Silence emanates from the GPS system. Then comes the ominous announcement, "RECALCULATING."
Time for us to make our own recalculations, as Siri's frosty voice gives us a new set of directions, since Cashie was so unwise as to diverge from the obvious plan.
Now that we can safely dismiss all the hooey about how the 2022 New York Yankees might be the greatest team that ever played—they never were, and never could have been—it's time to see what our real chances and real possibilities are.
—A 30th Straight Winning Record: HIGHLY LIKELY. It would be the 97th winning season in the Yanks' 120 years of existence. Which ain't nothin'.
CAN your New York Yankees manage to go at least 12-44 over the remaining 56 games of the season? I think they can—though it's no lock. The Yanks' pitching is coming apart, fast. When that happens, it's like your foundation sliding out from under the house, or an iceberg ripping a long gash in the side of your ship.
It don't matter how nice and fancy everything has been. You're going down, bad.
—Winning 100 games or more for the 22nd time in franchise history: HIGHLY UNLIKELY. True, all this Yankees team would have to do is go 30-26 the rest of the way. Not happenin'. No way they have a winning record from here on in, not with this pitching staff and these unfilled holes in the lineup (not to mention the holes in the ownership box).
Something that seemed like a slam-dunk just a few weeks ago...has already slipped out of reach.
—Taking the East Division: POSSIBLE. The way the remaining schedule is set up, the Yanks division rivals have to play each other. A lot. That will make it hard for any one team to make a run. But...Boston is sinking fast, and Baltimore could easily return to form. If they turn into tomato cans again, that would make a charge by both TB and the BJs much more possible.
And again—a complete Yankees collapse is more likely than not. The team has already lost nearly one-third of the peak, 15 1/2-game lead it held less than a month ago, after stomping the Sox in Fenway on July 8th. Losing the other two-thirds in two months? Very possible.
Just remember how the 2000 team, exhausted and thinking it already had everything clinched, sputtered down the end of THAT season, going 3-15 and getting outscored by 57-148. And THAT was an infinitely better team than this one in all categories—one with a truly superior pitching staff that would rally to win its third straight World Series.
Coming up right now for our boys is a pretty brutal full MONTH of games, all over the country, mostly against other contenders. This should really tell the tale—and it doesn't look to be a pretty one.
–Best Record in the American League: NO CHANCE. Houston, a better team, is playing like an incredible machine, to plagiarize my favorite track call. They will move past the Yanks like they are standing still.
—Making the Playoffs: HIGHLY LIKELY. That is, can the Yankees finish in the top 40 percent of the AL?
Though yet again, when you don't have your pitching, you don't have just about anything. I wouldn't be THAT surprised if they just went home after Game 162.
—Winning an ALDS Series: POSSIBLE. But this depends upon so much else. IF they don't slip down to a Wild Card spot, or finish as the third-best division winner and get beat in one of the best-two-of-three, play-in series.
IF the team they're playing has or has not wrecked their own staff getting through an earlier round...IF their opponent has injuries or is exhausted...yeah, it's POSSIBLE. I would not bet your trailer park lot on it.
—Getting to the World Series: ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. Hate to preclude ANY possibility of this happening. As a great man once said, there's no predicting baseball.
The more short series there are, the more likely it is that the best team—Houston—can get knocked off. Just look at the Braves back in the day, or the Phillies from around a decade ago. (Hey, Cashman's not TOTALLY wrong about this being a crapshoot!).
But if it IS Yankees-Astros—again—expect the Yanks to lose this match-up for the 4th time in the last 8 seasons. This year, Altuve won't even to keep his shirt on.
—Winning the World Series: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Which means NOT getting there might not be the worst thing. Who wants to see us get skunked by the Mets?
Posts
88 comments:
If you are going to get blitzed by the Mutts, better not to even make it to the World Series this year.
In some crazy kind of way, perhaps the stupid move by Cashman to unload Montgomery for Bader was the right thing to do. It torpedos the Yankees's chances at the overall best record. Which in turn pretty much torpedos their chances of making it through the A.L. playoffs. So they never make it to the WS. Brilliant, isn't it?
If the Mutts do indeed make it to the WS this year, we (along with HAL) can thank Brain Cashman on a job well done! Who else, on this earth, could have done such a thing? 4 dimensional chess? Master of the Absurd? This man would be in a class all by himself. He would attain demi-god status.
If you think about it, people have said that the two game series with the Mutts was the thing that really pulled the trigger on these deals, including the Montgomery deal. Cashman may have concluded that this team ain't good enough to beat the Mutts in a best of seven (rightly so), ain't good enough to beat the ASS-stros in a best of seven (again, rightly so). So why not punt away another season, get ready for next year?
Unfortunately, next year ain't going to be any better. They will hang on to all their garbage and dead wood. No housecleaning will be done. Nothing particularly significant will happen over the winter. Unless you count a Judge re-signing as significant. But he can't make the team any better than it was this year. He's having a career year, in his walk year, predictably enough.
The New York Yankees: leaders in the fields of Mediocrity, Risk Management, Maintaining Status Quo.
If this team doesn't win the division or 100 games, then Boone and Cashman should be gone. I agree they won't win the WS and that they won't make the ALCS. The bullpen will consist of 7 Scott Procters by October, because only 1 starter will consistently go 6 innings. The only hope is that Bader comes back and does Bader things!
I guaran-fucking-tee this team does not win 100, Judge will not hit 60, we will not win a playoff series, and that both Boone and Cash will be back next year. Our starters will include Bader in CF, Hicks in LF, Donaldson at 3B, IKF at SS. During the off-season Cashman will overpay for the wrong stating pitcher(s). Judge will re-sign for almost 40m a year, then suffer through an injury plagued season in which he hits 27 HR’s and bats .260. Andujar is claimed off waivers by the Orioles for whom he hits 33 hrs. In a surprise, Ben Rortvedt wins the Mr. Bikini title in Scranton and goes on to open several “The Office” themed vegan fast food restaurants in NE PA featuring Beet Burgers. Boone and Cash return in 2024 and give the retired No. 1 Jersey to Volpe.
I agree Judge won't hit 60hrs, because there will be a supply chain issues regarding steroids and there won't be any available till December
Ya see! Ya all complained about Ca$hman and not enough pitching. He went dumpster diving for you! He got...
Yankees Claim Luke Bard
By Steve Adams | August 5, 2022 at 1:30pm CDT
1:30pm: The Yankees announced the move, adding that Bard has been assigned to Triple-A Scranton/Wilkes-Barre.
1:12pm: The Yankees have claimed right-hander Luke Bard off waivers from the Rays, reports Lindsey Adler of The Athletic (Twitter link). Tampa Bay designated Bard for assignment earlier in the week. The Yankees opened a spot on the 40-man roster this morning when they outrighted right-hander Carlos Espinal, so there’s a 40-man vacancy for the newly claimed Bard.
Bard, 31, possesses a tidy 1.93 ERA in 14 frames with Tampa Bay this season, though his small sample of work is a good example of how misleading earned run average can be. Bard has fanned only eight of the 56 batters he’s faced (14.3%) and walked seven of them (12.5%) in addition to plunking another pair. He’s been knocked around for a 4.88 ERA in 24 Triple-A innings so far in 2022 and came into the current season with a career 5.05 ERA and 5.32 FIP in 66 big league innings.
That said, Bard has long been able to spin his four-seamer at a higher rate than just about anyone in the game, and that’s again been the case in 2022, when his four-seamer’s spin rate sits in the 99th percentile among big league hurlers, per Statcast. He’s averaging 94.1 mph on the pitch and carries a solid enough 11.8% swinging-strike rate in his career (on all pitches combined). Bard is in his final minor league option year, so he can be sent back and forth between the Bronx and Triple-A Scranton without needing to pass through waivers for the remainder of this year at least.
Bader Beet Boone and Cash
Last night I chatted with a die hard Cardinals fan that thinks Harrison Bader is an amazing player . . . but did confess that he played b better with long hair.
WHOOPSIE
The Yanks tout that they have the highest spin rates in baseball. It's not from the pitchers, it's from the front office that spins that they have top flight pitching gems when in fact they have top flight pitching cubic zirconia...
Like Samson of old, but with Achilles plantar fasciitis
Actually, given the restrictions we are under with the demise of the August waiver deadline, Luke Bard is a very acceptable pick up. But we will need more starting pitching, and I don’t know where the hell we’re supposed to get it.
Hey - but at least Bader's family is super duper happy he's back home.
And truly, at the end of the day that's all Cash truly cares about - - - happy families.
Yanks are now the kings of meaningless statistics. Exit velocity! Spin rate! Yay!
I love the in-depth reporting on how he can spin that ball. One pictures a tent attraction in a traveling carnival, the locals all crowding in to see the man with the top hat as he spins that baseball by the light of a magic lantern...
How many years have the Yankees been inconsistent and incredibly streaky? Too many, but therein lies our only hope.
The first half of the season, we streaked as we never streaked before. Even moreso than the guy who ran naked past David Niven at the Oscars.
And now, we've sunk into the mediocrity and losing ways that always have followed our streaks.
But...and like Kim Kardashian, it's a big but...what if we hit winning streak #2 heading into September? If we do, and can just keep it up for a fibonacci fraction of the first half's length, we run the table. Shoot the moon. Rack up the rings.
Look, it's a long shot, but that's who we are now. We should change our name to the New York Streakies. Even the pinstripes are streaks of a sort.
I don't know. Weirder things have happened. Look at April, May and June.
Oh, and to hark back to Duque's previous post, Food Stamps adores the minuet, the Ballet Russe, and crepes Suzette, but Cashman likes to rock and roll, a hot dog makes him lose control...what a wild duet.
Also keep in mind that the Monty trade is so bad, it may well have been carried out by Bizarro Cashman. We haven't seen too much of him the past couple years, but this has all his hallmarks.
Bad trade, good! Me lose games to be winner!
And yes, AA, it's hilarious how they've emphasized that Bader is a local boy.
One can almost picture the locals crowding around the telegraph somewhere in Westchester County, getting the news.
"Well did you hear that? He's a local boy, dad-blast it! Ol' Marv Bader's kid! Hitch up the wagon, Ma! If we leave now, we might just get to the city by the time he's ready to play!"
Guys: I think I figured out the mystery of the Montgomery dump. I posted in the other Gallo discussion, but here it is:
So the Montgomery-Bader deal was a hedge against the possibility of Judge leaving, plus more importantly, a bargaining chip to use against Judge during winter negotiations. Judge's agent, doubtless, would bring up that "Judge is a natural centerfielder, and he played very well in CF this year, so that raises his price even more". Cashman counters with, "yes, maybe with some other team without a CF, but we now have a real CF who can play the pants of Judge in CF, so let's not even bring that up. Judge will be strictly a right fielder for the remainder of his Yankee career. We'll negotiate strictly from the standpoint of Judge as a RF"
Presumably, in the minds of Yankee management, that would bring down the price of Judge's contract. That was the kind of thing that they were hoping to do with Gallo, but increasing public scrutiny of Gallo's rapidly diminishing, microscopic batting average forced their hand to dump Gallo. That left them with having to bring in what they consider a "legitimate" center fielder to use against Judge in contract negotiations. I think it's a masterful piece of preparation for contract talks. They might have saved themselves 50 million bucks. Neat, eh?
Plus, with Bader being a local boy, that makes all the more for better press. Less money to Judge, better public relations, a hedge against Judge leaving, it's brilliant! Checkmate!
Hoss....lol!!!!
Hoss - truth be told - check this out:
https://www.sportskeeda.com/baseball/news-my-brother-coming-homeeeee-harrison-bader-s-sister-shares-delight-instagram-following-outfielder-s-trade-new-york-yankees
Unfortunately - it does contain some of that Cashman-blight (not unlike what destroyed most of the earth's crops in Chris Nolan's Interstellar) but it is a bit adorable and cute and squishy.
My prediction of 83 wins is looking better every day.
Unlike AA's Kreepy Klown Kashman Klone avatars.
Roofy -
whatever do you mean. . . . ?
GO NESTOR!!!
AA,
Kind of a mashup of Killer Klowns From Outer Space and Dorian Gray. Both classics.
I'm with you, Mr Firefly.
If only we could all live in Freedonia.
Instead, we're at the circus.
HAL is the ringleader *and* bearded lady, if you know what I mean. Too many clowns to count.
I am never going to hear or read about "spin rates" -- for the rest of my days (limited horizon) -- without thinking about the ranger_ip contribution above.
The microphones tonight sound crappy.
Slight over modulation, proximity distortion (who wants to hear Michael Kay's heavy breathing) and overall unpleasant sounding.
They love Carp there don't they.
Nestor not so nifty so far.
Lars Nootbaar?
Nestor is ok - the umpire missed a couple of strike calls there - we'll see what happens next inning (although he was almost decapitated by Molina)
I may change my name to Nootbaar - and then just start eating nut bars as my go to snack.
Ah, there's the Donaldson we know so well. Whiffs on ball four. And Gleyber bad baserunning.
But including Gleyber was the dealbreaker!
Nestor lost the strike zone here.
Whew.
Okay, what the fuck all is happening now?
Holmes is now the 8th inning guy? What the unholy fuck-all are they us to?
Chapman in the 9th. That's what.
Holmes facing the monsters this inning. Makes sense, which is why it seems weird.
This. This is what the unholy fuck all this is.
they are done.
This team sucks big time.
Hmmm…it seems Holmes has feet of Clay.
If only the Yankees had some live arms in Triple A they could bring up to keep the bullpen fresh for the stretch run. But what kind of team has the resources and savvy to plan for stuff like that?
Don't worry. Kay and Flash loved Holmes' arm angle. The meatball to a lousy hitter? The two out walk? Not to worry, the YES men loved Clay's arm angle.
Dispiriting losses piling up.
Almost a fairy tale ending - but NOT I SAY NO WAY - NOT TODAY - GO AWAY.
Johnny Wad Homes has shot his load for the year.
lead over houston 1/2 game
lead over toronto 10.5
It's going to be a long hard fall.
Let the suckage commense!
I wonder how much of a collapse it would take to get Boone and/or Cashman fired.
Boy, we get beat by Dakota Fanning. Who's next? Ginnifer Goodwin?
Sadly, Holmes seems to have lost it.
Also...9 guys left on base. At least Beni finally got another hit—but that just underscores the fact that THE LINEUP MAKES NO SENSE.
DJ and Beni have to be 1-2. Judge in the 3 spot, with constant ribbie opportunities. This isn't rocket science. Put down the damned Dianetics, uh, Sabremetrics books, and think for a moment about how you've played baseball your entire life. The on-base guys leading off. Then the power guys. Straighten up and fly right!
As I said weeks ago, the Yankees are headed for a historic collapse. Look at this blah slow unathletic collection of mediocrities and has-beens (in contrast to the youth, speed, and dynamism of opposing teams)--a Cashman specialty. One can only presume that duque's perverse crush on Cashman is a bruised fan's desperation, his need to salvage something of worth out of his ineptly run franchise.
As for the "Food Stamps Hal" trope: this is squarely at odds with empirical reality. The Yankees have the third-highest payroll in baseball--a quarter billion dollars. It is weighed down with a series of catastrophically lengthy, ill-considered lifetime endowments--does anyone now feel happy about the lavish fortunes bestowed on Cole (the erratic no-longer-number-one starter), Stanton (the frequently hobbled one-trick pony), Hicks (the forever underchiever), LeMahieu (the slow, unathletic singles-doubles hitter who is regressing to the mean he dislayed for all those years in Colorado that Cashman somehow failed to notice in his dumbass recency bias), etc., etc.? This is not a matter of penury--it's a matter of money spent stupidly and recklessly, general-managed by an imbecile who tosses around inscrutable babble about "ecosystems"--the orotund double-talk of the dumb guy trying to sound smart.
I think duque understands these harsh realities but is inclined to veil them with clever epithets to salvage a sense of worth about his misspent fandom. Should anyone really be rooting for this sorry, racist crew of inbred plutocrats, sleazebag lawyers, cognitively challenged executives, and aging on-field washouts? What are you REALLY rooting for? The illusion that his is the same team that buoyed and enlivened your childhood? It isn't--that team is long gone. And this one is heavy, creaking, sinking ship.
HC 66 -- it makes no sense to deprive your best player of plate appearances by moving him down in the lineup. This is not a matter of the order in which the players come to the plate--it's a matter of the players who are coming to the plate SUCK.
Seriously, how many at-bats over the course of a season will you lose batting third instead of second?
The answer: none.
Judge should be batting third
Seriously--quite a few. You could look it up.
Depending on a host of variables, your best hitter would lose around fifty plate appearances in the course of a season by moving from the two hole to the three hole. That could result in several more losses, which could be fatal in a close race. Moreover, moving him to the two hole will not likely cost him RBI opportunities--you could look that up too.
I may weep and soil myself if I am unhappy with the outcome of this season.
Then again I might be just fine.
Then again I might spend the winter worried over Rizzo's back and Judge's lower body issues.
The 12:27 comment makes no sense to me, DA. I get that you probably don't mean it literally and I'd prefer Judge batted with people on base, too, which adduces Barney's point. Build a strong bottom of the lineup and batting Judge second or first makes sense.
Here's the actual hard-core analysis of this issue, as opposed to the "I hate to see anything that defies the conventional wisdom that I've never really thought about" approach that predominates on this blog.
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/38931/banjo-hitter-reimagining-2-hitter/
See the link I just posted--and please tone down your chronically vituperative, abusive tone--it's a blight on this blog. Once you've read the article I've linked, please come back with some substantive analysis of your own, rather than your customary foam-at-the-mouth splatter.
huh
https://www.lrsitsolutions.com/Blog/Posts/70/Analytics/2019/5/How-Analytics-changed-the-role-of-the-2-hitter/blog-post/
Here is what that article sets as it’ baseline model:
“… You want your best hitters batting the most often, and moving from 3-4-5 to no. 2 can equal an extra 30-50 plate appearances per season…”
It is easy to see a loss of at-bats moving down to the 4 or 5 slot. That makes perfect sense. But moving from 2 to 3 loses nothing except for the potential of the 3 hitter batting with 2 outs, a point that would be impossible to quantify - as in: does a players mind change from one to two outs? I think the answer is no.
Look--if you're going to cite numbers without doing the homework, this is a waste of time. You lose 50 plate appearances by going from number 2 to EITHER 3-4-5. That's what it says. That's the amount yielded by running the numbers. You have no idea what you're talking about and don't even seem to be able to comprehend the clear prose and analysis that's presented to you. There's nothing I can do about that, so you might as well engage with someone else.
OH is big brother deleting reasonable comments again but allowing comments that refer to others posts as "bullshit" to remain up? Karma, Mustang.
DA--you misread the passage. The difference between number two and EITHER 3-4-5 is up to fifty plate appearances per season.
Oh wait--I guess I should call your previous comment "bullshit," as you did to mine earlier, to be sure that Mustang doesn't delete it. Karma, Mustang. . . .
2 hitter vs 3 hitter gets an extra 50 plate appearances per season. Okay, so I get that but what about the 162 games a year that you've given up the possibility of that guy hitting a 3 run homer in the 1st inning, or a 2 run double? And what of the number of potential RBI chances that you're giving up later in the game, because the #8 and 9 hitters are never going to be as good as the #1 or 2 hitters?
Still think it's a mistake to hit Judge #2. Although with Benintendi's Yankee career off to a horrific start, I can see why they dropped him in the order.
Who keeps deleting my comments? The passage quoted by DA states that the difference between batting number 2 and EITHER 3-4-5 is fifty plate appearances per season. Now whoever keeps deleting my response should explain why that is happening. My interpretation of the passage is clearly correct.
Hammer of God and others--please take the time to read the Baseball Prospectus article that I posted. I addresses your points. The difference in plate appearances is significant--the difference in RBI opportunities between 2 and 3 is not. The likelihood that both 1 and 2 will get on base is very small. For decades managers batted their best hitter FOURTH, which meant that he often didn't even come to bat in the first inning--follies like that.
"“… You want your best hitters batting the most often, and moving from 3-4-5 to no. 2 can equal an extra 30-50 plate appearances per season…” means that the difference in plate appearances applies in the jump from 2 to either 3, 4, or 5.
Annnnnddd So it begins....
Here is a key excerpt from the Baseball Prospectus article that I linked above. IT says what it says--someone here is clearly misinterpreting a key passage, so I will quote the passage with the surrounding context to make the meaning clear:
"The idea behind the shifting identity of no. 2 hitters is a simple one: You want your best hitters batting the most often, and moving from 3-4-5 to no. 2 can equal an extra 30-50 plate appearances per season (and fewer plate appearances with two outs). The reason that no. 2 is often the choice instead of no. 1 is that batting second allows for more runners on base. It’s kind of a best-of-both-worlds solution relative to the leadoff and cleanup spots, adding more plate appearances but also leaving some RBI chances.
Think of how often, in your baseball-watching lifetime, you’ve been rooting for the no. 1 or no. 2 hitter in the lineup to reach base in the ninth inning so that the no. 3 or no. 4 hitter would have one last chance to make an impact before it’s too late. Now ask yourself why that lesser no. 2 hitter was there in the first place, if you were just hoping to see them avoid making an out so that a better hitter could come to the plate.
And with less and less focus on individual RBI totals, and more focus on team-wide run production, the idea of an “RBI spot” has less importance. Why bat someone no. 4 or no. 5 just so they can individually drive in a bunch of runs thanks to coming to the plate with lots of runners on base, when you can instead bat them no. 2, bring them to the plate more often, and score more runs as a team?
So why are sluggers batting earlier? There is a very strong correlation between batting order and run production. Statistics show that the #2 hitters get between 40-50 extra plate appearances per season than the player batting third or fourth. Statistics further demonstrate that more of the at-bats from the #2 spot come with fewer than two outs.
From the following:
https://www.lrsitsolutions.com/Blog/Posts/70/Analytics/2019/5/How-Analytics-changed-the-role-of-the-2-hitter/blog-post/
Here is the answer to Hammer of God's question, quoted from the Baseball Prospectus article that I posted above:
The idea behind the shifting identity of no. 2 hitters is a simple one: You want your best hitters batting the most often, and moving from 3-4-5 to no. 2 can equal an extra 30-50 plate appearances per season (and fewer plate appearances with two outs). The reason that no. 2 is often the choice instead of no. 1 is that batting second allows for more runners on base. It’s kind of a best-of-both-worlds solution relative to the leadoff and cleanup spots, adding more plate appearances but also leaving some RBI chances.
Think of how often, in your baseball-watching lifetime, you’ve been rooting for the no. 1 or no. 2 hitter in the lineup to reach base in the ninth inning so that the no. 3 or no. 4 hitter would have one last chance to make an impact before it’s too late. Now ask yourself why that lesser no. 2 hitter was there in the first place, if you were just hoping to see them avoid making an out so that a better hitter could come to the plate.
And with less and less focus on individual RBI totals, and more focus on team-wide run production, the idea of an “RBI spot” has less importance. Why bat someone no. 4 or no. 5 just so they can individually drive in a bunch of runs thanks to coming to the plate with lots of runners on base, when you can instead bat them no. 2, bring them to the plate more often, and score more runs as a team?
DA states, "But moving from 2 to 3 loses nothing except for the potential of the 3 hitter batting with 2 outs. . . ."
I have quoted not one but TWO passages of analytics from separate sources that state that the difference between 2 and 3 in the order is up to 50 PA per season. I will gladly post more if that will help to clarify the matter.
Dick Allen -- do you have moderation powers, and is it you who keeps deleting my posts? That is really appalling. Or is it you, Mustang?
So why are sluggers batting earlier? There is a very strong correlation between batting order and run production. Statistics show that the #2 hitters get between 40-50 extra plate appearances per season than the player batting third or fourth. Statistics further demonstrate that more of the at-bats from the #2 spot come with fewer than two outs.
https://www.lrsitsolutions.com/Blog/Posts/70/Analytics/2019/5/How-Analytics-changed-the-role-of-the-2-hitter/blog-post/
Who is deleting my informational posts--Dick Allen or Mustang?
Someone here should protest the deletion of informational posts that contain not even a hint of personal attack.
Well, I have seen them bat Judge #2 for quite a while now and I'm not impressed with this strategy. Even if the 2 hitter comes up 50 times more per year, I'm not sure that this does anything to win more games during the regular season, or any more games during the playoffs.
Good pitchers can often struggle in the first inning. That's often the best chance to score a few runs against them. If you put Judge in the 2 slot, you have reduced your chances for a big inning in favor of a smaller inning plus a chance for an extra at bat for Judge at the end of the game.
At the end of the game, Judge will often face a reliever who is throwing 100mph fastballs with nasty sliders. Do you want him in an RBI situation in the 1st against the starting pitcher or up with nobody on base in the 9th against a fireballing reliever?
In a blowout win game, I really don't care if Judge comes up in the 8th or 9th for a 5th time.
That's my thinking, Hammer. AND...let's face it: all pitchers struggle more with men on base. They have to worry about keeping them on base, have to worry about making finer pitches to the batter.
So, potentially sacrifice 50 at-bats moving Judge down from 2-3. But maybe in at least that many, he is batting with more men on base. Both the situation—a more harried, distracted pitcher—and the sheer potential—more ducks on the pond!—could well produce more runs than hitting with fewer men on.
For the ultimate proof, look at some of the great power combinations in history—and the current Yanks also seem adverse to batting, say, Judge and Stanton back-to-back, though they always seem to win when they do.
Did Roger Maris benefit from having Mickey Mantle hit behind him? Undoubtedly. Even Babe Ruth benefited from having Lou Gehrig hit behind him.
Thus a Judge hitting behind your first two hitters would make those guys harder to get out—and then Judge himself would constantly be hitting in better situations.
And for cryin' out loud, DON'T put Gleyber in the 4 spot any more!
But if Gleybsie's in the 4 hole it means he might not ruin a 1-2-3 first by running hard. Not that he'd be inclined to bust it out of the box but you never know. He could forget to not give a shit. THEN where would we be?
Thank God they lost and can now fulfill their historic destiny.
To all: There is no real gain in RBI opportunities by putting your best hitter in the 3 slot in the batting order as opposed to number 2. There is very little likelihood that both the one and two batters will get on in the first inning, and once the game proceeds, the batting order means less and less. There is also no evidence that a good starter in the first inning is any more hittable than a reliever in the eighth or ninth--all pitchers throw fast nowadays, with the average MLB fasbtall sitting at about 94 MPH. You can run simulations of seasons by the tens of thousands from here to eternity--they all show that you come out better with your best hitter getting more plate appearances--that is, batting second. This is the new conventional wisdom of baseball, pitted against the ancient conventional wisdom of placing your best hitter third or even fourth, whereby he would often not even bat in the first inning. It not only defies statistical analysis but common sense as well.
Post a Comment