The Official New York Yankees Thread

1…519520522524525…1256

Comments

  • Posts: 5,531
    DS1119 wrote:
    show previous quotes


    I would just reference the last few Yankee playoff exits to teams that rely on winning with homeruns. Like I said I hope Gardner can make it back. That team needs a player like him and if he won't be ready they better find one.

    Actually a great statistical article on SI.com about this.

    Teams that rely on HRs lose a lower % of their runs in the post season than teams that don't. Your conjecture is a common fallacy. Bottom line - a HR is still a hit. You generally get fewer hits against better pitchers in post season. So, while HRs also reduce, easier to score runs with a HR than stringing together hits or using up outs to move runners.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 5,531
    DS1119 wrote:
    CC to the DL. :fp:

    Has anyone else noticed in the last couple years a lot more of these mid-season "vacation DLs" (As I like to call them)?

    Perfect timing to get CC some rest and guarantee he doesn't have to deal with turning down All Star appearance.

    He's not the only one. Colby Lewis of Texas, etc. Now, maybe they're real. But, it seems if I were a GM and needed to "rejuvenate" one of my players, the all star break is like the end of a quarter in basketball (When coaches sub out stars with 30 seconds left to get them a longer continuous break while missing the least amount of actual game time).

    I guess time will tell, but this CC injury comes out of nowhere and appears he only actually misses 2 or 3 starts or so. They are in the playoffs, so why not take 20 innings off his arm and still give him plenty of time to ease himself back?

    I know it's early to be thinking playoffs. But, I've noticed a lot of these "injuries" since enhancers (including amphetimenes, etc) have been taken out of the game (And no, I'm not accusing CC of anything. Let's just remember roids, uppers, etc may have had more of an impact in keeping guys "healthy" for 162 more than actually making them hit further or throw harder).
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 33,497
    EdsonNascimento wrote:

    Actually a great statistical article on SI.com about this.

    Teams that rely on HRs lose a lower % of their runs in the post season than teams that don't. Your conjecture is a common fallacy. Bottom line - a HR is still a hit. You generally get fewer hits against better pitchers in post season. So, while HRs also reduce, easier to score runs with a HR than stringing together hits or using up outs to move runners.


    In all fairness you can believe the stats. I'll believe my eyes. When the Yankees don't hit hit homeruns they don't win. As of June23rd game with the Mets.

    Yankees record when hitting a homerun 40-14
    When they don't 2-14 ( may have actually given them one too many wins here actually)


    Those are the stats I look at. Wins and losses.
  • Posts: 5,531
    DS1119 wrote:
    show previous quotes


    In all fairness you can believe the stats. I'll believe my eyes. When the Yankees don't hit hit homeruns they don't win. As of June23rd game with the Mets.

    Yankees record when hitting a homerun 40-14
    When they don't 2-14 ( may have actually given them one too many wins here actually)


    Those are the stats I look at. Wins and losses.

    The commentary isn't counter to what you are saying.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 34,028
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    show previous quotes

    Actually a great statistical article on SI.com about this.

    Teams that rely on HRs lose a lower % of their runs in the post season than teams that don't. Your conjecture is a common fallacy. Bottom line - a HR is still a hit. You generally get fewer hits against better pitchers in post season. So, while HRs also reduce, easier to score runs with a HR than stringing together hits or using up outs to move runners.

    Exactly. You have a link? It's a lot easier to take advantage of one mistake and hit it out of the park than it is to string together hits against a good pitcher.
  • Posts: 5,531
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    show previous quotes

    Exactly. You have a link? It's a lot easier to take advantage of one mistake and hit it out of the park than it is to string together hits against a good pitcher.

    http://mlb.si.com/2012/06/25/new-york-y ... runs-risp/
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 33,497
    EdsonNascimento wrote:

    The commentary isn't counter to what you are saying.


    Give me a team that can manufacture runs (the Yankees from 96-01) vs a HR hitting team (08-current) Yankee team in the playoffs any day of the week.
  • Posts: 5,531
    DS1119 wrote:
    show previous quotes


    Give me a team that can manufacture runs (the Yankees from 96-01) vs a HR hitting team (08-current) Yankee team in the playoffs any day of the week.

    Ok. I'll take the 2009 Yankees you can have the 2001 Yankees. Thank you.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 34,028
    DS1119 wrote:
    show previous quotes


    Give me a team that can manufacture runs (the Yankees from 96-01) vs a HR hitting team (08-current) Yankee team in the playoffs any day of the week.

    Ha, such nonsense. Those teams wouldn't have won shit without home runs. Lyritz, Tino, Jeter, Brosius, etc. All gigantic home runs, not bunts, steals and moving runners over that got them the dynasty they had.

    You should watch NL baseball.
  • Posts: 33,497
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    show previous quotes

    Ok. I'll take the 2009 Yankees you can have the 2001 Yankees. Thank you.


    As long as I have the 98, 99, and 00 teams I'll give you 08, 10, and 11. Thanks.
  • Posts: 5,531
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    show previous quotes

    Ok. I'll take the 2009 Yankees you can have the 2001 Yankees. Thank you.


    Here's the funny part - Yankees "Guillen Number" (% of runs by HR):

    2009 40.98
    2001 40.17
    2000 38.58 (is 2% really that much difference?)

    And do you really think they are not going to improve with RISP which will lower their current number from 42? Their first half RISP BA is an anomaly. They will hit to the "back of their card" by the end. Which is a scary thought. I mean, Cano is the worst so far. He's hitting like .140 with RISP. Do you really think that will continue?

    BTW - I hate Gardner. One of the most overrated players there is. He's a nice 4th OF. I don't mind the Yankees having him b/c they basically have an All Star caliber player at every position. But, let's not make him out to be the solution to their RISP BA because he has a bit of speed. If he was on the Pirates, he wouldn't even be an afterthought.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 34,028
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    Here's the funny part - Yankees "Guillen Number" (% of runs by HR):

    2009 40.98
    2001 40.17
    2000 38.58 (is 2% really that much difference?)

    And do you really think they are not going to improve with RISP which will lower their current number from 42? Their first half RISP BA is an anomaly. They will hit to the "back of their card" by the end. Which is a scary thought. I mean, Cano is the worst so far. He's hitting like .140 with RISP. Do you really think that will continue?

    BTW - I hate Gardner. One of the most overrated players there is. He's a nice 4th OF. I don't mind the Yankees having him b/c they basically have an All Star caliber player at every position. But, let's not make him out to be the solution to their RISP BA because he has a bit of speed. If he was on the Pirates, he wouldn't even be an afterthought.

    I got destroyed here a while back when I had Gardner in a package for Bautista :lol:
  • Posts: 5,531
    DS1119 wrote:
    show previous quotes


    As long as I have the 98, 99, and 00 teams I'll give you 08, 10, and 11. Thanks.


    As long as you give me the pitching staffs from 98 and 99, I'll give you the pitching staff from 2011.....

    This is so silly. Your complaint is unfounded based on statistical analysis. But, keep spouting it. It sounds good to folks who don't understand Baseball games are 9 innings and seasons are 162 games and WS droughts of only 8 years are welcome sights to most teams' fan base.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 5,531
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    show previous quotes

    I got destroyed here a while back when I had Gardner in a package for Bautista :lol:


    Really? Gardner is awful. He's got a .355 career OBP. His playoff OBP - .290. He's hardly the solution. I'm sure we can find someone with a .300 playoff OBP. Hard to score if you're not on base.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 34,028
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    show previous quotes


    Really? Gardner is awful. He's got a .355 career OBP. His playoff OBP - .290. He's hardly the solution. I'm sure we can find someone with a .300 playoff OBP. Hard to score if you're not on base.

    Yeah, I mean, I'll gladly take a .355 career OBP from someone with his speed and defense but the playoff OBP is troubling. He sure as hell is not the reason they win or lose this year.

    Edit: And yeah, I just looked back, from the 2010 deadline I believe. One person who's opinion I really respect around here also wouldn't do it, but I think that's crazy.
  • Posts: 34,028
    http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/ ... f-edition/

    :clap::clap:
  • Posts: 17,560
    Strikes out the side. Love it!
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • Posts: 34,028
    Newch91 wrote:
    Strikes out the side. Love it!

    I have no clue where all these strike outs are coming from. It's unreal.

    I'd love to see the Yanks rough up Ubaldo. I really wanted to the Yanks to go after him last year. I was definitely wrong on that one.
  • Posts: 5,531
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    show previous quotes

    Yeah, I mean, I'll gladly take a .355 career OBP from someone with his speed and defense but the playoff OBP is troubling. He sure as hell is not the reason they win or lose this year.

    Edit: And yeah, I just looked back, from the 2010 deadline I believe. One person who's opinion I really respect around here also wouldn't do it, but I think that's crazy.

    Trust me, I'm not Sabermetrics fan. I think that's over doing it. But, there are some basic statistics that squash many of these - just look at it - theories.

    Jose Bautista? Really? Someone wouldn't take Jose Bautista for Brett Gardner? Cashman wouldn't even ask Toronto for that b/c he'd be the joke of every GM meeting forever and never be taken seriously.

    I'm a Yankees fan, but I hate when fans overrate players they have. Is Brett Gardner really any better than Rajai Davis? Age 28 season: .360 OBP, 41 SB

    Gardner's a nice player. A luxury if you will. But, he's a classic right place, right time guy.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • Posts: 17,560
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    show previous quotes

    I have no clue where all these strike outs are coming from. It's unreal.
    Doesn't matter to me where they came from. As long as he's striking out people and dominating and winning, I'll take it.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories