MLB 2009 Season

[Dave James]

Unfortunately for the M's, it's going to take them several years to move beyond the lingering effects of the Bavasi regime. That guy was a franchise wrecker.

With regard to the Red Sux, they better hope Wagner brings his A game. Bard clearly isn't ready for the show and I would not want to put my trust in Ramon Ramirez or Manny Delcarmen on any sort of regular basis. Tonight is a perfect example.

Up over and out.

[Quincy]

That was a very nice win for the Giants, and also the Mariners took two of three from the Angels (you're welcome Big Al). It looks like Seattle will be over .500 for the season, which is a great rebound from last year.

Yeah, and it's kind of funny (strange) how the best of the recently traded pitchers Kazmir picks up a loss, while the guys with 8 or 9 ERAs (whatever) win/win/win (Smoltz x 2 and Brad F. Penny.) Then again Kaz was facing Felix. Oh not to jinx the still young man, but this is the year where he's turned the corner. For a couple of years there it was kind of up in the air, though again he started so young. If all the parts of his body hold together it's scary good to think of how good he could become.

As for the WC races, roller coaster rides for everybody! Less so for M's fans though it's still possible!

[Dan Gould]

With regard to the Red Sux, they better hope Wagner brings his A game. Bard clearly isn't ready for the show and I would not want to put my trust in Ramon Ramirez or Manny Delcarmen on any sort of regular basis. Tonight is a perfect example.

Up over and out.

You're really turning into an arrogant front-runner, aren't you?

Who exactly do the Skankees have who have come close to performing with any consistency in their set up corps other than former "number one prospect" Hughes?

NEWSFLASH:

Saito, Ramirez, Delcarmen and EVEN BARD have lower season ERAs than any SKANKEE set-up man.

[Dave James]

Dan,

Would you rather have the Yankees pen or the Sox pen if the playoffs started today?

Up over and out.

[Dan Gould]

Dan,

Would you rather have the Yankees pen or the Sox pen if the playoffs started today?

Up over and out.

Absolutely 100% no fucking doubt about it, the Red Sox pen is far superior, top to bottom, to the Skankees. And the statistics prove it - Girardi has one shitty lefty who has given up ten or eleven home runs this year. There's no comparison to Okajima and Wagner. Ramirez, Saito, Bard, Delcarmen give more options, day in and day out, to Francona than Girardi can dream of. There's Hughes ... and who? A lot of crap. Robertson and Melancon HOPE to achieve the performance that Delcarmen has posted in his three year career, some happy day in the future. In the meantime, they look a lot like Delcarmen did at the start of his career: the very picture of mediocrity crossed with the occasional flash of brilliance. Ramirez was lights out for KC last year, and nearly as good this year. A single blow up, as Delcarmen and Ramirez had last night, does not take away from the entire season of excellent work they've done. And I haven't even gotten to Saito.

Put it this way:

Head to head, every single Red Sox bullpen member would be selected ahead of every single Yankee bullpen member not named Hughes or Rivera.

[ghost of miles]

I'm still chuckling over Posada's losing the count twice the night before--the shots of Jeter and Rodriguez laughing and holding up two fingers after Posada thought he'd struck out, and then Posada hitting a home run on the next pitch...a nice capsule of the Yanks' season so far. Lighthearted and winning. Again, the chemistry of this year's team (even A-Rod really seems at home now) is making them a joy to watch.

[Dave James]

Head to head, every single Red Sox bullpen member would be selected ahead of every single Yankee bullpen member not named Hughes or Rivera.

I rest my case.

Up over and out.

[Dan Gould]

Head to head, every single Red Sox bullpen member would be selected ahead of every single Yankee bullpen member not named Hughes or Rivera.

I rest my case.

Up over and out.

You're being ridiculous. A two-man bullpen is better than one that has excellent options (and better options than everyone else on the Yankee staff) up and down the bench? And don't misinterpret that statement you quoted: Saito, Bard, Delcarmen and Ramirez are equal to if not better relievers than Hughes.

I'll enjoy watching the Yankee bullpen blow up in October because Hughes' luck runs out or he's not available after pitching two straight games. There are zero good choices for Girardi after Hughes or before Hughes or when Hughes can't go.

And you think that's a better bullpen? WTF is wrong with you?

I'm still chuckling over Posada's losing the count twice the night before--the shots of Jeter and Rodriguez laughing and holding up two fingers after Posada thought he'd struck out, and then Posada hitting a home run on the next pitch...a nice capsule of the Yanks' season so far. Lighthearted and winning. Again, the chemistry of this year's team (even A-Rod really seems at home now) is making them a joy to watch.

I can't believe this "chemistry" shit.

Winning creates good chemistry. The rest is bullshit, and the cart is way before the horse.

[ghost of miles]

Oh, for God's sake, Dan--the 2002 and 2004 Yankees won just as many games, and they did NOT have the kind of chemistry that this team has. Your 2004 Bosox certainly had chemistry. One consternation of being a Yankees fan for so long (I started as a kid in 1974, when Bill Virdon was the manager, so I've pretty much been along for the ride during the entire Steinbrenner era) has been watching Steinbrenner think, year after year, that going after a few high-price players will always do the trick--and it rarely does. Yes, the Yanks are benefiting this year from Tex and Sabathia, but as Dave has pointed out in the past, the additions of Swisher and Burnett have done wonders beyond their statistical contributions. And the great 1996-2001 run was sparked by players such as Pettite, Rivera, Bernie Williams, Jeter, Paul O'Neill, and others who either came up through the farm system or were acquired in shrewd trades...and that team had superb chemistry. I'm grateful that a few of the vets from that era are still around.

NY always plays under tons of pressure, the media scrutiny is extraordinarily tense, and this year's team has found a way to still have fun. They ran their first kangaroo court way back in the spring, when things weren't looking so statistically hot... the vibe was already different and better than the past few years. Even if they don't get to or win the Series this year, I'd still say they've been the most enjoyable team to watch since the first years of the Torre era. In any event, I think chemistry and winning are inextricably linked--I wouldn't say that one comes before the other in either case.

[Dan Gould]

No team that isn't winning gets talk about great "chemistry". So which comes first? Yeah - winning.

Furthermore, "chemistry" or lack thereof didn't keep all of those post-2000 Yankee teams from reaching the playoffs, or sometimes winning 100 games, and a lack of "chemistry" didn't result in their subsequent dismissals from the playoffs. In fact, in 2006, it might be said that if one of the ultimate negative-clubhouse-forces, Randy Johnson, had a healthier back, it might have trumped that so-called "lack of chemistry" they suffered from. It surely had more to do with that post-season disaster.

The Reggie-Munson Yankees didn't have anything remotely resembling "chemistry" and they won it all, back-to-back.

What's the value of "chemistry" again?

Edited September 3, 2009 by Dan Gould

[ghost of miles]

No team that isn't winning it all gets talked about much, PERIOD.

You pull up one example--the 1977/78 Yanks--and yet I'd still argue that THAT team had a very weird, dysfunctional kind of chemistry.

Even if the Yanks blow up in the playoffs, I'll still argue that this year's team had great chemistry.

There are plenty of overachieving teams that didn't even make the playoffs that had it, too. It can stem from a manager's leadership, some key personalities in the clubhouse, what have you... but it's definitely something more present in some teams than others. And the Yanks--that team so legendary during the Steinbrenner era for a tendency towards tense, dysfunctional atmospheres--have it this year. Doesn't guarantee a WS win, not by any means...but surely makes it more likely than it's been for the past few years.

[Dan Gould]

And I'll repeat that "chemistry" is grossly overrated.

You may find greater pleasure in watching a group of people having fun as they go about their work, but it has no relationship to winning seasons, or winning playoff spots, or winning championships.

In fact, dropping nearly a half a trillion dollars on not one, not two but all three top free agents has far more to do with winning than any perceived change in "chemistry".

Edited September 3, 2009 by Dan Gould

[WorldB3]

^ Despite his numbers coming into the season I said that Swisher would become a fan favorite due to his personality and potential for him to create chemistry. I can't say much about Burnett but Swisher was one of my favorites when he was on the A's.

[WorldB3]

We don't have 50 hrs for the season!!

Its not 1995 thats for sure. I was just reminded today what a powerhouse that team was, look at that lineup 1-7 that year:

Kenny Lofton, .314

Omar Vizquel, .266 but Hall of Fame-caliber defense at shortstop

Carlos Baerga, .314 with a couple of 200-hit seasons in his recent past

Albert Belle, .317 with 50 homers

Eddie Murray, .323

Jim Thome (playing third), .314 with 25 homers

Manny Ramirez, .308 with 31 homers and 107 RBIs

[Big Al]

Okay Dan, if chemistry isn't worth shit and the Red Sox have a better bullpen than the Yankees, care to tell us why the Yankees are in first and the Red Sox are in second right now?

I mean, my God: don't you enjoy this game at all? Or is making sure we all kowtow to your declared superiority of the Red Sox over everyone else your ultimate goal?

Edited September 3, 2009 by Big Al

[ghost of miles]

And I'll repeat that "chemistry" is grossly overrated.

You may find greater pleasure in watching a group of people having fun as they go about their work, but it has no relationship to winning seasons, or winning playoff spots, or winning championships.

In fact, dropping nearly a half a trillion dollars on not one, not two but all three top free agents has far more to do with winning than any perceived change in "chemistry".

They've dropped tons of money before and it hasn't brought them rings.

[MartyJazz]

Okay Dan, if chemistry isn't worth shit and the Red Sox have a better bullpen than the Yankees, care to tell us why the Yankees are in first and the Red Sox are in second right now?

I mean, my God: don't you enjoy this game at all? Or is making sure we all kowtow to your declared superiority of the Red Sox over everyone else your ultimate goal?

I'll save Dan the trouble. The reason we're in first is because the Yanks play 1/2 of their games on a Little League field.

Of course, it would be a "Little Tyke" field and we would have won 100 games by now if our right handed hitters had the benefit of a green Monster in left.

Edited September 3, 2009 by MartyJazz

[Soulstation1]

IMO

Talking baseball with Dan is a waste of your time

He's right and you are wrong every single time

It's that simple PERIOD

IMO

Edited September 3, 2009 by Soulstation1

[Dan Gould]

Okay Dan, if chemistry isn't worth shit and the Red Sox have a better bullpen than the Yankees, care to tell us why the Yankees are in first and the Red Sox are in second right now?

I mean, my God: don't you enjoy this game at all? Or is making sure we all kowtow to your declared superiority of the Red Sox over everyone else your ultimate goal?

Where did I fucking say the Red Sox are superior to the Yankees? The Yankees clearly have the better and more consistent offense, and somehow or another the better and more consistent starting pitching. The Red Sox have the superior bullpen, and anyone with a brain would agree with that. And that's all that I asserted. Try reading next time.

And I'll repeat that "chemistry" is grossly overrated.

You may find greater pleasure in watching a group of people having fun as they go about their work, but it has no relationship to winning seasons, or winning playoff spots, or winning championships.

In fact, dropping nearly a half a trillion dollars on not one, not two but all three top free agents has far more to do with winning than any perceived change in "chemistry".

They've dropped tons of money before and it hasn't brought them rings.

They dropped the right ton of money on the right players. That is, the right players for 2009 - I can't wait until Sabathia is falling apart and earning 20 million a year, around 2 million per win, and when Burnett doesn't have a 97 MPH fastball but doesn't have a clue in his Nuke Laloosh head about how to pitch without one. I figure this will coincide with the dramatic declines in-everything-but-salary of the aging but still signed for many more years Jeter and A-Rod (does anyone think Jeter will accept anything less than the years/dollars A-Rod has coming?). That will also coincide with the first 300 or 350 million dollar payroll as there will be so much wasted in sunk costs to those four alone, plus a declining Mr. Leigh Texeira, that they will have to go hogwild on a whole nother generation of overpriced free agents to make up for it. Better hope the Steinbrenners hang on to the team for that, because any corporate ownership would never foot the bill to ease the pain of those disastrous contracts.

The reason we're in first is because the Yanks play 1/2 of their games on a Little League field.

Of course, it would be a "Little Tyke" field and we would have won 100 games by now if our right handed hitters had the benefit of a green Monster in left.

Sorry but not quite. Your little league dimensions and jet stream to right field go over an 8 foot wall, not a 37 foot wall. :rolleyes:

OH, and IMO, candle boy wouldn't know punctuation if it bit him in the ass.

[Soulstation1]

Dan

You should try making a point without using fuck every single time

Give it a break

[MartyJazz]

Okay Dan, if chemistry isn't worth shit and the Red Sox have a better bullpen than the Yankees, care to tell us why the Yankees are in first and the Red Sox are in second right now?

I mean, my God: don't you enjoy this game at all? Or is making sure we all kowtow to your declared superiority of the Red Sox over everyone else your ultimate goal?

Where did I fucking say the Red Sox are superior to the Yankees? The Yankees clearly have the better and more consistent offense, and somehow or another the better and more consistent starting pitching. The Red Sox have the superior bullpen, and anyone with a brain would agree with that. And that's all that I asserted. Try reading next time.

And I'll repeat that "chemistry" is grossly overrated.

You may find greater pleasure in watching a group of people having fun as they go about their work, but it has no relationship to winning seasons, or winning playoff spots, or winning championships.

In fact, dropping nearly a half a trillion dollars on not one, not two but all three top free agents has far more to do with winning than any perceived change in "chemistry".

They've dropped tons of money before and it hasn't brought them rings.

They dropped the right ton of money on the right players. That is, the right players for 2009 - I can't wait until Sabathia is falling apart and earning 20 million a year, around 2 million per win, and when Burnett doesn't have a 97 MPH fastball but doesn't have a clue in his Nuke Laloosh head about how to pitch without one. I figure this will coincide with the dramatic declines in-everything-but-salary of the aging but still signed for many more years Jeter and A-Rod (does anyone think Jeter will accept anything less than the years/dollars A-Rod has coming?). That will also coincide with the first 300 or 350 million dollar payroll as there will be so much wasted in sunk costs to those four alone, plus a declining Mr. Leigh Texeira, that they will have to go hogwild on a whole nother generation of overpriced free agents to make up for it. Better hope the Steinbrenners hang on to the team for that, because any corporate ownership would never foot the bill to ease the pain of those disastrous contracts.

The reason we're in first is because the Yanks play 1/2 of their games on a Little League field.

Of course, it would be a "Little Tyke" field and we would have won 100 games by now if our right handed hitters had the benefit of a green Monster in left.

Sorry but not quite. Your little league dimensions and jet stream to right field go over an 8 foot wall, not a 37 foot wall. :rolleyes:

OH, and IMO, candle boy wouldn't know punctuation if it bit him in the ass.

Dan, surprise but I agree with you about the overall superiority of the setup men in the Red Sox bullpen. And it seems to me that the Yanks were wrong to duplicate the original measurements of Yankee Stadium in the new ballpark, especially in light of what you refer to as the "jet stream" that apparently aids simple fly balls. What I don't understand is why baseball hasn't instituted a mandatory rule that all newly constructed ballparks are to have symmetrical dimensions, neither favoring left or right hand hitters. I really don't subscribe to the "charm" theory that attaches to ballparks with asymmetric dimensions.

Who's candle boy?

[ghost of miles]

Dan! Peace, my brother! Let us all agree to disagree... let Yankee and Red Sox fans hold hands and sing happy songs of bliss and joyous rectitude!

[Dan Gould]

And it seems to me that the Yanks were wrong to duplicate the original measurements of Yankee Stadium in the new ballpark, especially in light of what you refer to as the "jet stream" that apparently aids simple fly balls.

I am surprised that you are repeating this falsehood. It was established at the beginning of the year that while they made the marker points the same, the dimensions are not identical. The old stadium had a bend in the rightfield wall. With the lengthy scoreboard now embedded, the wall has to be straight. The bottom line is that for a substantial distance in right field, the fence is an average of five feet closer. In one section, its nine feet closer! On top of that, the fence is what, two feet lower? Put it all together and its a joke to say that the dimensions are the same.

Who's candle boy?

Sorry, that wasn't directed at you, it was directed at SS1, my favorite pain in my ass outside of Goodie.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Dan Gould

[Dave James]

Nuts! I thought I might be candle boy. I've never had a nickname.

Up over and out.

[Tim McG]

Okay Dan, if chemistry isn't worth shit and the Red Sox have a better bullpen than the Yankees, care to tell us why the Yankees are in first and the Red Sox are in second right now?

I mean, my God: don't you enjoy this game at all? Or is making sure we all kowtow to your declared superiority of the Red Sox over everyone else your ultimate goal?

I'll save Dan the trouble. The reason we're in first is because the Yanks play 1/2 of their games on a Little League field.

Of course, it would be a "Little Tyke" field and we would have won 100 games by now if our right handed hitters had the benefit of a green Monster in left.

How does the Green Monster help...?

Doesn't it keep balls in play that otherwise would fly out of there?

Just sayin'.

Edited September 5, 2009 by GoodSpeak