I think you forgot to bold some guy named Figgins.

Posada, Swisher and Cabrera to bat righty

Is this in anticipation of Teixeira changing his approach?

Teixiera is a postseason choke artist.  He is of no consequence.

How silly to suggest that Hunter isn’t the best fielder on the team.
Great stuff, as always, SG!

How silly to suggest that Hunter isn’t the best fielder <strike>on the team</strike>in the playoffs.

Fixed.

Will that be good enough? I’ll let you know in a bit.

According to this site, clearly not.

After reading the Daily News’ preview today, I am certain of two things: The Yankees have a high payroll. The Angels will win this series in three games. Oh, and lest I forget: Alex Rodriguez can only hit in the playoffs against Minnesota for reasons that were stated, but not explained, in a prose form that would make Chekov himself recoil in absolute terror.

in a prose form that would make Chekov himself recoil in absolute terror.

I thought he only did that when Klingons were around?

Klingons, Daily News Sportswriters, what is the difference?

[9] Klingons have honor?

Alex Rodriguez can only hit in the playoffs against Minnesota for reasons that were stated.

They overlooked the fact that he proved that he can hit in Games 1-3 of the ALCS v. Boston:

Game 1 2-5
Game 2 1-4
Game 3 3-5

Clowns.

All I know is, the Yankee and their despicable fans shouldn’t feel proud about “stealing the Twins’ lunch money.” Words from the pen of a master.

[10]
Brilliant, brilliant!!!!

[11]
Contributing to Boston being able to come back from 3-0 down.  Loser.

[7]
Chekhov himself... the implication being that Chekhov’s own prose style is so wretched that if even he recoils in horror…??

[6]
From the first line there: all of our Yankee ESPN visitors
Isn’t that a contradiction in terms?
Somebody ought to be mortally offended… I’m just not sure who…

Isn’t that a contradiction in terms?

He could mean Yankee fans fleeing ESPN and looking for some place sane to go.  We should put up signs on that road.

Yeah, I got nothing.

[6] Wow. that site is incredibly bad. I mean, wow.

So Yankees in 6?  5?

Guzman in Hinske out.  It lets Girardi start Gardner but in a close and late game where Jorge is pinch run for and they need a home run off the bench they won’t have Hinske to PH for Molina.

[16] Gohalos says you can throw your stats in the East River. This series will clearly come down to something that favors the Angels which I can’t quite discern even after having read the analysis.

In conclusion, Angels in 4.

[6] After seeing the “analysis” available on that site, I really don’t know what I’d do without RLYW.

According to this site, clearly not.

Does Lombardi ghost-write for that site?

Just a thought.  It is possible that they get game 1 in tomorrow but the weather screws with game 2.  With C.C. getting 3 starts, A.J. with 2 and Pettitte and Gaudin each getting one it most likely won’t make a huge difference in these projections.  I’d assume the odds would be somewhere between 60.6% and 58.7% but I just wanted to point out that it may still make sense to throw C.C. three times if they get game 1 in on schedule.

FWIW, here are Girardi’s comments on Guzman:

“We thought we could use another speed guy in this round. We’ve had some success doing those types of things late in the game, and in a seven-game series stuff could come up late in the game. We saw the games against Minnesota were very close and sometimes you can use a couple of pinch runners. If Gardy gets a start, then you don’t have a pinch runner (without Guzman). It just frees us up to do some more things.”

I think SG’s being optimistic. I have the Angels winning in 3

Angels in <strike>Four</strike> two.

As for not having Hinske, since he hasn’t played in a game in over two weeks, would he be very likely to hit a HR? Would Girardi even use him?

[21] to be fair to Lombardi, at least he tries to use stats and then just twists them to fit his point. That guys is just saying what he feels.

Not that Hinske’s either of those guys, but I seem to remember Raines and DiMaggio having some pretty good games after not having batted for several months.

I have two words for you all: solo shots.  As in, Jager.  By myself.  To erase the memory of that dreadful link.

What are the plans for adding a retractable roof on to Yankee Stadium? Is it still in the works? Will it be ready by tomorrow?

[29]
Strangely, these posts aren’t making me feel any better.

Interesting (and a bit disheartening) thought voiced in the comments to a recent BP post on baserunning:

The Angels relatively poor steal % is in no small part due to the other teams in their division being good at throwing out runners (SEA, OAK, TEX). 

That applies, possibly in the reverse, to the Yankees (the Sox can’t throw out my grandma, who’s dead), though I don’t really have a sense for how good BAL/TOR/TAM are at throwing out would-be thieves, and I’m too busy to look right now (yeah, I’m actually workin’ hard, as opposed to hardly workin’ today).

“Strangely, these posts aren’t making me feel any better.”

I’ve been having a reoccurring memory of one play that may have swung the 05 ALDS and that was the wreck in right center between Crosby and Shef.  I also have more recent memories of Swisher going back near the scoreboard in NYS about three weeks ago and getting all twisted around, falling to the ground and rolling the ball to Melky. Couple that with Damons misjudge on Friday near the wall.  Our outfield defense still gives me pause, four years later, and likely we will be playing on wet outfield turf.

Not to pile on or anything, WP.

That Swisher play was visually one of the uglier plays I ever recall.BTW

Yeah, bad job out of me with the Chekov quip. Was not meant as an insult. I feel like Mike when he ordered the “Age of Enlightenment” in Swingers.

[14] Rob Neyer recently included this site as part of the expanded Sweetspot network or some such crap. Sweetspot is Rob’s personal blog at ESPN. I believe that when he says ESPN Yankees, he means that Yankee fans who have been redirected from reading Neyer’s blog at ESPN.

Still, that is no analysis there. I can accept that a reasonable case can be made that the Angels are very good team, and they do appear to have some voodoo crap on the Yankees, which might, ex post, tilt things in their favor, but cannot be predicted before the fact. What the guy wrote there can be summed up as follows:

1. How the Yankees did against the Angels this season.
2. How the Angels did against the Yankees this season.
3. They were 5/5, but since Angels won a few lopsided games in July against the Yankees, then Angels are clearly better, and with all the predictive power bestowed on such small samples, clearly they are going to win.

Of course, no mention of small sample size, predictability of individual match-up numbers, or the fact that Yankees played two series in Anaheim this year, and yet came up with a series tie.

I think it is a great smack talking site. Analysis, not so much. Not sure what Neyer saw there.

Angels in <strike>Four</strike> <strike>two</strike> zero.

Of course, no mention of small sample size
Farther down the page, a different entry DOES mention SSS.
It goes like this:

Let me address some of your concerns.

Yes. This is the only sample size we have against this years Angel lineup.

See?  They do mention SSS!

Some of you are starting to get me down. 

I put myself on the line here, thinking the Yanks will win and you guys shoot it down with your negativity.  Your goshdarn negativity.  I don’t need it.  I’m an idea man. I thrive on enthusiasm.

Don’t take the wind out of my sails.

[38] I have to assume that is from a movie.

I understand this guy’s logic completely.  He figures (a) the Angels swept the RS, (b) the Yankees are only a game or two better than the RS in a short series, therefore (c) the Angels will win this series in 5 or 6 games.  The big flaw in this is “a.”  While the Angels did sweep the sox, the outcome of that series—3 and 0—doesn’t actually reflect the relative strength of the two teams.  (Over 100 games, Boston would probably win at least 45 games.)  But this guy can’t appreciate that because he’s all about extrapolating outcomes from small samples.

[39] Wedding Crashers?

[39] Wedding Crashers?

Correct.

(39) Citizen Kane?

[39] Wedding Crashers?

Correct.

Is it from the part where the Swingers guy and Owen Wilson are talking over breakfast?  That’s the only excerpt I’ve seen, as I always seem to land at that point in the movie when I channel surf. But I don’t really pay too much attention as the mound of breakfast food the Swinger guy loads on his plate just makes me wish I had a mound of breakfast food.

Ah, Vince Vaughn. That’s his name.

[28] But what are you going to do to erase the memory of the Jager?

[36] IOW, it’s going to rain all week and MLB will finally just give the Angels a bye into the WS because everybody knows that the Yankees have no chance to beat them anyway.

Could it just be that there aren’t any better Angels blogs out there?

For all I know, that might actually be true.

[44] Thanks for reminding me that I haven’t eaten all day.  Now I really wish I had a mound of breakfast food.  Or three.

This guy is one of the best bloggers around.

Unfortunately, he doesn’t blog much.

Not only does he have a mound of breakfast food, but he basically covers it all (muffins, eggs, fruit, etc) with tons of syrup. Just blanket syrup pouring. Awesome.

mmmmmm syrup

I always pictured MC as thin and hawk-nosed.
I’m beginning to reconsider.

I always pictured MC as thin and hawk-nosed.

Why? Because of the squirrel thing?

I am thin…  Relatively speaking that is…  Well, at least my nose is thin.  Not hooked or anything.  Just thin.

I eat like a teenager, exercise a lot less than I should, and still don’t put on weight.  Deal with it.

And speaking of squirrels:

http://www.ballparkdigest.com/features/index.html?article_id=1853

Angels in <strike>a rainout</strike>.

It’s a small miracle that Johnny Damon’s dRS is only 0.  I was expecting something along the lines of -15, especially when you consider Abreu is at -11.

[57] Remember when he forgot how many outs there were and he was going to throw the ball into the stands?

Yeah.

Heyman tweets:

#angels offered abreu a 2-year extension for about $16 million. after MVP calibre year with LAA, he is looking for more.

I’ve always pictured MC as an MC, clad in a very sharp, Colonial Williamsburgh outfit, Yankees cap askew and trottin’ the stage atop some very def, Adidas.
No laces.
“My names MC in VA, been chartin’ the Yanks since back in the day”
” F with me and you’ll be sad, My baseball team is very bad”
“I love them stats, I wear many hats, my pal ole thurman breeds forest katts”
Well… You get the idea.
Man alive, Whole Camels ain’t getting it done is he?

“I love them stats, I wear many hats, my pal ole thurman breeds forest katts”

The types that eat them rats?

And blinds them squirrels.

A swing from Alex’s bat, You know he’z lumber’s fat, And just like dat, Me and Alex got no quirrels.

Quarrels?

You don’t like them squarrels?

Clay done, K’sure?

Love me some squalls.

Nice inning. Who comes in for Philly? Bunning or Short?

I need a favor. I just started a new job on Monday. If the game starts on time, I miss at least the first 2 hours. So either…

1) We need a couple hour rain delay.
or
2) I need someone to take over the Vortex Control Pod.

[68] that implied optimism is only going to make getting swept that much worse.

Holy pelican beaks Pin, You don’t have an executive officer?
I’ll e-mail Thurm the Katt. He’s a wonder re personnel placement.( mostly rodents and birds, a few dogs too)
I’ll take the helm if needed but I would prefer someone younger.
This may reflect poorly on your fitness report for 09.

We have a nice lineup.
I don’t think it’s nice up enough to leave Hinske out.

I see that BP has
a) decided their previous postseason odds code was buggy
b) torn it up and put in new
c) have the Yankees at 73% for this series, which seems rather wild given the above.

[59] - Yeah I was talking about this with a friend.  I think Abreu screwed himself by signing a short one year deal and not getting assurances that the Angels wouldn’t offer him arbitration.  He (and Damon as well) are nice players but there is no way in hell I’d touch either of them if they cost me a first round draft pick. 

Damon is at least coming off a season where he made $13M so he can accept arbitration and it wouldn’t be that bad for him.  Abreu?  I actually kind of feel bad for the guy.

Could it just be that there aren’t any better Angels blogs out there?

Sean Smith (of BaseballProjection.com) is a huge Angels fan.  He wrote up the, “Why the Angels will beat the Yankees” article at HBT today.  He kinda admits w/o admitting he picks the Angels because he is a fan: “I’ve probably given more advantages in this analysis to the Yankees than the Angels, but the Angels will win.”

Abreu?  I actually kind of feel bad for the guy.

I think Abreu should negotiate off that Angels offer and get some bonuses added.  I think the Angels would be willing to have the contract worth 2/20 with those bonuses, and Abreu should be happy to take that, considering if he keeps declining in the OF (I know he was better this year but his projection for next year will probably be worse than it was for this year) he’s a soon to be DH.

MVP-caliber?  Um, no.

I saw the BP thing, complete with 73% to the Yanks, and I think that’s nutty.

c) have the Yankees at 73% for this series, which seems rather wild given the above.

Yeah, I wish that was true but I can’t see a scenario where it’s true.  I left a comment to Davenport in that post but not sure he’ll respond.

He kinda admits w/o admitting he picks the Angels because he is a fan: “I’ve probably given more advantages in this analysis to the Yankees than the Angels, but the Angels will win.”

Yeah, that’s the required format for those pieces. You have to explain why the team you write about “will” win, then do a post series analysis when they don’t.  Pretty sure Sean would say the Angels are at the very least slight underdogs.  THT asked me about doing one for the Yankees but I deferred to Larry.

THT asked me about doing one for the Yankees but I deferred to Larry.

I saw Larry’s post on Yankees vs. Twins; I think the only, “why the ____ beat the ____” missing was Yanks/Twins.  I was looking forward to that :(

I just thought it was interesting that he did a particularly fair analysis, and then was forced to resort to, “but the Angels will win”.  I mean that as a compliment b/c I think even most THT posters would have minimized Yankee advantages in some places to make their team look better, so they could have concluded w/ something like, “By this analysis, it will be close, but [my team] in 7”.