Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, October 08, 2012

CC Sabathia comes up aces as he comes one out short of complete game in Yankees Game 1 win over Baltimore Orioles in ALDS - NY Daily News

The Yankees win. The Yankees win.

Jim Furtado Posted: October 08, 2012 at 08:14 AM | 116 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: alds, orioles, 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 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. escabeche Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:10 AM (#4258962)
I'm not as dejected as I thought I'd be. You face down the opposition's best starter and go into the ninth inning tied with Jim Johnson on the mound, that's where you want to be in Game 1. Too bad Baltimore didn't take this one, but every reliever blows one sometimes.
   2. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:12 AM (#4258963)
It's over.
   3. DKDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:26 AM (#4258967)
#1,

I thought it was a painful loss, for some reason much worse than giving up some runs early and losing 4-0 or something.

That's the best I've seen CC pitch against the Os all year. They were probably lucky to scrape 2 runs when he's hitting his spots like that. Odds are that Sabathia willl be less sharp in a game 5 matchup, and hopefully Hammel will be more crisp with some game experience under his belt.

Tonight is not a must-win, but it will be a tall order to win three in a row at NYS, even though they've played well there all year. I'm optimistic against Pettitte. He has dominated the Orioles his whole career, but I watched him pitch twice in Septemer and he's not the pitcher he used to be. His season stats look good but that was mostly against the NL and the dregs of the AL.
   4. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:38 AM (#4258971)
It was painful watching Johnson implode in the 9th, but CC was great and you have to tip your cap. He was painting the corners all night. The strike zone was generous, but CC's command was so consistent that he earned those calls.
   5. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:38 AM (#4258972)
Sabathia pitched one of his best games of the year, considering the context, and yet he barely managed a win. This series isn't remotely over, and anyone who thinks the Orioles aren't capable of sweeping the next three games hasn't been paying attention to them over the past month.

That said, it's nice to see a few Yankee bats start to come to life, other than that third baseman who's now hitting under .133 with 2 outs and RISP in his long postseason career. Christ, if you take out 2000 and 2009 it'd probably be about .033.
   6. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:40 AM (#4258974)
One painful moment was the Adam Jones AB in the 8th(?). CC's first pitch was right down the middle, one of the few pitches all night in that spot. Jones recognized the pitch and had a good swing, but just fouled it off. That's baseball -- another quarter of an inch and it might have been the go ahead HR.
   7. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:44 AM (#4258977)
One painful moment was the Adam Jones AB in the 8th(?). CC's first pitch was right down the middle, one of the few pitches all night in that spot. Jones recognized the pitch and had a good swing, but just fouled it off. That's baseball -- another quarter of an inch and it might have been the go ahead HR.

True enough, and yet you can probably think of several hundred key games where a similar quarter of an inch would have changed the outcome of an entire series or season.
   8. Swoboda is freedom Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:54 AM (#4258981)
Odds are that Sabathia willl be less sharp in a game 5 matchup

Especially after throwing 120 pitches in the game. Why he was in the 9th after they took the big lead is beyond me.
   9. SG Posted: October 08, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4258983)
I'm optimistic against Pettitte. He has dominated the Orioles his whole career, but I watched him pitch twice in Septemer and he's not the pitcher he used to be. His season stats look good but that was mostly against the NL and the dregs of the AL.


For whatever it's worth, the average OPS+ of the hitters faced by Pettitte was 94 (calculated as the sum of PA vs. Pettitte times OPS+ divided by PA).
The average OPS+ of the hitters faced by Sabathia was 95.
   10. salajander Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:02 AM (#4258985)
Christ, if you take out 2000 and 2009 it'd probably be about .033.

So you're asserting that if you take out the times he did well, his line would be worse? Iiiiinnnnnteresting.
   11. salajander Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:03 AM (#4258986)
I was glad to see Swisher and Teixeira get out to good starts.
   12. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4258989)
Sabathia pitched as well as anyone I've ever seen in person. There were only a couple of calls all night that FX didn't think were strikes -- FX said that strike three to Andino was the blackiest pitch on the black ever, that the edge of the baseball got the zone, but by a millimeter, tops.

Pettitte isn't pitching like that tonight, but Chen could match what Hammel did -- Hammel wasn't even that sharp. If Chen does that, it's 1-1 going to New York.
   13. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4258996)
the yanks have seen chen and while he has not let them string hits together new york has tagged him for some homers.
   14. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:22 AM (#4258998)
That said, it's nice to see a few Yankee bats start to come to life, other than that third baseman who's now hitting under .133 with 2 outs and RISP in his long postseason career. Christ, if you take out 2000 and 2009 it'd probably be about .033.

So you're asserting that if you take out the times he did well, his line would be worse? Iiiiinnnnnteresting.


Not as iiiiinnnnnteresting as the fact that even with those two years put in, it's still less than .133. If only I could believe in "the law of averages" I'd be a lot more sanguine.
   15. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:39 AM (#4259010)

Especially after throwing 120 pitches in the game. Why he was in the 9th after they took the big lead is beyond me.


There is zero evidence 120 pitches is at all stressful for a healthy, mature pitcher. For 90% of MLB history, Sabbathia would have been out there with 140 pitches.

And the way he was pitching was probably much less stressful than 100 pitches where he struggled.

Can we please stop pretending we know things about pitch counts that we don't.
   16. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:41 AM (#4259013)
Well, it is still reasonable to ask why a pitcher in the playoffs with a weird rotation is being sent out to pitch the 9th with a 5 run lead while having already thrown 120 pitches. Having CC complete the game doesn't do anything for the Yankees. Having him go out there does risk things for the Yankees. So I don't know what the Yankees gained by doing it.
   17. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4259018)
Well, it is still reasonable to ask why a pitcher in the playoffs with a weird rotation is being sent out to pitch the 9th with a 5 run lead while having already thrown 120 pitches. Having CC complete the game doesn't do anything for the Yankees. Having him go out there does risk things for the Yankees. So I don't know what the Yankees gained by doing it.

CC wanted the CG. The announcers said repeatedly he's never had a post-season complete game.

I absolutely LOVE having a pitcher with that mindset.
   18. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:45 AM (#4259019)
Well, it is still reasonable to ask why a pitcher in the playoffs with a weird rotation is being sent out to pitch the 9th with a 5 run lead while having already thrown 120 pitches
CC threw 120 total, he wasn't sent out with 120. It wasn't the move I would've made--I doubt CC will suffer any long terms effects, but if you want to bring him back, he might as well be a little fresher--but it wasn't quite as crazytown as sending him out at 120 pitches and a 5-run lead.
   19. SG Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4259024)
with a weird rotation


What does this mean?
   20. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: October 08, 2012 at 10:58 AM (#4259028)
I saw CC on the way out of the park. Told him that Joe Bivens says "hey".
   21. Mayor Blomberg Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:08 AM (#4259033)
Well, it is still reasonable to ask why a pitcher in the playoffs with a weird rotation is being sent out to pitch the 9th with a 5 run lead while having already thrown 120 pitches.

1. CC was not "sent out to pitch ... while having already thrown 120 pitches." He let after his 120th pitch. Box scores man, all sorts of info.

2. Take a look at CC's starts throughout the years. 120 is nothing for him. He's also been known to pitch effectively on short rest from Sept. on.

3. Whether or not he throws an equal gem should there be a game 5 will have ZERO to do with throwing 120 pitches.

4. Why was he sent out for the 9th? How about he wanted to be because he'd not even thrown 110 pitches at that time and had been cruising.

Jesus, this used to be a baseball site.
   22. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4259034)
I think if the Yankees had designs on bringing back CC and Pettitte for Games Four and Five you might make the case that they should have gone to a reliever for the ninth. I can't see Pettitte coming back on short rest for Game Five so there is no real benefit to rushing CC for Game Four making that a moot point though.
   23. Mayor Blomberg Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:21 AM (#4259045)
No, they'd not bring Andy back on short rest, and couldn't do Kuroda either because he's not been as sharp, seems to be tiring. If they really wanted to accelerate CC's return, they shouldn't have sent him out for the 8th. ;)
   24. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:23 AM (#4259049)
That said, it's nice to see a few Yankee bats start to come to life, other than that third baseman who's now hitting under .133 with 2 outs and RISP in his long postseason career. Christ, if you take out 2000 and 2009 it'd probably be about .033.

A-Rod has 304 postseason plate appearances. Looking at his career totals, out of his 11163 overall plate appearances (man, that's a huge number - already 34th all-time, and he has a pretty decent number of years left on that contract), it looks like 1110 of them have been at bats with two outs and runners in scoring position.

So he probably had all of 30 AB with two outs/RISP in his playoff career before yesterday, and had hits in four of them. Which is a part (and a bad part) of his postseason career, but hardly the entire career.
   25. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:25 AM (#4259051)
Can we please stop pretending we know things about pitch counts that we don't.


It's past time for people to stop doing this, yes.
   26. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:26 AM (#4259052)
What does this mean?

It means you are not going to be using a 5 man rotation for the series, might have to use him again in relief/short rest, and might very well go into the next series without your rotation set.
   27. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:27 AM (#4259054)
Not as iiiiinnnnnteresting as the fact that even with those two years put in, it's still less than .133.


But what's the point? He's done badly in some limited slice of PAs. And if we take out the times he did well, he looks even worse. Yay.

This is not what intelligent baseball analysis - or even intelligent fandom - focuses on.
   28. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4259055)
I think if the Yankees had designs on bringing back CC and Pettitte for Games Four and Five you might make the case that they should have gone to a reliever for the ninth. I can't see Pettitte coming back on short rest for Game Five so there is no real benefit to rushing CC for Game Four making that a moot point though.

Exactly. If you're up 2-1, you don't pitch CC on short rest. If you're down 2-1, you need to win both 4 & 5 anyway, and the pitchers are Hughes and CC in whichever order. No reason not to keep CC on full-rest.
   29. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4259057)
1. CC was not "sent out to pitch ... while having already thrown 120 pitches." He let after his 120th pitch. Box scores man, all sorts of info.


Hey guys, being off by a dozen pitches doesn't change the point no matter how many people wish to focus on the minute error instead of the point.

The Yankees gain nothing by having him throw in the 9th with a 5 run lead. All they are doing is taking on risk and for what? Because CC wanted to throw a CG? That's the reason? This is the defense people are going with?
   30. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:29 AM (#4259059)
might have to use him again in relief/short rest

He's pitching Game 5, if needed, not before then.
   31. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4259066)
Hey guys, being off by a dozen pitches doesn't change the point no matter how many people wish to focus on the minute error instead of the point.

The Yankees gain nothing by having him throw in the 9th with a 5 run lead. All they are doing is taking on risk and for what? Because CC wanted to throw a CG? That's the reason? This is the defense people are going with?


There's essentially no risk being taken. CC's going to throw a lot more than 12 pitches in his throw day session.

A pitcher throwing well at ~110 pitches is not taking any particular risk by throwing 10 more.
   32. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4259068)
Not as iiiiinnnnnteresting as the fact that even with those two years put in, it's still less than .133.

But what's the point? He's done badly in some limited slice of PAs. And if we take out the times he did well, he looks even worse. Yay.


This is not what intelligent baseball analysis - or even intelligent fandom - focuses on.

Who ever said that fandom was supposed to equate with sabermetrics? Of course he's a worthy Hall of Merit selection, but we already knew that.

But all those past glories of his aren't going to do his team a damn bit of good unless he can resurrect a few of them in the here and now. And that's what fans generally concentrate on when they're watching the games.
   33. DKDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4259069)
#9,

You and your pesky facts, SG.

I'll remain optimistic nonetheless, as its more fun that harping on last night's loss.

Plus, the 2012 Orioles are 1-0 in the postseason when I attend, and I'll be at the yard tonight.
   34. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:37 AM (#4259073)
There's essentially no risk being taken. CC's going to throw a lot more than 12 pitches in his throw day session.

A pitcher throwing well at ~110 pitches is not taking any particular risk by throwing 10 more.


I don't give a damn about the health concerns of 12 pitches on CC. This isn't about what CC wants or what is good for him, well, not totally. It is about what is best for the Yankees and there is absolutely no advantage to the Yankees in having CC pitch the 9th. Having CC pitch the 9th only increases the risks to the Yankees now and in the future.
   35. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4259076)
A pitcher throwing well at ~110 pitches is not taking any particular risk by throwing 10 more.


Especially when that pitcher is Sabathia, who has proven to be a very durable veteran and whose season IP total in 2012 was the lowest since 2007.
   36. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:43 AM (#4259080)
I don't give a damn about the health concerns of 12 pitches on CC. This isn't about what CC wants or what is good for him, well, not totally. It is about what is best for the Yankees and there is absolutely no advantage to the Yankees in having CC pitch the 9th. Having CC pitch the 9th only increases the risks to the Yankees now and in the future.

Dis-concur.

Sabathia has a tremendous attitude of wanting to pitch deep in games and be a work-horse. You remember what he did for Milwaukee? Starting on short-rest for a month, heading into his Free Agency.

You reward that kind of attitude, b/c the team benefits from it every year.. If he wants to go for the CG you let him. It's pretty clear Girardi told him, first baserunner you're out, and wasn't going to let the pitch count get too high.

What's to say Robertson is less likely to get hurt than Sabathia?
   37. zonk Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4259084)

There is zero evidence 120 pitches is at all stressful for a healthy, mature pitcher. For 90% of MLB history, Sabbathia would have been out there with 140 pitches.

And the way he was pitching was probably much less stressful than 100 pitches where he struggled.

Can we please stop pretending we know things about pitch counts that we don't.


I wouldn't say there's NO evidence...

I recall a study that I think Rany Jazeryerli did for a BPro annual (I think?) some years ago showing that there was significant evidence of a performance drop-off for pitchers in their next starts following a certain PC outing (I don't recall if it was 100, 120, or 140... but I think he laid out several benchmarks and found the correlation to grow significantly).

Now, hey -- Sabathia is a horse, he's a veteran, and there's probably not enough evidence to even require saying he might be an exception to a rule no proven...

However, ever since Mark Prior in 2003 - and I know the lead was smaller here - I've been a strong proponent of not wasting any pitches for your best pitchers in circumstances where you really shouldn't need your best pitcher's pitches to win.
   38. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4259085)
I don't give a damn about the health concerns of 12 pitches on CC. This isn't about what CC wants or what is good for him, well, not totally. It is about what is best for the Yankees and there is absolutely no advantage to the Yankees in having CC pitch the 9th. Having CC pitch the 9th only increases the risks to the Yankees now and in the future.


I think there is an advantage to staying with CC. Let's say you go to Robertson or Soriano and they have a rough inning. Not anything catastrophic but they throw 20-25 pitches, that could come into play tonight. Even if they pitch well short relievers are short relievers because they are limited. I think giving the Orioles a free look at a reliever early in the series could potentially be harmful later.

On the other hand maybe you go to Lowe or someone like that. In that situation you run the slight risk that Lowe gets knocked around and all of a sudden it's 7-4 with a man on and you have to go to Soriano. A bloop and a blast and...####. That's a remote possibility and in June you go with Lowe. In October in a best of 5? Win the game in front of you, don't #### around and gear up for tomorrow.
   39. zonk Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4259093)

I think there is an advantage to staying with CC. Let's say you go to Robertson or Soriano and they have a rough inning. Not anything catastrophic but they throw 20-25 pitches, that could come into play tonight. Even if they pitch well short relievers are short relievers because they are limited. I think giving the Orioles a free look at a reliever early in the series could potentially be harmful later.

On the other hand maybe you go to Lowe or someone like that. In that situation you run the slight risk that Lowe gets knocked around and all of a sudden it's 7-4 with a man on and you have to go to Soriano. A bloop and a blast and...####. That's a remote possibility and in June you go with Lowe. In October in a best of 5? Win the game in front of you, don't #### around and gear up for tomorrow.


Sure, sure... and yes, win the game today...

But a 5 run lead against a team that was 10th in RS in the AL? Throw your 3rd or 4th reliever out there to soak up 3 outs, and if you run into trouble, it's hard for me to see how the trouble would develop so quickly that you wouldn't have time to get one of your top 2 guys ready.

   40. Mayor Blomberg Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:56 AM (#4259094)
Have people forgotten CC's September in 2008?
   41. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:56 AM (#4259095)
I've been a strong proponent of not wasting any pitches for your best pitchers in circumstances where you really shouldn't need your best pitcher's pitches to win.

But, if you follow this theory, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you never let CC go 120 pitches except when you absolutely need him too, he won't be effective at 120 pitches, b/c he won't have the stamina built up.

The only way to have a high-endurance pitcher, is to let him work a lot.
   42. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4259098)
But a 5 run lead against a team that was 10th in RS in the AL? Throw your 3rd or 4th reliever out there to soak up 3 outs, and if you run into trouble, it's hard for me to see how the trouble would develop so quickly that you wouldn't have time to get one of your top 2 guys ready.


But, having Joba throw 15-20 pitches is likely to have much more impact on his ability/effectiveness tomorrow than the extra pitches are going to impact CC on Friday.
   43. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:01 PM (#4259103)
But, if you follow this theory, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you never let CC go 120 pitches except when you absolutely need him too, he won't be effective at 120 pitches, b/c he won't have the stamina built up.

The only way to have a high-endurance pitcher, is to let him work a lot.


So they need CC to get his 120 pitches in during Game 1 of the ALDS? That is what spring training is for and the regular season. If 12 extra pitches mean nothing to CC's long term health then 12 extra pitches means nothing for his future ability to throw 120 pitches. You can't have it both ways.
   44. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:02 PM (#4259104)
In the playoffs there is absolutely no reason to have your starting pitcher start the 9th with a 5 run lead other than vanity.
   45. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:03 PM (#4259106)
Have people forgotten CC's September in 2008?

The difference is that in 2008 he finished the season with 3 days rest before his last 4 starts, including the postseason. I doubt if he'll be doing that this year.
   46. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:05 PM (#4259108)
However, ever since Mark Prior in 2003 - and I know the lead was smaller here - I've been a strong proponent of not wasting any pitches for your best pitchers in circumstances where you really shouldn't need your best pitcher's pitches to win.


There is no evidence whatsoever that Prior's injury troubles had anything to do with that 132-pitch outing in 2003.
   47. Misirlou is on hiding to nowhere Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:08 PM (#4259112)
There is no evidence whatsoever that Prior's injury troubles had anything to do with that 132-pitch outing in 2003.


No, but that, and his 116 pitch outing in the 12-3 game 2 may have contributed to his ineffectiveness in the 8th inning of game 6.
   48. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:10 PM (#4259115)
There is no evidence whatsoever that Prior's injury troubles had anything to do with that 132-pitch outing in 2003.

So? Is there evidence that it didn't lead to injury troubles?

The point really isn't about leading to injuries or not. The point is that with such a large lead there is no real reason to empty the tank on a starter you will need again soon.
   49. PreservedFish Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:13 PM (#4259124)
The point is that with such a large lead there is no real reason to empty the tank on a starter you will need again soon.

I think people are questioning whether or not it really empties the tank.
   50. zonk Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:14 PM (#4259125)
There is no evidence whatsoever that Prior's injury troubles had anything to do with that 132-pitch outing in 2003.



No, but that, and his 116 pitch outing in the 12-3 game 2 may have contributed to his ineffectiveness in the 8th inning of game 6.


Right - he lost it quickly (there were... other factors, of course).

Beyond that, though, it's not really injury that necessarily concerns me in October - flags fly forever, yada yada... I agree with "win today", but it's baseball, it's a series, and I just don't think it's wise to completely forget you've got more games.

Hey, if the Yankees sweep or even if they just don't need a game 5 - it's all pretty much moot anyway...
   51. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4259127)
The point is that with such a large lead there is no real reason to empty the tank on a starter you will need again soon.

They didn't "empty the tank". 120 pitches is nothing arduous for a rested, healthy pitcher.

If they had him throw 140, I'd agree with you. But, 120 is a typical CC start. That's what he does.
   52. zonk Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4259128)
The point is that with such a large lead there is no real reason to empty the tank on a starter you will need again soon.

I think people are questioning whether or not it really empties the tank.


OK - is "empties (completely)" or "empties (as in some further, unspecified amount)"?

I doubt CC comes out completely gassed by any stretch, but I do think it's a matter of why use up ANY of what you don't need to use up?
   53. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:24 PM (#4259140)
I doubt CC comes out completely gassed by any stretch, but I do think it's a matter of why use up ANY of what you don't need to use up?

Exactly.

They didn't "empty the tank". 120 pitches is nothing arduous for a rested, healthy pitcher.

So then 110 would be as well and it wouldn't increase the risk of a Yankee loss in Game 1 nor CC not being as crisp the next time he pitches.


What if the first batter he faces in the 9th takes up 10 pitches but ends in a strikeout? Does Joe pull him then? What if the next batter takes up 10 pitches but also ends in a strikeout? Does Joe pull him then? And if he gets the third batter out by throwing another 10 pitches was it all worth it?

You guys are saying it was 120 pitches, no big deal but Joe didn't know it was only going to be 120 pitches. All he knew is that his team needed 3 more outs with a 5 run lead to get the win and CC had thrown 110 pitches already.

If Joe's plan was to pull him the first time a runner got on base then it was pointless to send CC out there.
   54. The Long Arm of Rudy Law Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:25 PM (#4259143)
So you're asserting that if you take out the times he did well, his line would be worse? Iiiiinnnnnteresting.


If you don't count the World Series, Reggie Jackson hit .235/.302/.404 in the postseason.
   55. Famous Original Joe C Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:25 PM (#4259145)
If they had him throw 140, I'd agree with you. But, 120 is a typical CC start. That's what he does.

In his last 64 starts, he's reached 115 pitches 12 times and 120 pitches 5 times.
   56. Danny Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:36 PM (#4259152)
120 is a typical CC start. That's what he does.

He does it two or three times a season--except in 2008, when he did it five times.

His typical pitch count is 110 pitches, which is why it was a bit strange for them to bring him back for the 9th with a 5 run lead when he was already at 110. That was only the second postseason start where he's reached 115.
   57. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:41 PM (#4259158)
You pay these guys to throw big innings for your team; what could be bigger than a ninth inning postseason game? Take the context out; the opponent and the lead. I want my best pitcher throwing at that time. And CC was, IMO, the Yankees' best option to pitch the ninth inning right there.
   58. BDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:41 PM (#4259160)
I've got no strong opinion, but would note that where you are in the order matters. Due up were Machado/Davis/Ford; Davis had hit CC well earlier in the game but the other two hadn't. CC got the first two on six pitches; Ford made a hit on the tenth of the inning. Honestly, in that tactical situation I'd have let CC pitch to either Andino or Flaherty, neither of whom remind anybody of George Brett. And why tire a reliever now, even a little? But managers figure, there's a man on base now, I must go to my bullpen. It probably has no longterm impact on anything.
   59. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4259162)
You pay these guys to throw big innings for your team; what could be bigger than a ninth inning postseason game? Take the context out; the opponent and the lead. I want my best pitcher throwing at that time. And CC was, IMO, the Yankees' best option to pitch the ninth inning right there.

Why would you take context out?

CC after 110 pitches was not the best option to pitch the 9th inning.

Baseball isn't played context free.
   60. Nasty Nate Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:46 PM (#4259163)
You pay these guys to throw big innings for your team; what could be bigger than a ninth inning postseason game? Take the context out; the opponent and the lead.


Why would you try to answer that question without the context?

What could be 'bigger'?

The 7th inning of a close game.
The 8th inning of a close game.
The 9th inning of a close game.
The 10th (or later) inning of a close game.
Any part of an ALDS game 4.
Any part of an ALDS game 5.
Any part of an ALCS.
Any part of a World series.
   61. PreservedFish Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:46 PM (#4259164)
I don't think the idea that it was "vanity" should just be brushed aside. I agree with two things here: the Yanks were winning no matter who was pitching, but the extra pitches won't have any real effect on CC's health. So basically it didn't matter who you put out there. It was irrelevant to the score and irrelevant to the health of your pitchers. So why not let vanity win out? Throw CC a bone, make him happy, make the Yankees fans happy. Wasn't it pure vanity to keep Roy Halladay in the 9th inning of his NLDS no-hitter with a 4 run lead?
   62. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 12:52 PM (#4259170)
What the heck, I have time today...

A-Rod with 2 outs and RISP in his postseason career:

10/8/95: Game 5 of ALDS. A-Rod came in as a pinch runner, and stayed in the game; he ended up batting with two outs and runners on first and second in the ninth of a tie game, and hit into a force. As you may be aware, the Mariners won anyway in extras.

10/14/95: ALCS Game 4. A-Rod pinch hit with two outs and a runner on second in the top of the ninth, and struck out. The Mariners were behind 7-0 at the time; had he been playing for the Yankees, I'm sure the media still would have blamed him for the loss.

Running total: 0/2.

10/4/97: ALDS Game 3. Strikeout with runners on the corners in the top of the first. Mariners won anyway, 4-2.

Running total: 0/3.

10/4/00: ALDS Game 2. Strikeout with runners on the corners in the top of the ninth. Mariners won anyway, 5-2. A-Rod also had an RBI groundout in the game, and an RBI single the game before, but the RBI hit came with one out and doesn't count.

(No other 2ORISP at bats in 2000. He did have a go-ahead two-run single in Game 5 of the ALCS, but that came with one out. His Game 6 RBI double was also with one out, and a runner on first only; he had a second double leading off the sixth while down by one, and a leadoff homer to start a too-little-too-late rally in the eighth. Running total: 0/4.)

10/8/04: ALDS Game 3. Popup with runners on first and second, two outs in the second. Groundout with a runner on second and two away in the sixth. Groundout with a runner on second and two out in the eighth. It's like a bonanza of clutch failure! Never mind the fact that the Yanks were ahead 3-1, 7-1, and 8-1 when these at bats occurred, let alone the magnificent performance of Game 2 (single and run in the third, go-ahead homer in the fifth, RBI single in the seventh, game-tying ground-rule double in the bottom of the twelfth. None of those things came with two outs. Nor did A-Rod's double, steal of third, and sprint home on a wild pitch to win Game 4 in the eleventh inning.)

10/13/04: ALCS Game 2. Strikeout with runners on the corners in the second. Flyout with the bases loaded in the eighth, which might have earned a few boos except that the Yankees were already up by 2 with Rivera on the mound.

10/17/04: ALCS Game 4. Groundout with a runner on second in the fifth. (Also had a two-run homer with two outs in the third, but Jeter was on first.)

10/18/04: ALCS Game 5. Flyout with a runner at second in the twelfth. (Also struck out with a runner on third and one out in the eighth, and was hit by a pitch with a man on third and two away in the sixth. Bad game for both A-Rod and the Yankees.)

So far: 0/11

10/4/05: ALDS Game 1. Groundout with a runner on second in the fourth. Yankees led 4-0, won 4-2.

10/9/05: ALDS Game 4. Strikeout with a runner on third in the third. (Also walked and scored in the sixth in a game the Yanks would win by a run.)

10/10/05: ALDS Game 5. Strikeout with a runner on second in the second. (Also came up as the tying run in the ninth and hit into a double play. Not his best work.)

0/14

10/5/06: ALDS Game 2. Strikeout with the bases loaded in the first. (Part of an 0/4 with 3 K's in a one-run loss.)

10/6/06: ALDS Game 3. Groundout with a runner on second in the first.

0/16

10/5/07: ALDS Game 2. Strikeout with a runner on second in the ninth of a tie game that the Yankees would lose in extras. For once, he is not the sole focus of attention; in fact, he's seen as being less important than a bug. (OK, a whole lot of bugs.)

0/17

10/7/09: ALDS Game 1. Flyout with a runner on second in the first. And then... wonder of wonders! Two-out RBI single in the fifth! And in the seventh... can it be? Yes! Another two-out RBI single! (To be fair, the Yankees were already ahead at the time of the first hit, and ahead by more at the time of the second.)

10/9/09: ALDS Game 2. Game-tying two-out RBI single in the sixth. (And, just for fun, a game-tying two-run homer in the ninth, albeit with no outs and a runner on first.)

10/17/09: ALCS Game 2. Flyout with the bases loaded in the twelfth. This never would have happened if he hadn't had that game-tying home run in the bottom of the eleventh! What was he thinking?

10/20/09: ALCS Game 4. Strikeout with a runner on third in the sixth. (The Yanks were ahead 5-1, partly because of A-Rod's two-run homer one inning earlier.)

10/22/09: ALCS Game 5. No at bats, but an intentional walk with two out and a runner on second in the seventh (real men swing the bat, whether they're being thrown four wide ones or not!) Also: intentional walk with two outs and NOBODY ON, with the Yanks down one in the ninth. Didn't the Angels know they were dealing with the greatest playoff choker in recent memory?

11/1/09: WS Game 4. Flyout with runners on first and second in the fifth. Tiebreaking RBI double with runners on the corners in the ninth. (If I say it without emphasis, does that make it seem less awesome?)

Running total: 4/25

10/6/10: ALDS Game 1. Strikeout with runners on first and second in the third.

10/15/10: ALCS Game 1. Flyout with a runner on second in the ninth. The Yanks were ahead by a run, thanks to a five-run eighth-inning rally in which A-Rod had a two-run single, but it came with no outs.

10/16/10: ALCS Game 2. Forceout with two on in the third.

4/28

9/30/11: ALDS Game 1. Flyout with a runner at second in the fifth (with the Yanks ahead 2-1, and an RBI groundout from A-Rod earlier in the game); strikeout with a runner at second in the ninth (with the Yanks ahead 9-1).

4/30

Yesterday: ALDS Game 1. Strikeout with runners on the corners in a tie game in the seventh.

So it's now 4/31 in his playoff career with 2ORISP, which is obviously not good - but not all 2ORISP at bats are important, and not all important at bats come with 2ORISP, and over the course of his career, A-Rod has been a net positive to his teams during the playoffs.

Anyway, the thread has moved on at this point, but as mentioned above, I have time today.
   63. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:02 PM (#4259180)
Also, it's 31 ABs over 17 years.
   64. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:07 PM (#4259188)
Also, it's 31 ABs over 17 years.

Really, for any sample of 50 AB or less, they should probably just report it as H/AB, rather than as an actual batting average; it takes away the false sense of confidence in the number. If you say "A-Rod is 4/30 with two outs and runners in scoring position in his playoff career," that still sucks, but it sucks over a small and defined sample.
   65. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:23 PM (#4259198)
It is obvious to me that the optimal number of pitches Sabathia should have thrown is 97.3. Between the 97th and 98th pitches will come a catastrophic breakdown in his left shoulder rendering him useless for the remainder of his career. Joe Girardi is history's greatest villian for not contemplating that.

The pitch count thing, and the people that become instant authorities on it based on arbitrary numbers, is the most annoying pseudo-science that I see throughout the baseball community. Sometimes there is no "right" number. As it pertains to veteran pitchers, obviously not in distress, I have no problem with them throwing 120-130 pitches.
   66. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:26 PM (#4259199)
You make beautiful strawmen.
   67. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4259210)
Seriously, guys who have two out game winning hits in the 9th inning of a World Series game should get mostly a lifetime pass. Any other player would...especially if he had incredibly dramatic extra inning homers that postseason also.

A-Rod has a lot of huge hits with less than 2 outs.
   68. Nasty Nate Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4259211)
You make beautiful strawmen.


seriously.

A talking strawman in the other direction would say "pitching more, rather than less, has no effect on effectiveness or pitcher health, and the Yankees should start CC again in game 2, and why not game 3 as well etc etc"
   69. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:38 PM (#4259214)
So it's now 4/31 in his playoff career with 2ORISP, which is obviously not good - but not all 2ORISP at bats are important, and not all important at bats come with 2ORISP,


True enough on both points

and over the course of his career, A-Rod has been a net positive to his teams during the playoffs.


But what teams? And relative to what?

A-Rod's overall career OPS is .945. For the postseason it's .873.

But since Yankee fans are Yankee fans and not Mariners fans, let's look at his postseason OPS numbers in New York.

2004:
ALDS 1.213
ALCS .895

2005:
ALDS .635

2006:
ALDS .205

2007:
ALDS .820

2009:
ALDS 1.500
ALCS 1.519
World Series .973

2010:
ALDS .580
ALCS .606

2011:
ALDS .372

Through 2011, A-Rod's been in eleven postseason series with the Yankees, over the course of seven seasons.

In four of those series (2004 DS, all three 2009 series) he essentially performed on superstar levels, especially when you factor in his situational hitting. His 2009 postseason rivals some of the best of all time, particularly considering that unlike many earlier ones, it took place over three series, not one or two.

In two of them (2004 LCS, 2007 DS) he performed only slightly under his regular season rates, but in context they were far worse. In the 2004 LCS he was 2 for 17 in the final four games, and in 2007 he came up dry in every close situation.

And in five of them (2005, 2006, 2010, 2011 DS; 2010 LCS), he stunk up the joint.

Which comes down to this: In seven years in New York (not counting 2012), he's been a big "net positive" to his team in one of those years, a mixed bag but marginally positive in one, and a net negative in five. That's a more accurate assessment of A-Rod's postseason Yankee performance than just lumping all those years together and averaging them out.

And sorry, but what he did in Seattle doesn't mean squat, any more than his MVP seasons in New York mean anything to the Mariners or Rangers. And in the context of this discussion, his overall career and regular season numbers are completely beside the point.


   70. DKDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:39 PM (#4259215)
Really, for any sample of 50 AB or less, they should probably just report it as H/AB, rather than as an actual batting average; it takes away the false sense of confidence in the number. If you say "A-Rod is 4/30 with two outs and runners in scoring position in his playoff career," that still sucks, but it sucks over a small and defined sample.


I actually hate that, because then I have to do math to figure out if its a good number or not. Is 23-for-87 with RISP good or bad? Just tell me the percentage and sample size, and let me decide whether its meaningful or not.
   71. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:45 PM (#4259219)
I actually hate that, because then I have to do math to figure out if its a good number or not. Is 23-for-87 with RISP good or bad? Just tell me the percentage and sample size, and let me decide whether its meaningful or not.

Anything bigger than 50 and the math becomes harder (although in your example, 23/87 is going to be probably around .270, which is mediocre). I'd be fine with percentage-and-sample-size as well, but TV broadcasts can't always be counted on to give the sample size (they didn't when reporting A-Rod's postseason 2ORISP numbers, for instance, and I'd bet that the casual viewer would have guessed him to have far more than 30 AB in that situation in his career).
   72. Danny Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:46 PM (#4259222)
Sometimes there is no "right" number. As it pertains to veteran pitchers, obviously not in distress, I have no problem with them throwing 120-130 pitches.

There is no right number. Also, here is the right number.
   73. Curse of the Andino Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:48 PM (#4259225)
Good game by the Yankees, great season by the O's, my dog's sleeping on a lucky Wei-Yin Chen t-shirt. Can't wait for tonight.
   74. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 01:54 PM (#4259231)
And sorry, but what he did in Seattle doesn't mean squat

Then he was hitting .154 with 2ORISP in the playoffs coming into yesterday, not .133.

A-Rod's playoff career as a Yankee only, measured by WPA weighted by how important each game was to the team's championship chances at the time it was played:

2004: +.117
2005: -.039
2006: -.029
2007: -.020
2009: +.299
2010: +.003
2011: -.049

That's general mediocrity/lousiness in five out of seven years, very good performance once, and tremendous performance once. Overall, it's +.282, which strikes me as being a "net positive," and a pretty good-sized one.

For comparative purposes, A-Rod's 2009 postseason was about twice as good as Jeter's best one (2000, +.142).
   75. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:01 PM (#4259235)
And sorry, but what he did in Seattle doesn't mean squat

Then he was hitting .154 with 2ORISP in the playoffs coming into yesterday, not .133.


Okay, I was going by the number that was flashed on the screen late in last night's game, which then would have included what he'd done prior to that particular at bat.

That's general mediocrity/lousiness in five out of seven years, very good performance once, and tremendous performance once. Overall, it's +.282, which strikes me as being a "net positive," and a pretty good-sized one.

But again, you're averaging, which IMO is a strange way of looking at it. "General mediocrity/lousiness" in five out of seven years hardly strikes me as being a "net positive". He could have hit a home run in every single plate appearance in 2009, and that wouldn't have meant a thing to the Yankees in those other six years. Each year has to stand by itself.
   76. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:04 PM (#4259237)
For comparative purposes, A-Rod's 2009 postseason was about twice as good as Jeter's best one (2000, +.142).

That's lovely, but it still focuses on an irrelevant side question. Nobody's ever doubted for a second that A-Rod's overall 2009 postseason was among the greatest in baseball history. Considering the context many of those hits, in fact, it may well have been the best.
   77. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4259238)
I don't see why averaging is a strange way to look at it. If he practically carried the Yankees on his back to a World Series win one year, that certainly trumps being a bit poor in a few other years.
   78. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4259251)
But again, you're averaging, which IMO is a strange way of looking at it.

Adding, actually, not averaging.

Look, take a year from A-Rod's career in which he was a fine player, but not necessarily a spectacular one... say 2006 (.290/.392/.523). If you split that season (154 games played) into 22 7-game pieces, you get:

Nine OPSs of 1.050 or higher, with a peak of 1.356 in games 43-49
Four OPSs between .825 and .925
Nine OPSs of .715 or lower, with a valley of .450 in games 120-126

This adds up to a net positive, despite a pretty reasonable amount of time spent in mediocrity and/or lousiness.

Incidentally, none of the 22 7-game samples used comes especially close to the unbelievably tremendously superb performance A-Rod put up in the 9 games of the ALDS and ALCS in '09. Do I think that one year should buy him enough goodwill to overlook more than one mediocre-to-bad LDS in which the Yankees probably would have lost even if he'd played better? Considering he was easily the single most important factor in that particular championship, yeah, I do.
   79. escabeche Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:26 PM (#4259252)
Yeah, it seems weird to say "A-Rod sucks in the postseason, except for that one time he carried the Yankees on his back to their only title in a decade."
   80. salajander Posted: October 08, 2012 at 02:44 PM (#4259258)
Yeah, it seems weird to say "A-Rod sucks in the postseason, except for that one time he carried the Yankees on his back to their only title in a decade."

CONCUR.
   81. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:00 PM (#4259274)
Headline seems a little long; the Daily News must be slipping.

Jeter's 2 hits puts him at 193 for his postseason career. Could break the 200 hit mark this year. That record could stand for a long time.
   82. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:24 PM (#4259291)
Yeah, it seems weird to say "A-Rod sucks in the postseason, except for that one time he carried the Yankees on his back to their only title in a decade."

Okay, boys and girls, how's this? "A-Rod sucked in five out of seven postseasons, ruled the world in one, and produced mixed results in another."

Or this: "A-Rod was great in the postseason, except for the five seasons out of seven when he sucked."

I'm not sure why people seem to take offense at merely pointing out the obvious. This isn't a moral indictment.
   83. DKDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4259293)
Ugly forecast for tonight. Any idea what they do if they can't get this one in?

Travel day tomorrow, but I think there are sometimes CBA issues with just wiping out a travel day.
   84. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:34 PM (#4259299)
Ugly forecast for tonight. Any idea what they do if they can't get this one in?

I think they lose the travel day. However, the Weather Channel app is only showing a 10% chance of rain until 10:00PM, when it jumps to 40%. A bit cool, though.
   85. BDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:35 PM (#4259301)
"A-Rod was great in the postseason, except for the five seasons out of seven when he sucked."

I'm not sure why people seem to take offense at merely pointing out the obvious. This isn't a moral indictment.


Exactly. You could say very much the same thing about Barry Bonds or Mike Schmidt. (Or Josh Hamilton, the current Texas poster boy for the Heimlich Maneuver.) The fact that they were magic in one or two postseason series while batting like dead fish in several others is just that, a fact. That they were sometimes great proves that they were not somehow innately "unclutch." That they often sucked proves … that they often sucked.
   86. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: October 08, 2012 at 03:44 PM (#4259317)
Travel day tomorrow, but I think there are sometimes CBA issues with just wiping out a travel day.


I think the CBA issues are more of an issue during the season with the number of consecutive days a team can play rearing it's ugly head. During the playoffs I think the CBA issues would only be if you had a time zone situation. Both 2003 and 2004 ALCS featured rainouts eliminating offdays at the end of the series.
   87. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 04:17 PM (#4259355)
I'm not sure why people seem to take offense at merely pointing out the obvious. This isn't a moral indictment.

It was easy to take as one when you referred to A-Rod as "that third baseman who's now hitting under .133 with 2 outs and RISP in his long postseason career." And I'm sure there are plenty of Yankee fans out there who would be willing to make it one. But those people are not here (I assume), and I'll take your word for it when you say you weren't intending the criticism in that light.

Your answer to the question of whether A-Rod's postseason career has been a net positive for the Yankees, though, I still disagree with. But maybe that's just because I'm not a fan of a team that's entitled to a championship every year. (Smiley emoticon)
   88. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 04:26 PM (#4259371)
"A-Rod was great in the postseason, except for the five seasons out of seven when he sucked."

I'm not sure why people seem to take offense at merely pointing out the obvious. This isn't a moral indictment.


Exactly. You could say very much the same thing about Barry Bonds or Mike Schmidt. (Or Josh Hamilton, the current Texas poster boy for the Heimlich Maneuver.) The fact that they were magic in one or two postseason series while batting like dead fish in several others is just that, a fact. That they were sometimes great proves that they were not somehow innately "unclutch." That they often sucked proves … that they often sucked.


Right, and I'm not making any broader claims about the "clutchiness" or "unclutchiness" of A-Rod or anyone else. I'm talking about A-Rod's postseason Yankee performances, and nothing more.

But while A-Rod has obviously been a huge "net positive" for the Yankees as a whole, it's hard for me to avoid the fact that he's been the farthest thing from that in five out of the seven postseason years he's been with them. To me that's the most significant postseason "overall" number of them all.
   89. escabeche Posted: October 08, 2012 at 04:34 PM (#4259376)
The fact that the Yankees can only win in the postseason when A-Rod comes up big might be taken to say more about the rest of the Yankees than it does about A-Rod.
   90. Blastin Posted: October 08, 2012 at 04:39 PM (#4259383)
The fact that the Yankees can only win in the postseason when A-Rod comes up big might be taken to say more about the rest of the Yankees than it does about A-Rod


Truth. Though Cano's been raking the last few years. If the two of them managed to string a couple big games together at the same time...
   91. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 08, 2012 at 04:51 PM (#4259399)
The fact that the Yankees can only win in the postseason when A-Rod comes up big might be taken to say more about the rest of the Yankees than it does about A-Rod

Seems to me that it says a lot about the team as a whole, and to go beyond that you have to look at each year as a separate entity. The only reason people focus more on A-Rod is that his salary reflects what people consider to be his talent level. And while "what people consider" is often wildly out of date and based on unreasonable expectations for an aging player, a power hitter earning over $20 million is generally going to have a higher bar to clear than a player on a short term deal who was basically signed as a role player. When you're earning A-Rod level (or Jeter- or Teixeira-level) salaries, you're expected to "carry the team on your back" more than if you're Russell Martin or Nick Swisher. That's an expectation that simply comes with the territory.
   92. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 05:31 PM (#4259461)
But while A-Rod has obviously been a huge "net positive" for the Yankees as a whole, it's hard for me to avoid the fact that he's been the farthest thing from that in five out of the seven postseason years he's been with them. To me that's the most significant postseason "overall" number of them all.

Let me see if I'm understanding you correctly. What I think I'm reading is that you'd be happier with A-Rod if he'd played worse in '09, and better by an equal amount in at least a couple of the years when he played badly. I have a hard time coming around to that position, because if A-Rod plays worse by even a little in '09, there's an excellent chance you lose that title, and you're hardly guaranteed to pick one up in the other years, because the Yanks didn't even make it to the Series in any of them. (If A-Rod plays better in 2010, for instance, it's not going to make a bit of difference, because all four of the Yankee losses in the ALCS that year were by at least 5 runs.)
   93. Blastin Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:14 PM (#4259552)
I suppose we probably make the series (and possibly win) in 04 if he hits better in the second half of the series. But that was a concerted team collapse they pulled off there.
   94. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:22 PM (#4259577)
I suppose we probably make the series (and possibly win) in 04 if he hits better in the second half of the series.

Depends on the game - 4 or 5, probably; 7, it's unlikely to matter. But even though the Sox swept them, a Series win against the '04 Cards is no guarantee.
   95. McCoy Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:22 PM (#4259578)
I'll take Starlin Castro going 0-1000 in the rest of his PA if it means the Cubs win a world series in the next year or two.

Flags fly forever.
   96. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:24 PM (#4259581)
Your answer to the question of whether A-Rod's postseason career has been a net positive for the Yankees, though, I still disagree with. But maybe that's just because I'm not a fan of a team that's entitled to a championship every year. (Smiley emoticon)


The Yankees earn their playoff bonafides each and every season on the baseball diamond, as the good lord intended. If you're looking for teams with entitlement issues, you should start with those poormouth welfare frauds who have been raking in the free dough for nearly 20 years with naught to show for it but big new mansions and yachts for their owners and continued ticket hikes for their fans.
   97. Blastin Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:27 PM (#4259585)
a Series win against the '04 Cards is no guarantee


Well, yeah. Esp with our horrid pitching that year. But I said "possibly."
   98. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4259587)
Okay, boys and girls, how's this? "A-Rod sucked in five out of seven postseasons, ruled the world in one, and produced mixed results in another."


How's this: "Postseason splits such as '.133 with 2 outs in RISP' are too small a sample to be meaningful, and it's silly to care about them, even if TBS flashes them at you during the broadcast."

Stop letting TBS do your thinking for you, Andy.

In any event, it's hard for me to understand what you're complaining about. You'd rather have ARod be flakey in the playoffs -- turning in some great series and more poor series -- than have him hit roughly average in each. Please try to notice that his great postseason got you a bleeping championship in 2009.
   99. BDC Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4259589)
I'll take Starlin Castro going 0-1000 in the rest of his PA

And we thought that "Jason Bay has a low batting average" was threadworthy.
   100. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 08, 2012 at 06:31 PM (#4259591)
I suppose we probably make the series (and possibly win) in 04 if he hits better in the second half of the series. But that was a concerted team collapse they pulled off there.


And now we're looking at halfs of series. Wild.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Backlasher
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogMinuteman News Center: Giandurco: This means WAR
(84 - 2:28am, Apr 19)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogMitchell: Now Playing First Base for the Yankees
(55 - 1:57am, Apr 19)
Last: Dan

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(901 - 1:38am, Apr 19)
Last: Rob_Wood

NewsblogOMNICHATTER FOR APRIL 18, 2014
(150 - 1:29am, Apr 19)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogNY Daily News: Secret Service Threatened To Shoot Mr. Met
(15 - 1:16am, Apr 19)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOrioles launch D.C. invasion with billboard near Nationals Park
(27 - 12:57am, Apr 19)
Last: Belfry Bob

NewsblogA's, Doolittle agree to 4-year extension
(3 - 12:47am, Apr 19)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogPirates Acquire Ike Davis From Mets
(18 - 12:37am, Apr 19)
Last: Dan

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(332 - 12:20am, Apr 19)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1680 - 11:44pm, Apr 18)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogDoug Glanville: I Was Racially Profiled in My Own Driveway
(330 - 11:28pm, Apr 18)
Last: Select Storage Device

NewsblogRB: Carlos Beltran: more of a center fielder than Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb or Duke Snider. So what?
(33 - 11:18pm, Apr 18)
Last: bjhanke

NewsblogEscape from Cuba: Yasiel Puig’s Untold Journey to the Dodgers
(24 - 10:41pm, Apr 18)
Last: base ball chick

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(143 - 10:25pm, Apr 18)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogFletcher: Foes have slowed Trout in one category so far - steals
(7 - 7:22pm, Apr 18)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.8430 seconds
52 querie(s) executed