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

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Sherman: Fans, Vegas, media see dark days ahead for Yankees

Good. The Swamp Fox would be the perfectly named manager for the Yankees.

The difference with this year’s pessimistic projections is that more dispassionate elements have joined the chorus.

The website predictionmachine.com ran 50,000 simulations of the 2013 season, and in just 40 percent did the Yankees even make the playoffs (just 20 percent as the AL East champs). Their average season had the Yankees finishing third behind Toronto and Tampa Bay at 85-77. The Yankees’ lowest winning percentage in the past 20 seasons is .540, which equates to 87½ victories.

The site gives the Yankees just a 4-percent likelihood of winning the World Series, which ranks 12th of the 30 teams.

...The view is the same for winning it all. With their injury spate, the Yankees have fallen to the 15-1 to 18-1 range to win the World Series. Of the three casinos I contacted, none could remember the Yankees being anywhere close to that high in the past 20 years.

“With the Yankees entering the season at 18-1, this is the longest odds they have been as far as my records go back, which is to the beginning of the millennium,” said Kevin Bradley, the sports book manager at the offshore casino Bovada, said. “Even at those odds, we cannot write a bet on them.”

Kornegay at the Hilton also had the Yankees at 18-1, which put 10 teams in front of them with better odds.

Repoz Posted: March 17, 2013 at 09:05 AM | 97 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 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.

   1. McCoy Posted: March 17, 2013 at 10:13 AM (#4389776)
40% you say? Gosh, that is horrible.
   2. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 10:25 AM (#4389781)
“With the Yankees entering the season at 18-1, this is the longest odds they have been as far as my records go back, which is to the beginning of the millennium,” said Kevin Bradley, the sports book manager at the offshore casino Bovada, said. “Even at those odds, we cannot write a bet on them.”

40% my ass. They've got a better shot at having the worst record in baseball than they have of making the postseason. The only thing that might keep them from falling to 30th is the presence of the Astros.
   3. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:18 AM (#4389815)
40% my ass. They've got a better shot at having the worst record in baseball than they have of making the postseason. The only thing that might keep them from falling to 30th is the presence of the Astros.

Oh, just stop it Andy. They're probably an 83-85 win team with the latest injuries. The might win 78 or 80, they might win 90 or 92, they're not going to win 60. They only look terrible b/c you're used to looking at Yankee rosters than project to win 95.

I actually wish you were right. I'm rooting for them to open up 25-45 so they trade Cano, Granderson and Kuroda in July and jump-start the rebuilding. Unfortunately, that's not likely.

   4. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:25 AM (#4389822)
snapper, you're always welcome to take me up on my BB-Ref page sponsorship bet. I say that the Yanks will finish below the Orioles. If you want to bet that the O's will finish below the Yankees, just say so and you're on. All the pre-season projections seem to be in your favor, so you shouldn't have any problem with the odds.
   5. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:29 AM (#4389825)
Does anybody really believe the Yankees won't win 90 games? That they won't pull out the ol' wallet and plug a few holes? That some journeyman pitcher won't win 15 games for them? That Brennan Boesch won't suddenly morph into a superstar now that he's in pinstripes?

They're still the Yankees, folks. They don't die, they multiply.
   6. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM (#4389831)
The Yankees’ lowest winning percentage in the past 20 seasons is .540, which equates to 87½ victories.


Isn't this a strange way to describe the 2000 season, when they won 87 games?
   7. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:40 AM (#4389835)
Does anybody really believe the Yankees won't win 90 games?

See #4 above. It's an open-ended offer that doesn't expire until opening day.

They're still the Yankees, folks. They don't die, they multiply.

Maybe so, but I'm not sure if the newly legitimized offspring of Mark Teixeira and Eduardo Nunez will do them much good until about 2034.
   8. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM (#4389837)
snapper, you're always welcome to take me up on my BB-Ref page sponsorship bet. I say that the Yanks will finish below the Orioles. If you want to bet that the O's will finish below the Yankees, just say so and you're on. All the pre-season projections seem to be in your favor, so you shouldn't have any problem with the odds.

Sure. How big a sponsorship? $20?

I'm also willing to bet they finish ahead of Boston.
   9. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:47 AM (#4389843)
Isn't this a strange way to describe the 2000 season, when they won 87 games?

That season was so bizarre. It really looked like as soon as they knew they would clinch, they stopped trying, and then turned it on for the playoffs. You wouldn't think a team could do that, but they did.

The .590 W% they had before the Sept swoon is a better indication of the quality of that team than the final record.
   10. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:51 AM (#4389848)
Either way, they very clearly had exactly 87 wins, and not a fraction more.
   11. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM (#4389854)
Either way, they very clearly had exactly 87 wins, and not a fraction more.

I think we're all well aware of that, or can quickly verify on B-Ref.

They also very clearly have a World Series banner. Every team and fan in baseball would take 87 wins and a Championship over 107 and none.
   12. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 12:04 PM (#4389858)
snapper, you're always welcome to take me up on my BB-Ref page sponsorship bet. I say that the Yanks will finish below the Orioles. If you want to bet that the O's will finish below the Yankees, just say so and you're on. All the pre-season projections seem to be in your favor, so you shouldn't have any problem with the odds.

Sure. How big a sponsorship? $20?


You're on, along with Matt and RBinNYC. I've bookmarked the page.

I'm also willing to bet they finish ahead of Boston.

Let's keep it with the Orioles. The Red Sox are fully capable of doing their own tanking.
   13. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 12:12 PM (#4389864)

40% my ass. They've got a better shot at having the worst record in baseball than they have of making the postseason. The only thing that might keep them from falling to 30th is the presence of the Astros.


I'm not sure the Yankees win a single game, and will likely quit playing baseball altogether by midsummer to avoid embarrassment.
   14. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM (#4389877)

They also very clearly have a World Series banner. Every team and fan in baseball would take 87 wins and a Championship over 107 and none.


I think you're having a hard time following. Or more to the point, your instinctive snark is clouding your comprehension in this instance.
   15. Cowboy Popup Posted: March 17, 2013 at 12:54 PM (#4389887)
I actually wish you were right. I'm rooting for them to open up 25-45 so they trade Cano

I've seen you say this a ton this offseason. The Yankees should not trade Cano, especially in a market where elite players typically don't hit free agency before they are 32 or so. If Cano is in another uniform come August, or 2014, it will be a serious failing of the team's management. No plausible prospect package would make up for his production or the opportunity to negotiate with him exclusively.

Who exactly do you think the team is going to build around in two years if they trade Cano or don't re-sign him? I mean, ZIPs projects him to be the 5th best player (closer to second than he is to 7th) in all of baseball this year and you want to trade him because he might cost the Yanks (this is still the ############# YANKEES, regardless of the soft salary cap) a lot of money? I fail to see the logic.
   16. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: March 17, 2013 at 01:28 PM (#4389900)
you want to trade him because he might cost the Yanks (this is still the ############# YANKEES, regardless of the soft salary cap) a lot of money? I fail to see the logic.

Another reason to trade Cano would be getting back good players in return. They can still sign him as a FA in the offseason. All they have to do is to get back more than the value of the draft pick and accompanying slot money.

   17. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 01:31 PM (#4389901)
Is it too late for me to get in on the action? I would love to bet on the Yankees finishing ahead of the Orioles. Actually if I get odds I'd be happy to bet on the Yankees making the playoffs. Their contract with Satan is probably still in effect.
   18. cardsfanboy Posted: March 17, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4389904)
That season was so bizarre. It really looked like as soon as they knew they would clinch, they stopped trying, and then turned it on for the playoffs. You wouldn't think a team could do that, but they did.


See Cardinals in 2006.
   19. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 01:38 PM (#4389908)
That season was so bizarre. It really looked like as soon as they knew they would clinch, they stopped trying, and then turned it on for the playoffs. You wouldn't think a team could do that, but they did.



See Cardinals in 2006.


SEE MORRIS, JACK!
   20. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: March 17, 2013 at 01:56 PM (#4389923)
Oh, just stop it Andy. They're probably an 83-85 win team with the latest injuries. The might win 78 or 80, they might win 90 or 92, they're not going to win 60. They only look terrible b/c you're used to looking at Yankee rosters than project to win 95.

This can't be emphasized enough. It's sickening to listen to Yankees fans acting like such spoiled, whiny-ass little crybabies.
   21. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:01 PM (#4389929)
I'm also willing to bet they (the Yankees) finish ahead of Boston.


I'm willing to take that for a $20 BB-ref sponsorship. I think this is the year Satan cashes in the deal Zeth mentioned.
   22. Cowboy Popup Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:06 PM (#4389934)
Another reason to trade Cano would be getting back good players in return. They can still sign him as a FA in the offseason. All they have to do is to get back more than the value of the draft pick and accompanying slot money.

I don't think it is that simple now that the Dodgers are throwing around tons of cash and plenty of other teams have shown a willingness to shell out a lot of money for elite players. Letting Cano go play somewhere else removes the exclusive negotiating window while giving it to another team (presumably any team that trades for him will try to sign him). It would have to be a significant haul to make up for giving up that advantage in retaining him.

There is also the potential that being traded rubs Cano the wrong way or he finds out that he likes playing somewhere other than NY. And of course, trading the Yankees only star position player (in terms of actual on field production) would be a PR nightmare. If the Yanks want to keep Cano, trading him would be extremely risky. If they just want to get rid of him, like Snapper does, well, maybe I need to find a new team to root for.
   23. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:11 PM (#4389939)
The Yankees will be quite fortunate if 22 of their 25 players live until October 1.
   24. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4389945)
I don't think it is that simple now that the Dodgers are throwing around tons of cash and plenty of other teams have shown a willingness to shell out a lot of money for elite players.


Within five years - ten at the extreme outside - the Dodgers will have ownership who is dismayed at the unbelievable $ per win and they'll have a fire sale.
   25. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:31 PM (#4389948)
Is it too late for me to get in on the action? I would love to bet on the Yankees finishing ahead of the Orioles.

You're on, too. That makes four. Deadline is opening day.

----------------------------------------

It's sickening to listen to Yankees fans....

Anything that can sicken BTF's leading brown diaper baby is definitely worth the effort.

----------------------------------------

The Yankees will be quite fortunate if 22 of their 25 players live until October 1.

That's assuming that the love triangle that some of us know about isn't exposed by the tabloids, and that Ichiro's failure to hit his weight doesn't lead to hara-kiri. Either of these is about as likely as seeing Joe Girardi wearing #29 in 2014.
   26. KronicFatigue Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:35 PM (#4389951)
Let's say Cano wants to resign with the Yankees. Not necessarily a "home town discount", but more like "all other things being equal, I'd like to stay with the club". If I'm him, I might be willing to be rented out to a playoff team and then coming back. What he loses in being a "lifetime Yankee" he gains by incrementally making the future yankees better AND having a fun (and probably news-grabbing) October.
   27. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:38 PM (#4389953)

Within five years - ten at the extreme outside - the Dodgers will have ownership who is dismayed at the unbelievable $ per win and they'll have a fire sale.


Trading all their players to the Astros and Marlins for pennies on the dollar.
   28. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 02:47 PM (#4389958)
Underneath all the trouble and strife the Yanks are having is the simple fact that the luxury tax is finally having its desired effect, and that the burden of some of those long range contracts** is catching up to them. While it naturally grieves any real American to see America's team go down the tubes, even temporarily, the truth is that it's going to take a lot of good scouting and a lot of choice opportunities in the free agent market for the Yankees to be able to take full advantage of being able to compete without that luxury tax beginning in 2015.

**For A-Rod and A.J. Burnett (yes, A.J. Burnett) alone, the Yanks are paying $37.5 million this year, which is the equivalent of about 27% of the Giants' entire payroll, 33% of the Nats', and 43% of the Orioles'. It may well have been worth it for the memories 2009, but there are very few free lunches even in baseball.
   29. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:15 PM (#4389972)
Don't tell Loria and the rest of the Budshovik Babies on the dole.
   30. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:16 PM (#4389974)
If Cano is in another uniform come August, or 2014, it will be a serious failing of the team's management.

I guarantee you Cano will be wearing another uniform tomorrow night! ;)

For A-Rod and A.J. Burnett (yes, A.J. Burnett) alone, the Yanks are paying $37.5 million this year, which is the equivalent of about 27% of the Giants' entire payroll, 33% of the Nats', and 43% of the Orioles'.

And about half again of the entire Astros payroll!
   31. bobm Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:20 PM (#4389976)
A-Rod and A.J. Burnett (yes, A.J. Burnett) alone, the Yanks are paying $37.5 million this year

Bay and Santana are $31.5 - $52 million, depending on whether you calculate cash out or payroll.

From ESPN, Jan 2013:

For our method, Wright’s 2013 figure is $11 million for a payroll calculation -- the contract figure, even though $3 million is deferred. Jason Bay’s entire $21 million is still assigned to 2013, even though the Mets’ actual outlay this year is believed now to be only $6 million. And $31 million is assigned for Santana, which includes $25.5 million in salary and a $5.5 million buyout of 2014.

That yields a total payroll in 2013, including Bay, of $94.9 million. (Remember, that’s NOT cash outlay; that’s money assigned to 2013.) [Emphasis added]
   32. Lassus Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:23 PM (#4389977)
See Cardinals in 2006.

LET'S NOT OK THX
   33. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:37 PM (#4389982)
For A-Rod and A.J. Burnett (yes, A.J. Burnett) alone, the Yanks are paying $37.5 million this year, which is the equivalent of about 27% of the Giants' entire payroll, 33% of the Nats', and 43% of the Orioles'.


$43.6 mil if ARod manages 13 HR.
   34. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 03:49 PM (#4389989)
Jolly:
You're on, too. That makes four. Deadline is opening day.


Booked for a $20 b-ref sponsorship, then?
   35. Conor Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:05 PM (#4389999)
Either way, they very clearly had exactly 87 wins, and not a fraction more.


They only played 161 games that year, so that's why I assume it was phrased that way
   36. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:15 PM (#4390006)
If I correctly understand how seasonal winning percentages work, that means that had the Yankees played that 162nd game, they were certain to have outscored their opponent in five out of the nine innings.
   37. base ball chick Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:15 PM (#4390007)
if i was a betting woman, and i am not the kind who can afford to lose any money, i would bet that the yankees finish below .500.

they have cano. they have

um
um

some other guys, mostly hurt and i have a hard time believing that His Captaincy will hit like he did last year, especially after a broken wrist

i would also bet they'll win more than the astros.
i don't care if they DID beat the nats yesterday. and brandon morrow today. you can't lose em ALL
   38. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:31 PM (#4390017)
If the Yankee pitching is healthy, I don't see these doomsday scenarios happening, assuming Granderson & Teixeira come back on time. People are focusing on the departures, but the Yankees won 95 games despite losing Gardner for the season and enduring DL stints by Sabathia, Pettitte & A-Rod. Other team's are not without problems, so it may be a little early to call the playoff race over.
   39. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:37 PM (#4390025)
Sounds like Tex isn't coming back anytime soon, but I do agree that they have good enough pitching to still hang in there.
   40. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 17, 2013 at 04:51 PM (#4390035)
Jolly:
You're on, too. That makes four. Deadline is opening day.

Booked for a $20 b-ref sponsorship, then?


Yep, that's the deal.

---------------------------------------

if i was a betting woman, and i am not the kind who can afford to lose any money, i would bet that the yankees finish below .500.

they have cano. they have

um
um


Well, they do have Sabathia (coming off surgery), Mariano (coming off surgery at 43), Pettitte (age 41) Kuroda (a veritable Spring chicken at 38), The Captain (coming off major surgery at 38), and the twin aces Hughes (99 ERA+) and Nova (83 ERA+). Not to mention ICHIRO! Count da ringz and get yourself one of those three dimensional printers, and we're all set.
   41. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 17, 2013 at 05:10 PM (#4390053)
Sounds like Tex isn't coming back anytime soon . . .

Sometime in May, most likely, or shortly thereafter. Today's story is more a change in terminology than timetable.
   42. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: March 17, 2013 at 05:18 PM (#4390058)
Sometime in May, most likely, or shortly thereafter. Today's story is more a change in terminology than timetable.


Sounds like Jose Bautista, last year.
   43. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 17, 2013 at 05:37 PM (#4390068)
Didn't Bautista have an unstable tendon? Supposedly, Teixeira's partially torn sheath with a stable tendon won't need surgery.
   44. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 05:42 PM (#4390071)
Didn't Bautista have an unstable tendon? Supposedly, Teixeira's partially torn sheath with a stable tendon won't need surgery.


I didn't follow it closely enough to be spouting off, but I thought that was pretty much what the Blue Jays said last year before Bautista immediately aggravated it his first day back and the Jays says 'lol just kidding, it's unstable after all.'
   45. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4390087)
Who exactly do you think the team is going to build around in two years if they trade Cano or don't re-sign him? I mean, ZIPs projects him to be the 5th best player (closer to second than he is to 7th) in all of baseball this year and you want to trade him because he might cost the Yanks (this is still the ############# YANKEES, regardless of the soft salary cap) a lot of money? I fail to see the logic.

They can still resign him, if the price is reasonable, but I wouldn't give him a $200M contract.

Yes, Cano will be great this year, and next year, but the Yankees probably won't be very good (given the self-imposed cap).

After that, we're talking about a 32-38 (if you're lucky to sign him for only 8 years) y.o. 2B. That's not gonna be a 6 WAR player. Best case you're paying $25M for 3-4 WAR p.a. That's just not particularly valuable. Most likely, by age-36, he's an oft-injured average player, like ARod.

At some point, this team needs to restock with young talent, and trading Cano could bring a lot of you talent.

I think the way the economics of baseball is trending, signing prime age FAs is basically always a bad idea (unless they hit FA really young).
   46. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 06:35 PM (#4390094)
I'm willing to take that for a $20 BB-ref sponsorship. I think this is the year Satan cashes in the deal Zeth mentioned.

Done. But you'll have to remind me in Oct. My memory for these things is non-existent.
   47. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 06:38 PM (#4390095)
but the Yankees probably won't be very good (given the self-imposed cap).


this phrase exposes the deep, deep groupthink of this site, with not a single on-the-record quote to back it up.

The Yankees may well be cost-cutting because of some kazoo of the rules in 2014.

But I don't think any quotes or even reputable speculation has indicated that. But it's been repeated so many times on this site (this thread typifies this) that people on both sides of the normal Yankee wars tend to think of it as established fact.

I do not stipulate this to be true. I do not concede to the "common wisdom" of many of my respected fellow posters here. We do not know this stuff, yet we assume that we all do.
   48. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: March 17, 2013 at 06:41 PM (#4390097)
Done. But you'll have to remind me in Oct. My memory for these things is non-existent.


I've bookmarked the page, and hopefully ONE of us remembers. Maybe Sean Forman will remind us :)
   49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 06:57 PM (#4390102)
this phrase exposes the deep, deep groupthink of this site, with not a single on-the-record quote to back it up.

The Yankees may well be cost-cutting because of some kazoo of the rules in 2014.

But I don't think any quotes or even reputable speculation has indicated that. But it's been repeated so many times on this site (this thread typifies this) that people on both sides of the normal Yankee wars tend to think of it as established fact.

I do not stipulate this to be true. I do not concede to the "common wisdom" of many of my respected fellow posters here. We do not know this stuff, yet we assume that we all do.


If it is not true, then the Yankees are acting deeply schizophrenically in the front office. There were gaping holes on this team that they failed to fill, largely b/c they wouldn't give more than one-year to anyone but Ichiro.

If they aren't going to get under, why isn't Russell Martin of AJ Pierzynski the catcher? Why didn't they get Scott Hairston to give them a RH OF? Why isn't there a reasonable SS backup for the 39 y.o. with a broken ankle?

If they're not going to get under the tax threshold, then they're just idiots.
   50. bobm Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:11 PM (#4390107)
Yankees new under-budget style surprising to MLB union executive director Michael Weiner

The Yankees can reduce their luxury-tax rate from 50% to 17.5% if they stay below the threshold. Weiner believes their ability to spend in the years after that would make up for it.

BY MARK FEINSAND / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2013, 9:07 PM

TAMPA — The Yankees have said for two years that they plan to lower their payroll beneath the $189 million luxury-tax threshold by 2014.

The head of the players union is not yet sold on Hal Steinbrenner’s vision.

“I imagine Mr. Steinbrenner is sincere when he says that,” said Michael Weiner, executive director of the MLBPA. “But like a lot of things, I’ll believe it when I see it.["]

The Yankees can reduce their luxury-tax rate from 50% to 17.5% if they stay below the threshold. Weiner believes their ability to spend in the years after that would make up for it.

Weiner added that there “were certain incentives built in for the Yankees to drop their payroll. . . . I’m not concerned, because they’re dropping their payroll to put themselves in position to greatly increase their payroll the next year.”


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/thrifty-bombers-puzzle-union-bigwig-article-1.1275498#ixzz2NqDbIhFI
   51. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:11 PM (#4390108)
There were gaping holes on this team that they failed to fill, largely b/c they wouldn't give more than one-year to anyone but Ichiro.


Yes. But no significant innings of baseball have been played yet. Let's see if the Opening Day roster has Chris Stewart and The Great Gazoo as the only two catchers.

It appears that the Yankees are standing pat on a thirteen or fourteen. But I think the organization has earned my benefit of the doubt; first we need to determine if they are actually doing this. Second, we need to determine if this is a good strategy.
   52. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:34 PM (#4390116)
Yes. But no significant innings of baseball have been played yet. Let's see if the Opening Day roster has Chris Stewart and The Great Gazoo as the only two catchers.

It appears that the Yankees are standing pat on a thirteen or fourteen. But I think the organization has earned my benefit of the doubt; first we need to determine if they are actually doing this. Second, we need to determine if this is a good strategy.


I think it is a good strategy; reset the tax-rate and then resume spending $200M. They've had a great run. 18 straight years as contenders; 17 of those making the playoffs.

But the team is old and hurt. I'd be all for a more aggressive tear down. Or, if they had wanted to go all-in again and sign a bunch of FAs; I'd have been fine with that too.

My complaint is being stuck in the middle. The world where they resign Cano to a 8/200 deal, let Granderson, Kuroda, Youkilis, Hughes and Pettitte leave w/o replacing them, but don't trade them to get anything back, is a no mans land that I think condemns you to mediocrity for several years.
   53. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:35 PM (#4390117)
Erik -

See, eg, this report from the Times: Yankees look to cut payroll:
TAMPA, Fla. — Strange rumblings about fiscal restraint and lower payrolls have been emanating from the Yankees for several months, and Hal Steinbrenner, the managing general partner of the team, confirmed Thursday that he wants the payroll to be cut by about $20 million, down to the critical threshold of $189 million, within two years.

“I’m looking at it as a goal, but my goals are normally considered a requirement,” Steinbrenner said while speaking to reporters in the lobby of George M. Steinbrenner Field, named after his father. “Is it a requirement with baseball that we be at 189? No, it’s not a requirement. But that is going to be the luxury tax threshold, and that’s where I want to be.”
   54. Greg K Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:42 PM (#4390120)
It appears that the Yankees are standing pat on a thirteen or fourteen. But I think the organization has earned my benefit of the doubt; first we need to determine if they are actually doing this. Second, we need to determine if this is a good strategy.

Wouldn't giving them the benefit of your doubt mean you believe them when the say they're going to do it?
   55. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:54 PM (#4390126)
It's a question of priority - would they like to be at a reduced payroll number by a certain date? I think it's uncontroversial that they would.

But the thornier question is: If there was an Alex Rodriguez 2004 deal available, would they say "Sorry; we are not interested in putting the team in the best position to win games in the short run. We want to be flexible with the payroll."

I think that position assumes facts not in evidence. Certainly, given the stuff listed above, you are free to think I'm head-in-the-sand about this. But I've seen no proof. Unless you value Hamilton completely differently than I do, the 2012-13 offseason didn't really give us a definitive test case; while AJ Pierzynski is a nice player and would have fit the team's short-term hole on the field, he's not a great player in his mid-twenties.
   56. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 17, 2013 at 07:58 PM (#4390129)
Wouldn't giving them the benefit of your doubt mean you believe them when the say they're going to do it?

No, no, they have earned the benefit of the doubt, of being the worlds biggest bullshitters. See also "if Arod opt out we are not giving him a new contract", or "we have no intention of signing [available expensive free agent]".
   57. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 17, 2013 at 08:00 PM (#4390130)
he's not a great player in his mid-twenties

Available great players in their mid twenties are only slightly rarer than unicorns.
   58. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 17, 2013 at 08:00 PM (#4390132)
If the Yankees can replace Pettitte & Kuroda with in-house options (Pineda & Phelps?) they will be a lot closer to meeting the $189M threshold. I suspect they might go to a more expensive Plan B if those in-house options aren't there.
   59. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 08:04 PM (#4390135)
From Matt's #53 (I concede that this article doesn't agree with my thesis largely),

Steinbrenner said the payroll was expected to be $210 million this year, and he conceded that was about $10 million higher than he had planned. But when General Manager Brian Cashman asked to sign the free-agent pitcher Hiroki Kuroda to a one-year, $10 million contract, he agreed to stretch the payroll.


Note that this is in March 2012, for reference.

What will the true opportunity cost of the coming "austerity" mean for the team on the field?
   60. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 17, 2013 at 08:18 PM (#4390143)


They only played 161 games that year, so that's why I assume it was phrased that way


I get it - I said it was strange, not incomprehensible.
   61. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 17, 2013 at 09:32 PM (#4390166)
Since the publication of the Times article, there has not been a single Yankees transaction which was not 100% consistent with the goal of cutting 30-40M off the payroll by 2014. (Signing Hiroki Kuroda to two one-year deals, neither of which involves any guaranteed 2014 money, is 100% consistent with the goal.) The consistency is kind of amazing - most ballclubs never stick to a plan that long. The goal and the plan are indisputable at this point.

It is certainly possible that the Yankees will change their minds before 2014. But to dispute that this is the organizing principle, for now, you'd want to have at least a single piece of evidence on your side, and there isn't any.

And a little thing:
this phrase exposes the deep, deep groupthink of this site, with not a single on-the-record quote to back it up.
I trust you take this one back?
   62. Cowboy Popup Posted: March 17, 2013 at 09:34 PM (#4390168)
They can still resign him, if the price is reasonable, but I wouldn't give him a $200M contract.

Well, that's crazy. Especially if Cano puts up another 7 WAR season. He'll be 31 and the Yanks should never let a perennial MVP candidate walk.

And it's not like the Yanks have a cheap replacement waiting in the wings for Cano. Joseph doesn't have the glove for second, and David Adams can't stay healthy. Gumbs is 3 years away at best. So you want the Yanks to dump their best player because he's going to demand a salary that reflects his value and then go out and spend some other amount of millions of dollars on some middling middle infielder.

The Yanks are a lot more likely to be able to cheaply replace guys like Granderson (who can't even really play CF any more), Hughes, Kuroda and freaking Kevin Youkilis (who might be terrible this year for all we know, now there's a guy Joseph could possibly replace) than they are to make up for the loss of Cano's production.

Yes, Cano will be great this year, and next year, but the Yankees probably won't be very good (given the self-imposed cap).

With a second wild card, the Red Sox in flux, and the strength of the rest of the AL East, the Yanks don't have to be very good to get to the playoffs. Look at the O's last year. And the guys you are worried about losing can be replaced pretty easily on the FA market after 2014. Cano won't be.

After that, we're talking about a 32-38 (if you're lucky to sign him for only 8 years) y.o. 2B.

Who has the skill set and athleticism to move to another position if need be. And who has been extremely healthy. And I think it's been demonstrated here that great second baseman don't age much worse than other non-catcher position players. There's no reason to think Cano won't be more like Jeff Kent than Robby Alomar.

That's not gonna be a 6 WAR player. Best case you're paying $25M for 3-4 WAR p.a. That's just not particularly valuable. Most likely, by age-36, he's an oft-injured average player, like ARod.

You're just guessing. There's no indication that healthwise, he's going to age like A-rod rather than Jeter. It's certainly not "most likely."

At some point, this team needs to restock with young talent, and trading Cano could bring a lot of you talent.

Sure. Great players are worth a lot. There's a reason some teams might give up a lot of talent for him. He's crazy good. That's a reason for the Yankees to keep him. We aren't talking about the freaking Royals.

I think the way the economics of baseball is trending, signing prime age FAs is basically always a bad idea (unless they hit FA really young).

Without getting into that argument, I think that the Yankees should be making an attempt to compete every year. Robinson Cano and CC Sabathia give them a chance to do that in the current system and will for long enough for the Yanks to restock the team using their payroll advantage post-2014.
   63. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: March 17, 2013 at 10:10 PM (#4390179)
this phrase exposes the deep, deep groupthink of this site, with not a single on-the-record quote to back it up.

I trust you take this one back?


Yes. "Typifies" rather than "exposes" is a neater word which gets to my meaning better. Thanks for the opportunity.
   64. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: March 17, 2013 at 10:20 PM (#4390194)
After the disgraceful display by our "fans" in the ALCS, in which they barely made a peep except to boo the crap out of their own players, I'm ready to casually follow a losing season or two. We need to thin out the ranks of the white collar fans and get back to a 1995 atmosphere.

yes, I know it will never happen
.mostly thanks to the shitty new stadium.
   65. RollingWave Posted: March 17, 2013 at 10:44 PM (#4390211)
You know that with Murhpy's law Ichiro will so hit 30 HR this year.
   66. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:06 PM (#4390225)
Seriously, people here will argue about everything. If there is ever a point reached on a subject where actual groupthink forms, it's not for lack of critical thinking, it's because you would have to be wilfully blind not to see the damn forest. And even then most of the time some people will say the group of trees is a mountain.
   67. billyshears Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:19 PM (#4390239)
But the team is old and hurt. I'd be all for a more aggressive tear down. Or, if they had wanted to go all-in again and sign a bunch of FAs; I'd have been fine with that too.

My complaint is being stuck in the middle. The world where they resign Cano to a 8/200 deal, let Granderson, Kuroda, Youkilis, Hughes and Pettitte leave w/o replacing them, but don't trade them to get anything back, is a no mans land that I think condemns you to mediocrity for several years.


I tend to think that aggressive rebuilding is probably the right path for the Yankees, but also that it will never, ever happen. The hard part about rebuilding/reloading now is that you have to be really, really aggressive. Teams can't just decide to spend a shitload on the draft or the international market and have a kickass farm system in 3 years. As I see it, there are only three ways to build a farm system right now (a) be bad enough for long enough that picking at the top of the draft for a bunch of years in a row accrues to your advantage, (b) be better at finding prospects than everybody else or (c) be much more aggressive than everybody else at obtaining prospects. Nobody really wants to do (a) and everybody always tries to do (b), so that leaves (c) as the only novel organizational philosophy available. But now with more teams locking up their young stars to long-term contracts, it's not as if you can plan on rebuilding through the farm system and filling in key pieces with free agents, because those free agents just might not be there. Basically, rebuilding in baseball is just really hard right now. So while I think the most likely outcome for the Yankees for the next 3 seasons in something like 84 wins, 80 wins and 76 wins, I think any real tear down would be painful enough and uncertain enough that I can understand taking the chance on the upside variance around those figures. Also, this Robinson Cano creature was essentially conjured from thin air, so I'm not entirely sure that Mason Williams and Tyler Austin aren't the second coming of Bernie Williams and Paul O'Neil.
   68. salajander Posted: March 17, 2013 at 11:25 PM (#4390246)
You know that with Murhpy's law Ichiro will so hit 30 HR this year.

He could if he wanted to.
   69. PreservedFish Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:05 AM (#4390262)
groupthink groupthink groupthink groupthink
   70. salajander Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:06 AM (#4390263)
dupe
   71. Lassus Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:20 AM (#4390283)
I've truly lost track of which groupthink is being referred to.
   72. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:27 AM (#4390296)
I've truly lost track of which groupthink is being referred to.

That your mom is good in bed.
   73. Squash Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:01 AM (#4390337)
“I’m looking at it as a goal, but my goals are normally considered a requirement,” Steinbrenner said while speaking to reporters in the lobby of George M. Steinbrenner Field, named after his father.

I still think this is one of the very best entitled-kid quotes of all time.
   74. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:41 AM (#4390342)
"My goals are normally considered a requirement" is a hilarious quote. I don't know if that sounds more like something Clarence Boddicker would say, or something Busta Rhymes would say.
   75. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:44 AM (#4390343)
"Mr. Wolz, the Don has set it as a personal goal for him to get this young man into this movie."
"Well you can tell him that he's gonna fall short of his goal this time."
"The Don normally finds that his goals are considered a requirement."
   76. Walt Davis Posted: March 18, 2013 at 03:13 AM (#4390345)
Not that I recommend trading Cano but the 2013 offseason Yanks look pretty bad.

The only offensive players signed past 2013 are ARod, Tex, Gardner and Ichiro. Yikes. Gardner will probably be the best of those. The only starters are CC and Pineda.

Now, it's not impossible but, good golly, the money it would take:

resign Cano
sign at least 2 of Wainwright, Josh Johnson, Halladay, Lincecum and Garza
sign at least two of Ellsbury, Choo and McCann

So sign at least 5 of the top 10 FAs that offseason (assuming I haven't forgotten any extensions). Easy peasy. Amazingly enough, they just might be able to squeeze that in under the cap but they might have some issues if other teams decide they might like some new players too.
   77. RollingWave Posted: March 18, 2013 at 05:03 AM (#4390347)
Gardner / Ichiro / Ellsbury OF .... there must be some jokes we can write here.

Knowing the team, they'll probably pull some useful player out of nowhere this season again, so it wouldn't look quite as bad.

The last time the team looked this Dismal was probably before the 2005 season, then they pulled Cano and Wang outta their arse. and thx to those 2 to a large extend they basically rode out a potentially devastating part of their cycle.
   78. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: March 18, 2013 at 08:35 AM (#4390361)
You can't talk 2005 Yabks without mentioning Shawn Chacon and Aaron Small, the two biggest wtfs in baseball pennant race history.
   79. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 18, 2013 at 09:41 AM (#4390401)
You can't talk 2005 Yabks without mentioning Shawn Chacon and Aaron Small, the two biggest wtfs in baseball pennant race history.

True Yankees, the both of them.
   80. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 10:44 AM (#4390436)
pulled Cano and Wang outta their arse.


Must ... avoid ... obvious ... joke ...
   81. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 11:34 AM (#4390477)
Knowing the team, they'll probably pull some useful player out of nowhere this season again, so it wouldn't look quite as bad.


Of course they will! This is a crucial line in their contract with Satan. Whatever J. Random the Yankees plug into a hole will have a career year. That's why they're going to win 93 and eke out the division title and be praised for centuries to come for the grit and hustle that inspired a nation.
   82. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 11:58 AM (#4390493)
He'll be 31 and the Yanks should never let a perennial MVP candidate walk.

And, that's the way you got the ARod contract.

With a second wild card, the Red Sox in flux, and the strength of the rest of the AL East, the Yanks don't have to be very good to get to the playoffs.

Being a .500 team, and hoping to get lucky and sneak in with 87 wins is not a good model for the Yankees. I don't think the fans have any interest in paying premium prices to watch that.
   83. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM (#4390497)
Yes. "Typifies" rather than "exposes" is a neater word which gets to my meaning better. Thanks for the opportunity.
Am I taking crazy pills here?

You said the groupthink was typified by a belief in the Yankees self-imposed cap even though there are no on-the-record quotes to back up this belief. Hal Steinbrenner has in fact spoken on the record about the goalquirement of getting under the cap for 2014.
   84. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:21 PM (#4390502)
Being a .500 team, and hoping to get lucky and sneak in with 87 wins is not a good model for the Yankees. I don't think the fans have any interest in paying premium prices to watch that.

What's really going to be interesting is to see if the Yankees try to hold the line on their ticket prices after the disaster that seems to be shaping up this year and probably 2014 as well. Given that StubHub has already started to become a favored option among large groups of fans who don't like to commit to buying weeks or months in advance, I can only wonder what the attendance is going to be like as the Yanks suffer through their once-in-a-generation freefall. And that's not even considering what might happen to attendance if Congress ever got around to removing those "business expense" deductions for corporate season ticket holders.
   85. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:30 PM (#4390511)
For $20 on B-R these days I think you can sponsor one of Greg Swindell's nose hairs.
   86. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:36 PM (#4390519)
$20 can score you Jody Reed or Steve Lyons or Hensley Muelens. So there are options.
   87. nick swisher hygiene Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:53 PM (#4390543)
Andy--My second team for a long while was the mostly non-contending Expos......something nice about the impulse buy $6 ticket (and that was 1990s dollars!) where you enjoy the game with 15K of yr fellow baseball fans....tear the roof off the big O and it'd have been close to paradise.....if DNYS became the home of a .500 ish ballclub for a while, there'd be some upside.....
   88. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 12:59 PM (#4390547)
What's really going to be interesting is to see if the Yankees try to hold the line on their ticket prices after the disaster that seems to be shaping up this year and probably 2014 as well.


You mean keep prices the same, instead of raising them? Cause there is no way the Yankees are going to lower their ticket prices.
   89. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 18, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4390574)
For $20 on B-R these days I think you can sponsor one of Greg Swindell's nose hairs.

Which would be worth more than the brick of Greg Swindells rookie cards I once bought on a lark back around 1989. Fortunately that broke me out of that particular two week habit before it had a chance to really take root.

----------------------------------------

Andy--My second team for a long while was the mostly non-contending Expos......something nice about the impulse buy $6 ticket (and that was 1990s dollars!) where you enjoy the game with 15K of yr fellow baseball fans....tear the roof off the big O and it'd have been close to paradise.....if DNYS became the home of a .500 ish ballclub for a while, there'd be some upside.....

Tell me about it. In the Griffith Stadium of my long ago boyhood, anyone 16 or under could sit 9 rows behind the box seats behind the plate for the 2013 equivalent of $5.88. Or in the late 70's, you could get courtside seats for the World Champion Bullets at the current equivalent of $25.00, or sit behind the dugout to see the 102-57 Orioles for the equivalent of $20.79 today. Lots of things have changed for the better, but affordable good seats at sporting events aren't among the improvements.

-------------------------------------

What's really going to be interesting is to see if the Yankees try to hold the line on their ticket prices after the disaster that seems to be shaping up this year and probably 2014 as well.

You mean keep prices the same, instead of raising them? Cause there is no way the Yankees are going to lower their ticket prices.


Ordinarily I'd agree with you, but my guess is that the laws of supply and demand are going to be tested in Yankee Stadium over the next few years as they've never been tested before.
   90. Lassus Posted: March 18, 2013 at 01:51 PM (#4390586)
Will the Yankees finish with a better record than the Mets this year, Andy? Because that's the real question.
   91. JE (Jason) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:16 PM (#4390602)
Will the Yankees finish with a better record than the Mets this year, Andy? Because that's the real question.

Well, you're the resident optimist vis-a-vis the Mets. What say you?
   92. Cowboy Popup Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:19 PM (#4390604)
And, that's the way you got the ARod contract.

The A-rod contract was for 10 years, not 6 or 7. And for 300 million, not 200. He was a year older and he started falling apart the year after he signed the contract instead of having a gradual decline. The proposed contract is different, the risk is different and the player is different.

Being a .500 team, and hoping to get lucky and sneak in with 87 wins is not a good model for the Yankees. I don't think the fans have any interest in paying premium prices to watch that.

Being a .500 team for two years is a lot better than being a .450 team for two years.

And if you want to bring Yankee fans into it, I'm sure they'll be super excited to shell out for the insane prices to watch a mediocre team and get a shitty ballpark experience a year or two after the one homegrown star the team had was traded for a couple of prospects because the Yanks couldn't "afford him." Trading Cano will be a PR disaster, no matter what they might realistically get in return.
   93. Lassus Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:37 PM (#4390613)
Well, you're the resident optimist vis-a-vis the Mets. What say you?

I asked first!
   94. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 18, 2013 at 02:55 PM (#4390628)
Will the Yankees finish with a better record than the Mets this year, Andy? Because that's the real question.

Let's just have them play a Sewer Series sometime in November, and may the team with the best ratcatchers win.
   95. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 18, 2013 at 03:42 PM (#4390661)
The A-rod contract was for 10 years, not 6 or 7. And for 300 million, not 200. He was a year older and he started falling apart the year after he signed the contract instead of having a gradual decline. The proposed contract is different, the risk is different and the player is different.


No way Cano is signing for 6 years. Best case is probably 8/180. More likely over $200M.

And if you want to bring Yankee fans into it, I'm sure they'll be super excited to shell out for the insane prices to watch a mediocre team and get a shitty ballpark experience a year or two after the one homegrown star the team had was traded for a couple of prospects because the Yanks couldn't "afford him." Trading Cano will be a PR disaster, no matter what they might realistically get in return.

Yankee fans don't give a damn about "home grown stars". They care about winning, full-stop.

If they're 35-50 in July, they're not showing up at the Stadium, or watching on TV, regardless of whether Cano is on the team.

And, a trade of Cano does not preclude trying to sign him after the season.
   96. Cowboy Popup Posted: March 18, 2013 at 04:03 PM (#4390672)
Yankee fans don't give a damn about "home grown stars".

Yeah, sure, that's why they still love Mattingly more than they ever loved Giambi. And Pettitte gets his balls washed by most Yankee fans while Moose never got anything resembling that sort of affection. And Jeter is a god while A-Rod got booed during his MVP seasons. I mean, that's as demonstrably not true as a claim can get on this site without involving stats. Yankee fans love and hugely overrate lifelong Yankees.

Well, not you obviously, but most Yankee fans.

They care about winning, full-stop.

Yup, and keeping Cano gives the Yanks their best shot to win, even in the coming down years. You're the one advocating tearing down the team and sucking for two years to get prospects.

If they're 35-50 in July, they're not showing up at the Stadium, or watching on TV, regardless of whether Cano is on the team.

Obviously the fans won't show up if they are out of it by July. But next year they are a lot more likely to show up if the team has a star second baseman and a chance to make the playoffs than if they don't.
   97. Walt Davis Posted: March 18, 2013 at 06:03 PM (#4390723)
6 or 7. 200.

Whoa ... we're paying Cano $30 M a year now?

I put the probability of the Yanks not extending Cano at approximately zero so it's a silly point to discuss ... yet I can't stop!

And, a trade of Cano does not preclude trying to sign him after the season.

Unless Cano agrees to an extension as part of the trade, nobody is going to give up much of value for a Cano rental. (I mean they'll give up a good amount since it's a 2 win rental but you're not robbing the bank.) The small return is not worth it to the Yanks compared to all the sturm und drang surrounding a Cano trade plus the possibility that the new team will beat the Yanks to the extension. Trading Cano in the hopes of getting him back sounds to like the worst of the options.

I will say I didn't realize until this thread how much payroll "flexibility" the Yanks have for 2014 even with the threshold. They're projecting at $109 M right now. A lot of spots to fill but they can easily re-sign Cano and add 2-3 more FA from that list and still meet that threshold. That's probably still a team that gets pulled down by too many holes but they should be solid and primed to add another piece or two for 2015-16.

And, true, I don't know what the Yanks have in the system other than Romine who might fill a gap.

EDIT: and the 2014 question I find interesting is whether Jeter will want to keep playing and for how much.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Joost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogI hope this doesn't get me fired. | FOX Sports
(13 - 4:01pm, Oct 23)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(888 - 3:59pm, Oct 23)
Last: ursus arctos

NewsblogMcSweeneys: NEW BASEBALL STATISTICS.
(31 - 3:59pm, Oct 23)
Last: Delino DeShields & Yarnell

NewsblogSalvador Perez, Hunter Strickland Exchange Words In World Series (GIF) | MLB | NESN.com
(25 - 3:59pm, Oct 23)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogGold Glove Awards finalists revealed | MLB.com
(21 - 3:58pm, Oct 23)
Last: Enrico Pallazzo

NewsblogStatcast: Posey out at the plate
(22 - 3:56pm, Oct 23)
Last: Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame)

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3358 - 3:53pm, Oct 23)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogAJC: Hart says ‘yes’ to Braves, will head baseball operations
(9 - 3:51pm, Oct 23)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(358 - 3:20pm, Oct 23)
Last: Squash

NewsblogKey question GMs have to weigh with top World Series free agents | New York Post
(15 - 3:16pm, Oct 23)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogMartino: Michael Cuddyer is a perfect free agent fit for NY Mets, who like him
(17 - 3:14pm, Oct 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogSielski: A friend fights for ex-Phillie Dick Allen's Hall of Fame induction
(185 - 2:33pm, Oct 23)
Last: Jay Z

NewsblogHow Wall Street Strangled the Life out of Sabermetrics | VICE Sports
(21 - 1:12pm, Oct 23)
Last: AROM

NewsblogJay set for surgery — and for CF in 2015 : Sports
(7 - 1:08pm, Oct 23)
Last: Hal Chase School of Professionalism

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(861 - 12:44pm, Oct 23)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

Page rendered in 0.9980 seconds
52 querie(s) executed