Best & Worst A.L. Starting Pitching Staffs – So Far In 2012
Posted by Steve L. on May 3rd, 2012 · Comments (15)
Where does your favorite team rank?
| Tm | R/G | G | GS | Wgs | Lgs | ND | QS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAA | 3.76 | 25 | 25 | 10 | 9 | 6 | 17 | 68% | 58 |
| CHW | 3.75 | 24 | 24 | 11 | 9 | 4 | 16 | 67% | 58 |
| OAK | 3.73 | 26 | 26 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 17 | 65% | 53 |
| TEX | 3.48 | 25 | 25 | 13 | 4 | 8 | 16 | 64% | 56 |
| BAL | 3.40 | 25 | 25 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 14 | 56% | 54 |
| TOR | 4.32 | 25 | 25 | 9 | 6 | 10 | 14 | 56% | 54 |
| SEA | 4.27 | 26 | 26 | 7 | 11 | 8 | 14 | 54% | 52 |
| CLE | 4.59 | 22 | 22 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 11 | 50% | 49 |
| DET | 4.58 | 24 | 24 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 12 | 50% | 51 |
| LgAvg | 4.34 | 24 | 24 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 50% | 51 |
| BOS | 5.54 | 24 | 24 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 11 | 46% | 46 |
| TBR | 4.12 | 25 | 25 | 14 | 5 | 6 | 11 | 44% | 54 |
| KCR | 4.91 | 23 | 23 | 5 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 30% | 44 |
| NYY | 4.75 | 24 | 24 | 9 | 10 | 5 | 7 | 29% | 45 |
| MIN | 5.71 | 24 | 24 | 3 | 14 | 7 | 5 | 21% | 39 |
| 4.34 | 342 | 342 | 123 | 123 | 96 | 172 | 50% | 51 |
.
The Yankees are on pace for less than 50 Quality Starts this season. That’s not good.
Steve L. wrote:
Through April, no, it sure isn’t good.
Fortunately 85% of the season is still ahead of us and there is no reason why the situation won’t improve. Part of the problem was Sabathia but he’s already showing himself rounding into form (as he seems to always do once May rolls around and the weather improves a little).
Well thank God our bullpen has been stellar. But if our starters don’t pick it up it could be a very long season.
FWIW, CoolStanding.com today has the Yankees winning 89.5 games on the season.
Less than 90 wins, given the Yankees payroll, is a failure, no?
Steve L. wrote:
Less than 90 wins, given the Yankees payroll, is a failure, no?
Was the 2000 season a failure? Was last season a success?
If Derek Jeter, given his contract, doesn’t play like one of the two or three best shortstops in the bigs, is his season a failure? If Rivera doesn’t finish in the top 3 in saves, is his season a failure? And don’t get me started on A-Rod.
Look, the Yankees chose to overpay their players. I don’t think they’re getting their money’s worth; but I guess it’s all okay if they can afford it. Otherwise I really don’t see a correlation between payroll and winning percentage.
Steve L. wrote:
Again, there is 85% of the season remaining.
Jesus, it gets to doom-and-gloom time earlier and earlier around here.
What’s next season going to look like? If the Yankees lose Opening Day, will the season be over?
Jim TreshFan wrote:
Been saying that for years. Couldn’t agree more.
Jim TreshFan wrote:
Well, it does help you avoid the title of “The Worst Team Money Can Buy” if you win a lot when you cost a lot…
Steve L. wrote:
I’m confused by this statement.
1) If you “win a lot” then,,by definition, you wouldn’t be anywhere near the “worst”. The phrase you’re using is typically attached to teams that spend a lot while also losing frequently. I know that term was used to describe the 1991 or 1992 Mets (forget which year) when they spent money on Bonilla, Murray, Coleman, etc. and the combination of losses and bad PR/attitudes/behavior created a toxicity that drowned out early-season expectations.
2) Considering the title is fictional and/or arbitrary, why would anyone care if someone wanted to — erroneously or not — use that title in describing the Yanks?
Steve L. wrote:
Well, it does help you avoid the title of “The Worst Team Money Can Buy” if you win a lot when you cost a lot…
That title has already been taken:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Worst-Team-Money-Could/dp/0679419756
MJ Recanati wrote:
To say that payroll has nothing to do with winning is not entirely true. If you look at team payrolls over the last 10 years, 58 of the 80 teams (72%) that have made the playoffs have been in the top half of the league in terms of payroll. Only 22 teams (28%) that made the playoffs were in the lower half. Furthermore, in 9 out of those 10 years, a team in the upper half won the World Series, with the lone exception being the 2003 Florida Marlins.
As Yankee fans, we know all too well that your payroll does not guarantee a championship. But it sure as hell helps.
@ LMJ229:
The ability to spend may help in making the playoffs, that much is not in dispute.
What I’m saying — I won’t speak directly for Jim — is that payroll is not a predictor of winning percentage. Plenty of teams with high payrolls have flopped. You’re narrowing your search to playoff qualifiers which obviously excludes all of those expensive lemons. Moreover, since payroll — especially on winning teams like the Yankees — is retrospective, you’re assuming that players are being paid for current and future performance, which is often not the case. The Yankees are paying several players for what they accomplished at the time of their last contract negotiation, not for what they’ll be doing in the future.
I think the difference here is that, yes, some teams with high payrolls have flopped.
But, there’s HIGH and then there’s TWO HUNDRED MILLION!
Sure, a team like Tampa wins on a small payroll. And, a team like the Mets, some years, sucks on a high payroll. But, the difference not doing well on a high payroll and not doing well on a payroll that’s HIGHER THAN HIGH.
Steve L. wrote:
Nonsensical, arbitrary goalpost moving. To you, $200M is high. To LMJ229, she broke down the table into two halves of the payroll spectrum.
Steve L. wrote:
Your criteria and subjective opinion notwithstanding, it doesn’t change anything. You can draw the marker at whatever number you want but the fact remains that the highest payroll or the fifth-highest payroll or the 11th-highest payroll doesn’t change the fact that payroll, as a number, does not guarantee anything.
And again, guys like Jeter, Rivera, Posada, Rodriguez, etc don’t come cheap. The “Dynasty Yankees” were also made up of guys that other teams couldn’t afford to or didn’t want to pay. Heck, this predates the “Dynasty Yankees.”
High payrolls and the Yankees are nothing new. It’s the price of doing business, and a testament to the organization that they don’t rebuild, they reload.
It’s not the Yankees’ fault that the salary structure is out of whack;
1993
1. Bonilla (NYM) $6,200,000
2003
1. Rodriguez (TEX) $22,000,000
2011
1. Rodriguez (NYY) $32,000,000