According to George King of the NY Post, while it’s clear that right-handers, Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain, “are the favorites,” or at least the two early finalists, vying for the fifth rotation spot this spring, “there are voices within the organization who want Chamberlain and Hughes in the pen.” GM Brian Cashman discussed this very issue last week with the lovable Mike Francesa, pointing out that such a pitching configuration, one which would feature Alfredo Aceves, Chad Gaudin, or Sergio Mitre as the fifth starter – an option that many more are pondering today after a small sample of recent innings from both Mitre and Aceves – would certainly be to the Yankees’ short-term benefit.
However, Cashman noted that, long-term, such a situation is neither efficient or pragmatic. As stated by Joe Pawlikowski of River Ave Blues, the Yankees need to cultivate at least one of their two young arms and inserting both into the team’s bullpen just does not work towards that goal. “The Yankees need to replace two starting pitchers next year,” Joe writes. “They’d be better serves in 2011, then, by having at least one of Hughes and Chamberlain starting in 2010” (to build innings, etc.). Yankees skipper, Joe Girardi, also made a similar point several weeks ago.
Putting both Hughes and Chamberlain would help the bullpen this season, but it would come at the expense of future starting rotations. In the end, potential long-term benefits, especially with regards to young pitchers, should trump the short-term stuff, right (I say that, but it does not always occur—see Joba Chamberlain’s emergence in 2007)?
Photo by Reuters
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
7 Responses to Joba and Hughes, short-term or long-term?
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
Keeping them both in the bull pen for a bit would hardly affect their development, they are developed the only question is utilization.
If they log under 100 innings in the bullpen this season, I would think that it would impact their development in 2011. Also, in the bullpen they would likely scrap some of their lesser pitches for the year and would have to turn to those pitches again a year later. Those same pitches would not be improved if that occurred.
It sure would hamper their development. They wouldn’t work on their secondary pitches at all. Those pitches are needed to be successful starters. They also wouldn’t pitch the innings they need to pitch the almost 200 innings the next year.
I agree with your conclusion, but I think the reference to Joba’s 2007 season is a bit misguided. Joba was closing in on his innings limit in the minors that season and would have been shut down if he wasn’t shifted to the MLB ‘pen. The Yanks, in effect, killed two birds with one stone by shifting him to the MLB bullpen that season, since they kept his innings down and also got the benefit of an effective reliever with the MLB team (which needed the help at the time). The Yanks didn’t succumb to short-term pressures in that situation, they didn’t sacrifice the future for the present.
I think you make a good point, THCM. I guess I see it as a sacrifice, because he did so well that they decided to keep him in the bullpen in 2008 (at least initially).
Yeah, I think you can call the 2008 decision a mistake, but I’m cool with the 2007 decision and would make the same decision if presented with those circumstances again.
They could always dress up Sergio’s resurgent talents as trade bait, and exchange him for a promising pitching prospect. Meanwhiles, more relieving might just mean more experience and confidence for the young lads. No reason they can’t perfect their other pitches on the side, even surprise with them in a game, at a timely moment. Might just come to take them from the bullpen because they love what they see, and must have more.