• Does Anyone Out There Seriously Think The Yankees Are Better Than A 85-Win Team In 2014?

    Posted by on January 27th, 2014 · Comments (44)

    Go ahead – show yourself and explain why you think they will win more than 85 games this season.

    Comments on Does Anyone Out There Seriously Think The Yankees Are Better Than A 85-Win Team In 2014?

    1. tanzo
      January 27th, 2014 | 5:49 pm

      Yes I do. They have improved the offense. The rotation is better. Tex and Jeet are back from injury. The catcher position is very much improved. On the flip side the Bluejays and O’s have not improved at all from last year. The Indians and the White Sox’s haven’t improved much either.

    2. Mr. October
      January 27th, 2014 | 5:56 pm

      They’re at least an 85-win but with questions, or uncertainty, at every position with the exception of catcher. It’s not a “championship-caliber” team, which is what it should be and what it’s being sold as. They can win more than 90 games “if everything goes right,” but the lesson from last year is that it probably won’t.

    3. KPOcala
      January 27th, 2014 | 6:23 pm

      With what they currently have, no. If everything breaks their way, AND get a shot in the arm from the farm, probably. They REALLY need Drew. And another reliable starter, and two arms for the bullpen they can count on. I’ll be shocked if Cashman doesn’t add two significant pieces before ST.

    4. McMillan
      January 27th, 2014 | 6:31 pm

      KPOcala wrote:

      I’ll be shocked if Cashman doesn’t add two significant pieces before ST.

      Is Cashman gonna do another jump with the Golden Knights this year?

    5. Greg H.
      January 27th, 2014 | 7:02 pm

      Without doing the numbers, to see this team at less than 85 wins you would have to be betting that most of what went wrong last year goes wrong again this year. Meaning CC has another poor year, Kuroda is not as sharp, Tex is still injured, Jeter contributes very little. I don’t think that will happen (at least not all of it).

      Otherwise the offseason moves point to an improved team in the outfield, catcher, rotation, 1B, SS, and of course overall offense. We won a lot of close games last year – that’s the only real red flag for me.

    6. McMillan
      January 27th, 2014 | 7:33 pm

      Greg H. wrote:

      We won a lot of close games last year – that’s the only real red flag for me.

      30-16 (.652) in games decided by one run.

    7. Corey
      January 27th, 2014 | 8:12 pm

      They are better than they were last year. And last year was an 85 win team.

      But my gut says no.

    8. Corey
      January 27th, 2014 | 8:13 pm

      @ Corey:
      That being said, the trade deadline is always a wild card.

    9. Corey
      January 27th, 2014 | 8:15 pm

      @ KPOcala:
      Drew doesn’t make Greg H. wrote:

      We won a lot of close games last year – that’s the only real red flag for me.

      WARB

      Wins Above Replacement Binder

    10. Corey
      January 27th, 2014 | 8:17 pm

      Corey wrote:

      Drew doesn’t make

      Sorry got distracted by someone IRL and didn’t notice that I didn’t finish my thought.

      I don’t get why everyone is so high on Stephen Drew. He’s good, yes. But people make it out to be like he’s the key to the championship for the Yanks.

    11. MJ Recanati
      January 27th, 2014 | 10:16 pm

      Corey wrote:

      I don’t get why everyone is so high on Stephen Drew. He’s good, yes. But people make it out to be like he’s the key to the championship for the Yanks.

      I don’t think it’s that people are so high on Drew. It’s more about having a credible MLB-caliber SS on the roster so that Jeter doesn’t have to be the team’s primary player at that position. Drew’s injury history makes him quite unreliable himself but at least he’s younger and therefore a better bet to play to career norms.

    12. rankdog
      January 28th, 2014 | 6:31 am

      Do they have enough talent to be above 85 wins? Yes. Will they have any better luck than 2013? That remains to be seen.

      Why I think they have the potential to be better in 2013?

      -I believe Tex/Jeter will be healthy going into Spring Training. Which means better production at SS and first base. Upgrade at SS will be substantial.

      -A substantial increase in production at catcher.

      -Brian Roberts will be healthy and productive above league average taking some of the sting away form Robbie leaving.

      -Soriano/Beltran/Gardner/Jeter rotation at DH will be an upgrade to our options from last year.

      -A full season of Soriano/Ellsbury/Beltran is upgrade over Wells/Ichiro in the outfield.

      -Girardi has shown a knack for getting the most out of his bullpens. As much as I love Mo hss effect on WPA and WAR would only produce made a lose of a win or two compared the the average closer. Beyond that we lost Logan and the inconsistency of Joba.

      -I believe CC will rebound. Kuroda will be about the same. Nova is a tick below his performance in the second half but still above league average. I also believe we will get 2/3rd starter stuff out of one of Pinada/Nova/Tanaka possibly even 2 of the group. I also believe someone out of the Phelps/Warren/Nuno/Mitchell group will be above average 5th start with close to 200 innings.

      To summarize: I believe our offense will be much improved. Starting pitching will be a somewhat better and our bullpen will be somewhat worse. I think the improvement from Tex returning will negate the drop off from the production at second base. Third base is about the same and every other spot will improve.

    13. Corey
      January 28th, 2014 | 8:51 am

      rankdog wrote:

      -I believe Tex/Jeter will be healthy going into Spring Training. Which means better production at SS and first base. Upgrade at SS will be substantial.

      FYI, there were reports that Tex’s wrist is still causing him troubles.

    14. MJ Recanati
      January 28th, 2014 | 9:48 am

      rankdog wrote:

      -Brian Roberts will be healthy and productive above league average taking some of the sting away form Robbie leaving.

      I have no idea why anyone would believe that Roberts will be healthy and productive in 2014 if he hasn’t been healthy and productive since 2009.

    15. January 28th, 2014 | 1:28 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      I have no idea why anyone would believe that Roberts will be healthy and productive in 2014 if he hasn’t been healthy and productive since 2009.

      Amen. The math on this one is simple. The O’s are in need of a 2B outside of some rookie they may take a flier on. Roberts signed cheap with the Yankees. The Orioles could have easily signed him for that. But, they let him go – because they know he is cooked. Why the Yankees think Roberts has anything left is beyond me. He will be this year’s Youk. See him in April. Never see him again.

    16. Greg H.
      January 28th, 2014 | 2:48 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      The Orioles could have easily signed him for that. But, they let him go – because they know he is cooked.

      That’s a very good point. However, it’s possible that the O’s have already sunk too much on the guy. That last contract was maybe a bit tough for them to swallow, so they cut ties rather than re-sign and risk more injury and another no-value contract for the same player. For the Yanks, he’s a cheapie with a rather large upside if he does stay healthy.

    17. Greg H.
      January 28th, 2014 | 2:49 pm

      But I agree that betting on him staying healthy is taking long odds.

    18. Kamieniecki
      January 28th, 2014 | 5:48 pm

      A $200 million team should be an 85-win team, but… this is a Brian Cashman $200 million team, and, as such, if I were to bet on the son of George M. Steinbrenner business partner and Harness Racing Hall of Fame legend John Cashman to win, place, or show in the 2014 A.L. East race, I would bet on Team Cashman coming in third in the division behind Cherington’s Red Sox and Freidman’s Rays.

    19. Mr. October
      January 28th, 2014 | 6:28 pm

      rankdog wrote:

      As much as I love Mo hss effect on WPA and WAR would only produce made a lose of a win or two compared the the average closer.

      If that’s true, it’s another example of why the terms bWAR and bCRAP are largely interchangeable…

      rankdog wrote:

      … bullpen will be somewhat worse.

      It might be more than somewhat worse…

    20. McMillan
      January 28th, 2014 | 7:29 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      Drew’s injury history makes him quite…

      … a good fit.

    21. January 28th, 2014 | 7:37 pm

      They did a lot of things this offseason, but I’m not sure what the win translation will be. I feel better about the rotation now that they have Tanaka. On the other hand, I think the closer situation could become a real issue, I wouldn’t be suprised to see Robertson fail in that role. The infield is a disaster, I believe Jeter will spend most of the year DHing which means plenty of outfield playing time for Soriano. At some point, the Gardner situation is going to have to be addressed, he’s in his walk year and won’t take kindly to spending a lot of time on the bench. On paper it looks better than last year, but I admit I am assuming a rebound by CC, a consistent Nova and a solid season from an unknown in Tanaka.

    22. PHMDen
      January 28th, 2014 | 9:39 pm

      Corey wrote:

      That being said, the trade deadline is always a wild card.

      That’s when it’s great to have the 20th best farm system in MLB (http://waswatching.com/2014/01/28/but-they-have-the-best-gm-ever/), and a GM with the 3rd worst trWARP (WARP via trade) in MLB (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=21393).

    23. KPOcala
      January 29th, 2014 | 1:58 am

      @ McMillan: Good one! ;)

    24. KPOcala
      January 29th, 2014 | 2:06 am

      From the preseason books that I’ve read, and believe I’m thinking of “Baseball Prospectus” here, Drew seemingly got more athletic as the season wore on. They noted that Drew, because of a lot of injuries coming young essentially caused him to learn an older shortstops “game”, i.e., placement and the like. His defense would probably be better than “Prime Jeter”, and his bat isn’t a noodle. With the myriad of questions in that infield, Drew may not be Honus Wagner, but he sure as hell be some much needed mortar for a infield filled with crumbling bricks…..

    25. Evan3457
      January 29th, 2014 | 4:20 am

      On the basis of improvement in WAR, and starting from their Pythagorean record (79-83), they’re 9 games better than they were at the end of last season, and that’s with no one having a year way above the level of the most recent seasons. The infield is weak, the bullpen is suspect at the moment, but the outfield is stronger, the rotation is stronger, the catching much stronger.

    26. January 29th, 2014 | 9:22 am

      Greg H. wrote:

      That’s a very good point. However, it’s possible that the O’s have already sunk too much on the guy. That last contract was maybe a bit tough for them to swallow, so they cut ties rather than re-sign and risk more injury and another no-value contract for the same player. For the Yanks, he’s a cheapie with a rather large upside if he does stay healthy.

      Brian Roberts spoke with Dan Connolly of the Baltimore Sun yesterday about his decision to join the Yankees and leave an Orioles organization that was the only one he’d ever played for professionally. Roberts explained that he decided to join a new club in part because “the opportunity to be an Oriole wasn’t there anymore.” The second baseman indicated that Baltimore never approached him about a return. “We really didn’t have any conversations about [a return],” said Roberts. “I don’t think it’s my place as a player to necessarily go to an organization and ask for a job.” Roberts had nothing but positive things to say about his time with the Orioles, but said he is excited at the chance to don pinstripes. “[W]e felt like that was the best opportunity when it came to everything we were looking for, when it came to an opportunity to play and an opportunity to win and several other things that our family was looking at.”

    27. McMillan
      January 29th, 2014 | 12:23 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      the catching much stronger.

      Ya think? Stronger than Francisco Cervelli and Chris Stewart? If so, at $85-100 million, or the highest contract for a free agent catcher in American League history, McCann is a steal.

      Who said Brian Cashman can’t pass himself off as an evaluator of talent?

    28. Kamieniecki
      January 29th, 2014 | 12:43 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Who said Brian Cashman can’t pass himself off as an evaluator of talent?

      Brian Cashman.

    29. Greg H.
      January 29th, 2014 | 6:30 pm

      @ Steve L.:
      I saw this article as well. I still think that the O’s were done, mostly because they’d already spent 40MM on the guy and got next to nothing, so they weren’t going any further down that road. He wasn’t enough of a franchise player to warrant a sunset deal (are the Yanks the only ones that do that?) so they let him walk away. For the Yanks, though it fills a need inexpensively and is heavily incentivized for him to stay healthy. We’ll see. I’d rather have Roberts on this contract than Cano on the one Seattle gave him.

    30. Evan3457
      January 29th, 2014 | 8:22 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      the catching much stronger.
      Ya think? Stronger than Francisco Cervelli and Chris Stewart? If so, at $85-100 million, or the highest contract for a free agent catcher in American League history, McCann is a steal.
      Who said Brian Cashman can’t pass himself off as an evaluator of talent?

      The topic of the thread is NOT Cashman as an evaluator of talent.
      The topic of the thread is what is appropriate expectation for wins for the 2014 Yankees. McCann is a fairly dramatic improvement over what the Yanks had at catcher last year. That is relevant to the topic of this thread.

    31. McMillan
      January 29th, 2014 | 8:54 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The topic of the thread is what is [an] appropriate expectation for wins for the 2014 Yankees. McCann is a fairly dramatic improvement over what the Yanks had at catcher last year.

      @ Evan3457:
      Assumes Cervelli and Stewart would not have been as productive in 2014 at catcher as McCann will be.

    32. KPOcala
      January 29th, 2014 | 11:17 pm

      @ McMillan: Unless McCann steps and falls down a manhole, and maybe even then, he’ll be better than Cervelli and Stewart. And why are you, AND others make Cashman spending money a sin, committed by “him”? The Yankees ARE in a high risk/ high reward place in the market. They cannot allow themselves to build themselves in the “traditional manner”, because to do so means three or so great drafts. That almost guarantees terrible seasons, which Does guarantee terrible ratings, and gate shows. So they have to “chase the dragon”.

    33. McMillan
      January 30th, 2014 | 9:19 pm

      KPOcala wrote:

      Unless McCann steps and falls down a manhole, and maybe even then, he’ll be better than Cervelli and Stewart.

      @ KPOcala:
      It was a joke.

      KPOcala wrote:

      And why are you, AND others make Cashman spending money a sin, committed by “him”?

      Because he “earns” a $3 million-per-year salary to spend that money, and he sucks at it; it’s not a sin to spend money, it’s a sin to waste it. But he does mean well.

      KPOcala wrote:

      They cannot allow themselves to build themselves in the “traditional manner”, because to do so means three or so great drafts.

      If I was a dick, I would call this a “straw man.”

      A “sacred obligation” of fielding a “championship-caliber” team does not have to come at the expense of having one of the worst farm systems in M.L.B. Tampa Bay is able to win as many regular season games in the A.L. East, or within the same division, with a fraction of the payroll; Boston is able to win as many regular season games in the A.L. East, or within the same division, and a lot more than one A.L. pennant every 10 years, or three world championships, with a lower payroll and only one terrible season.

      KPOcala wrote:

      … That almost guarantees terrible seasons…

      No it doesn’t. And, again, if I was a dick, I would write, “assertion without proof – otherwise known, as ‘no proof.’”
      $200-38 million payrolls each season should guarantee that not one season is terrible, and should also guarantee playoff appearances in every season and more postseason games and series won in the long-term if if it is a top-tier G.M. and executive management group that is spending the $200-38 million.

      This isn’t a top-tier G.M.: http://deadspin.com/5845140/the-photos-of-yankees-gm-brian-cashman-that-broke-up-a-marriage

    34. Kamieniecki
      January 30th, 2014 | 9:54 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Cashman, and only Cashman, is an idiot.

      Agreed.

    35. PHMDen
      January 30th, 2014 | 10:31 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Who said Brian Cashman can’t pass himself off as an evaluator of talent?

      “… After Watson left, thirty year old Brian Cashman became the general manager. When asked about his strength as a talent evaluator, Mr. Cashman replied, ‘It’s not a strength. I’m an administrator. I’m a good listener. I would not pass myself off as an evaluator of talent.’ What an accurate evaluation.

      The Yankees won World Championships from 1998-2000 with only a few major changes along the way Cashman… traded Mike Lowell in a deal he would like to forget but Boston fans won’t allow that, and he made many minor deals that had little impact on the Yankees’ fortunes. Cashman has remained with the team to the present, which is itself quite an accomplishment, but the players who have followed O’Neill, Martinez, Knoblauch, Brosius, Raines, Davis, Wells, Hernandez, and others have not had much success as measured by the George Steinbrenner criterion…”

    36. Evan3457
      February 1st, 2014 | 7:32 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      The topic of the thread is what is [an] appropriate expectation for wins for the 2014 Yankees. McCann is a fairly dramatic improvement over what the Yanks had at catcher last year.
      @ Evan3457:
      Assumes Cervelli and Stewart would not have been as productive in 2014 at catcher as McCann will be.

      Fairly safe assumption, I’d think?
      You?
      Actually, who cares?

    37. Evan3457
      February 1st, 2014 | 7:35 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Cashman, and only Cashman, is an idiot.
      Agreed.

      On the other hand, if I were a troll, I’d constantly do things like this; cut out a phrase, or a sentence, and use it to create a straw man argument, just trolling’s sake.

    38. Evan3457
      February 1st, 2014 | 7:36 am

      otherwise known, as ‘no proof.’

      And if I were a dick, I’d do things like making a big deal out of this typo for its incorrect grammar, and use it as a proxy for castigating someone’s intelligence.

    39. McMillan
      February 1st, 2014 | 3:47 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Fairly safe assumption, I’d think?
      You?

      Already answered:

      McMillan wrote:

      @ KPOcala:
      It was a joke.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      And if I were a dick, I’d do things like making a big deal out of this typo for its incorrect grammar, and use it as a proxy for castigating someone’s intelligence.

      To “castigate” is “to subject to severe punishment, reproof, or criticism (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/castigate);” “mock” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mock) might be a more appropriate term in this context… And a “typo” is a “a typographical error, Richard…

    40. Evan3457
      February 1st, 2014 | 5:47 pm

      cas·ti·gate
      ˈkastəˌgāt/Submit
      verbformal
      1. reprimand (someone) severely.
      “he was castigated for not setting a good example”
      So thank you very little on that response, as I used the word correctly.

      I assumed you meant not to put the comma where you put it, because that would be correct grammar, and therefore that was either a typo or just another example of your arrogant stupidity.

      A typographical error (often shortened to typo) is a mistake made in the typing process (such as spelling) of printed material. Historically, this referred to mistakes in manual type-setting (typography).

      So, historically, typo is a typographical error. However, the meaning also includes typing errors. Such as the needless inclusion of the comma in the above quoted passage. Since you’re such a superior intellect on the basis of your spelling and grammar critiques, I thought you knew where a comma goes, and where it doesn’t. And that’s what makes the mistake a typo. So the word “typo” was used correctly, and your attempt to correct what was not a mistake awards you:

      http://tinyurl.com/lxuxaa5

    41. Kamieniecki
      February 1st, 2014 | 8:09 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      On the other hand, if I were a troll, I’d constantly do things like this; cut out a phrase, or a sentence, and use it to create a straw man argument, just [for] trolling’s sake.

      @ Evan3457:
      “I’ll answer this at the same intellectual and emotional level it was offered: Asphinktersezwut?”

    42. McMillan
      February 1st, 2014 | 9:12 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      So thank you very little on that response, as I used the word correctly.

      @ Evan3457:
      You’re welcome, but you did not use the word correctly.

      An idiot can not be criticized for doing something idiotic, as a person is what he or she is. I was not necessarily criticizing you, or your intelligence; you are what you are, as your reply confirms. And I was not punishing or reprimanding you. Castigate is not the most appropriate term in this context.

    43. Evan3457
      February 3rd, 2014 | 3:32 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      On the other hand, if I were a troll, I’d constantly do things like this; cut out a phrase, or a sentence, and use it to create a straw man argument, just [for] trolling’s sake.
      @ Evan3457:
      “I’ll answer this at the same intellectual and emotional level it was offered: Asphinktersezwut?”

      More denial by you.

    44. Evan3457
      February 3rd, 2014 | 3:36 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      So thank you very little on that response, as I used the word correctly.
      @ Evan3457:
      You’re welcome, but you did not use the word correctly.
      An idiot can not be criticized for doing something idiotic, as a person is what he or she is.

      And, if I had done something idiotic, that might be correct. But I didn’t, so it isn’t.

      I was not necessarily criticizing you, or your intelligence

      Liar.

      you are what you are, as your reply confirms.

      And this reply confirms you’re still wrong. Your own cited definition says that criticism can be castigating someone.

      Castigate is not the most appropriate term in this context.

      You don’t get to decide that an accepted definition is not appropriate. The English language doesn’t depend on your interpretation of it.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.