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.

The Flaws of the Verducci Effect

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 7:00 pm 4 Responses »
Feb 182010

I recently received an email asking me why I ignored Tom Verducci’s recent article on pitcher workloads and his highlighting of Joba Chamberlain as a pitcher at risk in 2010. I felt that response would be better served by a full post. There are a number of reasons for my disinterest:

1) His premise is obvious, and the Yankees are aware of it. The idea that overworking young pitchers can lead to injuries down the road is not a Tom Verducci original. Medical professionals have been making similar suggestions for years, and teams like the Yankees have paid attention. They clearly had a target for Joba this season, and acted accordingly. I see no reason to be concerned. This is not an appeal to authority or a suggestion that the Yankees are always right, simply an acknowledgement that Verducci’s finding are far from an exact science (which he concedes), which leads me to my second point.

2) His findings are anecdotal. While he takes an accounting of his results each year, the reality is that his study is generally incomplete in terms of evidence. David Gassko tested the premise and found that the data did not support, and may have been in conflict with, Verducci’s findings. Michael Salfino of SNY did a similar takedown last year, listing a number of issues with the study, including its ignorance of the concept of regression to the mean.

3) One major issue with the study is the inherent selection bias created by looking at pitchers with a large innings increase. Generally, a jump of that sort would be caused by one of two things: either an unexpected jump in performance which dictates increased use of the player, OR the player had injuries in prior seasons and was unable to build up innings properly. Both causes suggest that the player is more likely than others to see either some regression or a recurrence of injury.

These are my reasons for not paying much attention to the Verducci effect. Do you agree with them?

Tagged with: , , , , ,

Second or Seventh?

Posted by Chris H. at 5:03 pm 7 Responses »
Feb 182010

One of Joe Girardi’s biggest challenges this spring will be crafting an effective lineup.

The two primary candidates for batting second this season are Nick Johnson and Curtis Granderson. While that is not at all surprising – as seen by the poll in our sidebar – according to Bryan Hoch of MLB.com and George King of the NY Post, the player that is not selected to bat second will most likely bat seventh. Neither Hoch nor King offer any specific explanation for this decision, therefore, I assume Girardi simply made an off the cuff comment about it that was summarily glossed over by the two writers (maybe they thought it was an unimportant blurb). It does come as surprising news, though, as many fans seemed to think that whoever did not bat second, whether it be Johnson or Granderson, would bat fifth behind Alex Rodriguez so as to avoid a logjam of lefties in the bottom half of the lineup.

If accurate, this news leads me to believe that Granderson might end up in the two-hole with Posada hitting fifth and Cano hitting sixth. Johnson, with his healthy .292/.424/.438 career line against southpaws, would then bat behind Cano, who would be followed by Nick Swisher, and presumably Brett Gardner. Then again, what would the harm be in flipping Johnson and Swisher to have Swisher hitting seventh and Johnson eighth? Granderson can only bat seventh if Cano is hitting fifth and Posada is hitting sixth, but I don’t think that Girardi is ready to install Cano behind A-Rod just yet. If one of Johnson or Granderson is, indeed, slated to hit seventh, the rest of the lineup can be pieced together.

However, the “if not second, then seventh” item seems to lack utility. Hopefully, it is not set in stone.

Photo by the AP

Tagged with: , , , , ,

What to expect from Granderson's glove in 2010

Posted by Chris H. at 3:00 pm 2 Responses »
Feb 182010

In 2006-07, Curtis Granderson‘s two-year UZR was an impressive 27.9. Since then, though, the results have been less than stellar. In 2008, Granderson went backwards, posting an -8.9 UZR. Last season, he recovered with a 1.6 mark. So, after a pretty scattered defensive showing in Detroit, what do the Yankees expect from Granderson in 2010?

Well, a rebound, of course. Via the NY Post, here’s third base coach Rob Thomson discussing the issue:

“Not giving anybody an excuse, but I’ve heard it from a lot of our outfielders – it’s very tough to see in Comerica Park,” Thomson said. “You see a lot of route problems, read problems – it happens in Comerica, the glare off the seats …

“I’ve watched a lot of tape on him. This kid is a special cat. He’s really athletic, really strong, really fast, a quick-twitch guy. I think a lot of that stuff is overblown. He is a much better defender than people are giving him credit for.”

Perhaps there is some legitimacy to Thomson’s claim regarding Comerica Park, however, I doubt that seat glare would fully explain how Granderson could be as good as he was from 2006-07 only to see his defense completely bottom out in 2008. 2008 could have been a dramatic statistical outlier – that is a possibility – or it could have been the result of timid play after Granderson fractured a finger earlier that year (that plus seat glare). Whatever the reason for his defensive downfall two seasons ago, the young center fielder’s 2009 also indicates a lost step in the outfield. There are no clear excuses for Granderson’s performance, though, unless he brought his offensive struggles to the field.

Whatever the case may be, Granderson rebounded enough in 2009 after his disastrous 2008 to spur genuine optimism regarding his defense. He has the range needed to be an above average center fielder, plus his arm isn’t too bad either. Thus, it is reasonable to expect a rebound on the field, as Thomson does, given his overall track record.

Photo by Reuters

Tagged with: , , , , ,

Quick Answers

Posted by Matt Imbrogno at 1:00 pm 1 Response »
Feb 182010

Yesterday, Moshe posted 25 questions/issues going into Spring Training. Tackling them one-by-one in full posts would take way too long, so I’m going to give some quick hit answers to each one.

1. Jorge’s decline: Steve’s got legit concerns about Jorge declining, and if there’s anyone on the Yankees who’s going to decline, it’s likely to be Jorge. The average projection for Jorge doesn’t seem too ominous, but you never know with older catchers. My guess? Jorge doesn’t fall off a cliff, but he’s not as productive with the bat as he was last year.

2. The back up catcher: barring injury, I think this job is Cervelli’s to lose. His bat is iffy, but it’s okay for a back up catcher and his defense is solid.

3. The Jesus and 2010/catching: If we see El Carpentiero at all in ’10, it’ll likely be as a September call up. As for whether he can handle catching, I’m cautiously optimistic. Regardless, that bat is downright dreamy and I want it sticking around in the Yankee organization for years to come.

4. Nick Johnson: Like with Hideki Matsui in ’09, keeping Johnson off the field could be the key to keeping him healthy. If he does stay healthy, I think he could at the very least come close to matching Hideki/Johnny Damon, he’ll just do it in different ways. His power should bounce back by being in YSIII and I’d expect his HR/FB anomaly from 2009 to correct itself as well.

5. Cano’s defense: I think he’ll stay where he is, which is frustrating ’cause he’s brilliant out there at times.

6. Jeter’s contract situation as a potential distraction: I don’t think it will be an issue until after the ASB.

7. A-Rod’s defense: I think we’ll see the second half A-Rod on defense–still below average with the range (but what an arm!), but not as bad as he was immediately after returning.

8. Utility role: I say Pena, unless Russo really wows everyone in ST.

9. Which Swish: It may not be an exact copy, but I’d put good money on the ’10 Swisher looking a lot like the ’09 Swisher.

10. Grandy vs. lefties: Hopefully, Kevin Long can work some magic. And, yes, moving to YSIII will definitely help C-Grand.

11. Gardner as an everyday player: I’m cautiously optimistic for Gardner, but I wouldn’t hold my breath on this issue.

12. Randy Winn’s possible decline: 2009 looks like one of two outliers in the last 8 seasons, 2006 was the other. If he can bounce back, great. If not, it’s not a huge sunken cost and he’s replaceable.

13. Gardy or Grandy in CF: I’ll be happy either way, but the numbers point to Gardner in CF.

14. Hoffmann or Thames: I think they’ll go with Hoffmann, just to see what he’s got unless Thames absolutely destroys the Grapefruit League.

15. October hangover for SPs: It’s possible, but they’re veterans who know how to manage their bodies. Hopefully, there are no ill effects.

16. Javy as unclutch: I see good things for Javy this time around.

17. A.J.’s health: Burnett will pitch at least 185 innings in 2010.

18. 5th starter: I’ve written more than once about this. Joba it shall be.

19. BP or SWB: See above.

20. Damaso: He won’t be as lights out in the playoffs, but he’ll be his usual lefty destroying self since he’ll finally be healthy for a full year.

21. Second lefty: I don’t think a second lefty is a must, but I think General Joe likes the idea of having two lefties, so I think they’ll at least start off the year w/2 LHRPs.

22. If not, who gets the job: No thinking, gut reaction, Melancon.

23. Mo and…aging…: I’ll defer to Chris Turk for the answer.

24. Girardi’s lack of job security: The only way it becomes an issue is if Joe really screws up this year, which won’t happen.

25. Room in the budget if needed: They’ll find it.

So, there you have it: 25 quick answers to 25 complex questions. Before you know it, it’ll be November and we’ll be looking back on these (hopefully after a 28th championship) issues and their outcomes. Here’s to hoping they all turn out the way we want them to.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hughes Plans To Work On Changeup

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 11:00 am 10 Responses »
Feb 182010

From Chad Jennings (courtesy of RAB Twitter):

For now, Phil Hughes is only throwing fastballs and changeups in his bullpen sessions, and he expects to throw one more bullpen before he mixes in curveballs and cutters. He compared the development of his changeup to last year’s development of the cutter. “I’ll concentrate on it all spring,” he said. “Hopefully I’ll get it to a point where it’s a solid pitch for me. It just comes with repetition.”

Although Hughes does not need a changeup to be successful as a reliever or a decent starter, he may need one to be an upper echelon type starter. The cutter is simply a fastball variant, and I am not sure he can get by throwing a fastball or similar pitch 70-75% of the time. Mixing in a solid changeup, even if he only throws it once an inning, will help keep hitters off balance and will force them to refrain from sitting on the fastball and curve. However, improving a pitch is not an easy endeavor, and there are no guarantees that Hughes’ hard work will pay off. Hopefully, he can experience at least some success with the pitch, and broaden his repertoire in preparation for his eventual move to the rotation.

Tagged with: , , , , , ,

Joe Girardi-#1 Concern is Lineup

Posted by Steve S. at 7:06 am 11 Responses »
Feb 182010

Must be an old one. Alex plays 3B

At yesterday’s press conference, Yankee beat reporter Sweeney Murti asked manager Joe Girardi what his number one concern was going into the 2010 season. He replied that the biggest issue he has to iron out in his own mind, is the Yankee lineup. Here’s what Girardi said:

“I’m not concerned that we don’t have the players to do it; I’m concerned exactly how we place them. There is a ton of talent in that room. We have very good hitters up and down that lineup, but you want to try to find the right mix. … The concern is exactly where we put them, not that we don’t have the right pieces. I believe we have the right pieces.”

In my view, the biggest question is in what to do with Nick Johnson and Curtis Granderson. 1-4 is mostly set (except for #2) we know Gardner and Swisher will be near the bottom, and Cano has to prove he can drive in runs to move up in the order, so he’s going to hit 6th or 7th. The real question in my mind is what to do with our two new additions, both of whom are very talented but bring different skills to the table.

So who’s your 1-9? I’ll start:

1-Jeter
2-Granderson
3-Tex
4-Alex
5-Johnson
6-Posada
7-Cano
8-Swisher
9-Gardner

That’s my lineup facing Righties, which of course is most days. Johnson hits #2 facing a Lefty and Grandy drops down to 8th with everyone else moving up a notch. I like the protection Tex gives Grandy, I like his speed at the top of the lineup, and his OBP is .367 facing Righties (Johnson .394). I think Grandy’s speed on the basepaths will make up for the .027 difference in OBP, and then some.

Now I know some will only look at the OBP and decide Johnson’s the better fit in the 2-hole. Solely looking at OBP is myopic. You have to also consider the complete skill sets of the players involved. Grandy’s a plus runner and on the flip side, Johnson’s a sub par runner. So the spread between the two players is big once they’re on the bases, and the difference between their ability to get on base is fairly small. With a difference .027 of OBP between the two players facing Righties, you’re talking about Johnson getting on base 1 extra time every 40 ABs, and generating about 1 extra run per month. I think that with Grandy’s speed he will score runs more often, even if he has a few less opportunities. There’s also double plays to consider. Granderson is an extreme fly ball hitter who grounded into a grand total of ONE double play last season. Nick Johnson, on the other hand, grounded into 15.

In my lineup, you don’t lose Nick’s bat. It’s not like Johnson doesn’t hit in my lineup. He does, so his OBP will be in there. Those who want Johnson hitting 2nd could argue that Nick being on base for the power guys behind him would add up to him scoring when Grandy was never on base to begin with. Which is true, but you hit more singles and doubles than you do HRs. Grandy can steal 2B and score on a single, score from 1B on a double when Nick would get stranded at 3B. I think the latter will happen far more often than the former, and more than makes up for the difference in OBP. Curtis’ speed means he can score in many situations where Nick will not. The idea is to score runs, not to get and base and be stranded.

Finally, I’m not married to this lineup. I can see Cano moving up and Posada moving down if things play out the way I suspect they will. But I want to smooth Curtis’ transition to the Bronx, since defensively I would put him in Left. So offensively, I want to make things easy for him. He’ll see better pitches with Tex on deck and his speed with make the run scoring at the top of the lineup more efficient.

(pic courtesy of SI.com)

Tagged with:
© 2011 TYU Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha