There are also strengths. Reducing the level for establishing legitimate concerns/question marks to simultaneously include players occupying positions of strength is, in and of itself, contradictory and, as such, meaningless for the sake of comparison.
Of course the Yanks have plenty of strengths.
You've missed the point. The fact that it is the Yankees, for the purpose of understanding in this case, is incidental. Do you not recognize the contradition identified in the paragraph above?
No, there is no contraditiction. Everything is not black and white. Some people can look at things from more than one angle. Obviously, you are not one of them.
You keep pretending I picked them to finish behind the Sox.
I pretend nothing, and I have made no such claim. I simply noted a false dicotomy with respect to your reasoning in this particular instance.
It's Ok to project a team with many questions or concerns to have the best record. It's not a false dicotomy. I never even said the Yanks had more major questions. I just pointed out 10 concerns (some could have been minor, moderate or major).
The Yanks have many questions. I feel they have about the same amount as us and pretty close to the same level of concern. They have a few more near sure bets than us. I didn't mention that when I posted my list, because I was addressing only the issue of concerns at that time.
I projected them with the most wons in the AL.
Again, not the point.
It's one of my points. Just because you don't think it is related, doesn't mean it isn't.
I also raised some valid concerns or questions.
This is the point of argument. The aforementioned contradiction in reasoning quite necessarily dismisses any validity for your claims. Put another way, a pitcher who fashioned an ERA+ of 410 cannot be projected as both a strength and a question mark. It begs for a more coherent methodology. That which can be asserted without proof also requires none for refutation, rendering comparision meaningless.
You are arguing semantics. We could go on all day. I'll choose to just chalk you up as narrow minded.
For example, David Robertson was arguably the best set-up-man in baseball last season. 66.2 innings pitched, 1.08 ERA, only 40 hits, one HR allowed, 100 Ks. Since his debut in the second half of the 2008 season, he has consistently exhibited one of the highest K/9 in baseball. Yet, you listed him as a question mark due to his improvement in WHIP from the previous season, his career high, even though his WHIP was lower in the two seasons prior to that one.
If I projected his 2012 season, I would think he'd have a solid one, but the fact that he is 2 years removed from being awful is something to be concerned about. Bard had 3 straight good/great years, and many yank fans consider him a question mark.
Once more, if you project Robertson to have a solid year, then he should not also be a question mark. Hedging your bets by wagering on both sides of an issue is by definition no bet at all.
This sums up you limited mindset perfectly.
Moreover, Robertson has never been awful. Review his statistics again. The only blemish - ERA his rookie season; however, if you take the time to consider his game logs, you will find that he pitched in only 25 ball games for a total of 30.1 innings that season, of which he had only one awful outing against Baltimore, giving up 5 runs in 1/3 of an inning. He did his job in 20 of his 25 appearances.
Using ERA to evaluate a relief pitcher agains shows your tunnel vision. WHIP is a much better tool and here is Robertson's first 3 years in the MLB numbers:
He had a great season last year and I think he is the real deal, but that doesn't mean there is no serious doubt. Anyone who follows baseball closely knows that tha vast majority of relief pitchers have rollercoaster careers. They can look great one year and awful the next. Just because I "project" Robertson will have a good year, does not mean he has to be taken off the concern list. There is a significant chance he reverts back to a 1.40 type WHIP. There's also a chance he has a good year, but still worse than 2011 and perhaps that's enough to make a slight difference to the season outcome. Perhaps mot.
Furthermore, since being called up, no other reliever in baseball has entered more games with the bases loaded and no outs than David Robertson, who has struck out 270 batters in 202 innings pitched and has compiled an overall record of 14-6.
Now, you are using W-L record by a relief pitcher to make a point? I could rest my case right here, but here's a cherry=picked stat for you to ponder:
In 2010 he let of 10 of 33 inherited runs to score, and had at least 19 bad appearances out of 64...not counting games where he walked and let up multiple hits but no runs were scored.
Are you saying the chances of him having a season closer to 2010 than 2011 is so remote, the concern is so limited, that nobody who thinks he's a good pitcher can have serious doubts?
Robertson has very good numbers in clutch situations over his whole career. I wish he was on our side, but he's still a question mark.
As for Daniel Bard, he is only a question mark as a ML starter, not a set-up man; however, he does have a poor career record of 5-13 and has been dismal in save situations, blowing a horrendous 15 saves in 20 opportunities. Still, he is one of the best set up men in the game today.
His starter and closer numbers are based on extremely small sample sizes. That being said, Bard as a starter is a huge concern.
Besides, aren't you now "missing the point"? I never said Bard was not a question mark, in fact, I think he is a huge Q-mark as a starter. I was bringing his name up because I have heard many Yankee fans bashing him, and I used him as a reference to why Robertson could be considered a Q-mark as well.
Concomitantly, you assert question marks for players who showed a statistical decline. Therefore, both an improvement and a decline are evidence to you indicating a concern or question mark. Hmmm?
I wouldn't label Robertson a major concern, and they have Soriano as well, so the pen is not an issue like it is for the Sox. Even if Mo declines, the yanks should be OK there.
If the Yankee bullpen will be ok, then there goes your argument for David Robertson, Mariano Rivera, and the back of the bullpen as concerns/questionmarks. Especially, considering Joba Chamberlain, Pedro Feliciano, and David Aardsma are all on the DL and may not pitch this season.
You continue to misunderstand and misrepresent my position. I do think the Ynaks pen will be OK, and I think the Yanks will do well this year, but my point was that they have enough significant concerns to put serious doubt that my projection will come true. After all, I was wrong on the Sox last year due mainly to us getting over 80 starts by back-up or injured pitchers. With the age and decline of several key Yankees, I think I am being reasonable in saying I think they will win the division, but have so many concerns as to cast serious doubt on that projection.
To make another point, consider Robinson Cano - depending upon which array utilized by which company of leading sabermatricians, Cano was defensively one of the best second baseman in all of baseball. Yet, a competing company ranked him as one of the worst defensive second basemen last season. Still, a third company ranked Cano in the middle of the pack. Defensive metrics are dubious at best. Even year to year, the same player can rate near the top and then near the very bottom. Cano is awesome. He is not a question mark. Derek Jeter's dWAR was minus or - 1.3 last season. Not very good. But, his dWAR was an identical -1.3 in 1997 as well. Jeter hit .297 last season. Not shabby. He also hit .327 after the all-star break. His overall OBP was .355. Robinson Cano's was .349. Perhaps, you should have included Cano as a question mark too? See above. Look, Jeter had worse numbers than many SSs last year and is a year older. He is certainly a question mark and is one of the worst fielders in MLB right now. His range is pathetic. We can agree to disagree, but if you really think I am all wet to call him a question mark, you are not being objective. Jeter's second half numbers: .327/.383/.428/.811
Jeter's first half numbers: .270/.330/.353/.683
When many fans were burying Jeter last season, including most Yankee fans, I posted here several times that his struggles were a matter of mechanics and not a sudden and precipitous drop in athleticism or bat speed. Moreover, I predicted that Jeter would take off following his 3000th hit and would hit .300. Well, if not for getting hit in the hand and wrist, he damn near made it. I believe Jeter will hit .300 this season as well.
You could be right, but I'll trust the time tested S-curve projection methodology and project he will do worse than 2011 as a whole.
My guess is he comes out somewhere in the middle and coupled with his horrific fielding, he's overall bottom tier now. I could be wrong. The guy has heart and pride.
I have watched either live or on tape nearly every MLB game Derek Jeter has played since getting his first cup of coffee at the end of the 1995 regular season - and that is no exaggeration. No major league team could afford to field a "horrific" defensive shortstop, much less the New York Yankees, a team that has missed the playoffs only once since Derek Jeter put on Pinstripes. Your position is sheer hyperbole.
I guess that shows what a homer you are, because he is and has been one of baseballs worst fielders for several years now.
Don Zimmer, who has seen major league shortstops for the better part of sixty years, has stated on numerous occasions that Jeter is the best he has ever seen at coming in on ground balls and going back on fly balls. Not adequate, not serviceable, not very good...but the best at moving north and south in fielding a batted ball. Another opinion supporting that view is none other than Cal Ripkin. I will trust my eyes and playing/coaching experience in watching Derek Jeter play nearly every single inning of his career and the opinions of Zim and Ripkin - among others - rather than your exaggeration and the dubious outcomes offered by current defensive metrics. Even the father of sabrematricians, Bill James, has issued caution regarding the numinous nature of defensive statistics, and specifically, more or less abandoning range factor nearly ten years ago.
So, now you want to trust certain companies and pioneers of metrics when they suit your purpose.
Jeter's career OBP is .383. His worst season was .340 in 2010. For comparison, Carl Crawford's career OBP is .333 with a single season high of .364.
Did I ever defend CC? I called him a glorified platoon player whose contract will cripple us for 7 years. Using a 38 year old's career numbers to try and impress me is not going to work.
I never stated that you did. Rather, I used a corner outfielder's career numbers in comparison to a shortstop's worst year for OBP to illustrate just how high Derek Jeter has set his own standards. And, Carl Crawford is a four time all-star; he just may not be in the white-hot spotlight that is Boston and New York. Platoon players do not garner 20 million dollar contracts. Again, hyperbole on your part. And, if you are not impressed with Derek Jeter's career numbers, then I am beginning to question your sanity. How many shortstops has Boston had since 1996?
You talk about me getting off the point.
I never said Jeter was a horrible hitter. I said he was and still is in decline. Decline from being one of the best does not mean he is bad now. My point is that several key Yankee players should or could easily continue to decline this year, and that all put together could spell a significant offensive decline from last year...still a very good offense, but just not as good as 2011.
I've listened to those who argue that Derek Jeter is the worst defensive shortstop in baseball history (Rob Neyer). As a former player and coach, I maintain that Jeter was and is still sure handed, has a strong arm, is lanky and athletic at 6'3", comes in on slow rollers marvelously, throws off balance accurately, handles bad throws from catcher to outfielders as well as anyone, makes incredibly difficult tags around the bag, feeds the ball to second effortlessly, goes backwards on fly balls as well as anyone, and most importantly with the game on the line, no one is holding their breath when a grounder is hit in his direction. He consistently makes big plays in big moments and does not botch anything routine. And, he is death to base runners in a rundown or pickle.
He's great at relay throws....whoop-dee- doo!
Is that really all you have taken from what I have written? Thank you for the insightful response.
Yes, right now, that is the only good part I see in Jeter's defense.... his arm and instincts.
His weakness is and always has been balls hit to his left. It is not speed; he just has never read the ball well to that side and consequently gets inadequate jumps. He has also lost a step to his right over the years, but that used to be a strength as well.
He never had good range, and not he "lost a step"... hmmm....
Posted by moonslav59