Where he belongs.

Is that a serious statement, Benji, or is that the Met fan in you speaking?

I personally think this is dumb. "Protecting" Joba didn't prevent him from having to shut things down this season. If it were up to me, I'd just put Joba in the rotation, be careful with his pitch counts, and maybe skip him a couple times a year but that'd be it for protecting him. Having him start the season in the bullpen to limit his innings seems like a poor strategy to me.

If he can't pitch 180 innings at 23, he's probably destined to get hurt anyway.

I completely agree with you, Russlan. More important than limiting his innings is having some kind routine that he can stick to throughout the season, I think. Both mentally and physically, it seems like a better idea. I don't really understand why the Yankees are thinking otherwise.

Maybe they plan on doing with him what the Twins did with Johan.

Maybe they plan on doing with him what the Twins did with Johan.

Trade him to the Mets?

No, it isn't the Met fan talking, it's the baseball fan. There's no cut-and-dried right or wrong here, but the way today's game is played, the 8th inning guy is incredibly important. Chamberlain, in albeit a small sample, showed he could do that job terrifically (is that a word?). And down the road, he looked like the perfect replacement for Rivera. I never like breaking up a strength hoping to eliminate another weakness (like Reyes to 2nd base) and it seemed like that's what they did here. Do we Met fans wish we had an 8th inning man these last two years?

Benji, Joba has been outstanding as a relief pitcher but he has also been excellent as a starter. There's every reason to expect him to be successful barring injury.

Do we Met fans wish we had an 8th inning man these last two years?

Would you move Mike Pelfrey to the bullpen to solve that problem, even if you knew he'd be as dominant as Joba in that role? I know I wouldn't.

Trade him to the Mets?

Keep his innings real low, although slowly increasing, until his age-25 season.

If he can't pitch 180 innings at 23, he's probably destined to get hurt anyway.

This is pretty dumb, frankly. Almost as bad as saying that the eighth inning is more important than the first seven. If you drafted a 22 year old college senior who'd never pitched more than 90-100 innings in a year, would you double his work load in his first professional season? It makes all the sense in the world to limit his innings. This is as good a way as any.

I think this makes a lot more sense if he takes over for Rivera in 2010, or earlier if he falters in 2009. Whether people here admit it or not, closers have some value, and there's a good argument to be made that Mariano was the most valuable part of the mini-dynasty.

I'd still rather see the man as a starter, but if the medical people say definitively that in this situation, relieving is better than starting for Joba's health, I'm willing to listen.

I agree that if it's better for Joba's health to be a reliever, he should be, but (a) I think the Yankees are hoping Melancon is the actual heir of Mariano;(b) Starters as good as Joba are much more valuable than relievers (even as good as Joba was in 2007).

I disagree. Also, you suck uncontrollably.

the way today's game is played, the 8th inning guy is incredibly important.

The way the game has ALWAYS been played, getting to the 8th inning with an actual lead (or a chance to take the lead) is exceedingly important, and you don't do that if you don't employ quality starters, which Joba has proven to be (albeit in small samples). And, as #12 notes, starters are more valuable than relievers -- unless it's an issue w/ a guy being unable to handle the workload (which is still up for debate, at least publically), the better pitchers should obviously be in your rotation. And it's a cascading effect -- a better starting rotation = a better bullpen (if only by virtue of not being overworked).

And you definitely shouldn't use the Mets as an example of why a set-up man is so important, when they're Exhibit A on how to NOT set up a bullpen.

Limiting Joba's innings next season seems like an appropriate way to protect him. No one really knows if you can better achieve that goal by starting him in the bullpen or just adding in some extra rest and skipping a few starts, but it seems more likely that you'd run into an innings cap if he was just used as a starter. If this story is true, it might make it more likely that both Mussina & Pettitte are back next year.

No one really knows if you can better achieve that goal by starting him in the bullpen or just adding in some extra rest and skipping a few starts, but it seems more likely that you'd run into an innings cap if he was just used as a starter.

To bring up a name that doesn't live elsewhere in this thread, I think we can point to Papelbon's usage and injury non-history as a datapoint that reliever usage may be less strenuous on certain pitchers, handled carefully.

This is crazy.

what if he never came up in the pen last year, and he started a couple games? Would this even be considered?

I think we can point to Papelbon's usage and injury non-history as a datapoint that reliever usage may be less strenuous on certain pitchers, handled carefully.

Or Santana's. It looks like the Yanks don't mind using Joba as a swingman type pitcher for a couple of years before they decide to turn him loose and let him plow through the league. This does throw a new wrinkle into the "Who will the Yanks sign" question.

I do love how we link to lots of articles where the player's name is not identifiable from the title, like "Rodriguez has big night". But since the Wes Chamberlain era ended in 1995, there hasn't been a single other player with that name in MLB - yet the put his first name parenthetically in the headline.

*Edit*

My bad; I didn't see the other column. "Stephen Chamberlain" played for the Royals from 2002-2005.

It'd only be crazy if they leave him in the pen permanently. But they are saying that they plan to put him back in the rotation; basically do the same thing next year as they did this year.

The only potential problem here is that, the more you pitch him out of the pen (assuming he pitches well there, which is very likely), the more people you're going to have arguing that he should be left there. In terms of public relations, it'd be better to just pull the Band-Aid off, as it were.

But, if the organization is willing to just ignore that pressure, I don't see a problem. Who knows if that'll be the case.

I do love how we link to lots of articles where the player's name is not identifiable from the title, like "Rodriguez has big night". But since the Wes Chamberlain era ended in 1995, there hasn't been a single other player with that name in MLB.

This is a quarrel in a faraway bullpen among people of whom we know nothing.

On another note, I read that Phil Hughes and Humberto Sanchez will both be sent to the AFL. I am confident Hughes will turn into something. I hope Sanchez can be productive.

But, if the organization is willing to just ignore that pressure, I don't see a problem. Who knows if that'll be the case.

Well, they were willing to ignore it this year, so it seems likelt they'd do so again.

Here's an honest non-snarky question...suppose Chamberlain continues his career track of throwing large numbers of pitches, so he goes five-to-six innings a lot...is he more valuable THEN as a starter or a reliever?

Here's an honest non-snarky question...suppose Chamberlain continues his career track of throwing large numbers of pitches, so he goes five-to-six innings a lot...is he more valuable THEN as a starter or a reliever?

If Joba could give you 6 innings (on average) a start, at more-or-less the same level of quality as he would in relief and make 33, that'd be ~200 IP. That's probably worth more then his pitching the 8th inning role, epscially since the Yankees have Rivera who'd steal a goodly portion of the high leverage situations

I think he is, BB, but the unanswerable question is what type of starter and what type of reliever. A top-flight starter has much more value than a top-flight reliever, but an injured or not-as-effective starter is not as valuable.

Again, if experts say that Joba's health will be protected better with a reliever workload, I'm in favor of bullpen usage for him.

I'm not a doctor, of course. And what's true for Joba may not be true for all pitchers and vice-versa. So I genuinely don't know what's best for him and for the team in this spot. I'm willing to trust those who are paid to know and (presumably) have much more information than I do.

Here's an honest non-snarky question...suppose Chamberlain continues his career track of throwing large numbers of pitches, so he goes five-to-six innings a lot...is he more valuable THEN as a starter or a reliever?

Probably still not more valuable as a reliever. If Joba's a 3.50 ERA starter and can make 30 starts averaging 6 innings a start, then he'd save about 20 runs above an average (4.50 ERA starter), 35-40 runs above a replacement level one. If he's a 2.50 ERA reliever and pitches 80 innings, he'd save about 13 runs above an average (4.00 ERA reliever), 18-22 above a replacement level one. If we give him a leverage index boost of 1.5, which is probably high, that about 30 runs above replacement level, which makes him a half a win to a win less valuable in the pen.

Expecting Joba's control to remain shaky is probably wishful thinking if he follows typical aging patterns though.

I don't see why jerking him around between the bullpen and the rotation can be a good thing. Leave him as a starter, or make him a reliever and be done with it. I would think varying the usage is going to do way more harm than saving him 50IP next year.

Throwing 5-to-6 innings is what Mussina has done this season (he's very close to averaging 6 an inning - he's slightly below that).

Would you not want to have a dirt, cheap pitcher throwing the same number of innings as Mussina 08 with (probably) slightly better results?

(BTW - I'm a huge Moose fan, rooting for 20/300/HoF. My comment did not mean to belittle the Moose, who's having a wonderful season).

I would think varying the usage is going to do way more harm than saving him 50IP next year.

Why would you think that? You're far from the only person I've heard or read make this kind of comment, but I don't see any factual basis for it at all. Swing-man was the traditional way of breaking in young pitchers in MLB for about 120 years or so. Did it wreck all of them? OTOH, the Orioles almost destroyed Jim Palmer's career before it got going by doubling his workload between 1965 and 1966, and I bet you can find another dozen or so examples without too much trouble. Not to mention all the guys whose arms got shredded and didn't heal.