jacksonianmarch

4 yrs 66 mil with an easy vesting 5th yr option. Sounds like a good deal for Bay. And, the sox get a second rounder for their troubles plus a supplemental pick. So, the sox lost their #1 and #2 picks for Lackey and Scutaro. They gained Atlanta's #1 pick for Wagner, the Mets #2 pick for Bay and 2 supplemental picks.

Lets put it this way Mr. Ed. The Yankees were far and away the better team in 2009, FAR and AWAY. And they got better offensively, defensive, and in the rotation. The sox, were the far inferior team, and they got better in the pitching category and in the defensive category, but got worse in the offensive category.

exactly. So, the AL East crown is more important when you are talking about two teams that absolutely dominate in their own buildings

Its like arguing with a shrew.

So...Home field advantage isnt some sort of an advantage? Especially when the sox suck on the road and the Yankees dominate at home?

But it would hit later. They arent hiding any money, as a matter of fact, they'll be hitting themselves with a much bigger budget hit later on.

I NEVER SAID THAT. I said that the Yankees 1-4 are not questionmarks. All should reach close to 200IP barring anything unforseen happening. All 4 should be in the 4.5 or lower category in ERA. I said that the Yankee #5 spot was a ???. Reading is fundamental

http://www.overthemonster.com/2009/12/22/1212797/lets-talk-about-luxury-tax?ref=yahoo It doesnt go into it, but I did learn a bit about the lux tax

The Yankees are right at the 200M mark, while the sox are up against the 170M mark. I have a feeling that it will be more like 25 mil by the time the season starts.

They have a 6th starter who cannot stay healthy and just had back surgery. Guys, I am not saying the sox dont have depth. They just have questionmarks after 1-3. My definition of a question mark is someone who you cannot pencil in for 30+ starts and close to 200IP. You cannot pencil in anyone past Lackey for that. As we have seen yr in and yr out, the teams that have the least variability in both performance and endurance in their pitching staffs have more successful seasons.

sorry RS, the above post was directed at Dipre

Wow, yeah, you must be smoking some serious dub-age to try and make that statement. With pitchers' health, its all about "what have you done for me lately." DiceK has gone down with a shoulder injury. Burnett has strung 2 200IP seasons together and had a 170ish season right behind that one.

options do not count into AAV.

I want you to take a look at what an average #5 starter pitched to in 2009. You'd be shocked.

38 games? Thats pretty funny.

He's thrown 227IP over the past 2 seasons. He was throwing beach balls up there last yr. And he complained of a "tired shoulder." Do you want me to keep going or are you willing to accept that he's just a bit of a ??? for 2010.

The point is, you are comparing a player well past his prime to a pitcher in his prime. Yes, Vazquez is 33, but he is still throwing at max velocity and had a career season last yr. It is hard to make any sort of argument outside of pure bias that compares the two. Wakefield hasnt pitched a full season without injury or ineffectiveness since 2005. Vazquez, OTOH, has reached 198IP every yr for a decade. Also, saying that you'd take Lackey over Pettitte in their primes is outright laughable. Pettitte played in the tougher division and is arguably one of the best post-season pitchers of all time.

You dont know who is the #5 since DiceK is just as much of a question mark since he's coming back from a shoulder injury. There is an inherent risk that you will need to lean on a pitcher more, ie move them up in the pecking order. A #4 starter is vital. A #5 starter can be skipped 10 times a yr and is obviously less vital (see Yankees 2009). The bottom line is.... The sox have a 1-2 punch that is really hard to find, unless your root for the Mariners. Their #3 is at least a #2 in performance and is really only a mild injury question mark. Your #4 and #5 spots are question marks since one is coming off a concerning injury and the other is entering his first full yr of big league starting. The Yankees have an ace that is the best pitcher between the two sides. They have a 2-3-4 that is durable, but not of the caliber of Beckett (when he isnt hurt) and Lackey (if he isnt hurt). Notice a theme here? There is a certain relief that you can take when you know who is taking the hill. I am pretty damn sure that 1-4 will be starting regularly thoughout the yr. The #5 spot is a question mark. For the sox, you are pretty sure 1-3 will take the hill, although a bit less sure IMO when you talk about Beckett and Lackey due to their recent injury history. My question for you, is, can you count on 30+ starts from DiceK or Buchholz? The answer is, no. Just like I cannot count on 30 starts from Joba in yr 2. It certainly may happen without a hitch. But there is an inherent amount of risk involved.

But your point is comparing a player well past his prime and someone who is right in the thick of his prime. I could say that Andy Pettitte has a better AL track record than Lackey, but I wont since Pettitte is 37 yrs old and Lackey is still in his prime.

This is the point. Chamberlain or Hughes are fighting for the #5 slot. 1-4 is set in stone. For the sox, Buchholz is either a #4 or a #5. It isnt a bad predicament, but it assumes more risk.

Right, but standard metrics work too. Like strikeouts and innings pitched, etc. Wakefield has his own metric, but he is nowhere near as important or as useful as Vazquez is at this time.