CC Sabathia

Introducing the Yankees Doom Watch

84 Comments

I noted last week that people seem to be underselling the Yankees quite a bit. I’m seeing more and more of it. So much so that I’m getting the sense that one-dooms-manship of the Yankees will become a pretty prevalent meme between now and April. A contest of sorts between who can be most extreme in selling the Yankees short and predicting the ignominious end to the Jeter dynasty.

So let’s keep track of them, shall we? We’ll call it the “Yankees Doom Watch.”

Now, I’m not talking about merely being somewhat circumspect about the Yankees’ chances.  It’s totally rational and fair game to note that the team has some issues heading into the season. They don’t have a catcher. They’re relying on Kevin Youkilis to rebound way more than a contending team should be relying on a brittle and declining veteran to rebound. Everyone is getting older. There’s a decent chance that this team, like any other successful team, could crater. It’s a tough division. All have their strengths and all have their weaknesses and any of the five teams could reasonably win it or lose it.

No, I’m talking about examples of Yankees pessimism that go beyond the circumspect and tread into the dire. Conclusory predictions of futility that overstate the challenges they face. Failure to acknowledge that the team won 95 games last year.  Failure to acknowledge the weaknesses of the other teams in their division. Treatment of the 2012 ALCS as though it were the entire 2012 season. References to this team being like the 1965 Yankees are always a plus.

I’ll make an inaugural nomination: Bill Madden in this morning’s Daily News:

You have to go all the way back to 1992 for a spring training of lower expectations than this one for both the Yankees and the Mets, where in both cases, our locals have a better chance of finishing last than finishing first this season.

I’ll buy it for the Mets, but the Yankees? Really? Better chance of finishing in last place?  OK.

Last week Madden reported that A-Rod would never wear pinstripes again. This week he’s saying the Yankees have a better chance of finishing in last than first. What are the odds of a mea culpa on Madden’s part if A-Rod comes back midseason and leads them to a division title? You probably don’t want to bet your first born on that one.

Anyway, this one is definitely worthy of notice by the Yankee Doom Watch.  Please apprise us of any other examples you see between now and Opening Day.

Rob Manfred on robot umps: “In general, I would be a keep-the-human-element-in-the-game guy.”

KANSAS CITY, MO - APRIL 5:  Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred talks with media prior to a game between the New York Mets and Kansas City Royals at Kauffman Stadium on April 5, 2016 in Kansas City, Missouri. (Photo by Ed Zurga/Getty Images)
Ed Zurga/Getty Images
15 Comments

Craig covered the bulk of Rob Manfred’s quotes from earlier. The commissioner was asked about robot umpires and he’s not a fan. Via Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports:

Manfred was wrong to blame the player’s union’s “lack of cooperation” on proposed rule changes, but he’s right about robot umps and the strike zone. The obvious point is that robot umps cannot yet call balls and strikes with greater accuracy than umpires. Those strike zone Twitter accounts, such as this, are sometimes hilariously wrong. Even the strike zone graphics used on television are incorrect and unfortunate percentage of the time.

The first issue to consider about robot umps is taking jobs away from people. There are 99 umps and more in the minors. If robot umpiring was adopted in collegiate baseball, as well as the independent leagues, that’s even more umpires out of work. Is it worth it for an extra one or two percent improvement in accuracy?

Personally, the fallibility of the umpires adds more intrigue to baseball games. There’s strategy involved, as each umpire has tendencies which teams can strategize against. For instance, an umpire with a more generous-than-average strike zone on the outer portion of the plate might entice a pitcher to pepper that area with more sliders than he would otherwise throw. Hitters, knowing an umpire with a smaller strike zone is behind the dish, may take more pitches in an attempt to draw a walk. Or, knowing that information, a hitter may swing for the fences on a 3-0 pitch knowing the pitcher has to throw in a very specific area to guarantee a strike call or else give up a walk.

The umpires make their mistakes in random fashion, so it adds a chaotic, unpredictable element to the game as well. It feels bad when one of those calls goes against your team, but fans often forget the myriad calls that previously went in their teams’ favor. The mistakes will mostly even out in the end.

I haven’t had the opportunity to say this often, but Rob Manfred is right in this instance.

Report: MLB approves new rule allowing a dugout signal for an intentional walk

CHICAGO, IL - OCTOBER 29:  MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred laughs during a ceremony naming the 2016 winners of the Mariano Rivera American League Reliever of the Year Award and the Trevor Hoffman National League Reliever of the Year Award before Game Four of the 2016 World Series between the Chicago Cubs and the Cleveland Indians at Wrigley Field on October 29, 2016 in Chicago, Illinois.  (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)
Elsa/Getty Images
25 Comments

ESPN’s Howard Bryant is reporting that Major League Baseball has approved a rule allowing for a dugout signal for an intentional walk. In other words, baseball is allowing automatic intentional walks. Bryant adds that this rule will be effective for the 2017 season.

MLB has been trying, particularly this month, to improve the pace of play. Getting rid of the formality of throwing four pitches wide of the strike zone will save a minute or two for each intentional walk. There were 932 of them across 2,428 games last season, an average of one intentional walk every 2.6 games. It’s not the biggest improvement, but it’s something at least.

Earlier, Commissioner Rob Manfred was upset with the players’ union’s “lack of cooperation.” Perhaps his public criticism was the catalyst for getting this rule passed.

Unfortunately, getting rid of the intentional walk formality will eradicate the chance of seeing any more moments like this: