Now, let me first state that this is a great problem to have. But the reality is, because the Yankees are expected to compete for the World Series every single year, it is difficult for them to give young starters the experience they need. In a perfect world, at least for Joba and Hughes, both pitchers would be allowed to make however many starts they needed to reach their innings cap. The Yankees can’t just run both pitchers out there though; they tried that in 2008 with Ian Kennedy and Hughes, to disastrous results. So instead, in comes Javier Vazquez……

The big market teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and Mets have been accused in the past of using other teams like a farm system, but sometimes when it comes to starters, this is simply the most effective method. Look at how hard it is to juggle the development of 2 young starters.

Brian is right on the money here, as developing pitchers in a winning environment is difficult in terms of both perception and execution. Fans and media expect clubs like the Yankees and Red Sox to do what is best for the club at the present moment, and frequently suggest moves that might improve the team in the short -term but are not in the long-term best interests of the club. Teams shut down pitchers due to workload concerns all the time, but it gains negative attention when the club doing it is in the midst of a pennant race. Even though that sort of perception should not have an impact on decision-making, it is difficult for a club to act as if they were in a vacuum when every member of the media and many of their paying customers disagree with a move.

In terms of execution, even if the club ignores external pressures to send a young starter down or put him in the bullpen, the vagaries of a long season and the typical struggles of a young starter often force the organization’s hand. The team needs to find a balance between short-term and long-term goals, and it is often difficult to gauge what kind of impact a move made for “the now” will have down the line. When the club is in the midst of a pennant race and a young pitcher is struggling in the rotation, the priorities of the team may be altered and decisions that would not be made in Kansas City are undertaken to satisfy the needs of the current roster, often at the expense of the pitcher’s development. These factors combine to make for a inhospitable environment for young pitchers.

Related posts:

1. How To Develop Relief Pitchers
2. In the end, it's up to the pitchers to execute
3. The 5th Starter Fallacy (Joba AND Hughes To Pen?)

Indeed, the fact that Francona is boasting about a five-strong rotation of Josh Beckett, John Lackey, Jon Lester, Daisuke Matsuzaka and Clay Buchholz, with 43-year-old Tim Wakefield, a first-half All-Star last year before he sustained back problems that required surgery, in reserve, should come as unsettling news to Yankee legions watching Joe Girardi conduct endless tryouts for the fifth spot in his rotation.

This is pure silliness from Madden. If all of the Red Sox starters were healthy, they too would be having a competition to figure out the 4th and 5th spots, with Dice-K, Buchholz, and Wakefield vying for the two spots. As it is, the Red Sox are fairly thin in terms of bottom of the rotation starters, with Matsuzaka already hurt and Junichi Tazawa currently the 6th starter. Now, being thin at 7th starter is a problem that most teams would love to have, but the idea the Red Sox have an advantage because their rotation is currently settled is ridiculous.

By contrast, the Yankees have a handful of guys fighting for the 5th spot, but that is in no way indicative of a lack of talent. Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, and Alfredo Aceves would all be solid options in almost every rotation in baseball, and the losers of the rotation battle will give the Yankees enviable starting pitching depth should one of the top 5 get hurt. Both teams have solid depth and are among the best rotations in baseball, and the idea that competition for one spot makes the Yankees weaker is typical myopic thinking from Bill Madden.

Related posts:

1. I Give Up: Bill Madden Wants Robertson To Move To Rotation
2. Yankees-Red Sox Double Standard About Depth
3. Why Moving Hughes Back To Rotation Is Not A Slam Dunk

Ace from his days in the Mexican League

..to be the Yanks #5 starter. Brian Hoch of MLB.com discusses the Yanks hottest pitcher this spring, who has given up 1 run in 10 IP thus far. We’ve all assumed that the #5 will go to either Joba or Hughes, but the question must start to be asked, can he really pull this off? Yankee manager Joe Girardi weighed in on Ace yesterday-

“It’s impressive, because of the different things he’s been able to do with the baseball,” Yankees manager Joe Girardi said. “He changes speeds, [has] late movement, pitches up and down. He changes eye level, in and out. He can do all of those things.

“What I’m most happy about is he’s ahead in the count most of the time. He’s putting hitters in a lot of 1-2 counts, 0-1 counts. That’s what you love to see. Guys love to play behind those types of guys, too.”

Aceves spent almost all of last season in a relief role, leading the Majors with 10 wins out of the bullpen while also turning in one save and a 3.54 ERA in 43 appearances.

While technically still a rookie last season, Aceves made four starts for the Yankees in 2008 and one more in ‘09, lending to the thought that he could do it if needed. Ideally, the Yankees would like to take a long reliever as well, and Aceves could also be useful there.

“He has four pitches, and he has the ability to get you out a bunch of different ways — whether it’s cutters, sinkers, curveball, changeup,” Girardi said. “In, out, he knows how to pitch, and he knows how to read swings.

“As I’ve said, we’re going to take what we feel are the 12 best arms when the season starts.”

With last year’s addition of Chad Gaudin, the Yanks now have two long men. On this team that’s really a waste, it would just mean one of them never pitches. Especially on a team where you 1-4 starters all figure to give you 200+ IP. If he was only going to be a long man, you might as well send him down to AAA to begin the season, since he’s one of the few #5 candidate with options left (Hughes can also be sent down up to late April) and you’d risk losing Gaudin or Mitre. It could also buy you some more time to swing a deal involving one of those two guys, and be in better bargaining position. Teams will up their offer should one of their starters go down early in the year.

Regular readers of this blog may remember Alfredo was my choice for #5 before these Spring Training performances. While I don’t put much stock in these exhibition games, I have felt all along Ace is the most polished and mature of the candidates for the #5 role. He has the repertoire of a solid starting pitcher, does all the little things you want a starter to do, and his makeup is such that I wouldn’t worry about giving him the ball in any situation you can envision a starter encountering. With all of the talk about the other candidates and the Yankees future, we should remember that Ace is only 27 years old. He could be an important part of that future as well.

Related posts:

1. Theo makes the case for Gardner in left
2. The 5th Starter Fallacy (Joba AND Hughes To Pen?)
3. Girardi-Hughes will not replace Wang in rotation

Yankee Pitching Coach Dave Eiland weighed yesterday in on the competition for #5 starter’s role. George King of the NY Post has the story:

TAMPA — Nine games and two rainouts into the exhibition season, none of the five pitchers competing for the fifth spot in the Yankees’ rotation has copped a lead.

That means the headliners — Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain — are tied with long shots Sergio Mitre, Chad Gaudin and Alfredo Aceves.

“As of right now, if we had to pick one we couldn’t really pick one,” pitching coach Dave Eiland said yesterday after a game against the Nationals in Viera, Fla., was rained out. “The sample is not big enough.”

I’ve said all along the sample will never be big enough. You’re talking about facing AA and AAA hitters for the first few weeks, and many of the MLB vets are either working on things or still getting into shape. That leaves 2 starts at the end of March for them to ‘make a decision’ on, since they said they want thing thing wrapped up a week before the end of Spring Training.  I’ll say it again, I think this entire ‘battle for #5′ is absurd. They know who these pitchers are, and a few weeks of Spring Training shouldn’t change that evaluation, even at the margins.

He adds:

Though Girardi and Eiland said the competition won’t be decided by numbers, Chamberlain clearly needs a solid outing — if only for his confidence — after posting a 27.00 ERA so far this spring.

Yet, Eiland is looking behind the statistics, focusing on what the club is asking pitchers to develop.

“If a pitcher is working on something and it hurts him, we have to understand that,” Eiland said.

(snip)

“It’s not just numbers, it’s the quality of each pitch, pitching ahead in the count, first pitch strikes and stuff,” Eiland said. “Are the outs hit hard? You can give up lasers that get caught and not give up any runs.”

That last sentence can’t be overemphasized, the whole reason why folks have developed stats like BABIP and FIP is to try to isolate the element of luck from a hitter or pitcher’s results. And I’m not saying you can’t get valuable info from the small sample of a few starts, advance scouting is all about that. But to draw a determination of who someone is as a pitcher, and what their role on a team should be based on 2 exhibition starts in March is utterly absurd.

I’ve mantained all along that this is simply a storyline for sportswriters and folks like us to kick around, since Spring Training gets pretty dull in a hurry. But don’t buy what they’re selling you folks, it just doesn’t add up. The Yanks are smart enough to know this.

Related posts:

1. Discussion: Will Eiland Be First To Go?
2. Dave Eiland-’Hughes Rules’ not like Joba’s
3. Girardi: Starting Now, It Counts

Here are a few quick items on the evening regarding Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain:

• Sam Borden has an interesting piece out on the way the Yankees’ starters work with each other in order to craft and refine their own repertoires. A notable item from the article is that former Yankee, Mike Mussina, advised Phil Hughes to adopt a “spike grip” for his curveball back in ‘06. Hughes tried the grip and has used it ever since.
• According to an unnamed (of course) Yankee executive that spoke with ESPN 1050, on Wednesday, while facing Detroit, the first 2 innings Joba Chamberlain threw prior to giving up 6 earned runs were very good. In fact, the executive claimed that “he thought Chamberlain’s first two innings were the best he has looked in two years.”
• Speaking of Joba, Joe Pawlikowski of River Ave Blues penned a piece on the right-hander’s reduced velocity, noting that he should employ his breaking pitches with greater regularity this season – and in the future – to counteract the loss. I think Joba’s curveball, in particular, is a very good pitch that he needs to use more often.

In 2009, the whiff rate on Joba’s curve was 14.9%, the second highest rate in his four-pitch repertoire, just behind the slider. It was put in play 10.9% of the time, which was actually the lowest rate of the four pitches in his arsenal.

Photo by Reuters Pictures

Related posts:

1. In 2010, Joba should start, Hughes should relieve
2. Hughes changes his change (again)
3. Who Was A Bigger Prospect, Hughes Or Joba?

The criteria for getting on the list include having the previous season being your first full one as a starter, adding upwards of 700 pitches over the prior season, and extensive use of the slider, and Joba meets all three standards. Now, this system is by no means perfect, and the author of the study is still tinkering with the criteria. That said, I do think that the results can teach us something about the Yankees approach to young arms.

Whether it is Razzball’s system or the Verducci effect, Joba exceeded the totals that most freely available systems would have allowed him in 2009. As I have said a number of times in the past, it seems that the Yankees are a bit more liberal with their pitchers than people like Verducci would be. They tend to allow a jump of 40-45 innings over the previous career high, and do not seem to have an overall pitch limit. This is likely based on the results from a proprietary calculation on pitcher injuries and risk. This is an area where research has been largely incomplete, so it is hard to say whether the Yankees are being prudent enough. Hopefully, the results on Joba will help confirm the club’s process as reasonable and adequate.

Photo: Kathy Willens

Related posts:

1. Salfino: Innings Limits Not So Clear Cut
2. Joba Will Get 6 More Starts
3. Joba's Innings in 2009

Although he is entrenched in the much-discussed competition for the fifth rotation spot this spring, right-hander, Phil Hughes, will continue to experiment with his changeup, in the hopes that it will become a reliable fixture in his pitch repertoire. “I’m trying to get my changeup down to where it can be a useful pitch for me,” said Hughes, after throwing 10 changeups during yesterday’s 2 2/3 inning-outing against Detroit. “It’s never going to get there if I don’t throw it,” he added. If he can master it, or at least increase its employment and effectiveness, even marginally, the changeup should be a most valuable weapon for Hughes in 2010 and beyond, particularly versus left-handed opponents.

In his short big-league career (192 2/3 innings), left-handed hitters have had some fun facing the young righty, posting a .274/.368/.450 slash line against him. The cutter that Hughes adopted last season, darting in on lefties, helps with that issue, though the change, sinking out of the zone, away and down, against lefty batters, should help him improve further. As stated by Hughes, “You get used to throwing changeups to lefties because there’s no risk in it. If you bounce it to your arm side, it’s not big deal. With a right-hander, you’ve really got to finish the pitch.” Hopefully, come the end of exhibition play, Hughes’ change will be refined to the point where it is an actual weapon for him this year.

Photo by the AP

Related posts:

1. Hughes Plans To Work On Changeup
2. Hitting Hamels' changeup
3. Hughes changes his change (again)

A little more than a week ago, I posted an article that was a relatively sobering look at everyone’s favorite prospect, Jesus Montero. In that article, I used information/got inspiration from a FanGraphs article, showing what Jesus Montero would be worth to the Yankees per year for his cost controlled years if he spent all his time at DH. The result was about a three win player, which is very nice for a cost controlled guy.

Of course, though, Jesus is determined to stick at catcher. So today, I’m going to be a bit more rosy and bullish in my projections of Jesus than I was in my previous article. I will adjust the calculations to assume a two different playing time scenarios:

1. Full time catcher (~120 games).
2. Split catcher/1B/DH (think Victor Martinez).

For defense, which Smith alludes to in the comments, I’ll assume two things as well:

1. He’s at best a zero run backstop.
2. He’s a Mike Piazza/Jorge Posada type back there, so we’ll call it, as Smith does -10 or so (it will be fewer negative runs for playing time scenario #2.

For offense, I’m going to the .379 wOBA across 650 PAs I laid out in my first post.

For the most positive of scenarios, we’ll run situation one: a full time, zero run catcher. After catching 120 games, His positional adjustment would be 8.2 per Smith. So, running our WAR calculation, we get 5.10 WAR. Now, that’s assuming that he’s a zero run defender behind the plate, which isn’t likely to happen. Adjusting for a -10 run defense, we get 4.14 WAR, still a good mark. In fact, that mark would’ve made him the third most valuable catcher in the AL, behind Joe Mauer (8.1) and Victor Martinez (who played 85 games at catcher; 4.9 WAR).

Speaking of Martinez, let’s say he does something like Victor did in 2009–85 games catching, 70 games at first base. Using Martinez’s position adjustment of 0.6, Montero would produce (assuming 0 runs at first and -7 behind the plate) 3.71 WAR. Of course, Jesus could always be better at first base. Like Smith does, we’ll call Jesus +2.5 at first. Adding that to our -7 catching, we get -4.5 runs defensively. Running that scenario, we get 4.30 WAR, which actually makes him more valuable than a full time, bad defensive catcher.

Again, I’ll reiterate, these are in no way “crystal ball” calculations. I’m just having a little fun here, seeing what Montero could be worth. Like all prospects, he could either wildly under-perform these calculations or he could out-perform them. Being fair, I think he’ll probably never be all that great in the field but he could definitely hit for something better than a .379 wOBA. Either way, I’m damn excited to follow Jesus for another season and I hope we can see him in the Bronx in September. Best of luck in 2010 to El Carpentiero.

Related posts:

1. A More Sobering Look at Montero
2. Minor Notes: Jesus Montero Does More Stuff
3. Montero Determined to Catch at Major League Level

“Evolution” and “progress” are not always synonyms. The electric toothbrush is an example of that. So, too, our ability to now get dinner at the gas station. But because survival is the strongest instinct, in humans and in business, sports journalism is being forced to evolve into selling its principles and fairness (its soul, in other words) in exchange for clicks and cash, a trafficking not that far removed from porn.

(Porn is more honorable, actually. At least there, the participants agree to the transaction and get paid.)

It is either that or lose money and ratings and eyeballs to people who don’t make any kind of moral stand. The mainstream media might have wanted to stay out of the TMZ-ization of the Tiger Woods story on principle, but it literally couldn’t afford to do so because viewers were going to go find it somewhere. Show me the restaurant that tells you what you should be eating, instead of giving you what you want to consume, and I’ll show you an empty restaurant……

There’s also an interesting generation gap growing between old media, which is either aging or dying, and new media, which gets stronger by the day. Today’s kids — and kids are what make everything popular — don’t seem to be as judgmental as their parents. They want to see Portland center Greg Oden naked and the drunk photos of Texas center fielder Josh Hamilton just for the voyeuristic pleasure in it, not necessarily to judge it. And old media can’t keep ignoring those kind of desires, not if it wants to survive. It is hard not to notice that newspapers keep going out of business while TMZ Sports is scheduled to open this year.

While I do agree with the general sentiment of Dan’s column, that sports media is losing integrity as it embraces the voyeuristic tendencies of the Hollywood media, I do want to quibble with the bolded portion. Sports media is not being forced to sell its soul for clicks, it is choosing to do so. Analogizing to newspapers, the New York Post, the New York Times, and the National Enquirer have been sold at the same newsstands for many years. There is always a niche available for responsible, reasoned journalism, as there will always be an audience of fans that are not interested in voyeuristic stories that have little to do with the events on the field. Now, that niche may be less lucrative than the less principled route, but that does not change the fact that there is a choice being made every time a media outlet digs into Tiger Woods’ past.

I understand that as businesses, these outlets need to make decisions that will maximize revenues, and therefore do not begrudge them for moving away from the moralistic ideals that Le Betard pines for. However, for the writers, I think their choice remains obvious. If you got into journalism in order to report and comment on the news in a principled and moral fashion, and you feel that your outlet is forcing you to compromise those ideals, you can take the money or find a new employer. It is a simple decision, and I believe that both choices are equally valid. I have no problem with a reporter sacrificing his own ideals in order to support his family, and I have great respect for those who refuse to budge on what they believe in. But it is important to note, once you cross the line that Le Betard notes and sell your principles for clicks, you have lost some of your integrity.

Ultimately, journalistic integrity is the underpinning of a great sports writer or media outlet. In a climate where every story is picked apart within minutes, those who refrain from crossing those voyeuristic lines and do not seem to be trolling for clicks garner the most respect. Sites like Fire Joe Morgan sprung up because of the shift that Le Betard discusses, as writers began to make intentionally ridiculous statements in order to drive pageviews (of course, there are also those that are simply idiots). And yet, despite the constant fisking of journalism that lacks integrity, the media psyche continues to shift in the wrong direction.

A writer such as Ian O’Connor, who had an embarrassing column simply removed from the internet and continues to take shots at athletes for personal reasons (see recent A-Rod columns), was rewarded with a plum job at ESPN NY likely due to his ability to incite anger and drive page views. In the battle between dollars and integrity, the money is winning comfortably. And unless media outlets suddenly become uncomfortable with the sacrifices that they are making or the zeitgeist among fans shifts away from the more abhorrent voyeuristic elements of reporting, this is unlikely to change any time soon. Slowly, bit by bit, journalistic integrity in sports media is suffering an agonizing death, and we are largely powerless to stop it.

Edit: Just as an illustration of my point, see Bill Conlin’s response to the fact that he discussed the greatest infields of all time and left out the Reds of the 70’s:

“I covered Rose, Morgan and Perez when they were with the Phillies, know them well, and don’t really care what you post on your blog. I write a commentary column and it attracted an enormous response. That’s the coin of my realm and why I’m still drawing a paycheck 11 years past age 65. Thanks for helping to keep me in the game.”

Mr. Conlin, the job of a journalist is not to create controversy, it is to report and discuss the news. What you are doing makes you no better, and likely worse, than the bloggers that you so loathe.

Related posts:

1. A-Rod To Speak With Feds, Hysteria Ensues
2. Whitlock On The Roberts Book
3. Discussion: Does Twitter Mean The Death Of The Reporter?

Girardi has said he hopes to make a decision during the final week of March, and — as pitch counts rise and workloads increase — he expects both Hughes and Chamberlain (as well as Mitre and Aceves) to start mixing consistent pitching in their areas of focus with positive results.

“After this one,” Girardi said, “we’re really going to start making our evaluations.”

Spring training results generally do not mean much, as pitchers are working on specific pitches and skills rather than taking the most effective approach towards attacking hitters. That said, if the Yankees feel the need to base their decisions on a three week competition, eventually results will have to enter the equation. I still believe Joba Chamberlain will win the spot, but further outings similar to his first two might preclude that. Beginning with his next start, results will matter. Hopefully, Joba will seize the opportunity.

Related posts:

1. Girardi Hints at Joba Postseason Plan
2. State Of Yankee Starting Pitching Depth
3. Girardi: Joba To Make Roughly 30 Starts