Next Year’s GM

Today, Brian Cashman responded to Hank Steinbrenner’s recent suggestion that Cashman is an idiot.

"Joba’s staying in the bullpen right now," The Yankee GM told Newsday
in a telephone conversation this morning. "That’s where we’re at.
[Putting him in the rotation is] not something that’s going to happen
here early on, and [Hank] knows that. We’ve talked about it. I don’t
know what set him off."…

"If you had bet on the kids doing great out of the gate, it wouldn’t
necessarily be a safe bet, but we’re betting on them in the long-term,
not necessarily in the short term," Cashman said. "We’re certainly not
playing up to our capabilities after 20 games . . . we made our
decisions (in the off-season) and our season is now under way. It’s way
too early to start making judgments on anything."

Clearly these two are on the same page. In the past, a few of us here have worried about what the new Hank Steinbrenner Era is going to look like. What’s reassuring is that we now have an owner who is never going to be wrong about anything. It is apparent that everything that has gone wrong so far is attributable to decisions made in the off-season that Hank fought against. The lesson has been learned. Thankfully we’ll only have to suffer through one more season during which Hank’s plan was not completely followed. When Cashman leaves, who will fill the role? My guess is a guy from outside of baseball, someone nobody knows, except Hank Steinbrenner. He’ll likely have been Hank’s best man. Maybe he went to college with Steinbrenner. The important thing is he’ll agree a lot with what Hank says.

In the meantime, what to make of Cashman’s tenure? Yanks fans, what you you think of soon-to-be-ex general manager?. Will you miss him, or are you looking forward to the new era? Or am I jumping the gun here?

48 comments… add one
  • “We discussed this extensively this winter about how things would unravel or unfold,” Cashman said.
    Interesting choice of words, not sure Cashman quite meant what he said, at least not with “unravel”.

    SF April 21, 2008, 6:00 pm
  • I do wish we had Santana though. Ah well.

    Lar April 21, 2008, 6:05 pm
  • I think you are jumping the gun. Everyone seems to pity Cashman’s position, except he keeps re-upping for more. And being GM for the NYY is a more attractive job than many NYY-haters would like to admit.
    Having said that, Hank put his foot in it, and I don’t like the precedent at all. I’m sure Cashman likes it even less. Interesting in all this is the lack of any mention of Girardi. Anyone care what he thinks?
    In recent interviews, Girardi has said about Joba “That’s a decision ‘THE ORGANIZATION’ has to make.” This choice of words has struck me both times I heard him say this (most recently on the Joe Girardi Show last night) and it seems even more relevant now that we see that the organization is indeed weighing in…on both sides of the issue.

    IronHorse (yf) April 21, 2008, 6:30 pm
  • Cashman leaving the Yankees is similar to Manny getting traded by the Red Sox. It’s an approximately-annual event that generates a lot of buzz…then never happens.
    That said, I do wonder if Cashman is thinking about it a bit harder this year. It seems like he’s really interested in making the farm system work long-term, though.

    Devine April 21, 2008, 7:13 pm
  • Dead Man Walking

    YourName April 21, 2008, 7:25 pm
  • I don’t recall Cashman ever publicly questioning the ownership until this past off-season. Most (or at least a good portion) of Cashman’s tenure, in fact, he largely held the reins (2003-07), and the time before that, he was winning World Series (which cures all ills).
    (Incidentally, I’m curious what Mike Mussina thinks about the owner basically already wishing him out of the roation. We all know he’s a bit… fragile.)
    Maybe I’m just wishfully thinking. Cashman leaving the Yankees would be tremendous for the Red Sox, so I’d obviously like to see that happen.

    Paul SF April 21, 2008, 7:33 pm
  • I don’t get why Cashman is getting called out by Steinbrenner. I mean wasn’t it Cashman who had the final say in drafting the very players that are so highly touted? They wouldn’t be arguing about Chamberlain if Cashman hadn’t drafted him in the first place.
    Steinbrenner is being a bombastic asshole. The Yankees haven’t won a WS since 2000, but Cashman has still done a fantastic job.

    Atheose April 21, 2008, 8:40 pm
  • i think its all just hot air from Hank. Cashman is gonna stay, the organization recognizes his importance. That said, its not like he is irreplaceable. There are others who are capable of building a team. I dont buy into the whole “the sky is falling” mentality. Things are in flux but the Yankee organization has been run very well for many years now and I see no reason for that to change for the sake of change. Hank may have run his mouth all winter but when it really came down to it the plan of the baseball people was ultimately executed. Meanwhile, the financial power of the team has been maintained and expanded. This formula will continue to provide success in the long term. Much in the same way that the Sox have finally changed their ways. There may be a year or two of missing the playoffs mixed in but the team as a whole is on a very strong foundation. Hank may be a loud mouth but in the end he and his brother are gonna keep in place the best baseball people they can get. If Cashman were to move on, so be it. There are others who can do this job too.

    sam-yf April 21, 2008, 9:03 pm
  • but in the end he and his brother are gonna keep in place the best baseball people they can get
    I am not saying the WON’T do this, but there is absolutely no evidence to date that they WILL do this. Retaining the best players on the market, as in this offseason, is not the same as making a decision about the talent evaluators. It is easy to decide to offer Alex Rodriguez a tidy sum: his accomplishments are measurable in clinical fashion, but it’s a far harder effort to find the right talent-evaluator for an organization. I don’t think it is right to assume that because Hank et al kept a bunch of core players that they will look at their GM in the same terms as the on-field All Stars.

    SF April 21, 2008, 9:57 pm
  • SF to me they are business people. They are gonna try to staff their team and those who run it with the best possible people. If Cashman were to leave they wouldnt grab some random guy off the street to run the yankees, they would go for the most qualified person they could find. There are ways of figuring out who is best qualified to run a baseball team. The sox after all were able to do so, Theo was chosen for a reason. Sure there will be uncertainty as to if any new person is gonna succeed but this is the situation anywhere. I guess I just have more faith than others….

    sam-yf April 21, 2008, 10:12 pm
  • “We’re not going to rush him,” the New York Yankees co-chairman said Monday at the team’s spring training complex. “I think most people agree with me, including the baseball people and most of the fans, that sooner or later it would be nice if he was a starter.”
    All bark, no bite. The “baseball people” are still running the show around here. At least for now.

    sam-yf April 21, 2008, 11:27 pm
  • It’s funny, because Hank Steinbrenner has done absolutely nothing to suggest that he is like his father. The only thing he has done is talk. He talks a lot. But until he actually does something, anything, any remark about him running the Yankees to the ground are utterly ridiculous.

    AndrewYF April 21, 2008, 11:34 pm
  • When Cash last re-upped, he did so with George. And I would presume that he did so with the understanding that the work environment would be X.
    Hank is making the work environment Y. That’s not what Cash signed up for.
    My bet is that sometime in the next eight months he tries to have a Come to Jesus meeting with Hank and Hal (and maybe George and Regis Philbin, too) to get everything on the same page, and if it’s not to his satisfaction, he bolts.
    (And goes either to Baltimore or the Mets.)

    I'mBillMcNeal April 22, 2008, 12:28 am
  • In some ways, this is similar to the soap opera between Theo and Lucchino. Except this one is much more public. Little is being left to the imagination.

    I'mBillMcNeal April 22, 2008, 12:30 am
  • Oh, puh-lease. The ONLY thing, I repeat, and this is important, the ONLY THING Hank has done is talk to the media. If you think that actually makes it such a tough work environment that Cashman up and leaves the most glamorous GM job in baseball for some unknown job in, say, Philidelphia, where he has to start all over again in a completely new work environment and with a completely new set of players, you must be insane, or a very, very wishful thinker.
    Read updates to the story. It seems that Hank made some silly statements to the media, Cashman read about it, went to Hank and explained it all, and now Hank understands and accepts every bit of what Cashman told him. How horrible!

    AndrewYF April 22, 2008, 3:24 am
  • All bark, no bite. The “baseball people” are still running the show around here. At least for now.
    This sums it up pretty well, I think. The scary thing for Yankee fans has to be the possibility that the “baseball people” (or different, less qualified baseball people) end up running the show sooner rather than later. Hank’s thoughts that Joba should be a starter absolutely have merit (I sort of famously made comments of a like mind about Jonathan Papelbon, check the archives), but the way he discussed his thoughts reveal an antagonistic (at best) management style and, more troubling I would think, a fundamental misunderstanding of developing pitching. Joba had an innings limit, to an extent, in 2007, and he would have easily exceeded that had he remained a starter. The Yankees might not have made the playoffs last year were that the case, what would Hank’s response have been then? It is one thing for the Owner of a ballclub to speak his thoughts: that is his or her right and I certainly don’t begrudge Hank that right. It’s another thing to discuss developmental strategy when your ideas about developmental strategy seem somewhat dim and are wrapped up in not-so-passively calling your baseball development people “idiots”.

    SF April 22, 2008, 7:13 am
  • You make a nice point Andrew, except for one thing: Neither you nor I knows exactly what goes on behind the scenes.
    I tend to subscribe to the theory that where there’s smoke, there’s fire. And there’s definitely smoke in Yankee Stadium.

    I'mBillMcNeal April 22, 2008, 8:20 am
  • I wonder how much of Hanks’s “idiot” comment was directed at the morons in the media (see, Mike & Mad Dog, Sherman, etc) clamoring for Joba’s stay in the bullpen to be made permanent.

    yankeemonkey April 22, 2008, 9:30 am
  • Late to the party… listened to Cashman on TMKS yesterday and it did not seem like there was any tension between him and Hank. Cashman seemed to agree (more or less) with what Hank was saying. He said that Hank didn’t say anything new, putting Joba in the rotation this year was the plan all along. If there is a a riff between the 2 sides, Cashman did a great job of hiding it.
    Few things that trouble me:
    1. Yankee fans (and Hank) had to know that Hughes and IPK were not going to be slam dunks this season. They are young pitchers who are going have ups and downs over the course of the season. Hopefully there will be more ups than downs, but still they are not smooth ride guys like Santana. It can’t be both ways, you can’t hold onto youth and preach patience and then panic when they have 2-3 bad starts. They didn’t trade for Santana, now we have to deal with the ups and downs.
    2. Joba needs to be stretched out in the ML’s…what happens when he gets sent down for a month? This was the wrong way to approach this and I made this clear back in ST. Joba should have started in the rotation (if he was going to be there at all this season) and been stretched out in ST. Let him throw his 150 innings, then move him to the pen sometime in August. This was an a** backwards way of doing things. He can’t be stretched out in the big leagues and now you lose him for a few weeks to a month WHILE you are trying to get your team on track. This had all to do with Cashman’s belief that Mussina could be a servicable starter. (Again he said yesterday on TMKS that Mussina is the Yankees #3???)

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 9:39 am
  • Why can’t they stretch Joba by using him as a long man? The role Ohlie has so filled rather admirably? Considering how often the starters are getting knocked out in the early innings, there should be no shortage of opportunity for Joba to go ~3 innings every ~4 days.

    yankeemonkey April 22, 2008, 9:48 am
  • I really should preview my posts. Bleh. My apologies.

    yankeemonkey April 22, 2008, 9:49 am
  • Not a bad idea, but IMO the approach/plan of attack Joba would take as a long man is different than starting a game. Joba will get sent down IF they plan of using him as a SP this season (which according to Cashman and Hank is still the plan). If I had to guess I would say 3-4 weeks down would probably get him ready to be a SP again. God bless Hawkins, Ohlendorf, Farnsworth, etc…when that day comes. THREE young SP’s who don’t get you much length, an already questionable bullpen and all this after you lose your best set up man…Could be a long summer.

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 9:57 am
  • I honestly don’t see what the controversy is here. If anything, this Hank-talk shows he’s LESS of a ignorant fanboy than many NY, and even some national, columnists. That’s pretty sweet coming from the co-owner. And the one truly controversial quote was in calling out a “panic” move. Besides putting Cash on the spot, what’s the problem? Hank is right.
    I support the long-man role completely. They could gradually work Joba up to five innings from 1 and 2 over the course of the next two months, especially with all the aborted starts from Moose, IPK, and Hughes. I’m not sure why they’re considering that role. Perhaps it’s the difficulty in setting usage guidelines?
    BTW: On the same topic, I thought last year the SOx could have been more creative in using Papelbon. Okajima’s emergences made it less necessary, but I’m still shocked they aren’t more progressive in his use.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 10:24 am
  • John –
    Joba’s problem this Spring was in learning to pace himself. By stretching him out in a long man role, he’d still be working on that issue, and better, without knowing how long he’d be out there for.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 10:28 am
  • Bill, I respectfully suggest that you are engaging in a little bit of wishful thinking regarding “fire” in NY. I didn’t like Hank’s comments to the media, but the story is getting much more attention than it warrants at this point.
    You can’t say on the one hand that Cashman re-upped with work situation X in mind only to now find situation Y and then say that we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. The latter point is correct, and demonstrates that the former point is irrelevant. Cashman is not naive and it is not like Hank was a new owner with whom he had not had substantial interaction long before he re-upped.
    Of course, everyone knows Cashman didn’t appreciate Hank’s public statements, but Hank also backtracked faster than his father ever did as soon as Cashman pushed back. Depending on which of these developments you emphasize, you can argue that Cashman is getting screwed or that he has more power now than he ever had before vis-a-vis ownership.

    IronHorse (yf) April 22, 2008, 10:38 am
  • Problem with putting him in the long role is that you never know when he is going to get the chance to pitch. He needs to go through the process of pitching every 5th, BP sessions, etc…I don’t think that the long role will prepare him properly for starting. Just my opinion.

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 10:41 am
  • How did the Twins break Santana into the starting rotation? Didn’t he start out a reliever and then convert mid-season? It’s not like there isn’t a precedent for this.

    Nick -YF April 22, 2008, 10:49 am
  • I am not saying it’s impossible OR that there isn’t already a precedent. Santana pitched in ST as a SP, then was moved to pen. Just as Liriano did when he came up. Joba has not prepared as a starter since last off season. It’s not going to be easy this way, but it’s surely possible. All I am saying is he should have been worked as a SP in ST, it would have better prepared him and possibly cut out the losing him for 3-4 weeks part of it.

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 10:59 am
  • How did the Twins break Santana into the starting rotation? Didn’t he start out a reliever and then convert mid-season? It’s not like there isn’t a precedent for this.
    Pedro was a converted reliever as well, quite famously. Would need to see how it was done, though, for precedent.

    SF April 22, 2008, 11:12 am
  • Joba was prepared as a starter this Spring. He started a few games.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 11:12 am
  • Chad Billingsley had this done last year too. Cashman has actually mentioned these precedents when talking about Joba.

    AndrewYF April 22, 2008, 11:16 am
  • Pedro pitched in 65 games (2 started), 107 innings, at the age of 21. The following year he made 23 starts (out of 24 appeareances) and threw 140+ innings at the age of 22. His third full year he made 30 starts and threw 194 innings.
    Why not use Joba as a seventh/eighth inning relief guy as opposed to a straight 8th inning setup guy, thus shortening the games, and getting Joba up in innings so he can slot in the rotation full-time next year with 25+ starts on tap? Seems like this can be done, for sure, without hurting the team and without hurting Joba. In fact, considering Kennedy and Hughes, this might be a very helpful situation.
    Put it this way: if Moose, Hughes, and Kennedy all struggle this year the Yankees aren’t going anywhere, so Joba should be brought along in whatever way the baseball guys think is best for his long-term health and skill. It is hardly worth screwing him up to make an attempt to patch up this single season, the risk is not worth it.

    SF April 22, 2008, 11:27 am
  • I don’t recall him going more than 2 innings all spring.

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 11:27 am
  • I don’t recall him going more than 2 innings all spring.

    John - YF April 22, 2008, 11:28 am
  • Joba pitched 9.2 innings this spring in six appearances, including 2 starts. I don’t have the game-by-game breakdown, but if, in four appearances he pitched four innings, then those starts were 2+ inning appearances at a maximum, not a start per se as we know it but rather a “spring training start”. The intent would not be to stretch him out in preparation for being a starter but rather simply getting him work. By contrast, Clay Buchholz pitched 11.2 innings in four games, three of which were started. Perhaps a marginal difference, but you can read a little intent into the difference, I think.

    SF April 22, 2008, 11:37 am
  • Cashman himself has said, “I was hired when the situation was X. Now the situation is Y.” So Bill is in fact making two separate points — one based on the comments Cashman himself has made; the other acknowledging that we don’t know what else has been said behind the scenes.

    Paul SF April 22, 2008, 12:14 pm
  • Paul, to which Cashman quote are you refering?

    IronHorse (yf) April 22, 2008, 12:51 pm
  • “It is hardly worth screwing him up to make an attempt to patch up this single season, the risk is not worth it.”
    I think that’s exactly the thought for everyone involved, most especially because because none of Kennedy, Hughes, or Joba can pitch a full year. They’ll be happy to contend, but they won’t be trading one of those three at the deadline just to ensure it (or running up their innings). Also, let’s not forgot that they’ll still make their money this year and next as the stadium(s) will be sold out regardless. They’re practicing good baseball and good business simultaneously, and for the first time in maybe ten years.
    “Perhaps a marginal difference, but you can read a little intent into the difference, I think.”
    Sorry, but two innings and one start doesn’t lead me to the same conclusion.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 12:53 pm
  • Thank you, Paul.
    Horse, my dislike of NYY is not a part of the equation. I am doing my best to be impartial based on many things, including my own work history and the Theo-LL spat of 2005 and comments made by “insiders.” As much as I’d love for Cash to bail, in reality it would be a shame for all of baseball. One of MLB’s premier franchises should have a guy who can handle the pressures of the job. Cash certainly has proved that he can. His departure would alter the dynamic, probably for the worse. You know, be careful what you wish for. And really, how much fun would it be to compete against an NYY team that has an incompetent GM? You guys know the answer to that (1918!)
    My point about the behind the scenes stuff is pretty simple. We’ve all been around enough to know that what someone says isn’t really what they mean, or what is the truth. (e.g., the Farnsworth-Girardi protestations over Farnsy’s suspensions are not a denial so much as they are a nonadmission. They responded the way we would expect them to respond. If they say nothing, that would imply guilt. They know that.)
    There’s a lot that happens in-house that is never made public. It took some very goods reporting by the Globe to reveal the truth behind Theo’s departure. Until then there was a lot of speculation and comments from people who didn’t really know anything.
    In theory, for example, (and yes, I know this sounds a little too conspiracy theorist) it is entirely possible that “Bombastic Hank” is a decoy, the creation of the NYY PR Dept. to give the appearance that the NYY FO is a complete clusterf**k. (I really, really doubt this is true.)
    It is difficult for me to believe that Cash lets Hank’s big mouth and public questioning of his decisions simply roll off his back, regardless of what Cash says about it. I know it would irritate me after a while and I’m certain it would irritate you, too. At some point, the aggravation isn’t worth the reward, no matter how great.
    Lastly, Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports also suggests that Cash doesn’t need the aggravation:
    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8059584/Baby-Boss-could-cost-Yanks-their-GM

    I'm Bill McNeal April 22, 2008, 1:14 pm
  • I dunno, A. Buchholz pitched more innings in fewer appearances spread out over more days. That would seem to indicate something.
    But, more of an indication was that Buck was announced as in the rotation while Joba was not! No reason to read anything into the innings, in the end.
    It’s not off-base to speculate that Joba wasn’t prepared to be a starter for the 2008 rotation, either during the off-season or during Spring Training. I can’t say whether that was right or wrong – If one of Hughes or Kennedy had pitched consistently so far this year I doubt Hank would be going all Hank on us, nor would Joba’s role or the team’s plan for Joba be in question.
    Monkey wrench hypothetical, just for discussion: say they leave Joba in the bullpen, and Mo goes down, with Joba slotting in as the closer in beautiful fashion. Does Joba stay the lights-out closer for 2009 if Mo can’t do the job? Or does he go back to the bullpen like Paps did for the Sox?

    SF April 22, 2008, 1:14 pm
  • Yuck. That post is full of typos and rambling.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 22, 2008, 1:15 pm
  • “It is difficult for me to believe that Cash lets Hank’s big mouth and public questioning of his decisions simply roll off his back, regardless of what Cash says about it.”
    Ummm, how long has Cashman been working for a Steinbrenner? And this one is equally balanced by a fiscally conservative, and less bombastic, version.
    “But, more of an indication was that Buck was announced as in the rotation while Joba was not!”
    Joba has been as well. The plan all along has been to convert him back to starting mid-season. But he was most certainly prepared to be a starter – in the off-season and at the beginning of Spring. All of the stories about him this off-season were that he was told he would be a starter. It was only once they came to camp that the plan came to light.
    As for your hypothetical, I’d say no for one simple reason: Both the co-owner and the GM publically (and powerfully) think Joba should be a starter exactly because they know it’s harder to find a legit #1 starter than it is to find an excellent closer.
    One more note: I find the duplicity of the press in this story hilarious. Perfect example: Abraham. He’s been pushing hard the Joba as starter logic yet he’s was more than eager to write the story about the “rift”.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 2:05 pm
  • I agree with A that this story is really more of a non-story that was pushed by the press on a non-news day.
    In response to Bill, I think that Cashman is more than capable of letting comments roll off his back if he continues to retain control of Baseball ops. He has plenty of financial and professional reasons to do so. All the talk is how bad the relationship between the two are but I submit that it could easily be the reverse in which they have a good professional relationship and small things that come out via comments that are endlessly parsed by press and fans alike makes it seem much worse than it is. How many things have they been in perfect agreement in over the last year? Perhaps many, we just wouldnt know per se. My point being its all speculation at this point and until Cashman gets a new contract or walks we have no idea.

    sam-yf April 22, 2008, 2:37 pm
  • Paul SF April 22, 2008, 2:57 pm
  • “I signed up for situation X”
    He signed up when George Steinbrenner was the owner.
    “Now the situation is Y”
    Now Hank and Hal are the owners. The only way that Y is actually less desirable than X is if Hank and Hal are tougher to deal with than George. So far, I think it’s pretty clear that Hank and Hal are easier to deal with than ego-maniac win-now everything has to be my way George. Do you really think George would have preached patience, exactly what Cashman has asked for over the past X years? I can’t remember one single time where he has.
    It’s a non-story. The Yankees are much, much better and smoother-run than earlier in the decade. I hardly think that fact is even up for dispute.

    AndrewYF April 22, 2008, 4:08 pm
  • were hank and hal part of the tampa bay contingency of yankee brass we used to hear about?
    isn’t it possible to stretch joba out at the major league level? with yankee starters exiting early of late he has more than enough innings available to him.

    sf rod April 22, 2008, 4:33 pm
  • “Ummm, how long has Cashman been working for a Steinbrenner? And this one is equally balanced by a fiscally conservative, and less bombastic, version.”
    I would dispute that “less bombastic” part, but based on perspective. I’m in the midwest, not New York, so I don’t get a first-hand feel. Also because I remember a more bombastic George who really backed off Cash after he signed his last contract, and calmed down in general. (I’m not sure how many of you were around to live through the “Fire Billy Hire Billy Fire Billy” days when it was national news BEFORE then Internet. THAT George is long gone.)
    “The only way that Y is actually less desirable than X is if Hank and Hal are tougher to deal with than George.”
    Again, if I’ve got a boss who is throwing me under the bus in the papers — and that’s the point I’m focusing on — I’m not happy. Plain and simple, that just bad management.
    Appropos of nothing: I hate the 24-news cycle. Stories are reported in bits and pieces, updated as warranted. We as news consumers are expected to check back every hour for the updates.
    I don’t have time for that. Report the f***ing news when you have a complete story. This idea that the print can reasonably adopt the CNN/Fox approach to constantly updated news stories is assinine.
    Or maybe I’m just old.
    Eric Gagne has blown another save.

    I'm Bill McNeal April 22, 2008, 4:39 pm
  • “were hank and hal part of the tampa bay contingency of yankee brass we used to hear about?”
    No, neither were with the organization then. Indeed, both found it very difficult to work for/with their father. So they left. It seems very hard to believe, with both in the picture, they’d treat people worse. If anything their history has been helping to change Dad’s mind.
    “Also because I remember a more bombastic George who really backed off Cash after he signed his last contract, and calmed down in general.”
    That was for a total of one year. Then he became ill.
    I’m with Andrew. The job has gotten much easier for Cash. He’ll stick around if they choose to extend him. Keep in mind that Cashman said while he was making Jorge/Mo wait that he expected the same treatment himself.
    Count me as one though who’s ambivalent about Cashman staying or going. It’s fine if he stays. But Oppenheimer, the logical replacement, would be fine too. The Sox would have been just as fine with Byrnes too.

    A YF April 22, 2008, 5:53 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.