So the slider and curve aren’t any better pitches (by break), but he’s getting them for more swinging and looking strikes, and marginally doing better with his BABIP when those balls get put into play. That to me would mean he’s changed his approach to hitters and also maybe has gotten a bit more control on the off speed stuff.

Is there anyway to see how his slider and curve (in terms of movement) compare to the rest of the league? I would think that better control and better approach (setting up a hitter) leading to better results would be something you can hang your hat on if you knew he had a really good slider and curve, but I don’t know that off the top of my head.

Did he really throw a fastball at 98.2 mph?
Did he really throw a fastball at 86 mph?

86 = 85.3

85.3 is probably a classification issue - a changeup that didn’t move like a changeup normally does.  The “problem” with pitch-f/x is for Jamie Moyer, that’s a fastball.  So it doesn’t “know” that a Vazquez fastball doesn’t look like that.  However, that can be improved upon.

98.2 seems unlikely, but look at it this way - would you be questioning it if it was 96?  while high for him, that seems very possible, right?  Well that’s only off by 2.2%, which certainly seems reasonable.

I love Home Run Javy’s curveball, so that is a good thing.

What is the difference between a fastball and four-seam fastball in 2007 and 2008 in the last set of tables?

Also, massive increase in swinging strike percentage for curveballs and change-ups in 2009. Part of that could be explained by facing pitchers, but there is no way all of that is explained by just that. Did he face more left-handers and rookies in the NL?

Anyway, I’m not sure how much this tells us, but I figured it beats talking about signing Reed Johnson.

Or having to endure the high horse of hypocritical sportswriters who simultaneously demand athletes to come clean, and when they do, penalize them for that very act by saying they won’t vote for said athlete because he is now a confirmed cheat.

Part of that could be explained by facing pitchers

POOMA, but don’t a lot of NL pitchers pitch to contact when facing other pitchers?

Or having to endure the high horse of hypocritical sportswriters who simultaneously demand athletes to come clean, and when they do, penalize them for that very act by saying they won’t vote for said athlete because he is now a confirmed cheat.
Actually, although you may not like it, that isn’t hypocrisy.

Actually, although you may not like it, that isn’t hypocrisy.

Fine, if you are given to nitpicking on harmless word choices, call it moral posturing. And yes, I don’t like it.

POOMA, but don’t a lot of NL pitchers pitch to contact when facing other pitchers?

Possibly, but seems counterintuitive on the surface. Fastballs probably have the highest contact rate, and breaking pitches lower (both POOMA, but hopefully someone tests this and either accepts or rejects this premise). I would assume that pitchers will have a very high degree of contact difficulty. Won’t it make sense then to not pitch to contact to them?

Of course, there is the possibility that Mo may end up having a bases loaded walk against you, but that is probably a rarity. And He is Mo.

I would assume that pitchers will have a very high degree of contact difficulty. Won’t it make sense then to not pitch to contact to them?

More POOMA, but pretty sure that one of the reasons contact rate is lower on non-FB pitches is b/c they are thrown in the strike-zone less often.  Since most pitchers aren’t likely to do much damage with a pitch in the zone anyway, might as well put it down the middle, and both not risk walking them AND keep your pitch count down.

I still think the difference between his peripherals and results are luck so I don’t need an explanation but I’m not sure what (if anything) to make of this.  The change from 2007 to 2009 looks significant but he was trending the same way in 2008 and his results were worse, not better.

Possibly, but seems counterintuitive on the surface.

Does it? My response about pitching to contact was a result of someone proposing that the higer swing and miss rate was based on facing pitchers.

If NL pitchers pitch pitchers (!) to contact, it seems like they’d throw more fastballs, and so the swinging strike percentage wouldn’t change all that much as a result of, as someone said, facing pitchers.

From what I’ve read, he seems to lose effectiveness, at times, pitching out of the stretch.

[13] Hmm.

Career line from the wind up: .226/.261/.342/.603
Career line from the stretch: .219/.275/.354/.629

Also, if pitchers weren’t worse from the stretch than they were from the wind up, wouldn’t they always pitch from the stretch?

Interesting roster move by the Giants.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/giants/detail?blogid=22&entry_id=55270

Anyone else know what a merkin is?

How many pitches would pitchers pitch to pitchers if pitchers pitched in a sane universe without the NL?

[14] Where are those numbers from?

In addition to what I have read, I’m extrapolating from this:

A quick and dirty way of teasing this out of the data is to look at a pitcher’s stats with men on base. The numbers below are shown in tOPS+, which compares a pitcher’s performance in a given scenario to his performance in other situations. (A score of 100 means is a pitcher is average in that situation while anything lower means they were better and higher means they were worse)

Bases Empty: 92
Men on: 113
Bases Load: 141

One caveat: the bases loaded data is by far the smallest sample size of the bunch.

[14]: Some of that differnce should be from defensive positioning, which gets screwed up with runners on. I haven’t pitched above little league, but it always seemed weird to me to have two different pitching motions.

How many hits would hitters hit if hitters hit off hitters? (sorry, had more coffee than usual today)

[17] So, go forward with the previously mentioned plan of stashing a reliever in RF and switch that guy to pitcher if someone gets on, then switch Javy back with the bases empty???

In fact, Swisher has never allowed a runner who was on base to score despite his 2.00 career WHIP, so he clearly excels from the stretch.

Problem. Solved.

He may have been throwing more breaking pitches because of the decrease in his fastball velocity, as much as anything else. Last year’s results were good, but the decrease in and of itself is not.

[20] I can only hope that Girardi reads this blog!!!

[21] Andy Pettitte has a close personal friend who has some “training methods” that can help him get that velocity back.

Also, he could just try putting Icy-Hot on his man-sack before his starts.

[20] Clearly, Yankees should add more Nicks to the roster to implement this scheme. Swish pitched for Yankees last year, and the esteemed Nick Green (cue OTF) pitched two scoreless for the Red Sox last year (still can’t believe 2009 is gone).

[17] Oops. I pulled just his 2009 numbers from his BR page instead of his career numbers. Career he’s a .697 OPS from the windup, .773 OPS from the stretch.

but the decrease in and of itself is not.

I don’t know. The decrease in velocity, the better swing and miss rates, etc. Perhaps it’s pointing to him becoming a bit more polished and pitching smarter? 93-94 is nice, but not if 91-92 can do that job, especially since it may come with better control and keep him out there for 3-4 more outs.

Melky got 3.1 millions from Braves.

Melky got 3.1 millions from Braves.

The Yankees are supplementing $500K of that.

I would always laugh whenever I passed the marquee of the Merkin Concert Hall on the West Side.  I’ve gotten over that, but I still grin knowingly.

I think someone may have mentioned it on here, but it seems the MLB is going to be watching the Marlins spending the next three years to make sure they aren’t pocketing the revenue sharing funds. Also, the Marlins may have agreed to increase spending as well.

I guess that ends the Hanley Ramirez and Josh Johnson dreams for a lot of teams, as the easiest way for the Marlins to increase spending is keep Hanley as he gets really expensive and to extend Johnson.

[30]
Someone did mention it, and I was surprised - are there actually rules in place that prohibit the Marlins from simply pocketing the revenue sharing?
What are those rules?
It would seem philosophically difficult to formulate workable rules for that…

It would seem philosophically difficult to formulate workable rules for that…

Required reinvestment would be one way that might work.  Not just of revenue sharing, but all team revenue (less some money to payoff the financing even rich people presumably need to buy baseball teams).  A baseball franchise would be more like a real estate investment than a business investment; you wouldn’t make money off of it until you sell it. (like a stock without dividends, except you have some control over the future value.)  One problem is that this might force the Yankees to have a $400 payroll…

“Merkin”

Is that directly related to grimalkin?  Makes it easier to remember.

Career he’s a .697 OPS from the windup, .773 OPS from the stretch.

As they say on Mythbusters… That’s your problem right there.

[34]
How about Vasquez just forgetting about the stretch, then?

One problem is that this might force the Yankees to have a $400 payroll…
I don’t know how I’d live with that.
Oh, wait - I do (happily).

The formulation is not difficult at all, either philosophically or otherwise.

Article XXIV(B)(5)(a) of the Basic Agreement:

A principal objective of the Revenue Sharing Plan is to promote the growth of the Game and the industry on an individual Club and on an aggregate basis. Accordingly, each Club shall use its revenue sharing receipts (from the Base Plan, the Central Fund Component and the Commissioner’s Discretionary Fund) in an effort to improve its performance on the field.

Implementation (or enforcement if you prefer), on the other hand…

Anyone else know what a merkin is?

A ‘merkin is kinda like a mexkin, only a little bit further north.

How about Vasquez just forgetting about the stretch, then?

Sure.  Whenever he allows a walk or a single, just let the guy steal second, then third, and then home.  Problem solved.

One problem is that this might force the Yankees to have a $400 payroll…

If you add the Yankees’ revenue sharing and luxury tax bills to their payroll, they’re already re-investing close to $400M.  They’re just being forced to re-invest a big chunk of that into other teams.

[32] - That is essentially what the Yankees already do.  They reinvest at a very high percentage and grow the value of the franchise.  The family has been doing it for decades.

[36]
In other words, MC, the formulation was philosophically too difficult, so they punted, going for a general statement whose meaning is not rationally determinable until it’s applied.
Sure.  Whenever he allows a walk or a single, just let the guy steal second, then third, and then home.  Problem solved.
Gee, I forgot that baserunners steal bases automatically when pitchers use a wind-up and are prevent from doing so by the stretch… probably because it’s obviously not so.  The question, then, is whether giving baserunners an improved chance to advance really outweighs the advantages of pitching from the wind-up if the numbers we have are indicative.  The snark was really uncalled for.

yeah, the Yankees might be reinvesting everything already, although it’s not very clear how much YES makes. Financial people seem to think highly of it, but maybe that’s just because of high margins.

Also, if pitchers weren’t worse from the stretch than they were from the wind up, wouldn’t they always pitch from the stretch?

No, because you can use your body more from the wind up, so it puts less strain on your arm, and is therefor less exhausting.

Did he really throw a fastball at 98.2 mph?
Did he really throw a fastball at 86 mph?

Could be a juiced gun, or a classification issue. Any numbers that don’t pass the smell test are likely due to one of those two things being incorrect.

What is the difference between a fastball and four-seam fastball in 2007 and 2008 in the last set of tables?

It’s the same pitch.  For some reason they used to have two different classifications for it but they’ve consolidated it now.

He may have been throwing more breaking pitches because of the decrease in his fastball velocity, as much as anything else. Last year’s results were good, but the decrease in and of itself is not.

I wonder if that’s partially by design.  His fastball command seemingly improved with the decrease in velocity, going from a ball around 32.5% of the time to 29%.

“How about Vasquez just forgetting about the stretch, then?”

“Sure.  Whenever he allows a walk or a single, just let the guy steal”

Anybody know what the delta is?  I thought there were some (more than zero) relievers who never resort to the stretch.

No, because you can use your body more from the wind up, so it puts less strain on your arm, and is therefor less exhausting.

There are lots of pitchers who pitch exclusively from the stretch, and for varying reasons, I would imagine. See Rivera, Mariano.

My point is that pointing at a guys splits and saying “he’s worse from the stretch, they need to fix that” as if there is some mechanical issue is somewhat flawed. You expect him to be worse from the stretch, otherwise, he’d choose to pitch from the stretch. Additionally, is it really a good comparision? We’re potentially comparing a pitcher in a situation where he just let a guy on base to the same pitcher in a situation where he didn’t let a guy on base.  We’ve seen streakiness first hand - is it really surprising that when you clump those PA’s together, the ones that are preceded by a bad situation are bad and the ones that are preceded by a good situation are good?

Now, if Vazquez had like an .850 OPS against from the stretch, maybe there’s something with his stretch delivery, where he’s tipping. I’m not smart enough to now what the average splits are, but .75 points of OPS doesn’t seem too drastic to me.

[44]
Entirely fair. I think the reason we’re discussing this is that there have been a number of postings here (closer to the trade) and a number of articles that suggest that the reason JV has shown a tendency, possibly with the caveat “until recently,” to give up more runs than his peripherals would suggest, is that he doesn’t often get into a jam, but once it happens, it is unusually likely to end up very badly.
A problem pitching out of the stretch would help to explain that.
Now, if you can tell me that the number’s not worrying about if it’s under about .850, then we’ll have to look elsewhere for an explanation.  But are you sure that’s true?  Are you confidently answering Rilke’s question in [43]?

If our measures of his performance merit such a move, JV could be made to pitch out of the stretch significantly less.  For example:

3rd inning, tie score, JV pitching well.  A baserunner on first with none out.  If he’s slow, go with the wind-up.  If he’s so fast he’s likely (given the situation, the pitches, and esp. the catcher), perhaps you still go with the wind-up.  If he’s moderately fast, perhaps you do have him pitch from the stretch.
8th inning, JV pitching well with a low pitch count, man reaches first.  If NY has a 3-run lead, you might just have him pitch from the wind-up anyway.  If it’s a one-run lead, you might just take him out of the game, since leaving him in could spiral out of control faster than the usual starter in that situation.
And so forth.

[45] No, I’m definitely not confident. I have no idea what a typical career split should be. Vazquez is at 75 OPS points, and he’s, as you said, a notorious underperformer (according to his peripherals.) Last year he had a great year, with an ERA and FIP that were nearly identical, and a windup/stretch delta that was near 0. Is that the cause? Maybe? I think my small point was just that intuitively I would expect stretch splits to be worse than windup splits. By how much? No idea. 75 OPS points doesn’t set off bells and whistles for me, but maybe it should?

What is the league average difference in OPS between windup and stretch?  That would help…

[45] Ok, so taking this a little further, I looked up a few split differentials (Stretch OPS - Wind up OPS):

Sabathia: +19 points
Beckett: +55 points
Lackey: +50 points
Burnett: +47 points

So it would seem that Vazquez’s split is high, but not alarmingly so. I do agree, though, that he fact that in 2009 the split went away the the ABS(FIP-ERA) went to 0 is worth looking into.

[49] are career numbers, BTW.

If he’s slow, go with the wind-up.
Uh, I don’t know how recently you played baseball, but there is absolutely no professional baseball player in the world that is slow enough to pitch from the windup with them on first. It takes about 1.5 to 2.5 seconds before you release the ball from the windup. The guys would be over halfway to second before the ball is even released. Maybe 2/3 of the way there for an above average runner. There is probably not anyone in baseball who couldn’t steal on a guy pitching from the wind up.

So it would seem that Vazquez’s split is high, but not alarmingly so. I do agree, though, that he fact that in 2009 the split went away the the ABS(FIP-ERA) went to 0 is worth looking into.

Yeah, I think people might be making to big a deal out of this. Also, there are other reasons that you would pitch better with no one on base, namely that the infielders can position themselves to prevent hits with the bases empty, whereas with a guy on first the first baseman has to play on the bag, the middle infielders have to shade up the middle and play shallower to turn the DP, sometimes the infielders are moving if the runner is in motion, etc.

Also, with a runner in scoring position and two outs you will also sometimes pitch carefully to a guy if the run is important, because you don’t want to allow him to get a hit. It is sometimes the right move, especially if there isn’t a power hitter on deck, but that leads to walks which will inflate OPS, even if it doesn’t necessarily lead to more runs.

Not saying this is what happens with Javy—just saying that there are lots of reasons for every pitcher to allow a higher OPS with guys on base that have nothing to do with the stretch.

Here’s the career difference in OPS with men on vs bases empty for some not-good pitchers chosen at random:

Vicente Padilla +46
Carlos Silva +3 (+151 in 2009)
Jamie Moyer +61
Mike Morgan +53
Jaret Wright +21

+75 seems a little high to me.

This is only a rough way to look at what we are talking about, but there was a .024 OPS difference in the AL last year, bases empty vs man on (.748, .772).  I think defense is the big reason for that difference; is there a way to look up splits for peripherals?

Dannux, that sounds so convincing, but… am I the only one here who believes that we’ve seen people thrown out when the pitcher was throwing from the wind-up?  And not on anywhere near an as-rare-as-hitting-for-the-cycle basis?  Are there stats for that?  Where would I find them?

if you are given to nitpicking on harmless word choices

It’s why some of us visit the site.

Is “visit” accurate here, or best?  I’m thinking “afflict” over “infest”.

I roomed with a guy named Lewis Merkin back in the 80’s and he explained it to me. I’d love to say he’d developed a serious boy-named-sue complex about it and was a mean mo’fo’ but he was a nice guy.

That’s an interesting possibility, that he’s deliberately not throwing as hard to improve control.  His max velocity has decreased as well—even more precipitously than his average. Maybe it’s not so much deliberate as it is a fortuitous turn of events, like Frank White learning to position himself better when he could no longer dive for the ball as well. 

Many pitchers have extended their careers by accepting they could no longer throw the ball by people. Not many have actually become better pitchers. Still, he’s young, only on contract for a year, and 91 is fast enough. I just don’t like him losing a mile and a half off his average over three years.

[56]
Post of the week, or longer.  For God’s sake, the couplet even rhymes!

[58] I used to feel bad about reading Yankees blogs instead of catching up on the classics, like Brothers Karamazov, and White Oleander.  But rilkefan soothes my guilt with poetry.

For God’s sake, the couplet even rhymes!

And scans.

Hmm, that was an odd accident - anyway verse wasn’t my intent.

Pete,

Sorry if you thought I was too snarky, but I honestly didn’t think you could possibly be serious about abandoning the stretch.  Now I see that even after reading dannux’ response you actually do believe that pitching from the windup with runners on is even remotely viable at any level of baseball above little league.  So let me just say as politely as possible that you are mistaken if you think you’ve seen runners caught stealing with any regularity when the pitcher was using the windup.  This is primarily because you have not seen pitchers using the windup with runners on base with any regularity.  It simply isn’t done, with the exception of bases loaded (or with a not particularly fast runner on third).  In addition to dannux’ point, there is the fact that you really can’t do anything to hold a runner on first if you’re in the windup.

Anybody know what the delta is?

The delta approaches infinity.  But the sample size is exceedingly small because like I said, nobody does it.

I thought there were some (more than zero) relievers who never resort to the stretch.

It’s the other way around.  Many relievers never use the windup.

Also, I guess you lost me with “philosophical” back there too.  But the Marlins seem to have taken their stern talking to seriously, since they just gave Josh Johnson a 4yr/$39M extension.

[63] Congrats on the Yankees signing Josh Johnson!  Wait, they are only paying and not playing… Oh, well never mind then.

“It’s the other way around.  Many relievers never use the windup.”

Right, it occurred to me ex post I was in spherical cow land and must have the sign wrong once again.  Guess I should stick to iambs and root n.

One of the finest all-time film character names is Merkin Muffley.  It also happens to be from one of the finest all-time movies, Dr. Strangelove.  I’d have to put Peter Sellers’ performance(s) in that picture up there with any I’ve ever seen.  Muffley’s phone conversation with an obviously drunk Premier Kisov on the other end of the phone is perfection.

Hmmm… all right, then, MC.  I accept that the sense of having seen it must be false.  Was it always thus?
Strangely, however, in arguably appropriate situations, defensive indifference is done.

Was it always thus?

I suppose that there may have been a time, post-Babe Ruth and pre-Jackie Robinson, when the use of the stretch was determined by the base-stealing ability of the particular runner.  You’ve heard the story about Rod Carew stealing home seven times in 1969, all before the All-star break?  What you probably didn’t hear was that the thing that made him stop in the second half was pitchers finally going to the stretch when he reached third.  It used to be that you always went back to the windup when a runner got to third base, unless you were expecting the squeeze.

Strangely, however, in arguably appropriate situations, defensive indifference is done.

I don’t find that strange at all.  OTOH, conceding scoring position to every batter who reached first base safely, regardless of game situation, would be strange.

SG.  What do your projections say about Eric Byrnes?  Rumor is he’s being released.

Seems like he could be a pretty useful 4th OF at the minimum, if he’s healthy.  RHB with pretty strong splits, and average to above D in the corners.

I typically don’t go straight to the ‘haven’t you ever played baseball’ point of view, but do some people really not know the rationale behind the wind up and the stretch?

The D’backs are really going to eat $11m?

Byrnes’s splits v. RHP:

2008: .258   .333   .484   .817  
2009: .228   .274   .494   .767  

Would he be willing to sign here knowing that he likely would only play once a week at most, assuming that Gardner is given a full shot to fail? I’m skeptical.

As I have said before, if, as Sherman has reported, Hal really turned down Cash’s attempt to trade for Cameron last season for financial reasons, I would rather save the remaining $2m for an unexpected contingency.

but do some people really not know the rationale behind the wind up and the stretch?

Feeling the need to defend helpless wildlife…I think he knows the rationale just fine but pulled a Pettitte (“mis-remembered”) seeing pitchers go out of the wind-up w/ men on base, and catchers throwing them out.  Or even if it had happened (which it may have), he’s remembering it happening more than it has. 

IOW (pulling numbers out of the air), he knows the stretch helps cut down on base-stealing, but is wondering if it only helps by like 10%.  And though with most pitchers that 10% is sufficient justification for the loss of effectiveness, for Vazquez in particular, that may not be enough for him to go to the stretch in all circumstances.  Of course, we “know” the answer is it helps like 98% (Posada would probably still fail to steal 2nd).

[71] I would say that if Byrnes gets back whatever mojo he lost, he’d be a pretty legit starting LF candidate. I would think of it more as an open competition between the two.

Does anyone know much about Byrnes? He looked a solid corner OF type (similar to Nady) and then fell of a massive cliff with some OPS+‘s in the 60s at age 32 and 33. Injuries? Juice? Both? Neither?

Of course, we “know” the answer is it helps like 98% (Posada would probably still fail to steal 2nd).

Ok. Yeah, it wasn’t meant as a jab or anything so to anyone I may have jabbed at, consider this an unjab/dejab.

Funny thing is, at least once a game on my adult team, on of our pitchers goes from the wind up and gives up 2nd or 3rd base while the entire team is screaming at him ... “Step off!!!”

As I have said before, if, as Sherman has reported, Hal really turned down Cash’s attempt to trade for Cameron last season for financial reasons, I would rather save the remaining $2m for an unexpected contingency.

Agreed.  And not only the $$, but also the players - I believe the 40-man is full, so signing Byrne removes someone from it.  That player could be useful later, perhaps in a trade to meet that (unknown) contingency. 

Now, if Byrne is willing to accept an MiL deal that *could* pay him $2M (or even slightly more) if he makes the majors and hits certain benchmarks, that’s a different story.  He would need to clearly outplay a fringe guy like Hoffman (perhaps then deserving Hoffman’s roster spot anyway), or be brought up later when a player is on the DL or no longer deserving of a spot.  But he’ll probably get guaranteed PT elsewhere.

I believe the 40-man is full, so signing Byrne removes someone from it.  That player could be useful later, perhaps in a trade to meet that (unknown) contingency.

I don’t know.. I think if you could get Byrnes on something ridiculously cheap (like $1-1.5M) you can dump Gaudin and/or Mitre for the roster spot. Mitre would be my first choice.

[55] Amphibians are a hard to please lot.

Mitre would be my first choice.

Sure, but you just got rid of the easiest one.  Now if one of the NRI’s distinguishes themselves - or by injury earns a backup job like Pena last year - you’re using up another roster spot.  Perhaps there is enough “dead weight” on the 40-man roster (or maybe even there are open spots right now) so that it isn’t an issue.  Then again, I’m inclined to give Hoffman a shot at the RH left-fielder…

[78] I think I’d have to look at the 40 man a little more in depth, but I see your point.

[72]
Thanks to you, Mike K.
Yes, something like that.  To be precise: while I surely didn’t think the number was anything like 10%, I did have doubts, obviously based on false recollection (which is behind [54]), that it was in the 98% range (this was the essence of post [45]).
And the argument I presented (in post [46]), after the initial off-hand comment (in [35], was for selective avoidance of JV-from-the-stretch.
Actually, even given the equation of pitching from the wind-up and defensive indifference, the 8th-inning part of post [46] might still make some sense.

[79]  Good…what was my point again? 

I guess my main thing is against fiddling with the roster at this point.  I’m all for big upgrades if they fit into the budget, and I’m quite happy to get several NRI’s in spring training.  But at some point you’re just moving pieces around b/c it feels like you are doing something.  And this time of year especially, there is a LOT of urge to want (the Yankees) to do something!

[81] P(Eric Byrnes being useful) __ P(Jamie Hoffman being useful)

Fill in the blank with >, <, =. I think if you could get Byrnes on 1 year/$1M, you send Hoffman packing without a second thought. That’s what you’re hoping for anyway, isn’t it? Above average D, some speed, and good numbers vs LHP.

Funny thing is, at least once a game on my adult team, on of our pitchers goes from the wind up and gives up 2nd or 3rd base while the entire team is screaming at him ... “Step off!!!”

Just curious, what % of the time does the flustered pitcher balk anyway?

The middle school kids I’ve coached used to get incredibly pissed at me for screaming “stretch” whenever a guy would reach base.  They’d always say, “I know I have to pitch from the stretch with runners on, coach.”  But every time I’d decide to see if they’d remember, they’d forget.

As for Byrnes v. Hoffman, I’d be inclined to go with <; maybe approaching =.  The guy is 34, can’t stay on the field, and has seriously sucked when he has managed to get on the field.

I think that I prefer Hoffman. I don’t know what variety of cliff Byrnes fell off of, but being old and terrible for two seasons isn’t a good sign, although he had abnormally low BABIPs. Hoffman seems to be better defensively, so he looks better as a fourth/fifth outfielder, and he has a chance to stay with the team long term, which has some value.

[82] I kind of agree with MC.  There’s still a chance that Hoffman is a diamond in the rough, one of the 1 or 2 players each year that makes GM’s look like geniuses in the rule V.  The RH half of a LF platoon isn’t going to make or break the Yankees’s season.  Especially as there’s still a chance that Gardner can hit lefties well enough to justify playing every day, IWC the 4th OF REALLY isn’t going to make or break the season.  And if they need to replace an OF, Byrnes isn’t going to cut it.  W/ Hoffman, you’re giving AB to one of the guys who - if the Dodgers misread his talent/didn’t develop him properly - is in the mix for starting LF or at least 4th OF in 2011.

[83] Most. Usually because if it’s an experienced pitcher, the guy wouldn’t have went from the wind up to begin with. The guys who are trying it for the first time usually don’t know how to step off the right way, anyway.

33 days until pitchers and catchers?

The offseason has started to grow a bit long for my taste.

Maybe I’m anti-Hoffman because I’ve never seen the guy play, just looked at his BR page. With Byrnes, you at least know there is 105 OPS+ guy in there somewhere. But maybe he’s gone forever.. who knows.

Maybe a better way to put [88] is to say that if we’re taking a risk, I’d more partial to a guy repeating a performance than a guy performing to a level that he’s never performed to. In the end, though, it’s just preference. Hard to argue with going with the younger guy, especially since the older guy is not only older, but has an injury history.

Baserunning is a comedy of errors until high school/late little league.  Easily my favorite thing about watching cousins play.

I don’t want Gardner to be platooned. If Damon isn’t re-signed (The Braves only wants him for $1-$2m a year, so his options would appear to be extremely limited), Gardner should get until July 1st to sink or swim playing almost every game.

Edit: only want him

Well, there’s your Eric Byrnes DFA.

The Yankees’ offer to the Jays for Doc: Montero, full stop.

Interesting.  Source?

Dombrowski is denying interest in Damon.  So if the Tigers aren’t in and the Braves only want him for $2M or less…

Maybe the Mets should sign him to catch.

Source, can’t attest to its credibility of course.

Maybe the Mets should sign him to catch.

or to GM.

If the Yankees were offering Montero even up for Halladay, they knew that they would be turned down. It could be that it was a gambit designed to judge Anthropoulos’s seriousness about being willing to deal Halladay within the division.

Praise Jesus. Montero that is.
Leon, aka The Professional is such a great film. I’m not going to wait 15 years between viewings again. Masterpiece. Young film buffs.. watch it.
Go Jets.