If past performance against other teams means anything though, the Yanks are just 6-6 vs TB and 6-6 vs BAL. So, 7 more against each of them. Are they going to continue to play NY tough? Who knows. Also, they have 3 each at OAK and SEA. 6 more with BOS; BOS having to venture no further west than Cleveland for the rest of the year. I'll take our chances.
/humblebrag
It isn't really, though. Just because the Sox haven't had a real, extended slump yet, that doesn't mean they can't. Any team, no matter how good, can have a bad month. And in the Sox' case, that's most likely to come in September, when 15 of their 26 games are against likely playoff teams (ATL, HOU, NYY, and CLE), 9 of the 15 on the road. It wouldn't be at all shocking even for a team this good to have something like a 10-16 record for a month like that. If the Yankees are performing at roughly the opposite of that pace at the same time (easy to do if the Sox are losing, since 6 of those games are head-to-head), that's most of the lead right there. Which the Sox could survive, if they take care of business for the rest of August, when their schedule is almost as easy as the Yankees'. But they have to do that. If they take the foot off the gas and walk into September with the lead down to 5 or 6 games, things could get serious very quickly, and before you know it the game threads will be swarming with chicken and beer references.
Why would past performance mean anything in this case though? It seems far more likely that TB and BAL just randomly outperformed their true talent vs. the Yankees over a small sample of games than that there is something quirky about their rosters vis-a-vis the Yankees that makes those two pairs of teams, in spite of their records vs. everybody else, truly an even match for each other.
538 has the Yankees going 31-18 down the stretch to finish at 102-60. That feels about right looking at their schedule.
...so?
I've spent too much time already trying to understand what this means.
Ah, 116 wins, the magic number. But whose 116 wins are we talking about? Is it the 116 by Seattle in 2001 when they lost 46 games for a .716 winning percentage or the 1906 Cubs when they lost 36 games for a .763 winning percentage? A team today would have to win at least 124 games to outdo the 1906 Cubs from a winning percentage point-of-view.
With rosters expanded and a large lead, I'd like to see Cora stick with a 5 man rotation on regular turns but lower the pitch counts of the starters(~75/game). Instead of Pomeranz being the 6th starter, let's see if he can add value out of the pen (so far so good). ALSO use those extra relief innings to try out some minor league arms (Scott, Poyner, Gorst, etc) and try to discover a hot arm. Our pen is our Achilles heel and if Cora can uncover a reliable situational arm for the playoffs we'd be better off.
They should definitely take every opportunity to rest the top starters, but I'm not sure a flat pitch limit is the best way to do it. Especially one that low. Often it's not how many pitches thrown, it's the situations in which they are thrown.
Swihart is rehabbing with the Spinners today(weather permitting) so he is certainly close.
It’s almost impossible for the Yankees to make up the deficit without doing real damage against the Red Sox. I think that when looking at how good the Sox have to be TO BE SAFE, you should start from an assumption of the Yankees sweeping the Sox.
I am guessing the Yanks split with us. If you think they will sweep us, then just add 3 wins to our required 23 ... which would imply that the Sox need to go 26-16 the rest of the way.
You’re guessing the Yankees go 32-13? That’s .711. They certainly could but I’d take the under.
If we’re beating someone 10-0 in the 5th inning before clinching we can substitute and let some of those guys pitch mopup innings prior to clinching.
If the manager manages as scared as the most scared fans, he shouldn't be managing.
A couple points in our favor...
FWIW, they went 36-13 (.735) from Apr 13 through June 12. And 40-13 (.755) from Apr 21 through June 21. In total, 44-15 (.746) from Apr 13 through June 21.
Yes, hopefully.
Those only represent a total of 9 games. Matching the Yankees' record against those opponents is only a small part of the remaining necessary work.
Sox actually have to venture west of Cleveland to the South Side of Chicago, but your point still stands.
Is that the baddest part of town? We better go in there meaner than a junkyard dog.
How times have changed for braggable cars:
Since I wrote the above, Sox have gone 15-11. They'd need to go 8-8 the rest of the way to hit my 23-19 bogie.
How is you predicting a 12-1 stretch for the MFY against dreck and them going 6-7 "close"?
I think your sarcasm meter is broken. I wouldn't want anyone's life to depend on it, but I'm pretty sure.
I don't think you were being quite as sarcastic as you claim. You bumped a month old thread to poke fun at yourself for two lines, but the rest of the post is serious?
