Should the Yankees worry about Phil Hughes?

(Photo Credit: http://hammer41.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/hughes21.jpg)

Phil Hughes got off to a shaky start in his return to the mound Wednesday, but was that not to be expected?

Hughes walked Michael Brantley, the first batter he faced, and then allowed two singles, the second scoring Brantley. A Russell Martin throwing error led to another Indians run, but Hughes was able to get out of trouble down just 2-0.

Then he settled down...kind of. Hughes didn't have a clean inning all night but scattered three singles in the next three innings before hitting two Cabreras (Asdrubal and Orlando) and walking another batter in the fifth.

Hughes was able to get Lonnie Chisenhall to fly out to Brett Gardner to leave the bases loaded and end his night at 87 pitches.

All in all, it was a mixed bag of a return for Hughes. Five innings, ten baserunners, two strikeouts and 57 strikes compared to 30 balls. He worked his way into trouble in his first and last innings, but got out of the fifth without allowing a run or even a hit.

Stats are nice but what most Yankees fans are concerned about is Hughes' velocity. The 24-year-old right-hander hit as high as 93 mph on the radar gun and hit 92 at one point during his final inning.

But, as the New York Post reports, Hughes' average velocity dipped from 92.3 in the first inning to 91.5 in the third and 90.6 in the fifth, a bad sign for many who have questioned Ivan Nova's demotion to Triple-A to make room for Hughes.

While this drop in velocity may be reason for some to worry about Hughes' arm, it isn't for me. Most pitchers throw harder in the first inning than they do in the fifth, particularly one that hasn't thrown to major-league hitters in three months. Give the kid some time.

After allowing the first three batters he faced to reach base, Hughes allowed seven baserunners (still too many) and didn't allow a run on a hit, walk or hit batter. The late loss of control and two batters he hit are slightly worrisome, especially in the fifth inning when his velocity was dropping near pre-DL stint levels.

Overall it was a shaky first start back for Hughes, who obviously has some work to do before he gets back to his 2009 pre-All Star Break level. Some people I've talked to believe he never will, even before this start, while I'd like to see him throw a few more turns before I make any rash judgments.

Hughes is just 24 years old, an age where many pitchers are just starting their careers. Hughes already has an All-Star appearance and an 18-win season on his ledger, so he's earned a longer leash than one borderline start after a dead-arm period. I'm willing to be somewhat patient with him.

But are the Yankees? With Nova waiting for a rotation spot in Triple-A, the leash may be short if Hughes continues to struggle considering the way Nova was pitching since a rough April.

Some fans may be rooting for Hughes to fail and the team to bring back Nova, but I think that's a terrible way to look at the situation.

The Yankees need both youngsters in their rotation next season and, while Nova may be the odd man out as of now, Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia are no locks to stay healthy and it's likely neither will be wearing pinstripes next season.

Rooting against Hughes is not the answer for Yankees fans in the short or long-term, regardless of how you feel about the situation with him and Nova. The Yankees will need both in 2012 and very possibly later this season as well - you want both of these guys pitching well, not just one.

Do the Yankees miss Derek Jeter?

(Photo Credit: http://jonathanjoyce.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/derekjeter.jpg)

Since Derek Jeter went on the 15-day DL with a strained right calf, all the Yankees have done is go 10-3 without their captain. Does this mean they are better off without him?

The answer to that question depends heavily on which Jeter we're talking about. Are we looking at the Jeter who has hit .260 in 62 games this season with just two home runs, 20 RBI and a .649 OPS? Or are we talking about the Jeter who has hit .312 for his career with an .832 OPS?

New York is obviously better off with a healthy and productive Jeter in their lineup but he has been anything but this season. Eduardo Nunez has filled in capably at the plate since taking over at shortstop, batting .295 (13-44) with a homer, 4 runs and 4 RBI.

The Yankees have actually performed better as a lineup without Jeter, averaging a full run more per game (6.1 to 5.1) and hitting .288 compared to .249 in the 20 games Nunez has started. Nunez also has three errors since Jeter hit the DL, while the captain had just four all season before his injury.

Defense aside, this brings up a legitimate point about New York's lineup: The Yankees are better off with Nunez batting ninth than they are with Jeter batting first.

Forgive my potentially blasphemous words, but shouldn't Joe Girardi consider batting Jeter ninth when he returns?

Despite sabermetricians' best efforts, Jeter is an obvious upgrade defensively over Nunez, diminishing range aside. While Nunez has hit well over the past two weeks, Jeter is also a better hitter. If the Yankees lineup is better with Nunez ninth than it is with Jeter first, wouldn't it be even better with Jeter batting ninth?

Brett Gardner is the only prototypical leadoff man on the Yankees roster. His .360 OBP this season trumps Jeter's .324 on-base percentage and that includes an awful April where people were questioning his spot in the lineup. In limited at-bats against left-handed pitching, Gardner's OBP is actually higher (.386) than it is against right-handers.

There's no need for a leadoff platoon at the top of the Yankees order. Gardner should be the man at the top and while Jeter has been a No. 2 hitter for most of his career, Curtis Granderson is thriving in that spot this season.

With the copious power running through the Yankees lineup in the next six spots, Jeter batting ninth makes perfect sense. He still has enough speed and base-stealing ability that he won't slow down Gardner and who else would you want to turn your lineup over?

If he doesn't hit, it's not a big deal; you don't expect heavy offensive contributions from your last hitter anyway.

If Jeter was truly a great Yankee captain, he would recognize that he hurts the team batting leadoff if he's not hitting .300 and I can't find many people who think he's still a .300 hitter. I sure don't.

Jeter has been the consummate team player throughout his career but he can add to his Yankee legacy by being open to batting ninth. New York may be in first place in the AL East right now, but they are not a championship-caliber team with a .260 leadoff hitter who has a home run in just one game this season.

Do the right thing, Derek. Offer to bat ninth when you come back, because Joe Girardi does not have the stones to pencil you in there. Your team will be better off and you just may have another ring on your finger.

What to make of Iman Shumpert?

(http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/01/sp-bkc01_ph_wake_0499741637.jpg)

The Knicks surprised everybody last night by drafting Georgia Tech guard Iman Shumpert. As an avid college basketball fan and somebody who follows the sport almost religiously, I can honestly say my first reaction was, "What?!? Who?!? The Knicks did it AGAIN!"

While I didn't have the opportunity to catch a Yellow Jacket game this season and know little first-hand about Shumpert, it's obvious that he has great size for a point guard at 6'5''. He's a gifted athlete and his size and length will allow him to guard up to three positions in the NBA.

Replacing the outgoing Donnie Walsh, interim general manager Glen Grunwald said in an interview after the pick that the Knicks wanted to upgrade their defense and they expected Shumpert to help in that regard. The problem with that statement is that the best perimeter defender in the draft went right after the Knicks' pick, with the Wizards drafting Florida State's Chris Singleton.

I understand Singleton is a forward with no jump shot and the Knicks already have Carmelo Anthony and Amar'e Stoudemire locked in at the forward positions. But like Shumpert, Singleton has size (6'9'') and the perimeter defensive ability to guard point guards, shooting guards and small forwards.

Also like Shumpert, Singleton has no jump shot. Although Walsh has claimed Shumpert has improved his shot, I'd like to see it in game action at real-time speed before I make any judgments. Since I admittedly haven't seen Shumpert play, I can't do that now.

The difference between Shumpert and Singleton, and the reason the Knicks likely took Shumpert, is the potential to play the point. Singleton is a better defender but Shumpert can handle the ball. ESPN's Chad Ford said this about Shumpert: "If he can learn to run a team and shoot the ball, he can be a monster in the NBA. But right now, that's a big if. "

It seems the Knicks envision Shumpert as a lock-down defender on the outside and their potential future point guard, especially if Chauncey Billups proves to be the solid mentor he was to Toney Douglas last season. A future Knicks backcourt with Shumpert, Douglas and Landry Fields, assuming the Knicks don't land a big-name point guard, could be an excellent defensive trio.

Singleton wasn't the only player the Knicks passed on that would have filled a need. Morehead State rebounding machine Kenneth Faried was still on the board and went five picks later to Denver at 22.

Faried's boundless energy and tenacious defense was on display in the NCAA tournament, when his block in the final seconds of round one (or do I mean round two?) led to Morehead State's shocking upset of Louisville. But he's only 6'7'' and the Knicks need a center, not a power forward.

Regardless of his ability to rebound and defend, his height was the likely reason the Knicks went with Shumpert. Faried isn't likely to be a starter in the NBA but having him and Stoudemire on the floor would require Stoudemire to defend the opposing center, which isn't something the Knicks wanted.

Speaking of centers, secound-round pick Josh Harrelson is worth a mention. The Knicks traded with Charlotte to get Harrelson, who has size and really stepped his game up in the NCAA Tournament for Kentucky.

This may just be the Syracuse fan in me, but I think the Knicks should give Rick Jackson a look as an undrafted free agent. They worked him out previously and I thought there was a chance they would trade into round two to get him, but they didn't have to.

Jackson is big, strong and knows how to rebound and defend. He improved drastically from his junior year to his senior year and is a hard worker. Those are the players that make it in the NBA at the back of a big-man rotation, and I'd like to see Jackson get a shot.

Overall, my thoughts on New York's draft have fluctuated. At first, it was shock, disbelief and disappointment, mainly because I knew little about Shumpert. As the hours went on and now, a day later, I can understand what the Knicks were thinking. I may not agree with it, but I can understand it.

They didn't pass up any potential superstars, that's for sure. In a weak draft, they picked a player who fills a positional need, a defensive need and has the upside to be a "monster" (Chad Ford's words, not mine). Ford gave the Knicks draft a B- and I'll copy his grade for the moment.

With the draft in the books, the next question becomes: Will there be an NBA season? Charles Barkley says no, while Ric Bucher says a 50-game season is the best-case scenario. The Knicks are rooting for no lockout, as they can't afford to lose a season in the middle of their stars' primes.

A lockout would also put Billups one year closer to retirement and hurt Shumpert and Douglas, as they will have less time on the court to learn from Billups. James Dolan should be one of the NBA owners pushing for a deal although with his history, he'll do the wrong thing. He always does - what would a Knicks article be without a shot at Dolan?

Mock NBA Lottery: Who Will Rise and Fall?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/744076-2011-nba-draft-projecting-the-lottery-how-far-will-kemba-walker-fall

Why the Return of Phil Hughes Makes the Yankees AL East Frontrunners

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/742569-phil-hughes-5-reasons-his-healthy-return-makes-new-york-the-al-east-frontrunner

The Rise of Rory: Will he be better than Tiger?

(photo courtesy of http://nbcsportsmedia3.msnbc.com/j/NBCSports/Components/Video/_NEW/s_nbc_glf_usopenlexuswrapseg3_110619_4x3.300w.jpg)

At the Masters in April, Rory McIlroy had a four-stroke lead heading into Sunday. But the 21-year-old suffered through one of the worst final-round collapses in major history, shooting an 80 and losing by 10 strokes.

Just two months later and a year older (technically, since his birthday was May 4), McIlroy was again in an enviable position through three rounds of a major tournament. His eight-stroke lead heading into Sunday's final round at the U.S. Open would seem safe for any other golfer but with his Masters collapse fresh in the mind of many, including himself, there was reason to think the tournament wasn't quite over yet.

McIlroy, who called his Masters meltdown "a character-building day" back in April, proved that statement true by shooting a 69 in the final round to set the U.S. Open scoring record, one of 12 marks he set this weekend. McIlroy also set the 36-hole and 54-hole scoring record, among others.

Just eight months older than Tiger Woods was when Woods destroyed the Masters in 1997, the comparisons between McIlroy and Woods have been constant in the past day. If you're tired of hearing about it, please stop reading now.

Last year's Open winner Graeme McDowell was quoted as saying McIlroy was the best player he's ever seen, high praise for such a young pro from a fellow major champion. While Woods was a prodigy seemingly from birth, McIlroy has burst onto the PGA scene with much less hype than Woods did, possibly because he doesn't have a father who liked to fuel such a moniker.

The resolve McIlroy showed in his first major following the Masters was impressive to say the least, as similar major meltdowns have crashed the careers of other very talented golfers. That's the first sign to me that McIlroy is on top to stay.

Golf experts everywhere are saying he has the prettiest swing they have ever seen and are even throwing his name around as the premier challenger to Jack Nicklaus' record of 18 major victories.

Does all this sound familiar? Wasn't this the same hoopla surrounding Woods early in his career? The difference is, McIlroy has a much better head on his shoulders than Woods at the same age and even now.

Woods would have never handled an epic collapse the way McIlroy did after the Masters. McIlroy was more than willing to face the media and took it as a learning experience, which only spurred his performance this weekend.

We've seen Woods' media ineptitude plenty of times, from the start of his career until the infamous incident with his ex-wife two years ago. Woods' fragile psyche has yet to recover and, despite being just four majors short of Nicklaus, he may never reach the same heights he once achieved or the records many claimed he was a lock for.

McIlroy is the new Woods and frankly, he's easier to root for. I haven't seen him snap at anybody for taking his picture or act out at the attention he's received, positive or negative. I see no reason that McIlroy can't continue his rapid ascent to the top of the golf world, where he is now ranked as the fourth best player on tour.

If I had any advice to McIlroy it would be this: Don't follow in the footsteps of Tiger Woods; make your own path. And please, don't get married until you've won your 19th major.

Where will Plaxico Burress play this season?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/725036-plax-is-back-5-teams-that-could-use-the-former-giants-receiver