Page 1 of 54 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 796

Thread: The Joe.T Memorial FM® Yankees Suck Thread for 2008

  1. #1
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327

    The Joe.T Memorial FM® Yankees Suck Thread for 2008

    No time like the present to kick 'er off. Sox in 2008.
    The mounties always get their man.

  2. #2
    ‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^› Special K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Red Sox Nation
    Posts
    5,108
    10 days until pitchers & catchers! That's at least a bit comforting after tonight.

  3. #3
    Name Retired.
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Her Hot Dreams
    Posts
    2,417
    Hello all,

    Just got to start this thread off with a quote from Rumples. Hey Joe.t...



    Bronx Cheers,

    Korbel
    Korbie: of the Boston Red Sox Nation...the NBA Champion Boston Celtics Pride...and...the New England Patriots Dynasty!

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Le Chablis, Saint - Jacques
    Posts
    3,622
    Go easy on the glue bottle tonight rumpy, you've had a very rough day.

  5. #5
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    I agree. Within the past hour an underdog NY team surprised an overconfident Boston team to win the championship. Let's hope that trend continues in the AL playoffs this October.
    No team with a $218 M payroll can ever be considered an underdog. The Yankees either win a championship or fail miserably. So far this century, it's been the latter, year after miserable year.
    The mounties always get their man.

  6. #6
    Name Retired.
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Her Hot Dreams
    Posts
    2,417

    Clemens and Pettitte to testify.

    Hey guys,

    Did you think baseball season would start without some staggering controversy? Oh NO! Let the season begin with Yanker players Clemens and Pettitte testifying before Congress...under oath.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7758706/Attorney:-Clemens-won't-plead-5th

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7...-steroid-issue

    Cheers,

    Korbel
    Korbie: of the Boston Red Sox Nation...the NBA Champion Boston Celtics Pride...and...the New England Patriots Dynasty!

  7. #7
    Name Retired.
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Her Hot Dreams
    Posts
    2,417

    Did Cashman blow it with Santana???

    Hey Guys,

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7737068

    Cashman Should Have Pulled The Trigger


    by Michael Rosenberg

    So if you're Brian Cashman, what is the worst part of this?
    That somebody else got Johan Santana?

    That the somebody else in question was the cross-city, tabloid-headline-seeking rival Mets?

    That Hank Steinbrenner, who wanted Santana, will get increasingly agitated as Santana dominates the National League?

    That you're in the last year of your contract?

    The answer is ... none of the above. No, the worst part for Cashman is that people will claim he should have gotten Santana, and they will be right.

    Cashman could have had Santana. He should have had Santana. And he might really, seriously regret this.

    Johan Santana is the best pitcher in baseball. He is in his prime. He would have been well worth the price that Cashman would have had to pay, and here is why:

    The Yankees, as you may have heard, spend a lot of money. Their 2007 payroll was $218.3 million. Some perspective: that is more than the combined payrolls of the Cleveland Indians, Arizona Diamondbacks and San Diego Padres. The Yankees will spend more on the left side of their infield than Florida or Tampa Bay will spend on their entire major-league rosters.

    This is not another woe-is-baseball,

    why-do-the-Yankees-spend-so-much-and-can't-we-have-daytime-World-Series-games rant. It's their money. They can spend it.

    My point is that that kind of cash can buy all sorts of goodies. It virtually ensures that the Yankees will have one of the best lineups in baseball every single year. It means they can take a $40 million mulligan on Carl Pavano. It allows the Yankees to sign a setup man for closer-type money.

    But that money cannot give the Yankees the most valuable commodity in the sport: a true ace. Not just a No. 1 starter, but an elite No. 1 starter — a guy who contends for Cy Young Awards more often than not. There are only a few of them out there, and they rarely become available before they hit 30. Santana turns 29 in March.

    Santana instantly would have been the most valuable player on the Yankees roster. Yes, more valuable than Alex Rodriguez, the best position player in the game. Here is why: if Rodriguez left the Yankees, they would at least have a shot at making up for his production by improving at other positions. If A-Rod had left as a free agent, the Yankees could have signed, say, Mike Lowell, then used the leftover cash to upgrade another position. It wouldn't have been ideal, but the Yankees could still put together a playoff-quality lineup that way.

    But there is no way to replace a No. 1 starter. You can't just improve the rest of your pitching staff; it's not the same.

    The Yankees should know this. The key to their 1996-2000 championship stretch was ... drumroll, please ... an abundance of TRUE YANKEES! No, I'm kidding. The key was great starting pitching and dominant relief pitching.

    In last year's American League Division Series, nominal Yankees ace Chien-Ming Wang gave up 12 runs in 5.7 innings over two starts. That, more than the infamous midges or Derek Jeter's struggles, is what doomed the Yankees. Two miserable starts in a four-game series are almost impossible to overcome, especially against a great team.

    Santana, meanwhile, has not give up 12 runs in any two-start span since April 2000.

    Santana is also a proven postseason pitcher; in his last three starts, going back to 2004, he has a 1.35 ERA. Over his career, Santana's second-half numbers are significantly better than his first-half numbers.

    And why did the Yankees withdraw from talks? Because they didn't want to trade Philip Hughes.

    Now, odds are good that Hughes will turn into a consistent starter. He might be a top-of-the-rotation guy. But the chances of him being as great as Santana are extremely slim.

    It would have been well worth it for the Yankees to use Hughes in a package to get Santana. It should have taken Cashman 0.004 seconds to throw in Melky Cabrera, a nice player who is quite replaceable ($56,000,000/4 years). And since the Yankees' farm system is deeper than the Mets' by almost any measure, Cashman could have come up with a more attractive package than what the Mets offered.

    Yeah, they would have paid Santana a lot of money — a lot more than Hughes or Kennedy would get. So what? They are the Yankees. Hank Steinbrenner washes his armpits with hundred-thousand-dollar bills. The benefits of having a very good, cheap, young player are diminished for a team with such a high payroll.

    The Yankees are built to take their best shot at the World Series every single year. There is no better weapon in that quest than Johan Santana.

    LOL,

    Korbel
    Last edited by korbel; 02-04-2008 at 11:09 PM.
    Korbie: of the Boston Red Sox Nation...the NBA Champion Boston Celtics Pride...and...the New England Patriots Dynasty!

  8. #8
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,133
    CCF,

    I agree with almost all of your analysis, although I don't know if 2008 will be as much of a down year for the Yankees as you and some others believe. It's true that they will be relying on younger starting pitchers who are untested in terms of going 30 plus starts or 200 plus innings, but Chamberlain and Hughes are both, potentially, #1 starters sooner or later. I think they will be better sooner than most people think. Kennedy is sort of a wild card. 3 very good starts last year against mediocre teams, but it looked to me like he isn't a guy who makes a lot of mistakes. I was very impressed with his control, and his general mound presence. He could end up being a Greg Maddux type, maybe not that good, but that is the kind of pitcher he is: cerebral and reliant on control and mixing of speeds and locations.

    In the bullpen, there are some young power arms including Ohlendorf, Veras and the big guy they got from Detroit in the Sheffield trade (Sanchez - he is a 6'6" dude coming off an injury but is highly thought of). Also, they signed LaTroy Hawkins as the ostensible replacement for Chamberlain as set up man. Hawkins, if you look at his career since about 2002, has been a very steady bullpen performer and pitched well for Colorado last year.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 02-05-2008 at 03:00 PM.

  9. #9
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    The Sox are bringing back essentially the same team that just won the World Series. Therefore they are the favorites unless you'd like to argue that they just got lucky in 2007 like the 2003 Marlins.
    Not quite. With full seasons from Lester, Buchholz, and Ellsbury, and with Matsuzaka and Drew having had a year to adjust to the American League, this should be a considerably better team than the current champions.

    That said, I don't expect a repeat season from Lowell, nor do I expect this team to be as healthy as were the 2007 World Champions.
    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    As for the comments in the Giants thread about the Patriots still being the better team despite losing the super bowl, are the Boston fans saying that they choked?
    I've heard it said about Tom Brady and the Heartbreakers. While they were trying to win the Lombardi Trophy to establish themselves as the best football team of all time, they also managed to fail to win the Heimlich Trophy as the biggest choke team of all time. That honor still belongs the New York Yankees of 2004.
    The mounties always get their man.

  10. #10
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver
    I agree with almost all of your analysis, although I don't know if 2008 will be as much of a down year for the Yankees as you and some others believe.

    It's true that they will be relying on younger starting pitchers who are untested in terms of going 30 plus starts or 200 plus innings, but Chamberlain and Hughes are both, potentially, #1 starters sooner or later.
    True, though they do no more than match up with Lester, Buchholz, and Masterson.

    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver
    In the bullpen, there are some young power arms including Ohlendorf, Veras and the big guy they got from Detroit in the Sheffield trade (Sanchez - he is a 6'6 dude coming off an injury but is highly thought of). Also, they signed LaTroy Hawkins as the ostensible replacement for Chamberlain as set up man. Hawkins, if you look at his career since about 2002, has been a very steady bullpen performer and pitched well for Colorado last year.
    The bullpen is a crapshoot. Certainly, other than the slowly declining Rivera, there's no one from last year they'd want to bring back.

    Sanchez is a ways away from coming back. He's a crap shoot. Hawkins has pitched decently, if not erratically, over the past few seasons. He's a man of fragile make-up and not likely suited for the pressure he'll find in the Bronx. The bullpen is still likely the Achilles heel of the 2008 Yankees.
    The mounties always get their man.

  11. #11
    Name Retired.
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Her Hot Dreams
    Posts
    2,417

    Clemens Under Oath.

    Hey Boys,

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7...roids,-HGH-use

    "It was great to be able to tell them what I've been saying all along — that I've never used steroids or growth hormone," the seven-time Cy Young Award winner said.

    Unfair or not...it would be compelling to see how hard Clemens earnestly asserts his innocence...until one remembers he has no choice if he wants to keep his name from being destroyed completely.

    Catch 22,

    Korbel
    Korbie: of the Boston Red Sox Nation...the NBA Champion Boston Celtics Pride...and...the New England Patriots Dynasty!

  12. #12
    Name Retired.
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Her Hot Dreams
    Posts
    2,417

    Bullshit

    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    It's much less of an upset for the Red Sox to have beaten the Yankees in 2004 than the Giants winning the Super Bowl this year. In fact, it's not even close.
    Hello chercherfemmes,

    What garbage. You mean to tell me that in a sport where no one has a three game lead and "anything can happen on any given day" it's a bigger hill to climb than having to win four games in a row against the pressure of facing your arch-nemesis, the richest team in any sport by far, and the historical pressure...not to mention having to win the last two games in that den of evil known as Yanker Stadium. BULLSHIT! The Giants only needed to play better one day. The Red Sox had to do it four games in a row. And, don't you ever forget that Schilling had to pitch a day or two after experimental surgery against a lineup of stars where nearly every player was getting $10,000,000 a year, including the allegedly "greatest all-around player of all time"...A-Slob. Not to mention how the Red Sox had to find the guts to start the comeback after getting utterly blasted in game 3, 19-8. The Giants had the confidence of being only 3 points out from winning in their previous meeting just a month before. Give me a damn break!

    Your credibility GONE,

    Korbel
    Last edited by korbel; 02-05-2008 at 10:48 PM.
    Korbie: of the Boston Red Sox Nation...the NBA Champion Boston Celtics Pride...and...the New England Patriots Dynasty!

  13. #13
    ‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^› Special K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Red Sox Nation
    Posts
    5,108
    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    It's much less of an upset for the Red Sox to have beaten the Yankees in 2004 than the Giants winning the Super Bowl this year. In fact, it's not even close.
    WRONG!! You think the Pats would lose 4 straight to the NYG? I don't.

  14. #14
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by chercherfemmes
    It's much less of an upset for the Red Sox to have beaten the Yankees in 2004 than the Giants winning the Super Bowl this year. In fact, it's not even close.
    Utter bullshit. Your argument might hold some water if the Patriots had taken a 28-10 lead into the 4th quarter.

    If you remember, the Sox were down three games to none and down a run in the ninth inning of game four. Now that's a choke for the ages.
    The mounties always get their man.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by rumpleforeskiin
    No team with a $218 M payroll can ever be considered an underdog. The Yankees either win a championship or fail miserably. So far this century, it's been the latter, year after miserable year.
    $218 M buys Steinbrenner a nice tax write-off therefore, all calculations done, the real cost is significantly lower than $218 M.

Page 1 of 54 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •