but, hey, that’s the way it goes on the internet, no?
====
lol ur learning!

very fair point steve. excellent job again with that piece at bats.

Pat – thanks.

FWIW, one man’s thought that something “irrational” or it being “over the top criticisms” is just an opinion – like the opinion that I expressed which brought forth such a comment.

By this, I mean, I express my opinions here. It’s not always going to be stats and facts, etc. Sometimes it’s thought and opinion.

And readers are welcomed to express opinion back at me. If it’s different from mine, I respect their right to have a different take and I say “let’s agree to disagree.”

However, many times, when I share an opinion that some don’t like, they call me a hater, an idiot, or worse…but, hey, that’s the way it goes on the internet, no? That’s all I meant by that…

nice job on the bats blog steve. found a lot of your commentary very interesting. one thing i found particularly interesting was when you said anything shy of genuflecting over cashman and hughes brings out the people with pitchforks. not sure if you were kidding or not there, but if you were serious, that’s certainly not on point. i’m not a lover or a hater, and what i would say brings out the people with pitchforks, on this blog in particular, is your sometimes irrational and over the top criticisms of the two. you certainly have no obligation to be rational, but if you choose not to be i don’t think it’s fair to blame the negative reaction you often get from you cashman and hughes analysis on simply coming up short of genuflecting – you take it much further than that. i think if you kept it at criticism, and didn’t take it any further, you would probably find no pitchforks, some people agreeing with you, and less disagreeing with you as opposed to all pitchforks and disagreement.

YankCrank wrote:

I’ll say what it took butchie to say in 5,000 words:
All three teams are extremely talented, but all of them have question marks as well. The healthiest team will most likely go the furthest. As for organizational depth, they are all in good shape. Idc what the exact order is.

Was it 5,000, I thought it was more like 10,000!:) Even still we are saying something quite different from one another. The main concern with Tampa is if these young guys can repeat their performance from last year performnace wise not so much health. Their bullpen is their soft white underbelly and Madden’s machinations might not work again this year. So with Tampa, I don’t see health as overriding as the performance issue in that they have younger players.With the Yanks, they need the starting 5 to remain healthy BUT Burnit is an injury risk and CC pitched a record number of innings last year. I am worried about the Yanks in that regard,because their SP can be fantastic all things being equal except for injury. The Red Sox have some elder statesmen as well, so will these players rebound?It seems that Papi and Lowell have gotten better healthwise, but will they post their traditional numbers? In some ways Tampa and Boston are better than the Yankees (though the Yanks made some good offseason adjustments so did Boston and Tamapa)BUT they have their own problems as well and didn’t come in third last year either…..

Yankees Organizational Ranking
http://tinyurl.com/cmc5rw

Rays Organizational Ranking
http://tinyurl.com/d98xo8

Red Sox Organizational Ranking
http://tinyurl.com/dytfos

I’ll say what it took butchie to say in 5,000 words:

All three teams are extremely talented, but all of them have question marks as well. The healthiest team will most likely go the furthest. As for organizational depth, they are all in good shape. Idc what the exact order is.

I think the Yankees, Red Sox, and Tampa are pretty closely matched that I don’t get upset when someone picks them in an order I don’t agree with.

Welcome back, kid. I had heard about this on ESPN 1050 and just shrugged my shoulders.In sone ways I think that the Yanks are behind the ,Sox and Tampa BUT in other ways I think the Yanks are right there with them. The weakness of the Yanks last year was the offense. It had gone down to the point where some of the adjustments like Teix and to a much lesser degree, Swisher(not the most prodigious offensive stats last year with the White Sox)were made accordingly. Gardner and Swisher are more of these gritty,gutty types that General Joe seems to like, so the Yanks can manufacture runs when need be instead of hitting the mythical 5 run home run.

The Red Sox have question marks,too. Can Papi rebound and perform without his old partner in crime, Manram? How will Lowell rebound from hip surgery? As much as I love these cheap signings that the Red Sox made there are questions as well….Will Baldelli be able to play on a regular basis?Can Penney be a viable 4th starter in the AL East after a spotty 2nd half last year? Will they use Smoltz in the wrong way? How much of a black hole will Varitek be offensively this season? Contrary to what the sabermteric/Pecota crowd might say about Boston(and the Bosox are still a very good team), they are not without their problems. Yes, the Yanks have ifs BUT the Red Sox do too…it’s not like Papi and Lowell are spring chickens anymore….. As much as I praise the Red Sox organization for their intelligence etc so on, they have a lot of question marks just the same.

With Tampa, they improved with Burrell as a DH, but will they be that better offensively? Yeah, the young pitching with Price as an add on after May 15th looks good, BUT can they repeat that performance from last year? The biggest question is their bullpen…..can they approximate what they did last year? That seems to be their biggest conundrum this season. Can Madden’s experiment with the relief corps strike lighting twice? So it’s not like the AL rep in the World Series doesn’t have any question marks and are on the road to October again. BUT they will be good this year, BUT how good is the question……

nope, start her up raf