That didn't last long.

Mets are stale:

"This day curdled early for the Mets - in the second inning, to be precise. That was when Jon Niese's recent stretch of dominance ended, and the Mets effectively fell to two games below .500. Now we ask: When does this dance with respectability cease to be interesting?

...

But their dead-energy 7-3 loss to the Los Angeles Angels Sunday, which clinched a series defeat against a team stuffed with overpriced veterans and who-is-that-guy youngsters, offered a peek at the darker underbelly of where this could go.

Despite playing sharp baseball of late, the Mets are 10-7 in their last 17 games: Good, but not enough to muscle out of a losing record. The pattern has been, lose one, win three. Lose one, win two, lose one. Not sunk, but hardly soaring. And beginning to grow a tad stale."

They're the Rebecca Black of MLB.


Which actually got me thinking: Are the writers who cover MLB out of tune with the pacing of the game?

In the Internet meme / twitter / facebook age, is a 162-game baseball season filled with 3-hour games simply unable to keep their attention?

Does this explain why they're picking MVPs after two weeks and making up nonsense like "Power Ratings" and praising the Mets when they have a good week just to ridicule the Mets when they have a bad weekend?


"A clear-eyed look at Sunday's product could produce no other analysis: This team needs to be a bit better, if it wants to hold our attention."

Okay.

You're the sportswriter who's writing about the Mets.

I'm kind of embarrassed that I bothered reading the article about such a lame subject matter. I'll be sure to read the funny papers next time.


I don't necessarily think it's preferable to offer the Mets false praise ... which, actually, seems to be the typical tone for a $100-million team that's playing .500 ... Collins for Manager of the Year and such ...

I just don't understand why so many baseball columnists seem to dislike baseball so much.


Also, are the Angels really just a team of overpriced veterans and who-is-that-guy youngsters? If you're a baseball writer, why don't you explain to us who-is-that-guy>

The walk-off balk was compelling.

Another writer answering the question nobody was asking. Another baseball writer who's bored by a baseball team playing baseball:

"This was the backdrop to a get-away day game that would count in the standings but hardly seemed to matter in the grand scheme. By the time Brett Gardner’s broken-bat single in the 12th inning gave the Yankees a 3-2 walk-off victory, many of the 47,487 fans had already departed, but another regular-season game was crossed off the calendar.

And, for just a second, you could not help but think about the Mets coming home to play at Citi Field tonight, and how in the last two weeks theirs has become the more dramatic of the two local baseball stories."

Yesterday's Yankee win had about a dozen compelling storylines if you care about that sort of thing.

Sweeping the reigning AL champs; the converted outfielder starting pitcher guy; the Yankee bullpen pitchers with ERAs under 2.00; ARod not playing; Teixeira/Granderson HR race; a walk-off win; etc.

"Ever since June 2, when they trailed the Pirates 7-0 before coming from behind to win, 9-8, Terry Collins’ Mets have been playing for their lives and become much more compelling to watch than the Yankees. Derek Jeter going on the disabled list Tuesday and taking his march to 3,000 hits off the schedule for a couple of weeks only served to accentuate the point. The Yankees are the Yankees for a reason. Over the course of a six-month season, everyone knows they’ll be fine.

Not even losing eight of nine to the hated Red Sox could create much of a sense of urgency at the Stadium. Boston started the season 2-10 and now have the best record in the American League. The Yankees had a six-game skid in May and are right on Boston’s heels. Who doesn’t think they’ll separate from the rest of the American League by August? Gordon getting the start was more a curiosity than a cause for concern. The Yankees didn’t need the game."

Okay, so pay attention to the Mets. I'm a Yankee fan, so I'll pay attention to the Yankees. I hope you don't run out of Mets storylines.

By the way, there's no rule that says you can't pay attention to both teams.

I guess Dancing With the Stars must be a really, really, really, really good show.

What is more predictable?

A Mike Lupica article in which he mentions Dancing With The Stars or a Mike Lupica article in which he favors the Mets over the Yankees?:

"We talk and talk about shortstops this season in New York the way they once talked about Willie and Mickey and the Duke, though the conversation about them was mostly good. You really can't say the same about Jose Reyes and Derek Jeter, even if Reyes is the best player in town."

Wrong.

Jason Bay is the best player "in town."


The rest is comparing a 28-year-old baseball player to a 37-year-old baseball player.

If that intrigues you ... (spoiler alert: Lupica concludes that Reyes is better than Jeter and Lupica also uses the adjective "fast" to describe various things and, since Reyes is "fast," this somehow ingeniously links all of these things) ... please feel free to read the rest of the article.

I think it's kind of, well, lame to compare a 28-year-old athlete to a 37-year-old athlete.

Somebody, somewhere ask why Jeter didn't try to score on a fly ball in the first inning.

Yankees end up losing 1-0, fall to 7-11 in one-run games, and fall 2.5 games behind the Red Sox. The run was there for the taking, yet Jeter seemed unwilling to take it. A mental gaffe or lack of effort typical of the 2011 Yankees:

"Oh, by the way, the Yankees were blanked, 1-0, by the Indians as Asdrubal Cabrera's fourth-inning RBI single off A.J. Burnett stood up as the game's only run.

But enough about that. After a sweep at the hands of the Red Sox and three straight wins over the Tribe, this home stand has been all about Jeter and his pursuit of No. 3,000."

By the way, a baseball game was played.

Yawn.

Baseball is boring, isn't it?

Joe Girardi gets goes toe-to-toe with Manny Acta.

The question is, did Terry Francona give Girardi permission to act this way?:

"Yankees manager Joe Girardi was red in the face with anger, nose-to-nose in a screaming match with Cleveland counterpart Manny Acta after Mark Teixeira was whacked with a fastball.

Tired of getting hit by pitches - and losing to rival Boston - the fired-up Yankees took out their frustration on the skidding Cleveland Indians .

Alex Rodriguez hit a colossal home run, Curtis Granderson also connected and New York got back on track with an 11-7 victory Friday night in a game that quickly grew testy.

'Sometimes it doesn't really matter if it's on purpose,' Rodriguez said. 'There's no question, it was very important for us to bounce back and play our type of baseball.'

Girardi and Acta got into a heated argument when both benches and bullpens emptied after Teixeira was hit behind the shoulder by a second-inning pitch from struggling Cleveland starter Fausto Carmona .

No punches were thrown and there appeared to be little pushing and shoving - if any. Plate umpire Dale Scott issued warnings to both teams, and there was no further trouble.

'I have respect for Manny. I actually had a nice exchange with Manny at 3 o'clock today. But that doesn't mean there's not some feistiness in me and when my guys are getting plunked, I'm going to protect them,' said Girardi, who gestured angrily at Carmona on the field. 'I told him I thought he did it on purpose and I didn't like it.' "

So you got beaten up by your big brother Red Sox and you took it out by kicking the dog Indians.

The Yankees need to trade for some Boston Bruins players.

"David Ortiz on Wednesday night had a message for New York Yankees manager Joe Girardi, who had said he didn't care for the way the Boston Red Sox slugger had flipped his bat after hitting a home run Tuesday: 'Take it like a man.'

...

For his part, Girardi also downplayed his comment, suggesting before Wednesday's game that the media had given it a 'Full Monty' treatment he hadn't intended. Nor did he believe Red Sox left-hander Jon Lester hitting two Yankees batters Tuesday night -- Mark Teixeira and Russell Martin -- was an invitation for the Yankees to engage in any retaliatory target practice.

'I didn't hear our guys talk about it at all,' Girardi said. 'It seems like it's been talked about more in the media than our guys. I didn't hear anything about our guys being upset.' "

I'm upset.

Hey, Yankee fans, are you upset?

Because I'm upset.

Nice to know that Girardi is not upset and none of his guys are upset.

Makes me feel like I'm more emotionally invested than the manager and the players.

Makes me feel like, if I was playing second base for the Yankees, and the catcher threw the ball poorly to second base, and I was backing up second base, that I'd stick my arm out and try to keep the ball from going into centerfield.

Make me feel like, if I was managing the Yankees and Ortiz challenged my manhood, I might instruct my pitcher to drill him.

What were you expecting?

Derek Jeter has 1 career grand slam and 241 career GIDP. I realize that not all 241 GIDP occurred with the bases loaded, but he also has more career GIDP than career homeruns.


You were expecting a Time Warp Big Hit from the Cap'n?

It's like expecting a bird to swim.

It's like expecting a fish to fly.

It's like expecting A.J. Burnett to pitch well in a big game.

Under .500 in one-run games.

I don't trust Burnett and I don't trust this team to win a so-called big game.

The only "retaliation" against Ortiz is to win, but this team and this pitcher have a tendency in 2011 to come up small.

I searched high and far and I finally found a sportswriter who likes Derek Jeter.

"For much of the past year, too much of the talk around here has been about what Derek Jeter no longer can do:

Can’t get to enough balls to his left.

Can’t hit like he did in the clutch anymore.

Can’t hit more than .270 anymore."

That's definitely all true. His RISP BA is .170. His on-base% is .313. His slugging% is .325.

Awful.

"Yes, he plays for the Winning-Isn’t-Everything-It’s-The-Only-Thing Yankees, for whom the future is forever now, who will inevitably find themselves in the position of detesting Alex Rodriguez’s opt-in contract as much as they reveled in a modicum of payback for The Captain for his prodigious previous bounty even as they reap the marketing benefits of his run to 3,000 hits."

That, Sir, is a run-on sentence.

The Yankees are going to detest ARod's contract as much as they reveled in a modicum of payback for Jeter for his prodigious previous bounty? I'm confused and scared after reading that sentence.

"I ask:

Why are we so eager to show this guy the door?

Why are we so eager to shove him off shortstop?

Why are we so eager to shove him off leadoff?"

Can’t get to enough balls to his left, can’t hit like he did in the clutch anymore, can’t hit more than .270 anymore, has an on-base% of .313, and a slugging% of .325.

"Because trust me, we will miss him more than we know when he’s gone.

In case you have forgotten:

On and off the field, he has been The Pride of the Yankees, a five-time champion of grace and elegance and class who has drawn comparisons with Joe DiMaggio, minus the 56-game hitting streak, the home runs, and Marilyn Monroe."

Jeter is the most-worshiped and most-recognized person in baseball. He is going to the Hall of Fame. He will get a monument. His number will be retired.

There is no way we will ever miss Derek Jeter when he's gone, because Derek Jeter will never be gone. Jeter will always sell cars with cool panoramic vista roofs.


Turn on the radio and you'll still hear Joe Torre hawking green tea. Bigelow green tea. From the locker room to the dugout to the front office, Torre has always enjoyed the antioxidant benefits of Bigelow green tea.

Let's talk about the 1986 Mets and the Red Sox.

You'd think this would be a good time for a Yankee-Hater to focus on the Yankees, since the Yankees are just starting a 1-8 road trip which will drop them into fourth place.

But this is all we get:

"I will ask this question again: When was the last time you watched A-Rod and thought to yourself that you were watching the best player in baseball?"

If you are asking rhetorical questions, I'll provide rhetorical answers.


The last time I thought ARod was the best player in baseball was 1 1/3 seasons ago. The 2009 playoffs.

But it's a bit of a trick question.

Lupica himself never thought ARod was the best player in baseball and, to be fair, maybe ARod never was. The "Big Papi for MVP" argument wasn't very convincing in the first place, but it's even less convincing to backtrack and elevate ARod's status.

When did Lupica last think ARod was the best player in baseball? If he says anything other than "never," then he's either a liar or he wasted a lot of ink playing Devil's Advocate.


"And here's an even better question: Who IS the best player in baseball right now?"

Jose Bautista.

I know he doesn't play for Boston, but you should check out major league baseball sometime.

Plagiarism.

You're not hallucinating, you're reading two separate columns by the same writer on the same day.

I don't think it's legally possible to plagiarize yourself:

Article #1, Mike Lupica, May 27, 2011:

"He spent money badly and the Wilpons let him. So it's on him and it's on them.

...

They have had two bad years. Before that they had two bad Septembers. Nobody is quite sure what is going to happen with the 2011 Mets - though we're going to have a much better idea after the next homestand, starting with the Phillies coming to town - but they came into yesterday two games under .500. They were two games under even in a season when they haven't had Santana and might not have him, when David Wright and Ike Davis are on the DL, when Chris Young, who had been their best starter early, blows out his shoulder.

Sometimes, though, the coverage makes you think that they haven't won a game all year. Or as if these past two years, because of the stink of Madoff all around, is really ten years. But it isn't.

...

Mets fans have a right to be angry. They have a right to want these owners gone. It is the nature of fans in general and New York sports fans in particular. But for now, today, with a new owner about to be in place and some much-needed money coming into the Mets, money isn't the issue. The baseball decisions that will be made from now on are the issue. The general manager in this case is more important than the owners. New or old. I will say this again: You either believe in Sandy Alderson and his guys or you don't."


Article #2, Mike Lupica, May 27, 2011:

"He spent money badly. The Wilpons let him. So it's on him and it's on them. Here comes the hedge-fund guy to bail everybody out, at least for now.

The Mets have had two very bad years. Before that they had two bad Septembers. Sometimes, though, the coverage makes you think that they haven't won a game all year. Or as if these past two years, because of the stink of Madoff all around, is really 10 years. But it isn't. Think about how much more bad baseball the Mets would have to play to have a decade like the Knicks just had.

Mets fans still have a right to be angry, have a right to want the owners gone. But now, today, they get a new owner, one for whom Mets fans should cheer, just because he's the Mets owner who doesn't want to make baseball decisions."

As for the content:

1) Lupica is whining about the press coverage of the Mets. A team with the highest payroll in the NL and the tenth-best record in the NL.

2) "Two bad Septembers" is an understatement. Try "two of the biggest collapses in MLB history."

3) Lupica is whining about injuries on the Mets, including the injury to journeyman Chris Young. So Young's now the Mets' best pitcher based on 24 whole innings.

When I read this column(s), I truly wonder if Lupica is on the Mets' payroll.

Weird dude.

Knoblauch's teams won 4 World Series and 13 out of 14 playoff series:

"I remember working for $9 an hour in the Twins ticket office during the 1997 off-season when Knoblauch tapped on my window and asked if I had four quarters for his dollar so he could plug a nearby parking meter. I told him I had just three quarters and he said 'give me whatever you got.' So we traded and Knoblauch went on his merry way.

A few months later when the Yankees came to town to mark Knoblauch's return to Minnesota, a message came up from the Yankees traveling secretary to me that Mr. Knoblauch needed his quarter I owed him. A millionaire worried about a quarter? That's the Chucker I came to know."

The Yankees had a bad month.

"Somebody needs to point out to the Yankees that every time a batter of theirs gets hit, it's not on purpose.

And every single pitch one of their batters takes isn't always a ball."

Oh, you're making this up, Yankee-Hater.

Jeter and ARod have been getting plunked for 15 years. It's on purpose.

More to the point, it doesn't even matter if it's on purpose. Markakis gets one in the back to remind Baltimore pitchers to be more careful. Does Lupica have a problem with that?


As for the Yankees arguing balls and strikes, I see no evidence that they argue more than any other team from the past 100 years.


What did Lupica think of Reyes's "bear claw" after a leadoff double in a game where Reyes's team lost by four runs? To drop them a game under .500, a mere one game ahead of the last-place Nationals?

I'm sure Lupica thinks it's feisty. I'd like to see a Yankee do that: "I got a leadoff double. Bear claw! Rawwwr!"

Heck, Reyes should have been drilled just for acting like a fool.


"We have the Mets starting 5-13 and getting to .500 on Friday night against the Yankees, ending a month when they have been a much better and more entertaining team than the $207 million Yankees."

The Yankees were 12-6 after 18 games. Since then, the Yankees have won 12 and lost 14.

• They lost six straight home games for the first time since 2002(?).
• They lost six in a row for the first time since 2007(?).
• Swept by the Red Sox.
• Cano leads the team in batting average with a .275 batting average.
• 1,000 unearned runs in one month.
• A Mondesi-like BA with runners in scoring position.

The Mets were better than the Yankees over this stretch?

It's really nothing to be proud of. It's like saying "Thor" is better than "Police Academy 4: Citizens on Patrol."

Baseball analysis for people who know nothing about baseball.

"Admit it. You thought you had a handle on the New York baseball scene. The Yankees are destined for October. The are trying not to embarrass themselves before they fade from contention."

Please don't presume my baseball opinions.

Before the season started, I thought the Yankees would win about 95 games and the Mets would win about 85 games.

Since that time, I've lowered the Yankee prediction because I realized they're gutless punks. But the AL East is under-performing as a whole, so I'd still predict about 90 wins. It could still bump up to 95 or so when one considers their ability to acquire new players in mid-season trades.

As for the Mets, as long as there is a wild card, no team is out of contention. The Mets won't catch the Phillies.


"And then you get the Subway Series and it gives you a whole new look at things."

That makes no sense.

Both teams stunk on Thursday and both teams still stink.


"The Mets beat the Yankees, 2-1, in a pitching duel Friday night before 47,874 at the Stadium on the strength of R.A. Dickey's best performance of the season and Daniel Murphy's tie-breaking home run. And now the Mets (22-22) have exactly one fewer win than the Yankees (23-20)."

Now we're getting to the difference between the teams.

The Mets are proud of their .500 record.

So the key to success is to set expectations really low. Then, you can never fail.


As for the game itself, a Yankee fans has seen it all year.

-- One-for-ten with RISP .... and that "hit" didn't even advance the runner. If I was an opposing pitcher, I'd just intentionally load the bases at the start of every inning.

-- The Yankees score on solo HRs and nothing else.

-- The Yankees can't score in the final three innings.

Whether or not the team is truly gutless, it's hard to say. Gutless is as gutless does.

When your team has outscored opponents by 40 runs overall, but has been outscored by 20 in the last 3 innings ... when you have one walkoff win the whole season ... when your 1-through-5 hitters can never get a sac fly ... you're gutless chokers.

If the Mets' success is pegged to the Yankees' success, then the Mets should be ashamed of themselves.

You know Brett Favre is associated with football, and football is different than baseball. You know this, right?

"Alex Rodriguez made a nice stop, but his ill-advised throw to first was wild. Teixeira made a superb play to stop the ball, as Felix Pie would have scored the game-winner if it had gotten past the first baseman.

'That's one of the highlight plays of the year for me,' A-Rod said. Asked why he attempted the throw in the first place, Rodriguez said, 'To make a play, like Brett Favre. At that point, you have to go crazy to make a play.' "

It's almost charming in a way how ARod's mind can twist any bad play into a good play.

When he got thrown out at second base trying to stretch a single into a double? It was like Ben Franklin discovering electricity. Sometimes, you've got to take a chance.

Race to the bottom.

The Mets are the hottest team in New York, huh?

Even hotter than the Yankees, who are in the midst of their longest losing streak since 2007?

That must mean the Mets are totally awesome:

"They are still tied for last place and have the look of a team that is going to be fighting .500 for the year, but nobody refused to play for Terry Collins Sunday and nobody needed tea leaves and a lie detector to sort through all the versions of the truth, the way they seem to in the Bronx."

Unless you're a Mets ticket salesman, what is the point of conveying this information? When the Mets were 5-13, did any Mets fans suddenly start rooting for the Yankees? I don't quite understand the purpose of the Lupica-esque sales pitch. Do Daily News writers have stock in the Mets, or something? A side deal with the merch vendors at Citi Field?


"For the Mets, the story is simple: they are playing tight, aggressive baseball, and they are pitching the ball and catching it, and Sunday they even had a steal of home, with Jason Pridie scoring on the front end of a double-steal with Jose Reyes in a four-run fifth inning. They are winning games with help from all sorts of unlikely sources - from Justin Turner to center fielder Pridie to Daniel Murphy, the first baseman for the next two weeks until Ike Davis returns from the disabled list."

The Mets are in last place. The Mets are under .500. So the scintillating imaginary Battle for New York is between two bad teams.

Two wild pitches, two HRs, one batter two many.

Joe Girardi doesn't understand his players as, once again, Mr. 5 2/3 can't get the last out to preserve the lead:

"Bottom 6th: Tampa Bay

- J. Jaso doubled to right

- S. Fuld homered to deep right, J. Jaso scored

- B. Zobrist lined out to right

- J. Damon struck out swinging

- E. Longoria singled

- E. Longoria to second on wild pitch

- M. Joyce singled to shallow right, E. Longoria scored

- M. Joyce to second on wild pitch

- B.J. Upton homered to deep left, M. Joyce scored

- L. Ayala relieved A.J. Burnett" Also, I appreciate the Gutless Yankees responded to the adversity in the final three innings. Nine up, nine down.

This is an insult to young players.

Though I appreciate the worldwide existential crisis caused by Jorge Posada's meltdown, I think it's unfair to the younger players on the Yankees.

A lot of young players on the Yankees stink, too.

Girardi needs some heart to go along with his brain sometimes.

"After the game — the Yankees’ fourth straight loss — Posada was visibly disturbed that Cashman had gone public without speaking with him first.

The reality is that this moment — in fact, possibly the entire Yankees season — is about metamorphosis and transition, about a team that has gotten a lot of miles out of a core of aging stars. Now it’s time to begin the painful season of transition.

Posada recoiled when someone asked point blank if he was he considering retirement. Now. He repeated his refrain that his back was tight and that he needed time to clear his head.

The Yankees have the option of docking Posada’s pay; there is no indication he is going to retire. How will Cashman handle this? And what was Girardi thinking when he unceremoniously demoted Posada."

You play Posada tonight even though is average batting right-handed is a scintillating .000. You bat him ninth, he gets a standing ovation from the fans, and probably gets a 3-RBI double.

I'm a numbers guy.

I'm not a big believer is mystique, aura, and Pinstripe Power.

But this is kind of ridiculous.

Posada is not only angry with himself, he's angry at a team that doesn't play with guts or with brains. He's angry at a manager and a GM that seemingly shrug off players who earned five rings (four-and-a-half for Posada).

Posada's .165 BA doesn't give him the moral authority to chastise talented players who don't turn double plays and who jog to first base.

You play Posada tonight because this team has to turn the corner. Girardi has to realize that pride precedes production. In this instance, you ignore the numbers. This is not strat-o-matic.

Probably the best article about the Posada situation.

"Here’s where a series of mistakes unfolded on both sides. Posada, too indignant for a long conversation, chose not to explain why he was asking out. And Girardi, who avoids confrontations, didn’t push Posada for an answer.

...

So why the need for an alibi? Because Posada and his handlers under-estimated the Yankees’ wrath. Anyone following the events on Twitter would’ve known that Hal Steinbrenner had contacted the commissioner’s office early in the evening, weighing the possible responses. At the minimum, Posada was facing a two-day fine. At worst, the Yankees were asking about voiding his contract. It was a long fall for one of the most accomplished catchers in Bomber history, a personal favorite of none other than Yogi Berra. Posada was one of the last bridges to the Joe Torre golden era – back when the Yankees were a championship-winning machine.

But his slide toward sub-mediocrity this season is only part of the problem. The fact that Posada would walk away from a war with the Red Sox would’ve been incomprehensible under Torre – or even as recently as 2009, when he was an integral part of the Yankees’ 27th World Series conquest.

That was the former Posada, tough to the point of being indestructible. But Torre never had to shepherd Posada or Derek Jeter or any of the franchise’s guardians toward the ends of their careers."

Girardi's non-confrontational style doesn't always work. Girardi's postgame press conference was quite embarrassing. For all the critiques of Torre, I'd have to think Torre would have handled this situation better than this (e.g., when Knoblauch pulled himself out of the lineup in the middle of a game).

Having said that, some baseball tenets still apply.

When .165 hitters talk, nobody listens.

Just when you thought things couldn't get worse.

For the record, I was bearish on this team when they were 17-9, though I didn't envision the dual disintegration of the #3 and #4 batters.

I doubt I'm the only one who notes the irony of Nomar discussing Jorge's self-benching.

Yankees battled and had their chances.

I wish there was a stat for cheap runs. The Yankees have allowed a lot of unearned runs, but they undoubtedly lead the league in cheap runs allowed. A walk, an error, a wild pitch, two ground outs.

Burnett gives up two hits, sure. But he walks five, two HBPs, four wild pitches, three errors, a missed double play, a missed cutoff man.

The Yankees used to be the team that took advantage of other team's mistakes.

You know he's got an edge.

Jeter.

RISP.

.143.

Last-place Mets take two out of three from powerhouse Nationals.

Lupica and his "conversation." As if an individual can't pay attention to two whole teams at the same time. As if Yankee fans are cowering in fear as their first-place team loses Mike Lupica to the last-place Mets:

"Then here came Daniel Murphy again, ripping a double, a screamer, into the rightfield corner for two more runs, moving his batting average for the season to .315. He had done a bit more on this night than get the game to David Wright. He had provided a little hope. He had made the Mets, for this one night, the Yankees still scuffling to score runs against the powerhouse Chicago White Sox, the best baseball game in town to watch."

The Yankee game in question was actually pretty good. It included great performances by Buehrle, Colon, and Mariano. A baseball fan would appreciate that.

Do you think Lupica is even a baseball fan?

His entire premise is that the 5-13 Mets were not worth watching. Not worth writing about. Not worth being part of the NY baseball conversation.

Millions of Mets fans follow their team dutifully through thick and thin, and they're not even paid to do it.

You'd think an award-winning New-York-based sportswriter could muster up a bit more enthusiasm.

I believe if the Mets had beaten the Cardinals in the 2006 NLCS, then they would have beaten the Tigers in the 2006 World Series.

Mike Lupica outdoes himself, making predictions of past events that never happened:

"It doesn't matter how they got here, the terrible history that has been written since the night in October of 2006 when Carlos Beltran took a called third strike from with the pennant on the bases and the Cardinals went to the World Series, which they won, and not the Mets."

Okay, it doesn't matter how they got here. It doesn't matter how they got here. It doesn't matter.

The only reason Lupica would even suggest it doesn't matter is because an honest analysis would require a takedown of Randolph and Minaya.


"The chain reaction, at least on the field, started then. If the Mets had won that 2006 Series from the Tigers - which I believe they would have, the Tigers took all that time off after they won the American League pennant and never recovered against the Cardinals - then maybe they don't collapse in September of 2007."

Unbelievable.


If the Mets had beaten the Cardinals (which they didn't) ...

Then the Mets would have beaten the Tigers (which they didn't) ...

And if the Mets had beaten the Tigers (which they didn't) ...

Then the Mets wouldn't have collapsed in 2007.


Using this reasoning, I say anything would have happened.


"If they don't collapse that September maybe it doesn't happen again the next September."

We can extend this endlessly and you end up the Mets winning five World Series in a row.


"But it did."

Yeah.

It did.

Join the rest of the world in discussing what actually happened rather than discussing what maybe would not have happened.


"Terrible relief pitching. No Santana to start the season, no Bay, Beltran still looking like a shell of what he once was. Pedro Martinez long gone. It is the short list of Omar Minaya's All-Stars."

Beltran is playing well. Not a shell of what he once was. .286, 3 HRs, just for the record.


"I thought he was the best guy at the time to run the Mets, a good man and a great story out of the neighborhood in Flushing. Only now he is gone and the Mets are where they are."

That's almost Lupica admitting he was wrong about Minaya.


"And please understand that Minaya didn't act alone. Fred and Jeff Wilpon stood right there and watched him make the deals he did and spend their money the way he did and never stoped [sic] him."

No, Minaya acted alone. The owners stood right there and watched. That's the same thing as doing nothing. Which means Minaya acted alone.


"Maybe this doesn't seem nearly as hopeless if some of the relievers had gotten some big outs, and if stars like David Wright had over-performed instead of under-performed so far. There was the one series against the Rockies when the Mets had two-run leads in all four games and lost them all. There are all those teams who came into Thursday with 9-9 records in the National League Central. Give the Mets just a few more wins this season and they look like one more mediocre team trying to make its way through the first month of the baseball season."

Right.

Give the Mets a few more losses and they're the worst team in baseball history.

Lupica, you're going to be great on the radio.

What award die he win? Probably a Pulitzer for his in-depth appraisal of Tony Womack.

• A face made for radio.
• If you put the buildings far enough in the background, it will make me look taller.
• Lupica is gangsta.
  

Archives.

This article is dated April 18, 2011:

"As an ardent Yankee rooter, I am used to watching some stellar set-up pitching, such as the likes of Jeff Nelson, Ramiro Mendoza and Mike Stanton, as New York tries to make the jump from the starter to Mariano Rivera. So far, Soriano has not lived up to his billing."

Nelson, Mendoza, and Stanton.

We've got some good insight from an ardent Yankee rooter who hasn't watched a game since 1997.

Only.

"This season, with Brett Gardner off to a dreadful (.150) start and Eduardo Nunez on the bench as a utility infielder, All-Star second baseman Robinson Cano is the only everyday position player developed by the Yankees’ farm system."

Correct.

Except for Brett Gardner, Jorge Posada, and Derek Jeter.

Filip Bondy criticizes Phil Hughes for pitching poorly, but can't blame Hughes for spelling Phil with a "ph" instead of an "f."

"There is legitimate concern that Hughes, 24, hasn't really thrown at peak efficiency since the middle of the 2010 season. He was 5-0 out of the box last year with a 1.38 ERA his first six starts. He was 8-1 and 2.71, then was named to the All-Star team. From Aug. 25 on, however, he posted a 5.45 ERA. After a shutout stint against the Twins in the playoffs, he was blasted in two starts by the Texas Rangers, yielding 11 runs in 8-2/3 innings during two losses.

...

Then start No. 3 was a disaster again for Hughes. No Torre to blame for this one."

Right.

That's probably why Cashman isn't blaming Torre for Hughes's pitching.

Having said that, it's quite clear that Torre overused Proctor, Sturtze, Karsay, Quantrill, etc. So that has nothing to do with Phil Hughes. So thanks for nothing.


The only good thing to come out of this whole episode is that Joe Torre said "no comment" for the first time ever. I thought for sure Torre would effortlessly weave in a tale about Bigelow's green tea or the pitching exploits of Bob Gibson.

Somebody should ask him about the 1996 World Series.

The Yankees were down 2 games to 0 to the heavily-favored Braves. Yankee owner George Steinbrenner expressed his displeasure. In response, Torre calmly predicted that the Yankees would sweep 3 games in Atlanta and then win the World Series in 6 games.

That's what happened!

It's a good story.

Pass the beer nuts.

Judge Lupica.

Read this:

"It is a question asked repeatedly across America: why, in the aftermath of a financial mess that generated hundreds of billions in losses, have no high-profile participants in the disaster been prosecuted?"


Then read this:

"Does any living person actually think that Martha Stewart should have done time? Stewart avoided a loss of $45,000 by selling about 4,000 shares of stock in something known as ImClone Systems after receiving 'nonpublic' information. The government indicted Stewart on nine counts. Obstruction one of them. She was convicted of conspiracy, and obstruction of an agency proceeding."

Yes, I absolutely think Martha Stewart should have done time.


After mis-representing and mis-diagnosing Bonds / steroids / MLB in general, Lupica still believes he has the authority to write about Clemens's upcoming trial.

I think I can state with near certainty that Mike Lupica's columns are not the place to go for expertise on U.S. jurisprudence.

Red Sox probably losing on purpose.

Eric Ortiz is the guy who predicted the 2011 Red Sox would challenge the 1927 Yankees for the title of best team ever.

Melky Cabrera eats something off his bat.

At least Bill Madden is asking the question.

Yes, I'm still obsessing about an April loss. Too bad the $200 million players are not:

"But what was most bewildering about Girardi's explanation about using Soriano when he did was the fact that, obviously, he didn't consider Robertson an eighth-inning man in a non-save situation, and yet, he said, he'd planned to bring in Robertson to close the game out in the ninth had Soriano gotten through the eighth unscathed. All of this, of course, came about because Girardi was hoping to get Rivera a night off - which didn't happen anyway once the Twins tied it up in the eighth and the Yankee manager was in need of a true closer in the ninth.

'There are times you're gonna bring (Soriano) in (in non-save situations)' Girardi said. 'Four-run leads don't seem like a lot in the American League.' "

Four-runs leads don't seem like a lot in the American League.

That's.

Why.

You.

Keep.

Sabathia.

In.

The.

Game.

Yankees rained out.

At least Mariano is rested for the game of cribbage he's playing with Gustavo Molina.

Extended Spring Training.

Sabathia had retired 17 batters in a row. He had pitched 7 shutout innings. He had thrown only 100 pitches.

Mariano got 3 outs, but Girardi wouldn't let him get 4 outs.

"It's a long season" is Girardi's excuse for tanking a game in April.


While the manager certainly has to balance long-term goals with short-term goals, it's quite clear that Sabathia can pitch one more inning (or even two more innings) at minuscule risk.

If Rivera is available for 3 outs, he's available for 4 outs, if that's the difference between winning and losing.

The real reason Girardi and the Yankees tanked this game is because it's April, it's the Twins, it's mid-week, it's a half-empty stadium.

That's not being careful, that's being unprofessional.


Uber-Hack Wallace Matthews focuses on what Rafael Soriano did after the game. Who cares what Soriano did after the game?

I find it continually amazing that sportswriters spend so much time attacking the characters of players who don't talk to them.

Soriano has nothing to say -- he did all of his talking on the field.

I know you ... didn't you used to be Mike Lupica?

Oh, so you're just a contrarian:

"If you look at the way Jonathan Papelbon and John Lackey and Josh Beckett pitched last season for the Red Sox, you can make a reasonable case that the Red Sox, even having been established as a favorite in the AL East, have as many pitching issues as our hardscrabble, $204 million kids in the Bronx do."

Forget about the "underdog" tag ... that's just marketing / sportswriter drivel.

Did Lupica really just turn on Papelbon and Beckett?

I thought Papelbon is better than Mariano and ... why aren't you mentioning the game Beckett pitched against the Yankees in the 2003 World Series? Lupica, you love that game! You always bring up that game and you don't even mention Madison Bumgarner.

"As long as the star Yankees still play like stars, there is no reason why they don't win 95 again, why they don't win the East again. But what was an aging team last season is still an aging team. This was a spring to hear, once again, about young pitchers in the farm system, and maybe this is the year when one of them steps up the way Phil Hughes did last year as a starter, and the year before as an eighth-inning guy."

Dude: You're the one who always says the Yankees are old. That's the Lupica Doctrine. Now you sound like Rumsfeld criticizing Obama for not having a well-defined exit strategy.

This is known as reverse psychology.

Mike Lupica suddenly pretends to be bearish on the Red Sox and bullish on the Yankees:

"There are a lot of people in Boston who think Bobby Jenks is going to end up being the Red Sox closer this season, not Jonathan Papelbon."

1) In my next life, I want to be a journalist whose idea of a source is "a lot of people."

2) Remove the extraneous information from this so-called English sentence to reveal the following: "People think something is going to happen, not Jonathan Papelbon."

So we've learned that Jonathan Papelbon is not one of the people who thinks Bobby Jenks to going to be the Red Sox closer this season.


"Sometimes you look at the Red Sox, who have been treated as odds-on favorites since they got Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez, and think they have as many pitching issues as the Yankees.

And maybe more."

"And maybe more" is a paragraph by a professional columnist who is writing for a major newspaper.


"Terry Francona keeps saying he isn't worried about Josh Beckett, now the No. 4 man in Boston's rotation, but just about everybody in New England from Maine to Block Island seems to be."

Just about everybody in New England, not Jonathan Pabelbon.


While criticizing Papelbon and the Red Sox ...

"If the Yankees get big seasons out of A-Rod and CC and Teixeira and Cano and Mo Rivera - seriously, how do you pick against them in the American League East?"

This is probably the first time I've agreed with Lupica with regards to the state of the Yankees. Not optimistic, but realistic.


Problem is, I don't believe him.

I think he is merely setting up a weird "supposed to" for future Yankee ripping and BoSox praising ... a predictable mid-July column where he goes nutso for Epstein/Francona because the Boston bullpen (which was "supposed to" be terrible) has pitched well and the Red Sox are hanging in the AL East pennant race.

Bartolo Colon and Joba Chamberlain in the same bullpen.

I actually think the Yankee bullpen will be fine as long as Colon and Chamberlain sit on opposite ends of the bench.

You wouldn't want them sitting next to each other, tilting the bench like a see-saw, and accidentally catapulting Mariano into the bleachers.

Lupica Q & A.

Q: Why is Mike Lupica a hypocrite for attacking Bonds and Clemens?

A: Because Mike Lupica won't similarly attack Big Papi.

Sometimes, I agree with Joel Sherman.

Player X has an odd criticism of Alex Rodriguez:

"And in the April 4 issue of ESPN the Magazine an anonymous player decided A-Rod needed to be worked over, as well.

In the regular Player X segment, a copy of which I obtained before publication, the anonymous player decides to view the negotiation breakdown between and the Cardinals through the A-Rod prism. He writes: 'Every guy I know in MLB would rather have Pujols hitting on his side than Alex Rodriguez, so I think Camp Albert has every right to want more money than Rodriguez makes. A-Rod is overpaid. Sure, he plays third, a more premium position on defense than first, but even if they played the same spot, I'd take Pujols.' "

Player X, shut your trap.


"OK, let's see if I get this argument: Pujols is better than A-Rod. Is there anyone arguing the contrary? Is there a shame to being an inferior player to Pujols?"

Hear, hear.

Guilty.

I knew he was guilty, of course, I just thought he might beat the perjury rap.

He won't beat the perjury rap.

Waste of time and money.

Did you know that if Bonds was prosecuted for taking steroids, he would not go to prison? So the prosecutors are comfortable disconnecting the charge of perjury from the underlying charge. If this sounds odd to you, it's because it's odd:

"More often and more credibly, perjury is pursued when it's connected with more serious underlying charges. Martha Stewart, for example, was indicted for perjury and making false statements in connection with insider trading. Similarly, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, former assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney, was indicted on perjury charges in connection with leaking the identity of a former CIA operative.

The steroid controversy is altogether different. The Bonds case and Clemens indictment involve charges of lying - in Bonds' case to a grand jury, and in Clemens' case to Congress - for making allegedly false statements in an attempt to cover up the use of performance-enhancing drugs. The use of these drugs is banned by Major League Baseball and can in some cases be illegal, but the use alone is not a felony and was not charged in either case.

What has some people troubled here is that the underlying crime, if there is one, is so diffuse. These cases seem to have more to do with the integrity and reputation of professional sports than with the prosecution of a serious crime with real victims or any demonstrable financial or physical harm. Given the limits of the resources of the Justice Department and the probability that someone who is solely convicted on perjury will not likely receive prison time, it's fair to question the wisdom of spending millions of dollars pursuing these cases.

In fact, contrast the treatment of these two men with the cases of other professional athletes - Jason Giambi, Mark McGwire and Alex Rodriguez, to name a few - who, after long periods of failing to tell the truth, have simply owned up to the illegal drug use and suffered reputational damage without the threat of jail time or a felony conviction."

Bonds admitted under oath that he took the "clean" and the "clear" and we all know he took steroids. He knows he took steroids. But the prosecutors have to prove that he knew he was taking steroids at the time he was taking steroids. So when Bonds said he didn't know he was taking steroids, how do you prove that he didn't know?

The misconduct of the prosecutors and their disproportional pursuit of Bonds bothers me very much. Bonds's use of steroids and subsequent destruction of the HR records bothers me very little.

I like democracies.

Because these same people get to vote for President.

He pulled a love handle.

He's got an edge, baby!

A.J. Burnett is going to win 30 games in the 2011 season.

"That's not the case this spring for a few of the Yankees' key cogs, each of whom is instituting changes to his game to help him overcome a down year in 2010.

A.J. Burnett and Derek Jeter are the two most prominent players in this category, each of them making significant mechanical adjustments to bounce back."

Jeter had a subpar year by his standards.

A.J. Burnett had a subpar year by Jeff Weaver standards.

Jeter and Burnett are not in the same category.


"Burnett took the mound Saturday against the Nationals, his third start of the exhibition season. Although he saw his spring scoreless streak snapped at six innings, Burnett was encouraged by his outing after giving up two runs on two hits in four innings. He struck out four and didn't walk a batter, giving him nine innings without a walk this spring."

Yay.

I will bet $10 million that A.J. Burnett walks at least two batters in the first inning he pitches in the regular season.

I think Alex Rodriguez will have a productive 2011 season.

I think his hip has hampered him quite a bit for two seasons and I don't think his power is particularly hampered by the absence of performance-enhancing substances. I also don't think his age is much of an issue at all.

Having said that, I have witnessed exactly one instance in my lifetime where a Yankee hit 50 HRs and drove in 150 runs in one season:

" 'As I said, he's doing things I haven't seen since 2007.'

Long understands the significance of putting that out there. A-Rod, you might recall, had a pretty decent season in '07, hitting .314 with 54 home runs, 156 RBI and a .645 slugging percentage - all major-league highs - on his way toward winning his third American League MVP award.

Because of the hip surgery in the spring of '09, and because Rodriguez turns 36 in July, it's hard to believe he could approach such power numbers again. Yet it's also hard not to notice that he has come out pounding the ball early in spring training games, hitting a handful of lasers to the outfield gaps already, and then the home run that raised his average to .462."

Cool. It's Spring Training and ARod is hitting .462. As we all know, this means he'll probably win the AL MVP.

That's all for today. More baseball analysis tomorrow from John Harper.

The opposite of Mark Teixeira.

A.J. Burnett is probably going to win 20 games in 2011.

"A. J. Burnett made sure to stop by outfielder Greg Golson’s locker in the Yankees’ clubhouse Monday morning to check on him after a scary moment Sunday, when Burnett beaned him in batting practice."

Chipper Jones was hatched from an egg.

Which now means that somebody on the Internet has claimed that Chipper Jones was not born from a female human, but rather hatched from an egg. Maybe a sportswriter should waste everybody's time and write a column which disputes the notion that Chipper Jones was hatched from an egg:

"When an athlete pushing 39 has reconstructive knee surgery, the tendency is to speak about them in past tense. Or worse. Some cynics not only question Jones physically, they wonder if money is his primary motivation. This accusation generally comes from the short-sighted, ignorant and disturbed segment of the populace that vents on sports talk radio and posts comments on blogs, all behind the comfort of anonymity."

I don't have an ear to the ground regarding Atlanta Braves blogs, but I doubt very much if a large number of "short-sighted, ignorant and disturbed segments of the populace" are "generally" claiming that Chipper Jones is a sellout who is playing for money.

Even if there was, why would you list these people as a source? Why would you feel the need to rebuke anonymous so-called sources? Especially since the people who vent about the Atlanta Braves on sports talk radio and leave comments on Atlanta Braves blogs ... well ... they're the same short-sighted, ignorant, and disturbed people who are likely to read your column.

I briefly listened to ESPN radio this morning.

The morning show is Mike and Mike.

This is a synopsis of the show:


Mike: Albert Pujols is worth $280 million.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

Mike: Yes, he is.

Mike: No, he isn't.

We'll be back after these messages.

Popcorn.

The rites of Spring, indeed, as the snow melts, the pitchers & catchers report, and Mike Lupica writes ignorant things about baseball:

"It was reported afterward that A-Rod was furious that the television cameras had shown him eating popcorn this way, as if he were somehow allowed to act surprised that a star New York Yankee with a movie-star girlfriend sitting in some big-ticket suite might be on a cameraman's radar.

Really?

Sometimes you wonder if the guy will ever get it."

First of all, "it was reported" is not much of a source.

Secondly, if you don't care, I don't care.

Since I'm a grown man and a baseball fan, I don't really care about Cameron Diaz and popcorn. It's not why I'm reading a baseball article in the Daily News.


"But you know what? The popcorn moment was the closest A-Rod came to making real news in this baseball winter dominated by just about everybody except him."

"Just about everybody" except ARod.

This baseball winter was dominated by "just about everybody" in the baseball universe except for ARod.

This baseball winter was dominated by Jorge Cantu. It was dominated by the Jonathan Albaladejo. It was dominated by Russ Springer -- I can't believe how Russ Springer became a national story, dominating headlines from coast to coast.

That's just a start. There are thousands of players who dominated the baseball winter news ... until the "popcorn moment" stole the headlines.


"They need him to do better than 30 home runs with Mark Teixeira hitting in front of him. Do better than .270. We obsessed all winter about Jeter's stats and how Jeter is in decline after a year when the Yankee shortstop hit .270."

Infantile analysis. Completely embarrassing.

As if batting average was the be-all and the end-all. Dismissive of ARod's 30/125; ignoring Jeter's lack of production; wild overrating of Teixeira (the worst #3 hitter in 2010?).

Stick with the gossip pages, Miss Lupica.

That is very fatty muscle.

"Chamberlain showed up to the Yankees minor-league complex noticeably bigger. He looks like he's gained 10-15 pounds. That may set off alarm bells in Yankeeland, but he has seven weeks to lose the weight, and it's not like he's the size of David Wells.

Chamberlain said he is unsure what he weighs right now and attributed the weight gain to the gym he added to his house."

Because nicknames are important.

"Still, Swisher said he believes the Yankees will 'fit in the pieces where needed,' and he expressed confidence in the 24-year-old Nova.

'I call him "Super Nova," ' the All-Star outfielder said."

Your nickname is incorrect.

His name is Aldo.

I got a position for the Edge ... Left Out.

Jeter is going to play shortstop for the Yankees forever.

He's not just the best shortstop ever. He's not just the best Yankee ever. He has conquered Death.

Jets are in AFC Championship Game, Yankees are Desperate, Yankee Fans Should Worry.

My name is Mike Lupica and I am a hack:

"The signing of Rafael Soriano by the Yankees this week produced as surreal a Yankee press conference as the one a million years ago when George Steinbrenner fired Dick Howser and tried to make it sound like practically a promotion."

It was not really a million years ago. That is a middle-school-level rhetorical device known as hyperbole.


"Maybe Soriano will work out great for the Yankees, and there will be nights when he and Mo Rivera lock down games from the seventh inning on.

Maybe Soriano will be worth the closer money the desperate Yankees threw at him, and be Mike Stanton and Jeff Nelson all by himself."

The Yankees are not desperate.

Put another way, even if the Yankees are desperate, the Soriano signing and the subsequent press conference are not evidence of this supposed desperation.

That is a middle-school-level logical device known as a tautology. Lupica is claiming the Yankees are desperate and his proof of this is using the word "desperate" to describe the Yankees.

A "desperate" move would have been trading Cano, Joba, and three draft picks for Soriano.


Also, the Yankees are not expecting Soriano to be "Stanton and Nelson all by himself." That is a middle-school-level rhetorical device knows as a false equivalency.

But if Soriano was really that good, then the "closer money" would be quite a bargain. The Yankees would have two players in one and plenty of money left over for a good starter.


"But if you are a Yankee fan, you better worry about how this all played out, because this was the week when the Yankees once again looked like they were being run by a Crack Baseball Committee out of the past."

Which Crack Committee out of the past? The one that won 4 titles in 5 years?


"Or maybe just being run by no one."

Or maybe not.

Maybe the Yankees are really being run by someone.

Maybe the Yankees missed the World Series by two wins last season and maybe the Yankees have missed the playoffs only one time since 1995.


Lupica would write this article regardless of the actions of the Yankee front office.

The Yankees would have been desperate if they had done nothing and they would have been desperate if they had signed Lee.

The Yankees were expecting to sign Lee and are waiting patiently -- not desperately -- for starting pitching depth.

For some reason, it's very important to Mike Lupica to try and make Yankee fans worried.

Welcome to New York.

This is the kind of thing you don't say out loud:

" 'This certainly will help us try to win a championship, there's no doubt about that, so that's in the plus column,' Cashman said. 'But I didn't recommend it, just because I didn't think it was an efficient way to allocate the remaining resources we have. We had a lot of debate about that.' "


Also, no need to insult free agents:

" 'He's opting not to play right now but that might change, it might not. I told him, "Don't Brett Favre us. You got to be all in and fully dedicated to play." Do I need him? I need him, but I don't want him to play if his heart's not in it.' "

Yankees save winter.

After reading Kevin Kernan's opinion that the signing of Rafael Soriano has saved the Yankees' offseason, I have a question about Kevin Kernan.

Is he:

1) Optimistic?

2) A shill for Yankee management?

3) Drunk?

"So much for not getting Cliff Lee. So much for not holding on to their No. 1 draft pick. With Soriano and Closer I, Mariano Rivera, the Yankees now have a 1-2 punch at the end of the game that saved Brian Cashman’s offseason and will save the Yankees time and again in 2011."

Yeah, but who's pitching the first seven innings?

I totally wonder about Matt Garza's arm and nerve.

"I kept thinking that Matt Garza might somehow end up with the Yankees.

Garza was the most expendable of the Rays' young starters because he was the closest to free agency, and he's coming off an up-and-down year.

But if you ever wondered about Garza's arm and his nerve, go back and take a look at the Game 7 he pitched against the Red Sox in 2008."

Thank you for settling my nerves. I was losing sleep over this. In fact, the Matt Garza discussion has been dominating New York sports radio for several years and I was getting tired of it.

Ummm, who's Matt Garza, again?

"Go back and look what he did that night after Dustin Pedroia led off the game with a home run."

As if Mike Lupica remembers a specific play from a specific game.

"He did to the Red Sox that night what Josh Beckett did to the Yankees in Game 6 of the 2003 World Series."

Ha ha ha.

May as well put Josh Beckett's 2003 Game Six on Lupica's gravestone.

WE GET IT. Beckett beat the Yankees and this makes you HAPPY. It was in 2003, for cryin' out loud.

I know nothing.

I thought Larry Walker was one of the best all-around players I saw and a HOF shoo-in.

I believe this is sarcasm.

"The Red Sox were slated to win about 95 games last year. They won 89 despite injuries to Pedroia (a former MVP) and Youkilis (a possible future MVP). Add them back, along with the new players and a healthy Ellsbury, and 100 wins doesn’t just appear plausible. It seems downright inevitable.

So does a date with history.

The 2001 Mariners won 116 regular-season games to set the American League record for most wins in a single season and tie the 1906 Cubs for the major league record (though the North Siders accomplished the feat in 152 games). Both those teams failed to win the World Series. The Cubs lost to the White Sox in six games in the Fall Classic. The Mariners didn’t even make it that far, falling to the Yankees in five games in the ALCS.

The Red Sox have no intention of suffering a similar fate. The way they are constructed, they could surpass the 116-win mark, but nothing less than a World Series title will make Boston happy.

The 2011 Red Sox possess all the pieces to have a season for the ages. If everything falls into place and the breaks go their way, they could do more than set records and become champions. They could do more than take their place on Immortality Peak and end up being mentioned in the same sentence as legendary clubs of the past: the 1929 A’s, the epic Yankees teams of the ‘30s, the 1970 Orioles, the 1976 Reds.

The 2011 Red Sox could accomplish a feat that has never been done. They could unseat the 1927 Yankees as the greatest major league team of all time.

That would be something to celebrate."

Maybe it's not sarcasm.

But does this guy really think the Red Sox are going to win over 116 games? In the AL East?

I'm always amused by pre-season predictions which (1) focus on the additions and ignore the subtractions, and (2) insist that the team's season will be relatively injury-free.

How could he possibly know that the roster will stay healthy?

I actually think this is fair.

Unless you're going to exclude everyone who took steroids -- and it's too late for that -- then I think the whole point for any candidate is to assess their worthiness based on several factors.

If you think Bagwell took steroids, I don't even think that should necessarily exclude him from the Hall of Fame.

If you think he would have been a .260 hitter with 90 HRs without steroids, then, yeah, you should exclude him from the Hall of Fame.


My gripe, of course, is that the same guy voted for cokehead Tim Raines.

I want to play poker with Darek Braunecker.

" 'A.J. just had a down year,' Braunecker said. 'You know, it happens, and I'll bet you anything that he's going to have a really good year this year. He's focused. He's not happy, of course he's not. He's disappointed. But that's part of the game and part of life, ups and downs. I promise you, he's going to come back with a vengeance.' "

I'll bet $100 million.

Mike Lupica displays integrity. I'm shocked.

Two days later, after Lee signs with the Phillies: "The Yankees say they weren't desperate to get Lee. Yeah, they were, or they wouldn't have offered too much money and too many years. But that's what they do, who they are. I still believe it would have been a bad contract for them and is a bad contract for Philadelphia."

Cheating the Constitution is worse than cheating a baseball homerun record.

My intuition tells me Filip Bondy doesn't know what he's talking about.

"But then every once in a while - not too often, really, but at least twice in recent memory - something intuitively feels amiss and the chase becomes garish, excessive and short-sighted. It felt that way with Jason Giambi, about to turn 30, back in 2001, when the Yanks signed him to a seven-year, $120 million deal to replace Tino Martinez, for no great reason."

The only reason was because Giambi was a great offensive player.

In his first year with the Yankees, Giambi drove in 120 and scored 120.

.314, 41 HRs, 109 walks.

Made Mark Teixeira look like Andy Phillips.

It was the third season in a row Giambi finished top five in the MVP voting.

So unless Bondy intuitively knew Giambi was on steroids -- which might not have been too difficult to conclude, come to think of it -- then Bondy had no reason at the time to claim the Giambi deal was short-sighted.


"It felt that way again when the Yanks offered Alex Rodriguez, at 32, a 10-year deal worth $275 million. The idea of being stuck with designated hitter A-Rod, untradeable at 41, is not a happy glimpse into the future."

ARod is a great baseball player.

Don't trade him.


It's unclear to me when and how the conventional wisdom regarding ARod's contract tilted to the negative without any thoughtful debate.


"If he succeeds, however, he would be getting a top pitcher in his prime. Greinke is 27, and has two years left on a reasonable contract at $13.5 million per season. The Yanks would be able to renegotiate and extend it easily enough."

Right ... and that contract extension would be garish and excessive.


"That isn't the issue here, though. Desperation is. Forget the Rays for a moment. Cashman right now understands the Red Sox lineup is every bit as impressive as his own. Bullpens are unpredictable. There is really no way to plan them. The one thing the GM can do, must do, is shore up his starting rotation."

The Red Sox lineup is not every bit as impressive as the Yankee lineup.

The Red Sox lost Beltre and Martinez, right? Bondy is aware of this?


Assuming Ellsbury plays CF instead of Cameron, the Red Sox probably have an advantage in LF and CF and that's it.


Evoking the debates about Willie, Mickey, and the Duke, I'll call it a tie between Jarrod Saltalamachhia and Francisco Cervelli.

This is pretty much how I feel about it.

I just think Lee is overrated and his value is buoyed by some stellar playoff performances:

"The World Series that you might win with Cliff Lee—I am not sold on the idea that 24 current Yankees plus Cliff Lee equals a World Series, but even if you win one—is like cake. It feels good at first, but then over the next five or six years, you have a perhaps rapidly declining asset who used to throw 91 with great location but now throws 89 with great location and misses 10 starts a year because his spine is shaped like the letter Q. I could be wrong about that, and in the infinite parallel universes that exist, there will be many in which Cliff Lee pitched terrifically for the length of the contract, but there will be many more where he will not, because that is the way of things.

This morning, you will no doubt read many columnists who say things like, 'Now that the Red Sox have signed Carl Crawford, the Yankees must sign Cliff Lee!' I don’t quite understand this reasoning, much as I don’t understand the way that Crawford was supposed to be Plan B to Lee as Plan A. Saying that Crawford is an alternative to Lee is like saying you’re baking cookies and mustard is an alternative to sugar. It’s like saying that the alternative to your right leg is the Eiffel Tower. These are completely different players. If you need a left fielder, you pursue a Crawford. If you need a pitcher, you pursue Lee. Because you didn’t get Lee doesn’t mean that you now need a left fielder, and if you didn’t get Crawford it doesn’t mean you now need a pitcher. The needs stay the same, but the solution set changes."

Carl Crawford:

"As for Crawford, I hate to disillusion anyone, but he is just not a huge run producer for the simple reason that he doesn’t get on base that much. Clarifying: he’s an asset. Discounting 2008, when he was hurt, from 2006 to 2010, Crawford averaged .308/.354/.474 and averaged 54 stolen bases (and 11 caught stealing) a year, all while playing excellent defense. You can’t be dismissive of that, although you have to be aware that it’s not unusual for left fielders to have on-base and slugging percentages right in that zone. It’s a slugger’s position, and 2010 was the first time that Crawford was, on a per-game basis, a top-five producer at the position.

Now that Crawford is with the Red Sox, you can, just maybe, start subtracting from your expectations. Crawford is a better hitter on turf than grass. His .291/.332/.425 rates on natural surfaces aren’t spectacular for the position. His career .275/.301/.406 at Fenway is abysmal. Stolen bases only add so much when you don’t hit overall. Add in that Crawford is going to be hanging around from age 29 to age 36 and the Red Sox could really regret this deal, and that is even if Crawford doesn’t have some kind of catastrophic leg injury. All he has to do is lose a few leg hits a year and there goes the batting average that is at the heart of his game.

It is understandable that the Sox wanted to take this risk, because left field killed them last year. The position of Teddy Ballgame, Yaz, and Rice gave them just .230/.303/.396. Whatever Crawford does for them, it will be better than that. Put him together with Adrian Gonzalez and does he boost them up to 95-win territory this season, all else being equal? Yeah, maybe he does. But by himself is the move something that should panic the Yankees? No, not at all."

Mike Lupica is an Unfrozen Caveman Sportswriter who is Confused by Free Agency.

"Cliff Lee may turn out to be the most rare of free-agent starting pitchers, which means that he may be worth as much at the end of his contract as he is at the beginning of it."

All free agents, not just pitchers.

Freakin' Carl Crawford just signed a contract worth $20 million per year. He wasn't worth that much money when he was 27 years old. He's going to be 37 years old when this contract expires.


"So Lee might still be worth $25 million a year to the Yankees when he is 37 – the age Derek Jeter turns next year – or 38 or 39. So Lee might turn out to be the exception rather than the rule with insane contracts, money and length, for starters that often turn out to be a complete waste at the back end."

Well, you'll have to put some metrics around that. I think the Yankees would be happy with 110 wins overall, a .600 playoff winning percentage, and two Championships.

Is that fair?

When Lee is 38 or 39, assuming Lee is still alive and healthy and still playing for the Yankees, by then he'd probably a .500 pitcher. For argument's sake, let's say 12-12 and a #5 starter.

But how could I possibly know?

If Lupica expects 160 wins over 7 seasons, then that's not realistic.


For what it's worth, I think Lee is overrated. I also think the Yankees should offer him a seven-year deal and hope for the best. That's the Talent Pyramid.


"But here's the key thing: The Yankees have no idea if Lee will hold up or not. Don't know, don't care. They just care about next season."

No, you are wrong.

The Yankees care very much about Lee's longevity and the Yankees care very much about the future of their team beyond next season.


"The Yankees don't care how much they have to spend on Lee because the Red Sox now have Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford locked up."

No, you are wrong.

Mike Lupica is stating that the Yankees are going hard after Cliff Lee --
The 7-year, $185 million offer that everyone knew was coming for the past two years -- because the Red Sox singed Gonzalez and Crawford.


"When the Yankees absolutely have to have somebody, can't live without him, they spend whatever they need to."

I guess so.

They sign a lot of free agents. They also don't sign a lot of free agents.

I'm sure Lupica thought the Yankees needed Joe Mauer for sure.


"They were supposed to be done a couple of years ago after spending $240 million on CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett, and then they found another $180 million on a shelf in a closet for Mark Teixeira."

The Yankees were supposed to be done spending on free agents.


"But, man oh man, the Yankees sure did have to hold the line on Jeter. Various Yankee executives and accountants nearly tore rotator cuffs patting themselves on the back for saving and all Steinbrenner heirs everywhere some money on the captain of the team."

Snarky.


"We hear that the Yankees are terrified, that's what they are, about having too much money tied up with aging ballplayers. Except now they are prepared to commit a ton of money to Cliff Lee when he is ... an aging ballplayer!"

"We hear."

Who hears this?

Does Lupica hear this?

I don't hear this.


"When they got Teixeira and Burnett and Sabathia, it was supposed to be the beginning of another Yankee dynasty, even if it hasn't worked out that way."

This has to be one of the weirdest analyses, even by Lupica standards.

How can Lupica know in December 2010 if this will be the start of another Yankee dynasty?

Lupica has determined the status of a potential dynasty after just two seasons.

Think about that.

These players won a Championship their first year in pinstripes. In their second season, they made it to the ALCS.

So if they continue a 50% Championship rate for the remainder of their contracts, will that be a dynasty?


"One of these days the owners of the Yankees should go back and look at where the Yankee payroll was in comparison to the rest of the sport when the team was winning four World Series in five years."

What they will find is that their good players were young and inexperienced and not yet eligible for free agency.

Then, these players became eligible for free agency, and the Yankees paid them a lot of money.

So the payroll went way up while the talent didn't magically increase proportionally.

Because that's how free agency works.

Almost every young all star -- Mattingly, Jeter, Soriano, Rivera -- is a bargain until the exact moment they become a free agent (or sign a free-agent-equivalent contract extension).

They sign long-term contracts when they are young. These contracts are burdensome when they're old.

This is how it works.

The alternative is to be a bad team with AAA players.

Mike Lupica is a man who is so stupid, he doesn't even realize who won.

Golly, I hope the Yankees don't regret their negotiating tactics during the Jeter talks. It would be costly if Jeter signed with another team.

Oh, wait.

Jeter signed with the Yankees:

"So here we are, close to what the Yankees wanted to pay. The Yankees acting as if they had some moral high ground on this. As if they were making some kind of big, loud statement. About the quiet captain of the team who helped win them five World Series, who was as valuable a player as they had between 1996 and 2000 when they were as great as any Yankee team ever has been.

You can't be a better Yankee than Jeter has been. It is the Yankees who will someday wish they had done things better on this."

I don't think the Yankees acted as if they had some moral high ground. I don't think the Yankees were acting as if they were making some kind of big, loud statement. The Yankees just wanted to bring Jeter's asking price down, and that's what they did.


This is nothing new. A successful negotiation with a free agent. What is the regretful consequence that Mike Lupica is referring to? Another nasty article by Mike Lupica?

What's the rush?

"The fun with Derek Jeter and the Yankees really never stops and won't stop until he and the Yankees reach an agreement, and we can only pray that it's sooner rather than late."

I know you need stuff to talk about in the offseason, but this is not a big deal.

The Yankees traded for ARod in February. Then, a few years later, the Yankees signed him as a free agent in mid-December.

The Yankees waited until January to sign Bernie Williams.

CC Sabathia signed on December 20th.

Mark Teixeira signed on January 6th.


"Just so you know: The Yankees don't just want to cut Jeter's salary because he's getting older, or because he had his worst year. Or because his range has diminished - this at a time when you can actually see A-Rod calcifying in front of your eyes at third base - or because they don't want to be saddled with another huge contract for an aging champion.

They want to be able to sign Cliff Lee for an insane amount of money and then stand in front of their fans and say, Look, the payroll went down!"

Just so you know, it snows in December.

Thanks for the cogent analysis.

Oh, and if they're going to sign Cliff Lee, when?

I pray it's sooner rather than late.


"- We keep hearing that the Yankees can't bid against themselves on Jeter. No, because that would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Looking back over the past 10 years, we see that the Yankees never ever bid against themselves."

You keep hearing that from the straw man in your head.

Jeter will be overpaid. Everyone knows this.


"Hank, you made one guy rich:

A-Rod.

A-Rod opted out of his contract during Game 4 or the 2007 World Series and everybody from the groundskeepers on up at Yankee Stadium, old and new, knows that Cashman was ready to let him walk.

But not you.

Oh, no.

You gave him a contract that takes him to the age of 42 and could pay him up to $200 million, which means twice what A-Rod was going to make anywhere else."

Well, I think it's up to $275 million, and even that is not twice what ARod was going to make anywhere else. He had just hit 50 and driven in 150, for cryin' out loud.

But remember what you just said about Cashman was ready to let him walk? That's right. That's what they always say before they sign you.

This is not an unusual negotiating tactic, even for the Yankees. It's what they always do. When they overpay Jeter, Lupica will complain that they spent too much money on an old player.