If Roger Clemens, David Wells, and Andy Pettitte haven't left the Yankees in 2004, would the collapse have still happened?
2007-09-13 15:45:30 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
I don't think it would have happened.
2007-09-13 15:45:52 · update #1
Clemens won the Cy Young in 2004, so not having him was a huge lose. If all three were on the 2004 team, then they would have won. I think that if A-Rod wouldn't have been on the team, then the yanks would've won the whole thing.
2007-09-13 19:18:25 · answer #1 · answered by Tyler 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I occasionally see wistful thinking about how Mattingly "retired a year too early", and had he played on into 1996 he'd have been able to win that year's championship. Nice thought, but the point always avoided by such dreamer Yankees fen is that the '96 team WITH Donnie and WITHOUT Tino Martinez very likely would not have won the World Series, possibly not even made it into the postseason.
Tino '96 (age 28): 174 hits, 28 2B, 25 HR, 117 RBI, 68 walks, .292/.364/.466, 100 runs created, 107 adjusted OPS.
Don '95 (age 34): 132 hits, 32 2B, 7 HR, 49 RBI, 40 walks, .288/.341/.413, 61 runs created, 97 adj OPS.
Don '96 -- well, he'd be a year older at 35, so improvement would not have been likely. (And granted 1995 was a short season, but it wasn't THAT much shorter -- 144 games instead of 162. He wasn't deprived of much opportunity.)
So, the 1996 Yankees team with Donnie at 1B (that bat at DH? I don't think so, regardless that it was a revolving door spot), and without Tino entirely, probably loses out on the AL East title to Baltimore (40 RC is worth about four wins).
And that's the flipside of such "what if" thought experiments -- the 1996 Yankees team cannot have Donnie (for whatever he would have been worth) unless it loses Tino. And that team stays home in October, or gets knocked out in the Division Series.
A long telling to get to this: whatever happened to the 2004 team without Rocket and Boomer and Andy, happened anyway, because the 2004 Yankees didn't simply take the field with a 22-man roster. Some other players filled those spots, and maybe they did better, maybe worse (I'm not about to check, don't really care). And remember that TGCiBBH began with Rivera on the mound, three outs from the AL pennant, needing one win in the next four games, and that Game 5 went into extras as well. Starting pitching wasn't at fault in those two clinch failures.
One cannot declare that not having Wells, Clemens, Pettitte, was responsible for the loss. That is far too simplistic a chain of causality.
2007-09-13 16:34:47 · answer #2 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Pettite got hurt with the Astros in 2004, he was 6-4 in 15 starts.
Wells was 12-8 or the Padres.
Losing Clemens hurt much more than Pettite or Wells.
The collapse might not have happened because they might not have made it that far.
.
2007-09-13 17:28:04 · answer #3 · answered by Kris 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think Wells cost the Yanks the series in '03, so I don't think he would have helped. The big gun that would have kept the Yanks from choking is Pettitte. He has a knack for coming up big in games that are must wins. If Pettitte was still in NY in '04, it would be 89 years and counting for the Sux.
2007-09-13 16:14:50 · answer #4 · answered by Andy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wells means nothing zippo zada.
Clemens had a excellent seasons in '04 (He won the Cy Young in that season with a 1 something E.R.A. It would have made a differnce. A BIG BIG difference.
Pettite on the other hand got injured.
So if all three stayed it would have a few game win effect on the Yankees.
2007-09-14 14:54:29 · answer #5 · answered by #1 New York Yankees Fan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Wells means nothing, but Clemens or Pettitte would have given the Yanks that extra starter they needed...
2007-09-13 16:02:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
After the Yankees have been given swept by way of the pink Sox, i did no longer think of they deserved the suitable to bypass into an over-hyped sequence with the Mets and weigh down them. yet, 2 wins is two wins, so we will take them. besides, the sequence wasn't particularly the comparable besides, with Beltran, Reyes, and Delgado out of the lineup for the Mets. Regardless, they could have been extreme scoring video games with the suitable lineup in baseball (Yankees) against an ok Mets lineup.
2016-12-13 08:38:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
to tell you the truth who knows really what would of happened in 2004 was a embarrassing for the Yankees and for the red sox it was a miracle
2007-09-13 15:50:30 · answer #8 · answered by Janet ♥(YFFL) 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I think the collapse will still happen. The need for middle to set up pitchers would have been still needed. That is crucial step before you get to your closer.
2007-09-18 12:28:56 · answer #9 · answered by Mike T 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who knows but i still think the Yanks wouldv'e found a way to win regardless.
2007-09-14 07:18:03 · answer #10 · answered by Scooter_loves_his_dad 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋