• Madden: Cashman’s Moves Right On The $

    Posted by on October 1st, 2009 · Comments (28)

    Via Bill Madden today -

    There’s an old saying in baseball – “you can’t scout desire” – and most general managers will tell you the same applies to “makeup.” And when you’re the GM of the Yankees, you have to add yet another uncertainty to those intangibles and that is the “New York factor.”

    Such was Brian Cashman’s double challenge when he went about trying to restructure a Yankee team that had finished out of the playoff money for the first time in 15 years. Even though he had the financial flexibility to secure most any free agent he wanted, he knew he couldn’t afford to make another mistake on the intangibles. He couldn’t afford another Carl Pavano. Heck, he couldn’t even afford another Jason Giambi.

    Cashman knew he had to bring in players who were not just talented but who could also make the quick adjustment to New York and also change the clubhouse chemistry. In that respect, I have to believe even Cashman could never have envisioned the grand slam he’s hit with CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Mark Teixeira and Nick Swisher – especially since there were questions about each of them being able to handle the fishbowl existence of being a Yankee.

    Between Sabathia’s and Burnett’s influence with the pitchers, Teixeira’s subtle leadership and Swisher’s clubhouse effervescence, Cashman wound up going 4-for-4 in the makeup and chemistry department. Undoubtedly, if the Yankees go all the way this year, there are those critics who will scoff that Cashman bought himself a World Series. In fact, they already are doing so, as evidenced by Toronto Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi’s bitter assessment of the AL East the other day in which he said, “The Yankees could take their payroll to $300 million if they want to.”

    Yeah, but look what $200 million bought them last year. Cashman took his deserved share of criticism for that, as well as for the Pavano, Kei Igawa and Kyle Farnsworth signings in recent years. Which just goes to show it’s not how much money you spend. It’s how you spend it.

    Yes, let’s build a statue of Brian Cashman for the job he’s done this season – bringing in Sabathia, Burnett, Teixeira and Swisher – because that’s the reason why the Yankees are playing so well this season…and let’s place the statue in Monument Park at Yankee Stadium…

    Pull-ease.

    Yeah, let’s forget why Brian Cashman had to go out and spend a half-billion dollars to acquire Sabathia, Burnett and Teixeira…

    Let’s forget that it was Cashman’s failure to develop any talent to place in his starting rotation and first base…and that he didn’t have the chips and/or smarts to trade for players to fill a need…like when Gene Michael and Bob Watson traded for David Cone and Tino Martinez…that brought cause for the need to dip into the Steinbrenner Brothers change purse for a cool half-billion bucks…

    Giving credit to Brian Cashman for bringing in Sabathia, Burnett, Teixeira and Swisher this season is like giving Harry Truman credit for establishing the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission…after he dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    The only good thing Cashman has done in the last 12 months is take out the Steinbrenner Family Checkbook and spend more money than any other team in baseball was capable of spending in one off-season…to acquire the best talent on the free agent market…and plug the holes on his team that were the result of his own inability to produce or acquire quality players (outside of spending hundreds of millions to get it done).

    They don’t really build statues for spending money, do they?

    Comments on Madden: Cashman’s Moves Right On The $

    1. Raf
      October 2nd, 2009 | 12:12 am

      Let’s forget that it was Cashman’s failure to develop any talent to place in his starting rotation and first base…and that he didn’t have the chips and/or smarts to trade for players to fill a need…like when Gene Michael and Bob Watson traded for David Cone and Tino Martinez…that brought cause for the need to dip into the Steinbrenner Brothers change purse for a cool half-billion bucks…

      That makes no sense. You think the Red Sox would like to have Beckett and Hanley Ramirez? Tis better to get the player you want and keep your guys. Or would you rather he traded Hughes, Kennedy and Cabrera for Santana?

      Anyway, Madden’s article is BS. The pitching is performing @ the same clip as it was last year. HOWEVER, the offense has improved by a lot. Amazing how much having Cano, Cabrera, Jeter & Posada contributing more than they did last season makes the team better.

    2. Raf
      October 2nd, 2009 | 12:22 am

      FWIW, David Cone and Tino Martinez were salary dumps. That the Yanks gave up players in return doesn’t negate that the reason they were acquired was because Toronto and Seattle wanted salary relief.

    3. Evan3457
      October 2nd, 2009 | 2:51 am

      Cashman didn’t spend any more money this season than the team has spent the last 4 seasons. The Yankees’ payroll is essentially unchanged since 2004. Payroll going out about = payroll coming in. For spit’s sake, this “half a billion” meme is total horsespit, because it’s divided out over 20 player seasons. It’s $60 million for the 3, per season. That’s $60 million a year, not “half a billion”.

      Would Cashman be any smarter if he had traded away 5-8 good prospects AND spent all that money to resign the top players traded for? I don’t think so.

      The Yanks were never able to trade for a Tino Martinez not because they “didn’t have the chips or smarts”, but because they were on the hook for $10-22 million for Giambi already, and there’s no way the organization was going to pay $20-35 million a year to cover first base.

      Otherwise…David Wells? Free Agent. Cone? Salary Dump (back when teams were willing to take garbage prospects because they didn’t have solid analysts and needed to dump payroll. Those trades don’t fall out of the sky anymore. Cliff Lee ring a bell? How about Santana?), Clemens? Salary Dump, and trade-in on Wells. El Duque? Latin free agent, they just outbid for him. Jimmy Key? Free agent. Jeff Nelson? Throw in in the Tino salary dump deal. Mike Stanton? Free agent.

      And how many great starting pitchers did Gene Michael and Bob Watson “develop”, anyway? One starter of marginal greatness in Pettitte, who’s really more like very good for a long time.

      The trade for Swisher doesn’t count as a good one? How about Melky, Cano, Hughes, Joba, Robertson, Gardner, Cervelli, and Pena for the lineup, bench and pen? They don’t count, either?

      It’s a long way to Tipperary, but if the Yanks actually do win it all this year, does Cashman get no credit even for that? What will you write if that happens?

      Blank page?

      Seriously, you’re leaving yourself no outs on this score. None.

    4. Evan3457
      October 2nd, 2009 | 2:54 am

      …and while we’re at it…no credit either for Hinske, Hairston, and Gaudin, acquired for virtually zero cost, all of whom have helped the Yankees at one point or another this season.

      Oh, right, no credit…Cashman had to trade for them to cover for the fact he “couldn’t” develop a bench or a 6th starter.

    5. Pat F
      October 2nd, 2009 | 4:02 am

      All good points made in the comments above. This post is the typical narrow view that conveniently ignores important elements/facts in an attempt to prove a point, as evidenced by the inconsistencies highlighted above.

      The funniest thing is that GMs get crushed by for big money signings that don’t work out. But then when they do it was simply the obvious signing. This makes sense. Taking this viewpoint exposes a lack of knowledge of athletes and the many factors that go into success on the field/court. The view here is heads cashman loses tails cashman still loses. That seems fair.

      All of this aside, aren’t the yankees going to the playoffs next week? Didn’t they just run away with on of the strongest divisions in the last few years? Win triple digit games? Best record in baseball? And people are still complaining/criticizing/dertacting. You expect that from fans of other teams, but from yankee “fans”?! It really is amazing (and sad) how spoiled some in this fan base are. We’ve gotten to have a more enjoyable season this year already than most have ever had. And there are still things out there people find to be negative about right as the most fun part is about to begin. I can understand the frustration during the season when the ending is not certain, but now we’ve accomplished all that you can during the regular season, is there ever a time to just sit back and enjoy it without any detracting/negativity? I guess it’s up to each individual.

    6. Pat F
      October 2nd, 2009 | 4:10 am

      And I say all of that in the context of, do we have any idea how ridiculous it looks to serious fans of other teams that there are still things we could possibly be complaining about? From small market teams to the many teams out there spending big money – not yankee money, but big money – and experiencing nowhere near the proportional success. We’ve been to the playoffs 14 of the last 15 seasons! I, at the very least, am going to appreciate this, because as much as I want to win the world series every year, the boom or bust of that takes away some of the enjoyment. And the money we have to spend is a positive, not a negative, and I’m glad we continue ti use it to our advantage.

    7. Garcia
      October 2nd, 2009 | 8:26 am

      But he still got all the grief for Pavano, Igawa, Jaret Wright, Tony Womack, Farnsworth, etc. Those moves required the Big Stein checkbook and you (@ Steve) weren’t shy about giving Cashman grief, but now that these moves have worked then he was fortunate to have Big Stein’s checkbook and he gets zero credit. I don’t bust a nutty over Cashman, but I think when a player/manager/front-office person gets in your cross-hairs then he will never be given any credit.

      Did you read what Theo said about player moves? He says that a lot of times you’ll be right 50% of the time, him and his team are simply trying to move the odds to 55% of the time and then, hopefully, building on that. He says that’s why you don’t puff your chest out that much. Using Theo’s metric of 50% and 55%, then it’ll be interesting to see where Cashman falls in that range, or outside the range.

      You seem to think that being a GM is a science, I still think Cash made a great trade when he got Javy in 2004, but he sucked in the Bronx. Sometimes you just have a bad run.

      Look at the potential playoff roster and tell me if shit hasn’t changed from 2004/2005. Look at the # players that came out of the Yankees very own system.

    8. October 2nd, 2009 | 8:38 am

      For too many Yankees fans when it comes to Cashman it’s “heads he wins and tails somebody else loses”.

    9. Raf
      October 2nd, 2009 | 9:16 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      For too many Yankees fans when it comes to Cashman it’s “heads he wins and tails somebody else loses”.

      Be that as it may, pretzel logic isn’t needed to make a point. Cashman is doing the same thing that Watson and Michael did before him; mixing veterans with young ‘uns, picking up a few players through FA, acquiring a few others through salary dumps.

      Madden’s article is flawed from the beginning. Z0MG 1/2 BILLION isn’t the issue here, it’s bounceback seasons from Jeter, Cano, Cabrera and Posada… You know, homegrown Yankees ;)

    10. Raf
      October 2nd, 2009 | 9:19 am

      Garcia wrote:

      You seem to think that being a GM is a science

      It is, to a point. Problem is that the science doesn’t fly with the mystique, aura, unicorn farts and fairy whizz crowd.

    11. YankCrank
      October 2nd, 2009 | 9:43 am

      Hey Steve, i’m curious.

      Cashman isn’t worthy of praise when he spends money and it works (CC, Tex) and he also isn’t worthy of praise when players in his system come up and help the team win (Cano, Wang, Melky, Robertson, Pena, Cervelli, etc.).

      What does Brian Cashman have to do to be considered a good GM to you?

      He’s clearly made mistakes, like every GM has, but it seems like no matter what he’s lose/lose with you.

    12. cr1
      October 2nd, 2009 | 10:01 am

      You and Madden are at the far (opposite) ends of the silliness spectrum.

      There’s just too much nonsense in your post to go into details. You could start with the topic of developing talent and work it out for yourself, though. Where do the Yankees stand, in comparison with all other MLB teams, in terms of percentage of home-grown players on their active roster today?

      Are you surprised, or did you just forget the facts when you turned on your rant button?

    13. Garcia
      October 2nd, 2009 | 10:11 am

      @Steve – I think Cashman has made some horrible moves, it was well documented in Verducci’s book so I don’t think I drink the Cashman Kool Aid. But at the same time, he has improved in the last 4 years, and if you don’t want to give him credit for that then at this point your emotions are getting in the way of the results. He made a great trade for Abreu, he held onto his prospects knowing that CC would be a free agent, he traded decent prospects for Nady and Marte.

      Also, times have changed from when Stick Michael could get the Tino’s and Cone’s, GMs are much smarter now and they have more tools at their disposal. GMs overvalue their prospects and players, they are more reluctant to get rid of young players.

    14. October 2nd, 2009 | 10:39 am

      Say you owned your own company and you hired a manager to run it. Let’s call him Ryan Creditgal…for this example.

      Now, when you first hired Ryan, you micro-managed him – even ‘tho he was being paid to run the show. And, after 8 years of this, Creditgal comes to you and says “Let me do my job. I want to be the head cheese, etc.”

      So, you figure WTF and you cut the strings.

      Over the next three years, good ol’ Ryan Creditgal makes mistake after mistake. When he tries to be proactive and have contingency plans, the plans are a bust and fail. When he’s aggressive and makes a call on something real time, it usually blows up. And, worst, when it comes to the most important element in the nature of your business, he demonstrates that he’s clueless in identifying the right guys for the job.

      In three years, your company goes from being one of the best in the field to being one that’s outside looking in at the best.

      So, at this point, good ol’ Ryan Creditgal comes to you and says “We’re in a bad spot. We have serious holes and issues that have come up and we don’t have an internal answers. We need to get help from outside. But, it’s going to cost us – and cost us a LOT of money.”

      Now, you don’t want you company to fail, so, you give the kid your checkbook. With that, he goes out and buys the best and most expensive talent from other companies. It’s really no-brainer stuff…since these guys have awesome resumes, etc. But, it’s REALLY expensive.

      Well, the new guys come in and save the company.

      I dunno about you, but, if this is my company, I’m not ready to give Creditgal a huge bonus for saving the company. It was his failures that put the company in a bad spot. It was his inability to do his job that brought cause for the need to go out and spend a ton on hired guns.

      If it’s your company and this all went down, and you then want to give good ol’ Ryan Creditgal the keys to the executive washroom, a company car, and two extra weeks vacation, well, that’s your right. But, if you did that, I doubt that I want to buy any stock in your company, for sure.

    15. October 2nd, 2009 | 10:51 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      What does Brian Cashman have to do to be considered a good GM to you?

      He would have to perform in the same manner, production-wise and cost-efficiency-wise, as the two guys who had the job before him did…

    16. yagottagotomo1
      October 2nd, 2009 | 10:56 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Now, you don’t want you company to fail, so, you give the kid your checkbook. With that, he goes out and buys the best and most expensive talent from other companies. It’s really no-brainer stuff…since these guys have awesome resumes, etc. But, it’s REALLY expensive.

      This is where you lose me. I disagree with you about the job Cash did over the last 3-4 years, but I get where you are coming from. However, to refer to this offseasons signings as no-brainer stuff is not fair. If CC had gone 12-10, Burnett pitched to a 5.00 ERA, Tex hit 28 homers, and Swisher hit like 2008, you would have been first in line to rip him for “no-brainer stuff.” He picked the right guys this time, and deserves credit for that.

    17. YankCrank
      October 2nd, 2009 | 11:40 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      YankCrank wrote:

      What does Brian Cashman have to do to be considered a good GM to you?

      He would have to perform in the same manner, production-wise and cost-efficiency-wise, as the two guys who had the job before him did…

      I believe that this is an unrealistic expectation.

      In no way, with the current state of baseball, is it possible for Cashman to put together a team that would rip off four out of five championships and three in a row within the same span. Even SUPER GENIUS THEO EPSTEIN can’t do that…the game just isn’t the same. It’s also unrealistic to want to do it on a budget. We’re the Yankees, and we have money to spend…it’s a distinct advantage that we have over other teams and it would be silly not to use it.

      Waiting for Cashman to produce what Watson and Michael did is completely unrealistic and not a single GM in baseball should be held to that standard…it’s as ridiculous as Steinbrenner expecting Torre to win a Championship every single year.

      I can now see why you’ll never be on Cashman’s side, even when he does make the right moves.

    18. October 2nd, 2009 | 12:02 pm

      @ YankCrank: OK, how’s this: Let’s see him build JUST ONE team – that’s not seeded with players from a previous GM – that goes on to win a World Series with a payroll of $150 million or less. If he did that, I would be impressed.

      Because, right now, all I see from Cashman is $200 million teams who either get their ass kicked in the ALDS or that don’t make the ALDS at all…

    19. YankCrank
      October 2nd, 2009 | 12:37 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ YankCrank: OK, how’s this: Let’s see him build JUST ONE team – that’s not seeded with players from a previous GM – that goes on to win a World Series with a payroll of $150 million or less. If he did that, I would be impressed.

      Haha, Steve you are a smart man…you have to know that this is also unrealistic at this point in time. Jeter, Pettitte, River and Posada are still on this team. Once again, you give Cash a 0% chance of succeeding under your standards.

      As for the $150 million figure, i’m curious as to why a die-hard Yankee fan would only feel right if his team won on a budget? I tend to ask myself, when thinking of the Yankees and their use of money, which would upset me more…if the Yankees had all the money in the world and used it to better their chances of winning, or if they had all the money in the world and chose to pocket it and blend in with the rest of baseball?

      I think we should ask some A’s, Rays or Marlins fans if they’d rather have their owners pocket money or spend it and see what they say.

    20. Evan3457
      October 2nd, 2009 | 1:48 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Say you owned your own company and you hired a manager to run it. Let’s call him Ryan Creditgal…for this example.
      Now, when you first hired Ryan, you micro-managed him – even ‘tho he was being paid to run the show. And, after 8 years of this, Creditgal comes to you and says “Let me do my job. I want to be the head cheese, etc.”
      So, you figure WTF and you cut the strings.
      Over the next three years, good ol’ Ryan Creditgal makes mistake after mistake. When he tries to be proactive and have contingency plans, the plans are a bust and fail. When he’s aggressive and makes a call on something real time, it usually blows up. And, worst, when it comes to the most important element in the nature of your business, he demonstrates that he’s clueless in identifying the right guys for the job.

      First of all, over these 3 years, it HASN’T been mistake after mistake. In 2006-7 he traded for Abreu, cleared the againg malcontents off the team and brought back Pettitte. Johnson turned into Ohlendorf (who NEVER would’ve been allowed to develop in the Yankee rotation) and who became part of Nady and Marte. In 2007, he dumped Proctor just as he was breaking down for Betemit, and traded a AA reliever for Molina. In the 2007-8 offseason, he signed Aceves from the Mexican League, and traded Clippard for Albaledejo. In 2008, he traded Alberto Gonazlez for Jhonny Nunez, who became part of another deal. He traded for Nady and Marte. He traded Betemit and Nunez for Swisher. He deliberately let players of some proven quality go, to free room under the team’s self-imposed salary cap to sign even better players to replace them.

      In three years, your company goes from being one of the best in the field to being one that’s outside looking in at the best.

      Selective endpoint logic. The contract of old and declining players had to be allowed to finish so that roster space and money could be freed up to replace them with better players.

      So, at this point, good ol’ Ryan Creditgal comes to you and says “We’re in a bad spot. We have serious holes and issues that have come up and we don’t have an internal answers. We need to get help from outside. But, it’s going to cost us – and cost us a LOT of money.”

      And this is different from the Martinez/Nelson, Cone, Clemens and Knobluach trades, and the Wells, Key, El Duque and Stamton signings, exactly how?

      Now, you don’t want you company to fail, so, you give the kid your checkbook. With that, he goes out and buys the best and most expensive talent from other companies. It’s really no-brainer stuff…since these guys have awesome resumes, etc. But, it’s REALLY expensive.

      You mean like Giambi, Sheffield signings and the Johnson and A-Rod trades were no brainers? You mean like the Hunter, Gullett, Gossage, Jackson signings that put the first Boss dynasty over the top were no-brainers?

      Well, the new guys come in and save the company.
      I dunno about you, but, if this is my company, I’m not ready to give Creditgal a huge bonus for saving the company. It was his failures that put the company in a bad spot. It was his inability to do his job that brought cause for the need to go out and spend a ton on hired guns.

      No, it was the franchise’s relative postion in the rebuilding cycle combined with the organization’s philosophy that absolutely refuses to ever seriously rebuild that put the company in a bad spot.

      The Yankees won 4 titles in 5 years. The core guys were in their prime. It made perfectly good sense to try to squeeze out another title or two from them by surrounding them with other good players. The organization would not risk young players, nor was the farm producing them. But by re-signing the core, and bringing in veteran players of roughly the same age, the Yankees were creating a situation where, year-by-year they were slowly declining from championship level play. It showed up first in the defense, then the pitching, and finally, last season, in the offense.

      Other organizations are going to school on what you accomplished, they’re ready, and they’re able; so that when you slip a little, year by year, (and that’s what declining from 103 wins to 98 wins to 95 wins to 89 wins is), they step through the door and slam it behind you. For one season. Tough noogies on you.

      So you let the old players go. You now have $70 million to play with under your self-imposed cap. What the frig are you supposed to do? Not buy the best players on the market? Trade good prospects for the 7th best players at each position requirement, so that if it works, you can proclaim your own geniusitude and if it doesn’t, you can say, “well, I kept the payroll down, boss”?

      If it’s your company and this all went down, and you then want to give good ol’ Ryan Creditgal the keys to the executive washroom, a company car, and two extra weeks vacation, well, that’s your right. But, if you did that, I doubt that I want to buy any stock in your company, for sure.

      …and the most significant criticism of this entire analogy is that baseball teams are not run under the same criteria of success and failure as Fortune 500 corporations. One or two titles in a 5-to-8 year period is a wild success, because only 1 of 30 teams can win in any given year. In a good economy, nearly every major corporation will turn major profits and be successful.

      Just because the Yanks have won 26 titles, just because they won 4 out of 5, just because the have the top payroll and the top ticket prices does not entitle anyone to expect them to win every year, a majority of the years, or even a high minority of the years. It might be a mission statement, but that’s a goal, like the Pledge of Allegiance, but probably won’t be reality, not exactly. Not that you stop striving for the goal, but at the same time, if you don’t reach it, you don’t tear it apart and kick the thing into the trashbin.

      The 4 out of 5 Dynasty was built around 5 great players that the system kicked out within 3-4 years of each other, 4 of them in 1995 alone. 2 sure Hall of Famers and 3 near Hall of Famers. Do people realize how rare that is? (And, by the way, what great players did the system kick out the last 3 years of Stick/Watson? The anser is: none.) Yes, SOME team in baseball has that happen to them in just about every 5-10 year period. But the same team, time-after-time? That stopped happening in the 1960′s with the creation of the Rule 4 Draft.

      It is dammed hard to win one title, even if you spend a lot of money. It is almost impossible to do what they did a decade ago, under the current systemic mechanisms to enforce competitive balance.

      The Yanks can outspend their mistakes; that’s their advantage. But that only keeps them in contention, year-after-year. It doesn’t win titles, and by itself, it never will (see 1983 to 1988). The Yanks are going to have to be very smart AND get lucky with their farm system to have another multiyear dynasty.

    21. Garcia
      October 2nd, 2009 | 6:44 pm

      I could have swore I remember reading, that in order for Steve to respect Cashman then he has to win a championship. Now he needs to win with a 150 million dollar payroll. I see!

    22. Corey
      October 2nd, 2009 | 6:45 pm

      Garcia wrote:

      I could have swore I remember reading, that in order for Steve to respect Cashman then he has to win a championship. Now he needs to win with a 150 million dollar payroll. I see!

      Ooooh I remember that too.

    23. bfriley76
      October 2nd, 2009 | 9:11 pm

      Steve…let me ask you a question. If I’m reading these comments correctly, you’re probably unwilling to give Cashman credit if the Yankees win the World Series this year…which is your prerogative. But, since he, in your words, “acquired the best talent on the free agent market” which subsequently lead the team to the best record in baseball, if the Yankees DON’T win the World Series, will you blame him?

    24. Raf
      October 2nd, 2009 | 9:12 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ YankCrank: OK, how’s this: Let’s see him build JUST ONE team – that’s not seeded with players from a previous GM – that goes on to win a World Series with a payroll of $150 million or less. If he did that, I would be impressed.
      Because, right now, all I see from Cashman is $200 million teams who either get their ass kicked in the ALDS or that don’t make the ALDS at all…

      Beautiful. So you want him to run the team into the ground so he can rebuild it? So he doesn’t get credit for having a $200M team that makes the playoffs, but gets slagged for having a $200M team that misses the playoffs… Yep, I can see where that’s perfectly fair. Makes a whole lot of sense.

      Jeter’s a bum, Mo’s a bum, Posada’s a bum, Cashman is an idiot for keeping them around and paying them what they’re worth.

      C’mon, man, you can do better than that. Especially when the column that Madden wrote s inaccurate. THE PITCHING IS PERFORMING THE SAME AS LAST YEAR, THE OFFENSE HAS IMPROVED FROM LAST YEAR. That’s why the Yanks are doing better than they did last year. It not the players holding hands singing kumbayaa, it isn’t AJ’s pies, it isn’t karma, mystique, or whatever. It’s the Yanks running a lineup in 2009 that isn’t 4 hitters short like it was in 2008.

    25. October 2nd, 2009 | 11:36 pm

      @ bfriley76: We’ll have to wait and see, won’t we? ;-)

    26. October 2nd, 2009 | 11:37 pm

      @ Raf: Well, if you take out Wang’s stats, it looks like the pitching has improved this year.

    27. Raf
      October 3rd, 2009 | 8:53 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ Raf: Well, if you take out Wang’s stats, it looks like the pitching has improved this year.

      Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way.

    28. October 6th, 2009 | 11:09 pm

      [...] any event, thanks for the e-mail – as it helped establish another reason why those who want to credit Brian Cashman for a job well-done this season are just pushing [...]

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.