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.

Yankees Sticking To Budget

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 7:00 pm 7 Responses »
Jan 122010


From Joel Serman (h/t to Fack Youk), we get an interesting report on the Yankee ownership’s unwillingness to spend past their stated budget:

The Yankees are telling agents that they only have $2 million, at most, to spend on a left fielder. They figure Damon, even in a diminishing market, would never drop his demands that low. The Yanks being the Yanks, of course, could always just create extra money in the budget as they did last year when GM Brian Cashman successfully lobbied Hal Steinbrenner to add Andy Pettitte’s $5.5 million base plus makeable incentives to the payroll. [snip] After having won the World Series, ownership is not quite as compelled to blow up the budget again.

Hal Steinbrenner, after all, has shown a much greater willingness to hold to some financial guidelines than his father, George, did. For example, the Post has learned, the Yanks had a completed trade last July with Milwaukee for Mike Cameron, pending ownership’s blessing to take on the money. But Hal Steinbrenner refused to add the approximately $5.5 million in salary and luxury tax it would have cost for the rest of the season, so the deal was scrapped.

It seems that Johnny Damon is unlikely to return to New York unless his price drops to a point where he is certain to be snapped up by another club. In fact, 2 million may not be enough to obtain Xavier Nady, and might be barely enough to bring in a player like Xavier Nady. The Yankees are trying to be fiscally responsible for the first time since George Steinbrenner bought the team, and it seems like they are being run more like a business than ever before. While fans may not love that idea, I cannot fault the club for the manner in which they cap their spending. Ultimately, the goal of a business owner is to limit costs and maximize revenues. If the Steinbrenners truly believe that they can consistently win under the current budget (and there is no reason to believe otherwise), then it is within their rights to hold the line at an already exorbitant 200M in salaries.

Tagged with: ,

Law: Go with Gardner

Posted by Chris H. at 5:00 pm 7 Responses »
Jan 122010

From ESPN’s Keith Law:

“Either Nady or [Reed] Johnson represent marginal improvements that may not justify the cost. Neither is really a full-time player. Johnson is strictly a platoon player, and can back up Granderson, but they have Gardner for that. Nady, even when healthy, was a platoon guy until ’08. I’m not a Gardner guy, never have been, but their offense is fine even if they put a pointed stick in left field (if the ball hits the stick, the batter is out). So why not play for defense a little with the cheap guy in-house? Eventually, some other option will emerge and there’s no reason for the Yanks to spend money on left field simply for the sake of spending money.”

While it’s not exactly a glowing endorsement of Brett Gardner, Law’s conclusion makes sense. Still, in my opinion, the Yankees would be wise to spend a few more dollars and add a right-handed outfielder like Reed Johnson, just in case. Law doesn’t seem to think that such a move is necessary, but the flexibility provided might be a justifiable cost.

Photo by Getty Images

Tagged with: , , ,

Brett Gardner won't swing... at anything

Posted by Chris H. at 3:00 pm 5 Responses »
Jan 122010


One item we always hear about when discussing Yankee outfielder, Brett Gardner, is his tremendous plate discipline, a skill viewed through the prism of his stellar minor league on-base percentage (.388). Well, this past season, though Gardner’s OBP of .345 was not the best display of plate patience on the Yankees with regards to that specific statistic, he did exhibit a particular level of discipline at the plate that went unmatched by most of his pinstriped brethren.

To be straightforward, in 2009, the gritty young South Carolinian simply did not swing at pitches that were outside of the strike zone. According to FanGraphs’ plate discipline data, Gardner swung at only 17.2% of the pitches that he saw off the plate. Believe it or not, when compared to eagle-eyed sluggers like Nick Swisher, Mark Teixeira, Alex Rodriguez, and Hideki Matsui, Gardner actually swung at fewer pitches outside of the zone than any other player on the Yankees. Interestingly though, while Gardner did not swing at balls, he also did not swing at many strikes. Last season, the speedy outfielder swung at 50.7% of the pitches thrown to him that were in the strike zone (the team average was 64.6%). The percentage stands as the lowest in-the-zone swing mark of any Yankee last season. All in all, Gardner swung at 34% of the pitches he saw, which was, again, the lowest percentage of all the club’s hitters.

In addition, when actually swinging at pitches that were either in or out of the strike zone, in 2009, Gardner was actually very good at making contact. When swinging at a ball, the left/center fielder was rather Cano-esque, making contact 75.5% of the time. Furthermore, when swinging at a strike, Gardner made contact 91.9% of the time.

I bring these statistics up because, in 2010, if Brett Gardner is, indeed, the team’s everyday left fielder, it seems as though being a bit more aggressive with pitches when they are inside of the strike zone could be offensively beneficial. Basically, if the pitches are not balls, he has the ability to make contact and should try and put the pitch in play. As a regular, proud pitchers will be inclined to challenge Gardner given his specific offensive skill set — he’s a slap hitter with very little home run power — and, therefore, perhaps a slightly more aggressive approach within the strike zone would help the club in 2010. This is something the Yankees actually tried to emphasize to Gardner prior to the 2009 season. As he himself said in ‘08, “I feel like some pitches I should be swinging at, I’ve been letting go, but I learn from every at-bat, and that’s one thing I can continue to work on — not allowing them to just get one over for a strike.”

Thus, this season, I would anticipate Gardner to be more aggressive in the box, but not in a general way. He will continue to avoid off-the-plate offerings, as his keen eye simply won’t allow him to chase bad pitches. Beyond that, though, expect a significant increase in Gardner’s swing percentage with pitches that are actually over the plate.

Photo by Reuters

Tagged with: , , ,

A Hall Case

Posted by Matt Imbrogno at 1:00 pm 5 Responses »
Jan 122010

I’m going to put the numbers of two different pitchers up in a moment.
HOF Logo

Both pitchers were pretty similar. They pitched across widely the same era, though they did it in different leagues. They both last pitched in the Majors in 2008, and one ended his career on a very high note and the other on a rather sour one. One is considered a Hall of Fame slam dunk, and the other is considered to have only an outside shot. Without further ado, their 162 game averages:

Pitcher 1 (1987-2008):
15-10, 220 IP, 214 H, 75 BB, 130 K, 3.54 ERA, 118 ERA+, 1.314 WHIP, 8.8 H/9, 0.7 HR/9, 3.1 BB/9, 5.3 K/9, 1.74 K/BB, 3.95 FIP.

Pitcher 2 (1991-2008):
17-10226 IP, 219 H, 50 BB, 178 K, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 1.192 WHIP, 8.7 H/9, 0.9 HR/9, 2.0 BB/9, 7.1 K/9, 3.58 K/BB, 3.57 FIP.

Based on those, it would seem that the second pitcher has just as strong, if not a stronger, Hall of Fame case as pitcher one, who is considered a slam dunk. It is worth nothing that pitcher one does have two Cy Young award wins, while pitcher two never won. However, each placed in the top five six times.

Despite having a higher ERA than his counterpart, pitcher two was 23% better than league average, as opposed to pitcher one’s 18% better. Both pitchers did a very good job of keeping the ball in the park, and neither had control issues, though pitcher two walked a batter fewer per nine. He also struck out more batters and had a better FIP and K/BB.

In terms of the HOF Measurements found on the players’ respective B-R pages, they’re also pretty comparable (pitcher one listed first):
Black Ink: 29; 15 (HOF avg = 40)
Gray Ink: 202; 250 (HOF avg = 185)
HOF Monitor: 176, 121 (HOF avg = 100)
HOF Standards: 52, 54 (HOF avg = 50)

Both fall short of the Black Ink test, well surpass the Gray Ink and HOF monitor tests with ease, and squeak by the HOF standards test. Both of them have five HOFers in their similar pitchers category.

Despite the fact that both of these guys stack up very evenly, if I walked down the street, asking fans–using the pitchers’ real names–who was Hall of Famer, I’d say most of them would say yes to pitcher one and no to pitcher two.

As you’ve probably guessed by now, pitcher one is former Brave and Met Tom Glavine. Pitcher two is former Oriole and Yankee Mike Mussina. Because of his 300 wins, Glavine will likely be a first ballot, slam dunk Hall of Famer, while Mike Mussina will need a lot of help and/or support to eventually gain entrance into Cooperstown.

In my opinion, either both of them should get in or neither should get in. I’m by no means saying Tom Glavine was a bad pitcher–he wasn’t–but he is a tad overrated as his peripherals are nothing sparkling and he had the benefit of playing for incredibly good Braves teams that allowed him to have high win totals. Unlike Mussina, he never had to regularly pitch against a designated hitter, nor did he have to pitch most of his games in the high-powered American League East Division.

Stacked up side by side, Mussina beats Glavine in winning percentage, WHIP, H/9, BB/9, K/9, K/BB, FIP, and ERA+ (an aside on the ERA+, Glavine had five full seasons–150+ IP–in which he posted an ERA+ below 100, Mussina had three, which came at the end of his career).

Glavine has the advantage of having pitched for longer than Mussina. Because he had more decisions, he was able to rack up more wins than Mike was. Glavine also wins in the raw ERA match up. By winning those two categories–the two that most HOF voters use most–it would seem that Mussina has no chance against Glavine. The former has the magic number of 300 wins and, justified or not, that will punch his ticket to the Hall of Fame in 2013 when he is eligible.

There is a ray of hope for Mussina. While it’s moving slowly, the BBWAA is getting a little younger and a little more analytical. Perhaps with the inclusion of “new blood,” guys like Rob Neyer and Keith Law, Mussina will get a closer look and might end up with a better chance at election than I think. When put into context, his career was very impressive. A 123 ERA+ and a 3.57 FIP accumulated in the hard hitting A.L. East is no small feat. It will be disappointing indeed if HOF voters skip over Mike Mussina because he never won a Cy Young award and didn’t hang on long enough to get 300 wins. What Mussina should be remembered for is being an incredibly solid pitcher for a long time who ended his career on a high note.

The Yankees Defense Is Just Adequate

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 11:07 am 4 Responses »
Jan 122010


Yesterday, I discussed my feelings about UZR, and suggested that a weighted average of 3 years worth of UZR data would be a more useful metric than our current version of UZR. I was informed that Fangraphs does in fact have a leaderboard for defense that can be sorted into a “past 3 seasons” category, which is not weighted but does provide a relevant sample. Glancing at the list, the thing that struck me was that no Yankee was listed in the top 35 for UZR/150, while a number of Red Sox and Rays were, and only two Yankees had a positive UZR/150 over the time span. Here are the relevant defenders, among qualified players (those who have relevant samples at their primary position):

4) Carl Crawford
13) BJ Upton
14) Adrian Beltre
17) Kevin Youkilis
19) Dustin Pedroia
20) JD Drew
30) Mike Cameron
32) Mike Lowell
39) Curtis Granderson
49) Mark Teixeira
51) Carlos Pena

Obviously, this is simply anecdotal and does not say much about team defense. It does suggest, however, that the Red Sox, and possibly the Rays, have the components necessary to having a significantly better defensive team than the Yankees. Brian Cashman does seem to be cognizant of this, as the two Yankees on this list have been brought in over the last two offseasons. Hopefully, he can continue remaking this club into a team that can excel in all facets of the game.

Tagged with: ,
© 2011 TYU Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha