yankees228

I don't really think you can say I came here "guns blazing". I found my post to be respectful. Again, if all you care about is what Jackson said about the innings, then fine, but I was just defending his overall viewpoint on the matter.

The 2003 team, six years ago, had a great rotation. As for the next five years, yeah there were mistakes. But those teams made the postseason, and definitely could have won the World Series.

This is great. You're looking at it right now, knowing how each one of these guys fared. That's not fair. You have to look at it from when they acquired each one of these guys. So many different teams wanted Carl Pavano. I was thrilled when they got Carl Pavano. I understand that he didn't have the most lengthy track record, but he had a chance to be really good for a long time. On top of this, which I don't care about but obviously some do, he already had postseason success. Kevin Brown was a reactionary move to the losing Andy Pettitte, and one they probably shouldn't have made. However, they didn't give up much. For what it's worth, the Yankees went 2-1 in Brown's postseason starts (he got the win in one of them), and his only loss came on 3 days rest. Jaret Wright - bad move Kei Igawa - bad move Randy Johnson was coming off great season after great season after great season. On top of that, he was really good in 2005. In my opinion, you cannot blame them for Johnson. Yes, he pitched poorly in his two playoff starts, but people also forget the outstanding job he did out of the bullpen in the fifth game of the 2005 ALDS on 1 day rest. Oh, and when they got Randy Johnson, I would say he had a fair amount of postseason success. Jose Contreras was supposed to be really good, and even though they spent a lot of money on him, it was really low risk high reward (considering he wasn't even slated to be a starter coming of spring training in 2003). This was a guy who the Red Sox wanted so badly. This is not another example of Kei Igawa, who other teams were baffled at what the Yankees did to get him. Contreras also showed his potential for the White Sox in 2005, and was one of the big reasons they won the World Series that year. Obviously Contreras didn't really work out for the Yankees, but he was a very talented pitcher who, in my opinion, you cannot blame the Yankees for signing. Johan Santana - mistake

Obviously it's possible, but I think you're also missing Jackson's point (and the one that he has been standing by since this debate has started in other threads). We both thing that it would be better for Hughes' long term success if he was starting every fifth day, and right now, the only place he can do is that is the minors. If someone gets hurt, which will happen at some point, Hughes can be recalled.

Apparently CC is starting Friday. If this is the case then that's fine. I'm just curious about why they wouldn't just slide Wang in on Friday, when Hughes is scheduled to pitch.

If one of their starters gets injured, Hughes can be called back up. He is still developing his change up and cut fastball, and I would like to see him work on those pitches where his lack of success cannot hurt the Yankees and where he'll be able to pitch every fifth day.

The Yankees success in the regular season is much more indicative of how well the Yankees front office has done than the lack of success in the postseason. And, as I mentioned, when you make statements about the last 8 years, you should go all the way back to 1995, when the postseason run started. If those four championships had been more spread out, which easily could have happened, you would be singing a completely different tune. Four championships in thirteen postseasons is a much more reasonable way to look at it than no championships in the last seven postseasons.

It's incredible, but people still don't seem to get this.

My concern, for the moment, centers around why CC Sabathia is not starting tomorrow.

All I'm saying is that Jackson's points about the rotation are all fact driven.

That's the company line, but if you ask someone like Brian Cashman (who relies on a statistical analysis approach) off the record, I'm guessing he would repeat many of the same things that I'm saying.

Absolutely. But from a third party, unbiased perspective, I think we can both see that things that happen in the postseason cannot possibly be planned for. What happens over the course of the 162 game season, a much larger sample size, can be planned for.

But by the definition that DipreG gave, things have not improved, they've gotten worse, due to the fact that the Yankees have not won a World Series since Cashman was given control of the team.

For the record, I understand not winning the World Series is considering a failure. Obviously that is the goal. My point is that, just because they didn't win the World Series, does not mean the team was poorly constructed.

I would be hard pressed to call a 95-100 win team a failure. The playoffs are a crapshoot. The 162 game season is much more telling of how well constructed a team is. The Yankees saw so many things go right in the playoffs for them to win four championships in five years. Things were bound to even out. The Yankees made the playoffs 13 times (every year) from 1995 through 2007. The won the whole thing 4 times. Considering how much of a crapshoot the playoffs are, I would say 4/13 makes a lot of sense.

He is using facts, and using those pitcher's track records as the basis for his argument. Like Jackson said, he is not commenting on their effectiveness. I don't see why you think he's overvaluing the rotation. As for the comment about CMW, I'm sure Jackson would acknowledge that he is a question mark right now. He prefaced his argument by saying IF CMW does this and that... And as for the quote you used, I understand it's meaning, but at what point are teams just good and at what point are teams just bad? I'm not saying the Yankees fall into either one of those categories, but that can't always be the excuse or reason.

I guess I would have to see the plays again. Burnett just does not do a good job holding runners on. Obviously Posada's throws could have been better, but, in my opinion, Burnett did not give him a lot to work with.

Every single one of the stolen bases tonight were off of Burnett, Posada never had a chance. He threw out Carroll yesterday on the pitch out.

I'm guessing it's an old PM though?

Oh, ok, well back in 2004 I could see it. I was talking more about the last few years.

Putting some contact hitting number two batter on base ahead of the greatest player in the game, whether it be the first inning or the ninth inning is not a common practice. Given the example you used, the common practice would be to try and get the number two hitter out, intentionally walk Pujols, and then try to get the clean up hitter out.