a700hitter

Right now Jason Marquis has better stats than Roy Halladay. Does that mean he is the better pither? That doesn't enter my mind while I am watching a game. Sorry. Maybe that's because I am not the owner or GM. How would it affect the 2007 draft? The Yankees did not have to give up any draft picks for him. Again, is Marquis better than Halladay?

Not only don't Gabbard and Hansack not dominate, they pretty much stink. While Tavarez has done better than expected, he is not Clemens equal, but that's just silly ole me.

I never looked for the argument. After I happily posted that Clemens sucks during last night's game, I was asked if I had wanted Clemens when he was available. The answer is yes, because he is still, yes still, better than the other three guys. I don't care about his salary. It's not my concern. When I watch a game I don't care what the players make. I want to see overpaid guys like Manny coming out of the dugout instead of guys like Melky Cabrera, because I want to watch them win. Here's a flash. The managers don't care about the finances. They just want the tools and opportunity to win. They don't care how management gets those players. You are right that I cannot lose the argument if the question is who is the better pitcher, so why do you keep arguing? BTW If I were considering cost in the equation, it wouldn't have much of an impact, because it is a one-year commitment which will not affect future transactions. All I am saying is that Clemens is a better pitcher than Tavarez, Gabbard and Hansack based strictly on ability. That anyone would disagree with that baffles me, but please don't tell me what question I should ask. When MVP, Cy Young and other awards are voted on, Salary is not a consideration. Batting titles and Home Run Crowns are not adjusted for economics. Clemensis a better pitcher than the other three. I don't care if he lives in a bigger house.

But it wasn't a catch.

Yeah, you've got me pegged. That must be the reason that I went to Shea a few years back hoping that Shawn Estes would peg the prick.

It would have been a highlight reel type catch.

Managers don't pay the players. They don't get paid to figure out the finances. They have a hard enough time figuring out when to bunt, hit and run etc. I am not getting into an economic value debate. I am merely saying that Clemens is still better than all three of those guys, which is why I was hoping we would get him. That's all. Give any manager the choice of pitching Clemens or the other three, and guess who they will pick. They are not going to care how much he makes. They only care about who will give their team the better chance of winning.

This is just silly

Ignoring the bulk of your post as non-responsive, I don't think too many baseball experts would agree with your optimism.

I think Tito is doing a pretty good job at game management. I get a little peaved sometimes when he rests two or three starters when Wakefield is pitching.

The FO needs to reinforce the pitching staff, because we are one more injury away from a potential tailspin.

Thuuuuh Yankees Loooose!!! Thuuuuh Yankees Loooose!!!

Yes. What is your point? I'd rather roll him out to the mound every 5th day instead of Tavarez, Gabbard, or Hansack.

What a shame. The Rocket sucks. Too bad.

All of this is unnecessary. What they should do is make a move to bolster the rotation or the bullpen.

I'm just happy if he didn't injure his finger.

If they lose Schilling, a team like the Angels would have to win 1 of the first 2 games and then they would have a big advantage against the rest of our rotation.

This is a slight over reaction. Offenses will slump, especially on the road. The pitching kept us in the game and gave us a chance to win the game even though the offense was flat. My worry is that the continuing forfeit in the 5th rotation spot will start to take its toll on the bullpen and the other starters. If Schilling comes back strong, this should not be a problem, but if he falters and is DL'd again, the pitching will be flawed especially in the playoffs.