It has been 7 days, 10 hours, 6 minutes, and 27 seconds since they last won.  That’s unacceptable for a team with this payroll.  Snap out of it.  Something needs to be done.

I know it’s low hanging fruit, but I would really like to see Hairston back in 2010 as the super utility player. He could probably find a starting job elsewhere, but he was a nice late season addition - solid defense around the diamond, not an automatic out at the plate, and a pinch runner if you need one.

Depending on the length of contract (not more than three years), and the AAV, I think the Yankees should kick the tires on Figgins, if he they think that he can play CF.

SG, on a somewhat unrelated note, I saw this article in THT, and that made me go back to all of the Posada’s WAR debate.

So, of course what knocks Posada down is his baserunning (and defense), which was in full display in all its egregious glory during the playoffs. But, is baserunning position adjusted? I.e., is the replacement level for baserunning all MLB-equivalent players or MLB-equivalent catchers? I am sure that offense is adjusted that way, and probably defense as well. Is baserunning treated the same?

[2]  So . . .  the curse of Jose Molina?

[3]  A few days ago SG addressed the possibility of Figgins (a star on the RLYW all-Hot Stove League team) playing center, and concluded: no.

[5] Link?

Given the trajectory of Damon’s defensive ability over the last four years, I’m not sure that he will be able to play LF in 2011, so I think younger options may make some sense if Damon wont’ accept a one year deal.

Given the trajectory of Damon’s defensive ability over the last four years

You could probably just draw a line from his positions to plot his course. CF to LF, LF to DH, DH to a guy in the stands drinking beer and eating hot dogs.

You could probably just draw a line from his positions to plot his course. CF to LF, LF to DH, DH to a guy in the stands drinking beer and eating hot dogs.

If Boras is right about his genetics, at least he will look good doing it…

Call Damon’s bluff and offer him arbitration.  If he accepts great.  Maybe you overpay $3M at most for a 1 year deal.  If he rejects try to work out a $20-$25/2 year deal at most.  If not let him walk for the picks.

Given the trajectory of Damon’s defensive ability over the last four years, I’m not sure that he will be able to play LF in 2011

I don’t think we have enough data for that yet.  2007 and 2008 he was +7.5 and +6.7 UZR in LF.  Last year he was -9.2.  That’s a huge drop, and often we talk about using 3 years of UZR data to get “true talent”.  So he’d be about a +1 UZR LF’er.  Of course, 2009 could have been a talent-change season, and going forward he’s really a -10 or thereabouts.  I’m sure when anyone does projections on him he’ll be closer to average, maybe a slight negative.

I think this reinforces though why it should be a year w/ an option.  If last year was a fluke/SSS in defense, and he returns to being around average in 2010, you pick up the option for 2011.  If he has another down year, you don’t.

For the record, I’m still an advocate of going after Holliday.

Sherman POOHA:

2. So what would the cost be for Granderson? I assume the Yankees would have to start with center field prospect Austin Jackson. Maybe Jackson, Ian Kennedy and Double-A pitching prospect Zach McAllister gets it done.

And I wonder if the deal could be expanded to the blockbuster level. After all, the reason that the Tigers are even making Granderson available is because they have to cut payroll and they have six or seven contracts that seem near impossible to move. Could the Yankees drop the contract price [?] on Granderson by taking on one of those onerous contracts?

[...]

And the question then becomes if the Yanks are willing to do that could they extend the trade even beyond just Granderson? The Tigers also told teams at the GM Meetings that they would discuss the arbitration eligible Edwin Jackson and/or Gerald Laird.

Jackson could provide insurance in case Andy Pettitte does not return and/or if Pettitte returns allow the Yanks to pick either Phil Hughes or Joba Chamberlain for the No. 5 rotation spot and put the other into the set-up slot in front of Rivera. Laird, a strong defender, would provide a better option behind Jorge Posada than free agent Jose Molina while keeping Francisco Cervelli at Triple-A for insurance.

Obviously, mega-trades do not happen very often and I would suspect it would be difficult for the Yankees to obtain just Granderson, who is going to be attractive to a lot of organizations. But by having a ton of money and a very strong prospect base, the Yanks are positioned to at least try to make a play with Detroit for Granderson – and maybe a bunch more stuff.

[10] Overplayed jokes about NYS aside, the obvious difference there is that the most recent season is in a new ballpark. I’d be interested if Damon has anything to say about how difficult it was to play in LF in the new stadium. It sure would be nice if we could look to see how LF UZR/150 compared for YS 2009 and historically in the old stadium.

[6]  Link?  It’s on this site, dude.

Didn’t Fangraphs put out an article on why you shouldn’t compare a player’s UZR from year to year? SG would know.

[10] I would have no problem with a team option for 2011, but beyond defensive metrics there is also what one sees. Granted, Damon’s skillset, however unorthodox, has worked very well for him over the years, but too often when you see him play the OF, it now seems that he can’t track a flyball.

[13] *scans*

Since ESPN took it’s raw ZR number away, does anyone know where a good spot to get them is?

I didn’t see any comments about this, but a reported from Chad Jennings:

The Yankees have made their first moves of the offseason, outrighting both Freddy Guzman and Josh Towers off of the 40-man roster.

Kind of expected…

[14] Yeah, comparing UZR from year-to-year is kind of like comparing a player’s OPS from April/May to their OPS from June/July - it isn’t really predictive of what they’ll do in August/September, or representative of their true-talent.

[12] Good point; it could be LF is more difficult to field now and they need a better fielder.  Or it could be there is a LF in NYS adjustment that needs to be done, that they haven’t figured out yet for NYS.  Or it could still just be a fluctuation.

Arbitration on Damon is a good bet as well, the downside is you don’t have a (probably) reasonable option year if he repeats 2009, or better (worse?) yet repeats 2009 offensively while closer to 07/08 defensively.

I think their reasoning was kind of like what SG said about Alex yesterday- he hasn’t really gotten worse, just that the league has gotten better.

Yeah but Damon really did look like he got worse defensively this year.

See? It should have been the curse of Freddy Guzman.

19- I actually agree. I was a big fan of the dolphin/merman comparisons.

[11] The Tigers could save more money by giving away Magglio Ordonez and paying a third of his contract than they would by trading Granderson, Laird and Jackson.  Sherman may not understand this, but I’ll bet Dombrowski does.

@3 I believe Rob Neyer summed up my feelings about Figgins nicely, “Someone is going to make an expensive mistake with Figgins.” I just hope to god it isn’t the Yankees.

Re Granderson: I love the guy. He just seems like a really aware, charismatic dude. But he can’t hit lefties at all. No interest. Cameron on the other hand…

[19] That’s because he’s in the midst of turning into a merman. Once the transformation is complete. he’ll be fine. Assuming that LF is at least 10 feet deep and has the right ratio of salt.

I’d love to see Cashman eschew Holliday and make a trade for an OF, but I don’t think Granderson is the answer, as others have pointed out the flaws of Granderson and the trade in general.

If Cashman can strike a good deal for an OF, I think he’ll do it.  I don’t think he wants Damon at anything more than a two-year deal, at best, and would like to part ways with Matsui.

While I’m skeptical of the reports that a big chunk of players will be non-tendered to avoid arbitration, I do think some teams may be willing to trade some of these players to avoid arbitration at a bargain trade cost, ala the Bos/Fla Hermida trade.  My take is Cashman kicks the tires on some of these players and tries to acquire an OF on the relative cheap, giving him more leverage when dealing with Boras/Damon and possibly Matsui (although the glut of DH bats gives Cashman the leverage already).

I can’t see Cashman signing a big (or even medium) name FA SP with Joba and Hughes.  It’s time to get these kids in the rotation.  Maybe a FA SP if Andy retires and maybe a lesser name SP as insurance against Hughes/Kennedy/Joba not panning out in the rotation.  But I can’t see Cashman signing Lackey unless Lackey does a one-year deal.

I’d think between looking for a bargain OF in a trade and building a good bench, Cashman will probably be relatively quiet in the offseason.  Let Boston sign Holliday for too many years and too much money.

I was firmly in the Holliday camp, but I think I’m pulling back.  I now agree that offering Damon arbitration is the best way to go.  I prefer him over Matsui b/c of his ability to play the field.  I’d be willing to overpay by a couple of million for that ability.  If Damon declines, you offer him 1 year plus an option, but you also go after Matsui for 1 year (probably no option).  Whoever jumps first is your starting DH.

I’m completely OK with an OF of Melky/Gardner/Swisher with Damon getting time in LF.  However, I think we need to go after Granderson if the cost is only AJ+.

Also, I prefer Lackey over Pettitte.  I’m not sure why Pettitte’s 2009 puts us in any different position than last offseason.  We were willing to stand firm against his salary demands b/c we know the end is near.  In my opinion, his 2009 only tells us that the end wasn’t 2009…It gives me no confidence that he can’t fall off a cliff next year. 

Lackey will be a little too much money, and a year or more too long, but a playoff rotation of CC, Lackey, AJ is excellent.  And we’ll find the innings for Joba and Hughes.

[26] I’m all for Lackey over Pettitte if you can get him on a short deal. But realistically, that’s not happening. Lackey is going to be looking to cash in, and as the premier pitching FA he will.

Pettitte’s 2009 puts the Yankees in a different position because he pitched reasonably well all year. Combine that with the fact that his peripherals last year when we was sucking were actually OK to good and there’s no reason not to expect him to be decent again.

Also, there is no “finding innings” for Joba anymore if he is continue to progress, he needs to stick in the rotation full time this coming year. We can assume that his innings limit will be close to 200 in 2010. The only reason to remove him from the rotation is injury or ineffectiveness with few no redeeming signs or trends.

I’m completely OK with an OF of Melky/Gardner/Swisher with Damon getting time in LF

Gah!  The path to WOE looms.  There would be a defensive upgrade from Damon to Melky, but the offensive downgrade would be more.  I’m not at all sold on Gardner as a full time player (as a hitter), either. 

I would like Holliday, but I absolutely agree with offering Damon arbitration and seeing about a short-term deal.  If he walks, take the picks.  Meanwhile, negotiate with Holliday.  I don’t really want Damon as the primary DH, though.  Does his bat really work at DH?

Lackey > Pettitte, sure.  But of course Lackey will require at least 4, probably more, years.  Pettitte has been going year to year.

So, of course what knocks Posada down is his baserunning (and defense), which was in full display in all its egregious glory during the playoffs. But, is baserunning position adjusted?

No.  In my opinion, once a player is on the bases, his position is irrelevant, and he should be compared to all other baserunners. If you can make a case that I shouldn’t think this way, I’m open to listening to it though.

And regarding Figgins as a CF option, I’ll repost what I wrote since it was buried in the comments of a thread that really shouldn’t have had anything to do with Figgins as a CF.

  I agree that the chatter is silly, SG.  But I would think that Figgins would be even more valuable in CF, where he has played 25% of his career defensive innings.  Do the numbers say that he sucks there?

UZR isn’t very fond of him in CF.  Looks like he’s been -3.5 in his career, which isn’t awful, but the progression isn’t good.

Figgins UZRs.

2003: +9 (+36/150)
2004: -4 (-15/150)
2005: -4 (-12/150)
2006: -7 (-9/150)
2007: DNP
2008: DNP
2009: DNP

Trends aren’t generally predictive in baseball, but a weighted average of those #s means he’d have projected around -7 in CF in 2007.  Not sure what zone rating says, but I’d imagine it should be similar.

The fact that he hasn’t played an inning out there in three years means it’s doubtful he’s gotten better.  Factoring in typical aging of about -1 per season means he’d be around a -10 defender in CF right now on paper.

Obviously, statistical analysis of defense is somewhat limited but from this data I wouldn’t consider signing him as a CF.  Maybe the scouts see it differently.

Compare that to his defense at 3B, where he’s projected to be around a +10.  That’s a swing of almost two wins defensively.  Since CF and 3B hit about the same in most seasons, that’s a big, big difference.

I’m completely OK with an OF of Melky/Gardner/Swisher with Damon getting time in LF.  However, I think we need to go after Granderson if the cost is only AJ+.

I’m not so okay with this.  As I said in the previous thread, I think the Yankees need to resign both of Damon and Matsui to short term deals or find replacements for both.  The dream scenario would be Holliday in left and Damon at DH if the Yankees can afford it.

But if there are budgetary concerns, I would go cheaper on the everyday players and acquire a frontline starter.  Kronic puts it well:

I’m not sure why Pettitte’s 2009 puts us in any different position than last offseason.  We were willing to stand firm against his salary demands b/c we know the end is near.  In my opinion, his 2009 only tells us that the end wasn’t 2009…It gives me no confidence that he can’t fall off a cliff next year.

Totally agree.  So even if they bring Andy back, and I think they should, I’m still not counting on him to be a big part of the post-season picture again.  Which leaves them with CC, A.J., and….... Joba?  Hughes?  Is this the year those guys step up?  Does it make sense to count on those guys, not to mention A.J., who’s inconsistent and still something of an injury risk, when the addition of a Lackey or Halladay (or King Felix in a longshot, dream trade) could really lock this team in for another playoff run in 2010-11.

For me, this is not a team bursting at the seams with young players ready to lead the way to a championship.  It’s an old team with a rapidly closing window of success for guys like Jeter, Mo, Posada, Pettitte, and, to a lesser extent, ARod.  I say make a strong push to win another title in the next couple of years before the vets fall off a cliff, and I say the best way to do that is to add a premium starting pitcher to pair with CC at the front of the rotation.

No.  In my opinion, once a player is on the bases, his position is irrelevant, and he should be compared to all other baserunners. If you can make a case that I shouldn’t think this way, I’m open to listening to it though.

I think that sounds much like “once a hitter is in the batter’s box, his position is irrelevant, and he should be compared to all other hitters.”

The best case I can make is the following: there should be systematic differences in tools of the players playing different positions. I have a couple of reasons in mind (all of which can be somewhat ill-thought out):

1. A catcher is probably a catcher because he has skills/tools where speed is just not a valued attribute, and speed being an important part of baserunning, is more likely to be a bad baserunners in terms of being able to take an extra base.

2. Also, correct me if I understand it wrong, but isn’t a reason why hitting is position adjusted is because it is more physically demanding to play a position like SS compared to first base, which would be a reason for systematic differences in offensive output? So applying the same logic, it is possible that the physical demands of catching make some players worse baserunners. But this is probably tempered by the fact that most shortstops are good baserunners.

So, this is mostly an empirical question. Is it possible that all else (physical attributes, age, tenure at major league level) being equal, a catcher is likely to be a worse baserunner than other position players? Ideally, we should probably see if significant differences exist among all positions, but perhaps middle infielders and CFers are expected to be better baserunners than the rest, because of the tools required to play those positions?

There would be a defensive upgrade from Damon to Melky, but the offensive downgrade would be more.

For some reason I think this might be closer than you think. By UZR/150, Damon was pretty rough in LF.

SG - Would it be possible for you do a quick calc comparing 2009 Melky vs 2009 Damon if you move all of Melky’s defensive innings to LF?

No.  In my opinion, once a player is on the bases, his position is irrelevant, and he should be compared to all other baserunners. If you can make a case that I shouldn’t think this way, I’m open to listening to it though.

Well, I guess I don’t see why it should be considered differently than hitting.  You’re comparing the offensive contribution of the player to what you could get from a replacement that plays the same position.  Now, it won’t matter if you’re comparing the WAR for players who play the same position, but if you’re comparing different positions you’re not correcting for that.

Isn’t the point of batting runs to put all offensive contributions (hitting and baserunning) in the same context?  If you positionally adjust one, why not the other?

One thing to keep in mind is that the Yankees did very little at the trade deadline this year.  So maybe this time around they add either a LF/DH bat or a SP during the winter and address the other issue at mid-season if the in-house solutions aren’t panning out.  IOW, an opening day OF of Swisher/Gardner/Cabrera with Hinske and Nady platooning at DH doesn’t necessarily mean that they finish the season with that lineup; going into the season with Pettitte, Chamberlain and Hughes in the rotation doesn’t necessarily mean counting on two or three of them for the stretch run or in the post-season.

By UZR/150, Damon was pretty rough in LF.

In 2009, yes.  But he was pretty good in 2007 and 2008.  The problems with a single year of UZR have already been noted.  Hell, even Bobby Abreu bounced back defensively in 2009.

I wonder what it would take to get Dan Uggla, and how he’d be in left field.

I think that sounds much like “once a hitter is in the batter’s box, his position is irrelevant, and he should be compared to all other hitters.”

The difference being, we know what the average player at each position provides offensively and can use that as a baseline for position-adjusting.  Have you seen any place that tracks baserunning by position?  And what do you propose for players who play multiple positions?  Do we have to split out their baserunning based on what positions they were playing at they got on base and did their baserunning?

A catcher is probably a catcher because he has skills/tools where speed is just not a valued attribute, and speed being an important part of baserunning, is more likely to be a bad baserunners in terms of being able to take an extra base.

I wouldn’t disagree with that, but then you run into the issue of overvaluing a catcher who does have decent speed. 

Also, correct me if I understand it wrong, but isn’t a reason why hitting is position adjusted is because it is more physically demanding to play a position like SS compared to first base, which would be a reason for systematic differences in offensive output?

While that may be a small part of it, it’s more because as you said in your first point, the skill set required to play a position defensively restricts the type of players who can play there.  You’re not going to see someone built like Prince Fielder in CF, because he just can’t physically cut it there.

The only position where there’s been shown to be a marked difference in offense when a player plays there compared to elsewhere is catcher. AFAIK, that isn’t true at any other position.

So, this is mostly an empirical question. Is it possible that all else (physical attributes, age, tenure at major league level) being equal, a catcher is likely to be a worse baserunner than other position players?

I’d say that it’s not possibly true, it’s almost certainly true.

Ideally, we should probably see if significant differences exist among all positions, but perhaps middle infielders and CFers are expected to be better baserunners than the rest, because of the tools required to play those positions?

Again, I’d say that’s almost certainly true.

The other thing you need to consider is that the spread among the best and worst baserunners in the game in non-SB baserunning is not nearly as large as the spread on offense or defense.  Figure the spread between the best and worst players is around maybe 80 runs on offense, 40 runs on defense, and 20 runs in baserunning.  If you’re position-adjusting baserunning by more than a handful of runs you’re over-doing it, and if you’re not position-adjusting by that much, you’re really not making it worth the hassle of doing it all.

Would it be possible for you do a quick calc comparing 2009 Melky vs 2009 Damon if you move all of Melky’s defensive innings to LF?

Damon: 626 PA,  96.5 BR, 100 BR/650 PA, -6 RSAA in LF
Cabrera   540 PA, 65.7 BR, 79 BR/650 PA, -1 RSAA in CF

Damon was about 21 runs better offensively pro-rated to 650 PAs.  In general, an average CF would be a +10 LF, so if Melky was moved to LF he’d maybe have been +9, although anytime we do something like that we have to take those numbers with a grain of salt. 

So Damon in LF would still have been a little more than a win better than Melky would have been.

I’m not sure why Pettitte’s 2009 puts us in any different position than last offseason.

Pettitte finished 2008 with a bum arm and was, IIRC, regularly taking cortizone shots the last month or so.  He also wasn’t that good the last couple of months (though as noted, his perphals weren’t all that bad), plus he was just coming off that whole HGH/Clemens thing.  I think added to that some negative feelings about the Yankees “only” having 89 wins and no post-season.

This year, Pettitte stayed (relatively) healthy throughout the year.  His baseball-card numbers looked better (similar periphals).  Plus he was a major contributed on a world-champion.

I think most people are comfortable now that Pettitte *is* what he looks like.  A pitcher who can give you 180+ innings, league-average or a little better.

So Damon in LF would still have been a little more than a win better than Melky would have been.

... and I guess you could argue that the gap could be expected to bridge as Cabrera (going into his age 25 season) gets better and Damon (going into his age 36 season) get worse. Still, that may be too big of a gap for it to be a realistic scenario. And as MC noted, those numbers on Damon have to be questioned when considering that he was great by UZR in the previous two seasons.

If you start position adjusting base running, you have to adjust the positional adjustments we use to compare the WAR of players in different positions, so the end result is not much changes.

[37] I guess my question would be if you think it (position-adjusting baserunning) wouldn’t be worth it, or if you think we don’t yet have sufficient data to do a good job of it?  I’d think it is the latter.  Now once we *have* the data, we may find that there isn’t enough variance to make it worth-while.

But if all non-C positions as a whole have very little difference, and catchers have a large difference, maybe we need to add more positional adjustment for catchers.  E.g. 1B on average are the worst at -1, CF are the best at +1, probably isn’t worth it.  But then if catchers on average are -5, perhaps it makes sense to add 4 more runs for the position adjustment.  Seems to me I read a thread on the Book blog by Tango that indicated he (or one of the commentators like Rally) was thinking of adding a larger adjustment for catchers.

Given Granderson’s poor lefty splits, any precedent on drastic improvement?

So the downgrade from Damon to Melky is about a win?  And Gardner and Melky are close to a wash in CF?  Man, that really sounds to me like they can save some serious money by going cheap-o in the OF.

[41] Yeah, I think that is the crux, that catchers are almost surely far worse baserunners than the universe, but the flip side is what SG says, overrating a catcher for his baserunning skills (say a guy like Russell Martin).

But between the Molina brothers, Posada, Captain Tek, Gerald Laird, I am not sure that there is insignificant differences in baserunning for catchers versus rest.

[43] That’s assuming that Damon would be equally as bad in LF next year. Also, wouldn’t it make sense to throw Melky in RF and Swisher in LF given the differences in arm (I assume they have similar range)?

[44] To be fair, Russell Martin’s baserunning was only part of the reason he was hyped. Unfortunately for him, he has significantly regressed in just about everything else.

[40] Shouldn’t it be just setting a different “replacement level baserunning” by position? Although probably a replacement level catcher is a better baserunner than Posada.

... and I guess you could argue that the gap could be expected to bridge as Cabrera (going into his age 25 season) gets better and Damon (going into his age 36 season) get worse

Well, only if you use 2009 as your projection for 2010, which I constantly harp on not doing but for some reason the message keeps getting missed.

Yeah, Damon should decline.  Yeah, Melky should improve, but is Melky going to improve on 2009, or is he going to improve on what his 2006-2009 weighted data projected in 2010 would be?  Same thing for Damon.

[37] I guess my question would be if you think it (position-adjusting baserunning) wouldn’t be worth it, or if you think we don’t yet have sufficient data to do a good job of it? 

I think sam and DaPuj raise fair points/questions, but I just don’t think it’s worth the effort.  Say we change Posada from a -8 baserunner to a -6 baserunner.  What does that do, change his WAR from 1.2 to 1.4?  Do we really think WAR is precise enough that the difference between 1.2 and 1.4 is particularly meaningful?

I guess what you could do is regress non SB-baserunning towards average so it’s not as important in your definition of WAR.  So maybe you regress it 50% towards average, so instead of having a range of -10 to +10 you have a range of -5 to +5?  I’ve thought about that with defense as well, although not 50%, maybe more like 10 or 20%.

I get that we shouldn’t use one year’s worth of data, but I’m also factoring in the fact that Damon “looked” a lot worse in LF.  I’m still trying to figure out how someone loses the “skill” of being able to tell where a ball is going to be.  He looked so out of place out there at times (and not just in the new stadium).  I think it was on this site where someone said that he looked like a guy wearing the glove on the wrong hand.  Yeah, he got to most of the balls despite looking bad, but I could definitely imagine a future where he’s just a trainwreck out there.

Swisher in LF makes sense, unless the size of LF vs RF requires the more range-y melky in LF.

Anyone have the numbers handy for how many million dollars a marginal win is worth?

Well, only if you use 2009 as your projection for 2010, which I constantly harp on not doing but for some reason the message keeps getting missed.

My next sentence (not sure why you chose to not cut and past that one) was

And as MC noted, those numbers on Damon have to be questioned when considering that he was great by UZR in the previous two seasons.

So, yeah, it’s based on an assumption that Damon’s that bad defensively, which is easily challenged.

Swisher in LF makes sense, unless the size of LF vs RF requires the more range-y melky in LF.

That’s why I pushed Melky to LF. It also cuts down on the risk of projected that defensive alignment - you’ve moved 1 player instead of 2.

risk of projecting that defensive alignment

all things being equal, defense/baserunning is more fun for me to watch than offense.  Sign me up for an OF of Granderson/Gardner/Melky with Swisher as the DH/4OF

Re: Baserunning

but I just don’t think it’s worth the effort.

Eminently fair point.  I was unclear as to gross effect, and if it really is a couple of runs, then it’s not worth it.  If catchers were 5 or 10 runs worse at base-running than average, that would be something, but 1-3 runs are lost in the noise.  Thanks.

To be fair, Damon is also more of an injury risk (ah, those troublesome sexy calves of his) than Melky… though of course both managed to get hurt in one playoff series.

I think Melky-Gardner-Swisher starting OF is a bad idea for a number of reasons:

1) It’s a sure offensive downgrade from the 2009 status quo. 
2) The infield likely projects to lose some offensive production next year too, as a number of guys really rocked their high-end projections.  This makes offensive loss from the OF even more problematic.
3) 2010 Damon as DH < 2009 Matsui as DH, almost certainly.  2010 Matsui likely projects to be less than 2009 Matsui as well, of course, with the attendant injury risk. 
4) I’m worried that a full season of Gardner could expose him as less than the already marginal hitter he appears to be.  I admit this could just be pessimism based (partly) on his hideous looking swing.
5) Melky, who I like, has yet to really improve as a hitter.  He basically just held his own this year.  He’s young enough that he could still improve, but I don’t really see much basis for thinking he will.
6) I don’t see some awesome LFer (or CFer, I guess) hitting the market in 2010.  Some people seem to believe that Carl Crawford is that guy.  I, clearly, don’t.  I’d prefer Holliday.  So who are you blocking by signing Holliday, or Damon for 2 years?  Not Austin Jackson (if he makes the majors, it’s gotta be in CF.  I seriously doubt he has the bat to be even average anywhere else).

The good parts: 1) defensive upgrade; and 2) saves money.

Say we change Posada from a -8 baserunner to a -6 baserunner.  What does that do, change his WAR from 1.2 to 1.4?

My point is that you can’t give Posada credit for being a catcher without punishing catchers as a whole for being bad base runners.  If the average catcher is a -2 baserunner and you start measuring baserunning by position (ie, making the average catcher a +0 baserunner), then catchers need a second positional adjustment of -2 runs.  The value of not getting thrown out is fixed.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Yankees did very little at the trade deadline this year…

Absolutely true.  And it might be fun to try to repeat without any new, big-name players added to the roster in the postseason.  And maybe by the end of 2010 Joba and/or Hughes have made their mark in the rotation and away they go.  That’s not a far-fetched scenario, and I’d get behind it if that’s the way the Yankees decide to go.

I just feel like a LOT went right for this 2009 team—namely, Posada, Jeter, Pettitte, Mo, Matsui, and Damon staying healthy and productive at advanced ages—that doesn’t figure to happen to the same degree again (I’d be curious to see the actual vs. projected numbers for 2009—has SG already posted this?), and I’m not sure a year’s development for Joba, Hughes and the centerfielders will be enough to counteract any regression on the part of the old guys.

Sign me up for an OF of Granderson/Gardner/Melky with Swisher as the DH/4OF

Why do that instead of Granderson-Melky/Gardner-Swisher, plus a DH?  Melky isn’t much better than Swisher in RF.  He’s better, I’m sure (probably by about 1 win).  Swisher >>> Melky at the plate. 

So things aren’t equal there.  I like good defense too.  But I also hate 2-pitch plate appearances that end in a popup or groundball to 2nd…

I’m still trying to figure out how someone loses the “skill” of being able to tell where a ball is going to be.

One obvious answer is eyesight.  Not just is his vision 20-20, but other things like how bright-lights affect him, etc.  He may just not be picking the ball up as early as he used to.  I know enough to know these changes *do* happen, but not enough to know if a yearly eye-exam would catch them, or if Damon would need to go for specific tests.

Think Albert Pujols could play left?

I figure the Yanks could start with a package built around A-Jax and IPK…

All things being equal, winning is more fun for me to watch than losing.

I think Albert could probably pitch, catch, or play shortstop.  Hell, he might be able to do two of those at the same time.

I just feel like a LOT went right for this 2009 team—namely, Posada, Jeter, Pettitte, Mo, Matsui, and Damon staying healthy and productive at advanced ages—that doesn’t figure to happen to the same degree again

Well, a lot of stuff went wrong, too.  ARod wasn’t there for the first month, took a while to, “get back in the swing of things”, and needed regular rest.  Wang was projected to be 2 or 2A in the rotation, and that was a complete flop.  Four relievers (Edwar, Veras, Marte, Bruney) who projected to throw a lot of meaningful innings for the Yankees threw very few, and the few they threw were often not good.  Joba flopped in August and September.  Though Posada stayed fairly healthy and all, he did miss about a month, and his *backup* missed most of the same time so that they had a AA catcher starting (though that turned out well).  They actually had pretty much a AA infielder starting at 3rd (who hadn’t played 3rd before) and a AA catcher starting in some games!

I think there were a lot of things that went right, but there were several things that went wrong.  I think the pitching staff will be in better shape next year - Joba will be better, 2010 Hughes > 2009 Wang, probably some better depth, plus relievers are more talented.  Some of the backups will be more talented/seasoned, and better able to take over if the starters are hurt, and a full-season of ARod will really help.  Sure other things could go wrong, but…

They actually had pretty much a AA infielder starting at 3rd (who hadn’t played 3rd before) and a AA catcher starting in some games!

oh man, I had forgotten about that..

[63] The Red Sox ‘went wrong’ list was pretty long, also. I’m worried about how that will change as well.

Wang was projected to be 2 or 2A in the rotation…

I know this is the CW, but I had him at 3b or 4.  There’s no need for us to rehash all of the Burnett signing arguments, but I don’t think they gave him all that money to be a #3 or 4 guy.  For years, I’ve been telling my casual baseball fan friends (you know, the guys who were really impressed with 19 wins two years in a row) that the Yanks wouldn’t win a WS again until they didn’t need Wang to be any more than their third or fourth best starter.  Turns out they didn’t win one until they didn’t need him at all.

[66] Shh!  I’m strengthening my argument with half-truths which are defensible based on subjective reasoning from last January!

—-Why do that instead of Granderson-Melky/Gardner-Swisher, plus a DH?  Melky isn’t much better than Swisher in RF.  He’s better, I’m sure (probably by about 1 win).  Swisher >>> Melky at the plate. —-

I’m in the “save DH to rest a bunch of guys” camp.  With the right “backup” catcher, Posada might be best used as the primary DH, and I really want to see the left side of the infield get serious time at DH.

If Matsui can be had for one year, then yeah, platoon CF and put Swisher back in the OF.

I think the WS win in 2009 will mean i can completely live with a down 2010 with the eye on Mauer or Halladay in 2011.

Burnett was always signed to be the #2, if only for a few years (until he regressed and one of Joba/Hughes took over the #2).  Whether *Cashman* believed he had a 2 and 2A, or if he had a 2, 3, and 3A, I don’t know.  But yes, they didn’t pay the GDP of Wilkes-Barre* for a #3.

*If Jayson Stark can cite inaccurate GDP’s of places to compare Yankee payroll too, so can I!  I’m probably closer than him.

The Yankees need somebody who can play the outfield.  Swisher/Melky/Gardner leaves them without a fourth outfielder or injury insurance.

•Joel Sherman caught a vibe, and it said that the Yankees will not only non-tender Wang, but they will “not even offer him a small base with incentives to return.” Good thing it’s just a vibe

With all the reclamation projects we’ve signed I’d hate to give up on Wang so soon

My point is that you can’t give Posada credit for being a catcher without punishing catchers as a whole for being bad base runners.

I am not sure I understand. Why then make any position adjustment at all, even for offense? In other words, why would extrapolation of your statements to “you can’t give Posada credit for being a catcher without punishing catchers as a whole for being bad <strike>base runners.</strike> hitters.” “The value of not <strike>getting thrown out</strike> making an out is fixed.” be wrong?

I think Albert could probably pitch, catch, or play shortstop.  Hell, he might be able to do two of those at the same time.

he’d have to considering what the Yankees would have to give up to get him.

[66] You really had Wang as the 4? Below who? Joba? That’s the only guy who makes sense. Certainly not Andy.

Also, if healthy Wang is your 4th best starter that’s an outrageously good pitching staff.

This is a nitpick, but hey I’m bored.

Wang was a fine 2/2a.  I base this on roughly three seasons of 3.75-4 ERA ball he put up with the Yankees (with a suspect defense behind him much of the time, I might add).  Yes, I know there is more to evaluating pitchers than ERA, but CMW is the type that is hard to get a handle on b/c of his extreme groundballing tendencies.  If you look at his BB rate, K rate, hit rate… you’d think he was a fluke who was about to get pounded at any moment.  And yet, for 2 full seasons and 2 partial ones, he was a well-above-average American League pitcher.  Because he basically allowed singles.  NOTE: none of this has anything to do with Wins.

So, at the time Burnett was signed, you had two guys who projected to have ~4 ERAs, if Wang was healthy.  They did it in very different ways, but the end result was above-average but not great pitching.  Pre-injury Wang was, to me, slightly better.  Hence being the #2 starter, or #2a/b.  The injury was not his arm, and at the time I guess I didn’t realize how easily it could cascade.

I know this is the CW, but I had him at 3b or 4

Burnett was always signed to be the #2

FWIW, Sabathia start on Opening Day, Wang started the 2nd game of the season, and Burnett started the 3rd.  These #1, #2, #3, etc. tags change from person to person, but in their traditional sense, it certainly looked as though Girardi viewed CMW as his #2 starter going into the season.

Below who? Joba?

Yes.  Irrational exuberance, I guess, but I’ll admit to it.

Wang started the 2nd game of the season

That means very little.  I certainly never took it to mean that “Girardi viewed CMW as his #2 starter going into the season.”  Especially in light of his comments late in ST about mixing up his rotation so that opponents wouldn’t see the same kind of pitcher back to back.

I am not sure I understand. Why then make any position adjustment at all, even for offense? In other words, why would extrapolation of your statements to “you can’t give Posada credit for being a catcher without punishing catchers as a whole for being bad base runners. hitters.” “The value of not getting thrown out making an out is fixed.” be wrong?

Positional adjustments are actually for defense.  You can estimate how much the adjustment needs to be through differences in offense, but the point of the adjustments is that there is no league average measure of defense.  This is somewhat helpful: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/position-adjustments/

Like several others mentioned in the last thread, I am still enjoying the WS afterglow.

Agreed.  Still can’t stop smiling.

Joel Sherman caught a vibe, and it said that the Yankees will not only non-tender Wang, but they will “not even offer him a small base with incentives to return.

First, I doubt this to be true, particularly since it’s a Sherman vibe, but mostly because it wouldn’t make much sense at all for the Yankees to do this.  Unless there’s something about Wang’s rehab we just don’t know yet.
Second, placing the word “tender” right before “Wang” is just wrong.

MLB network had on the 1961 season last night.  In an interview with Johnny Blanchard(Casey’s butcher boy) he mentioned how at one point Houk had him batting 5th behind Mantle and Maris and how once after they both hit tape measure HRs he knew what was coming and got hit square in the head after which he asked Houk to please bat him 7th or 8th cracking Houk up.

I wish to weigh in on the speculation of an outfield consisting of going with Melky, Gardner and Swisher. This won’t happen.  Not nearly enough offense will come back from this group though their collective performance could qualify as offensive in one sense.  I believe a trade will occur if Holliday is priced too high.  Names that could be offered would include some minor leaguers such as Jackson, Kennedy,McAllister, Russo, maybe Cervelli.  I think depending on how big a fish is considered that even Joba, Melky, Coke, or Gardner could be had.  It would take someone pretty established to remove Joba, but its not completely out of the question IMO.

[80]  I don’t think there’s anyway they trade Joba or Hughes.

That die is cast; they made their decision when they wouldn’t trade either for Santana.  All that’s left to do now is pencil them in as your #4 and #5 SP and let them work through it.

EVEN Coke? Really?

Even Melky or Gardner?

Unless they plan on expanding payroll I just don’t see any way Holliday can happen.  Assuming he gets $20 per minimum that puts the payroll at $186 and change for 13 players.  That’s with no DH and no Pettitte.  Add Andy and you are close to $200M with no DH or bench/bullpen. 

If they really did borrow payroll from this year to pay for Teix then I can’t see a good way to spend the $30 or so million they have coming off the books when $20M is spend on one guy.

Increase - $14.5 M
Decrease - $45 M

Holliday might completely tap them out alone.  Even if they decide to keep payroll the same and forgive the “Teix loan” then Holliday and Pettitte takes care of the $30M right there.

I think depending on how big a fish is considered that even Joba, Melky, Coke, or Gardner could be had.  It would take someone pretty established to remove Joba, but its not completely out of the question IMO.

Even if they wanted to move Joba or Hughes, and I hope they don’t, their perceived values are down because of their troubles (real or perceived) in the rotation and the media’s insistence that they are better suited for the BP.

I agree with snapper [81] and you let them loose in the rotation.  Re-sign Andy or find his replacement in the FA market, but let Joba and Hughes be your 4 and 5 starters.  They have replacements if need be in Gaudin, Kennedy and even Mitre (if they bring him back) and McAllister (if he’s ready).

Yes, sd, of course.  It’s just not possible.

Except that I spent all of last off-season making exactly that kind of argument about how there was no way they could sign Teixeira.  Right up to the minute that Cashman humiliated me by borrowing from 2010 to sign Teixeira.  So I will no longer believe any claim that there is any limit on the Yankees’ payroll.

Even though you probably are right.

My next sentence (not sure why you chose to not cut and past that one) was  

And as MC noted, those numbers on Damon have to be questioned when considering that he was great by UZR in the previous two seasons.

So, yeah, it’s based on an assumption that Damon’s that bad defensively, which is easily challenged.

I read your post as talking about the overall difference between the two, not just defense, which made the second part of your post seemingly superfluous.  If you were just talking about defense then I apologize.

(I’d be curious to see the actual vs. projected numbers for 2009—has SG already posted this?)

Started with TSBG, then got derailed by stuff.  I’ll try and resume it next week.

But generally, in a season where you win the World Series, a lot of stuff HAS to go right.  Although it’ll be more useful to do with it actual data at some point, for now figure:

<u>RIGHT</u>
-Jeter rebounding offensively
-Posada’s return from injury
-Burnett staying healthy
-A-Rod returning from hip injury to perform just as well as expected
-Nick Swisher recovering from a brutal 2008
-Joba making 31 starts
-The emergence of Hughes and Robertson in the pen
-TSBG exceeding projections slightly
-Melky exceeding projections slightly
-Matsui staying healthy and having arguably his best season in at least the last four
-Mo coming back from shoulder surgery and not losing much effectiveness
-Aceves emerging as a solid relief option
-Overall health of a bunch players over 30 years old

<u>WRONG</u>
-Wang being awful
-Veras and Edwar being disasters after solid 2008s
-Xavier Nady missing the entire season
-A-Rod missing the first month
-Joba making 31 starts
-Mitre
-Marte(regular season edition only)
-Cody Ransom being even worse than projected
-Angel Berroa being even worse than Cody Ransom

Yeah, a lot of stuff went right, but a lot of stuff went wrong too.  Before the season, if you knew Wang and Nady would effectively miss the entire season and/or provide below replacement level value, you would not have been looking forward to 2009 I’d guess.

As far as who was the #2 coming into the year, I’d agree it was Burnett, and looking at the pre-season pitching projections that does seem to be the case.

[77] Thanks for the link, but I am still not sure if I get this. I will give a simple example to show how I understand this.

Derek Jeter is a very good offensive player (fourteenth in batting runs at 37.4), but not the best one in the league. He is an above average defensive player for a shortstop (saved 6.6 runs above league average at SS). In addition, he is getting credited with 6.3 additional runs because he plays SS (positional). In addition, it seems like for him Replacement is defined as 23.9 runs in Fangraphs. All that adds up to being the fifth best player in the league.

My question is, why make two adjustments, once with positional adjustment, and once with replacement level? My sense was that one was a defensive adjustment (positional), the other was an offensive adjustment, taking into account the difficulty and wear and tear of the position. Can you tell me where I am wrong?

Fangraphs doesn’t even quantify catcher defense in their WAR calculations, right? Do they adjust for it entirely due to offense?

Looks like Joba projected as the #2…

[86] - Ha ha.  I’d love to be proven wrong on this one.  I’m sure you weren’t that upset last year.

But I think I included C.C.‘s “increase” in those numbers so adjust them accordingly.

I’m sure you weren’t that upset last year.

I was devastated.

Fell into a deep and profound depression.

It last almost a full second.

Really.

Almost.

The fangraphs replacement level is basically a playing time adjustment.  I don’t think it’s position-dependent:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/win-values-explained-part-four

How many rounds are the Rule 5 draft?

My question is, why make two adjustments, once with positional adjustment, and once with replacement level? My sense was that one was a defensive adjustment (positional), the other was an offensive adjustment, taking into account the difficulty and wear and tear of the position. Can you tell me where I am wrong?

The batting runs + defense + positional adjustment will give you runs (or wins) above average. Adding Replacement changes it from WAA to WAR.  Fangraphs’ glossary says their replacement adjustment is always 20 runs per 600 PAs.  (It is all sort of confusing.  I did a lot of reading and re-reading to make sure I understand it.)

Fangraphs doesn’t measure catcher defense, so essentially they are assuming average defense.

That means very little.

Most teams line their starters up that way to begin the season - ace gets Opening Day, next best starter gets the ball the next day, and so on. So saying that it means ‘very little’, well.. come on, that’s a stretch.  Personally, I took it to be a sign of respect for Wang. He was the ace of the staff until his foot injury, and then had to watch as the Yankees signed two stud pitchers in the offseason. To me, it was Girardi saying ‘we still remember you’ve been the ace of the staff, but we’ve got Sabathia now.’

[93] till no team picks I believe

Most teams line their starters up that way to begin the season…

Oh, come on.  Girardi went out of his way to make it clear that his starter arrangement beyond Sabathia was more about strategy than pecking order.  Or like you said, a nod to his past service—a sign of respect.  But that doesn’t mean that he was viewed as the second best starter either.

“his past service” being Wang’s in [97], in case it wasn’t clear.

If you were just talking about defense then I apologize.

I was talking about overall performance, but I did want to make the caveat that you’ve been stressing which was - just what you said and MC said - the projection has to be based on more than just the 2009 data.  I thought the calculation was somewhat valuable even though we just did it for 2009 data in that (1) it was able to be done quickly and (2) it showed that Melky and Damon could were closer than someone might think if you had Melky playing LF on some hypothetical Yankee team in an alternate universe.  If you then subscribe to the idea that some discrete degradation between 2008 and 2009 was responsible for Damon’s drop off in UZR/150 (meaning you’d be weighting it more heavily in his 2010 projection), than doing something where Melky starts in LF in 2010 and you try to go all in on a big time DH (like a trade for Adam Dunn) and starting pitcher all of a sudden doesn’t seem like such a crazy option.

As far as AJ being the number two, didn’t SG to an analysis early this year comparing 2 pitchers at around 4.00 ERA and conclude that the one that had only lights out or horrible starts was more valuable than the one who consistently pitched at a ~4.00 ERA?

The reason being that the team has a good to even chance to win all of the consistent guys starts, but almost always wins 1/2 of the jeckyll/hyde pitcher and still has a chance to win a slugfest.