Post-Mortem ALDS Discussion

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,812
With a mediocre staff and great bullpen, you'd always be playing catch up and if it's in the playoffs, good luck. We saw it play out this year in games 1 and 4. I'd rather have great starters and a terrible pen, especially when you can use those starters as relievers come playoff time.
 

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
21,636
In The Quivering Forest
With a mediocre staff and great bullpen, you'd always be playing catch up and if it's in the playoffs, good luck. We saw it play out this year in games 1 and 4. I'd rather have great starters and a terrible pen, especially when you can use those starters as relievers come playoff time.
You say that after winning this series...let's see if you feel the same way moving forward.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,812
You say that after winning this series...let's see if you feel the same way moving forward.
I think the playoffs are pretty much a coin flip so my opinion wouldn't change. I don't expect a bullpen to hold up for 6-7 innings of work with any type of regularity and even if it does, it will have an impact later on. What are the chances all 5-6 MRs you throw out are all going to be on and perform well? The Yankees did for the most part, but I'd still bet against it. It's also very, very hard to replicate the Yankees bullpen.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
It seemed clear, and I posted in the "Yankees get Stanton" thread back in December, the Yankees rotation at that time was the team's Achille's heel and needed some additional depth. And got some blow-back for the opinion. I thought Severino was going to develop into a real 1, but he only got half the way there. And Happ wasn't and isn't the answer.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,968
Astoria
It seemed clear, and I posted in the "Yankees get Stanton" thread back in December, the Yankees rotation at that time was the team's Achille's heel and needed some additional depth. And got some blow-back for the opinion. I thought Severino was going to develop into a real 1, but he only got half the way there. And Happ wasn't and isn't the answer.
You guys are saying that because you won. Games 1 and 4 were extremely close games that were almost lost or won on very tight margins. Sox fans coming into the thread to proclaim why the Yankees lost could easily be a Sox thread on why they were flawed despite winning 108 games. You can't look at a small sample size of a series to dictate how to approach the offseason. Everyone knows that the Yankees are going after pitching this off-season but I maintain that the basis of everyone's posts are all discounting that the starting pitching didn't just get outpitched, they didn't make it out of the 2nd inning. That's not typical of anything that happened during the regular season for anyone not named Sonny Gray. Severino, Happ, Tanaka, and CC should have made for a formidable postseason rotation that kept the team in every game. They didn't, just like Chris Sale didn't last year.

TL:DR - The pitching wasn't supposed to be this bad in a short series, no matter who the opponent was.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
You guys are saying that because you won. Games 1 and 4 were extremely close games that were almost lost or won on very tight margins. Sox fans coming into the thread to proclaim why the Yankees lost could easily be a Sox thread on why they were flawed despite winning 108 games. You can't look at a small sample size of a series to dictate how to approach the offseason. Everyone knows that the Yankees are going after pitching this off-season but I maintain that the basis of everyone's posts are all discounting that the starting pitching didn't just get outpitched, they didn't make it out of the 2nd inning. That's not typical of anything that happened during the regular season for anyone not named Sonny Gray. Severino, Happ, Tanaka, and CC should have made for a formidable postseason rotation that kept the team in every game. They didn't, just like Chris Sale didn't last year.

TL:DR - The pitching wasn't supposed to be this bad in a short series, no matter who the opponent was.
I'm saying that because I posted that the Yankees starters were the Achilles heel in December 2017 in the Stanton thread,

QUOTE="bankshot1, post: 2574789, member: 9"]Tanaka and Gray in my mind remain questions for different reasons.
Severino seems legit.
CC is CC.

IMO the rotation is neither deep nor overwhelming.

In my mind its their Achilles heel.

YMMV[/QUOTE]


Edit I obviously don't know how to format this, but here's the follow-up response to Jon A

Just say it John, its ok to admit the rotation as currently constituted, is the Ys Achilles heel.

If Tanaka's shoulder starts barking again, or CC feels a year older, or Severino was a flash in the pan,or Gray is really just a 4/5, the rotation that carried the Ys to ALCS, may not get that far in '18.

That said, the Ys will score 1000 runs and may buy a prosthetic foot to get them through the post-season.
.
 
Last edited:

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
21,636
In The Quivering Forest
It seemed clear, and I posted in the "Yankees get Stanton" thread back in December, the Yankees rotation at that time was the team's Achille's heel and needed some additional depth. And got some blow-back for the opinion. I thought Severino was going to develop into a real 1, but he only got half the way there. And Happ wasn't and isn't the answer.
The Yankees didn't lose the series against Boston because of their pitching. They didn't score as many runs as the Red Sox did.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,812
You guys are saying that because you won. Games 1 and 4 were extremely close games that were almost lost or won on very tight margins. Sox fans coming into the thread to proclaim why the Yankees lost could easily be a Sox thread on why they were flawed despite winning 108 games. You can't look at a small sample size of a series to dictate how to approach the offseason. Everyone knows that the Yankees are going after pitching this off-season but I maintain that the basis of everyone's posts are all discounting that the starting pitching didn't just get outpitched, they didn't make it out of the 2nd inning. That's not typical of anything that happened during the regular season for anyone not named Sonny Gray. Severino, Happ, Tanaka, and CC should have made for a formidable postseason rotation that kept the team in every game. They didn't, just like Chris Sale didn't last year.

TL:DR - The pitching wasn't supposed to be this bad in a short series, no matter who the opponent was.
Pretty much every Redsox thread is whining about how flawed our bullpen is despite winning 108 games and beating the Yankees. Ironically enough, our bullpen didn't cost us any games but our SP did. In a 5 game sample, anything can happen but if asked before the series why the Sox or Yankees would lose, a betting man would say bullpen and SP respectively.

edit: Or they'd be a smartass and say "because they scored less runs." :p It's not wrong.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
The Yankees didn't lose the series against Boston because of their pitching. They didn't score as many runs as the Red Sox did.
Well starting 3 of the 4 games down, 5-0, 10-0, and 4-0, suggests that perhaps the starting pitching might have been problematic. But if you're good with that rotation, and giving the other team 4, 5, and 10 run leads, I've no problem on this end.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
5,902
Michigan
Pretty much every Redsox thread is whining about how flawed our bullpen is despite winning 108 games and beating the Yankees. Ironically enough, our bullpen didn't cost us any games but our SP did. In a 5 game sample, anything can happen but if asked before the series why the Sox or Yankees would lose, a betting man would say bullpen and SP respectively.

edit: Or they'd be a smartass and say "because they scored less runs." :p It's not wrong.
Fewer. /smartass
 

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
21,636
In The Quivering Forest
Well starting 3 of the 4 games down, 5-0, 10-0, and 4-0, suggests that perhaps the starting pitching might have been problematic. But if you're good with that rotation, and giving the other team 4, 5, and 10 run leads, I've no problem on this end.
If you think that accurately reflects the kind of pitchers that Happ, Severino and CC are, I don't know what to say. The offense missed a slew of chances to score runs, even against the almighty Sale. The games were close, everything makes a difference obviously. And I think the Yankees should go out and acquire some pitching I am not trying say they shouldn't improve in this area, they should look to improve every. I just don't think Porcello or Eovaldi are anything great. Obviously, the Sox won, and kudos for that, but I think the rotations were roughly even.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,382
Yoknapatawpha County
If you think that accurately reflects the kind of pitchers that Happ, Severino and CC are, I don't know what to say. The offense missed a slew of chances to score runs, even against the almighty Sale. The games were close, everything makes a difference obviously. And I think the Yankees should go out and acquire some pitching I am not trying say they shouldn't improve in this area, they should look to improve every. I just don't think Porcello or Eovaldi are anything great. Obviously, the Sox won, and kudos for that, but I think the rotations were roughly even.
You said "The Yankees didn't lose the series against Boston because of their pitching. They didn't score as many runs as the Red Sox did." Pretty absurd given how the series played out, to the extent that statement can actually mean anything. No one's talking about who they are deep down or whatever.

Severino's a #1. Happ's never been anything particularly special and CC in an elimination game kind of proves bank's point.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,968
Astoria
And with the apparent attention of the Sox fans in this forum. It's worth repeating that basically every Yankees fan who posted all year during the game threads was truly down on team and their performance for the most part. The 100 wins this season did not seem hard fought or even earned at times. There were character issues here despite what seemed like excellent team and clubhouse chemistry. Last year, this team was gutsy and fought tooth and nail. This year, except right when Judge & Voit entered the picture in September, they played dead baseball. Very odd season that I'd rather soon forget.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
If you think that accurately reflects the kind of pitchers that Happ, Severino and CC are, I don't know what to say. The offense missed a slew of chances to score runs, even against the almighty Sale. The games were close, everything makes a difference obviously. And I think the Yankees should go out and acquire some pitching I am not trying say they shouldn't improve in this area, they should look to improve every. I just don't think Porcello or Eovaldi are anything great. Obviously, the Sox won, and kudos for that, but I think the rotations were roughly even.
And the Patriots lost the SuperBowl last year because Brady didn't generate enough offense and score enough points.

Or perhaps the Pats could have won with a better defense.

This is not about Porcello or Eovaldi or the Sox starters versus the Yankee starters..

This is about the Yankee starters who were identified pre-season as their weakness.

I would suggest that the Yankees might not have to score in the double-digits if their starters were not giving up sizable leads to a reasonably good team. If you're comfortable spotting a 108 win team 4 run leads, then you are, and I don't know what to say.

Other than, thank you.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
CC in an elimination game kind of proves bank's point.
To be fair, he started game 5 of the ALDS last year against the best team in baseball on the road and NY won that game, and he did have a pretty good season this year overall, but I agree that he should probably not be in NY's plans next year.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
There is an argument he should be brought back as a 5th guy, especially to take Sheffield under his wing in spring training and onward, but I'm not sure that makes sense.

But in Cashman I trust, as was said above, except when it comes to choosing a manager.
 

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
21,636
In The Quivering Forest
And the Patriots lost the SuperBowl last year because Brady didn't generate enough offense and score enough points.

Or perhaps the Pats could have won with a better defense.

This is not about Porcello or Eovaldi or the Sox starters versus the Yankee starters..

This is about the Yankee starters who were identified pre-season as their weakness.

I would suggest that the Yankees might not have to score in the double-digits if their starters were not giving up sizable leads to a reasonably good team. If you're comfortable spotting a 108 win team 4 run leads, then you are, and I don't know what to say.

Other than, thank you.
We don't need to go back and forth about the ALDS, we can do that in other threads. But these are two teams are both extremely good. And it was close. The blowout in Game 3 makes it not feel as close as this series was. Hours before Game 3 started, posters across this board and RSN were making statements about how the Yankees were a better team (I know I don't need to cite examples for you.) The games were tight. The teams were as evenly matched as can be. The Yankees didn't hit with runners on base, had they done that at all, they would be playing a baseball game tonight.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
We don't need to go back and forth about the ALDS, we can do that in other threads. But these are two teams are both extremely good. And it was close. The blowout in Game 3 makes it not feel as close as this series was. Hours before Game 3 started, posters across this board and RSN were making statements about how the Yankees were a better team (I know I don't need to cite examples for you.) The games were tight. The teams were as evenly matched as can be. The Yankees didn't hit with runners on base, had they done that at all, they would be playing a baseball game tonight.
Both teams were good. The Sox weakness was the BP, (which became more apparent around mid-season) while IMO the Ys weakness was its starting rotation. Again you seem to be ok with playing 4+ runs down and hoping your BP would hold the Sox, while the Sox BP would blow multi-run leads. That seems to be a daunting handicap, and one I would prefer not to have.

YMMV

We will disagree that the teams were as evenly matched as they could be. The Sox won 13 of 23 games played between the two. The Yankees lost 13 of 23 games played.

I can easily image two more evenly matched teams, for example IMO in 1978, 2003 & 2004 the two teams were far closer to being competitive equals than they were this year.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,968
Astoria
Both teams were good. The Sox weakness was the BP, (which became more apparent around mid-season) while IMO the Ys weakness was its starting rotation. Again you seem to be ok with playing 4+ runs down and hoping your BP would hold the Sox, while the Sox BP would blow multi-run leads. That seems to be a daunting handicap, and one I would prefer not to have.

YMMV

We will disagree that the teams were as evenly matched as they could be. The Sox won 13 of 23 games played between the two. The Yankees lost 13 of 23 games played.

I can easily image two more evenly matched teams, for example IMO in 1978, 2003 & 2004 the two teams were far closer to being competitive equals than they were this year.
You’re creating a straw man. The argument being made is that the starting pitchers didn’t perform how they were expected to. Sure, a Red Sox fan might have imagined a dream scenario where the SP couldn’t get out of the 3rd 3 times, but that’s not who they were or what anyone, including this board, was expecting.

So, I guess your point is that you made a prediction and the Yankees lost a series because of a couple bad starts so your prediction was right. Can we just say you’re right so nobody has to argue about this anymore? It’s pretty moot.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,382
Yoknapatawpha County
You’re creating a straw man. The argument being made is that the starting pitchers didn’t perform how they were expected to.
No. This is the reason it feels like we're all chasing a moot point:

The Yankees didn't lose the series against Boston because of their pitching. They didn't score as many runs as the Red Sox did.
That's got nothing to do with expectations, or what CC Sabathia did against Houston in October last year. I agree they underperformed, and I agree Sabathia is capable. Not what was being argued though.

Moot point for sure, much more interesting things to talk about on NYY's offseason.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
I responded to a post about the Yankee rotation, and then referenced a post I made in December about the weakness i perceived in that rotation.

The argument I now get now is that the Yankees didn't score enough runs.

Congratulations thats the definition of losing, not an analytical statement.

I saw a team that had mediocre starting pitching, yielded large early leads, and had a difficult time scoring if it didn't hit home-runs.It's real one advantage, a better bullpen was really never a factor because the starting pitching took it out of the game, as a tactical weapon.
 
Last edited:

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,968
Astoria
No. This is the reason it feels like we're all chasing a moot point:



That's got nothing to do with expectations, or what CC Sabathia did against Houston in October last year. I agree they underperformed, and I agree Sabathia is capable. Not what was being argued though.

Moot point for sure, much more interesting things to talk about on NYY's offseason.
I’m somewhere in the middle because if you asked me before game 4 whether I would blindly accept the Sox scoring 4 runs, I would call that incredible and accept with the expectation that dumbo and scarecrow give up some runs to the Yankees hitters. So maybe for game 4 you could say this is true but not for the games were higher scoring. Yes, still moot point, agree
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
I would argue that the postseason rosters of these two teams are more or less similarly talented with different weaknesses and that a better manager than Boone would have made the series closer, but also who cares? It's over now and Boston won.

But that's just me, keep going if you want.
 

terrynever

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2005
14,571
pawtucket
And with the apparent attention of the Sox fans in this forum. It's worth repeating that basically every Yankees fan who posted all year during the game threads was truly down on team and their performance for the most part. The 100 wins this season did not seem hard fought or even earned at times. There were character issues here despite what seemed like excellent team and clubhouse chemistry. Last year, this team was gutsy and fought tooth and nail. This year, except right when Judge & Voit entered the picture in September, they played dead baseball. Very odd season that I'd rather soon forget.
This is all true. We were bitching early. The all-or-nothing offensive approach bugged me from the start. Stanton personified it. His numbers were pretty much on par with most of his career but seeing him day in and say out, you got a much better sense of the holes in his swing. Same with Bird, after he finally arrived.
A guy I missed from last year was Starlin Castro. He could put his bat on just about anything. No room for him on this year's team.
I think the offensive approach must change next year. Quit focusing on the long ball. Torres probably rolled over and hit weak grounders more than anyone. Why not hit the ball where it is pitched? They're all guilty of swinging out of their shoes and not hitting situationally.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
A bit of perspective: NY has gone from 84 to 91 to 100 wins over the last three seasons. Put in an adequate game manager and that total goes up by a few.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
26,016
AZ
No team has zero weaknesses, except maybe the Astros. I think four games is too few to make pronouncements about which sorts of weaknesses are more important than others in a short series. The Yankees' starting pitching was poor in three games in the series but they overall pitched pretty well in 3 of the 4 games. Well enough to win all of them. To me, this series was much more about what the Red Sox did right than anything the Yankees didn't do right or any Achilles heels.

The Red Sox pitching was phenomenal. That to me is the story of the series. They kept the Yankees in the park. Unless you're able to put up repeated crooked numbers, that's the way to beat them. The Red Sox and Yankees were close to even in runs this year but they were very different teams in terms of how those runs were scored. The Red Sox were first in the MLB in hits and the Yankees were 16th in the MLB in hits. Going into the series, if there was one stat I was interested in it was the home run differential. I thought that if the Sox could stay within touching distance they would have the advantage because they are better are scratching out runs and situational hitting. Even when the Sox were pitching to contact, they were mixing things up well enough to avoid the long ball and in the end I think that was the difference.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,984
Hingham, MA
Just had to add this point: the Sox had a 3+ run lead heading into 19 of a possible 34 Yankee batting innings. The series was semi close, but that to me is a fairly dominant stat.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,222
No team has zero weaknesses, except maybe the Astros. I think four games is too few to make pronouncements about which sorts of weaknesses are more important than others in a short series. The Yankees' starting pitching was poor in three games in the series but they overall pitched pretty well in 3 of the 4 games. Well enough to win all of them. To me, this series was much more about what the Red Sox did right than anything the Yankees didn't do right or any Achilles heels.

The Red Sox pitching was phenomenal. That to me is the story of the series. They kept the Yankees in the park. Unless you're able to put up repeated crooked numbers, that's the way to beat them. The Red Sox and Yankees were close to even in runs this year but they were very different teams in terms of how those runs were scored. The Red Sox were first in the MLB in hits and the Yankees were 16th in the MLB in hits. Going into the series, if there was one stat I was interested in it was the home run differential. I thought that if the Sox could stay within touching distance they would have the advantage because they are better are scratching out runs and situational hitting. Even when the Sox were pitching to contact, they were mixing things up well enough to avoid the long ball and in the end I think that was the difference.
They kept them in the park..... barely at times. The Yankees had some VERY long and loud fly outs. Still, they stayed in the park for the most part.

(MOD: I deleted the other part of this and quoted it in the Yankee offseason thread, I'd really like to keep these two topics separate if possible, thanks.)
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,968
Astoria
The irony in the pitching comments is that we advanced to game 7 of the alcs with an arguably worse rotation last year and the red sox were eliminated in the alds with the same rotation minus Eovaldi.
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,122
Two games were close, and the Red Sox won both, and that is baseball. But the score for the series was 27-14 and three of the four Yankees starters didn't pitch well, and three of four Red Sox (ed starting) pitchers did. The Yankees obviously have done very well in 2017-18 for a team that has been targeting the 2018-19 offseason and they have hit on a ton of great young players. The consequence of targeting 2018-19, however, was that they haven't expended big money or big prospects on starters since Tanaka while Scherzer, Sale, Verlander, Greinke, Price (lol) etc moved on and that might have cost them in the short-term. Might pay off in the long-term.
 

lars10

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
5,208
I would argue that the postseason rosters of these two teams are more or less similarly talented with different weaknesses and that a better manager than Boone would have made the series closer, but also who cares? It's over now and Boston won.

But that's just me, keep going if you want.
One thing I was seeing a few weeks ago was how many homers the Yanks hit this year.. Seemed to me that that wasn't a great thing since relying on the long ball in the postseason isn't a great idea. The lineup does seem to rely way too much on clearing the bases rather than moving runners along. To my eye the yanks have gone back to the bashing it out to right field model rather than being the scrappy team they were in the 90s. This could be totally wrong though.. I've been listening to Francesa today and one point that was made was that Stanton and Judge are sort of redundant. It's hard to have two bashers in your lineup that have also both struck out 200+ times over the year.

I think the bullpen was a strength (obviously) and Boone mismanaged it all series. Not sure what he could have done to get his guys into better spots on offense though... that just seemed like either better sox pitching or worse luck.

Also, the two teams may be similarly talented, but the two lineups are constructed totally differently.
 

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
17,390
Boston, MA
The injury to Hicks hurt, especially in Game 1 when Gardner was now in the 3 spot when NY was making their comeback. Gardner went 0-12 in the series, though he did have three walks.

Andujar and Torres were surprisingly bad as well. No XBH for Andujar after he was a doubles machine all season.
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,122
On the other side they somehow handled Betts. He looked awful
 

4 6 3 DP

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2001
1,909
The Yankee catcher in 2003 game 7 hit a single to tie the game against a pitcher on fumes.

The Yankee catcher in 2018 game 4 hit a ball to the track against a pitcher on mental fumes.

Inches. Not sure what happens in game 5 if that ball carries a little further but to suggest some Yankee failing in the series is to ignore that save for the carry distance of a couple of feet we'd be either waiting out rain delays tonight or playing tomorrow.

Now there are always inches - Tony Clark in game 5 2004 for example, but game 3 taken out it was a tight series and I don't think it suggests some sort of fatal weakness in NY. They lost a tight series against a 108 win team with HFA.
 

jayhoz

Ronald Bartel
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
15,038
The Yankee catcher in 2003 game 7 hit a single to tie the game against a pitcher on fumes.

The Yankee catcher in 2018 game 4 hit a ball to the track against a pitcher on mental fumes.

Inches. Not sure what happens in game 5 if that ball carries a little further but to suggest some Yankee failing in the series is to ignore that save for the carry distance of a couple of feet we'd be either waiting out rain delays tonight or playing tomorrow.

Now there are always inches - Tony Clark in game 5 2004 for example, but game 3 taken out it was a tight series and I don't think it suggests some sort of fatal weakness in NY. They lost a tight series against a 108 win team with HFA.
While technically true, that advantage was erased after game 2 and the Yankees lost both of their home games so it was a non-factor in the series.
 

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
8,225
Some fancy town in CT
The injury to Hicks hurt, especially in Game 1 when Gardner was now in the 3 spot when NY was making their comeback. Gardner went 0-12 in the series, though he did have three walks.

Andujar and Torres were surprisingly bad as well. No XBH for Andujar after he was a doubles machine all season.
The fact that Gardner went 0/12 against the Sox is proof that he's cooked.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
17,251
Newton
Do we only play a "but for a couple of inches" game with one team?
Or the "this unexpected injury really hurt their chances" game?

We are getting sidetracked by "I told you so's," and hard feelings from crowing (real or imagined). I think everyone here is more or less in agreement that this year the Red Sox were better than the Yankees. They played better during the regular season, they played better head-to-head during the regular season and they played better in the playoffs.

And, as @crow216 and @terrynever point out, there was something lacking in this Yankees team all year compared to the previous season -- yes, an intangible, whether it be a killer instinct, resilience or what have you. We can all sit here and debate what that was--Boone vs. Girardi, etc.--but both Sox and Yankees fans can agree it was there.

I think we can also all agree that this Yankee team won't need much to be a lot better -- certainly adding another top line starting pitcher would help.

Based on what I saw in this series but also over the course of the regular season, offensively the Yankees' explosiveness masked that they seem a little one-dimensional -- if they aren't hitting the ball out of the ballpark, they don't seem to be scoring many runs. They probably could use a guy or two in the lineup who does more than clobber baseballs. Gregorius (who had a good series) appears to be one guy. Is there someone else? Is McCutchen that guy once he settles down? Is Hicks that guy when healthy? Or is there someone else they should be targeting?

As a Red Sox fan, if there is one thing I expect from the Yankees it is that they do not sit tight after losing. I expect them to make some big/biggish moves this offseason.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
As a Red Sox fan, if there is one thing I expect from the Yankees it is that they do not sit tight after losing. I expect them to make some big/biggish moves this offseason.
Further to that, there's not much reason to focus so much on resetting the future tax rate if you don't plan to blow through it in the future.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,488
Boston, MA
The biggest difference between the two teams is balance. The Red Sox are good at just about everything. They can hit for power, hit for average, take their walks, make contact, and steal bases. On the other side of the ball, the starting pitching is very good, the bullpen is okay, and the defense is great. The Yankees can mash home runs and will take a walk, but they're not particularly good at making contact or stealing bases. The rotation is okay, the bullpen is great, and the defense is terrible.

If any part of the Red Sox game is slumping, they still have ways to win. The Yankees didn't have that luxury once the Red Sox started pounding the zone and kept them in the park.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
The Yankee defense isn't terrible, although that is largely dependent on which Sanchez shows up. Andujar is awful but was out mid-game in a few of the games and didn't even play the last one, Didi is great, Gleyber is great when he stays focused (which he did for the last few months, the casual mistakes seemed to all be mid-season), Voit is not great, Hicks and Judge are quite good, McCutchen is OK. When NY put in Hechevarria for Andujar, I think it was probably the best defensive infield they'd had in decades, three shortstops plus a 1B.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
Decades?

How soon we forget.

I don't put a lot of stock in GG (its reflective, but not perfectly accurate of the best defensive players) but the 2010 Yankee infield with Tiexiera (GG-legit) Cano (GG legit), Jeter (GG-IMO he lost his range to the left when he hurt his shoulder in '02?) Arod (no-GG but probably the best fielder) wasn't a bad infield.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
Yeah, I didn’t forget that, Tex was better than Voit, Cano/Gleyber maybe a tossup but the left side wasn’t close to Hechevarria/Didi.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
(Historians will mark that as the first and only time a Red Sox fan argued in favor of Jeter's defense.) :)
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,388
Pioneer Valley
The Yankees didn't lose the series against Boston because of their pitching. They didn't score as many runs as the Red Sox did.
Why was that? Nothing to do with the pitching on either side? The times the Sox pitching sucked, game #2, post-Sale game #1, and the excruciating 9th inning of game 4, then your guys did something. (Only not that much in game 4, given the chance they were given.) Those results had everything to do with the pitching they faced in the rest of the series. In the opposite case, game two, when you got a good start from Tanaka, the Sox couldn't beat the NYY. How does this not have to do with pitching? Hitting or not hitting has everything to do with pitching.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,756
where I was last at
Yeah, I didn’t forget that, Tex was better than Voit, Cano/Gleyber maybe a tossup but the left side wasn’t close to Hechevarria/Didi.
I think if we're talking every day line-ups and not late inning replacements (eg. Hech) the 2009-10 Y infield was pretty good, and overlooked with IMO:

Teix> Voit or Bird
Cano > Torres
Arod > Andujar.

With Didi the only current fielder having a fielding advantage over Jeter.

And for the record Jeter was an ok fielder for a statue.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,615
He made the plays if he got to them but his range was atrocious, especially to his left. He did have a few seasons around 2009 where he worked really hard in the offseason and managed to become mediocre but then age got him and he was back to dreadful. He was Pete Rose at SS, and about as effective defensively as Rose would have been.