• Delcos: Yanks Clubhouse Sedate

    Posted by on May 20th, 2007 · Comments (9)

    From The LoHud Mets blog -

    The Mets clubhouse is a lot looser than the Yankees. They are a more free-spirited group. They are more approachable than the Yankee players. Not all Yankee players, but the majority.

    Yankee players are more guarded. Derek Jeter is about his image. He’s not one you can shoot the breeze with. Neither is A-Rod. You can with Mussina and Pettitte. But forget Randy Johnson when he was here. And no way with Clemens, either. Conversely, Glavine, Wright, Delgado and Reyes are easy to speak with.

    Players on both teams can get a little uptight when they lose. The Yankee clubhouse was much better when they were winning. Then again, they were younger then and didn’t have the issues they have now such as drugs (Giambi and Sheffield) and the recent losing.

    The chemistry in the Yankees’ clubhouse is different without O’Neill and Williams and Cone. It is more staid.

    The Mets are easier to be around. Glavine is always interesting to talk with, as is Delgado and Wagner. Wright is always in a good mood. All of them are polite.

    John Delcos was on the Yankees beat for eight seasons – before spending the last two with the Mets. So, he should know what he’s talking about here.

    The days of O’Neill, Stanton, Tino, Pettitte, Brosius, Cone, Knoblauch, Nelson, Girardi, Mendoza, Curtis and Wells are long gone. Long gone, indeed.

    Comments on Delcos: Yanks Clubhouse Sedate

    1. baileywalk
      May 20th, 2007 | 1:37 pm

      Zzzzzzzzzz. This couldn’t be more hoary. Wow, not the same without Cone? Any insight into how the clubhouse has changed since 1935?

      Every clubhouse is going to be sober when they lose, but this idea that “they’ve BEEN losing” is incorrect — last time I checked, though they have won the Series since 2000, they did get there in ’01 and ’03, and have been in the playoffs every year. You can’t say the same thing about the Mets — who, by the way, are one of the oldest teams in baseball. Reyes, Beltran and Wright are young; Delgado, Franco, Wagner are not.

      I can’t wait for this subway series to end tonight — maybe then we won’t have to hear fifteen stories about how the Mets are better and have more fun. I bet the Yankees wouldn’t mind playing in the NL, where mediocre pitchers dominate.

    2. RICH
      May 20th, 2007 | 3:34 pm

      You must think this is interesting to have it as a blog entry. Is it just your observation of Delcos’ observation or are you trying to point something out?

      Based on what you’ve quoted, Delcos is sorry because the Yankee players aren’t as talkative than the Mets were while he covered them, or in his prior stint with the Yanks, (making his job more difficult now?).

      What a surprise, it’s two different groups. I can go to my friends’ house to the left, then to the family on our other side and, SURPRISE, they’re not the same personalities. And horrors!, the neighbors to the left aren’t acting as the same as they were a few years ago because people change.

    3. snowball003
      May 20th, 2007 | 10:38 pm

      I bet the Yankees wouldn’t mind playing in the NL, where mediocre pitchers dominate.
      ————————
      coughBILLYWAGNERcough.

    4. dereksTeam
      May 20th, 2007 | 11:39 pm

      Joltin’ Tyler, baby, the Yankees’ Clippard! We’re back, the end of our long national nightmare. Get ready for an 18 and 3 run, Stevie. You going to shave your head for us?

    5. baileywalk
      May 21st, 2007 | 12:07 am

      coughBILLYWAGNERcough.

    6. snowball003
      May 21st, 2007 | 12:43 am

      I was thinking more coughJOHNMAINEcough when I wrote that.
      ————-
      Yeah, I hear you. I just have this really unreasonably intense dislike of Billy Wagner. I’ve never thought him a very good closer, and he just bugs the crap out of me. He’s a good pitcher, just not the best closer. And I realize Mo isn’t doing the best job in the world lately, but I’d still take him over Wagner. Whether that is logical or not, I don’t know.

    7. baileywalk
      May 21st, 2007 | 12:56 am

      Whether that is logical or not, I don’t know.
      ——-

      It’s logical:

      Rivera in the post-season (112 inning!): 0.80.
      Wagner in the post-season (10.3 inning): 8.71.

      Last year, Wagner had a 16.88 ERA against the Cards in the NLCS, giving up 7 hits in less than 3 innings.

      Mo obviously isn’t quite as dominating as he used to be, but I’d take him over Wagner in a big spot any day.

    8. snowball003
      May 21st, 2007 | 2:18 am

      Mo obviously isn’t quite as dominating as he used to be, but I’d take him over Wagner in a big spot any day.
      _______________________

      I live just outside of the city, and my local newspaper did a whole back page story on which team has the upper hand in the subway series by comparing each position. They put Beltran over Damon, which I can’t really argue with. They also gave Jeter the edge over Reyes, which makes me happy; Reyes is a good player, but not a great shortstop.

      Anyway.

      They chose Wagner in favor of Mo, saying he’s had something like 8 saves or something this season (as of the time of publication) and Mo only had 3. They neglected to point out that the Yankees have only had 5 (is that right?) save opportunities. I never knew that post season ERA difference.

      Furthermore, having nothing to actually do with that whole “Enter Sandman” debate, have you seen the totally lame video sequence that they play when Wagner comes out to ES? It is absolutely craptastic.

      Now that I know their ERAs and such, I don’t feel as bad for having such an extreme dislike of the man.

    9. May 21st, 2007 | 8:30 am

      ~~~You going to shave your head for us?~~~

      It’s pretty much that way already!

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.