Yankees

report out this morning that the boss wants torre out and pinella in - whoever he gets, he is going to have to get some pitching.

look for a fraud to wind up in houston or boston next year, with the yanks paying a good chunk of his salary (at least what texas is not still paying - which I think is around 6-7 mill per season at this point)

 

Yes, unless they overspend and pick up another Carl Pavano.

Boston? You've got to be kidding. The only pitcher Boston has that the Yankees would want is Papelbon and the Sox aren't about to trade him. I have serious doubts about Oswalt leaving Houston and he's the only Astros pitcher that the Yanks should consider trading A-Rod for.

I think A-Rod will wind up staying in New York.

 

The Yankees and Boston are not making a trade anytime soon.

 

The reason I say boston - and it is merely speculation on my part, is that I think the boss is about ready to dump a fraud at any cost, but he has a no trade clause in his contract. Boston wanted him desparately when the rangers got tired of his act and almost did the deal. the asking price has gone way down (imho) with the season he had this past year and his playoff performances the past three years. Of course he is one of the best hitters in baseball when his team has a lead....

 

I propose a three way trade between New York, Boston, and Cleveland. There has been some speculation that Manny wants to come back to Cleveland, and the Indians could really use his bat. The Yankees need some young major league ready talent, something the Indians have plenty of, and Boston would like A-Rod.

 

Here's where A-Rod ranks among all batters in 2006.

• Ranks 10th in AL in HR (35)• Ranks 4th in AL in RBI (121)• Ranks 5th in AL in R (113)• Ranks 8th in AL in BB (90)• Ranks 9th in AL in OBP (.392)

You don't trade a guy who hit 35 homeruns to a team within your division. Maybe Steinbrenner wants to dump him, but Brian Cashman won't trade him to Boston, because that would be foolish and Cashman isn't a fool. Besides, the question remains of which pitcher besides Papelbon the Yankees would want that the Red Sox would give up.

 

and he ranks last in the american league with meaningful hits.

 

any team in the league would love to have him except the loonies in NY and their fans

 

Didn't this very thing almost happen a couple years ago with Manny and A-Rod traded even up? I recall the only loophole was the money.

 

The Red Sox tried to trade Manny to the Rangers after the 03 season for A-Rod. But, the Sox were reluctant to take on the rest of his enormous contract. To his credit, A-Rod was very willing to take a lower salary to make it happen, but the union wouldn't allow it.

After the deal died, the Yankees stepped in and traded Soriano for A-Rod and took on the big contract themselves. Once the trade happened, Steinbrenner gloated about how he was glad that he could make a trade like that happen for Yankee fans and was sorry that the Red Sox were unable to make a trade like that happen for their fans.

 

I guess I never expected that my comments would be so controversial. The people asking for evidence strike me as ones who will never be convinced. And I will provide evidence (someday), but I don't expect the naysayers to be convinced one iota. They appear to be Twins-adorers, and nothing bad can be said about them. I just assumed that most people had heard the argument before that the Twins have one of the biggest home field advantages in baseball. Is that not true? What, do they think the Marlins have a better home field advantage?! Come on, we all know which teams benefit most from their home park. You could put the Rockies, Yankees, Red Sox and a few others on that list, historically.

To me, my statement about the Twins was similar to saying that Ted Williams was the greatest hitter of all-time. Is that such an outrageous statement? Have you not heard that before? If someone stated that about Ted and then I shot back and said, "Prove that with absolute certainty," and the person came back with some stats like his .344 career average and 521 home runs. Then, me who is determined to not grant that Ted was the greatest hitter of all-time could simply say, well, Cobb hit .367 and Aaron has 755 homers, so Ted couldn't have been the greatest hitter of all-time. So you see, with statistics one can always interpret them to argue a point. Bare statistics still have to be interpreted. Fact is, sports arguments are always by nature, subjective. So that's why it struck me as odd that they were demanding all this proof, because when I do provide "proof", I'm sure they will have some other stat to counter with, so they can continue their man-love for the Twins...just like the guy who's not convinced that Williams was the greatest hitter of all-time, or Cobb, or Ruth, etc.

I'll be back. It may be 2007, but I'll be back someday. Cheers.

P.S. - I'm not upset at all, although I know this medium sometimes makes it appear that way. Like I said, it's just sports.

 

Wrong. I don't care for the Twins one way or the other.

I just want to see some stats to prove your statement, and yet you continue to backpeddle.

I seriously doubt you ever come back with any stats to prove your statment. But I guess time will tell.

 

Why do you continue with the provocative responses like this? That's why it seemed to me that I struck a nerve with you all. Be honest, are you saying that you've never before heard it claimed that the Twins have one of the best, if not best, home field advantages? What is so controversial about that statement?

 

Yes I have heard the statement before and every time I hear it I think it is ridiculous because no one has any stats to prove it. You have been no different thus far.

I guess all that is left is for you to come back with this proof. Good luck and I look forward to seeing it.

 

Andy wrote:

Twins-adorer? Not hardly. I have neither love nor hatred for the Twinkies, though you obviously can't stand them. You said that the Metrodome gives the Twins 5-10 wins per season. Here's what I said on 2 different posts about your claim.

You made a claim and I was interested in seeing the evidence behind it.


Andy continued on:

I don't appreciate the charge that I am so in love with an opinion that I won't change it if real facts are presented that are contrary to my opinion.


Andy again:

You've said that the Metrodome gives the Twins 5-10 wins per season. I would like to see something that supports this. My opinion is that it doesn't, from season to season, give the Twins 5-10 wins all by itself. Maybe 1 or 2, but not 5-10. Regardless, what's so controversial about asking for something, anything, besides anecdotal evidence?

 

Then you must think that every team has the same home field advantage as every other team. Now that's ridiculous.

 

Once again, I will ask you for what the 13th time to provide proof of your statement. You have yet to do that. You keep trying to change the subject to what I or others believe about home field advantage. Either show some proof or just admit it is merely your opinion and there are no stats to prove it.

This will be my last reply to this thread until you decide to provide some proof.

 

1987 Twins:

Home: 56-25
Away: 29-52

Find me a team that had a 27 game difference between home and away. I bet there's not many, if any.

Pythagorean Record: 79-83 vs. actual record of 85-77. A variance of 5 games or more in a team's Pythagorean record indicates a lucky team or unlucky team (if the other way), according to Bill James.

Conclusion: The 1987 Twins were one of the luckiest teams in baseball history. They were helped immensely by their home field advantage due to crowd noise and difficult playing conditions that the Twins players had 81 games to overcome vs. their opponents who had but a few. Their luck continued into the post-season by mere happenstance that the ALCS home field went to the West and World Series went to the AL. The Twins were undefeated in their post-season home games. Just about any baseball historian would rank them as one of the worst teams to win a World Series.

 

Hey! Evidence! Cool! :thumbsup:


I agree. In 1987, the Twins were a lucky team. They probably had a great record in one run, low-scoring games, but when they lost, they lost big. Do you happen to have Pythagorean numbers readily available for other seasons?

I never understood why home-field went to a particular division winner and the league champion rather than won-loss record. Statistically, home-field doesn't mean as much in baseball as it does other sports, but still, there should have been some reward for having the better record, even if it's an extra game at home.

 

Thank you.

Now what would make that better would be a comparison of that against all the other World Series teams. Do you happen to have that info?