• May 1st @ The Rangers

    Posted by on May 2nd, 2007 · Comments (56)

    May Day, indeed. Another injury? Another pitcher? I’m calling it “The Curse of Jeff Mangold.”

    This game reminded me that there’s a difference between disappointment and pain. Sure, disappointment can be painful. And, pain can be disappointing. But, there’s no contest between which hurts more – pain wins. Disappointment is getting an ice-cream cone and watching the top of it fall to the ground before your first lick. Pain is when someone punches you in the gut when you’re not expecting it.

    That’s the way I felt about Hughes’ fortunes in this game. When he had to leave the game, and lost the chance at the no-hitter, it was disappointing. But, when I lip-read Gene Monahan (during the YES broadcast) say “It popped” (when talking about Hughes’ hamstring), I was in pain. Like a punch to the gut.

    I have to confess that I missed most of the first six innings of this game. Tuesday evening is an Idol/House night in my home. (Hey, I don’t live alone and I’m not a TV dictator in my relationship.) However, from 8 pm to 10 pm, I did tune into the game during commercials – because I wanted to see Hughes. And, wouldn’t you know it – up until 9:30 pm, every time I turned to the game, the Yankees were batting.

    By the time I first saw Hughes, it was when he was facing the first batter of the bottom of the fifth inning. I made note of the fact that he was throwing 89-90-91 on his fastball (and around 71 on his curve) – and that he was around 40 pitches. But, I did not know that he had yet to give up a hit. It wasn’t until the next commercial break that I found out about the potential no-hitter.

    When House was over, and I got to the game full-time, it was the start of the bottom of the seventh. The YES boys said that Hughes was at 78 pitches. His first three pitches were fastballs: 89-91-92 on the YES gun. His next pitch, his last, was a curve at 74 MPH.

    So, once again, Phil Hughes was showing us a fastball in the range of 89-92 MPH during his game. The difference in this contest was his control – 63% of his pitches were for strikes. If someone wants to say he had “no-hit stuff” in this game, that’s probably not correct. What Hughes had was “no-hit command.”

    Shame, now we won’t see Hughes for another 6 weeks or so. It’s a tough break for the kid. For him, it must feel like someone punched him in the gut after he just dropped his ice cream cone.

    By the way, I think the umpires blew a call in this game. Hughes had an 0-2 count on Teixeira when he had to leave the game. Myers came in and Teixeira then switched to batting righty. (He was batting left against Hughes.) If I recall correctly, a switch-hitter cannot move to the other box during an At Bat once he has two strikes on him. (At least, I think that’s the rule.) If I’m right, shame on the umps for letting that slide – and on Torre too for not picking that up.

    In any event, the Yankees won the game – which is good. Strange though, with the Hughes injury, it feels like a loss.

    Lastly, pretty funny of the YES crew last night to put the camera on Pavano shortly after the Hughes injury. Much like Horace Clarke being the face of the 1966-1972 Yankees, Pavano is becoming the face of the 2005-2007 Yankees, with all these pitching woes, huh?

    Comments on May 1st @ The Rangers

    1. Nick from Washington Heights
      May 2nd, 2007 | 7:06 am

      Steve, he had no-hit stuff in addition to no-hit command in my view. His pitches were working to such a degree that only 1 Ranger was able to hit the ball out of the infield on him. It was also ground balls and k’s. Think the Wanger but with more bats missing balls.

    2. Nick from Washington Heights
      May 2nd, 2007 | 7:08 am

      that should read “it was only groundballs…” God, I’m dyslexic and tired!

    3. Joel
      May 2nd, 2007 | 7:50 am

      Hughes absolutely had no-hit stuff. In a post-game interview Posada said so as well. He was totally dominant last night. I have the “MLB Extra Innings” baseball package and Hughes was being clocked at 94-96 mph in the sixth and seventh innings on FSN Southwest. His velocity was actually increasing deeper into the game.

      The highlights for me: He threw three consecutive changeups to Mark Texiera, the last one striking him out. And, on a 2-1 pitch he threw a fastball that pasted the inside corner for a called strike to Kenny Lofton. If you watched carefully, Lofton stepped out of the box and shook his head as if to say “Damn, that was a good pitch.”

      The guy called his own game. He was shaking off Posada and blowing people away. After blowing away one hitter the FSN color guy (I forget his name) refelexively said “Wow!” My brother in Manhattan said Girardi compared him to Mo!

      It was something to watch.

    4. rbj
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:05 am

      The FSN broadcasters were showing a box where Phil’s pitches were. They were all on the sides, nothing in the middle of the plate. Utterly amazing.

      And send that new Director of Screwing Up Our Pitchers to a toxic land fill in Jersey. Seriously, going from working in a nursing home to working on ML athletes?

    5. Raf
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:06 am

      So, once again, Phil Hughes was showing us a fastball in the range of 89-92 MPH during his game. The difference in this contest was his control – 63% of his pitches were for strikes. If someone wants to say he had “no-hit stuff” in this game, that’s probably not correct. What Hughes had was “no-hit command.”
      ==================
      Define “no-hit stuff.” After all, pitchers like Chris Bosio and Phil Niekro and Jim Abbott have thrown no-hitters :)

    6. dpk875
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:07 am

      He sure didn’t look like Andy Benes, thats for sure. To think the Yanks were 8 outs away from being able to trade Pavano for a bag of balls and a bat boy to be named later. At least this should give Hughes a chance to come back and make an impact later on with a fresh arm, and some confidence around mid june.

    7. DFLNJ
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:12 am

      Steve, you missed too much of the game re: Hughes’s radar gun readings. I watched the game on the MLB.tv feed, so it was the Texas broadcast. In the beginning of the game, the gun did say 88-89-91 on his fastballs. However, the color guys said the gun was slow, and on one 89 mph pitch they made a note that the stadium gun said 93, and they thought that was more accurate.

      Later in the game, in his last 2 innings, Hughes TV radar gun readings were at 94-96. So if the TV gun was right all along, then he picked up 7 MPH in velocity as the game went on. Or, he was actually throwing 99+ at the end of the game, and started it at about 92-93.

      I think that, most likely, the truth was somewhere in the middle. But you cannot say that Hughes only throws 89 MPH, because that’s just objectively not true. It’s possible his lower velocity was a mechanical thing that he corrected as the game went on.

      But in any case, his 89 MPH fastballs were getting horrible swings from the Texas hitters. So, like baileywalk said yesterday, it makes no difference how hard it really is. The hitters don’t like it. And his stuff was “no-hit”…those guys had no chance.

    8. christopher
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:28 am

      I watched the Extra Innings broadcast too and the stadium gun read 93-97 through the entire start. Regardless of the actual MPH, he was blowing hitters away. The 5th and 6th innings reminded me of the last few outings we’ve had against Papelbon. You know a fastball is coming and there’s nothing you can do about it. With the curve mixed in, the Rangers were helpless. It was absolutely no-hit stuff. And his command was excellent. The FSN Southwest broadcast had this pitch tracker thing and it showed that he was just nailing the black – nothing over the middle of the plate.

    9. bfriley76
      May 2nd, 2007 | 8:58 am

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but during the YES feed, I SWEAR I saw them clock his Changeup at 63 a couple of times…that can’t be right, can it?

      In the “Please god, let there be SOME silver lining to this situation” department, maybe this time off will help keep Hughes be fresh for late summer/fall games, assuming we’re still have meaningful games to be played…

    10. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 9:12 am

      Steve, you should look at Teixera’s at-bats against Hughes. Remember when you said he had problems getting quality major leaguers out. Teixera was totally over matched against Hughes.

    11. May 2nd, 2007 | 9:29 am

      FWIW, Teixeira’s OPS coming into this game was .686 – and he was batting .231 on the season. It’s not just Hughes who has been overmatching him lately.

    12. May 2nd, 2007 | 9:39 am

      Want a good idea on how hard Hughes throws? Ask Hughes. This is what he said at the end of last year:

      “I’m generally sitting between 92 and 94 (mph) with it, and I’ll touch 95-96. I’m mostly going with 4-seamers, although I’ll throw a few 2-seamers that are closer to 91-92.”

      http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/262427.html

      So, he says it’s 92-94 – whereas the YES gun says 89-91. Let’s split the difference and say it’s 91-92.

    13. May 2nd, 2007 | 9:43 am

      Further, to support the 92 mark, here’s a report from his first start at Triple-A this year:

      “…Hughes hit 92 mph on the radar gun with his fastball, and threw a changeup that was effective, at times.”

      http://tinyurl.com/25qqsl

      So, that’s a bunch of sources: the YES gun, the gun at Triple-A, and Hughes himself that puts him in the ballpark of 92…and not someone who’s pumping consistently at 95+…..

    14. rbj
      May 2nd, 2007 | 9:44 am

      Buerhle also no hit this Texas team a couple of weeks ago, though there, the Rangers had a couple better bats in the lineup. Phil’s outing looked better — all of Texas’s hitters looked foolish.

    15. JJay
      May 2nd, 2007 | 9:52 am

      Hughes sucks. He’s not electric. He doesn’t have ‘no hit’ stuff even when he’s IN THE MIDDLE OF A NO-HITTER. I wonder if he had ‘shut out’ stuff last night. Probably not.

    16. DFLNJ
      May 2nd, 2007 | 9:55 am

      So, that’s a bunch of sources: the YES gun, the gun at Triple-A, and Hughes himself that puts him in the ballpark of 92…and not someone who’s pumping consistently at 95+…..
      =================================================
      No one ever said he threw 95+ every pitch. Besides that, you’re ignoring the end of the game where he was throwing 96 on the YES gun. Clearly he can touch 95+ when he wants to, but, unlike someone like Farnsworth, he doesn’t throw his fastball at max effort every time. This is a good thing, as it’s what gives him his control. Fastballs at 80% effort and 100% control are basically the cornerstone of Leo Mazzone’s philosophy.

      He’s not Joel Zumaya or even Bartolo Colon, but he throws plenty hard enough to get out quality major league hitters with his fastball.

    17. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:00 am

      Looks like Matt DeSalvo will get the call up to the majors.

      Why am I happier to see players like DeSalvo pitch versus Scott Erikson or Sydney Ponson?

    18. May 2nd, 2007 | 10:09 am

      ~~Why am I happier to see players like DeSalvo pitch versus Scott Erikson or Sydney Ponson? ~~

      It’s not just you.

    19. May 2nd, 2007 | 10:14 am

      ~~~No one ever said he threw 95+ every pitch.~~~

      Do a google search on “Philip Hughes MPH” – and you’ll see lots of claims that he throws 95+ all the time.

      FWIW, throwing 90-92 with control is awesome. That’s why I like Hughes. My only concern would be 7 years from now (or so). If he loses 2 MPH with age – which happens with pitchers as they age – he’ll be throwing 88-90 all the time. And, at that speed, he’ll need pin-point control to be effective as he’s closer to 30. But, again, that’s a long time from now.

      For now, and for the next 6 years, I’m happy that Phil Hughes is a Yankee.

    20. rbj
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:20 am

      ~~~My only concern would be 7 years from now (or so). If he loses 2 MPH with age – which happens with pitchers as they age – he’ll be throwing 88-90 all the time~~~

      Steve, the kid is twenty. In 7 years he’ll be 27 — the prime year (as per Bill James). I expect as he matures in the next couple of years he’ll increase his velocity. Say, 2 mph/year over the next 3 years = say, 98-100. He’ll stay there for a couple of years, then gradually decline. But he’s got a few other good pitches too.

    21. Raf
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:28 am

      My only concern would be 7 years from now (or so). If he loses 2 MPH with age – which happens with pitchers as they age – he’ll be throwing 88-90 all the time. And, at that speed, he’ll need pin-point control to be effective as he’s closer to 30. But, again, that’s a long time from now.
      ===========
      On a related note, did you see Livan Hernandez’s start yesterday? Mid-high 80′s fb.

      Anyway, provided Hughes keeps himself in game shape, and health willing, there’s no reason he wouldn’t be able to maintain his velocity into the prime of his career. And even if he loses velocity, who’s to say he won’t make the adjustment? Maybe picks up another pitch, or something like that?

      We’re getting way ahead of ourselves here :)

    22. DFLNJ
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:31 am

      ~~~No one ever said he threw 95+ every pitch.~~~

      Do a google search on “Philip Hughes MPH” – and you’ll see lots of claims that he throws 95+ all the time.
      ====================================================
      I did. The first page has one hit of anyone saying he throws 95+, and it’s some random guy commenting on a Yahoo story. The rest has him at 92-94.

      He will lose velocity as he ages, like every pitcher before him. But worry about that when the time comes.

    23. SteveB
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:40 am

      And A-Rod didn’t hit a double last night either. It was total luck, the FSN graphic said it was a double so the fielder didn’t even try to throw him out. What an overrated bum.

    24. BMack
      May 2nd, 2007 | 10:52 am

      Steve, no need to pour cold water on Hughes’s start-implying that his fastball wasn’t fast enough or his stuff wasn’t no hit enough- the water is already cold enough for Yankee fans.

    25. dereksTeam
      May 2nd, 2007 | 11:30 am

      After my Kyle Farnsworth experience, fastball gun speed is simply not something I place any faith in. As a fan watching tv, I think all you can use to evaluate a pitcher’s fastball is “does the batter swing and miss consistently”.

      If the answer is yes, then you have that “fastball with giddyap,” “fastball with good movement,” or “sneaky fast fastball” that “gets in on the hitter.” The latter standardized phrases measure up to a fastball that can be used as an outpitch. Rest assured Philip Hughes has all of that. With control and the devastating curve ball and a changeup that Posada asks for back-to back-to back, the kid is untouchable. I never saw the Little Rocket thing until last night.

      The bad news is that this was an old high school injury and hammies are notorious for their reoccurences among professional athletes. Oh, and the assistant strength and conditioning coach Dana Cavalea, has either taken down his site or is no longer posting (an ominous sign). “Cano’s hamstring was 8 weeks last year and his didn’t ‘pop’.” (wcbs)

      The good news is that Jonathan PoppleArm got touched up last night. Word out of the Sawks locker room was that he had pulled a couple of muscles in his face trying to look mean.

    26. May 2nd, 2007 | 11:44 am

      On the fact of velocity, i think the YES gun was way off. I was following on MLB enhanced gameday. I consider their gun very very accurate. It had him at 92-94 on the fastballs, 81-83 on the change and 75 or so on the curve. Also he was squeezed hard. Two of those walks should have been K’s. He was straight dominant that start there is no other way to describe it.

      As for the injury it sucks, but at least it was below the waist. Hopefull he takes 6 weeks off comes back fresh and helps us down the stretch run. It may end up he comes back from the injury right around the date where he was supposed to be called up originally.

    27. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 12:31 pm

      God. I mean, Jesus effin’ Christ.

      Hughes nearly throws a no-hitter, and Steve is still giving him shit about his velocity. Wake the hell up already — every gun (the stadium gun, the YES gun and the FSN gun) were different. Thus: radar guns aren’t accurate. The YES gun was the slowest gun last night, but you insist it’s the most accurate. FINE. What the hell does it even matter?

      It was bad enough that that fat idiot Peter Abraham took the opportunity last night to say “I told you so” to everyone after Hughes got hurt. I’m glad Hughes’ injury makes him feel smarter than everyone else.

      I cannot possibly express how utterly upset I was last night. Not only was Hughes unable to finish the game, which he was dominating, but then getting hurt on such a freak accident? It was maddening.

      This team is cursed. Something happened after ’03. The Yankees lost their magic. And this team definitely has some sort of dark cloud over its head.

      I almost have no enthusiasm to watch this team anymore.

      It’s amazing to me, Steve, that after ripping Hughes the way you did, you didn’t even watch him pitch! You should at least know the subject of your scorn.

      I think there’s really only one thing to say on this blog in relation to Hughes:

      Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy fucking Benes.

    28. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 12:32 pm

      The good news is that Jonathan PoppleArm got touched up last night. Word out of the Sawks locker room was that he had pulled a couple of muscles in his face trying to look mean.
      —-

      Ha. Thanks for that. I needed a laugh.

    29. May 2nd, 2007 | 12:58 pm

      baileywalk – I guess you missed the part where I wrote; “For now, and for the next 6 years, I’m happy that Phil Hughes is a Yankee,” huh?

    30. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 1:27 pm

      It took him almost throwing a no-hitter for you to give him some love. Before that, he didn’t have electric stuff and he was overrated. He was Andy Benes.

      You may say you’re happy he’ll be a Yankee, but you also still harped on his velocity, and you basically said that his accomplishment wasn’t great because he was playing against a struggling offense.

      I’m pretty sure you think I’m an asshole already, so I have no fear the following will negatively impact our relationship, Steve.

      A brief history of you and young pitchers:

      1) You wanted to trade Hughes for Aaron Cook.
      2) You wanted to make Hughes a closer.
      3) You wanted to use Tyler Clippard as a throw-in to stop the Red Sox from getting Jon Lieber.

      So I don’t think you’re the best judge of young pitchers — or so it would seem from that trio of ideas.

      Any praise from you about Hughes at this point is pretty empty to me — because you dismissed him before he even had a chance to prove himself. And from your comments here it’s obvious you still feel the need to diminish him. And that’s fine. Whatever gets your motor going, dude.

      I just don’t understand how someone who writes a Yankee blog, and had been talking about Hughes (negatively) so much lately, misses his start. You taped his last one so you could examine it and tell us where his gun readings were in the fifth inning, but you skip out on this?

      Anyway, this is your home. I am but a guest.

      Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes, Andy Benes.

    31. May 2nd, 2007 | 1:41 pm

      Fair enough baileywalk, you’re entitled to your opinion. I would never step in the way of that. But, here’s mine: It’s foolish to hump the leg of every Yankee prospect, like I was a dog with a woodie, just because they’re members of the Yankees organization. At least, it’s foolish to me. I like to see something first before I agree to have their baby. Again, that’s just me. So, excuse me for waiting to see a guy at higher levels before I confess my undying love for them. Like I’ve said, a thousand times now, I don’t wear Yankees blinders. And, I don’t get to watch every inning of every game.

      I guess I’m just a terrible Yankees fan, huh? Anyone know where I should turn in my membership card and decoder ring?

    32. May 2nd, 2007 | 1:50 pm

      ~~~On the fact of velocity, i think the YES gun was way off. I was following on MLB enhanced gameday. I consider their gun very very accurate. ~~~

      Here’s my rub for those who think the YES gun is slow:

      In his start against the Blue Jays, Hughes was clocked at 90. “Slow gun! Slow gun!” – everyone shouts.

      But, the Blue Jays pitcher, in the same game, the same inning, was clocked at 96 MPM.

      So, which is it? Was the Jays’ pitcher really throwing at 101 MPH? Or, does YES save a special slow gun *just* for Yankees pitchers?

      Because of this, I don’t buy into the “Slow YES gun” theories.

    33. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 1:50 pm

      ~~~I like to see something first before I agree to have their baby. ~~~

      Holy shit, Steve is a freak of nature. Can I see your belly when you do agree to have someone’s baby?

    34. brockdc
      May 2nd, 2007 | 1:56 pm

      You know, count me as one of the few Hughes skeptics. That was, until I finally watched him pitch for the first time last night (more about that in a moment). Initially, when I heard he was sitting at 91-92 in his first start, I was a bit disappointed after all the hyperbole about him being the next great dominant power pitcher. I also thought he was probably called up too early.

      But last night cleared all that up for me. Honestly, I don’t care what his gun reading is, Steve – he looked like a stud high school pitcher throwing against blindfolded pee-wee leaguers. His “secondary” pitches are filthy (12/6 power-curve, bottom completely dropping out late on his change, huge mph differential between fastball and change), and his fastballs – whatever their gun-reading – were virtually unhittable. Compound that with his poise and dogged work ethic, and I think he just might be the next great power pitcher, this freak injury notwithstanding.

    35. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:03 pm

      Steve, Hughes wasn’t some C-prospect people like me get a hard-on for and shout from the rooftops that, despite his flaws, he’ll be a big-leaguer. I do tend to get this way at times — I admit it. You know, maybe I have too much faith in less-than-stellar prospects like T.J. Beam. That’s who I am — I root for organizational guys to succeed, and maybe I do tend to overlook things.

      But Hughes wasn’t that guy — he was the best pitcher in the minors, he put up Santana numbers in AA, and you didn’t just say “wait, guys, we have to see him at higher levels,” you seemed to almost have a negative tone with him, like you were waiting for him to fail. Maybe I’m wrong and I misread your tone. If I did, my apologies. But I still sense that tone now.

      I don’t think you’re a bad Yankee fan — I know you love this team. I think you have a great baseball mind. But when it comes to pitchers, we definitely disagree on things.

      What can I say? I’m completely frustrated by Hughes’ injury and reading what you wrote today upped my frustration even more.

      No hard feelings, man. Peace. (Just don’t expect me to agree with you about young pitchers! Ha, ha. Pitching prospects are very red state/blue state in nature, I suppose.)

    36. May 2nd, 2007 | 2:09 pm

      ~~~No hard feelings, man. Peace. ~~~

      Ditto amigo.

    37. JeterReggieGuidry
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:12 pm

      It’s hard to believe we’re arguing about whether Phil Hughes has “electric” stuff after he pitched 6 1/3 innings of no-hit baseball — 3 hits to the outfield, 6 strikeouts — all this in his SECOND MAJOR LEAGUE START.

      Most Major League pitchers will go through their entire careers without being so dominating.

      As far as Texas slumping as an offensive team argument, lest we forget David Cone pitched his perfect game against a very weak Montreal Expos team and nobody diminishes his accomplishment because of that.

      This velocity thing also seems moot. I would take Phil Hughes’s 90 mph fastball over Kyle Farnsworths’ 100 mph fastball any day. Hughes seems to have much more pitcher’s sense — knows how to outwit batters. Farnsworth seems to rear back and throw.

      I like this blog a lot, but I have to say, my favorite bloggers are the ones who are opinionated but then are able to let their opinion evolve as the facts present themselves. I don’t know if Steve (or Pete Abraham) does that very well.

    38. Jen
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:16 pm

      Re: the rule about switching sides of the plate during the at bat, that’s perfectly legal regardless of the count. I think it’s a rule in little league, but not in the majors. It’s only illegal to switch sides if it’s done when the pitcher is ready to pitch.

      There is a rule pitchers switching arms during an at bat though(obvious only applicable for the few ambidextrous pitchers out there).

    39. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:23 pm

      There is a rule pitchers switching arms during an at bat though(obvious only applicable for the few ambidextrous pitchers out there).
      ———-

      We need to find that guy and sign him. If he proves he can get out both Ortiz and Manny, we’ll sign him to a ten-year contract.

    40. rbj
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:27 pm

      I saw the Indians’ #1 prospect a couple of weeks ago vs. the Toledo Mudhens. He was topping out at 92-93, though later in the game he hit 94, 95 once or twice. But what he was doing was setting up the hitters with his off-speed stuff, and guys who should have smacked his fastball around were barely able to foul it off because they had to gear down a bit for the changeup & curve. He was also a bit wild.

      Phil was incredible last night. He threw whatever he wanted, whereever he wanted and just made Texas look like they were A ball hitters. Just can’t wait to see him no hit Boston in September.

    41. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:29 pm

      ~~~I like this blog a lot, but I have to say, my favorite bloggers are the ones who are opinionated but then are able to let their opinion evolve as the facts present themselves. I don’t know if Steve (or Pete Abraham) does that very well.~~~

      ——

      I was going to say that same thing, but JeterReggieGuidry said it much better than me. Steve draws a line in the sand and that puts him in the position where people can disagree passionately with him, because he’s just as passionate about his stance/viewpoint.

      However, this is in no way is critical and I think bailey went over the line by going off on Pete Abe.

      I think Pete Abe and Steve are great at what they do and they definitely do it differently than Cliff and Alex at BronxBanter; it’s just a different approach. I love the Banter and their comment section is not filled with people ripping Alex and/or Cliff because they disagree with their viewpoint. They say what they have to say, in a non-confrontational sort of way, and the comments just take a life of their own.

      It really is just a style difference and it is probably more suited to their personality. If I were blogging, then I’d probably be more like Steve or Pete Abe than Cliff or Alex.

      I don’t mind insults going around among the people commenting, but I have a hard time insulting the people using their free time to keep us thinking.

      I actually think Pete Abe can be quite fair. I didn’t think he was gloating about Hughes getting hurt, he was just expressing his personal opinion and I’m OK with that.

    42. Raf
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:43 pm

      We need to find that guy and sign him. If he proves he can get out both Ortiz and Manny, we’ll sign him to a ten-year contract.
      ===============
      Greg A. Harris (Ex Yankee, I may add) has been long retired :)

    43. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:44 pm

      It’s funny to be taken to task by you of all people, Garcia, since you write some of the most inappropriate things I’ve ever seen. You compare Big Stein to bin Laden. You suggest the blood on Schilling’s sock was menstrual blood. Come on. All I did was say what most people felt last night: that Peter — who is fat, and who I also think says some idiotic things: a fat idiot — used Hughes’ freak injury as a way to say “I told you so.” His assertion that Hughes was rushed makes no sense. Hughes hurt his leg — not his arm. He could have hurt his leg on any mound in any stadium at any level of the game. Pete was so eager to make the point that he was right and Cashman/the fans were wrong, that he made an untenable point and made himself look like an egomaniac and a fool.

      I wasn’t the only one who felt this way — just about every board I saw last night (his own, nyyfans.com, etc.) were biting into him.

      And, sorry, but anyone who has the photo he has of himself on his web site — where he looks like a giant-headed wax figure of some bizarre mouse-human hybrid — he has to be expected to be called a fat idiot on occasion.

      Didn’t mean to offend your fine sensitivities, Garcia.

    44. May 2nd, 2007 | 2:49 pm

      Jen – thanks for the rule clarification.

      ~~~I like this blog a lot, but I have to say, my favorite bloggers are the ones who are opinionated but then are able to let their opinion evolve as the facts present themselves. I don’t know if Steve (or Pete Abraham) does that very well. ~~~

      JeterReggieGuidry – you would be suprised. There are many times where I start writing something with the intent for it to go one way…and as I start to pull the facts and/or data together, I realize that I have no case. When that happens, I usually delete the entry before I publish it, or, I write it with a finding/summary/opinion different than what I intended it to be…when I started.

      More times than not, I delete it. But, at least I do try and go with facts and/or data rather than just throwing crap out there.

    45. JJay
      May 2nd, 2007 | 2:52 pm

      Steve, it seemed like you were able to change your opinion on Matsuzaka awfully quickly. How come you can’t do the same with Hughes? Matsuzaka currently has an ERA of 4.36 yet you thought the Yankees wouldn’t be able to get any runners on base against him.

    46. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:04 pm

      baileywalk, I also said I hope Schilling gets Ebola.

      You’re right, I say a ton of inappropriate things but I try and say them in jest. If you go and look at the context in which I was comparing Big Stein to Bin Laden, it had to do with the similarities in how both deliver their messages/statements. We no longer know if they are truly dead/alive and it is quite hilarious to see the “releases” from both camps. But, you couldn’t get that…..I understand.

      I didn’t think you’d interpret it as Big Stein has issued a fatwa for jihad against anything/anyone that’s against the Yankees, and him condoning terrorist activity as long as it’s in the name of the Yankees.

      I’ve disagreed with you quite often, but I actually agree with your points on Phillip Hughes except that I didn’t think you should call Pete Abe fat. Why is that a relevant point in your argument? I think you’re a dick, but I don’t use that line every time I need to make my case – except now. But I don’t really mean to call you a dick, it is just my poor attempt at trying to be funny. Do you get the difference?

    47. Don
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:05 pm

      Steve, no wonder no post from you during the game. Watching those important TV shows instead of watching Hughes. Hughes, the twenty year old, who nobody claims is Dwight Gooden or Nolan Ryan. Hughes who is a gem of a prospect. Hughes who, for some odd reason, you have a total dislike/ disregard for. Even if you, in a backhanded manner, hope he’s here six years. I guess you can’t wait for him to leave in FA then? Since the Yankees won’t trade him for ______________ .

      Wasn’t it you, Steve, who opined recently when writing about Cashman, that maybe we would be better off having signed Jeff Suppan? I think those TV shows are eating away your little grey cells.

    48. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:10 pm

      I think you’re a dick, but I don’t use that line every time I need to make my case – except now. But I don’t really mean to call you a dick, it is just my poor attempt at trying to be funny. Do you get the difference?
      ——

      What I think, Garcia, is that you’re a sociopath.

      A sociopath who apparently doesn’t understand irony, either.

    49. Raf
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:11 pm

      Tuesday evening is an Idol/House night in my home. (Hey, I don’t live alone and I’m not a TV dictator in my relationship.)
      ============
      Then listen to the radio, or “watch” the game via gamecast :)

    50. May 2nd, 2007 | 3:16 pm

      HEY, ALL – LET’S PLAY NICE IN THE SANDBOX, OK? No name calling. Let’s be above that. Thanks!

    51. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:17 pm

      baileywalk, I agree, I am a sociopath.

      Would you at least accept that you are a dick? Either in jest or reality.

    52. Jen
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:24 pm

      //HEY, ALL – LET’S PLAY NICE IN THE SANDBOX, OK? No name calling. Let’s be above that. Thanks!//

      You don’t need to watch reality tv anymore Steve. You have a girl-fight right on your very own blog.

    53. May 2nd, 2007 | 3:27 pm

      Gee, I would really hate to close a thread or ban TypeKey Accounts. But, if needed, I will. So, please, please, please, let’s all respect each other. Thanks!

    54. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:28 pm

      I’ll accept whatever you want, Garcia. As long as you promise not to boil my dog or whatever other psycho things the screwed-up wiring in your brain might tell you to do.

    55. Garcia
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:33 pm

      I promise not to boil your dog or blow up your red balloon.

    56. baileywalk
      May 2nd, 2007 | 3:34 pm

      Don’t worry, Steve. It’s over on this end. I’ll go back to what I said a month or so ago and not respond to Mr. Garcia. It was dumb not to stick to my original plan, obviously.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.