Perrotto: Yanks want Damon back for one year


While we still have a month left of regular season baseball and, hopefully, a few weeks of October play in the Bronx, nothing dominates the conversation quite like the Hot Stove League does. In his latest weekend roundup, John Perrotto drops in a bit about the Yankees and Johnny Damon:

The Yankees would prefer to re-sign Johnny Damon to a one-year contract for 2010 and allow outfield prospect Austin Jackson a second year to develop at Triple-A, meanwhile pursuing such big-name free-agent outfielders as Matt Holliday and Jason Bay in the offseason.

This is not, of course, the first time we’ve heard the rumblings about Damon and the Yanks. We looked at some early Damon rumors on the 18th and the potential costs of a deal on the 25th. One way or another, Damon and the Yankees will exchange ample conversations about 2010 once November rolls around.

What strikes me about Perrotto’s report are the two other pieces. The first part involves Austin Jackson. As a 22-year-old at AAA, Jackson’s numbers are far from terrible. He is hitting .294/.352/.401 and has stolen 22 out of 26 bases. That’s the good of it.

The bad of it is rather extensive. He has hit just four home runs all season; he has struck out 118; and his BABIP is an unsustainable .386. Plugging his numbers into the Minor League Equivalences tool gives us a line of .255/.301/.340. He makes Melky look like an All Star, and it is clear that Jackson needs a least part of another season at AAA.

Next up are the dueling Jason Bay/Matt Holliday rumors that Perrotto drops. For the most part this year, we’ve heard about varying degrees of interest the Yanks may have in these two players. Some sources say the Yankees will kick the tires on Bay — to force the Red Sox to pay more — and Holliday because he’d be a great fit for Yankee Stadium. Other sources say the Yankees are loath to dole out more multi-year contracts for aging outfielders and may not be in a position to do so financially after landing Mark Teixeira last winter.

Between Bay and Holliday, though, my choice would be Holliday. The current Cardinals outfielder is 21 months younger than Bay and has proven that he can hit outside of Coors Field this year. The idea of giving four or five years to either of these players though isn’t one I can readily embrace.

As the calendar marches on, we’ll hear a lot about Damon and the Yanks’ outfield plans for next year. They have a left field vacancy to consider and a center field spot that could use an upgrade. With Jackson potentially waiting in the wings but still some time away, the Yanks have some tough developmental choices to make this winter. How it plays out will be interesting indeed. It always is.

Addendum: Another reason the Yanks might be interested in retaining Damon.


  1. Makavelli says:

    Like I’ve said before…

    Damon + New Yankee Stadium = Success

    1 year deal? I’ll take it. Although I’m sure Damon won’t. It’ll end up being a 1 year + Option contract at the very least. Perhaps a guaranteed 2 year deal? It will all depend on the numbers.

  2. Tony says:

    No Holliday, No Bay.

  3. Kiersten says:

    I say keep the same OF for next year, considering our record, I don’t think it’s really hurt much. Then sign Crawford for 2011. I’ll lead the campaign to get him in pinstripes.

    • I want to see his 2010 season before I get on that bangwagon.

      I like his .312/.366/.459 line this year. But his .273/.319/.400 line from 2008 scares me. I’d like to see another good season from him as he enters his prime where he demonstrates that he’s more of a baseline .350 OBP guy over the next 4 years rather than the .330 OBP guy that his career numbers indicate before I agree to give him a multi-year contract.

      There is excellent potential there, though. His speed and defense are solid.

    • Mattingly's Love Child says:

      I’m already on that bangwagon Kiersten! But with the Rays dealing Kazmir, that might mean they don’t have the requisite funds to pony up for Crawford’s option this year….

      I’m not sold on the long-term needs of having Holliday/Bay around. Sign Crawford if they can. If not, bring back Damon for a year (plus an option) and hope the extra time in AAA helps Jackson develop some more.

      • MattG says:

        Crawford’s option is team friendly, if not Tampa Bay friendly. That option will be exercised. If Tampa Bay can’t afford it, he’ll be traded in February.

        • They trade Kazmir to afford Crawford.

          • MattG says:

            I think they traded Kazmir because they believe he’ll never pitch well again. As team-friendly as Crawford’s contract is, Kazmir’s (as an ace) makes him look like Alex Rios.

        • Mattingly's Love Child says:

          I definitely agree. To me, Plan A has to be Crawford, knowing that it is extremely unlikely. Plan B would be Damon on a 1+1. Plan C would be Holliday (only because I don’t like the rest of the slop that is on the market this year).

      • I’m fairly certain that one of the driving factors behind the Kazmir trade was to ensure the cash available to pay Crawford. You won’t see both of them gone right now.

        • I still think it’s moot.

          Whether Kazmir was around or not, they were going to exercise Crawford’s option regardless.

          Probably to move him midseason next year.

          • Chris says:

            I think moving Kazmir allows them to pick up Crawfords option and keep him next year. Otherwise, they would have been forced to deal some payroll in the offseason (Crawford, Kazmir, or someone else).

            I don’t think the Kazmir deal changes the outlook for Crawford in TB long term.

    • Makavelli says:

      I don’t know about keeping it the way it is…Swisher and Damon are fine but Melky Cabrera has played above expectations (when he’s on) and when he’s not on…the real Melky Cabrera stands up…and it’s nothing to get excited about what-so-ever.

      We needed to stop the line dancing in centerfield once and for all. It’s worked as well as it could this year so far. I don’t think I want to see another year of it though.

  4. MattG says:

    I do not expect CC, AJ, AP and JC to make all their starts again next season, so the Yankees need to improve somewhere. The OF is due for some sort of shakeup. I think Damon on a one-year deal gives the Yankees some flexibility to pursue different options out there.

    • pat says:

      Crazy talk. Matsui’s 13 off the books gives plenty of wiggle room. Any why is the OF due for some sort of shakeup? Damon on a 1 year deal would be the opposite of a shakeup, it would be maintaining status quo.

      • MattG says:

        Matsui off the books is irrelevant. Cash is not the impediment, roster space is. There are 25 spots on the roster, 5 for outfielders, 3 for starting outfielders. Bringing back Damon does not ensure the status quo. It allows them to pursue Holliday or Bay, with the plan to move Damon to 4th OF/DH duty.

        Or, my personal fave, find a real centerfielder, in which case Damon can continue to start in left.

  5. No way the Sux don’t resign Bay. No thanx on Holliday.

    As far as Damon, I’d rather Cash trade for a Cody Ross type RF and slide Swish over to LF but bringing Damon back wouldn’t be so bad on a 1+option contract.

    • Mike Pop says:

      Meh, I’d rather Damon than Cody Ross. I’m all for bringing Damon back on a 1 + team option.

      I could also see Cash making another Swisher-esque trade. A buy low if you will.

      Damon can alternate between LF and DH. On a 1 year deal, sounds perfect.

  6. While I’m concerned that Jackson’s OPS has dropped by an average of 70.25 points per month (Apr-May: 71, May-Jun: 80, Jun-Jul: 96, Jul-Aug: 34), I’m less concerned about the BABIP. Yeah, it’s ridiculously high but it’s not like Jackson is doing this by dinking and dunking balls in Scranton. His overall LD% for the year 22.4% and it’s only dipped below 20% in one month (July). It would seem that Jackson’s BABIP is coming from hitting the ball very, very hard. The lack of power isn’t getting me too miffed, considering he’s a centerfielder. If Jackson was expected to be a corner OF, I’d be much more worried than I am that his power isn’t showing up yet. I’m more concerned about his K/BB that’s pushing three and his overall walk rate (7.9%).

    • Mattingly's Love Child says:

      I agree with you. That’s why I’d like to see Jackson back in AAA next year. Call him up if he hits the cover off the ball and reduces the strikeouts, but make him force the issue. Don’t include him as part of the plan for next year. If he’s an unexpected surprise, awesome.

      • Yep. An extra year in AAA would not be the end of the world. Just ask the Pirates and Andrew McCutchen.

      • Short Porch says:

        What he said.

        BA OBP SLG OPS
        Pre All-Star .324 .389 .452 .840
        Post All-Star .236 .281 .299 .580

        I hope will be playing winter ball, and that Kevin Long decides to drop by.

        Beyond that, he’d better be putting up numbers at Scranton that match his 2009 Pre Allstar numbers. A few more knocks and walks would help.

        If he’s the second coming of Gary Pettis, I am more than okay with that. But with that second half line, is this really Corey Patterson? If so, trade him before everyone else figures that out.

      • Sam says:

        Are we sure that the Yanks see A-Jax as a center-fielder? I could have sworn I heard that they saw him as more of a left-fielder…

        • whozat says:

          No, they were playing him in LF to increase his versatility. If Damon hurt himself, maybe Jackson had to come up and play some LF or something, who knows.

          He was still getting most of his reps in CF. Also, they wanted to play Pena in CF sometimes to make him more versatile, but not bench Jackson.

  7. Kiersten says:

    Also, the one problem with keeping Damon in 2011 is Jorge Posada, who will almost certainly be the DH by then. Although I would not complain about having either off the bench.

    • Chris says:

      Why do you assume that Posada will be a full time (or almost full time) DH in 2011? He really hasn’t shown significant decline behind the plate this year, and pretty much all of the criticism of his catching is directed at his game calling.

      It’s possible that he would need to move out from behind the plate but certainly not a given.

      • Kiersten says:

        He’ll be 39. It’s possible he’ll still be catching, but not likely.

        • Ed says:

          The odds of any random catcher lasting behind the plate until 39 are very low.

          The odds of a 37 year old catcher solidly holding down a starting job keeping his job for another 2 years are much better.

          When that 37 year old is one of the elite producers at his position, the odds go up even more.

      • 38 y/o catcher. Spent time on DL due to hammy, currently sitting out because of foul ball off of left hand. Keep his bat in the line-up as DH and sign a C.

        • Agreed.

          I think 2010 should be Jorge’s last full year at catcher.

        • Chris says:

          Everyone ages differently. Carlton Fisk was a catcher into his 40s.

          I agree that the hammy could be a sign of his age, but getting hit on the hand with a foul ball could happen to any catcher (just look at Jesus Montero).

        • Ed says:

          Those injuries are random common injuries that you should expect full recoveries from with no lasting issues. Hamstring injuries hit players off all ages, and in recent years the Yankees have had more bad luck with young players injuring their hamstrings (Hughes, Cano, and Wang all hit the DL for hamstring injuries. I believe Joba started ’07 with one as well)

          The shoulder injury was a legit concern, as that could have had a long lasting impact, but he’s clearly recovered fine from that.

          With an old catcher, the big concern is the knees. But Posada has shown no signs of knee issues so far. His defense is what it’s always been, and offensively he’s still right up there with the best of the non-Mauer catchers.

          You move him when he starts to decline or you have a better option behind the plate. You don’t move him just because he’s old. If you were going to do that, he should’ve been moved years ago, as he’s already long past the point of being old for his position.

        • Rod says:

          There is also this guy in the minors called Jesus Montero, not sure if you’ve heard of him. By 2011, the Yankees primary catching duo will likely be Montero and Cervelli with Romine or another of the 100 or so catchers the Yankees seem to have in the system.

          Montero may not stick at catcher long term but he only has to stick there until he turns 27 at which point 1B opens up.

          • Ed says:

            If Montero is ready, sure, you do that. But 2011 is optimistic. He’s only spent, what, 2 months above A ball so far?

            I wouldn’t be surprised to see him start 2010 in AA, then get promoted to AAA midseason. Start 2011 in AAA and make him earn a promotion.

            Also, remember what it took for Posada to get the fulltime job. He’s a much better defensive catcher than Montero, and he only had to beat out Giradi to get the job. He split time with Giradi for a few years before getting the full time job, despite Girardi being on his last legs and never being a good bat. I can’t see Montero just being handed the catcher job.

            • Rod says:

              The only thing that is keeping Montero in the minors now is his defense. I don’t think he needs to get rushed but he’s made the biggest transition he’s going to make short of the majors in going to AA this season. Unless he forgets how to hit a baseball, I see no reason why he isn’t with the big club in 2011.

              It took Posada that long because Joe Torre will play a marginal to scrub veteran over a stud young kid any day of the week. If Piazza and V-Mart can be major league catchers with their gloves, so can Montero.

  8. NZ says:

    Most thought the Yanks were done after Burnett and Sabathia. Steinbrenner could probably find a few million in between the couch cushions.

    • MattG says:

      Are you calling Matsui and Nady couch cushions? There’s $21mm between them.

      • NZ says:

        Considering the players they will likely be resigning – Damon and Pettitte – there might only around $10MM remaining from Hideki’s/Nady’s contracts. If they decide to let Wang walk, which I think would be wise, they might go after one of the free agent pitchers available, as well. If I’m not mistaken, John Lackey will be available, along with strikeout-machine Rich Harden and Justin Duchscherer.

        • King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

          i dont get your math–damon, pettitte, nady, matsui’s salaries all come off. then you put damon and pettitte back on…are you saying they get 11MM in raises next year? i think we’re all thinking same or maybe even a little less…

    • Rod says:

      The Yankees have at least $40M coming off the books next season. They should be able to tighten up a few things here and there and still have money left over.

      • MattG says:

        Matsui: 13
        Damon: 13
        Nady: 8
        Pettitte: 6

        Total: 40

        That’s right. That’s a lot of scratch. Are there any arb raises? CMW?

        • jsbrendog says:

          cmw won’t get a raise. he’ll be lucky to get to arb without being cut or nontendered.

        • But Matsui, Damon, and Pettitte are all likely to return now. Between the three of them, some will go up slightly, some down, but they’re probably making roughly the same total money from 2009 to 2010.

          So, it’s really just Nady’s 6.5M (not sure where you got that 8M number from) and Molina’s 2M.

          • Ed says:

            Everyone kept saying if Nady went to arbitration, he’d probably earn about $8m. That’s probably where it came from.

          • leokitty says:

            Andy is actually on pace to hit most of his incentives, I think, so he’s making a lot more than $6million anyway.

            I think everyone will get similar contracts with incentives next year. I would really really love for them to bring back Matsui as a part time DH but I don’t know if it will happen.

        • Ed says:

          Wang, Melky, Gaudin, and Bruney are arbitration eligible.

          And in contracts that bought out arb years, Cano goes up $3m and Swisher goes up $1.4m.

        • King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

          …dont we have other money coming off? arent we still paying giambi something too?

          what about guys not on the 25? juan miranda for example–how much is he making, and is he coming back? there have to be a few more sitting on the 40 that dont come back…

          damn 40 man limit…

  9. GG says:

    Def bring Damon back on a 1 year. I really want Godzilla back on a 1 yr in addition to Damon. Not only has he been a huge contributer this year, but leaving the DH spot open for a rotation of vets, would make the team much weaker, you need Matsui to put together your “a- lineup”…..what does each one cost??? Both want to be back

    • MattG says:

      Oooo, no. That’s going a little too far. Matsui has put together a wonderful season, but this is his swan song.

      Unless he’ll play for half of what Abreu got. I mean, if he’ll take a big enough pay cut, at some point you would bring him back.

    • Jake H says:

      I would rather offer Nady a contract or arbitration then Matsui.

      • Yeah… no.

        I get where everyone is coming from on the “No to Matsui, he’s old and can’t play the field”. I agree with it, which is why I initially was anti-HazMat.

        But he’s shown he still has a great bat. Having him back on a one-year deal would be okay.

        Nady, however, is a gigantic red flag. He actually makes Hideki look like a pillar of health.

        Don’t touch position players with multiple TJS. Both Nady and Matsui figure to be DH-only players in 2010, and Matsui will outproduce Nady by leaps and bounds.

        • Chris says:

          Don’t touch position players with multiple TJS.

          Based on what? From what I’ve read, the success rate for a second TJ surgery is the same as for a first (not 100%, but still pretty good).

          Nady projects as a type-B free agent. I have no problem offering him arbitration.

          • Ed says:

            Based on what? From what I’ve read, the success rate for a second TJ surgery is the same as for a first (not 100%, but still pretty good).

            The success rate or a second TJ is terrible. It’s around 90% for a first but 20% for a second. source

    • Well, that depends. If you let Matsui walk, you could sign someone else (Benjie Molina?) who can provide decent offense and you can have Posada DH. His bat can definitely play there.

  10. Jake H says:

    On ESPN this morning they said that Tampa will pick up C.C’s option and trade him. They are very worried about money down there. FL has been hit hard with this recession.

    I would offer Damon a 1+1 (option being mutual)

    • ESPN also says the Yankees have yet to define if Joba’s a starter or reliever. Take what they say with a mouthfull of salt.

    • whozat says:

      That’s kind of what we were thinking would happen anyway with Tampa and Crawford, before they traded Kazmir. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if it still happened.

      I don’t think the Yanks would be willing to give them what they’d want to make the deal, though. Tampa’s good enough, if things break right, to compete in the division the next few years…why would they set the Yanks up in LF for the next five by trading us Crawford, unless we set them up at multiple positions somehow, by trading them, like…Hughes, Montero and Melancon.

      • Neither the Yankees, nor the Rays, want to trade with each other.

        There will be no Crawford to NYC deal. He comes here as a free agent or not at all.

        • whozat says:


        • Chris says:

          Neither the Yankees, nor the Rays, want to trade with each other.

          In this case, it probably makes sense because both the Rays and Yankees are trying to compete next year, but in most cases this aversion to trade in your division is stupid.

          If you’re the Jays trading Halladay, wouldn’t you want to remove some of the top prospects from a division rival so they’re weaker in 3-5 years when you’re ready to compete again? The Jays have no chance to compete in the next couple years (which is why they would trade Halladay), so they need to rebuild for when they can compete again. I understand it’s tough to watch someone you traded away come in a beat you for the next couple years, but you have to take the emotion out of the deal and consider the baseball implications.

          Any time you make a deal based on emotions you’re not making the best possible deal.


          • No, it’s not.

            Bad teams should trade their chips wherever they can get the best deal, because they need the talent.

            Good teams should not trade intradivision with other good teams, because you’re strengthening your direct competition.

            Not smart. Any advantage we gain by adding Crawford is nullified by the advantage we give to Crawford in young players + salary relief.

            • whozat says:

              I think you guys are agreeing.

              “in most cases” bad teams should trade their chips wherever they can get the best deal; it’s relatively rare that a good team is looking to trade a good player, which is the case we have here, which Chris was willing to grant you.

            • toad says:

              Good teams should not trade intradivision with other good teams, because you’re strengthening your direct competition.

              Well, sort of, but it’s not a slam-dunk. Remember, the other team still has players it wants to trade. Just because you won’t deal with them dioesn’t mean no one will. So you both trade outside the division, and maybe you are worse off relative to your rival than you would have been had you just traded with them.

              Of course you make it harder for them, by reducing the market, but you do that for yourself also.

              I suspect a lot of the reluctance is really psychological. If the guy you traded ends up a star for the other team it looks even dumber if you’re in the same division.

      • MattG says:

        How could they set the Yankees up for five years when Crawford has only one year left on his contract?

        • whozat says:

          Because the Yankees would extend Crawford. I can’t imagine them even thinking about making the hypothetical deal without an extension.

          • MattG says:

            They can sign Crawford when his contract expires, and there’s not a thing TB can do about it. They are not giving the Yankees 5 years of Crawford. They would be giving them one.

  11. MattG says:

    Q: Wouldn’t Carl Crawford play centerfield here? In which case you would still try to retain Damon, and trade off Melky?

  12. Makavelli says:

    If we sign Damon for cheap for LF…can’t we poke around for a better CF option? We’ll have some money opening up from Damon and/or Matsui.

    Personally, I want Matsui back as well. I don’t see the problem with bringing him back and doing the same exact thing we’re doing now. If one of the veterans need a half-day off to DH? Do it and sit Matsui. What’s the difference? Matsui and Damon back on the cheap is a great idea. Then we can tinker with CF as the off-season goes on. Perhaps trade for Crawford? Ajax and a few other guys for him? We’d still have Heathcott down there in the wings for some point.

    • whozat says:

      Heathcott is probably five years away, if he ever makes it.

      THe issue with Matsui is that he’s a time bomb. Sign Damon for DH/LF and see what Cameron will cost on a one-year deal. His D is great, he can play all over the OF, and he can slot in every day when/if Melky and Gardner aren’t getting it done.

      • I’d rather Cameron start over either one of those guys. I was hoping that the Yankees would’ve put a claim in on Cameron and then worked a one year extension during the offseason.

        • Makavelli says:

          Why haven’t the Yankees put a claim on anybody? And what’s the progress with Penny? Does Penny want to go to the NL like Smoltz after seeing him succeed? Or does he want to help the best team in baseball win a World Series?
          Cameron is available and so is Penny and we just seem to be standing around with our arms folded for whatever reason.

          • whozat says:

            First of all, you’re assuming that just because YOU didn’t hear about something means it didn’t happen. All waiver claims do not get reported in the media, especially if the waiving team pulls a guy back and nothing goes anywhere. You do that a lot…project the stupidest possible reasoning onto your target, and then get all mad about it.

            Second, for NL players, the Yanks are literally the LAST team who gets a shot.

            Third, by claiming a guy, you put yourself at risk for having to pay all of his contract. If he gets released, you can get him for the minimum. I wouldn’t take Penny if I had to pay his remaining contract. I might if he only costs a hundred grand.

            • Makavelli says:

              Why are you angry? There’s no need to be angry. Tomorrow’s another day. The sun will shine again. Whatever it is that’s bothering you so much will end. Don’t worry about it. Everything will be alright. No need to take out everything on a post on a message board.

              That being said. I didn’t assume anything. I asked a question. I never said “the Yankees haven’t put a claim on anybody.” And it wasn’t even meant to be literal. They HAVE put claims on people…there was a whole post on it. It wasn’t meant to be taken as literal as you angrily thought.

              I asked a bunch of questions. You saw 1 thing taken out of context that you knew you could jump on…and you did so with anger.

              Go smoke some pot and take the edge off.

              • I guess irony can be pretty ironic sometimes…

              • Makavelli says:
                August 31st, 2009 at 1:08 pm

                That being said. I didn’t assume anything. I asked a question. I never said “the Yankees haven’t put a claim on anybody.”


                Makavelli says:
                August 31st, 2009 at 12:47 pm

                Why haven’t the Yankees put a claim on anybody?


                • Makavelli says:

                  It was a question…and I explained what I actually meant there-after. It wasn’t a statement.

                  Asking a question isn’t the same as proclaiming a statement.

                  If I ask you “why haven’t you tried this soup yet, it’s really good.” If you have? Your answer would probably be “Oh I have tried this soup…it is very good.” There probably wouldn’t be a lot of anger involved.

                  If I stated “You haven’t tried this soup!” And you actually did try the soup? THEN I could understand the anger being involved.

                  It’s not exactly the same thing.

                • Yeah… no.

                  It’s not a question asking “Have the Yankees put a claim in on anyone?”

                  It was a question asking “The Yankees HAVE NOT put a claim in on anyone… why is that?”

                  Your attempts to spin that are feeble at best and a blatant lie at worst.

                • Makavelli says:

                  I love how you’re telling me how I intended one of my posts to be like. I explain what I meant. Then you say “NO, that’s not what you meant” You then accuse me of “spinning” it…but then spin your own by saying I really meant “The Yankees HAVE NOT put a claim in on anyone… why is that?” instead of what I explained I meant.

                  I thought you were going to end this stuff? I explained what I meant. You can pretend to not believe me for whatever reason…but this back and forth nonsense with what you trying to convince everyone with what I meant isn’t really necessary.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  I just want to say that I’ve been reading these exchanges with growing fascination.

                  As an objective monitor, TSJC wins this debate by a landslide.

                • Makavelli says:

                  What a shocker.

                  And for the record and as my own person. I don’t care one bit.

                • I thought you were going to end this stuff?

                  I thought YOU were going to end this stuff.

                  Look, you said something and got called out on it. Just admit it and move on, or ignore it and move on. But don’t try to spin shit like we didn’t understand what you said at first. It was crystal clear what you said, we all read it.

                  Spin less, and people will pick apart your words less. Simple as that. Try to avoid making blatantly contradictory statements within 15 minutes of each other, and people won’t accuse you of making contradictory statements.

                  Don’t insult our intelligence. We all read what you wrote.

                • Makavelli says:


                  I guess it’s good to know that my explanations of what I said aren’t as good as what TSJC has wildly claimed what I meant.

                  One could only hope you’re never on jury duty when they’re on trial…

                • Makavelli says:


                  YOU think I spun it. I know I didn’t. I explained it perfectly in the soup analogy that you chose to ignore.

                  You get very upset and love to argue semantics. I know what I meant, I explained it. All hell broke loose. That’s basically the timeline here.

                  It’s over with. You’ll probably need to get the last word here but hopefully that’s not the case.

                • One could only hope you’re never on jury duty when they’re on trial…

                  Ironically (again), a good jurist would give less weight your “explanations of what you said” and more weight to what you actually said.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  It’s okay. What I say really means absolutely nothing. I’m just enjoying the show.

                  I have no personal stake in this whatsoever, I’m just noting that TSJC is making you look really stupid.

                  Personal observation.

                • Makavelli says:

                  Not with a good explanation, like I had.

                  If I was on trial for theft and somebody was up there and said “well I once heard him say that ‘this 2 for 1 bin is a steal!’” So he must be guilty because that’s what he said once.

                  Anyway, we’re going back and forth again. You have no idea who I am and what I use or how I write and most of all…what I mean by what I write. You have “an idea” and apparently that’s better than my own explanation.

                  Other people can chime in because I’m not that well liked on here…I don’t expect anybody to agree with me. You’ve been on here for years and everybody loves you and that’s great. But it doesn’t mean you’re always right.

                • How this whole thing should have gone:

                  Makavelli says:

                  Why haven’t the Yankees put a claim on anybody? And what’s the progress with Penny? Does Penny want to go to the NL like Smoltz after seeing him succeed? Or does he want to help the best team in baseball win a World Series?
                  Cameron is available and so is Penny and we just seem to be standing around with our arms folded for whatever reason.

                  whozat says:

                  First of all, you’re assuming that just because YOU didn’t hear about something means it didn’t happen. All waiver claims do not get reported in the media, especially if the waiving team pulls a guy back and nothing goes anywhere. You do that a lot…project the stupidest possible reasoning onto your target, and then get all mad about it.

                  Theoretical Makavelli says:

                  You know what, you’re right. My statement was too broad a generalization. The Yankees are probably making claims on people and looking under rocks for ways to improve the team and didn’t find anything to their liking. Whatevs. Let’s move on.

                • Makavelli says:

                  Nah. I’d never say that because I didn’t mean what he thought I meant.

                  Like I said before. People don’t like me on here so it’s easy for everyone to get their panties in a bunch with insignificant misunderstandings.

                  Whatever. Not a big deal. I’ll just keep explaining myself anyway. I don’t care if everyone has their “TSJC is my homeboy” shirt on. Doesn’t matter to me haha

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  For the record, my comments have nothing to do with a personal like or dislike of the posters invloved.

                • Makavelli says:

                  I believe you.

                  For the record. I’m Batman.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  You don’t have to believe me, I just felt compelled to like that.

                  I came here at the end of July. So I haven’t been here too much longer than you, if at all.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Sorry…scratch the word “like” and replace with “say”.

                • All I’m saying is this, dude:

                  You’ll have to explain what you mean less frequently if you say what you mean directly initially.

                  If you didn’t mean to say “Why haven’t the Yankees put a claim on anybody?” but instead meant to say something else, then, just say what you meant to say initially, or when someone gets confused and responds to something incorrectly, clarify your comments without being disingenuous or implying that we’re taking your comments out of context when there was no context involved.

                  But don’t say something and they say, in the very next post, mind you, that you “never said that”. And that’s the key point, here: You didn’t say “That’s not what I meant” which is a fine and reasonable statement, you said “that’s not what I said”. But it was what you said.

                • Makavelli says:

                  Well if I’m to offer any advice. Keep a Dictionary, Thesaurus, and an Encyclopedia by your side or opened on your computer. Also, if you talk a certain way and mean something since you’re used to slang/abreviations/your own meanings, etc. Regardless of thinking this is only a message board for Yankees fans… Expect people to jump on them and your two options are a.) explain yourself and get into a long neverending argument with people who will refuse to believe you no matter what or b.) just let everybody think what you’re saying is wrong anyway. Either way, nothing gets accomplished. I just get a personal satisfaction of explaining myself though. If they choose to believe their conjured up version based on my reputation, that’s still fine. So in short. It may be a baseball message board…but treat it like a thesis paper for college.

                • Makavelli says:


                  You’re right…I should have put it all together right away. Unfortunately, I write quickly and fast because I’m also working at the same time and can’t always think everything through 100% before I submit. BHut you’re absolutely right. I can easily avoid this…but I didn’t. And there is no “erase” or “edit” so I tried to explain it instead.

                  Again, I apologize. I just never thought it would be that big of a deal. That’s all.

                • Makavelli says:

                  Just bear with me. No “edit” or “delete” option accompanied with posting while working = boatload of mistakes. I tried explaining what I meant. Oh well. Just try to understand that in the future…avoiding any and all sarcastic responses to them lol

                • King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

                  i just want to weigh in with TJSC:

                  Don’t insult our intelligence. We all read what you wrote.

                  don’t insult MY intelligence…i didnt read shit he wrote…

              • whozat says:

                “and you did so with anger.”

                The only reason to read my post as though it were angry would be if you’re looking to incite people so that you can feel like everyone’s attacking you, which you’ve done before as well.

                Try reading what I had to say in a calm, reasonable tone of voice. That’s how I wrote it.

          • Well, maybe they feel that the Brew Crew would want too much for Cameron. As for Penny, I think that interest was nothing more than lukewarm. It’s highly doubtful that his fortunes would change with the Yanks.

          • Ed says:

            Why haven’t the Yankees put a claim on anybody?

            The waiver process is supposed to be confidential. The team gets fined if the commissioner’s office can prove who leaked information. You only hear about a very small fraction of the overall waiver activity.

            Second, claim priority is based off record. When a player gets put on waivers, every team in the same league gets a crack at him, in reverse order of record. Then the other league gets a crack, again in reverse order of record.

            If an NL player gets waived, the Yankees get last crack at him. If an AL player gets waived, the Yankees get 13th priority on the claim.

            • Makavelli says:

              Yeah. I kind of used the wrong terminology there…I was just writing fast and wrote everything in a blur. For that I apologize. Cameron cleared waivers anyway and Penny was outright released. So neither would need “claims” persay anyway right?

              • Ed says:

                Right. The Brewers have stated that they don’t want to sell off veterans though, so they’re probably only trading Cameron if a team overpays. I think they feel that the negative reaction from the fanbase would have more impact than the players they could realistically get from selling off players at this point.

                Penny, well… The extent of his appeal is “well, maybe he’s better than Mitre.” But Mitre just pitched a great game, and the last time Penny pitched, the Yankees destroyed him. It’s got to be a tough sell to convince the team to sign him.

            • Chris says:

              The waiver process is supposed to be confidential.

              Why is that? What’s the harm with people hearing about it?

    • MattG says:

      Jackson, for one year of Crawford (and his salary), would be a tough pill to swallow. What’s tougher is they would want even more.

      However, a Damon-Crawford-Swisher OF would be the bee’s knees.

    • If we sign Damon for cheap for LF…can’t we poke around for a better CF option? We’ll have some money opening up from Damon and/or Matsui.

      Love to, but no good options.

      Peruse for yourself:

    • chriskeo says:

      Depending on Heathcott for anything at this point is a bad idea, not saying he will bust but he is about a month removed from signing pro. Meanwhile Austin Jackson is putting up good enough numbers in AAA to be considered for the CF in the Bronx. I am not saying don’t trade Jackson for the right deal, just that they can’t depend on Heathcott.

      • Makavelli says:

        But as shown before. AJax predicted numbers (above), due to his 118 K’s and only 4 HR all year in AAA, seems to be incredibly bad. And as was stated, makes Melky Cabrera look like an All Star.

        • No, A-Jax’s MLE numbers make Melky look like an All-star; A-Jax is definitely not ready but you’re missing something there. As I said, I don’t mind the lack of power because of his position, but I do mind the lack of walks (K/BB is pushing three) compared to the abundance of strikeouts.

      • Meanwhile Austin Jackson is putting up good enough numbers in AAA to be considered for the CF in the Bronx

        This is not something we should be saying. He’s definitely not ready for the Majors yet. His OPS has dropped each month (an average of 70.25 pts. every month) and he’s striking out way too much without walking enough. Jackson should at least start 2010 in AAA.

  13. JA says:

    CARL CRAWFORD ANYONE?? He should be the yankees LF next year.

  14. Drew says:

    I think most of us would love Damon on a one year deal. I’m really not sure though if he would accept it though. Would you rather throw 10 mil at him for one year or 2 years at 15ish mil, maybe with some incentives in there such as 20+ hrs or 100 runs.

    I think I’d be happy with the latter. Who knows what the market will be though.

  15. Tank Foster says:

    Mixed feelings. You never know when an aging player is going to hit the wall. He’s really, really good, so it seems like a no brainer. But if he stinks next year – which sometimes happens…

    Obviously, 1 year with a team option seems safe. But I’d be wary of bringing back both Damon and Matsui. The main reason I worry about it is that both Jorgie and ARod have issues. We presume ARod gets off-season surgery and comes back fine, but that’s not a guarantee…he may need to DH some next year. Same with Posada; at the least, Posada should be doing some DHing next year.

    In all likelihood, though, as much as I’d like to see young players in there producing, the chances of upgrading on Damon OR Matsui aren’t great, so the reality is both may end up coming back. And there’ll be another DH logjam. But lots of runs, too.

  16. mryankee says:

    Ilike an outfield of Crawford-Gardner-Holliday-I always go for an upgarde. I think its time Melky was sent packing and good riddance.

  17. themgmt says:

    The Yankees have the 4th worse throwing OF in baseball according to fangraphs. The outfield defense needs work. Holliday or Crawford would help with the range. Or they could trade for a RF and put Swisher in LF. I make Damon the DH next year.

    • But they have the 6th best range of any AL team. The range is much more important than the arms. If he would accept a shorter term deal (unlikely), I’d like to bring Holliday in for LF, re-sign Damon for DH for a year and have Jorge catch.

    • The Yankees have the 4th worse throwing OF in baseball according to fangraphs.

      Okay. That’s not good, but since OF range >>>>>>>> OF arm, it’s far from the worst thing in the world.

      The outfield defense needs work.

      No, not really. Damon could use an upgrade, but he’s not an Abreu-level traveshamockery, so he’d be okay in LF for another year.

      Holliday or Crawford would help with the range.

      With the ARM. Not the range. Range is not a problem for us at the moment.

      Or they could trade for a RF and put Swisher in LF. I make Damon the DH next year.

      But the problem is, there’s no RF or LF upgrade to push Damon out of the field that makes sense. The only two guys who COULD be upgrades over Damon are Bay and Holliday, and they both cost way more than they’re worth.

      • themgmt says:

        Damon is solidly in the negatives range wise (this year) and Holliday and Crawford have been two of the best LF’s in UZR over the years. That’s a big difference.

        Holliday will cost more than he’s worth? I figure he’s going to cost less than we would any other off season.

        • Holliday will cost more than he’s worth?


          I figure he’s going to cost less than we would any other off season.

          Those two statements are not mutually exclusive. Holliday may be cheaper this offseason than he would be any other, and still cost more than he’s worth.

          • themgmt says:

            I don’t see how you figure that he’d be more than he’s worth. He racks up the WAR every year.

            He may cost more than you’d personally want to pay him, but in comparison to the rest of the market, it be hard to pay him more than he’s worth.

          • Omar says:

            I agree with this statement, but I still think that the Yankees should try and sign him for the right amount of years, as this 2008 offseason has shown, the Yankees are willing to spend lots of money on very good to elite players. Even though Holliday had a rough April in Oakland, I still think he is in the category of “very good.” Yes the Yankees didn’t want to fork out the dough for Jarrod Washburn, but he is…well…Jarrod Washburn, he’s not worth overpaying for.

        • JobaWockeeZ says:

          But with him doing great on the Cards and being a Boras agent, they will ask for a lot. A lot, a lot.

  18. themgmt says:

    Holliday/Crawford – Gardner – Swisher = great range, bad throws

    Swisher – Gardner – Nelson Cruz = great range, good throws

    Make it happen Cashman.

  19. themgmt says:

    Cruz is a beast in the field and has a good arm. Swisher would be an above average left fielder and his arm plays better on that side.

  20. Joba or Hughes to the pen says:

    Keep Jackson in AAA.We get to happy and hype our farm system too much.In 2007 Austin Jackson was consider a major outfield star in the minors.Now he’s average.

    How many times have you heard that from Yankees prospects.There average.Like Joba,Hughes and Kennedy.

    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      Yup you have to be the guy that voted “1″ on the poll…

    • Tampa Yankee says:

      1. PLEASE use some sort of punctuation.
      2. I believe you mean “They are average” not “There average”.
      3. WTF are you talking about?

      • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

        I think he’s tryng to say that we overhype our prospects, which ormally don’t pan out, and then used Hughes (got injured and is making significant contributions, and is 23), Joba (made significant contributions last year and the year before, is a major part of the team this year, and while struggling is in fact 23 years old), and Kennedy (injuries, can still contribute) as highly flawed examples of his arguement.

        Got all that?

    • Tom Zig says:

      So you want us to do what, exactly?


  21. camilo gerard says:

    def see what Holiday would want.. I think it was mcCarver on fox wondering aloud (while 2 other teams were playing..) whether Holiday would accept a HT Discount to remain in STL… Does he know who represents him?

  22. Sam says:

    Is BJ Upton a possible buy-low opportunity or is it WAY early to even be talking about that?

  23. [...] segment about the Yankees plans for the future outfield dilemma in his latest weekly roundup (h/t RAB). The Yankees would prefer to re-sign Johnny Damon to a one-year contract for 2010 and allow [...]

  24. Joseph M says:

    This is probably going to go round and round several more times over the next few months. Damon and Matsui are basically the same player, good left handed hitters who play left field and can’t field. Damon appears to be the more complete player at this time, keep himm give him him two years and hope for the best.

    Austin Jackson is starting to take on Eric Duncan characteristics. I wouldn’t count on him to be any more than just another player.

  25. Omar says:

    I have zero confidence in Austin Jackson, Melky Cabrera, or Brett Gardner becoming a legitimate center fielder. As of right now I think the best option would be to stick with Gardner and Cabrera as a quasi-platoon, and hope that Austin Jackson has trade value. This season they’ve gotten great contributions from just about everyone in the line up. They’ll have to replace Matsui and Damon’s production somehow. I’m hoping that they sign Holliday to play LF and bring Damon back as the DH for a year or two. A line up that goes:


    would be fun. But it’s far too early to think about next season now, MOAR BITCHING ABOUT CHAMBERLAIN NAO!!!111!!


  26. Rob in CT says:

    I’m fine with bringing Damon bafck for 1 year, maybe even 2 (option?). Matsui I think you have to let walk. I’d like Holliday, but goodness knows what it would take to sign him. No to Bay, who is apparently a very poor defender.

    Crawford’s OBP scares me. I think this year may very well be an outlier. I like the D and the baserunning, but will he retain those as he ages?

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.