You could make an argument that the Earth is flat.

"The Red Sox will be just fine." I happen to agree with Matt Waxman.

The easiest way to support this proposition is to list the Red Sox roster: Manny, Ortiz, Varitek, Beckett, Foulke, etc. Further, consider their enormous payroll and revenue streams.

The worst way to support this proposition is with pointless anti-Yankee "arguments":

"Conversely, you could make an argument that the Yankees have but two players (Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang) on their 25-man roster whose best years are ahead of them."

Well, sure. You could make that argument.

You could also make the argument that a dozen players on the Yankees 25-man roster will have their best season ever.

(Robinson Cano, Chien-Ming Wang, Johnny Damon, Mike Mussina, Derek Jeter, Andy Phillips, Johnny Damon, Alex Rodriguez, Shawn Chacon, Aaron Small, Bubba Crosby.)

This scenario is not likely. Those Everybody Having Career Year seasons only happen once every 1998. But I could make the argument.

In fact, I could make the argument that Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang have peaked and Jason Giambi will win the AL MVP, leading the Yankees to the playoffs, and saving the skins of all these young, athletic, fresh whippersnappers.


"Conversely, the Yankees average age keeps going up like George Steinbrenner's blood pressure every year his team doesn't win the World Series."

Conversely to the converse, the Yankees average age went down this off-season.

The age of the remaining individual players has gone up from last year. Every player on every baseball team has aged exactly one year since last year.

But the overall age of (John Flaherty) the (Mike Stanton) Yankees (Kevin Brown) has (Tom Gordon) gone (Tony Womack) down.


"New York's rotation is a strained back and a pulled oblique away from being in shambles."

This is obviously true.

But get a list of all 30 major league teams. Now look at their rosters. Now take away their top two starters due to injury.

Is that rotation now in shambles? Yup.


"Let us not forget that if Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke give the team anything in 2006, that'll be an improvement over their contributions to last year's team, which still made the playoffs."

Let us not forget that Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke are a strained back and a pulled oblique away from giving the team nothing in 2006.

What good is an analysis if it merely consists of best-of scenarios for one team and worst-of scenarios for the other team?

Because, you know what, Matt Waxman? The Red Sox will probably be just fine in 2006. but so will the Yankees.


Rant Number Two

Why does every conversation about the Red Sox have to include a conversation about the Yankees?

The Red Sox will play the Yankees 19 times in 2006 and they'll probably win 9 or 10 of them, like they usually do.

Apart from these 19 games, how would a Yankee collapse help the Red Sox? If the Yankees really collapsed, then somebody is beating them. That somebody could be the Blue Jays or the Orioles. If Unit and Mussina go on the DL, what's stopping the Blue Jays from winning the AL East? Or at least from challenging the Red Sox in the AL East?

The Jays added Ryan and Glaus, they'll get contributions from Halladay, and Schilling and Beckett might pull their obliques. There ya go! That was easy!

The Red Sox will be good not because of who they lost, but because of who they kept. The Red Sox will be good if they stay healthy, not if the Yankees get hurt.

Chicago White Sox are Favorites to Win the World Series.

"Every single time the Yankees make a big free-agent play like Johnny Damon, the rest of the American League is immediately supposed to call off the season."

No, they're not.

"It happened when they got Mike Mussina."

No, it didn't.

"It happened when they got Jason Giambi."

No, it didn't.

Even though the Yankees had three straight 100+ win seasons, won the division four years in a row, and made the World Series once. Not too shabby.

"Go back to February of 2004, when Cashman made the deal for Alex Rodriguez.

People were saying the same things about the Yankees that they are saying now, how the addition of A-Rod would make this batting order the most unstoppable fighting machine in the history of sports."

Is that so? Is that what "people" were saying? Were these "people" anonymous sources, an AL "scout" or a "trusted executive" who magically created quotes for Lupica to put in his column?

See, what I remember is "people" saying is that the Yankees lost Pettitte and the Red Sox added Schilling and Foulke.

"But just remember:

The Yankees basically taking A-Rod away from the Red Sox wasn't just supposed to hurt the Red Sox.

It was supposed to destroy them forever.

Eight months later they won the World Series."

Only Lupica, with his misplaced boxing metaphors about "getting off the mat," could have concocted the absurd propostion the Red Sox with their $100+ million payroll and sold-out Fenway Park were Destroyed Forever by Aaron Boone's homerun and ARod's addition to the Yankees.

Besides, if Johnny Damon is supposed to make the Yankees an unbeatable team, then why are the White Sox the favorites to win the World Series in '06?

Lupica, you can ask just about "anybody." Johnny Damon does not even make the Yankees the best player in the AL, much less the most powerful entity in all human history.


It is true that I've read a few fringe opinions that are way pro-Damon, including a Joel Sherman article which asks if the Yankees will score 1,000 runs in 2006. (Quick Felz analysis: "No.")

But these are the extreme opinions and Lupica knows better. Lupica may not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but he's intelligent enough to operate a keyboard and he's intelligent enough to read the English language.

Lupica knows the reaction to the Damon signing has been lukewarm. So why is Lupica pretending that General Consensus is presenting Damon as a Yankees savior? Because Lupica is just setting himself up to be the Sole Voice of Reason when the Yankees fail to win 120 games.

You'll see. July 15th and the Yankees are playing .540 ball and Lupica will write an article that claims "everybody said" the Yankees were going to win 120 games this year! That's what "everybody said."

Fitty mill buys a lot of tires.

"Damon will regret this. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but as soon as he gets his tires slashed in Boston."

Caple, get over here.

Somebody slashed my tires.

I'll give you $25 grand right now if you get down on your hands and knees and change my tires for me. That's a good boy.

I'll be inside watching the Bloomberg Channel. I made more in interest today than you made all year. Isn't that funny?

Actually, I have to go inside anyway to try and make some change. Sheffield usually carries small bills. I've got nothing smaller than a $100,000 bill on me. Can you believe that? Stupid ATMs!

Tell you what: If you do a good job, I'll sign a program or something that you can give to your wife.

Don't book the parade for the Red Sox just yet.

"Johnny Damon has a throwing arm that makes Bernie Williams' appear Ichiro strong. In the vast wilderness that is center field at Yankee Stadium, Damon and that wet noodle attached to his left shoulder will make Derek Jeter run out to the warning track to take the cutoff throw.

...

Is this four-year, $52 million transaction a good deal for the Yankees? Yeah, it's good. Just not Babe Ruth-for-a-few-bucks-and-a-Broadway-song good."

Johnny Damon isn't as good as Babe Ruth? Are you sure about that? You must know a lot about baseball history to make a wild claim like that.

I think most observers believe Damon is an upgrade that addresses the Yankees' specific needs. In terms of blockbuster signings, it's fairly minor and nobody was jumping all over themselves planning a parade.

As for the throwing arm, I keep hearing about the importance of the outfield throwing arms, and all I see is Championship rings on the fingers of the hands which are at the end weak throwing arms.

Get the best arm in the league. Heck, get the best arm in the history of baseball. If the Yankees rely on that arm throwing out runners on the basepaths, then they've got big problems.


"The Yankees made a smart deal last night because they stole from the hated Red Sox a leadoff hitter and star center fielder, not to mention the lifeblood of Boston's Idiot movement. The Yankees made a smart deal because their own void in center was bigger than the old courthouse beyond the outfield wall, and because they needed more speed on an otherwise lumbering, oafish team."

I don't know if the Yankees are exactly oafish, but are you for the deal or against the deal? According to you, it's a good, smart deal that made the Red Sox weaker and the Yankees stronger.

So what's the beef?


"It's about the pitching, stupid, and everyone knows the Yankees would trade Damon for Boston's prize catch, Josh Beckett, in a New York minute. Joe Torre isn't winning one for his thumb because Damon can score 100 runs in his sleep."

Good idea. Get Cashman on the phone and see if he can trade Damon for Beckett.

Of course it's about the pitching. I damn sure know it's not about the centerfielder's throwing arm. What, did the addition of Damon's hurt the Yankee pitching staff somehow?


"This free-agent score makes the Yankees a little faster, and the Red Sox a little weaker. But even with Damon last year, the Yanks would've lost the Division Series to the Angels."

That's quite a definitive statement from O'Connor, speculating about something that never happened.

I say Damon would've hit 3 homeruns in game five vs. Anaheim. You can't prove that he wouldn't have. Go ahead and prove that he wouldn't have.

I say Damon catches the ball that Crosby dropped when he collided with Sheffield.

There you go. I just proved the Yankees would've won the Division Series to the Angels.

Heeere's Johnny.

I think this is a great signing for the Yankees. Not to exaggerate Damon's abilities, and I'm not sure how spry he'll be when he's 36 years old and has one year left on his contract, but it's still a great signing for the Yankees.

My gripe is not with the announcement, it's with Ronald Blum's report. Actually, the first sentence of Ronald Blum's report:

"Johnny Damon gives the Yankees their first big-time leadoff hitter since Chuck Knoblauch was at the top of the order a half-decade ago -- an era when New York won three straight World Series titles and four consecutive AL pennants."

I may be the biggest Chuck Knoblauch fan in existence. I think his contributions to the Yankees are underrated and the throwing errors never bothered me. He had some big playoff homeruns and only lost one playoff series in his entire career.

However ...

1) Knoblauch was basically benched in the playoffs in 2000, the last time the Yankees won the World Series, a whole "half-decade" ago. Let's not go crazy, Ronald Blum.

2) Derek Jeter is a big-time leadoff hitter.


Predictably, Mike Lupica embarrasses himself with his knee-jerk anti-Yankee article.

"The Yankees got their leadoff man last night, the first leadoff man they have had since Chuck Knoblauch." (See above.)

"They get Johnny Damon to lead off and play center field, and that solves two problems they had to solve in this offseason. But ..." Okay, the Yankees solved two problems with one move. Plus, they weakened their chief rival in the AL East. Plus, they absolutely got younger and faster and more athletic. Plus, the terms of the contract are relatively cheap and short-term.

No "but." You can't solve all these problems with one move and focus on the "but."

Does it really matter, anyway? What course of action could the Yankees have taken that would have pleased Lupica?

Find a leadoff hitter and a centerfielder, but don't spend any money and make sure the player is very young. What alternative does Lupica propose? Go in the Wayback Machine back to 1986 and sign Andruw Jones?

First Base is Slightly Tougher than DH.

"Garciaparra said he looks forward to the challenge of playing first.

'I'll probably be working on it prior to spring training,' he said. 'Breaking in a new glove, that will be a challenge. You embrace them, you welcome them.' "

Yes, I'd agree with that. Breaking in a new glove probably is the most challenging aspect of playing first base.

My advice for Nomar is to buy some linseed oil, put a ball in the center of the glove, wrap it in rope, and put it under the mattress. Don't put it under Mia's side of the bed, of course.

Tell me all about Keith Hernandez, Don Mattingly, and Joe Pepitone. Call up WFAN right now and wax poetic about Hernandez racing in on the bunt and of Mattingly deftly turning the 3-6-3. But before you finish your point, let me remind you of George Scott, John "Da Butt" Mayberry, and Ed Kranepool.

First base is a hitter's position. In fact, my only gripe with signing Nomar is that his offensive output probably won't be that great for a first baseman. Defensively, he has played positions that are obviously a lot tougher than first base.

If first base is a challenge, then everything is a challenge. If everything is a challenge, then nothing is a challenge. Other than designated hitter, I can not think of any position in any major sport that is less athletically challenging than playing first base in Nine-Man-Stand-Around.

I don't know, does the NFL have a guy whose sole purpose is to hold the ball during kickoffs so it doesn't slip off the tee? That's probably easier than first base. As long as he never has to tackle or block.

Daily News sportswriting staff needs to get younger and more flexible.

"The Yankees continue to make phone calls, not news."

Then why are you writing about the Yankees in a newspaper? If they're not making news?

Maybe it's just a pointless article in which you can make a gratuitous dig at AL MVP Alex Rodriguez.

"Joe Torre called Brian Giles, when the Yankees were interested in Giles. Now he places a call to Nomar Garciaparra and does the same with Johnny Damon. The Yankees better sign one of these guys, or Torre's postseason batting average is going to be worse than A-Rod's postseason batting average."

Second paragraph. That didn't take long.

"Around the current New York Yankees, younger in center field could mean 32-year-old Johnny Damon instead of 37-year-old Bernie Williams. And more flexible could mean Nomar Garciaparra to be a DH, play first and fill in if anything happens to A-Rod, Jeter or Cano. Clearly, younger and more athletic are relative terms around these Yankees."

"Younger" and "more athletic" are always relative terms. "Young" and "athletic" are absolute terms.

Not to get all English 101 on Lupica, but you can add "er" to any adjective and make it a relative term. Since "athleticer" isn't proper, you just add a "more" in front of the adjective. Voila! Instant relative terms! Not just around these Yankees, but forever and ever, in any context. If the Yankees replaced a 2,000-year-old man on their roster with a 1,999-year-old man, they just got younger. Not young, but younger.

"So Nomar, who has never played first base, is potentially a Yankee first baseman ... Suddenly a guy who never seems to be healthy and hasn't played like an All-Star in years is in hot demand to handle jobs he has never handled before."

When healthy, Nomar has absolutely played like an All-Star every season he has taken the field. Even last season, he hit .283 with 9 homeruns in 230 at-bats. Of course, if a player is on the DL, he is not playing like an All-Star because he's not playing at all. But it's incorrect to question Nomar's ability and even more ridiculous to question his ability to play first base. Stand around and catch the throws.

Maybe he wore a black knit cap because it was cold in the ice cream store in December.

"The Yankees don't often put their faith in an untested 22-year-old player." Except for the times they do.

"But Robinson Cano was thrust into the lineup last May and charged with helping change the look of a team that was unexpectedly too old and slow to contend.

The second baseman responded well, hitting .297 with 14 homers and 62 RBI as the Yankees finished atop the AL East. Cano was the youngest Yankee regular since 1996, when 22-year-old Derek Jeter became the shortstop." Who just happened to be an untested 22-year-old in whom the Yankees put their faith.

I don't want to make too big a deal out of Abraham's assertion, but the Yankees absolutely have a history of putting faith in young players. Maybe not as young as 22 -- how many 22-year-olds are starters in the bigs? -- but the Yankees have put their faith in a truckload of untested 24- and 25-year-olds.


But that's not really the point. The point is that Cashman's faith in Cano's baseball-playing ability is clearly misplaced because Cano wears knit caps and talks on cell phones:

"General manager Brian Cashman has since declared Cano to be an all-but-untouchable chip in the trade market.

But is that faith misplaced?

Cano didn't look — or act — much like the fresh-faced rookie who captivated the Bronx during an appearance at the Last Licks sports memorabilia and ice cream shop yesterday.

Sporting a beard and wearing a black knit cap pulled down near his eyes, he rushed through hundreds of autographs that eager fans paid $50 each for. At one point, Cano was on his cell phone, ignoring fans who wanted a handshake or picture taken. But the autographs kept flowing.

Officials from Last Licks promised during the week that Cano would be available for a brief interview. But Cano twice ignored requests to speak to a reporter."

First of all, what exactly is an "official from Last Licks"? Did Cookie Puss put on a suit and tie and hold a press conference?

Secondly, when Cano "twice ignored requests to speak to a reporter," which reporter would that be? By chance, would that reporter be Peter Abraham?

I mean, aren't you the only reporter in the place? Or did CNN and the BBC send correspondents down to Last Licks in Scarsdale for the big Robinson Cano autograph session?

Let's see if I can piece together what happened here. Peter Abraham showed up at an autograph session for kids and twice yelled out, "Hey, Robinson!" and was ignored. Feeling dejected and sad, Abraham returned to his computer and took out his passive-aggressive feelings of rejection. Robinson Cano is a poo-poo head whose car screeched away and his friend wore sunglasses even though he was inside at the time. I hate Robinson Cano.

That's the Essence of Sportswriting right there. Next time, buy the reporter a hot fudge sundae and he'll write something nice about you.

Read This! Read This!

Pick a player. Pick a team. Link them together via an anonymous source and you've got a sports headline.

In this case, Michael Morrissey's fantabulous "Mets Mull Tejada," which totally makes sense since the Mets already have a 22-year-old shortstop and Tejada doesn't want to be traded from the Orioles:

"The Mets have been linked to disgruntled Baltimore shortstop Miguel Tejada in numerous reports — a development that one team official refused to comment on last night."


After a lengthy discourse which explains why the bullpen is the priority for the Mets, Morrissey contradicts his own attention-grabbing headline:

"Minaya has shown a roster restlessness vaguely reminiscent of Knicks president Isiah Thomas, so you can't discount him trading for the 29-year-old Tejada. Still, it seems unlikely simply because other teams are more desperate for a shortstop.

Additionally, Jose Reyes would almost certainly need to be the centerpiece of any deal, and that's one rare spot where the Mets struck gold from the farm system."

You know what? Let's go ahead and discount Minaya trading for the 29-year-old Tejada.

It has about as much chance of happening as Clemens returning to Boston.

Good headlines, though.

Two Words: "Julio Franco."

"I know it sounds neat when the Yankees talk about getting younger and more athletic, but I keep looking over their roster and wondering where this is supposed to happen, middle relief?

...

Seriously, where is all this youth and speed going to show up, with a new backup first baseman?

A backup infielder?

With this Yankee team, getting younger for the '06 season is a lot easier said than done."


When have the Yankees talked about getting younger and more athletic for '06? Is Mike Lupica confusing his own "Shootin' From The Lip" columns with Yankee press releases?

But since Lupica posed the question, I'll answer it for him. Bubba Crosby in CF instead of Bernie Williams, Andy Phillips at DH instead of Ruben Sierra, and Satchel Paige in the starting rotation instead of Kevin Brown.

All minor adjustments for sure, but all moves that improve the club with addition-by-subtraction.


If Lupica wants to talk about teams that are old and slow, please talk about the Mets. During this offseason, the Mets got older, slower, less athletic, more expensive, and also a whole lot better.

The Yankee could get faster and younger by swapping rosters with the Columbus Clippers. Kevin Reese is young and Melky Cabrera is quite athletic. "E-8" Cabrera has to be athletic to run down all the fly balls that he misjudges in centerfield.


The goal of any baseball team is not to be young, nor fast, nor "athletic" (whatever that means). The goal is to be good.

I don't really know how good the Yankees will be in '06. Johnny Damon couldn't hurt, that's for sure. But I'd prefer if they added a dumb, old, slow, fat, chain smoking DH who could jack 40 dingers.

Now you've got Terrmel Sledge.

I'm waiting for the Mike Lupica article where he explains how the Rangers are better off since they traded Alex Rodriguez.

Don't forget, Lupica claimed rather voraciously that the Rangers got the best of the Soriano-for-ARod swap.

Don't believe me? Do I sound like I'm making this up?

Just check the archives:

"Now, eight months later, after this collapse against the Red Sox, that same executive said, 'Let me ask you a question: Who's set up better for the future right now: the Yankees with A-Rod or the Rangers without him?' "

The Yankees with ARod. It was true then and it's truer now.


More sweet Lupica knowledge from that fateful column of October 24, 2004:

"Mariano Rivera will still be a great relief pitcher next season ... But he will never be regarded as a sure thing ever again."


Pick a Lupica article, pick any Lupica article. Pick a random sentence. There's a very good chance that Whatever You're Reading + Time = Wrong.

Brian Cashman is a genius.

While Kevin Howard and Ben Himes must forever live with the shame that they were traded for Tony Womack, Brian Cashman can proudly point to the fact that he somehow managed to get more than a box of resin bags back from the Reds.

Take that, Omar Minaya!

Mets Forgetting What It Takes To Win Championships.

"But things may be a little different. The Yankees have committed to about $155 million in salary next year and aren't likely to go much higher. That's a lot and still No. 1 in the league by a fleet of Brinks trucks. But if that is what they break camp with, it is about $50 million less than a year ago.

...

Steinbrenner spent a billion on rotisserie numbers, completely forgetting he won four of five World Series with great talent but greater heart when it was mostly homegrown talent such as Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera."

A baseball team has 25 players. Including Ramiro Mendoza and Andy Pettitte, you've got 6 out of 25 players who were homegrown.

What did the '96-'00 Yankees prove?

They proved that you win the World Series by spending lots of money and spending it on rotisserie numbers. That's how the Yankees did it, that's how the Red Sox did it, and that's how the Mets are trying to do it.

That's Myth #1. Please don't use the '98 Yankees as an example of homegrown talent whose biggest asset was a lot of heart.


But let's say you actually believe that the Big Payroll strategy doesn't work, despite its fabulous track record. Then why are you picking the Mets to finish first in their division? Why are you praising Omar Minaya while you're damning Brian Cashman?

Aren't the 2006 Mets nothing more than a hodgepodge of big name free agents with little playoff experience? What about character? What about identity? What about chemistry? What about competitive balance in the NL East?

What exactly are the Mets trying to do? Buy a World Series title? Heaven forfend!


The Mets are going to spend about $120 million on payroll this year and the Yankees will spend about $155 million. The difference is going to be approximately $35 million (which is $100 million using Lupica Math).

Will the Yankees up it to $200 million? I don't think so. In this regard, I agree with Dan Wetzel.

In any case, it's very difficult to take Mike Lupica's anti-Steinbrenner rantings seriously when they are juxtaposed with endless praise of the gritty Mets.

In 2003, Lupica claimed the Yankees sucked the joy out of the season when they added Aaron Boone to their roster. Not solely because of Aaron Boone, but that was the straw that broke the camel's back as Streinbrenner just kept adding soulless all-stars to the roster.

When the Yankees passed $120 million a few years back, it was the end of the world. When the Mets pass $120 million this year, it's because Minaya is a genius and it's still less than the Yankees, so it doesn't matter.

Am I to believe that when a team is spending tens of millions on their roster, that it's the $121st million that is unethical and distasteful?

How arbitrary:

"You hear this in New York these days: The Mets now spend like the Yankees!

Really? On what planet?

The Mets, according to MLB, currently have around $110 million in committed salaries for next season. Yeah, they spend the way the Yankees did in the 2005 season if between now and Opening Day, Omar Minaya spends another $100 million."

The Mets don't always have to be compared to the Yankees. Why not compare the Mets to the Braves? Or the Philles? Or the Cardinals? Or every other team in the National League in which the Mets play their games and stuff?

While it's true the Yankees are one of the few teams -- two, actually -- who will spend more than the Mets on their roster in the 2006 season, it is also true that the Mets will be the Cheapest Team on the Field in only 6 of their 162 games this season. (Disclaimer: I don't know if the Mets play the Red Sox in 2006.)


On the same day the Mets are pillaging the Marlins for a catcher, Lupica is crying about the dismantling of the Marlins ... and blaming the Yankees.

This kind of flexible thinking is easy for a man without principle. Yankee-Hating does not qualify as a principle.

And I thought Jason Giambi was a bad choice.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present Kostya Kennedy's choice for 2005 Sportsman of the Year: Jose Canseco.