Dream Matchup: 2006 A's vs. 1927 Yankees

by jc3 on Jan 2, 2006 9:05 AM EST

After reading some of the comments regarding the American League this year, I figured that we shouldn't even bother playing the season and just hand the AL crown to the Oakland A's right now. They have the best pitching, best defense, and just about the best offense in baseball. They have absolutely no weaknesses. So, instead of just comparing them to today's top teams (where there is no comparison), I figured that matching them up against the 1927 Yankees was the only fair thing to do for them. I don't want to offend them by comparing them against just mere mortals like today's Yankees and Indians.

Offense, with no DH (Players are listed with BA/OBP/SLG/OPS+):

C: Pat Collins (275/407/418/116) vs. Jason Kendall (275/342/321/77)

Well, I hate to do it, but I think Collins wins here.

1B: Lou Gehrig (373/474/765/221) vs. Nick Swisher (236/322/446/100)

Geez, I thought this would be closer, but after further review, I think Gehrig gets a slight edge. However, he may be tired by the time the playoffs start because he never seems to miss a game, so Swisher's got a shot.

2B: Tony Lazzeri (309/383/482/126) vs. Mark Ellis (316/384/477/125)

Ellis wins in a walk over this future HOF. His defense is God-like.

3B: Joe Dugan (269/321/382/79) vs. Eric Chavez (269/329/466/106)

Chavez!

SS: Mark Koenig (285/320/382/84) vs. Bobby Crosby (276/346/356/109)

Crosby!

LF: Bob Meusel (337/393/510/136) vs. Jay Payton (269/302/451/95)

Payton plays great D, so it's closer than you'd think. Oh right, Meusel did, too.

CF: Earle Combs (356/414/511/142) vs. Mark Kotsay (280/325/421/95)

Kotsay was bothered by a back injury last year, otherwise he would have been right there with Combs. And, he is a better defensive CF than pretty much anyone we have ever seen.

RF: Babe Ruth (356/486/772/226) vs. Milton Bradley (290/350/484/121)

What's to say about Milton Bradley that hasn't already been said? Ruth would probably have some kind of gastrointestinal problem by the playoffs, so he's a major question mark to hit that Oakland pitching.

Starters (W-L/ERA/ERA+):

Waite Hoyt (22-7/2.63/146) vs. Rich Harden (10-5/2.53/177)

Can anyone hit Rich Harden?

Urban Shocker (18-6/2.84/136) vs. Barry Zito (14-13/3.86/116)

If any Yankee could hit that curveball, I'd be shocked. Zito in a walk.

Herb Pennock (19-8/3.00/128) vs. Dan Haren (14-12/3.73/120)

With Haren's rapid growth, forget about this one.

Dutch Ruether (13-6/3.38/114) vs. Joe Blanton (12-12/3.53/127)

Forget about the BABIP number for Blanton. His outrageous stuff will keep the Yanks off balance. And don't forget about that Oakland D keeping that BABIP down.

Closer (W-L-SV/ERA/ERA+):

Wilcy Moore (19-7-13/2.28/168) vs. Huston Street (5-1-23/1.72/261)

Well, why in the world would anyone pitch their closer 213 innings?!? Street easily here.

Summary:

My guess is that Oakland, with their overwhelmingly dominant pitching, would easily take this series. Between Gehrig's fatigue (riding all of those trains sucks!) and Ruth not being able to get around on Harden's heat or touch Zito's curve, I can't see how they'd compete. I'd be shocked if it went 6.

Tweet Comment 40 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Put down

the bong and step away!!! A wee bit too much celebration on New Years eve.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jan 2, 2006 9:26 AM EST reply actions

LOL

If you are older than 14, and didn't catch the intent of the original post, than I worry that you haven't put the bong down enough over the years.

by GregJP on Jan 2, 2006 11:54 AM EST up reply actions

I agree...

Unless you have your tongue firmly in cheek (I hope) then you have lost it, jc3...

I am convinced, like slurve, that this post was done with either a LOT of alcohol beforehand OR an absolutely blinding hangover...

Talk to us when you get sober!

"Why do we need so many scouts? All they do is sit around and watch games" Marge Schott, the bane of my existence...

by BigRedMachine on Jan 2, 2006 9:38 AM EST reply actions

sober

Actually, I'm pretty sure this is tongue in cheek and is also a pretty funny caricature of an A's homer.

by FI @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 10:04 AM EST reply actions

definitely sarcasm

and quite a long post. Nice work!

What more must I do?

by akk99 on Jan 2, 2006 10:10 AM EST reply actions

re

Obviously done in sarcasm, but brings up a great debate, even if unintentionally.

Really, how well would have the 1927 Yanks faired if they played in today's game? Give them a whole offseason in today's world to prepare (our training and weight lifting compared to their non-existent training). Let them get use to the new equipment; gloves, bats, uni's (they wore wool that weighed like 20lbs). And give them every bit of technology that has advanced over the past 75 years (scouting, computers, video of ABs, training room and medicine).

Now, throw them in the National League East in place of the franchise that used to be the Florida Marlins. Let them share Yankee Stadium with the 06' Yanks. What would their record be? What would their HOFs numbers be? Ruth, Gehrig, Lazzeri, Combs, Pennock, Hoyt, etc?

by ScottAZ on Jan 2, 2006 11:16 AM EST reply actions

Nicely done

I also rolled my eyes at the A's worship in recent threads. Would be nice if they could actually win a playoff series before we hand them the crown.

by FunWithHeadlines on Jan 2, 2006 11:59 AM EST reply actions

I hope I did not come off like such a homer.

I voted for Yankees in round 1 but A's in finals more out of a lack of respect to Indians (sorry Indiansfan).

http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Jan 2, 2006 12:42 PM EST reply actions

The Indians and Yankees are strong in their

own right! :-)

Why you had the Yankees beating the A's in Round 1 when the Yankees pitching is arguably weaker than the Indians even without Millwood and Howry doesn't make much sense, novaoakland. :-)

You should also lay off the "sauce." LOL! :-)

Take care and have a great 2006! :-)

by indiansfan on Jan 2, 2006 7:34 PM EST up reply actions

wow

this is obviously sarcasm. I mean i realize the A's have their flaws, namely offense. I don't see why you are being such a jackass about it, i never said they were the best team ever, i never said they are the best team in baseball even. I said i think they'd beat the Yanks and the Indians. WTF is your problem.

Why are their jackasses on this site. I actually thought we had a decent debate back there, but whatever.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 1:18 PM EST reply actions

"i never said they are the best team..."

actually, you did say the A's would be the best team in the majors next year - It was in your first post in the NYY/OAK thread...

I like Oakland for this year, but if everyone turns the Yankees extremely old pitching staff into a negative, why can't one turn around and say that the inexperience (especially in big spots, i.e. playoffs) of the Oakland A's entire staff outside of probably Barry Zito could hurt them?

I think when dealing with the Yankees, many posts tend to bash with wishful thinking in mind. "Randy Johnson is too old, they will never stay healthy, etc."

All those points may prove to be true this season, but they are not guaranteed. While I agree that the Yankees starting staff has obvious question marks (and they should not be ignored completely), but I don't think we should always assume the worst case for the Yankees and best case for all other teams when projecting...just a thought

by rhodehead on Jan 2, 2006 2:23 PM EST up reply actions

I think the deal with age is

theinjury risk for older players, which is rreal, rather than "experience in big spots," which is usually not the factor everybody thinks it is.

by salb918 on Jan 2, 2006 2:52 PM EST up reply actions

ohad

what's your deal with jackasses?

by scarfo on Jan 2, 2006 1:58 PM EST reply actions

i don't know

it happened come out twice.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 2:25 PM EST up reply actions

A's in Five

This is quite possibly the best team ever...

I wonder what will happen to the blog when they don't make the play-offs.

by mckeeno on Jan 2, 2006 2:19 PM EST reply actions

actually

they missed the playoffs this year and nothing happened. That was witty and funny though.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 2:25 PM EST up reply actions

heh

I think this is one of the best posts I've seen here in a long time. The Oakland homer presence here is pretty insane.

What I want to know is, why aren't you guys going to the games? Oakland hasn't ranked in the top 5 in the AL in attendance since '92. Even when they were winning 100 games a year, they were still middle of the pack.

The Raiders have the same problem, it seems.

by Ian Miller on Jan 2, 2006 2:19 PM EST reply actions

Now you are stricking below the belt

Go ahead with the Homer comments (you can make an arguemnt for that. That is fair but BS to attack the fans.

Bay Area is small place and attendance is great for the amount of people. if you compare it to other 2 market areas:
CHI
LA
NY

They are all at least 2+ times the size.

OVer 5 million fans in 2002-2005 each year.

http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Jan 2, 2006 2:24 PM EST up reply actions

re:

Oakland's population according to the 2000 census numbered almost 400,000. The 2000 census revealed a population of a little over 330,000 for Arlington, home of the Texas Rangers. The past five years, the Rangers have recorded a significantly larger attendance, despite fielding a team that has averaged about 20 fewer wins a season. Infact, in 2000, the Rangers' attendance was almost a million more than the Athletics', and Texas won just 71 games(to Oakland's 91).

I don't think you can blame the poor attendance on the market size. Especially since nearby San Francisco is supposed to have the second highest population density of any U.S city.

by Ian Miller on Jan 3, 2006 3:00 AM EST up reply actions

population

I lived in and around Silicon valley for about 9 years and there are a few causes to Oakland's lack of attendance.

Not very many people live within a 30 minute drive to the ballpark. San Francisco has a large population density, but not a large population (775,000), San Jose is bigger (889,000) but spread out more. And nobody from SF is willing to cross the rush hour bridge traffic to go to Oakland. There is BART, but the Oakland stadium is very difficult to get to from San Francisco, San Jose, or from anywhere on the Peninusula. You won't believe it until you try it, but it can take 2 hours, through very bad traffic, to go 30 miles. I love baseball, and lived in San Mateo, but it was much easier and nicer to see A ball in San Jose than MLB in Oakland.
Everyone would rather go to the nicer, better stadium in downtown San Francisco.
The ballpark is horrible, with a large 10 story Mount Davis taking over centerfield. It used to be nice with inexpensive bleachers in front of a grassy hill, but now it is just plain ugly.

Oakland makes seeing a well run MLB franchise about as unenjoyable as humanly possible. It is too bad that they couldn't move to Santa Clara. The Sharks draw well and the Warriors sold out every game they played in San Jose during the Coliseum renovations.

by LindInMoskva on Jan 3, 2006 6:35 AM EST up reply actions

Homerism

I think overall I would still rank the Red Sox first and the Yankees second for homerism.
I recall reading a post not so long ago that suggested Chacon had a decent chance to have a sub 3 ERA this coming year.
Now that is true homerism.

by GregJP on Jan 2, 2006 2:26 PM EST up reply actions

Not homerism

I did say that Chacon had a decent chance at a sub 3 ERA in 2006.
I also said that something below 3.50 was more realistic. Funny how you are so selective in your comments.

In 12 starts for the Yankees he went 7-3 with a 2.85 ERA. Granted his walk/strikeout rate sucked and has always sucked but still you have to admit it was impressive. Also go back and look at the 7 teams he beat, not exactly pushovers (Angles, Rangers, Blue Jays three times, Indians & the A's). Most of the teams were trying to get into the playoffs or going for a decent record.

For a pitcher to go from an NL team to an AL team midseason and cut his ERA like he did he should be given some attention. Surely 12 games is not a fluke, if he only had 6 games like this I would consider that a smaller sample size that cannot be projected.

A sub 3.00 ERA is not exactly the holy grail of pitching. Several pitchers per year reach that without a problem.

Also consider that the Yankees CF problem they had last year is corrected and that Cano should be better on defense and you can make a point that the team defense will be improved over 05, it will still be average but it will be improved.

Greg, you said that a 4.50 ERA from Chacon was expected last year. No way that happens since he had a 4.09 ERA at Coors before he came over. His 04 ERA was 7.11 because Colorado made him a closer and that bombed (He never struck out enough guys to be a closer) and his 03 ERA was 4.60 because of a second half struggle.

It wasn't homerism, just an opinion. Next time you post an opinion I will be sure to crap on it and bring it up 4 days later in a totally new thread.

by colinadam on Jan 2, 2006 4:26 PM EST up reply actions

Chacon

I just can't think of any reasonable explanation other than Homerism.
Look at Chacon's career as a whole. I realize he has pitched at Coors, but his road stats in the NL aren't stellar either.
He has a career ERA of 4.90 and a WHIP of 1.48. Pitching in the AL East he will face a DH and some very good lineups.
Friendly bet, I'll be generous and set the line at 3.75. I'll take over and you take under. OK? If I'm wrong, I'll post an apology and admit that I just don't know what I'm talking about.
His ZiPS projection is 4.40, which I think will be pretty close.

by GregJP on Jan 2, 2006 6:13 PM EST up reply actions

Sample Size

One more thing. 12 games is an EXTREMELY small sample size. Tino Martinez went 12 games hitting a homer in almost every game. What did he do in the other 152 games?

by GregJP on Jan 2, 2006 6:15 PM EST up reply actions

coming from a Rangers fan

no surprise.

I go to all the games i can as a 15 year old. Alas, i currently live 6000 miles away so it's not quite convenient, since my private Jet is in repair.

To answer the actual question: Well, it's Al Davis fault. The Coliseum used to be a baseball only place until Al betrayed Oakland, then left LA and came back. Then he threw in "Mount Davis", and voila: You have one of the worst stadiums in the majors.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 2:27 PM EST up reply actions

Attendance has

nothing to with stadium in my point of view.

I love the Colesium as it is.

http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Jan 2, 2006 3:53 PM EST up reply actions

i love it too

but frankly, it's one of the uglier stadiums, and a family of four, or whatever other situations come up won't enjoy it as much. Also, the stadium is way too big for the possible fan base (as you said: Two baseball teams in this area). The closing of the 3rd deck should alleviate this.

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 3:56 PM EST up reply actions

Only stadium

a family of four can actually aford to go to though.

http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Jan 2, 2006 9:15 PM EST up reply actions

family of four

There is no reason to bring mom - LOL

starring Alfonso Soriano as Vinny C in RFK part deux

by natsfan2005 @ Minor League Ball on Jan 2, 2006 9:36 PM EST up reply actions

haha

by ohad @ Minor League Ball on Jan 3, 2006 2:33 PM EST up reply actions

Ugly Stadium

2 words
Metrodome

by Terry Ryan Jr on Jan 3, 2006 1:19 AM EST up reply actions

re:

I never thought Fenway was a particularly good-looking ballpark(it's uneven, and pretty small), but the atmosphere is second to none, thanks primarily to an extremely loyal fanbase.

Veterans Stadium was quite literally one of the worst places I have ever had the misfortune of seeing, but that never deterred Phillie fans from showing up to boo Mike Schmidt, Santa Claus and whoever else was in town for the day.

At the risk of sounding snobby, isn't baseball about the players, not the stadium?

I can't blame anyone for not liking Al Davis, though.

by Ian Miller on Jan 3, 2006 3:17 AM EST up reply actions

Age

I had no idea that people as young as 15 were posting on this site. That does bring to light some of the more extreme opinions. I hate to be an agist(don't know if that is a word), it is hard to take seriously a person that young. Where does the perspective come from? Is this a kids site? Does anyone know of other teenagers that are posting here?

Also, try not to fake curse or get personal here.

by Shamus on Jan 2, 2006 2:48 PM EST reply actions

Do you hate to be an ageist?

Simply discarding one's perspective based on the age of the individual strikes me as foolish. Age does not necessarily indicate intelligence. A fifteen-year-old who loves the game and studies many aspects of it probably understands it better than adults who take a more casual approach to baseball. That includes users of this site, as each of us studies baseball to varying degrees.

As a fifteen-year-old, I was beating adults who were three to four times my age in fantasy baseball leagues on a regular basis. My age had nothing to do with how well I understood the game, even its statistical aspects. I would concentrate more on, say, the content of ohad's posts and less on his age.

by historypeats on Jan 2, 2006 3:30 PM EST up reply actions

yo

i recently graduated beyond my teenage years but i've been posting here for quite a while, mostly as a teenager...and honestly, i'll put my own knowledge of baseball (minors & majors) against anyone elses and, not trying to brag or showboat or anything, i'm guessing 80-90% of the time, i win...i'm not trying to toot my own horn, i'm just trying to change some perspectives because IMO, i have a lot to offer in terms of opinions regarding baseball...obviously not all young people will have completely developed and well-rounded perspectives on the game but i'd say its pretty narrow-minded to assume right away that i don't and that other young people don't

in fact, in my experience (albeit more limited than many of yours) the most devoted fans i've met have been are around my age, not yours...thats just my experience

by Rob Castellano on Jan 2, 2006 6:11 PM EST up reply actions

Funny, jc3

enjoyed th schtick.

but I think baseball at the MLB-level would lose one of its most interesting characters if Beane were gone. His presence, to me, is what makes the A's interesting, as well as prospect-watching &, indeed, sites like John's.

by Azteca on Jan 2, 2006 4:12 PM EST reply actions

Man

this string opened up an ugly and odd can o' worms.

Ohad - don't take things so personally. Sure the intent of this post was to make fun of homeristic (yeah, I'm making up silly words now) views - but it wasn't intended at you personally.

JC3 could have easily made fun of Mets, Yankees, Twins, etc. fans. Who cares - it's all in good fun.

Also, age really is irrelevant on this site. If you know your stuff, then you know your stuff.

With that said I think the 1927 Yankees would squeak by the 2006 A's 4-3. In the bizarrely configured NL East, the 27's would finish second to the Braves in the regular season, but would blow them out in the NLCS....to potentially face the 2006 yankees (?!?!?!?). How Stewie Griffin-esque...

What more must I do?

by akk99 on Jan 2, 2006 4:55 PM EST reply actions