WasWatching.com

How about the news, that had an offer in place that included Hughes, Melky, Marquez, and Hilligoss?

We all saw with our own eyes, Hughes had moments of greatness last season. However, he also looked overmatched in others.

If what we're hearing about Hughes, and now whats coming out about IPK, let me be the first in line to knock down BC's door at the stadium and call for his head.

How do you not jump on that deal?

It's too bad just about every scout disagrees with Brower.

Hughes was throwing slower, earlier in the year because he needs to work into his fastball. Did you see him in September and in the playoffs? He was sitting 91, 92 and hitting mid-90s. Hughes himself said that he wasn't in midseason shape even in September.

Kennedy is a good prospect. But he is documented by scouts to have a 88-92 mph fastball. Hughes is documented around 93, 94. He's also definitively not a 'full-effort' pitcher. So he can hit 97 if he really has to. These are scouting reports, by people who get paid to judge pitchers, not a washed-up guy who dreams of throwing 90 mph.

Eh, I don't put much faith in that Madden report (I assume you were referring to the NY Daily News article saying that Marquez and Hilligoss would've been enough to get it done and it was only the money that made Cashman balk.) At this point, I don't see why the Twins would back down from demanding IPK in the deal. With the lack of premier pitching on the market, what could possibly be their hurry? If anything, judging by the hue and cry of the Yankee media, fans, and mensa genius Steve Phillips, the more time that goes by this offseason, the more pressure will build to deal Hughes et al for Santana. I have mixed feelings on that, mostly mixed negative.

first of all, i'm not sure jim brower knows too much about stuff. second, didn't his little stay with the yankees coincide with hughes coming back from the hammy and ankle when he wasn't pushing off his back leg as hard?

What does his fastball's not overpowering even mean? Do his strikeouts not count because Jim Brower says his fastball isn't overpowering?

This seems like a clear case of bias here. Brower didn't throw hard and probably has some affection for other guys who succeed without blazing fastballs. 'Hughes is just a thrower, but that kid Kennedy is a pitcher, man.' Just throw in a "he plays the game the right way" and we can call it a day.

Hughes's velocity was down as a result of the leg injuries. If Brower had seen him pitch at the end of 2006, he would know that he was regularly hitting 95 mph.

As for Kennedy, I like him a lot, but as far as the comparisons to Mussina, when Mussina was Kennedy's age, he was throwing around 3 mph harder.

Sorry for throwing something random on here, but this article has been making waves through RLYW from Joel Sherman. Any thoughts from you or anyone else?

The quote was this (from http://tinyurl.com/2lofbc):

"4. How good is this Yankee package? Hughes is the surest thing, and he has a questionable work ethic and more of an injury history at 21 than Santana at 28."

Sherman on ESPN 1050 with Max Kellerman: Hughes's conditioning is a poorly kept secret within the Yankees' organization. That's why they had Clemens and Pettitte work with Hughes. Joba supposedly works incredibly hard. He also says that Jeter doesn't like to run and do agility drills. Cano isn't a hard worker.
___

IMO, smearing someone without naming a source is borderline libelous. Since he didn't name a source, I think it's reasonable to dismiss everything that Sherman said, because it's impossible to assess whether or not someone has an agenda. Instead it reduces Sherman to the status of a gossip columnist rather than a journalist.

First, consider the source. Is it possible that a sportswriter in Minnesota would solicit an unfavorable review of Hughes and bolster it with a more favorable review of Kennedy? Then, think of the context. Did Minnesota not just 48 hours ago demand that Hughes wasn't enough and that Kennedy had to be a part of the deal? Even if what Brower says is true -- which is absolutely a debatable point -- I still take this story with a grain of salt, given the agenda it is carrying. Come on, media in Minnesota panders to the dopes in their city as much as the Post panders to the dopes in ours.

As for Sherman's riff on Jeter, Hughes, and Cano being lazy, I have no comment at all. I have heard people say that Cano loafs and I've also heard people say that he worked incredibly hard with Larry Bowa the past two years. I've never heard anything bad about Hughes and I wouldn't automatically assume that putting Pettitte/Clemens with Hughes meant anything beyond having the kid work with an All-Star and a Hall of Famer. As for Jeter, I've never heard anyone rip his work ethic. What's Sherman's axe to grind here? Plus, mentioning Jeter with Cano and Hughes? What, Sherman thinks Jeter should be traded? Go "eff" yourself, Sherman.

I've thought this for a couple of years now. Sherman is nearing 50 and, for all intents and purposes, he's hit and passed his career peak. You'll note he's no longer a "regular" on those local sports talk shows he was showing up on all over the place in the early part of the decade. I think he's bitter. He's settling into Mike Lupica syndrome except, at least, Lupica had a chance to fail at having his own TV and radio shows. Sherman never got that far. These "insights" are too little, too late to gain any credibility. He's been sitting on these "nuggets" until today? Give me a break.

~~He also says that Jeter doesn't like to run and do agility drills. ~~

A knee injury will do that to a guy.

Pete Gray, I've heard from an unnamed source, would never use his right arm in any stretching sessions or agility drills. His defenders (or enablers, if you will) say that's because he only had one arm...his left. I simply ask: isn't that a convenient excuse for an obvious tendency toward laziness?

Hughes is your new target since bagging on A-Rod was probably getting tiring even for you, huh, Steve?

~~Hughes is your new target since bagging on A-Rod was probably getting tiring even for you, huh, Steve?~~

See: http://www.waswatching.com/archives/2007/09/some_housekeepi_1.html

I think Jim Brower's probably about as a good a pitching analyst as he was a pitcher.

I think Jim Brower's probably about as a good a pitching analyst as he was a pitcher.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That made me laugh out loud. :-)

I just wonder when it gets tiring to create posts that state, without subtlety, that Phil Hughes is a crappy pitcher. No stuff, no velocity, blah, blah, blah. Okay -- he sucks. He's garbage. Trade him for Aaron Cook already. Make him clean the shit out of Stein's stables. We get it, we get it -- he's going to fail and you can't wait to say you told us so. Sigh.

Anyway, when Brower saw Phil in AAA, he was making his rehab starts after having not pitched in months. The writer of that article might have wanted to mention that -- you know, to be honest.

Sherman is a flat-out douchebag, he always has been, and it's been his sport to smack the Yankees around since 2003. I can't stand him. He constantly uses anonymous "AL/NL GMs," "scouts," "unnamed sources" to fill out his columns, which are nothing more than his own opinion. He's a disgrace, and Madden is just as bad -- he's already started the "Kennedy and Hughes better be good or I will behead Brian Cashman" talk. All these years the N.Y. media bashed the Yankees for being old and not having a farm system and buying championships; now Cashman wants to hang onto the youth and NOT giving someone twenty million, and they say he's an idiot. Make up your mind already.

All these years the N.Y. media bashed the Yankees for being old and not having a farm system and buying championships; now Cashman wants to hang onto the youth and NOT giving someone twenty million, and they say he's an idiot. Make up your mind already.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hear, hear!

And if the Yanks end up with Santana, you can be guaranteed that none of these jerkoffs would be neglecting to mention his $25M annual salary, reminding us of every time Hughes does anything good, and how the Yanks suck for not winning a World Series since 2000.

It's a no-win with the guys that write about sports in the mainstream. They know that bloggers have made them irrelevant and they're fighting the uphill battle to keep people interested by getting more and more outrageous with their straw-man arguments and their yellow-dog journalism.

It's why WW, RLYW, and Banter are the only places I get my Yankee news from. Why waste time reading schmucks like Sherman and Lupica?

It's nitpicky, but it always bugs me with ages being misquoted.

Hughes turned 21 mid-year. Kennedy will turn 23 in about a week.

Brower only played with Hughes @ AAA when Hughes was rehabbing from his TWO injuries. Not that it matters much, but Hughes fastball was mid-90s before his injuries and mid-90s after his injuries, once his arm strength built back up. You can see the difference in the stats when you look at his Sept. '07 stats by themselves.

I would argue that Hughes has more upside than Joba. He has 4 very polished pitches and Joba really only has 2 at this point. I've seen Hughes get by without his best stuff on many occasions. I think that is the mark of a good, consistent pitcher.

This is not to diminish Kennedy at all - I just think this is an inaccurate assessment of the two.

Yeah, exactly. I remember Sherman bemoaning the loss of Brandon Claussen and Brad Halsey. He would constantly mention them when they did something well, but fail to mention they both sucked. Sherman, like Lupica, just seems like a miserable person. Hey, you're getting paid to write about baseball -- cheer the hell up.

Incidentally, now that the Yanks are out of the Santana deal, word is that the Twins are asking around to other teams. Even the Mets are back in it. Gammons is saying Santana might not get traded at all. I read this as: once Hughes was off the table, the Twins didn't see anything worth trading Santana for. Lester just isn't enough.

It would be amazing if after all this Santana just played out his final year for the Twins.

It would be even more amazing if he took another step back stats-wise and his price dropped considerably.

I read this as: once Hughes was off the table, the Twins didn't see anything worth trading Santana for. Lester just isn't enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Turns the "Twins don't like Hughes that much" theory on its head, doesn't it?

~I just wonder when it gets tiring to create posts that state, without subtlety, that Phil Hughes is a crappy pitcher.~

I think it's extra heavy now because the great Tyler Clippard has been exiled.

we get it Steve, you hate Hughes.

anyway, considering that in most of Hughes' starts, his fb velocity was good (90-92), not great, and he still managed to K a lot of guys with it says that when he does get his 92-95 velocity back that he could dominate.

I guess all those scouts that had Hughes as the top pitching prospect in all of baseball were wrong and Jim Brower was right. But, even if you agree with everything Brower says here, Steve seems to miss the most important part of his analysis: His claim that both could win 15 games next year. That's pretty remarkable for pitchers of their age and experience. 30 wins from Hughes and IPK is more than we'd get from Santana.

~~~we get it Steve, you hate Hughes.~~~

Please show me where I said that...please.

This is the problem: Hughes is a G.O.D. to so many Yankees fans, and, when someone, like me, comes along and says "Hey, you know that dude, who is an OK dude, by the way, has some less than perfect things about him..."

...then, the mobs form, the pitch-forks come out, the fires are lit...and the screams begin:

That BASTARD Steve is not kneeling down before our G.O.D, the GREAT Phil Hughes!!! Stone him! Burn him!! DESTROY HIM!!! How DARE he SUGGEST that our GOD is less than perfect!!!!

All I can say is, please, chill out friends...and, please, don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say, OK?

I like what I saw from Hughes at the end of the season,especially in the playoff game he pitched.Does he have a downside...heck yeah.But with Andy coming back that slack work ethic could be whipped up into shape.Girardi will definitely make sure that Hughes gets on point.Right now,the Jays even have a better 1-12 then the Yankees do,BUT with these three young pitchers things might change in a hurry.Then again,that brings up an even bigger problem than Hughes:the bullpen!

*A knee injury will do that to a guy.*

True, but I don't think that he was talking about just last season.

Again, I discount anything that comes form an anonymous source.

~All I can say is, please, chill out friends...and, please, don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say, OK?~

Respectfully, please don't put words in our mouths either.

You're right, I don't remember you writing you hate Hughes, all I remember is reading you trying to show only the bad things and in my opinion for what it's worth, stretching things to try to make your points.

It's your blog, of course you should write what you want to but you're getting back to your 2006 period of trying to nitpick about everything that could possibly show the bad side of Arod.

you're right, you never said you hated Hughes, i was merely exaggerating your constant negativity toward him.

but tell me where anyone called him G.O.D.
we are just very excited about the best pitching prospect we've had, maybe ever. the dude was 20 throwing a no-hitter in his 2nd ML start! he was our best starter in Sept. & Oct.! i know he aint perfect, but there's a lot to be excited about, dont you think?

What did Brower say that was so crazy? Hughes' fastball is not overpowering. But there does seem to be something about his four-seamer that hitters don't pick up so well. This doesn't mean Hughes won't be good.

Anyway, I would have traded both Kennedy and Hughes for Santana. Both of these kids could easily wind up as mediocre ML pitchers and Santana is already a dominant guy who is still in his prime.

Pulsipher-Wilson-Issringhausen...

I would rather gamble my "future" (whatever that means) on a 28-year old superstar.

Pulsipher-Wilson-Issringhausen...
----

Generation K is by far the most overused comparison in baseball. Those three pitchers do not set the standard for all future pitching prospects. Look around baseball -- there are young pitchers on nearly every team contributing to their teams and in some cases dominating. How about in this division alone? Kazmir and Beckett were once highly-regarded prospects. How'd that work out? Right now teams are knocking down the door to get to Eric Bedard, who at 21/22/23 wasn't anywhere near as polished as the three pitchers the Yankees have.

Generation K feels like someone talking about World War II at this point. Let's try to update things a little and talk about Verlander, Hernandez, Cain, Gallardo... and a dozen more young pitchers in the game today.

Don't know about you guys, but I didn't reach my top strength at 21. Mo's fastball took off at the age of ~25. Some guys have it early. Clemens, Gooden, Ryan come to mind. But a lot, probably most, of guys’ fastballs don't really start jumping until they are a couple of years older. As good as Seaver was early, his strikeouts/IP didn't soar until he was 25. Gibson took off ~ 28. So did J.R. Richards. Some of that is physiology. Some of that is mechanics. The one thing I've observed about Hughes is that occasionally his mechanics get a little off. When this happens, the most noticeable thing is that curveball stays up. But, it surely will affect the pop on his fastball as well. That will likely work out over time. I think he projects as at least a solid #2, probably better.

One other thing I can report.... based on my most trusted source... my own eyes... By mid- January, every year since 1999, I've personally seen Jeter running wind sprints and taking BP at the minor league complex in Tampa.

Just so everyone knows Hughes' velocity, and we can stop talking about it, here you go:

http://baseball.bornbybits.com/plots/Phil_Hughes.html

Over 92 mph with a torn hamstring. Say what you want about him as a pitcher, but don't cite an 88 mph fastball when knocking him down.

You guys can project Hughes and Kennedy to be anything you want. (At this point we might as well be making Hughes' Cooperstown plaque already.)

The bottom line is we are going to lose an in-his-prime Johan Santana (maybe to the Red Sox) because we did not want to part with Ian Kennedy or another "top-level prospect" like Alan Horne or Austin Jackson.

Actually, if Madden is correct (in today's NYDN) the Twins were willing to accept Hughes, Melky, Marquez, and Hilligoss, but Cash talked Hank out of it because he doesn't think investing $120-$150 million in a pitcher is a wise investment.

Actually, if Madden is correct (in today's NYDN) the Twins were willing to accept Hughes, Melky, Marquez, and Hilligoss, but Cash talked Hank out of it because he doesn't think investing $120-$150 million in a pitcher is a wise investment.
-----

Five thousand writers have written about this deal. Heyman has had his nose in it from the start. NO ONE has mentioned Marquez and Hilligoss. Only Madden. He's full of it. If the Twins moved off of Kennedy and they wanted that above package, it would have gone down. The Yankees didn't want to give up Kennedy, Jackson or Horne (WITH Hughes). We all know that was the sticking point. This is just Madden making things up. Marquez and Hilligoss are the exact type of "mid-level prospects" the Yankees wanted to hand over.

I know the sabrmetric revolution has't touched the hearts and minds of every basbeball fan, and understandbly so. It's harline objectivity is sometimes jaring to take, especially when a system like PECOTA predicts the regression of your favorite mid thirties SS with alarming acuracy. But will someone send a copy of any one of Bill James abstracts to the likes of Sherman... The fact of the matter is Johan Santana is about to exit his prime. It may not happen this season, and it may never lead to a precipidus decline in his effectiveness. But to say that Johan is in the middle of his prime is akin to predicting he will have three more years like he had in 04, 05 & 06.

Johan like most pitchers entered his physical prime in his mid 20s. And like most pitchers leaving his late 20s for his early 30s certian aspests of his Physical ability are starting to regress...(His fastball no longer sits at 93-94 but rather sits at 90-91 and tops out around 95 a few times a start. In turn, this year he was unable to get away with a 78-80 changeup up in Zone [33 Dingers this year] like he used to. To his credit, Johan has already begun to make the adjustments necessary to maintian the performance he's shown at such a high level. Last year scouts will tell you he dropped the use of hard biting slider in favor of slurve... Wether this was a nutural progression or an intended adjustment is debatable. A nice result was his best K/9 since his unbelieveable 04 season. But I think this is just an outlier. Without some Magic potion ~ Cough Cough Schilling~~ Clemens~~ Johnson~~Cough Cough ~ Santana's heater is likely to regress and you'd expect those K rates to decline slowly but steadily.
The Point is Santana will never pitch they way he did like he was 25 again. Thats when he was obviously at his physical peak. (Just think a second who in their right mind without the aid o some major enhancement would say they had a better body at 30, 31, 33, 34, 35 then they did at age 25.) The doesnt necessarily mean He cant become a better pitcher. Given some adjustments and baring injury Santana can likely approximate the same production he had over fewer innings. All the great ones do. The problem is this isn't a sure thing, and it usually takes time for a pitcher thats been as good as Satana to adjust say a season or two like Seaver's 29 yr old season (notice his peripherals before and after, not necessarily his wins or ERA).

The Crux of my argument is this and it's Bill Jame's for the last 30 yrs or so... Players reach their prime early than whats expected or sumized. Santana is closer to leaving his prime than he is entering it.