Sox v. Yankees: Special Aluminum Edition

When The Octogon started this project, I had no idea how it would turn out. If I were assigned to the task, I would have spent about an hour on it and spent a lot more time making “Randy Johnson was the catcher for his high school’s dart team” jokes. Oc did a fantastic job and I wanted to bring all this together for posterity. There have been only minor changes to the original text. I tinkered with the formatting some, but that’s about it.

This is a wonderful analysis and is a great way to psyched for the start of the season. Enjoy! [This is an expandable post. Actually, expandable doesn’t do justice to the breadth of this work. It’s big and it’s sexy. For the love of God, just click “Read More.”]

To break down effectively how one team will fare against the other we need to take it player-by-player and position-by-position. You need to evaluate the teams on distinct categories: 1. Defense by position;2. Offense by batting order;3. Starting Rotation;4. Closers
You also need something far more advanced by giving the "edge" to one team over another. That is where the TANC comes into play.
TANC is the Totally Arbitrary Numerical Comparison. Each match up will receive a score from 0-3, giving one team the edge over another. 0 is a wash; both players at that position are equally good or bad. 3 is the mother of all mismatches; one player has a clear advantage and the other leaves his time with a tremendous void at that position. The team with the most TANCs by the end of the comparison should be deemed the better team.

DEFENSE

CATCHER: Jason Varitek v. Jorge Posada Both of these guys continue to be the premier catchers in the American League. Posada and Tek both have decent arms, but are also a bit slow to second base. Posada goes through bouts where everyone steals on him and so does Varitek. In all fairness, neither catcher is given any help by their pitching staffs who are equally inept at holding runners on. Posada has been prone to have problems with passed balls, and has tiffs with Randy Johnson over pitch selection. Varitek, The Captain, is widely considered one of the best game callers in the game and has been known to call his own game from beginning to end. The game calling aspect has to favor Tek here. Red Sox +1 1B: Jason Giambi/Andy Phillips v. Kevin Youkilis/J.T. Snow Giambi is dreadful at first. Phillips is an unknown quality at first, but reports show nothing spectacular here average is the word of the day. Youkilis is another unknown and we can assume he will be better than Giambi and not quite as good as Phillips. Snow however, is one of the best defense 1Bs EVER, better than Malaphabet, better than OlderDude, better than the Bamtino. He is the best of his generation. However, he may not see the field much due to a less-than-adequate bat. Late innings and tough righties may prove to be Snow's chance to shine, and give the Sox a slight edge. Red Sox +1 2B: Robinson Cano v. Mark Loretta 2B is always a little difficult to break down. Cano made some rookie mistakes, mainly mental, but appears adequate. Loretta is a very capable 2B who will man the position well. Neither one will win you a gold glove nor will they cost you a game, like our old friend, Chuck Knoblach.
No AdvantageSS: Derelique Jeter v. Alex Gonzalez Some pretty reputable baseball people seem to think that Jeter could be the worst gold glove shortstop ever. His rankings are near the bottom of the AL for defensive efficiency. The book Mind Game (written by the good folks over at the Baseball Prospectus) uses statistical analysis to argue that Jeter is the worst defensive shortstop to ever play as long as Jeter has. Wow. Gonzalez is average. He had 16 errors last year, which would be a major improvement over Rent-a-wreck. Let’s give the daisy his due. Jeter does not make a lot of costly errors and his range is helped by having the best shortstop in baseball playing third. He is also lethal at tracking down pop-ups in the outfield. Gonzalez will not make you forget the wonder that was Cabrera, but he will suffice. I just can't give DJ this one though.
No advantage3B: Alex “Blue Lips” Rodriguez v. Mike Lowell Tough decisions here. Lowell is a gold glove 3rd baseman and one of the best in baseball. I do, however, have to give Mrs. Jeter some props. He did a great job over there last year. Both are excellent, but Lowell may be slightly better. Not enough to earn a TANC, though. No advantageLF: Hideki Matsui v. Man-Ram
Both are below average. Manny can turn in some of the best and worst plays out in LF. Matsui is adequate at best, but does make some pretty heinous plays out there as well. Still, Manny costs the Red Sox a game or two a year with his loafing and brain cramps. Matsui has a poor arm and so does Manny. Manny gets aided by the wall at Fenway. Matsui also charges the ball very well to get his assists. So I have to give Matsui gets a TANC here, though not by much.New York +1CF: Johnny Damon v. Coco CrispI will not call Damon a traitor, not even once. I am reserving the right to criticize, however, where he is deficient. Crisp is a younger version of Johnny Damon. See the Caveman’s days with Royals for a mirror image. CF has long been a position where you can put a weak arm. Johnny Damon is renowned for having the worst arm in the majors now that Bernie Williams won't be seen very much. Crisp is adequate with the gun, but has more than enough to be considered better than Damon. Speed is key when covering ground at both ball parks. Both have it. Both are good. Damon is older, but still has the capacity and the speed to make solid plays on those tough balls going back to the wall. Crisp is much the same. Not enough here to get horny about.No advantageRF: Gary Sheffield v. Trot NixonSheffield has a great arm. The best of all six outfielders in this exercise. Nixon has the second best, but it’s a distant second. Nixon, however, will make plays through shear guts and determination that Sheffield can only look at and wonder why he roided up for all those years and has lost the ability to leap, dive and raise an arm above shoulder level to catch a ball. Ok, so right fielders need a cannon from right field, and I can't ignore that importance. Reluctanly, I will give Shef the slight edge here.

Yankees +1
Total TANCs Each:
Red Sox +2
Yankees +2

OFFENSE (BY BATTING ORDER)
We all know that chicks dig the long ball, so on we go to offense. I’m going to be breaking this one down by projected lineup. As fascinating as a defensive breakdown of two relatively mediocre defensive teams is, it will ultimately be the offenses that will garner the most debate and anger amongst readers.

LEADOFF: Johnny Damon v. Coco Crisp This one is really tough, and the fact that it is so tough should lend itself to neither a huge advantage either way. Damon is one of the best leadoff man in baseball, if not the best. He’s sustained an excellent level of play over several years with the Bo-Sox and is a proven big game player who also has some pop in his bat. His on-base percentage (OBP) is average for a lead-off hitter and certainly nothing to write home about. His splits are .316/.366/.439. The stats are very good, not Hall of Fame good, but very good nonetheless. Damon is also 6 years or so older than Crisp. It’s also important to keep in mind that Johnny is peaking now or, more likely, is just past his prime. Crisp on the other hand has raw talent that is still being developed and clearly has the potential to be Johnny Damon. Their stats will cross as one is on the way up and another on the way down. Here’s Crisp’s splits from last year: .300/.345/.465. Put bluntly, Crisp is NOT as good a lead off sort as Damon. He’s been playing in the league since 2000, which would indicate that the SLG number will increase (power develops later for MLB players). His OBP is a problem though. A leadoff guy should get you that magical .380 or so OBP. Neither does, but clearly plate discipline favors Damon with 53 walks as compared to Coco’s 44. Pitches seen per plate appearance does favor Damon as well. Stats don't lie though. Difference this year minimal. Yankees +1 2-Hole: Jeter v. Loretta Tough here to use 05 stats, both are vets (Loretta was hurt last year.) Both have middle infielder power (edge Jeter) and hit for .300+ (edge Jeter) and have decent OBP (edge Jeter). Jeter’s splits are .316/.386/.461 and Loretta’s are .301/.365/.408.

Let the record show, I hate Jeter. He is as overrated a player as you are ever likely to see. Don't bring up the whole diving into the stands thing either. It was beyond what the Yankees needed and needlessly risky. I hate clutch too. I really hate clutch. But, since I will use it later with Big Papi, I will grant Jeter, begrudgingly, that he is clutch and that he is the best in the business at taking the ball the other way. [insert homosexual innuendo here]Yankees +2 3-Hole: A-Rod v. Ortiz (Yes, I know it could be Manny here to0) This one can be debated on such a serious level and with such fervor for each side that I will simply say this: ARod is proven an MVP last year with great numbers Ortiz, however, should have been the MVP last year with his great numbers. He should also be given bonus points for not having 15% of his RBIs coming against Bartolo Colon in one night in early May. Lets save this debate for another blog shall we, and say its a coin flip. I will say this. ARod strikes less fear into me than Sheffield for some reason. I also know Yankees fans in a sobering moment are always scared of Ortiz.

But wait you have Austin Powers coming out of the bullpen! Mismatch Ortiz. [Editor’s note: I’ve reread this line about 50 times and I have no earthly idea what it means. It’s probably important and/or very funny, so it stays.]No advantageClean-up: Sheff v. Man-Ram I like Shef in spite of his demeanor, backne, and roid-rage induced stupors into the stands at Fenway. He is a great offenseive force. He is also 40. Lets look at the numbers though to see if there is an edge. Manny’s career splits are .314/.409/.599. By the way the .599 is staggering. 500 is HOF worthy consideration for a career. Shef’s career splits are .297/.399/.527. Excellent numbers, but not as good as Man-Ram. Also consider the fact that Manny is not nearly as aged and that Shef had been in the Bigs since the Reagan administration. Edge has to go to Manny here, although not a big one. Red Sox: +1 5-Hole: Mole-sui v. Varitek Matsui is 3 years in, has 100 RBI three straight years and is a .300 hitter. As a leftie, he hits southpaws at .354??? That is beyond ridiculously good. The flip side of the coin is that Hideki should have driven in 100 runs with all the people in front of him and that anything less would have qualified him as a AAA caliber player. In other words he benefits from the great lineup.
[EDITOR’S NOTE: I’m with Oc on despising the RBI stat. It’s the product of luck. RBIs are for girls. Men prefer OBP.]
I can sit here and praise Varitek's intangibles all day, much like a Yankee fan can with Jeter. Lets look at the facts. Varitek is a streaky hitter, who in 2004 went the entire regular season without a hit at Yankee Stadium. You don’t have to be Bill James to know that that isn’t good. (Of course he went on to hit a HR off Tanyon "Devil Ray" Sturtze in Game 1 of the ALCS, but that’s not really important.) He also breaks down in Sept. due to the enormous strains of playing catcher and calling a game, which he puts tremendous pride in. So let’s take a look at the career splits and assume that they will perform as they have in the past. Matusi: .297/.370/.484. Varitek: .272/.350/.456.
About 20-25 points in all three splits. So what does that mean? Average is a poor indicator. One hit every two weeks is the difference between a .270 and .300 hitter. But the OBP and power numbers favor Matsui. But how much? My feeling is that it’s enough to give the edge to Matsui.Keep in mind also that Varitek will play 80-85% of his team's games, while Matsui is good for 162. One could argue that the Yankees get even a bigger boost, because whoever backs up Tek will no doubt make Sox fans cry at the plate, but not enough to give the Yanks that 2 point advantage in my mind.
Yankees: +1 6-Hole: Posada v. Nixon Nixon is at a distinct disadvantage here because he is anemic versus left-handed pitching, but since Wily Mo will be adequate in his time out there figure it won’t be a significant drop-off. So obvioiusly in about 10-15% of the games Posada will have a +2 edge, So can Nixon Balance out at all this advantage. Let's go to the tale of the tape which I love using. By the way, you can argue the point that I should be using Home Runs, RBIs, Runs etc, and make good arguments, but I just love these splits. They take into account so much and offer such a tidy comparison without bringing in things like (when did he hit the Home Runs, what do RBIs mean and so forth) For those who have read this and don't know the splits are: Avg/OBP/Slugging. Take the last two and you have to oh so sexy OPS (Peter Gammons just got a hard on) Anyway, so here is how they look. Nixon .279/.366/.489. Posada .269/.375/.469. Scary similar. So, we assume that they are a 0, but Nixon plays only 85% of his teams games. Ok, but so does Posada (because he is a catcher.) Who is backing up Gerogie this year? Kelly Skinnet most likely, who had a bunch of MLB experience but nothing more than average stats. Its a wash friends. No advantage 7-hole: Mike Lowell v. Jason Giambi You can again argue where these people are going to be in the lineup, but this is fairly accurate none-the-less. Will the real Jason Giambi please remove himself from his steriod induce haze and please stand up? For kicks, look at the Giam-bino last year.His April and May were awful. Who knows why? But he was walking a lot his OBP last year was .440 (despite his early struggles), his SLG was .535 last year, over .900 is July (Amazing). In April and May it was below .350 (that’s Tony Womack Bad). In the end, he had a great year. His splits were .271/.440/.535. I think it is fair to extrapolate those numbers for 2006. He is not the same guy as the MVP seasons in Oakland, for a lot of reasons, so to use his career stats in this case may be misleading. I, however, am not ready to give up on Mike Lowell and call his last season the norm. I think it would be fair to take his baseball card numbers and assume that will be a nice approximation for his 2006 season. For every 10 people who say Lowell is done offensively there are 10 who predict a rebound. Lowell’s careers numbers are .272/.339/.461. Last year he put up .236/.298/.360. Yikes! This is a significant advantage to Giambi, but since Lowell is a proven vet you can't say that this is the worst mismatch in the rivalries history. Yankees: +2 8-hole: Bernie v. YoukMan alive, thorough the stats out here. Bernie is a shell of his former self and Youkillis does not have the ABs to get an accurate read, so my splits here prove useless. Bernie will clearly not be the Bernie of old, and Youk won't be the Bernie of old either. You will get a great OBP with Youk (picture Bellhorn without the Ks and with more pop in the bat). But it's his first full year in the bigs, so there will be growing pains to say the least. With Bernie, there will be pains. Bad knees and slowing bat speed indicate that the guy is long past his prime. I think he will give the Yanks .270/.340/.440, which is pretty admirable for a guy collecting AARP benefits. Youk can match those numbers on the OBP side and the Slugging side. He may fall short in average, however. Finally, I think that Bernie should still be feared in big spots. He is seasoned and will not cripple under the pressure. I recall an AB in late September of 04 with Kevin Youkilis in the Top 9 of a tie game with Mo on the mound. It wound up being a terrible at bat and one of the worst you'll see. Let’s just say that I’m a little nervous.For those interested, it’s the game where Cabrera got a game tying hit and Damon dropped one in front of the immortal Kenny Lofton prompting Rivera to scream “CATCH THE BALL!”Anyway, this will be a learning curve type season for the Greek God of Walks. Gotta go...Yankees +1 9. Cano v Alex Gonzalez Obviously we can't use career numbers for Cano. But here are Gonzalez’s career splits .241/.291/.391.
Typicaly middle infielder power numbers, and we should expect more of the same from him in ‘06. I am not a big fan at breaking down the 9 hole in the batting order so here is the quick down and dirty on Cano. Cano .297/.320/.458. Verry respectable. Will he have a sophomore slump? Can he adjust to a league that will be gunning for him? Will he benefit from the line-up around him? Is he a one hit wonder? Is John Sterling going to declare him the "best second baseman in the game" this year?Lets be reasonable. He may come back to earth this year a bit. Take a look at August v Sept numbers and you will conclude what I do, you can't know for sure what you are going to get from this guy. Very similar to the Youk situation.Yankees +1 Overall Yankees are +7 here (+7 overall). But wait til you see pitching, that is where I earn my money. Right now the Yanks are 33% better than the Bo Sox.

STARTING PITCHING

Lets face it, pitching wins championships. The Yankees for the past few years have been plagued by the fact that their best pitcher by far can only pitch about 90 innings a year out of the bullpen. I need not mention further that Schilling and Pedro together (with strong work from D-Lowe) are why the Sox won in 2004, but never before. Off the bat, there are question marks on both sides. Injuries for one, age for another, and for the Yankees, some inexperience.Pitching is much harder then hitting to throw raw numbers at. I would submit that wins are not a very good source of a pitchers performance throughout the course of the year. So what are the best numbers to use? I love the splits in batting, so I have tried to come up with one for use in pitching. ERA is OK, but Run Average might be better. Anyone have an opinion on whether it is better to count the unearned runs for a pitchers performance. I am not sure but a two out error to the shortstop followed by two singles and a grand slam counts for 4 unearned runs?? I propose this as a split. WHIP/K9/ERA This will take a lot of the randomness out of a season Run Support, parks, errors. WHIP is, in a word, pitchers OBP. It quantifies how many people get on base each inning. K9 is the number of strike outs (Ks) that a pitcher gets per nine innings. The less an opponent puts it in play the less random events (i.e. defense) can happen to the picture.And with that away we go. #1: Schiling v. Johnson Gotta give it to these guys as the aces. Schiling is coming back from a lost season, his worst since 1989. He is aging so it is very difficult to say if he is declining or last season was due completely to the ankle injury. My guess is both. Lets look at the career splits for Curt: 1.13/8.77/3.40 For RJ: 1.16/10.95/3.11Very slight edge here to Johnson. Not enough, in my mind to give a TANC either way. We have to consider other factors however. We can assume the breakdown factor applies equally to both taking in past years experience. Schilling is a few years younger, but we have to assume that both will turn in an equal number of healthy starts for their ball club. However, once we get away from pure numbers we have to look at the intangibles and likelihood of injury. Also that both are at the end of their careers in a much tougher American League. Schilling, however, has the experience of 2004 for a recent look.
So if we count 05 as lost for Schilling, which it was, let’s compare Schilling’s most recent 2004 campaign in the AL with the 05 Johnson numbers. We may get an indication that Johnson may be a bit further down the road then we thought. Keep in mind that this is all relative and the numbers are still good compared to the league. Shcilling 2004 in BOS: 1.06/8.06/3.26. (Amazingly Schill had a higher K9 in 2005)Johnson 2005 in NY: 1.13/8.42/3.79 These are the numbers we go by, down slightly for both in 2006. I love them both in a big game, but Schilling a bit more. I think those few extra years in age make a big difference at this point in their careers and I think that Johnson is prone to breaking down on a regular basis, where Schilling could (with no major injuries) remain durable for reasons of pitching mechanics. Johnson is constantly hurling his back with his sling shot delivery. After so many innings and so many years that is expected. Schilling comes from the Clemans ilk of using your legs to generate a bulk of the power behind his pitches. The legs will break down less than the arms of back. Yes, I remember the ankle. Again, we assume GOING INTO the season both are healthy, who is more prone to miss starts? To me, it has to be Johnson. That’s huge. Schilling: +1 #2. Beckett v. Moose Speaking of injury prone. Here we go again. Beckett loves getting blisters. Here’s a stat that will certainly help you determine nothing. Since 2002, he has not yet thrown 200 innings BUT each year he throws more. Beckett is young and his injuries are common but not serious. BUT we get reports of shoulder damage which added Guillermo Mota to a deal (no longer with team). So what can we expect from Beckett? #1 Type Stuff ,for sure, but how much of it? National League for Beckett: 1.23/8.97/3.46 Again this is the National League. Couple of points non stats related to consider 1. Guy was nails in the 2003 series. His great stuff shut down the Yankee offense. 2. He is not at his prime yet and is finding ways to work through those problems he encounters. So I will assume that his numbers will elevate slightly in 2006 due to the AL, but not as much as usual because he is getting better. 3. The shoulder in my mind almost gives Moose a +1 edge. So, we have to consider how does Mussina stack up and can he keep this +1 edge for the "questionable shoulder" "I hate you Mike Mussina, but I respect the hell out of you" [insert kiss on forehead] How many times will this guy throw 7 no-nit innings against the Red Sox?? All AL for Mussina (thank God): 1.18/7.17/3.64. Excellent numbers for the Moose. But again, he has the disadvantage of being older than his competition. his WHIP the last TWO seasons is up to 1.35+, ERA 4.50+, his Innings Pitched down to about 165+. In my opinion, Beckett has crossed his stats (upwards) with Mussinas (downward) in 2004 and 2005. Beckett is now the better pitcher. Period. But that shoulder bothers me. I reserve the right to make this as much as a plus +2 if Beckett is healthy but for now lets be conservative. Red Sox +.5 Now the order is subjective and may not matter that much, I will try to stick with last year's rotation dreams as much as possible for these teams. We can't say for certain who will make it into the rotation for either side. I pose this: Red Sox: Wells, Clement, Wakefield Yankees: Pavano, Wang, Wright Clement makes to much to be in the bullpen. Papelbon will start and will be great, but not right now. He will be in the bullpen or in Pawtucket.Pavano’s in the same boat as Clement. Small is elated to be in the Big Leagues and will service Papa Joe T as he pleases. Wright is another free agent head case who I will compare to Matt Clement. Wang v Chacon is tough. Wang turned in some solid innings last year and Chacon was brilliant down the stretch. I can't see either one being a huge factor in this thing, but I think that Chacon is the seasoned hand and will win the spot. Again this is a coin flip for me, but I look at Wang a bit like Papelbon. #3: Clement v. Wright They are so similar it’s scary. National League, no huge success in their career, both overpaid, both hit in head with line drives and collapsed after that. But Wright was bad all year. Clement was bad for a half of the year. So here is what I will do to be fair. Wright 2004 numbers with my ALF (American League Factor) and Clement for first half of 2005. This is as good as you are going to get from these guys, and you should not expect it all year. Clement because he can't Wright because he can't and he'll get hurt. Wright 2004 (NL)...Ok I just looked at the stats. I can't do this Wright had an abnormally great year in 2004. His last full season in the AL prior to 2004 was 1998 and his ERA was 4.50+. His career ERA is over 5.00+, his WHIP is over 1.50 (even worst last year) and his K9 is 6.60 (4.5 last year). The Yankees in my estimation would be making a huge mistake in putting him in this spot and not using Wang. (This is getting tough.) I pose this to readers: Will Wright be starting next year? It's him or Wang (they just paid too much to have him in the bullpen, and). Wright has to start for that reason and that reason alone. As much as most Red Sox fans would like to see Clement out of town, Wright was far worse.
[Not to interject myself too much in here, but this was Oc’s first, full-bore Bill James-esque rant. I’m so proud. It’s like watching your favorite son nail the prom queen.]
So with that tangent I will continue with my Clement numbers. The guy had two AWFUL months, July 8.88 ERA and Sept 6.00 ERA (including playoffs in Oct).He was fine in August and All Star caliber in the first half, so in this case let’s take last years numbers in the AL and move them out. (After trashing Wright I will not just use the first half numbers after all.) 1.36/6.88/4.57. Peak of mediocrity all the way around for Clement. Wright is just dreadful though and I still can't get over how abnormal 2004 was. I will grant that 2006 can turn out great for Wright just like you can grant me that all year Clement may be 1st half 2005 good. But all things being equal...Red Sox +1 #4: Wells v. Pavano I would like to say again how hard this is getting. I almost want to put a zero here, but I learned my lesson after my Clement-Wright analysis so I will go through this with zeal and fervor. Wells, despite his age, is amazingly durable. He will miss a start here and there with a bad back or a bad hangover, but all in all his numbers are consistently the same. He is pretty much the model for a control pitcher. He makes most of us think that we could go out there and do the same thing he makes it look so easy. So Wells analysis is easy for me. Let’s take 2005, and move it up a bit for age, and the fact that he hates Boston fans and we will come up with what is a reasonable expectation of Wells. Based on last years numbers and inflated slightly 4.55 ERA, 1.35 WHIP and 5.5 K9 are OK. Note on Wells his career walks per 9 is 1.87. That includes two years, 03 and 04, where his walks per 9 were UNDER 1 , which is unreal.Expect that to continue certainly. He was great with a sub-four ERA after the All-Star Break last year and after his injury. He also knows how to pitch with a lead and is willing to give up a few meaningless runs. He is all about the W. I still like him a lot. He is a Moneyball type pitcher in that he likes quick innings and not walking people. He lets his fielders do the work, but still can get a K with that nasty hook. So can Pavano compete with this? Last year the answer was ‘no,’ but injuries were a big problem and ruined his season. So, lets look at the 04 numbers (ALF them) and come up with something reasonable for Pavano. He is a lifetime NLer and has to be treated like Javier Vazquez until he can prove otherwise in my mind. He is not as good as Beckett or Burnett (his former Marlin teammates). 2004 was his best year, and 2005 was his worst. He only pitched 100 innings in 2005 and had an ERA over 5.00 to boot. There is also talk in spring training about him being quite injured again and missing time at the start of the season. 2004 numbers: 1.17/5.63/3.00. I am a big proponent that the National League makes a huge difference. See Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez. Their ERAs flipped last year from 2004. 2005: LOST SEASON 2006: ALF and Injury 1.25/5.63/4.00. This to me is VERY generous and conservative from a Red Sox fan point of view. 0 #5: Wakefield v. ChaconRight now if I had to put a figure on this if its Wang my analysis would not falter. Wang and Chacon bring the same thing to the table for me and the x-factor is Wakefield. To me, both Wang and Chacon are the "average" through and through. Chacon should not continue what he bought to the table last year for the Yanks. Wang will level off to an average point too, but he has the potential to be much better than that of course. Expect the league to adjust this year.When I look at Wake, I have to work hard to take the sentimentality out. In the end, Wakefield will give you the following:1. Innings at any point in a game 2. A lot of innings 3. Average ERA, WHIP, and K9 4. Nightmares if you are a catcher 5. A surprisingly low walk total for a knuckle ball pitcher 6. Unhittable streaks balanced with streaks where he’s firing 450 meatballs towards the plate. Sometimes he does this in the same game. 7. A very good back end rotation guy. I can't put a lot of stock into Chacon and Wang right now. Jeter is quoted as saying "To us Wakefield is their ace." He always seems to throw gems against the Yankees. Better than any other team. Red Sox +1 Red Sox +3.5 here, but -3.5 overall.

CLOSERS

It is hard to imagine a year ago today that I could sit here and legitimately make the argument that the Red Sox could get a TANC in the closer column. Opinions on Foulke were real high, his stats were great, and he was proven to be more versatile in his usage than Rivera and all was well in Red Sox bullpen land (for a change) A year later, I am forced with this challenge. Make a case that the Yankees don’t get the ultimate +3 edge in the closer column. First, a side-bar. I listen to a lot of Yankees broadcasts up here, and I have come to loath the man that is John Sterling. So I am refusing to mention Rivera’s stats because I hear them every single pitch the guys throws. He is an amazing HOF closer with no sign of letting up. He will probably show the same type numbers this year. We have no reason to believe otherwise. He will blow only a handful of saves and a few of them will be against the Red Sox because 1. The Red Sox are one of the best fastball hitting teams. 2. They don’t awing at a lot of bad pitches, which most of Rivera’s are. Rivera is great plain and simple. Again, my goal here is to make a case for Foulke not being completely useless out there. 2005 was a lost season for KF. He was hurt, had a divorce, hit the bottle, and underwent surgery. He had several tiffs with the local media, and the fans began to show a disdain for him due to his brash “who cares” mentality. Couple of things to keep in mind, however:1. His wife won’t divorce him again 2. He completed his surgery and has had some success but has just suffered some setbacks in recovery 3. The fans will be on his side on April 1 and if he goes 5 for 6 in saving games he will in the end be embraced. This may be a good time to point out the ever-growing sentiment about how useless the save statistic is. Rivera consistently leads the league in saves and in easy saves, but is not where near the top in hard saves. Easy saves look like the 10-7 games against Tampa where he gets them without giving up the lead in 1 inning of work. Hard Saves look like the Bot 9 in a 2-1 game at Fenway Park. Yes, they keep track of Hard and Easy Saves and it is not any more arbitrary than the normal save stat. That is not to take anything away from Rivera, because his numbers are still fantastic, it goes more towards his usage. Come on Torre, put him in when it’s tied once in a while. He's your best pitcher. Have him pitch for 5 outs in the regular season instead of pitching him 9 days in a row when your winning and then sitting him 9 days in a row when your losing. Come to think of it, add Manager to the TANC list, I want to break that down too.
Back to Foulke. I think he is still hurt and that it will take him a while to get back in the good graces of Red Sox Nation. There will be some bumps in the road. In short I propose taking the averages of 2004 and 2005 and coming up with some sort of reasonable stat line for the 2006 Foulke. I think this is more than fair. Foulke has not had an ERA over 3.00 since 1998 prior to 2005 and I will be giving him that with my “averages.” Please take into consideration that Foulke does in fact have a proven track record behind him 2006 Proposed Stats: 3.75 ERA, 68 Games, 25-35 Saves (Usage will play a big role like in 2004), 72 Innings Pitched, 60 strikeouts, 1.25 WHIP, .290 OBA, 7 K9, and 2.00 BB9.

By the way, this was one of the big problems for him last year. He lost his control due to the physical problems he was having. The BB9 tells half the story, because he could not locate and he became “wild in the strike zone.”I would take this line from Foulke this year. I want and expect more. OK I lied.... here is Rivera on similar stats my projection for 2006, keeping in mind that 2005 was a career year for him (again I hate saves and so no real weight is being put on those) ERA: 1.80 Games: 68 (This has to go down from 2005 or Torre should lose his job) Saves: 35-45 (Usage will play a big role like in 2004) IP: 73-75 SO: 73 WHIP: 1.05 OBA: .250 K9: 6.00 (Surprisingly this was WAY down in 2005, stats are strange some times) BB9: 2.00 All in all I have been very optimistic with Rivera and punishing on Foulke. This mismatch was a 3 in 2005 but in 2006...Yankees +2

Yankees +5.5 Overall

[EDITOR’S NOTES: You don’t think that this would end with a ‘Yankees +5.5 Overall’ did you?]

CONCLUSION

For the conclusion I have decided, amongst the pressure of some readers, to introduce the final say in all this Weighted TANC.

Why a weighted stat? Well, pitching in more important than any one man in the batting order. So not to get too complicated, you have to say that starting pitching has a value greater than that of the typical batting order. To put it into prospective: The batting order maxes out at a 27 point edge, while the starting rotation can only have a 15 point edge. I would argue certainly that the value of the starting rotation TANCs are in fact twice as much as that of any one spot in the batting order making the formular simple.

(2*TANC Starting Pitching) + (1*TANCBatting)+(.5*TANC Closer)+ (.5*TANC Defense)= WEIGHTED TANC.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Oc and myself found it hysterical that people were arguing over the awarding of TANCs. Some folks even wanted a weighted TANC. He obliged. The lesson? Baseball fans love stats...a lot.]

Note that I have also slightly devalued my closer and defense stat as not being as important as batting or starting pitching. Go ahead argue, but I don't want to get into it.

So what are the results. Looking at the Red Sox weighted TANC against the Yankees.

(2*3.5)+(1*-7)+(.5*2)+(.5*0)= 7-7-1-0=Weighted TANC 1.0 Yankees.

Ultimately, Weighted TANC predicts champions against another team. Who will win more against each other and who will fair better against like opponents?

Now that being said, prove me wrong boys! and win the whole damn thing. After all, what good is this stat if I didn't breakdown Kyle Farnsworth v. Jillian Tavarez.