“Now, instead, we’re trying to find out who’s best suited for that eighth-inning role.”

As if creating a role for the ninth inning wasn't bad enough, now we have the silliness of creating a role for the eighth inning.

Eventually, teams will carry 10 relief pitchers and one starter. Nine relievers will have a specific inning role. One will be a lefty specialist saved for high-leverage matchups, and the starter will be used in a multi-inning mopup role when the margin grows > 4 runs.

“You don’t take Jeter out of the two-hole and put him in the seven-hole just because you’re leaving the ‘4’ and ‘5’ guys on base,” he said. “You let him do what he does best.”

Doesn't this statement seem contradictory to Damon's point?

we had (Kyle) Farnsworth in the seventh, Joba in the eighth, and Mariano in the ninth - we thought it was game over.

Yeah, when Farnsworth comes in in the seventh, the f*ck*ng game is over, all right, if it isn't already over after Hawkins comes in in the sixth, or after the starter comes in in the first.

You don’t take Jeter out of the two-hole

Heh.

"Two-hole."

There may or may not be good arguments against taking Joba out of the setup role, but Damon isn't stumbling across any of them.

He's dumber than ten dogs.

I still hate this contract.

So Farnsworth is good for the 7th inning, but sucks for the 8th?

There may or may not be good arguments against taking Joba out of the setup role, but Damon isn't stumbling across any of them.

He's dumber than ten dogs.

I love Damon interviews. You can almost watch the gears grinding in his head as he ponders his next statement.

I read yesterday that Farnsworth is like 2.70 (ERA) or so in the 7th and whacked out sucky in the 8th.

I still hate this contract.

He could hit like Mickey Mantle for four years and you'd still hate that contract.

I love Damon interviews. You can almost watch the gears grinding in his head as he ponders his next statement.

whenever he talks, I think of those Simpsons jokes about what goes on in Homer's head - a donkey sleeping, monkeys picking bugs off each other's backs, etc.

Is Damon wrong? Long-term, Joba is probably more valuable as a starter but if he's a 4.25-4.75 ERA starter this year, isn't he more valuable as a shut-down reliever? Damon is selfish and wants to win this year like most veterans. I don't think he's being stupid.

Man, he is raking this year.

Is Damon wrong? Long-term, Joba is probably more valuable as a starter but if he's a 4.25-4.75 ERA starter this year, isn't he more valuable as a shut-down reliever?

were either Kennedy or Hughes healthy and pitching well, I might agree with you. At this juncture, however, Joba pitched to a 4.50 ERA is better than the AAA cannon fodder they could be throwing out there.

I love Damon interviews. You can almost watch the gears grinding in his head as he ponders his next statement.

whenever he talks, I think of those Simpsons jokes about what goes on in Homer's head - a donkey sleeping, monkeys picking bugs off each other's backs, etc.

It's funny because it's true!

I love Damon interviews. You can almost watch the gears grinding in his head as he ponders his next statement.

whenever he talks, I think of those Simpsons jokes about what goes on in Homer's head - a donkey sleeping, monkeys picking bugs off each other's backs, etc.

Tell me about it. I love Damon, but whenever I play free association with his picture, "simian" is what comes to mind. Or alternately, he'd have a terrific second career in those Geico commericals.

were either Kennedy or Hughes healthy and pitching well, I might agree with you. At this juncture, however, Joba pitched to a 4.50 ERA is better than the AAA cannon fodder they could be throwing out there.

Exactly. The Yankees desperately need a solid starting pitcher. The question for the future was when, not if Chamberlain got a shot in the rotation. The question for 2008 was whether the replacement level in the rotation was low enough that they would need to stretch Chamberlain out, and with both Kennedy and Hughes doing about as poorly as could have been projected, Chamberlain had to join the rotation.

I'd love to see a collection of idiot statements by Damon about his teammates. His attack on Schilling in 2005 was pretty solid. There's really nothing there inside that noggin, I don't think.

I think the mistake is to swtich mid season. Decide if you want him as a starter for 2008 and then proceed accordingly. They blew their chance to stretch him out as a starter when it didn't count and now they have a crappy, low pitch count starter for a few weeks/months while also losing one of their best relievers. Yes, they need another starter, but this is the worst of both worlds, IMO.

They blew their chance to stretch him out as a starter when it didn't count and now they have a crappy, low pitch count starter for a few weeks/months while also losing one of their best relievers

what? they started him in the bullpen to keep his inning limit down for the entire season - rather than shut him down completely at the end of the season when he hits 140 innings, when they might really need him for a playoff run, they got some limited contribution at the start of the season. And as for a low pitch count starter, he'll probably be up to 75-80 pitches the next start, 90-95 the one after that, and by the third or fourth start (which will be, what, two weeks?) he'll be a ~100 pitch starter, like most young pitchers.

I think the mistake is to swtich mid season. Decide if you want him as a starter for 2008 and then proceed accordingly. They blew their chance to stretch him out as a starter when it didn't count and now they have a crappy, low pitch count starter for a few weeks/months while also losing one of their best relievers. Yes, they need another starter, but this is the worst of both worlds, IMO.

Concur. I thought the best way to ease him into the inning load of being a starter would be to let him go more innings in relief rather than do a half-year starter thing. 120 innings or so of Joba in relief would lock down a lot of wins.

120 innings or so of Joba in relief would lock down a lot of wins.

this makes no sense to me - if they're trying to stretch him out to be a starter, they would have to space out his appearances to give him appropriate rest. Therefore, you would have a guy pitching 3 innings every 4 days or something, not the lockdown everyday 8th-inning short reliever everybody loves. Would he really have preserved enough wins that way?

I think the mistake is to swtich mid season. Decide if you want him as a starter for 2008 and then proceed accordingly.

There is attention on this because he is a Yankee, but Zambrano started in the pen and became a starter, Santana too.

I think they are being too careful with the pitch count, but whatever. This needed to happen.

I love Damon, but whenever I play free association with his picture, "simian" is what comes to mind.

I'm not sure I can find a great match picture-wise, but I always think of Patsy.

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/writers/frank_deford/12/27/frank/p1_damon.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9a/Gilliam_as_Patsy.jpg/200px-Gilliam_as_Patsy.jpg

120 innings or so of Joba in relief would lock down a lot of wins.

"Let's pitch prospect X for more innings than any reliever throws these days" is pretty similar to "my team should sign Barry Bonds." It's an argument for which one can make a reasonable case, but it also betrays a fundamental misapprehension of reality. Ain't gonna happen.

I think the mistake is to swtich mid season. Decide if you want him as a starter for 2008 and then proceed accordingly.

There is attention on this because he is a Yankee, but Zambrano started in the pen and became a starter, Santana too.

I think they are being too careful with the pitch count, but whatever. This needed to happen.

I agree he should be a starter. I don't recall the details on Z and Johan, but did they switch from the pen to starting midseason? If so and it worked well (that year) then I'd reconsider. My recollection, poor, is that they switched over an off season.

Santana switched midseason - see 2003: 45 G, 18 starts, moved to the rotation for good at the beginning of July. That was the year that BP went "Free Johan" crazy.

recollection incorrect. johan bounced back and forth between the pen and starting in 2002 and started the 2003 in the pen again. He started 1 game in May, 2 games in June, 4 games in July and finished the year as a permanent starter.

2002 -g -ip -k -era
reliever: 14 33 48 2.67
starter: 13 74.2 89 3.13

2003 -g -ip -k -era
reliever: 27 48 60 3.56
starter: 18 110 109 2.85

zambrano was similar but different, he pitched sporadically out of the bullpen through June of 2002, then was moved into the rotation permanently to start July

In 2002, Zambrano pitched in 32 games, started 16 of them.

In 2003, Santana pitched in 45 games, and started 18 of them.

Who cares what Damon thinks? Most veterans would trade every top prospect in the farm system for a three month contribution by an aging veteran.

what? they started him in the bullpen to keep his inning limit down for the entire season - rather than shut him down completely at the end of the season when he hits 140 innings, when they might really need him for a playoff run, they got some limited contribution at the start of the season.

Is it healthy for a 22-year-old pitcher to switch from starting to relieving and back to starting again within the same calendar year? I'm not saying it's not - just wondering.

But I don't see what's so magical about 140 innings, as opposed to 150 or 160 or 170 or 180. Nevertheless, if they want him to be a starter and that's the innings limit they've set, they should have just stretched him out in spring training and then shut him down after July. The Red Sox were willing to hold Bucholz back from the playoffs.

This way, the Yankees are yo-yo'ing him around, creating a spectacle, and conceding games in the process: the Blue Jays toyed with him the other day, waiting out pitches because they knew he was on a limit. The Yankees shot themselves in the foot by starting him under those conditions, against a division rival, against Roy Halladay. They should just stretch him out in the minors at this point rather than having him start under those conditions.

At least he got a standing ovation, though, and tipped his cap after pitching a poor 2.1 innings. Nothing like putting Jobamania ahead of the goals of the team.

Thanks for the clarification.

But I don't see what's so magical about 140 innings,

He threw 100 (and change) last year, and the Yankees don't want their young pitchers going up more than 40 innings in a season.

He threw 100 (and change) last year, and the Yankees don't want their young pitchers going up more than 40 innings in a season.

So they should have just started him for 140 innings and shut him down. Instead, they've engaged in silliness and have hurt themselves because of it.

In 2003, Santana pitched in 45 games, and started 18 of them.

And if memory serves, some of those starts were spot starts and Johan blew everybody away. Then Joe Mays would come back and Johan would return to long relief.

So they should have just started him for 140 innings and shut him down. Instead, they've engaged in silliness and have hurt themselves because of it.

You can keep saying it is silly over and over, but you aren't saying why, except they lost his first start. What does shutting Joba down in July do? Why not have him help some in the beginning of the year, and have him start at the end of the year?

there is historical precedent for this.

there is historical precedent for this.

Yeah. I don't get all the fuss. This kind of thing goes on all the time in MLB. The fretting about it has gotten silly. The Jays didn't swing the bats because Joba was wild. Rich Harden has had starts when he was on obviously low pitch counts and teams didn't just stand there with the bats on their shoulders hoping to see Lenny DiNardo as soon as possible. If Joba was throwing strikes the Jays would have swung the bats.

I read yesterday that Farnsworth is like 2.70 (ERA) or so in the 7th and whacked out sucky in the 8th.


JC, this year or for his career? If it's this year, I wouldn't read into it at all. If for his career - maybe it has some meaning...

You can keep saying it is silly over and over, but you aren't saying why, except they lost his first start.

Uh, yes. That's the reason why, and I said it above in #31: they're sacrificing games right now. It's not just that they lost, but the way that they lost. It was utterly predictable that the Jays were going to take pitches and try to drive him from the game very early.

What does shutting Joba down in July do? Why not have him help some in the beginning of the year, and have him start at the end of the year?

Because in between the "helping" -- as a reliever and then once he finishes transitioning back to a starter -- he is hurting. The Yankees are hurting themselves in games right now as he transitions (building up his stamina and using more of his pitches -- at the major league level -- from reliever to starter.

This isn't spring training. But the Yankees are treating it as such. That's why I'm saying it's silly.

So, it costs them 2 games until he is fully strectched, but you don't want it to cost him 3 games, you would rather shut him down for 3 months?

Uh, yes. That's the reason why, and I said it above in #31: they're sacrificing games right now. It's not just that they lost, but the way that they lost. It was utterly predictable that the Jays were going to take pitches and try to drive him from the game very early.

The guy who backed Joba up went 3 and a third and allowed a run.

Wouldn't it be more fair to say that they lost because their pen gave up 6 runs in the seventh? Or more fair to say they lost at least in part because they were facing one of the best pitchers in the game?

It's possible if Chamberlain was starting all year he would have pitched the 7th inning, but no lock.

You really think it would be a good idea for them to just start him at the beginning of the year and shut him down after 140 IP? For a team that is intending to play deep into October? There is about 0% chance that would have happened if Chamberlain was pitching well and the Yankees were contending.

Edit: What sj said; if they follow your plan and just shut him down after 140 IP, then who are you handing his spot in the rotation over to and how is that any less "sacrificing games"?

I read yesterday that Farnsworth is like 2.70 (ERA) or so in the 7th and whacked out sucky in the 8th.

Don't tell Michael Kay. He'll spend the next two weeks asking his color men 20,000 times why this would be.

Edit: What sj said; if they follow your plan and just shut him down after 140 IP, then who are you handing his spot in the rotation over to and how is that any less "sacrificing games"?

It's not "my plan" to shut him down after 140. I would have him go 180 and then shut him down.

But, yes, I think it's better to just have him go 140 and shut him down than fool around like this.

Well now all of these Primer folks with their heads in a Sprit Sheet Al who have never plait the game they can not understand why for a reliefer it matters is it the 7th or the 8th well its simple. In the 7th inning as you know from Time Immaterial there has always been a song sung now in the early days it was Tessie or Run for the Roundhouse Nellie He Cant Corner You There or Jo Jo Dimaggio and then later on in history Its a Beautiful Day for a Ball Game or Take Me Out to the Ball Game by Harry Kiri or Meet the Mets or during the 1960s they used to hold hands and sing Where Have All the Flowers Gone and There But For Fortune. Now a days we sing God Bless America and Cotton Eyed Joe and Who Put the Dogs Out but any way in the 7th they sure as hell sing Al and that is the big Deferens. Now if you are a reliefer and your job is the 6th you just throw and if your job is the 8th you just throw but if it is the top of the Seventh you are worried am I in voice and can I remember the words and What Would They Do If I Sang Out of Tune and if its the bottom you are doing a post Morton of your singing performance and sometimes you forget where the plate is at least I have so that is why Ozzie Guillen has a new Roll for me which is Second Out of the Third Inning Guy.

I hope that's satire, Jack.

Run for the Roundhouse Nellie He Cant Corner You There

Yet again, Jack Keefe shows why he is the finest poster at BBTF. Well played sir.