Where Is Igawa When You Need Him?

I guess Tyler Clippard was unavailable this weekend due to a prior commitment. But luckily, Brian Cashman was able to lock in an old friend.

With the battle-tested Dan Giese, who now has one career major league start under his belt, facing surging Mets’ right-hander Mike Pelfrey in the first half of Friday’s Subway Series double dip, the Yankees will show off their latest acquisition in game two.

The inflated Sidney Ponson (and that adjective describes more than his ERA), who hails from the baseball hotbed of Aruba, will take on Pedro Martinez at Shea Stadium on Friday night.

Recently acquired from Texas, which had a surplus of good pitching, Ponson will don the pinstripes for the first time since the memorable campaign of 2006. In his 16.1 innings as a Yankee that season, the burly right-hander surrendered 19 earned runs (10.47 ERA). One can only hope he looks half as good when he toes the rubber at Shea on Friday night.

Oh wait, now I realize why Cashman brought back Ponson. This guy is a horse that is capable of giving his team a lot of innings. In addition to the 16.1 he threw for the Yankees in 2006, he pitched another 68.2 frames for St. Louis that season to the tune of a 5.24 ERA. Then, last season, his workman-like 37.2 innings yielded a 2-5 record and a 6.93 ERA. Ok, so he’s not a horse, he just looks like he swallowed one.

Ok, let me reel myself back in and look at the situation from a different perspective.

Ponson could easily wind up as the winning pitcher in tonight’s game. Although his counterpart, Pedro Martinez, can still get major league hitters out, he is not the same Pedro that got the best of Don Zimmer a few years ago.

Ponson will receive more good news when he finds out the Mets batting lineup will include the pitcher’s spot (National League rules are in effect tonight much to Hank Steinbrenner’s chagrin) as well as Carlos Delgado.

I can’t predict how this series will go, nor can I even proclaim confidence in the Mets’ ability to put up a crooked number off Ponson.

I can guarantee one thing though.

Win or lose, Ponson is likely to put a dent in the Diamond Club Buffet, so get there early and be thankful that Jose Lima won’t be anywhere close to Shea tonight.

----------

The New Jersey Nets must have been subscribing to the Brian Cashman theory during last night’s NBA Draft. If it doesn’t work the first time, try, try again. Those Jason Collins enthusiasts know exactly what I’m talking about.

----------

Victory for Liberty: In the most important news of the day, yes even more significant than Maria Sharapova’s stumble at Wimbledon, the United States Supreme Court deemed the District of Columbia’s ban on hand guns unconstitutional in a 5-4 vote.

The high court’s protection of the Second Amendment, which states the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, is a victory for liberty. If you don’t believe me, then read the following short story.

There once was a leader who prohibited a certain sect of society to participate in the firearms business. This leader launched a campaign to disarm the individuals that comprised this sect of the population. Only months later, this leader’s army invaded the neighborhoods of the disarmed and easily incarcerated many of these folks.

The aforementioned story is a true one, and the leader’s name was Adolf Hitler. Before the infamous Kristallnacht of 1938, Hitler stripped the Jews of their guns in preparation for completely stripping them of their freedom.

Guns are a means of protection that empower us to individually preserve our lives and liberty. Not to mention, if the government can find a way to rescind our right to own a gun, then they can surely find a way to rescind others if they chose to do so.

Presidential hopeful John McCain (R) praised the Court’s decision as “a landmark victory for Second Amendment,” and later went on to say “This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant in defense of our freedoms.”

Meanwhile, his counterpart, Barack Obama (D) attempted to straddle the fence on the issue. Obama made a comment that I still don’t fully understand and I don’t know if he does either. “I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through commonsense, effective safety measures,” stated Obama.

So, is he saying that legal and registered hand guns are the ones being used to hurt children in these crime-ravaged communities? Or is the senator from Illinois saying that hand guns are the culprit of violence in these crime-ravaged communities? Or is Mr. Obama simply saying something that will help make him president?