Monday, September 03, 2007

Yankees @ Tigers, Week #7

So the Yankees at Detroit.

Game #1 was all Yankees, as Verlander gave up 7 ER (and 3 Unearned) while Randy Johnson gave up 4 ER. (Both starters went 7.2 innings). Proctor gave up 3 runs in the ninth, but that wasn't enough. Yankees win 10-7.

The second game saw Bonderman vs Mussina. In the top of the fifth Jeter got on base, followed by a Johnny Damon triple ... Damon later scoring on Sacrifice Fly. Then in the seventh, Jeter gets on base and Damon .... triples again (later scoring on a base hit). [In the first game, Damon also reached third while batting, but that was a double, then advancing when the outfielder threw to home].

In the bottom of the 7th, Shelton doubled. Mussina was yanked (even though not tired) to put in Myers as a LHP. Myers gave up a double to Shelton, but that was his only hit allowed in 2 innings of relief, and then Rivera closed out the ninth. Yankees 4-1.



At 3:27 PM, September 04, 2007, Blogger Dennis Ugolini said...

Verlander has now given up something like 19 runs, but only 11 of them earned. No one else comes close. Strange how he has been both helped (statistically) and victimized (in terms of wins) by bad defense.

At 8:21 PM, September 04, 2007, Blogger scott said...

re series
The funny thing is that game 1 was the one in retrospect where had I pulled Verlander after rhe 5th inning and gone to my 3 top relievers I might have been able to pull out a victory.
In the second game with the dice I rolled combined with the studliness of Mussina and Rivera and Myers not being half bad himself I could not have scored more than the 1 run I did score and there is no way I could have held the Yanks below 2+.

re season

It is shaping up to be a very interesting end to the season. A three way tie one game over .500 is possible in the AL and a two way tie at 2 over or a two way tie at one over might even be likely. Barring Michael tearing it up in his final four games the winner will be on a tie breaker (or perhaps an ALCS or tie breaker game)?

re follow on league

So we have had calls for NL only rules for all teams; for use of the solo usage rules to determine eligibility rather then tracking games; calls for player drafting... To these I would like to add the thoughts of using a pool of 11 of the teams we are not playing with this time around (I would suggest 4 best, 4 worst, and 3 middle of those remaining); more realistic rest requirements for relievers; 5 man rotation requirement; 3 game series; 40 or so game season length. Thoughts?

At 11:04 AM, September 05, 2007, Blogger Brian said...

My thoughts on a follow on:

1) It should be fairly flexible ... I don't want people to feel pressured.
2) We should allow managers to submit lineups & basics and allow others to manage. This would also allow new people to run a few games and see if they like it.
3) Managers shouldn't have to track stats if they don't want to. So, the "Games Left" mechanic needs to be simplified (I've pitched this idea already).

If we get the objectives right (so that people are happy to play) the rules aren't terribly important. But my thoughts:

1) Mainly play advanced rules, although I wouldn't mind adding the Super-Advanced charts (for more variety of errors, etc). I'd be willing to add the ballparks and clutch rules as well. (I agree with Dennis that 'clutch' is really just random noise, but it's fun and gives us more decisions to make, which would be good). I'd actually be happy with most of the SA rules, perhaps excepting stealing and the WP/balk (although the latter are easy enough). I'd like to add the closer endurance rules. I can live with the Robbing Home Run or Catching blocking the plate.
1a) We should allow managers to play a series with whatever mix of rules they like, as long as they don't change usage/lineup (or have effects 'outside' the series).
2) NL rules are fine. I'm ambivalent. It does add strategy, but it slows the game down.
3) I've pitched my "solitaire rest rules" idea already. Another idea -- The STAR tournaments simply declare that position players need 300 AB (250 for catchers) to be draftable, and don't require rest. We should probably have similar minimums. (Their reliever rules are no more than 4 innings in any four consecutive games ... but we'll have to track pitchers anyway).
4) If we're playing a longer series, then the possibility of injuries beyond one game (perhaps just till the end of the series, to prevent series order from mattering). Capping injuries based on PA is reasonable, too.

We should probably have a thread on this ... and see who is interested in another season.

For those interested, "Tournament" strato-rules are at

At 11:07 AM, September 05, 2007, Blogger Brian said...

Oh, and I personally want to add my variant where starting pitchers are given 'phantom hits' at the start of each inning after they become vulnerable. We're seeing lots of 8 inning starts. Granted, in NL that will be less of an issue.

But I can live without it.

At 11:20 AM, September 05, 2007, Blogger Dennis Ugolini said...

I'm not at all attached to "game appearances", which was a spur-of-the-moment simplification to avoid having to count at-bats all season. I'm good with the AB minimum, solitaire rest rules, and five man rotation.

I'd prefer NL rules (more strategy) but at least some AL teams (where most of the better/more interesting players are). I think NL rules and drafting relievers will alleviate the long starts -- many of our relievers will be statistically better than our starters (over short time spans), so not getting them in the game will be a strategic mistake.

I haven't looked closely at the SA rules. For some reason Robbing a Home Run appeals to me while clutch does not, but that's just me being silly. Did anyone else have thoughts on realistic reliever usage?


Post a Comment

<< Home