No One Will Want to Face These Yankees
You’re probably aware that the torrid Cleveland Indians have taken over the top run-differential spot in baseball and the No. 1 playoff seed in the AL.
You’re probably also aware that the Dodgers still hold the best record in baseball despite looking beyond terrible in September.
But did you know the Dodgers no longer hold the No. 2 run-differential spot in the sport? It’s true. That distinction now belongs to the Yankees, who entered play Monday having outscored the opposition by 62 runs (191 runs scored, 129 runs allowed) since August 14. And following last night’s victory over Minnesota, New York has now won 20 of their last 31 games.
You could make the argument that the Yankees are the second-best team in baseball. You could also make the argument that they’ve been the unluckiest, underperforming their expected record by nine wins according to BaseRuns, the worst mark in the majors. The Astros, Dodgers, Indians, and Yankees are the only four clubs in baseball currently averaging a run more per game than their opponents.
Somewhat lost in the shadow of the Indians’ record streak and Boston’s lead in the AL East is that the current version of the Yankees is stronger on paper than a number of division leaders.
The Yankees have just a 10.0% chance of winning the AL East, according to FanGraphs, and those odds might be a bit conservative. But should they get beyond the AL Wild Card game — they will likely face the Twins in that contest — they’re a club that few others will want to face. The Yankees have the best division-series odds (61.1%) and World Series odds (5.7%) of any non-division leader.
The Yankees can hit and continue to hit.
Over the last 30 days, the Yankees offense has produced the fourth-most runs (166) and fifth-best wRC+ (108) in the sport. Todd Frazier has shown some life, Aaron Judge has put his slump behind him, and Didi Gregorius continues to lengthen the lineup, posting a 112 wRC+ and 24 home runs this season with little indication of relenting.
But it’s the pitching that has a chance to really lead the way.
After Corey Kluber and Chris Sale, Luis Severino has arguably been the third-best starting pitcher in the American League this year. Only Kluber and Justin Verlander have been more dominant than Severino in the second half in terms of actual runs allowed (2.93 ERA), and Severino has also produced the second-most second-half WAR (2.5) among all starting pitchers. Severino’s considerable gifts are becoming skills.
The Yankees could put together a formidable postseason rotation after Severino, too.
Masahiro Tanaka has a 22.9-point K-BB% mark in the second half, during which period his ERA is a full two runs lower than during his first-half struggles. Sonny Gray has pitched like a No. 2 for most of the season, owning ERA/FIP/xFIP marks of 3.38/3.62/3.58.
In the bullpen, meanwhile, the Yankees (somewhat believably) are missing bats at a historic rate.
For the season, the Yankees bullpen leads baseball with a 28.9% strikeout rate, is second in relief WAR (8.1) and fourth in K-BB% (18.8). The club appeared to have a strong bullpen entering the season, and it was at the deadline that Brian Cashman elected to buy, building a super bullpen in the process.
In addition to Dellin Betances and Chad Green, and Aroldis Chapman — whose velocity has inched back up recently — the Yankees added both Tommy Kahnle and David Robertson in July. Kahnle has continued to strike out everyone in New York and the Yankees could become the first bullpen to feature five pitchers with strikeout rates of 30% or greater. Green (42.1%) and Betances (39.4%) could very possibly end the season above the 40% mark.
While there have been some hiccups, the team’s attempt to construct a super pen appears to be paying dividends. Over the last month, the team’s relievers have produced a major-league-best 31.9% strikeout rate as a group.
They Yankees weren’t supposed to be here, approaching the end of September with a plausible shot at a division title and a very real chance of pulling off an upset in the postseason. But some young players arrived ahead of schedule. Severino became an ace. Cashman built a super bullpen and then acquired one of the best available arms in Gray. And while they may or may not be the second-best team in baseball (as the run-scoring numbers suggest), they’re well constructed for the postseason, featuring a few strong rotation options and perhaps the best bullpen in the game. The Yankees surprised some during the regular season and they might be ready to do more of the same in the playoffs.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
Travis – As a Yankees fan, I really appreciate the flattering piece about our team.
That said, I am not as optimistic as you are because I feel (emphasis on feel, as in I don’t have hard data) that the Yanks are simply good at running up the score against bad teams AND have deep enough bullpen that people run up big deficits on us. And yes, we have been unlucky because Clippard, Betances, and Chapman collectively blew 6 games within a 3 week span.
My main point is that this article is predicated on our BaseRuns number. My concern is that we keep using that as a point estimate, instead of a distribution (of run differentials). Shouldn’t we be looking at what that histogram looks like over a season? Wouldn’t we see that gigantic spike of 1-run losses?
At the end of the day what I really care about is understanding if our distribution looks like that of the Dodgers, Indians, or whomever before I claim that we’re just as good.
The real question is, would that spike of 1-run losses be predictive? My understanding is that “running up the score against bad teams” has historically been a pretty positive indicator.
Jeremy – Really good point! There are actually two parts… one is understanding the distribution of scores and two understanding which behaviors are predictive.
I agree here. The team has a tough time in tight games and while I don’t have hard evidence behind this, their situational hitting has been awful and they frequently don’t drive in easy runs. The bigges thing going right now is how deep their lineup is. Really only frazier and bird are weak links and even those guys have hit a few home runs the last couple of weeks. Teams that pitch around Judge now get burned by didi Castro and even headley and ellsbury and with how deep they are they are immune to any pitching handedness
The Yankees haven’t been awful at situational hitting. The point is that they have had way more chances than most teams at hitting with RISP. For instance, if you look at the teams that average the most runners left on base per game, the teams with the most runners left on base, are the playoff teams. 30th is Cleveland. 29 is Minny. 28 is NYY. 27 are the Cubs. 26 is Arizona. And 25 are the Dodgers.
When you look at the aggregated data; the Yankees are 4th in the number of at bats with runners in scoring position. They are 2nd in runs. The avg leaves a lot to be desired (17th) but they lead the league in home runs with runners on. And have the 5th highest OPS.
So yeah…its more the offense has been so good that due to sheer volume, you are thinking the RISP has been terrible when in actuality they have been rather good.
So they’ve been good at the situational part, but bad at the hitting part?
They’ve done just about the same vs the good teams (teams with a shot at the playoffs) and the bad teams record wise
But as you can see they’ve fared much better on a run differential with the bad teams.
They’ve played the middle teams fairly well too.
I think the top box makes sense, you wouldn’t expect them to dominate the best teams, but you would figure they would have done a bit better W/L wise vs the weaker teams.
Maybe what’s encouraging is they’ve done better vs the middle teams than any of the groups.
This is my new favorite chart. Would love to see this for all contenders. Good work shauncore
I can give you Cleveland, though without the fancy chart.
Good Teams: 28-21, 238-206 (+32)
Middle Teams: 31-13, 223-132 (+91)
Bad Teams: 35-23, 296-192 (+104)
Indians main problem this season has been against the NL. They’re 6-14 overall, including 4-6 against the Reds, Padres, and Giants.
I hate myself for saying this as a Yankees fan, but I just hope they make it to at least the ALDS where we can look forward to more than just one game. The play-in game sucks – 2015 was painful!
If you want to find a reason for the disparity between the Yankees’ BaseRuns and their record, look to the bullpen. I did a week or so ago, in response to a friend’s inquiry. The Yankees were first in baseball in bullpen WAR at that time … and 17th in bullpen WPA. The relievers’ bad performances have been coming at bad times.
Whether this is a true problem or a five-and-a-half month blip probably depends on whether you think “clutch” performance truly exists in baseball. The studies keep saying it doesn’t, and one cannot dismiss that. (Then again, until not so long ago, studies said there was no evidence that catcher framing meant anything.) But if there is one aspect of the game where “clutch” performance is expected to exist, and where player psychology is supposed to matter, it is in relief pitching.
I honestly don’t know whether the disparity means anything, except that the Yankees’ relievers haven’t been as effective as the raw numbers say. But it’s something I’ll be watching closely in October, for however long the Yankees last.
If you’re going to believe in clutch, you kind of have to believe in smaller-sample trends, too, right? Chapman seems to have righted the ship and has been dominant since getting put back into the closer role, and Clippard is no longer on the team. Betances seems to be the biggest remaining question mark at this point, but Green and Robertson have been good enough that they should be able to pick up the slack.
The studies say clutch hitting doesn’t really exist. I think everyone knows clutch pitching does. Tom Glavine spent his entire career outperfroming his peripherals b/c of strong performances with men on base.
Hitting is reactive, so you don’t reall have time to “choke”. But pitchers lose it all the time. The extreme of “un-clutch pitching” is obviously Steve Blass/Rick Ankiel disease.
I’m of the opinion that the mathematics just hasn’t been able to properly quantify “clutch” or “momentum”. It doesn’t mean that those two concepts do not exist but rather that the statheads haven’t figured out how to describe it yet.
Anyone who has played any sport at a high level will certainly give credence to both as existing.
I bet anyone who tended to get the key hits would say clutch exists, and anyone who didn’t, would say that it doesn’t.
I played division I baseball. Pressure can certainly have a negative effect.
I won’t say that clutch exists.
But I promise you that choking exists.
I’m personally looking forward to the Angels’ improbable World Series title, defeating the Yankees (on a Ben Revere homer, no less), Indians, Red Sox, and Nationals to get Mike Trout his first world series win. CJ Cron will win the World Series MVP for his Ortiz-like performance.
It will play out exactly as Nostradamus foretold in 1555.
These yankees are good enough to beat anyone, if they can make it out of the wildcard game which will always be a total toss up no matter how good severino has been.
At its best, this yankee team is as good as any I’ve seen in 15 years or better. And its a fun, young team.
That’s nice and all, but the AL is simply stacked. The Indians just went through the run they went through, and the Yankees aren’t fond of Kluber (and Cleveland has a quite a bullpen itself). The Astros are getting their lineup back to its dominant form from earlier in the season, and now pairs a hot Verlander with proven Yankee-killer Keuchel. (Assuming the Yankees don’t win the division), when the “easiest” team to go through is a pitching-strong Boston team with a situational-hitting type of lineup that usually thrives in the postseason, you have to accept that the road to the WS is a minefield.
Even if the Yankees were indeed at the level of these teams (and I don’t think that is the case), the handicap of the play-in game just makes it too much for 2017. Which is fine, because then it’s on to a likely bright 2018 for the fellas in pinstripes.
The playoffs are a minefield for all teams (which is the point of short series). Just think of poor Boston! If the Yankees win the play in game, then Boston will have to face better teams than them in the ALDS and the ALCS no matter which teams they end up facing. 😉
“But should they get beyond the AL Wild Card game — they will likely face the Twins in that contest — they’re a club that few others will want to face. The Yankees have the best division-series odds (61.1%) and World Series odds (5.7%) of any non-division leader.”
This seems oddly put, because it’s basically measuring the Yankees vs. other wild card teams, instead of the Yankees vs. other playoff teams, which at the point in time in question means nothing because the other potential wild card teams have been eliminated.
The Red Sox seem like a reasonable candidate for an early exit, but if you speak more concretely about ‘wanting to face’ the Yankees vs. the actual alternatives, you’d certainly have to choose a 7 game series vs. them rather than vs the Astros or the Indians.
Honestly not sure whether I’d rather face the Yanks or the Astros.
Severino and Verlander are a wash, Gray and Tanaka have edged out Peacock and Morton in the second half…and then you look at the respective bullpens.
The Astros have obviously been better offensively, but the Yankees have a very, very scary pitching staff in a short series.
Why would the redsox be an early a candidate for an early exit? They’re built pretty well for a playoff run despite no one really putting up MVP caliber numbers (not that that matters in the playoffs anyway)
-Domiant starter
-deep bullpen. Kimbrel/Reed/Smith + a multi inning David Price
-contact hitting lineup (which are usually the way to go in the playoffs)
-plus they’ve shown an ability to grind out those close games (13-3 in extra innings). Maybe you believe in the whole “intanagables” thing maybe you don’t, but a lot of World Series teams recently have had that type of quality.
To me, I think the Indians and Redsox would be toughest teams in the AL because they check all those boxes and have a playoff built team.
Because the Red Sox starters and bullpen looks suspect beyond sale and Kimbrel. Outside of sale, pomeranz is their best pitcher with no describable 3rd starter (Foster? Porcello?) and many many of their bullpen guys outside of reed and kimbrel have bee feasted upon at certain times. The yankees and Indians both have deeper bullpens and having a contact hitting lineup is deadly, especially going up against top quality starters in the playoffs. Playoff games are not won in extra innings, Red Sox having no power will hurt them, their offense has been anemic most of the time when it goes against good pitching.
Kimbrel/Reed/Smith/Price is not a deep bullpen? How? That’s scary if Smith is somewhat healthy. Guys like Kelly/Hembree/Barnes have certainly over performed and IMO aren’t good, but they are like the worst relievers in their pen now.
What’s wrong with Pomeranz as a second starter? He’s been better than Sonny Gray and Carlos Carrasco the last two seasons. At this point he’s probably one of the more underrated players in baseball. He’s a top 25 pitcher easily.
I’d agree their 3rd starter (Porcello or Erod) doesn’t quite matchup to Tanaka, but they should matchup against Bauer/Morton.
The offense certainty has not performed as expected, but its better than its shown and as you mentioned contact is very important and their really good at that and have shown the resilance that most World Series team have shown. Who would have guessed that a Brantley, Carrasco, Salazar, and EE-less Indians would have made it to game 7 of the World Series? They were built for the playoffs (elite pitcher, elite bullpen, contact) despite not being super talented on the field
I made note of pomeranz he is a good pitcher. Porcello and Erod won’t match well against McCullers/McHughs, Salazar (if he is healthy) and Tanaka. Price has been very bad over the course of the post season, not to mention Smith has been hurt.
You are right about the Indians, but they were still stacked with quality contacts hitting (kipnis, Lindor, Ramirez) and high power guys (Napoli, Santana, Kipnis) and Kipnis and Santana being among the postseason leaders in HRs and slg. Not to mention Chris sale’s dubious august and September, while also not being playoff tested and having a history of an end of the season wall (same thing with Pomeranz). I’m not saying nothing can happen, but the Red Sox are a team that I am not worried to play in the post season.
Smith has pitched 6.1 innings, total, over the last two seasons.
Reed has been replacement level since the trade, and has amassed <1 career RA9-WAR in 250 IP with non-Mets organizations.
Price is great, but hasn't come out of the pen in nearly a decade, and can't come in during the middle of an inning.
Pomeranz is great on a rate basis…but he averages 5.1 innings per start.
Chris Sale is a career 3.49ERA/3.38FIP guy in 467 August and September innings…and that number jumps to 3.80/3.82 if you just look at September.
And, before you get on me about selective samples, both Gray and Carrasco have been better than Pomeranz this year, and every other year of their respective careers other than 2016, when both were hurt.
Every team in the playoffs is good…but I'd be less worried about the Sox than any non-Twins team.
Pomeranz has literally been better than Gray at everything – ERA, FIP, k’s, GB rate, WAR, BAA, etc over the last two years.
Now if you want to argue 2016 was a lost season from Gray, fine. ZIPS projectes Gray for a 4.15 ERA while Pomeranz is projected for a 3.78 ERA.
They’re both good 2/3 starters. Gray continues to be overvalued by his 2015 run prevention and Pomeranz continues to be undervalued due to his early career
struggles.
As for the other points- Sales lack of postseason track record, Prices lack of success in postseason sounds like a lot of cherry picking. I could very well say Severino has never pitched this deep, Jude/Castro/Gregorious/Garder/ Hicks overperformed in regular season and should be evaluated by their projections than their regular season numbers in terms of evaluating playoff rosters.
Either way, all these teams (besides the twins) are strong. even if you think one team is roughly 5 wins better than the other: it’s inanely hard to expose that in a 7 game series.
It would be cherry picking if sale’s late season struggles and Price’s postseason struggles were isolated events. They are not, Sale (including this year) has had a very tough time late in the season and it will only get harder with he addition of October baseball. Price, like sale, have had habitual postseason struggles (the same as Kershaw) which is too big to ignore. Severino and the rest you listed have no playoff experience so their expectations are a complete unknown, he is not a known quantity like sale or price (he may be great, he may be pour). For the players you listed, what do you mean? which projections should we consider? we can’t use their preseason projections, are there any postseason projections you have? I’m not being condescending I just want to know because that is a very weird argument Imo. Though I agree that anything can happen in the playoffs.
How much of a correlation is there between run differential and actual record, for a team that has tons of blowouts/they score tons of runs when the game is already over, but haven’t been able to win close games?
The 2017 Yankees remind me a ton of the 2016 redsox. Career years/best case scenarios everywhere and when they win-they win big. But they also seem to disappear during the close games, which makes their actual record look worse than what they should have done. In other words does baseruns overvalue teams that pour it on when the game is already over which drives there run differential up?
The 2016 redsox were easily to the best team in the AL last season statistically- the had the best run differential and 7 players with 4.5+ WAR. Despite winning 93 games, they actually underperformed by a good 10 games according to base runs given their inability to win the close games. I wonder if that at all had any correlation with them being swept in the first round and I wonder whether he 2017 Yankees will be in the same boat.
On the flip side, the teams that maybe don’t have the greatest run differentials but seem to always win the close games-seem to do very well in the playoffs. Just off the top of my head the 2014/2015 Royals, the 2010/2012/2014 Giants. 2013 redsox.
All those teams seemed to have a quality thats not statistically quantifiable. They didn’t have the best players nor embarrassed teams often, but they were always winning the close games
The best team at winning close games over the last several years has been Showalter’s Orioles.
The difference between these Yankees and last year’s Red Sox is that the 1-run losses have largely been isolated incidents of great relievers blowing games, rather than the 2016 Sox’s endemic lack of bullpen talent, combined with a down year from Kimbrel.
That’s true, the Yankees had a better bullpen. However that redsox team probably had better positional players/starting pitching. I think there are some par tales between the two of them though in the sense that they should have been 100+ win powerhouses with all those career years but weren’t because of those close games.
the Red Sox do not have better positional players. All of their players are having career lows and they have only one offensive player top 100 in WAR. Like I said in the top comment, outside of Sale, a threesome of Gray-Severino-Tanaka, three number one caliber pitchers, is much better than sale-pomeranz-Fister.
We’re comparing the 2016 redsox to the 2017 Yankees.
The 2016 redsox had 7 players with 5+ WAR including an 8 WAR season from Betts. They were crazy stacked. And swept in the ALDS.
The 2017 redsox and polar opposite to the 2016 redsox
(Also Pomeranz has been better than gray fro 2+ years and they’re both projected to be roughly equivalent-although unrelated to the original point)
That you are right, though the yankees have the deeper bullpen.
Pomeranz has only ever been “better than Gray” in 2016, when Gray was pitching hurt.
And I like Pomeranz.
There were some notable differences but in terms of young players and vets having career type years, there is something to that narrative – and its hard to predict when players like that will go cold.
“the Red Sox do not have better positional players. All of their players are having career lows and they have only one offensive player top 100 in WAR.”
~~~~~~
“The 2016 redsox had 7 players with 5+ WAR including an 8 WAR season from Betts. They were crazy stacked. And swept in the ALDS.
The 2017 redsox and polar opposite to the 2016 redsox”
Non sequiturs; if a player is having a career low that may be due to either injury, age, regression-or pure dumb luck. If the talent is still there then their poor performance this year may very well be an illusion, and we could thus expect improvement from here on out. Plus they did upgrade both left, (half of) catcher, and third this year with kids.
IOW both teams have gotten a lot of play this year from youngsters, but I’m not sure that the Yankees’ bunch outhitting the Sox’s kids means that will continue next year. If Mookie underwent some regression this year then that could easily happen to Sanchez (and already did to Judge). And the Sox by my count have 5 regulars under 27, the Yankees 3. The latter are still largely a veteran team.
IOW we have:
1st order wins [traditional won/loss]
2nd order [Pythagorean, runs scored/allowed]
3rd order [projected runs then run through Pythag]
4th order [based on projections of actual talent]
The Sox are ahead in 1, behind in both 2 & 3, but it doesn’t follow that they are also behind in 4.
But that’s the thing, if this was a regression for a few months in an otherwise stellar season, one can give the benefit of the doubt, this has been going on the entire year. It has been rather dubious along side having no catcher, first baseman and a two-month rookie (albeit very good) at third base. People love to bring up the 2016 Indians, but they were top 5-10 in the league last year in slugging, Ops yet Boston is in the bottom 5-10 of those categories. The World Series champs were top 3 last year, Kansas City the year before? top 10, I’m not saying those stats are the be all end all, but teams finishing in the bottom of those categories is not typically a good sign. Add on that there is not desirable number 3 pitcher on the sox as good as Tanaka/Peacock/McHughs/McCullers/Salazzar, you are going to have to rely on sale and pomeranz who have had a tendency to teardown late in the season.
“And the Sox by my count have 5 regulars under 27, the Yankees 3. The latter are still largely a veteran team.”
Jackie Bradley is 27, so I think that makes it 4 for the Sox under 27.
The Yanks have 3 regulars that are 27. I assume you meant Judge, Sanchez and Bird for your 3 but then you have Didi, Castro and Hicks who are all 27.
So if you move it to “under 28”, the Yanks have six and the Sox have 5. Both teams are young.
I don’t know if we should ignore pitchers entirely, either. But both teams are pretty young.
I don’t understand how anyone in this day and age can write a piece about how good a team and just totally ignore player projections. BaseRuns, second half stats, even full season stats are still back-wards looking. How good the Yankees are = how good the team’s players are = how good they are likely to perform in the near future != cherry picked stats from the last two or 5.5 months.
[Only after penning my last post up there do I see this. Thank you.]
I hear you, but I disagree.
Widely used projection systems are conservative by nature and slow to react to breakouts. Which is good, because usually spikes in performance are bound to regress towards a more recognizable level.
But sometimes, breakouts are real before the projections notice them. Picking up on which players / teams are likely to beat their projections based on recent performance is half the fun of following baseball.
Sure, the projections see the NYY as a .554 (89-win) team for the rest of the season. That includes Aaron judge as a true-talent 125 wRC+ hitter and Severino at a 3.75 ERA.
I hate the yankees, but I’ll take the over on that line.
Add in (1) joe girardi knows how to manage a bullpen, (2) the top of a bullpen can pitch a lot more innings in october, and (3) pitching depth doesn’t matter as much in even a longer series, and you have the makings of a team that looks better than the full-season projections suggest.
Sure, you can make a good argument the Yankees in the post season are better than their regular season ROS team projections suggest. This article didn’t do it in a particularly insightful way.
And to your specific points, I don’t see any particular reason to take the over on Judge, but your guess is as good as mine. And as good as the Yankee’s pen is, Chapman and Betances are the only Yankees relievers with a lower projected ERA than Kluber or Sale. Even on an inning by inning basis, the top end of the Sox/Tribe rotations erase whatever projection advantage (if any) the Yankee’s pen has. Sale + Kimbrel and Kluber + Miller mean short series benefits all these teams relative to regular season projections. Even more so if Severino gets used up in the WC game.
I mean, I can think of 44 reasons to take the over on Judge as a true talent .245 ISO hitter…and 115 reasons to take the over on his being a true talent 13.1 BB% guy. And 94.6 reasons to take the over on a .320 BABIP.
Also, Sale has a 4.25 ERA/3.40 FIP in 9 starts and 53 IP since the start of August…like he does every year.
I’m a Yankee fan. I watch nearly every game. I don’t think the Indians or Astros are worried.
This post really illustrates the difference between spreadsheet-ball and actual baseball. Yeah, you can make a very valid argument, based on statistics, about how the Yankees will be a potentially dangerous team in the post-season. But as an observer I see a team that’s very vulnerable to top-level pitching, a bullpen that strikes out a lot of guys but too often allows bad stuff to happen in between the strike outs (Khanle – whom I know this site loves but whom I think blows) and sometimes can’t find the strike zone at all (looking at you Dellin!).
I also see a team whose starters often struggle to go even six innings thus forcing them into bullpen roulette (how many guys can you bring in until you find the guy who’s having a bad night?) and can be homer prone (yes, even Severino, Tanaka and Gray), a tendency magnified by the cozy confines of YS III.
So while the fan in me hopes you;re right the objective observer in me is enormously skeptical. I’ve seen the games the Yankees played against Cleveland and Houston. The Yanks are simply not in the same league as those teams and while an upset is always possible I think that unless kidnapping Corey Kluber is part of the game plan they’re not getting past Cleveland. I think they have a better chance against the Astros but won’t beat them either.
“This post really illustrates the difference between spreadsheet-ball and actual baseball.”
What is “The last thing you should say in a Fangraphs comment section”, Alex?
But seriously, the concerns you listed also read well as a list of some of the most common emotional reactions us fans have. That’s why it’s so nice to have this stats site to help us put things in context.
Yes, they’re vulnerable to elite pitchers, but so is everybody. That’s why they’re elite. Yes, the bullpen gets involved early, but that’s because it’s so deep. Yes, the starters give up painful home runs, but that’s normal in this unprecedented age of homers.
Sorry, I don’t subscribe to the group think that numbers tell everything. Sorry, but they don’t. Numbers can can be used to tell us what is more likely or not likely to happen but what actually does happen is influenced by things the numbers can’t always measure. That’s why they play the games. This is MLB not Strat-O-Matic.
I don’t accept your condescending assertion about “emotional reactions”. My opinion is based on an objective assessment of the Yankees’ strengths and weaknesses in comparison to their potential playoff opponents. Its not all about numbers, its about how the team has performed when presented with opportunities to win critical games against those teams(or even against lesser teams when they had chances to gain on the Red Sox). The Yankees have fallen short most of the time. Put that in context.
Sure, a series of upsets could happen (and I would welcome that!). But the title of this post was about teams not wanting to play the Yankees. That’s pure unadulterated bullshit. No major leaguer on a contending team is afraid to play anyone, let alone because of their statistics. Guys with that kind of mental attitude are weaned out in the low minors.
The problem with this line of thinking is that you assume that because numbers aren’t completely perfect that automatically makes your unprofessional and biased eye test better.
Well trolled.
The only team that concerns me in the AL is the Indians. The Red Sox are not really that great of a team, and Sale has been struggling lately. The Astros are good, but I think our starting pitching is better. The Indians are the only team I don’t like our chances against. Having to face Kluber twice in a 5 game series doesn’t sound like fun.
I think people these days generally get away with saying we/us/our. But could you at least tell us which team you’re not actually part of?
Notice the team with the Yankees’ second worst run differential against: the Angels. Funny thing is, if they do well against the Twins in this current series, they could be having a lot to say regarding who their one-game playoff opponent is, as beating the Twins would be helping the Angels.
And I don’t know why it seems that in the past decade or so, the Angels seem to have the Yankees number more than just about any other team, and rosters have totally turned over during that time period. I don’t think it’s anything about the Angels style of play that gives the Yankees trouble, maybe it’s just a small sample size cluster statistical anomaly.
I’m with everyone who has already said: The Yankees are good, but so are the division winners. They are all in the playoffs for a reason.
I don’t think it’s too surprising that a wild-card team is as good a team as the division winners.
You can’t have “The Best Bullpen in baseball” while having the second most blown saves in the majors.
You absolutely can. For example, a team could have so many more save opportunities than any team in the majors that they amass the second most blown saves despite having the best overall save%.
That’s not the case in this instance…but neither is the claim that the Yanks have “the second most BS in the MLB.”
They’re tied with 2 other teams for the third most.
if im a yankees fan i feel pretty unlucky that theyre not in 1st in the al east. it just feels like they not only have been much better than the red sox so far this year but are also much better than the red sox as currently constructed going forward. ofc theres still time for them to win the al east but its pretty unlikely at this point.
either way, clearly this team is built for the postseason with a good offense and perhaps the best bullpen we’ve ever seen on paper. im not sure it would even be an upset if they beat any of the non-cleveland teams in a series at this point (i mean only in the sense that the sox or stros would be like a 55-45 favorite). i think we can lose the ‘not supposed to be here’ narrative; theyre as good as anyone.
It was that ugly stint in July that messed up the yankees, if not for the stint they potentially win the division.
yeah and in addition there just feels like theres been tons of games over the last 2 months where the red sox were losing and the yankees were winning after the 6th inning of both teams games and then it reversed. the red sox came back and won and the yankees amazing bullpen blew the lead. i realize thats very non-scientific analysis (and might not even actually be true) but thats how i kinda remember it in my head.
i think thats what makes me feel like i do about the two teams respective talents. red sox have won so many close and late and the yankees bullpen has had a few too many unclutch moments costing them games. reverse just a few of those and its easy to see the yankees having the pretty big division lead that pythagorean and baseruns suggests they should.