters here aren’t being rude when they originally post a thought (Hell, most of us seem to like each other); those of us responding can afford to do the same.

    • Jim Is Bored says:

      Fantastic post. I’m glad Havok pointed that out, because it’s tough to read long posts online without some line breaks, but I’m glad I did.

      I completely agree with you.

  11. Kevin G. says:

    I wonder if Montero was in the Upton package. Probably not, considering the DBacks have their own Montero and there’s no DH in the NL.

    • RetroRob says:

      Who do they have at first? Montero’s future is as the new Victor Martinez. Some catching, some first and DHing. With all season inter league play his value to an NL team might be higher than thought.

  12. Need Pitching & Hitting says:

    So apparently the Mariners had a deal in place rejected by Upton that would have sent Nick Franklin, Charlie Furbush, Stephen Pryor and one of Taijuan Walker, Danny Hultzen or James Paxton to Arizona for Upton.

    I was wondering if any prospect junkies here could give a rough Yankee system equivalent of that offer.

    • Get Phelps Up says:

      I’m not much of a prospect junkie, but Robertson, Sanchez, Logan, Phelps and one of Mason, Slade or Austin?

  13. blehmann says:

    I read here but seldom post but I was moved to post by Exiled in Santa Fe as we both herald from the same era. I became aware of baseball and a Yankees fan in the summer of 1961 and I still marvel at the player that was Mickey Mantle. Imagine the career he could have had if Joe D hadn’t destroyed one of his knees. I think Mike was quite clear about what was troubling about Hal’s comments. The Yanks’ comparative advantage comes from its deep pockets and tying your hands in this regard, particularly with the incumbent albatross contracts (of which the only one I fault the Yanks on is Arod’s). It is pretty clear that money is driving Hal more than championships because there is no earthly reason that we should not have resigned Russell Martin. I doubt any of us saw that coming. Even Swisher’s deal with Cleveland was reasonable given current baseball economics. I agree with Exiled in Santa Fe that we should all be more patient and I remember long periods of Yankee mediocrity that taught me some patience. But I think it is reasonable to fear that Hal will be content to be competitive, hoping that a high enough probability of getting to the playoffs equals a high enough probability of winning the Series. This is a reasonable statement but Mike is right: the fact is that we have the resources to improve the odds and Hal could choose to reinvest in the business and improve the odds.

  14. Elton Cod says:

    I just read Axisa’s post on Hal.

    Good to see that even Axisa agrees with me. I LOL when the crew of regulars here calls anyone criticizes the Steinbrenners “entitled”, “probably Mets fans”, etc. It’s pretty simple. Even with the new CBA, Hal and Hank are still making loads and loads of money, more than anybody else in the league. Why? Because it’s the fucking New York Yankees, the most famous franchise in the history of professional sports. What did Hal and Hank do to make the Yankees this profitable? Nothing. You want “entitled”? What entitles Hal and Hank to all of the money generated by the Yankee name, other than the fact that they happened to swim faster than George’s other sperm?

    I guess property taxes get really rough to deal with when you own six houses, maybe that’s why Hal/Hank need to cut down on spending. They _could_ wait until their long/awful contracts expire to vow to get below $189 or whatever, so that they don’t need to ruin the rest of the team to make it under the cap – but they won’t. The bad contracts are Hal/Hank’s fault; the cap is Hal/Hank’s decision, so that they can invest more of their money in hedge funds or whatever unfathomably rich people do; yet somehow it’s the fans (the people who make Hal/Hank’s profits possible) who are “entitled” and “selfish” and “immature” for calling bullshit. The knee-jerk Steinbrenner apologism in these comments is tiresome. It’s troll-ish, frankly.

  15. Pat D says:

    Woo hoo! Orientation for adult learning tonight. After getting there late due to a freaking car accident, it went pretty well. My god, textbook prices are insane. One of them was $218. The anthropology class I’m taking needs 4 textbooks, one of which was $145 used. The book I need for statistics wasn’t available. Luckily I’m not paying for any of this.

    But things are starting to look up, since it looks like unemployment will be extended. Now if I can just get the health care credit, I’ll be back to normal. Silver linings.

    Speaking of Silver Linings, the Oscar nominations were a little interesting this morning. Essentially, Argo, Zero Dark Thirty and Les Miserables now have virtually no chance of winning Best Picture. Which, I think, narrows it down to Lincoln and Silver Linings Playbook. Or maybe Life of Pi. I don’t think Beasts of the Southern Wild or Amour could sneak in, though.

    • jjyank says:

      Heh, I feel ya on texbooks bro. I’ve been there too recently. $200-$300 for a single book, and even if you sell it back in mint condition, you get like $30. I’d advise looking into third part sources to get your books if you need to. Amazon Prime offers deals for students on occasion, and half.com is another option.

      • Pat D says:

        Well, again, I’m not paying for any of it, so it’s not a big deal. I’m just having sympathy pains for other students.

        • jjyank says:

          My parents paid for it in undergrad. And I paid for it for grad. But in grad school, I never bought the books. I’d buy one main one maybe, and use the online databases to get the gist of the rest. Can’t knock my method though, I did finish grad school with a 3.8. My ability to navigate grad school on databases might just be why I got my new job though. Because that’s what I’d do…just cooler, and more threatening databases than JSTOR, CIAO, Ebsco Host, etc.

      • Jim Is Bored says:

        Sell it to people directly on Amazon Marketplace.

        If you sell it for 20-30 dollars less than the retailers, you’ll get a buyer.

    • Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

      Hmmm, interesting you say that. I haven’t seen (and honestly don’t plan on seeing) Zero Dark Thirty but from what I know that and Les Mis are definitely in the conversation, along with Lincoln and from what I heard Argo. I always figured Life of Pi would have no shot, and I’m actually fairly impressed it got the nominations it did.

      • Pat D says:

        ZDT, Les Mis and Argo have no chance because they didn’t get Best Director nominations. Only 3 times in the 84 year history of the awards has a movie won Best Picture without a Best Director nomination. 2 of those 3 times were in the Awards’ first 4 years of existence, and the categories and number of nominees were different. Only Driving Miss Daisy in 1989 has pulled off the trick since. So it would take an immense change in the trends of the past 80 years for one of those 3 movies to win.

        • Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

          Interesting trivia. I never knew that.

          • Pat D says:

            Yea, I’m up on Oscar stuff. I don’t have the exact numbers in front of me, since it’s on my other computer, but two other interesting things happened. Silver Linings Playbook was nominated in all 6 major categories (picture, director, all 4 acting categories), which has been around 10 other times, if I remember correctly.

            Also, The Master became one of 10 or so movies to get three or more acting nominations, but not be nominated for Best Picture. Ironically, the last movie that did that (Doubt) also saw Philip Seymour Hoffman get nominated for Best Supporting Actor.

  16. Vern Sneaker says:

    My take on what’s going on is that the organization believes they have several true impact prospects on the way — not the usual crop of possible/maybe guys — and they’ve decided to wait for them and save the $$ over the long haul. They might be right, too, though it sure makes for a couple of years where winning a title looks very iffy. But then it always is in reality, right, even with a bunch of stars? I LOVE watching the prospects make the big club (I was already a Yankees fan for thirty years in the 80s and damn near quit on them when they traded Drabek). That decade’s prospect policies killed me. The hopes I have for this group starting in ’15 or ’16 are as high as I can remember having.

  17. Exiled in Santa Fe says:

    Oops – looks like I parked my rant re Mike’s Hal post on the wrong street, but hell, not even Yankee Stadium is where it was last I saw it. I’m just an out-of-towner now, so please don’t ticket me. ;)

  18. long ron daniels says:

    I love you Debbie. I don’t mind that you’re too fat. I truly do love you. I love you like I love repeatedly dipping my testicles into a fresh bowl of warm au jus. Just promise me you won’t use the soap on your head after you use it on yer butt.

    I ain’t need no flu shot.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      No context. This is the problem.

      That was a great line with the au jus, though.

      I still think you have a future as a tension-breaker. You’re going to come in handy during losing Game Threads. Mark my words.

      • Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

        Classic of prospect hugging, RT. Give up on this guy, he’s never making it out of the AA off-season open threads league.

  19. Jacob The OG (formerly Jacob) says:

    So my offseason sport is Baskeball. The Knicks look like a highschool team out there tonight smdh

  20. Andy says:

    What does everyone think about shortstop Aledmys Diaz and outfielder Dariel Alvarez? I think that the Yankees should go after Diaz because we certainly will need left side of the infield help over the next few years.

  21. Craig says:

    Shaun Marcum is the only guy that would make sense as depth, but he probably wouldn’t come too cheap.


  22. Reuben Sierra's Chains says:

    Bernie was my favorite Yankee growing up.

    Little League number was #51. Love Him.

  23. Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

    Fuck Music Theatre International.



    That is all.

  24. Chas131 says:

    Would you trade Williams and Sanchez for Upton?

  25. CapitalT says:

    Always good to see Stump on the bench…Sometimes the good ole days weren’t so good

  26. RossA says:

    Very late to the party here…..but I have actually liked the fact that the team has been unusually stingy and reticent on player acquisition recently.

    There is a point at which you are throwing good money after bad. You can almost guarantee playoff appearances if you use the George Steinbrenner template of outspending the league by a factor of “X,” but you can’t guarantee playoff wins. The playoffs have too many series, with too many good teams, and are too short to make them anything more certain than a crap shoot.

    So if I were running the team, I would not mindlessly spend at the “X” multiplier over the league just because I can. I think I would consider what my current team roster realities are, what was available to me in my own minor league system, what was going to become available over the next 3-5 years in free agents, what the state of the market is right now, etc.

    Specifically, the fact that the Yankees’ offense is built around a core of infielders who are a) all on the wrong side of 30, and b) are either locked into a longterm deal or due to get one, makes it foolish, I think, to pay big money for extra players right now.

    The combination of what can be expected from this aging core and the financial commitments already in place is setting this team up for mediocre, declining performance over the next 2-4 years. To spend alot just to try to force that core into more playoffs is stupid, IMO, especially if you are paying filet mignon money for hamburger.

    Sure, you can argue that since we can never predict the future with any great accuracy that the team should go full bore every year. But I for one would love to see the team save up for a rainy day. Maybe there will be some incredible opportunities around the corner, either in terms of foreign signings, free agents, etc. I’d rather not be going all in at this point when I’m not exactly holding a great hand.

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.