yankees228

Fair enough. I'm curious which one it is. EDIT: Not that I'm looking to have the legitimate vs. illegitimate debate, because ORS and I basically exhausted that one. If he does feel that way though, I was just curious to hear the logic behind it.

You're this high on Robertson, yet you pass off what Hughes did this year as luck? To me, that makes no sense. Both threw with similar velocity, and both lacked pin-point control. I'd be willing to bet that Hughes also missed a lot more bats with his fastball than Robertson did. Both had decent curve balls, with Hughes' probably a bit better. Also, Hughes featured a decent cutter.

He did, and I like Robertson in the long run, but I just wouldn't really feel comfortable going into next year with him as the primary setup man, after seeing the difference Hughes made this year.

Gom, is that a legitimate rumor?

Haha, that's funny. Anyway, if you look at 2009, one of the things that really turned the season around was Hughes settling into that 8th role. I think they need to find someone to do his job next year, and I'm not confident he is currently on the roster.

Maybe he wants to go to the Knicks because he wants to play in a media market like New York, and he wants to try and return to the Knicks to contention? Maybe he doesn't want to go the Knicks because he doesn't feel they can contend? We have absolutely no clue.

I think what the Yankees did from 1996-2001 is more of the exception than the rule. It's just so tough, no matter how good a team you are, to win the World Series in the post wild card era. The Yankees had some excellent teams this decade, and the majority of those weren't even able to reach the World Series. Even winning this championship, as good as the Yankees were, took some degree of luck. For instance, you'll probably never see anything like the Yankees' run to the championship in 1996. The amount of luck and breaks they received is absolutely ridiculous. That was, far and away, the luckiest championship I've ever witnessed. As incredible and improbable as the Yankees run during that time period was, they still only won four championships. They did so much right, and they were so good, yet four isn't even close to six. For me, 1996-2000 represents the most impressive team accomplishment in the history of this game. You cannot reasonably expect that success to not only be recreated, but to increase. I have no problem continuing this conversation, and I think it's a good one, but for the sake of not hijacking the thread, would you mind responding in the Yankees' offseason thread?

Also, the 1950s are never going to come back for the Yankees. In that decade they won six championships and eight AL pennants. With two rounds to play before reaching the World Series, you will likely never see a decade like that again, and for someone to say that it should happen is laughable at best.

The ineffectiveness of the Yankees front office, coupled with the crapshoot nature of the postseason, is the reason the Yankees haven't won championships since 2000.

I never said he would make them a championship team, but with Lebron, the instantly becoming a team capable of making the second round in the Eastern Conference.

It would be awesome if the answer to this question was NY, but I'm not holding my breath for it.

I'm probably one of the few people that finds McCarver to very extremely baseball savvy. He says some dumb things from time to time, but so does everyone. When it comes to pitch selection, as one would expect, he knows his stuff.

Used to write for the NY Times. He's bad, but if you're not a New York sports fan, you probably haven't heard of him. Unless you get the Times out of state.

Definitely up there.

I also think you can just attribute it to the fact that it's Ken Rosenthal. His FOX in-game reports are not exactly insightful. EDIT: If you go through that same thread, someone posts a link to an article Rosenthal wrote early in 2008 where he talks about how the Red Sox are extremely diverse, with all the players uniting in pursuit of one, common goal.

YH, if you don't mind explaining, how exactly do NBA contracts and the free agent process work? I'm confused about the whole "max deal" thing.

Wait a second. If you're going to mention all those guys for the Red Sox, and then compare it to the Yankees, how are you going to only cite guys who have intro'd in the last two years. Based on the guys you listed for the Red Sox, here are the Yankees that are relevant to the discussion... Phil Hughes Joba Chamberlain David Robertson Melky Cabrera Jesus Montero Austin Jackson Dojji, the way you compared the two teams is one of the most biased posts I've seen on this site.

Well, yeah, the bullpen is an issue. For arguments sake, lets say Joba and Hughes are both starters next year. That leaves them with... Rivera RHP Robertson RHP Marte RHP Coke RHP Aceves RHP Overall, that's pretty good, but one solid setup man would really make it an enormous strength, like it was towards the end of last year. I would love to get Fernando Rodney, but he might want to close. Same with Rafael Soriano. In my opinion, those are the two best relievers on the market. They could consider going after Rafael Betancourt, but he might not be good enough to sacrifice the required draft picks. All three of those guys are type A free agents.

If that is true, then it would seem unlikely that the Sox will make a big splash this offseason. Obviously, you can't take what Rosenthal says as gold.