• May 15th @ The Rays

    Posted by on May 15th, 2008 · Comments (20)

    If you wanted to pick one game, and use it to depict the Yankees season to date, this would not be a bad choice.

    New York’s kid starting pitcher allows one run for every inning pitched.
    Bomber batters, for the most part, fail with runners in scoring position.
    Weak and shallow Yankees bench exposed.
    Yet, no name relief pitchers do surprisingly well.
    The Yankees lose.

    Be truthful here – the Yankees, in this set, just missed getting swept in a four game series by the Tampa Bay Rays. In fact, the Yankees are darned lucky that they won last night – via a bloop hit and gift DP liner – or else they would have been spanked in four straight.

    At this point, I’m almost hoping that the Mets do something stupid against the Yankees this weekend – like tick them off with some taunting or by hitting some batters…anything – that will maybe give this team a chance to show that they can be sparked to life.

    Right now…the Yankees play is just flat-out depressing.

    Comments on May 15th @ The Rays

    1. Rich
      May 15th, 2008 | 8:14 pm

      They also just missed splitting the series, but yes, they suck right now.

    2. May 15th, 2008 | 8:55 pm

      How did they just miss splitting the series – because of that 11 inning game? Com’on without that one Matsui swing, they were never in that one.

    3. Rich
      May 15th, 2008 | 9:54 pm

      Isn’t that why they call baseball “a game of inches.” So yes, they could have won Wang’s game.

    4. Joel
      May 15th, 2008 | 11:37 pm

      When 40% of your starting rotation going into the start of the season completely blows up, it’s going to be tough. The bats will come around.

      Let’s try Giese.

    5. TurnTwo
      May 16th, 2008 | 7:39 am

      as sketchy as 40-60% as the starting rotation has been at any given point this season, it still isnt the real reason why this stink stinks right now.

      it’s all about the offense. that’s the reason why i felt comfortable with the Hughes/IPK plan of developing the young pitching while competing for the division- this team, and this offense, was supposed to be on pace to score 1000 runs this season.

      and even without ARod and Posada, they’ve still got names in that lineup that should be producing more than 2 runs a game. that’s disgusting.

    6. May 16th, 2008 | 8:21 am

      ~~~When 40% of your starting rotation going into the start of the season completely blows up, it’s going to be tough.~~~

      This is two years in a row now for this.
      In 2007, it was Pavano and Igawa. This year it was Hughes and Kennedy. Both years, they went with a bad plan and had no back-up…but, I know, I know, that’s a dead horse, right?

    7. Joel
      May 16th, 2008 | 8:33 am

      Turn Two–”Sketchy” is a very generous way to describe Hughes and Kennedy. I prefer, “flat out sucked.” The offense has stunk too–especially without A-Rod and Posada. But when your starter puts you in a four or five run hole, it demoralizes the team and (even if subtly) changes the offensive approach..

      Steve–I know where you’re coming from on this, but I’m not canning the GM right now. They have backups this year. They have Rasner. They can try Giese. And they certainly have enough prospects to trade for a Millwood or an Arroyo.

    8. TurnTwo
      May 16th, 2008 | 8:35 am

      “bad plan, and no back-up”

      ugh. just, ugh.

    9. TurnTwo
      May 16th, 2008 | 8:40 am

      Joel, i would actually take a look at it from the other perspective.

      this offense has drastically underperformed, placing undue stress on young arms to have to be perfect with their pitches.

      the offense is the culprit here, because the approach doesnt change. it’s not like it was a small ball team who now, because they are 2 or 3 or 4 runs down, has to think swing for the fences.

      this team is built on OBP and slugging potential. up and down the lineup, these are veteran hitters who know how to get on base and produce runs over 9 innings.

      they started the season slow, and then got hit hard with injuries which certainly didnt help. but you’ve still got guys in the everyday lineup that need to take the reigns here and get the job done.

      you cant have a young pitcher go out and think he’s gotta throw 6 or 7 innings of 1 or 2 run ball every time he takes the mound… too much to expect from a developing pitcher.

    10. Rich
      May 16th, 2008 | 9:01 am

      you cant have a young pitcher go out and think he’s gotta throw 6 or 7 innings of 1 or 2 run ball every time he takes the mound… too much to expect from a developing pitcher.
      ______

      That’s why tonight’s game will offer a window into Rasner’s level of maturity; he’s inexperienced, but not young in baseball terms. What’s the under/over on the Yankees’ offense ability to hit Santana in light of their .229 AVG v. LH pitching? I would guess < 2 runs, which means that Rasner knows that he has no margin for error.

    11. Raf
      May 16th, 2008 | 10:09 am

      This is two years in a row now for this.
      ——–
      actually, it has been 4

    12. Raf
      May 16th, 2008 | 10:16 am

      In 2007, it was Pavano and Igawa. This year it was Hughes and Kennedy. Both years, they went with a bad plan and had no back-up…
      —————
      2007: The backups were found in-house (Hughes, Clippard, DeSalvo, Kennedy, etc), and Clemens was b(r)ought on board.

      2008: The replacements will be found in-house as well, be they in SWB or Trenton. Can’t rule out a trade either.

    13. May 16th, 2008 | 10:22 am

      Raf, without Clemens being out there, and the Yankees having millions to throw at him, last year would have been a mess – and, that’s what might happen this year…because there’s no Clemens out there to buy.

    14. Raf
      May 16th, 2008 | 10:53 am

      The point you tried to make was that there wasn’t a backup plan. As pointed out, there was. Clemens was bought on board, and several guys were promoted from within.

      Last year was a mess WITH Clemens; injuries and ineffectiveness still occurred after he came on board.

    15. May 16th, 2008 | 11:08 am

      Raf, if they had a back-up plan last year, they would have not needed to spend billions on Clemens.

    16. Raf
      May 16th, 2008 | 11:23 am

      How do you know Clemens wasn’t part of the backup plan? And even if Clemens wasn’t bought on board, there’s still the fact that other guys were promoted from within.

      The Yanks haven’t had a season where the rotation was tight from top to bottom since 2003 (Clemens, Pettitte, Mussina, Wells & Weaver/Contreras).

    17. May 16th, 2008 | 11:28 am

      You think the Yankees back-up plan was to spend $28 million on Roger Clemens? That’s a pretty expensive Plan B.

    18. TurnTwo
      May 16th, 2008 | 11:36 am

      Unofficially, one could make the argument that Clemens was on board for the season from spring training. I dont even see it as a Plan B.

      and why do yankees fans really care how much a player costs? i never got it. its their money, they can spend it as they wish. if it cost them $18 million for 2/3 or so of a season, then its no skin off my behind.

    19. Raf
      May 16th, 2008 | 11:53 am

      You think the Yankees back-up plan was to spend $28 million on Roger Clemens? That’s a pretty expensive Plan B.
      —————–
      It’s the Yanks. They can afford it.

      It’s not like the recent situation with Wells; it was known that Clemens was keeping himself in shape to pitch in 2007. It was just of question of where; NY, Houston or Boston.

      And even if he wasn’t signed, you still have the players that were promoted from within. So if Clemens wasn’t signed, you’re looking at Hughes & co. taking their lumps. Maybe Cashman makes another trade for another arm. There are many different scenarios that we can apply here.

    20. Rich
      May 16th, 2008 | 3:07 pm

      That Cano changed his number from 22 to 24 in ST is some evidence that Clemens was a backup plan.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.