On Monday, Moshe mused on Nick Swisher, his excellent 2009 season, and whether or not Swish is a candidate for regression in 2010. While there was some number crunching in Moshe’s post, I’m gonna take it a step further like I have for a few different players and project, based on other projections, what we might reasonably expect Swisher to do in 2010.

Before starting, I’ll say what I always say about Nick Swisher and players like him: if you’re looking for a guy to hit for a high batting average and make a lot of contact, Nick isn’t you’re man. He strikes out quite a bit and is not a good contact hitter. However, he does other things that offset those negatives. He’s got a great eye and when he does make contact, he hits for very good power. The same thing true here is true of Adam Dunn, but that’s really neither her nor there. Anyway, onto the forecasts.

Combining the CHONE, Bill James, Marcels, and Fans projections for Swisher, I came up with a line of .247/.357/.464/.821 for Swisher in 2010. Those numbers represent a bit of a drop off from Nick’s 2009, but they’re still right up there with his career numbers (.245/.357/.460/.818). The projections see Nick hitting 26 homers, rather than the 29 he hit in 2009, but that drop off isn’t really anything significant.

Basically, I have a lot of faith in Swisher to put up at least this projection. He’s a good hitter and I think he’s proved that 2008 was the exception whereas 2009 (and ‘05-’07) was more of the rule.

And though I should’ve started with this, I’ll end with it: I’m an unabashed Swisher lover. Over at River Ave. Blues last year, I declared myself president of the Nick Swisher Fan Club. Nick’s a solid player who fits the Yankees in more than one way. Not only is he a great presence in the clubhouse and a good guy for the fans, he’s also a guy whose skill set is perfect for the Yankees. Nick is patient and powerful and can hold his own on defense. The trade for him was an absolute steal and his contract is not too pricey. I’m very glad that Nick Swisher is a New York Yankee.

Nick Swisher, by all measures, had an excellent 2009. After a terrible 2008 in Chicago that lead to him being traded for practically nothing, Swisher bounced back in a big way and helped the Yankees to their 27th championship. The question now is whether he can repeat his performance. On the surface, his numbers suggest that he is not due for a major regression:

Swisher’s numbers in 2009 are similar to those from 2006 and 2007, and a look at his Fangraphs page shows that most of his other indicators (such as batted ball data) have remained consistent and steady as well. However, two recent articles suggest that if you dig deeper, you might find some reasons to believe that Swish is due for at least a bit of a regression regarding both his walk rate and his power. First, Jeff Zimmerman of Beyond The Boxscore used swing data to compute plate discipline, and then extrapolated an expected walk rate for each player. Swisher’s estimated walk rate was 12.5%, while his actual walk rate was 16%. This suggests that he is likely due for a correction in his walk rate in 2010.

Another important element of Swisher’s game, his power, may also be facing a bit of a downturn. Mike Axisa explains:

“Just Enough” homers are those that cleared the fence by less than ten feet vertically or that landed past the wall by less than the fence height (so if it’s an eight foot wall, it landed no more than eight feet deep)…..
As you can imagine, Just Enough homers are the most volatile year-to-year because they’re so close to the fence. As Rybarczyk chronicled at ESPN’s TMI blog, players who’ve hit 30 total homers in a season with at least 40% of them qualifying as Just Enoughs have seen their homer totals fall 23% on average the next season. That’s a problem for Swisher and the Yankees, because he led the American League with 14 Just Enough homers, 48.3% of his total big flies.
This isn’t the first time Swisher has been in the Just Enough danger zone either. His 14 Just Enoughs were second in the league back in 2006, exactly 40% of the career-high 35 homers he hit for the A’s. What happened in 2007? Swish regressed back to just six Just Enoughs and 22 total homers, a 37.1% drop. This isn’t to say Swisher is guaranteed to see a drop off in his homerun – and thus overall offensive – production in 2010, but it’s not looking good.

Basically, Swisher’s knack for sneaking balls over the wall last year may have overinflated his home run totals to an unsustainable level. As such, it would not be surprising to see him back around 20-25 home runs, rather than increasing past 30 as he enters his prime.

Now, stating that Swisher will lose production in the walk and home run categories sounds like pretty bad news for a three true outcomes (HR, BB, K) type player. That said, neither study sees Swish losing enough in either category to sap him of his effectiveness, and you could make the argument that a player at his age is likely to improve. Furthermore, Swisher was terrible at home last year, which is something that is uncharacteristic for players in general and Swisher in particular. While he is unlikely to repeat his road performance, the room for improvement at home should overcompensate for any loss of effectiveness on the road. In all, I expect Swisher to be very similar in 2010 to what he was in 2009, but would not be surprised to see a modicum of regression in terms of walks and power.

From baseballprojection.com, courtesy of RLYW:

Normally, projections do not forecast the same range of wins and losses as will happen in real life. We expect that a few teams will win 95+ games, but are not sure exactly which ones, and if you pick any one team (Yankees excepted) the odds are they won’t win that many games.

But yet I’m projecting 99 wins for the defending world champions. I think this is the highest projection I’ve ever had, for any team. I had them at 97 last year and they beat it by 6. I like the moves they have made in the last year. Curtis Granderson is a tremendous player who helps on offense and defense (at least against righties). Javier Vazquez was one of the best pitchers in baseball last year, and Nick Johnson is OBP Jesus. The Yankees are insanely talented, even more so than usual. The breaks of the season could mean that Boston wins the East, or even Tampa Bay, but the talent spread is so huge in this division that Baltimore and Toronto have basically no chance.

Wow. CHONE, for those who do not know, is one of the handful of widely respected projection systems, and a “highest ever” ranking for the 2010 iteration of the Yankees is pretty amazing. As a stated last week, projections are simply estimates based upon expected performance, and the amount of variance typical to a Major League season makes them more suited for use as a broad guide than for precise evaluations. That said, this simply confirms my belief that on paper, the 2010 Yankees project to be about as good, if not better, than the 2009 version.

This brings me to a question for debate. Do you think that Brian Cashman’s moves this offseason made the Yankees better or worse than they were when the 2009 season ended?

Thus far, I’ve taken multiple looks at offensive projections and what they could signal for the Yankees in 2010. In some of those posts, I’ve briefly gone over the defensive projections for some players. I’d like to go more deeply into that today. To do so, I’ll be looking at these age adjusted UZR projections.

Leading off, I’ll start with the leadoff hitter: Derek Jeter. Last season was a defensive renaissance for the Captain. The process started in 2008 when Jeter saw his UZR/150 jump from -16.7 in 2007 to -0.7, so he was essentially average. In 2009, Jeter’s defense sky rocketed to an 8.4 UZR/150 mark, the first time Jeter was in the black in terms of UZR. My eyes, for one, seemed to back this up as Jeter’s range to his left seemed much, much better (though it looked like he still had trouble going to hsi right). No matter how we slice it, Jeter had a damn good fielding season in ‘09. For 2010, this system projects Jeter to be at -2.0/150. That’d be a big hit from last season–a 10.4 run drop–but considering where Jeter’s been according to UZR, that’s not all that bad. I suspect Jeter’s defensive projection, despite the great fielding season in 2009, is lower because of two things. The first is Jeter’s age; he’s not getting younger and most shortstops don’t get better in the field with age. The second is the fact that it looks like Jeter’s 2009 season was the outlier in terms of defense. Hopefully, Jeter can repeat last year’s performance on the left side of the infield, but I won’t be shocked if he doesn’t.

Let’s stay on the left side of the infield and look at Alex Rodriguez. A-Rod’s fielding was up and down last year, but it was mostly down. His arm looked as strong as ever, but his range was severely decreased. Now that Rodriguez is farther removed from his hip surgery, I expect his range to get a bit better. I don’t think he’ll be in the black, but he won’t be as far in the red as he was last year (-11.7/150) and the projection agrees with me and sees Rodriguez posting a -5 UZR/150. With his offense, as long as he’s not Adam Dunn in the field, he’s a positive. A six run improvement, even if it is still on the wrong side of the number line, would be welcomed warmly.

In my humble opinion, there is no more puzzling player on defense than Robinson Cano. There are weeks when Cano looks like he’s the greatest second basemen to ever play the position. Then, the very next week, he’ll look completely lost at second. Robbie ended last year with a -5.2 UZR/150, his second straight year with a big negative number (-7.0 in ‘08). He’s projected for -2.0/150 and that makes sense. The only consistent thing about Cano’s defense is inconsistency. Regardless, he has the offense to way out-hit a -2 UZR projection and I will not be surprised at all if Cano posts another 4.0-5.0 WAR season.

No one sparked a bigger debate about the merits/demerits of UZR in 2009 than first baseman Mark Teixeira. Despite showing what looked like great defense at first, Tex posted a UZR/150 of -4.1. It’s worth noting that UZR has its holes for every position, but it’s least effective and accurate when dealing with first basemen, so take that number with a grain of salt. The projection sees Mark improving to a 0 UZR/150. In the last four seasons, Tex’s UZR/150 numbers have been -1.8, -5.2, +9.3, and -4.1. Those numbers are all over the place, so I’d expect that 0 UZR/150 to come to pass as it’s right in the middle.

2010 should give the Yankees their strongest defensive outfield in a long, long time. Brett Gardner seemingly gets to everything, Curtis Granderson covers a lot of ground, and though he doesn’t make it look pretty, Nick Swisher’s got good range in right. Starting with Swisher, we see he’s projected for a +1 UZR/150, which is just around where he was last year (-1.2).

Either position, LF or CF, is projected to be a positive for Gardner. Interestingly enough, Gardner’s CF projection, +8, is higher than his LF projection of +2. Regardless, it looks like we’re heading into 2010 with Gardner as the starting left fielder. That projection, though, is way too bearish. It’s that way probably because of a small sample (17 games) and I expect Gardner to field much better than that in 2010.

Curtis Granderson is projected positively in center field as well, with a +1 UZR/150 prediction. That seems about right, considering that’s where he was last year (1.6) and where he was in ‘08 (-9.3). It’s likely, though, that Granderson will outplay that projection because he won’t be relied upon to cover much ground, since he won’t have Magglio Ordonez (-5.8 UZR/150) or Carlos Guillen (-12.7 UZR/150) flanking him.

Bench outfielder Randy Winn should get his fair amount of time in the field as well; in right and left (+11 and +7 respectively), he projects positively.

The Yankees should have a solid defense in 2010 and paired with a strong pitching staff, the Yankees should do pretty well in the run prevention category.

Steve Goldman recently wrote an interesting post over at Pinstripe Bible about the Yankee lineup and the best place in it for Robinson Cano:

A career .306/.339/.480 hitter, Cano freezes up with runners on base. This was clearly demonstrated last season, when he batted only .255/.288/.415 with men on and .207/.242/.332 with runners in scoring position. Conversely, leading off an inning he hit an incredible .441/.459/.797. Batting with the bases empty, he hit .376/.407/.609. While Cano hasn’t been this extreme every year, he has been fairly consistent in this regard. He’s a career .256/.291/.398 hitter with runners in scoring position, .280/.312/.425 with men on, and .331/363/.528 with the bases empty.

This doesn’t mean that Cano isn’t a good hitter, but that he simply has limitations. To get the most out of Cano, a manager might keep him out of RBI spots. Now, when you have one of the best offenses in baseball, your whole batting order is an RBI spot. That’s why the second spot in the order is a place he might prosper. Even if the Yankees get another .400 OBP from their leadoff man, Cano would be batting with the bases empty 60 percent of the time, do his best hitting, and be on base for Mark Teixeira, A-Rod, et al. The downside is that you might get a few extra Cano double-play specials when the leadoff man does reach base.

Basically, Goldman suggests that the 2 slot in the order would be a good fit for Cano, being that it is not an “RBI spot” and would maximize what you can get from him. I think this idea has two flaws. Firstly, Cano will only be batting with the bases empty 60 percent of the time in his first at bat. After that at bat, all subsequent at bats will likely have the guys at the bottom of the order hitting before him as well as the leadoff man, meaning he will be in more RBI spots than Goldman suggests.

More importantly, the Yankees should not be ordering their lineup to do what is best for Cano while disregarding what is best for the club. I am quite certain that Cano’s career .339 OBP makes him a bad fit in the 2 spot, as you want someone in that slot to reach base for A-Rod and Teixeira. Rigging the lineup to help Cano in a way that will hurt the two sluggers does not seem like a great plan.

Furthermore, Goldman’s overall point presupposes the idea that we should expect Cano to continue to fail in “clutch” spots going forward simply because he has done so in the past. To steal a thought from Fack Youk, there’s a big difference between “hasn’t” and “can’t”. Just because Cano has not been able to perform as well with runners on in the past does not mean that he cannot. As Greg at Pending Pinstripes notes:

It is very evident that, to date, Cano has been very unclutch in his career. This doesn’t signal that he will be unclutch going forward. Another conclusion on clutch hitting from The Book is:

For all practical purposes, a player can be expected to hit equally well in the clutch as he would be expected to do in an ordinary situation.

This thought made me curious as to whether there was something changing in regard to Cano’s approach with runners on base that we could point to and say, “That is why he fails in the clutch.” Thankfully, SG over at RLYW looked at this issue recently. He examined luck factors, batted ball data, and pitch type, and found the following:

Honestly, I expected to see more of a split here in the underlying data, but it’s just not there. Cano’s results to this point with runners on base are markedly worse than his results with the bases empty, but it’s not because of any obvious change in his approach in the two scenarios, unless I’m missing something here or not considering something that I should be. I guess this is encouraging, because it means we really shouldn’t have any reason to think that Cano will continue to hit as poorly with men on base as he has so far.

Greg at PP had similar results in his study linked above, suggesting that nothing in the observable data reflects a change in approach by Cano with men on base. I would like to put forth an alternative theory, although I do not have much evidence to support it due to my inability to split certain data sets into bases empty v. men on base sections.

After Cano’s awful 2008, I made the following assertion:

Cano was flying open and jerking his head, leading to a multitude of soft popups. Rather than take those pitches up the middle or the other way, Robbie played into the pitchers hands by attempting to pull everything. Bad mechanics, rather than bad luck, were what killed Robinson Cano’s 2008.

This point was supported by Pitch F/x research done by Josh Kalk and the batted ball and swing data, and I am quite confident in its accuracy. Cano bounced back in 2009, and the data showed me the following:

Cano continued to expand his zone in 2009, but was more comfortable going with the pitch on the outer half. In fact, he made even more contact on those pitches than usual, leading to him striking out less. Increased and better contact on those pitches led to more of his fly balls leaving the ballpark than in the previous season, meaning he finally saw the benefits of trading ground balls for fly balls. New Yankee Stadium certainly helped, but his IsoP was almost as good on the road as it was at home. To sum up, I believe that Cano saw a BABIP increase because he was making better and more consistent contact on pitches on the outer half and out of the strike zone, leading to more homers and general power on fly balls than he got last season. Kevin Long worked particularly hard with Cano in the offseason regarding reaching that ball on the outer edges and going the other way with it, and I believe it paid off.

Cano’s spray charts, linked in the 2009 post, suggest that this interpretation of Cano’s performance has some merit to it. To state my conclusion succinctly, I believe Cano’s poor 2008 was the result of attempting to pull everything, and that his turnaround was the result of a focused attempt to take pitches on the middle and outer portions of the plate the other way.

What does this have to do with our discussion of clutch? Well, I would posit that Cano may have his 2008 issues regarding pulling the ball whenever there are runners on base. As Kevin Long and most other coaches would tell you, a player that attempts to pull everything is simply trying to do too much, attempting to change the entire game with one swing. That mindset snowballed on Cano in 2008, as the more he struggled, the more he attempted to alter things by crushing the ball. It may be possible that he always has that “trying to do too much” mindset when there are runners on base, and therefore fails to focus on taking pitches the other way and gets pull happy. If this is in fact the problem, some more work with Kevin Long might be able to solve it. (Anecdotally, because it does not really mean much in the way of proof, I would like to note that Cano’s 2008 numbers and his career numbers with men on base are very similar).

This is simply a theory, and I myself am not entirely convinced of it. I would just as soon believe that there is absolutely nothing behind Cano’s struggles with men on base, and that we should expect him to perform to his overall career averages regardless of the situation going forward. However, if you do believe that something must be changing with runners on base, I think this is as good a theory as any, and does have some factual underpinnings in terms of the 2008 data.

What are your thoughts on the issue?

Last week, I noted that I would hold off on commenting on PECOTA until they worked out the kinks in their system. As of Monday, they seem to have done so, such that this is likely to be the last update for a while, until clubs themselves begin to figure out how they are going to allocate playing time. CAIRO, created by SG over at RLYW, also released an update, and both systems are now in agreement regarding the projected AL East champion.

PECOTA has the Yankees at 94 wins, Boston at 92, and Tampa at 90, while CAIRO has the Yanks at 99, with both Tampa and Boston rounding up to 95. Looking at the rest of the league, CAIRO seems to be more in line with the expectations of fans, but that obviously does not suggest that one system is better than the other. In fact, I should note that even the people who create these systems would tell you that these standings are not to be taken as gospel, in the sense that the random error is anywhere from 6-10 games. For example, CAIRO predicts a range for the Yankees, where they could win anywhere between 93 and 106 games. Tampa’s range runs from 89-101, such that both teams could fall within their expected range of performance and still finish in a different order than the one represented in the CAIRO standings.

As such, these rankings should be used as a guide, suggesting to us that the Yankees are likely the favorite unless the unexpected happens, not to sleep on the Rays, and that the Diamondbacks are being underrated and the Mariners overrated. To look at the rankings and say “PECOTA has the Yankees winning the division” is not entirely accurate. It actually says that barring any events that do not fit within the expected pattern of performance, the Yankees should finish first. Being that there are always myriad unexpected things that occur in a baseball season, that prediction could easily be thrown off, and should be treated that way. As a Yankee fan, it is nice to see that Brian Cashman has constructed a club that tops all of these rankings. However, once they actually begin playing the games, all bets are off, as the unexpected can change everything.

Previously, I found the “middle ground” of projections for Jorge Posada, Curtis Granderson, and Brett Gardner. Now, I think it’s time that I did the same for a pitcher. I’ll be using the same process that I did for the hitters: averaging out the projections on the FanGraphs page–CHONE, Marcel, Bill James, and the Fans–and seeing where we end up. This afternoon, I’ll be looking at Joba Chamberlain.

This year, we’ll finally see Chamberlain without much (if any) of a harness. He pitched over 150 innings in 2009, and even if he had a limit in 2010, it likely wouldn’t matter. Chamberlain is going to be the fifth starter and the chances that he gets to 180 are pretty slim. Anyway, let’s look at what we’ll be able to expect from Joba this year.

153.5 IP, 154 H, 70 ER, 17 HR, 66 BB, 152 SO, 4.10 ERA, 1.4332 WHIP, 8.81 K/9, 3.9 BB/9, 2.3 K/BB, 3.95 FIP.

That’s the average projection for Chamberlain’s 2010 and I would definitely take that. The WHIP is still a little high, but I think it’s being thrown off by the Fan projection of 175 hits in 159 innings. Is it just me or does that seem like a strange projection? Regardless of that, if Chamberlain can pitch to a 4.10 ERA an a 3.95 FIP as the number five starter, the Yankees will most definitely be in good shape.

Some may see this projection and think “So? That’s not very good. This guy’s supposed to be an ace, right?” To those people I say this: be patient. In general, one does not simply become an ace after one full season of starting. Yeah, sure, Tim Lincecum did it, but he’s the big exception, not the rule. In 2010, Chamberlain will finally be un-tinkered around with for the first time in his professional career. The days of his innings limits are over. He won’t be relieving. He won’t be doing anything on the mound, except starting games.

With all young players and pitchers, there is a growing process that needs to take place, and it usually takes several seasons. Perhaps with Chamberlain, we forgot this. The way he rose through the minor league system in 2007 and the way he pitched in 2008 made us lose our heads. Those events made us think this guy was already polished and totally ready to step into the ace’s shoes. We were wrong. However, that doesn’t mean we need to give up on this guy just because he struggled in his first go around as a full-time starter.

There are many out there, both in the mainstream media and the Yankee blogosphere who would have us believe that 2009 was a negative for Chamberlain and that it proves he cannot be a big-time starter in the major leagues. As of right now, they are wrong. Last year was a success for Chamberlain because he stayed healthy and finally amassed a good number of innings. Those two things were the things the “Joba Rules” were designed to give Chamberlain in 2009. Some assumed that because of those rules, Chamberlain would have instant success.

No, the “Joba Rules” were not designed to guarantee results. They were designed to attempt to guarantee health and longevity and, if nothing else, the Yankees got those two things from Chamberlain in 2009. Along with those tangible things, Chamberlain was also allowed to “learn on the job,” so to speak, and mature against Major League pitching. That experience, along with the innings he pitched, will invariably help him as he moves forward in 2010.

Joba’s development is moving along, but is not done yet. I still believe that Joba Chamberlain has the talent and skill to become a front line starter. As of right now, he is on the path to “acehood”; now, all he needs to do is walk down that road.

RLYW has been running their CAIRO projections and simulations for years, and their system has become one of the most respected in the field. Yesterday, they released their initial projected standings, and Yankees fans are going to like what they see. The standings have the Yankees lapping the field, with 102 projected wins, 8 more than the next best team (Boston). They have the Rays at 89 wins, the White Sox and Mariners winning their respective divisions, and the Phillies Cardinals, Dodgers, and Braves making the playoffs out of the NL.

While these projections are by no means perfect, they do suggest that the Yankees project to be the best team in baseball once again. They have built a team that can hit, pitch, and even catch the ball a bit, such that they have amassed enough talent to be 8 statistical games better than their closest rival. Of course, the games are played on the field, and all of these projections go out the window once the season gets started. However, I think it is fair to say that on paper, Brian Cashman has built another club that can seriously contend for a championship.

In this dull time of the offseason, when non-roster invitees and minor league deals, are the only things keeping the Hot Stove warm, there’s really not much to analyze. However, in the very bottom of the barrel–well, maybe not the very bottom, but rather the side–we have the projections.

I’ve referenced a lot of them before–CHONE and CAIRO mostly–and today, the Marcel’s projections came out on FanGraphs. They are available on the player pages, as the article says, and they join the FanGraphs fan projections, the Bill James projections, and the aforementioned CHONE projections. In this post, I’m going to average out the different projections for a few different players, and see what we could reasonably expect.

There are certain guys–Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira, for example–that will put up great numbers no matter what the projections say. There are others, though, that could be curious cases. The first is Brett Gardner. He’s been one of the most talked about Yankees of this offseason, and he’s become boderline controversial. Let’s see what the average projection give us for Brett.

The average triple slash for Gardner is .272/.351/.379 (346 PAs) with 30 steals compared to six times being caught. If someone could magically guarantee that line for Gardner, batting in the nine spot, I’d take it literally every single time it was offered, especially if Gardner kept playing strong defense.

What’s interesting about these numbers, particularly the steals, is that they’re projected in a relatively small amount of playing time. The most plate appearances projected for Gardner is 428 (by the fans). If Gardner’s going to be the full time left fielder, he’ll obviously get a lot more trips to the plate than that. Let’s go bullish here, and assume Gardner is in fact the full time LF, and doesn’t have a platoon partner. Last year, Yankee nine hole hitters got 643 plate appearances.

With a .351 OBP in 346s PAs, Gardner would be on base about 122 times. With his projected 30 steals, that’s a steal every 4.1 times on base. Assuming a .351 OBP in 643 PAs, that’s 226 times on base. If we also give Gardner a steal every 4.1 times on base, that’s 55 steals to 10 CS (about 83%).

It is more than a tad bit optimistic to assume Gardner will stick for over 600 PAs in the majors in 2010 (I highly doubt that happens). However, if he does, and lives up to these projections, he could be very valuable for the Yankees. After all, nine hitters who get on at a .351 clip and can steal 55 bases–while playing great defense–don’t grow on trees. Factor in his salary and Gardner could be a big steal (get it?) for the Bombers in 2010. Tune in tomorrow when I run this same examination for another Yankee with question marks.

BIG, FAT, GIANT EDIT: SCOTT HAIRSTON IS NOT A FREE AGENT

Since the World Series ended, we’ve spilled a lot of virtual ink on the left field situation. Well, I’m going to throw out more left field scenarios, with one of them spilling into the utility player’s spot as well. For today’s venture, we’ll be looking at the Hairston brother.

As we’ve heard recently, and as Steve reported this morning, the Yankees are interested in bringing Jerry Hairston, Jr. back. In general, this seems like a pretty good move. Hairston offers extreme positional flexibility, as he can play all three OF spots well (career UZR/150 of 20.6 in 323 OF games) and he can also play each position on the infield without being a total embarrassment out there.

Jerry also offers an upgrade over probable utility candidates Ramiro Pena and Kevin Russo. Not only is he a more experienced player than those two, but he can also play the outfield. Pena and Russo would both be awfully green heading into 2010, so it’d be nice to get at least one of them some more seasoning in the minors.

By bringing back Jerry, the Yankees can also fill two positions at once. Not only would they have their utility player, but they’d also have one who could be a platoon partner with Brett Gardner in left field. Signing Hairston likely means that the Yankees would not bring in another (Reed Johnson, Xavier Nady, etc.) outfielder because it could force the Yankees to make a move they likely wouldn’t want to make. My logic is that with Hairston, Pena/Russo, Cervelli, and (platoon partner here), one of Jamie Hoffmann and Brett Gardner becomes superfluous. So, either Gardner would have to be sent down to AAA and one of Hairston or (platoon partner) would have to start in LF, and that’s undesirable. The other option is to send Hoffmann back to the Dodgers, but I assume the Yankees would at least want to see what they have in him before doing so. They could work out a trade with the Dodgers for Hoffmann’s rights if they wanted to keep him while still sending him down. There is, however, another side to this coin.

Conceivably, the Yankees could bring in Hairston along with a left field platoon partner. In this scenario, the hypothetical/possible future battle between Ramiro Pena and Kevin Russo would more or less not matter, because they’d both end up being kept down in SWB anyway. That would make the bench:

Cevelli–C
Hairston–UTI
Hoffmann–OF
(Platoon Partner)–OF

To make this full circle, I’m going to suggest another possible platoon partner for Brett Gardner in left field. That man is the other Hairston in Major League Baseball; Jerry’s brother Scott.

Scott will be 30 this coming season and he’s spent time with the Diamondbacks, Padres, and A’s. Last year between San Diego and Oakland, Scott put up a line of .265/.307/.456 with a .331 wOBA in 430 plate appearances. Those numbers are hardly impressive, but they’re not awful either. He also played decent defense, putting up a 1.8 UZR/150 between CF (-9.0) and LF (+8.7). What makes Hairston desirable for the Yankees is that, like the other candidates, he crushes left handed pitching; last year, he OPS’d over .900 against them. For his career, his OPS vs. LHP is .867, highlighted by a .528 SLG.

In 350 PAs just in LF with +2 defense and not adjusting for a strict platoon, Scott Hairston projects (via CHONE wOBA) to be a 1.13 WAR player in 2010. Combined with Brett Gardner’s projected 1.25 WAR, a Scott Hairston + Brett Gardner platoon projects to be worth 2.38 WAR. (Begin big, fat, giant edit)Scott Hairston is not a free agent and would need to be acquired via trade. He is not worth trading for, unless the cost is insanely low.

Could the Yankees bring in both Hairston brothers? Of course. Will they? Probably not. However, it would not only be cool to see both brothers on the same team, but acquiring the both of them could be an efficient use of money and roster space, along with being an effective deployment on the field. No. Since Scott needs to be had via a trade, it’d be much better for the Yankees to go with Reed Johnson or Xavier Nady (end big, fat, giant edit; sorry about that, guys).