Printable View
OK So to weigh in here.....the article is a joke. The Yanks are ONLY 1.5 games behind
1st place. They will be fine. Giambi does stink now, true....Wang is 3-0! The Yanks called up a great guy at SS for when Jeter was down....Cano...off the bench HR! THey'll be fine and in the WS this year!
I wouldn't be too confident. Their in the running, but age is catching up. More importantly, the competition in the AL East this season is going to be fierce.
True it is tougher competition but there is a youth drive this year with loads of 20sonethings ready to go. WS BABY!!!!!!
Next year Teixeira will be in a Yankees jersey and there will be NO way that we aren't ready for another few WS rings :)
This year, I don't know about the WS, but we have some stud youngsters... especially pitchers.
Now I have to turn the corner. I've been surprisingly defending the Yankees for most of this thread but I have to ask you to be real. Who are these 'studly' young arms??Quote:
Originally Posted by koolzach1
I'll give you Hughes has shown a few great starts, but pitching is so hard to gauge this early in his career. Does he have the mental makeup to last a full season? We'll see.
Ian Kennedy??? What has this guy shown you that makes you think he's a stud? Certainly not stats nor the eye test nor the scouts who a year ago projected him as a #3 pitcher at best. Far from a stud.
Joba Chamberlain?? He's been outstanding out of the bullpen, but thats a far cry from pitching 6+ innings every 5th day. Granted, he may turn into a stud but is a huge questionmark to be a starter at this point.
So, there's no denying any of those three statements. They are very fair and truthful. Who are these 'studs' then you are referring to? Wang has proven to be a stud during the regular season, but is not an ace go to guy in the playoffs. Thats also indisputable.
At least the Sox have a young Beckett & Matsuzaka who are proven starters. Granted, Matsuzaka is far from a stud but he's a solid #2 at best but probably a #3. The Sox also have Baseball America's second rated farm system with alot of young arms. I'm not projecting any to be studs, its way to early to pin hopes on that.
In short, what i'm saying is the Yankees better look long and hard at Sabathia or find another proven ace, because without one.....they are going to be hard pressed to win with or without Texiera.
Wait... So Matsuzaka and Beckett are proven?
Also, Wang is an ace. He was outstanding in his 1st 2 playoffs... just struggled badly in his 3rd.
In two playoff starts last year Wang had an ERA of 19.06!! He couldn't get the big out and got hammered both times. In 2006 he had just an OK start with a 4.05 ERA scattering 8 hits over 6 innings. The lack of an ace really cost the yanks last year against Cleveland.Quote:
Originally Posted by koolzach1
You bringing up Beckett is comical. A near Cy Young winner last year and the leagues most dominant pitcher in the postseason. His postseason career is on par with ALL the greats of all time. In 9 postseason career starts the guy is 6-2 with 3 complete games and an ERA of 1.73!!!!
As for Matsuzaka, I made it clear he's not a stud but yes he's a proven middle of the rotation starter. He's started at the professional level for many years now. Of concern is he did fade hard at the end of last year, but the transition to the MLB and a new culture are real factors. There are no doubters that he's got the makeup to last an entire season, he's proven in the WBC he can pitch in big games, but yes there's no denying that he's not a stud. But...the point is he's a proven arm after Beckett. The Yanks have none after Wang who's arguably not an ace in the first place. Mussina, borrowing an analogy, is past the twilight of his career and even the Yanks aren't counting on him for much longer. Pettitte is more than likely in his last year. Who else is a proven arm?
Stop answering questions with questions. Explain how you can honestly call these kids 'studs'.:cool:
Potential studs.
I'm not trying to be funny here, but seriously could someone actually define "stud" and/or "ace" please? Those terms have been thrown around baseball for years and years, but really do they actually mean anything?
Yes, they both mean exactly the same thing: "guy I really like at the moment."Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
exactly...
Yanks WON again and are only 1 game behind. Jeter is batting over .300, Pettite is 2-1
On the other hand, we're only 15 games into the season. Jeter only has 29 at bats (as of yesterday), and Pettitle only has 3 starts.
Besides, the Yankees (and Sox, and Jays) are chasing Baltimore...
True but since the scanty evidence offered why they would be home this season after 1 or 2 games I thought I would show why they won't be after 15!
Oh, I don't disagree with panning the original article. There is at least a grain of believability behind it, however.
Believability :eek: No way.....the Yanks WILL be 2008 WS champs baby!!!!!:D Now that is believable! :p
Spoken like a true fan
Well, I'd define "stud" as simple...a great player. :p As for ace, that's much easier to define. A simple way would be...since there are 30 teams, and each team has an ace, the 30 best pitchers are ace's. However, it's really not that simple. I think I view an ace as one of the 20 or so best pitchers in the league. An ace is just an excellent top-rotation starter - C.C. Sabathia, Josh Beckett, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, Brandon Webb, and their ilk.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Bringing up Beckett isn't "comical." Beckett basically has ZERO accomplishments if it weren't for last year. He done well in 2003 in the post season, and had a solid regular season, but other than 2003 and 2007, in his 8 year career; he has accomplished absolutely nothing. He has been an injury prone, inconsistent SP. Had a TERRIBLE year in 2006 with BOS, which everyone forgets. He has already struggled (6.35 ERA in multiple starts) so far this season, so who's to say that he won't have another 2006, or any other year other than 2003/2007. I would take Wang over Beckett, at least in the regular season. Wang, overall, has been more reliable winning near 20 every full season he has played.
What makes the trio of Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, and Ian Kennedy studly? Well, considering Joba has showed to be electric, and is considered the next big thing by many scouts. Also considering that Phil Hughes has been ranked as the #1 prospect by BA, plus almost threw a no hitter last year against a very good hitting team in Texas. Ian Kennedy has showed dominance at EVERY level thus far in his career. Ian was dominant in HS, college, in the minors, and had a 1.89 ERA least year. So, yeah... basically, those are considered some stud accomplishments/prospects.
Beckett in 2007 is what an "ace" pitcher is, is my point. Beckett's been a very good pitcher when healthy, except for 2006 where he was about league-average. His health problems were nearly exclusively blister-related, and all indications are that those are gone. His "terrible" 2006, which was actually average, was completely due to his home run rate which was wildly out of proportion with the rest of his career, and was most likely a fluke. Do I think he has another 2007 in him? Probably not, but he's a very good pitcher, and his 2007 was what an ace pitcher is.Quote:
Originally Posted by koolzach1