• The Importance Of Scouting & Player Development

    Posted by on December 16th, 2012 · Comments (43)

    From a Baseball America feature on why the Reds are their 2012 Organization of the Year -

    But more than the long playoff drought, it’s worth remembering just how broken Cincinnati’s scouting and player development was a decade ago. From 1992 to 2002, the team drafted in the top 10 four times, and during that 11-year span landed only one regular (Austin Kearns) with its first-round pick. Four of the 10 first-rounders failed to make the big leagues. Ryan Wagner, the 2003 first-round pick, did make the majors in his first year as a pro, but he was out of the majors after fewer than 150 innings because of injuries and ineffectiveness.

    A team reliant on developing homegrown talent can’t swing and miss on 10 out of 11 first-round picks. The Reds began their turnaround with the hire of Terry Reynolds as scouting director in 2004. They haven’t missed on a first-round pick since.

    Reynolds’ two drafts paid off with Bailey (2004) and Jay Bruce (2005). He then moved over to player development when Chris Buckley came aboard with the arrival of new GM Wayne Krivsky in 2006. Buckley’s first draft brought in first-rounder Drew Stubbs (2006) followed by Devin Mesoraco (2007), Yonder Alonso (2008), Mike Leake (2009) and Yasmani Grandal (2010), all of whom were big leaguers in 2012 (Alonso and Grandal with the Padres).

    “The 2004 draft, from then on the drafts have been outstanding,” longtime Reds field coordinator Freddie Benavides said. “You’re only as good as the players you have. The scouting department has done an outstanding job of getting players, and the player development staff has been outstanding at getting guys ready.”

    Benavides should know, as he’s one of the few people still in the organization who was working for the Reds during the dark days of 2000-2004. He has seen the club go from having few big league-caliber prospects in the farm system to last winter, when the team could trade three big league-ready players (Alonso, Grandal and reliever Brad Boxberger) to the Padres for righthander Mat Latos because all three could be traded without appreciably affecting the big league club.

    “Back then it would have crippled us completely to do a trade like that,” Benavides said. “We have the players to do that now. Our big league team had a first baseman, we have some catchers and the bullpen is one of our biggest strengths.”

    Seeing this, and thinking about how many times the Yankees “swing and miss” on their first round picks, well, you start to realize why the Yankees are signing so many free agents over the age of 38 at this time and trying to trade for players like Vernon Wells…who no one would want right now.

    Yes, the Yankees developed players like Robinson Cano, Brett Gardner and David Robertson. And, they’ve traded away some guys like Austin Jackson and Ian Kennedy. But, the hit and miss ratio is way too heavy on the miss side when it comes to scouting and player development for the Yankees. I know that Brian Cashman’s M.O. in the draft has always been “swing big.” But, maybe it’s time to start thinking “make some contact” once in a while too?

    Comments on The Importance Of Scouting & Player Development

    1. LMJ229
      December 16th, 2012 | 10:45 am

      Brian Cashman, February 3, 1998: (forgive me for being redundant)
      “It’s not a strength. I’m an administrator. I’m a good listener. I would not pass myself off as an evaluator of talent.”

    2. LMJ229
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:02 am

      I used to think that the whole scouting department should be blown up and rebuilt. Then I realized these are probably the same people who gave us Bernie Williams, Andy Petitte, Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter, and Jorge Posada. Of course, that was about 20 years ago. Hmmm … I wonder what has changed since then …

    3. Evan3457
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:36 am

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Brian Cashman, February 3, 1998: (forgive me for being redundant)
      “It’s not a strength. I’m an administrator. I’m a good listener. I would not pass myself off as an evaluator of talent.”

      But the Yankee record of 1st round draft picks in the years under Michael and Watson is just as bad, and if not for the Reds and Astros ignoring one of their scouts, they wouldn’t have gotten Jeter either (and Jeter was the #6 pick in the whole draft, a luxury Cashman has never had).

    4. Raf
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:39 am

      LMJ229 wrote:

      I used to think that the whole scouting department should be blown up and rebuilt. Then I realized these are probably the same people who gave us Bernie Williams, Andy Petitte, Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter, and Jorge Posada. Of course, that was about 20 years ago. Hmmm … I wonder what has changed since then …

      Only one of ‘em was a first round pick, as Steve laments ;)

      Scouting and development isn’t the problem, the system is producing. The problem comes with the natural attrition rate of prospects.

    5. Evan3457
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:39 am

      LMJ229 wrote:

      I used to think that the whole scouting department should be blown up and rebuilt. Then I realized these are probably the same people who gave us Bernie Williams, Andy Petitte, Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter, and Jorge Posada. Of course, that was about 20 years ago. Hmmm … I wonder what has changed since then …

      Actually, of those five, only Jeter was acquired/drafted under Gene Michael
      Bernie Williams was signed in 1985 under Clyde King, and Rivera, Pettitte and Posada were signed under Harding Peterson in 1990. Peterson lasted just one year as Yankee GM.

    6. Evan3457
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:43 am

      Actually, maybe Brian Sabean is responsible, or partly responsible, for all five of them. He was a key player in the Yankee player development/scouting during that period.

    7. LMJ229
      December 16th, 2012 | 12:10 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Actually, of those five, only Jeter was acquired/drafted under Gene Michael
      Bernie Williams was signed in 1985 under Clyde King, and Rivera, Pettitte and Posada were signed under Harding Peterson in 1990. Peterson lasted just one year as Yankee GM.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Actually, maybe Brian Sabean is responsible, or partly responsible, for all five of them. He was a key player in the Yankee player development/scouting during that period.

      The point is, our scouting and player development department has been woeful for some time now. We need more guys like Peterson and Sabean. The guys running the show now are just not getting it done.

    8. LMJ229
      December 16th, 2012 | 12:15 pm

      Raf wrote:

      Only one of ‘em was a first round pick, as Steve laments
      Scouting and development isn’t the problem, the system is producing.

      First of all, first round picks are over-rated. As many make it as don’t make it, maybe even more. Secondly, if the system truly were “producing” as you say, I doubt we would be in the position where we have to sign all these old players to one-year contracts just to stay competitive.

    9. Raf
      December 16th, 2012 | 12:23 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Secondly, if the system truly were “producing” as you say, I doubt we would be in the position where we have to sign all these old players to one-year contracts just to stay competitive.

      The two aren’t mutually exclusive. The system is producing, Steve rattled off a bunch of names in the original entry. That is just a handful, there are plenty of other players that haven’t been mentioned like Montero, Clippard, Tabata, Coke, Dunn, Choate, Rivera, etc, etc. And I’m sure there are plenty more, if we took the time to research players that have come through the Yankees organization.

    10. KPOcala
      December 16th, 2012 | 12:50 pm

      Even though I ripped Cash last night, the one unknown. Does he have the authority to pick his scouting team, and what their earnings are? With their money they should be able to scoop up the best in the biz, and then fill in with the second tiered guys. Anyone ever read much on this topic. It seems to be the hardest, best kept secret in the industry…

    11. December 16th, 2012 | 1:50 pm

      Raf wrote:

      That is just a handful, there are plenty of other players that haven’t been mentioned like Montero, Clippard, Tabata, Coke, Dunn, Choate, Rivera, etc, etc. And I’m sure there are plenty more, if we took the time to research players that have come through the Yankees organization.

      And, what did the Yankees get in return for Montero? Clippard? Tabata? That’s part of the issue on scouting…knowing what you have, and, if you deal it, making sure that you don’t get ripped off.

    12. Evan3457
      December 16th, 2012 | 2:16 pm

      The return for Montero is unknown at this time…as is Montero’s eventual value, for that matter.

    13. Raf
      December 16th, 2012 | 4:09 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      That’s part of the issue on scouting…knowing what you have, and, if you deal it, making sure that you don’t get ripped off.

      They knew what they had and what they needed, hence the trade.

      You can never make sure that you don’t get ripped off. Players get hurt, players don’t develop, players get passed on the organizational depth chart, players get blocked at the ML level.

    14. December 16th, 2012 | 11:08 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Brian Cashman, February 3, 1998: (forgive me for being redundant)
      “It’s not a strength. I’m an administrator. I’m a good listener. I would not pass myself off as an evaluator of talent.”

      LMJ229, Thank you, thank you, thank you. This is my main complaint with Cashman. All great GM’s know talent. Brian doesn’t, he admitted it. The Yankees need to go out and get a top flight GM for the work that’s ahead. This team is in bad shape, 1964 bad shape. The record hides the reality. This offseason should have been the beginning of the transition. Go out unload Granderson and try to trade Cano. Switch Nunez to the outfield, he’s not an infielder, and he will be 26 years old at the beginning of the season. Stop wasting time and see if he can be reasonable option in the outfield.

    15. KPOcala
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:25 pm

      @ Steve L.:
      Tabata’s career is one to build your case around. He has generally sucked, and the from the Yanks perspective, it seems lousy only in hindsight.

    16. KPOcala
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:28 pm

      Great Caesars’ ghost, my above comment about Tabata should have read “Tabata’s career is NOT one to build your case around.”

    17. KPOcala
      December 16th, 2012 | 11:40 pm

      It seems logical that a GM should be able to evaluate talent, that “would” really help. But, a fellow in Cashman’s shoes needs to be able to a least surround himself with the right advisors. The problem with that type of GM is that years can go by before you realize you’ve picked the right people. And, as has been pointed out many times, it’s better to be lucky than to be good….As far as replacing Cash, does anyone know who’s better, and is available? I’d like to hear some names being tendered or this debate is just a gripe session. And, right now, I think the gripe should really be directed at Hal more than Cashman. This cap BS, only makes true sense if your looking to sell the team. Because the Stadium could become a ghost-town very quickly…. Or, the slim chance that Cash pulls off a Michael Corleone move in the next month or so….Maybe Hal is playing possum to allow Cash some negotiating room? I know, that’s the craziest scenario since Hank re-signed A-Rod……

    18. Raf
      December 17th, 2012 | 12:35 am

      KPOcala wrote:

      It seems logical that a GM should be able to evaluate talent, that “would” really help. But, a fellow in Cashman’s shoes needs to be able to a least surround himself with the right advisors.

      Given that the system is producing, I’d say that this is probably the case. With the Yankees it’s not a question of whether they have talent, it’s a question of if they will let the talent develop.

    19. Raf
      December 17th, 2012 | 12:37 am

      KPOcala wrote:

      This cap BS, only makes true sense if your looking to sell the team.

      Depends. As noted, the penalties from the CBA are a bit prohibitive, and they impact teams at the major and minor league levels.

    20. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 8:58 am

      KPOcala wrote:

      Even though I ripped Cash last night, the one unknown. Does he have the authority to pick his scouting team, and what their earnings are? With their money they should be able to scoop up the best in the biz, and then fill in with the second tiered guys.

      Amen. My husband is a Phillies fan and he says that about the Yankees all the time. If they just take the difference between their payroll this year and the cap payroll next year, they will have about $20M that they can spend to bring in the best scouts in the business.

    21. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 10:06 am

      Raf wrote:

      Given that the system is producing, I’d say that this is probably the case. With the Yankees it’s not a question of whether they have talent, it’s a question of if they will let the talent develop.

      Again with “the system is producing” quote. Even the worst systems “produce”. Your second comment is more to the point. If the Yankees have true conviction regarding their draft picks, why not let them develop? Why not at least give them a shot? One young player shouldn’t kill your team’s chances for success. I’d much rather have Jesus Montero than Andrew Jones or (God forbid!) Vernon Wells. Austin Jackson was so highly touted but never even played ONE game for the Yankees. This administration has proven, over and over again, that they value other teams’ veterans over their prospects, even their most highly touted ones.

    22. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 12:38 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      If the Yankees have true conviction regarding their draft picks, why not let them develop?

      You’re making a flawed assumption here because you’re assuming that the Yankees don’t let the talent develop out of a lack of faith. The Yankees aren’t a team that sees themselves as sometime-contenders; they want to be winning divisions and qualifying for the playoffs on an annual basis. Thus, the best way to continue to bring in new talent that pays off most immediately is to continue trading young talent away in exchange for developed players that can contribue on a “present-tense” basis.

    23. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 12:56 pm

      @ Steve L.:
      From 2004-2012, the Reds have picked 7th, 12th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 12th, 27th and 14th. Over that same timeframe, the Yankees have picked 23rd, 17th, 21st, 30th, 28th, 29th, 32nd, 51st* and 30th.

      We’ve been over the whole topic of drafting for upside or drafting players with low ceilings with a higher probability of playing in the majors. I’ll never understand why anyone would advocate that the Yankees aim lower when they’re already disadvangaged by drafting near the bottom of every draft.

      That the team has made some clear errors in their drafts is not the question; everyone agrees that the Yankees have made some poor choices. The solution, however, isn’t for the team to compound the problem by making high probability bets on less-talented individuals. The ideal is to have a farm system stocked with good players and to let attrition run its inevitable course. A farm system stocked with low-upside players is no less subject to the ravages of attrition so all you’re left with is less talented survivors.

      *The only year where the Yankees didn’t have a true first rounder and instead picked in the supplemental portion of the first round.

    24. KPOcala
      December 17th, 2012 | 2:15 pm

      @ Raf: Raf, the thing is, the other teams are working with the same rules, and unless things break exactly right, they’ll be lucky to win 85 games.

    25. KPOcala
      December 17th, 2012 | 2:16 pm

      @ Raf:This time last year it looked as though the system was flushed with talent. Now, it looks as though it was just flushed…….

    26. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 2:33 pm

      KPOcala wrote:

      This time last year it looked as though the system was flushed with talent. Now, it looks as though it was just flushed…

      And for that reason it makes sense to take the long view on any farm system. A system can look great one year and terrible the next and easily alternate between the two. The system could look much better next year if some of the players who missed time last year — Campos, Betances, Romine — come back and play a full year.

    27. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:09 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      You’re making a flawed assumption here because you’re assuming that the Yankees don’t let the talent develop out of a lack of faith. The Yankees aren’t a team that sees themselves as sometime-contenders; they want to be winning divisions and qualifying for the playoffs on an annual basis. Thus, the best way to continue to bring in new talent that pays off most immediately is to continue trading young talent away in exchange for developed players that can contribue on a “present-tense” basis.

      I agree, that is their MO. But when a spot opens up, why not work in a kid? Why not have a kid fill in Swisher’s vacancy instead of Ichiro? Or have a kid fill A-Rod’s spot until he is ready to return? One position is not going to ruin the team. Of course, my flawed assumption on this one might be that we have kids ready to step up.

      Personally, I would have converted Nunez to the outfield to take Swisher’s spot. Why have Nunez rotting away on the bench? That kid can hit. They knew they wouldn’t be bringing Swisher back; they had plenty of time to convert him. And wouldn’t that fit into Cashman’s salary cap plans for 2014? I don’t know, there seems to be no planning for the future, we just go along plugging holes.

    28. Ricketson
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:17 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Of course, my flawed assumption on this one might be that we have kids ready to step up.

      Might be.

    29. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:20 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      But when a spot opens up, why not work in a kid?

      I will ask you the reverse: why work in a kid? Beyond the fact that fans have a somewhat illogical attachment to the notion of homegrown teams/players, why does it matter if the team fills a vacancy with “a kid”?

      LMJ229 wrote:

      One position is not going to ruin the team.

      No, but a position shouldn’t be filled with a young player just because it won’t “ruin the team”. Again, why does it matter if a vacancy is filled with a kid? As long as a vacancy is filled with a capable player, it shouldn’t matter where the player came from or how old he is.

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Why have Nunez rotting away on the bench? That kid can hit.

      He might be able to hit as an infielder but it’s highly unlikely that he can hit enough to justify a corner outfield position. As such, why would Nunez be a viable option in the OF if he can’t hit enough to play out there (to say nothing of the fact that he probably can’t field out there either).

      LMJ229 wrote:

      They knew they wouldn’t be bringing Swisher back; they had plenty of time to convert him. And wouldn’t that fit into Cashman’s salary cap plans for 2014? I don’t know, there seems to be no planning for the future, we just go along plugging holes.

      That they haven’t converted him to the outfield doesn’t mean the team has no plans for the future. To the contrary, it means they don’t see Nunez as a viable outfielder and are thus proceeding with him as a backup infielder whose chief value is that he hits enough at SS or 2B to justify playing there from time to time (because he can’t field well enough to play there every day).

    30. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:34 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      From 2004-2012, the Reds have picked 7th, 12th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 12th, 27th and 14th. Over that same timeframe, the Yankees have picked 23rd, 17th, 21st, 30th, 28th, 29th, 32nd, 51st* and 30th.We’ve been over the whole topic of drafting for upside or drafting players with low ceilings with a higher probability of playing in the majors. I’ll never understand why anyone would advocate that the Yankees aim lower when they’re already disadvangaged by drafting near the bottom of every draft.That the team has made some clear errors in their drafts is not the question; everyone agrees that the Yankees have made some poor choices. The solution, however, isn’t for the team to compound the problem by making high probability bets on less-talented individuals. The ideal is to have a farm system stocked with good players and to let attrition run its inevitable course. A farm system stocked with low-upside players is no less subject to the ravages of attrition so all you’re left with is less talented survivors.

      Logic would dictate that any team that picks after another team is at a disadvantage. The team picking second is at a disadvantage to the team picking first. That being said, you have to admit that the Yankees record of first round picks is not just bad, it’s God awful. They have had better success with their later round picks than their earlier picks. Why is that I wonder, since, as you pointed out, they should have greater success the earlier they pick. Steve may have a point. Maybe they are reaching for the earlier round picks but not so much with the later round picks when their expectations are lowered.

    31. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:42 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      I will ask you the reverse: why work in a kid?

      Because the Yankees need to get a better balance of youth and age on the team in order to meet their self-imposed salary cap. Also, I am of the belief that you need to have a good mixture to win a championship.

    32. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:43 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      Again, why does it matter if a vacancy is filled with a kid? As long as a vacancy is filled with a capable player, it shouldn’t matter where the player came from or how old he is.

      It matters if it’s costing you alot and you can’t sign other players you may need as a result.

    33. LMJ229
      December 17th, 2012 | 3:48 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      He might be able to hit as an infielder but it’s highly unlikely that he can hit enough to justify a corner outfield position. As such, why would Nunez be a viable option in the OF if he can’t hit enough to play out there (to say nothing of the fact that he probably can’t field out there either).

      I happen to believe he can hit enough and I believe he can be at least an average fielder. He has good speed and a strong arm. I don’t have that same faith in him as an infielder.

    34. McMillan
      December 17th, 2012 | 4:19 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      I will ask you the reverse: why work in a kid? Beyond the fact that fans have a somewhat illogical attachment to the notion of homegrown teams/players, why does it matter if the team fills a vacancy with “a kid”?

      “The problem, such as it is, will be exacerbated at this time next year. To build a championship team around the enormous contracts of Rodriguez, Mark Teixeira, CC Sabathia and Derek Jeter, Cashman will need homegrown players on reasonable salaries — players like Austin Jackson, Ian Kennedy and Phil Coke, who were traded for Granderson three years ago.” http://waswatching.com/2012/12/13/the-yankees-2013-plan

    35. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 4:20 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      I happen to believe he can hit enough and I believe he can be at least an average fielder. He has good speed and a strong arm. I don’t have that same faith in him as an infielder.

      Eduardo Nunez MLB: .272/.318/.384 (491 PA)
      Eduardo Nunez MiLB: .271/.314/.365 (2961 PA)

      How on earth you think he hits enough to justify playing LF or RF is beyond me. If he’s not going to hit like your prototypical LF or RF then he has to be among the best defensive players at his position in order to provide any value whatsoever at a corner outfield spot. While I agree that he’s got some speed and may have the arm to play LF (but not RF), he’s clearly not going to be a better defensive OF’er than either Granderson or Gardner and, as we know from watching Gardner, what he doesn’t do at the plate he more than makes up for in the field.

      Nunez is a unique player in that he’s miscast as a utility infielder because he can’t field at all but can hit enough to play every day at SS or 2B. Perhaps he should’ve been taught how to play CF because that’s the only position in the outfield where his lack of elite hitting would be masked by the less rigorous demand for offense from the position.

    36. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 4:22 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      It matters if it’s costing you alot and you can’t sign other players you may need as a result.

      You’re making an implicit assumption that free agents are all cost-prohibitive. Andruw Jones, Raul Ibanez and Eric Chavez all arguably took spots from “kids” last year and all cost a combined $4M. Not all free agents are expensive.

    37. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 4:36 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      Logic would dictate that any team that picks after another team is at a disadvantage. The team picking second is at a disadvantage to the team picking first. That being said, you have to admit that the Yankees record of first round picks is not just bad, it’s God awful. They have had better success with their later round picks than their earlier picks. Why is that I wonder, since, as you pointed out, they should have greater success the earlier they pick. Steve may have a point. Maybe they are reaching for the earlier round picks but not so much with the later round picks when their expectations are lowered.

      I suggest you read this:

      http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/valuing-the-draft-part-2/

      http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/analyzing-the-mlb-draft-using-war/

      The MLB draft is not a pure waterfall the way it is in football or basketball for a number of reasons (number of rounds, universe of players, relative lack of information, differing team philosophies, lack of MLB salary cap, leverage of HS players and draft-eligible college sophomore/juniors). For that reason, the best of the best are taken in the first half of the first round — where consensus exists on who the best talents are — and thereafter it’s subject to those various factors mentioned above.

      Why does it seem like the Yankees do better with their later picks? For one reason, until 2012, the Yankees could be agressive and spend a nearly unlimited amount in buying high school players out of their college commitment in the 20th round (for example). These types of players weren’t highly regarded in the same way as a first round player was regarded but there was enough upside there to justify a large investment relative to their draft round.

      The Yankees haven’t done a great job with their first rounders but if you read the links I sent you, you’ll see that picking in the last third of the first round more or less guarantees that you won’t be getting a very good player anyway (roughly .4 WAR/year which is basically a replacement level player).

    38. MJ Recanati
      December 17th, 2012 | 4:40 pm

      @ McMillan:
      And as I said to LMJ229, whether a vacancy is filled by “a kid” or a veteran on an MLB-minimum salary (or thereabouts) is irrelevant. To offset the large contracts on the books, the Yankees can just as easily fill a hole with a $600,000 rookie or a $1M MLB veteran.

    39. McMillan
      December 17th, 2012 | 5:35 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      You’re making an implicit assumption that free agents are all cost-prohibitive. Andruw Jones, Raul Ibanez and Eric Chavez all arguably took spots from “kids” last year and all cost a combined $4M. Not all free agents are expensive.

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      And as I said to LMJ229, whether a vacancy is filled by “a kid” or a veteran on an MLB-minimum salary (or thereabouts) is irrelevant. To offset the large contracts on the books, the Yankees can just as easily fill a hole with a $600,000 rookie or a $1M MLB veteran.

      And where are Jones, Ibanez, and Chavez at the moment? Jones hit .220 in 171 games in the past two years, and the team has discussed Vernon Wells, not a rookie, to fill yet another hole this offseason – as a possible replacement for Jones.

    40. Raf
      December 17th, 2012 | 7:23 pm

      LMJ229 wrote:

      This administration has proven, over and over again, that they value other teams’ veterans over their prospects, even their most highly touted ones.

      It isn’t just this administration.

      https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/05/sports/on-baseball-lest-we-forget-steinbrenner-lurks-behind-the-euphoria.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm

      Early in spring training, Hitchcock expressed to a reporter the frustrations young pitchers in the Yankees’ organization long have felt under the Steinbrenner regime.

      If a young pitcher gets a chance and falters, Hitchcock said, the Yankees “get him out of here and bring in Dave LaPoint,”

    41. McMillan
      December 17th, 2012 | 7:31 pm

      Raf wrote:

      It isn’t just this administration.

      And that administration converted Hitchcock and Davis into Martinez, Nelson, and Mecir.

    42. Raf
      December 17th, 2012 | 7:33 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      And that administration converted Hitchcock and Davis into Martinez, Nelson, and Mecir.

      So? LMJ229 is the one that has the problem with it, not me ;)

    43. McMillan
      December 17th, 2012 | 7:47 pm

      Raf wrote:

      LMJ229 is the one that has the problem with it

      I believe LMJ229 had a problem with “this” administration, not “that” one…

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.