Depends on the price obviously, but he’d be a nice upgrade.

I wouldn’t trade AJax for him, or any of the other highly-touted position players.  I’d be willing to trade Melky or Gardner.  Add that to maybe a pitching prospect like McCallister, and a reliever or two.  That probably won’t be enough to get it done but…maybe if they are REALLY trying to dump contracts add in Cervelli for Laird?  Chances are the Yankees won’t be willing to part with enough to get it done.

Now, there’s concern about him batting against lefties.  Simple solution; also sign Mike Cameron.  Play one in LF and one in CF against righties, play Cameron in CF against lefties.  If you still have Melky he plays LF against lefties.  Gardner I don’t think the book is out on him yet for how well he hits lefties, so if they kept him they can try him against lefties too (prob in CF).  Or maybe resign Nady and he can play LF vs. lefties and DH some.  They can do this with something of a platoon, but they have to treat the cost for Granderson like a platoon player.

It doesn’t seem to me that what it would take to get Granderson would leave us in any better situation than just signing Cameron.

Granderson’s contract is $5.5m for 2010 (age 29 season), $8.25m for 2011 (age 30), $10m for 2012 (age 31), and $13-14m club option for $2013 (age 32). Sounds reasonable.

In his four years as an MLB regular, he has OPS+ of 98, 135, 123, 100. And he’s supposed to be a good CF, right?

A. Isn’t Curtis Granderson the ceiling for Austin Jackson?
B. Getting him for Gardner or Melky would be Swisher-for-Betemit redux.

The problem with Cameron is that he only wants to play CF, and moving Gardner/Melky to LF diminishes a lot of their value, especially for Gardner.

I’d still rather get Holliday.  If you’re that worried about LH hitting you either bring back Matsui to DH, or get someone like Branyan or Nick Johnson to be your DH.  None of those 3 is likely to play more than 110-120 Gs due to health, so it would leave plenty of DH time for ARod/Posada, primarily against LHP.

I guess my assumption is that it would take something like Jackson, Cabrera/Gardner and Kennedy to get Granderson. The guy’s contract is so reasonable, he’s going to be expensive. And at that price, I just think it’d be better to just fork over some extra money for Cameron for a 1 year deal (1+1 deal), have him replace Damon as the full time LF, and have either Damon or Matsui DH.

3C. Is Carl Crawford, the basis of many 2011 left field fantasies (in both senses of the phrase) really better than Granderson? 103 career OPS+.

[4] I did not know that about Cameron preferring to play CF, but I guess that makes sense. That’s his position, and he’s more valuable there than as a LFer in the market.

I’m concerned by the steep decline in Granderson’s UZR/150 over the last two seasons. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have interest in trading for him, but it would have to be at a very reasonable price.

I would rather sign Cameron for one year than Damon for two.

[7]  Yes.  He supposedly declined to talk to the Mets b/c they wanted him to play LF.

Now, I’m not sure if he would feel the same way with the Yankees.  He never won a ring, so that and a few extra $$$$ might convince him that LF isn’t that bad.

Plus, Cameron is supposedly tight with CC.

Even so, I’ve got to think Cashman would be interested in Cameron as a CFer.  If the rumors were to be believed, he very nearly pulled the trigger on a Cabrera for Cameron before ST 2009.

[6] OPS+ is a lousy stat to judge Crawford.  He generates a ton of value on defense (+15 UZR) and the bases (50+ SBs).

That said, I don’t think he’s as great as some people make out.  Going by FanGraphs, he’s been worth 4.9, 4.5, 3.1, 2.7 and 5.5 WAR over the last 5 years.  The 2.7 in 2008 was injury driven, but the 3.1 in 2007 was fielding driven, -1 UZR vs. his normal +15.

With so much of his value tied up in speed, I think he’s a big risk for aging/injury decline.  As an elite fielder/basestealer he can be a superstar, but without it, he’s just a nice player.

I also think his basestealing would lose a lot of value in the Yankees lineup.  They’re not going to want him to steal 60 bases.

[11]  But that doesn’t solve LF.  Gardner is an elite defensive CF, but that value is diminshed severely in LF.  Melky’s value is that he hits OK for a CF.

It’s an upgrade where we don’t need an upgrade.

Cameron only makes sense to me if he’ll play LF, and you think he’ll be a plus, plus defensive LF, or you move Melky for a LF.

They’re not going to want him to steal 60 bases.

No? I could see it. Gardner pretty much tried to steal everytime he had a base open in front of him, right?

Prospects are less valuable to the Yankees than they are to other teams.  Similarly, expensive contracts are less damaging to the Yankees than they are to other teams.  So if a team has a talented player (Granderson) they want prospects for, I find it hard to understand that either our package “won’t be enough” or that “it will cost us too much” to get him.

If we were starting with Granderson on the Yanks, we wouldn’t want to trade him for AJ.  We’re biased towards AJ b/c he’s “ours”.  We’re over-rating him.  AJ for Granderson makes all kinds of sense.  If AJ actually becomes something, we’ll just get him back in a few years.

I also think his basestealing would lose a lot of value in the Yankees lineup.  They’re not going to want him to steal 60 bases.

Why wouldn’t Girardi, who appears to like use speed, want him to steal 50 or 60?

Well Granderson would be near the top of the lineup, no?  With Tex and Arod behind you, caught stealings are more detrimental than when Gardner was getting on in the 9 hole.

Meant crawford, not granderson.

[15] Prospects may be less valuable to the Yankees than they are, for example, to the Twins, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t have significant value, especially if Cashman’s often repeated comments about reducing the payroll and gaining roster flexibility are not merely rhetorical. They already have an aging core of position players, and a lot of players signed to long-term deals. Developing a pipeline of homegrown, cost-controlled players helps mitigate the negative consequences of these issues, while meeting Cashman’s stated goals.

[19] Granderson seems to fit the bill then. He’s not terribly expensive right now. And at his current level, or if he improves, he’d still be worth it. I mean, I guess I fantasize about Cash stealing the deal by using Melky and some other castoffs, but AJax seems a reasonable price.

If the Yankees are going to trade for a long-term solution to CF, that tells me they don’t think Austin Jackson is going to be particularly useful.  He’s not a MLB corner OFer (doesn’t have the bat, no way).  So if you’re going to trade for Granderson, you use Jackson to get him, IMO.

I’d rather have Holliday in LF and continue to live with Melky/Gardner in CF (and see if Jackson can eventually improve on that duo).  But Granderson is an upgrade (though you’d probably want to platoon him).  If the price is right, ok.

Realizing that the Tigers’ POV is of little interest to us RLYWers, I still feel compelled to note that Detroit’s payroll problem is pretty much a 2010 issue only.  They have almost $35M committed to Jeremy Bonderman, Nate Robertson, and Dontrelle Willis.  Now of course, those guys have just about zero trade value, but these aren’t long-term commitments.  They have very little tied up for 2011 and beyond.  They can extend Verlander easily as long as they backload his deal.

What exactly does selling low on Granderson and his eminently reasonable contract do for them?  And Jackson too?  Especially in 2010?  These guys are nice players, but they aren’t exactly going to be getting Jesus Montero type prospects back for them.

They should be offering Ordonez and $6M to anyone who will give them a C prospect.

If the Yankees are going to trade for a long-term solution to CF, that tells me they don’t think Austin Jackson is going to be particularly useful.

Or maybe they think that Austin Jackson will be quite useful, but not until 2012 or so.

What exactly does selling low on Granderson and his eminently reasonable contract do for them?

I have no idea.  They’re the ones that indicated he was available.  If they are only doing that to try to get several prospects out of him, then forget it.  If they’re willing to sell low, go for it.  Just set a value you are willing to give up for him, and don’t go above it.

So if you’re going to trade for Granderson, you use Jackson to get him, IMO.

That’s only if you think Granderson is a long-term solution at CF.  Yankees *could* be looking at him as a short-term upgrade until Jackson is ready, and then they could slide him into a 4th OF role, or trade Granderson later.

Isn’t Curtis Granderson the ceiling for Austin Jackson?

Which Granderson?  The one who put up a (FanGraphs) 7.4 WAR in 2007 or the one between 3.4 and 3.9 WAR 3 of the other 4 years?  The former is an MVP candidate, the latter is a borderline AS.  I think Jackson’s ceiling is somewhere in between, but Jackson’s age 24 (assuming one more year in AAA) through 29 years will most likely be better than Granderson’s age 29-34 years.

Granderson’s contract is $5.5m for 2010 (age 29 season), $8.25m for 2011 (age 30), $10m for 2012 (age 31), and $13-14m club option for $2013 (age 32). Sounds reasonable.

I guess my assumption is that it would take something like Jackson, Cabrera/Gardner and Kennedy to get Granderson. The guy’s contract is so reasonable, he’s going to be expensive.

Alright, let’s see… just thinking out loud…

Ignoring the option years, Granderson has $24M coming for the next three seasons.  If he’s a 3.5 WAR player, then he’s worth something like $45M, or a little more than $20M net.  I’m no expert at putting dollar values on prospects, but if Detroit got back two 1 WAR players making the minimum for the next three years, they’d win the trade handily.

Or looking at it another way, if Melky maintains his 2009 performance level through his three remaining arb years, he’s probably worth at least $6-7M net all by himself.  OTOH, looking at Melky from Detroit’s POV, he’s going to make at least a couple million this year.  That means that trading Granderson for him only saves them ~$3M.

[13] See this doesn’t make sense to me.  Seems you are saying if Cameron will play LF, then that is good and you start Gardner in CF.  But if Cameron insists on playing CF, you need a LF b/c Gardner doesn’t hit enough to play LF.  But why does it matter, from an offensive standpoint?  If between them they are 30 runs above average (non position adjusted) offensively, they are 30 runs above average offensively, regardless of who plays where.

[25] Right, so you’re not really saving any money (if you’re Detroit) by losing Granderson because Melky will likely be comparably expensive. But if you’re able to get Kennedy in the deal, you might have a cost controlled starting pitcher to start replacing those awful contracts you have in the rotation. Maybe then it lets you cut or salary dump those guys without totally punting 2010. 

I’m with you - I just can’t see the Tigers trading Grandeson unless it’s to get actual valuable players back for him. It can’t be a salary dump, because Granderson’s contract terms are so reasonable.

On the other hand, while Melky Cabrera is by no means a ‘sexy’ name in CF, when you look at the hypothetical package is would take to get this trade done, it doesn’t really make sense. Cabrera in CF is not that bad of an option. And on top of that, Mike Cameron on a 2 year deal is an even nicer option.

I’m still confused about this whole LF mess. I’ve sort of fallen in love with the idea of removing older players from the roster and not tying ourselves in big contracts, but what’s the point of that? It’s only a means to an end, and if the elite level free agent that the Yankees want is out there right now, then they should just go get him. I’m slowly moving over to the Holliday camp, especially if we’re talking about something like 5 years/$90M.

Mike, I think you’re overrating Jackson.  I’m not an expert or anything, but Jackson has yet to show ANY power, and he’s striking out like once a game in AAA.  He’s not terribly young anymore.

[26] Yeah I was thinking the same thing. In both cases, Gardner or Melky and Cameron are in the field and in the line up. The overall result should be the same.

I recall this being somewhat of the rationale behind the 1B drama we’ve experienced before this year and it involved Cano. The point was, if your 2B hit’s like a 1B, then your 1B can hit like a 2B and you’re back at par.

I think this: Jackson’s age 24 (assuming one more year in AAA) through 29 years will most likely be better than Granderson’s age 29-34 years.

Is overly optimistic.  If it’s true, hot damn I’ll be psyched.  Well, not if we’ve traded Jackson for Granderson.

Maybe then it lets you cut or salary dump those guys without totally punting 2010.

Of course, if they could do a real salary dump (there must be some team that thinks Carlos Guillen will bounce back, right?) then keeping Granderson, Jackson and Laird lets you not totally punt 2010.

Or how about doing it in one fell swoop?  Granderson, Jackson, and Laird for Gardner, Kennedy and Cervelli.

[28] I think 22 in AAA isn’t exactly old.  I’m also not sure where, “yet to show ANY power” comes from.  He hit 13 HR between low and high A in 2006 and 9 HR in Trenton in 2008.  Only 4 last year, but also 9 triples.  I know he hit several balls off the top of the wall in CF, and Jennings reported several more.  He also drives the ball well to RF, which will play well in NYS.  His ISO was only .105 last year but that’s the lowest it’s been since 2006 when he was 19.

Yes, he strikes out too much, and he could walk a little more.  But his wOBA in AAA last year was .348, which isn’t shabby, especially for a CF.  Part of the problem is evaluating his defense.  I think it’s above average, I’ve read anything from “just okay” to “excellent” about it.  I think if he’s a +5 defender next year he could probably be about 2 WAR, and go up from there for a while.  I think at his peak he could probably be worth 4-5 WAR for 2-3 years.

Granderson next year will definitely be more valuable, and likely in 2011 as well.  But starting in 2012, Granderson will be less valuable, and Jackson more.  I don’t think that’s far out there as I doubt Granderson will be a 3WAR player by then. 

But yes, I am optimistic about Yankee farmhands coming up and contributing.  Certainly sometimes too much.

  Granderson, Jackson, and Laird for Gardner, Kennedy and Cervelli.

That I would do, even though Edwin Jackson single handedly killed my 2009 fantasy team.

You want the better fielder in center, since he will get more chances, but since Gardner and Cameron are both good defenders it doesn’t matter too much who goes where.

[30] To go with my [32] part of it is I’m not that high on Granderson.  2007 looks like a fluke year, and given he’s 29 I think we need to expect him to lose some value gonig forward.  So if he was 3.4 in 2009 you’d think something like 2.9 in 2010, 2.4 in 2011, and maybe 1.9 in 2012.  I definitely think by 2012 Jackson will be better than 2 WAR.  And we would still expect Jackson to improve some going forward while Granderson would decline, or at least settle in.

I think as much as I may be too high on Jackson you may be too high on Granderson.  Granderson’s a nice player, and I think he would help the Yankees the next couple of years, but I don’t think he’s a cornerstone to build an OF around for the next 5+ years.

Jackson’s got a pretty healthy career minor league ISO. I’d be very happy to see him become a non-HR power hitter, sort of like Brian Roberts.

[33] Of course, my fell swoop wouldn’t happen.  The Tigers would be giving up around 5 WAR to save at most $15M.  So it would take something more.  Either a decent prospect who’s still a couple of years away or another cheap ~1 WAR player.

[37] Or just have Detroit send over Guillen and do a 1 for 1 B+ prospect swap that doesn’t need Rule 5 protection this year.

The thing that worries me about Granderson is that he needs to be platooned out against lefties, and they don’t have anyone they could platoon him with.  Maybe I’m just a little paranoid after watching Howard get eaten up by lefties in the WS.

That said, I think a deal centered around AJax for Granderson is a pretty reasonable deal for both sides, with the Yankees side doing slightly better because money doesn’t matter as much to them and I’d be very surprised if AJax ever became as good as Granderson.

The Yankees OF situation is so weird right now, because they basically have 3 young-ish players who all hit barely well enough to play a respectable CF, but none of whom scream star, or even big asset.  That makes a lot of the possible FA or trade permutations kind of tricky.

Granderson’s a nice player, and I think he would help the Yankees the next couple of years, but I don’t think he’s a cornerstone to build an OF around for the next 5+ years.

Yes.  Definitely should assume that the 2013 option will not be worth picking up when we’re evaluating Granderson trade scenarios.  With the buyout, he’s got $25.75M coming for the next three seasons.

Oof, scratch that. Guillen looks pretty terrible.

I guess this is what I was getting at. Why go through all this trouble when you could just as soon buy one of 3 or 4 guys out there?

just have Detroit send over Guillen

Along with the 3 for 3?  Because that would have the Yankees adding something well north of $25M in 2010 payroll.  Or did you just mean Granderson and Guillen for slop?

I take back anything I said about Guillen. The cliff he fell off is getting smaller in his rearview mirror and that contract is awful.

[41] The idea is to see what Detroit is asking for now.  If it is a steal like the Swisher deal was, do it.  You improve the team, and it doesn’t preclude you from still signing a better LF, or a DH.  If it isn’t you set some parameters, and then see what happens as you go further into the off-season.

Later on as teams fill needs Detroit’s price may come down.  And/or if the Yankees find they are unable to sign one of the players on the FA market.  Then Granderson is still there.  They have a week before they can start talking to other FA; why not talk to Detroit?

[44] Oh, I agree, definitely see what the price is. But I don’t know about the comparison with Swisher. Williams and Guillen were pretty soured on Swisher for his lackluster 2008 in Chicago, and clearly just wanted him out. They messed up. Granderson’s sudden availability is strange - it’s not making sense as a salary dump, and if it costs what we all think it would reasonably cost, then it doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense.  But fleecing stupid GM’s is always in season, so it certainly makes sense to make the call.

3C. Is Carl Crawford, the basis of many 2011 left field fantasies (in both senses of the phrase) really better than Granderson? 103 career OPS+.

Yes.  Crawford’s baserunning is a huge edge, and even if you moved Granderson to LF he’d probably not be as valuable defensively.  I’d also imagine the less severe platoon split for Crawford makes him harder to match up against in high leverage situations, which probably has at least some further value.

OPS+ isn’t really a good way to try and compare two players in total value.  First of all, it underweighs OBP.  Second of all, it completely ignores playing time.  Third of all, it ignores SB/CS.  Fourth of all, it ignores non-SB baserunning.  Fifth of all, it ignores defense. Sixth of all, there is no position-adjustment.

Other than that, sure, it’s fine.

Also, don’t discount the idea that leaking an interest in Granderson can be a way for the Yankees to tell Damon and Boras through the media, “we have non-Holliday options, so don’t be stupid.”

[26]“See this doesn’t make sense to me.  Seems you are saying if Cameron will play LF, then that is good and you start Gardner in CF.  But if Cameron insists on playing CF, you need a LF b/c Gardner doesn’t hit enough to play LF.  But why does it matter, from an offensive standpoint?  If between them they are 30 runs above average (non position adjusted) offensively, they are 30 runs above average offensively, regardless of who plays where.”

No.  The better glove has more value in CF.  If Cameron is a +7.5 CF and Gardner is a +15 CF, you lose value by putting Gardner in LF b/c he’ll have fewer chances to utilize his superior defense.

It also matter in terms of value as trade chips.  Melky and Gardner will have less perceived value as LFs.

[48] And what if Cameron and Gardner are the same defensively?  And why does playing a corner for a season or so mean that a guy is no longer a CF?  After all, Cameron moved to RF when the Mets signed Beltran.

I think the ideal (non-Holliday) solution would be as follows:

1) Re-sign Matsui
2) Sign Cameron
3) Trade Melky for an RH OF who kills LHP.

Against RHP Gardner plays CF, Cameron plays LF, Matsui DHs
Against LHP Cameron slides over to CF, new OF plays LF, and you rotate DHs among the older guys who need rest (Posada/ARod/Jeter) and Matsui, depending on health, off-days, etc.

[49] Then it wouldn’t matter.  I said perceived value.  Sure they could move back to CF, but with a guy like Melky who doesn’t look like a CF, and may start to bulk up, there will always be concerns that he can’t.

Actually, see [50]. I think any plan that involves Cameron probably should lead to trading Melky.  You’d have 2 better CFs already, and could better use a bigger bat as your 4th OF.

It also matter in terms of value as trade chips.  Melky and Gardner will have less perceived value as LFs.

Would a team really shy away from moving Melky or Gardner back to CF if they really wanted them? I bet some teams out there are considering whether Crawford can play CF if they talk to the Rays about him or have him on their Radar for 2011.

[52] I think it depends if Melky tried to bulk up as a LF.

These are fairly minor factors, but, it still would be easier just to give Cameron an extra $1M to be happy with playing LF against LHP and CF against RHP.

You still have the issue that there’s really no place for Melky on a team with Cameron and Gardner.

[48] I agree the better glove should be in CF, but as MC says if they are roughly equal it shouldn’t matter.  Maybe someone else made the case that Gardner as a LF didn’t hit enough and I lumped that in with your comment.

You still have the issue that there’s really no place for Melky on a team with Cameron and Gardner.

Agreed.  They could trade Melky OR Gardner.  I’d rather trade Melky, but obviously you take into account what you’d get back as well.

You still have the issue that there’s really no place for Melky on a team with Cameron and Gardner.

Defensive replacement for Swisher, or if Gardner gets pinched hit for, provided another bat is added.

You still have the issue that there’s really no place for Melky on a team with Cameron and Gardner.

Pinch runner for Posada, Matsui (if he’s still on the team), and Alex (if the Yankees make it back to the WS).

But I don’t know about the comparison with Swisher.

I was doing the comparison more from the Yankees POV than trying for a one-to-one match.  That is, if they can get Granderson for a discount - for whatever reason - they should do so.  Because like Swisher he could fill multiple roles (Swish could have played 1st if they didn’t get Teix, Granderson could be CF or LF), and the cost isn’t so high that it would (greatly) prohibit them from improving the team in other ways.

The more I think about it though the more I think they could get better value for their chips than Granderson, b/c though he’s a solid player I have doubts if he’ll be much above average in 2-3 years, and he could then be blocking players.  I’d almost rather sign Cameron and see if they could turn Melky (and nothing else) into Dunn, though I’d need to think on that further.

I think it depends if Melky tried to bulk up as a LF.

Of course, if that happens, maybe you can sell Melky as a cheap, league average offensive LFer with plus defense. His slash line is that of the league average LF, minus about 40 points of SLG.

That is, if they can get Granderson for a discount - for whatever reason - they should do so.

Yeah, absolutely. I thought you were making a comparison of *the trade* for Swisher, not Swisher himself. If there are any similar trades available this offseason, then those are obvious no brainers. Swisher was a stud and then got him for basically nothing.  I’m just not so sure that Granderson will ever fall into that category - I could be reading it wrong, but Detroit likes Granderson and his contract, but may decide to build a roster with what kind of haul they can get for him. Swisher was a ‘get this guy out of here’ trade.

I’d almost rather sign Cameron and see if they could turn Melky (and nothing else) into Dunn, though I’d need to think on that further.

I think I like this idea better. Melky is a valuable player to some teams, and it still doesn’t seem to make sense to me to make a trade when their are options in the free agent market. On the other hand, there is no one in the market like Adam Dunn, and that would be a huge addition to cover for the loss of Damon *and* Matsui’s offense. I’d rather send my prospects to DC and grab Cameron then mess around with trading for Granderson.

[59] Yeah, not well described by me.  I agree they probably won’t do that with Granderson.  I can dream though.  I find myself warming up to Melky for Dunn, though that depends on how reasonable Washington is.  Melky should be more valuable to Washington than Dunn…Melky last year was a 1.6 WAR (using FanGraphs), Dunn was 1.2.  But as a full time DH for the Yankees Dunn would be more like a 3.5-4 WAR player.  Melky - even as a full-time LF/RF - would pobably be about 2 WAR for Washington. 

So they’d gain nearly a win plus save $7M+.  Yankees would gain almost two wins, but and while adding payroll not stop themselves from doing anything else.  Best for them it is short-term so they can decide after 2010 if they should re-up Dunn or move someone else there full-time or part time.  Then they can do Damon or Cameron on short deals for LF or still pursue Holliday for long-term, and stick Gardner in CF for a year.  I think it makes great sense.  So it will never happen.

I think it makes great sense.  So it will never happen.

It’s very rare that you can find a non-zero-sum trade, but anything with a guy in the NL who should be a DH but is playing the field seems like it would work out.

Gardner pretty much tried to steal everytime he had a base open in front of him, right?

Except that one time he got a steal sign in the 9th…

Except that one time he got a steal sign in the 9th…

That was the equivalent of playing foos ball, lining up a push or a pull, moving the ball and then just going “errr” and not taking a shot.

MLBTR and Roto has the Angels moving in on Granderson. What is that, like.. 10 OFers?

I think it depends if Melky tried to bulk up as a LF.

The problem with Melky is not his power, its his swing.  He could look like Canseco and it still wouldn’t matter if he continues to swing the same way.  I don’t have a problem with it, though, because hitting where he does in the lineup, he, or anyone, can be valuable by simply getting on base.

I don’t like the platoon split on Grandy. Rather have Cameron.

The problem with Melky is not his power, its his swing.

I’m not sure I understand this. If he had a better a swing, wouldn’t he hit for more power?

[65] The Angels must acquire a CF every off-season.  It’s in the CBA.

In other news, the Red Sox are reportedly interested in Lackey.  What’s that, like… 13 aces?

“MLBTR and Roto has the Angels moving in on Granderson. What is that, like.. 10 OFers? “

“In other news, the Red Sox are reportedly interested in Lackey.  What’s that, like… 13 aces?”

Excellent.  Let all the big market teams fill up on salary, and then the Yankees can swoop in an d nab Holliday at a reasonable price.

[68] yes, he would hit for more power if he had a better swing.  However, simply “buking up”, adding muscle, getting stronger, is not going to change anything about his swing.  There are a bunch of guys in baseball right now who are smaller, probably not as strong as Melky, but they hit for more power by far, and its because they have better swings.  It’s physics, man.

[71] Ahh I see what you mean.

FWIW it’s worth, Mekly’s HR/FB has gone like this over the last 3 seasons: 5.8%, 6.5%, 10.3%, while his FB% has stayed pretty constant.

Still thinking about the fact that marginal RS are worth less to the Yankees than marginal -RA.  That argues for better defense even if it reduces overall WAR a bit.

I would rather have Granderson than Jackson, so if he is actually available, I would try and build a package around Jackson.

I’m still thinking that RA projections come with bigger error bars than RS projections, which sometimes makes it harder to argue with conviction that you are in fact getting better defense.

[73] I think the Yankees are losing enough offense that they could add one or the other equally.  That is, losing Damon’s ~30 RAA of offense/-10 runs defense, I don’t know if it would work just as well to add a +0 RAA offense/+5 runs defense LF.  I think they *would* be just fine if they added a +15 offense/+5 defense player though.  I don’t think they need to replace all his runs with offense.

[73] Yes.

Either Holliday or Cameron as primary LF would be a big defensive upgrade.

I like Holliday, but I’m warming to a Cameron/Gardner/LHP-killer solution to LF/CF.

[75] Agreed.  One needs to know the cost of risk to the Yankees to evaluate this.

Of course pitching -RA is also less certain than RS - it would be interesting to know the relative expected risk for pitching and defense.

[76] Last time I looked at the equation I thought the only point was whether the team had RA<RS or not.

[78]  Which equation, pythagenpat (or similar)?  I had thought generally speaking that the difference between RS and RA determined your record.  For example, looking at a few teams on BBREF it looks like one win was about 10-11 runs difference, depending on the team.

I had thought the argument (one I seem to remember anyway) was that when you reach a certain level of RS, there was more value to preventing an extra run than there was to gaining an extra run, and vice-versa.  E.g. a team that was 900-790 would do as well as a team that was 920-800.  Perhaps I’m pulling a Pettitte.

Wow- I was going to see if maybe the split was going away with time, but Granderson had a .484 OPS vs. lefties last year.

If Nady comes back healthy he could platoon with Granderson. Career .308/.383/.471 vs. lefties, +1.8 UZR/150 in LF. You could have them play left and keep Melky Gardner in CF. I really don’t see Nady’s contract going above ~$2M next year. That said, I’m not too optimistic about him ever being fully healthy again.

[80 & 81] Yeah I think 2008 he was pretty good (like .730 OPS or something) against lefties, and my first thought was 2009 was a down-year.  Then I looked at 2006/2007 and career.  2008 was a fluke.

I agree you can’t count on Nady right now.  The only other RH OF bats ready for the majors are Shelley Duncan and Austin Jackson.  Duncan we’re not sure if he’s good enough to play regularly, and if you’re going to bring Jackson up anyway he should every day.  The “safe” option would be to sign Cameron to play w/ Granderson, but if you sign Cameron do you even need Granderson?  Oh decisions, decisions.

The basic equation is 1/(1+(RA/RS)**2).  I’m too lazy to write down the Taylor expansion of 1/(1+x**2) for x not 0, but you change x more by changing the smaller of the two by a fixed amount.  If I did the math right I get (x+d)/y - x/(y-d) = d(y-x)/y**2 to first order, so the sign of the change depends on which is larger.

... and the size of the change depends on RS.

If you feel like reading a </a href=“http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/10363604/Making-Jeter-wait-a-bad-move-for-Yankees”>bad article</a>.  The interesting thing is that a trainer Jeter worked with over the winter said:

“We discussed how we can keep (Jeter) in the game as long as he wants to play,” said Riley. “Derek said it may not be eight to 10 years at shortstop, but that he wanted to play that long.”

i tried

By the by, I think Detroit is moving Edwin Jackson because they think that this is the peak of his trade value (well, actually, July 09 would have been the peak, but this is closest).

And I think that they are correct.

The Tigers gave up Matt Joyce for him and I think they can now get a lot better than Matt Joyce in return for him.

That bad article.

I am liking this Adam Dunn as a DH idea. He also offers the “break glass in case of emergency” ability to play the corner OF spots or 1B. Which is handy, remember when Melky hurt his neck and they played a weekend series with only 3 OFers. If anyone got hurt it was going to be Matsui’s zombie-knees, Mo in CF, or Melky in a neckbrace in the OF.

Not to mention, the power numbers Dunn would put up in that disgrace of a stadium.

Dunn could hit 50 HRs if he played 81 home games in NYS, but I think the Nats would want more than Melky, maybe IPK as well.

[85] Klapisch also proposes trading Joba in that article…

Anyone have a sense of how IPK’s trade value is affected by his injury last year?

[85] Klapisch also proposes trading Joba in that article…

Joba “in a package of prospects” for Granderson would make me a sad plant.

Lohud headline: ‘Tellem: Matsui is “ageless”’

Well duh, agelessness is a common characteristic for zombies.

If we get Cameron and Dunn, this is going to get dangerously close to a video game team I built up around 2004.  and THAT yankee team was unstoppable!

[92] This note doesn’t directly answer your question, but Cash did make these comments about IPK at the recent GM meetings:

• Another name to keep in mind is Ian Kennedy, who’s pitching pretty well in the Arizona Fall League while making his way back from aneurysm surgery. “(Other teams) are asking about him,” Cashman said. “He’s a good, young, under-control starter that’s cheap, that we need. Not surprisingly, a lot of people would like to have the same opportunity. I’m not volunteering him, teams are asking about him, which is a good thing. They see the same thing that we see.”

[92] Probably not much. It wasn’t a serious injury in terms of ability. The only loss would be in his age. And given that he’s still only 24 I don’t think it will be a big hit.

I kind of miss you guys. I’m unable to spend my life speculating about the vast pool of potential left fielders.
Thank yiz for doing it for me.
14 weeks.

[96] Thanks - while of course Cashman isn’t going to say, “He’s damaged goods, nobody wants him”, apparently claiming zero effect (as in [97]) isn’t prima facie implausible.

I would rather have Granderson than Jackson, so if he is actually available, I would try and build a package around Jackson.

A year and a half ago I would have felt differently, but now I totally agree.