Yankees vs Indians

[Cephius]

If you look at the math, they did. Look at his paycheck and look at the number of games he played before you call people idiots. Nobody said he specifically got paid 1M per game, just that the math worked out that way.

So what, you didn't specifically say it? Are we in court? You're trying to say he's overpaid at 1m/win, its a dumb statement no matter how you phrase or suggest it.

First of all, I never said he got paid 1M per win. I said the math showed he got roughly 1M per game played, and that in my opinion he wasn't producing the results normially associated with that paycheck.

And like I said, wins is a stat and stats are deceiving. He pitched well, sometimes the offense wasn't there to back him up. It may not have been "worth the paycheck" as far as wins go, but overall he provided a boost that was needed, and helped to get them back to the post season.

And hi, they played a long stretch of games against the Tigers, Indians, Angels and Red Sox. They won the majority of the games, and swept the Red Sox. Hardly "struggling central teams" considering the Indians look like they're going to beat my Yankees anyway.

I hope you aren't crediting Clemens with all those wins. If you are, thats incorrect, and if you aren't, thats irrelevent.

I was responding to the guy who said we didn't play anyone down the stretch except "struggling central teams" as if winning that many games was an easy task. I wasn't talking about Clemens.

And way to make a hypocrite of yourself (again) by saying "payroll is the biggest misconception in baseball" and that the yankees are "overpaid" in the same sentence. Why does it matter what they're paid if payroll doesn't matter smartass?

Because, gasp, its possible to think that players are overpaid without thinking a payroll is the reason a team wins. Its, gasp, possible, to think a shitty player is making too much money without thinking the team is winning because they're paying a shitty player too much money.

Why are you assuming everything I said was referring directly to Clemens? Did you even read at all? The Yankees are no more "overpaid" than any other player on any other team. Just because they're on the same team doesn't mean anything, it goes back to the retarded argument about payroll. If you want to say every player in baseball is overpaid fine, but you can't single out people on the Yankees and ignore everyone else.

Sorry, you're going to have to quote more than Forbes here, which looks at a very basic overview of the Yankee organization.

Lets just discredit the associated press completely while we're at it.

George Steinbrenner owns 60% of the YES network, which again was valued in the billions of dollars. The Yankees make over 200 million from that alone, do you guys really believe the Yankees are running out of money? I realize that's what the Forbes numbers show, but if you look at the pure amount of capital that the Yankees have, it really doesn't ring true.

You can pinch numbers all you want, and I guess I was wrong about Forbes not including merchandise and network revenue. But my main point is that the Yankees have all that money, and the only thing they should do with it is spend it on players. What else would you have them do with it? I guess with all the bitching and nitpicking you guys are doing about the money the Yankees spent on Clemens, they should have just lined their pockets with gold. Then if the Yankees missed the post season everyone would have been asking why George didn't spend money on someone to help the bullpen? I love how you second guess every payroll move yet offer no other explanation as to what he should do with all that money. Just hand it to you I suppose?

[Akiyama]

And hi, they played a long stretch of games against the Tigers, Indians, Angels and Red Sox. They won the majority of the games, and swept the Red Sox. Hardly "struggling central teams" considering the Indians look like they're going to beat my Yankees anyway.

I was responding to the guy who said we didn't play anyone down the stretch except "struggling central teams" as if winning that many games was an easy task. I wasn't talking about Clemens.

Wow. I thought you went away. D: Guess I was wrong. Okay, well to prove the fact that they played a bunch of mushy teams, and you seem to be too lazy to check their second half of the schedule, I'll do it for ya right here.

Yankees (51-25) from July 12th-Sept. 20th
Their opponents combined records were (821-799) .. which is me combining all of their opponents' record together. Not bad, just over a .500 record.

This is where it gets fun. You said they didn't play mush? Okay.
Tampa Bay: 14
Toronto: 14 (Granted they were 4 games above .500)
Boston: 6
Baltimore: 12
White Sox: 3
Kansas City: 10
Detroit: 8 (4-4 against them, not so dominant.)
Cleveland: 3
Seattle: 3
LAA: 3

Now, what does all of this show? That's 39 games against teams with HORRIBLE records. By horrible, I of course mean games against teams with records from 18 to 30 games below .500.

Now, against teams like the Red Sox, Indians, Mariners, and such they did good. 5-1 against the Sox, 3-0 against the Indians and 2-1 against the Mariners. That's well and good, but they were 1-2 against the Angels, and 4-4 against the Tigers.

What's my point in all this? They had 37 games against teams with above .500 records. That's not too tough of a schedule.

It's a bit on the soft side if you ask me? Yeah, sure. They beat teams they should have. Congrats. You should be proud, but don't throw bullshit in my face that I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about. I take pride in my research and I just happen to know for a fact that their schedule was easy down the road. A team as with the talent as the Yankees have should have done so much better over the entire year if they were indeed a good team. I don't care about their pitcher issues. Other teams have those too, you know.

Fact is, I wasn't trying to throw just the pay roll into the picture for why I think they are overrated. I also don't give a rat's ass how much they pay Clemens. I just laugh at the fact that they'd waste money on him instead of.. oh, I don't know.. trying to bring back Joe Torre, because if you guys lose him.. that'd be the stupidest offseason move anyone's made in a while. (Other than the Raiders trading Randy Moss for a 4th Round draft pick that is. Different sport though.)

Anyway, I'm done with you. you want to stay loyal to your Yankees until the end? Go right ahead. I have no problem with a fan loyal to his team. It's nice to see. I just don't like people who act like they know everything and try to make the other person included in the argument feel like a jackass. As I said before.. enjoy your offseason. I wonder how different the Yankees will look next year.

[Cephius]

And hi, they played a long stretch of games against the Tigers, Indians, Angels and Red Sox. They won the majority of the games, and swept the Red Sox. Hardly "struggling central teams" considering the Indians look like they're going to beat my Yankees anyway.

I was responding to the guy who said we didn't play anyone down the stretch except "struggling central teams" as if winning that many games was an easy task. I wasn't talking about Clemens.

Wow. I thought you went away. D: Guess I was wrong. Okay, well to prove the fact that they played a bunch of mushy teams, and you seem to be too lazy to check their second half of the schedule, I'll do it for ya right here.

I'm at work, I have nothing better to do

Yankees (51-25) from July 12th-Sept. 20th
Their opponents combined records were (821-799) .. which is me combining all of their opponents' record together. Not bad, just over a .500 record.

This is where it gets fun. You said they didn't play mush? Okay.
Tampa Bay: 14
Toronto: 14 (Granted they were 4 games above .500)
Boston: 6
Baltimore: 12
White Sox: 3
Kansas City: 10
Detroit: 8 (4-4 against them, not so dominant.)
Cleveland: 3
Seattle: 3
LAA: 3

Now, what does all of this show? That's 39 games against teams with HORRIBLE records. By horrible, I of course mean games against teams with records from 18 to 30 games below .500.

Now, against teams like the Red Sox, Indians, Mariners, and such they did good. 5-1 against the Sox, 3-0 against the Indians and 2-1 against the Mariners. That's well and good, but they were 1-2 against the Angels, and 4-4 against the Tigers.

What's my point in all this? They had 37 games against teams with above .500 records. That's not too tough of a schedule.

You made it sound earlier like they played every game against the Royals. They didn't, they played the teams they were told to play (and by the way, if you follow the East at all, you know how much Toronto/Tampa/Baltimore love playing spoiler to Boston and NY late in the season - those are no pushover games) and they did what they needed to do. I just don't see how you can try to diminish them coming all the way back, payroll and everything notwithstanding.

It's a bit on the soft side if you ask me? Yeah, sure. They beat teams they should have. Congrats. You should be proud, but don't throw bullshit in my face that I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about. I take pride in my research and I just happen to know for a fact that their schedule was easy down the road. A team as with the talent as the Yankees have should have done so much better over the entire year if they were indeed a good team. I don't care about their pitcher issues. Other teams have those too, you know.

I think your definition of "easy" is completely statistically based, and therefore faulty. Tampa Bay lost almost 100 games this year, but with their young explosive offense and Scott Kazmir starting every 4-5th game, you can't just call every game against them "easy". Even the Red Sox, the "best" team in baseball, lost a fair amount of games to them. Going on that kind of a tear after the all-star break - no matter who they faced - is a great accomplishment no matter how much you try to diminish it.

About pitching - show me another team that had it's opening day starter never pitch after April, that were forced to have rookie after rookie (DeSalvo, Hughes, Chamberlain, Clippard, Kennedy, Wight just off the top of my head) come up and pitch for them, and I'd be happy to agree with you.

Fact is, I wasn't trying to throw just the pay roll into the picture for why I think they are overrated. I also don't give a rat's ass how much they pay Clemens. I just laugh at the fact that they'd waste money on him instead of.. oh, I don't know.. trying to bring back Joe Torre, because if you guys lose him.. that'd be the stupidest offseason move anyone's made in a while. (Other than the Raiders trading Randy Moss for a 4th Round draft pick that is. Different sport though.)

Couldn't agree with you more about Joe Torre, they should bring him back. However it's wrong to try to relate them spending money on Clemens to Torre. Completely unrelated, it's not like Torre is demanding money that Clemens' salary would have paid.

Anyway, I'm done with you. you want to stay loyal to your Yankees until the end? Go right ahead. I have no problem with a fan loyal to his team. It's nice to see. I just don't like people who act like they know everything and try to make the other person included in the argument feel like a jackass. As I said before.. enjoy your offseason. I wonder how different the Yankees will look next year.

The problem here is that you look at stats and dollar figures as the be-all-end-all measurement of player caliber and team ability. I on the other hand tend to look past the numbers and see the team for what it is on the field. I thought the Yankees played with a lot of heart this year and fought back, the kind of things you don't keep stats on. Which is why I get aggravated when people come on here and spout garbage about payroll and easy schedules and junk, giving no respect for the team nor it's fans. Are either of us right in the end? Who knows, all I know is that I stand by my team.

[Akiyama]

You made it sound earlier like they played every game against the Royals. They didn't, they played the teams they were told to play (and by the way, if you follow the East at all, you know how much Toronto/Tampa/Baltimore love playing spoiler to Boston and NY late in the season - those are no pushover games) and they did what they needed to do. I just don't see how you can try to diminish them coming all the way back, payroll and everything notwithstanding.

Well, maybe not every game was against the Royals, but their records still don't lie. The Yankees beat who they were supposed to, and I know how the Yankees generally have trouble with the Devil Rays, much like nlast year. I'm not trying to diminish a 51-25 record after the All-Star break. I'm just saying that the record may be different if they played some of the other tougher teams in the AL a few more times. Yeah, you're right though. It's not like they picked their games or anything, they played who they had to.

I think your definition of "easy" is completely statistically based, and therefore faulty. Tampa Bay lost almost 100 games this year, but with their young explosive offense and Scott Kazmir starting every 4-5th game, you can't just call every game against them "easy". Even the Red Sox, the "best" team in baseball, lost a fair amount of games to them. Going on that kind of a tear after the all-star break - no matter who they faced - is a great accomplishment no matter how much you try to diminish it.

My definition of "easy" is based heavily on stats, yes. Numbers don't lie. TB lost 96 games. I know how good their offense is and how much potential it has. I know how good Scott Kazmir is and I feel bad he's stuck in that horrid situation playing for them, he deserves better. Remember, I'm all about the stats. They went 9-5 against the D-Rays in the second half of the year. One of those losses came to Kazmir. What about the other two? Their pitching staff isn't anything worth bragging about, that's for sure. 9-5 is still good, don't get me wrong. D: I promise you though, I'm not trying to shit on their achievment in the second half of the season. It was great with the amount of heart they faught back with.

About pitching - show me another team that had it's opening day starter never pitch after April, that were forced to have rookie after rookie (DeSalvo, Hughes, Chamberlain, Clippard, Kennedy, Wight just off the top of my head) come up and pitch for them, and I'd be happy to agree with you.

I can't think of another team that didn't have their opening day starter start again after April, but I know the Braves sure used a ton of starters because they could never find a half decent 3-4-5 guy. Chuck James filled in the 3 spot pretty well. The 4-5 spot was still a toss up between Reyes, Cormier, Davies, Carlyle and Bennett. Only a couple of those guys were rookies, granted, but the Yankees rookies were a hell of a lot better than the Braves rookies, lol. D: I'm sure quite a few teams had different 3-4-5 starters throughout the year. You had a consistant Wang, and a consistant Pettite after the all-star break, just like the Braves had Hudson and Smoltz throughout most of the season. Fact is, people still had to deal with a ton of pitching issues and I don't like the fact that you use the "we had a ton of rookies pitching" card. x.x

Couldn't agree with you more about Joe Torre, they should bring him back. However it's wrong to try to relate them spending money on Clemens to Torre. Completely unrelated, it's not like Torre is demanding money that Clemens' salary would have paid.

I dunno. I'd pay Torre 16mil before I'd pay Clemens, but I know it's completely unrelated. What a player makes compared to what a manager makes should never be compared in the first place, so I was at fault here. I just feel bad for Torre after everything he's done for the club. The Yankees are this century's Braves afterall.[/quote]

The problem here is that you look at stats and dollar figures as the be-all-end-all measurement of player caliber and team ability. I on the other hand tend to look past the numbers and see the team for what it is on the field. I thought the Yankees played with a lot of heart this year and fought back, the kind of things you don't keep stats on. Which is why I get aggravated when people come on here and spout garbage about payroll and easy schedules and junk, giving no respect for the team nor it's fans. Are either of us right in the end? Who knows, all I know is that I stand by my team.

I can't really help that I'm a numbers guy. It'll always be my nature. It's a positive thing and a negative thing too. I look at a player and see stats first, not the caliber or the ability. I see potential in a lot of guys, like a scout would, but I still base a lot of my thinkings behind their numbers. As I said, numbers do not lie. Heart doesn't win championships. The Yankees just didn't perform this year, all there is to it. I wasn't spouting garbage in the topic, you just took some of the things I said the wrong way. I don't like shitting on the Yankees or any team for that matter. I love to hate them, yes, but I wouldn't come in here and bring up completely unrelated, bullshit stats from no where. I'd try to back them up like I did this morning. I respect the Yankees, I respect their players, their coaches, and some of their fans, but I don't respect the dicks that try to defend their Yankees as the best baseball team ever to walk the planet or some other random bullshit. (Not you, just the random dicks in general.) I commend ya for standing by them though.

Will either of us be right? Haha, yeah.. who knows. You stand by your team though, and I'll stand my Braves through our struggles. If Cox were to retire and Torre were to come here, we'd be the luckiest team in the offseason, I can tell you that much. That and I hope we get Torri Hunter to replace Andruw in Center.

This has been fun though. Thanks for not going on a rampage with me again. To think this all started with me mentioning I don't think Clemens was worth 17+whatevermillion dollars, lol. Anyway, wheeew. Break time. D:

[Viq]

About Scott Kazmir, he isn't completely stuck in a horrid situation. Tampa keeps signing him to one-year contracts every year, including 2007. If I'm not mistaken, he'll be eligible for free agency after the 2009 season. If the Rays don't trade him before then (I'm looking at you, 2009 trade-deadline), Kazmir will get paid pretty generously somewhere for 2010. He's got to be aware of that, and I don't see him signing anything that will keep him in Tampa beyond 2009, especially given the way they keep tossing weak single-season deals.

[Akiyama]

About Scott Kazmir, he isn't completely stuck in a horrid situation. Tampa keeps signing him to one-year contracts every year, including 2007. If I'm not mistaken, he'll be eligible for free agency after the 2009 season. If the Rays don't trade him before then (I'm looking at you, 2009 trade-deadline), Kazmir will get paid pretty generously somewhere for 2010. He's got to be aware of that, and I don't see him signing anything that will keep him in Tampa beyond 2009, especially given the way they keep tossing weak single-season deals.

Yeah. Well I mean.. by horrid situation I'm talking about by his standpoint. I'm sure he's tired of finishing with a team that's 30 games below .500. I'm sure he'd like to reach the playoffs one day and such, yanno? With a winning team? Maybe the Braves should go after him. >.> <.<

[Cephius]

About Scott Kazmir, he isn't completely stuck in a horrid situation. Tampa keeps signing him to one-year contracts every year, including 2007. If I'm not mistaken, he'll be eligible for free agency after the 2009 season. If the Rays don't trade him before then (I'm looking at you, 2009 trade-deadline), Kazmir will get paid pretty generously somewhere for 2010. He's got to be aware of that, and I don't see him signing anything that will keep him in Tampa beyond 2009, especially given the way they keep tossing weak single-season deals.

Yeah. Well I mean.. by horrid situation I'm talking about by his standpoint. I'm sure he's tired of finishing with a team that's 30 games below .500. I'm sure he'd like to reach the playoffs one day and such, yanno? With a winning team? Maybe the Braves should go after him. >.> <.<

I dunno, the Rays are probably the "best worst" team I've seen in a long time. If management would spend some money (and fans in Florida would fill more than 5000 seats a game) on the bullpen they wouldn't be bad off. They have a young offense that has tons of speed and are only going to get better. Honestly they're only 2 starting pitchers and 2-3 relief men away from being a +.500 team. Easier said than done, though.

I'm pretty sure Kazmir has to pitch another 2 full seasons to be eligible for free agency, so we'll see if the Rays deal him before then or not. If they have any sense they'll hold onto him though, as he would probably win 20 games easy with a competent bullpen behind him.