For once, I'm actually not annoyed by the weather.
I'm stuck overloaded with work tonight but tomorrow will be perfect for being outside, throwing back a few beers and having the Yanks on most of the day wherever I wind up.
the Royals have some interesting guys to watch- Merrifield, Nicky Lopez, Mondesi, Dozier and even Soler that are fun to watch. Its amazing how devoid that Baltimore organization is of any talent whatsoever. I don't like to look too far ahead but that O's team may lose well over 100 for the next 3 or 4 years.
It also doesn't help them being in the AL East. Yankees, Rays, Sox are going to pound them for years. Blue Jays do have enough talent to mix it up a bit.
Yep absolutely. Toronto has blue chippers like Vlady, Bichette etc...was saying to my kids the other day that a team like the O's should look at the Tampa model. Get a ton of live bullpen arms and guys who can catch the ball. Mix in some solid vet castoffs who can hit when given the every day opportunity. I think more of the small market teams will use that model.
Another reason why I don't like scheduled days off for players. Â
I know it's a minor gripe, but I can't stand how the Yanks for the past couple of years don't believe in "hot". They've sat Sanchez, Judge and others when they're going good and their reasoning was it was a planned day off and they're sticking to it.
When I saw the lineup for the last O's game I couldn't believe both Gary and Gleyber were sitting. Yes, we ended up winning the game but there was no good reason they should've been sitting IMO. Gary could've been the DH and it wouldn't have hurt Gleyber to wait one more day for some rest. They were both red hot feasting on O's pitching and should've been able to ride that out.
What would the harm have been to wait one more day for each guy? To hell with the pre planned stuff and go with what's working now.
As it turned out the weather in KC sucks and they'll both have another day off. Here's hoping the little break doesn't cool them off and the pre planned deal doesn't come back to bite them in the ass.
My Grandmother used to say "who knows what tomorrow brings" and it turns out it was rain in KC and those guys missed most of that game for nothing.
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
RE: Another reason why I don't like scheduled days off for players. Â
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
But nobody knew it would rain in KC today, so they would not have had a day off had it not rain. But it was goofy giving both of them off on the same day except it was the Orioles and Trenton would probably beat them.
Seriously, I wasn't against giving Sanchez and Torres yesterday. I was against trying to over rest the bullpen.
We are nitpicking on Boone a bit.
RE: RE: Another reason why I don't like scheduled days off for players. Â
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
But nobody knew it would rain in KC today, so they would not have had a day off had it not rain. But it was goofy giving both of them off on the same day except it was the Orioles and Trenton would probably beat them.
Seriously, I wasn't against giving Sanchez and Torres yesterday. I was against trying to over rest the bullpen.
We are nitpicking on Boone a bit.
Honestly I'm not picking on Boone as I think he's just the face of this and not the one making the calls. It's all analytics and he just follows orders IMO.
My biggest gripe is analytics has no use for "hot" and the Yanks have admitted they don't look at hot. That's a mistake IMO as I think it's more likely they'll cool their own guys off by doing this than an opposing pitcher will or them being tired.
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
RE: RE: RE: Another reason why I don't like scheduled days off for players. Â
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
Weathermen cannot predict the hour it will rain and you never know when a front will breakup. I can read a radar and weather map as well as most and you just can't guarantee too much 24 hrs in advance with our wacky weather patterns.
While I agree with you on hot players, analytics says otherwise. I'm not sold on analytics but I can't argue with what has happened with guys like Voit and Urshela. And I understand that they need these guys healthy in September and October and hopefully November. We just must be "old school."
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
Weathermen cannot predict the hour it will rain and you never know when a front will breakup. I can read a radar and weather map as well as most and you just can't guarantee too much 24 hrs in advance with our wacky weather patterns.
While I agree with you on hot players, analytics says otherwise. I'm not sold on analytics but I can't argue with what has happened with guys like Voit and Urshela. And I understand that they need these guys healthy in September and October and hopefully November. We just must be "old school."
Haha, I'm definitely an old school guy but I do try and keep an open mind to progress and things constantly changing. I can see the benefits of analytics but I don't like how it doesn't take things like "hot" into account.
My thing about having guys healthy in Sept and Oct is you have to get there first. Granted one game in May vs the O's isn't make or break but I don't like the precedent it sets. We saw it last year with the resting of guys the day before an off day. They lost a few of those games and while they won the WC, those losses might've had an effect on the Division race in the end.
As for the KC weather, yes there's no way of knowing in advance the exact hour but these storms have been different there. Lots of tornadoes, rain and flooding. Hell, Suzyn Waldman was even talking about it before the game yesterday as far as their travel in, and getting the games in.
I'm not saying they should've counted on a rainout, only that there was a good chance of it, and at worst if they did play, those guys still could've had today off instead of yesterday. To me, it's kind of like the eye test, and putting some things together common sense wise that analytics doesn't consider. At best if it rained the guys get an off day without missing playing time and at worst they just get their rest day if the game is played.
analytics is what this team is built on. Obviously they favor the math instead of “being hot”. If you are going to invest the time and money into the math, then implement the math.
The math says scheduled days off are better than trying to string along a hot player without a breather. I’m fine with it as long as it’s backed by data.
Eman, I typically feel the same way about days off during a hot Â
streak. But somehow the Yanks have gotten away with it time after time over the last few years.
I can't know how exhausting it might be to play and travel like the pros do, so I'm trying to give Boone and Co. the benefit of the doubt in this regard.
about resting your 2 best bats the same day so they can continue to compound their productivity together instead of splitting up their days off, decreasing production with just one in the lineup for 2 games.
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
The Yankees know what they are doing. Old school fans might not agree with analytics but it is the reason they have greatly improved their drafting, trades, and signings over the years. This is baseball in 2019. The Yankees don't pick guys like Cito Culver anymore. Every once in a while you get a Sonny Gray but that is rare now. Analytics are why the Yankees can win without spending everyone to death like in the past.
...have you seen UNC's rookie Aaron Sabato? He's a local boy from Rye Brook, New York and I mentioned him as a possible choice in last year's draft when he was a high school senior. I think he won ACC rookie of the year.
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
They're not smarter than you, they crunch numbers - data in, data out. Percentages. One guy wrote a program and the others enter numbers, the hamsters run and out poops percentages....basically actuaries.
RE: I think it has been proven time and time again Â
The Yankees know what they are doing. Old school fans might not agree with analytics but it is the reason they have greatly improved their drafting, trades, and signings over the years. This is baseball in 2019. The Yankees don't pick guys like Cito Culver anymore. Every once in a while you get a Sonny Gray but that is rare now. Analytics are why the Yankees can win without spending everyone to death like in the past.
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
They're not smarter than you, they crunch numbers - data in, data out. Percentages. One guy wrote a program and the others enter numbers, the hamsters run and out poops percentages....basically actuaries.
That’s an extremely simplified take on it. Data is data, but it’s collection, interpretation, and use varies greatly depending on countless variables and weighting. I don’t think it’s as simple as data in data out - everyone would be able to win 100 games if that was the case.
analytics is what this team is built on. Obviously they favor the math instead of “being hot”. If you are going to invest the time and money into the math, then implement the math.
The math says scheduled days off are better than trying to string along a hot player without a breather. I’m fine with it as long as it’s backed by data.
If they don't pay attention to hot then why do they pay attention when a guy is struggling? They'll give him a day or two to clear his head, work on things etc,and that's ok by analytics? Or do analytics not play into that part? Seems to me when a guy is struggling it's more of an eye test thing to sit him than anything that's backed up by data, and maybe the opposite should happen sometimes as well.
I see how analytics is working for them and I'm really not opposed to it or trying to make this a big deal. I just think there needs to be a place for the human element to sometimes factor into the decisions as well.
Would analytics tell them the probability of them getting rained out in KC? If not, it should've IMO as the weather forecasts sure favored it. To me if they factored everything in they could've at worst rolled the dice another day figuring they'd get their day off because of the bad weather and if somehow it cleared, they'd just get their day off on Friday instead of Thursday. Would one more day really hurt? Especially since they both were smoking hot and killing it in Baltimore.
I say take advantage of that, and if analytics is such a big part of their planning how does it not see the probabilities of guys continuing to be hot in a place they're comfortable? Wouldn't the numbers show that?
Again it's not a major gripe but I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isnt in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
whether you are hot or not. That’s clearly something they believe in. And I’ve seen plenty of Yankees in the lineup when struggling - Bird, Gardner, all last season with Gary, Stanton when he’s on a cold streak, etc.
I don’t know the formula, I just know that rest seems to be weighted more heavily. I think this strategy could be questioned on a .500 team but what they are doing is working, plain and simple. And the regular rest for most guys won’t come into play during the post season so what does it matter anyway?
I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
whether you are hot or not. That’s clearly something they believe in. And I’ve seen plenty of Yankees in the lineup when struggling - Bird, Gardner, all last season with Gary, Stanton when he’s on a cold streak, etc.
I don’t know the formula, I just know that rest seems to be weighted more heavily. I think this strategy could be questioned on a .500 team but what they are doing is working, plain and simple. And the regular rest for most guys won’t come into play during the post season so what does it matter anyway?
It's working because for the most part the guys filling in have been coming through. I don't think most .500 teams have the depth the Yanks have and that probably factors in to rest not working as well for them.
I think they got lucky winning the last game vs the O's and if they had lost it as they almost did, there would be more stink about Gleyber and Gary sitting. I'm not the only one who feels this way as even Michael Kay ( who I know is not an expert but definitely more closely tied into the Yanks than me) went off on them on his show and felt both should've played.
I also think it matters because I thought the rest thing might very well have cost them a few losses last year, especially when it came to sitting hot players or giving them a day before an off day. The question is though, do the wins they get from analytics saying rest outweigh the losses?
Yes they won 100 games last year so the analytics worked, but my question is, could they have won more if they rode the "hot" guys instead of sitting them when they did?
I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
How do you know they are not doing that?
I guess they could be but the evidence suggests otherwise. All I ever hear is the numbers show this or the numbers favor that. Hell they even have an analytics guy on the bench during games, and I doubt he's taking guys temperatures while there.
I wouldn’t have cared if they lost with Gary and Torres sitting. As I mentioned previously the analytics may say that the probability of winning without both of them in 1 game is still high enough to justify, and also helps keep them both in the lineup more often, as opposed to 2 games per week without 1 in the lineup.
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
How do you know they are not doing that?
I guess they could be but the evidence suggests otherwise. All I ever hear is the numbers show this or the numbers favor that. Hell they even have an analytics guy on the bench during games, and I doubt he's taking guys temperatures while there.
Well they're not going to say we rested Sanchez because his wife gave him a toothy blowjob last night. As for the analytics guy, it's not his job to take guys temperatures, that's what they have the bench coach for. And then the manager makes a decision (or in this case the general manager).
p.s.--I'm just playing devil's advocate, but maybe the analytics is more sophisticated than you give it credit for and it factors in hitting streaks and slumps when it times days off. Also, matchups could play a role not just in resting a starter, but when playing his replacement as well (in other words, maybe it's not just a coincidence that the replacement comes through that day).
I wouldn’t have cared if they lost with Gary and Torres sitting. As I mentioned previously the analytics may say that the probability of winning without both of them in 1 game is still high enough to justify, and also helps keep them both in the lineup more often, as opposed to 2 games per week without 1 in the lineup.
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
Fair enough UConn.
I'm not saying I'm right and you, the Yanks or anyone else is wrong. I'm just offering up my thoughts on it, and appreciate the back and forth.
I guess I'm doing my own little analytics thing in getting as much input from other posters in order to really evaluate everything fairly and not just going by numbers or the eye test in coming to a conclusion.
One thing though, a loss to the O's while sitting both of those guys when they were so hot would've bothered me more than you. Losing sucks but I can deal with getting beat by a better team or a great play but it bugs me more when my team either doesn't play it's best, gives the game away or isn't giving 100%. That includes not putting its best or hottest players on the field when they're really going well, when the rest could wait one more day.
I wouldn’t have cared if they lost with Gary and Torres sitting. As I mentioned previously the analytics may say that the probability of winning without both of them in 1 game is still high enough to justify, and also helps keep them both in the lineup more often, as opposed to 2 games per week without 1 in the lineup.
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
Fair enough UConn.
I'm not saying I'm right and you, the Yanks or anyone else is wrong. I'm just offering up my thoughts on it, and appreciate the back and forth.
I guess I'm doing my own little analytics thing in getting as much input from other posters in order to really evaluate everything fairly and not just going by numbers or the eye test in coming to a conclusion.
One thing though, a loss to the O's while sitting both of those guys when they were so hot would've bothered me more than you. Losing sucks but I can deal with getting beat by a better team or a great play but it bugs me more when my team either doesn't play it's best, gives the game away or isn't giving 100%. That includes not putting its best or hottest players on the field when they're really going well, when the rest could wait one more day.
.
Here's my thought on the subject, why not at least
space out the days off for the players. Give Player A (Sanchez) the day off one day, and Give Player B (Torres), off the next day. You have two players who have a total of 19 HR's against an opponent, let me repeat
19 HR's (before Memorial Day), and you sit them both the same day? Girardi would do the same thing, give 3 players off the same day?
Just space it out better is my theory.
see my theory. Is it worth ripping the band aid off and sitting both for 1 game so you can have both playing together more often? I don’t know, but I think it can be a factor.
Also if you sit Sanchez and Torres you free up 2 positions players and allow someone else to “rest” at DH every once in a while. I think it goes beyond just the players who sit. Cash man spent a lot of time building this bench, not using it would be foolish over 162 games.
see my theory. Is it worth ripping the band aid off and sitting both for 1 game so you can have both playing together more often? I don’t know, but I think it can be a factor.
Also if you sit Sanchez and Torres you free up 2 positions players and allow someone else to “rest” at DH every once in a while. I think it goes beyond just the players who sit. Cash man spent a lot of time building this bench, not using it would be foolish over 162 games.
.
Not using the bench is silly, I agree, my point is just spacing out the off days better. It just seems managers
want to give players off the same day, they can space it out.
You have two players doing serious damage against the O's, play one player, sit the other.
The last game of that series was a day game after a night game for example, so you could sit Sanchez, and play Torres. The next game, sit the other player, don't see why it has to be the same day, it's a long season.
That's just my theory, it's not a right or wrong answer.
it’s possible the analytics say they are more effective playing together, which offsets the mutual day off. There has to be a reason, it’s not like Boone can’t count and see both have scheduled off days. It isn’t a coincidence, IMO.
RE: RE: I think it has been proven time and time again Â
The Yankees know what they are doing. Old school fans might not agree with analytics but it is the reason they have greatly improved their drafting, trades, and signings over the years. This is baseball in 2019. The Yankees don't pick guys like Cito Culver anymore. Every once in a while you get a Sonny Gray but that is rare now. Analytics are why the Yankees can win without spending everyone to death like in the past.
They are still not drafting pitchers very well.
That couldn't be more wrong. The Yankees have a recent track record of drafting guys and adding velocity and turning fringe guys into actual prospects. Fangraphs had a long post not long ago about the Yankees success with pitching.
it’s possible the analytics say they are more effective playing together, which offsets the mutual day off. There has to be a reason, it’s not like Boone can’t count and see both have scheduled off days. It isn’t a coincidence, IMO.
Another very overlooked reason is that the Yanks have quality reserves who need playing time. Estrada is a legit ML prospect, and can play 2B, SS and 3B. He needs ABs in the bigs- which means that someone has to sit. Some days that is DJ; other's it is Torres.
As for C, the Yanks have to look big picture- they have to ignore hot and cold streaks. This team has aspirations of playing deep into the post-season. That means you need to pace your pitching and C to make sure that they are not worn down in October.
It doesn't get your TEAM anywhere if you ride your starting C hard in May and June just because they are killing it at the plate if the C is beat up and worn down in October. You don't get any extra points for winning games in May or June. In addition, what is the utility cost of winning 97 games vs. 100? If that means your C is tired and ineffective in the playoffs, you have HURT your club- and for what? A few extra HR or hits?
Not worth it.
Everyone is aware that this team is a legit contender- that means that you make the trade-off that a hot hitting C sits 3 times a week so he has a better chance of being effective in the games that actually count- the playoff games.
Players are not machines- they need rest, they need to pace themselves, and be ready for more than 162 games.
People who get caught up in hot streaks vs. rest are not accounting for the larger goal- a World Series title. 2-3 extra HR during the regular season doesn't help you in the playoffs- but those extra games can HURT your team.
Two ugly strike three swings from Torres and Sanchez Â
it’s possible the analytics say they are more effective playing together, which offsets the mutual day off. There has to be a reason, it’s not like Boone can’t count and see both have scheduled off days. It isn’t a coincidence, IMO.
Another very overlooked reason is that the Yanks have quality reserves who need playing time. Estrada is a legit ML prospect, and can play 2B, SS and 3B. He needs ABs in the bigs- which means that someone has to sit. Some days that is DJ; other's it is Torres.
As for C, the Yanks have to look big picture- they have to ignore hot and cold streaks. This team has aspirations of playing deep into the post-useason. That means you need to pace your pitching and C to make sure that they are not worn down in October.
It doesn't get your TEAM anywhere if you ride your starting C hard in May and June just because they are killing it at the plate if the C is beat up and worn down in October. You don't get any extra points for winning games in May or June. In addition, what is the utility cost of winning 97 games vs. 100? If that means your C is tired and ineffective in the playoffs, you have HURT your club- and for what? A few extra HR or hits?
Not worth it.
Everyone is aware that this team is a legit contender- that means that you make the trade-off that a hot hitting C sits 3 times a week so he has a better chance of being effective in the games that actually count- the playoff games.
Players are not machines- they need rest, they need to pace themselves, and be ready for more than 162 games.
People who get caught up in hot streaks vs. rest are not accounting for the larger goal- a World Series title. 2-3 extra HR during the regular season doesn't help you in the playoffs- but those extra games can HURT your team.
Yeah well you have to get to the playoffs first, and IMO, they got lucky beating the O's the other day with Gary and Gleyber sitting.
I find it hard to believe a day at DH for Gary is going to have a negative impact on him making it through the season healthy and strong.
Personally I think it's nuts to ignore hot or cold streaks, and while analytics definitely has its place and has helped the Yanks, I don't think it should be the end all as far as decisions go. A little common sense added to the mix won't hurt.
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
when they are hurt? I also don’t believe everything I read an refuse to believe that the Yankees are giving away their formula by saying that don’t factor in “hot”.
This isn’t simple math. There’s just too many variables in play here and many of them are, and should be, unknown.
RE: RE: RE: Again, how do you know they ignore them Â
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
It's not about stats, it's about playing guys when they're hot in order to try and win as many games as possible.
Just because they look like a playoff team now doesn't guarantee anything. With all the injuries this team has suffered, I'm not sure how anyone can be confident all the guys will be back at 100%. That's not even taking into account the possibility of more injuries. It's not even June yet and as good as things are going now, there's a hell of a long way to go. This isn't being contrarian, it's being honest and realistic.
Besides the goal is to win a WS title, not just get to the playoffs. IMO, the best way to win a WS title is to put yourself in the best possible position and that means winning your Divison and even better getting home field throughout. That takes getting as many regular season wins as you can.
Yes wild card teams have won it all but it's certainly a much harder road and I don't think any of us like the idea of playing a one and done. I'm not looking for guys to get better numbers for the back of their baseball cards, I want them getting good numbers to help win more games.
when they are hurt? I also don’t believe everything I read an refuse to believe that the Yankees are giving away their formula by saying that don’t factor in “hot”.
This isn’t simple math. There’s just too many variables in play here and many of them are, and should be, unknown.
Do you really think Gary being a DH in the last O's game would've hurt him or even risked him getting hurt? It wouldn't have any more than any other time he DH'd IMO.
As far as what I believe, I'm with you there on most writers and media but when guys like Michael Kay say it, it carries some weight with me.
it’s mental. It’s listening to your players and their routines. It’s respect. It’s the way baseball is in 2019. You can’t just quantify everything with “hurt or not hurt”. That’s too simple and not what’s happening. This is a grueling season and these players have scheduled time off built into their regimen. There’s other factors that we also don’t know about (nagging injuries, personal issues, etc.).
RE: RE: RE: RE: Again, how do you know they ignore them Â
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
It's not about stats, it's about playing guys when they're hot in order to try and win as many games as possible.
Just because they look like a playoff team now doesn't guarantee anything. With all the injuries this team has suffered, I'm not sure how anyone can be confident all the guys will be back at 100%. That's not even taking into account the possibility of more injuries. It's not even June yet and as good as things are going now, there's a hell of a long way to go. This isn't being contrarian, it's being honest and realistic.
Besides the goal is to win a WS title, not just get to the playoffs. IMO, the best way to win a WS title is to put yourself in the best possible position and that means winning your Divison and even better getting home field throughout. That takes getting as many regular season wins as you can.
Yes wild card teams have won it all but it's certainly a much harder road and I don't think any of us like the idea of playing a one and done. I'm not looking for guys to get better numbers for the back of their baseball cards, I want them getting good numbers to help win more games.
Obviously no one is going to convince you of the fatal flaw in your misguided opinion. Even more misguided because you are listening to a baseball moron in Kay.
The reality of the situation is that the Yankees don't care one iota about your opinion, and your complaining comes across as old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn. This is modern baseball. Deal with it or don't, but I for one am tired of explaining reality to someone who refuses to listen.
I'm stuck overloaded with work tonight but tomorrow will be perfect for being outside, throwing back a few beers and having the Yanks on most of the day wherever I wind up.
Can't wait for this fucking weekend.
Game 2: 8:15OM, on PIX11
There you have it for tomorrow.
Quote:
the Royals have some interesting guys to watch- Merrifield, Nicky Lopez, Mondesi, Dozier and even Soler that are fun to watch. Its amazing how devoid that Baltimore organization is of any talent whatsoever. I don't like to look too far ahead but that O's team may lose well over 100 for the next 3 or 4 years.
It also doesn't help them being in the AL East. Yankees, Rays, Sox are going to pound them for years. Blue Jays do have enough talent to mix it up a bit.
Yep absolutely. Toronto has blue chippers like Vlady, Bichette etc...was saying to my kids the other day that a team like the O's should look at the Tampa model. Get a ton of live bullpen arms and guys who can catch the ball. Mix in some solid vet castoffs who can hit when given the every day opportunity. I think more of the small market teams will use that model.
When I saw the lineup for the last O's game I couldn't believe both Gary and Gleyber were sitting. Yes, we ended up winning the game but there was no good reason they should've been sitting IMO. Gary could've been the DH and it wouldn't have hurt Gleyber to wait one more day for some rest. They were both red hot feasting on O's pitching and should've been able to ride that out.
What would the harm have been to wait one more day for each guy? To hell with the pre planned stuff and go with what's working now.
As it turned out the weather in KC sucks and they'll both have another day off. Here's hoping the little break doesn't cool them off and the pre planned deal doesn't come back to bite them in the ass.
My Grandmother used to say "who knows what tomorrow brings" and it turns out it was rain in KC and those guys missed most of that game for nothing.
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
But nobody knew it would rain in KC today, so they would not have had a day off had it not rain. But it was goofy giving both of them off on the same day except it was the Orioles and Trenton would probably beat them.
Seriously, I wasn't against giving Sanchez and Torres yesterday. I was against trying to over rest the bullpen.
We are nitpicking on Boone a bit.
Quote:
Sorry for the long rant but I want hot guys playing til they cool themselves off, and I'd bet they wanted to ride it out as well.
But nobody knew it would rain in KC today, so they would not have had a day off had it not rain. But it was goofy giving both of them off on the same day except it was the Orioles and Trenton would probably beat them.
Seriously, I wasn't against giving Sanchez and Torres yesterday. I was against trying to over rest the bullpen.
We are nitpicking on Boone a bit.
Honestly I'm not picking on Boone as I think he's just the face of this and not the one making the calls. It's all analytics and he just follows orders IMO.
My biggest gripe is analytics has no use for "hot" and the Yanks have admitted they don't look at hot. That's a mistake IMO as I think it's more likely they'll cool their own guys off by doing this than an opposing pitcher will or them being tired.
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
Weathermen cannot predict the hour it will rain and you never know when a front will breakup. I can read a radar and weather map as well as most and you just can't guarantee too much 24 hrs in advance with our wacky weather patterns.
While I agree with you on hot players, analytics says otherwise. I'm not sold on analytics but I can't argue with what has happened with guys like Voit and Urshela. And I understand that they need these guys healthy in September and October and hopefully November. We just must be "old school."
Quote:
As far as the weather in KC goes, it would've only taken a look at the news and forecast to see what's been happening out there and the likelihood of it continuing. Granted it wasn't a guarantee but likely, and with yesterday being a day game, those two guys would've had plenty of rest before tomorrow's game even without a rainout. No reason Gary couldn't DH yesterday even after a night game, and Gleyber is a young guy. One more day in a park he loves wouldn't have hurt.
Weathermen cannot predict the hour it will rain and you never know when a front will breakup. I can read a radar and weather map as well as most and you just can't guarantee too much 24 hrs in advance with our wacky weather patterns.
While I agree with you on hot players, analytics says otherwise. I'm not sold on analytics but I can't argue with what has happened with guys like Voit and Urshela. And I understand that they need these guys healthy in September and October and hopefully November. We just must be "old school."
Haha, I'm definitely an old school guy but I do try and keep an open mind to progress and things constantly changing. I can see the benefits of analytics but I don't like how it doesn't take things like "hot" into account.
My thing about having guys healthy in Sept and Oct is you have to get there first. Granted one game in May vs the O's isn't make or break but I don't like the precedent it sets. We saw it last year with the resting of guys the day before an off day. They lost a few of those games and while they won the WC, those losses might've had an effect on the Division race in the end.
As for the KC weather, yes there's no way of knowing in advance the exact hour but these storms have been different there. Lots of tornadoes, rain and flooding. Hell, Suzyn Waldman was even talking about it before the game yesterday as far as their travel in, and getting the games in.
I'm not saying they should've counted on a rainout, only that there was a good chance of it, and at worst if they did play, those guys still could've had today off instead of yesterday. To me, it's kind of like the eye test, and putting some things together common sense wise that analytics doesn't consider. At best if it rained the guys get an off day without missing playing time and at worst they just get their rest day if the game is played.
The math says scheduled days off are better than trying to string along a hot player without a breather. I’m fine with it as long as it’s backed by data.
I can't know how exhausting it might be to play and travel like the pros do, so I'm trying to give Boone and Co. the benefit of the doubt in this regard.
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
...have you seen UNC's rookie Aaron Sabato? He's a local boy from Rye Brook, New York and I mentioned him as a possible choice in last year's draft when he was a high school senior. I think he won ACC rookie of the year.
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
They're not smarter than you, they crunch numbers - data in, data out. Percentages. One guy wrote a program and the others enter numbers, the hamsters run and out poops percentages....basically actuaries.
They are still not drafting pitchers very well.
Quote:
There’s so much that goes into this. I have to think it’s for a very valid reason that many people a lot smarter than me are paid to analyze and implement.
They're not smarter than you, they crunch numbers - data in, data out. Percentages. One guy wrote a program and the others enter numbers, the hamsters run and out poops percentages....basically actuaries.
That’s an extremely simplified take on it. Data is data, but it’s collection, interpretation, and use varies greatly depending on countless variables and weighting. I don’t think it’s as simple as data in data out - everyone would be able to win 100 games if that was the case.
The math says scheduled days off are better than trying to string along a hot player without a breather. I’m fine with it as long as it’s backed by data.
If they don't pay attention to hot then why do they pay attention when a guy is struggling? They'll give him a day or two to clear his head, work on things etc,and that's ok by analytics? Or do analytics not play into that part? Seems to me when a guy is struggling it's more of an eye test thing to sit him than anything that's backed up by data, and maybe the opposite should happen sometimes as well.
I see how analytics is working for them and I'm really not opposed to it or trying to make this a big deal. I just think there needs to be a place for the human element to sometimes factor into the decisions as well.
Would analytics tell them the probability of them getting rained out in KC? If not, it should've IMO as the weather forecasts sure favored it. To me if they factored everything in they could've at worst rolled the dice another day figuring they'd get their day off because of the bad weather and if somehow it cleared, they'd just get their day off on Friday instead of Thursday. Would one more day really hurt? Especially since they both were smoking hot and killing it in Baltimore.
I say take advantage of that, and if analytics is such a big part of their planning how does it not see the probabilities of guys continuing to be hot in a place they're comfortable? Wouldn't the numbers show that?
Again it's not a major gripe but I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isnt in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
I don’t know the formula, I just know that rest seems to be weighted more heavily. I think this strategy could be questioned on a .500 team but what they are doing is working, plain and simple. And the regular rest for most guys won’t come into play during the post season so what does it matter anyway?
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
I don’t know the formula, I just know that rest seems to be weighted more heavily. I think this strategy could be questioned on a .500 team but what they are doing is working, plain and simple. And the regular rest for most guys won’t come into play during the post season so what does it matter anyway?
It's working because for the most part the guys filling in have been coming through. I don't think most .500 teams have the depth the Yanks have and that probably factors in to rest not working as well for them.
I think they got lucky winning the last game vs the O's and if they had lost it as they almost did, there would be more stink about Gleyber and Gary sitting. I'm not the only one who feels this way as even Michael Kay ( who I know is not an expert but definitely more closely tied into the Yanks than me) went off on them on his show and felt both should've played.
I also think it matters because I thought the rest thing might very well have cost them a few losses last year, especially when it came to sitting hot players or giving them a day before an off day. The question is though, do the wins they get from analytics saying rest outweigh the losses?
Yes they won 100 games last year so the analytics worked, but my question is, could they have won more if they rode the "hot" guys instead of sitting them when they did?
Quote:
I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
How do you know they are not doing that?
I guess they could be but the evidence suggests otherwise. All I ever hear is the numbers show this or the numbers favor that. Hell they even have an analytics guy on the bench during games, and I doubt he's taking guys temperatures while there.
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
Quote:
In comment 14455378 Eman11 said:
Quote:
I think there should be a little wriggle room with analytics as there's no way it can factor in all the human elements, eg, how a guy is actually feeling that day, their confidence level, or even if there are personal problems that might be affecting their play on a particular day.
What if the numbers say a guy kills it against that day's pitcher but the guy had a big fight with his wife the night before, and it's clear his head isn't in it? A manager could see that but a computer can't, and if they only go by analytics, the guy plays that day even if it's a mistake.
How do you know they are not doing that?
I guess they could be but the evidence suggests otherwise. All I ever hear is the numbers show this or the numbers favor that. Hell they even have an analytics guy on the bench during games, and I doubt he's taking guys temperatures while there.
p.s.--I'm just playing devil's advocate, but maybe the analytics is more sophisticated than you give it credit for and it factors in hitting streaks and slumps when it times days off. Also, matchups could play a role not just in resting a starter, but when playing his replacement as well (in other words, maybe it's not just a coincidence that the replacement comes through that day).
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
Fair enough UConn.
I'm not saying I'm right and you, the Yanks or anyone else is wrong. I'm just offering up my thoughts on it, and appreciate the back and forth.
I guess I'm doing my own little analytics thing in getting as much input from other posters in order to really evaluate everything fairly and not just going by numbers or the eye test in coming to a conclusion.
One thing though, a loss to the O's while sitting both of those guys when they were so hot would've bothered me more than you. Losing sucks but I can deal with getting beat by a better team or a great play but it bugs me more when my team either doesn't play it's best, gives the game away or isn't giving 100%. That includes not putting its best or hottest players on the field when they're really going well, when the rest could wait one more day.
Quote:
I wouldn’t have cared if they lost with Gary and Torres sitting. As I mentioned previously the analytics may say that the probability of winning without both of them in 1 game is still high enough to justify, and also helps keep them both in the lineup more often, as opposed to 2 games per week without 1 in the lineup.
I don’t know what the figures are or if it’s even true, but it’s how I think they applying their data. Basically, rip the bandaid off, maybe get a win, then be at full strength more often to compound each other’s plus at bats.
Fair enough UConn.
I'm not saying I'm right and you, the Yanks or anyone else is wrong. I'm just offering up my thoughts on it, and appreciate the back and forth.
I guess I'm doing my own little analytics thing in getting as much input from other posters in order to really evaluate everything fairly and not just going by numbers or the eye test in coming to a conclusion.
One thing though, a loss to the O's while sitting both of those guys when they were so hot would've bothered me more than you. Losing sucks but I can deal with getting beat by a better team or a great play but it bugs me more when my team either doesn't play it's best, gives the game away or isn't giving 100%. That includes not putting its best or hottest players on the field when they're really going well, when the rest could wait one more day.
Here's my thought on the subject, why not at least
space out the days off for the players. Give Player A (Sanchez) the day off one day, and Give Player B (Torres), off the next day. You have two players who have a total of 19 HR's against an opponent, let me repeat
19 HR's (before Memorial Day), and you sit them both the same day? Girardi would do the same thing, give 3 players off the same day?
Just space it out better is my theory.
Also if you sit Sanchez and Torres you free up 2 positions players and allow someone else to “rest” at DH every once in a while. I think it goes beyond just the players who sit. Cash man spent a lot of time building this bench, not using it would be foolish over 162 games.
Also if you sit Sanchez and Torres you free up 2 positions players and allow someone else to “rest” at DH every once in a while. I think it goes beyond just the players who sit. Cash man spent a lot of time building this bench, not using it would be foolish over 162 games.
Not using the bench is silly, I agree, my point is just spacing out the off days better. It just seems managers
want to give players off the same day, they can space it out.
You have two players doing serious damage against the O's, play one player, sit the other.
The last game of that series was a day game after a night game for example, so you could sit Sanchez, and play Torres. The next game, sit the other player, don't see why it has to be the same day, it's a long season.
That's just my theory, it's not a right or wrong answer.
Quote:
The Yankees know what they are doing. Old school fans might not agree with analytics but it is the reason they have greatly improved their drafting, trades, and signings over the years. This is baseball in 2019. The Yankees don't pick guys like Cito Culver anymore. Every once in a while you get a Sonny Gray but that is rare now. Analytics are why the Yankees can win without spending everyone to death like in the past.
They are still not drafting pitchers very well.
That couldn't be more wrong. The Yankees have a recent track record of drafting guys and adding velocity and turning fringe guys into actual prospects. Fangraphs had a long post not long ago about the Yankees success with pitching.
Another very overlooked reason is that the Yanks have quality reserves who need playing time. Estrada is a legit ML prospect, and can play 2B, SS and 3B. He needs ABs in the bigs- which means that someone has to sit. Some days that is DJ; other's it is Torres.
As for C, the Yanks have to look big picture- they have to ignore hot and cold streaks. This team has aspirations of playing deep into the post-season. That means you need to pace your pitching and C to make sure that they are not worn down in October.
It doesn't get your TEAM anywhere if you ride your starting C hard in May and June just because they are killing it at the plate if the C is beat up and worn down in October. You don't get any extra points for winning games in May or June. In addition, what is the utility cost of winning 97 games vs. 100? If that means your C is tired and ineffective in the playoffs, you have HURT your club- and for what? A few extra HR or hits?
Not worth it.
Everyone is aware that this team is a legit contender- that means that you make the trade-off that a hot hitting C sits 3 times a week so he has a better chance of being effective in the games that actually count- the playoff games.
Players are not machines- they need rest, they need to pace themselves, and be ready for more than 162 games.
People who get caught up in hot streaks vs. rest are not accounting for the larger goal- a World Series title. 2-3 extra HR during the regular season doesn't help you in the playoffs- but those extra games can HURT your team.
Quote:
it’s possible the analytics say they are more effective playing together, which offsets the mutual day off. There has to be a reason, it’s not like Boone can’t count and see both have scheduled off days. It isn’t a coincidence, IMO.
Another very overlooked reason is that the Yanks have quality reserves who need playing time. Estrada is a legit ML prospect, and can play 2B, SS and 3B. He needs ABs in the bigs- which means that someone has to sit. Some days that is DJ; other's it is Torres.
As for C, the Yanks have to look big picture- they have to ignore hot and cold streaks. This team has aspirations of playing deep into the post-useason. That means you need to pace your pitching and C to make sure that they are not worn down in October.
It doesn't get your TEAM anywhere if you ride your starting C hard in May and June just because they are killing it at the plate if the C is beat up and worn down in October. You don't get any extra points for winning games in May or June. In addition, what is the utility cost of winning 97 games vs. 100? If that means your C is tired and ineffective in the playoffs, you have HURT your club- and for what? A few extra HR or hits?
Not worth it.
Everyone is aware that this team is a legit contender- that means that you make the trade-off that a hot hitting C sits 3 times a week so he has a better chance of being effective in the games that actually count- the playoff games.
Players are not machines- they need rest, they need to pace themselves, and be ready for more than 162 games.
People who get caught up in hot streaks vs. rest are not accounting for the larger goal- a World Series title. 2-3 extra HR during the regular season doesn't help you in the playoffs- but those extra games can HURT your team.
Yeah well you have to get to the playoffs first, and IMO, they got lucky beating the O's the other day with Gary and Gleyber sitting.
I find it hard to believe a day at DH for Gary is going to have a negative impact on him making it through the season healthy and strong.
Personally I think it's nuts to ignore hot or cold streaks, and while analytics definitely has its place and has helped the Yanks, I don't think it should be the end all as far as decisions go. A little common sense added to the mix won't hurt.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
Quote:
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
This isn’t simple math. There’s just too many variables in play here and many of them are, and should be, unknown.
Quote:
In comment 14455625 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
It's not about stats, it's about playing guys when they're hot in order to try and win as many games as possible.
Just because they look like a playoff team now doesn't guarantee anything. With all the injuries this team has suffered, I'm not sure how anyone can be confident all the guys will be back at 100%. That's not even taking into account the possibility of more injuries. It's not even June yet and as good as things are going now, there's a hell of a long way to go. This isn't being contrarian, it's being honest and realistic.
Besides the goal is to win a WS title, not just get to the playoffs. IMO, the best way to win a WS title is to put yourself in the best possible position and that means winning your Divison and even better getting home field throughout. That takes getting as many regular season wins as you can.
Yes wild card teams have won it all but it's certainly a much harder road and I don't think any of us like the idea of playing a one and done. I'm not looking for guys to get better numbers for the back of their baseball cards, I want them getting good numbers to help win more games.
This isn’t simple math. There’s just too many variables in play here and many of them are, and should be, unknown.
Do you really think Gary being a DH in the last O's game would've hurt him or even risked him getting hurt? It wouldn't have any more than any other time he DH'd IMO.
As far as what I believe, I'm with you there on most writers and media but when guys like Michael Kay say it, it carries some weight with me.
Quote:
In comment 14455650 Eman11 said:
Quote:
In comment 14455625 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
seems to me like you are making assumptions that likely aren’t true.
I've heard and read in several places the Yanks don't believe in "hot". You're right about the cold part though, I am assuming that part but it stands to reason if they don't believe in hot, they probably don't believe in cold either.
I was only referring to the last line in Rich's post about that. I wasn't overlooking the long term things when looking at hot, just not ignoring or dismissing hot in the mean time. Yes, the long term goal is winning a WS, but we have to get there first and IMO, hot players help that objective.
You are reaching for points that don't exist at this point.
The Yankees are going to be a playoff team. Too many clubs mailing it in, and the Yankees are in first place without Judge, Stanton, Andujar, Sevy and Betances adding anything to this team. Arguing otherwise is making Stephen A Smith arguments just to be contrarian.
When you know you are a playoff team, hot streaks by individual players are really meaningless. A win is a win, and you don't get extra points for putting up stats. It's actually arguable that guys like Urshula have carried this team- and no one whines when he sits.
The reality is that Boone has to manage the tram for a 180 game season and individual stats don't mean anything in that context.
It's not about stats, it's about playing guys when they're hot in order to try and win as many games as possible.
Just because they look like a playoff team now doesn't guarantee anything. With all the injuries this team has suffered, I'm not sure how anyone can be confident all the guys will be back at 100%. That's not even taking into account the possibility of more injuries. It's not even June yet and as good as things are going now, there's a hell of a long way to go. This isn't being contrarian, it's being honest and realistic.
Besides the goal is to win a WS title, not just get to the playoffs. IMO, the best way to win a WS title is to put yourself in the best possible position and that means winning your Divison and even better getting home field throughout. That takes getting as many regular season wins as you can.
Yes wild card teams have won it all but it's certainly a much harder road and I don't think any of us like the idea of playing a one and done. I'm not looking for guys to get better numbers for the back of their baseball cards, I want them getting good numbers to help win more games.
Obviously no one is going to convince you of the fatal flaw in your misguided opinion. Even more misguided because you are listening to a baseball moron in Kay.
The reality of the situation is that the Yankees don't care one iota about your opinion, and your complaining comes across as old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn. This is modern baseball. Deal with it or don't, but I for one am tired of explaining reality to someone who refuses to listen.