If they had pulled off the comeback, and AJ came out and hit A-Rod with pie, do you think Alex would have punched him in the face?

of course, the assholes at espn list tampa bay before the yankees, even though we're tied for 1st. our run diff is +5 on them...

[1] what is this - new england bias? i posted at the same time as you and you get the top billing?! sheesh.

[1] no, only beltre would do that.

[2] Cool Standings gives the Rays an extra fifth of a game in win expectancy. (Maybe it's pythagorean? maybe it's strength of schedule? Not sure.)

[3] Oh, it's not top billing. It's geographical. I'm north of you on the page.
Oh, right! I saw him get his head rubbed in the dugout -- did you see that comment of mine? Very odd.

[2] At this point, I'd have to agree. The Yankees starting rotation is kind of a mess now, while the Rays' rotation is six deep. I also think the Rays have the much superior manager.

Hey, did the folks get any Bar Harbor brew?

[4] there's nothing cool about giving the rays more win ex than yanks.

6) he's a chessmaster, that Rays manager.

"There's a lot of things that baffle me" - AJ Burnett in the postgame.

I think that just about says it perfectly.

[9] I know you're not a fan, but if the two managers were swapped, I firmly believe the Yankees would have about a 6 or 7 game lead in this division.

[5] i'm terrible at geography, but that does make sense!

yeah, not only did i see your comment, but i saw that "highlight" on bbtn. quite strange, indeedeth.

[6] ah, you're right. dammit.

oh, and fuck pavano and that god awful 'stache of his. worthless piece o' poop...

[7] i'm not sure. i need to find out. but they loved being up that way!

Yeah, it seems to be a result of the pythagorean estimate. (Runs Against is slightly more important the Runs Scored, for a winning team.)

[12] Cool. I gazed out at the Schoodic Peninsula from Dorr Mountain on Friday, but I guess they were gone. The weather was fantastic, I must say.

[6], final sentence. First I've heard you mention that.

11) i'm neither a fan nor not a fan. But when the Rays and Yankees play, it seems to bring out managerial silliness on both sides.

[13] i told my mom to tell my pop to make sure he wears his yankee gear up 'ere in enemy territory. i'm sure he woulda brought his yankee hat and mantle shirt regardless, but apparently he obliged...

a few folks - including a cop - sought him out to say 'hey' and 'good on ya' for representing! : )

18-1 Brewers leading Cubs, bottom of the 9th.

Cubs have 4 hits, all doubles. Record for all hits being doubles is 5, done 6 times.

[17] i guess no save for ol' trevor! ; )

[18]

no ... but he did get an at-bat :-)

I was just in the Bay area. They think Joe Maddon is a bad mgr. Fans are always questioning his lineups.
It is really silly to ascribe any of these wins and losses to the managers. If the Yanks don't get to the playoffs it will be because their veteran players are not able to do it one more time.
Some good news tonite. Laird went 4 for4 with 2 homers in his AAA debut. Dellen Betances give up one hit and fanned 11 in six innings. I saw him last week. He is a big kid with great stuff.

I checked out when it was still 2-1. Glad I missed the rest. AJ drives me fucking crazy. But without him the Yanks don't win last year. so that keeps me from throwing him all the way under the bus. If A-Rod is a space cadet, I don't know what universe Aj hails from. And is anyone really suprised it's taken Alex close to 50 ab's? But MK says it's not like he won't hit 1 more. He's got 7 years left in his deal. Douche.

[20] Thank you! I don't think people believed me when I mentioned this. Rays fans think the manager is the only thing that's held the team back from winning a World Series. They think Maddon's an idiot. Which casts William's mooning over him in a certain light. I don't think Maddon's an idiot, but I think some of his moves are good, and some of them are silly.

[22] Grass is greener on the other side, I suppose. I'm not particularly impressed with either manager.

[23] Life with Joe G. is better than watching Torre's bullpen insanity. I know that's not a ringing endorsement, but the team did win a World Series last year, and I don't have anyone else in mind that I'd prefer. I'm certain that I didn't want Mattingly. Is there anyone in particular you would want at the helm?

[11] The funny thing is, I travel to Tampa quite a bit and when I'm there I listen to their local sports radio; they all want Maddon fired over there. They really don't like him. To think that Maddon would somehow magically have the Yanks with an even better record is just speculation.

[21] Now that is a thought. Suppose, just suppose that Al has serious hip problems. His career could be over in an at-bat. He looks like he is worse than mired. Misses balls. Hits softies. Doesn't get elevation. The entire bunch looks like a team for another time. Tired. I thought they wanted to get younger.

I see A-Rod swing, and ... this may be faulty memory on my part ... I don't see any hip turn anymore ... its all rigid legs and upper body dipping to meet the ball.

Am I misremembering how A-Rod used to swing?

All managers make mistakes, of course. I think I just prefer the kind of mistakes Maddon and Torre make to Girardi's brand. Maybe it's just a style thing.

[24] I wasn't particularly impressed with Torre either. To be honest, it really doesn't matter much who's at the helm of the Yankees, be it Showalter, Torre, Girardi, Mattingly, Maddon or the managerial pick of the day. I'm fine with Girardi managing the Yankees. His players were healthy, they won the World Series. His players weren't healthy, they missed the playoffs. Given the randomness of the playoffs, whether he wins the World Series or not this year, doesn't mean that he's a tactical wizard, nor does it mean that he's an idiot.

[28] It could be a style thing. Maddon and Torre have been presented differently than Girardi in terms of "style."

I read through the game thread last night and saw where a few moves were criticized. I was at the game last night, and I can see why he made some of the moves he did. The only quibble I had was with Berkman and Granderson. Given the manager's penchant for L-R balance in the order, I was a bit surprised that Granderson and not Berkman was batting 8th.

Yeah, hard to see how Maddon is a great manager or even a good one. But I'd trade the Rays rotation for the Yankee rotation almost one to one. CC is a keeper. Girardi I got little to no problem with. I have noted however that the voices from last year have just waited to for their moment to blame Girardi. Perfect timing! And yet, Girardi will sign a nice long extension this off-season. It's hard to name a better manager in the game because managing just isn't that important. It's why the highest paid managers make less than Kei Igawa. Still, thank god they let Mattingly go. And to think Trey Hillman was the other runner up. Wow, at least they got clearly the best manager of the three. And Girardi is top 5 in the game.

Glad that Torre is finished. Some magic he's pulled in LA, huh? Now THAT's team chemistry. What is he good at? It won't stop him from getting the Mutts job though...

I don't see any reason to revisit Girardi v. Torre debates (Wilbur, is that you Wilbur?). I tend not to be particularly critical of Girardi's managing overall. That is, he strikes me as not much better or wrose than most other managers, and indeed his BP use over the last couple of years has been generally....not always....commendable.

My complaint at present would be restricted only to how he has deployed the new players that he has had at his disposal since the trade deadline. Hopefully, once the excitment of the new toys has worn off, and the wrapping paper and packaging have been thrown away, or better recycled, he'll settle down and use the players as they should be used. And, i assume, as cashman envisioned them being used.

[29] It's the way he won the Series though that has me giving mad props. Where the naysayers were arguing against the three-man, he nailed it. Add to that the bullpen that has now gotten better during the course of each of his three years and I see a lot to like. I could bitch about lineups here and moves there, but neither are truly relevant. They'll win or lose with the players they got. TB is a very good team. That would be a classic ALCS, but TB has the pitching to win it all especially with enough timely hits from a good enough offense. I'd certainly choose the TB pitching against the Yankee hitting. And Soriano was a fantastic pickup. I wish the Yanks had been in on him.

If anything, I put more blame on Cashman for the state of the Yanks than Girardi. Burnett would be better off hurt at this point. Any kid could give the Yankees what he does. And how is Cashman's off-season looking? Every single move has been a negative.

[32] I can't say that I'm unhappy with the way the new players have been deployed. Berkman is the DH, but I don't think anyone should be surprised to see him starting @ 1b every so often. I suspect that Granderson now will be PH for when a tough lefty's on the mound. Thames will probably be the 1st guy off the bench. Then it becomes a question whether Girardi wants Thames to go out in the field, or if he wants to replace him with Kearns.

34) PH Kearns for Gardner was goofy both from an offensive and defensive perspective. PH for Grandy with Thames was the correct move, in my opinion, as I argued last night. Starting Berkman at 1B while DHing Teix was not very clever. Doing so in a game where he also sat two other starters was very poor management of personnel, in my opinion.

33) "Every single move has been a negative."

Thames? Javy? And by extension with the trade for Javy, going with Gardner over Melky?

[36]

"Thames?"

He was supposed to be the 4th OF and Granderson caddy. That ended as soon as he "played" the field once.

"Javy?"

He's got a 88 ERA+ and has given up 1.5 HR/9. Yeah, not a guy I want in the post-season rotation. Right now, with a $210M payroll, that playoff rotation is one deep and even that one is looking very vulnerable.

"And by extension with the trade for Javy, going with Gardner over Melky?"

Who's to say Gardner wouldn't have won that job outright...again?

Question is: What has Cashman done right in the last year?

"Starting Berkman at 1B while DHing Teix was not very clever. Doing so in a game where he also sat two other starters was very poor management of personnel, in my opinion."

They're playing what 22 games in 24 days? I got no problem. And Berkman has been a 1B for a while now. Hard to see how Girardi would have something to worry about.

If Tampa is so unhappy with Maddon, I hope he comes on the market when Girardi jumps ship to the Cubs!

Unlike most, I don't think managers are most irrelevant. I think running a game can really make a difference, particularly when your team is struggling. What I like about Maddon is he is willing to try the uncoventional, whereas Girardi, well, he seldom does anything proactive.

In particular, Maddon has been a master at using the squeeze this season, and there have been several times the Yankees would have benefitted from such a strategy. Based on Maddon's success with the play, I think he is responsible for the three game swing I mentioned.

37) And Berkman has been a 1B for a while now.

Read what I wrote. I have no problem starting Berkman at 1B once and a while, even though he is coming off knee surgery and is viewed as a 1B at best and preferably a DH-only.

I have a problem with him starting at 1B with Teix as DH: if Teix needs a rest, give him the game off. Plus, by starting both in this configuration, there is no way to PH for Berkman (who at this point should only be used against RHP) without losing the DH.

Also, I have a major problem with starting multiple backups in the same game, as well as putting the lesser defensive player in the field (at 1B), especially when the game is against the next best team in the league.

[35] I was perplexed by Kearns PH'ing for Gardner as well, as the resulting move having Swisher playing CF. I agree with Thames PH'ing for Granderson. I don't think any cleverness was implied with having Berkman starting @ 1b. He was starting there when he was with the Astros. It's not like he was new to the position, bad day in the field aside. Sure, in a must win game, Teix will be there, but I can't find fault with Berkman getting a start @ 1b every so often. I will admit to surprise at Gardner being on the bench in that game, though I understand why Rodriguez was to get the day off.

[39] Adding to your argument, Teixeira had DH'ed four games prior, so it's not like he was starving for a 1/2 day off.

[38] See [25]. Why argue something that is inherently your opinion? I also think Whitey Herzog and Tony LaRussa are vastly overrated. Who cares? The Yankees won 4 rings with a guy who slept through most games. And they've won another with a guy who knows how to manage a pen. The Sox have won 2 titles with a guy who refuses to use the most basic platoons. Heck, if Ozzie Guillen can win a title, then I don't see how the job is all that difficult.

Managers use the players they've got. With the Yanks, who's going to bunt?

Seriously, is that the best you got?

[38] Squeeze plays aside, overall, the Yankees' problem isn't scoring runs. They're 3rd in the league in SLG, 1st in OBP, and runs scored. I can understand why they' would be hesitant to use the squeeze play.

[39] That's roster construction. Only the Yankees carry four DHs.

The manager obviously wanted to see his new 1B first-hand. It won't happen again.

Meanwhile, no-hitter or not, Shields is the Rays worst starter this year. And the Yanks had previously smacked him around. I have little doubt that A-Rod was always going to be a half-game rest. And Gardner will always find his way into close games.

Mountain meet anthill.

[40] Kearns has power. Gardner doesn't (Road SLG = .335). Gardner has also been scuffing his way through July and isn't much of a road hitter overall (.710 OPS).

[43] There problem isn't scoring runs in a macro environment, but in some games...against some pitchers...in certain situations...they do. That's when a good manager can be proactive and give his team a nudge. I want the manager of the Yankees to lead at times, not just take a backseat to the very talented players.

[43] Good call. The Rays meanwhile have a 100 OPS+ team wide. Of course the manager has been creative. With his lineup (and roster) he's had to be.

Jaso and Joyce have had excellent seasons....because Maddon has platooned them exactly as he should.

With the Yankees, how could Girardi platoon Granderson when for the majority of the season it's meant Thames in the field? That's on the G.M.

Otherwise, there's just not much for a Yankee manager to do. He writes their names on the lineup card and watches the starter. And for the third year in a row he's made something out of a mess of the bullpen...after showing how useless the G.M's signings have been.

44) The manager obviously wanted to see his new 1B first-hand. It won’t happen again.

Then it's on the manager to experiment in that particular game, with that particular lineup. Want to see Berkman at 1B? Fine, then give Teix a full day off...which Girardi could have done had he DHed ARod. Or, if ARod really needed the day off, then play Berkman at 1B against the LHP on Monday.

There really is no excuse for sitting two starters AND playing the lesser defensive play all in the same game, especially against the Rays. And you can't blame Cashman for that one, either.

OK, I'm done running going around in circles with you on this. Have fun with the thread,

[42] Aren't most arguments over opinion? It seems to me that is the nature of discussion.

Anyway, although Vasquez started off rotten, he straightened out, more or less. Right now it seems like a good pick-up.

"There problem isn’t scoring runs in a macro environment"

Except that's exactly the problem.

They're hitting .255 (10th of 14 in the AL)

They're slugging .406. (8th)

They've got a team .745 OPS (8th).

They've struck out 822 times (14th)

"I want the manager of the Yankees to lead at times, not just take a backseat to the very talented players."

Lead how? Because all you've said so far is about bunting. And since bunting usually leads to fewer, not more runs, I don't see the point., not especially because the Yankees haven't had trouble scoring runs this year. Indeed, they're #1 in all of baseball.

The Yankee problem isn't with scoring runs.

[45] And in "some games…against some pitchers…in certain situations" it's likely that one of the guys in the lineup will go deep, or somehow get on base for the next guy. I find it hard to believe that Girardi will squeeze with Teix, Cano, Posada, Berkman, Granderson, Rodriguez, Thames or even Kearns. Swisher, maybe (.555 SLG), but that's unlikely. Gardner's a possibility, but he gets on base at a near .400 clip. Jeter's a possibility, and I would expect it with Pena and Cervelli.

[47] If you DH A-Rod, your problem [39] still stands. You lose the DH if you want to pinch hit for Pena.

In fact, since there's no point to PH Berkman or Teix, I can see exactly why the manager did what he did.

That's the roster, not the manager. Meanwhile, Aubrey Huff could have been had this past off-season for peanuts. Or why let Hinske go?

[48] Yeah, I'l argue over opinion where at least some facts enter the picture. This type of argument leads to this type of unsourced statement:

"“There problem isn’t scoring runs in a macro environment”"

Which is so far from the truth we might as well call it a guess rather than an opinion.

I mean, clearly Sabathia is too fat to be an effective long-term pitcher...

[50] Garder, Jeter, Pena, Cervelli and Granderson are all perfect candidates for a squeeze. I am not suggesting that he do it with everyone, or everytime, but there are certain moments in a game when a run is very important and the situation favors a tactical move. Girardi, however, never uses the play. I think there is room on a talent laden team for some strategy.

[52]

First of all, why is a squeeze rarely executed? There are basically 4 reasons. One, the batter has to be a very good bunter. Two, the pitcher has to mostly throw strikes. Three, if you do it too often, the defense can pitch out against you a lot (game theory). And four, and most important to this discussion, is that, like the sac bunt, at best, it is a marginal play. In other words, hitting away and executing the squeeze generally yields around the same WE, even in ideal circumstances. How do we know that? If it didn’t, then managers would be doing it A LOT more often than they do.

Let's see of all those players listed who's a very good bunter? Not Jeter or Granderson.

Gardner you bunt and give away an out with the top of the lineup coming up? And Pena and Cervelli - how many chance have they had to execute a squeeze? And don't you think pitchers would expect exactly that?

Assuming that under the best of circumstances a suicide is occasionally a marginally correct play, which I think is a pretty good assumption, given only that it is one of the rarest elective plays in baseball, it is absolutely, unequivocably, NEVER correct to try a suicide with anything but a single runner on third base (with one out of course). So what were these genius commentators even thinking? BTW, not one of them mentioned or discussed the importance of the baserunner configuration.

The question is: How many times are we talking about a runner on third with one out with Pena or Cervelli at the plate this year?

Source

[52] Given the Yankees' offense, I would say that the tactical move is usually a base hit, or a fly ball somewhere. If the situation is runner on 3rd, less than 2 outs, I doubt that Gardner, Jeter or even a struggling Granderson would not be swinging away.

And given the Yankees pitching staff, I would rather the team score as many runs as they can.

[54] We are kind of going in circles in here. My contention is that even a great offense like the Yankees could benefit from a tactical move, while you seem to think that their prowess should preclude interference. That's fine...it's just a strategy with which I strongly disagree. I think there is often a time and a place for a good game manager to make a difference.

[54] "And given the Yankees pitching staff, I would rather the team score as many runs as they can."

That's your best point yet. Maddon can play for one run because his pitchers support that strategy. 4/5th of the current Yankee rotation does not.

51) But at least Pena is a good defender. By Playing Berkman at 1B and DH Teix, you get the worst of both worlds.

And you still do not address the bizzarro decision to rest multiple players in the same game.

My complaint, which you continue to dance around, is not any one move that game--resting ARod or starting Berkman at 1B, etc--it was the decision to make all of the moves in the same game against a difficult opponent. I think Girardi got a little excited there...hopefully he keeps it under control.

Oh, BTW, you are incorrect that the manager should not foresee PH for Berkman. Everyone and their aunt has discussed how he has become, essentially, a LH only batter. Basically, he should DH platoon with Thames. So, there was a very good chance that he have to be PH for.

I guess this thread might be over.
But I would like to know why you [47] think that it matters whether a bunch of guys are rested together, or instead the rests are spread out over a week. I don't believe it matters, in the long run, to overall number of wins. That is, it might make some really tiny difference (and it's not clear to me which way the advantage would lie), but I'm pretty sure it can't make a significant difference.
But I'm willing to be convinced.

I very much like where this conversation has gone, and cannot resist throwing in a few cents.

[25] Further confirmation that Maddon-worship by a Yankees fan would seem shocking and comical to a Rays fan. As I've mentioned, I have a friend who is reasonably high up in the Rays' organization. I have never asked him how he feels about Maddon - the question would be not only inappropriate, but silly, as I could not (and should not) expect an honest response. The Rays' brass may love him, for all I know. But because of my friend and the fact that they have clearly been a developing threat for some years now, I do pay attention to that team. And in every single medium, I have noticed that Maddon gets blasted and cursed by the fanbase. The one thing my friend did tell me? Everyone knew he was a great prospect, but the Rays' organization was extremely confident that Longoria would develop into a major, major star years before it happened.

[32], [58], etc.: I think there are two issues here - 1) Girardi's propensity to employ multiple rest days (and half days) at once, and 2) Girardi's use of the new players.

[58] There's not a great answer to your question, but I also don't like the multiple substitutions on the same day approach. Particularly, at least, when you are playing the Rays. Each of those games is a full game swing, as opposed to a half game swing. The rest is a non-statistical argument: one could say that by employing those multiple substitutions in the same game, the other regulars might be inclined to press, feeling that if runs are to be scored, those runs will most likely come from the non-substitute spots in the lineup. Then there's the added importance of losing that last game to the Rays. You probably don't want to do anything to make a loss in that game more probable. These players aren't robots. For anyone who thinks that the win in the final game of the Yankees-Rays series didn't have one team (the Rays) exiting with positive momentum, and the other team (the Yankees) exiting with negative momentum - well, I think that person would be wrong.

[32], [34], etc: Use of the new players. I haven't been thrilled with the use of the new players, but I understand why Girardi has made the moves he has with each of them.

Here's one thing I've seen no one acknowledge about the new players: any time you bring in new pieces it is nearly axiomatic that, in the short term, there are negative consequences. Logic screams that this is the case. New players have to be tested to find their appropriate roles. New players discombobulate everything - existing players are likely to be unsettled by their arrival, and it is, at the very least, a process to incorporate them off the field and on the field. Dislocation is inevitable - I hated seeing Swisher moved from the #2 hole, but this is type of thing one should expect to be part of the experimentation that simply has to follow the acquisition of new parts.

The integration of new players is always a now vs. later calculation. The bet is that the growing pains of the first weeks of integration will pay off with new capabilities further down the road. It sucks that the timing made it so that this would take place during the Rays series, but it is what it is. The thing is, that as angry as I was about the losses in the last few games, I recognize the calculus at work here. My problem is that I have concerns about each of the new parts, which makes me less confident that there will be a back-end payoff. But if these players actually have value (and others have made compelling arguments in other threads as to why they might), the struggles of the last few games cannot be divorced from the potential payoff. In simplest terms, if these players ultimately contribute, these last games will have been growing pains towards an overall better product.

[53] Squeeze plays - there have been interesting points made about the squeeze throughout this thread. What particularly bothers me, and what no one would acknowledge in the game thread last night, is that the squeeze some folks were calling for would have involved Berkman as the runner or third base. That is the other variable in a squeeze situation. Outside of a Posada, Berkman is just about the last guy you want as the third base runner if you're going to deploy a squeeze. I think there's a great chance that the defense, recognizing Berkman is running, calmly fields any bunt and throw home, nailing Berkman by at least five feet.

[33], etc.: I am also inclined to blame Cashman for some of the current weaknesses on the team (and I've generally been a Cashman supporter). It remains to be seen how everything will turnout, though, so despite the fact I wanted to throw AJ through a wall last night, I recognize that there's a lot of baseball still to be played.

As I mentioned, my one concern is that I think we may have a harder schedule left than the Rays (and will attempt to run some numbers later this week).

Finally, if talking about pet peeves is fair game, I detest the use of the non-word "proactive." I don't know if it's fought its way into certain inferior dictionaries, but it is not a word. It's redundant, as it means the same thing as the perfectly adequate "active." "Proactive" is a first cousin to "irregardless." Regardless of some folks' desire to use either word, only the original word is correct. In both cases, the original word is sufficient.

[58] As I mentioned, the grass is always greener on the other side. I suppose Maddon is the current flavor of the month, just like Scioscia was/is with the Angels. Maybe it would be fun to watch the Yankees run plays, hit and run, squeeze, steal, etc, but that's not the way the Yanks have been constructed. Haven't been for quite some time.

[59] rather...

[60] The "flavor of the month" take is exactly how I feel about this - in fact, those were the precise words running through my head listening to the fawning over him during a recent telecast.

Oh, and in reading what I wrote in the tome that is [59], I should clarify at least one thing - the argument about multiple substitutions causing the remaining regulars to press is a statistical argument. What I am suggesting is that there may be further statistical impact that is not captured by the current metrics.