the tenacious tigers and the yawning yankees
First, GO TIGERS. Git'er done.
Second, I'd like to think that with this being the sixth straight season since the Yankees have won a Series title, this might be the offseason in which Steinbrenner realizes that maybe a $200 million-plus payroll and a team full of all-stars might not be the right combination in the beginning of 21st century baseball. I'm not holding out too much hope though. The media is already talking about the "big shakeup" of the team, which yes, I'm sure will happen in some way, shape, or form, but I can't really see Cashman and the Boss cutting their payroll to anything along the lines of the Tigers ($80 mil), A's ($63 mil), 2005 World Champ White Sox ($75 mil), or even the 2004 World Champ Red Sox ($127 mil).
I'll be the first... well, probably the second, after some hateful fan threw this fact in my face... to admit that the 2004 Sox were a highly-paid team second only to the Yankees, but that's a whole different post all together. The truth is, with the exception of the Red Sox, the last 5 WS champs have had payrolls of $82 million or less. Time to usher in a new era, Mr. Steinbrenner. Although I suppose personally, I wouldn't mind if you keep up the charade and keep losing. Fine by me.
The Moneyball era has never fully been recognized to this point, and I'm not entirely sure it ever will be, but the theory has had an effect. The three-division + wild card rule that went into effect in '95 has also had a huge effect, especially for those teams that have made a last-month/minute run to the playoffs and entered on a high. (Here is an interesting article about wild-card playoffs, albeit a 2-year-old article.)
Whatever it may be, however, I'll just say it again: GO TIGERS! And the Yankees loss - well, it certainly made my day, whether that be healthy or not.
Second, I'd like to think that with this being the sixth straight season since the Yankees have won a Series title, this might be the offseason in which Steinbrenner realizes that maybe a $200 million-plus payroll and a team full of all-stars might not be the right combination in the beginning of 21st century baseball. I'm not holding out too much hope though. The media is already talking about the "big shakeup" of the team, which yes, I'm sure will happen in some way, shape, or form, but I can't really see Cashman and the Boss cutting their payroll to anything along the lines of the Tigers ($80 mil), A's ($63 mil), 2005 World Champ White Sox ($75 mil), or even the 2004 World Champ Red Sox ($127 mil).
I'll be the first... well, probably the second, after some hateful fan threw this fact in my face... to admit that the 2004 Sox were a highly-paid team second only to the Yankees, but that's a whole different post all together. The truth is, with the exception of the Red Sox, the last 5 WS champs have had payrolls of $82 million or less. Time to usher in a new era, Mr. Steinbrenner. Although I suppose personally, I wouldn't mind if you keep up the charade and keep losing. Fine by me.
The Moneyball era has never fully been recognized to this point, and I'm not entirely sure it ever will be, but the theory has had an effect. The three-division + wild card rule that went into effect in '95 has also had a huge effect, especially for those teams that have made a last-month/minute run to the playoffs and entered on a high. (Here is an interesting article about wild-card playoffs, albeit a 2-year-old article.)
Whatever it may be, however, I'll just say it again: GO TIGERS! And the Yankees loss - well, it certainly made my day, whether that be healthy or not.
posted by Amy at 10:30 PM
3 Comments:
Just got back from a party. And upon watching the Mets-Dodgers highlights, I was accosted by several "hardcore baseball fans" who immediately set out to prove my inadequacy in the sports knowledge/moneyball department.
Let's just say they were schooled. And proceeded to introduce me to all their friends as "this girl knows her shit and wants to work for ESPN someday." :oP Hehe, I love you girls...
pam: we really need to make pink shirts with "yes, i know what ops is" emblazoned on them.
ames: fab post! i hope that someday, when you have the time, you'll explore that 2004 payroll. it is interesting that the sox won on the strength of "hired guns" like foulke and schilling that year, which sort of breaks that pattern of teams with low to medium pay structures. i obviously have no problem with teams using the resources they have at hand to win championships (which is why it's so damn embarassing when the sox fall flat and so sweet when the yankees do the same), but i'm fascinated by the idea that money won't always necessarily buy you a championship.
go a's! :P
Maybe to look at it more accurately, you need to expand your defination of the Moneyball era. Yes, Schill and Foulke were hired guns for that season, but they were hired to work within a specific system.
Put aside the "low payroll" aspect of Moneyball for a minute, and recal what kinds of players Billy Beane was enrolling in his little weird baseball religion. Players who take pitches, walk more, the value of OBP as opposed to BA, the effectiveness of pitchers not just on wins and ERA, but how those runs were being scored (and not scored) off them, uncovering the inflation of a "good defensive player" but mathmatically seeing how many runs they save in the field and how fewer runs they produce at the dish.
Beane took a whole new look at how you put a team together. He had to do so because of the budget he was given in small market Oakland, but Theo and the new Yawkey Way boys simply transfered the baseball fundimentals of that system to a place with a larger budget. Granted, their stubborness to not overpay for a player who can't perform up to and over what they are worth is a carry-over (and became a drawback when player's output changed and they were just flat out wrong), but they were always willing to spend where needed. And why not? They've got the money to spend, with a constantly sold-out park and high merchandise sales, if you've got it, you should use it.
The Yankees don't seem to be looking to build a team in that kind of formula. They are much more traditional than most other teams, scouts who look at the five tools rather than the stats, the often-proved wrong belief that if you pay a guy the highest money he wants, than he'll work harder. Fortunately for them, when you do sign a lot of the best players in baseball, they play at a high level. But just as the Moneyball concept has its holes, so does this. And, sometimes, there is just a little luck. The right people, the right chemistry, a lights out pitcher or a guy who hits anything you get over the plate. The Yankees just haven't been able to catch that lightening in a bottle in a few years.
Post a Comment
<< Home