2012 New York Yankee Game Thread

[jacksonianmarch]

It seems like 4 starts is their number. Hughes got 4 last yr, and now Freddy is at 4. At least with Hughes you can see the upside of righting the ship. There's no upside to Garcia. Cut f***ing bait. We have a bevy of good, young pitchers ready to contribute. Get phelps and Mitchell in the 4 and 5 slots, bring up pettitte in 2 weeks, cut Garcia and make Hughes te long man

[iortiz]

Valeverde is s***ing the bed....

[iortiz]

As I said... The 9th inning is something else...

[iortiz]

Ufffff.... That was close...

[Brennan]

The umps tried to give the yankoffs the usual ninth inning gratuitus walks and called a bunch of strikes balls, but somehow they sucked more than Valverde.

[VA Sox Fan]

Ufffff.... That was close...

 

Seriously!

[Station 13]

Valverde is an *******. Can't believe anyone buy into it.

[Brennan]

Umpires just decided that from now on if the yankoffs are trailing in the ninth, jeter no longer has to stand in the batter's box until they let him take base, he can now insert himself into the lineup as the leadoff hitter of the ninth inning and walk to second base (crossing the pitcher's mound like a-roid.

[User Name]

Valverde is an *******. Can't believe anyone buy into it.

 

This. No proof that the 9th is "something else". Valverde just sucks ass.

[iortiz]

The 9th is something else, like it or not... Valeverde sucks? Let me see... He just put a 2.2 ERA, 49 SV through 72 IP last year...Sure... he sucks.

[User Name]

Oh the 9th is different, but it's not a mythical inning only conquered by the Papelbons of the world. "Like it or not".

 

Also, Valverde was extremely lucky last year, which is why St13 keeps talking about how much he sucks, because, well.....he sucks.

 

.247 BABIP and 82 LOB%? Bound for regression, which is exactly what's happening.

[iortiz]

lucky? Nahhhh the guy deserves the credit, like it or not.

[User Name]

He deserves credit....for being lucky and keeping up the charade this long. He stinks.

[iortiz]

Lucky? Really?... He has 3 season with over 40 SVs throwing over 70 + IP. In fact, he has 5 seasons with 2.0-2.5 ERA. In fact he is a 3.0 ERA career pitcher thus far.

 

Do not fool yourself. Do not confuse yourself. He probably has an ugly fat ass which surely sucks, but he is a solid pitcher.

 

Sorry, those are facts, no lucky there.

[User Name]

Facts are backed by reliable statistics, not opinions:

 

Valverde has had a BB/9 over 4 the last two years and over six this year. Fact.

 

Valverde has had a declining K rate since 2007. Fact.

 

Valverde's success has been BABIP (.247 last year) fueled. Fact.

 

In fact, a statistical decline was predicted by most projection systems, including ZIPS and Bill James.

 

But hey, 70 saves (the only stat worse than saves are RBIs) over the last two seasons.

 

You know who else had back-to-back seasons of sub 3.30 ERA and 70 saves? Francisco Cordero. Guess what? He sucks too, and now he's an afterthought.

 

The law of averages catches up to these pitchers who are a heart attack in the 9th inning eventually.

 

And by the way, both Valverde and Cordero (as well as Carlos Marmol, Kevin Gregg and the pitcher formerly known as Leo Nunez) are good examples of why closers are so overrated. Because of the sample, and the situations in which they pitch, otherwise ineffective relievers can be seen as "mid-tier" or even "near-elite" closers.

 

And those are actual facts, backed up statistically, not by opinion, unreliable samples, and bias.

[iortiz]

Decline? For this game? For thus far of the season? Really? BB/9? K rate? Really? You must be kidding me. What is closer's job?. What?. Cherry pick all the stats you want for your convenience. Jeez! he ended up last year with 100% at SV%, the year before? 90%, career? 90%. Yes, 90% at SV%. Decline for a closer? My ass. Stats show me just the opposite. Ohh wait...but you like BB/9, almost forget.

 

He is 34 years old and just put outstanding numbers last year, LIKE IT OR NOT, which BTW is not the first time in his career, hence is not fluke or lucky as you want to put/look like. Sure, he will decline at some point (He is getting older, I expect that to happen; that is not the discussion) but still has good/solid career numbers under his belt and a recent solid one. Those are facts.

 

Again, do not fool yourself. You said he sucks. He doesn't. You said he is lucky. He is not. he only makes the job that he is paid for (7 MUSD, BTW)... What?, Save Games.

[jacksonianmarch]

Facts are backed by reliable statistics, not opinions:

 

Valverde has had a BB/9 over 4 the last two years and over six this year. Fact.

 

Valverde has had a declining K rate since 2007. Fact.

 

Valverde's success has been BABIP (.247 last year) fueled. Fact.

 

In fact, a statistical decline was predicted by most projection systems, including ZIPS and Bill James.

 

But hey, 70 saves (the only stat worse than saves are RBIs) over the last two seasons.

 

You know who else had back-to-back seasons of sub 3.30 ERA and 70 saves? Francisco Cordero. Guess what? He sucks too, and now he's an afterthought.

 

The law of averages catches up to these pitchers who are a heart attack in the 9th inning eventually.

 

And by the way, both Valverde and Cordero (as well as Carlos Marmol, Kevin Gregg and the pitcher formerly known as Leo Nunez) are good examples of why closers are so overrated. Because of the sample, and the situations in which they pitch, otherwise ineffective relievers can be seen as "mid-tier" or even "near-elite" closers.

 

And those are actual facts, backed up statistically, not by opinion, unreliable samples, and bias.

 

UN, I think you are right in the premise that Valverde does seem to do better than his peripherals would indicate and last yr was an aberration in terms of Sv %. But I think your numbers might be a little disingenuous. His K rate has remained stable over the last 3 yrs.

 

2009- 9.3K/9IP

2010- 9K/9IP

2011- 8.6K/9IP

 

The rate appears to be dropping at a rapid rate, but he really is 3 K's in 2011 away from having the same rate as 2010, which would probably not reach statistical significance. This isnt a starter who K'd 10-15 less hitters over 200+IP. The sample size is so small, that the number drop is a measly 3.

 

#2- BABIP. It seems Valverde has put up multiple seasons of low BABIP's. And for elite closers, you see that a lot. The one inning at a time thing seems to defy the logic of BABIP.

 

#3- The Cordero comp is WAY off. Cordero's K rate dropped off a cliff last season. He K'd 17 less hitters in 3 less innings, which is humongous. The other non paralell is that Cordero cut his walk rate last yr to compensate and became a contact pitcher. Contact closers typically abide by the rules of BABIP a little more than the power armed high K pitchers.

 

The big reason why I think Valverde declines has more to do with the fact that he has shown to be prone to meltdowns in non-save situations. And with Albuquerque out for most of the season, their pen is a little shoddy and he will likely need to pitch in tie games and 4 run games a few times to lock things down, and he just doesnt seem to be into those situations. Hence, I think he will put up a higher ERA and WHIP this season. Also, he's already blown one save and history suggests that he wont run off another 49 before blowing another one.

[User Name]

UN, I think you are right in the premise that Valverde does seem to do better than his peripherals would indicate and last yr was an aberration in terms of Sv %. But I think your numbers might be a little disingenuous. His K rate has remained stable over the last 3 yrs.

 

2009- 9.3K/9IP

2010- 9K/9IP

2011- 8.6K/9IP

 

Not it hasn't.

 

K rate since 2006:

 

12.59

10.91

10.38

9.33

9.00

8.59

5.59 (Small sample)

 

That constitutes a trend. What's disingenuous is not looking at the entire picture.

 

 

The rate appears to be dropping at a rapid rate, but he really is 3 K's in 2011 away from having the same rate as 2010, which would probably not reach statistical significance. This isnt a starter who K'd 10-15 less hitters over 200+IP. The sample size is so small, that the number drop is a measly 3.

 

For six years running? No small sample.

 

#2- BABIP. It seems Valverde has put up multiple seasons of low BABIP's. And for elite closers, you see that a lot. The one inning at a time thing seems to defy the logic of BABIP.

 

That's the problem. Valverde is not an elite closer. If the BABIP normalizes (and it probably will if his LD% keeps increasing like last year) he's going to get hammered.

 

#3- The Cordero comp is WAY off. Cordero's K rate dropped off a cliff last season. He K'd 17 less hitters in 3 less innings, which is humongous. The other non paralell is that Cordero cut his walk rate last yr to compensate and became a contact pitcher. Contact closers typically abide by the rules of BABIP a little more than the power armed high K pitchers.

 

The point is that Cordero had a similar history of light decline, followed by his K rate falling off a cliff as you say. While Cordero's situation was a bit more extreme, not only was it similar, but he didn't have the added problematic of a 4 + BB/9.

 

 

The big reason why I think Valverde declines has more to do with the fact that he has shown to be prone to meltdowns in non-save situations. And with Albuquerque out for most of the season, their pen is a little shoddy and he will likely need to pitch in tie games and 4 run games a few times to lock things down, and he just doesnt seem to be into those situations. Hence, I think he will put up a higher ERA and WHIP this season. Also, he's already blown one save and history suggests that he wont run off another 49 before blowing another one.

 

Or he's just not that good, and with a declining K rate and massive BB/9, he's going to walk the park and get hammered.

[User Name]

Decline? For this game? For thus far of the season? Really? BB/9? K rate? Really? You must be kidding me. What is closer's job?. What?. Cherry pick all the stats you want for your convenience. Jeez! he ended up last year with 100% at SV%, the year before? 90%, career? 90%. Yes, 90% at SV%. Decline for a closer? My ass. Stats show me just the opposite. Ohh wait...but you like BB/9, almost forget.

 

He is 34 years old and just put outstanding numbers last year, LIKE IT OR NOT, which BTW is not the first time in his career, hence is not fluke or lucky as you want to put/look like. Sure, he will decline at some point (He is getting older, I expect that to happen; that is not the discussion) but still has good/solid career numbers under his belt and a recent solid one. Those are facts.

 

Again, do not fool yourself. You said he sucks. He doesn't. You said he is lucky. He is not. he only makes the job that he is paid for (7 MUSD, BTW)... What?, Save Games.

 

He sucks and he's lucky. You're falling into your typical logical fallacy of attempting to A ) discount stats with your opinion, and B ) Assigning your own opinion to my interpretation of the stats.

 

The numbers show that while he had a great year last year, he was very lucky. The one who's fooling himself is you.

 

It's not about me liking BB/9, it's about the numbers, which are out there for all to see, proving that he's not an upper tier closer.

[iortiz]

What do you want from your Sales Rep.? What do you expect from him? That he Arrives early to office? Make phone calls? Make visits? I do not care as long he meets his sales quota, PERIOD. That's all you care about him year over year. As long as he does that, you'll be happy with him, trust me. If it takes 100 phone calls/visits or 50 or 1 in order to meet your sales quota, it is what it is.

 

Again, what do you want from your closer? BB/9? K ratio? No!... You want that he ensures you victories. That's it. You do not need to complicate things. Well you can, but you shouldn't. Do not waste your time.

 

Face it, he is a 90% SV% & 3.0 ERA career pitcher over 10 years. No small sample there.

 

It's not about me liking SV%, but it is the line you must look at when you want to hire a closer and put money on the table. If that line tells me that he saves 90% of the situations over 10 years and just put 100% SV%, there's no way he sucks as a closer which btw is what he is paid for. He is making 7 MUS because well, he closes/ saves/shuts down games... In other words, he ensures you victories.

 

Face it, he doesn't suck at what he is paid for. You do not like his peripherals? You dont like his face? Who cares... You do not pay the guy for that. Do not fool yourself.

[BornToRun]

Scherzer is getting squeezed.

[jacksonianmarch]

CC has been dominant. Good thing too, since the Yankees seem to be sucking mooseballs when it comes to hitting with RISP.

[User Name]

What do you want from your Sales Rep.? What do you expect from him? That he Arrives early to office? Make phone calls? Make visits? I do not care as long he meets his sales quota, PERIOD. That's all you care about him year over year. As long as he does that, you'll be happy with him, trust me. If it takes 100 phone calls/visits or 50 or 1 in order to meet your sales quota, it is what it is.

 

Again, what do you want from your closer? BB/9? K ratio? No!... You want that he ensures you victories. That's it. You do not need to complicate things. Well you can, but you shouldn't. Do not waste your time.

 

Face it, he is a 90% SV% & 3.0 ERA career pitcher over 10 years. No small sample there.

 

It's not about me liking SV%, but it is the line you must look at when you want to hire a closer and put money on the table. If that line tells me that he saves 90% of the situations over 10 years and just put 100% SV%, there's no way he sucks as a closer which btw is what he is paid for. He is making 7 MUS because well, he closes/ saves/shuts down games... In other words, he ensures you victories.

 

Face it, he doesn't suck at what he is paid for. You do not like his peripherals? You dont like his face? Who cares... You do not pay the guy for that. Do not fool yourself.

 

All you're doing is reinforcing the notion that teams pay big money for mediocre pitchers based on a s***** statistic.

 

How much money teams paid doesn't factor into how good or effective they are. Valverde is the perfect example. If you can't dispute my claim that he is A) Lucky, B ) Statistically not that good, then your claims hold little water.

 

Honestly, would you want Valverde closing games for the Red Sox on a big money contract? If you would, then you really don't like the Sox very much.

[jacksonianmarch]

5-2 top 8 with CC rolling and an awesome pen behind him. I feel pretty good about today

[User Name]

God i hate myself so much for having CC on my fantasy team.

[iortiz]

1. IMO he doesn't suck. He is not lucky. I already rest my case. I won't try to change your opinion though.

 

2. If the contract is around Pap contract, I prefer Papelbon since he's younger and already proved in our environment.

 

3. If the contract is 7 MUSD/1 year or even 15M/2Y I take it anyday. He has the numbers as closer regardless he is healthy. Nothing else to ask for. So yes, I would take that kind of contract.

 

Back on topic.

 

CC went 8 IP.

[jacksonianmarch]

God i hate myself so much for having CC on my fantasy team.

 

Fans in life make the world go round. Fans in fantasy make your team go down

[jacksonianmarch]

6-2 Yanks

[VA Sox Fan]

As always...Yankees suck......

[jacksonianmarch]

A great day for the Yankees. Sox lose, Yanks win. CC was dominant and looks to be rounding into form. We need to see if Kuroda can do it too