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.

Discussion: Considering Player Makeup

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 9:30 pm 12 Responses »
Mar 232010

Tom Tango chimed in with an interesting thought over at The Book Blog today that I wanted to highlight:

Its interesting how little minor leaguers are paid, and how talented players, with limited drive, are weeded out. Imagine instead that minor leaguers are paid half the MLB minimum (200,000$ a year). Now, those leagues could see a shift of players with more physical tools than mental/emotional ones. And, that might not be the best thing. Indeed, its very possible that the low pay and rough life is part of the process of becoming a MLBer. In the NHL, Canadians make a big deal about the Sutter brothers, players with limited physical tools but huge on heart and determination, players who worked on their parents farm in the offseason, and on their own. When it comes to player makeup, its possible its an important attribute. Certainly in the lower leagues. And thats at least one place where scouting has a leg up on performance analysis.

Tango suggests that players who make it through the crucible of the minor leagues may by nature have good makeup, as they survive fairly tough conditions and an uncertain future for a long time before they see any payoff. It takes a lot of discipline and will to make it to the majors. This ties into previous discussions that we have had about effort. I firmly believe that unless you see something obvious to the contrary, most players give it their all on most nights. They have spent their entire life working to hone their craft and achieve success, and I do not see them relaxing once they reach the majors. It takes a certain breed to reach the top of a profession, and that sort of individual is usually fairly motivated.

Do you agree?

Tagged with: , ,

Did The Yankees Fall For The Small Sample On Gaudin?

Posted by Moshe Mandel at 6:54 pm 8 Responses »
Mar 232010

According to Ed Price, the Yankees have placed Chad Gaudin on waivers. This means that another club could claim him and take on his entire 3M dollar salary, he could clear waivers and go to AAA, or he could clear and reject the assignment and become a free agent. This move comes after Gaudin moved to 0-3 with an 8.38 ERA on the spring, while his primary competition for a roster spot, Sergio Mitre, continued to impress. However, Gaudin pitched just 9.1 innings, and Mike Axisa at RAB wonders, did the Yankees make this decision based on a tiny sample size?:

In over 460 career innings in the American League, Gaudin has been the definition of league average. His 4.25 ERA equals a 101 ERA+, his .271 batting average against isn’t much worse than the .265-ish league average (basically one extra hit every 142 at-bats), and his 6.5 K/9 is right around the 6.8-ish average as well (one fewer strikeout every 30 IP). His walk rate (4.2 BB/9) is definitely high (~3.4 league average), but he mitigates it somewhat with a strong groundball rate (43.7%). There’s nothing sexy about league average, but it’s very valuable in the role he’s expected to fill.
Mitre, on the other hand, has never been league average at much of anything, even before having Tommy John surgery. Even in his best season (2007), he put up a 4.65 ERA (93 ERA+) and a 4.8 K/9, both below average by any measure. And that came in the NL, in a pitcher’s park. His groundball rate (59.7% career) is spectacular, but missing bats and avoiding contact is the name of the game in the AL East. Oh, and Gaudin’s more than two full years younger.

On the face of it, this seems to be a poor decision based on spring training stats. However, as Mike touched upon earlier in his post and a number of readers on Twitter noted, this may be the best way for the Yankees to keep all of their pitching depth in the organization. If they had waived Mitre, his low salary and strong spring performance make it likely that he would have been picked up by another team. Conversely, Gaudin costs 3 million dollars and has had a poor spring, such that there is a reasonable chance that he makes it through waivers and is available to the Yankees should they need him later in the season. Considering that the role that they are fighting for on the Opening Day Roster is that of mop-up reliever, it is not a huge deal if the lesser pitcher makes the club. While it seems counterintuitive, the Yankees probably made the right move.

Tagged with: , , , , ,

Mets Should Not Repeat Yanks' Mistake

Posted by Matt Imbrogno at 11:00 am 15 Responses »
Mar 232010

While there has been a lot of talk about who will fill the Yankees’ fifth starter role, there has been even more talk in Mets camp about who will fill just about any role. Aside from Johan Santana, the pitching staff is a bit of a question mark. And while much of the Mets’ buzz this Spring Training has been about Carlos Beltran’s and Jose Reyes’ injuries, the other big piece of news is that of prospect RHSP Jenrry Mejia.

Mejia has impressed the Mets, and others, in Spring Training and there is talk of Jenrry heading north with the big league team as a relief pitcher once the regular season starts. This would be a huge mistake. For confirmation of this, the Mets need only to look across town to see what happens when you tinker with a young player’s development to fill a hole that could be otherwise filled. Of course, I’m talking about Joba Chamberlain.

Before going further, I will say that the situations are not analogous. Chamberlain was older than Mejia when he made his run through the minors in 2007 and was much more polished as a college pitcher. He was also brought up very late in the season and spent time in the bullpen because of an approaching innings limit and because the team needed late inning bullpen help. The biggest mistake, though, was not “re-starting” him, so to speak, in 2009. The talk of Mejia has a similar “Make-Him-A-Reliever-Before-Giving-Him-A-Chance-To-Succeed-Or-Fail-As-A-Starter” vibe.

First of all, Mejia is just 20 years old (B. Oct. 11, 1989) and he has yet to pitch a full season in AA; he pitched 44.1 innings in AA in the second half of 2009 after pitching 50.1 innings at A+ during the first half. To rush him up to the minors just to pitch in relief would be a move devastating to his development as a starter. FanGraphs ranked him as the number three prospect in the Mets organization. A talent like that should not be converted into a reliever until it is clear he has failed as a starter. Mejia is far too young to have failed and we’ll need to see him pitch at AA and higher to see if how he can fare as a starter.

There is a counter to this, found here:

“Mejia’s slider needs a lot of work. He throws it with an inconsistent release point and arm speed, often leaving it up in the strike zone He sometimes throws his changeup too hard and doesn’t achieve enough separation from his fastball. His fastball command also can stand to improve, and even he acknowledges he doesn’t quite know where the pitch is headed when he releases it.

The logic could be that if Mejia is having trouble harnessing his secondary offerings, why not focus his energy on perfecting two pitches rather than a whole arsenal? Why not? Because, again, Mejia is 20. A lot of 20 year old pitchers struggle with their control and the effectiveness of their secondary pitches. He needs time to perfect these things.

This same argument is made in regards to Joba. Some say he should just focus on his fastball/slider combo, which would make him perfect for the bullpen. Of course, I say to that, why waste his talent and other pitches? But, I really don’t need to sit here and remind you that I think Joba should be a starter. I’ve done that enough.

I will say, though, that Chamberlain’s development was hampered by the tinkering in 2008 (the shoulder injury didn’t help) and if the Mets do the same thing to Mejia, his development could be hindered even more. By turning Mejia to the bullpen, the Mets would be giving up on a great talent to fulfill a current need that is not nearly as great as their future need.

As it’s been mentioned everywhere in the baseball world, the Mets’ starting rotation is essentially in shambles. Johan is the only sure thing, and even he’s a bit less sure after an elbow injury. Mike Pelfrey and John Maine are okay, but they’re not the building blocks of a rotation. Jon Neise has a bit more upside, but he’s still behind Mejia in that category. The Mets’ need for starting pitching in the future will be greater than their need for a reliever now. Like Chamberlain’s, his development would be stunted, halted, tampered with, and all around impeded upon. It would hurt Mejia as a pitcher and it would hurt the Mets, as they’d be depriving themselves of a possible legitimate starting pitcher. Mejia-as-reliever may briefly plug a hole for the Mets, but that very same strategy will cause a greater leak down the road.

Tagged with: , ,

Heyman-Crawford Yanks #1 target for 2011

Posted by Steve S. at 8:01 am 12 Responses »
Mar 232010

My favorite rumor-maven is at again, with a new piece in SI detailing the Yanks desire to have Carl Crawford patrolling Left Field in Yankee Stadium when he becomes a free agent after this season. He writes:

Still, as one competing executive says, “The Yankees absolutely love Crawford.”

And what the Yankees love, they usually get.

(snip)

Realistically, the Rays’ best hope might be for the Yankees to concentrate on someone else. But that isn’t very likely. The Yankees determined that they wanted to avoid a two-year deal for Johnny Damon in part because they like Crawford so much. And they will have to like their chances to get him.

The Yankees do like the Phillies’ Jayson Werth, who’s also going to be a free agent at year’s end. Werth has more power, bats right-handed and is proven in right field, the tougher position to fill. But the Yankees still like Crawford better. Part of that comes from seeing him compete in the AL East, and most of it comes from seeing him thrive in the AL East. He’s averaging .297 and 50 stolen bases over his eight-year career.

Frankly, I’m not buying it. I’m sure there are Yankee execs who love Carl, but unless they’re named Brian Cashman it doesn’t mean much. If I’m the Yankee GM and have a choice between Carl Crawford and Jason Werth for a similar deal in terms of length, I’m taking Werth, even if he gets a higher AAV. More pop, better arm, better OBP, better fielder. Just more toolsy than Carl in every area of the game except for speed.

Carl’s value is tied up in his speed, he turns 30 the 1st year you sign him and his OBP has only been above .350 for 2 seasons in an 8-year career. In terms of power, he’s below average by most measures. I just don’t love him going forward, I don’t see any upside potential, and see real possibility of decline. He’s one leg injury away from being a mediocre player.  There are some questions about Werth’s knees, but nothing I’ve seen would be enough to make me pass on a player of his talent.

Don’t get me wrong, Carl’s a really good player. But I prefer the flexibility of signing Werth for Right Field, moving Swisher to Left and letting Nick’s contract expire after 2011. I could bring Nick back on a shorter deal, or target someone else. I generally don’t like signing Left Fielders unless I have to. I like leaving LF open as much as possible for future considerations. You can move aging/declining players there, since it’s the least demanding OF position. By having LF open after 2011, you can target a Right Fielder or Center Fielder as a Free Agent or in a trade, and move Curtis Granderson or Werth to Left if needed. But if you sign Crawford, you’re locked in at the other two spots. Also, Left would be open for Jeter or Alex if need be, both of whom will be in their late 30’s in 2012. Loads of flexibility, which is something I know Brian Cashman values.

We’ve become accustomed to having a regular LF in recent years, but that wasn’t always the case. During the Championship run of the late-90′s, the Yanks trotted out Gerald Williams, Tim Raines, Chad Curtis, Ricky LeDee, and Chuck Knobloch as their Opening Day Left Fielders from 1996-2001. We really didn’t have a player locked in at Left until Hideki Matsui (who George signed) arrived in 2003. Johnny Damon wasn’t signed to play in Left, he was supposed to be our CF, and Damon is a good example of why you value flexibility. If Carl Crawford was locked into LF over the past few seasons, you would have either be stuck with Damon as a defensive liability in Center or forced to make him your DH, a spot already occupied by other aging, injured players like Matsui and Giambi. To quote Mo, The Plan In Left Field Is….No Plan At All? My answer is yes.

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