Our franchise high water mark for wins is 105 in 1912. If we can surpass that, it will be the best season in the history of this very historied team.
Do you think we can get there? And also, do you want it to be a focus of team effort to get there or are you more concerned about the playoffs?
If history tells us anything, the path to redeption for any bad baseball team is marked with a deep rotation of durable starters, a world class defense in both infield and outfield, a lineup that can generate runs in more than one way, a bullpen that won't steal defeat from the jaws of victory, and a top end catcher to hold the whole package together. These are the conditions by which victory is achieved, anything that does not accomplish these objectives is a waste of resources.
To get to 106, they have to go 8-10. I don't think it's an either/or. Really the question should be asked once the magic number is exhausted.Originally Posted by Dojji
The playoffs are the only thing that matters to me. Regular season W-L records are quite irrelevant except for getting you into the playoffs.
Also, not meaning to be a wet blanket, but the 1912 team only played 154 games, and 2 of them were ties. They had 47 losses.
Yes, the team can absolutely get there.
No, I don't think that getting there should be any part of the team's focus. If it happens (it will), then great, but don't play for that goal.
No reason that they can't keep winning while getting things in line for the playoffs.
Slumping into the playoffs would not be a healthy sign.
"Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.
"It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."
109 is my guess. And they will get there with many of our starters taking a blow.
other names i have posted under: none
Cleveland went 111--43 back in the 1950s but the Giants swept them in the World Series.
I would agree.
While it's nice to have a great regular season, it rings hollow if you don't win it all.
At least they broke up the string of pennants by the Evil Empire. If the Indians had not won the AL that season, the Stankees would have won 10 straight pennants from 1949-1958.
As it was, New York went 103-51 that season to finish second. The Whiite Sox were 94-60 and ended up a very distant 3rd.
The Yankees could go 0-162 and it wouldn't be enough
I think the number of season wins is not that important, but I do think what that number reflects is important. There is a kind of invincibility for this 2018 team, which I think all its members can stand behind, esp since it's the exact reverse of last year with many of the same players on stage. I think it's a proud moment in itself, regardless of the post season.
Yeah, I was going to add that but forgot. 111 wins in an AL with the Yanks and Sox is no small feat.
Yes.
It seems like for some reason some teams find a way to win while other teams find a way to lose.
I've seen the Sox capitalize on a break to win this year just like I've seen teams commit an error to lose. It can be a strange game. Random, almost.
It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
-Vin Scully
The thing that correlates best with post season wins is regular season wins. So, the # of wins does mean something in that regard. Not a lot, as the postseason is still largely a crapshoot, but it means something.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote