This is just speculation to meet a column deadline. Tis the season for trade rumours, right? None of the rumours need to make any sense to find their way into newspapers. I'm sure George gets whispers from all sorts of folks, but there has been no indication that anyone but Cash is in charge this year.
Hahaha. Well, Cashman's autonomy lasted about two months longer than most everybody expected. I actually don't see the harm in getting a warm body for the outfield if it meant that the team would just be taking on extra salary. But if the Yanks even give away a bag of sunflower seeds for this guy, they're nuts.
2 This is a test of the Emergency Bull** System. This is only a test...
Eeeeeeeeeek!!!
I imagine that this is someone testing the extent of Cashman's power in "crunch" time, with complicity from the usual media underbelly. We'll see; if Cashman wins this back-door power struggle, it bodes well for the rest of the season. If not... well, it will take a lot to live down to James Dolan, so pbbbbt!
Daily News: "...the Bombers actually have had recent internal discussions about the Cubs' Jacque Jones...Those talks came at the behest of George Steinbrenner, who apparently was told about Jones by one of his cronies"
'Was told about?'. Jacque Jones has been in the majors for 7 yrs. and played twice in the playoffs against the Yankees. Those cronies don't miss much, including players with 1040 games in the bigs. It's like 'discovering' Scott Erickson. Or thinking Madonna is singing about chastity in 'Like a Virgin'.
While I agree the Cubs should start trading away players, I don't want the Yanks to trade for them. I can't see a scenario where Jones would be a good fit for this team.
No doubt, Jacque's 2 HR and .300 avg. against the Yanks in the 2004 ALDS has George scratching his itchy trigger finger.
And since this appears to be a "George thing," better brace for the possibility, or at least consider the possibilities.
Scanning the career numbers put up by the 31 year old left hitting/left throwing right fielder, it appears he could help the Yanks down the stretch.
Consider his career numbers against the current top AL teams (he's only 1/2 season removed from the AL):
Toronto: 46 games, .349 avg. (.366 at Rogers Centre)
Boston: 45 games, .300 avg. (.316 at Fenway)
White Sox: 100 games, .292 avg. 48 RBI
Cleveland: 102 games, .316 avg. 49 RBI
Detroit: 110 games, .261 avg., but 61 RBI (his best against any team)
Oakland: 55 games, .309 avg.
The Yanks have 8 games remaining against Boston this season (Aug. and Sept.) and 13 more games against Toronto, including the final 3 games of the season.
Jones owns Halladay: 8 for 21 .381 avg.
and can hit BJ Ryan: 3 for 9 .333 avg.
He can't hit Wakefield, but who on the Yanks can? 1 for 15 .067 avg.
Can't hit Schilling either: 0 for 5 with 3 Ks, BUT, he can hit Papelbon: .500! 1 for 2 and that 1 hit is a home run.
If he doesn't cost the Yanks much in the way of prospects he's worth considering, no?
11. I think you are right. I just put this one up there to get everyone riled up. But I can't imagine them doing something as silly as trading for Jones.
He appears to be pretty consistent .280's pre and post All-Star, slighty hotter in the 2nd half of the season. I believe August is his best career month.
17 Then if it would make sense to use him in a three-way to acquire a good three or four starter or such. Where would you put him next year if they decided to keep Sheff for his bat? Jacque Jones doesn't seem like a fourth outfielder to me, but neither would anyone else have put A-Rod at third (I suppose). Besides, again the team needs pitching, not more outfielders. Man, if this was not speculation, I'd get up...
Don't believe everything you read, guys. And, if we put away our knee-jerk bias and look at things for what they are, as Sliced Bread has done, is Jones that bad a short-term solution? If he comes cheaply, what's the harm? Besides, one of George's cronies once had a bright idea that Cashman summarily turned down. His name is Big Papi. A nice alternative history novel could be based on that datum. And let's not act like Cashman, for all his positives, is some kind of modern day Branch Rickey, autonomy or not.
There may be something to this. I remember that last season there was talk of THe Yankees going after JJ.......that George was impressed by his play in the 2003 WS. If, and only if, its a salary dump, Why not take him? He's fast, hits a little for power and average and with Damon's toe problem he could play center or left field.
23 That's almost what I was going to say, YFiC. The last time Jones slugged over .500 was 2002, his - surprise! - age 27 (aka peak) season. The power numbers so far this year scream "fluke!" to me, a Wrigley-aided fluke I'm guessing.
He can't hit lefties, he doesn't get on base enough, and BP's numbers at least have him as a very pedestrian RF. Pass.
27 I think Jeter should hire KRS One to bum rush the pitchers mound like it was a P.M. Dawn concert.
(Just wanted to bring the KRS thing full circle.)
Seriously though, if you're Jeter, at what point do you drop the nice guy act and head out to the bump with your Louisville Slugger and say "This Agression Will Not Stand!"
We've seen the guy for years; we know what he is and more importantly what he isn't. I think Vockins and bp1 had it right above. Over whom would Jones represent an upgrade? Christ if we're that desperate bring up Gaper or Gardner. Under no circumstances should we contemplate trading either of those guys for him. In fact I wouldn't trade much more than a 1/2 eaten ham sandwich and a cold cup of coffee.
I did a quick check from a batting point of view over at BBresearch. What I found really didn't surprise me. We already have Jacque Jones in the system, only we call him Terrance Long. Jones's numbers are on top.
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
29 Mr. Gee, I've read you in this blog before I joined on the "Tug At The Heartstrings" thread. I like your spirited input a whole lot, and if this the end, I'm sure I speak for quite a few that say you will be missed. We often have family we don't get along with, but how much is those disagreements worth when family is gone? Please don't take this as preaching, lecturing or naive. As you may appreciate, I'm just saying what I feel. I don't know what else to say; but hopefully I can think of something decent.
You can tell I'm new because the comments come in faster than I write. Now what I wrote 30 makes sense and 33 probably doesn't. Oh well, this probably won't make sense either. I'll just stick to my original train of thought.
35 that's probably the best reason to avoid Jones now, length of contract.
32 man, I didn't realize they were pretty much the same guy. My impression of J. Jones is that he's much better than T-Long. your comparison and half a ham sandwich and cold cup o'joe line has me thinking otherwise.
still, George has demanded sillier moves. Let's hope Melky (and maybe some good news re: Matsui) can surpress his jones for J. Jones.
38 Intriguing. But wouldn't that mean that Rob couldn't have posted the mysterious missing 29, if his account was deleted? Boy am I confused.
In the meantime, MFD your 32 was a fantastic post. I would have never thought Jones = Long with a bit more power. In 460 more ABs than Long, Jones did manage 64 more homers - but also struck out 285 more times and walked only 8 more times!
OK Alex, mission accomplished 16, I'm both scared and riled up.
29 He created a new account, and (imo) amicably said goodbye. Though I'm new to this blog, I've thoroughly enjoyed it in the past few weeks. Can't help but feel this is unfair. All he wanted was an honest clarification.
I guess it was deleted because it referenced the old post from last week, critical of Alex.
38 Marcus? Rob Gee, you know, passionate Yankees fan, shoots his mouth off and says inappropriate things at times, speaks uncomfortable truths and is often insightful. You remember, he's a big Milton Bradley fan. There was something of a dustup on the 17th at the "Bernie goes to Washington" thread but that was followed by an apology from Rob.
The Fairpole thread was posted on 06-18, what happened at 29 above on this thread? Does anyone know? Given some of the stuff that wanders around in here it must have been a doozy. Just wondering.
42 MFD, when you have the original why settle for an imitation? Also, there was a thread going the other day after the Sunday loss wherein the hate word was being tossed around in connection with Mr. Torre. I thought the way you handled that stuff was great I haven't had a chance to say nice job on that till now.
I'm taking back what I said. I wasn't following the contentious post closely. Rob was immature. But it's one thing to delete an account, another to destroy the record of it.
I've seen worse. It was up for a few minutes right as I posted 30. I saw it and felt bad, though I wasn't aware of the previous dustup. At any rate, 44 is right; it isn't hard to create a new account, and obviously he only intended to speak his peace and say goodbye.
Who knows if he's still lurking about under an assumed name, reading up on what anyone has said; or if he's even looking at this at all? I can't speak on whatever happened to have him booted and I don't really want to know, but I give him props and keep it moving. Must have been something for Fairpole to post a thread, I'm not sure I've seen that happen.
I'd say I'm impressed at what the folks here put up with, for the purpose of sustaining the passion that drives us as fans on such a relaxed and entertaining site.
It's nice to believe that an unpopular point of view may have driven out a poster, but my observation (without any inside knowledge) is that the lack of civility on the part of the poster in question was really the issue. It's one thing to raise a controversial point, but it's another to get defensive and berate people who decide to take the point on and raise alternate points of view. (And to continue to do so even after being warned)
I personally got tired of the snide name calling that was sprayed around...and trust me, this is coming from someone who's been pretty childish himself (especially toward Red Sox lurkers). But for the most part, I'm impressed at how people mostly avoid getting personal around here.
I for one will miss Rob (and I know I'm not alone). Once I got passed the hyperbole I found him to be a smart and engaging conversationalist who has a way of cutting to the chase. He's never boring and is usually thought provoking and always is challenging when on the other side of an argument. Nobody's attempts at humor are always funny. Sometimes his are in lousy taste but if that's the litmus test most of us here are doomed. If he's reading, I'd like to say so long and I wish you all the best man, this has been a lot of fun.
I hope you boys can work this stuff out, in the final balance Rob's contribution to our ongoing conversation is a positive one.
44's guess is wrong. It has nothing whatsoever to do with that. If those comments bothered me, I would have deleted those comments. I thought it was much ado about nothing, but it wasn't an unreasonable ado.
45 Read that dustup again. Two people were insulted in that thread; only one of them ever received even a half-baked apology. That's all this is about. I deleted 29 because it compounded the insults.
48 I like Rob, too, and agree that his comments are often insightful and provocative. I did/do have a problem, however, with the smugness and the name-calling.
Whether or not Rob Gee's account should have been deleted isn't really for me to decide. I will say two things though:
1) While he was often contentious, on the balance, I thought most of his input made this a better place.
2) I read 29 before it was deleted. There really wasn't anything in there that merited deletion IMHO. (Unlike the original argument that started the whole thing which had several posts that should have been deleted.) I think deleting Rob Gee's farewell post shows a very low tolerance for criticism. It was his biased opinion...but it wasn't completely out of line or unfair either. Time for an honest look in the mirror by the mysterious delete-r.
53 Well, Ken is the host here at Baseball Toaster and the 29 post took a few parting shots at Ken. If Rob Gee wanted to stick around, why make the conversation about apparent slights against himself, rather than about Yankees baseball and related topics?
50 If that's what it was and at the risk of being tossed myself, I'd like to ask a question: To my recollection there have been jokes made at this site about sexual ejaculation, spousal abuse and pedophilia. For god's sake it was suggested that Peter Gammons looks like a member of NAMBLA, whatever the hell that was supposed to mean. Given there is no published "code of conduct", how did the byplay on the 17th break the tolerance barrier when those other matters couldn't? There is an arbitrary feel about this action especially since it comes on the heels of the other pointed discussion. This feels like an overreaction to the isolated event on the 17th and something that is in fact cumulative in nature. This was done without apparent warning and notice. We know you have the right and the power to take the action. Yet, was this fair?
If you feel obliged to answer Ken that would be nice but I'll move on. As I've said recently I enjoy the banter and camaraderie of all my Yankee friends here. I learn a lot and have a place where I can speak my mind about something that has been an important part of my family for three generations, the New York Yankees. This is a cherished place on the net. Unfortunately for me, this is a dark day in the Toaster. Think I'll take tonight off.
55 Peter Gammons is certainly one strange lookin' dude and I usually question his intelligence, but I doubt he would allow the NAMBLA comment to be posted on a blog he hosted.
55
I think it was that Ken asked/told people to tone it down.
FWIW, I think Rob Gee did originally raise a valid point; but I think it was also answered validly. It seemed to spin out of control, and Rob wasn't able to let go of it. 29 could be read to be starting it up again; and I guess Ken wasn't in a mood to go through the whole thing again.
I thoroughly enjoy being at the banter, but let's remember this is Ken's and Alex's and Cliff's spot, we're just guests here. And if the host asks you to cool it, then cool it.
55 As one of the insulted people in the "dust up," I thought you'd like my two cents. First, I was trying to contribute to a debate on the stats versus intangibles of one Bernie Williams, and instead of being met with argument, I was met with scorn and derision. It has been my impression over the month or so I've read the blog that Rob has produced intelligent discourse about 75% of the time, and smug insults without evidence the rest of the time. For the record I thought his "apology" was immature, and from afar I think the incident about the linking was blown out of proportion by a general argumentative attitude.
I agree with you, though, that this is the best place I've found for intelligent discussion and debate about my favorite sports team. Censorship in such venues is inevitable, as there are a lot of people who don't care for the Yankees, and forums can get ugly. I've had a similar experience trying in basketball forums on my alma mater (Duke) and its embattled star player. That said, communication should not be censored when it is not inflammatory, and is directed at people's arguments rather than personal attacks. As someone else mentioned, this is a free site, and we should be greatful for its presence.
55 It's one thing to behave badly. It's another to react to a warning about bad behavior with an insult instead of an apology. And then, when given a second warning, to respond with a clearly half-hearted sarcastic semi-apology. That's what ticked me off: one warning should be more than enough.
Even after all that, and the additional insults directed at me in deleted post 29, I'm still willing to restore his account, because I concede that I may have overreacted. That's why I wrote that last paragraph in the Fairpole post. Everyone makes mistakes. Responsible people take responsibility for their mistakes. All I've wanted all along is for Rob to contact me (or Cliff or Alex), so we can discuss and resolve the issue like reasonable adults. So far, that hasn't happened.
While Rob's comments were insightful, thought provoking, and contributed to the general flow of ideas at this site; he annoyed the hell out of me w/his childish and sometimes vindictive comments. Hey, at least we don't have to hear about freakin' Uncle Milty anymore. Rob had it coming; someone toed the line, and he, in his persistent unrelenting way, crossed it.
59 I've been on the receiving end of it myself here, usually at the hands of my pal Rob. I usually find it best to ignore it or let it go with a joke and move on. Feelings do tend to run high at times; it's a reflection of caring so much. I'll also say that I found that when I ignored it and stuck to the "issue" the other stuff stopped immediately.
Everyone has their own style and threshold for nonsense I'm not saying you're wrong or that I don't understand; Rob has a way of getting under peoples skin. It's just too bad because your posts are good and you have nice way of looking at things. During the Hot Stove that combination with Rob made for some good talk while the snow was flying.
Rob was out of line with his insults. (Rob, didn't your mom ever tell you to attack ideas, not the people who hold them?) But I mostly enjoyed his comments. Even the ones about T-Long. I hope he comes back. I'll miss him if he doesn't.
60
Thanks Ken.
And when I was saying things spiraled out, I was putting it on R.G. I hope he does contact you and can settle down. I'd like for him to come back, but there's enough negativity in the world, I don't need gratuitous garbage here.
A Melky for Jacque Jones trade?
I thought Ca$hmoney was in total control? What's up with this crony of George stuff?
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Eeeeeeeeeek!!!
I imagine that this is someone testing the extent of Cashman's power in "crunch" time, with complicity from the usual media underbelly. We'll see; if Cashman wins this back-door power struggle, it bodes well for the rest of the season. If not... well, it will take a lot to live down to James Dolan, so pbbbbt!
'Was told about?'. Jacque Jones has been in the majors for 7 yrs. and played twice in the playoffs against the Yankees. Those cronies don't miss much, including players with 1040 games in the bigs. It's like 'discovering' Scott Erickson. Or thinking Madonna is singing about chastity in 'Like a Virgin'.
not only does it sound speculative.. it soudns baseless..
i donno whether its a way to stoke the front office into a conversation..
i promise u this much.. if Steinbrenner as much as tries to think abt getting back into these baseball decisions..
Mr Cashman is gone..
this is smoke.. coming out of some serious pot..
And since this appears to be a "George thing," better brace for the possibility, or at least consider the possibilities.
Scanning the career numbers put up by the 31 year old left hitting/left throwing right fielder, it appears he could help the Yanks down the stretch.
Consider his career numbers against the current top AL teams (he's only 1/2 season removed from the AL):
Toronto: 46 games, .349 avg. (.366 at Rogers Centre)
Boston: 45 games, .300 avg. (.316 at Fenway)
White Sox: 100 games, .292 avg. 48 RBI
Cleveland: 102 games, .316 avg. 49 RBI
Detroit: 110 games, .261 avg., but 61 RBI (his best against any team)
Oakland: 55 games, .309 avg.
The Yanks have 8 games remaining against Boston this season (Aug. and Sept.) and 13 more games against Toronto, including the final 3 games of the season.
Jones owns Halladay: 8 for 21 .381 avg.
and can hit BJ Ryan: 3 for 9 .333 avg.
He can't hit Wakefield, but who on the Yanks can? 1 for 15 .067 avg.
Can't hit Schilling either: 0 for 5 with 3 Ks, BUT, he can hit Papelbon: .500! 1 for 2 and that 1 hit is a home run.
If he doesn't cost the Yanks much in the way of prospects he's worth considering, no?
besides.. hes been so poor.. the Wrigley faithful are booing..
u have to stink like trekker or worse to get that treatment
OPS vs righty/lefty over the past 3 seasons: .807/.658
Yeah he'll be friggin great for us. Hey why don't we offer to take Juan Pierre off Dusty's hands too while we're at it.
He can't hit lefties, he doesn't get on base enough, and BP's numbers at least have him as a very pedestrian RF. Pass.
he cant hit lefties: .200 and takes lesser number of walks
his OBP is lesser than Melky Cabrera.. even factoring in Cabrera's mini-slump
u dont need another player with similar or exact numbers to melky.. Melky as recent as 15 days back was at .300 BA
if u are going to upgrade a position then "UPGRADE" it dont "REPLACE" a 22 yo with a 30 year old @ 4mill per for 3 years..
(Just wanted to bring the KRS thing full circle.)
Seriously though, if you're Jeter, at what point do you drop the nice guy act and head out to the bump with your Louisville Slugger and say "This Agression Will Not Stand!"
I did a quick check from a batting point of view over at BBresearch. What I found really didn't surprise me. We already have Jacque Jones in the system, only we call him Terrance Long. Jones's numbers are on top.
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
976 3492 492 974 189 15 132 476 67 40 231 737 .279 .327 .455 1589 13 19 25 28 81
878 3032 422 818 165 21 69 374 27 15 223 452 .270 .319 .406 1232 0 23 23 7 90
29 Mr. Gee, I've read you in this blog before I joined on the "Tug At The Heartstrings" thread. I like your spirited input a whole lot, and if this the end, I'm sure I speak for quite a few that say you will be missed. We often have family we don't get along with, but how much is those disagreements worth when family is gone? Please don't take this as preaching, lecturing or naive. As you may appreciate, I'm just saying what I feel. I don't know what else to say; but hopefully I can think of something decent.
Actually, check out the latest Fairpole post by Ken Arneson, I think it is in reference to the mysteriously missing Rob Gee.
32 man, I didn't realize they were pretty much the same guy. My impression of J. Jones is that he's much better than T-Long. your comparison and half a ham sandwich and cold cup o'joe line has me thinking otherwise.
still, George has demanded sillier moves. Let's hope Melky (and maybe some good news re: Matsui) can surpress his jones for J. Jones.
In the meantime, MFD your 32 was a fantastic post. I would have never thought Jones = Long with a bit more power. In 460 more ABs than Long, Jones did manage 64 more homers - but also struck out 285 more times and walked only 8 more times!
OK Alex, mission accomplished 16, I'm both scared and riled up.
I guess it was deleted because it referenced the old post from last week, critical of Alex.
The Fairpole thread was posted on 06-18, what happened at 29 above on this thread? Does anyone know? Given some of the stuff that wanders around in here it must have been a doozy. Just wondering.
42 MFD, when you have the original why settle for an imitation? Also, there was a thread going the other day after the Sunday loss wherein the hate word was being tossed around in connection with Mr. Torre. I thought the way you handled that stuff was great I haven't had a chance to say nice job on that till now.
https://bronxbanter.baseballtoaster.com/archives/403834.html
Who knows if he's still lurking about under an assumed name, reading up on what anyone has said; or if he's even looking at this at all? I can't speak on whatever happened to have him booted and I don't really want to know, but I give him props and keep it moving. Must have been something for Fairpole to post a thread, I'm not sure I've seen that happen.
It's nice to believe that an unpopular point of view may have driven out a poster, but my observation (without any inside knowledge) is that the lack of civility on the part of the poster in question was really the issue. It's one thing to raise a controversial point, but it's another to get defensive and berate people who decide to take the point on and raise alternate points of view. (And to continue to do so even after being warned)
I personally got tired of the snide name calling that was sprayed around...and trust me, this is coming from someone who's been pretty childish himself (especially toward Red Sox lurkers). But for the most part, I'm impressed at how people mostly avoid getting personal around here.
I hope you boys can work this stuff out, in the final balance Rob's contribution to our ongoing conversation is a positive one.
45 Read that dustup again. Two people were insulted in that thread; only one of them ever received even a half-baked apology. That's all this is about. I deleted 29 because it compounded the insults.
1) While he was often contentious, on the balance, I thought most of his input made this a better place.
2) I read 29 before it was deleted. There really wasn't anything in there that merited deletion IMHO. (Unlike the original argument that started the whole thing which had several posts that should have been deleted.) I think deleting Rob Gee's farewell post shows a very low tolerance for criticism. It was his biased opinion...but it wasn't completely out of line or unfair either. Time for an honest look in the mirror by the mysterious delete-r.
If you feel obliged to answer Ken that would be nice but I'll move on. As I've said recently I enjoy the banter and camaraderie of all my Yankee friends here. I learn a lot and have a place where I can speak my mind about something that has been an important part of my family for three generations, the New York Yankees. This is a cherished place on the net. Unfortunately for me, this is a dark day in the Toaster. Think I'll take tonight off.
I think it was that Ken asked/told people to tone it down.
FWIW, I think Rob Gee did originally raise a valid point; but I think it was also answered validly. It seemed to spin out of control, and Rob wasn't able to let go of it. 29 could be read to be starting it up again; and I guess Ken wasn't in a mood to go through the whole thing again.
I thoroughly enjoy being at the banter, but let's remember this is Ken's and Alex's and Cliff's spot, we're just guests here. And if the host asks you to cool it, then cool it.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2494491
I agree with you, though, that this is the best place I've found for intelligent discussion and debate about my favorite sports team. Censorship in such venues is inevitable, as there are a lot of people who don't care for the Yankees, and forums can get ugly. I've had a similar experience trying in basketball forums on my alma mater (Duke) and its embattled star player. That said, communication should not be censored when it is not inflammatory, and is directed at people's arguments rather than personal attacks. As someone else mentioned, this is a free site, and we should be greatful for its presence.
Also, go Yankees!
Even after all that, and the additional insults directed at me in deleted post 29, I'm still willing to restore his account, because I concede that I may have overreacted. That's why I wrote that last paragraph in the Fairpole post. Everyone makes mistakes. Responsible people take responsibility for their mistakes. All I've wanted all along is for Rob to contact me (or Cliff or Alex), so we can discuss and resolve the issue like reasonable adults. So far, that hasn't happened.
59 I've been on the receiving end of it myself here, usually at the hands of my pal Rob. I usually find it best to ignore it or let it go with a joke and move on. Feelings do tend to run high at times; it's a reflection of caring so much. I'll also say that I found that when I ignored it and stuck to the "issue" the other stuff stopped immediately.
Everyone has their own style and threshold for nonsense I'm not saying you're wrong or that I don't understand; Rob has a way of getting under peoples skin. It's just too bad because your posts are good and you have nice way of looking at things. During the Hot Stove that combination with Rob made for some good talk while the snow was flying.
Thanks Ken.
And when I was saying things spiraled out, I was putting it on R.G. I hope he does contact you and can settle down. I'd like for him to come back, but there's enough negativity in the world, I don't need gratuitous garbage here.
Hear that, Rob? I think you should take him up on his offer. :)
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.