Detroit Series Wrap

After dropping the first game 4-2, the Yankees went on to score 19 runs over the next two games to beat Detroit 2-1 in a three game set in the Motor City. Sadly, I was unable to watch any of these games because none of them were on My9 and I'm blacked out of ESPN coverage. Luckily, I'll be graduating a week from Sunday so I'll be home to watch every game.

SERIES POSITIVES: Starting pitching. Yeah, when was the last time I could say that? The KC series? The Yankees got good performances from their starters in Detroit; combined, they went 21 innings while allowing only 4 runs (all of those from CC) for an ERA of 1.71. Phil Hughes looked incredible on Tuesday night, as his cutter was biting and his curveball was just absolutely filthy. Last night, the Joba Chamberlain of the present looked like the Joba Chamberlain of the future. It's games like Wednesdays that should remind everyone why Joba's future is as a starter.

SERIES NEGATIVES: The bullpen remained a little shaky, as it gave up six runs last night. But in a win, there's little to complain about. After all, the bullpen only pitched a handful of low-leverage situations during this series.

LOOKING AHEAD: The Yankees come home to play the Angels (9-11) stating today. The Angels are 5-5 in their last ten games, but they are on a three game win streak. The pitching matchups are:

Thursday: Anthony Ortega vs. A.J. Burnett
Friday: Jered Weaver vs. Andy Pettitte
Saturday: Matt Palmer vs. CC Sabathia
Sunday: Joe Saunders vs. Phil Hughes

TEAM STATS:
OFFENSE: .279/.357/.470/.828, 116 OPS+, 30 HR, 113 R
PITCHING: 5.87 ERA, 81 ERA+, 1.511 WHIP, 4.1 BB/9, 7.0 K/9, 1.73 K/9

Kansas City Series Wrap Up

Joe Girardi made some questionable bullpen moves yesterday, as the Yankees fell to the Royals, 6-4. The Yanks, however, still took two out of three from KC, winning Friday night and Saturday night, with strong pitching performances from Andy Pettitte and CC Sabathia.

SERIES POSITIVES: The starting pitching was the most inspiring thing in this Yankees/Royals series. Friday night featured a vintage version of Andy Pettitte, Saturday brought us the CC Sabathia we've all come to know and love, and Sunday was Joba Chamberlain's first start of the year and if it weren't for said questionable bullpen moves, Joba would've had his first win of the year.

SERIES NEGATIVES: Cody Ransom. We knew he wouldn't be A-Rod, or anything close to it for that matter, but Cody is definitely playing well below where we thought he would. His play in the field isn't looking all the great either. Maybe General Joe will throw Ramiro Pena a start in the coming days, just to shake things up. He can't be worse than Ransom, right?

LOOKING AHEAD: The Yankees open a three game series in Tampa tonight. Both teams come in 3-3, trying to establish an early rhythm in the rough AL East. The pitching matchups are: Wang v. Kazmir, Burnett v. Garza, and Pettitte v. Sonnanstine.

TEAM STATS TO THIS POINT:
OFFENSE: .262/.336/.452/.789, 108 OPS+, 7 HR, 35 R
PITCHING: 4.41 ERA, 105 ERA+, 3.4 BB/9, 7.1 BB/9, 2.11 K/BB

A sad note today as the baseball world lost its second member in a week. Legendary Phillies broadcaster Harry Kalas died today before the defending champs' match-up with the Nats in Washington tonight. Kalas was truly one of the greats and Phillies games won't be the same without him. RIP Harry Kalas and Nick Adenhart.

Why Do People Still Think Like This?

Why? Just why? Why do people still think that Joba Chamberlain is best used as a relief pitcher? It's just ridiculous.

Joba Chamberlain had his best outing of the spring Tuesday,, limiting the Reds to five hits and two runs in 51/3 innings. He was so good, in fact, that he pitched the Yankees almost to the point where, ideally, Joba Chamberlain would come into the game.

And that's the problem.

So his pitching well is a...bad thing? Why? Because he did it starting instead of relieving? That makes very little sense.

Not even Joba, as good as he is, can fill two roles at once. He can start a game or he can finish it.

Or, he could throw a complete game and do both. But that's a rarity in baseball. It's also a story for another day. Anyway, if I have my choice between Chamberlain starting and pitching 5-7 innings, I'll take it over him relieving and pitching 1-2 innings.

The Yankees, who have an abundance of guys to start their games this year, think it's a good idea to take the greatest two-inning pitcher since Mariano Rivera, circa 1996, and turn him into just another starter.

Yeah, they also have an abundance of guys who can relieve. That's why Dan Giese, Brett Tomoko, and Al Aceves were sent down to Scranton instead of breaking camp with the Yankees. It's not like the pen isn't some rag-tag group of ne'er-do-wells. They've got a good core of live young arms--Brian Bruney, Phil Coke, Jon Albaladejo--two seasoned veterans--Mariano Rivera and Damaso Marte--and the capable Jose Veras and Edwar Ramirez. In fact, this bullpen had a 3.73 ERA in '08, along with an 8.66 K/9. I know that includes some of Chamberlain's numbers, but they'll be more than fine without him.

As for Mariano Rivera...do you wanna know why he was a two inning pitcher, Matthews? Because he failed as a starter. He was a fantastic starter in the minors, but he couldn't hack it as a starter in the majors. Why's that? Because he didn't have enough pitches to make it through the lineup more than once. Joba Chamberlain does not have this problem. He has a plus fastball, an explosive slider, a workable changeup, and a solid curveball. Guys with four pitches don't need to be wasted in the eighth inning.

I think they're nuts.

Pot? Kettle? Black?

The reality with starters is that they are six-inning pitchers on most days, seven- and eight-inning pitchers on their best days.

Yeah, and? Wouldn't you rather have a guy pitch six innings instead of one or two, especially if he was fully capable of doing so?

In four out of every five starts, they are going to need a guy to come charging out of that bullpen in the seventh inning to hold the game until the closer gets there.

A guy like Joba Chamberlain.

You wanna know the truth, Wallace Matthews? Most games are essentially already decided by the 7th inning. Using the WPA Calculator, we can see that a home team, winning by one, in the top of the seventh, wins the game 72.5% of the time. You don't need a guy as good as Joba Chamberlain to pitch the 7th or 8th to hold that lead down. You only need a guy as good as say...Brian Bruney or Phil Coke or Albie or Edwar or Veras or Marte...

Not to mention the Yankees were something like 73-2 in games in which they led after 7 innings. Taking Joba out of the 8th inning role will not drastically hurt that number.

But Joba isn't doing that anymore. Greater baseball minds than mine have analyzed this situation at great length and determined that Joba for the first six innings every five days is better than Joba out of the bullpen five times a week.

You know why they've determined that? Because even a slightly above average starter is more valuable than a lights out reliever.

I say that's like hiring Picasso to paint your garage door or asking Mozart to come up with a toothpaste jingle. Many can start; few can finish. Joba can finish. He was a great setup man, and someday he'll be a great closer. Those commodities are a lot scarcer on the market than starting pitchers.

Actually, I'd say in your situation. That'd be like hiring Picasso or Mozart to do such menial tasks. Joba is fully capable of being a great starter and wasting him in the eighth and ninth innings would be so silly.

That second statement about the market is just a joke. Why do you think CC Sabathia's getting $14 million in 2009 and $23 million from '10-'15 and K-Rod is never making more than $17.5 in a year? BECAUSE STARTERS ARE ALWAYS MORE VALUABLE THAN RELIEVERS!

And the Yankees, of all teams, should know it. In 1996, they wrote the book on the art of shortening the game. The nightly relay team - starting pitcher to Rivera to John Wetteland - was more reliable than Tinker to Evers to Chance. It forced every one of their opponents into the hurry-up offense, every night.

Again, Rivera failed as a starter. Go look up Rivera's minor league numbers. If he had been able to duplicate them at the Major League level, do you really think he would've been turned into a closer? I doubt it.

If you didn't get those Yankees within six innings, you weren't getting them at all, and the numbers bear it out - the record of the 1996 world champions was 70-3 in games they led after six.

That's because it's hard to win a game when you're down with only 9 outs to play with no matter who's pitching.

I also love how he completely ignores the Yankees good starting pitching in the late '90s, as if it was the bullpen that did the job.

The Yankees patented that formula, bottled it and swigged liberally from the bottle for the next decade, although it never worked quite as well when Rivera had to depend on mere mortals such as Brian Bruney and Kyle Farnsworth to get him the baseball.

Didn't the Yankees make the playoffs all the time despite "poor" set up men? Yeah, they did. They also survived with Joe Torre's more-than-questionable bullpen management. Also, Brian Bruney was awesome in '06 and '08 so I don't see Matthews's point here.

*snip*

Best of all, he seemed to solve the biggest question the Yankees will have to face in the next couple of years, namely, who would replace the irreplaceable Rivera?

I'd say a bigger problem was their crappy starting rotation, which they've fixed with the likes of Sabathia, Burnett, and Chamberlain. As for who will take over the closer role? Well, if Rivera were hurt, there's a ton of bullpen guys who can do that. And there's Mark Melancon.

As great as Rivera has been for the Yankees, he is overrated. Yes, I said it. The closer is probably the most overrated position in American sports, even if it's Mo--the greatest closer ever.

Besides, now Joba and his colleagues will have to sweat out games entrusted to the likes of Bruney and Damaso Marte. It could be worse, I suppose, but thankfully Farnsworth is in Kansas City this year.

Like I said, Brian Bruney was fantastic last year. Damaso Marte wasn't great, but he has a history of performing very, very well. Does this guy seriously know anything about the Yankees?

This guy can shorten games for the Yankees now, and close games for them over the next 10 years. Barring catastrophic injury, that's virtually a certainty.

Yeah, you know how he can shorten games? Pitch the first six or seven innings, which are more important than the last two. Why do games get shortened in the first place? BECAUSE OF GOOD STARTING PITCHING! The bullpen can only be effective when the starters are good, right? You could have a 7-8-9 combo of Soria-Papelbon-Rivera but if your starters are Ponson, Rasner, and Igawa, what does it matter? I know it's not that drastic since the Yankees now have a strong rotation (with Chamberlain) but what's the point of weakening it by removing Chamberlain?

I'll end on this. Here are Chamberlain's stats as a starter:

12 G, 65.1 IP, 60 H, 25 BB, 74 SO, 2.76 ERA, 1.305 WHIP, 2.96 K/BB, 10.23 K/9

Much Ado About Nothing

Sorry for the lack of posts lately. School and life are busy and there really isn't much baseball news going on.

There's the A-Rod press conference today, but I'll be in class when it starts (Women in 20th Century Literature) and probably when it ends (Spanish and Latin American Film). Honestly, I couldn't care less about the whole damn thing and I hope this is the end of the issue...but I know better. Maybe this will end it for Spring Training but as soon as the season starts, we'll hear the "A-Roid" chants on the road and the boos at home and the whole can of worms will be re-opened. My first reaction to everything was not anger, but rather disappointment. At this point, though, I'm way past caring about the PED issue in baseball. I am, however, pissed off that the NFL essentially gets a free pass on the same issue, but whatever.

In legit baseball news, there are some things I'll touch on.

1. This is ridiculous. If anything like this happens, the Yankees, Mets, Phillies, and Braves--and any team that had to give up a draft pick--should go absolutely nuts on MLB.

2. Ken Griffey appears to be headed to the Braves. This is good news for Yankee fans (especially me) because it means the Nady and/or Swisher to the Braves talks will die. Keeping both on the roster provides depth and insurance. We all know how big my man crush on Nick Swisher is; hell, I named one of my fantasy teams "Swisher's Biggest Fan."

3. After watching bits and pieces of that Baseball Tonight special on Sunday night, I have made it my goal to watch as little BBTN as possible this season. This is for a few reasons: a) I first tuned in when they were talking about the Rays. They listed Pat Burrell as a new acquisition (I think this is a great move) and they listed his BA (.250) and HR (33) totals next to his name. When will ESPN, the "Worldwide Leader in Sports" catch up with the times and stop using BA/HR/RBI as their "Holy Trinity?" Ugh. b) John Kruk and Buck Showalter both agreed that Joba Chamberlain should be in the bullpen, citing a few tired arguments. The first, by Kruk, was that Mariano Rivera won't pitch forever and the Yankees will need someone to close when he is gone. This just shows that the people at ESPN do absolutely no research. At all. There is someone being groomed for the future closer's job. His name is Mark Melancon. He will put an end to this stupid Joba to the bullpen debate. The second "argument," agreed upon by both Showalter and Kruk, is that Chamberlain can pitch in 60-70 games out of the bullpen rather than 25-30 as a starter, and thus "impact more games." This is dumb. If Chamberlain's a reliever, he'll pitch 1-2 innings a game. That way, he's only impacting 1/9 to 2/9 of a ball game. As a starter, he's impacting 5/9 to 7/9 of the game. Which is more valuable? If you say it's the former, that's like saying 2 quarters are worth more than 1 dollar because there's 2 of them, as opposed to 1 of the dollar. Anyway, it's just clear that the guys at ESPN have some work to do. Baseball Tonight is good for one thing--showing us highlights and getting interviews. In the words of Austin Powers, analysis is not their bag, baby.

3. In the Joba vein, there's this article by Joel Sherman in the New York Post. In honor of the fallen Fire Joe Morgan, I'm going to try and shred this post.

2. When it comes to Chamberlain's long-term role a question that is often asked is what is more valuable: 70 innings or 200 innings? I think that is a misleading talking point by those who want Chamberlain to be a starter.

No it isn't. 200 innings is usually more valuable than 70. Hell, an average 150 is about the same as a great 80. For a good summary of that article check here.

Now back to the 70/200 matter. You should really ask who is pitching the 70 and who is pitching the 200? For the champion Phillies, Cole Hamels' 227.3 innings were probably more valuable than Brad Lidge's 69.3, but were Jamie Moyers' 196.3. If you told the Red Sox, they could play this season with either Jonathan Papelbon or Josh Beckett, which do you think they would take? It is not a layup.

As someone in the comments pointed out, Moyer (39.7 Pitcher VORP) was more valuable than Lidge (26.5 VORP). Jamie Moyer had a slightly above average season in 2008 and was more valuable than the best reliever in the National League. Via FanGraphs, Moyer was worth 2.6 wins above a replacement player and Lidge was worth 2.2 WAR. So, 196.1 above average innings was worth more than 69.1 godly innings.

As for Boston having to make the choice between Beckett and Papelbon, they'd pick Beckett every time. I'm sure Mr. Sherman meant to say "slam dunk" instead of "lay up" so I'll correct him. It is a slam dunk, dude. Beckett is worth more to the Red Sox than Papelbon.

In those 200-or-so innings for a starter how many would you define as game-on-the-line high leverage? With someone such as Lidge or Papelbon or Rivera, just about every pitch they throw in a season is in a game-deciding moment. That is why the 70/200 thing doesn't work for me. I can just as easily say would you rather have a pitcher impact 60 games (like a reliever) or 30 games (like a starter).

I'd say most of them are game-on-the-line high leverage situations because by the time closers come in, the game is already determined. For this, I'm gonna head to the WPA Calculator. By typing in the situation that would happen at the beginning of the game--no outs, none on, top of the first, visiting team batting and the scored tied--we see that the home team wins 54% of the time, so basically a toss up. Now, I'm gonna put a classic save situation in: top of the ninth, the home team up by one, no one on, no one out. In that situation, the home team wins 86% of the time. As great as Mo is, when he comes in to the game, it's usually already determined.

As for the 60/30 thing, see above. 30 games of even average to slightly above average pitching is better than 60 games of light's out pitching. Hopefully this year, Joba absolutely dominates and shows all the people who think he should be in the bullpen where they can stick it. You don't waste a great talent like Chamberlain in the bullpen. Cashman and Co. have it right.