River Avenue Blues

  • About
    • Privacy Policy
  • Features
    • Yankees Top 30 Prospects
    • Prospect Profiles
    • Fan Confidence
  • Resources
    • 2019 Draft Order
    • Depth Chart
    • Bullpen Workload
    • Guide to Stats
  • Shop and Tickets
    • RAB Tickets
    • MLB Shop
    • Fanatics
    • Amazon
    • Steiner Sports Memorabilia
River Ave. Blues » Musings » Page 128

Our Universe is bigger than your Nation

July 13, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 76 Comments

I’ve always been rather skeptical of the idea of Red Sox Nation. Do fans really need to prove their love of their team through the cost of their fan package and a ludicrous faux-presidential election? While New England dithered with their quaint fan club, the Bronx fans simply went on cheering for the Bombers.

Well, I guess the Powers-That-Be have determined a fan club to a lucrative venture. Earlier today, the Yankees announced the formation of the Yankee Universe, an official Yankee fan club with “members exclusive benefits, unique access and special savings.”

Per the press release, members of the fan club with earn benefits that “extend to all aspects of the fan experience.” They get 10 percent discounts at the clubhouse store and online specials at the MLB.com Shop. Those holding a membership card and a ticket will get fast-tracked into the stadium at Gate 2. That one, by the way, is the gate all the way out in left field at the corner of Jerome Ave. and 162nd St. It’s not really worth the walk.

In reality, this fan club isn’t much of anything. For $19.95 for the rest of the season, members gain access to the Gameday Audio package and all of these benefits. It’s basically an MLB.com enticement with some perks. Some of the proceeds will go to the Department of Pediatrics at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

Boston may have its nation, but we have an entire Universe. We win.

Filed Under: Musings Tagged With: Horrendously Stupid

Where have you gone, Joba Chamberlain?

July 11, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 168 Comments

Following a stellar eight-inning appearance in Cleveland on June 1, Joba Chamberlain seemed to be on the verge of a run. He had allowed just four hits and two walks while winning his third decision of the year. His ERA sat at 3.71, and he had reached the 8th for the first time this year.

The run he went on was not the one we expected. Since then, Joba has thrown 35.2 innings, and he has been awful. He has allowed 27 runs — just 20 earned — while giving up 47 hits and 15 runs. That’s a WHIP of 1.74 and an ERA of 5.05. Opponents are hitting nearly .300/.400/.450 during this stretch. It’s ugly.

As I’ve said a few times, I don’t know what’s wrong. Joba has no approach on the mound. He has no pattern; he has not rhythm; and he has no velocity. His stuff — once electric even as as starting pitcher — is simply average. His breaking pitches have less bite than they once did, and his fastball isn’t even all that fast.

Joba doesn’t seem to have a clue about it. “I made great pitches throughout,” he said after the game, seemingly in denial. I can’t even begin to guess what that was all about.

A good number of Yankee fans feel that the bullpen will magically restore Joba to the pitcher we saw in 2007 and 2008. That, though, just won’t happen. The Yankees will be left with another ineffective reliever who can’t locate his pitches and can’t find an out pitch when things, as they did in the 5th inning last night, start to go bad.

The bullpen may have been the worst thing to happen to Joba. Where the Yanks go from here with the once-heralded phenom struggling as a 23-year-old in the Majors will be both telling and vital to the team’s future.

Filed Under: Musings Tagged With: Joba Chamberlain

When the Blue Jays trade a pitcher

July 10, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 49 Comments

When I heard earlier this week that the Blue Jays were prepared to trade Roy Halladay, six names ran through my head: Jason Jarvis, Mike Gordon and Marty Jenzen. David Wells, Homer Bush and Graeme Lloyd.

The names represent extremes of the trade spectrum and relate, as we know, to two blockbuster trades between the Jays and the Yankees. The first three were the package of prospects the Yanks sent to the Blue Jays in 1995 for David Cone. That would be a coup for the Yanks as Cone would win four World Series rings with the Bombers, and none of those three would amount to much. The second three were for Roger Clemens prior to the 1999 season. The legacy of that trade is best left to other posts.

As the rumors have grown surrounding Halladay — you can find the latest here on MLBTR — I pondered a post about the prior trades involving the Blue Jays and ace. So did Mark Feinsand. Since there’s no need to reinvent the wheel, we shall examine Feinsand’s charge that the three situations are not alike.

On Cone:

It’s hard to believe that’s all Toronto got for Cone, but don’t forget that he had only been in Toronto for three months when they traded him. He wasn’t the institution that Halladay is. Still, they should have gotten much more for him.

It should also be noted that this took place just months after the 1994 strike, and Cone’s $8 million salary was second-highest in the American League, so the Jays were probably happy enough to dump the free-agent-to-be once they were out of the race. Halladay is signed for another year, so there isn’t the same desperation to get rid of him.

On Clemens:

As for Clemens, the Yankees traded a package led by David Wells to get the Rocket, who had requested a trade and left the Blue Jays with very limited options based on his no-trade clause. If you want to equate that to present-day, the Yankees would have to send Toronto a package led by A.J. Burnett to get Halladay. I’m pretty sure that won’t happen.

Feinsand is on the money with Clemens, but I think the Cone comparisons are slightly closer than he thinks. As they did in 1995, the Blue Jays, a franchise treading water, want salary relief. But, unlike in 1995, their fans know the value of Halladay, and they will have to land more than just three no-names who aren’t going to amount to much.

Earlier this morning, rumors swirled that the Blue Jays asked for a package of three players consisting of Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes, Mark Melancon, and Austin Jackson or Jesus Montero. Clearly, J.P. Ricciardi has his intra-division sights set high, and that’s where things stand. The Yankees will not acquire Halladay, and I highly doubt the Red Sox will either. Philadelphia seems to be the likely destination with Texas far behind. The history of Toronto Blue Jays starting pitcher trades will, sadly, probably not repeat itself.

Filed Under: Musings

B.J. Ryan: What could have been

July 9, 2009 by Joe Pawlikowski 70 Comments

Yesterday the Toronto Blue Jays caught many baseball fans off-guard by releasing former closer B.J. Ryan. The move comes just 3.5 years into the five-year, $47 million deal he signed after the 2005 season. The Blue Jays will eat roughly $15 million, which illustrates just how far Ryan has fallen since undergoing Tommy John surgery in 2007.

During the 2005-2006 off-season, Ryan was one of the most highly-regarded free agents. He, Kyle Farnsworth, and Billy Wagner represented the top of the pack. The Yankees, who were about to lose setup man Tom Gordon, were heavy into the relief market. While Wagner was right out — he was too perfect a fit for the Mets at the time — the Yanks thought they had a shot with Ryan.

A 6’6″ lefty from Louisiana, Ryan was poised to cash in. The Orioles moved him into the closer role at the end of 2004, and in 2005 it was his alone. He took advantage, pitching to a 2.43 ERA and amassing 36 saves (on the 74-win Orioles) in 70.1 innings. In terms of hits, walks, home runs, and strikeouts, it was a mirror of his 2004 campaign. Now that he’d established his place as an elite closer, demand for his services was high.

Perhaps as a ploy to up the bidding for his services, Ryan “expressed interest” in playing for New York. Keep the Yankees in the running and you can pump up your value for another team. It was unclear at the time whether Ryan’s interest was sincere, but the Yankees weren’t making any other moves until his situation was settled. As a left-hander and a viable replacement for the departing Tom Gordon, he was clearly the Yanks’ top target.

In late November, the fantasy came to an end. Ryan had signed his five-year deal with the Blue Jays. The Yankees, still in need of a setup man, turned to Kyle Farnsworth after Billy Wagner signed with the Mets and Tom Gordon headed to Philly. While it seemed like a good idea at the time, the Yankees were wise to stay away.

Then again, even at the time there were a few reasons for the Yankees to pursue other paths. Ben Shpigel, in the above-linked Times article, reminds us of a previous incident of signing a closer to set up:

Cashman was burned once before on this route, in 2001 when he signed Steve Karsay to a four-year, $22.25 million contract to be Rivera’s setup man. Karsay battled injuries and inconsistency and spent only one healthy season with the Yankees.

In the end, Ryan had only one healthy season with the Jays. It’s easy to say that Ryan might not have suffered the torn UCL which sidelined him for a year had he signed with the Yankees, but many thought surgery was inevitable. As Keith Law said in a chat: “Ryan was destined to blow out his elbow.” Will Carroll heard the same thing: “Then again, a pitcher with Ryan’s mechanics, and one that several scouts have told me was rushed through the minors to get as much value out of his arm as possible before it blew up, always represents a risk.” So there were definitely indicators beforehand.

(Yet, upon signing Ryan, Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi said: “He stands among the few pitchers in baseball worthy of a five-year contract.” Yeah, not so much, J.P.)

Finally, there was a rumor that Ryan doesn’t want to deal with the stress of playing in New York. This originally appeared in Newsday, but they’ve since taken down the article. I know it existed, though, because I linked to it from my old blog. Yes, I said you have to be a gamer in New York. How novice of me.

One can only imagine what life would have been had Ryan signed with the Yankees. While Farnsworth was busy blowing games and racking up a 4.36 ERA, Ryan was decimating opponents, pitching to a 1.37 ERA and holding a 0.86 WHIP. Unfortunately, after that it’s tough to tell. Would the Yankees have allowed Ryan to rush back from Tommy John surgery? He pitched his last game in 2007 on April 14, and returned to the majors on April 13, 2008. Rushing back didn’t seem to affect him: he didn’t allow a run until May 18 and pitched generally well all year (though I’ll always remember Giambi’s walk-off to the upper deck off him).

Ryan entered this season as the Jays closer, but quickly lost the job after going blowing two games and amassing a 11.12 ERA in six appearances. He then hit the DL with a sore trapezius, which manager Cito Gaston thought could be the reason for his lost velocity. That might have been the case, but Ryan still struggled after returning. In 15 innings over 19 games he’s allowed eight runs, walking 12 to just nine strikeouts. The three runs he gave up in a losing effort to the Yanks was apparently the last straw.

At the time, it was easy to fall in love with the prospect of Ryan setting up for Mo. He was the best option available who had a chance of coming to New York, and the allure of adding a power lefty setup man was there. It appears, though, that even at the time there was plenty working against Ryan. Much of it came to fruition, culminating with his release yesterday. He’ll catch on somewhere, probably on a minor league deal so he can work out his problems in games that don’t count (or he could just sign with the Nationals). All we as Yanks fans can do is wonder what could have been.

Filed Under: Musings Tagged With: B.J. Ryan

Pondering the untouchables

July 8, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 282 Comments

Yesterday’s news concerning the Blue Jays’ willingness to trade Roy Halladay sparked a fire storm of conversation among baseball fans around the nation. With that announcement, Halladay became the most sought-after July name, and early indications are that he would waive his no-trade clause for New York, Philadelphia or Boston. My money is on Halladay’s landing in Philadelphia, but we can’t count out the Yankees.

Yesterday, in writing about the potential for a trade, Joe mostly summed up my take on it:

What about acquiring him? Rosenthal notes that Ricciardi would deal within the division, though we all know there’s a premium there. Any package would probably have to start with Phil Hughes, and then include one of the Yanks’ precious few bats, likely one of the catchers. Would Hughes, Romine, and a third prospect, probably of the top-10 variety, be enough to land Halladay? Would the Yankees be wise to make such a move?

There’s no doubt that acquiring Halladay would leave the Yankees with the best rotation in baseball. In the short term, they’d be as well off as any other team, probably better off. In the long term they’d be giving up prospects, sure, but prospects can bust. It looks like Phil Hughes is finding his way, and it would probably suck to face him four or five times a year. But it wouldn’t be nearly as bad as facing Halladay that many times.

I’d add a caveat: Considering their respective ages, Phil Hughes could be a thorn in opponents’ sides longer than Halladay may be. Furthermore, as many have pointed out over the last 24 hours, if Brian Cashman opted 18 months ago to avoid sending Hughes and others to the Twins for a younger Johan Santana also with one year left on his contract, why would he do the same with Halladay? (Santana, by the way, has a 5.12 ERA over his last 10 starts with some bad peripherals. Meanwhile, Fangraphs posits that J.P. Ricciardi will not only ask for the sky for Halladay but deserves it as well. Roy is just that good.)

While we’ll be hearing a lot about Halladay and other potential trade targets over the next few months, I noticed an interesting thread in the comments from Yankee fans who were discussing potential deals yesterday. In light of a few bad starts and some thoughtless comments to the media, Joba Chamberlain isn’t as untouchable in the eyes of the fans as he once was. That’s an odd and confounding sea change in fan opinion, and I’m willing to discount it as the frustrations of a fan base expecting their 23-year-old stud to be lights out right away.

Anyway, these comments and the general state of trade rumors made me ponder the question of untouchables. As fans, we overvalue our prospects, but who among the Yankee farm hands is truly untouchable? Jesus Montero fronts that list. In two levels this year and at just 19 years of age, he is hitting .336/.391/.556. A young hitter who is, for now, a catcher such as Montero doesn’t come around that often, and the Yanks should hold on to that one.

Beyond Montero, I would also add Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes to that list. While both are clearly works in progress, they have shown the ability at a young age to get hitters out by way of the K. Hughes had shown his potential pitching out of the pen this year, and we know what Joba, when 100 percent healthy and on, can do with his high-90s fastball. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the Yankees stopped developing young cost-controlled pitching to complement their free agent signings. With Joba and Phil, they can do just that.

Beyond that, though, anyone is fair game. The Austins — Romine and Jackson — both have a lot of potential, but both feature some red flags as well. Romine’s on-base percentage is just .316 at A+, and Jackson is striking out a lot. Keith Law, in particular, has accused fans of over-projecting A-Jax. For the right package, I would trade either. Other prospects are certainly movable too.

In the end, this boils down the simple reality that the Yankees must know when to trade from a strength. They have catching depth, and they have pitching depth in their farm system right now. Both of those are commodities, and either could land the Yanks a big fish. The next 23 days will be as interesting as they always are, and the Yanks should make some splashes. We’ll suffer through some separation anxiety, but with the right moves, it should be well worth it.

Filed Under: Musings

A sportsnation ranks the Yanks poorly

July 4, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 32 Comments

Every year ESPN The Magazine ranks all of the sports franchises across the four major sports leagues for their Ultimate Team Rankings feature. Each team is graded against eight categories — title track, ownership, coaching, players, fan relations, affordability, stadium experience and overall bang for the buck — and the magazine publishes the standings.

Earlier this week, the Worldwide Leaders released the 2009 edition of the Ultimate Team Rankings, and the Yankees did not perform so well. The team is ranked an absurdly low 107, ahead of also-rans and disasters such as the Knicks, Clippers, Bengals and Islanders. They are ranked just 27th in the “title track” department, despite a lofty payroll and the third best record in Major League baseball, and they find themselves far behind the Angels, the overall No. 1 team, the Red Sox (58) and even the hapless Mets (82).

A few months ago, as ESPN was putting together this list, I spoke with Eddie Matz, the reporter assigned to write up the piece on the Yankees. At the time, the team was struggling, and people were complaining about the new stadium. Furthermore, with no George Steinbrenner-type figure atop the Yankee Front Office, even the ownership seemed in flux. In the end though, the new stadium dragged down the team. Matz writes:

How do you replace a legend? You don’t. That’s what fans are saying about the new Yankee Stadium, which ranked a surprising 37 spots lower than Babe’s house did a year ago. (Among outdoor AL parks, only Oakland’s, Minny’s and Tampa’s rated worse!) Sure, the new crib has double-wide concourses that circle the park. Yeah, the seats have as many as 10 inches more legroom, and the 101-foot-wide scoreboard is seven times larger than its predecessor. Plus there’s a Hard Rock Cafe and cupholders and family bathrooms. So what’s missing? A certain je ne sais quoi. “It just doesn’t have that same feel,” says Ben Kabak of fansite RiverAveBlues.com.

In fact, the only feeling most fans have is the need to knock off a bank to pay for a date with the Bombers: For the price of an average Yanks ticket ($72.97, up 76% and the most in baseball by more than 20 bucks), you could buy five — count ’em, five — average seats (a lot more if you were going for the cheapos) at a D-backs game. Steak sandwiches for $15 from Lobel’s don’t cut the mustard either. Yes, it’s tough replacing a legend. And right now the sound filling Yankee Stadium isn’t the actual Voice of God (retired PA announcer Bob Sheppard) but an honest-to-goodness Bronx cheer.

The use of “right now” in that last sentence is certainly out-dated. As the Yanks find themselves just a few games out of first, the stadium has been filled with cheers of a different nature. Meanwhile, fans have come to embrace the new stadium for what it is: a spot to watch the Yankees play baseball. It may not be the old Yankee Stadium, but it is home.

Take a look at ESPN’s final Yankee rankings:

Title Track: 27
Ownership: 64
Coaching: 83
Players: 81
Fan Relations: 101
Affordability: 121
Stadium Experience: 84
Bang for the Buck: 119

That affordability number is completely skewed by the expensive seats. True, the average ticket price is up, but it’s easy to find an affordable seat at Yankee Stadium. The team has also made an effort to improve their fan relations, and the players — one of the more talented collection in any sport — deserve higher than 81.

In the end, this seems to be more Yankee negativity coming out of Bristol. It’s far better for sales if the Yanks are ranked lower. Everyone likes to beat up on the Bombers because everyone is jealous of them. It just makes winning that much sweeter.

Filed Under: Musings Tagged With: 2009 Yankees

Musings on in-stadium economics

July 3, 2009 by Benjamin Kabak 48 Comments

Nothing irks sports fans more than concession prices. Inside of a stadium, everything costs more. A beer you might buy for $5 at a sports bar costs $9 or even $11 inside the stadium. A steak sandwich that sells for $8 can go for as much as $15. Even New Era Hats, priced at a steep $34 at the flagship store, can go for $40 inside the stadium.

Meanwhile, fans like to justify the prices and their ballpark expenses by blaming — or celebrating — the payroll. Yankee fans are willing to pay so much for concessions because the team has a $200 million payroll, and that lofty total demonstrates the Steinbrenners’ devotion to winning. Or so it goes.

In the Wall Street Journal this week, Allen Barra, he of the excellent Yogi Berra biography, challenges that assumption. Prices inside a stadium are high, he says, because a stadium is a natural monopoly with a captive audience. Barra writes:

The point is that prices go up because the owners think that’s what you’re willing to pay. If you are willing to pay, the price stays high. If you aren’t — or at least if enough of you aren’t — then the price will come back down. It’s that simple.

The athletes and their agents don’t determine the price of tickets, souvenirs and food. Not even the owners determine them. Well, they sort of do when it comes to the food. The hamburger joint across the street from the park probably charges half of what you pay at the game, but that’s because the ball club has a monopoly. In general, though, you are the ones who set the prices for T-shirts and baseball hats.

It may take a while but eventually, if baseball management has overpriced its commodities, consumers — that’s you, the fans — will show them their error and the prices will come down. If you are willing to pay their prices that means they set the right prices after all.

It is a very valid argument, but Barra obscures his point by the end. He says that if society were to stop spending as much at baseball stadiums, then prices and salaries would go down. There is, it seems, a cause-and-effect problem. If salaries don’t determine how much a team can charge, then why would cutting fan spending reduce salaries?

In reality, salaries do have an impact on how teams set their prices. The teams need to generate a certain margin to cover their expenses. For the Yankees, that includes a lofty payroll and luxury tax payments. While revenue from TV deals and licensed merchandise sales cover some of that, the rest is captured through ticket sales and in-stadium concession deals.

Where the monopoly takes over though is in the profit space above the margin. Once the Yankees recover the payroll and luxury tax figures, anything they make above that is pure profit that can be pocketed or reinvested in the team in future years. If that $15 cheese steak were $12 instead, the Yanks’ would probably be covering their costs and more. But since fans are willing to pay $15 for it, the Yankees will continue to charge that much, pocketing the profits as any company would.

Filed Under: Musings

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • Next Page »

RAB Thoughts on Patreon

Mike is running weekly thoughts-style posts at our "RAB Thoughts" Patreon. $3 per month gets you weekly Yankees analysis. Become a Patron!

Got A Question For The Mailbag?

Email us at RABmailbag (at) gmail (dot) com. The mailbag is posted Friday mornings.

RAB Features

  • 2019 Season Preview series
  • 2019 Top 30 Prospects
  • 'What If' series with OOTP
  • Yankees depth chart

Search RAB

Copyright © 2023 · River Avenue Blues