Game 92-Another look at Hughes

By Steve S. On July 17, 2011 · 102 Comments · In Game Thread

Phil Hughes makes his second start after coming back from the DL, and I think most of us will be watching to see if he misses any more bats than he did last time. His contact numbers in the strike zone and swinging strike rates are downright scary this year, but I’m waiting for a bigger sample before I do a piece on that. He’s tinkering with his mechanics, he’s dusting off his old curveball grip, blah, blah blah. I suspect his arm is just dead after the innings jump last year, and there’s probably not much that can be done about it. Hopefully I’m wrong and he blows away the Jays this afternoon.

Here’s your lineup, courtesy of LoHud:

Brett Gardner LF
Curtis Granderson CF
Mark Teixeira DH
Robinson Cano 2B
Nick Swisher RF
Jorge Posada 1B
Russell Martin C
Eduardo Nunez SS
Ramiro Pena 3B

The Captain has a day off, which appears to be a weekly thing they’ve employed since his return from the DL. Chris Dickerson showed up in the clubhouse, but no word yet on who’s being sent down. Soon as I know, you will. GO YANKS!!!!!!!

102 Responses to Game 92-Another look at Hughes

Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:10 pm

Hideki Matsui made the highlight reel on MLB Network today with a sliding catch in left field yesterday.

[Reply]

Matt Imbrogno Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:15 pm

Over/Under: 95.5%: Players who make that play standing up (I haven’t seen it, haha).

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:21 pm

It was in a spot where there was only a couple of feet of foul territory, so you either had to be standing there, or slide. You couldn’t run through it without hitting the stands.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:12 pm

Gardner in the leadoff spot, and he singles to start the game. Go! Go! Go!

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:14 pm

Stole second easy.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:16 pm

No shift on Teixeira because of Gardner.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:18 pm

Bases loaded for the slumping Swisher. (Or is he? It seems so.)

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:21 pm

He would say no haha.

[Reply]

Matt Imbrogno Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:30 pm

.256/.302/.333/.636 for July.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:32 pm

A slump compared with June, locked in compared with April.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:21 pm

Two station-to-station singles in a row. Bases still loaded for my man Posada.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:23 pm

Should help Hughes to get a lead before he steps out onto the field. He won’t have to feel that every pitch has the game riding on it, anything that can help his confidence is a good thing.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:26 pm

Yeah. He may have a way to go. He has to worry about his arm, he has to worry about learning new pitches, he has to worry about getting his location under control, and getting the movement back on his fastball. It may take some time, and the Yankees need to manage his expectations for himself.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:41 pm

He’s not really learning a new pitch. He’s simply going from a knuckle curve to more of a regular curveball.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:24 pm

Damn, only one run, partly because of the turf, partly because of their usual blahs with RISP.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:42 pm

Martin smoked that one ball, it was just right at SS.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:29 pm

Hey, gets the caught looking on an 0-2 hook. That’s great to see from Hughes.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:32 pm

Any strikeout is a good strikeout, but Hughes’ problem has never been getting them looking.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:34 pm

True, he needs to miss bats. But aside from that he messes around too much with 2 strikes, and he doesn’t throw the curve much, so these are goods signs.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:40 pm

Seemed like it would be a quick inning for Villanueva, but at least Gardner worked the count full. 40 pitches after two innings.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:51 pm

K swinging on the curve for Hughes. The pitch is looking good. If he can get the third out here and limit the damage to one run, that’s a moral victory.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:54 pm

I’m still not sure what Cone is talking about by saying Hughes is throwing his curve with more velocity though. He has been throwing it around 76 today, and last year he averaged 75.8. Sure this year he has been averaging 73.1, but his velocity across the repertoire went away this year.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:57 pm

Hmmm.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:51 pm

Matt, if you were the GM and you were looking to deal for Jimenez would you be more willing to deal Banuelos or Hughes? Obviously there is a chance the Rockies wouldn’t want Hughes, since he has been dealing with his own issues this season. But if they were, who do you believe in more?

For instance if they asked for one of the following 2 packages which one (if either) would you do?

Montero, Hughes, Nova, Betances

or

Montero, Banuelos, Nova, Warren, Phelps.

[Reply]

Matt Imbrogno Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:42 pm

I would rather do the second package. Hughes is something right now and can be something better. Right now, Banuelos is mostly upside. If Banuelos was closer to being ML ready and I could see him immediately replicating Hughes, I might do that.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:47 pm

Let me ask you this. If Ian Stewart is coming with Jimenez in the deal, how does that change what you are willing to give?

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:51 pm

Nunez makes the catch! Wa-hoo!

Hughes looked good after he gave up the run. Another positive sign.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:57 pm

His fastball control has been shaky though, a lot of pitches over the plate and middle. I really don’t care as much about velocity with Hughes, it’s always been his control that has been my biggest key for his success. I personally think he tries way too much to be a power pitcher.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:00 pm

I tend to be able to grasp movement more than location, especially when you’re talking about location within the strike zone. So I like the movement I’m seeing on his curve today.

When he first came up, I read about the late movement on his fastball, but I never saw it.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:05 pm

My biggest problem with Hughes has always been his wildness within the zone. He has always presented his fastball in a “see if you can hit it” kind of way, and been much less concerned about the location. He’d be a lot better off trying not to run past people, and focusing more on hitting the corners.

It’s funny to me because I always read about his loss of movement, but yet the biggest critique he faced when he was coming up was that he needed a change because of the lack of movement on his fastball. He ended up gaining movement on the ball in the pen, but that’s to be expected. As a starter, he has always had a fairly straight fastball.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:08 pm

That’s the way it always seemed to me, but I remember reading about the movement on his fastball. I can’t remember if they were (usually) reliable sources.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:11 pm

I think the time in the pen ultimately hurt him in his development. It helped the team win that year so you can’t knock the move itself, but he picked up quite a dew bad habits. He came out of that time trying to throw harder with less importance on location, and he ditched the curve way more than he should have.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 1:53 pm

Hey, Chris, who on the Staten Island Yankees is most likely to help the big league team the soonest?

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:56 pm

I’m way more familiar with the higher level clubs, to be honest. I’ve heard good things about Gumbs and Williams, but I haven’t seen them play with my own eyes. So anything I say would be a complete guess on my part.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 1:57 pm

I’m thinking of going to a game on Tuesday–actually a double header. They’re coming to my neck of the woods.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:00 pm

If you do make sure to report on what you see here.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:03 pm

It wouldn’t be of much use. I thought Joel Skinner had a great swing.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:07 pm

Haha, any report is useful haha.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:06 pm

Another swinging K by Hughes.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:09 pm

Only 91 on the gun, but very good location down and in on that pitch. He needs to realize that kind of pitch is much better than 93+ down the middle.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:06 pm

That is the first time I can remember seeing both the runner and the first baseman miss the bag. THAT will be on MLB network tomorrow.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:07 pm

Weird play.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:14 pm

Nice contact by Pena there. Not trying to do too much.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:16 pm

What a weird year for Posada.

April- .132/.244/.397
May- .219/.342/.297
June- .382/.419/.588
July- .148/.226/.185

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:17 pm

I hope he can come up with another month or two like June.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:22 pm

Doesn’t look to hopeful, but then again I didn’t think he had June in him to begin with.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:16 pm

It’s tough to take two bases on a single on this turf. The ball just gets to the outfielders too quickly.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:20 pm

Bases-clearing double for Granderson.

The Grandy Man’s can!

(Or something like that.)

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:25 pm

Looks like Hughes’ velocity has dropped in every inning. He threw a few 93′s in the first, and in the last 2 innings he has slipped to sitting 89-91.

EDIT: two of them were cutters but those last 4 pitches were at 88, 90, 86, 90.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:28 pm

Three straight 91 mph fastballs on Arrencibia.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:30 pm

Yeah, it looked like he was reaching back for it after the double. Still the velocity has been dropping.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:31 pm

Definitely. As you say, though, he can get by with a well-placed 91er.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:33 pm

I think he can be a very valuable number 3 pitcher throwing 90-92 if he just commands the fastball to get ahead, and finishes with the curve.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:29 pm

There should be a law that when you see a commercial for the 50th time you get a free one of whatever they’re selling.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:30 pm

If that’s the case keep running those steak commercials.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:30 pm

And talking about commercials, has anyone here ever had a girlfriend who thought you were great because you bought her a meal from McDonald’s value menu??

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:32 pm

“Ahh heck baby, it’s our anniversary, you can get two things off the dollar menu today!”. haha.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:36 pm

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:34 pm

I know you’ve been dying to know Professor. I ended up trading Josh Beckett for Michael Young to replace Alex on my fantasy team haha.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:38 pm

Not a bad idea. I keep getting the feeling that Beckett is going to be less effective going forward. No reason for that–he’s has good years through and through before. Maybe it’s more a hope than a feeling.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:43 pm

His numbers suggest he is in for some kind of regression, if not a huge one, and I got him in the last round of my draft. So I rode the good times, and I’m getting a great player for very little original investment.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:42 pm

Hughes has had Thames number all game.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 2:51 pm

This game has definitely been an improvement for Hughes, but cone and Singey seem to be commenting like he is blowing the Jays away. He’s looks pretty good, but he has shown more problems then they seem to be willing to point out.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 2:54 pm

They do that all the time, not just about Hughes.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:03 pm

Those two in particular out of the YES crew seem to focus on the good in everything. I don’t mind that, but I tend to look for broadcasters to keep it a little more real with me. I’m watching the game, I see when someone struggles or they don’t.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:04 pm

I agree. We were talking about this briefly on yesterday’s game thread.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:06 pm

One thing I like about Kay is he always is looking for the bad haha.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:02 pm

Jon Heyman is reporting that the Yankees and Rockies match up well for a Jimenez trade, because the Rockies like Montero. But apparently the Yankees don’t want to trade Banuelos, Betances, or surprisingly Nova.

I understand not wanting to part with Betances, and Banuelos, but I don’t see how Nova is a hold up for a pitcher like Ubaldo. Nova will never have half the upside Ubaldo does.

Peter Gammons says the Rockies are looking for “two prime prospects, along with one or two big league players, including a starting pitcher”. That might mean something along the lines of Montero, Betances/Banuelos, Nova, and Warren/Phelps might do it.

I heard Buster Olney say this morning that if Jimenez isn’t traded this month, they will likely trade him this winter.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:03 pm

When Heyman reports something, the first thing you have to ask is, “Which of the players involved is represented by Boras.”

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:10 pm

The answer as far as I know is none.

People give him a lot of crap, but he was the first one to come up with Lee to the Phillies, and he stuck by it even when others were saying it was definitely Yankees or Rangers. I admit he isn’t the best source in the world, but he does hit things on the head sometimes.

I actually do believe we match up really well with the Rockies though. Montero makes a lot of sense for them, especially when you consider Helton turns 38 in August.

[Reply]
Duh, Innings! says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:12 pm

If the Yankees win today and Boston wins tonight – they have a good chance to win with Beckett on the mound and should if he pitches like he has pitched this year – the Yankees are in position to take three of four in Tampa Bay and leave T.B. 7.5 games ahead of them.

The Yankees 58-38 and Rays 51-46 through Thursday would mean if the Yankees played just 33-33/.500 ball the rest of the way, the Rays would have to play 40-25 ball the rest of the way to finish tied with the Yankees, 41-24 to finish ahead of the Yanks. I don’t see either record happening with the Rays playing five games above .500 ball through 97 games or any of the teams trailing T.B. leapfrogging them or the Yankees.

Either a split with T.B. and an 8-2 homestand to end July or three over T.B. and a 7-3 homestand to end July will, I think, ensure the Yankees the wildcard as long as they play .500 or better ball which they should do and keep them in the hunt for the division title.

I no longer want Ubaldo Jimenez although I would not be disappointed if he was acquired considering his contract is a bargain even if/as long as he’s #3 starter good. My thinking is he is not an ace yet, he is a #2, but a #2 in the NL is a #3 in the AL, so why give up the farm for an NL #2? Instead, the Yankees should go after a solid AL #3 who will cost less in terms of players to give up as there are no available aces or true #2s. Gavin Floyd or someone of his ilk would do just fine with the team he’d have behind him.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:17 pm

Ubaldo is no number 3 in the AL. He has been one of the best road pitchers in all of baseball this season, and since June first he has been dominate all around.

You can’t look at any pitchers numbers who pitch in Colorado in the way you do other “NL pitchers”. The park/enviorment creates a huge imbalance.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:28 pm

Ubaldo Jimenez on the road this year has been absolutley dominant to the tune of
55.1 IP, 42 Ks, 30 H, 20 BB, 1 HR, .158 BAA.

I hardly think we can classify this as a “number 3″ anything.

Ubaldo’s Lefty/Righty splits this season.

Vs lefties .251/.321/.432
Vs righties .235/.318/.346

In fact his xFIP has been the exact same this year as last, he has gotten awfully unlucky this season though. Holding a LOB% of only 66.8% compared to a career 72%, and a 76.5% last year.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:47 pm

He’s a #3 in the AL or 17 teams including the Yankees wouldn’t have been looking at him the other day.

30 H + 20 BB = 50 men put on base in 55.IP for a sub 1 WHIP, 42 SO, and just one homerun away from Coors is dominant. When a guy’s SO exceeds H and are 13 less than H + BB, and he gives up just one homerun in the equivalent to six complete games plus an inning and a third to boot, that's dominant.

I know you think you're always right and post a million times an entry, but you are wrong on this one.

And didn't I tell you to stop replying to me? You know that every contrarian reply you make to my posts only shows your insecurity about your own baseball knowledge. Right, we get it, you're a knowitall who lives in the comments section.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:50 pm

You really take everything hostile don’t you?

I was saying he is better than a number 3 in the AL.

Actually you didn’t, you said only reply in a civil manner. Which is exactly what I did, and have done.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:00 pm

Um, if anyone is being hostile, it’s you to me. I have posted stuff on here and you reply with smarminess and an “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude I don’t like.

I wasn’t even addressing you in the post I made in here and you felt the need to go out of your way with another “I’m right, you’re wrong” reply. You’d make a good sportstalk show host.

You saying Jimenez is not a #3 in the AL means you are saying he is a #4 or #5 in the AL (since he is an MLB pitcher), and that makes you wrong considering 17 teams including the Yankees watched him the other day, deal with it. Seventeen teams wouldn’t dispatch scouts to check on a #4 or #5.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:03 pm

I simply was responding to you in saying that I think Jimenez is better than you are giving him credit for. I have never attacked you, and have never tried to make you feel uncomfortable here.

I know you said you don’t think he’s an ace but you would still be OK with acquiring him. I was simply giving evidence to support him being an ace.

He’s not a number 3 in the AL because he’s an ace. I never implied he was anything but a number 1 pitcher everywhere. I said several times in my posts he is dominant. I think you missed the entire point of my post.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:14 pm

You said Jimenez is no #3 in the AL. So you’re saying he’s an ace or a #2 in the AL then? If so, he is not. Elaborate cuz considering you don’t want the Yankees to get him or get him at the price he will require (three top prospects), it came off like you thought he wasn’t a #3 in the AL let alone an ace or #2. So, I took that as you saying he’s a #4.

My personal rule on starters:

NL ace = AL #2
NL #2 = AL #3
NL #3 = AL #4
NL #4 = AL #5
NL #5 = Starter for an AL team’s AAA team

cuz of the DH and much stronger 7-8-9 batting order.

I don’t consider Jimenez an NL ace, I consider him an NL #2 thus he’s an AL #3. To me.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:24 pm

I do want them to trade for him. This is what I have been trying to say the entire time. In fact I would be willing to give up more for him than most on this blog have proposed.

Since June first Ubaldo has been a beast. 53.2 IP, 7.92 H/9, 8.28 K/9, 1.8 BB/9, with a 2.50 ERA. Which includes a 7 inning, 2 ER game against the Yankees, in Yankee stadium.

55.1 IP, 42 Ks, 30 H, 20 BB, 1 HR, .158 BAA. on the road this season.

Ubaldo’s Lefty/Righty splits this season.

Vs lefties .251/.321/.432
Vs righties .235/.318/.346

These are dominant, dominant numbers. Numbers I believe prove that he is an ace.

I also don’t think he can be classified as strictly an NL pitcher. He pitches in Colorado for half his starts, which means he has to deal with am extreme hitters park, above sea level. Because of this he has to deal with things no other NL pitcher does, and his numbers look worse because of it.

I consider Ubaldo a notch or two below Justin Verlander, with the chance to be that kind of dominant.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:34 pm

So who would you trade Jimenez for?

List names.

Moshe Mandel Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:58 pm

Anyone can respond to anyone.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:00 pm

I’m actually kind of confused anyway, because he seemed to agree with everything that was in my post yet still be mad haha.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:07 pm

I didn’t agree with everything in your post. I changed my mind about Jimenez for my own reasons regardless of what you think which I could care less about.

You don’t want any top prospects traded for anyone or you blanket say no one would give up an ace or #2 for them.

You, Moshe, and the other Yankee Analysts have this fantasy of Sabathia/Hughes/Betances/Banuelos/Nova and Montero being the second coming of Mike Piazza which is never gonna happen.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:10 pm

Again I think you are completely missing what I wrote. I want Jimenez, very badly. I was talking about the post after that where you were talking about how dominant Jimenez is.

I actually do want to trade our prospects for Jimenez.

I don’t like Hughes. In fact, I probably have on of the lower opinions of him on this board. We both agree he is a number 3 pitcher in potential.

You really need to go back and re-read because you totally didn’t understand any of my posts. Or you did, and are getting it wrong on purpose.

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:03 pm

Two peas in a pod.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:06 pm

You really need to go back and re-read what I wrote. If anything I barely disagreed with you, and completely agreed with your second post.

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:32 pm

Here’s the problem with the comments on here, and you’re part of it:

I come on here and say who the Yankees should trade Jimenez for, you tell me that’s too much, I disagree with you, we disagree with each other, fair enough. I decide it’s too much for my own reasons.

Ok, well rather than tell me what I want to give up is too much, and since you want Jimenez badly, who would you give up to get him? If I tell you too little or too much, big deal, but truth be told, I wouldn’t say either. It’s who you think they should give up. If they get Jimenez and the package is closer to mine than yours or vice versa, so what? Big deal. Bottom line is the Yanks got him. Again, I said I wouldn’t be disappointed if they got him.

It’s a bit disingenious on your part to say no to my trade idea but not have one of your own when you want the guy, too. It’s so easy to say no without why? or laying out your idea/s. If you want Jimenez badly, who would you give up to get him? List names.

You bring up the word “adult” which implies I am not one when I am most certainly older than you thus an adult since I saw a post you made where you wrote Guidry was before your time, or something like that. When you use the word “adult” when I never called you a child, that’s hostile talk on your part esp. when I was halfway done with highschool when Guidry hung up the spikes. Canada Boy is just a ballbusting namecall for which I apologize, hardly calling you a child. T.O. is short for Toronto, you call yourself “T.O. Chris” so it’s not unreasonable to think you’re from and/or residing in/around Toronto.

I’ll call a truce as long as when you disagree with me, you disagree with your own idea vs. my idea e.g. I say the Yankees should trade Betances, Banuelos, and Montero for Jimenez, you say who you’d trade him for if you want him a Yankee. No “The Yankees won’t get him for that.” or “That’s too much.” without why. Neither of us knows why the Yanks will or won’t make a move. All we can do is lay out our ideas.

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:23 pm

The Yankees and Rays have a lot of games left against each other. If the Yankees are lame in those games, it makes it a lot easier for the Rays.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:18 pm

Final line for Hughes is encouraging, and the Blue Jays are not a weak hitting team. It’s encouraging, although I hardly think we can stop worrying.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:20 pm

He showed encouraging signs, he also showed some of the same red flags as before. Overall he is building in the right direction, but he isn’t where we/or he want him to be just yet.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:37 pm

MVP of the game: Yoooooz

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:40 pm

Could be Gardner. He has gotten 3 hits, scored 2 runs, driven in 2 runs, and stolen a base.

Back to back 3/4 games for Gardner too.

[Reply]

Professor Longnose Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:43 pm

Now Granderson has 3 RBIs.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:47 pm

Gardner also adds a stolen base, and a run scored.

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:40 pm

Wouldn’t it be cool if Montero hit a World Series winning home run in the bottom of the 9th of game 7 off Cliff Lee?

[Reply]

Duh, Innings! Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:50 pm

Wouldn’t it be cool if Montero caught well enough that he could be the Yankees starting catcher in 2012 not 2015 the way he’s going?

[Reply]
Professor Longnose says:

July 17, 2011 at 3:44 pm

Is Teixeira’s average in the .230s yet?

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 3:48 pm

All but. He’s down to .240/.347/.501.

[Reply]

Matt Imbrogno Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:44 pm

I still can’t believe how low his BABIP is.

[Reply]

T.O. Chris Reply:
July 17th, 2011 at 4:48 pm

I can’t figure it out myself. I have cited time and time again how that should correct itself, but it really doesn’t seem to be doing so. I am at a loss to explain Teixeira’s struggles.

Before last season his lowest BABIP was .288 in his rookie year. Then last year he drops to .268, and now it’s .218.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 4:07 pm

Great win! Hughes took some positive steps forward, and the offense did very well from beginning to end.

[Reply]
T.O. Chris says:

July 17, 2011 at 4:44 pm

“Here’s the problem with the comments on here, and you’re part of it:

I come on here and say who the Yankees should trade Jimenez for, you tell me that’s too much, I disagree with you, we disagree with each other, fair enough. I decide it’s too much for my own reasons.

Ok, well rather than tell me what I want to give up is too much, and since you want Jimenez badly, who would you give up to get him? If I tell you too little or too much, big deal, but truth be told, I wouldn’t say either. It’s who you think they should give up. If they get Jimenez and the package is closer to mine than yours or vice versa, so what? Big deal. Bottom line is the Yanks got him. Again, I said I wouldn’t be disappointed if they got him.

It’s a bit disingenious on your part to say no to my trade idea but not have one of your own when you want the guy, too. It’s so easy to say no without why? or laying out your idea/s. If you want Jimenez badly, who would you give up to get him? List names.

You bring up the word “adult” which implies I am not one when I am most certainly older than you thus an adult since I saw a post you made where you wrote Guidry was before your time, or something like that. When you use the word “adult” when I never called you a child, that’s hostile talk on your part esp. when I was halfway done with highschool when Guidry hung up the spikes. Canada Boy is just a ballbusting namecall for which I apologize, hardly calling you a child. T.O. is short for Toronto, you call yourself “T.O. Chris” so it’s not unreasonable to think you’re from and/or residing in/around Toronto.

I’ll call a truce as long as when you disagree with me, you disagree with your own idea vs. my idea e.g. I say the Yankees should trade Betances, Banuelos, and Montero for Jimenez, you say who you’d trade him for if you want him a Yankee. No “The Yankees won’t get him for that.” or “That’s too much.” without why. Neither of us knows why the Yanks will or won’t make a move. All we can do is lay out our ideas.”
———————————————————————————————————————————

I don’t recall actually telling you that your proposal was too much. I think you have me confused with someone else on that one. In fact I didn’t think your idea for Montero, Banuelos, Betances was too much.

I am 22 years old, I don’t try an hide that. I don’t care how old someone is, but when you use as many curse words as you have, and degrade people as I have seen you do in that past it comes off somewhat childish. I’m sorry if it offended you, but on my behalf I’ve asked you politely to stop cursing and disrespecting this blog on many occasions. If you do that we have no problems.

Once again “T.O.” stands for “The other” in this instance. When I joined the Yankees universe they had a writer by the name of Chris H, so I used “the other Chris H to avoid confusion. I eventually shortened it to T.O., however he is no longer with this blog now that it is TYA.

I have honestly never done anything but disagree with your ideas, though at times I have also disagreed with your behavior, since I do not feel it has been respectful of posters (who aren’t me) or this blog itself.

My original proposal was Montero, Banuelos, and Betances, this is how I know you have me confused with someone else when it comes to disagreeing with your trade. Or you simply misunderstood something I wrote.

As it stands I think we can get Jimenez for something along the lines of Montero, Banuelos/Betances, Nova, and Warren/Phelps/Noesi/Laird.

If it took Montero, Banuelos, and Betances I would do that so long as we also got Ian Stewart in return as well.

[Reply]

Game 92-Another look at Hughes

102 Responses to Game 92-Another look at Hughes

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

LIKE TYA ON FACEBOOK!

Recent Activity

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Authors

Authors

Twitter

Meta

Blogroll

Blogs

Writers

Resources

Search TYA

Archives

Calendar

Site Organization

Categories

MLB Standings

Site Stats

New York Yankees blog, Yankees blog, A blog about the New York Yankees | The Yankee Analysts

Pages

The Latest

Phil Hughes and the Case of the Curiously Effective Curveball

More

July 2011
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Jun
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

Game 92-Another look at Hughes

102 Responses to Game 92-Another look at Hughes

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

LIKE TYA ON FACEBOOK!

Recent Activity

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Authors

Authors

Twitter

Meta

Blogroll

Blogs

Writers

Resources

Search TYA

Archives

Calendar

Site Organization

Categories

Tags

MLB Standings

Site Stats

New York Yankees blog, Yankees blog, A blog about the New York Yankees | The Yankee Analysts

Pages

The Latest

Phil Hughes and the Case of the Curiously Effective Curveball

More