I think we all slept better last night, huh?

I was happy to see Damon, Abreu, and Cano show signs that they're out of their slumps. Let's hope eight or nine hitters peak for the next couple of games.

Who is Julian Tavarez?

Things I really liked from last night:

- Myers finally does what he was brought here for
- Krazy Kyle finally does what he was brought here for
- As you mentioned, Wang looked subpar and STILL held the best team in baseball in check.
- A-Rod continues to hit well off the team whose fanbase will forever mock him
- Damon snaps out of it
- Cano snaps out of it

Overall just a nice, feel-good win over a team who we all KNOW we're better than but so far haven't been able to prove it...

Definitely a satisfying win in a lot of ways.
Even though he generally seems oblivious to the score and situation, having a lead seemed to help Wang work through it last night. The cushion allowed him to stick to his alternative gameplan.

Now, what are we going to get from Moose tonight? Will the wind blow in his preferred direction? If not, can he adjust?

Girardi made an alarming (though carefully worded) observation about the team on Kay's show yesterday: they've been losing because they've been stuck in a certain gear, and can't seem to adjust.
Ballplayers tend to emphasize consistency in their approach. Girardi was suggesting that they need to tinker in order to find a solution.

Wang's change of approach last night was a shining example of the type of adjustments the Yanks need to keep making to fight their way back into the race.

Can Rain Man Mussina go with the flow? Can he show the Red Sox something they aren't expecting?

Tim Marchman probably should have saved today's piece for a rainy day in Yankeeland, but it's still a compelling read:

http://www.nysun.com/article/54945

Now, let's cut the lead to 8.5, Moose!

2 I wasn't particularly thrilled with Myers or Farnsworth.

If I remember correctly, Myers missed where Posada was setting up low and outside, and the ball went low and in the zone. Ortiz would send that ball to New Rochelle 9 times out of 10.

Two of Farnsworth's outs were to the warning track. I think they were the longest hit balls of the night for the Sox. Farns got lucky.

3 Mussina will be pitching on five days' rest. How can you possibly expect him to function under conditions like that?

Well I'm feeling better; whether or not anyone looked sharp or not, what matters is the Ws.

"If Giambi, who has never failed a drug test, admits that he used steroids in 2005 or later, something he is unlikely to do, he could be retroactively punished. Jason Grimsley, a pitcher with the Arizona Diamondbacks, was suspended for 50 games after telling federal investigators in 2006 that he had used steroids and human growth hormone."

I thought Grimsely was caught receiving a package containing HGH. So effectively he was caught with a banned substance which led to the 50 game suspension, not for having told anyone about it. Correct?

And I'm against retroactive punishments.

2 not complaining, but Myers was brought here simply to pitch to Ortiz and nothing else really (except for maybe a spot start against the Mets lol) and all he did last night was give up a big fat double!

5 and we haven't factored in the tree pollen count!, nor the consequences of applying shaving cream with his left hand! the morning after his last bullpen session.

4 That's one helluva pull. Giambi only got as far as Mt. Vernon...

Probably just my own quirks, but i honestly felt more satisfied by the win Sunday night. I'm not sure why, but anybody else?

Meanwhile, if the Angels would pick up all of Giambi's salary + send back Jose Molina and middling prospects, and the Yanks had a deal for Helton in place (minus some salary) involving Farnswacker (and Mghjfk please too) and similiar middling prospects, don't they have to pull the trigger?

8 The pencil lead must be 2-1/4 when doing the crosswords, of course...

4 Farnsy kept it in the park, bottom line.

After what he's been prone to in the past, are you honestly THAT picky about the way he got his outs?

Man I'd hate to lose Giambi. I've gotten used to having him around.

10 I'd feel very bad for Molina in the clubhouse if that kind of trade went down.

6 That was the commish using the best interests of baseball clause. I have to assume it was the combination of the package and the comments.

On Giambi, recall this isn't the first time he's admitted to something. I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't the secrecy of his gand jury testimony be called into question if he's making public statements along the same lines?

10 the Sunday night victory was sweet, but you have to wonder if it had more to do with Clippard URPing the Mets hitters.

Last night was far from perfect: Jeter's error, Farnswacker's shakiness.

To me, the thing that made last night's game so encouraging: five of the six runs were scored with two outs. Big runs that helped Wang, and maybe rattled the Sox.

12 New name for Farns: "Deep-fly Ky"

16 I still don't see how you can call it 'shakiness' considering it was the meat of the order of the BEST TEAM IN BASEBALL, people.

15 You serious? Why?

Meanwhile, he is terrible and old but he's at least a small step up from Nieves. All depends if they pick up all of Giambi's contract. Figgins would also be a nice throw in even as he might have seen better days.

7 Ortiz got a sac fly against Myers. The double was of Wang. Papi had both RBI for the Sox last night.

15 Admitted what? "I was wrong for doing that stuff." Who said anything about steroids?

18 I'll give you that, pistol, it was the meat of the order, and he kept it in the park. I'm a Farnswacker supporter around here, but his "Look, no net!" performances are exhausting.

Re: Manny's single in the first- I was beyond stunned that it got thru. I know Derek was playing in the hole, but it was 25 feet to the left of the 2B bag…that dish wasn't even worthy of being called Pasta Divingjetah, it was completely unthawed- Pasta Frozenjetah…
Udder den dat, I was happy overall.

10 No, I was more satisfied by last night's win. Once, it's just a nice win; two in a row, it means a little more. Plus, beating the Mets is nice, but beating the Red Sox is essential.

As for the trade speculation: that's one helluva lot of ifs.

23 Yuck, I hate Pasta Frozenjeter. Too damn cold.

21 Meh - context is everything. He apologized for mistakes. He admitted to stuff. But most certainly he was honest in that grand jury box. I think the only question (from having watched enough Perry Mason, then Matlock, then LA Law, then Law and Order): under what conditions can that testimony be unsealed?

10 No, because Helton's contract is worse than Giambi's. The advantage to Giambi's deal is that, after next year, its over. Helton's runs until 2011 (total cost - $73.5M, including $4.6M buyout of 2012). Giambi will cost $21M in '08 plus a $5M buyout of '09.

Add in the huge advantage Giambi would give the Angels - the OBP and SLG bat they desperately need - and I say no.

15 Considering the testimony has already been leaked? No.

This whole Giambi issue is a non-issue to me. Its not like this is new news. That MLB is treating it that way suggests that Seligula is looking for a way to distract attention away from the much bigger name (Bonds) and the issue that's been causing Seligula much grief - the breaking of Aaron's home run record.

MLB up to its old garbage.

One last thought (i hope for the sake of work): I love Jorge's comments and the red ass we saw with the terrible call at 1B last night. Doesn't this team need some red ass? Clemens will provide it right away in the rotation (whereas he didn't his first two years in pinstripes).

But who provides the red ass in the lineup? if it's going to be anyone it will be Jorge.

But when ws the last time we've seen Jeter get tossed? Sure, he cheers good things, but as the captain, where's his fire? I've seen more from Arod and I'm convinced he's had it programmed in.

12 An out's an out, of course, but his performance certainly wasn't something you'd count on having a similar result again.

Farns got lucky, period.

27 Look at it this way:
Helton = 90 million
Giambi = 40 million
Farns = 8 million
Mgfdhj = 1 million

And what if the Rox throw in 10 million?

That's Helton for only 30 more million
and apply that for the three years (2009, 2010, and 2011) they'd need a 1B any ways. Even an old Helton - wouldn't he be worth that on the open market?

BTW: Helton is actually making 16.6 million this year vs 21 million for Giambi, So over this year and next year they'd be saving 10 million.

15 It was leaked but does that make it admissible?

15,26 Grand jury testimony is supposed to remain sealed. It being leaked is a crime, even if reporters don't go to jail for reporting it. Dunno about how it could be unsealed -- most likely it would take the consent of the US attorney (it's a federal case) and the witness. Otherwise, I don't see how someone could have an adverse action based upon illegally leaked GJ testimony. If Selig did try to suspend Jason, all Jason would need to do is get a court order restraining Selig from suspending him. Selig would then have to be in court, saying the reason he's suspending Jason is based, in large part, on illegally leaked testimony. I seriously doubt that a judge would allow that to happen, as it would inhibit future GJ witnesses from testifying about anything that might reflect badly upon them. Except for when you are a defendant, you are required to give testimony in a GJ proceeding, the trade off is that that is not to be held against you in the future.

1526 Grand jury testimony can be used at a subsequent trial under specific circumstances, most frequently to impeach a trial witness who testifies at odds with the testimony she gave in the grand jury. It is for this reason that the entire grand jury transcript is made available to the court and the prosecution, and the testimony of any trial witness is made available to the defense. While the contents of the testimony are confidential, the subject matter is not. That is, it would be a violation of grand jury secrecy for someone to leak the actual testimony to the public, but Giambi himself is not barred from discussing the subject matter, i.e. he can come out and admit his BALCO connections and/or steroid use without getting into trouble for violating the integrity of the grand jury.

BTW, Giambi gave that grand jury testimony in exchange for immunity from prosecution. I don't have a cite, but that's generally why people will open up to a grand jury. Giambi wasn't the prize catch - BALCO and Barry Bonds were. So the prosecutors offer Giambi immunity, and in exchange he tells them everything so they can get BALCO and Bonds. Common practice.

Thus, as long as he's done nothing illegal since then, Giambi will have no trouble with the law.

If MLB tries to go back and punish him now, its going to look awfully bad, and I think the union will raise a huge stink about it. Giambi's testimony was leaked over 3 years ago. It took the Commish's office that long to catch on?

Sorry to ramble on, but speaking as an attorney, the leaked grand jury testimony that was central to BALCO and "Game of Shadows" infuriates me.

31 32 Great stuff, thanks!

My one question still: Does his public statements, in a legal sense, unseal his GJ testimony? It that mechanism even possible as a way of tacitly granting consent?

29 Even so - you're dismissing luck? Yanks could certainly use some of that, considering all the calls that have been going against us...

34 Jim, the person who testifies in the Grand Jury can speak about his own testimony. They just usually don't want to. It's the prosecutors, their office, and the members of the grand jury themselves who cannot divulge what was said in the grand jury room.

20 (how do I get that link setup so its blue and underlined?) You're right, it was a sacrifice and an RBI - I guess better than a double in that situation. I must be flashing back to one of those times that he was brought in just for Ortiz and gave up a big hit.

Anybody have Myer's numbers against Ortiz? I'm also curious as to how many pitches he threw all of last year and how many of them were to Ortiz?

30 Aside from all the other conditionals in your proposal, you'd have to get Giambi to waive his NTC. That would probably mean giving him an extension, and do you think LA of Anaheim of California of the United States would be willing to do that?

So, besides the obvious bad luck (hamstrings, batted balls breaking pitchers, balls bouncing out of the glove and over the fence), what do you guys think of the 2 most unlikely calls from the ump that have gone against the Yanks the last 2 days - first, MCI getting hit by a pitch and not getting the base, which while the rule states the batter must make an effort, they NEVER call it, and in this case it look like he strode and froze, not knowing how to react. And then last night, they called a ball when Wang went to his mouth to fix his fingernail. I know the rules are rules, but can anyone recall the last time either of these were called in any game, not to mention against the Yanks? Luckily neither of these hurt the winning efforts, but it sure seems like when it rains it pours.

31,32 Not too late for one of you to Jinx the other >;)

36 No, no, I understand that. The question for me is: Do public statements affect the sealed status of GJ testimony? Can they ever? Any case history here?

38 Well, King points out that Anaheim is 20 minutes from where he grew up.

42 That's only the half, JD; would Anaheim be willing to extend Giambi's contract, which you know he'd want to do if he's leaving the Yanks in this manner even if it's twenty minutes from where he grew up. (I hated where I grew up) Probably not, and they do have a little bit of sense there...

43 He might be convinced that leaving the NY spotlight would enable a fresh start, especially if it coincides with an end to his personal steroid saga.

Probably wouldn't hurt if someone pointed out his current inflated contract comes close to fraud and that the Yanks paid for a few seasons where he recovered from his "mistakes" and "stuff".

If he's so sorry, let him prove it.

41 From my understanding (my evidence class was a long time ago & I don't practice) the answer is no. Jason can talk about his past steroid use, but basically the testimony itself stays sealed.

Essentially, all Selig has to go on is Jason's old crypto-apology and ambiguous USA Today statement.

40 Jinx on the Red Sox.

37 Put the post number in brackets. [ # ]

44 I hear you, but Gene Orza probably doesn't. At any rate, No one is going to let up on Giambi now, even if he's not on the Yanks. They'll stop when he joins Jeremy in relative obscurity, but his name will live on as a cautionary tale in one end of the spectrum of PEDs and how to deal with the stigma if you're a star.

45 Phooey on the Red Sox.

46 thanks

47 I think a no-trade is strict negotiating leverage and has no monetary value attached. So Giambi wouldn't be giving up a measurable benefit. If anything, he'd be controlling where he goes.

That said, he could use that leverage to demand an extension. In which case, this discussion is moot. :)

Check out soxaholix. It's often pretty funny, usually at "our" expense, but today it pokes fun at the lovable tendency of RSN to, well, you'll see.
And the comments are unintentionally funny.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/35gpwh

37 This is the best I could do: It looks like Myers threw a total of 529 pitches last year. 40 of those pitches were to Ortiz. Ortiz was 2 for 9 with 1 HR, 1BB and 2K.

I really don't mean to be a downer (sometimes), but Moose has yet to show he belongs in a big three of anything. Tonight is a big start for him.

52 I'm surprised, I would have thought a much higher percentage of his pitches were to Ortiz. So used to seeing him brought out to pitch to Ortiz only and then back to the bullpen for someone for Ramirez. Of course, last year during the Boston Massacre we just had whoever was pitching walk him since they did not have anyone else who could do anything to move him around the bases.

Numbers aren't bad against Ortiz (.222) but its a smaller sample than I thought - of course that HR was probably a real stinker when he's brought in for just one batter!

50 A little moot can go a long way >;)

51 Their snark can be clever in a provincial sense sometimes, but Knuckles' Bronx Comix and Mike Plugh's work on COY is a lot more clever purely from an artist's perspective. I'll be accused of bias, but who cares?

35 I am definitely discounting luck.

If there's a market for that guy, he should get the boot. If he's not going to stand up Ortiz/Ramirez/whoever, or literally beat the crap out of opposing pitchers, I don't see what his value is considering Bruney's in the bullpen.

If the Rangers keep up the sucking by the ASB, maybe the Yanks could offer Farns and one of the rookie pitchers not named Hughes for Teixeira. Their bullpen doesn't need much help, but I think they'll take whatever they can get as far as starters are concerned.

Helton - forget it.

56 Hey, I never said he's the second coming - my only point was that he did his job, which was to get outs.

Sad to say, but I was more nervous about Mo potentially coming in than I was for Bruney or Farnswacker.

54 Actually I missed one AB, the total pitch count to Ortiz should have been 43 instead of 40. Surprisingly, it looks like Myers actually got better against Ortiz as the year wore on. The homer was in the first AB (May 1) and the single was in the 2nd AB (May 10). The remaining AB's were all outs (Ortiz did draw a walk in his final appearance vs. Myers on Sept 17).

I will stop rooting for the Yankees if they push to void Giambi's contract. It's a load of crap.

It's highly disingenuous of the Yanks to try and void Giambi's contract, considering they agreed to remove a clause about steriod use from the contract during negotiations. Like that's not a red flag!

And Cashman had the gall to say, on national TV, that it's nobody's fault but the individual players who used - the organization is blameless. I lost some respect for him then.

60 What did you expect him to say on nat'l tv?

Let me preface this remark by saying that I know I'm hard to please. I have very high standards.

That said, I must confess to being troubled by the fact that the team's victories these past couple of days have been built on the longball.

I'll feel good about this team when they can win a one-run game without benefit of the longball.

Say, a 5-4 game where the team manages to put together a bunch of singles.

I just feel that reliance on the longball is a losing strategy, because ultimately the longball is unreliable.

It essentially means that when the team's in a slump they score nothing, rather than managing to scratch out 3 or 4 runs on fumes.

I'm pleased with the victories, of course, but I'd really like to see some more diversified run production.

Cano's two-out opposite-field hit was huge. I want to see more of that.

57 I know what you mean. That's because when the others fail, it's just par for the course. When Mo fails, it signals the End of Days.

62 i think that's a shallow way of looking at the game last night.

i'd say only one of the runs we scored last night wasn't what i would call manufactured and that was giambi's bomb.

a-rod's shot? that was manufactured. damon stole 2nd and then clearly distracted wakefield into hanging the next pitch to a-rod.

we constantly ran on wakefield and mirabelli and that made a huge difference ... jeter's rbi single was another instance where damon's speed bothered wakefield into making a bad pitch

abreu's SB manufactured the situation where cano could come through with the triple

i'd say last night's game was exactly what you describe yourself as looking for ...

about the only thing that went wrong with our aggressive gameplan on the bases was that a-rod somehow managed to forget how to steal bases after stealing 2nd base.

His lead on that double steal attempt was pathetic, not only did he not get a decent distance from the bag, he also didn't manage to get a running start ... essentially he acted like he was trying to steal third like he was trying to steal 2nd against a pitcher with a good move

not a big deal, but there was no way he should have been thrown out there

64 You're right, I don't mean to discount all that. That was great.

My point is I'd like to see the team win without hitting any homeruns.

Zero.

Plus, I was also referring to the Mets series, not just last night.

But perhaps it's just a quibble.

Your point is taken.

66 FWIW, the Yankees are 5-12 this year when they do not hit a home run (15-11 when they hit at least one). By comparison, the Red Sox are 7-12 when they do not hit a home run (13-2 with at least one homer).

Also, in the Yankees' five homerless wins, all of them against the Rangers or Mariners, the Yankees have scored an astounding 36 runs.

66 Jeez, I don't think there's anything wrong with hitting homeruns. They certainly didn't "rely" on them last night - it's not like they were sitting back and waiting for someone to hit one.

They played aggressive baseball, and homeruns only make that better.

59-60 I absolutely 1000% agree. Of all the suspected PED users (and the hundreds not suspected), Giambi is the only one to show some character. This is pure scape-goating and sour grapes because MLB hasn't been able to nail Bonds.

I've heard Cash speak 3 times (on radio) and he seems very honest and thoughful in his comments. But his 'what did MLB/ownership do' statement was horrific. I too lost a lot of respect for him because of that.

An aside... there are a number of teams that were further behind, and later in the season, and still made the PS. Yes... we are looking at a serious uphill battle. But we should not underestimate this team.

62 & 64 - you both read my mind and I agree with the points and counterpoints you both made (is that possible?).

I really thought they played some ballsy (pardon the pun) baseball last night. I'm glad that Giambi did his thing, I was thrilled that Cano had that triple, and A-Rod's home run was ssssssweeeeeet! I'm glad that Johnny D & Abreu are showing signs of a pulse. I think (hope) that Matsui was just having an off night.

All in all - I was happy with the game, but until I can get to a point where I don't get that "oh no" feeling in my system when the opposing team has even just one baserunner (oh yeah, RISP much last night?) that's when I'll be able to enjoy their wins more!

And even better news - I just found out I'm going to Friday nights game. I'm being given (yes, given...not paying for) 2 tickets about 20 rows behind home plate! WOOHOOOOOOOOO!!! Oh boy! I'm a happy girl! Who'll be pitching...it's Jered Weaver for LosAnaheim I think - so, will the rookie Clippard be pitching on Friday? Whatever - I'm going to a game! I'm going to drink $9 beer and eat $5 hot dogs and like it!

;-)

59 Steeeve - What if they trade him, and he waives his no-trade agreement on the condition that the PED questions from the Yankees and and Angels are washed away?

Meanwhile, you think it's fair that Giambi is making more than Jeter? You think that's based on his honest capabilities?

71 What does fair have to do with it?

72 Absolutely nothing. :)

71 Jim Doan, I won't stop rooting for the Yankees if they trade Giambi. If they can trade him, and replace his production, go for it.

As for the second part of your question...I really have no idea what you are asking me.

Do I think it's fair that Giambi makes more than Jeter? I have no idea, nor do I care how much either of them make. It's monoploly money as far as I'm concerned. They could pay Mike Myers a million billion dollars and I wouldn't give a rat's ass. I really struggle to understand fans' preoccupation with players salaries.

Unless the contract is so bad that it hampers the orgainzation's ability to compete, I really have no interest in how much guys get paid.

As for the thing about honesty, I don't know that baseball players get paid for being honest. And I wasn't aware that MLB's CBA had a "fairness" clause in it, with regard to player compensation.

Now, I may have misunderstood your question, or you may have been addressing the second part of your question to someone else. So forgive me if I spoke out of turn.

67 Thanks for that. I guess that's my point; I'd rather see them win without the longball.

And you're right, they didn't sit back and wait.

68 70 Indeed, they did. And hats off to 'em for that. Maybe my feeling about reliance on the longball went back to the second game against the Mets?

I think my broader point is that I'd rather see a slump broken up by a profusion of opposite-field hits than by a new orgie of homeruns.

I may be overstating the point, though, so I'll leave it at that. I'm really just offering a feeling I had a couple times over the last couple of days, it wasn't meant to be offered as a scientific truth. That said, my intution is strong so I have to believe it has some foundation, even if I can't readily see what it is.

I'll try to monitor it, though, and maybe I can better articulate my point in future.