2012 General Yankee Comments Thread

[Battingly]

Any results on Tex's MRI?

[Bub]

Any results on Tex's MRI?

I thought it was being done on Monday?

[JL25and3]

I thought it was being done on Monday?

According to Andrew Marchand says on ESPN.com, you're correct:

Yankees manager Joe Girardi said Teixeira will have an MRI on Monday and acknowledged his concern that the star first baseman could be done for the rest of the regular season.

[NYYankeesFan92]

I'm very happy that Joe had the presence of mind to pull Freddy after giving up those three runs. The bullpen pitched 5 2/3 innings of scoreless relief. Heck, they were even 7-15 with RISP.

[BroadwayBomber55]

Actually, if Swisher moves to 1B, I would put Suzuki in RF and someone else in LF personally.

That having been said, I would probably go for Chavez at 1B as the first option. I remain concerned, however, about his playing every day, even for 1 1/2 months - the man simply seems to be made of glass that needs to be tempered properly.

I think the Yankees should go like this: Chris Dickerson in LF, Curtis Granderson in CF, Ichiro Suzuki in RF. Do not let Andruw Jones get in the ballgame whether it's pinch hitting, pinch running or defensive replacement. He can't hit a lick and he can't field.

As for Chavy, I will also platoon with Steve Pearce.

[BeantownYankee]

I'm very happy that Joe had the presence of mind to pull Freddy after giving up those three runs. The bullpen pitched 5 2/3 innings of scoreless relief. Heck, they were even 7-15 with RISP.

Yes that was very ungirardi like...

[fredgmuggs]

No, it was me. Shhh.

well, I took care of business today

[NelsonMuntz]

Pitching match-ups for the Orioles series this weekend:
Thurs: Phelps vs. Hammel
Fri: Hughes vs. Chen
Sat: Sabathia vs. Saunders
Sun: Garcia vs. Britton

On paper this looks like a split to me. I like our chances vs. Hammel in game 1. Hughes has historically struggled in Camden Yards and Chen has been great this year so I like Baltimore in game 2. CC over Saunders in game 3 (seriously, if we can't hit Saunders we're in trouble). Unfortunately I have to go with Britton over Freddy in game 4. Zach has been on fire lately and Freddy is, well, Freddy. Unless the offense suddenly catches fire and we out slug the O's that's not a great match up for us.

So the exact opposite of everything I typed in this post happened in this series. A prognosticator I am not.

[Ram Man]

So the exact opposite of everything I typed in this post happened in this series. A prognosticator I am not.

You got the part about the split right.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

So the exact opposite of everything I typed in this post happened in this series. A prognosticator I am not.

Nah, I stopped reading after that first sentence... You nailed it

[JL25and3]

So the exact opposite of everything I typed in this post happened in this series. A prognosticator I am not.

Trying to predict baseball. Such hubris.

[ymike673]

I'm very happy that Joe had the presence of mind to pull Freddy after giving up those three runs. The bullpen pitched 5 2/3 innings of scoreless relief. Heck, they were even 7-15 with RISP.

Now if he would just pull Freddy from the rotation.

[dabomb2045]

I wanted 3 of 4...but a sweep isnt awful. At least we kept our lead for now. Nice to see the offense put up a crooked number for the first time in what seems like forever.

Going forward...we need to get Garcia out of the rotation. I'm willing to go back to Nova next time around.

And anything less then 2 of 3 in Fenway would be a disaster. Really should sweep them. The Sox are the definition of "dead team walking".

[JL25and3]

It'staken me a few days to get back to this one, while I've tried to sort out the arcana os Section XXIV of the CBA, particularly paragraph 15

You are right. It has to be in 2014 because it wipes away the past lux tax sins.

Getting under the limit in 2013 or 2015 would also reset the luxury tax.

I *think* Rosenthal worded that poorly. They won't "multiply"; they'll accumulate. To my knowledge there's not a kicker or coefficient by getting down in '14 that wouldn't be in play getting down in '15. They'd simply forgo the savings they in theory could have achieved by getting down under the threshold sooner.

No, the rebate does have a multiplier - or, rather a divisor - but it's a complicated one. I've read it about 5 times and finally figured it out. Follow the bouncing ball.

1. Big-market, small-revenue teams (that is, teams that are underpferforming reltive to their market) have to give back a certain percentage of any revenue-sharing money they receive – 25% in 2013, 50% in 2014, 75% in 2015, and 100% in 2016

2. That money is then given back to the teams paying into the revenue-sharing fund, proportionally to how much they paid in – meaning that the Yankees would get the most back.

3. However, if one of those teams that’s up for a rebate is also over the luxury tax threshold, they forfeit some or all of the rebate, depending on how many years they ve been over the threshold. Right now, because the Yankees have been over the luxury tax threshold since about 1548, they forfeit 100% of their rebate. If they go under in 2014, they'll get 100% back; and if they go over in 2015, which becomes their first year over, they also get 100%. With each consecutive year they're over, the amount they forfeit goes up - 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% again. Of course, after 2016 there's a new CBA, so the rule may or may not change.

So Rosenthal isn't completely wrong, he's just not right. There's no bonus multiplier but a bonus divisor; consecutive years under the cap don't increase the rebate, but consecutive years over the cap decrease it.

The big question is how much money we're talking about, and neither I nor anyone else can even estimate that without access to the books. My gut feeling, though, is that it's less than people are making it out to be. Here's why:

The teams defined as "big-market" are NYY, NYM, LAD, LAA, CHC, CWS, SF, (OAK, if and only if they get a new stadiium), TOR, PHI, BOS, WSH, ATL, TEX, HOU. So which of those team are going to be net receivers of revenue sharing funds? We can judge their ticket sales, but not their TV contracts and other revenues, and we don't really know what the revenue sharing numbers will be. But let's say Mets, maybe Cubs, maybe White Sox, Toronto and Houston for sure. I'm not sure any of the other teams provide rebate money, how much those five teams will stand to lose (50% in 2014, but 50% of what?) Those are numbers we simply don't have access to, and I wouldn't even know how to estimate them realistically. Does anyone else?

[ymike673]

It'staken me a few days to get back to this one, while I've tried to sort out the arcana os Section XXIV of the CBA, particularly paragraph 15

Getting under the limit in 2013 or 2015 would also reset the luxury tax. No, the rebate does have a multiplier - or, rather a divisor - but it's a complicated one. I've read it about 5 times and finally figured it out. Follow the bouncing ball.

1. Big-market, small-revenue teams (that is, teams that are underpferforming reltive to their market) have to give back a certain percentage of any revenue-sharing money they receive – 25% in 2013, 50% in 2014, 75% in 2015, and 100% in 2016

2. That money is then given back to the teams paying into the revenue-sharing fund, proportionally to how much they paid in – meaning that the Yankees would get the most back.

3. However, if one of those teams that’s up for a rebate is also over the luxury tax threshold, they forfeit some or all of the rebate, depending on how many years they ve been over the threshold. Right now, because the Yankees have been over the luxury tax threshold since about 1548, they forfeit 100% of their rebate. If they go under in 2014, they'll get 100% back; and if they go over in 2015, which becomes their first year over, they also get 100%. With each consecutive year they're over, the amount they forfeit goes up - 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% again. Of course, after 2016 there's a new CBA, so the rule may or may not change.

So Rosenthal isn't completely wrong, he's just not right. There's no bonus multiplier but a bonus divisor; consecutive years under the cap don't increase the rebate, but consecutive years over the cap decrease it.

The big question is how much money we're talking about, and neither I nor anyone else can even estimate that without access to the books. My gut feeling, though, is that it's less than people are making it out to be. Here's why:

The teams defined as "big-market" are NYY, NYM, LAD, LAA, CHC, CWS, SF, (OAK, if and only if they get a new stadiium), TOR, PHI, BOS, WSH, ATL, TEX, HOU. So which of those team are going to be net receivers of revenue sharing funds? We can judge their ticket sales, but not their TV contracts and other revenues, and we don't really know what the revenue sharing numbers will be. But let's say Mets, maybe Cubs, maybe White Sox, Toronto and Houston for sure. I'm not sure any of the other teams provide rebate money, how much those five teams will stand to lose (50% in 2014, but 50% of what?) Those are numbers we simply don't have access to, and I wouldn't even know how to estimate them realistically. Does anyone else?

So that would mean the Yankees could wait untill 2015 to go under but then they would forfeit the 100% they would get back if they go under in 2014. That would explain wanting to do it in 2014. Is that right?

[JL25and3]

So that would mean the Yankees could wait untill 2015 to go under but then they would forfeit the 100% they would get back if they go under in 2014. That would explain wanting to do it in 2014. Is that right?

The sooner they do it, the sooner they start getting the benefits. 2012 or 2013 would have had the same effect, but I guess they felt that 2014 was the earliest realistic timeframe.

I think it still remains to be seen how realistic it is.

[ymike673]

The sooner they do it, the sooner they start getting the benefits. 2012 or 2013 would have had the same effect, but I guess they felt that 2014 was the earliest realistic timeframe.

I think it still remains to be seen how realistic it is.

Thanks for the info. I sort of thought they would not be able to go under in 2013.

[philleotardo]

Good opportunity to pick up ground if the Yankees hold up their end. Every other postseason contender behind them has a head-to-head with another. TB/BAL, DET/CHI, OAK/LAA. Kind of hope someone sweeps in the Tampa/Baltimore series.

[Yankee Tripper]

Good opportunity to pick up ground if the Yankees hold up their end. Every other postseason contender behind them has a head-to-head with another. TB/BAL, DET/CHI, OAK/LAA. Kind of hope someone sweeps in the Tampa/Baltimore series.

I think ideal would be Yanks putting the smackdown on Toronto while

CHI takes 2 of 3 from DET
BAL takes 3 from TB
OAK takes 3 of 4 from LAA

If I had my choice I think I'd prefer Chicago to win the Central with Baltimore & Oakland getting the WCs.

[sweet_lou_14]

I think ideal would be Yanks putting the smackdown on Boston while

CHI takes 2 of 3 from DET
BAL takes 3 from TB
OAK takes 3 of 4 from LAA

If I had my choice I think I'd prefer Chicago to win the Central with Baltimore & Oakland getting the WCs.

Fixed the opponent for you ...

[Yankee Tripper]

Fixed the opponent for you ...

Thanks. Wonder why did I put toronto? I have no idea. I just looked at the pitching matchups too.

[Mr Coffee]

Thanks. Wonder why did I put toronto? I have no idea. I just looked at the pitching matchups too.

Not your fault.

It's hard to see all the way down to the bottom of the division from here.

[dabomb2045]

So with Tex out another 2 weeks...who should get most of the starts at 1B? Chavez or Swisher? What I really hate about Swisher playing 1B, is it means the decrepit Ibanez or useless Jones gets a start in the OF.

[philleotardo]

So with Tex out another 2 weeks...who should get most of the starts at 1B? Chavez or Swisher? What I really hate about Swisher playing 1B, is it means the decrepit Ibanez or useless Jones gets a start in the OF.

Melky Mesa got called up, so hopefully he takes away some innings from Andruw in the outfield.

[LIYanks]

So with Tex out another 2 weeks...who should get most of the starts at 1B? Chavez or Swisher? What I really hate about Swisher playing 1B, is it means the decrepit Ibanez or useless Jones gets a start in the OF.

When ARod is playing thired, I'd prefer to have Chavez at 1B. Otherwise, we don't seem to have better option than Swisher at 1B.

I don't see how Baltimore can keep this up with the tough schedule they have to play over the next two weeks. But we are going to need our offense to produce big time.