Cardinals vs. Yankees: Two Different Approaches, Same Result

[theslick1]

This is a pretty good article from RAB contrasting the Cardinals and Yankees offensive approaches. The Cardinals rely on timely contact hitting, while we all know the Yankees rely on the long ball.

But different approaches yielded the same result: The Yankee offense died in the ALCS. The Cardinal offense died in the last 3 games of the NLCS - they were outscored 20-1 in the last 3 games of the series.

Slumps can happen to any team, regardless of the approach they take to scoring runs.

http://riveraveblues.com/2012/10/the...offense-78140/

[YEDN90]

Good find Slick.

That said, Id still prefer contact hitters with some pop than all pop.

[Pinstripe power]

cardinals won the world sereis last year and almsot made it this year, so im sure they are good. home run slumps are much more common and eaisere to find in the playoffs than contact slumps

[Yankee Clipper]

cardinals won the world sereis last year and almsot made it this year, so im sure they are good. home run slumps are much more common and eaisere to find in the playoffs than contact slumps

Agreed. Having more players that have high contact rates can battle through those untimely slumps in the playoffs and still make things happen.

[johnnyi]

Agreed. Having more players that have high contact rates can battle through those untimely slumps in the playoffs and still make things happen.

When you have contact hitters you can sacrifice bunt, bunt for a hit, hit and run, run and hit, slap the ball, chop the ball, take two and hit to right, hit a ground ball to move the runner, hit a sacrifice fly, work a walk or even just work the count.

When you have non-contact hitters, you can hit a mistake out of the park and turn a game around only if you have other runners on base.

Therefore, you need more guys to get on base, then you do big boppers to either hit a homer or squash a rally.

Ideally, In my opinion, I would like to see 6 guys who could hit .280 or higher in the lineup and no more than 2 big bopper, all or nothing types. This means that the yankees could keep Texiera and Martin or Granderson for their fielding ability even though they are all or nothing at the bat. However, the rest of the team better be making contact.

That is why you can't have Swisher, A-Rod and the designated hitters (Ibanez and Jones) also as all or nothing hitters. if any of these players could maintain a higher average, then they might work out.

You can't have more rally killers than rally starters. Instead of 6 all or nothing rally killers and 3 rally starters, we need to flip the mix.

[YanksFan89]

When you have contact hitters you can sacrifice bunt, bunt for a hit, hit and run, run and hit, slap the ball, chop the ball, take two and hit to right, hit a ground ball to move the runner, hit a sacrifice fly, work a walk or even just work the count.

When you have non-contact hitters, you can hit a mistake out of the park and turn a game around only if you have other runners on base.

Therefore, you need more guys to get on base, then you do big boppers to either hit a homer or squash a rally.

Ideally, In my opinion, I would like to see 6 guys who could hit .280 or higher in the lineup and no more than 2 big bopper, all or nothing types. This means that the yankees could keep Texiera and Martin or Granderson for their fielding ability even though they are all or nothing at the bat. However, the rest of the team better be making contact.

That is why you can't have Swisher, A-Rod and the designated hitters (Ibanez and Jones) also as all or nothing hitters. if any of these players could maintain a higher average, then they might work out.

You can't have more rally killers than rally starters. Instead of 6 all or nothing rally killers and 3 rally starters, we need to flip the mix.

mostly agree, but you cant call arod an all or nothing hitter, he still had one of the highest avg's on the team...

[jeter 2]

I think the Yankees were off their game. They weren't working pitchers, taking pitches and getting in deep counts. Nonetheless, the Yankees have to improve on moving runners over and timely hitting. Thats what wins in the playoffs.

[Webslinger]

This is a pretty good article from RAB contrasting the Cardinals and Yankees offensive approaches. The Cardinals rely on timely contact hitting, while we all know the Yankees rely on the long ball.

But different approaches yielded the same result: The Yankee offense died in the ALCS. The Cardinal offense died in the last 3 games of the NLCS - they were outscored 20-1 in the last 3 games of the series.

Slumps can happen to any team, regardless of the approach they take to scoring runs.

http://riveraveblues.com/2012/10/the...offense-78140/

Is this a fair comparison when the Cardinals's payroll is half that of the yankees?? This also doesn't take away the fact that the yankees's offense is not well balanced.

[theslick1]

Is this a fair comparison when the Cardinals's payroll is half that of the yankees?? This also doesn't take away the fact that the yankees's offense is not well balanced.

Well, the comparison was in offensive approaches, not payrolls, so I think it's a fair comparison because both teams lost their league championship series for the same reasons: their offenses died.

The Cardinals have the kind of offense that a lot of people are suggesting the Yankees should have (i.e., better hitters for average, not as much reliance on HRs, more "small ball") and yet the NLCS showed that that kind of offense can disappear just as easily as the offense that relies heavily on the HR. I'm not saying the Yankees shouldn't have a more balanced offense (they should), but it's not necessarily the missing ingredient to post-season success.

[Yankee Clipper]

Well, the comparison was in offensive approaches, not payrolls, so I think it's a fair comparison because both teams lost their league championship series for the same reasons: their offenses died.

The Cardinals have the kind of offense that a lot of people are suggesting the Yankees should have (i.e., better hitters for average, not as much reliance on HRs, more "small ball") and yet the NLCS showed that that kind of offense can disappear just as easily as the offense that relies heavily on the HR. I'm not saying the Yankees shouldn't have a more balanced offense (they should), but it's not necessarily the missing ingredient to post-season success.

Yup and it's a good point to make. Sometimes offenses just die as a whole. In the end, having players with high contact rates generally is the best way to avoid those mega slumps, especially in the postseason.

[LeoYankee]

Here's the difference:

Our steroid guys now suck: Arod. Tex. cano (for a week)

Cardinal steroid guys did not suck: pujols. Beltran. Holiday. Berkman.

[theslick1]

Here's the difference:

Our steroid guys now suck: Arod. Tex. cano (for a week)

Cardinal steroid guys did not suck: pujols. Beltran. Holiday. Berkman.

The Cardinals got outscored 20-1 in games 5, 6, and 7 and lost all three games.

Somebody was doing a lot of sucking!

[insert joke here]

[LeoYankee]

The Cardinals got outscored 20-1 in games 5, 6, and 7 and lost all three games.

Somebody was doing a lot of sucking!

[insert joke here]

Yes I know. I meant last year mostly then Beltran ths year.

Anyone can win the playoffs obviously.