Tom Verducci predicts an all SoCal World Series

by anaconda on Mar 20, 2007 7:01 PM EDT in New York Yankees News

Not sure why Tom Verducci of SI.com thought it was necessary to call out the Yankees in his piece this week while unveiling his prediction for the 2007 World Series -- but he's entitled to his opinion and usually knows what he's talking about.

That said, I'll eat my dirty underwear if his Dodgers prediction pans out.

SI.com:

Here is a message for George Steinbrenner, Derek Jeter, Brian Cashman and everyone else who has bought in to the Yankees culture that the season is a failure if New York does not win the World Series: The '90s are so over. The baseball world has changed so much from when the Yankees won four titles in five years that the Yankees' world-championship-or-bust mentality has become awkwardly outdated.

Don't get me wrong. The aspiration to win it all should always remain paramount. But the Yankees continue to set themselves up for joyless seasons and their own definition of failure by thinking they should win the World Series every year. Last season they lost two-thirds of their starting outfield and they still won more games than any team in the league and blew the doors off the rest of their division -- and went home horribly unhappy, ready to fire the manager, run a Hall of Fame pitcher out of town and heap more abuse on an all-time great third baseman. Their fans have zero interest in Division Championship hats.

This just in: The Yankees probably won't win this year, either, even if they do have the best team on paper heading into Opening Day. The World Series? It'll be all SoCal -- the Angels over the Dodgers. Why? Because the best team doesn't win any more; teams with young legs do. These are five reasons why the game has changed to the point that the Yankees' philosophy is obsolete.

Tweet Comment 37 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I do

agree the disparity between the middle of the pack and the top teams is not as great as it was. Further proving if you get in, its alot of luck.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 20, 2007 8:21 PM EDT reply actions

Yankee Bashing is in their blood

This was a weird article, I don't see why he had to focus on the Yankees so much. It's a trend I've seen with writers trying to discount what the Yankees did in 90's and I find it un-American.

Verducci makes it sound like the way the Yankees won in 90s is outdated. Verducci says the Yankees have to realize the 90's are over. One of his "new" important aspects to winning is being youthful. Verducci uses 32 as the cutoff, well look at the 98 Yankees and the only starter over 32 was Paulie. So the 90's Yankees were youthful.

Verducci says when the Yankees were winning only four or five teams had a chance of winning it all, which doesn't jive with his statement that playoffs are crapshoot and anyone in them can win it. From 96 to 2000 the Braves, Marlins, Indians, Seattle, Oakland, Houston, Boston, Baltimore, Mets, & Texas all had a chance of winning since they did make into the playoffs.

I do agree with him that an information revolution has and is sweeping through MLB and that this can and should help level the playing field. But I think the Yankees are doing a good job in this front, they went to China to get information other teams don't have.

As a baseball fan in SoCal I am looking forward to seeing this year's Dodger squad though, and I agree they should be a good team for the next couple of years.

But if he's pointing to the Dodgers and Angels as the anti-Yankees I don't buy it.

by collink on Mar 20, 2007 9:02 PM EDT reply actions

I guess

his main point really isn't Yankee bashing. Its that there isn't a team out there that is as great as those teams were, so the disparity is not as big. I really think both LA teams are flawed, but hey, so were the Cardinals and Tigers.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 20, 2007 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Why focus on the Yanks so much?

To hook the readers. I read this article because when I saw it on Yahoo, it mentioned the Yanks. From our POV as Yanks fans it is unfair, but the fact of the matter is the Yankees attract attention. Nevertheless it is cheap and I don't like it. Instead of bashing a team, Verducci could have chosen a lead that focused on the growing parity in MLB--the actual focus of the article--that happens to be an important story in itself.

I don't like the "Yankees culture that the season is a failure if New York doesn't win a World Series" though. On face value it seems spoiled, immature, and childish. But Verducci misses the fact that a lot of the resentment from the last several years of playoff disappointment comes not from the mere fact that the Yankees lost, but rather that they lost without putting out the effort and intensity that we accept and deserve.

www.thezboogie.blogspot.com

by Walk On The Wild Side on Mar 20, 2007 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Am I missing

something here? Where is the bashing?

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 20, 2007 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions

the opening three paragraphs

In the opening three paragraphs he's setting the Yankees up as straw man to criticize. The opening ends with the phrase the "Yankees' philosophy is obsolete." But what set's up as the "new" winning philosphy as I pointed out earlier is very similar to the Yankees philosophy that won in the 90's.

by collink on Mar 21, 2007 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions

yup,

i read it, still isn't bashing.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 21, 2007 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I define "bashing"

as attacking or taking an unwarranted shot at somebody. Verducci's article is an attack on what he wrongly percieves to be the Yankees philosophy of 90's. He says the way the Yankees won in the 90's doesn't work anymore, stating that youth wins it now, ignoring the fact the Yankees had youth in the 90's (he talks about the Yankees of the 90's but shows the ages of players in 07.)

Yankee bashing isn't a crime and I'm not overly offended, I was just giving my take.

Do you think Verducci's is complimenting the Yankees in that article, or that he's being neutral towards the Yankees?

by collink on Mar 21, 2007 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't think

he is bashing or looking at them positively either. The way I read it and take it, is that the model from the last 90's doesn't work anymore since there is less disparity between teams. To me, its more of a compliment to the late 90's yanks than a diss to any of the Yank teams.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 21, 2007 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions

right on

What pisses me off about the past few years is not so much the losing, but the way the Yankees lost. The last two playoffs against the Angels and Tigers we're just bad performances.

The 01 loss to Zona was easier to take because it was highly competitive.

by collink on Mar 21, 2007 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions

While I agree

I didn't like the effort with the 05/06 teams, saying that the 01 loss was easier to handle is crazy. 3 outs away from 4 in a row, what the city just went through, and to lose in that fashion, that was tough to swallow. Little did I know then that it was an end of a dynasty.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 21, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions

I hear you

but my thinking was after everything that happened that fall losing a WS wasn't so bad.(I might have been suffering from too much perspective.)

Also in 01 the Yankees competed and just got unlucky, against the Angels and Tigers in the last two years I thought the Yankees gave the series away.

by collink on Mar 21, 2007 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions

awful

I still remember it like it was yesterday. The worst part was afterward when people somehow tried to portray it like mo choked when it reality it was Brosius who shit the bed in the 9th on that bunt play.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 21, 2007 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions

It was all Arod's fault

obviously.

: )

by matthaggs on Mar 22, 2007 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions

Still blame Brosius

There isn't too much you can do about broken bat bloopers. My point was that if Brosius throws to first on that bunt play, Gonzo never would have been in that position.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 22, 2007 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions

True

But if Mo's lousy bad throw to 2nd that preceded Brosius' non-throw didn't happen, then Brosius is just a spectator and Gonzo never comes up to bat.

6 years ago and I'm still pissed off about it. Then again i'm still furious about 1995. I might need a life.

by matthaggs on Mar 22, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions

1995

hurt the most. Mainly because of Donnie Baseball.

I remember going to the first playoff game in the Bronx, we scalped tickets right behind first base, and this big tough friend of mine started bawling when they introduced Donnie.

The fact that they won the next year without Donnie always bothered me.

(I'm pretty sure that the first game was on the day the OJ verdict was announced too, I guess it was a bad omen.)

by collink on Mar 22, 2007 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions

The 95 one

hurt because I had never experienced Yankee playoff ever in my lifetime (well, I was born in 77 and wasn't aware of the stuff then). After 96, it didn't hurt as much.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 22, 2007 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions

I was 11 in '95

and cried as Griffey rounded third.

We're reaching the point where you can either be a truly dedicated, state-of-the-art fan or you can have a life. Take your pick.

by jscape2000 on Mar 22, 2007 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions

I was a freshman

in college and I had two roomates that just met me one month earlier. They thought I was crazy when I through the remote across our room and left for 2 hours.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 22, 2007 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions

I was a freshman too

I threw a beer at the wall of our dorm. Unfortunately, his closet door was open and it went into his closet. He made me do his laundry, but it was worth it.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 22, 2007 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions

I meant

threw, not through.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 22, 2007 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions

That picture of Verducci

had to be taken in 1988. Classic Sam Malone from Cheers haircut.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 20, 2007 9:17 PM EDT reply actions

nothing

beats the Bagwell picture Anaconda put up last year. That was classic.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 20, 2007 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Ah yes, Bagwell's rookie card

Good stuff.

by anaconda on Mar 20, 2007 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Hahah,

thats a classic

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 21, 2007 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions

A bizarro pfisty.

The Yanks are going to make the playoffs but they're not going to win.

Way to go out on a limb Tom.

by matthaggs on Mar 21, 2007 12:49 AM EDT reply actions

He's right on some points

I know this is going to be unpopular.

He's right about the Yankee fans being too hard very good players because they are not great enough. We feel that huge contracts or reputations like AROD or the Big Unit put the players in a place where MVP, Cy Young type years are a minimum to jusatify them.

If these privledged few do not produce in huge ways it must be because they are bums.

Well they are not. You cannot replace Arod in a way that is an upgrade. So, cheer for him, support him. To play his best he has to stop the constant booing.

He's the best player we can get for that position. He may become the best Yankee third baseman of all time.

I know his time there is short, but, who is the best Yankee of all time at that position? Boggs? Nettles? Nice players to be sure. Some one way back? Don't tell me Carey, McDougal or Boyer. I saw them!

What makes a good manager?....Good Players. (Yogi)

by Cbeck3 on Mar 21, 2007 10:55 AM EDT reply actions

Wow,

your emotion in the post brought a tear to my eye. I wish I could give Arod a big hug right now.

Great Success!

by ReLaunch on Mar 21, 2007 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions

No way

Arod will be the best Yanks 3B of all time? Please.
He's not going to be here long enough. I give the nod to Nettles, even if he was only the third best 3B of his generation.

We're reaching the point where you can either be a truly dedicated, state-of-the-art fan or you can have a life. Take your pick.

by jscape2000 on Mar 21, 2007 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Nettles

or Mike Pagliarulo

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 21, 2007 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Eric Duncan

I still believe.

by Ronster22 on Mar 22, 2007 3:50 PM EDT reply actions

Ha!

Isn't he technically a first baseman now? Oh well, I guess he can be a bust at any one of the nine defensive positions.

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 22, 2007 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

It sucks, really

In looking back at the post Nettles era, the Yankees hyped a number of third sackers like Hensley Meulens, Mike Pags, Drew Henson, Eric Duncan (who is being converted). Only Pags panned out, but he really only last two or three seasons. I remember watching Meulens play in Columbus, and I thought the guy was a "can't miss". He made seveal good defensive plays and smoked a homer over the scoreboard. He's probably selling insurance in Utah now.

by Ronster22 on Mar 23, 2007 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions

Hopefully

his office has an opening for Eric Duncan since he will be applying soon!

Fear the Evil Empire

by pfistyunc on Mar 23, 2007 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions

Sadly, I agree

He is only 23. Maybe he'll learn how to hit .340 and blast 30 homers. And maybe, just maybe the Prize Patrol van will roll into my driveway.

by Ronster22 on Mar 23, 2007 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions

Attacking the Yankees

He is having a guy, but I think he is also having a guy at everyone, especially in the media, who just always say the Yankees will win it, rather than taking a punt on someone else.

As for the SoCal bit, I can see it happening, the pitching both those teams have is impressive, that will carry them into the postseason right there, and in the postseason, pitching is so important, and a bit of luck.

by quint on Mar 24, 2007 1:10 AM EDT reply actions