Feb
18

Open Thread: 2/18 Camp Notes

By
(Star-Ledger)

(Star-Ledger)

With position players now in camp, the Yankees held their first full squad workout of 2013 today. Here’s the latest from Tampa…

  • Chad Jennings has the day’s batting practice groups, which include pretty much everyone. It was a light day for the pitchers, with Hiroki Kuroda the only projected big leaguer to throw. He didn’t face hitters, it was just a bullpen session.
  • Derek Jeter ran on the field for the first time since ankle surgery — he had been running on a treadmill — and did some defensive drills, including some side-to-side movements. He did not run the bases. Eduardo Nunez, meanwhile, made at least two errors during infield drills, so hooray for that. [Dan Barbarisi, Jennings, Sweeny Murti & Mark Feinsand]
  • Joe Girardi gave his annual start-of-camp speech, saying the message is “let’s get better … I mean, that’s the bottom line. Let’s get prepared and let’s get better. That’s what we’re here for.” [Bryan Hoch]
  • First official batting practice homer of the new season? It belongs to new DH Travis Hafner. What does it mean? Nothing. It’s baseball. [Hoch]

This is your open thread for the night. None of the local sports teams are in action, so you’re on your own for entertainment. You folks know how these things work by now, so have at it.

222 Comments»

  1. trr says:

    Look, I’m not gonna push the panic button ’cause Nunez made 2 errors during the first drill, but does anyone really think he’s a viable back-up SS – one who will see major time in the field this year? And if not, who’s next (great album!) – Jayson Nix??

    • vicki says:

      live at leeds and isle of wight are so much hotter than the studio albums.

      • Pat D says:

        I just can’t get into live albums as much as studio albums. The crowd noise always distracts me.

        • Cris Pengiucci says:

          Live at Leeds is one of the few exceptions. Outstanding live album. Thanks for bringing that one up Vicki! The Who was my favorite band. Unfortunately, it’s simply the Pete Townshend show now, with Roger Daltry doing vocals. Sad.

          • Pat D says:

            Yea, they should have just quit when The Ox died. Zak Starkey was a decent enough replacement, though there could never be a true replacement for Keith Moon.

            My only issue with Live At Leeds is that it was before Who’s Next, so it’s missing about half of my favorite Who songs. I do like how they did “Heaven and Hell” on that one, though. The lyrics are hilarious.

            • Cris Pengiucci says:

              Met John on several occasions as my friend was his drummer and US business manager from about ’87 through his death. Having toyed with the bass guitar, he was my idol. Wonderful man, easy to talk to and truly enjoyed meeting the fans.

              Agree, they should have quite when he died. I also love Pino Palladino, John’s replacement, but his style just doesn’t fit with The Who. Although I must say I enjoyed their rendition of Bell Boy during the 12-12-12 Concert. That was unexpected.

          • vicki says:

            they may have been onto something when they hoped to die before they got old.

            • Cris Pengiucci says:

              2 of them got it.

              • vicki says:

                the wrong two.

                • Cris Pengiucci says:

                  Pete was (is?) a tremendous song writer and an excellent guitarist. However, the one time I met him personally (’89 in Boulder, backstage in John’s dressing room prior to a show during the “Tommy 20th Anniversary Tour” (The Who On Ice)), he wasn’t exactly pleasant. I was disappointed, as I had my copy of his book hoping he would sign it for me. He didn’t even acknowledge we were in the room. It was only 4 of us plus John and his girlfriend. Not like it was a huge crowd.

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      I’d call Nix a bargain, the best I ever had.

    • Steve D Fl says:

      agreed “Who’s Next” love it,

  2. Bo Knows says:

    Really cool analysis about Nova over at Yankeeanalysts

    http://www.yankeeanalysts.com/.....nova-47887

  3. Bob Buttons says:

    http://www.cincinnatimagazine......ID=1885174

    Aroldis Chapman really sound like an immature dick with the agent switching. His agent is not without fault but his worries did come true – other agents poached him. He also whined about how he’s not getting an iPhone when his first agent bought him a brand new Blackberry.

    Also in the article is that apparently the agent switching made the Yanks and Sox back off. Can’t blame them.

    • RetroRob says:

      Once he did the somersault on the mound that was it for me. He’s had quite a few issues surrounding him in his short time in the majors.

      http://cdn.lastangryfan.com/wp.....jpg?adb689

      • YanksFanInBeantown says:

        Honestly, he’s a lefty who throws 104 mph, has a devastating slider and a change up with potential.

        If he was on the Yankees I wouldn’t care if he called himself Weapon X had a Brian Dawkins style entrance from the bullpen.

        • RetroRob says:

          My point is not a question of his ability or if I’d want him on the Yankees. My point is I’d be concerned about any player on the Yankees with maturity issues that could impact his development. For example, I have concerns about Slade Heathcott. Doesn’t even have to a younger player. I will not be happy if the PED allegations against A-Rod turn out to be true. He and pretty much every other player got a pass from me (not that it matters) ten years back because it was a culture that MLB on all levels encouraged, as did the media and the fans. I’m not holding it against anyone. I do have a more of a problem with players who use PEDs now. I still don’t think they’re evil, but they are ignoring very clear guidelines and their act endangers their own team because if they are caught they will be suspended. That does bother me.

          Additionally, if any Yankee closer did that somersault, I would not be happy.

    • Manny's Banwagon says:

      Neither of you would give a rats ass about those things if he was a Yankee pumping in 105 MPH fastballs.

  4. Barry's Gift Basket says:

    Ohhh good ol’ Eddie Scissorhands with the errors already. I bet he lost the helmet running too.

  5. The Girardi quote. Was driving around running some errands on my day off, and was listening to WFAN…Kim Jones/Chris Carlin.

    Anyways, Carlin was going on and on about Giardi’s quote saying it was out of line and said while Jeter and Rivera would never do it, that they should be offended/say something to skip.

    They never said the whole quote and I kind of came in mid thought, but after seeing the entire quote, wow, Chris Carlin was totally off, which isn’t at all shocking, because he’s a hack, but still.

    I can see the media coverage for the Yankee being even more annoying that usual. They don’t have the classic ‘feared’ offensive lineup and after years of media types calling for ‘small ball’ they will bash the Yanks for not scoring runs.

    Also, the Jeter coverage is already unbearable…almost Tebow-like.

  6. DR says:

    Still have 3 openings for a keeper fantasy baseball league that I posted about a week or so ago. 1 email address given was invalid so it didn’t go through. If anyone who hasn’t joined yet wants to join, email my alt email at fultzy@rocketmail.com and ill send you an invite.

  7. vicki says:

    oh yeah, pronk. don’t call it a comeback.

  8. voiceofirrationalrationale says:

    Hafner hits 1st bomb of ST, and it’s nothin’ ?! That Cashman is a sauvant is what he is ! Yes sir, 1st of about 58 (6 spring, rest when it counts). Greatest signing ever ! Put’em on your back you sexy beast ! On second thought, you better not.

  9. Havok9120 says:

    So, according to ESPN NY (oy), IF Justin Turner of the Mets is “expected” to be available. I know nothing about him, but what say you, people of teh interwebz?

  10. Pat D says:

    I’m kind of bored. Let’s see what dead horse I can beat tonight.

    Eh, let’s keep it simple. Tim Tebow sucks as a football player and isn’t much better as a human being.

    (waits in eager anticipation)

    • Barry's Gift Basket says:

      I don’t know anything about him as a person, but as a football player he blows, no doubt. Wich is why i just can’t believe to this day how he completed that pass against my Steelers a couple of years ago. It was O/T in a playoff game no less. I’ll hate him forever because of that, i don’t need anything else.

    • Gordon m says:

      I agree, and if it isn’t true then may god strike me dead in the next five minutes.

      • Gordon m says:

        Well, I’m still alive, it must be true.

        • Pat D says:

          Glad to see you’re still with us! I’d call this incontrovertible proof.

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

            “The Babel fish,” said The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy quietly, “is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy received not from its own carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish.

            “Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.

            “The argument goes something like this: ‘I refuse to prove that I exist,’ says God, ‘for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.’

            “‘But,’ says Man, ‘the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.’

            “‘Oh dear,’ says God, ‘I hadn’t thought of that,’ and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

            “‘Oh, that was easy,’ says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

            “Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingo’s kidneys, but that didn’t stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his bestselling book, Well That about Wraps It Up for God.

            “Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.”

            -Douglas Adams, “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      I don’t think it’s that black and white. I don’t agree with his particular brand of Christianity and find it hypocritical, to put it mildly. I don’t think that precludes him from being capable of very good things and, I’m sure, has done them. We’re rarely all good, or all bad.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      Dumber than dirt? For sure. Potentially a xenophobic and/or hates “heathens” and “pagans” ? Possibly. Contributed less to the world than Ben Stein? Probably.

      • MannyGeee says:

        As a Ben Stein fan, I am gonna have to ask you to shut your lying whore mouth. thank you and good day…

        • Bob Buttons says:

          Not a good day. Damn dentist been hurting my lying whore mouth.

        • Pat D says:

          Ben Stein supports intelligent design. Yet he’s supposed to be really, really smart.

          That knocks him down to merely smart.

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

            I disagree with this. Intelligent Design theory is NOT something I subscribe to, to make clear, but it has more to be said for it than people think.

            Basically though, if you’re atheist you’ll think it’s silly, because why wouldn’t you?

            • Pat D says:

              No, I think it’s silly because it’s creationism masquerading as science. Its theory is ridiculous and it is one where scientific data cannot be collected, studied, analyzed and tested. Therefore, it is not science.

              • Govin says:

                “Even if there were no actual evidence in favor of the Darwinian theory … we would still be justified in preferring it over rival theories.
                Richard Dawkins.

                One of the smartest men in the world, is willing to believe evolution, even if the facts don’t back it up. If that’s not a religious belief, then I don’t know what is.

                • Pat D says:

                  Isn’t he saying “if there were no evidence,” not “there is no evidence?” So I don’t think that quote backs up your assertion.

                  I get what you’re saying, his religion is science. But science and religion are so different in how they go about looking at things that they’re not the same.

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

                Eh, it’s a bit more complicated than that. It assumes in advance that God exists though.

    • Mike HC says:

      I think I am one of the few (or maybe relatively silent majority, idk) that doesn’t love or hate Tebow.

      He seems like a pretty decent guy to me. Also had a bunch of friends go to college with him and hung out with him on multiple occasions and they too say he is a good guy, genuine and not phony. As a football player, seems to me he would be a decent back up QB in a read, option type of offense. Also could be used in more creative ways, which the Jets failed to do. Overall, I would say he is a solid NFL backup and a relatively good person. Just my opinion.

      • Pat D says:

        And my opinion is that a “good person” doesn’t go speak at a mega-church whose head is anti-gay, anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim and anti-Mormon. It’s equivalent to a tacit endorsement of those views.

        • Mike HC says:

          Don’t really know enough about that whole thing to pass judgment. I guess it depends on what he said in the speech.

          • Mike HC says:

            I see that it hasn’t happened yet. So I guess it depends on what he will say.

          • Pat D says:

            I don’t care what he says. I don’t agree with his viewpoints and never will. But I can still have respect for his opinions. Then he does something like this, it’s very hard to muster any respect for him at all.

            • Mike HC says:

              Yea, I wouldn’t call anyone a “good person” who is “anti” all, or even any of those groups of people. Just the announcement on its own that he is going to speak there isn’t enough for me to jump to the conclusion that he agrees with those views though. You could easily be right though.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                I can only speak for myself here. I don’t need to agree with every single thing a given place stands for in order to speak at the place. I would say, though, that I would make very, very clear, either beforehand or at the event, what aspects of the place I disagreed with.

                Not that I make these decisions for the agency I work for, but I’d have no problem having Tebow appear for us. I would just make sure he knew in advance what we represent, as well as what we don’t.

                I tend not to give Tebow the benefit of the doubt with this particular appearance.

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

              Not to be a dick here, or to start a shitstorm, but President Obama went to a Church with a racist Pastor, and was married by that same Pastor.

              • Pat D says:

                We discussed that somewhere on here. To make clear, I don’t care for that guy either and will not defend the president on going to his church.

        • Bob Buttons says:

          Sums it up right there.

          At least the church doesn’t seem to be racist based on skin colours)

        • Havok9120 says:

          You’re condemning him for a speech he hasn’t given yet?

          C’mon now. Should we be applying that same line of thinking to the President and good ‘ole Jeremiah Wright?

          • Pat D says:

            I can condemn him for his choice of speaking venues. Your Obama/Wright comparison really doesn’t ring true either. Not that I would defend Obama on that score, either.

            But, like Tilapia, I think you’re missing the point here.

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            There’s nothing necessarily radical about Jeremiah Wright. That was a targeted attempt to make black theology, and the black man, seem scary in advance of the election.

            How that whole saga played out was absolutely disgusting.

            • Havok9120 says:

              Eh. Some of his stuff may not be “radical,” but that’s mainly because it goes into “crackpot” land instead.

              And it didn’t help that he liked the attention the press gave him when the story broke and kept pushing himself back into the news.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                Yeah, his response afterwards didn’t do anyone any favors.

                The type of stuff we heard in snippets from his sermons, though, was stuff I didn’t have any issue with. It’s rather animated liberation theology.

                I will say that I’m not familiar with specific entire oeuvre of the Reverend’s, though. :)

                • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                  Is saying that the government invented AIDS to kill black people normal liberation theology?

                  Honest question.

                  • Robinson Tilapia says:

                    I don’t think the government “invented” AIDS, and I wouldn’t say it’s part of anyone’s theology.

                    They did, however, sit on their hands for an awful long time on it, and who that was at the expense of is something I’ll leave for everyone else to think about.

                    Off to bed. Goodnight, everyone.

                    • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                      Wright did say the government invented AIDS, and that’s my main problem with him. I can appreciate a good Malcolm X-esque fiery speaker as much as anyone; I just get pissed when they say stuff like that.

                      And it was at the expense of gay men.

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

                  Really? He was a racist nutcase.

                  We’re enough past that point that I’ve stopped thinking about it, but I’m not giving him a pass.

        • Govin says:

          All because someone disagrees with your views doesn’t make them evil. You should look into why these people believe what they believe, not just what they believe. One last thing the word anti does not equal the word hate.

          • Robinson Tilapia says:

            “One last thing the word anti does not equal the word hate.”

            I’d partly agree with that. I just think the word “hate” gets thrown around a lot and that, in the end, it just doesn’t mean a whole lot. If you’re anti-something-or-other, it doesn’t really make a difference whether you love, like, dislike, or hate, how your “anti” gets played out could wind up really disenfranchising another person. That matters to me more than “hate.”

          • Pat D says:

            From what I’ve read of this “pastor,” it is hate. You’d have to go find his direct quotes.

          • Jason says:

            So…..RT, no issue with characterization of the state of Israel as ‘illegal’ or ‘genocidal’. Are those snippets the animated ones?

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              Did you read what I wrote above that?

              I don’t take sides in the Middle East debate. Leave the technical questions there to jjyank.

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

                “Sides in the debate?”

                To call Israel genocidal is not taking a “side”. It’s ignoring facts to support an agenda.

                Fuck it all, I’m never going to look at this thread again after tonight. Congrats all, you’re getting a tiny snippet of my views. I’m not going in detail though.

                I’m sure you all care, right?

    • RetroRob says:

      BTW What is the issue with Tebow as a human being? I’m asking that as a serious question. I don’t follow football enough to get involved in the personality aspect. I know he doesn’t have a NFL QB’s arm, and I know that he has lot of supporters and he is overtly religious. Is it the religion part that causes problems? Once again, it’s a serious question, but he seems to get people upset so I’m curious why.

      • Robinson Tilapia says:

        He’s a pretty open conservative Christian and, depending on what your own beliefs are, it’s either a beautiful thing, or it isn’t.

      • Pat D says:

        I’m being overly harsh, I will admit. I don’t care for the in-your-face religious shit. His father has this missionary in a country that is almost exclusively Catholic, which means that they come from a school of thought that their version of Christianity is the right, or superior, version.

        I am also being admittedly extremely judgmental in that I feel people who are so overtly religious like that are very judgmental themselves. Where I draw the line is that where I’m judgmental, it’s not because I feel I’m superior to others. I’ve had enough experiences already in my relatively short life to know that I’m not. But I’m not sure those people feel that way.

        • YanksFanInBeantown says:

          A truly good Christian is pretty much the nicest person in the world. He’s a little OTT, but I haven’t seen anything to suggest he isn’t genuine.

          Also,
          htt0p://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-sound-efx/09000d5d8250f44d/Sound-FX-Tim-Tebow

          He honestly seems like a great guy, even if he sucks at football.

          • Pat D says:

            I don’t think he’s malicious, but to me he comes off as a douche.

            • YanksFanInBeantown says:

              I think that organized religion is responsible for most of the evil of the past couple of millenia, but really strong individual faith really doesn’t bother me that much if what you take from it is “be a good and loving person” as opposed to “God hates f**s”

              • Bo Knows says:

                That is an over simplification though, the main issue with organized religion like any major institution is that there can and have been individuals who will abuse the system to further their own selfish ambition and abuse, pervert all that is good about it in order to get what they want.

                Many of the atrocities that have been associated with organized religion have been based on other factors and the individuals who order and commit said atrocities will often use the pretext of religion to hide behind so they can be “blameless” so to speak.

                • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                  The Puritans weren’t led astray by a corrupt individual, they were just self-righteous, hypocritical dicks.

                  And my main problem with organized religion isn’t the religion itself but the fact that its very nature lends it to being used for things like the Crusades or the Inquisition, because a religious man will do anything if he believes his religion truly requires it.

                  • Govin says:

                    And a none religious man will do anything because he knows he can get away with it. I’ve also seen people do amazing things they normally would not have done had they not been religious.

                    • Cool Lester Smooth (Formerly YanksFanInBeantown) says:

                      Oh, it can absolutely be a force for good. I am Christian and I deeply respect Islam, I just really really dislike a lot of what their churches have done for the last 2000 years.

                • Robinson Tilapia says:

                  This.

                  • Cool Lester Smooth (Formerly YanksFanInBeantown) says:

                    My issue is that organized religion has a way of changing the message from “be a good and loving person, because it’s the right thing to do” to “do what we tell you, because we’re God’s voice on Earth.”

        • RetroRob says:

          Okay, I was just curious. Looking at what I wrote, it almost could have been a set-up trolling note, although I wasn’t shooting for that. I thought maybe he had done something recently that set off a new wave of Tebow stories or postings. As said, I certainly know who he is, but I wasn’t sure if something else was going on. I passed by this thread a couple times tonight and noticed it growing, but I didn’t post anything since I didn’t have much to add, so I figured I’d just ask a question!

      • Jason says:

        Its a NYY blog, huh. Tim tebows a Yankee now? Come on, your are a reasonable guy, that cop out is beneath you. It’s ok to say, ‘maybe I’m wrong. My bad.’

  11. Hoss says:

    “Let’s get better”? Girardi has been watching too many reruns of Frasier. That was Miles Crane’s greeting when he subbed for Frasier’s radio show.
    Given the state of the Yankees, Joe may need a psychiatrist by the ASB, so it kind of makes sense.

  12. Govin says:

    The mariners Gm says he is close to trading mike carp. What are the chances its to the Yankees

    • Hoss says:

      Mets: They already got Buck, Lyon, Cowgill and Byrd.

      • Bob Buttons says:

        Both your logic behind your argument and your argument itself makes perfect sense.

        • Hoss says:

          Yes, because Mike Trout is untouchable at this point.

          • Bob Buttons says:

            In social science generally and linguistics specifically, the cooperative principle describes how people interact with one another.

            The maxim of relation, where one tries to be relevant, and says things that are pertinent to the discussion.

            • Hoss says:

              Thank you, Torii Hunter.

              • Bob Buttons says:

                Once upon a time Vertically Challenged Native-American Riding Hood, wanted to take a vacation at her chronologically advanced grandmother’s house.

                On the way, she ran into a wolf that had recently been put on the endangered species list.

                “Hey where are you going Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood”, asked the wolf.

                “I’m going to my grandma’s house for a togetherness celebration”, said Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood.

                The wolf told Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood a short cut to grandma’s house. Unfortunately the short cut was through a federally protected weapons facility. So Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood was fined for disturbing the fragile ecosystems.

                When she finally got to grandma’s house, she noticed that grandma looked much different then usual, but accepted and celebrated their differences.

                “What plus size eyes you have, grandma”, said Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood.

                “The better to see not to judge you with”, said “grandma”.

                “What plus size teeth you have”, said Vertically Challenged Native American Riding Hood.

                “The better to eat you with”, said “grandma” – “but I can’t because I’m a vegetarian and I also have irritable bowl syndrome…”

      • Govin says:

        Are you saying that John Buck has been traded for the third time this offseason. That poop guy.

    • RetroRob says:

      Hmmmm, well, Carp is really not someone the Yankees need right now, so I’d say less than 1%. Yet, Cashman and Trader Jack seem to have each other on speed dial, so I’ll up it to 15% based on the bat phone connection between their lairs.

      BTW I didn’t realize Zduriencik was 62. I thought he was part of the new stream of GM. He looks like shit, but I thought he was a few years younger but looked like shit. Now I realize he’s older and looks like shit. I just can’t see him as a slick-fielding second baseman. One thing was clear. Could not hit!

      http://www.baseball-reference......urie001joh

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      I actually like Mike’s Casper Wells idea so much more.

  13. dkidd says:

    i am printing up “let’s get better” t-shirts

    i expect to sell none of them

  14. RetroRob says:

    From the Cinicinnati Magazine article Bob posted above. Thought this quote about Brien Taylor was interesting, just to make my fellow Yankee fans feel bad for what might have been,

    “Before Law went to ESPN, he worked in the Blue Jays front office. Once, he asked an older scout to name the best pitching prospect he’d ever seen. “Without really hesitating,” Law recalls, “he said, ‘Brien Taylor.’ ” Taylor was baseball’s top draft pick in 1991, and he remains an almost mythical figure for talent evaluators, in part because he ruined his pitching arm in a brawl. Yet Taylor is the first comparison Law reaches for in explaining what makes Chapman so special.”

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      Yup. Not the first time I’ve seen that. Just amazing, ain’t it?

      • RetroRob says:

        He was still pretty raw and took a slight step back in command his first year in AA, yet it was to be expected as he just blew hitters away in high school. Considering AA is where the real seperation occurs, I thought he did well. They certainly couldn’t hit him.

        This was back during the Michael years when the Yankees were identifying and producing quality MLB players from the farm, eventually including Pettitte, Mo, Posada, Bernie and Jeter, who would be drafted the following year. Taylor had a good shot. Touching 100 and throwing lefty will carry a player a long way for a long time. A lost member of the dynasty? Now he’s in jail. Life can be cruel.

        I’m guessing Law’s comparison was on the easy velocity Taylor and Chapman showed, the command issues and, yes, the maturity issues.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      “Good makeup” suddenly makes much more sense, no?

      • Havok9120 says:

        Really though, at least why it became something the FO actively searched out for.

        Not saying it’s a great idea, but certainly becomes somewhat more understandable.

      • YanksFanInBeantown says:

        Eh, I can’t really fault him for defending his brother. It just really, really sucks for him that he got injured doing it.

        • forensic says:

          Defending a family member from an imminent attack or something like that is absolutely fine. Unfortunately that is nowhere near what he reportedly did.

          Going to another guy’s trailer and fighting him for fighting your brother at an earlier time is beyond assinine, especially when your career is tied to the health of your arm. His actions since then also support the notion of him just being a complete dumbass who makes terrible decisions.

          • YanksFanInBeantown says:

            The guy hadn’t just fought his brother, he had beaten the crap out of him. Do you expect a 21 year old kid from Beaufort, NC to not retaliate when someone legitimately injures his brother?

            It was a stupid decision, but definitely an understandable one considering the circumstances.

            • forensic says:

              His brother had cuts on his head and was plenty fine to again confront the same guy at a later time.

              But, regardless of that we obviously differ in maybe how we were brought up or something because yes, I would absolutely expect a 21 year old to be able to control himself from being a fucking schmuck and basically hunting down a guy for getting into a fight with his brother.

              Where he’s from doesn’t make it better or worse, but maybe it explains/predicts it a little more. It’s not like he was 13, he’s a 21 year old man. Grow up and mature already…

              • Cool Lester Smooth (Formerly YanksFanInBeantown) says:

                I would have wanted to fight the guy and then thought better of it. Call it naked classism, but I have a far higher expectation for myself than I do a 21 year old who grew up in a town with less people than my college in a county with the population of a mid sized suburb.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      http://a.espncdn.com/photo/201.....1x_600.jpg

      http://media.nj.com/yankees_ma.....-large.jpg

      Though I have no idea how many pitchers look alike mid wind-up, these are eerily similar.

      • Now Batting says:

        I have this theory that a lot of all time great bands are so highly revered because they broke up or a member died, so they never had the chance to decline. The Beatles/Zeppelin/Hendrix/Doors/Sublime/Nirvana. Brien Tyler is sort of like that.

        • Robinson Tilapia says:

          People forget that the Doors actually recorded a couple of albums without Morrison. Never actually heard them, but think of that what you will.

          I’ve always been curious as to what Hendrix would have been doing today.

        • Pat D says:

          The Beatles are the unique one in that group because they didn’t actually break up due to a death. All the other bands you mentioned did.

          It is one of the reasons why The Beatles are still so revered. They just never had the “decline phase.”

          • Now Batting says:

            That’s true but I also think Zeppelin is kind of in its own category. Sure Bonham died, but he wasn’t really the creative powerhouse behind the band’s success like Cobain or Nowells. Rather his death catalyzed the band into breaking up.

            • Pat D says:

              Yea, but Zeppelin was clearly already declining. The Beatles, not really.

              • Robinson Tilapia says:

                “In Through the Out Door” was a wonderful album. I don’t think they were declining at all.

                • Pat D says:

                  I disagree. There’s only one great song on “In Through the Out Door.” But the same held true for “Presence” as well.

                  “In Through the Out Door” scares me because I try to guess what might have come next if they’d continued. TOO MANY SYNTHS!!!

                  • Robinson Tilapia says:

                    I love synths, though. I am a VERY big new wave and synth-pop person, especially going back into the late 70′s and would eventually cross over into pop, but hadn’t yet.

                    I think they were very much bringing in a lot of world music type rhythms into the music, and that it continued when they resumed working together.

                    The direction Plant immediately took as a solo artist was interesting. I love it, in retrospect, but fans must have been scratching their heads at the time.

                    I was just becoming a music fan in time for the Honeydrippers, which is still a strange chapter in music history.

                    • Pat D says:

                      Yea, I can’t stand synth-powered rock. As an enhancement, it’s fine. As the defining sound, it just bothers me. Which is why I don’t like today’s pop and rap, because all the sounds seem to come from a piece of electronics, not an instrument.

                      Ah, yes, The Honeydrippers. With that awesome video for “Sea of Love.”

              • RetroRob says:

                The Beatles pulled a Marilyn Monroe. Die young, stay pretty. Or in baseball terms, a Sandy Koufax. They didn’t hang around long enough to enter a decline phase.

                Death may not have broke the Beatles up, but I think it certainly prevented them from getting back together. I have no doubt that at some point if not for Lennon’s death they would have regrouped. The money would have just been over the top. The advances in equipment and staging would have also allowed them to perform their later works on stage.

                As for money, well there were attempts. And if you want to pay Ringo less, well that’s up to you!

                http://vimeo.com/19569910

                • OldYanksFan says:

                  Dude… I don’t believe any of the Beatles really needed any money.

                  If you listen to the music produced individually by John, Paul and George, you will see they all went in very different directions. They may have gotten back together for a ‘nostalgia’ tour, but I doubt they would have produced any new music together.

                  Even though many songs say written by ‘Paul and John’, that was by contractural agreement. In truth, most songs were written by one or the other. Once they ‘made it’, very few songs were co-written.

                  • Pat D says:

                    Supposedly one of the reasons they did the Anthology project in the 90′s was because George did indeed need money at that time.

                    If you’re interested, this is a really good book on why there were a lot of reasons they never re-united.

                    http://www.amazon.com/You-Neve.....your+money

                  • RetroRob says:

                    It wouldn’t have been a question of needing the money.

                    As to how the tour would have unfolded, I don’t know. I’m just quite sure it would have happened, and would still be happening today, even if it was an every five-year thing.

                    New music? I could either way on that, but yes I can see them eventually doing an album. Even when they were writing seperately they clearly were influencing each other.

                • vicki says:

                  a more apt reference may be thurman munson, rob.

                  the captain.

                • Pat D says:

                  The book I linked to in a comment below goes into some detail, or speculation might be a better word, why they never re-united.

                  If I remember correctly, there was a chance they might have done something together again, but when Yoko got pregnant it was quashed. The biggest obstacle also seemed to be not the animosity between John and Paul, but George still having issues with Paul.

                  • RetroRob says:

                    Makes sense, although moving forward over then the next generation, I really would have been shocked if they didn’t get back together. They toyed with the idea, but never quite got there, but that was only a few years after they broke up. Thirty-plus years is a long time for four guys who shared something only they could understand to stay apart forever as a group.

                    BTW The Lorne Michael link I posted above had an interesting side story that I never heard. Apparently both Lennon and McCartney watched that live and thought it was funny. They actually were considering going down to the SNL studios to sing just as a goof, but then they realized it would require too much to pull it off. At least that’s the story McCartney told a couple years back.

            • Robinson Tilapia says:

              Listening to “In Through the Out Door,” and seeing what Plant and Page came up with when they did the first “Unledded” reunion, as well as the now-under-appreciated “Walking to Clarksdale,” I feel like we do have an idea as to what direction the music would have headed in – at least much more than with other bands.

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

            The other reason is that they had a batshit-crazy nuber of hits.

            But seriously, look at bands like the Eagles and guys like Billy Joel. Still playing and still insanely good. “Long Road out of Eden” even had a couple of good songs on it.

        • Bob Buttons says:

          Well yes, points can be made that the band as a whole fit the Shakespearean “Tragic Hero” role, as a fatal flaw (dead member) made them mortal, yaddi yaddi yadda.

          I’m not a Shakespeare guy so I can’t say more on that.

          Or you could go with theory #2.

          Joe DiMaggio is highly revered because he retired before a steep decline. Something about him not wanting fans to see him fail. Yaddi yaddi yadda, Willie Mays falling over on a flyball, yaddi yaddi yadda. (In no way am I saying Joe D. is, or is seen as better than Mays)

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

            I think that’s true to an extent. They always say that if you talk to people who saw both Joe D and Mantle play they’ll say Joe D was the better player.

            But the facts just don’t support that, either in rate or longevity stats-pick your poison. I really do think that part of it is that Mantle seriously played until his body fell apart. Joe D also battled injuries but he retired before his body truly failed him. So the memory stays golden.

            • Bob Buttons says:

              Actually… A semi-legit case can be made about Joe D. being the better fielder.

              For starters, he was a better fielder by reputation (supposedly he never had to dive for a fly ball).

              He was supposedly a faster player (SB totals are a bit misleading, as Yanks don’t usually allow Joe to steal, with his leg injury and all. Mantle was allowed, despite that knee injury in ’51. Don’t know why, nor is speed really important here) due to the reputation of his legendary range. Granted, it could be people caring less about Mantle after seeing Joe going at it for 13 years.

              Then if you look at their away stats

              Joe DiMaggio: .333/.405/.610
              Mantle: .291/.413/.545

              You also examine their stats vs lefties (supposedly Mantle’s swing was as good as Ted Williams’ from the right side, while he’s an upper cutter from the left)

              Joe: .326 .443 .598
              Mick: 330 .424 .575

              Granted, Mick’s OPS+ is at 172 while Joe’s is at 155, but factor in that Mantle batted lefty at Yankees Stadium (as an upper cutter) for probably 1/4th of his career, while Joe D. spent half of his career batting righty, hitting balls to Death Valley.

              Do I believe that Joe D. was better? Frankly I’m not sure. But a case can be made for sure. Though it probably needs to look into the intangibles like Death Valley and how much the injuries affected them.

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

                Eh, it looks to me like if you’re going to make the case for Joe you’re really pushing it. I get the “Death Valley” principle, but 172 is a Hell of a lot higher than 155.

                I don’t know where I read this or how they came to the conclusion, but I read somewhere that Joe as a fielder was very overrated, ranking as a only a bit above average.

                The legend probably grew for a few reasons. For one, Joe was fast, and Death Valley was huge. Even if he wasn’t great he was still good, and looked great doing it-a bit like Granderson, except it would look more forgiving with him given the size of Death Valley.

                For another, not as many games were seen live, and the Yankees marketed Joe D very well, so that probably had a lot to do with it too. And also, people didn’t WANT Mantle to be better than Joe D. They wanted him to be the NEXT Joe D. Subtle but important difference.

                I’ll try and find where I heard the stuff on fielding.

                • Bob Buttons says:

                  Well the whole case is based on Death Valley took more than 18 points of OPS+ off Joe D.’s career record. Other than that it’s all intangibles and reputations. Mantle is more likely to be better, but it really wouldn’t surprise me if Joe D. was actually the better player.

                  Of course I agree that legend grew a lot. The idea is that stuff grows when stored in memory over a long time. Kinda like how fishing tales get out of hand or “wildest night in college” stories are often quite far from the truth. There might be some truth in there, and I still have to say Joe D. is at least as good a fielder as Mantle, if not better.

                  I really have problem finding another RH power hitter between 20s and 80s that played in both NY and another cozier stadium in the same stage of their careers, so I really have to say a semi-legit case can be built solely from how the 18 points were due to Death Valley and how better competition (not sure if true) dragged the league average OPS up in Joe’s era.

                  I’ll probably bring this up again in another open thread when I get more evidence. Again, as disclaimer, I am not convinced that Joe is better. I’m just doing it for the sake of finding an answer.

                  • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                    I’d bet that Joe D was a much better fielder than Mantle, if only because he had both ACLs in working condition.

                  • RetroRob says:

                    I believe it was Bill James who said there was no great player hurt by him home park more than Joe DiMaggio. He was a RH’d power hitter back with the Stadium was simply insane to LF.

                    His road numbers: .333/.405/.610/1.015 was about 80 points more OPS than at home. Hitters generally hit better at home, yet DiMaggio had to overcome his park.

                    Mantle and DiMaggio were elite players, although different types of players.

                    • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                      I’m most impressed by the fact that he had only 8 more Ks than he did HRs over the course of his career. Literally the only comparable combinations of power and contact was Stan Musial, and Joe had a lot more power.

                • RetroRob says:

                  DiMaggio’s reputation was as an excellent defensive CFer. The defensive metrics available do show he was very good and quite a bit better than Mantle. Now, I saw with full realization that even defensive metrics today should be looked at with a questioning eye, so I have zero faith that defensive metrics from 70-plus years back can be trusted. Yet, I don’t know of much that supports DiMaggio not be a plus-defensive OFer.

                  I’m comfortable in the belief that DiMaggio was not only a better defensive OFer than Mantle, but probably by a good margin. I mean, Mantle was the golden boy, yet many of the reviews I heard of him would include words like “he could outrun his mistakes.” That’s generally not a good sign.

            • YanksFanInBeantown says:

              In Joe D’s defense, he was a righty playing in YS and he lost his 28-30 seasons to WWII.

              He actually had a higher career wOBA, although it was in a better offensive era. More importantly, though, he is the only player with an ISO over .200 to strikeout less than 5% of the time. That is a sexy hit tool. He actually has the highest career positive differential between BA and BABIP.

              I think Joe’s game was definitely more appealing to baseball purists than Mantle’s because of the higher average and much, much fewer strikeouts.

              • YanksFanInBeantown says:

                (Nap Lajoie actually has a higher differential, but most of his career occurred before BABIP became available, so the data is corrupted)

  15. Pat D says:

    So they replace one ridiculous looking title belt with another equally ridiculous looking title belt?

    • Robinson Tilapia says:

      I’m about 15 minutes behind on the show, so the Rock just came out to the ring.

      The Swagger/Colter stuff is already terrible. My Shield looked amazing. So new to the big time, but they get so many little details right.

      • Pat D says:

        Yes, I agree about Swagger. He has to be kept away from the mic, that lisp just kills him being taken seriously.

        I liked The Shield in the ring. Now they just need a definitive story.

  16. Tom says:

    I know health is a question but I get the feeling that Hafner is going to be a massive upgrade at DH.

    While I will not forget what Ibanez did at the end of the year, he was pretty much a league average (wRC+ 102) DH/”LF” platoon bat, and league average is pretty poor for a strict platoon guy at the DH spot.

    • Govin says:

      I’m excited to see what Hafner brings to the table this year. He has a lot of talent(Anyone who can get injured while being a full time DH has talent.)Offensively I believe that he will be better then Ibanez would have been with the Yankees this year.

  17. Green Manalishi says:

    Exactly what are the Mets wearing in Spring Training? They are a sad, misguided organization. Mr. Met on the front of their caps????

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

    I got in a discussion with somebody comparing the modern day trend of Edward/Christian Grey style characters with the Phantom from the Weber version of “Phantom of the Opera”. It was mostly about how a dominating, attractive male character can be portrayed in a well-written manner.

    I’m high-class, yo’.

  19. forensic says:

    I continue to be baffled as to why Harold Reynolds still has a job as a baseball ‘analyst’ or ‘expert’.

    A grand total of 5 players into their Top 100 this year, he’s said the following:

    On Ryan Howard: His power was back in September. Yes, the same September in which he hit .181/.250/.351.

    On Jacoby Ellsbury: 30/30 has always been there for him. Yes, the same guy who had a grand total of 30 homers in 6 minor/major league seasons prior to 2011.

  20. vicki says:

    THIS. COMMENTS. SECTION. HAS. EVERYTHING.

    tremendous.

  21. OldYanksFan says:

    I’ll say up front that I worshipped the Mick.
    Just a few facts and thoughts.

    When Mantle first came up, many thought he was the FASTEST runner in MLB. He was the ultimate 5 tool player, although fielding may have been his ‘weakest’ tool. The guy had a sick arm. I saw a game on TV where he was given an error on a play where the ball was hit over his head in CF (which was 471′ I think), chased the ball down, whirled, and threw the ball over the Catchers head on the fly.

    It is impossible to separate the player who was seriously injured in his first year, and continued to have leg problems through his career… to the kid that first came up, young and healthy. Early on, even the other great players in MLB considered Mantle in a league of his own. I have no problem saying that if not injured, he would have been the greatest player all-time.

    As it was, he lead the league in OPS+ EIGHT times, 3 MVPs, and 3 – 2nd place in the MVP.

    … YS killed DiMaggio on HRs. He hit 50% more HRs on the road.
    … YS RF didn’t help Mantle much. Career wise, he hit 4 more HRs on the road.
    … Never ‘having’ to dive for a ball is silly. Every OFer in history has needed to dive for many balls every year. If you don’t dive, you simply don’t make the catch.
    … Joe D. was known for his ‘grace’ in the OF. I never saw him, but I’ll guess he played CF like Cano plays 2nd base.
    … Joe D’s career HRs would have been closer to Mantle’s if he had not lost 3 years to the Military. But Mickey was the ultimate power hitter. My guess is his bad legs cost him many HRs.
    … Joe’s highest OPS+ was 184. Mantle’s 4 best OPS+ were 188, 195, 205 and 210.

    It’s very difficult to compare these two. Even though they overlapped a year, they really played in different eras. Black players were just entering MLB in Joe’s day, while Mickey played against Willie and Hank, and many great players in the late 50′s, 60′s and 70′s.
    My guess is Relief Pitching was more frequent and sophisticated in Mickey’s day.

    This is just pure gut guesswork, but I’ll say if Joe played in a HR neutral stadium and Mantle played healthy (and sober), and they both played in the same era, Joe may have been more ‘well rounded’, but Mickey’s offense would have been other-worldly. After all, it wasn’t that bad playing on one leg for most of his career.

    • OldYanksFan says:

      Shit…. reply fail.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      I’ll explain a bit more maybe tonight or tomorrow night, but hear me out on this.

      Joe D. also had a freaky leg injury so severe that at one point some people were afraid that it would end his career. And by “never diving”, it means that Joe D. is so fast and his range is so good, that he never really need to go play face plant on balls the average outfielder wouldn’t even dream of getting to.

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.