History The Media

YFSF Slightly Misleading Lede Department

From today's Times website:


(Technically true, we suppose, but not quite right either)

27 replies on “YFSF Slightly Misleading Lede Department”

I can’t wait until we don’t have to hear about 2004 anymore…hopefully a few more weeks!!!

I am confident, but 2004 has taught me not to be cocky. In an odd way Krueg it’s a blessing. Makes you appreciate the “now” much more. It will never go away, but a trip to the WS will certainly lessen the sting.

Looks like someone was stretching a bit to tie in yesterday’s fifth anniversary of Game 7 with the Yanks’ current commanding lead.
The big problem, of course, is that if the Sox had indeed rallied from just a 3-1 deficit, no one would remember it — at least, not as well.
I can’t wait until we don’t have to hear about 2004 anymore
I don’t think that will ever happen, Krueg. At least not until the Yanks and Sox face off again in the postseason, and even then, the chances are quite good that it will be the only 3-0/0-3 postseason choke/rally in baseball history for many years, if not decades, to come.

There is not looking past the Angels, which is of course important though admittedly hard to do given how strongly things are in the Yanks’ favor right now. Then there is acknowledging the legitimacy of the likely NL oponent this year. The Phillies have played the Yankees very well this year, including in YS and without Cliff Lee. Ryan Howard has been just about on par with A-Rod’s productivity this October and their team has displayed the same never-die come-back quality that has been a Yanks hallmark all season. And they have an excellent defense. If the WS is indeed to be Philly-NY, that will be a serious war and I don’t take it as a foregone conclusion at all that the Yanks would win. I like their chances IF they get there of course – I would still call them a favorite (even apart from my fan-bias), but I find Philly a pretty impressive oponent this year. I think it would be a superb 6- or 7-game series in a post-season that has given us many thrilling individual games but not a single thrilling series.

Paul, I don’t want to speak for Krueg, but for me at least 2004 is like your 1918 minus the extra 80 something years of pain. 2004 to Yankee fans was when we lost a little mojo. So whenever the next time is that the Yankees can get out of the ALCS and into the WS and hopefully win a WS, I think as fans we gain a little of that mojo back. You guys own 2004, like we own Aaron Boone and Bucky Dent. Things like that never get forgotten, you just look for something to take away the sting and give back a little swagger! We don’t need to come back from 0-3 to rid ourselves of those demons, that may never get erased, but winning an American League title or WS title will certainly put it on the back burner in our memories. Sort of like I am sure Aaron Boone and Bucky Dent don’t feel good to watch, but don’t sting nearly as much now that you have 2 titles.

Continuing with the “misleading lede” theme, and not having read the article, I’m assuming Kempner is focusing on the fact that Sabathia is far better than any of the starters the Yankees had in 2004, and that Burnett is as good, if not better, than those, as well, and that Pettitte is probably no worse than the best one or two starters the Yanks had that season.
But that ignores the actual results of the games themselves. Mike Mussina had a subpar year, but he pitched a perfect game into the seventh of Game 1. Jon Lieber pitched a gem in Game 2 to outpitch Pedro Martinez. Yes, Kevin Brown was torched in Game 3, but so was Bronson Arroyo.
So the Yankees were up 3-0 with Orlando Hernandez, who was actually the starter with the best ERA+ for the Yanks that season, against Derek Lowe, who was AWFUL for the Sox that year. And the Sox won in 12 innings. In Game 4, it was Mussina, who pitched very well, against Martinez, who also pitched very well, and the Sox won in 14 innings. In Game 6, it was Lieber against the one-ankled Curt Schilling, and Lieber also pitched very well, except for one bad inning (the super-cheap Mark Bellhorn homer being the main blow there). Game 7 was all but determined before the game even began.
In the three Yankee losses, the starters left with the lead twice. So maybe the argument is that the Sox’ bullpen was better, and maybe that’s true, but the Sox tied the game twice against Mariano Rivera, the greatest closer of all time, and won the game when their own pitchers on the hill were Curtis Leskanic and Tim Wakefield (8.59 ERA that series, 6.75 career postseason). In other words, it wasn’t bad pitching that cost the Yankees the 2004 series.
But, yes, the Yankees’ pitching is better in 2009 than in 2004. Of course, the 2004 Red Sox were also a better team than the 2009 Angels, and the ’04 Sox got really lucky at several key moments.
Trying to draw comparisons like that is pretty silly because what the Sox did in ’04 is unlikely to be repeated for a very long time (it took 101 postseasons to happen just once). To say it can’t be repeated because this factor is different or that factor is different is of course true. But it’s highly misleading. If the teams were exactly the same, and the Yankees built a 3-0 lead in a rematch, I’d put my money on the Yanks closing out the series without a second thought. So would you. So would most everybody else. And we’d all get our money back.

Sort of like I am sure Aaron Boone and Bucky Dent don’t feel good to watch, but don’t sting nearly as much now that you have 2 titles.
I agree with this. I still turn the channel though when I see or hear highlights from those games, which was more my point — and yours, I think, and probably krueg’s, as well.

Oh God, for how many more years must long-suffering Yankees fans endure hearing about 2004?!
Hopefully, for as many years as you all got to shout “1918” at us.

I’m just glad that “2004” doesn’t lend itself to catchy stadium chants.
Biggest similarity between ’04 Sox and ’09 Yanks: a slugger delivering an almost inconceivably clutch performance at precicely the moment it is needed. And then doing it again. And again.

You summed it up perfectly John.
For SF’s, 2004 is defining. For YF’s, #27 would put that aberration behind us once and for all.
If we win #27, then I no longer care about 2004. Order to the universe would be restored!!!
Oh and for the record Beth, I’ve never yelled “1918” at anyone that didn’t deserve it… ;)

Beth, it cannot be fun knowing that your ownership has dropped nearly $2 billion in payroll since your last title. ;)

Of all possible things, why is the focus here on 2004?
More to the point, the 2004 Sox were actually the better team (according to Pythagorean records). I knew the Sox were better too and they clearly had better starting pitching.

Going into the 2004 ALCS, I expected the Yankees to lose. I really did. My prediction was Sox in 6. Viewed that way, the Yankees actually overperformed my initial expectation. It sure didn’t feel that way, of course. ;)
That’s not going to be erased. It is, as they say, in the books. It will fade with time and winning.
As it has faded for me, I look back and see two absolutely fantastic, insane ALCS’s in back-to-back years. What baseball! Won one, lost one. C’est la vie!

“Sort of like I am sure Aaron Boone and Bucky Dent don’t feel good to watch, but don’t sting nearly as much now that you have 2 titles.”
Sort of. I was 13 when Dent hit that cheap 9-iron shot (which would be 9 rows back in the new YS RF ;).
The Boone shot, had it NOT happened and the Red Sox won, Grady would have stayed, Tito would be elsewhere, Theo probably wouldn’t have had Thanksgiving dinner with the Schillings, we wouldn’t have had the glee of coming back from down 0-3 in ’04 and the franchise wouldn’t be as healthy as it appears to be now. The Boone shot was a watershed.

Sorry, YFs, but until you humiliate the Sox in astonishingly dramatic fashion in the postseason, one suspects that no amount of World Series r-ngz will fully expunge your sour aftertaste of 2004. For the bitterness of 2004 for YFs is not that the Red Sox won the World Series that year, but the manner in which they won the ALCS.

Not at all Hudson, but if that makes YOU feel better then keep telling yourself that. I think we have all been honest with our feelings. Nothing will erase it, but one more win in the ALCS and it will certainly sting a little less. After all it’s the END game, not what we do against one another. That’s what hurts the most.

Here we go…nice work Hudson.
I’m just going to leave it alone so we don’t go down this path any further.

“until you humiliate the Sox in astonishingly dramatic fashion”
You mean like sweeping them in the ALDS? Unfortunately someone beat the Yankees to that one.

I don’t think anyone expects YFs, SFs, or any other Fs to suddenly forget 2004 entirely should the Yankees win the ALCS or WS this year.
But, like numerous people here have already said, a title would help take the bitterness of it away, at least for YFs. It would remain an unpleasant memory, but it wouldn’t hurt quite so bad.
Really, it just gives YFs a come-back to the taunting. Before 2004, there wasn’t much a SF could use to respond to a 1918 chant, or memories of Dent, etc. There just wasn’t a satisfactory response.
Similarly, since ’04, YFs haven’t had a satisfactory response to memories of that series, or comments about the failure to win big since ’00, etc. When those things are brought up, we just kind of shrug, sigh, and try to move on.
A title this year would give us a response. It would reset things a bit. 2004 would still be unpleasant, just like Dent is still unpleasant for SFs. But just like YFs can no longer invoke Dent to send SFs into frustrated silence, SFs could no longer invoke ’04 to provoke YFs into frustrated silence.
Success makes these things become just bad memories instead of albatrosses we can’t escape.

I find that simply mentioning the four titles I’ve seen won in my lifetime, including one in-person at Yankee Stadium, shuts up any SF.
2003-2004 was great baseball, but nothing more to me. Though I can certainly understand why that’s all SFs want to talk about these days (besides a ghost). Thankfully we can hang our hats on something a bit more recent.
And Bill, who’s spent the most to win a Series? Though that’s an “honor” I’ll happily accept.

Thanks for telling us all how we feel Hudson. I could basically care less at this point about 2004 and I was at games 6 and 7. It sucked then alot. About 2 months later I was more or less over it and 5 years later, i dont think about it for a second. Assuming we all have some deep wound over a series played half a decade ago is totally absurd. Im enjoying watching my team play now and Im not thinking about what happened earlier this year much less in 2004.

//Beth, it cannot be fun knowing that your ownership has dropped nearly $2 billion in payroll since your last title. ;)//
Yes, I weep for their plight. :)

Let’s all calm down and try not to let the worst among us drive us exactly where they want us to go.

hehe…this was fun to read…sorry i missed it…it’ll make sf’s feel good, those that think it’s important anyway, to know that ’04 stung for me…it still does…until that point, i had never “lost” an argument with my sf friends…up 3-0 my balls grew even bigger…losing that series to the sox was not a big surprise really…despite the 3 opening losses, they seemed to have the same karma that season, clicking on all cylinders, whatever cliche you want to use, that the yanks seem to have this year, so far…sf cringed when i called the playoffs a “crapshoot”, a few days ago, and i conceded that he had a bit of a point…except, underdogs do win, teams do make up deep deficits, and anything can happen, and it did…so there you have it, ’04 hurt, so did ’07, because that win more than ’04 established the sox as a legit threat to yankee championship entitlement ;)…those sox wins still hurt, and no amount of yankee winning from here on out will make that go away…

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.