This was the first game this season that I had to turn it off in the middle. After Hughes was lifted I just couldn't bear to watch anymore. I kept with it on my computer but had to change the channels. Came back to see the 8th and 9th though.

Ugh, couple that with the fact that Barcelona got knocked out by Man U yesterday and it was not a good sports day for me.

I missed the Hughes part of the game, just as well. Major attaboy to Olendorf, he kept the Yankees in the game.

What the hell was Abreu swinging at that pitch in the eighth? Low and away? Grr. I always figure on a 1 LOB per inning as a dencent stat. 13 in 9 innings is at least 4 too much, which would result in an 8-6 win rather than a 6-4 loss.

Might be time to send Hughes to SWB to get whatever straightened out, rather than have him lose his confidence. But who comes up, Rasner, Igawa?

If some sort of Hughes demotion is really on tap, then now could be the perfect time to start moving Joba into the rotation.

That is, if the team can endure not having a designated "eighth inning guy."

If the Yankees had taken Santana for Hughes and Kennedy and used position players to pitch the games Santana didn't pitch they'd be in First place today. Hughes looks utterly lost on the mound. He couldn't wait to give back the lead after the Yankees tied up the game on Cano's home run. Kennedy is even worse. What were Cashman and so many of you guys on this board thinking? First of all, this is an older team with a big payroll designed to win now. Arod, Jeter, Posada, Matsui,Giambi,Damon are all in or entering the downhill years. Pettite will be gone in one more year as will Mussina. Adding Santana would have given us a left handed ace for 5 years to complement Wang. What will we have next year?

4 No one doubted that Santana would improve the team greatly this year. The question was whether he was worth trading away multiple pitching prospects who might help the team for a longer time.

We'll see if Santana is still an ace in five years when he is 34. If he is, AND if none of the pitchers mentioned in various trade scenarios (Hughes, Wang, Santana, Joba) are toast, AND if the position players mentioned in trade (ie, Melky) are no longer productive, THEN you can come back and crow.

4 Also, using the phrase "designed to win now" and "Giambi" in the same sentence somewhat undermines the credibility of your argument.

Part of the problem with Phil is IPK ... by which I mean BOTH are a mess right now and we are (as fans) living through 'careful what you wish for' as many people were noting during the Santana debates. The 'fun' of kids is not a free ticket to the excellence of kids. It can take time AND it can fail to happen. The history of baseball is littered with pitchers of infinite promise to fail to deliver or take 3-4 years to become all right.

I suppose it is worth looking at Melky and remembering that he was gone too in any Santana deal.

I think it is fair, as Alex suggests, to be aware of a brutal schedule as a reason for slack batting, coupled with missing their two best hitters from last year AND being in a hole early on a cold night. It was a bad game, and I'm kind of amazed we actually had the tying run at the plate at the end. Yes, give Dorf credit.

Article on yahoo sports about how the Jays could urgently use Bonds, having no left handed power at all, a dreadful offense ... but they took 'five minutes' to scrap the idea.

I suppose it might be less 'collusion' than chickens coming home to roost for him but it FEELS like collusion if no one offers a lowball heavily incentive laden deal. He could refuse it, but it would erase the idea of colluding wouldn't it? (Or would someone say it was like the Torre 'negotiation' making an offer he has to refuse? "If you accept we will put a horse's head in your bed!")

If Hughes does get sent down, it should not be to AAA but to Tampa and Nardi Contreras. I'm coming around to believe there's something mechanically wrong with him, he's walking too many guys, he's all over the zone and his fastball keeps tailing off to the right like a sliced golf shot. Let Nardi have a look at him, fix him up and then rocket him back up through AA/AAA.

7 This is a team that released Frank Thomas based on less than 100 ABs and to save money on his option next year. The Jays can crow all they want about small market this and that but when you shoot yourself in the foot that much you have no complaint (also see, Morris, Matt and Pirates).

5 Monkey if you are able to take a 5 year framework and accept rebuilding, missing playoffs, you are unique among Yankeedom.

What you say fits a Billy Beane paradigm, but not this team or town. The Yanks decided they could win NOW with the kids. They might, but your views ignore the reality of the town, team, media, even us. I'm not even sure Oakland can safely say 'wait 5 years then evaluate'...

Look at the panic about being .500, and it isn't yet May. (Last time I get to say THAT! Or maybe once more before end of day!)

8 Someone on another blog noted that his next start is against Seattle, followed by an off day when his next turn comes around. Maybe he gets one more shot, then he could be skipped the following turn and sent to Tampa.

In the meanwhile (caution: dead horse stinking up the joint), I would plan to "shadow" Hughes with Joba on his next start, as part of Joba's transition to the rotation by mid-May.

7 Tommy, the 10 million for next year was and is a big deal and an utterly STUPID contract to have given. With that on the table, I can vaguely see a case for doing it early rather than obviously manipulating at-bats to keep him under the 360 or so that would trigger it. THAT would have been toxic.

You can say the idiocy was the contract not the early release, I suppose, given that they do vaguely hope their call-up kid can hit 20-25 hrs. If Thomas were a different person, willing to spot in and out, maybe keep him, but he isn't and wouldn't have been.

It isn't so much small market - they aren't actually, and are at about 100 million this year - it is dealing with a truly dumb deal made.

11 TWO dead horse references in a morning ... must be yesterday's game!

10 Maybe I am unique. I was very much looking forward to this year even if things went awry with the kids. Part of me secretly wished the team would have tanked a couple of years ago so they would have broken it up then, rather than function under the intense pressure of filling the holes and winning this season (as all dynasties in any sport seem to want to do).

The success of the late 90s was built on the ashes of the late 80s and early 90s. Now, there is no reason with team's revenue and talent core (A-Rod, Jeter, Posada-when-not-hurt) that rebuilding should have to be as long or as painful as it is for most clubs. But the rebuilding has to come some time, whether with kids or FAs.

I prefer to rebuild with kids, warts and lumps and growing pains and all. I admit that this is an emotional and aesthetic argument, not a rational position.

And indeed, as you say, perhaps I am unique.

13 : )

I missed yesterday's game and game thread, so I got to get it out of my system! Giddyup!

4 Given that the Yanks are only 2 games out of first place, I could make about 5 different "Well if the Yanks had done ______" statements that would have them in 1st place right now.

You also forget to mention that acquiring Santana would have meant trading the Yanks' best hitter. Melky leads the team in OPS+ (133), is tied for the team lead in HRs (5 - 3 less than he hit all of last year), and has been great in CF (wonder how things would have went if he, not Damon, was out there last night; I'm thinking of the 1st). As bad as Hughes has been - hey, he's only the youngest pitcher in all of MLB right now - and since we're both dealing with just one month of data, Melky's performance alone means not doing the Santana deal was the right thing.

5 10 I'll take a longterm rebuilding process if there's a real plan and its followed. As long as it isn't like 1988-1991, I will not complain.

10 " I'm not even sure Oakland can safely say 'wait 5 years then evaluate'..."

My point is that it is impossible to evaluate such a (non)trade in the short term. The absurdity of the Ken Phelps-Jay Buhner trade was not apparent within the first few months of the deal, and indeed Buhner was only a part-time player for another two years before blossoming. That trade was not bad in the summer of 1988, it was bad in 1991.

So it is with the Santana non-trade. We will not know if it is a bad trade for three or four or five years, when all of the various elements involved (Santana, Melky, Hughes, et al) can be evaluated fully. Hell, he's off to a great start, but for all we know Santana could tank this year after throwing 1100 INN over the last four years.

There's a very simple reason why the Yankees chose now to "try to win with the kids." The Yankees have at least a two year free pass with respect to on-field performance: (i) they've sold out the ballpark this year, regardless of performance, because it's the last year at the Stadium, and (ii) they'll sell out over the next year or two because of the new building north of 161st St that isn't Yankee Stadium. Ratings on YES will not suffer much under the circumstances.

Thus, if there was ever a time in history when the club could afford to take its lumps while seeing what the kids can do, it's now. Moreover, in a financial environment where fans and businesses might ordinarily restrict discretionary spending on baseball tickets, the Yankees have found a way to generate cash over the next two years without dramatically increasing payroll by adding the likes of Santana. To me, it's a welcome addition to the overall pleasure of watching the Yankees play that they have gotten smarter about the way they run their business.

Stuck in Lincoln Tunnel traffic backed up to Secaucus this morning, I observed two pigeons fornicating atop an Exxon sign. A third dirty bird perched close by warned me
problems are a multiplying.

Keep the Yankees struggles in perspective, people, and remember, Kenny Rogers weren't built in a day.

Not that Hughes has pitched that well during the day games, but apparently he has bad night vision:

http://tinyurl.com/5v3ww9

"Joe Girardi revealed after the Tigers' 6-4 victory over the Yankees that Hughes has some difficulty seeing at night, especially at Yankee Stadium. Hughes and GM Brian Cashman both confirmed the problem, but no one was quick with a remedy.

"At night things get blurry," Hughes said."

0 The clanging was Freddy's frying pan.

Also, the guy who relieved Bautista and retired Abreu was lefty Clay Rapada, who came over in the Craig Monroe deal last year. That at-bat was the first time any Yankee has faced him. He's a tall, lean lefty with a viciously deceptive hurky jerky sidearm delivery. Abreu, the Yankee lefty who is least comfortable against lefties, didn't stand a chance.

As for Hughes, Leiter and Flaherty leaned on it in the broadcast, and I strongly agree: he's not using his changeup and slider enough. He's a two-pitch pitcher right now who doesn't have the control or late movement on his fastball that he showed last year and in the minors. If those third and fourth pitches aren't good enough to use, he should go back to the minors to get them to the point that they are and fix whatever's ailing his fastball (mechanics?). If it's just a matter of kicking him in the pants and saying "use your changeup more" then Girardi and Eiland need to do that.

Above all else, however, the fans who booed him are idiots. In fact, given the Stadium fans' treatment of Alex Rodriguez in 2006, LaTroy Hawkins earlier this year, and now Hughes, I think the fans should be farmed out to the minors.

20

His 2007 #s at night seem fine .... 2008 is another story.

http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/rUwg

22 Anybody know whether Hughes had lasik surgery in the off-season?

21 Couldn't agree with you more on the fans. I mentioned it a couple of weeks ago but the average fan at the stadium has no real understanding of the team, or really of baseball. Its just sad. Do they not realize these guys are trying as hard as they possibly can? Do they think Hughes woke up yesterday and said it would be fun to see how many HRs he could give up? You can make all the arguments you want about ticket prices, player salaries etc. but at the end of the day that was a whole smattering of people booing a 21 year old kid and a nice guy trying to honor his hero. Blech.

23 Or borrowed Kyle's glasses? ;) I kid, I kid.

24 At LEAST Hughes is 21 and wasn't WEARING 21!

18 With respect, I don't think it is ever about filling the seats in Yankee Stadium old or new or YES being vulnerable in any way ... during the George era it was simply unacceptable for the Yankees to rebuild - with no other issues mattering.

They could not do it. Period. It is JUST possible Hank 'n Hal are different but my guess is no, and part of the reason is the media and the idiots in the stands.

Um, with great power comes great responsibility? Something like that. Because expectations are irrational, inflated, and impatience is by now a given. They will NOT lose revenue, nor will they be a sub-.500 team, but just missing the playoffs in the first year Torre is gone, when he NEVER missed ...

Not acceptable in NYC. Alas. Media + fan firestorm. And if Boston, also old, also rejigging wins the east? Picture it.

You know, after I posted this, I realized, "hey, that must have been Freddy."

Good lookin.

26 The real question is: does Spiderman have a good curveball?

I believe Hughes problems are not in his arm, but in his head. I think he's scared of the strike zone. I think he's trying to be perfect.

29 And THAT is what everyone's saying about IPK, too.

Hmm. Paging Dr Igawa.

20 He needs more beta carotene in his diet. It's good for the night vision. Either that or a pair of those night vision goggles that the Navy Seals wear??

28 No, but he can really pull the string on his changeup . . . literally!

21 24 I agree wholeheartedly, though I found myself having to defend such a statement last night on this very site. It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about baseball and really reflects poorly.

But Cliff, I think what you touched on is the fundamental issue with the "does he get farmed out" debate. If its a quality of pitch thing, then he needs to go down and work on them. If its simply a pitch selection/stubbornness, then Eiland needs to take over. At the very least he needs to TRY and throw those pitches, I have yet to see him do it more than 5 or so times a game, and that really doesn't tell you anything.

If its mechanical, than I don't see why eiland can't address the issue and work on it here. If it is so bad that he needs to be reworked, well, can't they figure that out too?

If it is a confidence/learning to pitch thing, as Eiland and Girardi thus far have stuck to, than going down to AAA won't do squat...

Doesn't all this angst over Hughes, IPK and Igawa, make us appreciate Wang that much more. He's really quietly a very special pitcher.

32 Ha! Great joke Cliff. I can't stop laughing at that one.

Also, his spidy-sense lets him pick up pitches very early, and his super strength allows him to hit it out nearly every time. I think the way forward is clear, sign Spiderman!

32 Ohhh, Cliff.

35 Sign Spiderman!

34 I don't need to appreciate Wang any more than I already do, which is a way of saying I think he's one of the best pitchers in baseball. What I'm most impressed with is his refusal to rest on his laurels. He could just throw the sinker all the time, instead he's learning new pitches, working more things in to make him a more complete pitcher. If his last outing is a sign of the future, then sign me up.

33 I know and I hear you. I tried to help last night but at some point I just couldn't bear to watch anymore. If anyone missed it, the postgame interview with Phil was heartbreaking. The kid manned up, but you can see he's crushed. If its mechanical, and I think at this point it may be (a guy with pinpoint control for 3 years has close to 1:1 K/BB ratio) than Nardi might be in order. Let him work out his delivery and then send him back up, treat it like a rehab assignment. If they think they can fix it then keep him here. Just sending him to AAA will do nothing, he can K everyone there with his curve.

Funny how the reaction to Hughes struggling is so much different than the reaction to Igawa struggling last year. I guess some guys we feel are deserving of a chance to prove themselves, and others just need to be tossed aside and ridiculed?

It is hard to watch a good young man like Hughes struggle like that. The Sheffield homer was like a sharp stick in the eye. You just know he was going to sit on one of those curveballs. I called it from the couch.

Ah well. Whattyagonnado? Move on, I guess. I would bring up Igawa and Rasner and let Kennedy and Hughes work on their game in the minors. They are long term investment, and at this point it's not helping them to work through it at the majors. Rasner and Igawa can't do any worse then they have done, I don't think.

Last night's game was really depressing.

39 Well Hughes was flat out dominant in the minors, almost threw a no hitter last year and was lights out in September and the playoffs. He's also 21.

Igawa had 4 or 5 good innings in relief against the Red Sox and the rest of the time was awful. Also Igawa was in the majors through May 4th. So sending Phil down now would be giving him less of a chance than Igawa got last year.

Personally, I never want to see Igawa pitch for the Yankees again, but that's just me.

21 Not saying there aren't morons who attend these games, but isn't it well within someone's right to voice displeasure when their team is playing poorly...?

After all, this isn't like the 1st, 2nd or even 3rd time Hughes has pitched poorly in this still-fledgling 2008 season. He's pretty much stunk it up almost every time out there. IMO he deserved to hear it a little – I'm sure he's fully aware that he's not doing well, but as someone said last night during the game, Hughes is a competitor and wouldn't want to be coddled or lied to when he's pitching poorly.

That said, the Hawkins thing doesn't compare - I agree that was based on pure idiocy, nothing more. Hawkins was booed during the opening day announcements before throwing a single pitch, but A-Rod & Hughes were booed because of two factors - performance and hype.

A-Rod came into '06 as the reigning MVP and the fans got restless when he didn't perform like it 'in the clutch'. Now we have - thanks to incessant media (bloggers included) hype – the "#1" prospect in our entire farm system (who was NOT traded for a true ace in Santana) and he's getting shellacked in every single start.

Not saying it's 'right', but the reasons behind the booing are out there, plain as day. This fanbase can't handle losing or rebuilding, myself unfortunately included sometimes.

21 Not saying there aren't morons who attend these games, but isn't it well within someone's right to voice displeasure when their team is playing poorly...?

After all, this isn't like the 1st, 2nd or even 3rd time Hughes has pitched poorly in this still-fledgling 2008 season. He's pretty much stunk it up almost every time out there. IMO he deserved to hear it a little – I'm sure he's fully aware that he's not doing well, but as someone said last night during the game, Hughes is a competitor and wouldn't want to