• October 29th Vs. The Phillies

    Posted by on October 30th, 2009 · Comments (36)

    In a must win situation, the Yankees got the win that they needed.

    And, the Yankees can thank two parties for this victory: A.J. Burnett and Charlie Manuel.

    Burnett was super for New York in this game. He was a master at getting strike one and starting ahead in the count. And, he would have pitched a shutout over seven innings if not for the A-Rod’s error…errrr…I mean Matt Stairs RBI “single” in the 2nd inning.

    And, Charlie Manuel made a stupid, stupid, move in the 7th inning – one that probably cost his team a win in this one.

    Pedro Martinez had thrown 99 pitches over the first 6 innings of this contest – allowing just 2 runs and getting 8 K’s in the process. Now, even when he was a superstar, everyone knows little Petey was not the same pitcher after 100 pitches. And, today, Martinez is clearly in what Dan Duquette would call the “twilight of his career.” Or, as FOX pre-game analyst Ozzie Guillen would say: “Pedro’s not the san juan as he used to be…”

    So, why, would you allow Pedro Martinez to come out and start the 7th inning in this game – when he was at 99 pitches? Holy Grady Little Batman! Manuel did the Yankees a favor and that extra run (charged to Pedro) was huge. If the Yankees don’t score there, then it’s a 2-1 game and that changes the whole scene in the top of the 8th inning when Philly had two on, etc. For sure, then, they play for one-run, probably get the job done, and then it’s a tie-game heading into the bottom of the 8th inning.

    But, that’s all just “What if?” stuff. And, while it’s not up there with “What if Jane Foster had found the hammer of Thor?” it’s just “What if?” nonetheless…

    Back to Pedro Martinez…I don’t like the clown, but, you have to give him his due for this one. So many in Yankeeland looked at Martinez season this year and went into some babble about “Brad Penny, John Smoltz, National League, blah, blah, blah…he would get killed in the American League…” Well, in this game, Pedro faced the best offensive team in the American League, in a hitter’s park, on the big stage, and was near stellar for six innings. So, he’s got nothing to feel bad about there.

    Back to the Yankees…again, a huge win here. Now it’s “Best 3 of 5″ (albeit with the Phillies having the home field advantage). Even if the Yankees now win just one game in Philly, they get to bring the series back to New York. Hey, things could be worse.

    Now, for some miscellaneous observations…

    Hey, is it just me, or, has Alex Rodriguez struck out in 6 of his first 8 career World Series At Bats. Whither that Kate Hudson magic?

    Derek Jeter bunts with two strikes in the 7th inning with runners on first and second, no outs, and the Yankees leading by two runs? Ladies and Germs, if that ain’t a “WTF?” moment there ain’t a “WTF?” moment in the world.

    Speaking of the bottom of the 7th inning today, the umps blew that call, obviously, on the Damon “DP” liner. But, how simple was it to realize that Howard knew he trapped Damon’s hit – since he threw to second instead of stepping on first? No way he throws to second if he knows he caught it on a line. Man, the umpires are falling apart this off-season.

    Lastly, Mo Rivera made that 8th inning sort of interesting, huh? All these two-inning saves for Mariano is a sure sign that the “Bridge to Mo” does not exist in the Yankees pen. Hughes, Chamberlain and Bruney cannot be trusted. Ditto Robertson and Aceves in a tight spot. That leaves Coke and Marte. And, that’s not happening. So much for the Yankees bullpen being so good. And, that might come back to haunt them in this series. Given the Yankees bats are so weak, most times, this post-season, these games are going to be close. Further, all these two inning saves, even with off-days, are going to drain Rivera. Just wait and see…

    Comments on October 29th Vs. The Phillies

    1. KPOcala
      October 30th, 2009 | 12:12 am

      Why didn’t Brian Gorman, et al, check the ball on the controversial DP in the seventh? Had they done so they most likely would have seen a very scuffed ball that Ryan Howard had scooped on the short hop.

    2. Evan3457
      October 30th, 2009 | 12:49 am

      That’s now 4 quality starts for CC in 4 tries and 3 for AJ in 4 tries.

      Thanks, Cashman, for signing those two up.

      C’mon, Steve, you can say it; it won’t hurt.

      Much.

    3. Scout
      October 30th, 2009 | 6:45 am

      A-Rod’s slow start in WS demonstrates a pattern we see in almost all players in the post-season — few remain hot over all three series. Go back and look at some of the stars from those great teams int he late 90s and you’ll find the same thing. Even the best post-season performers typically have two excellent series, not three.

    4. jrk
      October 30th, 2009 | 8:08 am

      After the win, I received many texts asking “are you happy?” I re-characterized my emotion as “I am relieved”. It is a relief to tie the series, a relief to see AJ go out there and dominate (with only 2 walks), a relief to see matsui finally show up, a relief to not have to watch swisher pop up or strike out for an automatic at-bat… BUT I have to honestly say, I am still very worried. Our offense is…well…almost non-existent, and that worries me. We cannot expect starts like CC and AJ gave every game this series, and especially with our (lack of) bullpen, we NEED runs.

      Anyone else concerned? Anyone agree that JHJ should be permanent in right field? Seems to at least put together pesky at-bats, whereas Swisher seems to be going down easily.

      At least we have Mr. Reliable on the mound for game 3….on the road where he has shined…

    5. October 30th, 2009 | 8:12 am

      @ Evan3457:
      Thanks Cashman, or, thanks Steinbrenner Family Checkbook?

      Let’s not make this as if Cashman found these guys pitching in the Independent League or on a raft off the coast of Staten Island. Any GM could have spent $240 million on 2 pitchers if their owner was willing to sign the check.

    6. October 30th, 2009 | 8:27 am

      jrk wrote:

      After the win, I received many texts asking “are you happy?” I re-characterized my emotion as “I am relieved”. It is a relief to tie the series, a relief to see AJ go out there and dominate (with only 2 walks), a relief to see matsui finally show up, a relief to not have to watch swisher pop up or strike out for an automatic at-bat… BUT I have to honestly say, I am still very worried. Our offense is…well…almost non-existent, and that worries me. We cannot expect starts like CC and AJ gave every game this series, and especially with our (lack of) bullpen, we NEED runs.
      Anyone else concerned?

      Well said. I agree and am also concerned.
      Then again, I’ve been concerned about the Yankees offense, or lack there of, for the last 2 months. ;-)

    7. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 8:33 am

      jrk wrote:

      Anyone else concerned? Anyone agree that JHJ should be permanent in right field? Seems to at least put together pesky at-bats, whereas Swisher seems to be going down easily.

      I agree with you that Swisher’s been more or less horrendous this October and maybe just seeing someone else changes your mood a little bit, but…

      …your eyes are playing tricks on you. On the eve of Game 6 of the ALCS, Buster Olney wrote that Nick Swisher was leading the Yankees with a very healthy 4.57 pitches per plate appearance. That’s roughly a full count in every at-bat. Hard to say that Jerry Hairston would bring more “peskiness” than a guy working an AVERAGE of nearly 5 pitches per at-bat.

      Think about that for a moment: most guys in deep slumps would probably press and hack at balls outside of the strike zone, trying to force the action, hence they probably wouldn’t get to work deep counts. In this case, however, Swisher is working deep counts but has been unable to square up on the baseball, just missing pitches that he should be hitting (and hitting with authority, as the last two pitches of Game 5 of the ALCS were fastballs down the middle from Fuentes).

      I’m not arguing that Swisher didn’t earn himself a night off but your reasoning is off. Swisher’s not “going down easily” as you wrote.

    8. October 30th, 2009 | 8:45 am

      @ MJ: Back in the day, people used to salute Ted Sizemore’s ABs saying that he rarely K’ed and handled the bat so well. He was a asset to a winning team! – the analysts used to say. But, Bill James added “Yeah, he doesn’t strikeout, but, he doesn’t do anything else either.”

      Same goes to Swisher. Getting X pitches per AB is nice – when you do something else good once in a while too. But, right now, all those P/PA are leading into whiffs and soft outs and nothing else. And, that’s not helping.

    9. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 8:54 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Thanks Cashman, or, thanks Steinbrenner Family Checkbook?

      Let’s not make this as if Cashman found these guys pitching in the Independent League or on a raft off the coast of Staten Island. Any GM could have spent $240 million on 2 pitchers if their owner was willing to sign the check.

      This is your own personal, subjective roadblock that you’ve placed in front of Cashman which prevents you from judging him objectively on a case-by-case basis.

      A GM’s job isn’t to only find Independent League players hidden under rocks who end up being great additions to the team, although Cashman has certainly done that too. Alfredo Aceves and Brian Bruney have both, in their time in New York, provided value to the ballclub.

      I’ll anticipate that you’re probably chomping at the bit to tell me that Aceves and Bruney suck and that if they were so good, they’d have pitched more in this post-season (and to better result). I’ll certainly concede that they’ve both underwhelmed since July and I would even go further and agree with you that I think their value is just about dried up. But that’s the thing with these “under-a-rock” types of guys. You get what you can from them and then toss them aside for the next crop of randoms that you pull out from the weeds.

      But I digress. As I said, a GM’s job isn’t to only find Independent League players but to also find and sign free agents that would improve the ballclub. This is true of every GM, not just the New York Yankees. As such, Cashman selected the three free agents that best addressed his ballclub’s needs as they were this past off-season. The Yankees needed to replace Mike Mussina and the Darrell Rasner/Sidney Ponson pu-pu platter that combined for 69 of the team’s 162 starts last year. Enter CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett.

      I really don’t understand why you would hold it against Cashman, or, more accurately, not give Cashman credit, for signing Burnett. Yes, the Yankees signed Burnett because they offered him a very generous contract. But not only did they have choices — for instance they could’ve signed Derek Lowe or Oliver Perez (as you feared) — instead of Burnett. Furthermore, I don’t understand why you don’t mark down other GM’s when they sign free agents. Free agency is part of the game and every GM in baseball uses free agency to improve their ballclubs on an annual basis.

      Finally, spare us the argument that a good GM wouldn’t have needed to bring in Sabathia/Burnett if only he had developed his own in-house replacements. That’s a strawman if there ever was one. After all, you’ve said on more than one occasion that you don’t trust young pitchers and that a smart GM trades young pitchers for established ones. You spent all of 2008 ripping Cashman for the dual “errors” of holding onto and trusting Hughes/Chamberlain and, as a result, not going for Johan Santana. If Cashman had heeded your advice, the 2009 rotation would’ve consisted of Johan Santana, Andy Pettitte (free agent signing, by the way), the rehabbed Chien-Ming Wang and who else, exactly?

      After all, you don’t trust young pitchers, right? So signing Sabathia and Burnett actually seems to be the ONLY route Cashman could go if you were whispering in his ear. How can you knock Cashman for practically taking your advice in 2009?

    10. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 9:00 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Back in the day, people used to salute Ted Sizemore’s ABs saying that he rarely K’ed and handled the bat so well. He was a asset to a winning team! – the analysts used to say. But, Bill James added “Yeah, he doesn’t strikeout, but, he doesn’t do anything else either.”

      Same goes to Swisher. Getting X pitches per AB is nice – when you do something else good once in a while too. But, right now, all those P/PA are leading into whiffs and soft outs and nothing else. And, that’s not helping.

      I’m not arguing that Swisher’s been good in the post-season. In fact, I do believe that I even wrote that he “earned” his night off, given how poorly he’s been going since the playoffs began.

      I’m not saying he was helping, I was merely trying to point out that commenter jrk’s contention that Swisher was going down easily wasn’t correct. Swisher’s been battling up there, it’s just not leading to anything good.

      Outs are outs and his outs have been unproductive. But if you’re gonna stink, you may as well stink with a 4.57 PPA instead of doing what Cano has been doing, namely making crap outs on 2.71 PPA. Swisher’s had the better approach, at least. I’ll take it.

    11. Corey
      October 30th, 2009 | 9:26 am

      Derek Jeter bunts with two strikes in the 7th inning with runners on first and second, no outs, and the Yankees leading by two runs? Ladies and Germs, if that ain’t a “WTF?” moment there ain’t a “WTF?” moment in the world.
      ———
      Seriously, I almost had a stroke when he did that. WTF?!?!!?!?

    12. YankCrank
      October 30th, 2009 | 9:33 am

      @ MJ:
      Every Cashman basher on this site, including Steve, has just offered tired arguments over a year that border extreme contradiction. He’s always wrong, even when he’s right.

    13. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 9:33 am

      Corey wrote:

      Derek Jeter bunts with two strikes in the 7th inning with runners on first and second, no outs, and the Yankees leading by two runs? Ladies and Germs, if that ain’t a “WTF?” moment there ain’t a “WTF?” moment in the world.
      ———
      Seriously, I almost had a stroke when he did that. WTF?!?!!?!?

      Completley agree. In the post-game presser, Girardi said he had the bunt sign on for the first two strikes then took it off but Jeter took it upon himself to keep the bunt on.

      Forgetting for a moment how idiotic it is to have one of your best hitters bunting with runners on 1st and 2nd and no one out, why would the supposedly intelligent Jeter be bunting once he had a two-strike count on him? What on earth was he thinking?

    14. Corey
      October 30th, 2009 | 9:56 am

      MJ wrote:

      Forgetting for a moment how idiotic it is to have one of your best hitters bunting with runners on 1st and 2nd and no one out, why would the supposedly intelligent Jeter be bunting once he had a two-strike count on him?

      Not to mention, he’s the only one hitting.

    15. October 30th, 2009 | 10:11 am

      On the Cashman thing. ANY one of the 30 GMs in baseball could throw around $325 million and sign Igawa, Pavano, Burnett and Sabathia – and bat .500 when two work and two fail. There’s nothing special there. It’s throw around the cash and hope that your coin flip works. Again, nothing special there in terms of GM skill. That’s why I don’t see why we should plan a parade for Cashman on spending $240 million on AJ and CC…unless you also want to throw him a parade for pissing away $85 million on Igawa and Pavano as well.

      Cashman is not an astute GM. He’s just a GM with a huge bank roll behind him that allows him to keep spending to make up for his other shortcomings and bad spending.

    16. October 30th, 2009 | 10:16 am

      On the Swisher thing. Working the pitcher and building up his pitch count to get into the bullpen is a good thing when you’re playing teams like the O’s and Rays in the regular season – since their pens stink. But, in the post-season, where you’re facing teams with great staffs, it doesn’t hold as much value – esp. when you’re not going anything else of value and your outs are not productive.

      Productive outs, in the post-season, are sometimes HUGE. And, strikeouts in the post-season are poison.

    17. ken
      October 30th, 2009 | 10:24 am

      Cashman held out against giving up too much for Santana. Good move. Couldn’t have been easy fighting the S’brenners on that one. Then believed in AJ & CC and did what it took.

      I believe he wanted Beltran when King George forced R Johnson on hin instead. We are still waiting for the next great Yankee centerfielder.

      It takes more than money.

    18. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 10:47 am

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      Again you confuse those willing to be objective on a move-by-move basis with those that think he’s the greatest GM to ever work in baseball.

      You can’t give Brian Cashman credit for not trading the young players and instead signing the two pitchers most instrumental for the Yanks’ success this year, citing those moves as no-brainers requiring all the skill it takes it sign a check. But, again, since you’re the one that doesn’t trust young pitchers and prefers established pitchers, how would YOU have done it differently with Sabathia and Burnett? Would you have not signed them? If you would’ve signed them, would you be willing say that you’re no smarter a GM than Cashman?

      Your bias and your total lack of objectivity in this matter is once again readily apparent.

    19. October 30th, 2009 | 10:56 am

      Last point on the Cashman thing.

      It’s Saturday night. You’re out and you see two of your friends – and they’re both with smokin’ hot babes. We’re talking faces that are perfection and bods that a rockin’, etc.

      You ask one friend, when you get the chance, “Dude, where did you bag that chick?” And, he tells you the story about how he met her in the park, picked her out of a crowd of women, talked to her, impressed her, won her over, etc., to the point where she agreed to go out with him on a date.

      And, later, you ask the other friend the same question. And, he tells you “Her? She’s a pro. It’s costing me $400 an hour to be with her tonight. But, hey, it’s only money, right?”

      At this point, which friend’s story is more impressive?

      It’s the one who put in the work, etc., and made the find. It’s not the one who just wrote a check.

      Anyone can write a check. And, that’s what Cashman did with CC, Burnett and Tex – just like he did with Pavano, Igawa, etc.

    20. YankCrank
      October 30th, 2009 | 11:23 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      At this point, which friend’s story is more impressive?

      The story that ends with how that girl got us to the World Series.

      We’re not the Oakland Athletics or Kansas City Royals. We have a distinct advantage of a large payroll that should be used as far as we can take it, which Cash has done.

      Once again, I suggest that if you want to root for a team where your GM picks through the weeds to find talent, or works on winning with a small budget because it’s “more admirable,” than i’ll gladly buy you one of these…

      http://bit.ly/3X7yU5

      Let me know.

    21. MJ
      October 30th, 2009 | 11:30 am

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      Apples and oranges, frankly. There’s no stigma for signing a free agent, whereas there’s a societal (and legal) stigma for hiring a prostitute. A GM has to pick the right free agents because they have to work out for him. There’s no guarantee that free agents will work out, but there is absolutely a guarantee that a prostitute will deliver at the end of the night.

      But let’s stick to the scenario you present above. Since you yourself don’t advocate making the find (Hughes, Kennedy, etc.) and prefer going after the known quantity (Santana), what am I supposed to believe you would have done?

      Again, you can’t advocate that Cashman made a mistake by not trading his unknowns for knowns and then say Cashman stinks at his job for carrying through with his plan and that plan working in the end.

      If Cashman had traded the young players for Santana and Santana had stunk, you’d have ripped Cashman for something (dunno what). If Sabathia/Burnett hadn’t worked out this year as they have, you’d have ripped him for not getting Santana when he had the chance. As it stands, you’re still ripping him for (a) not getting Santana and (b) simply spending money.

      As I wrote before, the Yanks had two holes in their rotation that needed filling. Cashman picked the right guys over other, available pitchers (Lowe/Perez). Not only that, but he signed players while keeping the young pitchers that provided some value to the team this season.

      I’m just not understanding what you’re arguing about here. You contradict yourself at every single turn when you always talk about how the Sabathia/Burnett moves were the moves of an idiot with a big payroll to back him up.

      You can’t prefer established pitchers over young pitchers on one hand and then say that signing established pitchers was an “obvious” move. You’re basically saying that you advocate the obvious move. And if you advocate it, you’re effectively saying that you’re as much an idiot as Cashman is.

      When it comes to Cashman and A-Rod, you have a moving target. You criticize them for everything under the sun and every time they clear a hurdle that you’ve set before them, you move the hurdle a few feet further in front, claiming that, once again, they haven’t accomplished what you’ve set out for them.

      I simply don’t understand how you can be so stuck on this point. No, it doesn’t take a genius to sign a check for a lot of money. But no one ever said Cashman was a genius. You want an all-or-nothing assessment of him whereas I think I (and many of his other supporters) are able to do a move-by-move analysis.

      Steve, really, you’ve argued both sides of the coin on this one. I think you’ve confused yourself on what you really believe and what you simply state as this blog’s talking point or manifesto. I simply no longer believe that you believe these contradictory arguments. I just don’t see how it’s possible.

    22. October 30th, 2009 | 11:31 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      We’re not the Oakland Athletics or Kansas City Royals. We have a distinct advantage of a large payroll that should be used as far as we can take it, which Cash has done.

      Which ANYONE could have done. That’s the point. What Cashman has done is not special and therefore I don’t see the need to paint him as being a hero.

    23. YankCrank
      October 30th, 2009 | 11:41 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Which ANYONE could have done. That’s the point. What Cashman has done is not special and therefore I don’t see the need to paint him as being a hero.

      I’m not trying to paint him as a hero, nobody is. All we’re saying is give recognition when it’s due, and criticize when it’s due.

      What he did this offseason, which was bring in AJ, CC, Tex and Swish and let Giambi and Abreu walk, worked. We’re in the World Series, good work Brian Cashman. No he didn’t use magic pixie dust and the Luck of the Irish to do it, but it worked. We all know he’s made mistakes, nobody is flawless, but man up just admit what he did this year worked. Who cares how it was done, we’re in the World Series right now.

      If you say the man is an idiot for going with kids one year and not acquiring the big talent, then slam him the next year for acquiring the big talent…it doesn’t hold much merit to your criticism.

    24. October 30th, 2009 | 11:51 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      If you say the man is an idiot for going with kids one year and not acquiring the big talent, then slam him the next year for acquiring the big talent…it doesn’t hold much merit to your criticism.

      Oh, so, if Susan Smith drives her kids into a lake one year and the next year she helps an old lady across the street at a cross walk, I’m supposed to give her props for doing a good deed? Sorry. Homey don’t play that way. ;-)

      Cashman is not my kid. If my kid screws up, I love them anyway and I make sure that I praise them the next minute they do something well. The GM of my baseball team, it’s a different story.

      I cannot forget the sins of the past just because, today, things are going well.

    25. Corey
      October 30th, 2009 | 12:05 pm

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      So, essentially, you won’t ever give Cashman any credit. In order for you to praise a Yankee GM, there needs to be a new person with a clean slate. Our mileage varies, that’s all. To me, once the Yanks won the pennant, it’s a fresh ball game.

    26. October 30th, 2009 | 12:50 pm

      @ Corey:

      Not true. When he has more “A” grades on his report card than “F” grades, then I would be willing to consider that he’s done more good than bad – and would give him an overall passing grade.

      But, for now, those pitching staffs from 2004-2008, the pissed away money, etc., all can’t be washed away with one championship season that was basically the result of spending a half-billion bucks on three players this off-season.

    27. Left Coast Mike
      October 30th, 2009 | 12:51 pm

      Steve, looking at all these discussions re: Cashman, it really comes down to the prism through which one looks at his performance, and objective becomes highly subjective. Regardless, could you do a poll on Cashman’s performance? You usually get over 100 folks (or maybe even more) participating in your polls, so it’d be interesting to see the distribution of these “prisms” across your readership. Perhaps, a 1-10 scale poll, with a non-leading phrased question :).

    28. Corey
      October 30th, 2009 | 1:51 pm

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ Corey:
      Not true. When he has more “A” grades on his report card than “F” grades, then I would be willing to consider that he’s done more good than bad – and would give him an overall passing grade.
      But, for now, those pitching staffs from 2004-2008, the pissed away money, etc., all can’t be washed away with one championship season that was basically the result of spending a half-billion bucks on three players this off-season.

      You know what though, I remember having this conversation a few times already. And, the end results IIIRC, was that you would be willing to give him a pass once he got the Yankees back to the world series.

    29. Scout
      October 30th, 2009 | 2:23 pm

      I think we’ll have ample time in the post-season to debate Cashman. For the moment, I’ll stick to the games. It is the World Series, after all.

    30. Raf
      October 30th, 2009 | 2:40 pm

      Anyone with any objective analysis would realize that Cashman has been doing the same thing Watson and Michael have done. Yeah, he wasted $$ on Igawa and Pavano. Guess what, the other two screwed up with guys like Irabu, Mulholland, David Weathers, Ricky Bones, etc, etc, etc.

      But hey, like Scout says, I’ll enjoy the WS…

      BTW, by 1999, the team was constructed by players Cashman retained, or traded or whatever ;)

    31. October 30th, 2009 | 3:11 pm

      Scout wrote:

      I think we’ll have ample time in the post-season to debate Cashman. For the moment, I’ll stick to the games. It is the World Series, after all.

      Works for me! ;-)

      @ Raf: 1999? Check the main drivers on that team, they were 90% not Cashman.

    32. October 30th, 2009 | 3:59 pm

      Left Coast Mike wrote:

      Steve, looking at all these discussions re: Cashman, it really comes down to the prism through which one looks at his performance, and objective becomes highly subjective. Regardless, could you do a poll on Cashman’s performance? You usually get over 100 folks (or maybe even more) participating in your polls, so it’d be interesting to see the distribution of these “prisms” across your readership. Perhaps, a 1-10 scale poll, with a non-leading phrased question .

      Sure, what kind of question and answer options did you have in mind?

    33. Left Coast Mike
      October 30th, 2009 | 4:20 pm

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      Something along the lines of “On a scale of 1 to 10, what is your overall approval of Cashman as the General Manager of the Yankees”. Probably doesn’t make sense to break down by years, just as a whole. I suppose the sentiment may be different now as opposed to back in May, but nonetheless, check the pulse now, and then do it again at other high or low points in the future.

    34. October 30th, 2009 | 4:25 pm

      @ Left Coast Mike:
      Thanks. I’ll sneak that in during the next series off-day or when the series is over – whichever comes first.

    35. Left Coast Mike
      October 30th, 2009 | 4:54 pm

      @ Steve Lombardi:
      Off-day come first ;)

    36. November 3rd, 2009 | 7:28 pm

      [...] Here’s one requested by WasWatching.com reader Left Coast Mike… [...]

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.