Archive for November, 2009
Yanks plan to watch spending, says Cashman
Posted by: | CommentsDespite packing a brand new stadium in the Bronx, drawing record ratings for both their regular season and post-season games and securing their 27th World Series title, the Yankees are going to cut their spending for 2010, Brian Cashman said yesterday.
Speaking to reporters at the premiere of the 2009 World Series DVD, Cashman spoke at length about the team’s off-season spending plans. Although he has yet to meet with the Steinbrenners to assess the club’s 2010 budget, he cautioned against an off-season free agent spree similar to last year’s binge. During the winter of 2008-2009, the Yanks brought aboard Mark Teixeira, CC Sabthia and A.J. Burnett at contracts that could total as much as $429 million before 2016 is out.
“We spent a lot of money last year. We’re not going to spend as much this year,” Cashman said. I’m real pleased with the financial commitment we were able to make last year. It puts us in a much better position as we move forward.”
The Yankees, furthermore, are in no rush to leap into the free agent fray. In that sense, though, they are not unlike the 29 other teams who have been largely silent this winter. “We haven’t game-planned yet,” Cashman said. “That’s what we’re going through. Once I get firm numbers, then I can go ahead and start putting ideas together.”
For some Yankee fans, this news might be a bit dismaying. After all, even if we assume that Andy Pettitte comes back, the team still has at least $26 million coming off the books between Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon alone. Furthermore, the club needs a corner outfielder, a designated hitter and maybe even another starting pitcher. Buster Olney claims that the club is going to focus on the bullpen, but the Yanks’ pen M.O. has been to eschew overspending for relievers when replacements are easy to find. It worked last year, and Cashman has no reason to shift that approach now.
So then, fans might wonder, how can the Yanks fill their holes without spending? On a closer look, though, it’s clear that the Yankees could still be very willing to spend. Cashman simply said that the team is not going to spend “as much this year” as they did last. Considering that the free agents out there don’t stack up well with Sabathia, Teixeira and even Burnett, one team would be hard pressed to find $429 million worth of contracts out there.
The Yanks have some flexibility. Even if they shoot for the $200-$210 million payroll range of 2009, the team can go out and spend on the players they need. Signing a Matt Holliday may be cost-prohibitive and a bad use of future resources, but reupping with either Matsui or Damon and Pettitte while bringing aboard an adequate DH/OF — a Nick Johnson perhaps (but more on him later tonight) — certainly isn’t out of the realm of possibilities. In the end, it’s all about spending wisely, and the Yankees certainly know that.
The plan has both Joba and Hughes in the rotation
Posted by: | CommentsWe learned a lot about Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain in 2009. They both went through ups and downs during the season, so we got to see them at their best and at their worst. That can tell you a lot about a player, but you’ll never get the whole story from just one season, especially for pitchers as young as those two. The main takeaway is that both can succeed at the major league level. Whether that is in the rotation or in the bullpen remains a question, and will be until they prove where they’re best situated.
I’ve always taken the stance that a starting rotation should consist of the team’s five best pitchers — that is, pitchers capable of starting baseball games. If Joba and Hughes are among the Yankees’ five best options, they should be in the rotation. Given their potential, there’s a good chance that they’re in that top five. If not, a spot will eventually open. The best strategy, then, is to assume that they’re starters and then assess in Spring Training. According to Peter Gammons, this is exactly what they’ll do.
“They can always go from starting to the bullpen, but it’s tough going the other way,” says Brian Cashman.
This statement is not groundbreaking. The Yankees prefer to have pitchers prepare as starters and then convert them when necessary. They did it in 2007 with Scott Protor, and did it again last year with Phil Coke. There is no surprise, then, that they will have Chamberlain and Hughes prepare as starters. Why pigeonhole them now, when they could ultimately be one of the team’s top five starters?
Still, the Yankees will assess all of their options in the rotation. In fact, it’s probably the most important item on the off-season docket.
“I think the first thing you have to address is our rotation,” Girardi said. “Right now if you looked at our starters you’d say that we have two starters for sure and then you have a mix of some other guys, so I think that’s probably the first thing that we have to address. But I think that’s probably first on everyone’s list, pitching.”
Pitching always comes first, and the Yankees learned that lesson in recent years. It’s why they got the top two guys on the last free agent market, and why they’re trying to develop high-ceiling arms in the minors. Just because it’s first on everyone’s list, however, doesn’t mean that the team will necessarily sign John Lackey or trade for Roy Halladay. It just means that they understand the importance of pitching, and will consider any move that makes the rotation stronger in 2010 and beyond.
(Which, of course, could include signing Lackey or trading for Halladay.)
Do the Yankees have a contingency plan for the bullpen should both Hughes and Joba break camp in the rotation? I guess that depends on your definition of contingency plan. Buster Olney thinks that the Yanks will pursue “two relievers, in all likelihood.” Why they’d do this, I don’t know. Again, we’ve learned the lessons of free agent relievers over the past few years, and with a number of in-house options, bringing in a middle reliever, or even a closer who will pose as a setup man, seems to be a luxury item rather than a necessity. That’s what Cashman says.
“We have guys knocking on the door from the minor leagues, and it’s always easy to take a starter and make him into a reliever – I think we’re good at that,” Cashman joked. “Is it an area of obvious need? No. You’ve got to look more at the rotation and left field.”
The Yankees have a lot of pitchers, and many of them could factor into the rotation and bullpen plans for 2010. That affords them the luxury of choosing only the players they see fit. If they like the cut of John Lackey’s jib, they can bring him aboard. If they don’t like something about him, they can let it go and wait until next off-season. The team is in a good position now, even though some of the rotation spots are nominally unsettled.
Pujols named NL MVP, again
Posted by: | CommentsAlbert Pujols was unanimously named NL MVP today, beating out Hanley Ramirez and Ryan Howard by considerable margins, as you can imagine. The 29-year-old Pujols has been in the league for nine years, earning three MVP’s and seven top three finishes in the voting. He’s a machine.
Here’s the voting. Who voted for Jeremy Affeldt? I mean come on.
The RAB Radio Show, November 24, 2009
Posted by: | CommentsAfter a nearly season-long hiatus, the RAB Radio Show returns for the off-season. Information flow slowly from the Yankees, but that won’t stop us from speculating on their off-season moves. Our readers are some of the finest speculators out there, so we take on a number of questions regarding what the team can do this off-season. The topics are the usual suspects:
- What about trading for Halladay and signing Lackey? One reader suggested it, so Mike and I run down the feasibility of the idea and what it would mean for the short- and long-run.
- Matt Holliday. There are plenty of questions regarding his candidacy for the left field gig, so we dive into that subject. It involves all left field options, including, of course, Johnny Damon.
- In fact, we pretty much discuss the entire outfield situation for 2010. It’s a rough outlook now, but the Yanks could make a few moves to improve it.
- Plenty more, too, on pitching, specifically the bullpen.
Podcast run time: 43:06
You know what the RAB Radio Show is great for? Downloading and listening to in the car. If you’re heading out of town for Thanksgiving, it’s the perfect accompaniment to a car ride with your family. Guaranteed your wife will enjoy. You can download the RAB Radio Show by right clicking that link and selecting Save As. You can play it in your browser by left clicking that link, or you can use the embedded player below. If you don’t subscribe to the RAB RSS feed, you can subscribe to the podcast feed on our server, or subscribe in iTunes.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Prospect Profile: Gavin Brooks
Posted by: | CommentsGavin Brooks | LHP
Background
Brooks grew up in Vista, California, which is pretty much halfway between Anaheim and San Diego. He attended Rancho Buena Vista High School, where he enjoyed not only a decorated baseball career, but a successful basketball career as well. Brooks took home a whole bunch of hardware with the Longhorns, so it’s easiest to recap this bullet-point style:
- Three-year varsity letterwinner
- 2003 Rancho Buena Vista MVP
- 2005 Rancho Buena Vista Most Outstanding Pitcher
- 2005 Aflac All-American
- 2005 All-Avocado League honors
- 2006 Rancho Buena Vista Male Athlete of the Year
- 2006 San Diego Union-Tribune All-Academic Team
Damon: I don’t want no stinkin’ paycut
Posted by: | CommentsOh, Johnny, what ever are we going to do with you? Your public statements are so fickle, and the Yanks would like to bring you back. But let’s be realistic. You’re 36, and 36-year-old outfielders who are declining in the field don’t get to sign a multi-year deal without some sort of pay cut.
But more on that in a minute. First, a recap. Previously on “As the Johnny Damon Turns,” we discussed how Boras and Damon seemed to be at odds over Damon’s free agency. On numerous occasions during the season, Damon expressed a desire to stay in New York. He’s enjoyed his time with the Yankees, and his bat certainly took to the home run-friendly new stadium.
Yet, just a few days after the Yanks won the World Series, Scott Boras, Damon’s agent, spoke out against a hometown discount. Still, Damon, on a Sirius XM appearance, discussed his wishes to stay in New York, and Boras must have cringed. By publicly reiterating his desires to remain in the Bronx, Damon was slowly losing negotiation leverage. Why would the Yanks feel the need to pay him much if he actually wants to stay in the Bronx? Shouldn’t he take fewer years and less money for the stability and happiness it could bring?
Yesterday, in what will probably be his last public statements in a few weeks, Damon again spoke about staying in New York, but this time, his words had a twist to it. Now on board with the Boras program, Damon says he won’t entertain a paycut. Mark Feinsand reports:
Damon’s preference is to remain with the Yankees, and while he has made that wish well-known, sources close to the veteran say he isn’t about to give the Bombers a big discount to stay in pinstripes. Although he’s told friends all season that he would take a shorter deal from the Yankees than he would elsewhere, it is believed that he would want a higher average annual salary if he were to take fewer years.
A source close to Damon said that the outfielder believes his statistics over the past two years have been good enough that unless the market crumbles entirely like it did last winter for Bobby Abreu, he doesn’t feel he should take a pay cut. Damon chose not to discuss his contract desires Sunday, saying only that his first wish is to stay in pinstripes.
“I want to continue to be on a team that can win and to play in front of great fans – and we know that the Yankees fill both of those,” Damon said. “I think everyone knows my desire to come back. Still, every time I’ve been a free agent, I’ve ended up switching teams. It’s the nature of the beast. If people are interested, I’m going to listen.”
A few weeks ago, Mike noted how the Abreu contract would provide a comp for the Damon negotiations, and that reality is slowly coming to pass. Boras will probably not allow Damon to take less than Abreu, and the uber-agent probably has designs on a deal similar to Damon’s $13 million-per contract that just ended.
So what to do? As I discussed yesterday, the Yankees have to know when to turn over their roster. Although a multi-year, multi-million dollar deal for Matt Holliday doesn’t strike me as a good idea, over-committing to Damon isn’t either. At best, Damon is a subpar left fielder with a good bat; at worst, he’s an adequate replacement for Hideki Matsui as the Yanks’ full-time DH. Anything longer than two years is too long; anything more than $10 million a year is too much.
Will the Yanks not offer anyone arbitration again?
Posted by: | CommentsFree agency officially started last Friday, but unlike last winter, the Yanks are approaching this offseason at a snail’s pace. “I’ll talk to our guys first,” said GM Brian Cashman. “And after I have my conversation with our guys, I’ll be full blown into the marketplace.” He said that today at the World Series DVD premier, which means he still hasn’t talked business with any of the team’s free agents, most notably Johnny Damon, Hideki Matsui, and Andy Pettitte.
However, before the team can even begin to have serious discussions with those guys, Cashman will need to sit down with ownership to hammer out the budget. Or at least I assume that needs to happen first. It would make sense if it did. Anyway, that meeting with the Steinbrenners apparently won’t happen until next week, which is after the December 1st deadline to offer free agents arbitration.
Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but that indicates to me that the team isn’t planning on offering any of their free agents arbitration. After all, if you’re going to offer a player arbitration – especially well-compensated players like Damon, Pettitte, and Xavier Nady – you have to be prepared for the guy to accept. How can you risk offering these players arbitration before you know what the exact 2010 budget will be?
Given his unspoken stance of “Yankees or retirement,” there doesn’t seem to be much of a point in offering Pettitte arbitration. He’s only a Type-B, and if he accepts, he’s looking at a $12-14M guaranteed deal. Declining to offer him arbitration affords the team some flexibility to negotiate a lower base salary. Xavier Nady is a no-brainer offer on the other hand, because he’d earn just $7-8M should he accept, and there are worse things in the world than Nady on a one year deal. That assumes his elbow is sound, of course.
The most interesting case is Damon, the team’s only Type-A free agent. After pulling down $13M next year, he’d likely earn $14-15M in 2010 should he accept arbitration. We found out yesterday that Scott Boras is going to use Bobby Abreu’s two year, $19M contract as a blueprint for Damon’s next deal, so he’s already made it known that he’s willing to take less money. The two draft picks would be nice (assuming another team would actually give up a draft pick for Damon), but maintaining roster flexibility and sticking to an offseason plan would be even nicer. Of course, offering Damon arbitration could very well be part of that plan.
Like I said, I might be reading a little too far into this, but I don’t think my logic is insane. If you offer all three guys arbitration before knowing your budget (or before ownership is on board with your offseason strategy, for that matter), and they accept, suddenly the Yanks could find themselves in quite the predicament. The Yanks surprised everyone by not offering any of their free agents arbitration last year, but I wouldn’t be shocked at all if they did the same this year.
Open Thread: Building a team with up the middle players
Posted by: | CommentsThe late 90s Yankees were blessed with incredible talent in up-the-middle positions. Those teams are a testament to the strategy of developing pitching and up the middle players, and using trades and free agency to fill in the other positions. It’s just not easy to find players like Jorge, Jeter, and Bernie on the free agent market, or even in a trade from another team.
Part of the reason the Yankees succeeded in 2009 was that they had excellent talent up the middle. Jorge Posada is one of the best hitting catchers in the league. Jeter is near the top, if not at the top, for shortstops. Cano is one of the better hitting second basemen, and Melky Cabrera hits league average, which is above average for center fielders. The Yanks appear ready to reload, too, as their two top prospects are a catcher and a center fielder.
Over at Baseball Prospectus, friend of RAB Tommy Bennett looks at the up the middle free agents. As expected, the class isn’t all that inspiring. Thankfully, the Yankees have a superior player at every position except maybe center field (Mike Cameron), but even in that case they have a young player who has shown promise. He’s easily an acceptable alternative to Cameron.
Unfortunately, the article is subscriber-only. This is Tommy’s takeaway line, with which I fully agree. “The lesson to be drawn is that if you’re looking to add more than one of these players on the open market, you might want to take seriously the possibility that you’re not going to be competitive this year.” This is true in most years, and 2009 is no exception.
That said, this is your open thread for the evening. Treat it well.
For Halladay, cost would include Phil or Joba
Posted by: | CommentsAs Roy Halladay continues to hover above this off-season as Johan Santana did two years ago, the Blue Jays’ demands for him are coming into view. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, Alex Anthopoulous, the new Toronto GM, will have to make a splash if he ships out Halladay. He’ll need a good, young, sure bet to take Halladay’s place and set Toronto on the path to AL East competitiveness.
With that in mind, it is clear that any trade talks with the Yanks would involve the names Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes being bandied about. After all, these are two kids who can get out AL East hitters while pitching in pressure-packed stadiums in New York and Boston. What GM wouldn’t try to demand one of the two from Brian Cashman?
Yesterday, in his regular Sunday round-up in the Boston Globe, Nick Cafardo confirmed that the Jays would readily give up Halladay for Phil or Joba. He wrote:
The Yankees could easily get into the Roy Halladay hunt if they’re willing to part with Phil Hughes or Joba Chamberlain, which they apparently are. The one player they’d love to hold on to is Austin Jackson, their future center fielder who could keep their outfield costs low.
This is a tantalizing tidbit from Cafardo for so many reasons, and as we like to talk about rumors, talk about it we shall. First, Cafardo casually mentions that the Yankees are “apparently” willing to part with Hughes or Joba. This unsourced development is a drastic turnaround from recent years when the Yankees have not wanted to let any of their young pitchers out of their grasp, and I’m not so sure I believe it here.
As with Santana, Roy Halladay comes with one year guaranteed and the option to negotiate for more. He will be 33 on Opening Day, a good four years older than Santana was on Opening Day 2008 when he made his Mets debut, and while Halladay may be more durable and better equipped to deal with the rigors of age than Santana, the Yanks would be acquiring one year of an old pitcher for a few years of Joba or Phil. If it didn’t make sense a few years ago before we had a better sense of what Joba or Phil could do, it doesn’t make too much sense now.
Next, Cafardo’s belief that Austin Jackson is “the one player” the Yanks would love to hold on to seemingly flies in the face of conventional wisdom. While Cafardo mentions Jesus Montero in another paragraph about the Yanks’ catching prospects, I find it hard to believe that Montero would be made available over Austin Jackson. Montero has a better bat and plays one of the key up-the-middle positions. Jackson profiles as a future center fielder, but Montero ranks higher up on my the Yanks’ prospects list. I’d be far more open to moving A-Jax than I would Montero (or Hughes and Joba, for that matter).
Cafardo’s piece allows us to confirm the high price for Halladay, but anyone following the Blue Jays would know it already. I don’t believe the Yanks intend to trade Phil or Joba for Halladay, and I don’t think the team should.
On World Series winners and roster turnover
Posted by: | CommentsThroughout the late 1990s, the Yankees won three World Series in a row and came within two outs of a fourth with much of the same cast of characters. In fact, 14 players on the 2001 team were also on the 1998 team, and other than the DH spot, the regular 1998 starting lineup took the field during 2001.
This stability makes the Yankees unique among World Series winners. Most, according to a Jonah Keri article in The Times this weekend, turn over 28 percent of their roster — or approximately seven players — after winning. These moves make teams better, younger and more able to maintain a competitive edge, and the current iteration of the Yankees would do well to heed Keri’s warnings.
First, some numbers. Keri used the introduction of the Wild Card as a baseline, and he found that six of the 13 World Series winners, not counting the 2009 Yankees or the extreme outlier 1997-1998 Marlins, turned over less than a quarter of their rosters and combined to lose 47 games — or nearly eight per team — more than they had in their World Series years. Those teams that turned over more than 25 percent lost just three combined games more the following year. Clearly, a savvy general manager along with some roster machinations can lead to repeated success.
For the Yankees, Keri’s lessons are particularly apt:
The Yankees face another regression-related situation. They had an old roster in 2009. Two of the top three starters, five of the nine starting batters as well as the Hall of Fame closer were 33 or older.
It is possible that 35-year-old Hideki Matsui’s knee problems are behind him and that 28-homer seasons will remain the norm. It is conceivable that Johnny Damon’s tying a career high for homers at 35 (he turned 36 on Nov. 5) means we should expect a big power threat for the next half-decade. It is imaginable that Andy Pettitte, a 15-year veteran who has flirted with retirement in recent years and has nearly 3,000 regular-season innings under his belt, will keep winning games well into his late 30s and beyond.
But it is not likely. Few players are more likely to see a regression in their numbers than those getting well into their 30s who have suddenly had a big bounce-back season. The Yankees caught lightning in a bottle with Matsui, Damon and Pettitte, who are free agents, as well as incumbent 30-somethings like Jorge Posada. Even (gasp) Mariano Rivera cannot fight Father Time forever.
The Yankees, warn Keri, shouldn’t grow complacent, and by extension, neither should the fans. It would, in fact, be foolish for the Yankees and their fans to claim this team can repeat what it did last year without questioning some holes. To that end, the Yanks should look to free agency to boost the team. A few younger bats are out there, and some hurlers who could replace Andy Pettitte loom as well.
But there is a part to Keri’s thesis that he didn’t explore in his column. I e-mailed Jonah today to ask him about the so-called sentimental players who have won over fans by winning a World Series: What if the ‘sentimental guys are 1) on short term deals and 2) are better than other options on the market?
Jonah’s answer was not surprising. “You definitely want to go with incumbents if nothing better is out there,” he wrote. “Of course, something better clearly is out there, between Holliday and Bay, plus maybe some trade candidates. So yes, it could very well be a question of deciding whether, say, Damon at 2/28 is better than Holliday at 7/120. There’s no easy answer to that one – you’d probably just go for the better (and younger) player, since the Yankees can obviously afford it.”
The Yanks can afford Holliday today, but do they want to be paying him in four or five years? That’s the real rub, and the answer is “probably not.”
Oftentimes, good teams are, in part, the product of career years and a good deal of luck. With their walk-off wins and overall season numbers, the Yanks certainly exhibited a combination of the two in 2009. To avoid a fall, expect some roster turnover. If the incumbents can be had for cheap and the big fish sign elsewhere for too much money, as Keri said to me, the Yanks would be golden, and that right now is in the hands of the Front Office.



