On the Yankees beat

Breaking News - Redsox choose 8 day series
[quote]

http://yankees.lohudblogs.com/

From Peter Abraham:

"The Red Sox chose the eight-day series, meaning the Yankees will open their series against Cleveland on Thursday at Jacobs Field.

The schedule (times TBA)

Thursday, Oct. 4: Game One ay Cleveland

Friday, Oct. 5: Game Two at Cleveland

Sunday Oct. 7: Game Three at New York

Monday Oct. 8: Game Four at New York (if necessary)

Wednesday Oct. 10: Game Five at Cleveland (if necessary)

This means that Mike Mussina or Phil Hughes would start Game 4 if needed and Chien-Ming Wang could come back for Game 5."

What is 8-Day Series?

They get an extra day off.

So that means that they can now pitch their number 1 and 2 starters 2 times each in a 5 game series.

So knowing the Sox, they will go....

GM 1: Beckett
GM 2: Schilling
GM 3: Matsuzaka
GM 4: Beckett
GM 5: Schilling

BTW, all games are on TBS, with Game 3 possibly on TNT.

After the ALDS, it will be FOX all the way.
[/quote]

It always Advantage to the Sox. Only because they get to rest from the east coast, west coast trips, ugh! angry If the Yanks had that in 2005 the series could have gone another route! MLB always messing with the Yanks

ter's Lack Of "Glove" Not Really A Big Deal?
[quote]

http://actasports.com/sow.php?id=144

Fact: Derek Jeter had the second worst plus/minus figure at shortstop in 2005 at -34.

Fact: Derek Jeter had the second worst plus/minus figure at shortstop in 2006 at -22.

Fact: Derek Jeter is tied for the worst plus/minus figure at shortstop thus far in 2007
at -34.

Fact: Virtually every other fielding metric shows similar results.

But Jeter won Gold Gloves in 2005 and 2006. And he’ll probably win again this year. As my good friend Carmen Corica used to say, “Don’t let facts cloud the issues.”

The issue is that Derek Jeter is the best shortstop in baseball. The first shortstop I would pick in all of baseball to play for my team this year or next year would be Derek Jeter (though I would have to consider putting A-Rod back at short as well). Jeter is great offensively and has tremendous leadership skills. But he is not one of the best defensively. The managers and coaches who vote for the Gold Gloves have a hard time separating the best defensive shortstop from the best shortstop.

So, Derek Jeter makes 34 fewer plays than the average player at shortstop. Derek Jeter averages about 155 games played per season. This means there is one play, at short, every 5 games (rounding up) that Derek Jeter fails to make that an average shortstop would handle.

What does that mean? Well, one study says that a batted ball out is worth -.299 of a run. So, if Jeter misses 34 plays a year, he's costing the Yankees around 10 runs a season with his play at short. Or, if you look at his games played per season, Jeter is costing the Yankees one run, with his glove, per every 16 games (rounding up) that he plays at short.

That doesn't seem like a lot of damage - does it?

But, again, this is compared to an "average" shortstop. If you compare Jeter to a Troy Tulowitzki type, then he's costing the Yankees around 20 runs per season - or one run, with his glove, per every 8 games (rounding up) that he plays at short.

What does this mean? Let's use pythagorean winning percentage for a test. The Yankees, to date, this season, have scored 938 runs and allowed 753 runs. That's a pythagorean winning percentage of .608.

Now, take away 20 runs (that Jeter allows compared to a great fielding SS) from that runs allowed total. This would give the Yankees a pythagorean winning percentage of .621.

The difference between the .621 and the .608, in terms of wins, over a 162-game season, is two wins.

Therefore, in the end, I would suggest that having Derek Jeter at short, compared to having a world-class fielding SS at that position, is costing, the Yankees two wins per season. (Keep in mind this is under the condition of the Yankees having a great offensive team.)

Without looking, I would bet that Jeter makes us those two wins, somewhere, with his bat.

Don't get me wrong here. My blood pressure goes up every time I hear "Past-a-diving Jeter" during a Yankees broadcast. And, when I hear it, the fanboy in me comes out and says "It's time to get someone with some range at short."

However, in the end, when you look at the numbers, it's really not like Jeter is hurting the Yankees with his glove - or, better said, he's not killing them with his glove. And, at this moment, it only makes sense to move Jeter off short if you had a replacement who fielded like Adam Everett and who could hit like Jeter.

So, unless you had a healthy Barry Larkin in his prime, you're not going to find someone who will help the Yankees more at short than what Derek Jeter is doing now...even with his defensive "shortcomings."

[/quote]

Sf; Thanks but my watching every Yankee game possible and my gut told something that you just proved mathematically. I would love too see what Derek's numbers offensively are with the average hitting SS. I would suggest mathmatically more than +2 for a push more like +6 with his affinity for the clutch hit, just a gut feeling.
Stat guys are amazing how acceptance is based purely on numbers but I can find room in my head and brain at times for this process.

Since someone else is throwing up some "stats", I figured that I would provide a little background on how this is calculated. I will say that it is a very biased predictor based on an panel of analysts opinions for a given play. It does not take into account the play's difficulty based on the runner, how hard the ball was hit, weather, etc. Giving parts of a point to given play doesn't exactly make you sit and go, I get it. The -34 that is being calculated for Jeter proves absolutely nothing in my mind for it is so arbitrary. You cannot point to 34 plays that he should've made if he was "average" at short.

Here's the theory:
My book, The Fielding Bible, goes into great length (ad nauseum to some) describing the new fielding system we developed at Baseball Info Solutions, the Plus/Minus System. Video Scouts at BIS review video of every play of every major league game and record detailed information on each play, such as the location of each batted ball, the speed, the type of hit, etc. Using this in-depth data, we’re able to figure out how each player compares to his peers at his position. How often does Derek Jeter field that softly batted ball located 20 feet to the right of the normal shortstop position, for example, compared to all other major league shortstops?

A player gets credit (a "plus" number) if he makes a play that at least one other player at his position missed during the season, and he loses credit (a "minus" number) if he misses a play that at least one player made. The size of the credit is directly related to how often players make the play. Each play is looked at individually, and a score is given for each play. Sum up all the plays for each player at his position and you get his total plus/minus for the season. A total plus/minus score near zero means the player is average. A score above zero is above average and a negative score is below average. Adam Everett turned in the highest score we’ve had in four years of using the system with a +43 at shortstop in 2006. That means he made 43 more plays than the average MLB shortstop would make.

Interesting, HYD.

How did Jeter rate under your system?

Well Marianne: That's not my theory, it's the theory to support SF's post. I find that evaluating defensive players using statistics is flawed and tend not to turn to stats. At the same time, I don't trust someone else's opinion on what should be fielded and what should not. If you really read deep into the analysis and go into one of Bill James' articles, you get a better understanding. Jeter was criticized for "gambling" on getting the forceout. This by no means takes into consideration why this may have been a smart "gamble" based on the game situation and the need to keep that runner from scoring, etc. They also criticize Jeter for his location before the play develops. Again not taking into consideration the position of the other fielders, tendency of the hitters, or tendencies of the pitchers. There are a lot of defensive theories, but all of them are merely theories. They are designed to discount fielding percentage (a stat i think is almost as overrated as the save, hold, and stolen base). Unfortunately, I don't have a way to make defense into a fairly evaluatable category. To me, you just have to see those guys do it. No stat is going to tell you how often Jeter finds himself in the right place when others would not be (any other SS and Jeremy Giambi is safe and we lose to the As). So, I can't say one way or the other, I just wanted to put the other set of stats a bit more into context.

Larry: You had to love my last post. I'm abandoning the stats and not relying on numbers.

Thanks, HYD. I've read James's books, even owned a couple of them when they first came out, but could not make defensive theories fit into what I saw watching games, so I kind of gave up on that aspect. I guess I was hoping you had come up with something better! And you may yet.

I will say I enjoyed the James books at the time and felt that I gained some perspective, so you 'stat-heads' definitely have something to offer even fans like me who are not paying as close attention to the numbers as you.

These stats are predicted based on a panel of analysts opinions...who happen to be Mets, Sox and Angels fans...it's a conspiracy against Jeter.

Just joking about the conspiracy theory. We all know the analysts aren't fans of any team whatsoever. Even if they were Red Sox or Mets fans, if a play could go either way for Jeter, I'm sure they would give Jeter the benefit of the doubt.

I think this is lining up as well as possible for the Yankees. They're undefeated against Cleveland this year and, frankly, they owned the Red Sox in the second half.

No Angels and, likely no West Coast trip in the ALCS if they advance...Looks like a pretty good draw.

I also think that, considering how the Yankee lineup has been patient and built up huge pitch counts on opposing pitchers, Sabathia is in for a long game on Thursday.

HYD
Maybe if you played the game you have a better understanding of what's going on instead of BS.

Cleveland Indians shrug off poor regular-season showing against New York Yankees
Sunday, September 30, 2007
[quote]

http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/119114289172830.xml&coll=2&thispage=1

Cleveland's poor showing against the Yankees in the regular season is no big deal, the Indians say.

Kansas City, Mo.- The Indians, enthralled with the approaching playoffs, brushed aside their poor regular-season performance against the same New York Yankees they will play this week in the American League Division Series.

The Yankees pitched a shutout against the Indians, winning all six games of their season series.

New York went 3-0 at Yankee Stadium and 3-0 at Jacobs Field. They out-hit the Indians, .348 to .228. They outscored them, 47-17. Tribe pitchers had an 8.19 ERA.

The Indians shrugged their shoulders Saturday afternoon at such stats and said, "What, me worry?"

"The Yankees probably feel confident," said Indians shortstop Jhonny Peralta. "They know they went 6-0 against us, but we're different and so are they."

Peralta is glad the Indians are playing the Yankees.

"The Yankees are famous in the Dominican Republic," Peralta said. "I know a lot of people will be watching me. It's going to give me a lot of energy."

Said Indians relief pitcher Rafael Betancourt: "This is a different situation than the regular season. We weren't playing our best baseball when we played them. There are four great teams in the postseason and we're one of them."

The Yankees pounded starters Jake Westbrook and Jeremy Sowers in the first two games of an April series in New York. They scored six runs with two out in the ninth against closer Joe Borowski to complete the sweep.

They beat starters Fausto Carmona, Paul Byrd and Westbrook in an August sweep at Jacobs Field.

The matchup for Game 1 this week is expected to be C.C. Sabathia (19-7) vs. Chien-Ming Wang (19-7).

"We haven't faced Wang this year, but they haven't faced C.C.," said first baseman Ryan Garko. "We had a lot of different guys on our club in April and Travis Hafner was hurt when we played them in August."

Hafner missed the series with a sore left hamstring.

"This is like Christmas Eve," Garko said. "I know we're still playing for best record, but I'm anxious to get this thing going."

The Yankees lead the Indians in playoff experience. This is their 13th straight postseason appearance. The Indians most recently were in the playoffs in 2001.

"I have no idea how important experience is in the postseason because I've never been there," Hafner said. "I know we're excited. I don't think you need experience to win and I don't think anybody really cares what happened in the regular season."

Prime time:

The Indians will start their AL division series against the Yankees on Thursday, but wanted to start on Wednesday. The biggest reason was it would have allowed them to start 19-game winners Sabathia and Fausto Carmona twice.

They didn't like the idea of waiting until Thursday, when the second division series starts. The Indians will be off three days following today's regular-season finale against the Kansas City Royals.

"No one wants to sit around that long," said Indians General Manager Mark Shapiro.

Finally:

New York's Roger Clemens (left hamstring) is still questionable for the division series. Manager Eric Wedge, who played with Clemens in Boston, isn't betting against him. "He can resurface with the best of them," Wedge said. [/quote]

Who came up with this new rule where the team with the best record can choose between two schedules?

Was this in place before the season began?

The rule doesn't make a whole lot of sense since the extra day can possibly benefit BOTH teams -- even though it's not supposed to -- and not just the team with the best record (the team with the best record plays the team with the worst playoff record and they might benefit as well).

And why only have the AL team pick their schedule this year but not the NL team with best record (they have to wait until next year -- why?)

Also is this schedule selecting only done for the first round of the playoffs? What happens in the next couple of series?

This sounds like the dumbest rule ever. It makes no sense.

Anyone notice that the Red Sox are the only team that this rule is supposed to benefit (even though their opponent can possibly benefit from it as well)?

Anonymi: You're right, I never played the game. In fact, I spent all of high school making fun of the "baseball fags" just like they were "track pansies". I don't lie about that. I'm a lacrosse player first and forth right. I understand every intricacy of that game.

Your comment though, doesn't make any sense. No one can argue that defensive statistics are accurate portrayal's of a player's defensive ability.

At the same time, I am not saying that Jeter is an above average fielder. Rather I'm putting the article that SF posted into context. Neither agreeing with or disagreeing with the end result, but only the methodology employed. I think that my reasoning shows I have a VERY STRONG understanding of the game. When you contribute something of any worth or at least use a name that you can be identified with, then and only then, will I openly debate you on any issue you'd like. Until then, you're part of the moronic triumverate.

I think it was a big mistake for JT to announce his rotation before the schedule was determined. Now that we know we don't have the extra rest day, it would have been better to have Pettitte go in games 1 and then 5 since they are BOTH away games.

Wang pitches better at home and Andy is better on the road. Torre should have waited until the schedule was locked down before making the decision.

The R\Sox choice of the "8 day series", shows they have little confidence in Dice K. Their lack of confidence in the "$50 mullion dollar man", has forced them to rely on "The Schill", who is a "shadow" of what he once was. Having Dice K pitch a possibly "pivotal" Game 3, and Schilling a "deciding" Game 5, is a recipe for disaster.
Considering Pettitte and his much lower "road" ERA, he should be pitching Game 1, and a "possible" Game 5, both on the road. Torre needs to reconstruct his announced rotation. The "time tested" Pettitte throwing 2 playoff games, is a far better option than Wang.

PS to above...with the shorter schedule, I would of had Wang pitch game 3 at home (Game 3 is always the pivotal game to JT) and used Clemens in game 2. Pettitte for games 1 and 5 (if necessary) and Hughes or Mussina for game 4 at home. I think Mussina does better at home too? Hopefully, they will re-think things and make some changes now that we know we have the shorter schedule.

Dittos Roy!

I guess having Clemens throw in Game 3 as opposed to Game 2, gives him 2 more days to "heal". This is another Yankee injury that has proven to be far more serious than the Yanks originally led us to believe. I hate the thought of Mussina pitching in any game in any capacity.

HYD
1-Statistics are not accurate portrayl's of a player's defensive ability.
2-You can have a very strong understanding of the piano but that doesn't make you a pianist.
3-BASEBALL FAGS AND TRACK PANSIES that kind of talk reveals the character and personality of a person and you sir have some serious issues.You might know sports but in the game of life you are a LOSER and

This season has been a real roller coaster to say the least. I would love to see my postings blasting everyone from Torre-Cashman. I wanted to trade Cano, Melky and Abreu. These guys made me feel stupid. But that's why we are fans. I am just glad that they were able to ride out the tough times. This is the first year for me since 95, that I don't have high expectations on them winning it all. I will not be disappointed if they don't win it all. I know they will give it their best effort. I hope that's enough to have them win their 27th World Championship in their history. We shall see!!

Take care and have a great Sunday!!

Go Phillies & Padres!!

Clemens pitching in JT's "crucial game 3" scares the crap out of me. If we come out of Cleveland 1-1 and Clemens blows game 3, we are in BIG TROUBLE! Then, we're looking at Mussina (you know JT will go with "his experience" over Hughes) in game 4. Pressure and Mussina do not go well together. It will be last year all over again, done in 4.

I say revise the rotation. There is plenty of time. Pettitte in games 1 and 5. Clemens/Mussina in game 2. Wang in "crucial" game 3 at home. Hughes at home in game 4. Much better than currently aligned.

Roy,

You can't blame the Sox for picking the longer schedule. It probably has nothing to do with their lack of faith in Dice-K.

1. Extra travel days are beneficial when flying cross country.

2. It's not so much that they want to avoid Dice-K as it is an opportunity to get two World Series winning aces to pitch four out of the five games. I'm guessing you'd rely on those guys a little more than a rookie with no postseason experience.

Buckeye,

You can't pitch Pettite in 1 and 5 because they're no guarentee that the series is going the distance, especially with the 19-game-winning, 300-pound lefty Cy Young Winner pitching twice.

Andy's too valuable to not pitch twice in the playoffs. This is why we're paying him $16m. He has to pitch twice!

Anonymi:
1. You agreed with me, thanks.
2. I don't claim to be able to swing the bat. I don't even claim to be good at softball. What's your point? There have been great managers and GMs that either were never any good at the sport or never played.
3. My comments were based on high school. If you would've read my post, you'd understand the context. To make a judgement on me for saying my thoughts from 6 - 10 years ago shows YOUR character.

So, why don't you stop wasting your time envying me and start contributing to discussions on this board.

The Game of Life: Let's see, I graduated high school in three years; college in three years; got my masters degree in one year; began working as an accountant at a Big 4 Accounting firm; got promoted after my first year. I'm winning the game of life. As Donald Trump says, "I don't care much about money, but it's the only way to keep score."

Pretty soon everyone will see that Donald Trump, while a nice man, is so, so very wrong about money -- especially our imploding currency.

Money is not the way, certainly not the "only" way to keep score in The Game of Life.

How positively sick.

In fact, the love of money is the root of all evil, while money itself can be used for good things or bad as we all know.

The fact someone would actually write this here is disgusting -- truly.

The Game of Life?

Firemen
Policemen
Combat Medic
Mother Theresa

I think we all know deep down there are other far, far better ways to keep score.

Otherwise -- Haliburton, Paris Hilton and Carl Pavano would be our role models.

But one way or another, people will wake up to reality -- soon in fact.

Highly competitive people are magnetized by score-keeping mechanisms that the rest of us may find ridiculous, but let's admit that we all keep score and the ways we find to do it are not necessarily attractive. Keeping score by monitoring other people's 'virtue' according to our parochial standards of goodness and 'reality' can be at least as repulsive and even more 'hate-full' than numbers games like scorecards and money.

So back to baseball, where we can all understand and accept the scorekeeping!! Gametime!!!

Said by the pauper? Success does not make one a role model. Interpretation is glorious.

HYD got caught speeding again ...FAGS AND PANSIES. All that education [ha ha]and still as dumb as dirt.What is pathetic is this clown feels no remorse and attempts to put the blame on the person who called him out. What a nut case.
Marianne,let me repeat what I told you yesterday.STOP turning a blind eye when it comes to your cronies behavior. There is no way you can defend or spin this BS. HYD is a bigot and a sick bigot at that.
He called somebody a queer the other day and Jim A and Sully tried to twist the intent. No Jim A or Sully today which should tell you something.

Cashman,

Here I am on a blog populated almost exclusively by guys. My observation throughout life, as a non-guy, is that (straight) guys seem to filter almost every element of life through a sex-and-gender screen, including their relations with all other human beings, other guys included. What is more, most of them do not even realize (a) that this is happening or (b) that this strikes other human beings as weird at best and offensive-to-scary at worst. Do I enjoy it? No. Do I think this factor has driven other women off this blog? Very probably. Do I think it can be changed? No. Is any of this new, or surprising, or unique to this group? Please. So don't exhort me to try to change my 'cronies' on this, its pointless.

Marianne you are getting to sound like HYD. I didn't ask you to change anything what I asked is for you to be fair and stop the blog hypocrisy. You don't have a problem calling out a bloger not in your loop but you make excuses for a sick bigot who is.

Cashman, if you're going to quote me, do it correctly. It was not I who called anyone a queer.

When dumb and dumber learn to read what's written and stop writing between the lines for the sake of making a posting on this board (clearly nothing real to contribute), then, maybe, people on this blog will take them seriously.

Calling me out or misquoting me? BIG DIFFERENCE.

Cashman, I honestly don't know what hypocrisy you're talking about. I am not aware of ever 'calling out' any blogger on any gender-related issue.

Maybe you mean that I have 'called out' other bloggers on other, unrelated issues, but failed to 'call out' HYD on this. I am not sure.

There are people I agree with more frequently than most, though I don't think there's anybody I haven't disagreed with from time to time (including HYD). I hope I am an equal-opportunity disagree-er and if not I regret it!

Marianne,
Cut the BS,you know exactly what I'am talking about. The only gender-related issue pertains to the sick bigot HYD and not only didn't call him out you attempted to create a smokescreen.

HYD
What did you call the football and basketball players?
Get help you tricked out BIGOT.

Friends.

The way the schedule is laid out - Wang or Pettite could pich Game 5. Wang would have 5 days rest and Pettite 4 because of the offdays on Saturday and Tuesday. So if Wang gets ripped in game 1 and we get to game 5, don't be surprised if Torre goes with Pettite.

Of course, any rainout would remove this possibility.

Newsday should ban HYD from this blog and also have bloggers register. Also,have a legally authorized system of rules to prevent bloggers from using more than one name and engaging in a course of conduct offensive to others.

Are you willing to play be the same rules YOU want to impose on everyones else anon?....nah, didnt think so....

Casual Observer
That's the problem with the obnoxious on this blog. You ask and answer the questions.Worry about yourself as I recall your another blogger that has be known to go over the top and lose your marbles with someone gets the best of you and like HYD your a blowhard with an inflated opinion of your baseball knowledge.
As for myself,I would welcome the change.

LMAO...you see...that is YOU'RE problem.

NO ONE has "got the best of me", because this is just a blog...it is a public forum for people to exchange opinions and thoughts regarding (mostly) baseball ...If I dont like what other people say, I usually ignore them, but sometimes I point out stupidity when it is blatant....

If you want to pigeon-hole me and others as being some sort of over-blown elitists because it helps you deal with your insecurities...then go for it..I couldn't care less. I don't always agree with HYD...and I think his obsession with "predictions" is funny and mostly irrelevant...I don't find him any different than most of us on here. It's all part of being a fan of the game, and enjoying the social aspect of it. You ought to try it....baseball isn't a "war", it is a game. We, as fans, have little, if any, effect on the outcome of games...certainly, chest-thumping and idiotic statements made in a public blog have NO effect what-so-ever on the outcome of any team's wins and losses. If your team wins...you are no better or worse a person than you were before that game was played. If you are so pitiful as to live and die on a personal level based on the wins and losses of a baseball team...you have more issues than can be resolved in a public forum.

Once again, being small minded is not exclusive to you...there are others of all team loyalties that fall into that category..and they experience the same useless frustrations you do. You might consider getting beyond this...and truly enjoying the game of baseball, as well as the thoughts and opinions of others...from all walks of life. Who knows...you just might learn something...I know I do.

Casual Obsessor
Another verbal sparring match and again you get knocked the **** out.
Get your dumb ass back into rehab and don't forget to say hello to Nudge.

"Verbal sparring match"....LMAO....you idiot, you couldn't hold your own in a "verbal sparring match" with my black lab, much less me.

Read all the posts on all the threads knuckledragger...you have NO support...most people find you offensive, childish, and brainless...but clearly, YOU get some sort of perverted thrill out of any response you can get...pathetic.

Go play in traffic boy....you're truly not worth the bandwidth you take up...and expect no further responses from me, pissant.

And further more I am superior to all as i own a woodlot of 50 acres that I had to kill a relative for! Plus , i know one is not supposed to start a sentence with "and" but I don't worry about such nuiances as I am superior! Bow to me as I am above all and above all reproach!

Anonymousketeer,

Turn just a little to the right so I can draw the ears...

Well maybe not completely above reproach there was a time when i just broke up with my bull dog and i had a little to much to drink and i gave them the rope to tie me to the tree but it was only one time i think