Lackey And Vazquez

Even before John Lackey signed with the Red Sox for a deal nearly identical to the 5 year, $82.5M one that the Yankees gave A.J. Burnett a year prior, many saw the two as being very similar. Both pitchers are right handed, oft-injured about six and a half feet tall and around 30 years old with intimidating on-the-mound demeanors. Today, however, I wanted to compare Lackey to Javer Vazquez given their parallel entrance to the Yankees vs. Red Sox rivalry and their disparate reputations in regards to handling pressure.

Lackey has been in the league since 2002 and has averaged 188 innings per season since then. Over that same time period, Vazquez has averaged 215. Lackey's ERA is about a quarter of a run lower over stretch, but that's essentially erased by having to fill in those extra 27 innings a year with a replacement level pitcher.

In general, when John Lackey is healthy, he's a better pitcher than Javy Vazquez. But he's also the Red Sox highest paid player ($18M this year) and is expected to contribute to the top of their rotation. The Yankees are paying Vazquez only about 2/3 as much and hoping that he slots in as their number four.

But what about their reputations under pressure? The idea for that comparison between the two comes from fellow LoHud pinch hitter and editor at the Harvard Crimson, Yair Rosenberg. On Sunday, Yair dropped me an email with the following suggestion/request:

I think the more productive comparison for AL East purposes would not be to Pettitte or Glavine, but to Lackey, whose reputation is that of a big game pitcher, and who is essentially the corresponding addition to this year's Red Sox as Vasquez is to the Yankees. It would be really interesting to see if the stats bear out Lackey's clutch rep - and might go a long way towards predicting the key factors in the coming Yankees-Red Sox race. I'd love to see a post on that.

So here we go. Fighting in the red corner, we have John "Big Game" Lackey, the winning pitcher in Game 7 of the 2002 World Series and supposed consummate clutch performer as anointed by his former manager. In the blue corner is Javier "Can't Handle New York" Vazquez, the man responsible for one of the more infamous home runs in Yankee history, who was called out publicly by Ozzie Guillen for not stepping up when it counts.

There is no question as to who has the better postseason resume. Lackey was thrust into the spotlight at an early age, his team reaching the playoffs in his first season in the majors and asking him to start Game 7 of the World Series only four days after his 24th birthday. Since then, he's been back to the postseason 5 times and pitched a total of 78 innings to a 3.12 ERA.

Vazquez, on the other hand, was trapped on bad Expos teams (no offense, Jonah) for the first six years of his career, and didn't pitch during October until 2004. His performance in the postseason has been pretty dreadful (10.34 ERA), but he's only had a chance to throw 15 2/3 innings in the playoffs.

Do these reputations carry over into the regular season? Do their postseason resumes line up with how they handle pressure during games throughout the year? We know the answer to that question when it comes to Vazquez, as we have assessed his clutch reputation at length here and in other places.

That first and more in-depth inquiry into Vazquez's purported lack of clutchiferousness began with his FIP/ERA differential. Coincidentally, Lackey and Vazquez have identical 3.83 career FIPs. However, Lackey's career ERA is 3.81 while Vazquez's is 4.19. Leaving aside team defense - which would be very difficult to quantify over multiple years and teams - it's helpful to look at situational and leverage statistics when trying to explain FIP/ERA differentials.

There are some notable similarities between the Vazquez and Lackey in the chart to the right. Both pitch better with the bases empty than with runners on. They have similar tOPS+ distributions when the score of the game is within 4 runs.

Naturally, the biggest differences come in the smallest sample sizes. Lackey has done much better with the bases loaded than Vazquez and far worse when the game is out of hand.

Both Lackey's distributions are optimal and both are significant. If you could choose a situation to pitch your best in, it would be when the bases were loaded. If you had to give up runs, you would prefer to allow them when the margin of the game was greater than four runs. But there is a limit to how much these numbers can tell us. Lackey has only 141 plate appearances with the bases loaded while Vazquez has 163.

The sample sizes are larger for when the margin is greater than four (394 for Lackey, 811 for Vazquez) but those at bats are by definition less important. Lackey is obviously better in those situations, but not likely by as much as the numbers indicate.

What about the leverage index, though? While Lackey's numbers don't tell a coherent, progressive story like Vazquez's do, it's still clear that he pitches his worst in high leverage situations. Again, high leverage is based on the smallest sample size among the three levels, but each pitcher has over 1000 plate appearances to draw upon. So perhaps Lackey can't simply summon his best performances when the stakes increase.

If there was something about Lackey's internal constitution that gave him to ability to elevate his performance under pressure, wouldn't it show up in the leverage index? Shouldn't he be able to sense when the game is on the line and reach back for a little extra?

This contradiction begins to chip away not at Lackey's resume in particular but at the manufactured archetype of the "big game pitcher". It's one thing to have had good results in the postseason but it's another entirely to universally improve as the leverage increases. You can argue that the playoff results are more important, but Lackey has only faced 328 batters in postseason play. I think the regular season numbers tell us more.

While it may be convenient to label certain pitchers as big time performers and others as choke artists, they rarely fall neatly into one category or another. More correctly, there are players who have performed well in certain situations and others who have not.

As far as this season goes, it will be interesting to see who is better, Lackey or Vazquez. It's very likely that Lackey will have a lower ERA than Vazquez but based on their respective histories, Vazquez should be the better bet to throw more than 200 innings. However, perhaps this is the year that Vazquez's heroic workload over the past decade-plus catches up with him and it's also the first time in 3 years Lackey makes more than 30 starts.

Time will tell, but remember that the Yankees only need to get 2/3 the performance out of Vazquez to get as much value as the Sox do out of Lackey.

Vazquez's Pitch Selection

One of the things we touched upon towards the end of our post about Javier Vazquez's clutch ability was his pitch selection in 2009. Here is what Tyler Kepner said shortly after the trade was completed:

Scouts believe Vazquez’s changeup improved a lot with Atlanta last season, giving him a second swing-and-miss pitch to go with his curveball.

A quick look at the Pitch Type data at FanGraphs shows that his fastball, slider and change were all significantly better in terms of run value while his slider was about the same.

Today, SG at over at the Replacement Level Yankees Weblog took a look at his pitch selection over the last three years in terms of quantity, run value, velocity, strike percentage, and break. For the first time in his career in 2009, Vazquez threw fewer than 50% fastballs while using each off-speed pitch slightly more than in 2008. Last year he also threw significantly more sliders and curveballs than in 2007.

How much of his standout 2009 campaign you want to attribute to this is up to you, but it looks like mixing in more of his off-speed stuff was beneficial. Anecdotally and with small sample size caveats, his leverage numbers were the same as usual - worse as it increased.

There's a lot of data over there, so be sure to check it out and peruse the comments for some other cracks at explaining what's going on.

Is Javier Vazquez Unclutch?

Throughout his career it has been intimated that Javier Vazquez has the stuff of an ace but the track record of a back of the rotation starter. He has excellent peripheral numbers (3.45 K/BB), a better than league average ERA (107 ERA+) and averages well over 200 innings per season. Above average performance and lots of innings should be a winning combination, but Vazquez has always seemed to underachieve when it comes to his won-lost record. His four postseason appearances haven't been pretty either.

Plenty of Yankee fans are worried that he doesn't have the make up to pitch in New York. Vazquez bombed in the second half of his only season with the Yankees and served up perhaps the most infamous home run in Yankee history. But all of that was more than 5 years ago and the latter was the result of one pitch. Ozzie Guillen ran him out of town in Chicago after calling him out for not being a big game pitcher, but Guillen was supposedly responsible for ousting Nick Swisher too and that worked out pretty well for the Yankees.

Does Javier Vazquez's performance get demonstrably worse under pressure, or has he been a victim of marginal teams and bad luck? Is his reputation as someone who shrinks as the expectations grow deserved, or is it the conflation of a few unrelated events?

As I attempt to take a deeper look into these questions, I'm going to go back to something Tom Tango said during his Q & A with Mike Silva last week. In the process of justifying FIP as a useful statistic, Tango pointed out that there is a strong correlation between the best pitchers in the league over a long period of time when ranked by FIP and ERA.

Those familiar with the two stats might take that for granted at this point, but it's fairly remarkable considering all the things that FIP totally disregards that factor into ERA: singles, doubles, triples, runs allowed, etc. What's more intriguing, he contends, is what the significant gaps between FIP and ERA over the long term can tell us:

Tom Glavine’s career FIP is about 0.50 runs worse than his career ERA. This signals that Glavine does something extra, either he can sequence his events better (leaves alot of runners on base for example), or he has better control on his balls in play. And Javy Vazquez’s ERA is about 0.30 runs worse than his FIP, which signals something different, that perhaps he gives up alot of doubles, or doesn’t sequence his events well, etc.

Overall, two-thirds of pitchers will have their FIP and ERA be within 0.20 runs of each other, and almost all will be within 0.40 runs of each other.

That’s the power of FIP: that it’s designed to tell you one specific thing, and it tells you a second, perhaps even more important, thing.

So what's that thing? That's the million dollar question.

One interesting fact is that Vazquez has been extremely consistent in under performing his FIP throughout his career. He's only had an ERA lower than his FIP twice in his 12 professional seasons and only then by the slimmest of margins.

Even in his career year with the Braves last season, his FIP was lower than his ERA (his low FIP was one of the reasons Keith Law included him on his Cy Young ballot). I think we can agree that this not just the result of random chance: there is something about the way that Vazquez pitches that causes him to have an FIP lower than his ERA.

So what is it about Vazquez's pitching that could be causing this? Let's look at the career FIP/ERA differentials for Vazquez, Glavine as well as Andy Pettitte:

Above, Tango says that almost all pitchers will have an FIP and ERA within .4 of each other, so keep in mind that we are looking at two outliers extreme outliers here in Vazquez and Glavine. This is the main reason I chose to include Pettitte, who is closer to the norm.

If you're a Yankee fan, I bet you're a little surprised that Pettitte's differential is closer to Vazquez's than Glavine's. Pettitte has the reputation of being able to bear down and pitch better when it matters and seems to induce a lot of double plays, both of which would lower his ERA but not FIP. But the numbers indicate that he's not as great at controlling his outcomes as many assume.

As Tango mentioned above, one thing that might inflate ERA independently of FIP is giving up a lot of doubles. (Numbers are normalized over 200 IP to account for different career lengths):

Vazquez and Pettitte give up more two-baggers than Glavine does, but four over the course of 200 innings doesn't seem like enough to account for a shift in 3/4 of a run in ERA. Furthermore, Vazquez and Pettitte give up doubles at a nearly identical rate, but the latter has an FIP significantly closer to his ERA. There's something else at work here.

The other possibility that is mentioned above is "sequencing". Maybe Vazquez gives up hits in a way that hurts him. For example, starting an inning with a walk before a double often results in a run scored and a man on second. Conversely, a double before a walk likely means men on first and second without a run scoring. Vazquez gives up his fair share of home runs as well, and they are obviously more harmful with men on base (something that doesn't show up in FIP but does in ERA).

A quick and dirty way of teasing this out of the data is to look at a pitcher's stats with men on base. The numbers below are shown in tOPS+, which compares a pitcher's performance in a given scenario to his performance in other situations. (A score of 100 means is a pitcher is average in that situation while anything lower means they were better and higher means they were worse)

One caveat: the bases loaded data is by far the smallest sample size of the bunch. Vazquez has faced 163 batters with the bases loaded while Glavine and Pettitte have 428 and 237, respectively. That said, there is a major difference between Vazquez and the other two (particularly Glavine) when it comes to their performance with men on base and especially with the bags packed. And those situations are the ones that separate FIP from ERA the most.

Now let's look at how each pitcher performed based on the score of the game, again using tOPS+:

The smallest sample size in this case is "> 4R", but even for Vazquez that includes 811 plate appearances. Pettitte has the most favorable distribution, pitching his best when the game is close and his worst when it is out of hand. Vazquez, however, is just about average in tight games but much better when the lead or deficit is greater than 4.

Now let's put the last two items together. Baseball-Reference's Leverage stats take into account the occupancy of the bases as well as the score of the game, as does FanGraphs Clutch stat:

This tells a slighty different story about Pettitte but affirms what's becoming a trend for Vazquez - he doesn't perform as well in high leverage situations as he does in lower ones.

Does WPA agree?

Yes. It appears that Vazquez has not given his team as good of a chance to win as either Pettitte over Glavine over the course of his career, but this is to be expected to a certain degree because WPA is tied more closely to ERA then FIP. In a sense, we already knew this.

=====

So what do we make of all this?

=====

It's tempting to use these stats to claim that Vazquez can't handle pitching in New York. His data seem to trend very uniformly (remarkably so) from good to poor as the leverage increases. However, why didn't he cripple under the weight of the New York media in the first half of 2004 when he had a 3.56 ERA in 118 2/3 IP and won 10 games?

To say that he can't handle New York not only gives too much weight to a small sample size but requires a jump that conflates the pressure of in-game situations to be analogous to the demands of pitching for one franchise or another. Does the weight of overall expectations have the same effect on performance that increases in in-game leverage do?

Well, maybe. As 'Duk from Big League Stew pointed out in September, Vazquez's best seasons in terms of ERA+ have come with teams that were out of contention and his worst years came with teams in playoff races:

Three of his top ERA+ years came in the anonymity of Montreal and one came for the 2007 White Sox, who went 72-90. This year's ERA+ of 139 equals his career-best with the 2003 Expos, but while the Braves stuck around as a potential contender for longer than expected, they didn't occupy striking distance space for long.

Meanwhile, Vazquez's worst ERA+ years — with the exception of his first two seasons — all came with contenders: the '04 Yankees, the '05 D'Backs and the '06 and '08 White Sox.

So what is he doing wrong? As we saw when trying to identify some differences between A.J. Burnett's good and bad starts last week, it's extremely difficult isolate any one underlying factor or find a specific reason that Vazquez's numbers go bad as the leverage of the game increases. Javy's K/BB ratio slips from 4.34 to 3.26 to 2.57 as the leverage rises from low to medium to high. His batting average, on-base and slugging percentages all ascend with the gravity of the situation as well.

Even if you grant that Vazquez gets worse under pressure and will pitch worse just by virtue of being a Yankee, he's still likely to be better than league average and throw more than 200 innings. It would be extremely difficult to do that and not add significant value to a team regardless of how his performance is distributed by leverage.

And of course, there's a big difference between "hasn't" and "can't". I'm willing to say that Vazquez certainly hasn't pitched well under pressure in his career, but not that he can't. He clearly had a great year in Atlanta and some of that has been attributed to an improved change up, giving him a second pitch to miss bats with in addition to his curveball. FanGraphs shows that his curveball was what stood out last year, but his change up looked to be improved as well.

It's certainly not impossible that Javy has a good year and surprises his doubters (and even some of his supporters). Vazquez might be frustrating to watch at times in 2010, but the beauty of the situation is that our expectations for him shouldn't be that high to begin with. Not too many teams have the luxury of acquiring a very good pitcher and hoping that he's just average.

Replacing A World Series MVP [Part II]

Yesterday, Matt noted that for the third time since 1996, the Yankees will have to evaluate whether or not to retain a World Series MVP who is heading into free agency. In 1996, they opted to let John Wetteland walk in favor of an up-and-coming closer named Mariano Rivera. However, they decided to keep Scott Brosius after their legendary 1998 campaign instead of turning to Mike Lowell, who had just posted two excellent minor league seasons, the majority of which came at AAA.

Interestingly, 11 years later, Mike Lowell found himself playing the role of Brosius for the 2007 Red Sox with frightening accuracy. Lowell had a standout year at the plate that was driven by a batting average well above his career mark, played excellent defense at 3rd while putting up an OPS+ in the 120's, made the All-Star team, and drove in exactly 15 runs in the postseason en route to a team championship and a World Series MVP.

Membahs of Rex Sawx Nation were all, "Aw, you've gotta resign Mikey Lowell. Dood is fackin' moooooney!" And, yes, some people (presumably a group of 7th graders) even started a petition, which included this gem:

These statistics show that Mike Lowell has elevated his game since his coming to Boston. In the perspective of Red Sox Nation, he has been the team MVP the entire 2007 season. He delivered for the team when the team needed something big to happen. Mike Lowell has been "a clutch player" this entire season.

However, this past post-season, he has taken things to another level.

[cites 2007 postseason stats]

So how did Mike Lowell's incredible postseason carry over into the 3 year, $36M contract he signed with the Sox? What of his "Bostonian Game Elevation" and "Clutch Player-ing"?

Since the beginning of the 2008 season, Lowell has hit only slightly above league average for a third baseman, played no more than 110 games in either season at 3rd base, underwent hip surgery, watched his defensive skills erode and oh by the way, kind of sucked in the playoffs.

So what of Hideki Matsui, who finds himself in a similar situation this year? Matsui won't be looking for a deal anywhere near as long, and didn't even play defense this year, but both are older players coming off surprisingly strong offensive seasons, punctuated by productive postseasons and, of course, the WS MVPs.

Yesterday, Brian Cashman came right out and said that he wasn't going to be influenced by what Matsui (or Johnny Damon) did in the playoffs when it comes to deciding whether or not to hold onto them this offseason:

We’re thankful for the guys who did what they did, and if you had a great postseason, terrific.

What they are when they went into October, that’s what they still are, regardless of how good or how poor they played in the postseason.

I know Matt advocated bringing Hideki Matsui back yesterday (not because of his postseason, obviously), but I'm on the other side of this debate. There are certainly going to be offensive losses involved with giving Posada, A-Rod, Jeter and Damon days off by DH'ing them, but there will also be defensive upgrades. I believe those players are going to need the days off and having to sit Matsui by no fault of his own will make it more difficult for Joe Girardi to give guys adequate rest, regardless of how professional Matsui is about it. And if he's on he bench in 1/3 or 1/2 of the games, how effective will Matsui be when he finally gets to the plate?

Matsui's knees have become a nagging problem and he needed to have them drained multiple times throughout the season. They have already turned him into a full-time DH so I think it's fair to wonder how long it will be before they total kill his baserunning skills and begin to sap his offensive power as well.

He was a great hitter and a consummate professional in his time with the Yankees, but I think it's time to say "sayonara" to Godzilla and send him off on the highest possible note. Thanks for the memories, Hideki.

Enthusiasm For Derek Jeter Can Not Be Curbed

I'm guessing that everyone reading this blog was watching the World Series last night, but there was an interesting discussion about Derek Jeter taking place on another channel sometime between 9 and 9:30. And unlike the last time we talked about a baseball player in conjunction with a TV show, this one is true.

FanGraphs has the transcript:

Stonemason: “That guy [Derek Jeter] sucks.”

Larry David: “Who sucks?”

Stonemason: “Derek Jeter, he’s the most overrated player in baseball.”

Larry David: “What did you say?”

Stonemason: “I can’t stand Derek Jeter, you know he’s the worst defensive shortstop in baseball statistically?”

Larry David: “Oh Bullshit! He’s a great clutch hitter, he’s a great clutch player!”

Stonemason: “There’s no way he deserves that kind of money he’s making.”

And then Larry David changes the subject.

Later in the episode, Larry David starts talking about the stonemason’s Jeter hating and says, “…starts telling me how Jeter’s overrated. What an ignorant moron. My God, please, give me a break. There’s not one person who has ever said that except this asshole, honestly.”

FanGraphs takes special pride in this little snippet of conversation because the implication is that the statistical justification the stonemason is referring to is Ultimate Zone Rating. The assaults on Jeter's defense are familiar to those of us in the baseball blogosphere but I heard plenty of people react the way Larry David did when confronted with what UZR says about Jeter. I don't think you'll hear too many people complaining about his salary of his defense this year, however.

On a related note, this is my favorite Curb episode with a Yankees-related plot line. Here's the best I could do for a clip. Skip to the 1:13 mark (and beware of the strong language).

Yanks Desecrate Angels

It's tempting to say that CC Sabathia and Alex Rodriguez won last night's game on their own. Sure there were many guys who made contributions to the win, but A-Rod drove in more runs than CC allowed in 8 innings and although the game was much closer than the final score indicates, the Angels never led in this game and were never particularly close. The ALCS MVP award race is certainly heating up.

Sabathia had an absolutely beastly pitching performance. He was efficient, needing only 101 pitches to plow through 8 innings and only one of them - a homer to Kendry Morales - would he have wanted back. The big man pitched to weak contact all night, striking out 5 Angels and the Morales home run was the only hit for extra bases. He did it all three days rest in a game that Yankees didn't want to lean to heavily on their bullpen - a huge and timely contribution.

A-Rod smacked a single and stole a base in the 4th inning, scoring from third on a close, hard collision at the plate after an infield bouncer by Robinson Cano. Mike Napoli's foot knocked him pretty squarely in the chest but he slid in under the tag and popped right up, scoring the Yankees first run. Alex then cranked a two run homer in his next at bat in the 5th, putting the Yanks up 5-0. Adding on to an already massive night, he doubled in the 9th inning, tagged up and took off for third, putting the pressure on Bobby Abreu. The throw was close to being there on time, but it bounced away from Chone Figgins into the stands, allowing A-Rod to score. For those scoring at home, A-Rod either drove in or scored 4 of the Yankees' runs and played a big role in the ones he scored. He forced the action all night and took over the game offensively, as much as you could expect one player in a 9 man line up to.

Both were one-man wrecking crews who, along with Melky Cabrera in particular, combined to smash the Angels apart in a 10-1 victory. Melky broke out of a postseason slide with a move out of Derek Jeter's playbook, a well-placed push bunt single towards first base. It worked like a charm, busting the slump with a real hit his next time up. He came to the plate with the bases loaded in the 4th inning and knocked in two big runs with a broken bat single. Melky later drew a walk against Ervin Santana before being driven home on a Johnny Damon homer and knocked in two more runs with a double in the 9th inning.

Melky silenced his doubters, namely the one moron who said he should never put on a Yankee uniform again and the other one who told him to go to hell, in a big way last night just like CC and A-Rod continued to do.

There's a sort of beautiful symmetry that the two guys on the Yankees who were perceived as the biggest choke artists coming into this postseason have not only made people think twice about their individual mettle but also the concept of clutch in general. Hey, maybe it's not indicative of a flaw in someone's mental make up if they have some bad postseason performances, you know? Guys can play well or not during October for extended stretches and it's not an indication of some asset or defect in their make up.

Aside from A-Rod and CC, people are sure to talk about the curious calls that once again plagued this game. Third base umpire Tim McClelland was the one at the center of the controversy this time. (Conspicuously) soon after Nick Swisher should have been picked off second base, McClelland said that he left third too early on a sacrifice fly by Johnny Damon. When the Angels checked, Swish was out, completing an inning-ending double play. The replay showed that Swish didn't leave early, but it was of the split screen variety so it was at the whim of whoever put it together to line the two clips up perfectly.

More egregiously, McClelland missed a double play that the Angels should have had in the fifth inning. Jorge Posada was caught in a run down between third and home while Cano was advancing from second. Both were off the bag when Mike Napoli tagged them, but only Posada was called out. If Cano was being forced to the base (which he wasn't) it would have been the right call. If Cano had put his foot on the bag, it would have been the right call.

Alas, it was not, and McClelland as the crew cheif addressed the media after the game to explain his mistakes. He admitted he was wrong on the Posada-Cano call but understandably didn't trust the replay on Swisher's tag-up. Neither of the errors led to any Yankee runs.

Predictably, the grounded rationalists over at Halos Heaven are taking this well. Just kidding, they've uncovered a vast conspiracy between FOX, the MLB and the umpires to get the Yankees into the World Series because they draw bigger ratings.

Speaking of the MLB and FOX being in cahoots, we've got a non-travel off day to sit through because the league has to milk the TV ratings for as much as they are worth and can't have too many weekday games starting at 4:00. As such, we'll have to wait until Thursday to find out when the next game at Yankee Stadium will be played.

Lucky 13: Postseason Pie Part Deux

When Chone Figgins singled home the go-ahead run in the top of the 11th inning, I was pretty sure the Yankees would be heading to Anaheim tied 1-1. You'd figure the walk-off magic had to wear off at some point. The invincibility could only last so long, right? It had been a long night with little scoring and a cold, steady rain was beginning to fall.

When A-Rod led off the bottom of the 11th and promptly found himself in a 0-2 count against Brian Fuentes, the outlook appeared even more grim. Freddy Guzman and Brett Gardner were the next two Yankees on deck and only one could have been pinch hit for - by Jerry Hairston Jr. or Francisco Cervelli if the Yanks were really desperate.

But Fuentes left a fastball in the middle of the plate and A-Rod served it over the right field wall, just out of the reach of a jumping Bobby Abreu. The game was tied again and hope was restored.

It took two more innings, three more Yankee pitchers and a terrible decision by Macier Izturis before Jerry Hairston crossed the plate and won the game for the Yanks, but the Yanks would not be denied.

Too much went on during this 13 inning marathon to do a blow by blow recap, so let's head for the bullet points:

• A.J. Burnett was solid, with the exception of the 5th inning. He loaded the bases and via a single, walk and HBP and uncorked a wild pitch, but buckled down and didn't give up the lead. All told, he went 6 1/3, gave up 3 hits, struck out 4, walked 2 and allowed 2 runs.
  
  
• Joe Saunders did give up a home run, but largely stifled the Yanks otherwise, holding them to 2 runs of 7 IP and striking out 5 while walking just 1.
  
  
• The Yankees are now 17-0 this season when tied after 7 innings (including Game 2 of the ALDS). And that's not just at home. The team has continued to defy the odds over and over again, and the snowballing confidence has become a real asset. You could hear it in the post game comments. They've had an uncanny knack for coming away with the win under any circumstances or conditions or against any closer. Call it what you will - luck, magic, mojo, juju, never-say-die attitude, destiny, aura, positivity, good karma, clutchiferousness, God; the stuff that the best teams always have working for them (at least in retrospect) - it's certainly been on their side so far.
  
  
• Both teams fared miserably with runners in scoring position, combining to leave 30 men on base. The Yankees were 0-8 w/RISP, scoring their runs on two solo homers and an error while the Angels were 3-15 and with only 2 RBI. (The other run came on the WP by Burnett.
  
  
• Robinson Cano drove in a run with a triple in the second inning, but made some really big mistake which nearly sank the Yankees' chances from there on out. He rapped into a double play, erasing a lead off single in the 7th inning and made two errors on routine balls but was thankfully bailed out by his pitchers each time. The Yanks had no errors in the previous 4 games this postseason but had 3 tonight.
  
  
• Similarly, Derek Jeter homered in the third inning, but hit into a twin killing of his own and muffed a potential double play ball in the field.
  
  
• Joe Girardi asked Mariano Rivera for 2 1/3 innings, the most in an appearance since Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. Mo was as brilliant as ever, needing only 25 pitches to sit down 7 batters.
  
  
• Alfredo Aceves was the one who gave up the single to Chone Figgins in the 11th, the only one of the 7 relievers the Angels got to.
  
  
• A-Rod's homer was only the 3rd game-tying extra inning HR in postseason history. That's nearly unbelievable at first blush, but if you consider that only the home team can tie the game in extras, it's merely incredible.
  
  
• After Girardi used three pitchers in the 12th inning of a still-tied game, the only man remaining in the bullpen was Chad Gaudin. With the threat of a postponement still looming, it could have been costly to use four of his pitchers for less than one inning (Coke, Joba, Hughes and Marte). Girardi kept firing bullets and luckily, the offense bailed him out before the chamber was empty. And since Nick Siwsher was lifted for a pinch runner in the 7th, it would have been really empty.
  
  
• The decision by Macier Izturis to go to second base on the last play of the game was real, real bad. You've gotta take the sure out there. The Angels has almost no chance of turning two and getting the force at second would have done them essentially no good with the winning run already on third.
  
  
• Last night's game was only the 5th postseason game ever to end on an error.
  
  
• And lastly, meteorologists get a lot of flak for getting things wrong all the time, and usually I refrain from piling on, but this weekend is an exception. FAIL. We were told over and over again that rain would wreak havoc over one or both of these games but neither was so much as delayed. I understand it's not an exact science, there's gotta be some accountability.

The Yanks now lead the series 2-0 and will head for better weather out in Anaheim. The swing between 1-1 and 2-0 is huge because if the Yanks has lost this game, they would have gave up homefield advantage and shortened the series to 5 games.

It's late and that's all I've got for now. Chances are we will have some more thoughts about this game tomorrow today, so check back before football fires up.

Great win. Goodnight.

Closer Implosions

Good morning, Fackers. We began yesterday talking about Huston Street's blown save and how it fit into a trend of closers not being able to lock it down so far this postseason. Aside from the aforementioned meltdowns by Jonathan Papelbon, Joe Nathan and Ryan Franklin, other shutdown late inning relievers like Phil Hughes and Ryan Madson stumbled as well.

These late inning offense outbursts, couple with the long layover before the League Championships Series begin have swung a huge amount off attention towards the closer role and have fans of various allegiances doing a fair bit of hand wringing.

It's not just the fans though. David Pinto, a former chief researcher for Baseball Tonight whose Twitter moniker is "@StatsGuru" thinks Joel Sherman might be somehow jinxing the Yankees with this column, entitled "Rivera Gives Yankees Edge In October". Pinto says:

After watching Nathan, Papelbon, Street and Franklin get lit up, Joel Sherman really shouldn’t write this headline.

Pinto's own headline is "Bad Time To Put Your Faith In Closers", implying that they rise and fall in relation to each other as if they are some sort of commodity. That would be like saying that the LCSes are going to be terribly umpired even if Phil Cuzzi and C.B. Bucknor are watching at home. Anyone feel comfortable making that prediction? I don't think I have to remind a "Stats Guru" that a rash of bad performances by someone's peers doesn't make them anymore likely to mess up themselves.

Tom Verducci over at SI.com attempts to unlock the mysteries of October in a single column, entitled: "Here's why it's so hard to close out a game in October". Intriguing, yes? What secrets has Tom uncovered? How long must it have taken him to research countless postseasons to find the relevant trends? Enlighten us with you timeless findings, Mr. Verducci! [emphasis mine]

Take all the closers this postseason [...and] look at what they did in their 18 ninth-inning appearances of the Division Series, and compare that to the major league average ninth inning -- not just those thrown by closers -- for the 2009 season.

Wait, what??!?! Where do we even start with this statistical atrocity?

First and most obviously, he looks at one round of the Divisional Series with a robust sample size of 18 innings (or an average of just over 2 per pitcher) and tell us why "it's so hard to close out a game in October"? That's not even a good method of comparing data for this year, let alone postseason play in general. Apparently Dane Cook was right, there really is "ONLY ONE OCTOBER!!".

Secondly, why the Major League average 9th inning? If you wanted to find out what is unique about closing out games in October, it would probably be wise to compare that to closing out games in other months of the year, don't you think?

With this shoddy methodology, Verducci's main conclusions, aside from pressure which he mentions briefly, are that hitters have better scouting reports which they can only really pay attention during the postseason and batters have a more "intense focus".

But baseball is a zero sum game. So pitchers have better scouting reports and a more intense focus, too, right?

I'll grant Verducci the point that it is harder to close out games in October, but I think he's forgoing Occam's Razor in a major way here. Maybe closers' arms are a little bit worn out when the postseason rolls around, but does it really come down to much more than pressure and facing better offensive teams?

Did you see Joe Nathan's face when he was on the mound on Friday night? He looked like he was heading through US Customs with a kilo of cocaine in his suitcase, except even a tweaked out drug mule wouldn't have been doing that thing with his lips.

It's easy to dismiss pressure as a contributing factor during the regular season. Closers are built to handle the stress of closing down games and do it all the time, but rarely is there anything more on the line. Once the playoffs roll around, a blown save doesn't just cost you a game, it could very well cost your team their season. It's human nature to feel that pressure - we all do it as fans, just watching it on TV.

If it really was scouting reports and batter's focus, would Mariano Rivera have an 0.74 ERA in the postseason, almost exactly 1/3 of his regular season mark despite facing better competition and averaging more innings per appearance? I think not.

Mariano Rivera isn't perfect, but he's a lot better at dealing with pressure than any other closer remaining in the postseason, so Joel Sherman and Burt Blyleven don't think twice about the titles to their columns even though a bunch of lesser closers lost their shit in the LDSes.

There's no guarantee that Mo gets through this postseason perfectly. In fact, he already failed to clean up for Phil Hughes in Game 2, allowing an RBI single to Denard Span. But he came back out the next inning and got three outs. And he popped up on the mound in Game 3 in Minnesota to break Joe Mauer's bat like stale loaf of bread in the 8th inning and lock down the save in the 9th.

Saying that he gives the Yankees the edge isn't going to somehow jinx him, because there are no such thing as jinxes. He's the best postseason pitcher of all-time by a mile and if someone gets the best of him it's because nobody's perfect.

Getting A Couple Monkeys Off Of A Couple Backs

Good morning, Fackers. Last night's was obviously a pretty big win, but mostly because a loss would have been so devastating. Being that it's a short series and Games 3 & 4 are going to be played in the Metrodome, where the Twins were 49-33 this year, it's good to get the first one under our collective belt. The old dome in Minneapolis is going to be supercharged for the inevitable Game 3 and possible 4 given that they could be the last baseball contests ever staged there and they'll be packing them to the rafters and handing out hankies.

Last night was also huge for both CC and A-Rod. I was a little concerned after the egg he laid in Tampa Bay looking for win number 20, but Sabathia stepped up last night, getting some big outs, striking out 8 and allowing hardly any solid contact. He needed 113 pitches to get through 6 2/3, but he kept the Twins offense, which been so hot of late, at bay under very tough conditions.

A-Rod's not one but two hits with runners in scoring position broke a massive postseason drought spanning all the way back to Game 5 of the 2004 ALCS. He was hitting .143/.314/.214 with 1 RBI and two extra base hits in 70 plate appearances. In that span left 38 runners on base and was 0 for 27 with RISP. We don't give a whole lot of credence to the concept of clutch hitting around here, but it's undeniable that A-Rod wasn't just falling victim to bad luck.

If those 70 at bats had occurred in a row, there's no chance that his numbers would have been that bad. He would have kept swinging and worked out of it. But they spanned years and happened in small doses since the Yanks hadn't played in more than 5 postseason games in any season since then. The pressure began to build and he began to press, striking out in almost 1/3 of his at bats.

While it makes for a convenient tabloid story to talk about how Alex has some sort of a new-found focus since he admitted to using steroids, or is more comfortable in the clubhouse, the reality is that he's just too good of a hitter to slug .214 for very long, under any circumstances.

Arguably, or at least potentially the Yankees two most important players for this postseason, Sabathia and Rodriguez got off on the right foot last night. They've already cut themselves some slack, even if it's just in their own minds, so when A-Rod digs in on Friday night, the urgency of having to drive in a run will be gone. When Sabathia takes the hill next, whenever that might be, he won't have to prove that he can have a good outing in the postseason, because he already got that out of the way.

We can downplay the impact of pressure, but I think we can agree that those who perform well regardless of the level of pressure are the ones that don't change their approach. The feeling of urgency is unfamiliar to players who are constantly looking out for the long haul - that 162 game mega-marathon. The postseason might be a sprint, but the key is to keep running the same speed. Derek Jeter's OPS is almost exactly the same in the regular season as it is in the postseason (.847 & .850), yet he's perceived as a clutch god. The reality is that he's the same great player that he always is.

That's all the Yankees need right now. Not everyone can be Mariano Rivera and actually elevate their performance on the biggest stage. If Sabathia and A-Rod can just be their usual excellent selves, we'll be well on our way to a satisfying October.

Chip Caray Is Unclutch

(Photoshop via Sussman, via BBTF)

Sadly, I didn't even hear Chip Caray severely botch the call of Ryan Rayburn's throw home, calling it a "line drive, base hit" when it clearly was caught on the fly, instead pointing out a smaller error he made in the bottom of the 9th. Luckily, pretty much everyone else watching the game did.

This should come as no surprise though, as Caray has previously shown that the more important the moment is, the more likely he is to completely fuck it up. He did it in the 2007 ALDS against Cleveland too:

Caray does not distinguish a go-ahead run from a winning run. In Cleveland on Friday, he said the Indians had the winning run on second base in the bottom of the eighth, and he put the Yankees in the same position in the top of the ninth. Wrong.

I think we know who the real postseason choke artist taking part in this ALDS is. And it's not A-Rod.

A-Rod's Turbulent But Taciturn 2009

Good morning, Fackers. The Yankees and A-Rod in particular closed out the regular season with a bang yesterday.

This year will be remembered for a lot of things done by individual players. The debuts of CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira and A.J. Burnett, the emergence of Nick Swisher, the defensive re-invention of Derek Jeter, Robinson Cano's rebound, Jorge Posada's ability to contribute despite his shoulder and hamstring injuries, Johnny Damon's power surge, Chien Ming Wang's fall from grace, Phil Hughes' transition to the bullpen, Brett Gardner's first season in The Bigs, Mariano Rivera's continued excellence, Joba Chamberlain's innings limit, and the swan song of Hideki Matsui.

Am I missing anything? Oh yeah, A-Rod.

A-Rod endured what was certainly the most tumultuous offseason a player has had since Game of Shadows essentially convicted Barry Bonds of doing steroids in the court of public opinion before the 2006 season to have a pretty damn good year in 2009.

It started with Joe Torre's book, exploded with his admissions of steroid use, got worse with his interview with Peter Gammons and even more ugly with his press conference in Tampa. Adding still more fuel to the fire was the time he left the park with his disgraced cousin, the Details magazine photo shoot and the revelations that he was involved in a relationship with the madame of a whorehouse.

Those events were really just bad P.R. and weren't going to have much of an impact on his on-field production. Then came the news of his hip injury and the impending surgery which ultimately cost him the first month of the season. What was already a disastrous offseason got tangibly, inarguably a whole lot worse. At least it seemed pretty terrible at the time. (Click through that one for one of my finer photoshops)

But at a certain point when he was hiding out and rehabbing in Colorado, things started to change. The details of Selena Roberts's book began to leak and some had the potential to be very damning, but the tide began to turn. Craig from Shysterball was among the first to question the motives and level of objectivity Roberts used in writing her exposé and fairly swiftly, we all grew tired of the never ending stream of A-Rod's exploits.

Then of course he rejoined the team in a moment a movie studio would have rejected because it was too unrealistic; a three run shot on the very first pitch he saw. Although he struggled early on in his return, the back to back days off he got off in Florida seemed to turn his season around.

Since his return the Yankees went 88-44 and climbed from 4.5 games behind the Red Sox to achieve the best record in baseball by 6 games. Since his two day hiatus they are 62-28. He was probably given too much credit for turning Mark Teixeira's season around, but it's hard to understate the importance of swapping replacement-level guys like Angel Berroa and Cody Ransom for one of the 5 best hitters in the game.

We've heard a lot about the fact that A-Rod has flown under the radar this year. Joel Sherman recently talked about his newfound ability to blend in with the team. Yesterday, Marc Carig dubbed him the "Quietest Yankee". Even our pal PeteAbe, who has never been too fond of the slugger, gave him credit for his ability to "blend in [and] stay out of the news".

Did anyone see this coming? I'll be the first to admit that I did not. One the posts I wrote before the season started and liked above was entitled "This Is Never Going To End" and another was "Hurricane A-Rod". I put up another one comparing him to an actual Albatross. At the time it looked like he was spiraling out of control and I think we should be very thankful that he did not.

It's not just that he eclipsed the 30 home run and 100 RBI marks for the 13th straight season, miraculously breaking a record he previously shared with Jimmie Foxx and Manny Ramirez. A-Rod actually had a higher on-base percentage than in 2008 despite batting 16 points lower. He changed his approach at the plate and as a result struck out in 18.2% of his plate appearances, down from 19.6% in 2008.

Fifty-one of his 100 RBIs tied the game or gave the Yankees the lead (although that didn't stop a certain insufferably bitter Yankee blogger who didn't even watch yesterday's game from dismissing the homers because they came in "garbage time"). He stole 14 bases and got caught only twice. He gave the Yankees more production than they could have reasonably expected given the injury he was coming off of.

I'm not going to fall into the trap of saying any of this makes him more likely to have a great postseason. I thought his ridiculous MVP campaign in 2007 set him up to break out of his October slump but it most definitely did not. The reality is that a 5 game series is a tiny, tiny sample and there is no guarantee that he will get the big hit or hits that he is seemingly due for.

I'm sure as hell hoping it happens, though. A-Rod is a power hitter with holes in his swing, who seems to alter his approach when the pressure elevates, neither of which portend profound postseason production. But as he's demonstrated time and time again, he can carry a team when he finds his groove. Maybe this is the year he finally gets hot in the postseason, and maybe it's not. If it is though, the other teams standing in the Yankees' way had better watch out.

Game 155: Guilty Until Proven Innocent

With the magic number for the Yankees to clinch the AL East and the one for the Red Sox to secure a playoff spot both sitting at 3, last night the Yanks took an important step towards preventing the Sox from sullying the visitor's clubhouse with celebratory champagne. With the Rangers' win last night, the Yankees can ensure that the Sox don't pop the bubbly at the New Stadium with two more victories and in the process, wrap up the division for themselves. The Yanks seem to be taking that apporach seriously, as they trot out the "A" line up again, including catching Jorge Posada in a (late) day game after a night game. [UPDATE 2:53 P.M.: According to LoHud, Posada has been scratched with a stiff neck. It's been bothering him since the Jesse Carlson incident nearly two weeks ago]

Unlike last night, the starter climbing the mound for the Red Sox is the one with something to prove. Daisuke Matsuzaka has managed to generate a lot of buzz during the two starts he's made since emerging from his exile in Fort Myers but objective observers still have some questions as to whether he's really "back and better than ever".

His first start was quite excellent but his last one against the Orioles was a lot closer to the old Dice-K: decent results but inefficient with his pitches. He threw 110 of them over 5 1/3 innings, allowing 8 hits and three runs. He walked away with the win, but the myth of the new and improved Matsuzaka took a bit of a hit down in Baltimore.

For whatever reason, Matsuzaka is being discussed as a "weapon" in the postseason, but CC Sabathia is considered more of a liability. CC is 8-0 in his last 10 starts dating back to the beginning of August and the Yankees have won every single one of those games. Over that time he has an ERA of 2.24 and struck out 77 while giving up just 55 hits and walking only 17. You'd think that that people might be making a bigger deal out of this. After all, he just signed a monster contract this offseason and plays for the best team in baseball.

However, just like Zack Greinke's terrible team makes it harder for his great season to be recognized, the fact the the Yankees have already pulled away from the pack means that Sabathia's great stretch gets largely swept under the rug because it doesn't appear to factor into the playoff race either. The problem with this logic is that if CC was pitching poorly, his team would be a whole lot closer to the pack.

Part of the equation is that Sabathia is as pure of a late-season pitcher as there is in the game. His career ERA in September and October regular season games is 2.67 and his next closest month is August at 3.14. His ERA in all other months is 4.01. Maybe writers feel like they've heard the story before. But more likely, it seems that they want to talk about his lack of success in the 5 starts he's made in the postseason. It seems he's a choker until proven clutch; guilty until proven innocent.

Look in my eyes dog, right in my pupils
If I'm your rival, why would I have to do you?
Press try to throw dirt on my name, disturbin' my game,
Seemed happy when they heard he was arraigned.

Thursday Night News And Links

It's Thursday, and the Yankees once again have the night off. Former Yankees General Manager and Hall of Famer George M. Weiss has some suggestions to keep you occupied in the meantime.

The Red Sox play the Royals out in Kansas City tonight, which means they will be making a pretty late arrival to NYC tomorrow morning. The magic number is currently at 5 after a Sox win last night, but it could drop to 4 if they lose tonight. This means that the Yanks would have to take just two out of three to clinch the division at home against Boston. Something called Anthony Lerew would have to out pitch Clay Bucholz for that to happen, however.

The Twins and Angels are off, but Tigers are playing the Indians tonight and sending Justin Verlander to the hill. Detroit still holds a 2.5 game lead over Minnesota but those teams have 4 head to head games remaining against reach other, so anything could happen.

In college football, #4 Ole Miss (the highest ranking the school has had since Archie Manning played there) takes on South Carolina.

Peter Gammons has sure elicited some strong reaction after suggesting the MLB might want to "think" about adding one Wild Card team to each league. Craig Calcaterra thinks the system is fine the way it is. Kevin Kaduk concurs. Jason thinks it ain't broke neither. Joe from RAB would actually prefer the playoffs to be scaled down before they are expanded.

Joel Sherman is just about the only person I've heard agree with Gammons, citing the fact that it's nearly impossible for a team other than the Yankees and the Red Sox to make the postseason in the current format.

In related news, since the Blue Jays won't be contending any time soon, Joe from RAB suggests that the Jays trade Roy Halladay and get some value for him while they still can.

Fangraphs takes a look at A-Rod in the postseason since he's joined the Yankees and points out that over the same span, Derek Jeter hasn't been any great shakes either. An astute commenter points out that saying A-Rod "doesn't" hit well in the playoffs (like the post did) is much different that saying he "hasn't" which implies that he still could.

Speaking of FanGraphs, they released their iPhone app today. For $2.99, you get live WPA and most everything you'd expect to be available from the website. Yes, I've already downloaded it.

Jayson Stark ranks the playoff rotations.

Jon from Subway Squawkers wonders if the Yankees are a leading economic indicator.

Via Baseball Musings, Rays Index points out that before the Daily News crowns the Yankees' infield the best ever, they might want to take into consideration that the Rays' IF put up better numbers this year.

Jim Rice: Still an ass.

Our boy HowFresh calls out Plaxico Burress for the last meal he ate before he went to prison and shows him how it's done.

Terrible news for Giants fans.

And finally, this is pretty damn cool. (via Schiff on Google Reader)

Today In Dumb Headlines

"CC Sabathia proves he's a winner by earning fifteenth victory against Boston"

I'm glad that we now have this "proof", because had he earned his 15th victory against the Angels, he still would have been a total loser. Or if it was his only his 14 victory, we would still have to suspend our judgement. We can't blame John Harper for the writing that, but we sure can for this:

On the matter of pitching, after all, regardless of the era there are the Javier Vasquez types, pitchers whose stuff always seems to be better than their records, and then there are the Jack Morris types, pitchers whose records are more impressive than their ERA because they know how to win.

Sabathia gave the Yankees something of a Jack Morris game Sunday night, at least by the pitch-count limits of today's game, going 6 2/3 innings, allowing four runs, three earned.

Harper then cites affirmative quotes from Joe Girardi, but oddly finishes by talking about Sabathia's shortcomings in the postseason, apparently implying that he forgets how to win once the playoffs roll around.

I get the feeling a lot of pitchers "know how to win" games when the guy who they are opposing gives up 8 runs. Craig from Shysterball points us to a Baseball Prospectus article which shows that Jack Morris was not uniquely adept at "pitching to the scoreboard" and shuns the notion in general. Pitchers shouldn't ever want to give up runs, and just like hitters trying to score them, can't really control when it happens, just how often it does in the long run.

Earlier this year, we noted that the Yankees were 11-11 in Sabathia's starts primarily because he was receiving the least run support out of any of their 4 regular starters. Since then, he's ripped off 5 straight victories while the team has averaged just under 8 runs per game in support of him. It's not rocket science or psychology here, folks. The guy is a good pitcher and when he's backed by a strong offensive performance, he's likely to walk away with the win.

It's Only One Game, Now Excuse Me While I Blow It Out Of Proportion

Hat Guy is at it again. Someone must have told him that FJM shut down their operation and he's taunting them into starting it back up again. I don't care if this is unoriginal. Ken Tremendous is rolling over in his digital grave right now, and I must do something about it. It would be a bigger sin to let this article sit there on NBC Sports without pointing out how factually incorrect and schizophrenic it is. Celizic is simultaneously telling everyone to relax because it's only one game, and totally, wildly, insanely overreacting to that game.

"Leash Just Got Shorter For Girardi, Yanks"

Yes... 1/162nd shorter. 0.0617% shorter.

It’s a good thing for the Yankees that you don’t draw broad conclusions from one game, because if you did, the conclusion would be expressed in two words: they stink.

It's a good thing the first part of that sentence doesn't say you can't do something, only to have the second half of the sentence do that exact thing.

Most of the time when a team loses, they are going to look like "they stink". If a team wins 90 games in a season, they are going to look good in probably 90 of them (most wins, but some close losses) and look bad in the other 72 (most of their losses and a few sloppy wins). No matter how good a team is, they aren't going to impress you in every game they appear in. That's baseball.

The offense rallied to cut the Baltimore lead to 6-5, but when Derek Jeter, who had three hits in the game, had a chance to tie it, he failed. And then when expensive free-agent acquisition Teixeira had a chance to put the team ahead, he, too, failed.

I can see knocking Teixeira for having a bad day at the plate after the Baltimore fans put the focus on him by booing him mercilessly, but Jeter? He went 3 for 5 and left one guy on-base. Reading this column, you would think that the first three hits counted towards Spring Training. A message from Mike Celizic to Derek Jeter: If you can't hit in the clutch, don't bother hitting at all.

You wouldn’t expect to find panic in the clubhouse after one loss with 161 left to play, and you didn’t. Girardi was calm. The players were calm. It’s a powerful team and they just need to play Yankee baseball.

So why are you writing this article again?

This is all good, but the fact remains that the Yankees didn’t just lose. They played a bad baseball game. That’s not supposed to on Opening Day.

YES IT IS!!!! This is exactly when it is supposed to happen. It's the first fucking day of the season. Everyone is still rusty. Teixeira is a notoriously slow starter. Sabathia had a 7.76 ERA in April last year.

What had to be mystifying to Yankee fans was watching Sabathia’s pitch count mount into mid-season levels without getting any relief. Even when it was obvious Sabathia had nothing left (How could he? He had nothing to begin with.), Girardi left him in the game as his pitch count climbed to 96.

Count me among the unmystified. 96 pitches is not "mid-season levels" for CC Sabathia, you hysterical moron. You know how many times he threw fewer than 96 pitches last year? Fucking TWO (April 11th & 16th), and he gave up nine earned runs in both of them.

Too much may be made of pitch counts in today’s game.

Sort of like what you are doing right now?

But when your ace pitcher is struggling in the season’s first game and it’s so cold he has to hold a heating pad to his stomach — Sabathia’s favorite organ — between innings, it seems senseless to let him throw that many pitches.

If Sabathia is like any other guy I know, his favorite organ is a little further South. And it's 96 pitches. I've never heard anyone complain about a starter throwing fewer than 100 pitches before. Senseless is letting him take the hill in the ninth inning when his pitch count was already 111 and the Brewers were up by 7 runs.

Sabathia is not in mid-season form. Why give him a mid-season pitch count? It just seems a risky thing to do in a game that the Yankees were already out of.

Except they weren't out of it, were they, Mike? Take a look at the box score. Yes, they were down 6 to 1, but if you hadn't rushed to your computer to start writing this retarded column, you might have noticed that they Yankees pulled to within one run in the 7th. You mentioned it above. Remember? It was when you were crushing Jeter and Teixeira for being unclutchiferous.

But it’s early; just one game and one questionable pitching decision by the manager.

Questionable if you wear a fedora and refuse to look up Sabathia's pitch counts on Baseball-Reference.com.

If the Yankees win on Wednesday and keep winning, it will all be forgotten. If they don’t, by the time the team opens their new park, there will be calls in the tabloids for Congressional investigations.

What sort of Congressional investigations they would be calling for? That doesn't even begin to make sense or be funny.

Somewhat ironic that he uses "tabloids" derisively here. This is the epitome of knee-jerk, tabloid "journalism", except it's not even well written enough to appear in the Post or Daily News.

Last year was a free one for Girardi and the Yanks. This year isn’t. It’s just one game and one loss, but the pressure is already on.

It's just one column which constantly contradicts itself, but Mike Celizic still has no idea what he's talking about. The pressure was on when they signed Sabathia, Burnett and Teixeira. It didn't come from losing the first game of the season.

-----

Keep them coming, Mike. I'll be here waiting.