The Final Score

ANTHONY: MY FEAR IS DONNIE'S GONNA BLOW IT

Like most execs, Donnie Walsh has a mixed draft record. Here are his first-round picks for Indiana. Thanks to www.knicksonline.com.

1987 Reggie Miller
1988 Rik Smits
1989 George McCloud
1990 None
1991 Dale Davis
1992 Malik Sealy
1993 Scott Haskin
1994 Eric Piakowski
1995 Travis Best
1996 Erick Dampier
1997 Austin Croshere
1998 Al Harrington
1999 Vonteego Cummings
2000 Primoz Brezec
2001 None
2002 Fred Jones
2003 None
2004 David Harrison
2005 Danny Granger

Miller and Smits are a pretty good start to a drafting record. But how many All-Stars since then? The Knicks need impact players, not role guys.

It’s important to note Walsh picked Jones in 2002 over Tayshaun Prince. Isiah Thomas usually gets blamed for that, but Walsh was the man who made the final call.

The Pacers were usually in the middle to the end of the pack of the draft, so finding a star player was hard.

But…

Walsh hasn’t drafted an impact player since Al Harrington a decade ago. And Harrington took a long time to develop.

Can the Knicks afford for Walsh to swing and miss here? No. And of all of the trade proposals I’ve read today on Alan Hahn’s Knicks Fix blog – yes, I’m a Fixer – the only one that makes the Knicks better is the one that lands them O.J. Mayo.

And Alan says that one probably ain’t happening.

The Knicks are 3-for-3 in their last three decisions: dumping Isiah, hiring Walsh, hiring D’Antoni.

Sorry, but it’s hard to imagine them going 4-for-4.

JIM: WALSH WILL MAKE RIGHT CHOICE

Donnie Walsh's draft history is not encouraging, and that certainly should worry Knicks fans. But, rest assured, when it's the Knicks' turn on the clock for the sixth pick, I think the choice will be an obvious one. And that's Danilo Gallinari.

From everything I've read about the draft, this guy is the most intriguing player after the can't-miss stars. And the fact that he has a relationship with the new Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni and is a big man who can run the floor and score, score, score also are positives.

Now the last thing I want to hear from Knicks fans who disagree is that Gallinari doesn't fit the Knicks' needs. So, tell me, what are the Knicks' needs? They need talent. Forget about how he fits. The Knicks are rebuilding, and when you rebuild you take the best player on the board and then make everyone else fit around him.

So, for tonight, I have faith in Donnie Walsh that he won't take another Fred Jones like he did in 2002 or Primoz Brezec like he did in 2000. He'll go for Gallinari, and history will soon prove it was hands-down the right call.

Baumbach is in video training at Newsday all day today, so I was going to ask Chicago Norm if he wanted to debate something.

But then I saw a post by Newsday's esteemed baseball columnist Ken Davidoff about Joba Chamberlain, so I just figured, what the heck, I'll debate him even though he doesn't know he's being debated. This is like one of those "Law and Order" and "Homicide" crossover episodes. Or "Murder She Wrote" and "Magnum, P.I."

Read Davidoff's piece and then click back here.

Done? OK.

ANTHONY: Ken, you are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!

First of all, you shouldn't waste any brain cells watching those sports debate shows. I'm sure all of the people involved are very nice, but you're better off watching a cooking show on The Food Network (Hey, so that's how you make gazpacho! Who knew?)

Second, why can't Joba save the Yankees season? If by saving the season you mean he goes 12-0 with a 0.12 ERA, well, no, he's not going to do that.

But can't he go, say, 7-5 with a 3.64 and get stronger in August and September? Can't he stabilize the staff and provide energy and fun? Can't his absence in the eighth inning force the Yankees to deal with their setup relief problem by either finding the answer from within or dealing for someone from without?

And can't the Yankees, realizing they have a good shot to make the playoffs as a wild card, ride Joba's back down the stretch? And can't Joba start Games 1 and 5 of a playoff series and at least get the Yankees to the second round?

Yes, I know it's unlikely any of that will happen. But young pitchers burst onto the scene all the time to save teams' seasons. The problem with us is we already know so much about Joba that he can't burst onto our scene.

****
What do you think, Final Score and Davidoff readers? Can Joba save the Yankees season?

Here at Final Score HQ, where we like debates, we have one going on about whether Chicago Norm should become a permanent fixture of TFS or a regular guest-host, like Jay Leno used to be on The Tonight Show.

What do you think, TFS loyalists, should Chicago Norm get his picture in the upper left hand corner and his name in big lights? Please vote in the comments section.

We know that thousands of people read TFS but don't comment. Please, if you only comment once in your life, make it this one.

The picture above is the one I think Chicago Norm should use for his logo --if he gets one.

ANTHONY: Yes, they should have put Willie out of his misery

This isn’t about whether Willie is a good manager. He is. Not a great manager, but a good enough one.

This is about how the team is playing and whether Willie can turn it around. The answers: like garbage and no.

The best clue came Sunday in Denver. The Mets were coming off a 9-2 win that seemed to lift the mood of the team. Then they throw up another stinker on Sunday and lose 4-1 to a Rockies squad that was missing most of its hitters.

If the Mets wanted to save Willie, they would have won Sunday. When they didn’t, that told me all I needed to know about the players’ views. No matter what they say, the players know Willie is a dead man walking. They are ready to move on with a new skipper.

The meeting on Monday with the Wilpons wasn’t even necessary. Minaya could have axed Randolph right there on the tarmac in Denver and spared us the drama. Then Jerry Manuel could have been sitting in the manager’s office on Monday and everyone could get on with their lives.

When a manager or coach’s time with a team is over, it’s over. Joe Torre stayed about three years too long with the Yankees. Isiah Thomas should have been fired the minute he botched the Stephon Marbury benching and lost whatever hope he had of a competitive season.

The Mets can still win the World Series in 2008. But not with Willie Randolph at the helm. Sorry.

CHICAGO NORM: No, Omar was right in not throwing in the towel

Firing Willie and bringing in an interim manager at this point of the season is tantamount to giving up. The Mets are only six and a half games out, not a huge number by any means. The fact that three strong teams are ahead of them is a significant concern, but all the Mets can do right now is take care of their own business and not worry about any other teams than the one they’re playing today.

I’m sure that one of the reasons that Willie is still around is that there’s no genius out there who could do the job any better.

The Mets have too much at stake to turn this troubled team to an unproven manager before midseason. It also makes no sense to think that one of the many castoffs now coaching in the majors would magically metamorphosize into Earl Weaver.

Who you gonna call, Ghostbusters? Jerry Manuel’s certainly not the answer. I doubt he’d have more magical powers as manager than he does as bench coach and if his Zen was actually working, we wouldn’t be having this debate in the first place.

Is Willie the best guy available? Probably, or Omar Minaya wouldn’t have kept him around.

There is a lot of talent on this team, and if it can get out of circus mode and play baseball, there’s still two-thirds of a season in which to turn this thing around.

Can the Mets rally under this manager? That’s why they play the games.

If Omar was going to fire Randolph, he should have done it after last season’s choke. Now’s the time to live or die with that decision.

So, what do you think? Should the Mets have fired Willie Randolph?

Let me get this straight, Anthony. You want me to defend Chicago’s cute little El/subway system against the world’s largest underground urinal.

OK, you win. New York’s subways smell worse. You have better trannies and winos and a better quality of DNA on the seats.

The CTA is better in a couple of ways, though. The El takes you right into O’Hare Airport. The El takes you right into Midway Airport. Incoming visitors can take the train from either airport to the Shrine of the Chicago Cubs and/or U.S. Cellular Field.

Sure, it’s a roaring, boring ride and somewhat scary because of some hairpin turns on the elevated tracks north of Wrigleyville and near Chinatown.

As kid, the ride from the far North Side to Wrigley Field used to scare the hell out me as the train slowed to navigate that turn. To your right, below, is a cemetery presumably filled with all the victims of trains that didn’t make the turn.

I was just 10 or 11 when I started riding the El to Cubs games alone or with Jill, my younger sister who I never have forgiven for freezing when a foul ball landed at her feet. It was just laying there until someone else ran over and picked it up while I was trying to put down the Frosty Malt that I had in one hand and the scorecard in the other. By the way, the Phillies lost their 22nd game in a row that day. It’s hard to believe that in those days and 11 year old and and and 8 year old would ride the train alone.

Anyway, back to the “debate.” The El has much better scenery on the overhead lines around the Loop.

My biggest problem with the MTA is that only natives can figure it out. Once, about 10 p.m., I entered the subway at Times Square and had to walk about a mile underground to get to whatever train goes to Kew Gardens. Only when we arrived did we see a sign that the line was out of service. And my wife and I were not the only people fooled.

Now comes the real difference between New Yorkers and Chicagoans: As people who were similarly fooled by the closed line were walking back to another station, not a single one ahead of us warned people coming in the other direction.

So who wins the Great El/Subway debate? I vote for Montreal.

Chicago Norm

in "The Movie" episode on Seinfeld.

This is for Larry or anyone else jonesing for Papaya King.

JIM: Hey, Nelson, worry about your pitching

Seriously, Anthony, this has to be my easiest debate argument yet.

So let me get this straight -- Nelson Figueroa, a guy who hasn’t pitched in the majors before this season since 2004, just stunk it up against the lowly Nationals last night and then he chooses to rip them?!?!?!

Nelson, you have to look at yourself in the mirror and be accountable.

I know, Mets fans, he wasn’t blaming them for his troubles. Blah, blah, blah.

Here’s what you need to take from this: when Figueroa was on the mound last night, he allowed himself to get distracted by the Nationals. They were in his head, and there is no debating that. If they weren't in his head, he wouldn't have cared if they were doing jumping jacks, making fart sounds or dancing the macarena in the dugout.

All that should have mattered to Figueroa was who was at the plate and the pitch he was going to throw. So they were chanting, “Let’s Go Austin!” Yes, a little sophomoric. But big whoop! Must we go talk to high school pitchers and see how they deal with that!?!??

Lack of professionalism? Lack of class? Offensive?

Pfffft.

You need to worry about one person: yourself.

ANTHONY: Nelson showed them Brooklyn

Nelson Figueroa is my kind of guy, and not just because we’re both from Brooklyn.

Figueroa was asked a question on Monday night about the Nationals’ juvenile clapping and cheering in the third inning and he answered honestly. That’s what Brooklynites do: We say what’s on our mind. We get in your face.

Figueroa didn’t bring it up. He was asked, he answered. He wasn’t ranting, he wasn’t raving. He threw in a few insults, basically calling the Nationals girlie men and pointing out that they are a last-place team. Nice.

Some people have said “who is Nelson Figueroa” to be talking about professionalism. Well, Figueroa is a guy who has been eeking out a living in baseball since he first appeared in the majors in 2000. He had to play in Taiwan before landing with the Mets this spring. He appreciates everything he has and knows it could be taken away at any time. He respects the game and how hard it is to play it at this level.

If the Nationals want to act like bush leaguers, there’s nothing wrong with calling them on it.

Nationals have a problem with that? They know where to find him. And now they know where Nelson Figueroa is from. Brooklyn.

****
Who do you agree with?

ANTHONY: Let the players take care of it

Personally, I don't care whether Joba celebrates or not. Many people in sports celebrate on the field -- every sport, in fact. It's only in baseball that it becomes "showing up your opponent."

If it bothers you, David Dellucci, here's what you do:

Next time Joba does a twirl & fist pump, tell your pitcher to drill Derek Jeter with a pitch in the next inning. Then, when Jeter gets to first, your first baseman says, 'Oops. That pitch must have gotten away. Of course, you might want to have your reliever calm down on his celebrations or someone might get hurt."

So then it will be up to the Yankees batters if they want to continue to get plunked because Joba feels the need to express himself after a strikeout.

Now don't get me wrong -- this doesn't mean Joba shouldn't celebrate if he wants. Heck, he can do a moonwalk from the mound to the dugout if he wants.

People should do whatever they want in life. As long as they are ready to accept the consequences.

JIM: Keep up the enthusiasm, Joba

Is Joba showing up his opponent with his celebrations? Yes!

Is it wrong? No!

What happened to sports that we get mad at people if they DON'T celebrate and then we get mad at others when they DO celebrate?!?!

The bottom line is this is a game. Of course Joba's celebrations can offend the opponents. But you know? His celebrations are a part of who he is. It fires himself up. It fires his teammates up. And it fires up the fans. He's not playing for the sake of the opponents.

If they have such a problem with it, then don't let him celebrate. Get hits. Knock him out of the game. Then, when he is sulking in the dugout with his towel over his head, do a dance around the bases. Have fun. It's just a game!

When did everyone forget that?

Jim is feeling pretty unhappy about pubilcly declaring his support for Kei Igawa. I say stay with it. Heh heh.

ANTHONY: NO WAY!

You know how I know Kei Igawa will never be an effective starting pitcher in the big leagues?

Big Papi told me.

Actually, David Ortiz told a lot of reporters this after Igawa's proudest moment as a Yankee. It was last April 28, when Igawa came in against the Red Sox in long relief and pitched 6 2/3 shutout innings in a 3-1 Yankees win. Igawa got the victory -- his second and final one of the season.

After the game, Big Papi was asked what he thought of Igawa.

"He was all right," he said. "Nothing special."

I don't think that was the usual ballplayer bravado. Big Papi was saying what we can all see with our own eyes: Igawa doesn't have the stuff to make it here. Just because the Yankees wasted $46 million on him doesn't change that fact.

JIM: DON'T GO BY BIG PAPI

I need to get Anthony one of those Magic Eight Balls and rig it so it will give him a Big Papi answer. This way, whenever we do a debate, he can shake the Magic Eight Ball and ask, "Big Papi, tell me how I should answer this Final Score debate."

Here's the thing about Igawa: forget about the money the Yankees paid. It's completely irrelevant at this point. If he allows three runs in six innings tonight, Yankees fans are not going to yell at the screen, "Yeah, but we didn't pay $46 million for just that!"

But the question here is, will Igawa be a successful major league pitcher, and I think he will be. There is reason to believe it. He posted strong minor-league numbers last season and he has done well so far this season. And while he wasn't Daisuke Matsuzaka in Japan, he did constantly lead the league in strikeouts.

Yes, he stunk last year. But there is undoubtedly an adjustment period when coming from Japan to the United States. That's by no means the reason for his struggles last year, but it has to be part of the discussion.

Tonight, Year 2 of Igawa begins. Prepared to be surprised.

Barry Bonds has asked the Players Association to consider filing a grievance on his behalf because he has been unable to sign a contract, according to MLB.com. So, we ask, has there been collusion among baseball owners to keep Bonds out of baseball?

ANTHONY: Yes. It's Bud's world and we're just all living in it

Bud Selig runs a tight ship in the baseball world. Any owner / GM who even thought about signing Bonds for 2008 probably got a call from one of Selig's henchmen, or was taken aside by Selig at an owners' meeting, or woke up to find a horse's head in his bed.

The message: Don't do it.

Selig doesn't want Bonds is his game and would do anything in his power to prevent that. You think teams couldn't use Bonds? Padres? Cubs? Rays? Cardinals?

Cardinals manager Tony La Russa has a long history of ignoring steroid use by his players (allegedly). If Bonds showed up in St. Louis with his big bat and oversized head, La Russa would hold open the clubhouse door. St. Louis fans would probably cheer.

But even the Cardinals know it's not worth risking the wrath of Bud.

Will the union be able to prove this? Don't bet against it. All it takes is one leaked memo, one honcho with an axe to grind, one e-mail that ends up in the wrong hands. So Bonds could be sitting in prison and also be the winner of a big collusion judgment.

Only in America!

JIM: Collusion? No way! Bonds did this to himself

Certainly several teams sat down last winter and weighed the pros and cons of signing Bonds, and decided in minutes he wasn't worth it. Let's do the same thing, and I bet it won't even take 20 seconds...

Pros:
*Still a great slugger at 43 years old - 28 homers in 340 ABs in '07.
*Had a .480 on-base percentage last season.

Cons:
*Can't play the field.
*Can't run because of bad knee. Needs days off often.
*Was indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.
*Tons of evidence say he took performance-enhancing drugs.
*Well known poor presence in the clubhouse.
*Will bring unwanted attention every day.
*Surely wants a lot of money.

So basically the only team that would even have room for him would be an American League team without a designated hitter. That limits the field, don't you think? And, really, if you're a contender, would you want to bring this jerk on your team? There's too much of a risk, the reward of a .480 OBP and 20 homers isn't worth it.

Ken Davidoff, on his blog, said, "It's so ridiculously simple why Bonds is unemployed. Teams are reluctant to bring aboard an aging, selfish jerk who could face a federal trial at some point down the line. It is nothing of laughable for people to hint about collusion. Bonds colluded with his own demons to bring this fate upon himself."

Well said, Ken.

Collusion? Fat chance.

You did this to yourself, Barry.

**********

What do you think?

Prediction time: Celtics vs. Cavs

Anthony: LeBrons in 6

Jim?

UPDATE, 6:04 p.m.:

Jim says Celtics in 5.

ANTHONY: Time to say goodbye

The Jaromir Jagr Era ended, appropriately, in Pittsburgh yesterday. The final tally on the era: good for Jagr, not so good for the Rangers.

Stars like Jagr are supposed to deliver Stanley Cups, not playoff-less seasons and second-round ousters. He did all he could as a player. But not as a leader.

Jagr is a diva. That’s OK if he’s leading the league in scoring and the team is going deep into the playoffs. It’s not OK if his skills are diminishing – not a lot, but a little – and the team is spinning its wheels in terms of becoming a true championship contender.

Jagr demands attention from opposing teams. He also demands attention from his own organization, just like any diva. How can we keep him happy? Who is going to play with him? One year, the Rangers added a ton of Czechs. That didn’t work. Then they signed Drury and Gomez. No Cup on Seventh Avenue.

Is it Jagr’s fault? Of course not. But to sign him to a long-term deal means you have to pay him top dollar while he really starts to decline. Not a good idea. A one-year deal means you have to do this all again next offseason.

Move on, Rangers. Let the Jagr Era come to a quiet end.

JIM: Do what you can to keep Jagr

We saw over the past month what Jaromir Jagr is still capable of. Yes, frustrated Rangers fans, it sure would have been helpful had he played like that all season, instead of just the last month. But let's not lose sight of the fact that Jagr is not 28 anymore. What this past month showed us is that at 36 he still has it, that he can be the type of player who can change a game.

The difficult part here is the salary. The Rangers can't pay him the roughly $8 million he took in this year. Will he accept lower? He'll have to. But would he consider an incentive-laden contract? Based on his comments after yesterday's game, he seemed very wishy-washy at best about staying a Ranger.

That's too bad, because I do think the Rangers need him, even if it's for one more year. Maybe he envisions his career ending with a team that plays a more up-tempo style, one in which he can score more and be more productive.

But the Rangers have to stress to him that with their youth movement, he can be to the Rangers players what Mario Lemiuex was to him. He wants to do it. And they've come this far. The team has turned a corner the last three seasons. Give it one more chance.

The other day Anthony and I debated whether the Rangers had a chance to win the series down three games to none. I said absolutely not. Anthony gave them a chance.

Just because the Rangers won one game doesn't change a thing. Rangers fans, enjoy the victory, but don't get confident. I've already seen too many message board posts this morning in which Rangers fans are talking about a comeback as if it already happened. No shot. This one's over, and the Rangers 2007-08 season remains a disappointment.

BTW, if you think I'm a overly giddy, you're right. I picked Pens in five.

JIM: No.

The Rangers are done. D-O-N-E. Done. My only regret is that the Rangers will get swept and not lose in five games as I predicted. Too bad.

What a majorly disappointing series for the Rangers. They looked so good against the Devils, and they've outplayed the Penguins more often than not in these three games. But what do they have to show for it? Nada.

You could have seen this happening when the Rangers blew a three-goal lead in the first game. No good team does that in the postseason.

The party line for the Rangers fans today - at least for the ones courageous enough to show their faces - is that the Rangers could have won all three of those games. So why can't then win the next four?

Pfffttttt. Stop right there. This series is over. You know it. And the Rangers have only themselves to blame.

ANTHONY: A chance? Yes.

If I sat here and said the Rangers will definitely come back, it would undercut the vast amount of hockey knowledge I obviously have. But to say it's impossible? No way.

Jim says they can't. More importantly, our Newsday colleague Steve Zipay, who covers the team, says they won't.

I say there's a small chance they might.

Look, no one can making a living betting on a team to come back from 0-3 down. But it happens. It happened for our beloved Islanders once, it happened for the Red Sox against the Yankees in '04.

Could it happen for our beloved Rangers? All you have to do is go back to the first part of the first game of the series, when the Rangers took a 3-0 lead. A most learned colleague of mine who is a true hockey expert told me, "The Rangers are going to win the Cup. I just have a feeling about them."

Oops. Well, that guy had a feeling because of how the team was playing. Can they play that way again for four games, the last two on the road. It's unlikely. But impossible? No.

And don't forget that the NHL wants the Rangers to continue in the playoffs. I'm not saying the refs will throw the entire series the Rangers' way, but would it shock us if a few calls went in the Rangers' favor so the series can be extended? And once the Rangers get their confidence back. It's not like the Penguins are can't-miss Cup favorite locks. Any team can be rattled.

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? No. And it's not over now.

             Just kidding.

Padres closer Trevor Hoffman blew his second save in six chances last night, denying Greg Maddux his 350th win. Hoffman is baseball's all-time saves leader.

ANTHONY: THE HALL OF FAME STANDARDS NEED TO BE HIGHER

Trevor Hoffman in the Hall of Fame? I say no way. On most of these HOF debates, I’m going to come down on the “no” side. I think there are two many people in the HOF as it is. Our standards have eroded year after year after year and now we have many, many very-good-but-not-great players in the Hall.

Who gets in the Hall? Glad you asked. Immortals. The greats. Not the very goods. Not the compilers. Longevity doesn’t do it for me.

Hoffman, the all-time saves leader, is very good at a very specialized job. For the most part. But he’s fallen apart almost every time he’s been in the postseason, or the All-Star Game, or the regular season when the Padres are three outs away from making the playoffs on the day after the regular season (2007).

If Hoffman had pitched in the American League, he probably wouldn’t be the all-time saves leader. But he is. So be it. Lee Smith didn’t get in when he was the all-time saves leader. The writers got that one right.

Vote no on Hoffman, brethren!

JIM: EAST COAST BIAS!

I'm always surprised when I hear people vehemently fall on the side of Not A Hall of Famer for Hoffman. Listen, I get it. The save is a bogus stat. You won't get an argument from me there. But that doesn't mean it's easy to, ah hem, compile 528 of those saves.

If it was easy, then Mel Rojas would have done it.

But, hey, I agree with you on longevity. The Hall of Fame should be about immortals, not the guys who hung around to have a great career. Even before the positive drug test, I didn't think Rafael Palmeiro was a Hall of Famer. And he's the perfect example of a number compiler.

But Hoffman is the real deal. We're spoiled here with Mariano Rivera. Yes, no one compares to Rivera. But Hoffman is one small notch before him, maybe the third best reliever of all-time if you put Eck in that category. And Hoffman definitely deserves major props for doing it this long.

A career 2.77 ERA... a 1.05 WHIP... 1,017 strikeouts all coming as a reliever. And spare me the 'he came up weak in big spots.' Yes, he did. But so did Alex Rodriguez. Try that argument when A-Rod's on the ballot. Bottom line: Hoffman still does have a 3.20 ERA postseason ERA. So we're not talking 10.43 here.

This will be an interesting vote. I bet the writers will surprise you, Anthony.

Who do you agree with?

Lincoln and Douglas who? In case you missed them, here are the topics Jim and Anthony have debated in the first three-plus weeks of the two-man Final Score. If you click on "April archives" over to the right, you can scroll down and read all of them.

--Should Islanders fire Ted Nolan?

--Did Sean Avery cross the line with his waving?

--Should the Yankees retire Paul O’Neill’s No. 21?

--Should Mark Jackson be the next Knicks coach?

--Should Joba Chamberlain become a starter now?

--Who hurts him team more: Delgado or Giambi?

What Jim and I are wondering is: Who's winning?

Maybe some of our regulars (Brooks Simpson, Chicago Norm, Mushinghead, Jim A.) can give us a scorecard.

Because I've been known to not let things go...

Jim definitely won our Carlos Delgado/Jason Giambi debate yesterday -- for one day. Delgado has another awful day and the Mets lose and Giambi hits a HR and the Yankees win. So a tip o' the cap to you, Jimmy.

One point to all of the people who want to dump Delgado: The Mets have no one else who can play first. Stop with the Moises Alou or Angel Pagan or Ryan Church to first base ideas. Alou, Pagan, Beltran and Church are going to be a very nice four-man outfield rotation.

(One aside: Willie did a nice job getting Pagan to cool off, didn't he? This guy's really hot. Let me sit him for a few days to play Endy Chavez and Brady Clark.)

If the Mets were to eat Delgado's money -- which they are not -- then they would have to go out and get a new first baseman. And that's not going to happen either since the Mets have nothing of value left to trade.

The Yankees/Giambi situation is different because, in my opinion, the Yankees already have better first base options on their roster in Morgan Ensberg, Wilson Betemit, Jorge Posada and Shelley Duncan.

I'm not saying they will release Giambi, just that they should. The Yankees can afford to eat $21 million. They have to pay him anyway. And they would get better production from first base and have a more flexible roster w/o Giambi.

I guess so. Because Anthony can't admit when he's wrong. In the next post down he talks about how Joba needs to go to the rotation now. Fine, be that way. But I've explained it several times, as have the Yankees: he can't do that because of his innings limit.

Make fun of the innings limit all you want - I agree they're silly - if a pitcher is going to get hurt, he's going to get hurt. It won't be because he pitched 190 innings instead of 140. Nevertheless, I think most people who have watched Yankees games this year agree Chamberlain has been awesome in the eighth.

How would you guys have felt last night seeing Kyle Farnsworth or LaTroy Hawkins or Ross Ohlendorf running into the game with one out and the bases loaded in the seventh inning? But when Joba comes in, you breathe much easier.

Yes, he will be more valuable as a starter for many years to come. But this year, in my opinion, don't mess with what's working. Keep him in the bullpen.

I've been known to not let things go . . .

OK, Jim, there are two main arguments for why to not move Joba into the rotation now:

1) Who's going to pitch the eighth?

2) Joba can't exceed his innings limit because he's 22 and has never pitched 100 innings in a season.

Taken in reverse order. No. 2 first.

David Cone said something interesting on the Yankees broadcast last night. He said he started in middle relief in the bigs and then earned a spot in the rotation. Here are two things I don't remember anyone saying back then: 1) How are we going to stretch Cone out and 2) What about his innings limit?

In 1987, Cone pitched 99.1 innings. In 1988, Cone pitched 231.1 innings.
Quite a jump, no? And Cone isn't a big, strapping kid like Joba. Did the jump ruin his arm? Well, in 1998 -- 10 years later -- he pitched 207.2 innings. Had a pretty good career.

How about John Smoltz, who went from starter to closer to starter? In 2004, Smoltz threw 81.2 innings as a reliever. In 2005, he threw 229.2 innings as a starter. He's thrown 200-plus innings every season since.

As for stretching Joba out, the way the Yankees rotation is (only Wang and Pettitte go deep into games) there's no reason they can't pitch him on a middle relief schedule. two innings, then three, then four. It can be done. Used to be done all the time.

And who is going to pitch the eighth?

Well, no one knows. But who is going to pitch the eighth if Joba is a starter in June? July? Next season? 2010? 2015? There's never a good time to take a dominant eighth-inning guy and make him a starter.

Here are other guys who would have been dominant eighth-inning guys:
Pedro Martinez
Roger Clemens
Josh Beckett
Bob Lemon
Cy Young
Babe Ruth

But you know what? They were all more valuable as starters. Except for the Babe, who was more valuable as a skirt-chasing, hot-dog eating icon.

The Yankees wouldn't be facing this issue today if they had made Joba a starter in spring training. Six-man rotation, Mussina in the pen, Kennedy at Triple-A. One of those options would have worked.

Make Joba a starter. Now.

JIM: DELGADO HURTS METS MORE

This, to me, is really an easy answer -- the Mets need Carlos Delgado to hit like his old self far more than the Yankees need Jason Giambi to.

The Yankees can get by without Giambi hitting. They can hide him far down in their powerful order, maybe even as low as eight if his struggles continue. And no one will notice because you're bound to get massive power numbers from A-Rod and Abreu, Matsui, Posada and Cano will drive their share of runners in. They'll still score a ton.

But the Mets' lineup becomes significantly weaker with Delgado scuffling. Basically, without Delgado, they're down to two legit run producers in Wright and Beltran, and you've just got to hope Alou can stay healthy to give you 300 at-bats and Church continues on his current pace. That's a whole lot of fingers crossed in that scenario.

If only Delgado can show enough to hit .275 with 30 doubles, 22 home runs and 90 RBIs - essentially his 2007 numbers with a higher average - the Mets become such a more formidable offensive team. Yet right now, after what we've seen so far, it's easy to wonder whether Delgado can give half that. And the Mets have to be worried...

ANTHONY: GIAMBI’S A REAL DRAG

Jim, remember when the Yankees signed Jason Giambi to that seven-year, $120-million free agent contract? Well, this is Year Seven. And the Yankees need to do to Giambi what the Blue Jays did to Frank Thomas.

Release him.

Giambi is dragging the Yankees down by taking up at-bats that could be going to Shelley Duncan or Morgan Ensberg or even Wilson Betemit when his eyes clear up. There’s no way I can prove this, but I believe Brian Cashman signed Ensberg with the idea that he would somehow be the everyday first baseman this season. Cashman knows the Yankees are too lefthanded and probably figured Giambi would have trouble staying healthy.

Plus, the Yankees need more grinders and less glitz in their lineup. Releasing Giambi now would continue to move the team away from the star-at-every-position madness that hasn’t produced a championship in seven years – going on eight.

Giambi is making $21 million and can’t hit anymore. It’s sad that his best contributions have come on defense.

Joe Girardi gave it the ol’ college try when he hit Giambi fifth to start the season. But Giambi is beyond done. You can’t say the same about Carlos Delgado. Delgado is not a top offensive player anymore, but he’s had a few big hits already this season.

Plus, and most important, the Mets have no other options at first base. They are stuck with Delgado in a way the Yankees aren’t with Giambi.

Who do you agree with? Let us know!

I still don't understand the love affair with Mark Jackson. (See the Final Score debate from last week for my reasons.) Why do you believe he will be a better coach than, say, Patrick Ewing?

Jackson may be more polished in terms of public appearances, etc., but at least Ewing has been an assistant for a few years and definitely knows the inner-workings of the coaching biz better.

I ask, only because of today's Newsday story in which Ewing is quoted saying he hasn't heard from the Knicks yet.

ANTHONY: Yes, right now!

Jim, you were wrong in spring training when you said the Yankees were better with Joba Chamberlain in the bullpen. And you’re even more wrong now.

So Joba and Mariano make a great 1-2 punch late in the game? Wonderful. What good is the 1-2 punch when you’re already flat on your own back because your starting pitcher got KO’d in the third inning?

It’s time for the Yankees to make Joba a starter. Now. Even Hank Steinbrenner knows that. Let him air it out for as many innings as he can until he builds up the arm strength to go seven or eight innings. Or, God forbid, nine. He’s a big kid with a great arm. He can be the No. 1 starter the Yankees need.

Question: Did Boston win the World Series last season because of its eighth-inning guy? No, the Red Sox won because they had the best starting pitching, beginning with Josh Beckett. Joba (and to a lesser extent, Phil Hughes) are the Yankees’ only chances at having a Beckett. The Yankees need to stop babying Joba and let him fill the more important spot on the team. There’s a reason No. 1 starters make $20 million per year.

Ian Kennedy is afraid to throw the ball over the plate. Fine. Send him back to Triple-A so he can get some needed seasoning. He’ll be back later in the season. When he’s ready, he can replace Mike Mussina, who can become a $12-million long man.

The Yankees already made a terrible mistake when they didn’t trade for Johan Santana, who is only one of the top two pitchers in baseball. Now they are making another crucial mistake with someone who could become as good as they guy they passed up.

JIM: Don't panic!

The Yankees are 10-10 right now and it seems as if you think they'd be somewhere around 15-5 if Joba Chamberlain was a starter. Of course that's not the case.

Don't make your Chamberlain decision based on how others are doing. The Joba decision should be based solely on what's best for Joba. And right now he's exactly where he belongs - because this is the role where he's most dominant ... and because of his innings limit.

Joba is slated to pitch no more than about 140 innings this year. So why would the Yankees consider moving him into the rotation now, in which case he would reach his limit in August and not be available for the postseason. If the Yankees go this route, you know it's all because of Hank Steinbrenner, and then the Yankees have bigger issues.

But let's go back to the central focus of this debate, and that's the role best suited for Joba. Have we already forgotten what Joba showed us in spring training? Even his teammates admitted he looked like a different pitcher once they moved him to the bullpen. He's got a different mentality coming out of the pen, going gangbusters of hitters with an all-out fastball. Maybe it's not conscious, maybe in the back of his mind he holds back as a starter, but he didn't look the same (albeit for a few spring starts).

Does that mean he won't succeed as a starter someday? Noooooo way. But right now, 20 games into the 2008 season, we know for a fact he's already the best eighth-inning pitcher. Let him dominate the eighth (and seventh, sometimes) and hand it off to Mo.

Stay the course. Don't worry about the wins. They'll come.

Do you agree with Anthony (and Hank Steinbrenner) that Joba should be in the rotation now? Or do you agree with Jim that the Yankees should keep Joba in the pen for now.

Should he be the next Knicks coach? Just scroll down five items or so. Stop when you see the picture of Mark Jackson as a Knicks draft pick in 1987. If you see the huge cheesesteak picture, you've scrolled too far.

JIM: JUST SAY NO TO JAX
Someone please explain to me Mark Jackson's credentials to be the next head coach of the Knicks.
Yes, he's a New York City kid, a St. John's guy, a great NBA point guard, knows the game inside-out and has been a talented broadcaster. All of that is true. But please tell me how does that guarantee that he will be a good head coach? Shouldn't the Knicks look for someone with, say, coaching experience?
What a concept!
Hey, if the Knicks want Jackson and Jackson wants the Knicks, fine. Make him an assistant coach. He can see the innerworkings of coaching for a year, two or three, and maybe by then the time will be right to elevate him.
Oh, I can hear Knicks fans squirming. You want him as coach. I've read the message boards. He is exactly what the Knicks need in their next coach, you say. That doesn't make sense to me. Why is he above having to pay his dues? Isn't the risk for comp