Saturday Night Open Thread



Here is your open thread for this fine evening. The Mets and Marlins are still playing, believe it or not. They’re in the 18th inning (!) as I write this. The Red Sox and Angels are the FOX game in the Tri-State Area (Buchholz vs. Wilson), though those of you scattered elsewhere will see a different game depending on where you live. There’s also some NHL playoff action. You folks know how this stuff works, so have at it.

Categories : Open Thread


  1. stuart a says:

    the Yanks still cannot hit. WOW. THE OBP of guys on this team are really ugly…

    this is the worse Yankee offense I have seen in forever. It is also 1 of the best pitching staffs I have seen in many years.

    Nix gave the Mariners a run today so the 2 big hits were huge…

    cano looked good against Perez when he struck out on a pitch in the middle of the other batter box on the dirt. He is a true superstar, his numbers are impressive. GIve him 10 years, do not want to insult him…

    • Pat D says:

      We don’t want to insult you, either, but you make it too easy.

      That being said, I’m not going to insult you right now. Because I don’t think that’s in our national interest.

    • WhittakerWalt says:

      OMG stuart actually chimes in after a Yankees win. Somebody write this down.

      Guess what, dipshit? Cano drove in the first run of the game. I don’t expect you actually watched that, since your Mets were playing, but it happened.
      Cano is a superstar, even if you’re too feebleminded to understand that.
      No one wants to give him a 10-year deal.

    • Get Phelps Up says:

      It must be tough to watch your team score 1 run in 18 innings against a bunch of scrap heap Marlins pitchers.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      Been saving this for a while now.


  2. forensic says:

    Two 18-inning games in one day. That’s pretty insane.

  3. Darren says:

    Pretty cool that Andy’s son was drafted today i the 37th round. hey, ya never know. What round was Donnie Baseball again? 22?

  4. Eddard says:

    250 wins is the new 300. I really think Andy is headed to Cooperstown, possibly with Mariano if he retires this year. Maybe Jorgie can wait a couple years and they’ll all go in together as they should.

    • Pat D says:

      I’d love to see all three guys get in, but I highly doubt Pettitte and Posada make it.

      The case against Pettitte: PED usage, high ERA, not ever really considered dominant in an era that did have dominant pitchers (Pedro, Johnson, Maddux) and very good pitchers (Glavine, Smoltz, Schilling, Mussina).

      The case against Posada: not a good defensive catcher, late start to career so doesn’t have huge counting numbers, probably only considered 3rd best at his position during his career (behind Piazza and Pudge, even with Piazza’s obvious defensive deficiencies and Pudge’s PED suspicions).

      • WhittakerWalt says:

        I think Posada’s case has a lot to do with whether or not the voters ever understand advanced metrics. I think he’s right in the mix with Piazza and Pudge. He was better defensively than Piazza, but worse offensively. He was better offensively than Pudge, but worse (much) defensively.
        Objectively speaking he’s a Hall of Famer, but try telling that to the voters. And I’d say this even if he wasn’t a Yankee.

        • vicki says:

          the old-timers do like rings. i hope that pushes him over.

          • Pat D says:

            There is that to consider, but at the same time those voters might say something like, “Well he was only the 4th or 5th most important guy on the team.”

            • WhittakerWalt says:

              These are the same guys who voted in Tony Pérez, though, and he was maybe the 4th most important member of the Big Red Machine.

              • Pat D says:

                A lot of people put those teams above the late ’90′s Yankees teams. It’s an interesting debate since I never felt that the Reds had really good pitching.

                • WhittakerWalt says:

                  I remember back in ’98 Sparky Anderson said he thought his Reds teams were better than that year’s Yankees. I guess he’s supposed to say that, but come on.

                  • Pat D says:

                    Of course he would say that. But his opinion is also obviously biased and therefore not to be taken into consideration in such a debate.

        • Pat D says:

          He has a good slash line, but he’s barely over 1000 RBI’s, didn’t get to 300 HR’s, 1000 runs or 1700 hits. I don’t have my hall of fame spreadsheet, so I can’t compare him to all the HOF catchers. I know he’s better than a few like Ray Schalk and Rick Ferrell, but those two shouldn’t be in the HOF.

          He has a fairly solid bWAR number, but it also trails some non-HOF’ers like Bill Freehan, Wally Schang, Thurman Munson and Ted Simmons (who should be in the HOF).

          His candidacy might ultimately be determined by how crowded the ballot will still be when he hits it in 2017. And that could very well drop him a la Bernie.

          • WhittakerWalt says:

            His biggest problem is lack of big counting stats, due to starting his career late. I like to blame Girardi for that too, but that might just be pettiness. In terms of pure offense he was much better than Pudge, though of course had the benefit of being in the league at 19 and therefore racked up more counting stats. Defensively Jorgie wasn’t great, as we all know, but he wasn’t as terrible as Piazza by a long shot and he was actually a decent thrower before age caught up with him. The passed balls were unfortunately a career-long problem.

            I don’t really like to compare him to other HoFers or guys who never got in, because there have just been too many mistakes (both kinds) on that score. I mean, imagine being a 2nd baseman as good as Bobby Grich or Lou Whitake and not getting into the Hall? Meanwhile Jim Rice gets in because he was “most feared” and writers are still building a case for Jack Morris.

            • Pat D says:

              Unfortunately, that is how you have to compare guys when they’re up for the HOF. They need to be better than at least a few HOF players and hopefully a few legit HOF players.

              I still hold out hope that guys like Whitaker and Grich will have a chance with the Veterans Committee, but that’s becoming very hard to predict these days.

              • WhittakerWalt says:

                Yeah, I know it’s the only way to compare. It’s just weird when you see how many colossal mistakes have been made while actual, deserving players are on the outside looking in. How long did it take Ron Santo to get in?

                • Pat D says:

                  Too long. Especially when considering that he was better than a few HOF 3B and that 3B is the least represented position in the HOF.

                  • Bob Buttons says:

                    I agree that Santo is a good HOF candidate but judging by people who are in and representation are not good criteria for HOF voting.

                    • Pat D says:

                      But that’s how the voters think. And when trying to predict who will or won’t be elected, that’s what you have to consider.

            • Preston says:

              There’s an argument to be made that his unusual longevity at a position that doesn’t usually allow it is because he didn’t have the heavy workload of a full time catcher for so many years. I have a hard time seeing either Jorge or Pettitte getting in. The ballot is going to be very crowded, many voters are refusing to vote for anyone in protest of steroids and I don’t see how these problems are going to be cleared up by the time these guys get on the ballot.

              • WhittakerWalt says:

                There’s also the argument that Piazza and Pudge have the taint of (rumored) PED usage, while Posada never did. Not that I personally believe that this should invalidate a player’s candidacy, but it could muddy the waters significantly in the minds of the voters when the time comes.

            • Cool Lester Smooth says:

              Jim Rice: Moises Alou without the defense.

              • Preston says:

                But Jim Rice did it without pissing on his hands. That counts for something right?

              • WhittakerWalt says:

                Yup, though I think Alou was better. And definitely not a Hall of Famer.

              • JohnnyC says:

                The best thing that happened to Jim Rice’s HOF candidacy was the Red Sox winning 2 WS in 04 and 07. Otherwise he never gets in (nor should he have).

        • TomH says:

          I think Posada’s case has a lot to do with whether or not the voters ever understand advanced metrics.

          “Ever understand”? Jeez, you make it sound as if it’s as demanding as understanding Kant or mastering classical Greek. To understand what you call “advanced ‘metrics’” requires no particular intellectual distinction, just a reasonably competent high school statistics course and average intelligence.

          Posada and Pettitte are, at best, marginal candidates, of a type that sometimes do make it (and sometimes do not).

          Objectively speaking he’s a Hall of Famer….

          In such marginal cases “objectivity” is always a matter of interpretation. It’s not a matter of selecting some “metrics” and then reading off the resulting numbers from a “bref.com” chart.

          • WhittakerWalt says:

            I never said those things were hard to understand. It’s just that baseball writers are notoriously stubborn, and slow to adopt new ways of thinking.

            As to your second point, perhaps I should have said that it was clear to me. I wasn’t kidding when I said I’d make the same assessment even if Posada wasn’t a Yankee. I suppose it’s the kind of thing that’s always going to have a certain degree of subjectivity to it, but for my money his case is extremely solid.

            • Pat D says:

              What you say about the writers is 100% true. There has to be an evolution in the thinking of sportswriters. We’re only seeing a slight bit of that so far.

  5. Mike W says:

    Yankees draft Josh Pettitte in the 37th round.

    • Preston says:

      He’ll go to college and we’ll draft him again in three years,much earlier and for a much bigger bonus.

  6. Darren says:


    Per the press conference, Girardi took Andy out because “It was the 8th inning. If it was the 6th it would be a different story. And Reynolds has had more success against lefties (BINDER ALERT) and I just went to Robby there because that’s his job.”


    • forensic says:

      Are you surprised somehow?

      • Darren says:

        I am an eternal optimist so I was hoping he’d have some inside info, like “Andy told me he was gassed and had one more better.” I guess in the scheme of things, I’d rather have a manager with no imagination than a pitcher who was out of gas.

  7. WhittakerWalt says:

    I love me some Andy Pettitte.

  8. forensic says:

    Can we have a moment of silence, please?

    Jackie Bradley Jr. has been sent back to AAA again.

    • Pat D says:

      Sorry, I’m laughing too hard.

    • I'mVernonI'mVernon4U says:


    • WhittakerWalt says:

      His MVP campaign has hit a speed bump.

    • Preston says:

      Bradley still looks like a good player, he’ll cut down on the K’s and have a BABIP correction and be a solid starting CF for them next year when Jacoby leaves. It is satisfying to see them struggle though. I’m happier that Middlebrooks has turned into a pumpkin, he’s a one tool pony. Doesn’t walk, doesn’t make contact and is below average on D, he just hits one out every once in a while. Now if only Iglesias could stop looking like he might hit enough to stick and I’d be happy. Also if they could trade Xander Boegarts to an NL team for an ace who immediately gets injured and is never good again…

    • SDB says:

      and in three days, he rose from the dead.

      Wait, am I confusing him with someone else based on the hype?

  9. vicki says:

    cj wilson, you are useless.

    • forensic says:

      I’m so torn, because he’s on the fantasy team I’m facing this week. I figure he gets demolished, then Buchholz also gets demolished (with Napoli doing some work for me), then maybe the Angels win late (though I also hate the Angels).

      • vicki says:

        fantasy is evil.

        • forensic says:

          lol, especially when you sit Dunn against a lefty and he hits a homer and you sit Lind against Darvish and he gets 4 hits. :-)

        • Pat D says:

          Which is why I haven’t bothered in a long time. But when I did most recently, I wouldn’t pick any Red Sox players.

          I still do NFL Fantasy, but, as a Giants fan, I refuse to draft any Eagles or Cowboys player. I allow Redskins players if absolutely necessary.

          • forensic says:

            I haven’t had a team in many years. I just took this one over from someone else earlier this week, so I haven’t had a chance to try to get rid of some of the players I don’t really want on my team yet.

          • Bob Buttons says:

            Same thing here. My two golden rules (other than don’t pick players on crap team) : Don’t pick any long-time Sox (stop gap guys are okay for me if they are a steal) and don’t pick any everyday Jay. (Janssen can still be good while Toronto crash and burn. Oh wait, that already happened). The Toronto rule is actually just a modification of the no crap team rule.

            • vicki says:

              at least it sounds like you, forensic and pat have a righteous perspective. it’s the dispassionate relativism of some fantasy owners (and gamblers) that offends.

              • Bob Buttons says:

                Gamblers though I can understand. Cheer for one or two wins from those teams and you get money. Fantasy though lasts over an entire season, and I think it’s safe to say most of us don’t play money leagues.

          • Cool Lester Smooth says:

            I don’t play fantasy football because, as an Eagles fan, I hate every other team that isn’t run by a former Eagles assistant or coach.

            • Bob Buttons says:

              Solid proof why, despite the savage beatings, baseball fans are much more relaxed than football fans.

              Of course, I’m being a hypocrite in that I’m much more angry when I’m watching NFL, or even playing Madden.

              • Cool Lester Smooth says:

                I scream at the TV so much when i watch football.

                My roommate hated it, haha.

                • Bob Buttons says:

                  I’ve literally swore at the computer playing Madden (yes, 08 with updated rosters. Not worth getting a console just for sports titles, and not a huge fps gamer either.) after they screw me over. After that I’ll totally neglect my own team’s chances to win just to attempt 2 pt conversions and/or onside kicks just out of spite.

                  • Cool Lester Smooth says:

                    Even if you were a big FPS player there would be no justification for buying a console; KB+M>>>Joystick.

                    PCs are where it’s at.

                    • Bob Buttons says:

                      The problem is some titles, not just FPSes, are only available on consoles. I wouldn’t buy a console, period, because I hate the controls on both ps3 and xbox whenever I’m playing at someone elses, but I can see why other people like them better.

                      I mean, they don’t sell console-style controllers for PC to promote consoles, right?

                    • Cool Lester Smooth says:

                      They’re definitely better for sports and fighting games, but I really do not understand how someone could prefer them for a shooter.

  10. forensic says:

    So, Mike Redmond saves his closer through 19 innings of a game only looking for a save, and ends up getting rewarded for it.


    • Pat D says:

      Beginner’s Luck, I suppose.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      To be fair most of the innings were pitched by Kevin Slowey, and I’d do the same thing. I mean, no point taking out your long guy and waste your arms by then.

      • forensic says:

        There were still plenty of other chances to use him between the 9th and 13th when Slowey came in.

        • Bob Buttons says:

          To play devil’s advocate, Cishek is not his best reliever for the recent past. 4+ ERA for a reliever isn’t someone I’d trust coming in with runners on.

  11. trr says:

    20 innings , 3 runs.
    Did we really lose 4 in a row to them?

  12. KennyH123 says:

    Donnie Baseball was drafted so late because he had big signability issues. He was a hitting legend in HS. Yankees gave him a small fortune to sign.

    • nycsportzfan says:

      Did he have projected power or did he suprisingly hit for more power then anticipated? I always thought he fell because they weren’t sure if he was gonna hit for enough power to be a 1B or corner OF spot. I could be wrong though.

  13. nycsportzfan says:

    I asked this on the GDT yesterday after the game was over, and i’m gonna ask again because i’m curious to know.

    If you were picking between Ian Clarkin or Ty Hensley, who would you pick? I’m just curious to know which onehas the higher upside or projected better stuff.

    • Pat D says:

      And as I said, I’m not sure why you have to pick one over the other. Both are in the system, assuming Clarkin signs. Just let them develop and see what happens.

      I’m a believer in the concept of TNSTAAPP, so if one of them makes it, great. I don’t really care which.

      • Preston says:

        As they were on draft day I think Hensley was the better prospect. He threw harder and being bigger was more projectable too. But given the shoulder abnormality and the hip problem you’d have to like Clarkin better now, plus he’s left handed which is always a plus in Yankee Stadium. Hopefully Clarkin signs and the two of them are both healthy and pitching for Yankee affiliates next year.

        • nycsportzfan says:

          Thanks, i appreciate the insight. Its a good debate, becuase both throw the curve, and both were picked almost the exact same pick and both were outta high school.

      • nycsportzfan says:

        You don’t have to pick one. Im curious to know who people like more. Who gives a fuck if we have both, it dosen’t mean one dosen’t have a higher upside or whatever, or people don’t think one is better then the other.

        Your a strange fucking dude.

        • Pat D says:

          I don’t have a preference because right now neither has really done anything.

          But thank you for reminding me not to engage you anymore.

          • nycsportzfan says:

            So why even answer? If you have no prefrence, just leave the question alone. You don’t have to be a dink and ask “why do we have to pick just one, we have both?”. Obviously, we have both, dosen’t mean people might not think ones a better player then the other, at least projectibly.

          • Bo Knows says:

            why are you throwing getting offended man? nyc wasn’t being rude, he just asked a question, there is no need to act so impolite.

      • Bob Buttons says:

        What’s TNSTAAPP?? Too many letters to guess.

        • forensic says:

          There’s No Such Thing As A Pitching Prospect.

        • Preston says:

          There Is No Such Thing As A Pitching Prospect, it is a warning about getting too high on any young pitcher because the rate of attrition due to injury and ineffectiveness is so high (unless you’re the Rays).

    • CashmanNinja says:

      The 2 names that were thrown around most in terms of comparison were Josh Beckett for Hensley and Clayton Kershaw for Clarkin. I guess I can see how they’d get those comparisons, but that’s if they reach as good as they’ll ever get. I personally see some Barry Zito in Clarkin, which isn’t a bad thing when you consider Zito when he was younger. Consider this…each has a damn good curve and a solid fastball, but I’d say Hensley’s fastball is a bit harder, but Clarkin’s has a little more movement. They both have great curveballs, but Clarkin’s changeup is probably a tick better than Hensley’s (still needs work, though).

      I wouldn’t take one over the other because they’re (hopefully) both ours. I suppose Hensley gets the nod for now since he’s gotten his feet wet a tad until he had to get surgery. They’re both great prospects and I’m hoping each develops because these guys are extremely talented and if they reached their full potential we are in for a real treat. We’re going to need to go a bit over the slot to get Clarkin because he’s going to be asking for the moon — hence why we had to settle for a ton of cheap seniors, but I’m alright with that because he’s worth it…if that answers your question.

      • nycsportzfan says:

        Awesome post. I was more curious to know who people would pick if they were both on the board at pick 30 and you had to only get one?

        So Hensley projects to be AJ Burnett, Josh Beckett esque?

        Ian Clarkin is in the Clayton Kershaw, Barry Zito mold?

    • Bo Knows says:

      Both have high ceilings, both have very very nice curveballs. Hensley is bigger and his frame looks like he could add another 15 lbs to his frame easy which theoretically means his fastball that’s been clocked as high as 97 could see an even higher bump.

      Clarkin is 2 inches shorter and 30 lbs lighter and his body type looks closer to Cole Hamels/Zack Greinke which would mean his weight maxing out between 195-200lbs. His fastball averages 90-94 but I could see it jumping to a more consistent 92-96 on average due better conditioning and his mechanics getting ironed out.

      Clarkin is interesting to me because his mechanics look so similar to Kershaw’s, I would never give anyone that kind of ceiling but I think studying Kershaw’s development would be a good thing when tweaking Clarkin’s mechanics. Also if he can’t develop a changeup, it might be smart to once again “be like Clayton” and teach Clarkin a slider or cutter (or the hybrid slutter) as his third pitch. The fastball and curve both come out of the same arm slot a harder slider would be a good pitch to split the difference.

      Also, I believe he’ll sign, the yankees went for a ton of cheap signings after the second round and with the 5% over-budget grace limit they’ll have 8.3 million dollars to work with without losing a future pick. I doubt the guys from rounds 2-10 cost much more than $3 million collectively; that leaves a ton of money for Jagielo (who I think signs for just around slot), Judge (I bet he gets around $1.8, similar to Jagielo’s bonus) that would leave around $2 million for Clarkin. That I think would be enough to get him to sign and also show him symbolically that the team values him as a top 15 talent.

      • nycsportzfan says:

        Good analysis. I sure do hope they get em all signed, as i’m kinda banking on it, personally. Who do you get the most excited about Judge, Jaigelo, or Clarkin?

        • Bo Knows says:

          I’m a pitching fan so Clarkin is who I’m most excited about just from his potential.

          I think Judge if he reaches even the vicinity of his ceiling will be fun to watch.

          Jaigelo should be a fast mover, and the thought of a touted prospect breaking in quick at a position that hasn’t seen one in years offers its own joys.

  14. Preston says:

    I can’t ever remember being this excited after a draft. I think that Jagielo is pretty safe to sign, and hopefully he does it for close to slot money. I think Judge might want a little more. Hopefully Clarkin’s demands aren’t too high for the Yanks to accomodate. If they can sign all three of them I might be more excited for MiLB box scores next year than MLB ones.

    • CashmanNinja says:

      I think Judge and Jagielo are pretty much easy signs, but Clarkin will be a bit hard to get. I think we’ll have to go a lot over slot to get him (like $2.1 mil compared to $1.6 mil). That’s why they went so many seniors, but that’s ok because it’s not like they could draft all high profile young guys and sign them anyway. Good thing we have more $$ this year to use. So when taking into account the first 3 picks and the rest of the draft…I honestly haven’t been this excited in a long time. It’s just a shame we got some guys who are super talented, but most likely won’t sign (i.e. Pettitte’s kid and the QB from Oklahoma).

  15. nycsportzfan says:

    The yanks have some serious OF potential down the line now with Judge, Williams, and Heathcott.

    • Bob Buttons says:

      I’d honestly consider (in the sense of ponder over, not in the sense of picking) Austin over Williams. Williams haven’t shown much power lately and I love me some power hitters.

      • CashmanNinja says:

        I like Austin over Williams, too. I think it’s because that even with early season struggles Austin is producing much better than Williams. Mason Williams just really seems like he doesn’t care right now. I hate to say it but this sounds like Jose Tabata all over again.

        • Preston says:

          Honestly I think Austin is the system’s second best prospect behind Sanchez. No he’s not the athlete that Mason, Slade or even Judge are. But he’s a fine future RF, with good base running instincts and he has the most advanced hit tool of any of them.

          • vicki says:

            jags will beat them all to the show! keith law sez!

          • CashmanNinja says:

            Austin isn’t the most athletically gifted athlete, but it’s not as if he’s Travis Hafner out there either. He’ll most likely never be a stud defensive outfielder, but if he’s serviceable and can hit then that’s good enough for me. His bat will carry him. A contact hitter with some pop. I’ll take it. There are 2 players that Austin seems to always remind me of: Nick Markakis and Michael Cuddyer, but a better OBP of the 2. Possibly Andre Ethier before he started going downhill. Either way I think he’s a fun prospect.

          • nycsportzfan says:

            Ya, your probably right. Heahtcott, Judge, and Austin might be the better trio, and Austin is probably the 2nd best prospect in my opinion as well(that we have).

            Ramon Flores and Michael O’neill for future 4th OFer types for us as well

      • Cool Lester Smooth says:

        The issue with Austin is that he really doesn’t have that much power either.

        He’s a 15-20 HR guy, max, and he’ll never be more than an adequate defensive right fielder.

        Realistically, his offensive ceiling is somewhere between 2012 Alex Gordon and 2012 Justin Upton.

        Mason Williams, being a good to very good defensive CF, has a lot more margin for error as far as his offensive development goes. If he’s somewhere between 2012 Michael Brantley and 2012 Austin Jackson offensively, that’s a starting-caliber CF. If Austin is never more than 2011 Nick Markakis, he’s a 4th OF only capable of playing the corners.

  16. nycsportzfan says:


    Ian Clarkin
    Rapheal DePaula
    Ty Hensley
    Jose Ramirez


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.