Steve R. Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Had to post that in the Yankee thread huh? Why? Get your own losing thread. But really… I love articles like that. Of course, a good fan can always backseat drive a game and find more than enough decisions that, had they been made differently might have made all the difference. None can be taken seriously of course, but it's fun to do. Leyland's managerial decisions cost his team as much as Mattingly's and he's now gone… let's see how Donnie fares. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hollywood Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Had to post that in the Yankee thread huh? Why? Get your own losing thread. But really… I love articles like that. Of course, a good fan can always backseat drive a game and find more than enough decisions that, had they been made differently might have made all the difference. None can be taken seriously of course, but it's fun to do. Leyland's managerial decisions cost his team as much as Mattingly's and he's now gone… let's see how Donnie fares. Birds of a feather? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mitchells Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the results to change. I hope I’m wrong but seven years for Jacoby Ellsbury is ridiculous. He seems to play every other season so they are basically paying him $153 million for 3 years. Just sayin….. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the results to change. The results. Unless you think the goal is to spend money and not make the playoffs 95% of the time, in which case this appears to be a poor strategy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mitchells Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 They have won one WS in the last 13 years. That sucks with their payroll. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Anthony Bonner Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 I'm pretty sure they have the highest winning percentage over the last 13 years by a decent margin though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mitchells Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 I'll look for the Highest Winning Percentage Banner the next time I'm at the stadium. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Anthony Bonner Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 I mean look - winning % is the best indicator of "the best team" - we just happen to award championships in the US based on short series. Its fun, I enjoy it - actually I prefer it. But it doesn't necessarily do a great job of identifying who the best team is. I mean only a yankees fan would think 10 years of playoffs in 12 years while winning the most games in baseball was a mediocrity. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Right, because playoff results aren't given probability function determined by the relative strength of very closely matched teams and, therefore, are nearly random, but can be consistently earned through some strategy that yields a lower winning percentage in the regular season. Perhaps this has to do with finding players who have "clutch" and "hustle" and "hunger". Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lex Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 They've become the Atlanta Braves of the American League. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 I mean look - winning % is the best indicator of "the best team" - we just happen to award championships in the US based on short series. Its fun, I enjoy it - actually I prefer it. But it doesn't necessarily do a great job of identifying who the best team is. The US system is very good at crowning a legitimate champion. Another system, based on a large sample size and regular season winning percentage, would be better at determining the best team. The irony of something like the BCS is that it's probably better at determining the best team than a playoff would be; it's just not very good at creating a legitimate champion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mitchells Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Do you think Brian Cashman and the owners are satisfied with the team's performance over the last thirteen years? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lex Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Ellsbury will make the Yankees better for awhile if he can stay on the field. I think the Yankees real problem will be pitching this year. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Wrong question. Do you think there's a strategy that would consistently yield better results in the playoffs than the Yankees have followed? And if so, why aren't they following it? The Yankees run from 1996 to 2002 was phenominally lucky. It wasn't based on some superior strategy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mitchells Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Two or three really good pitchers plus clutch hitting trumps teams with sluggers all the time. The sluggers feast on mediocre pitching all season long but then their production goes way down when they face better pitching in the playoffs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.