Thanks SG.  A request and a question.  For the request, I know you already posted Giambi’s totals for last year, but for him and future players could you include a line for last-year’s totals in the table w/ the projections?  It’s useful to see what we would be losing/gaining with a player based on what they did last year.  E.g. Giambi next year may be worth 10 runs less than Giambi last year.  Though we can go back to the year-end review, the farter away from it we get the more annoying it is to go back to it.

As for the question…the BRAR is *not* position adjusted, correct?  So for example, if the Yankees were able to trade Matsui (doubtful, but if), we could also be evaluating Giambi as a DH w/o needing to redo the numbers.

Just by what I’m seeing here, I’d be happy if Giambi took a contract understanding he may not be the starter, and get paid like it.  E.g. 1 year $4m, with some incentives.  If the Yankees don’t manage to sign another 1B, he wouldn’t be the worst option as a starter.  If they do, he provides depth at 1B/DH, and we’d FINALLY have a good PH on the bench.  I have a feeling Giambi will get some offers for 2-3 years somewhere, so the “concentrated evil” era in NY is over.

For the request, I know you already posted Giambi’s totals for last year, but for him and future players could you include a line for last-year’s totals in the table w/ the projections?

Sure, done.

As for the question…the BRAR is *not* position adjusted, correct?
It is position-adjusted.  If Giambi were a full-time DH instead, add about 4 runs to his offensive projections and remove the -6 defensive hit.

The problem with Giambi as a prospective DH is the fact that Matsui shouldn’t play more than 20 games or so in the outfield and preferably none.

I would also not be crushed if Giambi accepted arbitration, and would be thrilled if he took a contract as a non-starter (although I can’t see why he would prefer that to arbitration, since he would get “incentives” in 2010 if he put in a good 2009, and an arb contract would almost certainly be for more money than a non-starting contract).

One benefit of having Giambi around on the cheap is that it reduces the risk that the Yankees will bid against themselves for Tex as the offseason continues out of fear that they could be stuck without a viable alternative.  I would prefer that they not sign Tex for any year when he’s projected to be worth less than 2.5 Wins above replacement.  I suspect that is about 6 years, but I’m sure that SG will tell us soon enough. 

My reluctance to sign someone for the long term in years where he will not be an above average Yankee (not just an above average player) is partly about risk reduction.  If a player is projected to be worth 5 wins in a given year and he delivers 3, then the signing was a poor financial deal, but not a baseball disaster.  If a player projects to be worth 2 wins and delivers 0, then he probably shouldn’t be playing at all, and any contract which makes it difficult to cut him is a problem (even if the difficultly is only a PR issue of explaining the theory of sunk costs to fans).

The problem with Giambi as a prospective DH is the fact that Matsui shouldn’t play more than 20 games or so in the outfield and preferably none.

I agree 100%, which is why they either need to trade Matsui, or have him ride the bench, if they bring Giambi back to be a DH.  Trading him will be hard before ST (since teams will want to see him play before committing anything to him), and I don’t know if they’ll be willing to put him on the bench, so…

Thanks for the info SG!

Worst case, if he accepts, you have some depth at first base on a one-year deal, even if it’s overpriced.

If you have a player who comes back on because he accepts arbitration, does his contract have an NTC? Seems likely - I can’t imagine the arbitration is solely based on dollar amount.

The 5/10 rights would apply to Giambi, so he would have a NTC.

I would offer Giambi arbitration but that’s about it.  Posada can play 1B and may well have to as early as next season.  I would rather re-sign Pudge for a year, let Molina play backup and see what Cervelli can do in AAA next season.

If he stays there will be trouble, if he goes there will be Mark Teixeira.

´Pudge is leaving the MLB, he is going to play in Puerto Rico next year, so don’t count him.

“Posada can play 1B”

Can he play it well?

Can he play it well?

No, not really.

He can play it better than Giambi…for what it’s worth.

Not sure it matters, but Posada supposedly dislikes playing 1B, and he and the Yankees are expecting him to play 120 games behind the plate next year.

He can play it better than Giambi…for what it’s worth.

1. That’s a low bar to set
2. What makes you think he’s better?

I doubt Posada’s better than Giambi at 1B.  With Giambi I think we have to also consider the amount of runs he creates per base achieved less than the replacement level.  He is VERY slow. 

Any word on Matsui’s ability to play 1B in Japan (supposedly he has played there before)?

I think it’s more useful to include the alternatives right away ... I’m not so sure about Giambi, but Abreu is someone that is clearly declining. However, I don’t know what are the alternatives.

I would offer Giambi arbitration but that’s about it.

Oh, I’d still be willing to offer him 1/$4M.  He wouldn’t take it, but it doesn’t prevent the team from doing anything else.  But yeah, there’s little reason to have him back.  According to the projections, it looks like we can expect to *lose* 10 runs from Giambi if he comes back.

I doubt Posada’s better than Giambi at 1B

I’m sure we don’t have enough data to look at this objectively.  Subjectively, Posada has looked fine the times he’s played there, and he really doesn’t need to do MUCH to be better.  I think Posada can handle the throws at first just as well (he is after all, a catcher), and throwing if they decided to amputate he shouldn’t be any worse.  I still think they’re going to try to get Posada 120+ games behind the plate, and go from there (DH opens up in 2010).

Giambi goes from 1st to 3rd surprisingly well, iirc.  And of course while we’re aware that he can’t e.g. throw to second, he does do some things pretty well at 1b.

Anyway, I suspect he signs an incentive-laden contract if it’s offered - part of making up for the lost steroid years - and is useful.

Is there someone we’re waiting for to be the solution at 1B? Obviously 1 year deals are great, but what’s to say that this problem won’t exist again in 2010 and beyond? That to me makes the case to sign Teixiera.

Is there someone we’re waiting for to be the solution at 1B? Obviously 1 year deals are great, but what’s to say that this problem won’t exist again in 2010 and beyond? That to me makes the case to sign Teixiera.

In one of my more optimistic moments, I noticed that Pujols’s contract ends after 2010, but I’m under no illusions that we can therefore write him in to the lineup for 2011.

Sign Teixiera is plan A, sure, unless you think Pujols will sign.  Do we have reason to think T would be inclined to agree to a contract we’d be happy with?

[22] in reference to certain optimistic moments, not [21]...

Anyone ever look at the difference in contracts between the post-2001 offseason and the post-2002?  Jeter, Manny, etc. signed in the former, I remember some guys coming off big years signing much smaller contracts in the latter.  I think Sheff was a beast but he only got about $13/yr from The Yanks in 2004.  Maybe post-2009 will be the year when salaries fall- maybe this year is the top.  If that’s the case I hope we don’t overpay.

I agree that Teixeira is plan A.  I would just feel more comfortable having a plan B (and C) in reserve for when Boras won’t go below 10/220.

Using a highish number for the value of a marginal win like $5m (which is about double the league average pay per free agent win in 2004 http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/intro_to_salaries_and_win_shares/), Tex might get 6/140 (assuming that his 2009 projection looks almost as good as his 2008 projection after adjusting for being a year older and having a good 2008).

I’m ok with that, even if it’s a little too much.  The question is whether he is, and I’ve got no idea, and would rather the team didn’t get carried away if he says that it’s not close to enough.  One good way to not go crazy bidding on plan A is to have plan B ready.

The Yankees greatest need is a manager who knows how to win; the kind of manager the Dodgers have.

Ortiz on the decline, Pujols to Bahston in 2011.  Or maybe The Mutts post-Delgado?  Maybe Yanks can trade Cano, IPK ++ for Pujols, sign him up LT, sign CC and Ellis/Hudson and be done with it.

I like the idea of offering Giambi arbitration.  Having Giambi on a one year deal would provide insurance against not being able to add a 1B from outside the organization, and even if Teixeira is signed and Matsui can’t be moved, I’m not so worried about positional “logjams”.  If Giambi and Matsui have to compete for time at DH, that’s fine.  If they both hit, and Matsui gets pushed into some LF duty, pushing Damon to center, putting some more pressure on Melky and Gardner, I think that’s a good thing.  Make the old guys and young guys fight their way into the lineup.

Oh, and I’l remind you all what teh #1 most important offseason move if this year: FIRE STERLING AND WALDO!!!  Bad Karma…

If Giambi and Matsui have to compete for time at DH, that’s fine.  If they both hit, and Matsui gets pushed into some LF duty, pushing Damon to center, putting some more pressure on Melky and Gardner, I think that’s a good thing.

I haven’t run the numbers yet, but I’m starting to think Damon in CF 60-70% of the time with Melky/Gardner spelling him is going to be the best option for 2009.  I still think Juan Rivera would be a good option in that case, since he can be spotted in the OF corners, should be close to league average on offense and defense and shouldn’t require a long-term deal.  Then you can look at Crawford or Holliday in 2010.

Why wouldn’t St. Louis re-sign Pujols?  Besides being the best player in baseball, he is the face of their franchise.  I would assume the Cards will do whatever it takes to keep him.

Why wouldn’t St. Louis re-sign Pujols?

Just a guess, but because they won’t have the money to pay him?

I’m pretty sure money won’t be an issue for St. Louis and Pujols.  It’s not realistic to think he’s ever going to be an option.

Teams are keeping their best players now.  There’s a reason it seems like free agent crops are getting worse lately, and it’s because of all the deals that buy out arbitration and the first few years of free agency.

It’d be interesting to look at a study of the quality of free agents over the last 10-15 years, I’d bet that in general, the available free agents are worse more recently.

Why wouldn’t St. Louis re-sign Pujols?

They got lucky signing him the first time before it became clear that the numbers he was putting up were sustainable.  The contemporary accounts of his first big contract made it sound like he wasn’t willing to give St. Louis a hometown discount, but was willing to accept that his value was based on a projection well below his 2003 numbers (regressing his performance to the mean because of the small amount of data—not that it was phrased that way).

These days, he’s clearly worth 25m+ per year, and St. Louis might not be able to pay that much for the years that he will likely ask.

One piece of bad news, though.  I just checked in more detail, and St. Louis has a $16m option for 2011, and the $5m buyout makes it virtually a sure thing that they will exercise it if he’s not seriously injured.

I’m sorry, but constructing the 2009 roster based on the fact that Pujols *may* be available 3 years from now is a Bad Idea(tm).

<i>I’m sorry, but constructing the 2009 roster based on the fact that Pujols *may* be available 3 years from now is a Bad Idea(tm). <i>

Agreed.  It was probably dubious for me to consider it back when I thought he might be available in 2 years.  Now that it’s 3 years out, I officially abandon the idea.

The Yankees are not risking committing an extra $16 million for Jason Giambi next year. If he accepts, he’d have to be a glorified Ruben Sierra, but paid $21 million.

That’s not happening. Unless the Yankees can get some kind of guarantee from Giambi that he will reject arbitration (and I’m pretty sure that’s illegal), they’re letting him walk. It’s just not worth the risk.

The Yankees are not risking committing an extra $16 million for Jason Giambi next year. If he accepts, he’d have to be a glorified Ruben Sierra, but paid $21 million.

You really think Giambi would a) ask for $16 million in arbitration and b) would win?  I doubt it.

And I’m not sure why you’re factoring in the $5 million buyout. It’s already spent, whether you offer him arbitration or not.  Including it in his 2009 salary is misleading.

Unless the Yankees can get some kind of guarantee from Giambi that he will reject arbitration (and I’m pretty sure that’s illegal), they’re letting him walk.

Teams and players have handshake agreements like that all the time.  I don’t think it’s illegal.

I’d actually be quite pleased if Giambi accepted arbitration.  Having him on a 1 yr. deal splitting time at first and Dh is far from the worst thing.  He’d also probably be a type B free agent the following year anyway.

So what does a arbitrator look at when deciding cases for post-FA players?  Is there some sort of analysis like the dollar-value of a player over replacement?  Is there some sort of quantitative assesment of value, or is it more market-based, such as looking at the dollar figures obtained by comparable FA?  I’m really curious about this. 

I doubt there’s any chance Giambi would accept arbitration.  He can almost certainly do as well or nearly as well on a per-year basis on the market, and the contract would be multi-year.

Wonder if the Rays could trade Upton to LAAA for the evening.

Think Floyd is going to be seeing Upton in his nightmares?

Think Upton is going to be seeing more strikes?

Go.

I want Teixera making those scoops for us next year.

I want Vlad to put one over the green monster.

Hate Figgy- kills us, saves them.  Damned Angels.

Lester is not a shitty pitcher. Just sayin.

Good man Lackey.
I think he’s almost cooked.

That would have been a fantastic time for an XBH by Mr. Tex there.

Eddie Rap got one call right on that Tex AB.

Lester: Lefty.  Better stuff than Hughes.  More accurate than Hughes. Apparently- according to many poster’s here- not in the same league as Hughes during the Santana saga but now it’s reversed.  Is Hughes upside a #2 or #3 or did his stuff look bad because of the rib?  I hope he can impress but I don’t see electric stuff other then the curve. 

That K of Teixera is a disgrace.  The ump should be called out due to inconsistency as much as the wrong call.

Bad Juju.

This game is over.  The Angels suck- I can’t wait to take Teixera from them.

Walk and a blast?

‘Tek ducked so he wouldn’t be hit by that pitch.  Wearing a mask wasn’t enough that time.  What a gamer.

I’m going to Boston this weekend (don’t ask) and I’d really like it everyone there would be too depressed to wear their Sox gear.

Sorry.  I jinxed.  Damn.

LAngels: most pathetic showing by a 100-win team.  Ever.  They deserved to lose.  Sorry you have to suffer the Bawston douchebaggery, Frog.

So, losing in a walk-off elimination game with KRod sitting in the bullpen.  Was that just because Shields probably had the better chance of getting out of it?

No, it’s because Mike Scioscia is a genius.

Throughout the ALDS, I kept thinking rooting for the Angels is like rooting for syphilis vs. cancer.  I have realized something now: I hate the Angels more than I hate the Red Sox.  I didn’t think it possible.  In a battle of cancer vs. syphilis, cancer wins (this time)!

the rays are cool

oh, and they gonna end the legend of j beckett

Is there any reason to believe that Teixeira would take less money from some other team than play for the Yanks?  If not, then, as much as love Bino, he’s gotta go.

My hat’s off to Schteeve, by the way.

Man, not only are the Red Sox winning, but they’re winning dramatically.

Annoying.

Come on, Rays!!

So what does a arbitrator look at when deciding cases for post-FA players?

Since no one more knowledgeable picked this up, you’ll have to take my fuzzy understanding.  The way I understand it is, the player asks for a number, and the team counters.  In Giambi’s case let’s say the Yankees offer $8M and he asks for $12M.  Then for the hearing each side has a “team”, which argues their case.  I believe this is where Bill James first got noticed by the mainstream media, by helping to argue cases for baseball players.

The player’s team tries to use precedent - the player’s stats, position, what similar players won in arbitration the year before, and what similar players got in free-agency in recent years.  The club does the same thing pretty much.  The difference I think is point-of-view; the player’s team looks at the positives, the club the negatives.  The arbitrator then, has to judge who has presented their case better, the player or the team.

One of the problems with arbitration in baseball is that - unlike in hockey - the arbitrator can EITHER pick the player’s offer or the team’s.  He/she can’t pick a middle number.  So back to that Giambi scenerio, if the arbitrator uses some formula (honestly, they could just flip a coin) that makes him believe Giambi is actually worth $10.5M, he could say, “10.5 > 8, so Giambi gets 12”.

I think that’s the simple version, but isn’t too far off.  One nice thing though about the last CBA, is that under the old system if a player rejected arbitration from his old team, he couldn’t sign with them until May 15th.  The new system, I believe the player can reject arbitration and then sign with the club the next day.  I’m not 100% sure of that, there could still be some period they can’t talk.  So, Giambi could reject arbitration hoping to get a 2-3 year deal, and then if he can’t get one and the Yankees still need a 1B in January, they can work something out for 1 year.

If you pay Jasons buyout,thats 5M.If you then offer arb I promise you that he accepts.I don’t think you can cut him more than 20% that way.That gives him around 17M.At that point might as well have picked up the 22M option.My idea.2 years 24 mil.Starting off with the idea of playing 1b then if Tex seems realistic you trade Matsui in ST once he seems healthy.