Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hey Yankee fans that season was a lot of fun to watch right? So many good memories, watching great baseball like that is always amazing to witness. Do you think there was ever a better offensive infield in the history of the game? Tex Cano Jeter ARod Posada They put up some serious numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hey Yankee fans that season was a lot of fun to watch right? So many good memories, watching great baseball like that is always amazing to witness. Do you think there was ever a better offensive infield in the history of the game? Tex Cano Jeter ARod Posada They put up some serious numbers. Pettitte had a big hit too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Do you think there was ever a better offensive infield in the history of the game? I don't think so. If you're going to factor in the catcher, then the next two are probably the Big Red Machine: Bench Perez Morgan Concepcion Rose and the '51 Dodgers: Campanella Hodges Robinson Reese Cox Adjusting for era, that Dodgers squad would give the current Yankees a run for their money if not for Cox being the weak link (offensively). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 I would love if we traded Cano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 All for 73.7 million dollars. The Yankees infield cost more than 14 entire teams. They got their money's worth, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 All for 73.7 million dollars. The Yankees infield cost more than 14 entire teams. They got their money's worth, though. Right on cue. There's not point in talking Yankee baseball here anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Right on cue. There's not point in talking Yankee baseball here anymore. Sure there is. The entire board, minus 7 or 8 posters are on your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Sure there is. The entire board, minus 7 or 8 posters are on your side. Find me a Yankee thread that was created in the last 10 days that doesn't have a reference to money in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Find me a Yankee thread that was created in the last 10 days that doesn't have a reference to money in it. Find me a Red Sox thread without a Yankee fan being a jackass in it. Money is the reason that the Yankees won the Series. It's worth talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Find me a Red Sox thread without a Yankee fan being a jackass in it. Money is the reason that the Yankees won the Series. It's worth talking about. This thread has nothing to do with the World Series. But go ahead, call in Scotty and PFKIHS to derail this one too. I do get a kick out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share Posted November 13, 2009 Find me a Red Sox thread without a Yankee fan being a jackass in it. Money is the reason that the Yankees won the Series. It's worth talking about. Dierking has done this in a few threads. You guys go start your own threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 This thread has nothing to do with the World Series. But go ahead, call in Scotty and PFKIHS to derail this one too. I do get a kick out of it. You're right, this thread is about the Yankees infield. I forgot to add in the opening day pitcher. CC makes it an even $90 mill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share Posted November 13, 2009 I don't think so. If you're going to factor in the catcher, then the next two are probably the Big Red Machine: Bench Perez Morgan Concepcion Rose and the '51 Dodgers: Campanella Hodges Robinson Reese Cox Adjusting for era, that Dodgers squad would give the current Yankees a run for their money if not for Cox being the weak link (offensively). Good post JH, real good post. I am going to check the #'s out later tonight and will come back with a response. I know Campanella was such an offensive force. Also do you think #s should be adjust for inflation? Parks are smaller now so what some of those old teams did seems even more impressive to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Dierking has done this in a few threads. You guys go start your own threads. Maybe I was a bit snarky. There's a correlation between having one of the greatest infields of all time, and having the highest paid player at most of those positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share Posted November 13, 2009 Find me a Red Sox thread without a Yankee fan being a jackass in it. Money is the reason that the Yankees won the Series. It's worth talking about. It is worth talking about. So you should go talk about it in one of the other 12 threads that were already hijacked for it. I gave Yankee fans crap for posting crap in the Red Sox thread last week. So let's just stick to the topic at hand here. The Yankee infield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share Posted November 13, 2009 Maybe I was a bit snarky. There's a correlation between having one of the greatest infields of all time, and having the highest paid player at most of those positions. I am trying to have a discussion about offensive numbers. If you want to discuss the reasons behind those #s feel free to start your own thread. This is a NY site, so there is a NY Yankee bias naturally. No reason to hijack every thread. Dierking has been doing it all week, it was funny at first. All I am trying to do here is have a baseball discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 I am trying to have a discussion about offensive numbers. If you want to discuss the reasons behind those #s feel free to start your own thread. This is a NY site, so there is a NY Yankee bias naturally. No reason to hijack every thread. Dierking has been doing it all week, it was funny at first. All I am trying to do here is have a baseball discussion. Max, I have done nothing BUT talk baseball. I have left the name calling out of it, even though that has been leveled at me. No big deal, I can take it. Just because it is not the baseball YOU want to hear, does not make it hijacking. I gave my reasons why I felt the Yankees have the opportunity to win more than one in a row. I linked that to history of the team.. Again, that some did not want to hear that, that is on them. It is called a thread. Threads have twists and turns. My comments are in context,. Except this post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share Posted November 13, 2009 I don't think so. If you're going to factor in the catcher, then the next two are probably the Big Red Machine: Bench Perez Morgan Concepcion Rose and the '51 Dodgers: Campanella Hodges Robinson Reese Cox Adjusting for era, that Dodgers squad would give the current Yankees a run for their money if not for Cox being the weak link (offensively). Actually I thought about this some more, still haven't looked up the #s yet, but I thought factoring in the Catcher would help the Yankees. Forgot about some of the big hitting catchers of yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Actually I thought about this some more, still haven't looked up the #s yet, but I thought factoring in the Catcher would help the Yankees. Forgot about some of the big hitting catchers of yesterday. If the Phillies add anyone who is even mediocre to replace Feliz at 3rd base, you have to take a look at the infield they have. Present day, I believe their 1b, 2b and SS trump the Yanks at those positions. 3B is another story, I understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Actually I thought about this some more, still haven't looked up the #s yet, but I thought factoring in the Catcher would help the Yankees. Forgot about some of the big hitting catchers of yesterday. No chance... as good as Posada was this year, he's not the hitter that Bench or Campanella were. His OPS+ of 133 is less than Bench's in '74 (143) and '75 (140), and Campanella was the NL MVP in '51 with a 159 OPS+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Also do you think #s should be adjust for inflation? Parks are smaller now so what some of those old teams did seems even more impressive to me. Absolutely, they need to be adjusted... OPS+ is a good stat to use as a comparison, since it's a relative measure against the league average (which is normalized to 100). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 If the Phillies add anyone who is even mediocre to replace Feliz at 3rd base, you have to take a look at the infield they have. Present day, I believe their 1b, 2b and SS trump the Yanks at those positions. 3B is another story, I understand Absolutely. If the debate was limited to the best 1B/2B/SS, the Phillies win hands-down IMO, even factoring in Howard's poor average and Rollins regression over the last 2 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 14, 2009 Author Share Posted November 14, 2009 If the Phillies add anyone who is even mediocre to replace Feliz at 3rd base, you have to take a look at the infield they have. Present day, I believe their 1b, 2b and SS trump the Yanks at those positions. 3B is another story, I understand It is a bit of a weird equation but the Phillies have an incredible infield, leaving 3b out like you said. Utley puts up numbers that make me think of Ryan Sandberg. Howard's power #s are sick. And Rollins sets it all up. The Phillies really are in a weird spot at 3b. I know they are talking about upgrading but they really don't have to. If they do and get a Mike Lowell type of player - 20 home run guy that offense is going to be even more insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 It is a bit of a weird equation but the Phillies have an incredible infield, leaving 3b out like you said. Utley puts up numbers that make me think of Ryan Sandberg. Howard's power #s are sick. And Rollins sets it all up. The Phillies really are in a weird spot at 3b. I know they are talking about upgrading but they really don't have to. If they do and get a Mike Lowell type of player - 20 home run guy that offense is going to be even more insane. At this point in his career, I don't think that Lowell is that significant of an upgrade over Feliz, who is pretty sound defensively. The guy they'd be better off going after is Beltre, who, despite a poor (injury-plagued) season last year, is still one of the top fielding 3B in the game and should rebound to be a .270-20-80 guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 At this point in his career, I don't think that Lowell is that significant of an upgrade over Feliz, who is pretty sound defensively. The guy they'd be better off going after is Beltre, who, despite a poor (injury-plagued) season last year, is still one of the top fielding 3B in the game and should rebound to be a .270-20-80 guy. Adrian Beltre is severely overpaid and overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 14, 2009 Author Share Posted November 14, 2009 At this point in his career, I don't think that Lowell is that significant of an upgrade over Feliz, who is pretty sound defensively. The guy they'd be better off going after is Beltre, who, despite a poor (injury-plagued) season last year, is still one of the top fielding 3B in the game and should rebound to be a .270-20-80 guy. I think Lowell is done, I was using him as a type of player. Someone you can get as a free agent. There won't be high demand but he can provide value. A 2nd tier kind of guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'd love to hear how Rollins is better than Jeter. Next time where Rollins has a better season then Jete, it'll be the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I think Lowell is done, I was using him as a type of player. Someone you can get as a free agent. There won't be high demand but he can provide value. A 2nd tier kind of guy. The same Mike Lowell who OPS .811 hit 17 HRs and 29 2Bs while driving in 75 runs with less than 500 ABs? That Mike Lowell? His range at 3B might be limited now by his hip but he can still hold his own at the hot corner. He's got one season left in Boston and if he hits well they might bring him back to be the DH, depending on if Papi figures out his life. There are worse options at 3B than Mike Lowell. You're way off here Max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 14, 2009 Author Share Posted November 14, 2009 The same Mike Lowell who OPS .811 hit 17 HRs and 29 2Bs while driving in 75 runs with less than 500 ABs? That Mike Lowell? His range at 3B might be limited now by his hip but he can still hold his own at the hot corner. He's got one season left in Boston and if he hits well they might bring him back to be the DH, depending on if Papi figures out his life. There are worse options at 3B than Mike Lowell. You're way off here Max. Yes. That Mike Lowell. The one that hit 5 home runs outside of Fenway last year. I was using him as a type of free agent, didn't mean to even specifically bring him up. If you could (the Phillies) get a 32 year old similar to him, that is the player I was saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 14, 2009 Author Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'd love to hear how Rollins is better than Jeter. Next time where Rollins has a better season then Jete, it'll be the first. If the category is making stupid predictions that won't come true...I would have to go with Rollins. Otherwise a .250 leadoff hitter? I will pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 It is worth talking about. So you should go talk about it in one of the other 12 threads that were already hijacked for it. I gave Yankee fans crap for posting crap in the Red Sox thread last week. So let's just stick to the topic at hand here. The Yankee infield. They were posting actual pictures of crap. There's a difference. I'll stay on topic. The Yankees infield is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 They were posting actual pictures of crap. There's a difference. I'll stay on topic. The Yankees infield is awesome. What is the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted November 14, 2009 Author Share Posted November 14, 2009 They were posting actual pictures of crap. There's a difference. I'll stay on topic. The Yankees infield is awesome. There is a difference and that is why the other posts were deleted and yours is still here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyHector Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 Adrian Beltre is severely overpaid and overrated. Adrian Beltre was not nearly worth the contract he received after his 48 HR season, but he's one of the top defensive 3B in the game and is a free agent, so he will only be "severly overpaid" if a team chooses to offer him a figure that he is not worth. Before last season, his average season for the 4 years spent in a pitcher's park in Seattle was: .266, 24 HR, 88 RBI, 80 R, 36 doubles, 10 SB There's also a big difference hitting in the Phillies lineup and having no protection on a poor team. I'd much rather have Beltre than Lowell if I'm the Phillies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.