Of course, but what's your point? Being at home is an advantage. Having more home games is also an advantage. Are the Yankees good enough to overcome the disadvantage of having less home games? Sure, but it reduces the probability that they'll win the series in question. Home field is a decided advantage, especially for some teams. Ask the Red Sox or the Rays. Or the Giants. Or the Twins or Tigers. The Yankees are going to face either the Twins or the Tigers in a best of five series, and both of those teams have been poor on the road this season.
Don't put words in my mouth. I have never said that. Of course their chances improve with HFA! This is true for ANY team against ANY other team. So of course it'd be nice to have (which is what I have said repeatedly). The difference is that I am not concerned if they don't get it. As in, I don't believe that any advantage conferred by HFA will be the difference in why the Yankees win or lose a series. I mean, how did HFA treat the Yanks in the 2002 ALDS? Or the 2003 WS? Or, hey, how about that HFA from the 2004 ALCS. Good thing they got that extra home game in there, huh? Or what about the 2005 ALDS, when they nullified the HFA by taking the first game in Anaheim? They then dropped three in a row... two at home. It is very, very rare that the advantage of playing at home finds its way into deciding a series. Certainly not often enough for me to worry about whether they have it or not. Talisaynon nailed the only one I can remember affecting the outcome. 1995. And, to me, that's like going into a job performance review and worrying about picking out a tie that your evaluator likes instead of worrying about how well you did your job. If you want to worry about the Angels, worry about them because they're a good baseball team, regardless of where they play. Not because they'll get an extra game in Anaheim.
about Sabathia: I was reading an article about playoff rotations that excused Sabathia's performance in the playoffs because he was worn down. OK. But even with the Yankees giving him extra rest down the stretch, he's going to make two more starts. That will likely put him over 230 innings this season. He's already at the third highest innings total of his career (behind only 2007 and 2008). If his struggles are really only because he was worn down (I'm very skeptical), then how do we know he won't be worn down again? 2003: 197.2 2004: 188 2005: 196.2 2006: 192.2 2007: 241 2008: 253 2009: 220.1 with two more starts to go. telling stats: Sabathia is tied for the MLB lead in games started, at 32. Sabathia is second in the majors in innings pitched, at 220.1. He trails Roy Halladay by two-thirds of an inning.
Well, I imagine that - at least in last year's case - it was more a result of pitching on short rest three starts in a row, the last being a complete game 122 pitch effort. In 2007, I think he just pitched poorly.
He's making light of the argument, as is his wont. In hockey, the home team gets the last line change, which is obviously an advantage. He's poking fun at this.
