Melky was really painful to watch this season, especially when he would strike out swinging at eye-level fastballs.

While Molino had a strong defensive season, he hit like crap.

That’s Mr. “I Hit the Last Home Run at Yankee Stadium” Molino to you.

Fantastic work.

How many runs did the 2008 Yankees score?  789. That’s creepy, huh?

I wish there was a way to beat <strike>idiots</strike> sports pundits over the head with this analysis until they believed and understood the value of advanced metrics and projections in baseball.

Fabulous work as always, SG.

Well, I think the corroboration between the calculated 789 runs scored here and the actual 789 runs scored is much more a testament to the batting runs methodology, not really the projections (not that I’m saying anything untoward about those).  You could think of a scenario where the projections predicted the Yankees would score 3000 runs, but when calculating the batting runs you would come up with an underperformance of 2211 runs.

Melky Cabrera should be a reminder that “youth” is not necessarily a predictor of future improvement; talent is. I hope I am wrong, but I have seen very little evidence over the last couple of years that Melky Cabrera can be a productive hitter. His K rate has gone up, BB rate is down for the third straight year, the LD percentage is down, he has hit more FBs than GBs, but his HR/FB is a really low 6.5 percent.

In other words, a bunch of weak pop-ups is not going to cut it as a regular.

Thanks, SG.  May your prowess always loom large.

I am a little surprised that Cano hurt as little as he did.  I guess this hot streak he’s been on since changing his stance made him look less like the disaster he seemed for most of the year.  I hope he can keep it up heading into the playoffs. 

Wait . . .  They what?  Oh.

Yeah, I thought Cano would have showed up worse but his last 47 PA of the year (.452/.468/.643) gave him 14 more batting runs to finish off the year.

Hmmm, so Cano’s hot-streak coincided with a winning streak?  Weird.

Great post, SG.

Rivera opts for shoulder surgery

Didn’t want to bump this thread, SG.

“Their starting nine created 71 fewer runs than expected, and their bench created 69 fewer than expected”

I guess that having to shift up players to cover injuries means these are quite correlated.  It might be interesting to see the performance of the projected bench players vs their actual rate stats to try to tease the above apart.  Otherwise one might wrongly say the bench was as much the problem as anything.

Also when citing clutchness it might be nice to see the expected sigma(BR).  A team total of -3 is probably flukily close to 0 even for a true clutchness of 0.

One thing that is troubling looking at these numbers is that 2 of the top 4 offensive performers will be gone next year. So even with a couple of big acquisitions, they may only get back to being a 780 - 800 run team. Then they have to hope that Posada comes back healthy (probably 50 - 50 at this point), Matsui comes back healthy, and/or Cano bounces back in order to get back to the 930 run range.

OTOH, if I understand the conversion from BR to wins correctly, this team would have been 14 wins better if the offense had met expectations. That leads me to believe that if the pitching improves next year simply by getting a full season from Wang and full seasons (for them) from Hughes and Joba, that maybe 930 runs won’t be needed to win 95 games.

It might be interesting to see the performance of the projected bench players vs their actual rate stats to try to tease the above apart.

It’s a little tough to do with the non-common players, but here are the common players between the projections and actuals:

Also when citing clutchness it might be nice to see the expected sigma(BR).  A team total of -3 is probably flukily close to 0 even for a true clutchness of 0.

Looks like expected sigma is around 6.5, so yeah, 3 is close enough to 0.  But when I saw that adding -3 to 792 would give me 789 I couldn’t resist using it.

One thing that is troubling looking at these numbers is that 2 of the top 4 offensive performers will be gone next year. So even with a couple of big acquisitions, they may only get back to being a 780 - 800 run team

I’m hoping to look at what the Yankees can do position-by-position to improve as we move into the offseason in more detail, but I’m not ready for that yet, but I think you raise a valid concern.

If we assume 790 runs scored is average, then in order to win 95 games with average pitching/defense they’d have to score something like 150 runs more than average.  I don’t see how they can get to there from where they are now in one offseason.

While Teixiera would be nice, and an upgrade over Giambi, he’s not that much of one offensively. Most of the upgrade comes from defense and durability. Still, he’s probably +10 runs offensively.

Obviously, you hope Posada comes back healthy and can catch, which would possibly be another +30 runs over Molina.

Then you hope that Cano rebounds.  That may help you pick up another 30 runs.  So that’s 70 runs.  A healthy Matsui might be another 20 runs, then you have CF left to fill, although with no one to fill it with.  They could be 100 runs better next year, although I doubt it.

Great post, SG.  Thanks.

So before the season, Brian Cashman placed nine bets on the offensive production of his starters. 

Two of those bets were on “young guys”:  Cano and Melky.  On those bets, Cashman went 0-for-2, with both guys underperforming and costing the yankees 43 runs against their projections.

The other seven of those bets were on “old guys.”  Of those seven bets, Cashman went 3-for-7, winning with Giambi, Damon, and Abreu, while losing with Posado, Matsui, Jeter, and ARod (I know some of those guys underperformed due to injury, but that’s one of the main risks when you bet on “old guys”).  The seven “old guys” together cost the team 28 runs of offense against their projections.

I’m not sure what this tells us, but I find it interesting.  I suppose it tells us that while veterans are at great risk to lose playing time to injury, the volatility in the performance of young players can really bite you in the ass. I think we’ll see this in the starting pitching, as well.

By the way, I’m not passing any judgment on Brian Cashman’s “bets.”  Just looking at how things worked out in 2008.

BTW, in post 14, the projected BR are pro-rated to the actual YTD playing time.

Well, I’m not sure you can say he went “3-for-7” on the old guys.  I don’t think you’re betting whether or not the player will hit the projection, it’s more like will the player get to or come close to the projection. I’d put ARod and Jeter in the “push to almost win” category.

SG, it’s okay, you don’t have to say YTD anymore.  The 2008 season is over.  The healing can begin.

I’d put ARod and Jeter in the “push to almost win” category.

And I wouldn’t say that injuries really should count toward the bet.  That’s more akin to someone coming to the table and taking your cards away.  I mean, yeah, you can bet on health, like with Burnett or Sheets or Pavano, but barring reason to feat a strong gust of wind, you kind of figure you will at least get to play with the hand you were dealt.

That said, Nady is a big bet for next year.  From what other has posted, he more or less regressed to his career norm.  Is that enough offensive for 1) an outfield spot 2) replace Abreu safe bet 120+ OPS+?

I’d put ARod and Jeter in the “push to almost win” category.

Fair enough.  I was over-simplifying by using zero-sum evaluations.  Jeter is almost certainly a push.  I’m less inclined to push with ARod, who was only two runs better against his projection than Cano.  Again, I’m not giving mulligans for injury, as those are risks of “old guy” bets.  In a way, one could argue that a push is a successful bet for a GM, so let’s be generous and say Cashman went 4-for-7 on old guys.  That only strengthens the point about young players biting one in one’s ass.

injuries really should count toward the bet.  That’s more akin to someone coming to the table and taking your cards away.

Trying to stay with the casino analogy, I think you can think of injury risk as akin to where you happen to be playing cards.  Someone without a big injury risk is like playing at Ceasar’s, while someone like Pavano is like playing in a basement game against the mob.  Chances are someone is going to come take your cards away.

You just have to factor injury risk into your “bet”.

Great piece, SG, and the number coming up equal was absolutely hilarious!

Being so obsessed with the Yanks specifically and the AL in general, I didn’t realize what an amazing year Albert Pujols had.  An OPS+ of 190 is just unbelievable.  The sad thing is he almost certainly won’t win the MVP because the Cards didn’t make the playoff.

“I’m less inclined to push with ARod, who was only two runs better against his projection than Cano.”

Did you note that “On a rate basis, he basically hit his projection”?  If you were publicly concerned before the season about his durability, then you can pat yourself on the back, but otherwise this is bad wind not bad betting.

The sad thing is [Pujols] almost certainly won’t win the MVP because the Cards didn’t make the playoff.

Some slight irony considering his statements two(?) years ago basically saying your team has to go to the playoffs to be an MVP contender.

Alexi Ramirez does his part to force a one-game playoff tomorrow. Nice.

I like the Twins better than the White Sox, so I’m not too pleased, but one-game playoffs ARE pretty damn cool, so I guess I’m happy overall.

Dotel put on some weight, huh?

Jeter’s injury wasn’t because he’s old, it’s because Daniel Cabrera pitches with his eyes closed.

Did you note that “On a rate basis, he basically hit his projection”?  If you were publicly concerned before the season about his durability, then you can pat yourself on the back, but otherwise this is bad wind not bad betting.

I explicitly said that I wasn’t passing judgment on any of Cashman’s “bets.”  I was just trying to look for a different way to parse out the RESULTS of those bets, and I found it to be an interesting conceit to look at things in terms of “old guys” vs. “young guys.”  And I think it will continue to be interesting once we look at the starting rotation.

The Yankees were counting on contributions from five guys aged 25 or younger:  Cano, Cabrera, Kennedy, Hughes, and Joba.  Only Joba delivered.  Again, I’m not saying Cashman was wrong to go with these guys, I’m just saying it’s interesting.  We’re looking for places where things went wrong, after all, and one subset of the roster that clearly underperformed this year was the “young guys.”

I think my pre-season projection of 88 wins is best of all. Uncanny, you might say.

Been lurking lots lately…but such a well-crafted dissection merits applause.  Angry applause.  You continue to outdo yourself, SG.

Jumping Joe Dugans ghost.
Best post in months SG.
My favorite part was the Cano - Tolleson comparo.
I remember paper bags lining up to challenge Wayne.
They remain untorn to this day.
Lyle and Ruth were traders too.
Just saying.

I think my pre-season projection of 88 wins is best of all. Uncanny, you might say.

I think you have to nail it on the head to get into “uncanny” territory.  A 90 win projection would have been just as accurate.  Unless it’s “price is right” rules or something.

Thank you for running these.  With one exception, I found them very helpful for getting some perspective on WOW.  The one thing that confused me was that the team (including the bench) seems to have gotten 446 fewer PA than projected, yet I don’t see any minor league players missing on the bench to account for the difference.

WOW = WOE as typing skills strike again

Less offense should account for some of those missing PA, no?

[37] Excellent point.  140 runs might well contribute x3 PA, throwing in the extra LOBs more offense would entail.

The one thing that confused me was that the team (including the bench) seems to have gotten 446 fewer PA than projected, yet I don’t see any minor league players missing on the bench to account for the difference.

There are two issues leading to the difference in PAs between the projections and actuals.

1) Like the Frog alludes to, PA are a function of OBP and outs.  Outs are fixed, PA are not. 

So if we have say 4100 outs to play with, a team with an OBP of .342 would have 4100 outs divided by 1 - .342 = 6231 PA.  A team with an OBP of .357 would have 4100 outs divided by 1 - .357 = 6376 PA.

2) I overestimated the # of outs the Yankees would have in 2008.  I estimated 4294, they actually had 4104.  That knocks their projected batting runs down by 30-40 or so, so they probably didn’t underachieve by as much as my initial analysis showed.

MC in VA— No, it was uncanny, especially in light of the prevailing *wisdom* here, and elsewhere.

No, it was uncanny, especially in light of the prevailing *wisdom* here, and elsewhere.

So you predicted that Hughes and Kennedy wouldn’t win a single game, that Posada would miss four months, that Cano and Melky would tank, and that Darrell Rasner and Sidney Ponson would make as many or more starts as Chien-Ming Wang?  Well done then.

We won’t remind you about the fact that you wanted Andruw Jones either.

“I overestimated the # of outs the Yankees would have in 2008”.

Why is this a matter of estimate and not calculation?  Because of home games with or without 9th innings contributing?  That comes in the opposite way for the pitchers if that’s the issue.  Umm, so 80*3*0.6 is 144, I get 4230 overall, hmm.

Also note that [40] was just trolling you.

Why is this a matter of estimate and not calculation?  Because of home games with or without 9th innings contributing? 

Yeah, you can’t just go 27 times 162, so I used some formula that I can’t recall right now, but similar to yours, except I used something less than .6 to account for some extra innings.  So that part was calculated, but the other issue are non PA outs.  CS, GDP, any other baserunning outs.  I didn’t account for those either. There were 39 CS and 149 GDP, not sure how many other outs on the bases, maybe 50? So those should have been factored in as well.

You’ve got to love how Pete Abe comes to conclusions.  This from an article (his own) linked on his blog:

“The Yankees stole fewer bases, put down fewer bunts and grounded into more double plays than the previous season.

Co-chairman Hank Steinbrenner predicted before the season that the Yankees would be a more aggressive and exciting team under Girardi than they were under Joe Torre. They proved more conservative.”

Okay, The Yankees were 118 of 157 this year on SB, last year they were 123 of 163.  Of course, Jeter and ARod combined for 10 less SB, and both dealt with lege problems this year.  I don’t know if you can make any conclusions about SB totals showing the Yanks were “more conservative”.

For bunts…this year’s Yankees had 31 sacrifice hits, last year’s 41.  I think that is significant…and I’m really not sure how sacrifice bunting less makes you more conservative, and most here I think agree it’s not a bad thing.

As for GIDP…last year’s team grounded into 138, this year’s 149.  So yes they grounded into more.  I suppose you could make arguments that if they stole more bases they would GIDP less.  Probably if they sacrificed more (hmm, 10 less sac bunts, 11 more GIDP.  Could be coincidence…) they’d hit into less DP.  The only other argument is more hit-and-run, but I don’t know if we can quantify that.  So again, I don’t see how this means they’re more conservative.

Basically, Pete Abe picked an argument he liked, and found a few stats that he claims supports it.  Never talks about *why* they support his argument, but it is critical of Girardi so go with it!  I think this excellent work by SG gives us some better ideas about where the Yanks fell short as far as offense…

I feel one underlooked part of this survey is the distribution of offensive production.
As noted, Giambi did most of his work in a 6 week period.
Ditto for Cano.
Jeter batted .230 for two months and then spent the rest of the season making it up.
Melky had 5 great weeks.
Roughly the same for Molina.
These non-aligning and multiple drastic spikes in production strike me as much more prevalent than most years and I can’t help but feel that the aggregate performance of each individual player belies their effect on team performance over the course of the year.

yes, i’m pretty sure the lack of “aggressive” baserunning is about 90th on the list of reasons the yankees missed the playoffs.

yes, i’m pretty sure the lack of “aggressive” baserunning is about 90th on the list of reasons the yankees missed the playoffs.

Just ahead of not bunting enough, but just behind, “who will pitch teh 8th!!!@#”

While Teixiera would be nice, and an upgrade over Giambi, he’s not that much of one offensively. Most of the upgrade comes from defense and durability. Still, he’s probably +10 runs offensively.

SG, I just took a peek at bbref, and their “Batting Runs” stat.  I believe that is linear weights (if not the same formula you use, one that is very close), adjusted against an average player in that league (not position).  Giambi last year was a healthy 22.9.  Teixeira was an excellent 49.  I would think given Giambi’s age vs. Tex’s, that they would project more than a 10 run difference next year.  I’m thinking more like 20; do you have Tex as a Yankee yet in CAIRO?

If Tex is +20 on offense, and (at least) +10 on defense over Giambi, I think it is a no brainer for next year.  The problem of course is the 9 other years Tex wants

But Girardi lies to the media!  That is unacceptable, so any “analysis” that makes him look bad is useful!

I assume that no one’s worried about the risk of offering arbitration to Giambi and Abreu any longer.  Each will definitely get multi-year offers from a team or three.  The production, however weirdly shaped, won’t be easily replaced.  But even though I probably like the two of them more than a lot of Yankee fans, keeping them is obviously worse than losing them.

Okay, The Yankees were 118 of 157 this year on SB, last year they were 123 of 163.  Of course, Jeter and ARod combined for 10 less SB, and both dealt with lege problems this year.  I don’t know if you can make any conclusions about SB totals showing the Yanks were “more conservative”.

Let’s see, six fewer SB attempts as a team.  Seven fewer by Jeter.  Seven fewer by Rodriguez.  I think you’ve got the conclusion right.

Abraham really is a doofus.

I would think given Giambi’s age vs. Tex’s, that they would project more than a 10 run difference next year.  I’m thinking more like 20; do you have Tex as a Yankee yet in CAIRO?

I haven’t set up my official CAIRO projections for 2009 yet, but I’d probably project Teixeira around .289/.387/.526 as a Yankee, which is around 109 BR/650 PA.  Giambi’s 2008 was worth 101 BR/650.

When I threw out the +10 I didn’t give enough credit to the difference in playing time though.  Teixeira projects to get about 624 PA in 2008, so that’s an extra 10 runs or so.  You’re right that this year’s difference is larger, but I’d probably project it as a 18 run offensive upgrade(good call on the 20), and maybe a 10-15 run defensive upgrade.  That’s pretty large for 2009, around 3 wins but like you said, there’s that pesky 2010 - 2018 issue…

Still, Teixeira’s fairly young, if you sign him for 6 years, he’ll only be 34 at the end of his deal.  He’s not as good as Giambi was at the same age, but he’s probably a very good risk on a contract of 5-6 years.

The average player declines in value by about one half win a year in their 30s, so if we estimate Teixeira as about 6 wins above replacement right now, he’d still be worth 3 wins above replacement at the end of a 6 year deal.

How much is that worth over 6 years? Somewhere in the area of $140-150 million I’d estimate.

Great post, SG.  Geeky shit like that is why I keep coming back here.

Robbie did have a down year overall, but that April really was horrid and makes his mediocre season really ugly.  If he’s an .800-850 OPS 2B he’s an all-star.  Take out April, and he’s at .776 - a downturn not out of the realm of possibility for a guy that relies so much on balls in play for his offense.

With your WAG of increasing next year’s run production, bear mind that Nady’s offensive production most likely won’t come close to replacing Abreu’s.  If Jeter can hang on and Posada can give a 110 OPS+, it’ll help, but I’m like you, I can’t see where they can pick up 150 runs next year.  Teixeira’s good, but he’s not such a huge improvement over Giambi that would compensate for weak production from the rest of the line-up.  They Yankees will have to pick up runs from an improved defense (Oh, Bobby!) and better pitching (which, even without CC, I can see improving).

It’ll certainly be an interesting off-season.  When does Cash makes his choice?

How much is that worth over 6 years? Somewhere in the area of $140-150 million I’d estimate.

Thanks SG, this is excellent.  If it is really “worth” $150 million, I can’t see Tex getting much more than $25 million per on the market.  The problem of course is the 2-4 extra years some team will likely give him (not to mention any predisposition he may or may not have against playing in NY).

6 years is really what I’d like to sign him for.  I wonder if they can get creative and do something like 6/140, with two option years that can vest.  Make each option year a $5 million buyout (so if he’s there for six he gets his 150), and maybe $20 million per year or so on top of that (so 8/200 if they pick up both options)?  I’d be comfortable with that…keep him through his productive years, and if he ages better than your average player, and/or no one else is availble, you have him still for a couple of more.

With your WAG of increasing next year’s run production, bear mind that Nady’s offensive production most likely won’t come close to replacing Abreu’s.  If Jeter can hang on and Posada can give a 110 OPS+, it’ll help, but I’m like you, I can’t see where they can pick up 150 runs next year.

I’d imagine that next year Abreu won’t project to more than 10-15 runs better than Nady, and I’d also hazard that Nady would be the more likely of the two to beat the projections.  Nady would also make up most to all of the difference on defense.

Also, they don’t *have* to pick up 150 runs.  Roughly, if they were 150 runs better this year on offense, they’d have been a 104 win team.  98 would have won the division.  So the question is can they pick up 90 runs on offense?  Still not easy, but Posada being able to catch 120 games (still a question) is probably 40 of it.  If they can pick up 20 more in defense (replacing Abreu & Giambi with average defenders), and 20 in pitching (Wang and a FA), suddenly they’re a 97 win team…

If Jeter can hang on and Posada can give a 110 OPS+, it’ll help, but I’m like you, I can’t see where they can pick up 150 runs next year.

Matsui, if healthy, should produce a lot more, no?

Ed Price claims Cashman hasn’t made a decision yet.  Le sigh.

Also, if you needed any further proof that this year’s team was cursed by all manner of bizarre injuries, note this little nugget at the bottom of the article:

Pitching coach Dave Eiland will have surgery on his rotator cuff, which he injured Sept. 8 at Anaheim when he fell in the dugout.

“He’s not as good as Giambi was at the same age”

Can he be counted on to be healthier over 6 years, because he’s not pumped full of steroids?

I can’t see where they can pick up 150 runs next year.

Of course, they don’t need to pick up anywhere near 150 runs.  We only think they do because we’re comparing them to the 2007 offense (which just happened to be historically great), and the 2006 offense (which scored 930 runs despite losing Sheffield and Matsui for most of the year and carrying Andy Phillips as the primary 1B).

Only one team in MLB scored 900 runs this year, and that team just barely made it.  The Yankees led the majors by 76 runs in 2007 and by 60 runs in 2006.

Improving the offense by 50-60 runs and the pitching/defense by 10-20 would be just fine.

“He’s not as good as Giambi was at the same age”

Texeira has to be better than Giambi was, defensively, at the same age, tho, right?

and I’d also hazard that Nady would be the more likely of the two to beat the projections.

Why would you think that?  Just age?  Nady isn’t a particularly talented hitter.  Outside of this season’s first half, he’s a ~5.25 runs per 27 outs kind of guy and Abreu is about 2 runs better than that.  That’s a decent gap even factoring in an age-related decline.  Again there’s a defensive upgrade, but I don’t think that it’s enough to make a Nady in RF next year a positive gain.  Just me, I guess.

Of course, they don’t need to pick up anywhere near 150 runs.

Like the bumper sticker says, shit happens.  This is an older team and it’s a good bet that there will be declines elsewhere next year.  They don’t just carry over the runs from this year.  As much I love Jorge, I wouldn’t bet big money on him getting a 110 OPS+ next year, nor would I bet too much on Jeter to replicate even this season’s numbers.  A lot of Posada’s value is in OBP, which I don’t think declines too traumatically, but his SLG really took a hit with the shoulder. 

For me the biggest holes on the team are CF and C, and I’d have rather seen Cashman make a trade for a half-way decent CF than for a corner OFer with a 108 career OPS+.  I’m less concerned with 1B and pitching [2006 offense (which scored 930 runs despite losing Sheffield and Matsui for most of the year and carrying Andy Phillips as the primary 1B) that statement, to me, emphasizes why paying extraordinary amounts of money for a 1B might not be the best place to spend the money.  However, it also carries the caveat of what’s available].

And I’m sure we’ll see more charts and pie graphs in the coming weeks.

Re: 15 - That’s why they need to pick up 2 bats. If they get a Sabathia/Burnett/Whatever before they fix the offense, I’m going to light myself on fire.

also, i have to think the Rays will not be *as good* next year.  i still think they will be good, but i would take the under on 97 wins again.

they got 153 starts from the same 5 starters. they do have Price waiting in the minors, but that is an exceptionally healthy season for their rotationa that i am not sure will happen again.

i would also guess that Grant Balfour will not repeat his 2008 season.

of course, Crawford will likely improve, as will Longoria.

but i really think the main reason the Rays were so successful this year was because their entire rotation stayed healthy the whole season.

And they had a slick fielding 1B, which according to the New York media, is key to reaching the playoffs.

By the way, I like Cashman and all, but if the decision is so agonizing for him, he may as well just leave already.  Let him take over the Mariners and lose 100 games next season.

By the way, I like Cashman and all, but if the decision is so agonizing for him, he may as well just leave already.

didn’t the season end 2 days ago? 

he said he’d give a decision this week. 

what is the problem?

Why would you think that?  Just age?  Nady isn’t a particularly talented hitter.

Yes, mostly age.  It is true that Nady is having a career year, and unlikely he will repeat it next year.  However, Abreu is also having a bounce-back year, and I think is unlikely to repeat that next year, either.  I’m agreeing Abreu will project to be better next year, just not more than 10-15 runs.  Which is a lot, but they practically cancel out for defense.  I do think Nady is more likely to outplay his projections, mostly based on age.

As much I love Jorge, I wouldn’t bet big money on him getting a 110 OPS+ next year

Well, there’s very few players I would bet big money on to put up an OPS+ of 110 in any given year.  But an injured Posada this year had an OPS+ of 106.  Exactly twice what Molina did.  I don’t think Posada being a 40 run upgrade over Molina offensively is that much of a reach.  The question is if Posada’s arm will allow him to catch.  If he starts a throwing program on Dec 1, the Yanks should have a decent idea by early Jan if he can or not.

Here’s comparison of Abreu and Nady’s quick and dirty projections for 2009:

Abreu: .290/.378/.457, 96 BR/650 PA.
Nady: .284/.342/.463, 90 BR/650 PA.

These are subject to change, but there shouldn’t be more than 10 runs of difference between them offensively.

Nady at nine million in 2009 will also be far cheaper than Abreu.

Nady at nine million in 2009 will also be far cheaper than Abreu.

Yep, also Nady + draft picks > Abreu.

so basically Nady and Abreu are a wash, except Nady gives the yankees about $9M extra to spend on other areas.

he also gives them option to trade Damon and sign someone like Burrell, giving them a better offensive OF for less $$. 

he can also play 1B if they can’t trade Damon and still want to sign Burrell.

i was assuming Nady would get about $7M in arbitration.  he may get a little more.

i really prefer younger and better dunn to burrell, fuck the money let’s get players on the right side of 30 with more upside.

i really prefer younger and better dunn to burrell, fuck the money let’s get players on the right side of 30 with more upside.

#1 for the last three years they’ve been very similar in value offensively I think (just eyeballing it with OPS).  Dunn probably offers a little more.

#2 if you’re signing the player to play LF, I think Burrell makes up for the offensive difference with his defence.  He’s at least average, and Dunn is pretty bad.  Maybe not Matsui bad, but bad.  If you are signing the player to play 1B (or perhaps signing Burrell to move Nady to 1B), I’d probably give Dunn the edge.

#3 It’s not just $$, it’s years.  If Dunn and Burrell were both willing to take 3 year deals, I’d take Dunn.  If Burrell is willing to take three and Dunn asks for six, I’d take Burrell.  If there is a middle-ground…get back to me.

I think the Yankees should - and will - be in contact with both, to gauge their interest and what they are looking for in a contract.  I also don’t think it is mutually-exclusive.  Depending on what they decided on Teixeira, and Matsui (how his rehab is coming, whether they trade him), and Posada (if they feel he can catch most of the time), they certainly could sign Burrell for LF and Dunn for 1B.