BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Yankees’ Sabathia headed to disabled list

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Yankees’ Sabathia headed to disabled list

CC Sabathia will be placed on the 15-day disabled list with stiffness in his left elbow, Yankees manager Joe Girardi told reporters after Saturday’s victory in Toronto. However, Girardi said the team’s concern was “pretty low” for his long-term status, tweets Marc Carig of the Star-Ledger.

Earlier Saturday, the New York Daily News’ Mark Feinsand reported Sabathia was dealing with soreness in his elbow following Wednesday’s start in Detroit and that the team was considering pushing back his next start, Monday against the Rangers. After the game, it was revealed that Sabathia first experienced the discomfort in his elbow following his previous start, Aug. 3 against the Mariners.

“Right now, it’s a low-level concern,” a source told Feinsand. “Long-term, it’s not a big concern.”

Thanks to Los.

Repoz Posted: August 11, 2012 at 05:59 PM | 47 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: August 11, 2012 at 06:32 PM (#4206453)

Considering how recent his last DL stay was, it doesn't feel like a low level concern.

2. Renegade (((JE)))

Posted: August 11, 2012 at 06:39 PM (#4206455)

Three, two, one ... Derek Lowe looks good as a Yankee.

3. hardrain Posted: August 11, 2012 at 06:44 PM (#4206456)

Phelps will make the next start while CC gets ready for the playoffs.

4. bfan Posted: August 11, 2012 at 06:54 PM (#4206457)

"After starting 6-2, Lowe was 2-8 with an 8.80 ERA in 12 starts since May 26."

Not unlike the end of his season with the Braves in 2011. I do not think Lowe has much left, but with that great Yankee offense, maybe he can win some 9-8 games.

5. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 11, 2012 at 07:10 PM (#4206469)

1 - last one was hamstring, this is elbow; that's an involved connection.

6. shoewizard Posted: August 11, 2012 at 08:19 PM (#4206514)

too bad. forget 300 wins. when is the next time we will see a guy retire with 3500 innings and a 120 or higher ERA+ ?

halladay has almost 300 innings just to get to 3000. verlander isnt even halfway to 3000 innings.

CC has career 125 era+. even if he gets to 3500 innings decline will most like drag him under 120.

Clemens Maddux Johnson were the last of a breed me thinks.

7. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 11, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4206520)

Yeah. The last of a breed that supposedly became extinct sometime around Maddux' rookie year.

EDIT: or maybe Johnson's.

8. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:06 PM (#4206546)

EDIT: or maybe Johnson's

Walter or Randy?

9. rconn23 Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:08 PM (#4206547)

So he's going to miss two starts and his shot at 300 wins is blown? Whaa?

10. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:39 PM (#4206555)

too bad. forget 300 wins. when is the next time we will see a guy retire with 3500 innings and a 120 or higher ERA+ ?

Well, there have been only 15 such guys since 1901, 11 since 1920. It's not like they were ever common.

11. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:39 PM (#4206556)

Yeah. The last of a breed that supposedly became extinct sometime around Maddux' rookie year.

EDIT: or maybe Johnson's.

or maybe Mussina's

12. bunyon Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:49 PM (#4206560)

Well, I don't think we've seen the last great pitcher. But I have to say that the aces at the moment don't compare to what we got used to in the 90s and 00s. But those guys are inner circle, greater than great types. It's no criticism to say someone isn't Maddux or Clemens.

13. Dan Posted: August 11, 2012 at 09:58 PM (#4206565)

Mussina has to be one of the most underrated players among guys who had extended time as Yankees. Contrast him with Andy Pettitte, and it's really quite remarkable.

14. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 11, 2012 at 11:30 PM (#4206616)

Mussina has to be one of the most underrated players among guys who had extended time as Yankees. Contrast him with Andy Pettitte, and it's really quite remarkable.

except..except..Moose's years with the Yankees corresponded EXACTLY to their mini drought of world championships--they won the year before he joined them and won the year after he retired. Silly, of course, but some people take that serious

15. TVerik, who wonders what the hell is "Ansky" Posted: August 11, 2012 at 11:34 PM (#4206618)

Over the course of CC's Yankee career, if there's ever a "good" time to miss a few starts it's now. The AL East isn't over, but I still don't take the Orioles as a likely division winner. The Sox are out of the division race. The Rays are hanging around, but the lead over them is pretty substantial.

16. Jim Wisinski

Posted: August 12, 2012 at 03:05 AM (#4206659)

17. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 12, 2012 at 03:42 AM (#4206663)

The Yankees' lead is six games, not small by any means but they still play head-to-head at least six more times and a lot can happen in 50 games. Odds are obviously good for the Yankees but the Rays are finally getting sorta healthy, Cobb and Shields have really turned it around recently, and I think their chances of making another late-season charge are pretty good.

Yeah, I'm not taking the division for granted. It's a good lead, as good as can be hoped for. But with CC down for a couple of starts at least, it's time to keep an eye on Tampa, and even Baltimore. They've both hung around long enough that they could make a huge push with a good showing while the CC-less Yanks finish with Toronto, and then face the Rangers, Red Sox and White Sox.

18. Dan Posted: August 12, 2012 at 06:50 AM (#4206669)

The Rays have Longoria back in the lineup too. Even as a DH he's a huge upgrade for that offense.

19. Ray (RDP)

Posted: August 12, 2012 at 07:26 AM (#4206671)

Eric Chavez is having a sneaky good season filling in for ARod. He's turned back the clock eight years. Though he's not playing full time. I'm actually surprised that he's been able to get 200 PA.

20. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 08:56 AM (#4206684)

they still play head-to-head at least six more times

Assuming that this is just a two week thing, Sabathia won't miss any starts against Baltimore or Tampa. And of course, the Rays and O's still play each other six more times too. That's going to help the Yankees one way or the other.

Eric Chavez is having a sneaky good season filling in for ARod. He's turned back the clock eight years. Though he's not playing full time. I'm actually surprised that he's been able to get 200 PA.

I think almost everybody is surprised that he's been able to get to 200 PA (216 to be exact). And 194 of them against RHP, for a nifty .309/.371/.571 line. He's struggled against lefties in the past, but he's pretty much useless against them now, so he hasn't quite turned back the clock. Still makes a long side of a platoon though.

21. shoewizard Posted: August 12, 2012 at 09:33 AM (#4206694)

when i wrote forget 300 wins i meant forget about that as a milestone. i think we will see a 300 game winner before we see another guy finish up with 3500 innings and a 120 or better ERA +

22. Rally Posted: August 12, 2012 at 09:40 AM (#4206695)

"except..except..Moose's years with the Yankees corresponded EXACTLY to their mini drought of world championships--they won the year before he joined them and won the year after he retired. Silly, of course, but some people take that serious"

Don Mattingly has the same problem. Well, not exactly, they lost the WS in 81, but didn't get back until the year after Donnie retired, which they won. It's a real shame because despite being a shadow of his former self, Donnie hit the crap out of the ball in his only postseason series.

23. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:03 AM (#4206716)

Mussina has to be one of the most underrated players among guys who had extended time as Yankees. Contrast him with Andy Pettitte, and it's really quite remarkable.

This was an eye-opener for me. I never knew just how much better Mussina was.

24. KronicFatigue Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM (#4206717)

Don Mattingly has the same problem.

I actually think he has the exact opposite thing going for him. He's the poster boy for my generation. His excellence, tied squarely in with the team's mediocrity (by Yankees' standards) is his legacy. Even his injury-induced decline is somehow poetic.

25. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4206718)

when i wrote forget 300 wins i meant forget about that as a milestone. i think we will see a 300 game winner before we see another guy finish up with 3500 innings and a 120 or better ERA +

Well, yes. 300 game winners are (slightly) more common. As I pointed out, there have been only 11 of the latter since 1920, while there have been 12 300 game winners.

26. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:14 AM (#4206719)

Another wow (and kinda off-topic, but came up when considering Mussina's HOF chances): Is there a legitimate reason Ron Santo made it and not Dick Allen?

27. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM (#4206728)

Santo being considerably better isn't sufficient reason?

28. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 12, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4206743)

Santo being considerably better isn't sufficient reason?

Statistically? That's highly up for debate.

29. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4206752)

Santo and Allen were both one and done with the BBWAA (Santo got 15 votes, Allen 14). As for Santo being considerably better, that is all defense (actually more than all defense: Allen had 4.6 more oWAR in 2000 fewer PA). I could be wrong, but I don't think the Veteran's committee voted Santo in for his glove. The composition of the nominating and voting committees can be found here.

Also, I think that we have to separate the question of "Is there a legitimate reason Ron Santo made it and not Dick Allen?" from the question of "Is there a legitimate reason Ron Santo should have made it and not Dick Allen?" While the short answer to both may be a simple "yes," the reasons behind the answer are likely quite different.

30. Joey B. is counting the days to Trea Turner Posted: August 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4206753)

So it turns out that you can pull fat after all?

31. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: August 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4206760)

Statistically? That's highly up for debate.

It really isn't. Time spent with that big leather thing on the left hand counts.

32. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: August 12, 2012 at 01:18 PM (#4206779)

Santo was a great fielder, Allen was an indifferent one. I think that's the main difference.

Also, Santo was a nice guy, and Allen was . . . well, a dick.

33. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 01:21 PM (#4206783)

Time spent with that big leather thing on the left hand counts.
...
Santo was a great fielder, Allen was an indifferent one.

Again, that's an argument that Santo deserved to be inducted and Allen doesn't. But I don't believe that it's got much to do with why Santo actually was finally elected and Allen almost certainly never will be.

34. The District Attorney Posted: August 12, 2012 at 01:27 PM (#4206785)

I actually think that's incorrect; I bet Allen is eventually.

And I do think that HOF voters do factor in defense a little bit (especially up the middle, but even at the corners). And they certainly understand that a 1B, the position at which Allen played more games and I suspect is generally "considered" to be, has a lot less defensive value than a 3B.

But, just to expand on #32, the main reason Allen has not been inducted is because he was a Milton Bradley-esque crazypants.

35. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 01:44 PM (#4206791)

I do think that HOF voters do factor in defense a little bit

Which ones? The BBWAA who summarily dismissed both of these guys? The former vets committes that never came close to electing either one? Or the new committee that finally put Santo in? I agree with the general feeling that defense factors into the voting to some (variable) extent, but I'm just not seeing it as the determining factor in this particular comparison.

I bet Allen is eventually.

How? Under the present rules, he'll never even get on the ballot.

36. The District Attorney Posted: August 12, 2012 at 01:56 PM (#4206795)

I agree with the general feeling that defense factors into the voting to some (variable) extent, but I'm just not seeing it as the determining factor in this particular comparison.

Five Gold Gloves vs. zero is the type of discrepancy they'd deem significant ;-) And again, in this particular comparison, I think they're actually viewing Allen as more of a 1B. Surely you'd agree that matters.

How? Under the present rules, he'll never even get on the ballot.

The "present rules" of the HOF are like New Yorker cartoons. They're written in gossamer.

37. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 02:03 PM (#4206798)

I think they're actually viewing Allen as more of a 1B. Surely you'd agree that matters.

I also think that Allen is and has been viewed as a 1B, and I do agree that it matters. But considering the way that HOF voters have historically treated 3B, I'm not sure it's a disadvantage. ;-)

38. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 12, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4206805)

Which ones? The BBWAA who summarily dismissed both of these guys?

Ron Santo was on the ballot for 15 years, getting a high of 43%.

39. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 12, 2012 at 02:46 PM (#4206812)

You know, I thought something didn't seem right when I checked the voting on BB-Ref earlier. The vote totals that I quoted for Santo's and Allen's first ballot are correct, and they wee both dropped for not getting 5%. But they were both added back to the ballot in 1985. Anybody remember what the deal was with that? Also, it looks like Allen was dropped after his 14th time on the ballot even though he did not fall below 5%.

40. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 12, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4206818)

You know, I thought something didn't seem right when I checked the voting on BB-Ref earlier. The vote totals that I quoted for Santo's and Allen's first ballot are correct, and they wee both dropped for not getting 5%. But they were both added back to the ballot in 1985. Anybody remember what the deal was with that? Also, it looks like Allen was dropped after his 14th time on the ballot even though he did not fall below 5%.

1979 was the first year of the 5% rule. Prior to that, it wasn't uncommon for guys to get paltry support on their first few ballots and slowly build support. Check the vote totals for Ralph Kiner, Richie Ashburn, Lew Burdette, Ken Boyer. It took the writers a few years to get the hang of it, and vote for the deserving guys rather than the guys who had been on the ballot longer, thinking they would get to the others in a year or 2. Guys like Santo and Allen, who fell through the cracks during the transition period were re-instated in 1985.

As for Allen falling off a year early, I have no idea, other than maybe since he lost only 1 year before reinstatement, they counted that year against him.

41. cardsfanboy

Posted: August 12, 2012 at 11:07 PM (#4207019)

1979 was the first year of the 5% rule. Prior to that, it wasn't uncommon for guys to get paltry support on their first few ballots and slowly build support. Check the vote totals for Ralph Kiner, Richie Ashburn, Lew Burdette, Ken Boyer. It took the writers a few years to get the hang of it, and vote for the deserving guys rather than the guys who had been on the ballot longer, thinking they would get to the others in a year or 2. Guys like Santo and Allen, who fell through the cracks during the transition period were re-instated in 1985.

As for Allen falling off a year early, I have no idea, other than maybe since he lost only 1 year before reinstatement, they counted that year against him.

The BBWAA petitioned the Hall of Fame Board of Directors to reconsider the eligibility of Ken Boyer, Curt Flood and Ron Santo with the intention of restoring their names to the 1985 ballot.

As for the difference between Santo and Allen. Beyond the personality issues, number of times they each played more than 150 games in a season, Santo 11 times, Allen 4 times. Don't care what anyone says, that lack of seasonal durability(some of it self inflicted) hurts a player. Yes a Barry Larkin can overcome that, but not others (and I would argue that some of the people who claim they are not voting for McGwire because of the merits are using a little bit of the seasonal durability in their thinking) I think it's a minor factor in Whitakers exclusion(there are other factors, mostly being that the writers are legal retards) and it wouldn't surprise me at all if that is a big factor in the catchers not going in (and also other third baseman)

42. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: August 15, 2012 at 12:39 AM (#4208558)

Mussina has to be one of the most underrated players among guys who had extended time as Yankees. Contrast him with Andy Pettitte, and it's really quite remarkable.

This was an eye-opener for me. I never knew just how much better Mussina was.

Long time lurker, first time caller has to dispute this from the POV of a Yankee fan.

I think everyone here realizes that Mussina had a better overall career than what Pettitte’s had up to now. But what some people may not be aware of is that for their Yankee careers, they’re like separated-at-birth twins in terms of their rate stats.

Regular season, with Yankees only:
Mussina 123-72, WP .631, ERA+ 114
Pettitte 206-115, WP .642, ERA+ 115

Postseason, with Yankees only:
Mussina 5-7, 3.80 ERA
Pettitte 18-9, 3.79 ERA

Salaries, with Yankees only:
Mussina $109 M for 8 seasons, average $13,625,000
Pettitte $94,904,000 for 14 seasons, average $6,778,857

The bottom line is that Mussina was clearly the better pitcher, but he never demonstrated that superiority while wearing a Yankee uniform. And dollar for dollar, Pettitte has provided far more value to the Yanks than Mussina did, though that can be explained mostly by the years covered by their contracts.

43. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 15, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4208559)

The bottom line is that Mussina was clearly the better pitcher, but he never demonstrated that superiority while wearing a Yankee uniform. And dollar for dollar, Pettitte has provided far more value to the Yanks than Mussina did, though that can be explained mostly by the years covered by their contracts.

Of course, Mussina pitched entirely during the shitty Yankee defense era, while Pettitte conveniently missed three of the worst defensive teams the Yanks have ever run out there (05 & 06 particularly). Pettitte likely got a lot of defensive support from the late 90s teams and probably a decent amount from the 09-12 teams.

I would guess Pettitte's strength's, including not giving up flyballs and controlling the running game also probably played up on the Yanks as opposed to Mussina's. They had lousy OFers and haven't been good against the run game in what feels like Pettitte's entire career, although I'm probably exaggerating. Mussina's ability to limit BBs and miss a lot of bats obviously helped, but they would have helped every where.

I'm not sure what my point is. Basically, I will look for anything to discredit that fraud Pettitte and prop up Mussina, who was awesome.

Edit: Btw, how about CC Kuroda tonight? He ripped through a hot Texas lineup tonight and his era is 3.06. That's pretty amazing.

44. cardsfanboy

Posted: August 15, 2012 at 01:13 AM (#4208561)

Well, yes. 300 game winners are (slightly) more common. As I pointed out, there have been only 11 of the latter since 1920, while there have been 12 300 game winners.

I'm not a fan of those type of milestones. Spahn ended his career with 119 era+ after 5200 ip, after 3500 ip he had a 126 era+, and I'm sure with a pi index or just a little time I could find half a dozen more from the post 1920's that the reached that same milestone with an era+ (Carlton was over 120 when he crossed the 4000ip barrier, Niekro, Perry, Glavine, Blylevn etc.)

I just don't think a milestone could be considered a "milestone" if someday in the future it could have "no longer true". When a pitcher reaches 300 wins, he can't ever fall below that number.

45. shoewizard Posted: August 15, 2012 at 01:34 AM (#4208565)

Thats a good point CFB

Fergie Jenkins through age 35, 3553 IP 120 ERA+

Bert Blyleven's ERA+ didn't drop below 120 until his second to last season. Through first 4700 IP 121 ERA+

But those types of guys all end up makig the HOF anyway. (Although it was a close call for Bert)

I don't expect to see anyone even get over 3500 innings for a while to come. CC and Mark Buehrle maybe. But they both have over 800 innings to go to get there. No lock at all. Buehrle is the better bet among those two. CC is 1000 innings away. Doable if this injury is a blip. But it's an elbow injury. So who knows. Felix, Verlander, and Cain would all have to average 200 innings for the next 10 seasons through 2021 to get to 3500 IP.

It'll happen sooner or later I'm sure...but it's very possible that if Buehrle falters, and CC is hurt, then nobody reaches that innings plateau for another 10 years or more.

46. SoSH U at work Posted: August 15, 2012 at 01:46 AM (#4208569)

The former vets committes that never came close to electing either one? Or the new committee that finally put Santo in? I agree with the general feeling that defense factors into the voting to some (variable) extent, but I'm just not seeing it as the determining factor in this particular comparison.

Santo's failure with the previous vet's committee was not a failure of his, but of the structure of the committee and the vote. That committee was designed to not elect anyone (though Santo had the best showing). It was revised when the Hall discovered that fact, and Santo made it the first time his age group was eligible.

47. Squash Posted: August 15, 2012 at 02:44 AM (#4208572)

Another big thing Santo had up on Allen in terms of the HOF is that he stayed in a prominent position in the game and therefore in people's minds. Allen on the other hand is pretty much forgotten like a lot of the stars from his era.

A quick google search doesn't turn up much on his current whereabouts - there's an SI article from 1999 (the Brandi Chastain issue!) that said he had recently signed on as a roving instructor for the Phillies, but that's now 13 years ago (my god). I don't think it would push him over the top, but if Allen had settled in as a beloved broadcaster a la Santo (Blyleven also went the announcer route) he would have gotten face time which a guy like him needs.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Yankees’ Sabathia headed to disabled list

Reader Comments and Retorts

News

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics