YES Network.com

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Damon will stay cold. He's aging, he's banged up, and even in his prime he had years like 2001 (.256/.324/.363) and 2003 (.273/.345/.405) where he wasn't able to hit much.

Of course, if the Yankees are giving up on the season then it doesn't matter what kind of hitting they get at first base. It doesn't seem as if they're going to waive the white flag any time soon, nor should they though their window is rapidly closing. That means they're still obligated to be smart for awhile longer.

Several readers have written in to say that the Yankees should not trade for Todd Helton if it means giving away young pitching. Unless the Yankees panic, it seems unlikely that the Rockies can exact a high price from any team if they deal Helton. As is now commonly understood, his contract stretches on to the end of time, inflating as it goes. Not even the Hubble space telescope can perceive the end of Helton's contract, or its beginning. The Rockies will have to pay some of the cost in any trade, probably a lot of the cost, and they won't get a boatload of talent back in return. Either they're going to give him away, Abreu-style, or they're going to be stuck with him.

The foregoing prediction may be negated at any time by a team choosing to act in defiance of the laws of aging and fiscal sanity. It's doubtful, but you know how owners can get.

TO THE MATS WITH READER MAIL
1: HA!

I just don't like it. Like you, I try to defend A-Rod, great player, but his justification for this seems to be we needed a win. Well, so does everybody else. It just seems a bit childish; it happens all the time I believe, and it is not as distasteful to me as say Piniella.... but still. -- Todd

I grew up watching Billy Martin. For me, Piniella's outburst wasn't distasteful at all. It was nostalgic. That doesn't mean it was right, I guess, but I long for the days when managers weren't so passive in the face of a blown call. As for "Ha!", Howie Clark is a 33-year-old busher of long standing. A real Major Leaguer would probably have understood that his obligation at that moment was to catch the ball, not investigate the interesting noise behind him. As I wrote last week, this isn't tennis. There are only two things that are really shameful in this incident, both in the Yankees' reaction to it. First, there are A-Rod's teammates, who, if some reports are to be believed, were ashamed of A-Rod because "Ha!" is not the "Yankee way." All hail the gentlemen ballplayers.

They're 12.5 games out of first but their consciences are clean. Second, Joe Torre sold Rodriguez out again in failing to back him. Torre reached the Majors in September, 1960. I guess gamesmanship had died out by then, and none of his Braves teammates bothered to tell him anything about it.

Torre's first manager was Charlie Dressen, one of the great sign-stealers. He was teammates with Lew Burdette, spitballer, for about three and a half years. He and Billy Martin were teammates for a few months in 1961. What do you suppose they would have said about "Ha!"?

2: SPOILED MELKY

Last season after less than 100 at-bats you proclaimed that Bernie Williams "can't play". I have news for you. He played quite well. You were wrong! They could use his bat this season too, especially from the right side. Mr. Cashman was very short-sighted letting Williams and Sheffield go without getting anything close to an adequate replacement for either one of them. This team has been assembled very poorly and Cashman deserves to lose his job because of it However, all of the above is not why I am writing to you. Melky Cabrera, all of 21 years old, injected life into a dead team last year. Melky Cabrera, all of 22 years old now, should be playing every day this year so he can do the same thing... Why your limited expectations for him? He is only 22 years old. His future will be much brighter than is apparent to you. Given his age and the progress he has made in the last several years I think you are being short sighted and foolhardy putting such a low ceiling on his ability. I am not writing this because he has done well in Boston. I have felt this way about him since I first saw him two years ago. He has a very solid approach from both sides of the plate and is unique for a switch hitter in that he is very similar from both sides. There is no doubt in my mind that once he gets his footing he will be a well over 300 hitter with adequate power numbers and a very healthy on base percentage. He should have been starting every game this year from day one. This is an aging, sluggish team which needs his energy. They are at a crossroad here. With the exception of pitching, their farm system is barren. If they succumb to their stupid quick fix ways, and trade their young pitching for more 30-year-old-plus players (see Todd Helton), then the future will be very bleak. They are crazy. This Clemens thing is a fiasco. If they hold on to most of the young pitchers they will be ok. Hope your health is under control. -- S.S.

Thanks for the good wishes on the health, S.S. (man, do I look forward to the day when "unhealthy" is not part of my identi-kit, though I lack the hubris to expect that it will come). That makes it harder for me to disagree with you, but I have to.

Last year, Williams showed that his bat wasn't quite dead. That's not to say that it was still living. The average player had on-base and slugging percentages of .340 and .438 last year; Bernie's were .332 and .436. "Swell," you say. "That's pretty much league average, more than enough for a reserve outfielder and DH." Not so fast. Reserves have to pinch-hit, and Williams went 2-for-16. Last year, the average DH hit .264/.349/.469. Bernie hit .267/.336/.317. The average right fielder hit .286/.349/.468. He hit .284/.317/.485, which is, I suppose, competitive, except that his defense in right, and at any position, had become unacceptable. Bernie also hit .261/.305/.383 against right-handers, which is just south of useless.

So what did he do well? As above, he hit decently when playing right field. He somehow went 10-for-20 in five games in left field, which was a fluke. Finally, he did what he almost always did well, which is hit left-handers, batting .323/.387/.549 against them. For his career, Bernie hit .308/.397/.503 against southpaws.

Would that skill set -- doesn't play defense, doesn't hit righties, hurts lefties -- have some value? Sure it would, assuming that Williams' pinch-hitting numbers were just small-sample bad luck. But (as I said over the winter and on into the spring) the Yankees would have needed a different roster configuration to take advantage of it, carrying fewer relievers and first basemen than they began the season with. Mike Myers got the spot that the Yankees could have promised to Bernie, or Doug Mientkiewicz did.

Even if the Yankees had carried Williams, chances are that he wouldn't have hit as he did in 2006, but gravitated back to the .256/.342/.403 of 2004-2005, or, given his age, something a lot worse. The result could have been a very embarrassing situation for Williams and the Yankees, with the latter forced to release the former. Sorry, Neil Young, but for the professional athlete it's better to fade away than burn out.

It's time to let go of last year's overblown contribution and the fantasy that a 2007 return for Williams would have meant anything more than one more over-aged Yankee on a dying club.

As for Melky, I'd like to see him develop as much as you would, but right now the package is lacking and I can't predict the future. Unless he develops more power and more patience than he's show to date, he's going to have to hit .300 to be of much offensive value, and very few players are consistent at that level. Thus I remain hopeful but maintain a healthy level of skepticism.

3: RADICAL FRINGE

Seeing George has not done the clean sweep -- time to BOYCOTT -- very poor attendance will get someone's attention. I believe Roger is now only for attendance purposes -- George knows this -- cannot win - let's make some money! Sorry, not from me. -- Knapper

If you didn't write, Knapper, then who did? While we work on that mystery, your theory about Clemens is a bit off; when the Yankees signed him their situation wasn't quite as dire as it now appears. Further, given what the Yankees are paying The Rocket, I very much doubt that any extra attendance he might bring will begin to offset his salary. Remember also that the Yankees draw extremely well, with many committed season ticket holders, and they aren't going to face an attendance crisis until a year or two after a bad season, not this year. Actually, with a new park coming they won't face it the year after next either.

I am also not sure who you want to sweep out -- Brian Cashman? Joe Torre? Making changes at these positions may or may not be justified. I have mixed feelings along the lines of, "better the devil you know who has at least shown some propensity for resisting the franchise's reflexive need to trade its best young players for Steve Trout than the devil you don't know who might go fishing," but either way a boycott is premature and a bit silly. This isn't 1991. The Yankees are enduring a crisis but you ought to wait and see how they deal with it and see if it becomes chronic.

There may come a time when making a change at manager or general manager is appropriate, but it's difficult to see how such a move would be beneficial now. A new GM isn't going to have any more flexibility than Cashman has. He won't be able to move unmovable contracts or play prospects who don't exist. As for those who believe the Yankees would win more if they just had a manager who would yell a lot, they're naïve.

4: HANDS ACROSS THE WATER, PIECE OF CAKE

As a Met fan it's not good form for me to be seen reading yesnetwork.com, but I can't stay away from reading the Pinstriped Bible. Outside of Christina Kahrl at Prospectus, you're the most entertaining and literate baseball writer around. Your Memorial Day piece on Madison, Jefferson, and the Republican attitude to war was really insightful; it really should be reprinted as op-ed in the Times or the Washington Post or somewhere where more people will see it.

Also, Re: McCartney, I can't imagine how "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey" was actually released as a single, let alone charted. Different times, I guess, and I suppose that at the time McCartney could call his own shots. In every interview I've seen with Paul McCartney, be it from the 60's, 70's or now, he's come off as a pompous ass, but I'll be darned if he didn't put out some really engaging, listenable pop records in the 70s. As a person, I have so much more respect for George Harrison, but I'd almost always rather listen to Ram than All Things Must Pass. Keep up the good work. -- Anand

Thank you for the many good words, Anand. I never mind coming in second to my good friend and colleague Chris Kahrl, one of the most erudite people I know. For the last two springs Chris and I have traveled together to promote the BP annual, and I look forward to those long train rides for the many things we talk about, ranging from Jeff Montgomery at the All-Star Game to Robert Montgomery in "They Were Expendable" to Field Marshal Montgomery at El Alamein. All we'd need is Dick Cavett along for the ride and we'd have a helluva talk show (one that no one would watch, but still).

The amazing thing about "Uncle Albert" is that it not only charted, it reached #1 in September, 1971. As you say, it was a different time -- the early 70s were an egregious time for pop music, and the first nine months of 1971 were especially bad. Although there were some quality hits, like "Brown Sugar" by the Rolling Stones, the posthumous "Me and Bobby McGee" by Janis Joplin, "It's Too Late" by Carole King, and "Joy to the World" by Three Dog Night (does that count?), and Ringo Starr's "It Don't Come Easy," but you also had the charts dominated for eight weeks by various iterations of The Osmonds. The song "Admiral Halsey" knocked off the top of the charts was the Bee Gees' "How Can You Mend a Broken Heart," not one of their best. People were desperate, Anand!

For an interview with McCartney where he comes off rather well (if depressed), try last week's New Yorker (abstracted here). I was struck by a number of things -- at one point the interviewer suggests that someone approaching McCartney on the street could be another Chapman, McCartney replies, "It could also be Jesus come to give his blessing. When your time is up, it's up," and that the line "Maybe I'm a lonely man who's in the middle of something that he doesn't really understand" in "Maybe I'm Amazed" was intended to refer to the breakup of the Beatles.

"All Things Must Pass" is a terrific album (with a redundant extra disc of jams tagged on). There are songs you just can't do without (spectacularly depressed after a breakup just prior to my senior year of high school, I listened to the title track twice each morning every day for about four months), but Phil Spector bollixed the production. Prior to the 2001 remastering, you needed a stethoscope and a flashlight to find George in some of the mixes, so far down was he buried. It's still not perfect, and the record should have been remixed prior to its reissue, but with George's passing that ship has probably sailed.

McCartney's "Ram," which came out about six months after "All Things," is more of a pure pop album than Harrison's opus -- Paul doesn't ask you to spend any time thinking about the nature of God, he's too busy enjoying the material world. McCartney is always at his best when he's not reaching too hard for profundity ("Yesterday," for example, is a simple ditty that gets there without trying), and "Ram" is McCartney at his most off-handed. "Uncle Albert" is an elaborately crafted throwaway that happened to hit, of a piece with such frivolities as "Dear Boy," "Smile Away," "Monkberry Moon Delight" and "Back Seat of My Car," all of which are happy just to be here, thanks. It also opens with the excellent, catchy, "Too Many People," which just might be smarter about John Lennon's agitprop than Lennon was himself.

Last weekend, Aimee Mann had an awkward piece in the New York Times responding to the 40th anniversary of the "Sgt. Pepper's" album. One thing she said made me stop and think. "I'm ashamed to say it, but sometimes John Lennon's melodies feel a bit underwritten, while Paul McCartney's relentless cheerfulness is depressing. The very jauntiness I used to love as a girl feels as if it's covering up a sadder subtext. And what's bleaker than a brave face?"

Reading that, I thought of a song McCartney wrote with Elvis Costello, "My Brave Face." "I've been living a lie," McCartney wrote. "Now that I'm alone again, I can't stop breaking down again. The simplest things set me off again, and take me to that place, where I can't find my brave face."

I thought, "Aimee, don't you think he knows that? And why should we question his motives for trying, or the results? You're bringing a lot of ex post facto baggage to songs that were supposed to be taken at face value. Confronted with a problem, he proposed fixing a hole. What the heck else are you supposed to do?"

5: TORRE VS. THE BULLPEN
Long one from frequent writer Rich, which I mostly agree with. He also went into the offense but I opted to save some length. Stay with Rich, and then I'll close with a few words at the end.

So, they have a saying in business school -- don't confuse genius with a bull market. Which is to say that a manager isn't really tested in a bull market, rather the market makes bad managers look good and good managers look great. I think this year has been a real test of Joe Torre's ability as a manager, and frankly he's not looking too good. You have noted on numerous occasions his poor ability to handle the bullpen. This year, it's just tragic. You like stats, here's one: the Yankees have used 188 relief pitchers, 16 more than the next closest team (Baltimore). The average for the AL this year so far is 155, with a standard deviation of 14.5 -- which is to say that statistically you would expect to see 90% of the teams fall between 125 and 184. In fact, all other teams are between 132 and 172, making Torre's use of the bullpen a pretty big outlier (more than a standard deviation beyond anyone else). While it's tempting to blame the injuries for this, that just doesn't tell the whole tale.

This year there are three Yankee relievers who have averaged more than 3 outs per appearance: Ron Villone (4.0), Sean Henn (3.25) and Luis Vizcaino (3.185). Since 2002, no fewer than 9 pitchers per year have averaged less than an inning be outing. This year, it's a third of that. And he's using the worst ones too. Henn's down in AAA now, but guess who has the two worst ERAs in the current bullpen: Villone ( 5.63) and Vizcaino (6.91). Vizcaino actually leads all Yankee relievers in innings pitched. Meanwhile, Chris Britton toils away with an 0.78 ERA in AAA and when he actually gets called up, he sits on his hands in the bullpen during a three game series with Boston where Torre uses every other reliever twice. What's more, Torre is burning Proctor like crazy right now. He brought him out of the 'pen in 6 out of 8 games leading up to Saturday night, a stretch during which he compiled an 11.25 ERA. This is highly reminiscent of Villone's usage in August of last year. On August 14, he had a 2.25 ERA. Torre had already been using Villone almost every other day for a couple weeks when he decided to use Villone 4 out of 5 days against Baltimore and Boston and he gave up 6 runs in 7 innings. Villone's arm was done for the season, ending up with a 10.48 ERA over the last two months.

...I am frankly shocked that Torre has gone on and continued doing what he's been doing throughout the season. There have been no significant changes in the bullpen and no significant changes in the line-up. In previous years, dropping a couple series would have been a major cause for alarm and Torre would have shook up the line-up or made some shifts in the bullpen or something, anything. There's been talk about whether the Yankees are complacent. When you work in an environment where losing is accepted and performance is not rewarded, that's what you get. Hope your eye heals well. All the best. -- Rich

The only minor caveat I can offer, Rich, is that Villone was never a very good pitcher in the first place. The Yankees might have gotten what he had to give, regardless of how he was used. It was a bit odd to see the celebration that attended Villone's return to the Majors and his initial seven scoreless innings. He's not that kind of pitcher, and the chances that he had become that kind of pitcher at his age were remote. Since then, we've seen a reversion to form, this despite his pitching exactly every three days.

The handling of Britton has been bizarre. Here's a pitcher who had a fine rookie year with the Orioles. He maintained a good strikeout rate, didn't walk many, allowed few home runs, and held righties to a .186 batting average. He had a rough Spring Training, and for whatever reason that counted more than his 52 games in 2006. He goes down to the Minors and pitches well for 23 innings. Simultaneously, Luis Vizcaino reveals himself to be a serial arsonist, with 23 walks in 28 2/3 innings and an ERA of 9.40 since mid-April. He keeps pitching anyway. Brian Bruney pitches very well but is largely saved for low-leverage situations. Scott Proctor is forced to pitch two out of every three games. Britton stays below. Finally brought up, he's the invisible man in Boston. Vizcaino pitches twice. None of this makes any sense, but then so much of this season has failed to rise to the level of sensibility.