branchinator {l Wrote}:
I was hoping it would come to this.
Wow, you're an even bigger d-bag than I thought.
branchinator {l Wrote}:Of course, my whole post was predicated on Lee going to the Yankees. Now that he's in Texas, this whole discussion is moot.
It's actually not moot because if you believed the Yanks plus Lee meant they would absolutely steamroll anyone, then the Yanks should be close to unbeatable even without him. But hey, I'm nice enough...I'll let you backpedal all ya want.
branchinator {l Wrote}:1) "A-Rod has officially left his turtle-Rod playoff rep behind" - A-Rod's career playoff OPS is .977. In Seattle, he performed well in the postseason. All of this "turtle-rod" stuff is the result of his 2005 and 2006 ALDS performances where he did suck pretty hard and the slapping incident in the 2004 ALCS. However, in the 2004 ALCS he had a respectable .895 OPS. Isn't using real stats instead of your incredibly uninformed opinions fun?
Other than last postseason, A-Rod's OPS in a playoff series was above his career average exactly twice and there were several times when his OPS was miserable. That's called turtling up. Superstars step up during the playoffs, and A-Rod hasn't (until last year). A player of his caliber is held to a higher standard (except by you of course). Tons of strikeouts and hits in meaningless spots. But go ahead and pull out all the stats you want to fellate him.
branchinator {l Wrote}:2) "Tex does anything" - Mark Teixeira currently has 17 HRs and 59 RBI's. He has done "anything". His avg and obp are below career norms right now and he's always been a second half player. Here come some pesky stats again: for his career, Teixeira's 1st half OPS is .872. In the 2nd half, it's .968, almost 100 points better. So, if anything, the Yankees can count on MORE from him in the 2nd half of a season where he's already produced solid power numbers.
He has done something, but as stated above, superstars step up for their team. The high RBI # has more to do with the significantly high # of baserunners around him. You're right that he's a second halfer usually, so we'll see.
branchinator {l Wrote}:3) "A 38 year old pitcher continues on his torrid pace for another 4 months" - This is probably the least moronic part of your post because there should be some regression from Pettitte. However, if the Yankees had traded for Lee, this wouldn't have been an issue because he'd be the 3rd or 4th starter in the playoffs.
A third or fourth starter is still seeing significant time on the mound in the playoffs...so you can downplay it all you want, but he would have been out there with big expectations.
branchinator {l Wrote}:4) "Granderson does anything" - This is the 7th or 8th batter in the Yankees lineup. He doesn't need to be an all-star for them to succeed. The Yankees' record to-date clearly shows this.
This is true. But they picked him up to be more than the 7th or 8th best hitter. And so far he's been a huge disappointment.
branchinator {l Wrote}:5) "Gardner and Cano continue to play at a high level" - Brett Gardner looks to me like a young player who's taking advantage of the first real opportunity he's ever had. And he's the 9th hitter. If he regresses a bit, it won't matter. As for Cano, he's a very good hitter entering the prime of his career. There's no reason why he can't finish the season with a .900+ OPS.
I didn't say there's no reason that either one of them will continue to be good. The premise of my list was not to say it couldn't happen (which you've seemed to either blatantly ignore or missed completely), but to say this is what probably needs to happen for the Yanks to roll through the postseason in the same manner they are rolling now (Lee-less or not).
branchinator {l Wrote}:So, to recap, my original post was to say that the Red Sox would have no chance to beat the Yankees if they acquired Cliff Lee. That is obviously an opinion and I never presented it as fact. When I do present things as fact, I use real stats, which is obviously something that your baseless post above lacked.
This is my favorite part. It's hilarious that you said something would absolutely happen, and I responded by saying that isn't necessarily true - yet you argue against me like I said that it absolutely wouldn't happen. Then you say you use stats when presenting something as a fact, then lambast me for not using stats for my opinion. So my post is "baseless" because it's an opinion? Logic ain't your strong suit.