With AJ and CC in NYC now does that make them the fav. in the east?

[Dipre]

So you graduated from Cum Loud? I mean Cum Laude?

 

Did you go to the same school as Gom where they don't know what that is?

[mvp 78]

i'm not all that concerned about aj and cc. i think both are fairly hittable. sure, having a big lefty in yankee stadium used to be a huge plus but it really remains to be seen if it'll make a difference in the new ballpark.

 

the bigger issue is if their younger talent can play up to their potential. if cano had a pedroia 08 season, i think we'd be in trouble. that might make a few people chuckle, but it's closer to reality than worrying about aj having a big impact next year.

[diony]

i'm not all that concerned about aj and cc. i think both are fairly hittable. sure, having a big lefty in yankee stadium used to be a huge plus but it really remains to be seen if it'll make a difference in the new ballpark.

 

The new ballpark has the same dimensions as the old one.

 

CC and AJ are two of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball. Sabathia leaded the majors in Contact% with 72.0% which means, last year batters made contact on just 72.0% of the swings they took against CC. Burnett was 6th with a 76.2%. So I think you should be a little concerned about that.

[rician blast]

CC and AJ are two of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball. Sabathia leaded the majors in Contact% with 72.0% which means' date=' last year batters made contact on just [b']72.0%[/b] of the swings they took against CC. Burnett was 6th with a 76.2%. So I think you should be a little concerned about that.

 

source?

[BSN07]

Both have 4ish ERA's in the AL last season. Both are hittable. That said. They are both quality arms that when on can be "unhittable". But how many times is a pitcher dialed in like that over the course of the regular season?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

HA. please. The Yankees are still third best in the AL east. They signed an injury prone Burnett who only produces when he's in a contract year, and they signed Sabathia, who is bound to fold in the Bronx. Both of them combined might replace the production they got from Mussina last year, who is now gone.

 

 

Until the Rays sign another couple of quality players, Theo doesn't have to do anything.

[ORS]

source?

Fangraphs ... which is quickly becoming the best source of free baseball data on the internet.

[26 to 6]

Sabathia leaded the majors in Contact% with 72.0% which means, last year batters made contact on just 72.0% of the swings they took against CC.

[Dipre]

The new ballpark has the same dimensions as the old one.

 

CC and AJ are two of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball. Sabathia leaded the majors in Contact% with 72.0% which means, last year batters made contact on just 72.0% of the swings they took against CC. Burnett was 6th with a 76.2%. So I think you should be a little concerned about that.

 

You gotta consider Sabathia spent most of last season in a salary drive in the NL.

 

But Sabathia is one of the most dominant pitchers in baseball, but saying he's the less hittable due to a salary drive in the decidedly weaker NL is just ludicrous.

 

I'd take Burnett's data much more seriously.

[ORS]

The new ballpark has the same dimensions as the old one.

True, but that doesn't make it the same park. New YS won't be exactly the same, particularly not in the OF, and that will impact the batter's eye. This is why some track K and BB park factors as well. It may turn out that new YS is more friendly to hitters in a lefty-lefty matchup due to batter's seeing the ball better there and the same short dimensions in RF.

 

EDIT: By different in the OF, I'm referring to beyond the fences, obviously.

[ORS]

You gotta consider Sabathia spent most of last season in a salary drive in the NL.

 

But Sabathia is one of the most dominant pitchers in baseball, but saying he's the less hittable due to a salary drive in the decidedly weaker NL is just ludicrous.

 

I'd take Burnett's data much more seriously.

In the two full years prior to going the the NL, CC's swing-contact rate was about the same as Burnett's was this year, and Burnett lead the AL.

[Dipre]

In the two full years prior to going the the NL' date=' CC's swing-contact rate was about the same as Burnett's was this year, and Burnett lead the AL.[/quote']

 

Yes, but not as ridiculous as they were this year, which is my point.

[diony]

Both have 4ish ERA's in the AL last season. Both are hittable. That said. They are both quality arms that when on can be "unhittable". But how many times is a pitcher dialed in like that over the course of the regular season?

 

We're talking about how hittable they are. ERA has nothing to do with it, the defense also plays a role.

 

Plus Burnett gave 86 walks that contributed to his high ERA. On Sabathia, he had a really bad April. But that's not the point.

[Dipre]

We're talking about how hittable they are. ERA has nothing to do with it, the defense also plays a role.

 

Plus Burnett gave 86 walks that contributed to his high ERA. On Sabathia, he had a really bad April. But that's not the point.

 

If the point is that they're hard to make contact against, then that is correct.

[Dojji]

The problem here is that you still have 3 swings against them. if when you do hit them you hit them VERY HARD, and this is especially true for Burnett, that takes a lot of the value away.

[jacksonianmarch]

The problem here is that you still have 3 swings against them. if when you do hit them you hit them VERY HARD' date=' and this is especially true for Burnett, that takes a lot of the value away.[/quote']

 

that is an utter falsehood. What you are trying to say is that Burnett's BABIP is high, right. You are saying that when other teams make contact, that they typically get a hit, hit a homer, etc. So this could be best explained by BABIP, otherwise known as batting average on balls in play, calculated by taking total batters faced, subtracting strikeouts and homers and then dividing that into the total amount of hits. That gives you an idea of how often the pitcher gives up hits when the other team makes contact. And if you want to measure good contact, ie extra base hits, you should use IsoPower, calculated by taking the SLG-AVG. That would give you a rough estimation of how hard the balls are hit over a career, because it is safe to say that over 5000 or so ABs, that a pitcher would start to show a trend. How bout we compare Burnett to your ace, Beckett? Shall we?

 

How do you explain Burnett's .271 career BABIP? How bout his career .129 IsoPower against? Lets compare that, shall we?

 

Burnett's career BABIP .271

Beckett's career BABIP .293

 

Burnett's career IsoPower against .129

Beckett's career IsoPower against .149

 

So if you are going to say that Burnett gets hit VERY hard when the other team makes contact, then you must say that Beckett gets hit super ultra hard when the other team makes contact. And when you factor in that Burnett has had a higher K/9IP over his 3 yr ALE tenure compared to Beckett's 3 yr tenure, then you must say that Beckett gets hit more frequently AND gets hit super ultra hard when the other team makes contact?

 

This gets to the very core of my argument. Burnett, if healthy, is an ace. Last yrs numbers, for the most part, were an aberration. Yes, the wins and the K's looked great. But his peripherals were skewed by one poor month. Burnett's career WHIP is in the 1.19 range. His WHIP from last yr was 1.34, but in only one month did he have a WHIP over 1.34 (April 1.79). If you look at his career stats and then focus down to the post TJ days, you will see that he decreased his BB rate while maintaining or increasing the K totals and maintaining the same BAA. And when you compare his numbers in Toronto to the 3 yr total from Beckett, there are some real eye poppers there.

 

Beckett 579.2IP 553H 265ER 71HR 524K 148BB 4.11ERA 1.21WHIP .248BAA .710OPS 3.54K/BB 8.1K/9IP

 

Burnett 522IP 480H 229ER 56HR 525K 191BB 3.94ERA 1.29WHIP .242BAA .701OPS 2.75K/BB 9.1K/9IP

 

Pretty darn similar, eh? So dont try and say that Burnett is only a K pitcher who gets hit VERY HARD when someone makes contact, because your ace is actually worse in that category and in terms of the rest of the peripherals, our guy who gets his tits lit when he makes contact stacks up well against the fearless DL warrior Beckett. Face it, they are very similar pitchers, both capable of starting about as much as they are resting an injury. But if both are fully healthy, they are f***ing dominant.

[example1]

I can understand your excitement about getting Burnett, but I find your defense of his dominance and your implied tone about how that reflects on your favorite club kind of sickening.

 

Ben Sheets has averaged 178.5 IP through the 8 years that he has been in the league. Over the same 8year period AJ Burnett has averaged about 156 IP.

 

I simply don't see how that justifies him getting the 6th highest AAV contract among pitchers in history. I would love to get into a discussion about how Burnett and Beckett are similar (which they are), or I could mention that Beckett is considerably younger, or I could mention that he will make about 6.5m less per season than Burnett, but I can't get over the contract that he got and how much the Yankees are willing to spend to field a competitive team.

 

I think the thing that gets me about the Yankees spending isn't how much they spend. It's the fact that I don't think they could win if they were constrained by the same values that every other team seems to have.

 

Go ahead everyone, lambaste me, remind me that it is the owner's money and that they can spend as much as they want. Remind me that the Sox spend a lot too, blah, blah. That's all true; but no other team opts to spend above and beyond the luxary cap over and over, without regard for it and the blatent inefficiency that doing that reveals.

 

From 2004 to 2007 the Sox paid 13.9 million in cap penalties, total. THey spent about 9 million in penalties in their two WS years. There wasn't a single year in that period where the Yankees paid less than that 13.9m, paying 25.9, 33.9, 26, and 23.9m in 04-07. That's a total of 121.6. They were over the cap by 54 million in 2008.

 

I guess my point is that I will be impressed by a 21st century Yankees team and any bragging their fans do about their club when they:

 

a) put the best team in all of baseball on the field and

do it with roughly the same resources as other teams

 

by "roughly" I mean within, say, 25 million of the rest of the top spending teams in baseball. Is that too much to ask? Does that require too much strategy? Is it really that hard to get people to play with pinstripes on?

 

2008:

 

1) New York Yankees: $209,081,577

2) New York Mets: $137,793,376

3) Detroit Tigers: $137,685,196

4) Boston Red Sox: $133,390,035

5) Chicago White Sox: $121,189,332

 

Tell me, what is impressive about that?

 

If the Red Sox and the Mets combined their payroll they would total $271,183,411.

 

That would be $62,101,834 more than the Yankees spend.

 

By comparison, in 2008 the Yankees spent $71,288,135 more than their closest competition.

 

Again, what is difficult or impressive about what the Yankees do, other than that their owner spends more than anyone else? Where's the pride in that?

 

Just for shits and expensive giggles here's the lineup the Sox and Mets combined team would have (with every other player and both farm teams sitting on the bench):

 

Jose Reyes-SS

Dustin Pedroia-2B

David Ortiz-DH

David Wright-3B

Carlos Beltran-CF

JD Drew-RF

Kevin Youkilis-1B

Jason Bay-LF

Jason Varitek-C

 

SP-Johan Santana

SP-Josh Beckett

SP-Daisuke Matsuzaka

SP-Jon Lester

SP-Pedro Martinez

 

We could go through the bullpens, but needless to say it would entail the best players from each team and would be pretty impressive.

 

What's the point?

 

Well, do you see how unimpressed you are? That's about how I feel when you brag about the occasional impressiveness of AJ Burnett--who currently makes more than any Red Sox player--as your team's new trophy. Again, he's averaged fewer IPs than Ben Sheets who is the poster boy for injury plagued pitchers who don't deserve $16m a year.

 

 

Sorry Jacksonian. Your long post was very well researched and, as usual, grounded solidly in facts. Burnett is a good pitcher and will make their staff better every time he is on the mound instead of Rasner or Pettitte or whoever else they had last year. I just can't get over their spending.

 

Granted, they will likely have a smaller payroll in 2009 than they did previously, but I'm also a Sox fan. This kind of thing is what I do on a Sox board. Thank you for your patience Jacksonian.

[The Real Boss]

I can understand your excitement about getting Burnett, but I find your defense of his dominance and your implied tone about how that reflects on your favorite club kind of sickening.

 

Ben Sheets has averaged 178.5 IP through the 8 years that he has been in the league. Over the same 8year period AJ Burnett has averaged about 156 IP.

 

I simply don't see how that justifies him getting the 6th highest AAV contract among pitchers in history. I would love to get into a discussion about how Burnett and Beckett are similar (which they are), or I could mention that Beckett is considerably younger, or I could mention that he will make about 6.5m less per season than Burnett, but I can't get over the contract that he got and how much the Yankees are willing to spend to field a competitive team.

 

I think the thing that gets me about the Yankees spending isn't how much they spend. It's the fact that I don't think they could win if they were constrained by the same values that every other team seems to have.

 

Go ahead everyone, lambaste me, remind me that it is the owner's money and that they can spend as much as they want. Remind me that the Sox spend a lot too, blah, blah. That's all true; but no other team opts to spend above and beyond the luxary cap over and over, without regard for it and the blatent inefficiency that doing that reveals.

 

From 2004 to 2007 the Sox paid 13.9 million in cap penalties, total. THey spent about 9 million in penalties in their two WS years. There wasn't a single year in that period where the Yankees paid less than that 13.9m, paying 25.9, 33.9, 26, and 23.9m in 04-07. That's a total of 121.6. They were over the cap by 54 million in 2008.

 

I guess my point is that I will be impressed by a 21st century Yankees team and any bragging their fans do about their club when they:

 

a) put the best team in all of baseball on the field and

do it with roughly the same resources as other teams

 

by "roughly" I mean within, say, 25 million of the rest of the top spending teams in baseball. Is that too much to ask? Does that require too much strategy? Is it really that hard to get people to play with pinstripes on?

 

2008:

 

1) New York Yankees: $209,081,577

2) New York Mets: $137,793,376

3) Detroit Tigers: $137,685,196

4) Boston Red Sox: $133,390,035

5) Chicago White Sox: $121,189,332

 

Tell me, what is impressive about that?

 

If the Red Sox and the Mets combined their payroll they would total $271,183,411.

 

That would be $62,101,834 more than the Yankees spend.

 

By comparison, in 2008 the Yankees spent $71,288,135 more than their closest competition.

 

Again, what is difficult or impressive about what the Yankees do, other than that their owner spends more than anyone else? Where's the pride in that?

 

Just for shits and expensive giggles here's the lineup the Sox and Mets combined team would have (with every other player and both farm teams sitting on the bench):

 

Jose Reyes-SS

Dustin Pedroia-2B

David Ortiz-DH

David Wright-3B

Carlos Beltran-CF

JD Drew-RF

Kevin Youkilis-1B

Jason Bay-LF

Jason Varitek-C

 

SP-Johan Santana

SP-Josh Beckett

SP-Daisuke Matsuzaka

SP-Jon Lester

SP-Pedro Martinez

 

We could go through the bullpens, but needless to say it would entail the best players from each team and would be pretty impressive.

 

What's the point?

 

Well, do you see how unimpressed you are? That's about how I feel when you brag about the occasional impressiveness of AJ Burnett--who currently makes more than any Red Sox player--as your team's new trophy. Again, he's averaged fewer IPs than Ben Sheets who is the poster boy for injury plagued pitchers who don't deserve $16m a year.

 

 

Sorry Jacksonian. Your long post was very well researched and, as usual, grounded solidly in facts. Burnett is a good pitcher and will make their staff better every time he is on the mound instead of Rasner or Pettitte or whoever else they had last year. I just can't get over their spending.

 

Granted, they will likely have a smaller payroll in 2009 than they did previously, but I'm also a Sox fan. This kind of thing is what I do on a Sox board. Thank you for your patience Jacksonian.

 

Very nice post sir.

[jacksonianmarch]

I can understand your excitement about getting Burnett, but I find your defense of his dominance and your implied tone about how that reflects on your favorite club kind of sickening.

 

Ben Sheets has averaged 178.5 IP through the 8 years that he has been in the league. Over the same 8year period AJ Burnett has averaged about 156 IP.

 

This is why you dont use an 8 yr period to prove durability for a pitcher. Especially a guy like Sheets who was an absolute bulldog for his first 4 yrs in the league (206IP per yr) and who has been lame for the past 4 yrs (150IP). And when we talk about Burnett, he missed an entire yr and a half with TJ, something that doesnt routinely need to be repeated. And in contrast to Sheets, whose IP per yr has plummeted over the last 4 yrs, Burnett's have risen (183IP per yr over the last 4 yrs). I am not saying he is a durable warrior by any stretch of the imagination. Just that Sheets has had a string of shoulder issues and forearm issues that havent gone away and is currently injured. Burnett has missed a total of 45 days in his career with shoulder issues. But has missed a massive amount of time with elbow problems, last in early 2007.

 

I simply don't see how that justifies him getting the 6th highest AAV contract among pitchers in history. I would love to get into a discussion about how Burnett and Beckett are similar (which they are), or I could mention that Beckett is considerably younger, or I could mention that he will make about 6.5m less per season than Burnett, but I can't get over the contract that he got and how much the Yankees are willing to spend to field a competitive team.

 

my post wasnt a money argument, but if you want to get into that, a supposed mid market team in the Braves offered pretty much the same amount of money. They set the market. That being said,the money is ridiculous, but we can afford it. And btw, the monetary differential between the yankees and the rest of baseball is about to explode as we move into the new park.

 

I think the thing that gets me about the Yankees spending isn't how much they spend. It's the fact that I don't think they could win if they were constrained by the same values that every other team seems to have.

 

Trying to cry poor when your team is consistently in the 2-4 slot doesnt work either. If there were a cap in the 95 mil range, then no team would stay playoff caliber for long, something that our 2 teams have done for quite some time now.

 

Go ahead everyone, lambaste me, remind me that it is the owner's money and that they can spend as much as they want. Remind me that the Sox spend a lot too, blah, blah. That's all true; but no other team opts to spend above and beyond the luxary cap over and over, without regard for it and the blatent inefficiency that doing that reveals.

 

From 2004 to 2007 the Sox paid 13.9 million in cap penalties, total. THey spent about 9 million in penalties in their two WS years. There wasn't a single year in that period where the Yankees paid less than that 13.9m, paying 25.9, 33.9, 26, and 23.9m in 04-07. That's a total of 121.6. They were over the cap by 54 million in 2008.

 

I guess my point is that I will be impressed by a 21st century Yankees team and any bragging their fans do about their club when they:

 

a) put the best team in all of baseball on the field and

do it with roughly the same resources as other teams

 

by "roughly" I mean within, say, 25 million of the rest of the top spending teams in baseball. Is that too much to ask? Does that require too much strategy? Is it really that hard to get people to play with pinstripes on?

 

2008:

 

1) New York Yankees: $209,081,577

2) New York Mets: $137,793,376

3) Detroit Tigers: $137,685,196

4) Boston Red Sox: $133,390,035

5) Chicago White Sox: $121,189,332

 

Tell me, what is impressive about that?

 

If the Red Sox and the Mets combined their payroll they would total $271,183,411.

 

That would be $62,101,834 more than the Yankees spend.

 

By comparison, in 2008 the Yankees spent $71,288,135 more than their closest competition.

 

Again, what is difficult or impressive about what the Yankees do, other than that their owner spends more than anyone else? Where's the pride in that?

 

Just for shits and expensive giggles here's the lineup the Sox and Mets combined team would have (with every other player and both farm teams sitting on the bench):

 

Jose Reyes-SS

Dustin Pedroia-2B

David Ortiz-DH

David Wright-3B

Carlos Beltran-CF

JD Drew-RF

Kevin Youkilis-1B

Jason Bay-LF

Jason Varitek-C

 

SP-Johan Santana

SP-Josh Beckett

SP-Daisuke Matsuzaka

SP-Jon Lester

SP-Pedro Martinez

 

We could go through the bullpens, but needless to say it would entail the best players from each team and would be pretty impressive.

 

What's the point?

 

Well, do you see how unimpressed you are? That's about how I feel when you brag about the occasional impressiveness of AJ Burnett--who currently makes more than any Red Sox player--as your team's new trophy. Again, he's averaged fewer IPs than Ben Sheets who is the poster boy for injury plagued pitchers who don't deserve $16m a year.

 

 

Sorry Jacksonian. Your long post was very well researched and, as usual, grounded solidly in facts. Burnett is a good pitcher and will make their staff better every time he is on the mound instead of Rasner or Pettitte or whoever else they had last year. I just can't get over their spending.

 

Granted, they will likely have a smaller payroll in 2009 than they did previously, but I'm also a Sox fan. This kind of thing is what I do on a Sox board. Thank you for your patience Jacksonian.

 

This wasnt a money argument and you could write a book about the inequities in today's baseball market. But as long as they operate within the rules, you can't do anything about it. And as long as the owners make good money and profit from the yankees success (revenue sharing), they wont insititute anything more stringent. My point was that Burnett, when healthy is an ace, and it is very difficult to downplay his performance when he takes the bump. I agree with anyone who says he's fragile. But some people like to blow his fragility out of proportion.

[BSN07]

Can you imagine if somewhere in the near future, because of some kind of circumstances, baseball put's in a salary cap? If the Yankees go absolutely nuts with $ because they can with the new stadium. It might have some repurcutions. I know I heard some rumblings on the radio, read some articles about the reaction to these contracts the players are getting in these economic times. If it picks up enough steam. It could lead to MLB having to rethink its rules on Salary. For a sport the preaches parity, the Yankees, Mets, Sox and a few choice others have an incredible advantage over teams such as KC,Pittsburg. I mean can you imagine rooting for a team that has absolutely no shot at winning year in and year out?

 

Listen I love the Sox, and I love the fact the can spend big to bring in players. But I also like the fact the show some restrant, still like finding a deal, show some strategy other then just outbidding everyone.

 

Would I mind a salary cap for the league? Nope not at all. In fact I think it would improve the game alot.

I think the league would be better if every team was a contender. I mean look at the NFL, that's a league that aims to have everyone finish 8-8. What seperates the +.500 teams from the others is done through scouting, coaching, drafting, smart FA choices. And the league is thriving more then ever.

 

Force Baseball to do the same, and I think it could very interesting and extremely entertaingin to watch.

[rician blast]

 

Trying to cry poor when your team is consistently in the 2-4 slot doesnt work either. If there were a cap in the 95 mil range, then no team would stay playoff caliber for long, something that our 2 teams have done for quite some time now.

 

 

As example said: "Go ahead everyone, lambaste me, remind me that it is the owner's money and that they can spend as much as they want. Remind me that the Sox spend a lot too, blah, blah. That's all true; but no other team opts to spend above and beyond the luxary cap over and over, without regard for it and the blatent inefficiency that doing that reveals. "

 

You conveniently ignored that he acknowledges that the Sox are one of the higher

spending teams.

 

Worse, however, is that you ignore...or simply don't understand...that the gap between the Yankees and everyone else absolutely dwarfs the advantage the Sox, Mets, Tigers, and teams in that $100m-$140m range have over the rest of baseball.

 

Just using 2008 as an example, the Yanks had a payroll $76m higher than the Sox.

 

Hmmm, let's see...that kind of coin can get you 4-5 AJ Burnetts or 3+ Sabathias...but "the Red Sox spend a lot too".....that's horseshit.

[diony]

This gets to the very core of my argument. Burnett, if healthy, is an ace. Last yrs numbers, for the most part, were an aberration. Yes, the wins and the K's looked great. But his peripherals were skewed by one poor month. Burnett's career WHIP is in the 1.19 range. His WHIP from last yr was 1.34, but in only one month did he have a WHIP over 1.34 (April 1.79). If you look at his career stats and then focus down to the post TJ days, you will see that he decreased his BB rate while maintaining or increasing the K totals and maintaining the same BAA. And when you compare his numbers in Toronto to the 3 yr total from Beckett, there are some real eye poppers there.

 

He was healthy last season and pitched like a #3 starter at best. A guy with a career BB/9 of 3.71 is definitely not an ace.

 

If you wanna use the 'bad month' argument then fine, but I could tell the same of Beckett's July.

 

If you wanna put up a nice argument on why Burnett's season was an aberration, then check his BABIP which was .328 and that's 35 points higher than his career BABIP. His FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching) was 3.45, that's 62 points lower than his ERA. FIP helps you understand how well a pitcher pitched regardless of his team's defense.

 

That tells us that Burnett's ERA last season was inflated due to poor defensive support, and bad luck.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Burnett' might be an ace in the last year of his contract. Which this is not.

[TheKilo]

Burnett is a nice pitcher. Sabathia is an ace.

[BoSox21]

I still think a pitcher has to have a solid playoff track record to go along with top-of-the-rotation numbers to really be considered an ace.

[BSN07]

CC is a regular season Ace. Beckett, while not putting up better numbers then CC during the regular season, is an post season Ace. Burnett is not either. If your Ace is a 4ish ERA, .537% winning percentage, and only has eclipsed 200IP twice? Your in a world of trouble. Burnett has great stuff when he can put it all together. But since he doesn't, he's more of a #3 that get's paid #1 or #2 money. But him being a #3 on the Yanks isn't bad. He has CC and Wang infront of him. Having those 2 infront of him will help with the pressure. He just needs to stay healthy and pitch consistantly, which has been a problem over his career.

[TheKilo]

I still think a pitcher has to have a solid playoff track record to go along with top-of-the-rotation numbers to really be considered an ace.

 

I disagree because the playoffs are far too small of a sample size to make any kind of snap judgments.

 

Sabathia ias a top 10 pitcher in this league, and therefore should be considered an ace.

[Dojji]

I disagree because the playoffs are far too small of a sample size to make any kind of snap judgments.

 

Sabathia ias a top 10 pitcher in this league, and therefore should be considered an ace.

 

Disagree with that assessment. "Rising to the occasion" is part of what being an ace means. An ace is based not just on the general trend but what you do when the game is on the line. That means you have to hit the important small sample sizes as well as the big picture.

[BoSox21]

Bottom line, if im paying a guy $160 mil, I wanna know that he nuts up in October when it counts rather than shits the bed like CC did

[TheKilo]

Disagree with that assessment. "Rising to the occasion" is part of what being an ace means. An ace is based not just on the general trend but what you do when the game is on the line. That means you have to hit the important small sample sizes as well as the big picture.

 

But the most important thing is knowing how to pitch with a lead, right?

 

Bottom line' date=' if im paying a guy $160 mil, I wanna know that he nuts up in October when it counts rather than shits the bed like CC did[/quote']

 

And if CC turns in a fantastic playoffs this season, and his postseason numbers trend towards his regular season numbers, what do you say then? He's an ace? Based off a ~20 inning sample in one postseason?

 

Beckett's career postseason ERA went up almost a full run after his performance this season, and that's with 3x the sample size Sabathia has!

 

If Sabathia turns in a 2009 postseason like Beckett's 2007 (30 IP, 4 ER, 1.20 ERA), his career postseason ERA is cut in half! How can you make any kind of subtantiated claim off of a 25 inning sample size??