BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: NYY Fans: Thacker: Postseason success and failure with the 1996-2005 Yankees

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, October 28, 2005

NYY Fans: Thacker: Postseason success and failure with the 1996-2005 Yankees

What have the Yankees been missing most from the ‘dynasty’ years of 1996-2000?....Ben Thacker will figga it out!

2) The ‘new’ Yankees are too one-dimensional – they hit home runs or they strike out.

Home runs are good, and strikeouts aren’t all that bad; but even if that wasn’t true, the 1998 Yankees hit 207 homers and struck out 1,025 times. The 2005 Yankees hit 229 homers and struck out 989 times. (In fairness, the more recent editions have generally whiffed a little more often than the World Series winners, but not by a huge margin.) And in three of the five years since the Yankees last won the big one, the eventual World Series winners struck out more often than the Yankee roster they beat out. Doesn’t seem like a strong correlation here.

Repoz Posted: October 28, 2005 at 08:18 PM | 9 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
Related News: NY Yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. robinred

Posted: October 29, 2005 at 01:14 AM (#1710117)

0 comments on a Yankee article? I guess this is because it's from NYYFans.com. I remember that line in "Ball Four" when Bouton tells the story of Greg Goossen yelling at a player to throw to a certain base on a bunt, IIRC, the player ignoring Goossen, and Bouton then saying, "Goose, he had to consider the source."

2. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: October 29, 2005 at 01:43 AM (#1710131)

Not a bad article. My blame would center on the inability of the middle relievers to carry from the fifth to the eighth. That trio of Mendoza, Stanton and Nelson leading up to Rivera has never been adequately replaced in recent postseasons, and as a result Gordon has seemed to fade from overwork late in the year.

It also seems that the last two years have seen an awful lot of one-sided wins against weak pitchers which pad their stats but which don't really help much against the better pitching in October, or even earlier in the season. IIRC, the Yanks won only 8 of 19 games against Tampa Bay this year, but I'll bet that they outscored them over the 19 games---a meaningless stat if ever there was one.

3. Boots Day Posted: October 29, 2005 at 02:41 AM (#1710175)

The article points out that the Yanks have been 28-26 in postseason games since 2001 -- but were 46-15 before then, when they won their four titles. Obviously, the latter record is far more anomalous than the former, and we would be better served to try to figure out how the Yanks managed to be so dominant from 1996 to 2000.

The one reason Thacker introduces that I think has some validity for the Yanks' more recent troubles is team age. It stands to reason that a team of older players is more likely to wear down as the season goes on. A lot of what gets perceived as choking in October may be nothing more than six months' worth of fatigue.

4. Rough Carrigan

Posted: October 29, 2005 at 02:49 AM (#1710181)

Some of those 1996-2000 yankee teams had pretty good efficiency at converting balls in play into outs. The yankee teams of the last few years have been lousy at it.

5. Mefisto Posted: October 29, 2005 at 03:23 AM (#1710210)

Some of those 1996-2000 yankee teams had pretty good efficiency at converting balls in play into outs. The yankee teams of the last few years have been lousy at it.

Yankee DER 1996-2005:

2005: .690
2004: .685
2003: .681
2002: .688
2001: .683
2000: .693
1999: .696
1998: .708
1997: .685
1996: .682

The 1998-9 team stands out, but otherwise there doesn't seem to me to be much difference.

6. depletion Posted: October 29, 2005 at 03:42 AM (#1710218)

How about the poor fielding?
Sheffield, Giambi, old-Williams all on the field at the same time! They don't compare well to O'Neill, Martinez, young-Williams.
I mean Giambi and Shef are not just sub-par, they're exceptional.

7. Boots Day Posted: October 29, 2005 at 03:46 AM (#1710220)

The Yankees' defensive lapses didn't cause them to be any worse during the regular season in 2001-2005 than they were in 1996-2000. Why would the defense suddenly become more important in the postseason than it was in the regular season?

8. Chris Dial Posted: October 29, 2005 at 04:01 AM (#1710222)

BIP distribution, Boots.

Where the key hit falls in a decisive game, say Game 4 in 2004, is a big deal. If the ball is hit to someone other than Bernie, maybe it gets caught. Hitting it to the wrong player at the wrong moment in a short series, where "things won't even out" is where defense didn't matter before, but matters now.

9. Chris Dial Posted: October 29, 2005 at 04:02 AM (#1710223)

I was glad to see Ben write something - I liked the piece, but I think Boots' first post here is key - what made them so good before, rather than so bad now.

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Friday, October 28, 2005

NYY Fans: Thacker: Postseason success and failure with the 1996-2005 Yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics