The winning team will be able to claim themselves the best team in the National League, which is akin to being the most insightful Baseball Tonight anchor, or the best trade made by the Twins’ Bill Smith.

If the Yankees somewhat miraculously manage to beat the Angels and then face this team and lose to them in the WS, I am going to hunt down SG and reveal his identity to the world.

“Joe Torre will be trying to lead his team into the World Series to face the Angels, for whom he worked as a broadcaster.”

Dude, you are brilliant.

Also, you think a manager would ever use a lefty starter as a LOOGY on this throw day?

The winning team will be able to claim themselves the best team in the National League

A dwarf among midgets?

a mouse among men.

In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.

I am so tired of having to hear how wonderful Joe Torre is.

If the Yankees somewhat miraculously manage to beat the Angels and then face this team and lose to them in the WS, I am going to hunt down SG and reveal his identity to the world.

SG is Miguel Cairo.  next.

Phillies: 54.3%
Dodgers: 45.7%
Red Sox: 0%

Pulitzer for SG, please.

Thats some amusing edwar. The katt and I doff our kapps.

For some reason I’m dreading the ALCS preview.

OK, here’s a silly question.  If they do lose Friday night’s game, would they shift the middle three to Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday, or make them fly across the country on Sunday night and play game three roughly twelve hours after landing?  I know where my money is.

And here’s an even sillier one, perhaps - MC, do the adverbs in the second sentence of [12] have the same antecedent?  It was unclear to me.

Pete being a grammar nerd. F dat yo.

<strike>Pulitzer</strike> Nobel for SG, please.

Fixed.

[14]
In less grammar-nerd terms, then, OTF: I don’t understand what he said.  If WHO loses the game, then WHO might shift the other games… does NY have the power to shift the schedule?

They is Selig. (“them” is Angels and Yankees, if Selig had to fly cross country, it would be “their royal self”)

And pronouns are adverbs, for the good of the game.

also, “lose” is “lose to rain.”

Also, you think a manager would ever use a lefty starter as a LOOGY on this throw day?

Torre tried it with Wells in the 2003 ALCS against Ortiz.  Didn’t work out so well, but it’s been done.

For some reason I’m dreading the ALCS preview.

No need to dread it, it’s only going to be three words. 

Angels in four.

No need to dread it, it’s only going to be three words.

Angels in four.

I see. So, in other words:

Angels: 100%
Yankees: 0%
Red Sox: 0%

I really dread to think of life as a baseball fan without RLYW.

Whilst the Angels loom, so does some bad weather loom. Blimey!

Angels: <strike>100%</strike>50%
Yankees: 0%
Red Sox: <strike>0%</strike>50%

Gammons is still holding out hope that Selig realizes the Angels had to have cheated to beat the Sox…

Torre tried it with Wells in the 2003 ALCS against Ortiz. Didn’t work out so well, but it’s been done.

But we now know Ortiz was injecting 25 different kinds of steroids and eating only hormone-treated bull testicles at the time, so has it ever been attempted against a non-cheater.

Angels: <strike>100%</strike> 0%
Yankees: 0%
Red Sox: 0%
Rays: 100%

Kruk’d. (Rays have great speed on the base paths)

Torre (or was it Girardi by then?) used Pettitte on his throw day during the regular season a couple of times one year.  And it worked well.

[13] see [18]

[18] thanks

[26] In regular season play, Pettitte has pitched in relief 10 times in his career.  Half of those as a rookie under Showalter and once while with Houston.  The other four were all with Torre (once each in 1996 and 1998, and twice in 2007).  He’s done pretty well, but it’s a whopping 16 innings.

He has never relieved in postseason.

Baseball Reference rocks.

May have already been discussed, but what’s the logic behind starting Saunders in game 2? Is it strictly to go with a lefty in YS?

[28] Magic eight-ball.

[28] That would be my guess.  The whole Weaver in NYS with a high fly ball rate could have factored in.  I guess that means we would face Weaver in a theoretical Game 7 though.

Okay, took me a little while to find it (internet is sluggish for me today).  Here is the MLB.com article about the Angels rotation.  In particular:

Scioscia made the decision to start Saunders in Game 2 for various reasons, noting that Saunders had success in the old Yankee Stadium and that as a left-hander with a sinking fastball, he could limit the effects of the new park, such as the short porch in right field.

There are some other points made in the article as well.

[25] Believe it or not, there is actually a statistically oriented website that had Rays as the second best team in the Major Leagues this year based on their end-of-season power rankings. And Blue Jays were the sixth best team in the league. Twins, Phillies and Cardinals did not even crack the top 10.

Thankfully, their power ranking happens to agree that the team with the best record is also the number one in their power rankings.

May have already been discussed, but what’s the logic behind starting Saunders in game 2? Is it strictly to go with a lefty in YS?

I’m wondering if Scoscia is also trying to alternate lefty and righty starters in the series.

I’m not sure I will survive a game 1 rainout.  This wait is hard enough as it is.

Wow, it’s supposed to rain all night. Which unfortunately brings back memories of Schilling and 2004.

The whole Weaver in NYS with a high fly ball rate could have factored in.

I that’s likely a factor:

2009 FB%

Saunders: 36.1 % 
Weaver. 50.4 %

50.4%? Wow.

I still think he used an 8-ball (fill in the blank for what that means).  Suanders HR/9 is still worse than Weaver’s by quite a bit.  Probably, because even though Weaver’s FB% is worse, Weaver allows fewer BIP total (much better k-rate).  Saunder’s FIP is also a full run higher.  Yankees I believe have also hit lefties (slightly) better this year.  So, sure, throw Saunders in game 2.

I’m not sure I will survive a game 1 rainout.  This wait is hard enough as it is.

The Yanks wouldn’t survive a rainout either.  That would mean they’d have to use a 4th starter in the series.  Which means they’d lose because they didn’t pick up Cliff Lee when they had a chance.  I read this information from a very reliable source.  If tomorrow night’s game gets rained out, the Angels will sweep because the Yanks don’t have a #4 starter.  Bank on it.

Sometimes I really wish Cashman weren’t so incompetent.  If only the Yanks had 9 aces like that great team up in Boston.  Then they’d be in good shape for the playoffs.  Instead we’re stuck watching the likes of Chad Gaudin.

[37]
Maybe that’s the point - if they’re going to use Saunders and he’s the weak link, then the goal may be to give him the best chance to succeed, banking on Weaver being able to handle either circumstance adequately.

Is baseball season still going on?

C.C. in the rain and the temperature won’t crack 50 degrees. Color me nervous.

2009 FB%

Saunders: 36.1 %
Weaver. 50.4 %

Hopefully, Weaver’s fly ball rate will give the talking heads ample opportunity to discuss what a disgrace the new stadium is.

With the present forecast according to accuweather and weather.com, Game 1 might be on Sunday. 

At this rate, if it’s a NY-PHI series, I propose that anyone tagging from third be given a sled and be required to cross the plate on it. 

Catchers will either apply tags or mound snow to make the sleds airborne as they cross the plate.

+ Guzman, - Hinske.

LoHud:

Guzman in Hinske out (Marte stays?).

Or what [43] said.

Maybe Girardi and Eiland figure that, with the rain, the extra pitcher is more valuable.

I would have preferred Bruney over Marte.

Guzman in… and they say you can’t predict baseball.
They’re playing the Angels, they won several of the games with Guzman-style play, they gave Guzman this long try-out - if not for this, then for what?
They were always going to take Guzman for this series.
I would have taken both Guzman and Hinske and left Marte home.

I don’t think I like either of those moves.  what’s Guzman’s D like?

Let’s hope fast = good outfield defense. I honestly have no idea.

Fangraphs has him at +21.8 UZR/150 in all of 188 innings across all 3 OF positions but mostly (162 innings) in CF.

I have always thought the one reason that the Yankees under Torre had trouble v. the Angels is that they were sucked into playing Scioscia’s style of play. Based on these moves, Girardi has been sucked in as well, although the Yankees’ other strengths should be enough to compensate for the axis of offensive futility: Gardner, Guzman, and Melky. It also means, however, that Damon really has to start to hit.

Fangraphs has him at +21.8 UZR/150 in all of 188 innings across all 3 OF positions but mostly (162 innings) in CF.

I checked his TotalZone numbers at MiLSplits.  Other than 2007 in AAA (+20 in CF) he looks around average.  I only saw him play once in Scranton, and don’t recall him doing anything in the field, good or bad.  POOMA, I’d say he’s probably better than Damon, similar to Swisher defensively.  Definitely better than Hinske.

Based on these moves, Girardi has been sucked in as well

Because he chose a better runner/defender over a LH pinch-hitter?  I think it is highly unlikely Hinske would have started even if Damon continued sucking; instead it would have been Hairston or Gardner (in CF, Melky sliding into LF).

Because he chose a better runner/defender over a LH pinch-hitter?  I think it is highly unlikely Hinske would have started even if Damon continued sucking; instead it would have been Hairston or Gardner (in CF, Melky sliding into LF).

Because allocating three of five OF spots to players that are all below league average offensively at a time when Damon has slumped since September (.235/.347/.284/.631) and in the ALDS, seems to be going away from the Yankees’ strength, which is being able to out-SLG other teams, and instead, trying to out smallball the Angels.

seems to be going away from the Yankees’ strength, which is being able to out-SLG other teams, and instead, trying to out smallball the Angels.

I think you’re reading too much into it, and Melky and Gardner are only below league average if you stop with OPS+.  FanGraphs has Melky as +1 run and Gardner as +2 runs, before adjusting for position.  Basically all it means is Girardi felt he had more use for a pinch-runner than a pinch-hitter.  I’m not sure in any way how this is trying to “out smallball” the Angels.  Girardi is going to bunt, hit-and-run, and steal more now in innings 1-7 because he has Guzman instead of Hinske?

I don’t see this as a controversial move.  Hinske may be a better player, but Guzman, as a potential PR, is far more likely to actually get into a game.

I think you’re reading too much into it, and Melky and Gardner are only below league average if you stop with OPS+.  FanGraphs has Melky as +1 run and Gardner as +2 runs, before adjusting for position.  Basically all it means is Girardi felt he had more use for a pinch-runner than a pinch-hitter.  I’m not sure in any way how this is trying to “out smallball” the Angels.  Girardi is going to bunt, hit-and-run, and steal more now in innings 1-7 because he has Guzman instead of Hinske?

Maybe, but even if you want to call them league average, it still makes them less of a SLG team.

I think the roster construction may reflect a mindset that may cause them to bunt and hit-and-run more. We have already seen Jeter bunt in the early innings, which may or may not have been his own decision. The players often take their cues from the messages the manager transmits, often in both explicit and implicit ways.

FWIW, Francesa thinks that it may mean that Gardner could be starting games in CF. If that’s the case I like the move a little more.

Maybe, but even if you want to call them league average, it still makes them less of a SLG team.

For Gardner and Melky, they’ve been there they whole year so it doesn’t make them less of a SLG team than they were for the year.  Though removing Hinske for Guzman certainly does, I’d have to think w/ how much each would project to play in the post-season the difference would be fairly small.

The players often take their cues from the messages the manager transmits, often in both explicit and implicit ways.

True, though obviously impossible to quantify.  The message they may take is, “get lots of runs early”.  Or late in a game Matsui may be more willing to take a walk knowing Guzman will come in and try to steal 2nd.  So it could go the other way.

If that’s the case I like the move a little more.

Now we agree on something!

I think it means that they expect close games that can be won by small ball in the 8th and 9th and, given the way the last 4 regular season games went against the Angels, you have to expect them to play more of a small-ball kind of game IN THOSE INNINGS (and, of course, any extra innings).

I think it means that they expect close games that can be won by small ball in the 8th and 9th and, given the way the last 4 regular season games went against the Angels, you have to expect them to play more of a small-ball kind of game IN THOSE INNINGS (and, of course, any extra innings).

Personally I wouldn’t be distressed if they left Marte home and kept Hinske.  Or only carried 2 catchers (meaning Posada caught Burnett) and kept Hinkse.  I just have trouble getting worked up over the 25th man on the roster. 

Basically all it means is Girardi is trying to guess which situation is more likely to come up - needing a LH pinch hitter, or a pinch runner?  The only hitter you would like bring a lefty in to hit for is Molina, and in that case you have either Posada or Matsui on the bench, and would use them ahead of Hinske anyway.  And if the batter reached then you’d want to pinch-run for them anyway.

How many PA does Guzman project to get?  How many would Hinske have projected to get?  Sure, it’s less of a slugging team on paper, but the chances that this actually shows up in the boxscores are virtually nil.

Girardi is going to bunt, hit-and-run, and steal more now in innings 1-7 because he has Guzman instead of Hinske?

In his comments to Francesa a short while ago, Girardi said that Gardner could be used earlier in games. He implied that Guzman’s presence on the roster affords him that latitude.

How many PA does Guzman project to get?  How many would Hinske have projected to get?  Sure, it’s less of a slugging team on paper, but the chances that this actually shows up in the boxscores are virtually nil.

Your point has merit, but Hinkse is more likely go on an offensive roll if Damon continued to slump and Girardi wanted to replace him. OTOH, his defense may scrare Girardi too much against the fleet-footed Angels for him to consider that option.

The interview is up on WFAN.

Hinkse is more likely go on an offensive roll if Damon continued to slump and Girardi wanted to replace him.

First, there’s the whole if Girardi wanted to part.  Barring injury, I expect Damon to start every game even if he’s 0-for-the-series.  More importantly, in a matter of a dozen PA or so, Hinske is no more or less likely to get on a roll than any other available player.  He is more likely to run into a fastball in a late-inning pinch-hit opportunity, however.

First, there’s the whole if Girardi wanted to part.  Barring injury, I expect Damon to start every game even if he’s 0-for-the-series.  More importantly, in a matter of a dozen PA or so, Hinske is no more or less likely to get on a roll than any other available player.  He is more likely to run into a fastball in a late-inning pinch-hit opportunity, however.

I agree about Damon unless the Yankees are behind in the series and Damon’s ineffectiveness is a significant contributing factor in producing that deficit.

I’ll rephrase: Hinske’s career OPS+ is 100, Melky’s is 87, Gardner’s is 78, and Guzman’s is 42, Hinske is more likely to make positive offensive contribution merely be hitting in accordance with his career average.