It seems everyone has written about the relationship and negotiations between the New York Yankees - mostly Brian Cashman and the Steinbrenner Bros. - and Derek Jeter and his agent, Casey Close. I didn't think I would have much unique to add until I was observing a debate about Jeter's worth to the Yankees going forward. I'm surprised at how many Yankee fans and baseball fans in general think the Yankees should give in and pay "El Capitan" whatever he wants for services rendered and not punish him for one bad season despite his advanced age.
If Jeter were 31 and coming off his worst season, I don't think the Yankees would be giving pause to paying him like an elite ballplayer. The problem is, the chances are high that he is not an elite ballplayer anymore. To give him four years or more at $20M plus, would exacerbate an already problematic budget situation in the years ahead.
The Yankees have $95M committed for the 2013 season to four players - Mark Teixeira (33 that season), A.J. Burnett (36), C.C. Sabathia (33) and Alex Rodriguez (38). There is a reasonable chance that they will also be paying the replacements for Burnett in the rotation and Rodriguez at 3B if he moves to DH. With the Yankees, it's never safe to assume who will be signed long-term, but it would be a worthwhile bet to say they will be paying large truckloads of cash to Robinson Cano, Cliff Lee and any other Free Agent they go after over the next three seasons.
There are only three active players born in the same year as Jeter (1974) with a higher career OPS (on-base avg. plus slugging pct.). We'll get to the names in a bit, but what we're trying to do is take away the name and just look at the anticipated value. They have all been All-Stars multiple times, have all made at least $13M in a season, all had a higher OPS last season than Jeter, but all had lower OPS marks than their career mark. Despite having better offensive statistics throughout their career AND last season, nobody is lining up to pay these players anything near the amount the Yankees are reportedly offering Jeter ($45M/3Yrs) because it is recognized they are in the twilight of their career with declining skills.
Two of the players were paid $7M LESS in 2010 than they were in their peak. The third is in this FA class with Jeter and will absolutely take a marked pay cut to play in 2011. The players? Two former teammates that the Yankees quickly cut bait with in previous years when it was generally assumed their best years were behind them. Hideki Matsui - let loose after winning World Series MVP in 2009 - and Bobby Abreu, who was dumped after a 20HR/20SB, .296/.371/.471 season in 2008. The third player - Magglio Ordonez - is coming off a season-ending injury which complicates the comparison, but was on pace for 20+ HR and a .300 BA.
The Yankees were not wrong for cutting ties with these players to get younger and to avoid paying players for past performance instead of future returns. It was the right move. The problem is the name - Derek Jeter. The Captain. Mr. November. Author of "The Flip Play" and "The Dive". Master of his "patented jump throw".
The more accolades & nicknames you receive as a ballplayer, the less likely you are to live up to them in the future.
Someone involved in the online debate mentioned earlier (Patrick Gallagher - host of The D League Show - www.thedleague.com) said he wouldn't give those players the $20M/year he would give Jeter because "they have not been consistent. Last season was Jeter's 1st bad season in some time." If you took a poll of Yankee fans - or maybe even people in the game - they would generally agree with that assessment (I did before investigating) and justify the higher price tag for Jeter. A closer look at the numbers, however, flush out the truth.
In 13 full seasons, Abreu has had 12 seasons with an OPS of .800+. In 10 full seasons (and three partial seasons due to injury), Ordonez has only fallen short of an .800+ OPS once. In six full seasons, Matsui has eclipsed .800 in every one but his rookie year. Pretty consistent, eh? In 15 seasons, Jeter has failed to reach an .800 OPS four times. There goes that argument.
Sometimes a closer look reveals all the wrinkles you don't want to see. $20M+ for more than three or four years? If it weren't for the name Jeter, you wouldn't even think twice.
As always, baseball-reference was used extensively for the statistics found in this blog. In addition, ESPN Insider Keith Law's top 50 Free Agents was referred to for information. Special thanks to Patrick Gallagher and Megan Marshall for their entertaining debate that gave birth to this blog idea.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
2010 - We should have known & ideas for '11
We fooled ourselves.
We believed in a team that played .500 ball - one game under, actually - since August 1. We kept saying they would turn it on come playoff time, would kick it up a notch. Despite having his worst season as a pro, in which he was a below-average SS on both sides of the ball, we believed Derek Jeter would flip a switch and be Mr. November. We felt that Mark Teixeira would be fine even though he, too, was coming off a season that was below his standards. Sure the power numbers looked okay, but in addition to being his worst statistical season since his rookie year, Teixeira disappeared late in games, hitting .225 in innings 7-9. We didn't realize that Alex Rodriguez may be on the downside of his career. He hit 30 HRs for the second consecutive year (he hadn't been below 35 since 1997), missed 25+ games for the third year in a row, and had the lowest OBP (.341) he's had since he was a teenager.
Why didn't we see this coming? 40% of our starting rotation had ERAs above 5.25. The Yankees were atrocious defensively behind the plate - In part-time duty, Francisco Cervelli had 13 errors & I kept waiting for Girardi to put himself in as a defensive replacement each time Jorge Posada let a fastball three inches away from the target get by him. The more you look at the numbers and the makeup, it becomes more surprising not that we lost to the the Rangers, but that we made the postseason at all.
But, to paraphrase Mark McGwire, I'm not here to talk about the past. It's time to look to the future - to 2011. What changes should the Yankees make to return to the World Series? The obvious and most persistent question is whether the Yankees will sign Cliff Lee. Obviously, they will make every effort to obtain him and though there are always dark horses lurking, it looks like it will be a battle between the Yankees and the Rangers to acquire his services. The Yankees probably have the financial advantage, but the Rangers have a head start at building loyalty and emotional ties, especially if they come back and beat the Giants in the World Series. I think the Yankees will use CC as a recruiting tool and will eventually win out for his services. For everywhere else, let's go through position-by-position.
Catcher - Jorge Posada should not catch more than once or twice a week, if at all. When healthy, he still has power, but he had his lowest batting average in over a decade in 2010 and was brutal behind the plate in almost every facet of the defensive game. He is under contract for one more season and hopefully can go out with a bang. In what will be a recurring theme, what is best for the Yankees in 2011 and what is likely to happen are two different things. We will likely find out early on if the low BA was a down year or if the 39-year-old has finally given in to Father Time. Keep in mind, Posada has a bit of a reputation for being moody and some feel that the relationship between he and Girardi is cool at best. If he doesn't get the reps he feels he deserves it could cause a rare problem in the clubhouse.
After a hot start offensively, Francisco Cervelli lived up (down?) to his reputation and may or may not have hit his weight from June-August. He had a torrid September, hitting .394/.553/.485, but that was aided in part by an unheard of .448 BABIP (BA on balls in play-see italicized note below). On the positive side, he displayed an improving eye as the season wore on, getting 16 BB after the All-Star break in 110 PA as opposed to 17 BB in 207 1st half PA. The biggest problem with Cervelli was a huge regression in his defense. The Yankees could live with a .240 slap-hitter if he threw out 43% of baserunners and handled pitches off the plate, as Cervelli did in 40 games in 2009. This season, baserunners stole 55 times on 64 attempts - a 14% CS rate. Cervelli also tied for the league lead in errors by a catcher with 13. Basically, he was no better than Posada, even if the fist pumps and energy may have masked his futility. I couldn't find any expert or scout who felt strongly whether he was suffering from growing pains, taking his poor at-bats behind the plate with him or whether 2009 was a small sample size and the 2010 version was what we will see in the future. I feel like he can be a serviceable back-up catcher, but when thrust into a full-time role his weaknesses become more evident. I'm a big proponent of defense being more important than offense with your catcher, but you need at least one or the other.
Jesus Montero - currently sitting in the top 8 of most prospect reviews (Baseball America & Baseball Prospectus have him at #4), Montero is likely the future for the Yankees behind the plate. There is significant chatter as to whether he can be a serviceable defensive catcher, but it appears the Yankees are committed to giving him every opportunity. The only problem is his bat appears to be ready for everyday duty in the majors, but his glove (mitt?) is still a work in progress. He did show progress this year both with the bat and behind the plate, and without any big-name catchers hitting the market this winter, I think the Yankees will look at him long and hard in Spring Training.
What they should do: I don't think you can keep the kid down any longer. Bring Montero up next season and let Girardi show that he can teach the tools of ignorance. Posada will get a fair-share of ABs and will catch on occasion with Cervelli being the third C and emergency IF. (Montero 100 GS; Posada 40; Cervelli 20)
What they will do: Despite their history, I don't think the Yankees will stand up to their "core-four" and limit them as much as they should. I think they will see what happens in March and unless Montero forces their hand, they have Posada and Cervelli split time until mid-season when they bring up Montero.
BABIP is considered a measure of how lucky a hitter is - the average is usually around .300 except for the Ichiro's of the world who get more infield hits. His BABIP for the season was .353 - Austin Jackson led the majors with a .396 BABIP for what it's worth.
First base - I won't spend much time on the obvious positions. Teixeira will turn 31 in April, should be fully recovered from his hamstring injury and is signed through 2016. He consistently starts slow (.235 career April BA) and his 2010 BA was 30 points below his career average, but his power has remained steady and his defense is as valuable as it gets for his position. It would be a luxury to have a Berkman-type backup to give him a rest once in awhile, but it doesn't appear that he needs it at this stage of his career. Hopefully the hamstring injury doesn't return down the road.
What they should & will do: Teixeira will play his usual 155-160 games there.
Second base - Robinson Cano grew up this season. There were no mental lapses on the field, there were no issues with hustling down the line. Whatever the reason, the light went on this year and Cano should finish in the top-3 in MVP voting, win the Silver Slugger and possibly Gold Glove. He walked more than the last two seasons combined without losing his aggressiveness and he committed only three errors all season. He should be hitting third everyday, but I don't know if they will risk bruising the egos of Teixeira and Rodriguez by moving one or both of them down.
What they should & will do: Cano will have the longest tenure at 2B since Willie Randolph manned the position from 1976-1988.
Third base - This is where things start to get interesting again. One of the things it seems we overlook about the Steroid Era is that even with today's advances in medicine and training, it is probably not normal to have a 2nd peak of your career in your late-30s without artificial help. At the age of 35, Rodriguez has played 2303 games - 101st all-time. There are four players in the Hall of Fame whose careers ended between 1995-2003 and played at least 600 more games than Rodriguez' current number. In the full seasons following their 2300th game, these four Hall members had cumulative batting averages of .249, .267, .272 and .275. The highest HR total in a season among these four legends is 28 during this time. These late-career stats were from Dave Winfield, Eddie Murray, Cal Ripken and Rickey Henderson.
This is not cherry-picking stats. They are the only players who have played in enough games to make a legitimate comparison and retired within the last twenty years. The only other comparison we could use is Barry Bonds. If we were still in the "loosey-goosey" era A-Rod enjoyed so much, that would be a valid comparison. I think we can all agree, it is not. Using the career comparison tool on Baseball Prospectus, the closest to Rodriguez from ages 23-31 were Mickey Mantle and Ken Griffey Jr. The twilights of their career were not pretty. It can fall apart fast for any athlete. The Yankees have $174M tied up in Alex Rodriguez over the next seven years. They gave Rodriguez that contract based on his first four years in the Bronx when he averaged 157 G, slashes of .303/.403/.573, 22 SB and what had become above-average, if not excellent, defense. It is certainly possible that Rodriguez defies the odds. He could deny the effects of old age, he could avoid the joint and muscle issues that have plagued many other athletes who used steroids for long periods of time. It is just not likely.
For 2011, we can still reasonably expect 30 HR, a .280 average and solid defense, although his range has definitely diminished over the past two seasons. I think due to the injury risk and the apparent need for rest, the Yankees will try to find a solid backup who they can plug into the lineup for extended periods of time at various infield positions. Ramiro Pena is not the answer nor is Cervelli, though I think they will continue to see if he can improve there. They should go out and get a veteran who can play multiple positions (SS & 3B) and not kill the team offensively. There are quite a few Free Agents that will be available this winter that may fit the bill. Most of them are on the downside of their career but will fill in adequately and will probably be willing to backup if it means playing with a contender. The type of player I have in mind is Juan Uribe. If he resigns with the Giants or is given a starting job elsewhere, there are others that will be available (Ty Wigginton, Pedro Feliz, et al.), although Uribe is ideal since he can play SS as well.
What they should do: The Yankees need to find someone who can fill in if Rodriguez misses more than the 24-36 games he's missed each of the last three seasons. Having a replacement who can come in late in blowouts and allow Rodriguez to DH once or twice a week could help extend his shelf life. Ideally, I think Uribe is the solution. They can afford to give Uribe $1M or $2M more than he is worth to anyone else because he is pretty close to the ideal fit for their needs. (Rodriguez 120 GS; FA pick-up 40)
What they will do: Declining range at 3B is not as apparent or painful as at SS, where most of the focus will be. Of course, having a 3B who can cover ground takes some pressure off a SS with limited range. Offensively, the days of 40+ HR and a .300+ average are likely over, but the Yankees are hoping Rodriguez is on a plateau and not on a downhill slide. I have not heard a utility person mentioned in early offseason talks, so they may feel Rodriguez can come back and truly be an "everyday" player with only the occasional appearance at DH. Also, discussions about fifth infielders doesn't drive many headlines, so it may be something they plan to address and haven't been asked about. I think they are anticipating Rodriguez for 140-150 games at 3B with one of their young backups from 2010 filling in when necessary.
Shortstop - Let's be blunt. The Yankees would be better off treating Jeter like they've treated Rizzuto, DiMaggio, Jackson, Williams, Ruth and almost every other beloved Yankee from days gone by. It is more likely that the future Mrs. Jeter star in an adult film in 2011 than Jeter bounces back with a season of 30 SB and an OPS (on-base plus slugging pct.) of .871 with Gold Glove defense like 2009. For this reason, the Yankees would be foolish to sign him to anything but a one- or two-year deal. If GM Brian Cashman sticks to his word that they will spend money based on results and not milestones or history, then they will offer Jeter a 1-year deal for about $10M plus incentives that can go all the way up to $18M with a mutual option for 2012. No other team will offer Jeter more for his services at this point. There may not be better options available through Free Agency this season, but the Yankees' hands wouldn't be tied down the road and if Jeter refuses to move positions or down in the lineup, it will be much easier to thank him for his many years of tremendous service and move on. There's a reason why no Yankee has ever had 3,000 hits. The Yankees, much like the Patriots of recent years in the NFL, have always been willing to cut ties a year too early rather than a year (or three) too late because it can set the franchise back in multiple ways by holding on for too long.
Now that we've gotten logic out of the way, Derek Jeter will be lining up along the sideline on opening day being announced as the starting SS. He will be a liability in the field. Toward the end of the season, he even had difficulty making his pivot-jump throw going to his right. It may come up that he was injured, which changes everything, but if it hasn't come out by now, I don't expect anything to be revealed over the winter. One of the best things with Jeter, even at this age, is his durability. He has logged seven straight seasons of 150+ games. Of course, each year his risk of injury increases, but he has always kept himself in shape and he is a safe bet to show up for work everyday.
What they should do: The Yankees should tell Jeter - go out and get your best offer. Shop around. The best offer you get, we will beat by $2M and match the years. The Yankees can afford to play chicken. If Jeter leaves, they have the trade chips in the minors (Romine, Brackman) to go out and upgrade. That's right. I said upgrade. I don't think Jeter wants to leave, even if his feelings may be hurt. He is likely an average shortstop at best at this point, but he's THEIR average shortstop. (Jeter 130 GS; FA pick-up 30)
What they will do: I don't think the Yankees will give Jeter a blank check, but I do believe they will set up a deal that includes future considerations and a position with the club upon his retirement. I think they will probably overpay to keep The Captain happy and will give him a year or two too many. They are quickly setting themselves up for disaster if they give Jeter the four-year deal that some have speculated. Can he transfer to 3B like his idol Ripken? Will Rodriguez move to full-time DH in a year or two? I'm afraid we're going to find out.
Outfield - For the first time since 2004, the Yankees go into the offseason without a need to upgrade their OF in anyway. It doesn't mean they won't attempt to, but they don't need to. Another side-effect of the Steroid Era hangover is some people don't realize how good Brett Gardner is. Ballplayers like Gardner are the ones that will be coveted in the years to come. In addition to outstanding defense with 12 assists and earning the Fielding Bible Award for top defensive LF, he led the team in OBP (.383), SB (47) and should be the leadoff hitter for the next few years. Defense and speed. They're two facets of the game that don't go into slumps.
Curtis Granderson turned his season around in the middle of August after some work with hitting coach Kevin Long. He finished the year at only .247, but his slugging pct. of .468 was 22nd in the league. Higher than Alexis Rios, Hideki Matsui, Torii Hunter and Nick Markakis among others. Although his speed and range seems to have diminished slightly since his mid-20s, he still provided above-average defense when healthy and, along with Brett Gardner was able to cover a lot of range in the gaps. For the most part, he provided exactly what the Yankees wanted. Solid CF play for the first time in years with some power toward the bottom of the lineup. It looks like there may be some upside to the BA and OBP after the way he finished the season, so it would not surprise me to see a .265-.270 season with 30 HRs in 2011.
Nick Swisher was possibly the biggest surprise for the Yankees in 2010. He shortened his swing from last year and became more aggressive early in counts. This resulted in career-highs in BA (.288), SLG (.511 - 10th in AL), and total bases (289). Although his OBP went down slightly, it was a fair trade-off from the player who, along with Cano, helped carry the Yankee offense during the first half of the season when other bats were struggling and earned his first All-Star appearance. He also had his best season in the OF, finishing with 10 assists and displayed good range for someone with below-average speed. Because of this, Swisher's value has never been higher. If the Yankees decide to make a trade this winter, don't be surprised if Swisher is the cornerstone. He is owed $9M in 2011 and that is a reasonable price even for medium-sized payrolls. If the Yankees decide they want Tampa Bay FA Carl Crawford - Swisher, not Gardner, is likely to be considered the expendable piece. What could they get for Swisher? The Nationals are looking to upgrade their lineup and have good, young starting pitching. I'm sure there are other teams out there that would like to have Swisher both on the field and in their clubhouse.
What they should do: As much as I like Swisher, I think this year was his peak. Trade him for pitching or prospects. Go out and get Crawford. An outfield of Crawford, Granderson and Gardner would cut down the doubles and triples against Yankees pitching considerably. Granderson should still sit against tough lefties and the Yankees need to decide whether the bat vs. lefties that Marcus Thames provided is worth his horrendous work in the field or if they should look elsewhere for someone to fill that role. (Crawford 160 GS; Granderson 130 GS; Gardner 150 GS; Thames/other 4th OF 30-40 GS)
What they will do: If the Red Sox pursue Crawford aggressively, the Yankees may go after him for the block as much as for their own needs. I think the Yankees (incorrectly) view Swisher as more integral to their success than Gardner and if they obtain Crawford, they may see what they can get for Gardner. I don't think the Yankees have much interest in the other top OF free-agent, Jayson Werth.
Starting Pitching - CC Sabathia (21-7, 3.18) was every bit the ace and workhorse that the Yankees were hoping for when they signed him two seasons ago. Phil Hughes (18-8, 4.19) started out the season by giving up 2 ER or less in eight of his first 10 starts. He only accomplished that feat five more times the rest of the year as he went through a full season as a starter for the first time. The future is bright for Hughes, but he must learn to keep the ball down at Yankee Stadium, where he gave up 20 of his 25 HRs on the season.
A.J. Burnett was maddening. Last season, the "bad A.J." didn't take the mound quite as often as "good A.J." He was frustrating and still gave the team no shot to win on too many occasions, but the moments of brilliance were enough to give us hope coming into this season. This season, A.J. had a 1.08 ERA in his 10 wins and a 10.35 ERA in his 15 losses. Read that again. 1.08 ERA in wins, 10.35 ERA in losses. How must it feel - not only for him, but for his teammates - to go out every fifth day and have no clue whether you're going to watch Picasso paint a masterpiece on the mound or a monkey throwing poo at the strike zone (and missing often)?
When Javier Vazquez was acquired in what some Yankee fans now affectionately call the "Boone Logan trade", there were two camps of people. The ones (myself included) who said it was a tremendous mistake because Vazquez could not handle New York and his worst season in this century was the one he spent in New York when he crumbled in the 2nd half and postseason. There were also people who saw him coming off his best season in 2009 with Atlanta, felt he had matured and that 2004 started off brilliantly, he was an All-Star that season and just wore down and was injured. Despite teasing the Yankee faithful with a 6-2 stretch in June and July that featured a 3.28 ERA, Vazquez' worst-case scenario was that he would fall apart in the second half of the season again and be of no help to the Yankees come the postseason. Vazquez was pulled from the rotation twice during the second-half and with an opportunity to pitch his way back on the postseason roster, he gave up 10 hits and 7 ER in 4 2/3 IP in Toronto. Thank you, Sir. We've seen enough.
Andy Pettitte was masterful through the first 85 games of the season. He was 11-2 with a 2.70 ERA and was being considered as the starter for the American League All-Star team. He was better than anyone could have imagined. The only question was if Pettitte's 38-year-old body would begin to break down. Sure enough, Pettitte pitched only 15 2/3 innings after the All-Star break as he recovered from a groin injury. The Yankees were 54-31 after Pettitte's win that day. The rest of the way, they went only 41-36. He did recover, though, and was their best pitcher in the postseason, going 7 innings in both of his starts and giving up just two runs each time. Had he pitched against anyone other than Cliff Lee in the Texas series, things may have been different... but that's a whole different blog post. It remains to be seen whether Pettitte will come back again, but my gut feeling is that the time spent rehabbing from the injury was enough to convince him to stay home and spend time with his family.
What they should do: Obviously, Sabathia and Hughes will be the primary holdovers. I don't know if Burnett can be saved. I don't know if anyone knows. The Yankees have too much money invested in him over the next three seasons to cut the cord at this point, and he will be in their rotation to start 2011. I think the Yankees lose Pettitte to retirement, which would mean they have two spots to fill. Cliff Lee will of course be the primary target for the Yankees in the offseason and they have to be considered the favorite for his services. The fifth starter will either come through the somewhat unappealing Free Agent market - Jorge de la Rosa, Carl Pavano (just kidding, put down your weapons), and Brad Penny are some of the "marquis" names - through a trade (my preference - see OF section), or the Yankees will give Ivan Nova a chance to show he belongs. (Sabathia, Lee, Hughes, Burnett/Nova and de la Rosa/SP from trade)
What they will do: The Yankees will spare no expense to get the only top-flight SP on the market this offseason. Lee, Sabathia, Hughes and Burnett are probably penciled in Cashman's notes for next season. I think they will look to spent as little as possible on a #5 starter and see what the landscape is around the trade deadline.
Relief Pitching - Mariano Rivera (33-38 saves, 1.80 ERA, 0.83 WHIP), the oldest of the core four, also seems to be the most ageless of the group. He had a typical season - which, for him, means excellence. There appeared to be chinks in the armor toward the end of the season, but Rivera has shown those chinks before, only to bounce back without issue. One of these years, the magic cutter will stop doing tricks, but it would be foolish to think we know when that will be.
Joba Chamberlain (73 G, 4.40 ERA) was the relief version of Burnett, alternating between awesome and awful from appearance to appearance and too often leaning towards awful. David Robertson (61.1 IP, 3.82 ERA, 71 K) recovered from an atrocious start to make a positive contribution. The problem is he still walks way too many hitters (4.8 BB/9 resulting in a 1.50 WHIP) to be the eighth-inning guy or potential Rivera fill-in. The potential is there to be a dominating presence, but it remains to be seen if he can control his stuff without diminishing it. Boone Logan appears to be the LOOGY (Left-handed One Out GuY) for the future. Against 91 LHB, he was incredible - .190 BAA with one extra base-hit (a 3B), 10 BB and 30 K. Against 78 RHB, 3 HR, 10 BB and only 8 Ks, .279 BAA. These specialists are important to a bullpen, especially in the postseason and Logan should be that guy for the Yankees. The transition from starter to reliever went very well for Sergio Mitre (54 IP, 3.33/1.09 WHIP - 2.45/0.97 as reliever) and if the price is right, he should be retained in 2011 as a key cog in the bullpen. Kerry Wood was excellent during his stay in NY (0.69 ERA in 26 IP) and seemed to shine in the big city, but he was so good it likely drove his price and role beyond what the Yankees are willing or able to provide. If money were truly no object to the Yankees, they would pick up Wood's $11M option for 2011 or offer him a two- or three-year deal for at least $8M/yr. Hal Steinbrenner has said he wants to stay around the same payroll as last year ($206M) and if they re-sign Jeter and Rivera, sign Lee and/or Crawford, there will not be enough left for Wood. If the Yankees were able to sign Wood, it would solidify the back-end of the bullpen and give the Yankees a legitimate insurance policy for Rivera better than any other option.
What they should do: The Yankees should re-sign Rivera for the same $15M he made this year (unless he is willing to give a discount - unlikely) and although there are some warning signs in his peripherals, he has shown he can be an elite closer even after losing a few MPH from his famous cutter. Unless if there is a stud like Rivera was in '96 or Joba in '07 (or Wood at the end of this season) I don't like having a designated 8th-inning guy. You use the guy or guys that match up best to get to your closer, but Girardi likes to have someone he can refer to as "that guy". Jonathan Albaladejo should be given every chance during the spring to earn a full-time role and possibly be the 8th-inning guy after shutting down hitters in Scranton (AAA) for the past two seasons. Joba still can contribute to a bullpen, I just don't know if it can be in NY. He is still inexpensive, so they can afford to take a wait-and-see approach. Robertson, Mitre and Logan are all either under contract or arbitration-eligible. (Rivera, closer; Logan, LOOGY; Mitre, 2-inning guy; Albaladejo, Robertson, Chamberlain round out staff)
What they will do: They will re-sign Rivera and give Chamberlain another opportunity to establish himself in the bullpen. They will keep the same young guys that served them well this year and probably add a second lefty to the pen.
Financially, the Yankees have approximately $150M tied up for 2011 (including arbitration-eligible players). I think they will try to get Jeter to sign for the same $15M they've been giving Rivera the past three seasons. With Rivera and Jeter, that would bring them to $180M. Cliff Lee may have cost himself some money with his two WS starts, but he is still likely to command $20M/year. This brings the Yankees to $200M. At this point, they can either trade Swisher (-$9M) and sign Crawford for $15-18M to get them to their approximate limit or they can keep Swisher and sign a back-end SP and utility player for $10M.
Here's how I think the Opening Day lineup should look:
Gardner (RF)
Crawford (LF)
Cano (2B)
Teixeira (1B)
Rodriguez (3B)
Montero (DH/C)
Jeter (SS)
Posada (C/DH)
Granderson (CF)
Here's how I think the Opening Day lineup will look:
Jeter (SS)
Granderson (CF)
Teixeira (1B)
Rodriguez (3B)
Cano (2B)
Swisher (RF)
Posada (C)
Montero (DH)
Gardner (LF)
Either way, the Yankees could bury themselves for the next few years like they did frequently in the 80's if they're not careful with how they spend their money this winter. They're talking tough and smart right now - but will they be able to stick to the plan?
Much of the statistics and info within this blog were gotten from: baseball-reference.com, Cot's Baseball Contracts, Mark Feinsand of the Daily News & Jessica Quiroli - freelance MiLB writer extraordinaire. Many thanks to them.
We believed in a team that played .500 ball - one game under, actually - since August 1. We kept saying they would turn it on come playoff time, would kick it up a notch. Despite having his worst season as a pro, in which he was a below-average SS on both sides of the ball, we believed Derek Jeter would flip a switch and be Mr. November. We felt that Mark Teixeira would be fine even though he, too, was coming off a season that was below his standards. Sure the power numbers looked okay, but in addition to being his worst statistical season since his rookie year, Teixeira disappeared late in games, hitting .225 in innings 7-9. We didn't realize that Alex Rodriguez may be on the downside of his career. He hit 30 HRs for the second consecutive year (he hadn't been below 35 since 1997), missed 25+ games for the third year in a row, and had the lowest OBP (.341) he's had since he was a teenager.
Why didn't we see this coming? 40% of our starting rotation had ERAs above 5.25. The Yankees were atrocious defensively behind the plate - In part-time duty, Francisco Cervelli had 13 errors & I kept waiting for Girardi to put himself in as a defensive replacement each time Jorge Posada let a fastball three inches away from the target get by him. The more you look at the numbers and the makeup, it becomes more surprising not that we lost to the the Rangers, but that we made the postseason at all.
But, to paraphrase Mark McGwire, I'm not here to talk about the past. It's time to look to the future - to 2011. What changes should the Yankees make to return to the World Series? The obvious and most persistent question is whether the Yankees will sign Cliff Lee. Obviously, they will make every effort to obtain him and though there are always dark horses lurking, it looks like it will be a battle between the Yankees and the Rangers to acquire his services. The Yankees probably have the financial advantage, but the Rangers have a head start at building loyalty and emotional ties, especially if they come back and beat the Giants in the World Series. I think the Yankees will use CC as a recruiting tool and will eventually win out for his services. For everywhere else, let's go through position-by-position.
Catcher - Jorge Posada should not catch more than once or twice a week, if at all. When healthy, he still has power, but he had his lowest batting average in over a decade in 2010 and was brutal behind the plate in almost every facet of the defensive game. He is under contract for one more season and hopefully can go out with a bang. In what will be a recurring theme, what is best for the Yankees in 2011 and what is likely to happen are two different things. We will likely find out early on if the low BA was a down year or if the 39-year-old has finally given in to Father Time. Keep in mind, Posada has a bit of a reputation for being moody and some feel that the relationship between he and Girardi is cool at best. If he doesn't get the reps he feels he deserves it could cause a rare problem in the clubhouse.
After a hot start offensively, Francisco Cervelli lived up (down?) to his reputation and may or may not have hit his weight from June-August. He had a torrid September, hitting .394/.553/.485, but that was aided in part by an unheard of .448 BABIP (BA on balls in play-see italicized note below). On the positive side, he displayed an improving eye as the season wore on, getting 16 BB after the All-Star break in 110 PA as opposed to 17 BB in 207 1st half PA. The biggest problem with Cervelli was a huge regression in his defense. The Yankees could live with a .240 slap-hitter if he threw out 43% of baserunners and handled pitches off the plate, as Cervelli did in 40 games in 2009. This season, baserunners stole 55 times on 64 attempts - a 14% CS rate. Cervelli also tied for the league lead in errors by a catcher with 13. Basically, he was no better than Posada, even if the fist pumps and energy may have masked his futility. I couldn't find any expert or scout who felt strongly whether he was suffering from growing pains, taking his poor at-bats behind the plate with him or whether 2009 was a small sample size and the 2010 version was what we will see in the future. I feel like he can be a serviceable back-up catcher, but when thrust into a full-time role his weaknesses become more evident. I'm a big proponent of defense being more important than offense with your catcher, but you need at least one or the other.
Jesus Montero - currently sitting in the top 8 of most prospect reviews (Baseball America & Baseball Prospectus have him at #4), Montero is likely the future for the Yankees behind the plate. There is significant chatter as to whether he can be a serviceable defensive catcher, but it appears the Yankees are committed to giving him every opportunity. The only problem is his bat appears to be ready for everyday duty in the majors, but his glove (mitt?) is still a work in progress. He did show progress this year both with the bat and behind the plate, and without any big-name catchers hitting the market this winter, I think the Yankees will look at him long and hard in Spring Training.
What they should do: I don't think you can keep the kid down any longer. Bring Montero up next season and let Girardi show that he can teach the tools of ignorance. Posada will get a fair-share of ABs and will catch on occasion with Cervelli being the third C and emergency IF. (Montero 100 GS; Posada 40; Cervelli 20)
What they will do: Despite their history, I don't think the Yankees will stand up to their "core-four" and limit them as much as they should. I think they will see what happens in March and unless Montero forces their hand, they have Posada and Cervelli split time until mid-season when they bring up Montero.
BABIP is considered a measure of how lucky a hitter is - the average is usually around .300 except for the Ichiro's of the world who get more infield hits. His BABIP for the season was .353 - Austin Jackson led the majors with a .396 BABIP for what it's worth.
First base - I won't spend much time on the obvious positions. Teixeira will turn 31 in April, should be fully recovered from his hamstring injury and is signed through 2016. He consistently starts slow (.235 career April BA) and his 2010 BA was 30 points below his career average, but his power has remained steady and his defense is as valuable as it gets for his position. It would be a luxury to have a Berkman-type backup to give him a rest once in awhile, but it doesn't appear that he needs it at this stage of his career. Hopefully the hamstring injury doesn't return down the road.
What they should & will do: Teixeira will play his usual 155-160 games there.
Second base - Robinson Cano grew up this season. There were no mental lapses on the field, there were no issues with hustling down the line. Whatever the reason, the light went on this year and Cano should finish in the top-3 in MVP voting, win the Silver Slugger and possibly Gold Glove. He walked more than the last two seasons combined without losing his aggressiveness and he committed only three errors all season. He should be hitting third everyday, but I don't know if they will risk bruising the egos of Teixeira and Rodriguez by moving one or both of them down.
What they should & will do: Cano will have the longest tenure at 2B since Willie Randolph manned the position from 1976-1988.
Third base - This is where things start to get interesting again. One of the things it seems we overlook about the Steroid Era is that even with today's advances in medicine and training, it is probably not normal to have a 2nd peak of your career in your late-30s without artificial help. At the age of 35, Rodriguez has played 2303 games - 101st all-time. There are four players in the Hall of Fame whose careers ended between 1995-2003 and played at least 600 more games than Rodriguez' current number. In the full seasons following their 2300th game, these four Hall members had cumulative batting averages of .249, .267, .272 and .275. The highest HR total in a season among these four legends is 28 during this time. These late-career stats were from Dave Winfield, Eddie Murray, Cal Ripken and Rickey Henderson.
This is not cherry-picking stats. They are the only players who have played in enough games to make a legitimate comparison and retired within the last twenty years. The only other comparison we could use is Barry Bonds. If we were still in the "loosey-goosey" era A-Rod enjoyed so much, that would be a valid comparison. I think we can all agree, it is not. Using the career comparison tool on Baseball Prospectus, the closest to Rodriguez from ages 23-31 were Mickey Mantle and Ken Griffey Jr. The twilights of their career were not pretty. It can fall apart fast for any athlete. The Yankees have $174M tied up in Alex Rodriguez over the next seven years. They gave Rodriguez that contract based on his first four years in the Bronx when he averaged 157 G, slashes of .303/.403/.573, 22 SB and what had become above-average, if not excellent, defense. It is certainly possible that Rodriguez defies the odds. He could deny the effects of old age, he could avoid the joint and muscle issues that have plagued many other athletes who used steroids for long periods of time. It is just not likely.
For 2011, we can still reasonably expect 30 HR, a .280 average and solid defense, although his range has definitely diminished over the past two seasons. I think due to the injury risk and the apparent need for rest, the Yankees will try to find a solid backup who they can plug into the lineup for extended periods of time at various infield positions. Ramiro Pena is not the answer nor is Cervelli, though I think they will continue to see if he can improve there. They should go out and get a veteran who can play multiple positions (SS & 3B) and not kill the team offensively. There are quite a few Free Agents that will be available this winter that may fit the bill. Most of them are on the downside of their career but will fill in adequately and will probably be willing to backup if it means playing with a contender. The type of player I have in mind is Juan Uribe. If he resigns with the Giants or is given a starting job elsewhere, there are others that will be available (Ty Wigginton, Pedro Feliz, et al.), although Uribe is ideal since he can play SS as well.
What they should do: The Yankees need to find someone who can fill in if Rodriguez misses more than the 24-36 games he's missed each of the last three seasons. Having a replacement who can come in late in blowouts and allow Rodriguez to DH once or twice a week could help extend his shelf life. Ideally, I think Uribe is the solution. They can afford to give Uribe $1M or $2M more than he is worth to anyone else because he is pretty close to the ideal fit for their needs. (Rodriguez 120 GS; FA pick-up 40)
What they will do: Declining range at 3B is not as apparent or painful as at SS, where most of the focus will be. Of course, having a 3B who can cover ground takes some pressure off a SS with limited range. Offensively, the days of 40+ HR and a .300+ average are likely over, but the Yankees are hoping Rodriguez is on a plateau and not on a downhill slide. I have not heard a utility person mentioned in early offseason talks, so they may feel Rodriguez can come back and truly be an "everyday" player with only the occasional appearance at DH. Also, discussions about fifth infielders doesn't drive many headlines, so it may be something they plan to address and haven't been asked about. I think they are anticipating Rodriguez for 140-150 games at 3B with one of their young backups from 2010 filling in when necessary.
Shortstop - Let's be blunt. The Yankees would be better off treating Jeter like they've treated Rizzuto, DiMaggio, Jackson, Williams, Ruth and almost every other beloved Yankee from days gone by. It is more likely that the future Mrs. Jeter star in an adult film in 2011 than Jeter bounces back with a season of 30 SB and an OPS (on-base plus slugging pct.) of .871 with Gold Glove defense like 2009. For this reason, the Yankees would be foolish to sign him to anything but a one- or two-year deal. If GM Brian Cashman sticks to his word that they will spend money based on results and not milestones or history, then they will offer Jeter a 1-year deal for about $10M plus incentives that can go all the way up to $18M with a mutual option for 2012. No other team will offer Jeter more for his services at this point. There may not be better options available through Free Agency this season, but the Yankees' hands wouldn't be tied down the road and if Jeter refuses to move positions or down in the lineup, it will be much easier to thank him for his many years of tremendous service and move on. There's a reason why no Yankee has ever had 3,000 hits. The Yankees, much like the Patriots of recent years in the NFL, have always been willing to cut ties a year too early rather than a year (or three) too late because it can set the franchise back in multiple ways by holding on for too long.
Now that we've gotten logic out of the way, Derek Jeter will be lining up along the sideline on opening day being announced as the starting SS. He will be a liability in the field. Toward the end of the season, he even had difficulty making his pivot-jump throw going to his right. It may come up that he was injured, which changes everything, but if it hasn't come out by now, I don't expect anything to be revealed over the winter. One of the best things with Jeter, even at this age, is his durability. He has logged seven straight seasons of 150+ games. Of course, each year his risk of injury increases, but he has always kept himself in shape and he is a safe bet to show up for work everyday.
What they should do: The Yankees should tell Jeter - go out and get your best offer. Shop around. The best offer you get, we will beat by $2M and match the years. The Yankees can afford to play chicken. If Jeter leaves, they have the trade chips in the minors (Romine, Brackman) to go out and upgrade. That's right. I said upgrade. I don't think Jeter wants to leave, even if his feelings may be hurt. He is likely an average shortstop at best at this point, but he's THEIR average shortstop. (Jeter 130 GS; FA pick-up 30)
What they will do: I don't think the Yankees will give Jeter a blank check, but I do believe they will set up a deal that includes future considerations and a position with the club upon his retirement. I think they will probably overpay to keep The Captain happy and will give him a year or two too many. They are quickly setting themselves up for disaster if they give Jeter the four-year deal that some have speculated. Can he transfer to 3B like his idol Ripken? Will Rodriguez move to full-time DH in a year or two? I'm afraid we're going to find out.
Outfield - For the first time since 2004, the Yankees go into the offseason without a need to upgrade their OF in anyway. It doesn't mean they won't attempt to, but they don't need to. Another side-effect of the Steroid Era hangover is some people don't realize how good Brett Gardner is. Ballplayers like Gardner are the ones that will be coveted in the years to come. In addition to outstanding defense with 12 assists and earning the Fielding Bible Award for top defensive LF, he led the team in OBP (.383), SB (47) and should be the leadoff hitter for the next few years. Defense and speed. They're two facets of the game that don't go into slumps.
Curtis Granderson turned his season around in the middle of August after some work with hitting coach Kevin Long. He finished the year at only .247, but his slugging pct. of .468 was 22nd in the league. Higher than Alexis Rios, Hideki Matsui, Torii Hunter and Nick Markakis among others. Although his speed and range seems to have diminished slightly since his mid-20s, he still provided above-average defense when healthy and, along with Brett Gardner was able to cover a lot of range in the gaps. For the most part, he provided exactly what the Yankees wanted. Solid CF play for the first time in years with some power toward the bottom of the lineup. It looks like there may be some upside to the BA and OBP after the way he finished the season, so it would not surprise me to see a .265-.270 season with 30 HRs in 2011.
Nick Swisher was possibly the biggest surprise for the Yankees in 2010. He shortened his swing from last year and became more aggressive early in counts. This resulted in career-highs in BA (.288), SLG (.511 - 10th in AL), and total bases (289). Although his OBP went down slightly, it was a fair trade-off from the player who, along with Cano, helped carry the Yankee offense during the first half of the season when other bats were struggling and earned his first All-Star appearance. He also had his best season in the OF, finishing with 10 assists and displayed good range for someone with below-average speed. Because of this, Swisher's value has never been higher. If the Yankees decide to make a trade this winter, don't be surprised if Swisher is the cornerstone. He is owed $9M in 2011 and that is a reasonable price even for medium-sized payrolls. If the Yankees decide they want Tampa Bay FA Carl Crawford - Swisher, not Gardner, is likely to be considered the expendable piece. What could they get for Swisher? The Nationals are looking to upgrade their lineup and have good, young starting pitching. I'm sure there are other teams out there that would like to have Swisher both on the field and in their clubhouse.
What they should do: As much as I like Swisher, I think this year was his peak. Trade him for pitching or prospects. Go out and get Crawford. An outfield of Crawford, Granderson and Gardner would cut down the doubles and triples against Yankees pitching considerably. Granderson should still sit against tough lefties and the Yankees need to decide whether the bat vs. lefties that Marcus Thames provided is worth his horrendous work in the field or if they should look elsewhere for someone to fill that role. (Crawford 160 GS; Granderson 130 GS; Gardner 150 GS; Thames/other 4th OF 30-40 GS)
What they will do: If the Red Sox pursue Crawford aggressively, the Yankees may go after him for the block as much as for their own needs. I think the Yankees (incorrectly) view Swisher as more integral to their success than Gardner and if they obtain Crawford, they may see what they can get for Gardner. I don't think the Yankees have much interest in the other top OF free-agent, Jayson Werth.
Starting Pitching - CC Sabathia (21-7, 3.18) was every bit the ace and workhorse that the Yankees were hoping for when they signed him two seasons ago. Phil Hughes (18-8, 4.19) started out the season by giving up 2 ER or less in eight of his first 10 starts. He only accomplished that feat five more times the rest of the year as he went through a full season as a starter for the first time. The future is bright for Hughes, but he must learn to keep the ball down at Yankee Stadium, where he gave up 20 of his 25 HRs on the season.
A.J. Burnett was maddening. Last season, the "bad A.J." didn't take the mound quite as often as "good A.J." He was frustrating and still gave the team no shot to win on too many occasions, but the moments of brilliance were enough to give us hope coming into this season. This season, A.J. had a 1.08 ERA in his 10 wins and a 10.35 ERA in his 15 losses. Read that again. 1.08 ERA in wins, 10.35 ERA in losses. How must it feel - not only for him, but for his teammates - to go out every fifth day and have no clue whether you're going to watch Picasso paint a masterpiece on the mound or a monkey throwing poo at the strike zone (and missing often)?
When Javier Vazquez was acquired in what some Yankee fans now affectionately call the "Boone Logan trade", there were two camps of people. The ones (myself included) who said it was a tremendous mistake because Vazquez could not handle New York and his worst season in this century was the one he spent in New York when he crumbled in the 2nd half and postseason. There were also people who saw him coming off his best season in 2009 with Atlanta, felt he had matured and that 2004 started off brilliantly, he was an All-Star that season and just wore down and was injured. Despite teasing the Yankee faithful with a 6-2 stretch in June and July that featured a 3.28 ERA, Vazquez' worst-case scenario was that he would fall apart in the second half of the season again and be of no help to the Yankees come the postseason. Vazquez was pulled from the rotation twice during the second-half and with an opportunity to pitch his way back on the postseason roster, he gave up 10 hits and 7 ER in 4 2/3 IP in Toronto. Thank you, Sir. We've seen enough.
Andy Pettitte was masterful through the first 85 games of the season. He was 11-2 with a 2.70 ERA and was being considered as the starter for the American League All-Star team. He was better than anyone could have imagined. The only question was if Pettitte's 38-year-old body would begin to break down. Sure enough, Pettitte pitched only 15 2/3 innings after the All-Star break as he recovered from a groin injury. The Yankees were 54-31 after Pettitte's win that day. The rest of the way, they went only 41-36. He did recover, though, and was their best pitcher in the postseason, going 7 innings in both of his starts and giving up just two runs each time. Had he pitched against anyone other than Cliff Lee in the Texas series, things may have been different... but that's a whole different blog post. It remains to be seen whether Pettitte will come back again, but my gut feeling is that the time spent rehabbing from the injury was enough to convince him to stay home and spend time with his family.
What they should do: Obviously, Sabathia and Hughes will be the primary holdovers. I don't know if Burnett can be saved. I don't know if anyone knows. The Yankees have too much money invested in him over the next three seasons to cut the cord at this point, and he will be in their rotation to start 2011. I think the Yankees lose Pettitte to retirement, which would mean they have two spots to fill. Cliff Lee will of course be the primary target for the Yankees in the offseason and they have to be considered the favorite for his services. The fifth starter will either come through the somewhat unappealing Free Agent market - Jorge de la Rosa, Carl Pavano (just kidding, put down your weapons), and Brad Penny are some of the "marquis" names - through a trade (my preference - see OF section), or the Yankees will give Ivan Nova a chance to show he belongs. (Sabathia, Lee, Hughes, Burnett/Nova and de la Rosa/SP from trade)
What they will do: The Yankees will spare no expense to get the only top-flight SP on the market this offseason. Lee, Sabathia, Hughes and Burnett are probably penciled in Cashman's notes for next season. I think they will look to spent as little as possible on a #5 starter and see what the landscape is around the trade deadline.
Relief Pitching - Mariano Rivera (33-38 saves, 1.80 ERA, 0.83 WHIP), the oldest of the core four, also seems to be the most ageless of the group. He had a typical season - which, for him, means excellence. There appeared to be chinks in the armor toward the end of the season, but Rivera has shown those chinks before, only to bounce back without issue. One of these years, the magic cutter will stop doing tricks, but it would be foolish to think we know when that will be.
Joba Chamberlain (73 G, 4.40 ERA) was the relief version of Burnett, alternating between awesome and awful from appearance to appearance and too often leaning towards awful. David Robertson (61.1 IP, 3.82 ERA, 71 K) recovered from an atrocious start to make a positive contribution. The problem is he still walks way too many hitters (4.8 BB/9 resulting in a 1.50 WHIP) to be the eighth-inning guy or potential Rivera fill-in. The potential is there to be a dominating presence, but it remains to be seen if he can control his stuff without diminishing it. Boone Logan appears to be the LOOGY (Left-handed One Out GuY) for the future. Against 91 LHB, he was incredible - .190 BAA with one extra base-hit (a 3B), 10 BB and 30 K. Against 78 RHB, 3 HR, 10 BB and only 8 Ks, .279 BAA. These specialists are important to a bullpen, especially in the postseason and Logan should be that guy for the Yankees. The transition from starter to reliever went very well for Sergio Mitre (54 IP, 3.33/1.09 WHIP - 2.45/0.97 as reliever) and if the price is right, he should be retained in 2011 as a key cog in the bullpen. Kerry Wood was excellent during his stay in NY (0.69 ERA in 26 IP) and seemed to shine in the big city, but he was so good it likely drove his price and role beyond what the Yankees are willing or able to provide. If money were truly no object to the Yankees, they would pick up Wood's $11M option for 2011 or offer him a two- or three-year deal for at least $8M/yr. Hal Steinbrenner has said he wants to stay around the same payroll as last year ($206M) and if they re-sign Jeter and Rivera, sign Lee and/or Crawford, there will not be enough left for Wood. If the Yankees were able to sign Wood, it would solidify the back-end of the bullpen and give the Yankees a legitimate insurance policy for Rivera better than any other option.
What they should do: The Yankees should re-sign Rivera for the same $15M he made this year (unless he is willing to give a discount - unlikely) and although there are some warning signs in his peripherals, he has shown he can be an elite closer even after losing a few MPH from his famous cutter. Unless if there is a stud like Rivera was in '96 or Joba in '07 (or Wood at the end of this season) I don't like having a designated 8th-inning guy. You use the guy or guys that match up best to get to your closer, but Girardi likes to have someone he can refer to as "that guy". Jonathan Albaladejo should be given every chance during the spring to earn a full-time role and possibly be the 8th-inning guy after shutting down hitters in Scranton (AAA) for the past two seasons. Joba still can contribute to a bullpen, I just don't know if it can be in NY. He is still inexpensive, so they can afford to take a wait-and-see approach. Robertson, Mitre and Logan are all either under contract or arbitration-eligible. (Rivera, closer; Logan, LOOGY; Mitre, 2-inning guy; Albaladejo, Robertson, Chamberlain round out staff)
What they will do: They will re-sign Rivera and give Chamberlain another opportunity to establish himself in the bullpen. They will keep the same young guys that served them well this year and probably add a second lefty to the pen.
Financially, the Yankees have approximately $150M tied up for 2011 (including arbitration-eligible players). I think they will try to get Jeter to sign for the same $15M they've been giving Rivera the past three seasons. With Rivera and Jeter, that would bring them to $180M. Cliff Lee may have cost himself some money with his two WS starts, but he is still likely to command $20M/year. This brings the Yankees to $200M. At this point, they can either trade Swisher (-$9M) and sign Crawford for $15-18M to get them to their approximate limit or they can keep Swisher and sign a back-end SP and utility player for $10M.
Here's how I think the Opening Day lineup should look:
Gardner (RF)
Crawford (LF)
Cano (2B)
Teixeira (1B)
Rodriguez (3B)
Montero (DH/C)
Jeter (SS)
Posada (C/DH)
Granderson (CF)
Here's how I think the Opening Day lineup will look:
Jeter (SS)
Granderson (CF)
Teixeira (1B)
Rodriguez (3B)
Cano (2B)
Swisher (RF)
Posada (C)
Montero (DH)
Gardner (LF)
Either way, the Yankees could bury themselves for the next few years like they did frequently in the 80's if they're not careful with how they spend their money this winter. They're talking tough and smart right now - but will they be able to stick to the plan?
Much of the statistics and info within this blog were gotten from: baseball-reference.com, Cot's Baseball Contracts, Mark Feinsand of the Daily News & Jessica Quiroli - freelance MiLB writer extraordinaire. Many thanks to them.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Friday, October 15, 2010
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Hall of Fame outrage edition...
When you add arrogance to ignorance, apparently you get... the BBWAA. I completely understand this is not true in every case. I would even say the majority of the members are able to display reason and logic among some other fine traits. The problem is if you need 75% to garner a Hall pass and 40% of the voting contingency are unable or unwilling to make competent or even justifiable selections, you will have a difficult time getting the consensus you need to get some very qualified individuals into Cooperstown.
I believe you can figure out which voters are the ones who need their status revoked. They are likely the same ones who refuse to acknowledge the existence of Twitter or the internet in general as a reasonable format in which to get breaking news or information directly from the source. They are likely the same ones who read four different newspapers every morning but refuse to turn on their computer. In many cases, they have worked in the newspaper industry their whole career without ever having to adjust to any other media or even attempting to expand their horizons. They don't care about the possible validity of recent statistics (meaning VORP, win shares, runs created, etc.) or the relative importance of OPS and WHIP over BA and wins. To me, this is proof of arrogance. When you refuse to admit that there are alternatives to your way of thinking, that is pure arrogance. When you feel you should never vote for anyone in their first year of eligibility - you are arrogant beyond reason, and we'll get to you a bit later.
This is not to say that every person up for a vote should be 100% or 0%. There are very few things as a "sure-fire" Hall-of-Famer. However, an intelligent argument should be required from every voter regarding every "aye" or "nay". Let's take this year's lone electee, Andre "The Hawk" Dawson. Also known as Lionel Richie's secret twin.
If you want to vote "no" on Andre Dawson, you would make the following arguments: His career OBP was .323 - a number that in today's world would have bloggers and writers screaming that you are killing your team. His career SLG of .482 does not even finish in the top 100 of all-time and is considerably lower than such luminaries as Tim Salmon (.498) and Will Clark (.497). If you want an older example due to the higher hitting percentages in general in recent years - Dolph Camilli, a 1B for the Phillies and BROOKLYN Dodgers in the 30s and 40s has a career slash-line of .277/.387/.492. You don't really hear ol' Dolph mentioned among the all-time greats. You will claim that Andre Dawson's cumulative stats are due more to his 9,927 career AB (26th all-time) than his greatness as a hitter.
If you feel Dawson is a HOFer, you can very easily point to the 1591 career RBI, 503 2B, being one of only three players in history with 400 HR/300 SB, the eight Gold Gloves and eight All-Star appearances. You will say his 9,927 career AB are due to his greatness and ability to play at a high level longer than most other players.
It's not difficult to make a reasonable argument either way. If I asked you the reason for your voting and you gave me these arguments, I would walk away satisfied that you have done your homework even if you never saw him play. I would even be okay with you telling me you saw him play and he was one of the most feared sluggers of his generation and for a ten-year span was one of the greatest OF to roam the grass. I would give you credit for voting as a scout would vote, and although I'm a numbers guy, I think it is important when someone can pass the "eye-test" or I guess you could call this the "Sheffield theory". If I had a vote I can guarantee I would vote for Gary Sheffield every year of his eligibility regardless of what the numbers are - I won't even look them up. I will just tell you that for 12-15 years, he was one of the last people on the face of the Earth you would want to see hitting against your team in a big situation. I've never seen anyone with such bat speed and plate discipline in one combination and I would stop whatever I was doing when he was hitting just to watch. I know he has been linked to performance-enhancing drugs in his career, but I don't care. That bat speed was there when he was a 190 lb. SS for the Brewers. If I were to look, I know I could find numbers to back up my argument but I don't need to. If you were to make that argument with me regarding Dawson being a Hall-of-Famer, I wouldn't necessarily be satisfied, but I would understand.
What I don't understand is how you can vote "no" on someone for two or five or 10 years, then start voting for them because they are so close or whatever reason it is that causes some writers to hold out then change their mind. If a statistic comes along that allows you to analyze a player's career differently and change your vote (one way or another - this isn't always a positive thing as displayed by the recent backlash against Dawson's OBP) based on the new information, I applaud your open-mindedness and your willingness to admit error. If new information comes to light that changes your view of the player during his era - for instance, I didn't view Fred McGriff as a Hall of Famer when he retired for multiple reasons which added up to him not being one of the premier sluggers of his era. Now, if you look back at the time when he was in his prime, and you take away every hitter who has been linked by more than rumor to have taken PED, McGriff stands with a much more select group. This changed my view on McGriff as a HOFer.
My feeling is if you are not voting for McGwire because you feel he cheated, shouldn't that change your view of The Crime Dog? His numbers, by all accounts, are legitimate. If he played in an era where he was say, the 6th best slugging-type hitter, and four of the top five were dirty, how can that not improve his standing relative to the era? On the other hand, if you vote for McGwire and don't vote for McGriff, I can see it justified as you are voting on the pure numbers and not based at all on any substances or methods used to acquire those numbers.
If you vote for both or if you vote for neither, I am okay with it IF you back up your vote with a reasonable argument. That's all we're asking for here, people. Some reason and some logic.
Now, I mentioned earlier the writers who NEVER vote for anyone in their first year of eligibility OR the writers who feel certain players are not worthy of being selected in their first year of eligibility but will then vote for that player every year after. The writers who never vote a first-year eligbile player in, I will just say this: Just because Babe Ruth or whomever did not get 100% of the votes their first year does not make it right. The people who voted no for: Babe Ruth, Christy Mathewson, Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, etc. are morons. This isn't a new problem for HOF voters. It does not make it right for you to follow in their footsteps. Take a minute and apply that logic to anything else in life and you will realize that is some of the worst reasoning you could ever possibly do. As for those who pick and choose which players are "worthy" of their vote in the first-year... Until we divide the Hall of Fame into Bill Simmons' Pyramid* - which is not a bad idea, but a WHOLE different blog - your job is to vote Hall of Famer vs. not a Hall of Famer. At no point in any of the voting instructions does it ever say, "If you feel this player is a HOFer, but not really one of the best of all-time, please wait one year to give this person the greatest achievement of his life and begin voting for him next year."
Since I am running long already, I will take on one more debate and, in my mind, end it swiftly. There are many who feel no DH should be voted into the HOF. These writers feel they are only playing half the game so there is no way they should be considered one of the greatest players. Have I made that side of the argument fairly? That is the reason, correct? OK, then - guess what? You are NEVER allowed to vote for an AL pitcher again. Good day, Sir.
See? Reason & logic. See you in a few years, Edgar.
* Bill Simmons' Pyramid is taken from his "The Book of Basketball" as well as his Sports Guy columns. In the book, he takes the top 96 basketball players of all time and divides them into five groups. The lower level up to the "Pantheon", which consists of the top handful of players ever to grace the court. Where this may not work as well for football, it is the perfect way to tear down and rebuild the basketball and baseball Halls of Fame. Explaining The Pyramid in a footnote of sorts is also a nod to Simmons as he used more footnotes in his book than a pianist with no hands.
I believe you can figure out which voters are the ones who need their status revoked. They are likely the same ones who refuse to acknowledge the existence of Twitter or the internet in general as a reasonable format in which to get breaking news or information directly from the source. They are likely the same ones who read four different newspapers every morning but refuse to turn on their computer. In many cases, they have worked in the newspaper industry their whole career without ever having to adjust to any other media or even attempting to expand their horizons. They don't care about the possible validity of recent statistics (meaning VORP, win shares, runs created, etc.) or the relative importance of OPS and WHIP over BA and wins. To me, this is proof of arrogance. When you refuse to admit that there are alternatives to your way of thinking, that is pure arrogance. When you feel you should never vote for anyone in their first year of eligibility - you are arrogant beyond reason, and we'll get to you a bit later.
This is not to say that every person up for a vote should be 100% or 0%. There are very few things as a "sure-fire" Hall-of-Famer. However, an intelligent argument should be required from every voter regarding every "aye" or "nay". Let's take this year's lone electee, Andre "The Hawk" Dawson. Also known as Lionel Richie's secret twin.
If you want to vote "no" on Andre Dawson, you would make the following arguments: His career OBP was .323 - a number that in today's world would have bloggers and writers screaming that you are killing your team. His career SLG of .482 does not even finish in the top 100 of all-time and is considerably lower than such luminaries as Tim Salmon (.498) and Will Clark (.497). If you want an older example due to the higher hitting percentages in general in recent years - Dolph Camilli, a 1B for the Phillies and BROOKLYN Dodgers in the 30s and 40s has a career slash-line of .277/.387/.492. You don't really hear ol' Dolph mentioned among the all-time greats. You will claim that Andre Dawson's cumulative stats are due more to his 9,927 career AB (26th all-time) than his greatness as a hitter.
If you feel Dawson is a HOFer, you can very easily point to the 1591 career RBI, 503 2B, being one of only three players in history with 400 HR/300 SB, the eight Gold Gloves and eight All-Star appearances. You will say his 9,927 career AB are due to his greatness and ability to play at a high level longer than most other players.
It's not difficult to make a reasonable argument either way. If I asked you the reason for your voting and you gave me these arguments, I would walk away satisfied that you have done your homework even if you never saw him play. I would even be okay with you telling me you saw him play and he was one of the most feared sluggers of his generation and for a ten-year span was one of the greatest OF to roam the grass. I would give you credit for voting as a scout would vote, and although I'm a numbers guy, I think it is important when someone can pass the "eye-test" or I guess you could call this the "Sheffield theory". If I had a vote I can guarantee I would vote for Gary Sheffield every year of his eligibility regardless of what the numbers are - I won't even look them up. I will just tell you that for 12-15 years, he was one of the last people on the face of the Earth you would want to see hitting against your team in a big situation. I've never seen anyone with such bat speed and plate discipline in one combination and I would stop whatever I was doing when he was hitting just to watch. I know he has been linked to performance-enhancing drugs in his career, but I don't care. That bat speed was there when he was a 190 lb. SS for the Brewers. If I were to look, I know I could find numbers to back up my argument but I don't need to. If you were to make that argument with me regarding Dawson being a Hall-of-Famer, I wouldn't necessarily be satisfied, but I would understand.
What I don't understand is how you can vote "no" on someone for two or five or 10 years, then start voting for them because they are so close or whatever reason it is that causes some writers to hold out then change their mind. If a statistic comes along that allows you to analyze a player's career differently and change your vote (one way or another - this isn't always a positive thing as displayed by the recent backlash against Dawson's OBP) based on the new information, I applaud your open-mindedness and your willingness to admit error. If new information comes to light that changes your view of the player during his era - for instance, I didn't view Fred McGriff as a Hall of Famer when he retired for multiple reasons which added up to him not being one of the premier sluggers of his era. Now, if you look back at the time when he was in his prime, and you take away every hitter who has been linked by more than rumor to have taken PED, McGriff stands with a much more select group. This changed my view on McGriff as a HOFer.
My feeling is if you are not voting for McGwire because you feel he cheated, shouldn't that change your view of The Crime Dog? His numbers, by all accounts, are legitimate. If he played in an era where he was say, the 6th best slugging-type hitter, and four of the top five were dirty, how can that not improve his standing relative to the era? On the other hand, if you vote for McGwire and don't vote for McGriff, I can see it justified as you are voting on the pure numbers and not based at all on any substances or methods used to acquire those numbers.
If you vote for both or if you vote for neither, I am okay with it IF you back up your vote with a reasonable argument. That's all we're asking for here, people. Some reason and some logic.
Now, I mentioned earlier the writers who NEVER vote for anyone in their first year of eligibility OR the writers who feel certain players are not worthy of being selected in their first year of eligibility but will then vote for that player every year after. The writers who never vote a first-year eligbile player in, I will just say this: Just because Babe Ruth or whomever did not get 100% of the votes their first year does not make it right. The people who voted no for: Babe Ruth, Christy Mathewson, Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, etc. are morons. This isn't a new problem for HOF voters. It does not make it right for you to follow in their footsteps. Take a minute and apply that logic to anything else in life and you will realize that is some of the worst reasoning you could ever possibly do. As for those who pick and choose which players are "worthy" of their vote in the first-year... Until we divide the Hall of Fame into Bill Simmons' Pyramid* - which is not a bad idea, but a WHOLE different blog - your job is to vote Hall of Famer vs. not a Hall of Famer. At no point in any of the voting instructions does it ever say, "If you feel this player is a HOFer, but not really one of the best of all-time, please wait one year to give this person the greatest achievement of his life and begin voting for him next year."
Since I am running long already, I will take on one more debate and, in my mind, end it swiftly. There are many who feel no DH should be voted into the HOF. These writers feel they are only playing half the game so there is no way they should be considered one of the greatest players. Have I made that side of the argument fairly? That is the reason, correct? OK, then - guess what? You are NEVER allowed to vote for an AL pitcher again. Good day, Sir.
See? Reason & logic. See you in a few years, Edgar.
* Bill Simmons' Pyramid is taken from his "The Book of Basketball" as well as his Sports Guy columns. In the book, he takes the top 96 basketball players of all time and divides them into five groups. The lower level up to the "Pantheon", which consists of the top handful of players ever to grace the court. Where this may not work as well for football, it is the perfect way to tear down and rebuild the basketball and baseball Halls of Fame. Explaining The Pyramid in a footnote of sorts is also a nod to Simmons as he used more footnotes in his book than a pianist with no hands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)