last week it was the umpires, tonight it was the defense. Next week wit will be the weather and then eventually we'll agree that he sucks. Look, I hope youre right. As a matter of fact, I hope it turns out that you're actully UNDER estimating what he will turn out to be. But your predicting that hes gonna be "solid" is just as likely or unlikely to come to fruition as my prediction that he wont make it in MLB. So again, you can have your opinion and Ill have mine.
Really? Because he didn't look terrible when he first got called up as a 21-year old, aside from hurting his leg. Based on what? He's never had arm problems, from what I can remember. A pulled hammy, an oblique tweaked, and a cracked rib. Remember when everyone thought Jose Reyes was going to be injury prone because of a couple of odd injuries like that at the start of his career? Remember when he averaged almost 160 games a season the last four years? Hughes has a great frame, clean mechanics, and no history of arm trouble. If anyone expected him to just step right in and be an ace, they're retarded. And if anyone is now calling him terrible based on one great start, one shitty one, and one lousy one, they're double-retarded. You people are all insane. Livan for Hughes, straight up, right now. He's a proven winner!
Yes, he did. He was missing the glove by a good amount, and couldn't get his breaking stuff over. He didn't pitch as bad as his line, but he looked awful out there. Tonight. Anyone can SPECULATE that. But how would you explain that first outing? Looked pretty dominant there. Seems a more likely explanation would be that he's 22 years old, and inconsistent with his command. You know... the way a lot of young pitchers are. Now you're just making stuff up. Especially considering that all of his injuries (since you've heard of him) are unrelated to a pitcher's durability. They've all been fluky. You realize you're talking about a 22-year-old, right? There IS no book on him. There hasn't been enough time for there to be a book on him. But people do love to have their freak outs. Perhaps I should just let them. People thought he could be an ace on this team WHEN? Today? Tomorrow? In three years? I thought (and still do think) that he can and will be a serviceable pitcher at the big league level right now. Will he have games like tonight's? Yup. But, hey, Wang, Sabathia, and Burnett have also put up stinkers this year. Will he also have great outings? Yup. Again, go look at what Santana did at Hughes' age. Go look at what Halladay did. Go look at James Shields and when he made it happen. Freak outs like this are why Yankee fans get a bad name.
Yeah, but my opinion is based on realistic expectations, not overreactions to a handful of games. And the whole point that you're missing is that this move was not rejected with the expectation that dividends would be paid in 2008 or 2009 (or maybe even 2010). It's the several years after that.
I'm not arguing about anything based on that potential deal. Though honestly, I think they might be better off with Sabathia and Hughes than they would be with just Santana. And that's coming from a dude who would be fully willing to attempt rearing Johan's children in spite of the biological impossibilities.
I totally understand that. But if Hughes doesnt turn into something more than a 4th starter then it was a terrible mistake. Agreed? I dont think he'll be more than a 4th starter
Yeah, but not many fans have the chance to say, "We should have Cy Young winners in every slot in the rotation every year!" Yankee fans seem to feel that they're entitled to it. And - even more frustratingly - when the team tries to adopt a team-building strategy that increases the likelihood that they'll develop top-notch pitchers... the fan base revolts when they have to deal with the growing pains of development. Sorry, but not even Johan Santana pitched like Johan Santana when he first came up.
If that happens, I guess it will have been a mistake. But I don't know how terrible a mistake it would have been, because - in all likelihood - we wouldn't have been able to afford CC this past off season. Right now, we have Sabathia in place of Santana, PLUS we still have all the prospects. So we'd have Santana, but we'd be watching Gardner in CF right now, and have Igawa starting these games instead of Hughes. Does that make you feel better? Doesn't make me feel better.
how about this scenario...we have Santana and then last off season we add CC...no Burnett and no Tex......actually maybe even still Burnett..but lets keep him off for now. Santana, CC, Wang, Pettitte, Joba
I get what youre saying about having to watch Gardner in CF(who was your boy a few weeks ago mind you) but I have to believe we could have found some sort of a CF at least on par with the Melk man
I don't know if I would go so far as to say Gardner was "my boy"... I think he was better than we've seen from him this year (and still do), but he's not a good major league player. He would be a placeholder for Austin Jackson at best. At least Melky has potential. (As I've said elsewhere, I think people forget that Melky is still only 24.) But I know you don't like Gardner, which is why I make the point. Remember, if we got Santana, we have the same payroll that we do right now with Sabathia, only we don't have Hughes, Kennedy, Melky (and possibly one other prospect). I'm not sure that we would have added anyone. Regardless, the point is that you don't write off prospects like Hughes at his age after such a small body of work. He's shown flashes of brilliance (which means he has the talent) and inconsistency (which happens to young pitchers/players). To write anyone off at his age, after what he's done, is insanity.
Oi. I'm back agreeing with Cappy and a Mets fan. :smile: Anyway, I missed most of the game, since I was at a party. I didn't see Hughes pitch at all, but I still refuse to worry about him at all. I still believe that he'll be a great MLB pitcher. And if anyone doesn't think Melky is a major upgrade over what we'd have as a centerfielder with Gardner, they might be mildly retarded. As for Kennedy, who knows? He's having surgery now, so that's always something to think about. Even if he busts that still leaves the book open on Hughes and Cabrera. Santana is awesome. Yippie. If we got him we'd definitely be down Hughes, Melky and Kennedy (we'll even ignore the "fourth player" that some people deny would exist.) On top of that, we would not have brought in Sabathia, and it's doubtful we'd have brought in Burnett or Teixeira. (As much as Teixeira is on my shit list, when he breaks out, he's going to be dangerous.) The fact is, the Yankees suck. Not any one particular player, but the whole frigging team. On any given night you have no clue who is going to fail. Will it be the starter? Will it be the pen? Will it be the silent bats? Will it be the shitty gloves? The team's problem is consistency. Well, that and the fact that no one can seem to stay healthy. I blame the coaching staff, as I've said repeatedly. #1 on my hit list isn't even Girardi anymore. It's Dave Eiland. This pitching staff is in shambles. There's no way this much talent should be this bad. If it were a couple guys who were inconsistent, then fine, we've got bad apples. When everyone has not just bad, but tragically terrible nights, it's time to look at what links them together. Girardi is still on the list though. This team is physically unprepared for games, mentally feeble, and poorly run in-game. Girardi runs this team like Torre did. He acts like a team full of superstars should be able to coach itself. Well, it can't.
Alio, your first sentence is inssane. You REFUSE to even worry about hughes and you're sure he'll be GREAT? C'mon, if im ridiculous for writing him off then youre insane for those two comments
For the sake of accuracy, Alio said he "still believes he'll be a great pitcher." Not that he's sure he'll be great. As for refusing to worry about him... that's kind of the whole point. You don't freak out about a 22-year-old pitchers individual performance on a game by game basis. Hate the game he pitched all you want. But you don't take a handful of game by a young pitcher and label him a bust. Could he turn out to be Jeff Weaver? Um... sure. But people weren't even writing off Jeff Weaver when he was 22. Could he turn out to be Johan Santana? Um... sure. Santana put up ugly numbers at the same age as Hughes, and wasn't a full-time starter until he was 25. Please note: I am not suggesting that we compare Hughes to either of those pitchers or that they are similar or whatever... I'm just showing why you don't make concrete judgments about very young pitchers. Hughes has shown the ability to get major league hitters out. At this point, he just needs consistency.
The bolded area makes no sense. You can say we might not have brought in CC but why not Burnett and Tex? We signed CC, Burnett and Tex...Santana's contract is smaller than CC's right? So why not Santana, Burnett and Tex? Makes no sense
