The LoHud Yankees Blog

A New York Yankees blog by Chad Jennings and the staff of The Journal News


Travel rosters open questions

Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Mar 30, 2012 Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Post Email This Post

No lineup posted just yet, but the Yankees have posted their travel rosters for the next four games.

Phil Hughes is not listed for Saturdays game. Originally he was lined up to start that game. Based on which pitchers are making that trip, Id guess Adam Warren is getting that start.

The Yankees are basically bringing their expected big league pitching staff to Miami, including both Cesar Cabral and Clay Rapada. George Kontos is making that trip. Warren, D.J. Mitchell and David Phelps are not.

On Tuesday, Ivan Nova is the only starting pitcher scheduled to make that trip against the Mets. That would seem to line him up as the Yankees No. 3 starter.

Also, the Yankees have outrightrd Craig Tatum to Triple-A, meaning their new catcher has cleared waivers.

Russell Branyon has also been released from his original minor league contract and signed to a new one. That must have been done for financial reasons.

Comments

comments

 

Advertisement

7 Responses to “Travel rosters open questions”

  1. Bret The Hitman March 30th, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    “I have been openly gay for most of my adult life,” the statement said. “For years, my physical high school relationship with Carl Pavano has been well-known to my close friends and family. Carl Pavano’s sister, Michelle DeGennaro, contacted me on Facebook asking under what conditions would I not talk about my relationship with Carl.”

    Bedard said he responded to her that he wanted an apology, and said his comments about wanting a Range Rover were made “in jest.”

    “I did not attempt to extort money from Carl Pavano,” Bedard said. “I have not been charged with any crime. I will allow my local police department to conclude their investigation and I will have no further comment.”

  2. trisha - true pinstriped blue March 30th, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    “And NOW Schilling is piling on.

    PROJECTED AL EAST STANDINGS

    (1) NEW YORK YANKEES
    (2) TAMPA BAY RAYS
    (3) TORONTO BLUE JAYS
    (4) BOSTON R\SOX”

    Seriously? Because those are my projections too.

    Last year Schilling predicted the Sux wouldn’t make the playoffs – and that’s before they totally tanked.

    I predicted the same thing.

    Never thought Schilling and I would be on the same page.

    I don’t think he’s piling on. I think he’s telling it like he sees it.

  3. GreenBeret7 March 30th, 2012 at 2:33 pm

    I guess the re-signing of a new minor league deal with Branyon was to stall his option to leave at the end of spring if he wasn’t on the major league roster.

  4. stuckey March 30th, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    “I said that the trade was a failure regardless of results for the reasons you all very well explained:

    “The only way this trade is a victory for management is that all the following conditions are met, IMO:”

    Which is it, Luis? A “failure regardless” or a “victory if”?

    Can’t be both.

    “1)Both B´s, Marshall, Noesi and DePaula are a bust, because then the FO could argue that you needed Pineda, if one or two of those prospects fullfills his potential, Pineda was redundant. Even if he becomes the ace. His impact won´t be as important if you have many very good pitchers.”

    Logic flaw.

    If the B’s, Marshall, DePaula, Campos, whomever reach their potential, the Yankees will be well positioned to be a dominant team for the foreseeable future AND have assets to spin off in other areas.

    Great pitching will be ML assets in some fashion or another. Its not just going to be forever wasted in AAA.

    You logic is based on the unsaid premise that no team will ever consider trading a high-end bat for high-end pitching to the Yankees ever. And that is pure speculation.

    “3) The offense manages to stay productive for the next three years without any noticeable declines. And even then, you could argue that he relied on “luck” rather than a good move.
    Risk Management 101: You leave as little as you can to chance. I rather have a Management that´s good rather than lucky.”

    Debate fail. This comes from the Randy school of I’m not wrong even if I’m wrong, which is intellectually dishonest and a dead end.

    AGAIN, the underlying premise of this track of thinking is offense cannot be obtained by any means.

    Any held convictions that you can reasonably predict the 2014 landscape in ML baseball is based on fallacy.

    Your argument, Luis, is if the Yankees happen to win the WS in 2014 with Pineda playing a key roll and in 2015 Gary Sanchez breaks out that the trade was still a “failure”.

    You’ve left yourself in the corner of having to predict with 100% neither or both of those things CANNOT and WILL NOT happen, or that even if it did, you’d still consider the trade a failure.

    Which is it?

  5. Rich in NJ March 30th, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    So what’s up with the Hughes move?

  6. J. Alfred Prufrock March 30th, 2012 at 3:11 pm

    Luis,

    This is why trades like this happen.

    People don’t know the difference between a Russell Martin and a Jesus Montero.

    So what’s the big deal? Losing the latter?

  7. hardwired7 March 31st, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    test

Leave a comment below


Sponsored by:
 

Search

    Advertisement

    Follow

    Mobile

    Read The LoHud Yankees Blog on the go by navigating to the blog on your smartphone or mobile device's browser. No apps or downloads are required.

Advertisement

Place an ad

Call (914) 694-3581