MYSTERIES OF ARIZONA
Riddle me this, Batman: when is it a bad thing when a prospect has a great Arizona Fall League season, batting .397/.472/.731? Answer: when the prospect isn't a prospect.

Colin Curtis, 25 in February, was the Yankees' fourth-round selection in the 2006 draft, one of those so-called "polished college hitters" that don't have much projection but should at least be able to give you a little something in the way of the league averages. Instead, he's been a complete disaster since rookie ball, hitting an aggregate .264/.334/.375 in 431 games. This year he pancaked at Scranton, hitting .235/.302/.347. He was a bit better at Trenton, hitting .268/.343/.385, but that's still not anything to get excited about.

Now Curtis had a great small-sample session in a league which bans gravity at exactly the same moment that the Yankees have to figure out which players to protect from the Rule 5 draft. The Yankees can gamble that Curtis's last 20 games outweigh the 400 that came before, protect him, and lose someone who has a chance to actually do something, or they can let him dangle and see if anyone else is fooled by his little hot streak.

Curtis had a great AFL, and his five home runs in 78 at-bats is impressive, but if this truly marks a career change, then Curtis has had an awakening equivalent to the Blue Fairy coming down and zapping Pinocchio to life. These numbers are unrealistic for any player this side of Babe Ruth, and in this case it's a sure thing that something that seems too good to be true is too good to be true.

It should be noted that most Rule 5 picks come to naught. Every once in awhile a George Bell will wash up on the beach, but these are few and far between, and getting them to a place where they can contribute involves much in the way of pain and suffering--Bell hit .233/.256/.350 in 60 games the year the Blue Jays took him away from the Phillies. This season the Rangers ended up with a solid reliever in Darren O'Day, who the Mets had Rule 5'd from the Angels (and then gave up on far too quickly). Mostly, though, it doesn't pay to get too exercised about the players lost this way, so if the Yankees lose someone interesting after protecting Curtis, you can spin up your Doris Day records--Que Sera, Sera (or Sly Stone, preferably). Still, there's always that chance that someone useful will slip out because the organization bet the wrong horse, perhaps a horse on a desert-fueled hot streak.

MYSTERIES OF SWISHER
Bob Nightengale has mooted it about (h/t to the swell guys at the LoHud blog that the Yankees have "ever so quietly" told other clubs that Nick Swisher is available in trade. Interesting bit of information, but another shoe has to drop there. If this is correct, then the whole Yankees outfield is down to Melky Cabrera, Brett Gardner and Austin Jackson. Johnny Damon is a free agent, Hideki Matsui likewise, if you want to consider him a potential outfielder (the Yankees don't), and even Freddy flippin' Guzman is no longer under club control.

Swisher has many faults, and an upgrade would be welcome, but for all his negatives, players who have the potential to hit 30 home runs with 100 walks aren't easily found. That guy isn't on the free agent market, unless the Yankees are going to ante up for Jason Bay, who is older, more expensive, not a good defender, and was not 10 percent better than Swisher this year. Sure, you have the added benefit of taking him away from the Red Sox, but Swisher is due only $6.75 million in 2010 and with two outfield spots open, the Yankees could use both. Adding one while subtracting the other puts you right back where you started, if not a little worse off.

If they Yankees are not planning on buying Bay, then I'm mystified as to where dealing away Swisher might lead. There would have to be a truly Olympian trade in the works, where the Yankees suddenly were in possession of Justin Upton, Ryan Braun, or Clark Kent, but those things are about as likely as your winning the lottery and getting a date with Megan Fox on the same day.

One player that I keep thinking of as a solid DH replacement for Matsui, one who could help stem the loss of an OBP-oriented player like Swisher, would be old pal Nick Johnson. Johnson is like a paper-mâché version of Matsui in terms of his durability and defensive utility (he has none and none respectively), and a three-legged moose might beat him in a race around the bases, but perhaps a year of sitting on the bench and doing nothing but hit might be survivable for him.

This year Johnson showed that even though he missed a good chunk of the last couple of years, he could still hit .295 with 100 walks. He'd likely also be less expensive than some of the bigger names out there and is only a Type B free agent, meaning that the Marlins would not get to poach the Yankees' first-round pick. I'm not campaigning for Johnson the way I did for Mark Teixeira a year ago--he's just one of many possible solutions this time around in a free agent market that lacks the slam-dunk candidates of last winter.

Since new Blue Jays general manager Alex Anthopoulos let it be known that he would not object to trading Roy Halladay within the American League East, there has been much speculation about another Yankees-Red Sox competition for the veteran right-hander's services. If true, this almost ensures that Halladay will be traded in the division, because these are two teams deep in resources who will be motivated to top each other, thus escalating their offers above and beyond what teams outside the division would be willing to offer.

This news is both exhilarating and depressing. The Yankees just won a World Series by leaning on three starters, and their 2010 rotation is unsettled beyond CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett. Halladay is one of the best starters in the game and an additional asset in new Yankee Stadium given his groundball tendencies. The depressing part is that Halladay will cost a lot, particularly if the Red Sox and other teams are bidding up the price. It would be sad to see Phil Hughes and Jesus Montero blossom in a Blue Jays uniform. Halladay will be 33 next year, while Montero will be 20, so even if Halladay spends the next five years in pinstripes, Montero will still be in his prime for years after the Doc has checked out.

The "other hand" to that is that flags fly forever, and maybe you trade 20 years of Montero for two more World Series appearances with the present group. Perhaps by that time there will be some other Montero around to distract from the 30 homers a year the original is hitting at the Rogers Centre. On yet another hand (the fifteenth hand, I believe), the Yankees' position players are rapidly aging, and keeping a player like Montero around may help keep them competitive in ways beyond what Halladay might contribute. We're lost in Borges' Garden of Forking Paths here.

Were the Yankees to let the cup of Halladay pass from their lips, it might not be a bad thing. The odds are that Hughes or whoever the Yankees might trade won't develop into a Cy Young pitcher of Halladay's caliber, but they might, or might be good enough that the Yankees prosper anyway. Hughes will be 24 next year. In seven years he'll be 31. Seven years from now, Halladay could be on the golf course 12 months a year. Were he to go to the Red Sox it would be a tough thing, as Halladay has pitched very well against the Yankees over the years (though not nearly so well against the Red Sox), but like the Yankees, the Red Sox have problems that Halladay can't solve; in fact the same problem, an aging roster. The replacements that Theo Epstein trades for Halladay in December he might need by July.

Here's another argument for trading for Halladay: Commissioner Selig and his umbrella Perkins say that each postseason series will not have 43 days off between games next year, with no series running less than six weeks each. As such, were the Yankees again to make it to October with just three trustworthy starters, Coffee Joe could not get around it by starting the Golden Trio on short rest--that fourth starter would almost certainly come into play. In addition, the same relievers could not be used in every game. If Halladay gives you anything, he gives you length, so he would be a help to any team trying to work through a more reasonable schedule.

And then there's the Mayan calendar. If that's right, then none of this matters anyway.

ANGELS PATRONIZED
I'm offended by the notion that what put Mike Scioscia on top for the American League Manager of the Year award is that his team succeeded despite Nick Adenahrt's death. Adenhart's death was tragic and futile, and no doubt the young men of the Angels' organization were deeply affected. That said, I have more faith in the professionalism of the ballplayers on that team, a fairly seasoned lot, than to believe they would have packed it in on April 9 for any reason, no matter how upsetting.

Further, as one who deals with existentially-flavored depression on a fairly regular basis, I find it impossible to believe that any manager, Scioscia, Joe Girardi, Joe Torre, Connie Mack, John McGraw, could jolly anyone out of a true bout of sadness. Words just don't mean that much when you're staring into the abyss. Nor has anyone said that Scioscia held individual counseling sessions or did anything out of the norm except report to work and keep making out his lineup cards. What else can you do in such a situation except keep playing?

Finally, in the most basic baseball sense of things, the loss of Adenhart was not necessarily something decisive the Angels had to overcome. While he was projected to be a big part of the team, and certainly had talent, he had not yet established himself in the Majors. In the same way that Joba Chamberlain or Hughes has advanced one foot and retreated two, Adenhart might have had steps back in his future. Certainly his Minor League record suggests that would have been the case.

The Angels had many such baseball situations that they had to work through to get to the postseason. Howie Kendrick slumped early. Vlad Guerrero and Torii Hunter got hurt, as did John Lackey, Ervin Santana and key bullpen piece Scot Shields. Brian Fuentes was always a blown save away from losing his job. At the same time, they were also the only really solid team in a weak division, something you can't say about Girardi's Yankees and Terry Francona's Red Sox, both of which had their own baseball-oriented problems to deal with. They didn't have to confront death, and that's something we can all be thankful for, but just because Scioscia's team did have that occur doesn't necessarily make him the best manager in the league last year. Treating Adenhart's untimely demise as an excuse to lionize a manager is both trivializing and exploitative.

MORE OF ME, SORT OF
Last weekend, NPR had a "Write a song" contest. I was too swamped by the Baseball Prospectus annual to do much more than kibbitz about a few words in the item ultimately entered by my songwriting partnership, but perhaps that was a blessing to the song that was ultimately created. If you're interested in a completely different and heretofore unpublicized aspect of my creative output (as here embodied by my collaborator, Dr. Rick Mohring), you can find it on the scroll list halfway down the page under the name "Casual Observer." I hope you enjoy listening to our "Carrie and Pierre."

THOUGH HIS LORDSHIP'S STATION'S MIGHTY
THOUGH STUPENDOUS BE HIS BRAIN
These are the slow days. Sure, we've got the major awards coming out, but as far as actual movement, not much is happening. Clubs can't negotiate with outside free agents until Friday, but even then, few players will move before December 1, the deadline for teams to offer arbitration to free agents. Those that receive an offer have a choice -- they can take it and return to their team, or decline it and continue on in pursuit of a contract from a new team. If a Type A or Type B free agent is offered arbitration, he'll cost the signing team a draft pick. Those that aren't offered arbitration don't cost anything but money. For obvious reasons, teams don't want to punt a first-round pick for no reason -- well, a few teams have punted them for a very specific reason, which is that if they don't have a first-rounder, they don't have to spend first-round money -- it pays to wait until the offers have gone out. Signing a player before December 1 invokes the draft-pick penalty; since the players' team didn't have a chance to offer him arbitration it's assumed that they would have. There isn't much that Brian Cashman can or will do now except to survey the landscape, try to lay the groundwork for future deals, and wait for the market to coalesce.

Perhaps the best (only?) news surrounding the Yankees today is that the list of Minor League free agents is out, and among those able to depart the Yankees is 24-year-old corner infielder Eric Duncan. The New Jersey native was the Yankees' first-round pick in 2003, the 27th player taken overall. With the benefit of hindsight, we can name a few players who were on the board at that time and actually made the Majors, which is something that Duncan will never do -- Daric Barton, Carlos Quentin (No. 27), Matt Murton, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Adam Jones (No. 37), Scott Baker (No. 21 in the second round) and Andre Ethier (No. 25 in the second round). Several other fringier types have also made the climb. Three pitchers the Yankees drafted have made it -- Tyler Clippard, T.J. Beam and Jeff Karstens. It was not a good draft.

Duncan had some things going for him when the Yankees took him, including good power and a solid batting eye for a teenager. Sadly, he never grew from there, never added anything else or developed the skills that he did have. There were some back injuries along the way that might have had something to do with, or perhaps Yankees scouts and decision-makers just missed, or there was some combination thereof at work. I once interviewed Duncan and he came across as someone who wasn't having a great deal of fun. He was only 21 then. He'll turn 25 in a few weeks, and I doubt he's much happier now given that he hasn't done anything of note in years. This season he batted .204/.242/.285 and was benched in the second half as the Yankees gave up on him.

Even had Duncan improved a great deal at the plate over the course of the last six years, he was probably doomed anyway. He was selected as a third baseman, but he never could field the position with any consistency, and the Yankees pushed him over to first base beginning in 2006. First base may be one of the most defensively forgiving positions, but it's also the most offensively demanding, and any kid that moves over there had better learn to hit with real authority if he wants to have any kind of career. Production of, say, .250/.330/.430 may cut it at third base when combined with decent defense -- heck, the Phillies just went to consecutive World Series with Pedro Feliz hitting less than that -- but a team will only accept that kind of production at first base if they have absolutely no choice or they're the Kansas City Royals, and the Yankees will never be mistaken for the Royals.

It would be nice to say that Duncan might prosper with a move to another organization, but it seems like it's too late for that. For their part, the Yankees get to make a clean break with a mistake and an era in which they could do no right in the amateur draft (if they need help staying humble, they can always think about the gamble they took on Andrew Brackman). Alternative Triple-A third baseman Cody Ransom is also a free agent, as is Double-A third baseman Marcos Vechionacci, another non-prospect who once looked like he could develop something. It should be a clean sweep at the hot corner for the farm system, but don't get too excited, as the Yankees didn't really have anyone pushing them -- though perhaps Brandon Laird's good showing in the Arizona Fall League (.337/.406/.640 with six home runs in 86 at-bats) bodes well for his making the move up to Double-A Trenton in the spring, though I fear what the cold winds of Trenton will do to the home runs Laird must hit to advance himself.

The presumed end of Duncan in the Yankees organization (they could opt to re-sign him, though there is no real reason why they would) is another reminder that they've had much more success developing pitchers than position players in recent years. That's not a criticism -- there were literally decades where they couldn't draft and develop anything -- but a reminder that there is still more work to be done if the Yankees do not want to continue to be at the mercy of the free agent market when it comes to filling out the team's needs.

PARTY ARBY
The list of arbitration-eligible players is out, a fine subject for scrying the future, for hidden somewhere in the list is a group of unexpected free agents, players whose teams will not send them contracts so as to escape the expensive "heads I win, tails you lose" business of arbitration. How appropriate that it is Friday the 13th.

The depressing thing about arbitration is that no one ever takes a pay cut. The player submits his desired salary and the team submits what it wants to pay, lower than the player's figure, but still more than he made the year before. Either way, a young player tends to get a bump from six figures to seven, and those who have been through the process -- all players between three years of Major League service time and those under six years (the six-year guys get to be free agents), plus a handful of so-called "Super-Twos," players who qualify despite less than three years of service -- go from one seven-figure salary to a higher seven-figure salary.

Most of these cases settle before an actual hearing, but those that actually go before an arbitrator are depressing for everyone, as a team has to slag the reputation of a player it wants to keep and the player has to listen to it. "Let me tell you why Arnold Smoof is not worth a quintillion dollars. Sure, he drove in 187 runs on 43 home runs, sure, he batted .387, but he's still completely lame compared to Albert Pujols. Also, he's a total klutz in the outfield. And he smells. Bad." As Tom Hagen said, "This is business, not personal," but you can't help but take it personally when people who have formerly professed to love you are telling a total stranger what a loser you are. It's like a divorce hearing without the divorce -- there's no coming back from that.

The list is long, containing 209 players, including what seems like the entire Dodgers roster. Teams have until December 12 to tender these players a contract. If they do and the player doesn't dig the proffered salary, the player can opt for arbitration. At that point, everyone negotiates with a gun to their heads, trying to compromise before the actual hearing, and most of the time they do. Even then, a big raise is inevitable, so with some players, teams would prefer to avoid the subject altogether. Those players never even get a contract. The deadline passes and they're set free. Their teams can still negotiate, but at that point they're fair game for anyone. This makes perfect sense. To pick a player at random, Ryan Church is a useful outfielder, but you don't really want to pay him the gross national product of Luxembourg for his services, which is what you're going to end up doing if you send him a contract. Better to gamble on losing the player than blowing the budget on someone who is basically replaceable.

The Yankees have five players on the list, and four of the five probably shouldn't be tendered a contract. The no-brainer is Chien-Ming Wang, who made $5 million this year. He pitched in 12 games, was pounded like Berlin in '45, and underwent shoulder surgery. He could be out until 2010 All-Star break, perhaps longer. There is simply no reason to commit anything to Wang right now, let alone a figure north of $5 million. You could make a similar argument about Brian Bruney, who gets hurt often, pitches well sometimes, and is "just" a right-handed reliever, a breed of player which is (1) highly variable in its performance, and (2) available in huge, heaping numbers. However, the Yankees apparently plan to make him an offer.

More troublesome is the case of Chad Gaudin, a pitcher who obviously has some ability but rarely got to demonstrate it with the Yankees, who were always holding him back for an emergency that never came. I've been calling him "The Fireman of Atlantis." It's a novel role, but it might not be worth paying for. On the other hand, the guy could probably be a league-average starter, and you never know when your staff is going to be kneecapped by injuries (or the Joba Rules), so Gaudin could be handy.

The remaining players are Sergio Mitre, who can't be non-tendered fast enough as far as I'm concerned, and Melky Cabrera, who is going to get an offer above this year's $1.4 million base salary and should, players who can field his position and hit (sort of) being in short supply. More importantly, the Yankees have to hold Cabrera at all costs until their Sally League prospect Melky Mesa is ready, so that they can play the first two-Melky outfield in Major League history, sell T-shirts that say, "Got Melky2?" and so on. It might be awhile -- Mesa has a whole lot of learning about the strike zone to do before a dual-leche pasture can become a real possibility.

As for the non-Yankees players on the list who might actually have use to the Yankees and could conceivably bet set free, there's the platoon outfielder Matt Diaz, a career .347/.384/.537 hitter against southpaws; Conor Jackson, who missed most of the season suffering from Valley Fever but would be a decent left field candidate if healthy; power-hitting center fielder Cody Ross; and Rays fourth outfielder Gabe Gross. Chances are there will be many more non-tendered, and perhaps some top-quality players will be in there, but it's tough to anticipate what teams will do in this depressed economy of ours. If teams are in more of an austerity mode than anticipated, it's possible that some very good names will be available for signing in a month. Until then, alas, things will go slowly.

PANT, PANT, PANT: CURTIS GRANDERSON IS IN THE WIND
Joel Sherman of the New York Post writes that the Tigers have put center fielder Curtis Granderson up for grabs. Brian Cashman has learned not to deal prospects, a commendable attitude, but given the relatively weak state of the team's center field and the indeterminate future of left field, Granderson is the kind of player worth giving up value to get. He plays a solid defensive center field, has power, patience, speed, bats left-handed, and is intelligent and personable to boot. He turns 29 in March and his contract only takes him up to 32, so age isn't a huge issue. The world also hasn't seen the best of Granderson given that Comerica Park can be hard on left-handed hitters. He's a career .261/.334/.451 hitter at home, but hits  .284/.353/.516 on the road.

The only downside to Granderson is that the Yankees would need to carry a platoon bat for center field, as Granderson has consistently failed to hit left-handers. His career average against them is .210/.270/.344, whereas he hit only .183/.245/.239 against them this season. However, this seems a small matter, as right-handed hitting outfielders aren't too difficult to find, and the playing time for said player could be tightly controlled if needed, in the same way that Joe Girardi got Jose Molina the heck out of his playoff starts as soon as A.J. Burnett was gone. You would hope the Yankees could find an outfielder who wouldn't need such tight supervision, but the point is that Granderson's weaknesses should be manageable. It strikes me that Austin Jackson is a right-handed hitting center fielder, and that platooning with Granderson, combined with spot starts in the wings, would be an ideal way to break him in.

One would hope Mr. Cashman is salivating about now. The chance to add a 30-home run guy in center field doesn't come along too often. Were the Yankees to do this, not only would it be a coup, it would mean that they could worry a bit less about replacing lost offense from Johnny Damon or Hideki Matsui on a one-to-one basis. Speaking of which...

TO THE MATS WITH READER COMMENTS:
MORE FROM BATTLIN' BARRY ON DAMON AND MATSUI
Reader Barry responds to my Branch Rickey follow-up. Before we proceed, I want to reiterate something I've said in the past, which is that if I pull something from comments or email to respond to in the main column here, it's because I figure it's a topic of potential interest to everyone, not just the correspondent. I also want to thank Barry, and all of you, for the civil response. Sometimes it seems as if these things instantly devolve into invective, thereby losing all possibility of constructive dialogue. Alas, that seems to be the nature of the Internet... I'm going to interrupt from time to time rather than saving my responses for the end.

Thank you for a thoughtful, intelligent response. Nothing less was expected, and while all of your points are accepted, you missed mine. First, The Yanks are the gold standard, not the Cards or Dodgers.

Unless the Yankees are the gold standard of not aging, your point is a non-sequitur. I could give you a tin of Bob's Caviar, widely considered the best sturgeon eggs in the world, but if the caviar has gone past its expiration date its reputation really doesn't matter -- the greatest caviar in the world is going to poison you if you eat it. More to the point, the truth of Rickey's observation that it's better to lose a player a year too early rather than a year too late is universal. It has nothing to do with one's perception of the Yankees' place in the universe, applying equally to the Yankees and the Pirates and the 1962 Mets or any other club you might want to name. It would be true if Brian Cashman had said it instead of Rickey. It would be true if Theo Epstein or Dayton Moore said it. Heck, forget Rickey -- just pretend that we hadn't been talking about Rickey's little axiom and instead were discussing Newton's law of universal gravitation. Your resort to the "gold standard" makes exactly the same amount of sense in that context -- you'd be saying that what goes up must come down for the Cardinals and Dodgers but not for the Yankees, just because you think the Yankees are cooler.

Second, and of more importance, at least to me, is that some teams you can fall in love with, others, not so much. Both this season, this post-season, as well, took the team to another level. Being part of them, as a member of the congregation, was an existential religious experience. They provided more than entertainment, but rather epiphany. And for more than just me. I am not alone in this. And, I am in no hurry to lose the love.

I've said this a million times before, and will probably say it a million times more before I hang up my pen: you have to choose between the thing you love and winning. If seeing players you love age into decrepitude is your desire, then freeze the team, make no changes. It will shock you how quickly a team can go from 103 wins to 103 losses when operating under the misapprehension that it's a traveling museum show instead of a ballclub. The 2009 championship season was a great ride, but it's over now, and you have to put it in the past and look towards next season with open eyes if you ever want to have another experience like it. If athletes didn't age, if you could keep everything the way it was then Nick Swisher wouldn't have played right field for the Yankees, Paul O'Neill would have. Or Roger Maris. Or Babe Ruth.

The problem with existential religious experiences and epiphanies is that they're as instantaneously addictive as crack and do as much damage to one's ability to think rationally. Falling in love is the greatest feeling in the world, but can also be the most painful and debilitating experience you ever go through, as your brain swamps your consciousness with chemicals of desire. It's a state of perpetual impairment I associate with being about 15 years old. This is why they do not let teenagers operate baseball teams. The job requires perspective, and you can't have that, can't pull apart this really cool thing that you just built, if you're high on infatuation.

In any case, there seems to be little or no justification on a practical level to do so.--Barry

You need never lose the love and you never will. I don't think we ever lose old loves, we just develop new ones. That's why, someday, you'll be rocking back in your chair thinking nostalgically about that cute little number who stole your credit card but was loads of fun to be with before that. A part of us always remembers that wonderful feeling of being in love, each instance having its own unique flavor, even if things go completely sour after. And just as the credit card incident caused you to reexamine all those good times in the context of an uncertain and untrustworthy future, the advanced baseball ages of Damon and Matsui require that a jaundiced eye be cast towards 2010, and most likely 2011 and 2012, as the players will push to be signed for more than one year.

The justification, the very practical justification, for making a change is that the Yankees want to win again next year, and presumably their fans want that as well. Damon and Matsui are old and therefore subject to a sudden and irreversible fall-off in productivity, defensively inadequate, and each changes the shape of the roster in reaction to their presence. The Yankees have EVERY reason to move on. That cannot be debated except on the terms that you have created here, that we're too much in love to let them go. As I wrote yesterday, the question is not SHOULD they move on, but if they can come up with the resources that allow them to move on.

Thank you for playing, Barry. Words not spoken often enough on the Internet: there is nothing personal in this discussion. Reasonable people can disagree reasonably.

On my own and on the road at dinner hour this evening, I stopped at a National Sandwich Chain. Upon reaching the counter, I was greeted by a fresh-scrubbed American male of the youthful college variety. "How may I help you?" he asked rabidly. I jumped back.

"I would like the turkey sandwich," I said, "but hold the bacon, please."

"Well," he said, obsequiousness giving way to consternation, "That's a problem. See, the sandwiches, they're premade in, I think, Eastern Europe, and we just stick them in a panini press to heat them up. So if you don't want the bacon, you need to give us permission to go in and get it."

"Go in?"

"Break 'er open."

"That sounds invasive. How about you just give it to me as is and I'll pull of the bacon myself."

"Why don't you want it?"

"What?"

"Why don't you want the bacon?"

"It's just not my thing."

"Just personal taste, or..."

"It's part cultural, part nutritional, it's -- I'm not discussing this with you. Can I just have the sandwich?"

"You don't want us to remove the bacon? Because we can just excavate that sucker --"

"No!"

"You don't want the sandwich?"

"I do want the sandwich. I don't want you to touch it anymore than is strictly necessary. I will remove the bacon myself."

"You see this button?" He pointed to the register. "It's the bacon button. I'm going to press it."

"Okay. You do that."

"It's a shame to let it go to waste."

"Then make your sandwiches fresh and don' t have them shipped over the Silk Road with the ingredients soldered in."

He ignored me. "Well, that's done. Now ... What would you like to drink?" I steeled myself for a debate about the merits of diet vs. regular. The rest is a blank. I might have blacked out from the stress. I half-suspect that I'm not really writing this. I'm still there, trying to get a little poultry and two slices of bread and failing miserably.

The AL Gold Gloves
I've never tasted a Gold Glove, but I bet they have that same chewy consistency and flavor as a Cadbury Easter egg. I normally get frustrated with pundits that pompously pout about awards, crying that they're so watered down as to be ludicrous, because while it's mostly true that (a) the awards validate their recipients in the eyes of the mainstream, and it's important to keep speaking up for quality players when the awards pass them by, and (b) this is the lame, corrupted world that we live in, so engage with it already.

The need to joust with the Gold Gloves is particularly acute, since so much perception of defense seems to be based on how many times the hometown announcer shouts, "Great play!" There's more to it than that, and while zone-based rating systems aren't foolproof, they take some of the subjectivity out of defensive appraisals by providing us facts that at their most basic level show how many balls were hit towards a fielder and how many he picked up. If you don't cope with these figures when ranking defensive players, you're left with cases made on the basis of "I thought he looked pretty good." Your friend Barney could say that about his wife, and he wouldn't be any more right or any more wrong than someone who held a contradictory opinion (Sorry, Barney, but we've gotta be straight with you about this).

That said, in this sense, the Gold Glove award voters didn't necessarily err in giving Derek Jeter his chocolate-y citation, number four. Jeter was at his best this year, and made his usual quotient of heady plays. But the days of "past a diving Jeter" have hardly vanished. Jeter deserves credit for somehow improving his fielding at about the time that most shortstops are being banished to other positions or retiring, and if he wasn't the best defensive shortstop in the league, he gave a championship club what it needed. This was also not a great year for defensive shortstops in the American League, and while Elvis Andrus of the Rangers probably deserved a shot at the award, he made 22 errors in 145 games -- the second most in the league. He'll trim that down as he gets older and the Cadbury Gloves will come his way.

The big oversight, which everyone with two nostrils has pointed out, is the omission of Mariners center fielder Franklin Gutierrez from the awards. Gutierrez has been the best outfielder in the league for a few years now, and having gotten away from Cleveland he finally got to show what he could do in the central pasture. It's not clear how the voters missed this, given that you don't need the stats (which support Gutierrez) to prove his excellence. It was there on the field and in the nightly highlight reels. This might be the biggest miscarriage of justice in these awards since Rafael Palmiero was given one for being the best-fielding DH.

A quick to the mats with reader comments: Defending Branch (Who Doesn't Need it)
Keep the team intact. Replace the parts when they weaken. And with all respect to Mr. Rickey, his teams were wonderful, but they were not World Series Winners, literally or metaphorically. Ultimately, they were the Pittsburgh Pirates. So, to sum up, let us not, even in print, be so all knowing and arrogant that we wish to destroy the unit that we all admire.
-- Barry

Barry, you've been misinformed. It is true that Branch Rickey was General Manager of the Pirates from 1951 to 1955 and couldn't do much with them. However, the Buccos were a very small part of his career. The two teams for which he did the bulk of his work, the Cardinals and the Dodgers, were crazy successful. Rickey ran the Cardinals from 1919 through 1942. In that time, the Cards won six pennants and four World Series. In two of those series the Cardinals defeated the Yankees. In the immediate aftermath of Rickey's departure, the team he built added another three pennants and two more championships. The Dodgers franchise he took over had had some recent success, but had been derailed by the War and needed to be rebuilt, and rebuilt cheaply, because as much as the Dodgers were beloved in Brooklyn they were not that successful in the revenue department. The necessity, combined with Rickey's strong morality, created the conditions in which the color line could be broken. Rickey remained in Brooklyn through 1950, winning two pennants. He also deserves a large share of the credit for the other pennants won by the Dodgers in the 1950s, as well as the 1955 championship. Let us also throw in his last job, as the power behind the throne for the World Series-winning 1964 Cardinals, another team that beat the Yankees.

The word genius is tossed around far too lightly, but Rickey was a baseball genius, and was responsible for as many pennants as any executive not named Ed Barrow or George Weiss. If his advise was to get rid of a guy too early rather than too late, we have to heed what he said. The issue is not whether or not Rickey was correct, because he was; the issue is whether or not the Yankees can find the replacements that allow them to pass on their soon-to-be old timers.

THE MAIN EVENT
The main focus on the Yankees' offseason seems to be on the big free agent decision, namely Hideki Matsui but not Johnny Damon, or Johnny Damon but not Hideki Matsui, or neither Hideki Matsui nor Johnny Damon and please hold the onions.

This seems like a complicated knot for folks to untangle, and I admit to struggling with it myself, but only because the Yankees have a paucity of replacements in this area. On a basic philosophical level, this isn't complicated at all: you let both of them go for the simple reason that they'll be 36 next year, and older still in however many contract years they will require to sign. The problem is that hewing to that old Branch Rickey philosophy of, "better a year too early than a year too late" requires that you know the answer to a subsequent question: "And then what?"

The Yankees are not deep in outfield prospects at the higher Minor League levels. In future years, we may be discussing the merits of Melky Mesa, Neil Medchill, Kelvin De Leon and Zach Heathcott, but for now, Austin Jackson is the only game in town. Hitting .300 with four home runs and 40 walks at Triple-A is better than not, but it isn't starting corner outfield material and possibly not starting anything material. Jackson, 23 next season, is almost obligated to take a big step forward if he's going to play regularly for the Yankees, even in center. Suffice it to say that neither Melky Cabrera nor Brett Gardner is qualified to carry left field, a position at which the average cat hit .270/.341/.440 this year.

There are useful outfielders available on the free agent market, but they all have some flaws. Matt Holliday will be only 30 next year, but he will be expensive, cost his team a first-round draft pick, and doesn't provide the kind of left-handed power which is more important to the Yankees than ever. Jason Bay will be 31, which gives him a year's head start on Holliday in the decline-phase derby, is a defensive millstone, and like Holliday, he ain't a southpaw. Rick Ankiel, who will turn 30 in July, does have left-handed pop and as a player who was a bit stretched in center field might prove to have pretty good range in left. He also hit only .235/.285/.387 and rarely walks, so the acquiring team would be hoping for a rebound, but given that Ankiel has only had two seasons as a regular, "Rebound to what?" is a valid question. Jermaine Dye has certainly hit in his career, but he's 36, wasn't particularly impressive this season, hasn't played left field in about a century and a half and is range-challenged in right. Of this group, only Holliday qualifies as an "all-around" player.

Word to the wise: no one had better mention Garrett Anderson if they know what's good for them.  

Another alternative is to pursue a trade, but that's going to cost the Yankees pitching resources that Brian Cashman has preferred to hoard, or just money, if he wanted to take on a bloated contract like that of Vernon Wells -- not that there's any reason to do that. It's hard to know exactly who the Yankees might get, and if they could trade into someone young instead of a veteran as flawed as the free agents above.

If the Yankees prefer to limit their choices to Damon or Matsui, the argument for one vs. the other comes down to which you believe will better bear up at an advanced age. The answer just might be Matsui, compromised knees and all. Damon had a swell year, but a good deal of his power production was due to his becoming adept at poking the ball down the left field line for home runs at Yankee Stadium. His ability to hit on the road, which necessarily is exactly half his job, was less certain. He hit a respectable .284/.349/.446 with seven home runs. Matsui hit 15 home runs on the road, having not taken advantage of Yankee Stadium to the same extent that Damon did. He's far more likely to adapt to the ballpark next year than Damon is to start hitting on the road.

The downside to Matsui is that while Damon's days as a defensive asset seem to have gone the way of the economy, at least you can stick him in left field as needed, whereas to have Matsui available at all you have to restrict him to designated hitting. That's a serious problem, as it clogs up the roster and prevents the Yankees from resting other players in the DH spot. However, it could be a blessing in disguise. The problem with a DH rotation is and always has been who the on-field subs are. If Alex Rodriguez spends ten games next season DHing, then who plays third base for those ten games? If it's Ramiro Pena, then you've taken a huge offensive hit. Ditto any Jorge Posada/Frankie Cervelli DH/catcher combo, or Derek Jeter/Ramiro Pena. If Matsui is on the roster, then subs will play only as needed, whereas with Damon around, Joe Girardi might feel liberated, even obligated, to give players rest.

The best answer remains "neither" and "Get some guys between 22 and 27!" but this is easier said than done in this age of baseball in which "young" is synonymous with "cheap."

CHRIS SNYDER IN THE WIND
The Arizona Republic (with a h/t to MLB Trade Rumors) reports that the Diamondbacks have been talking about moving catcher Chris Snyder, who lost his job to Miguel Montero this year, for Toronto first baseman Lyle Overbay. The deal has apparently fallen through, but that's good news as this is a player the Yankees should very much be in on if they expect Jorge Posada to spend significant time as the designated hitter in 2010.

Snyder, 28 next year, missed a good chunk of the season due to a nerve problem in his lower back and was no fun when he did play because of it. However, from 2005 through 2008, he hit a combined .251/.346/.438 with a home run every 24 at-bats (or 21 in a 500 at-bat season). Those are strong numbers for a part-time catcher. Now, he did have some flaws during that time. He disappeared versus right-handed pitchers (.222/.314/.374 vs. .273/.374/.460 vs. left-handers) and on the road (.229/.323/.405 vs. 247/.344/.394 at home), though he did maintain his power away from the hot, dry air of Phoenix. In his career, he has caught 32 percent of potential basestealers, which is a bit better than Posada, four or five more caught per 100 attempts, assuming Posada has another year at 2009's 28 percent in him.

As in the previous section, the Yankees' ability to live without Hideki Matsui is directly connected to their commitment to upgrading the bench. If you have real players to step in and perform for the stars, great. If you only have Angel Berroa, well, the current world champions were 4-8 in games in which Berroa started. Basically, the Yankees face a Darwinian choice when it comes to going after solid second-string players.

THIS QUOTE COSTS ONLY FIVE CENTS
The Yankees clubs for which Lefty Gomez pitched (1930-1942) went to seven World Series and won the first six. Thus, when the Yankees dropped the 1942 World Series to the Cardinals, he was less than excited to have "just" won a pennant. "The Yankees' victory celebration," he said after the fifth and final game, "will be held at Horn & Hardart. Don't forget to bring your nickels." Despite all the rings, Gomez never got a tickertape parade, so perhaps he had cause to be jaded. On the other hand, Derek Jeter will never get to eat at an automat, so you win some, you lose some.

COFFEE JOE'S NEW NUMBER
My pal Colonel Lindbergh suggests that "Coffee Joe" Girardi should perhaps now be called "Champagne Joe," but I think not -- it sounds too much like "champagne chicken." Besides, "Champagne Joe" describes some toff who appears on "Lifestyles of the Rich and Indolent," not a manager who is often thinking not two steps ahead of the opposition, but 42 steps with a half-twist to the right (in the Olympic thinking event, Girardi gets high marks for difficulty of routine). Perhaps he should be called "Calculator Joe," and were this the 1920s or 30s, when sportswriters were all about bestowing nicknames like "The Little Napoleon" and "The Tall Tactician," perhaps he would be.

In any case, I am sticking with my Girardi nom de baseball, even though Girardi is not going to be sticking with his uniform number, trading up from No. 27 to No. 28 to symbolize the quest for the next championship. Fortunately for Joe and his motivational techniques, No. 28 is not one of the many numbers the Yankees have nailed to the wall, though one very prominent Yankee, a Cy Young winner, did have a long hold on the digits.

Courtesy of the book, "Now Batting, Number..." by Jack Looney, select Yankees who have worn No. 28: outfielder Myril Hoag (1931, 1934-1935), pitcher Atley "Swampy" Donald (1938-1945), pitchers Tommy Byrne (1948-1951) and Art Ditmar (1957-1961), famously busted outfield prospect Steve Whitaker (1966-1967), relief ace Sparky Lyle (1972-1978), first basemen Bob Watson (1979-1980) and Steve Balboni (1983), southpaw Al Leiter (1988-1989), future pitching coach Dave Eiland (1991), pitcher Scott Kamieniecki (1993-1996), outfielder Chad Curtis (1997-1999), and DH David Justice (2000-2001). The current holder is Shelley Duncan.

Perhaps the Yankees could bring Sparky in for the ceremonial change of jerseys. He did a lot for the team and deserves the nod.

BEFORE THE PARADE PASSES BY, A TO-DO LIST
In no particular order, and without going into detail just yet, just a few of the matters that Brian Cashman and pals will have to grapple with in the coming days. Let me know if I missed anything:

• Derek Jeter is going into the last year of his contract. Do the Yankees try to offer an extension now, so as not to have the matter be a distraction throughout 2010? How will baseball's post-downturn economic realities -- for the most part, players are not getting $20 million a pop any more -- affect negotiations?

• Mariano Rivera is also going into his walk year and expressed a wish for an extension in the giddy, celebratory moments after the World Series. He had a great season and was a key factor in the postseason, but he turns 40 in about three weeks. As with Jeter, the lack of a contract post-2010 might be a distraction.

• What roles will Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes have next year? Will they be starters? Relievers? Swing men?

• Does outfielder Austin Jackson, who hit .300 at Triple-A (but with only four home runs) have a role to play on next year's club?

• How to approach aging but important free agents Johnny Damon, Hideki Matsui and Andy Pettitte?

• How about lesser free agents like Xavier Nady, Jerry Hairston, Jose Molina and Eric Hinske?

• Are any members of a weak free agent class worth bidding on? If Damon or Matsui departs, do the Yankees want to take a shot at Jason Bay or Matt Holliday? Instead of trusting in Joba or Hughes again, do they want to bolster the back of the rotation with a veteran starter like John Lackey?

• Do they offer Chien-Ming Wang a contract and thus get tied into an arbitration situation with an injured player?

• What about other arbitration eligible types like Chad Gaudin, Melky Cabrera and Brian Bruney?

• Do they pick up the club option on Sergio Mitre?

• Coffee Joe is also going into the last year of his contract. Does the World Series win earn him an extension as well?

Man, do the Yankees have a lot to talk about, and so do we. If I'm Cashman, I don't linger at the parade. I get right back to the office and start working this stuff out. After all, yesterday the Red Sox picked up outfielder Jeremy Hermida (career .276/.359/.456 outside of Florida, and still only 26 next year), so the opposition is already hard at work trying to knock the Yankees off their perch.

Hey, beautiful. It's been awhile. Can I say, you look really, really good? You haven't aged a day. Don't feel the obligation to say the same thing, even just to be polite. I know I've seen some dents and scratches. There have been a few accidents along the way in getting to this little reunion. Mistakes were made, I know that. Innocence is not a concept I cling to. Sometimes it seemed like there would never be a safe harbor, and yet, here we are at last. It's so good to be with you again. Thank you, I really mean thank you, for letting me feel this way one more time. I heard Jorge say you never know when you're going to get another chance. I know that you don't have a lot of time to stay, but Jorge was so very right, and he would know, wouldn't he? All I'm trying to say to you is, kid, let's not rush it. Let's just enjoy the moment. Let it breathe, because all I want to do is feel this way a little longer. And when it stops, give me one last look before you go, so I can make up another dream.

THE LORDS OF THE RINGS
Given that the Yankees won four World Series in the span of five years not terribly long ago, it is somewhat shocking to consider that there are fans--Yankees fans, baseball fans--now 18 years old who were only nine when the Yankees last hosted a championship trophy. This is not long by the standards of some teams; there are some Cubs fans who are now on their second or third afterlives since the last time their club got to dance on the field. Nor is it long by the standards of my own youth, when the Yankees got a little lost, a little tragic, and a little angry on their way to defending the 1978 championship and gradually disappeared, first from the postseason winners' circle, then from the playoffs, and finally even from the list of .500 teams. Eighteen years went by, each one of them more difficult and bizarre than the last. The Yankees only waited half as long this time, and yet, but the standards of expanded postseason baseball and the changed economic environment of the game, and the obvious effort the Yankees organization put in to winning, eight years seems like a very long time. Throw in painful lose-from-ahead defeats like the 2004 Championship Series against the Red Sox, throw in the midges that ate Joba Chamberlain, throw in Jeff Weaver, and (especially) throw in the last ten minutes of Game 7 of the 2001 World Series, and nine years seems like a very long time indeed. Derek Jeter turned 35 this summer. He was a youthful 26 the last time he earned a new ring.

Many congratulations are due to Joe Girardi and Brian Cashman, the latter of whom was strangely and undeservedly absent from the winner's podium. They made smart offseason acquisitions, certainly the best of Cashman's entire run. No Tony Womack this time, no Carl Pavano. They bought the best in Mark Teixeira, and had the perceptivity to see that the White Sox had badly undervalued Nick Swisher. They were also lucky in getting big rebound years from Jorge Posada (injury), Robinson Cano (inexplicable slump), Derek Jeter (uncharacteristic malaise), Melky Cabrera (wholly explicable slump), and Hideki Matsui (injury). Johnny Damon contributed his second solid year in a row, which also wasn't a sure thing, and Alex Rodriguez came back reinvigorated from personal scandal and surgery, which also didn't have to happen. All of these elements, when combined with a new ballpark that seemed to favor raw power ("seemed"  because the jury is still out on YS II's true nature), gave the Yankees one of the best offenses in club history, one which would be able to hold its own if it ran into any other great offense in club history, 1927 and 1998 Yankees included.

With four switch-hitters and three left-handers in the lineup, opposing managers couldn't match pitchers with them, and even the weakest spot in the lineup was a short distance from average (center fielders hit .273/.338/.400; the average AL hitter averaged .267/.336/.428). All those comeback wins aren't surprising given that kind of depth. There have been years in the past when the Yankees have gone to the ninth inning down a run or two, and when I looked ahead to see who is coming up to try to pull the game out of the fire, I would see Andy Phillips and Miguel Cairo, or Bubba Crosby and Kelly Stinnett. "Oh great," I might sigh to myself. "Here comes Ruth and Gehrig." You knew the game was almost certainly over. There were very few moments like that in 2009, because in a lot of cases, Ruth and Gehrig, or some very reasonable facsimiles, were in fact coming up to the plate.

On the pitching side, the team also bought at the top of the market, bringing in CC Sabathia and the oft-dominant but erratic A.J. Burnett, as well as re-signed Andy Pettitte. Just as significant is what they did not do, which was hurl loads of cash at name-brand relievers, who rarely reward the investment. Instead, they were satisfied to stand pat with their improvised pen of late 2007, all balanced on the Rock of Panama, Mariano Rivera. When the relievers faltered, they didn't trade the farm for veteran help, as the organization almost certainly would have done in the past. Instead, they reconfigured the relief staff once again and emerged with the best bullpen in baseball--at least in the regular season, but the Rock was always there in the postseason to set things right. 

Not every string that Girardi pulled, not every move that Cashman made was perfect, and as in any year there is a lot that you can argue about (as we often did in this space). As we'll discuss in the coming days and weeks, there were a few moves that they're unlikely to get away with twice. Still, as the old saying goes, flags fly forever, and for now those disputations are reduced to mere quibbles. They organized this team almost as well as a team can be organized, and I cannot wait to see what they do for an encore. Congratulations to the brains trust, to the coaches and scouts, to ownership and executives and interns, and, most of all, the players. Well played, gentlemen.

STAY TUNED--ALL WINTER LONG
Even though the lights have gone down on the 2009 baseball season, the Pinstriped Bible will be maintaining its usual five-day a week schedule, plus more when there's breaking news to discuss. Baseball never stops, and we'll immediately light up the hot stove and start talking about the path to championship No. 28 and all the other doings around baseball. It's going to be a fascinating winter, especially for the Yankees. I look forward to passing the cold months with you, and I hope you'll stay and be part of the discussion.

As I always do at this time, I'd like to thank you for reading the Pinstriped Bible. It has been my privilege to write the PB for about ten years now, and I never feel less than blessed to have the opportunity to (I hope) entertain you, challenge you, and learn from you. Even if your only contact with me was to register a compliment or a disagreement, I appreciate the fact that you took the time to give me your thoughts. I have the best job in the world, and it's all due to your support. Once again, thank you so very much, and may you enjoy this championship as much as I have enjoyed writing about it.

Andy Pettitte has made 14 regular season starts on three days' rest. His ERA in those games is 4.36. He has made 281 starts on four days' rest. His ERA in those starts is 4.28. This seems like an insignificant difference and it is. Unfortunately, it is rendered even more insignificant by the fact that, like Jerry Hairston's supposed track record of success against Pedro Martinez, it all happened so long ago that we may as well be talking about another person. Pettitte last made a regular season start on three days' rest in 2006. The time before that came in 2001. All we can really say right now is: "The Golden Age Andy Pettitte wasn't better when he pitched on three days' rest -- though he also wasn't significantly worse -- and we don't really know what the Silver Age Andy Pettitte will do under like circumstances."

Even had Pettitte pitched to a 2.00 ERA in an extensive course of short-rest starts, we wouldn't have been able to generalize about the outcome of any one game, particularly one against the defending champions. However, such a generalization would have at least provided more of a sense of comfort after the debacle that was Game 5. In most cases, there is little reason to fear a pitcher being physically unable to withstand the rigors of short rest; they do throw extensively on two days' rest, after all. There is, though, something to be said for not asking your pitchers, particularly the 37-year-olds, to do something you have never asked them to do before in the tensest situation of the year. If you don't have any choice about it, fine. You do what you have to do. If the general says you need to take that hill to win the war, you go try to take that hill. Yet, the Yankees did have choices, and if Pettitte doesn't take that hill, Girardi's decision to ask both Burnett and him (and to a lesser extend CC Sabathia) to perform new tricks at this late date will have to be questioned. This is particularly true in the case of Burnett, whose poor work at Fenway Park this year (his ERA in three starts was 14.21), not to mention Game 5 of the ALCS against the Angels, suggested that he might get twitchy in a big spot on the road. That's in addition to the three-day element. Indeed, the three-day aspect may be irrelevant where Burnett is concerned --- the problem is emotion, not fatigue.

At the risk of repeating myself (and when has that risk ever stopped me?), subtract 10 Sergio Mitre starts from the regular season and this might not have happened. Chien-Ming Wang made his last start of the season on July 4. Alfredo Aceves took his next start. The next time the spot came up was during the All-Star break. Mitre made his first start on July 21 and got creamed. He made his second start five days later and got creamed. He made his third start five days after that and got creamed. He made his fourth start... The Yankees acquired Chad Gaudin shortly after the July 31 trading deadline. At that moment, Mitre's ERA was 7.50. Had Gaudin been immediately inserted into the rotation in Mitre's place, the Yankees might have felt more comfortable starting him in Game 5, instead of trying to do stunts with Burnett and Pettitte. When the Yankees say that they had some tough breaks with pitching this year -- Chien-Ming Wang and Ian Kennedy getting hurt -- we have to remember that there were other options, like Gaudin, like Phil Hughes, like Alfredo Aceves, that they did not use. The decision to just soldier on with Meatball Mitre was as complacent as any they've made in recent years and has led them to build the foundation of their World Series strategy on a very risky basis.

Still, they have a very good chance of winning tonight. The bullpen is rested from its day off, so Joe Girardi can go Coffee Joe10 if Pettitte falters. They've got the designated hitter back. Pedro Martinez's act may not be good enough to fool the Yankees a second time so soon after his last start. Martinez is unlikely to go all the way, and the Phillies relievers can pour gas on any fire. Mark Teixeira or Robinson Cano might actually hit something. Chase Utley might get lost in the subway on the way to the ballpark. Stranger things have happened.  The 2009 season should come to an end tonight, one way or another, making Girardi's gamble an act of genius. And if not, he still has one day to think of something else.