SB Nation User Blog: 3460kuri

My kids always come back and eat their vegetables. Johnny Damon will come back and take his two...

3460kuri — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:31:39 -0000

My kids always come back and eat their vegetables. Johnny Damon will come back and take his two year deal. I let my kids douse the veggies in ranch dressing to make it more palatable. I suppose the Yankees will build in some elaborate vesting option to do the same for Damon. But really: my kids ultimately have to do what I say, and Damon ultimately wants to stay in New York. The Yankees and I have all the cards in our respective transactions.

Maybe Damon isn't gone just yet.

Melky as the starting left fielder?

3460kuri — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:59:55 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

Sorry Melky, this hurts me more than that pitch you just got hit by.

Browse more photos »

I suspect that both Johnny Damon and the Yankees will be moving on shortly, leaving Scott Boras to work his magic elsewhere and Brian Cashman to find another left fielder. Melky Cabrera seems to be the most logical in-house replacement, because he’s young, athletic, and inexpensive. I want to take a closer look, though; just because he can play there doesn’t automatically mean he should.

Melky bounced back from a horrible 2008 to hit .274/.336/.416 in 2009. He gave us some reasons to be optimistic, posting a career-high Isolated Slugging Percentage (.142) and a career-high in pitches per plate appearance (3.87). Let’s not get carried away, though. His .259 EQA and 99 OPS+ meant he was squarely average at the plate.

That's the first problem. A team may not rely on their left fielder to hit as well as, say, their first basement does, but left fielders are still typically required to be above-average hitters. In fact, over the past three seasons, the average American League left fielder has posted a .769 OPS, about ten points higher than OPS of the entire AL over that time and seventeen points higher than Melky’s career best.

Further complicating matters is that Melky wouldn’t be replacing a fictitious average hitter, he’d be replacing an excellent one. Johnny Damon’s 2009 season looks a lot like a career year from a good hitter, so although he probably won’t hit .282/.365/.489 again (at least outside of Coors Field), .280/.360/.460 would be realistic, and still very good, going forward. .

Now obviously, the same good things cannot be said about Damon’s defensive abilities. He doesn't play well up against the outfield wall, looks extremely rigid when diving for balls, and has one of the worst outfield arms in baseball at this point. Surprisingly, Baseball Prospectus actually had Damon at +4 FRAA last year, while Fangraphs ranked him at -9.2 UZR. Considering his age and what I’ve seen with my own two eyes, though, I highly doubt Damon will be above-average going forward. Melky should move better on the field by simple virtue of the fact that he’s a decade younger than Damon, but again, let’s not get carried away. Baseball Prospectus has Cabrera at 3 career FRAA over the equivalent of about a full season in left field, while Fangraphs has him at 4.0 UZR/150 in left. It’s also important to note that three quarters of Melky’s left field experience came in 2006. So while he figures to be a solid left fielder, don’t confuse him with Carl Crawford.

Put this all together and you’ve got a dilemma. As things stand today, Melky would be a below-average hitter for the position, and his glove, while presumably solid, would not be elite, and therefore probably not good enough to make up for his offensive shortcomings. Even factoring for some regression from Damon both offensively and defensively, Cabrera figures to be the lesser player next year. This is not to say that Melky still can’t improve as a hitter. The increased selectivity he showed at the plate in 2009 could lead to him taking more walks, making better contact, and hitting for more power down the road, I just wouldn’t hand him the starting left field job until he does.

Brian Cashman should consider his options, ranging from signing a free agent to moving Curtis Granderson to left. Melky isn’t good enough to start in left field, at least not yet, and having a stacked lineup around the rest of the field is no excuse to give too much playing time to a player who is neither an excellent hitter nor an excellent fielder.

Around the Yankees..Galaxy?, Monday, 12/14/2009

3460kuri — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 03:48:34 -0000

More photos » by Alex Brandon - AP

4 days ago: FILE - In this April 8, 2009, file photo, New York Yankees pitcher Chien-Ming Wang works in the first inning of a baseball game with the Baltimore Orioles at Camden Yards in Baltimore. Wang Chien-ming became a free agent when the New York Yankees failed to offer a contract for next season by Saturday night's deadline. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Browse more photos »

I think "galaxy" works, so we don't have to worry about getting sued.

-It seems like Brian Cashman has gone all Bernie Williams on Chien-Ming Wang, ending his Yankees career for all intents and purposes. I’m beating a dead horse here, but I don’t get it. Nobody, not even Wang’s agent it seems, was expecting anything unrealistic. But a non-guaranteed, minor-league deal? Rich Harden just got $6.5 million guaranteed for crying out loud, and while he’s is more talented, I’d bet on anybody (Wang included) to pitch more innings than Harden next season. We’re going to have to trust that Cashman knows something we don't, but I’m worried this move will could back to bite the Yankees.

-Something isn't adding up with Johnny Damon. Jon Heyman was reporting that Scott Boras was basically asking for a redux of his last contract, but Damon is saying that's not true. It’s easy to revile Boras, but it is his job to earn the most he can for his clients, and he usually does his job well. We’ll see what happens, though; even he has a big swing and miss occasionally. I remember Jeff Weaver rejecting a 3-year offer for about $25 million from the Cardinals the year after he won the World Series with them. That worked out well. On a side note, if Damon does leave the Yankees I hope he goes for the Biblical look again.

-No new developments on the chances of trading Brett Gardner. As much as I like seeing a home-grown player make a contribution with the big league club, I think Gardner’s speed makes him the type of player who’s perceived value may far exceed his actual value. Let's face it, he has no power, doesn’t get on base at an exceptionally high clip, and plays good, but not great defense. If Cashman can turn him into something useful, he should.

-Chad Jennings over at LoHud posted a great rundown of the Yankees rotation depth as of right now.

-Brian Cashman is kidding, I hope.

Rethinking Curtis Granderson

3460kuri — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:57:03 -0000

More photos » by Charles Rex Arbogast - AP

Browse more photos »

Update by jscape: Looks like it's happening. I don't like it from the look of things, but I'm reserving judgment until I see all the names and dollars involved.

As I'm sure you've heard, the Yankees discussed a 3-team deal with the Tigers and Diamondbacks that would have sent Curtis Granderson to the Yankees, Austin Jackson to the Tigers, and Ian Kennedy to the D-Backs (plus others). The discussions had gotten to the point where the teams began naming the prospects and secondary players who were to be included, but it now appears that the deal, at least as it was proposed yesterday, is on hold.

My initial reaction was the Yankees shouldn't trade Ian Kennedy and Austin Jackson. But the more I think about it, I'm not so sure.

I've always liked Ian Kennedy, and always hoped that he'd find success in the majors. But the Yankees have other young, major-league ready starting pitchers, and Kennedy's coming off of two consecutive lost seasons - one to injury, one to poor performance - so I'm not sure that anybody would rank him much higher than seventh or eight on their rotational depth chart right now. Cashman shouldn't be looking to give him away, but I wouldn't be heartbroken to see him included in a trade that brings back a useful player. My feelings for Phil Coke are similar. He's a useful lefty reliever who's competent enough against opposite-handed hitters, but he's also a flyball pitcher who gave up a home run every six innings last year. The re-emerge of Damaso Marte made him expendable, although he was unlikely to ever see many high-leverage innings anyway.

Austin Jackson is obviously the key to this trade. As a 22-year old in AAA last year, he hit .300/.354/.405 . Scouts are mixed on how he projects as a major league player - he strikes out a lot (22% of plate apperances last year) for somebody who doesn't really hit for power or get on-base at an exceptional rate. Jackson could certainly develop into a useful major league player, but I'm not sure how high his ceiling really is.

And so the problem, depending on your point of view, is that Jackson plays the same position as Curtis Granderson. We can talk about how Ajax might project in 2010 or 2011 after some more seasoning in the minors, but Granderson has already established himself as an above-average major league centerfielder. He hits for power (.212 career Isolated Slugging), walks often enough (unintentional BBs in 9% of career plate apperances) and is good defensively (32 FRAA and 21.2 UZR for his career). Granderson is coming off of a season in which is BABIP was 46 points lower than his career average, and while he's never hit lefties well, his 2009 performance against them (.484 OPS) was aberrently low relative to his career .614 OPS versus southpaws, and possibly affected by the BABIP issues.

Granderson's true value is probably somewhere between his 2009 performance (2.7 WARP) and his career year in 2007 (7.0 WARP). Assuming he reverts to his career numbers on BABIP and against lefties, we're looking at a 4 win player who's under 30 and signed to a favorable contract ($36.8 million for 2010-2013, including the team option) in terms of dollars and length, a player with a track record that Austin Jackson will be hard-pressed to match and unlikely to ever exceed.

Somebody said no to this trade, but I doubt it was Brian Cashman.

It has been so long since the Cubs last won the World Series that we estimate that just 1 in 3,109...

3460kuri — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 17:59:08 -0000

It has been so long since the Cubs last won the World Series that we estimate that just 1 in 3,109 adult Cubs fans were even alive when they last took home the title.

Baseball-Reference.com posted a link to this website the other day and it has some interesting things on it.

HOF Veteran's Committee passes on Billy Martin

3460kuri — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:05:20 -0000

HOF Veteran's Committee passes on Billy Martin

The Veterans Committee elected Whitey Herzog to the Hall of Fame today. Also on the ballot, but falling short, was Billy Martin, who actually had more regular season wins and a better winning percentage in roughly the same number of games as Herzog.

Billy has to be one of the more memorable managers in the 20th century, and managed long enough (and well enough) to warrant a plaque in Cooperstown. Hopefully it comes one day.

Wang Gone?

3460kuri — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:19:22 -0000

Ken Davidoff is reporting what we all figured - the Yankees are likely to decline arbitration with Chien-Ming Wang, making him a free agent once the Dec 12th deadline passes. Peter Gammons points out that if Wang doesn't sign with another team, the Yankees would still be able to re-sign him after May 1st.

This makes no sense to me. Wang made $5 million last year, and it seems certain that he'd "earn" the maximum 20% pay decrease in arbitration based on his awful 2009.

I know that shoulder surgery is far more complicated, and often far less successful, than Tommy John surgery. And it doesn't seem like anybody knows for certain how far along he is (or isn't) in the rehabilitation process. But we do know that some GM is going to cross his fingers and sign Ben Sheets, Erik Bedard, or Rich Harden this offseason, probably for at least $4 million guaranteed, and the only way that Wang differs from any of them is that he's actually pitched more than 200 innings in a season in the last half-decade.

Wang is far from a sure thing at this point, but somebody will take the gamble on his comeback. I just hope it's the Yankees.

Improving the rotation without adding Roy Halladay

3460kuri — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:05:15 -0000

I've been against the Yankees trading for Roy Halladay since he became available on the trade market. It really has nothing to do with Halladay himself - clearly, he is one of the best half-dozen pitchers in the game - but everything to do with the costs of acquiring him, not only in prospects, but also in salary. The Yankees have huge financial resources at their disposal, but they already have $95 million dollars of payroll - $95 million! - committed for the 2013 season, and that doesn't include Derek Jeter's inevitable contract extension. I don't care if we're talking about Roy Halladay, Albert Pujols, or Babe Ruth's ghost, I just think it's unwise to make another huge financial commitment through the middle of the next decade to another player who will be on the wrong side of 35 when the contract expires.

Putting those concerns aside, I don't like dealing for Halladay simply because it's too obvious and too predictable.

The thing that separates good teams and good GMs from mediocre ones is the ability to get creative and to think outside the box, to get something for nothing, or something for very little. Think about it. Signing Matt Holliday or Jason Bay, or trading for Roy Halladay or Felix Hernandez, doesn't really take much. Sure, GMs need to be able to pony up the money or the prospects, or both, to make these guys a part of their team, but it doesn't require much thought.

I want to see the Yankees make the non-obvious move and get $20 million of production for $15 million, or trade a handful of B-list prospects for a solid contributor. I want to see Cashman make more moves like the trade for Dave Justice or Nick Swisher. I want to see him get a deal or find a bargain.

This is how the Yankees starting rotation broke down, in terms of WIns Above Replacement, in 2009:

1. C.C. Sabathia - 5.3 WARP

2. A.J. Burnett - 3.2 WARP

3. Andy Pettitte - 2.4 WARP

4. Joba Chamberlain - 1.0 WARP

5. Wang/Mitre/Gaudin/Hughes - -1.7 WARP

Halladay has averaged 5.5 WARP over the past five seasons, so if you plugged him into the Yankees rotation, he'd replace the Wang/Mitre combo and would theoretically represent a net 7.2 win upgrade. That's huge. But it's not the only way to improve the rotation.

Suppose Joba posts 2.0 WARP from the 4th slot and Hughes manages 1.0 WARP from the 5th - that's a 3.7 win upgrade. Or suppose the Yankees sign Ben Sheets and he puts up a 3.0 WARP season - that's a 4.7 win upgrade. Let's even think about Chien-Ming Wang returning to form and posting another 5.0 WARP season like he did in 2007 - that would represent a 6.7 win upgrade. Even something as simple as getting replacement-level performance from the fifth spot improves the team by nearly two wins.

And so my point is that while adding Halladay is obviously the best way to improve the rotation for 2010, if Cashman could add 50-75% of that production for 10% of the cost, shouldn't he do that instead?

Is Swish really on the trading block?

3460kuri — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:27:41 -0000

If you haven't heard the rumor, the Yankees are "quietly" making Nick Swisher available for trade. I have no idea if there is any truth to this, nor do I know how available Brian Cashman has made him. However, if this rumor is correct, I think I may know why.

Compare Nick Swisher over the last three seasons to a certain Mystery player X:

Want to guess who this mystery player is? I'll give you a hint: he just reportedly turned down a 4-year, $60 million dollar offer.

Jason Bay is the second-most coveted, and likely to be the second-highest paid, outfielder/hitter on the free agent market this offseason. And while he's a fine player, I'm just not that convinced he's that much better than Swisher when you factor in defense and age. And that's where it gets interesting.

Bay is 31 years old, and at this point it seems unlikely that he'll sign for anything less than 5 years/$75 million. Swisher, on the other hand, is only 29, and is signed for a total of $25.5 million (including a team option) for the next three years.

Given the choice between two good (but not elite) outfielders, most GMs would probably choose the younger, cheaper one. Brian Cashman is no doubt aware of this. Swisher is a great value, based on his production and his salary (and who the Yankees gave up for him), and I have a feeling that his availability hinges on the number of teams who have pitching, need hitting, and don't want to spend eight figures in the free agent market.

This is pure speculation, but the Atlanta Braves fit that description perfectly. They have holes in at least one outfield corner and first base, in fact, the lack of offense probably kept them out of the playoffs in 2009. They also have six good starting pitchers signed for 2010. Tommy Hanson is untouchable and Tim Hudson just signed a three-year extension. While they'd love to move Derek Lowe, his salary is probably too high, and nobody seems that interesting in Kenshin Kawakami. That leaves Javier Vazquez (pass) and Jair Jurrjens.

One would think that any team would be reluctant to part with a 24 year old pitcher who's posted stellar ERAs the past two seasons. I'm not suggesting this is probable or likely. However, when a team is dealing from a position of strength to fill a glaring need, strange things can happen. And I think Cashman may be dangling Swisher in hopes of a deal like this falling into his lap.

Options for the 2010 rotation

3460kuri — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:03:53 -0000

The early buzz a few days into the hot stove season is that John Lackey is there for the Yankees’ taking, if they want him. And after playing most of the second half of the season with only three dependable starting pitchers, why wouldn’t they? Lackey's career stats are impressive – a career ERA+ of 117 to go along with an average of 6.4 IP/start, plus a reputation for being a big-game pitcher.

If there is a problem, though, it’s that Lackey is relatively old, and will likely demand (and get) something in the ballpark of AJ Burnett’s 5 year/$82.5 million contract. To make matters worse, if the Yankees do sign him, they will have committed $56 million for 2013 to three pitchers whose average age will be 35 when that season begins. Committing lots of money to older players (especially 31 year-old pitchers who’ve been injured each of the last two years) is not typically a recipe for success.

The real key for the Yankees is trying to flex their huge financial muscles in the short term without signing too many big contracts that could hamstring them in the long term. With 40% of their starting rotation already filled with dependable veteran arms, this seems to be the right strategy this winter. With that said, here is what I think the Yankees can do to set themselves up for success in 2010 without tying down too many roster spots or too much money for 2011 and beyond.

Re-sign Andy Pettitte – Pettitte is the exact type of player a large-market team can afford to overpay in the short term. It helps that he’s taking it year to year anyway at this stage of his career, and isn’t likely to play for any other team. He has adjusted well as he’s aged, bookending the 2000s with statistically comparable seasons despite ten years of wear and tear on his arm to go along with the typical loss of velocity pitchers endure as they reach their late 30s. 38-year old pitchers are notoriously difficult to project, but he seems as good a bet as any to post a better-than-average ERA along with 30 starts and 180 innings in 2010. Bringing Pettitte back for another season in the Bronx should be the Yankees primary offseason priority

Sort out the youngsters – Both Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes should see the majority of their innings from the starting rotation next year. Joba pitched 163 2/3 innings this year, so the innings cap and strict pitch limits are likely going to be more a theory than a practice in 2010. Hopefully a year of development coupled with the longer leash will allow him to sort out his issues, known by many of us as difference between "pitching" and throwing". His 2009 season my serve to lower expectations going forward, but any time you can get a roughly league-average performance from a 23 year old starting pitcher who’s not yet eligible for arbitration, you’re happy (New York media hype notwithstanding). If he can reduce his walk rate and/or increase his strikeout rate, he still projects as a solid major league pitcher.

Hopefully, the shortcomings of the 2009 version of the “Joba rules” will help the Yankees brass develop a better way to handle Hughes in 2010. Whether they begin the season with him in the bullpen, or give him an extended All-Star break, the Yankees should be able to get this one right. Hughes highest innings total in the minors was 146, nearly double Joba’s, and as he approaches his mid-20s (he’ll turn 24 in June 2010), the stress/workload risks do begin to subside.

Offer Arbitration to both Chad Gaudin and Chien-Ming Wang – Presumably, Wang will have to settle for the maximum pay decrease (20%) and sign for $4 million in 2010, while Gaudin can probably expect a raise from his $2 million in 2009. Either way, these are the types of financial moves the Yankees can and should be making to improve their rotation depth. It’s unlikely that Wang would make it back before mid-season, but considering how good he was before he got hurt (ERA+ of 120 in his last two injury-free seasons), $4 million is a small gamble to take on the chances that he can give you 70-80 good innings after the All-Star break.

Chad Gaudin, on the other hand, is nothing special, simply a slightly below-average innings eater in the vein of Jon Garland, Braden Looper, and Kyle Lohse. Yet for $2.5 million (or $2.7 or whatever) on a one-year deal, you gladly take it. Gaudin can be a 5th starter or a long man out of the bullpen, and can be easily jettisoned if things don’t pan out.

The upside is that these two can give the Yankees 200 innings of above average baseball in 2010, and while the downside is probably a few dozen innings of horrendous baseball, for $7 million and no commitment beyond 2010, it’s a risk the Yankees can afford to take

Watch the Minors – Namely, keep your eye on Ian Kennedy. Yes, he missed the majority of 2009 with an injury, and yes, he has pitched terribly in limited major league action thus far, but we’re still talking about a guy who hasn’t yet turned 24 and has posted pretty solid peripheral stats and an ERA under 2.00 through nearly 250 minor league innings (most of them in AA or AAA). Nobody’s forecasting him to be an ace, but 59 2/3 MLB innings aren’t enough to convince me that he can’t still be a serviceable (and cheap) 4th or 5th starter.

Take a risk – If all else fails, the Yankees are in the unique position to make a high-risk, high reward signing on the free agent market with somebody who’s looking to bounce back on a one-year contract. They can offer a higher base salary, better incentives, or guarantee a second year when other teams are unwilling, and if the free agent market is as slow as it was last winter, guys like Ben Sheets, Erik Bedard, and maybe even Rich Harden could be spending a lot of time waiting by their phones; if two or three of them are still available in late January, would the Yankees be crazy to make identical one-year offers and see who bites first?

This is how I would approach the offseason if I were Brian Cashman. Lackey is obviously a good pitcher, but when you factor in the contract demands, he’s not enough of an upgrade over their other options to justify spending the money and committing the years. Without him, there’s no reason the Yankees should enter 2010 with fewer than seven or eight viable starting pitchers, and there's no reason to commit any additional money for 2011 and beyond.