Yankees, Last 91 & 11 Seasons
Posted by Steve L. on May 3rd, 2012 · Comments (6)
In the 91 seasons between 1921 and 2011, the New York Yankees had 50 “Playoff Appearances.” (See chart below.)
For those scoring at home, that’s a rate of making the post-season 55% of the time over a 91-year period. And, it means that just about half the time they made the post-season, they have won a ring – as they have 27 World Series Championships.
However, over the last 11 seasons prior to this year, the Yankees have made the post-season 10 times and only won one ring.
Is that because there are more rounds in the post-season today? Or, is it because the Yankees of recent years are a team built to reach the post-season but not win in the post-season? What do you think?
.
I’m sure the fact that there are more rounds in the post-season has alot to do with it. And the short ALDS series doesn’t help either. That being said, I do believe that the Yankees of recent years are a team built to reach the post-season but not necessarily to win it all. We need better piching and guys who can actually perform in the clutch. We seem to have alot of stat builders on our team (A-Rod, Texiera, Swisher) who don’t perform well when they need to most.
@ LMJ229:
Your first two sentences more or less negate or respond to your third sentence.
The Yankees aren’t merely built to reach the playoffs without an intention to win the World Series because, obviously, a team cannot win a World Series without reaching the playoffs first.
Until 1969, there was no such thing as “playoffs.” The team with the best record in the league simply qualified for the World Series and that was that. It’s therefore not at all surprising that a team would have a greater World Series winning percentage if it qualified for the World Series with regularity. Adding the barrier of another seven victories to merely qualify for the World Series should answer why teams in general — not just the Yankees — don’t win the World Series with regularity any longer.
LMJ229 wrote:
The notion of “stat-builders” or stat-padders is absurd and simply illegitimate. It’s part of the narrative out there among some fans (and some members of the media) so it’s taken a life of its own and seems true because it’s oft-repeated.
Please show evidence that some/most/all of Rodriguez’s, Teixeira’s and Swisher’s stats are meaningless or otherwise accrued when games are out of reach in one direction or another. If you can show me that their stats are merely for selfish accumulation and have no effect on the team’s overall success, I’ll be happy to tell you you’re right.
@ MJ Recanati: Doesn’t sabermetrics allow us to look at production in high leverage situations as opposed to low leverage ones? Doesn’t sabermetrics allow us to look at production when it is late and close as opposed to during blow-out games? Doesn’t sabermetrics allow us to look at production against contending teams close to you in the standings versus production against eliminated teams when your own fate is secure in the standings?
Could we not use these measures to determine who is producing when it means the most to his team versus who is producing in somewhat meaningless situations (outside of padding his own stats)?
@ Steve L.:
Yes, sabermetrics does give us these tools.
Go ahead and prove that Rodriguez, Teixeira and Swisher are selfish stat-padders whose baseball card totals come in 15-1 blowouts. Be my guest.
Just posted it on A-Rod now in a separate post.