Jan
16

Yanks demanding the moon for Nady

By

Via Ken Rosenthal comes this gem: “A trade remains a possibility, but the Braves are unwilling to meet the Yankees’ price for outfielder Xavier Nady, knowing they might get better deals in July.” That’s music to my ears because it shows the Yanks aren’t going to just give Nady away because they have a bit of a logjam. They don’t have to move him, but if someone is willing to pay the right price, they will. It works for me.

Categories : Asides

71 Comments»

  1. SimCity says:

    Is Jordan Schafer or Gorkys Hernandez a possible return for Nady or would we have to throw in a couple other names?

  2. steve (different one) says:

    exactly.

    this is the absolute correct strategy for Cashman.

    Nady is available but you’re going to have to make it worthwhile.

  3. jsbrendog says:

    seeing as how this is the yankees and there is never a need to “give anything away” i do not see how they will “get a better price in july” from the yanks. they very well may get it from someone else on a different player but thre is no way the yankees asking price comes down in july. they are not pitssburgh or the twins who are afraid of losing him for nothing or whatever. if they dont get the moon they will either sign him, let him go and offer arb because if he accepts thats sweet and if he doesnt thats sweet too.

    i like our position

    • Mike A. says:

      I think Rosenthal meant that the Braves can get better deals on a RHB at the trade deadline, not necessarily for Nady.

    • Chris says:

      Of course, the other aspect is that if you trade for Nady (or someone else) in July, you’re getting less in return.

      • Not necessarily.

        We could easily have a greater market for Nady come July. Say he plays well and more teams have injuries/slumps at a corner OF spot. It’s easy to see how Nady could have the exact same value, or even a higher one, come midseason.

        • kunaldo says:

          I think he meant b/c Nady would then be a 3 month rental..

        • gio says:

          tsjc…you interpreted that incorrectly. i think chris meant that the team trading FOR nady would be getting less in return (only 2-3 months of his production).

          • No, gio and kunaldo, I understand that he was saying that we’d get less because Nady’s only a two month rental. I’m just disagreeing with his conclusion.

            Nady right now is a six-month rental, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that all six-month rentals are worth intrinsically more than all two month rentals. There’s many more factors in play.

            - The Braves (or any other team, for that matter) may be willing to pay more later because their other internal options have performed poorly or gotten injured and they’re in contention and Nady is less of a luxury and more a necessity.
            - More suitors besides the Braves may become interested in Nady, driving his price up via increased demand.
            - Nady may play extremely well, increasing his desirability and making his production down the stretch less of a guess and more a certainty.
            - With only a portion of the season remaining, and not the entirety, teams trading for Nady would only pay a third of his salary, making him more financially palatable to small market teams for a pennant run.

            Blanket statements are rarely analytically correct.

            • Chris says:

              I was saying that the team trading for Nady (in this case the Braves) would get less, because it’s half or less of the season. And particularly with Nady, there is no chance of signing an extension before he’s a FA.

              Obviously, there are other factors in play that affect what the Yankees could get in return, but that doesn’t change the fact that the team acquiring Nady gets less if they pick him up in July.

              • Okay, gotcha.

                I was just making the point that a team that trades for Nady getting less of Nady’s production over the course of the year isn’t necessarily paying a lower price in prospects to get Nady at midseason as they would getting him now.

              • Old Ranger says:

                True and false…
                They get him for less time…right!
                They need him more…right
                They pay the asking price…for less time!
                So, in conclusion…you are both right and wrong.
                You and tsjc were coming at it from different angles that’s all…so, you are both right. How’s that? I think! Hell, it looks worse then it is.

  4. The Evil Empire says:

    If we deal Nady away, the OF will consist of Johnny, Brett, Melky and Nick only. I don’t see a surplus or a need to trade him at all

    • D.B.H.O.F. p.k.a The Last Don says:

      Same here. I think if anything we need more depth, not less. We still got three not perfect situations out there in those three guys. If say we trade Nady, who picks up an OF spot if one of those guys goes does? An OF that has both Matsui and Damon in it as starting players in 09 will make our starting pitchers vomit.

  5. Steve S says:

    I wonder how much of Cash’s lack of urgency to fill center field has to do with Ajax? They said they are looking to add pitching for either Nady or Swisher. Its becoming obvious that Ajax will become an absolute necessity by 2010.

    • TurnTwo says:

      where did it say that? am i missing this somewhere?

      • whozat says:

        Well, in honesty, Cash certainly can’t be described as “urgently” looking for a center fielder.

        I think Steve’s wording implies that the Yankees are screwed with their current CF situation, and that if Jackson isn’t at least a league-average CFer at the age of 23 in 2010, Cash will have done the team a horrible disservice.

        This is not a point with which I agree, but it’s true that Cash isn’t urgently looking for a CFer. Part of that has to do with the bats on the team, part of that has to do with Damon/Swisher being adequate part-time CFers, part of that has to do with Jackson.

        • Steve S says:

          I wasnt saying that at all about Cash, i Just think there arent any real options available, especially short term and the fact that you havent heard anything aside from Mike Cameron would lead you to believe that Cash either believes Gardne/melky can be adequate or suceed / and AJAX will be good enough to take over by 2010. Lets not forget, the only outfielder signed beyond 2009 is Nick Swisher (and Melky/Gardner neither of which can be a corner infielder). Considering next years fa class finding a corner outfielder and a center fielder is going to be difficult.

      • Steve S says:

        In the earlier rumors the reports were that the Yankees were looking for pitching in return…eg- Harang/Arroyo from the Reds….

  6. UNION YES. says:

    When does Tim Hudson reach FA? When are they projecting him to be back? May?

  7. CashMoney: Can I have Jordan Schafer now?
    Frank Wren: The answer is no.
    CashMoney: I’m afraid I must insist. You see, my boss, Hank, he has been quite vocal on the subject of Jordan Schafer. As in, “Where’s Jordan Schafer? “When are you going to get Jordan Schafer?” “Why aren’t you getting Jordan Schafer now?” And so on. So please… Jordan Schafer.

  8. Brian M says:

    Nady is an interesting one because he could well be a type A free agent next yr and we could offer arbitration without worrying about a mega pay day for him. Odds are we’d get a couple of picks for our trouble.

    The main argument for moving him is that for slightly more than we are paying him we could get Abreu back for 1 more year. So we’d lose the chance for the draft picks but have a better bat and presumably a solid prospect or 5th starter in return for a package built around Nady.

    I don’t think we have to move him though, cos even as DH the odds of Matsui playing a full season are slim. We need a strong bench to pick up the slack. Plus either Melky or Gardner will struggle at some point and need to be optioned to Scranton. I’d love to see Gardner in the lineup though.

  9. Brian M says:

    I’d actually be interested in buying low on Franceour. At the very least you get a gold glove RF. Hopefully he can rediscover his swing too.

    Or we could put a package together and go after Mike Gonzalaz. That would be as tough a sell as Schafer though.

    • Ugh.

      Resigning Bobby Abreu = Bad Idea Jeans
      Trading Nady for Jeff Francoeur = Bad Idea Jeans
      Trading Nady + anything for Mike Gonzalez = Bad Idea Jeans

      • Mike Pop says:

        I don’t think Francoeur is such a bad idea, ya he fell off last year but he still has a nice upside. We only have 1 year of Nady and he will be our 4th OF anyways. He can probably give you jsut as good of a season as Nady will and you have him under control for more years. We need an outfielder for 2010 anyways.

  10. gio says:

    Franceour, no. Gonzalez piques my interest, though.

    • whozat says:

      Why? The Yankee bullpen was good last year AND is the main area in which the team possesses depth. You want to weaken the OF to add a 30 year old reliever?

      • You want to weaken the OF to add a 30 year old reliever?

        … who hasn’t been healthy in 2 years, and could easily be no better than the 3rd best lefty in our pen behind Marte and Coke?

        http://www.hulu.com/watch/1031.....idea-jeans

        • whozat says:

          But he’s MIKE GONZALEZ!!!!

          Think of the FEAR that other teams will feel when facing the injured former closer for the juggernaut that was the 2006 Pittsburgh Pirates.

            • gio says:

              I wasn’t aware Phil Coke was a dominant reliever. He is proven and has tons of ML experience, afterall.

              • Phil Coke isn’t a dominant reliever. He isn’t proven nor does he have tons of ML experience. He does have talent, though, and considering his talent and the natural fluctuation of ML relievers, he could be good and he could be bad. He’s a wildcard.

                Mike Gonzalez also isn’t a dominant reliever. He’s had moments of dominance. He’s also had stretches of injury and mediocrity. He’s proven that he can give you 50 innings of great relief or he can be injured and give you 30 innings of dreck. He does have talent, though, and considering his talent and the natural fluctuation of ML relievers, he could be good and he could be bad. He’s a wildcard.

                Xavier Nady is a useful player in an area of relative weakness (due to injury and a lack of depth). Mike Gonzalez is possibly a useful player in an area of relative strength (due to numerous quality players currently performing well and significant depth).

                Trading for Mike Gonzalez, in the abstract, has upside. Trading Xavier Nady for Mike Gonzalez doesn’t make sense for the Yankees as presently constructed.

  11. whozat says:

    The main argument for moving him is that for slightly more than we are paying him we could get Abreu back for 1 more year. So we’d lose the chance for the draft picks but have a better bat and presumably a solid prospect or 5th starter in return for a package built around Nady.

    That is certainly not the main argument. The main argument would be “if the team can be made better by trading Nady (by a combo of the return in players AND spending his money elsewhere), then it a trade should be made.”

    Abreu does not make this team better. He’s on the verge of declining, and he’s defensively terrible. I’d rather have Nady at 6 than Bobby at 8. Unless I’m getting a reliable 5th starter AND an interesting prospect, or a REALLY interesting position player prospect that’s in AA/AAA…I’m not even really thinking of moving Nady.

  12. A.D. says:

    Schafer or bust!!!

  13. Steve B says:

    Fine that the Yankees are asking for the moon, but they’re nuts to expect. So far as Swisher goes, the Yankees paid the price for the ’08 edition of Nick Swisher and were thus able to procure him for a couple B-list guys. As he’s played zero games since the trade, there’s no reason to think his value has gone north.

    Nady? One year of a guy who’s not an especially strong player. He’s a decent OF with an average bat. Among MLB outfielders, he’s a dime a dozen guy. He came from Pittsburgh for a high end talent who was falling out of favor with the organization and 2 B-listers in McCuthchen and Orhlendorf (sp?). But he came with Marte, who was arguably the more important component in the deal. What’s one year of him supposed to bring???

    To put it simply, one of these guys is not good enough to start in the outfield for a team whose outfield will feature A) the other guy and B) Melky Mendoza or Brett Gardner.

    • whozat says:

      To put it simply, one of these guys is not good enough to start in the outfield for a team whose outfield will feature A) the other guy and B) Melky Mendoza or Brett Gardner.

      nnnnoooo…one of these guys is not enough of a CFer to play there full-time OR good enough to justify moving Damon to CF full-time — where his D will hurt both the team and him after a while..

    • steve (different one) says:

      but they are both more than good enough to start for the Braves, and would most likely BOTH be the best hitter in Atlanta’s OF.

      and isn’t that what’s important?

    • Should be working says:

      Whats a Melky Mendoza?

    • Nady? One year of a guy who’s not an especially strong player. He’s a decent OF with an average bat. Among MLB outfielders, he’s a dime a dozen guy.

      Xavier Nady’s 2008 .374 wOBA places him as the 18th BEST outfielder in all of baseball, offensively.

      Some of the players worse than Xavier Nady:
      Alfonso Soriano – .374
      Curtis Granderson – .374
      Magglio Ordonez – .373
      Johnny Damon – .373
      Vladimir Guerrero – .373
      Jack Cust – .371
      Nate McLouth – .369
      Bobby Abreu – .368
      Conor Jackson – .364
      Raul Ibanez – .356
      Shane Victorino – .355
      David DeJesus – .355
      B.J. Upton – .354
      Torii Hunter – .353
      Mike Cameron – .353
      Randy Winn – .352
      Alex Rios – .350
      Matt Kemp – .349
      Ichiro Suzuki – .339
      Aaron Rowand – .325

      • dkidd says:

        is wOBA catching on outside of smarty-pants sites like this one? i love that stat

        • the most felonious vocalist in the wide world of showbusiness says:

          Yes. For those interested, Tangotiger recently mentioned the following rule of thumb that lets you roughly adjust wOBA for defense:
          Very Good: +.030
          Good: +.015
          Average: 0
          Bad: -.015
          Very Bad: -.030

          I realize that anybody who gives a fuck about wOBA is probably not predisposed to making rough adjustments but it is kind of handy if you’re looking at a list of wOBA’s or something.

      • Rob in CT says:

        To be fair, Nady had a flukey good year last year. He is highly unlikely to post a .374 wOBA again.

        Other than that, I agree: I think he’s useful, and I like having him on the team. If the Yankees could turn him into a good CFer or a really good prospect, fine. Otherwise, keep him. They’re probably gonna need him.

    • Sweet Dick Willie says:

      As he’s played zero games since the trade, there’s no reason to think his value has gone north.

      That’s not necessarily true. Value is in the eye of the beholder, and if a team thinks that Swisher will fill a need for them, him not having played a game since his last trade may not affect what they ultimately pay for him.

      Team X: I’ll give you prospects, A, B & C for Swisher, which is basically what you paid for him.

      Cash: Nope.

      Team X (if they really want Swisher): Fine. I’ll throw in D.

      Cash: Nope.

      Do you see where this is going? If they really want Swisher, they will pay Cashman’s price, which could have no relationship to the price he paid.

      That shit happens in commerce every day.

      • Thank you.

        That’s what I was saying above: Value, production, ROI, price, supply, demand, preference… there’s tons of variables here and they don’t always line up the same across constantly-varying times and situations.

      • the most felonious vocalist in the wide world of showbusiness says:

        This definitely needed to be said. The common wisdom on this site seems to be that Swisher’s value is set at Wilson Betemit and two C prospects. Even if that were true, each team could very well have a different idea of what that value is. Kenny Williams may have turned down a package that you or I would have deemed superior. He might believe that Wilson Betemit is a very valuable player. Let’s not forget, this is a guy who thought trading a younger, cheaper, thinner Carlos Lee for Scott Podsednik was the reason Chicago won the World Series in 2005. I hope that Brian Cashman always calls the White Sox, Reds, Royals, Giants and Dodgers before finalizing any transaction as they are all teams which seem to value batting average, experience and grit. The Mariners and Orioles used to be on that list but I think they’ve smartened up and are evaluating players more properly.

        Let me put it this way. If you were to somehow buy a 2009 Bentley for $20, would that mean that the car is now valued at $20? Of course not. Price and value are not the same.

        • Rob in CT says:

          Cashman absolutely stole Swisher. He robbed a child of his candy. It was beautiful.

          • pat says:

            kenny williams had a milkshake waaaay over here. Brian took his straw and put it in kennys milkshake. You see what he did there? HE DRANK HIS MILKSHAKE HE DRANK IT UP

            • Cashman: Ladies and gentlemen… I’ve traveled over half our state to be here tonight. I couldn’t get away sooner because my new player was coming in at first base and I had to see about it. That player is now producing at 70 extra base hits and it’s paying me an income of 150 RBI’s a year. I have eight others hitting and I have nine more producing at Tampa. So, ladies and gentlemen… if I say I’m an baseball man you will agree.

    • jsbrendog says:

      who is melky mendoza?

  14. Mike Pop says:

    Would Nady+IPK for Schafer + something work? Or would that deal just for Schafer work?

    • Steve B says:

      They’re not trading Schafer (sp?). Hanson, Heyward, Schafer and probably Hernandez aren’t going to be moved for Nady. Start from below there.

      Couple things to consider beyond the fact that Nady isn’t all that strong a player:

      1) Braves will most certainly be gunshy in their trading after the Teixeira mess. Forget them moving high end guys for a player a year from FA.

      2) Still a glut of corner outfield types on the FA market. Longer we go the cheaper those guys get. They really only need seatwamers for Heyward and Schafer. Might not be a stretch to lock up an FA or two short term for their OF rather than trade for one.

  15. dkidd says:

    who started the rumor that we have a logjam in the outfield corners? everyone is a thousand years old and will invariably get hurt/need rest

    also, isn’t anyone curious to see what nady would do over a full season in nyc? who knows whether 2008 was a “career year” or “finally figured it out year”?

    • Steve B says:

      The issue is whether he can get a full season, is it not? Does he get 600 PA’s as the team is presently comprised?

      Would be interesting to know whether he’s Nady the ’08 Pirate or Nady the ’08 Yankee. Career suggests the latter, but who knows?

  16. Short Porch says:

    If they want Swisher, but don’t want his salary, why not offer him and Igawa for Zito?

    Zito gets another 100 million from SF, Swisher and Igawa get another 32 mil from the Yanks, so basically you are getting Zito for five years at 68 mil or 13 mil per, with years One Two at about 4-5 million.

    How much does a serviceable innings eating 4-5 starter go for? Much less than a year ago. Perhaps the Giants would eat 15-20 to make it work.

    Pitched very well second half FWIW

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.