MLB Postseason GDT

andyb 2019-10-15 17:32:27 UTC #61

But his value was near zero the previous two years. I get he hit .340 this year and has been clutch in the playoffs. I just don't think we should add a defensively challenged reserve for more than nominal dollars at this point. He also had most of his starts at 1B this season and that probably helped hide his defense which has been pretty poor in the playoffs.

We'll probably add a bench player purely for their bat. It is just one of our last priorities beyond filling in the starting rotation and bullpen. Kendrick will likely stay in DC anyway because the dollars will be low enough that he will stay where he is comfortable. DC could easily do the 1B by committee again if they need to devote all their dollars towards retaining Rendon and Strasburg (i.e. re-sign Zimmerman and/or Adams to play 1B because they are inexpensive).

zambonir 2019-10-15 19:06:53 UTC #62

I wouldn't have any interest in Kendrick, I would have an interested in finding another Kendrick type. But you always need to get a little lucky with an older player. And we already have Jay Bruce. Heck, what Brad Miller did in September is no different than what Kendrick is doing now, albeit in games that didn't matter.

From a friend's FB page:

LoneStarPhan 2019-10-16 03:37:28 UTC #63

Kendrick is very unlikely to match this season next year, but there will be a few veteran players who are at best mediocre this season who will have very good years next season. It sure would be great if our GM is either skilled enough or lucky enough to find one of those veterans who goes on to a super 2020 season. It is probably more luck than skill, really.

zambonir 2019-10-16 21:58:09 UTC #64

No baseball today (rainout).

zambonir 2019-10-20 05:10:41 UTC #65

Media really playing up the fact that the Yankees haven't reached the WS since 2009 (since they have usually made it every decade). Us neither, funny we might hire the opposing manager.

phillychuck 2019-10-20 12:08:43 UTC #66

Here are the Yankees' win totals from 2010-2019:

95, 97, 95, 85, 84, 87, 84, 91, 100, 103

I would take that in a nanosecond and roll the dice in the playoffs pretty much every year.

Where can I sign up?

...

They have run into the Scherzer/Verlander/Miggy Tigers, the Red Sox, and the dominant Astros throughout this decade. Not an easy gauntlet to run.

andyb 2019-10-20 13:05:13 UTC #67

The Yankees spending into the luxury cap every year kind of guaranteed them being an above average team, especially since they consistently spend in Latin America. Their draft returns were less good a decade ago, but that seems to have improved of late (it better have if we are hiring one of their guys).

Philsmania 2019-10-20 15:55:43 UTC #68

Yet, the 2010's decade ends up being the first decade since 1910's that the Yankees don't play in a single WS. Probably more of a testament to October's unpredictability. Also, one can say they went through a teardown and rebuild stretch from '13-'16 but that they never suffered a losing season during that time is a testament to the strength of that organization.

phillychuck 2019-10-20 16:27:49 UTC #69

While winning the World Series is really important and the ultimate goal, as a fan I mostly want to watch a good team play all season. I could stand a 103-win team losing in the NLCS to, say, the Dodgers. There would be 103 really good days during the season to celebrate. Don't get me wrong, I'd be upset that we got knocked out, but that would be better than what we have now. And a consistent run averaging over 90 wins? Seriously, sign me up for that decade.

California_Dreamin 2019-10-20 16:57:15 UTC #70

And Judge just called their season a "failure", just as they are referring to the Dodgers season here is SoCal. I find this a very sad way to view the season and sure does a lot to destroy the feeling that its the journey and not the destination that truly matters. As a guy who has been through wayyy too many Phillie seasons, I still believe I enjoyed the 1964 journey over the 1980 destination.

The '64 team gave me a baseball joy I have probably only witnessed a few times in my sporting life whereas the '80 team was a total roller coaster of good baseball, bad baseball, happy team, miserable team.

I still prefer the journey to the destination.

zambonir 2019-10-20 17:14:51 UTC #71

Aaron Judge has never known baseball without a wild card. I think that's the big difference, and it's also why the stat about this decade especially doesn't mean much. As most here well know (in many cases more than I), what it took to get to the WS until 1969 was completely different than what it took from 1969 to 1985 (as well as from '85 to '94), and now in the wild card era regular season success is pretty much devalued to just be about seeding. Even after '69 simply winning the AL or NL "pennant" (when did they even start saying 'ALCS'?) felt huge.

Nobody really cares about it but in MLS and NHL you do still get a trophy for being the best regular season team.

zambonir 2019-10-21 08:44:08 UTC #72

It's funny how everyone is now saying the Yankees didn't have enough starting pitching and were too reliant on their offense and bullpen. It's all relative.

andyb 2019-10-21 11:00:22 UTC #73

A bullpen strategy is actually really good for the postseason when there are more off days. It is just hard to sustain over the course of the season, especially if you need multiple innings at times out of relievers trained to go one.

This is a bit ironic from the Yankees of course. A premium is paid to starting pitchers because there are rare ones that are good and can pitch 200 innings. That premium also is risky. Teams like the Yankees, of course, could afford that premium. Now when they choose not to and face the same problems as everyone else they complain.

Which of course leads to the conclusion - get Cole and pay the luxury tax occasionally.

BostonRoss 2019-10-21 14:32:50 UTC #74

On the other hand, in a seven game series, hitters might see a reliever four or more times, making it easier to lay off the pitchers’ pitches through recognition.

zambonir 2019-10-21 17:52:30 UTC #75

The Yankees’ strategy worked during the regular season — outscoring teams with their potent offense so that their best relievers could secure the wins — but was strained in October.

Like I said, I just thought it was funny. The strategy was similar to Klentak's even in the regular season but their hitters hit, their relievers were healthy/effective and the caliber of their "thin" rotation was considerably higher than ours. If Happ had been what they expected and Domingo German hadn't gotten suspended (or even if they'd just kept Sonny Gray) who knows. But, like the Phillies, they wouldn't go to six years on Corbin.

And in reality, it's just how the playoffs go, whether you call it random or just the razor-thin margin between success and failure. They almost got to a Game 7. Most times a playoff series ends with an otherwise great reliever blowing it. The familiarity thing might be one reason but in some ways it's also just roulette. The other night, both closers blew it, Osuna just had a bigger cushion and a home frame to follow.

Now we're gonna watch two teams that both have three great starting pitchers (in theory), but Game 4 will probably be the bullpen game on which the series turns, and I'm sure we'll see a couple of blown saves.

andyb 2019-10-21 18:22:34 UTC #76

Anibal Sanchez will clearly get a start for the Nats so no bullpen game for them. I am actually wondering since he pitched better than Corbin in the NLCS whether you start Sanchez in game 3 and Corbin in game 4. Then Sanchez would be the game 7 starter with Corbin pitching a couple (and probably Scherzer lurking in the bullpen).

zambonir 2019-10-21 19:04:49 UTC #77

Ah yes. Well, would be even more interesting if the series turns on Sanchez vs. the Astros' bullpen.

andyb 2019-10-21 20:45:22 UTC #78

I guess it is a bit interesting that the Nats have still not announced their game 1 starter. Astros have announced 1-3. I wonder if the Nats are weighing whether to have Scherzer and Strasburg pitch games 2 and 3 so they would line up for 6 and 7. I doubt they will do it, but potentially they are thinking about it.

Philsmania 2019-10-21 23:02:31 UTC #79

Per MLB on Facebook, it's Scherzer.

zambonir 2019-10-22 00:59:12 UTC #80

And Martinez has declined to name a Game 3 starter as either Corbin or Sanchez could be used as relievers in the meantime (if necessary).