IMPORTANT BLOG ANNOUNCEMENT

PLEASE CHANGE YOUR BOOKMARKS AND FEEDS TO THE NEW URL, YANKEEANALYSTS.COM. TYU IS IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH THE NEW YORK YANKEES OR YANKEES UNIVERSE.

Cone out at YES

Posted by Steve S. at 7:59 pm 5 Responses »
Jan 032010

Say it aint so, David

Bob Klapisch of Northjersey.com (aka The Bergen Record) has the news. After being hinted at by the lovely and charming Phil Mushnick of the NY Post last week, it now appears the two sides have parted ways. Here’s the report:

David Cone: Say YES. It appears Cone’s short but brilliant run in the YES broadcast booth may be over. Sources say Cone is out after a heated disagreement with network executives.

A spokesman confirmed via e-mail: “David’s contract is up. We’d love to have him back, but he’s in the process of evaluating his various options. … He may not be back based on what he decides.”

Cone’s skill and confidence grew appreciably in the past year. Like former-Met teammate Ron Darling, he had a graceful way of explaining baseball to casual fans, but also was immersed in cutting edge sabermetrics.

Michael Kay said, “I’d come into the booth five hours before a game and Coney would already be there, buried in the computer, looking up stats. He took it very seriously.”

I can’t begin to describe how annoyed I am at this news. Cone really grew into the job in recent years. He was funny, offbeat, and occasionally danced on the edge of being inappropriate. He always had a sabermetric stat or two here, and a Red Ruffing and Lefty Gomez reference there. He would openly cite Baseball Reference and Fangraphs on air, and is one of the only announcers I’ve ever heard do so. There are some indications that Tino Martinez is the leading candidate to replace him. While Tino was a fine player, Tino’s media work comes across as robotic. Between Tino and Flaherty, you might as well turn the sound down and listen to Sterling say “You can’t predict Baseball” for a 8 millionth time and the sweet dulcet-tones of Suzyn Waldman. I hope the games are good.

(h/t to Ben@ RAB for the links)

Tagged with: ,

Pujols, Fielder, Mauer, or Gonzalez...

Posted by Chris H. at 4:00 pm 10 Responses »
Jan 032010

In his most recent piece, Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune discusses Joe Mauer, Albert Pujols, Prince Fielder, and Adrian Gonzalez, dubbing them the Four Horsemen of baseball. While Rogers’ analogy is somewhat strange, he then goes on to turn a few more heads once he begins discussing the Yankees’ future in relation to the aforementioned quadruplet. According to Rogers, “[e]xecutives with other clubs” actually believe that the Yankees (the Red Sox are also named, as well) are reluctant to spend this winter “because they want as much flexibility as possible to land one of baseball’s four horsemen at some point in the next two years,” as all four will be free agents by then — Mauer after 2010, Pujols, Fielder, Gonzalez after 2011 — unless extension agreements are reached with their respective teams.

Wait… what? Though it is certainly feasible for the Yankees to tighten their purse strings this offseason in the hopes that Joe Mauer will be available on the open market after the upcoming season, how exactly do Pujols, Fielder, and Gonzalez — three first basemen — fit into the Yankees’ plans with some guy named Mark Teixeira inked through 2016? Well, Rogers adds that the Yankees “are keeping the DH spot clear, for the time being, as a potential way to accommodate Pujols, Fielder or even Gonzalez playing alongside Mark Teixeira.” Wait… what (again)? According to Rogers, this winter, the Yankees are “keeping the DH spot clear” — and by clear, I guess Rogers is referring to the team’s short-term deal with Nick Johnson — so as to sign either Pujols, Fielder, or Gonzalez sometime toward the end of 2011 (or in early 2012). Is that right? This is heavy stuff, however, plausibility is a key issue here. For instance, will the Yankees actually offer a $100 million contract to a designated hitter? Further, would Pujols, Fielder, or Gonzalez even want to be designated hitters for the Yankees? There are many important factors to consider, thus, thinking that the organization is “keeping the DH spot clear” for either of the three players, years in advance, seems far fetched.

In reality, it appears that the Yankees are limiting their spending this winter, not for another winter two years from now, but because, as Brian Cashman recently noted, they find next year’s free agent crop to be a more appealing sort (Joe Mauer — he’s the likeliest horseman to be pursued if available — plus Carl Crawford and Cliff Lee, for example). And, with regards to Rogers’ second claim about “keeping the DH spot clear,” perhaps the Yankees simply see the value of the roster flexibility provided by that role. Or, maybe they would rather funnel their rich resources into elite starting pitchers or multitalented position players that can offer both offensive and defensive contributions, instead of a DH who solely offers the former. The DH spot might also be kept clear with a short-term contract for Nick Johnson so as to prepare for the coming of Jesus Montero (assuming he outgrows catcher), the organization’s offensive wunderkind.

Basically, in sum, there are several reasonable reasons which explain why, exactly, the Yankees are currently curbing their spending and “keeping the DH spot clear.” However, awaiting the arrival of a pinstriped Albert Pujols, Prince Fielder, or Adrian Gonzalez, years in advance, does not seem like one of those reasons (not at this point in time).

Photo by Getty Images

Tagged with: , , , ,

Defensive Revaluations

Posted by EJ Fagan at 1:08 pm 6 Responses »
Jan 032010

I think that there are a lot of big picture baseball stories that we saw unfold this offseason. A lot of important things happened. As written by Joe at RAB, the top end of the free agent market has taken a serious hit. Nearly all GMs, including Brian Cashman, have been on a very strict budget this year. Both as a necessity of the recession and as a part of the gradual evolution toward more rational decision making, these same General Managers have seemed to be a lot smarter than in past years – avoiding the overpriced, aging, overrated players. Except for Ed Wade.

However, I think that the big picture story that we’ll look back on years from now and judge this offseason by is the reevaluation of defense by major league teams, and at other times by fans. Defense has always been the hardest thing for us to quantify online.

For the most part, we’ve figured out how offense works. Runs are scored at a predictable rate (with some random variation) based upon hits, bases, walks, baserunning, etc. We also know pretty well that hitting is 50% of the game – since a run scored is as valuable as a run saved.

The question that is still up for debate is the other 50% of the game. Run saving has two components – pitching and defense. Some people will tell you that pitchers control the vast majority of the remaining 50% – somewhere around 39-40%. Some will tell you that the reality is more evenly split – pitchers control maybe 30-35% . That’s a huge difference – the difference between defense-heavy players being assets or liabilities.

Major league teams have bet on defense this offseason. The Red Sox replaced a very productive hitter in Jason Bay with a less productive defensive specialist in Mike Cameron, and are doing everything they can to jettison Mike Lowell. The A’s paid good money for Coco Crisp, and appear to be strongly considering Adrian Beltre. Jason Bay couldn’t find a decently huge deal that guys like Carlos Lee got a few years ago, but Chone Figgins and Placido Polanco did.

Teams that have showed unexpected and prolonged strength in the past few years have mostly been strong defensive clubs. Most notable have been the Mariners and Rays. Neither had a particularly strong set of pitchers – the Mariners practically were picking people out of the stands to pitch after Felix Hernandez – but both had top notch defensive arrangements. Ben Zobrist, Evan Longoria, Carl Crawford, B.J. Upton, and the rest in Tampa Bay provide almost as much value according to Fangraphs on defense as on offense. The Mariners took this strange paradigm to new levels in 2009 – Gutierrez, Ichiro, Beltre, and Jack Wilson are collectively impotent with the bat, but gold glovers on defense.

This is a very pertinent condundrum for the Yankees. Brett Gardner is probably a very good to elite defensive player. How good is subject to debate, but our eyes as well as our aggregated eyes (statistics) confirm that he tracks down a lot of balls in center field. Our eyes as well as our memories confirm this about Curtis Granderson too, but for now let’s leave him out of the question.

If defense is more valuable than we used to think it was, we need to rethink what we assume about players like Brett Gardner. Melky Cabrera had a slightly, by some accounts significantly, better bat, but much poorer glove, and the Yankees let him go without much hesitation. The Yankees look to head into 2010 with their second straight year of well-improved defense on paper. Four years ago, we all saw through Brian Cashman stating that he was prepared to go into the season with Bubba Crosby as his center fielder. While Crosby was a lot worse player than Gardner, I don’t think that we should be too surprised if the Yankees go into 2010 with Brett Gardner as their starting center fielder, or a big part of a platoon.

Update: One more thought that I’d like to add on. Part of this problem is that we don’t have an openly-available, reliable defensive measure. The best we have is UZR/150, which has its problems. Teams have professional scouts and professional statistical analysts at their disposal, so they have a much better read on how good players are on defense. That’s why reading the decisions of smart MLB teams is so important. We shouldn’t try to be super-precise with defensive evaluations as fans, and instead recognize that the best we can do is reasonably estimate plateaus. Its more important for us to correctly value what it means to be a “very good center fielder” in terms of value than try to estimate an individual player’s value.

Photo Credit: Tom Szczerbowski/US Presswire

Tagged with: ,

Deconstructing the Trouble with Brett

Posted by Steve S. at 9:28 am 20 Responses »
Jan 032010

Brett Gardner doing what he does best

Chad Jennings of LoHud poses an interesting question in his latest post, one that I think strikes at the heart of why Brett Gardner has as many detractors as he does fans among the Yankee faithful. Referring to Gardner and Granderson and their defensive positions in the outfield, he wrote this:

My question is: If those roles were switched, would that change the way you feel about the current Yankees roster?

This isn’t to debate the defensive merits of the two outfielders. I’m just wondering if the speed were coming from a typically speed-based position and the power were coming from a typically power-based position, would the lineup seem better? It seems there is some debate about whether Gardner provides enough power to be a left fielder, but I don’t see that it matters. If he were to open as the Yankees left fielder, he would be batting in the same spot in the lineup as on opening day 2009. The fact he would be playing left instead of center only means the Yankees defense would have improved.

For me, this really sheds light on why some fans are so dead set against him. Critics look only at his bat in his position and find it to be inadequate. He’s simply not a prototypical Yankee Left Fielder. Yankee fans have come to enjoy slugging Left Fielders in Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon in recent years. The competition has often had a big bat in Left as well. The Red Sox had Manny for years, and more recently the dangerous Jason Bay. The Phillies have Raul Ibanez, the Tampa Rays have the dangerous Carl Crawford.

But this wasn’t always the case for the Yankees. The 1996 team had the light hitting Gerald Williams in Left, the 1998 team had Chad Curtis, 1999 and 2000 featured Ricky Ledee there and the 2001 team had a washed up Chuck Knoblauch manning the corner position. If you want to go back even further, the 1976-77 teams had Roy White out there. So if anyone wants to argue that ‘we can’t win’ with Brett out there, it just doesn’t wash. As of today, the Red Sox are looking at playing the speedy, light hitting Jacoby Ellsbury in Left field, which makes even less sense for them since the Green Monster negates much of the value of his speed. For this reason, I suspect he’ll flip positions with JD Drew by Opening Day assuming no further roster moves.

Those of us who support Brett view him primarily as CF, a premium defensive position where teams will often carry a light bat. We also view him as our #9 hitter and as such aren’t overly concerned with his bat. The value he adds is not so much in slugging the ball but rather in turning batted balls into outs. Making catches like this. His glove is so outstanding that in 09 he was a +2.1 WAR player as a part time player, his net value based almost entirely on his fielding abilities. As David Pinto famously noted, there are only three dimensions of offense. Anyone who can do two of them effectively can start for most MLB teams. We know Brett can run the bases, and he showed the ability to get on base at a .345 clip last year.  That’s more than enough to make him a starter, though he may very well require a caddy on days when you face a tough Lefty. I will acknowledge that between Gardner and Granderson, the Yanks will likely be a bit more susceptible to tough Lefthanders than the 2009 edition was. But not enough to worry too much about with Jeter, Alex and three switch hitters (Tex/Posada/Swisher) in the lineup. Robbie Cano has always handled Lefties as well, and Nick Johnson has actually fared better facing Lefties over the course of his career.

To me, it comes down to this. If both Granderson and Gardner are going to play in the outfield somewhere, does this really matter? For lineup purposes, not one bit. But if were committed to playing both of them (which as of right now we are) then you might as well take advantage of Brett’s superior defensive abilities in CF. It makes no sense to put the lesser defensive player in CF when you’re playing both guys anyway, which is why EJ was right when he penned this controversial piece.

(photo courtesy of the NY Daily News) Continue reading »

Tagged with:
© 2011 TYU Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha