Yanks, D-Backs, Tigers talking blockbuster


Updated 12:15 a.m.: It looks like Monday was a busier day for the Yankees than we thought. According to Ken Rosenthal and Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports, they discussed a three-way trade with the Tigers and Diamondbacks that would have sent Curtis Granderson to New York and Edwin Jackson to Arizona. Talks, however, reached an impasse. The D-Backs are pushing hard, but the deal “was rejected by at least one of the other two teams.”

I originally thought that team to be the Yankees, and Joel Sherman confirmed as much a few minutes ago. The Yanks thought the costs were too high, and the Tigers were lukewarm on their returns as well. Although the three-way talks are dead, the Yankees are still very much interested in Granderson, not least because their interest could drive Johnny Damon‘s price down.

So what then were the costs to this proposed deal? The Yankees would have lost Ian Kennedy, Mike Dunn, Phil Coke, and Austin Jackson in the trade and gotten back Granderson and “one or two prospects from the Diamondbacks.” The Diamondbacks would have sent the Tigers Matt Scherzer and another prospect or two for Edwin Jackson. So, even though they’d be losing two to four prospects in the deal, the Diamondbacks were the ones pushing for this. It made the situation a bit more interesting.

We can forget about Dunn and Coke, because they’re not the ones who were holding up this deal. I doubt Kennedy was, either. If the Yanks are the stalling party, it’s likely over Austin Jackson. He’s still developing, and his lack of power in 2009 is concerning, but he’s still a good prospect, probably the second best in the Yankees system. The Yankees are reluctant to deal him, and for good reason. If that power tool comes around, he could be a very good MLB center fielder.

Granderson is attractive for a number of reasons, as I outlined in this post. He’s trended downward since his breakout 2007 season, but as with Nick Swisher‘s 2008, 2009 could have just been a bad season for Granderson. As I noted, he hit way, way more fly balls than normal, which led to a lower BABIP and, accordingly, batting average. I can definitely see Granderson recovering to his 2008 form, which would be great news for the Yankees. He could instantly replace Johnny Damon in the outfield and in the two-hole.

Getting two prospects back from the Diamondbacks would have helped soften the blow of losing Jackson, but we still don’t know which prospects were under discussion. Without mentioning prospects, the Diamondbacks are getting both Kennedy and Edwin Jackson and giving up only Scherzer. Maybe both the Tigers and the Yanks get a B-prospect from the D-Backs. So is Granderson and a B-prospect worth Austin Jackson?

As with most rumors, I discussed this one with both Ben and Mike for a while before even starting to write. All three of us are on the fence. If the Yanks pulled the trigger, we’d welcome the new center fielder. If they didn’t, we’d maintain hope for Jackson. It’s nice not to be disappointed either way. But, gun to my head, I do the trade. I have faith that Granderson can recover, and while I do want to see Austin Jackson grow into his pinstripes, there are some situations where trading prospects makes sense. I can see this being one of those situations.

Categories : Hot Stove League


  1. A.D. says:

    I’m not really a big Granderson fan, but getting the price down from Hughes + AJAX is something. Really would be interesting to know who the “prospects” would actually be.

  2. Moshe Mandel says:

    Gotta make that deal. Most scouts think A-Jax will never be as good as Granderson, which is the difference for me.

  3. Joey H says:

    This will be one of those trades we look back on and laugh at next off season when you pull it out of the vault of horrendous rumormongering.

  4. Keanu Reeves says:

    But, gun to my head, I do the trade. I have faith that Granderson can recover, and while I do want to see Austin Jackson grow into his pinstripes, there are some situations where trading prospects makes sense. I can see this being one of those situations.

    I agree with this.

  5. Yank Man says:

    That is a lot to give up for a player that can’t hit lefties.
    Maybe he can fix that under Kevin Long, if Granderson becomes a Yankee, I say welcome aboard but that is a hefty price imo.

  6. TJF says:

    I say do the trade straight with the Tigers and have them include Jackson and give them IPK and Jackson. Coke and Dunn with IPK and Jackson for Granderson and Jackson.

  7. AndrewYF says:

    So this is that ‘three-for-one’ trade to clear up roster space that Cashman was talking about.

  8. TJF says:

    Then sign Lackey and add a bat for DH (VLAD?)


  9. Stryker says:

    i agree with joe, i think this is one of those times you go for it and trade the prospects. yes, there are a few disconcerting things about granderson going forward but he’s under a reasonable contract for a good amount of time and he’s already been in the MLB for a few years. we’ve yet to see jackson make it to the bigs and we’re still waiting for him to develop (if he does). i say in this case you go for the sure thing.

  10. Salty Buggah says:

    Damn, I’m on the fence too. I like the deal and at the same time don’t. I guess it depends on what prospects AZ gives up.

  11. TheZack says:

    If A-Jax pans out, he’s ceiling is probably Ganderson of 2008, not 2007 (lacks the power of Grandy). Granderson’s ceiling is higher than that. I’d make the trade, but I doubt it happens…

  12. P. Allen says:

    I’m not as sold on Granderson. Even if I grant his 2009 is akin to Swisher’s 2008, Swisher’s style fits the Yankees mold of patience. Granderson never has had a good enough OBP and strikes out a high right. I like the power, but the lack of getting on base will be problem in this lineup.

    • Keanu Reeves says:

      Career OBP:

      Granderson: .344
      Swisher: .357

      Best OBP single season:

      Granderson: 2008 (.365)
      Swisher: 2007 (.381)

      I get what you’re saying, but if getting on base nearly 35% of the time isn’t horrible at all.

      • Keanu Reeves says:

        I get what you’re saying, but if getting on base nearly 35% of the time isn’t horrible at all.


      • P. Allen says:

        Maybe swisher can show him how to take pitches. Still not sure I do it. You have to like the tradition of a homegrown yankee CF. Jackson has that possibility (with apologies to melky/gardner). I still dont think I do it.

        • Keanu Reeves says:

          In my fantasy, just being around all the great hitters the Yankees have would have Grandy with all of this stuff.

          And yes, the homegrown CF is always attractive.

        • JMK aka The Overshare says:

          I really don’t see why the homegrown thing is amplified. Tradition is nice but Granderson likely improves the team. That beats tradition.

          Will Jackson be as good as Granderson? Maybe. It’ll take at least a few years, you still have to worry about the strikeouts and the lack of power. Giving up Dunn and Coke? Don’t care. Neither is all that good and I think we can replace them in-house. IPK’s loss depends on what we get back.

  13. T-Dubs says:

    IPK would win 15 games in the NL west. I’m so high on A-Jax that this trade makes my insides hurt.

  14. CJ says:

    How about Yanks get Granderson, Conor Jackson
    Arizona gets Edwin Jackson, Ian Kennedy, McCallister/melancon
    Detroit gets AJax, Scherzer, Coke, Dunn

  15. I’m kind of ‘meh’ on it–my reaction would depend a lot on the prospects involved

    • Stryker says:

      it’s nice how yankees fans are beginning to take notice of the minor leagues/farm system, but there’s such a thing as being too ‘in love’ with our own prospects. i’d say 95% of those guys won’t even make it to the majors, let alone play for the yankees. it should be known no one is untouchable and if trading austin jackson, a toolsy, athletic outfielder with potential that still has to work out some parts of his game nets the yankees one of the top center fielders in the game (and one who, IMO, jackson won’t be as good as) i say they do it.

      there’s a good chance it takes a while for jackson to work out said kinks and even then i’m sure he’d struggle some in the majors. that’s a lot of waiting – waiting i’m sure the yankees aren’t necessarily looking to do; which is why they’re looking to get other teams involved to get this move done.

      • Keanu Reeves says:

        It’s not that she (or any of us) are so much overvaluing Jackson to the point where we render him untouchable, it’s that we don’t want to give him up in the wrong deal.

        I’m not completely sure that Granderson will continue to perform as one of the top CF’s in the game, therefore, I’m hesitant to say goodbye to Jackson in this deal.

        • Stryker says:

          ok – say you do hold onto jackson. the question now becomes “what do you expect out of him?”

          are you sure he’s worth hanging onto? he’s still a fairly raw player. do you expect him to be major league ready for 2010? what about 2011? what if he hasn’t found his power and still struggles with plate discipline – even more so at the major league level?

          i respect your opinion and whatnot – just playing devil’s advocate.

          • Keanu Reeves says:

            Nothing wrong with playing devil’s advocate. It makes for excellent discussion.

            I’m expecting a 2011 arrival for AJAX. The plate discipline concerns me more than the power, as power is typically the last thing to come. I’m hoping with another full year at AAA he blossom into a 15 HR, 20 SB, above-average defense type player. I’d be thrilled with that.

        • Count Zero says:

          This is precisely where I’m at. I just don’t like Granderson that much.

          I know lots of you are on the “but teh short porch!!1! many HRs!1!!1″ train — but there is another possibility as well. Players who profile like Granderson (flyball, power, LHB) often become so enamored with “teh short porch” that they become worse hitters. I can definitely see that as a possibility with Granderson.

          I’m somewhat ambivalent, but if push comes to shove, I pass on this deal unless there’s a really good D-Backs prospect in there.

    • Slugger27 says:

      maybe im missing something, i just dont see how anyone can not like this deal for the yanks… hes at bare minimum a 3.5 win player, hes just now entering his prime, and hes grossly underpaid for the remainder of his contract

      getting an established player at the up-the-middle position that doesnt include joba, hughes, or montero… i really just dont see how anyone could be “on the fence” by this… im baffled

      • Keanu Reeves says:

        Because he has historically bad numbers against LHP’s, his defense has shown sign of declination, and he strikes out an awful lot.

        That being said, I hear your point about an established up-the-middle player. I’m just not so sure he’ll continue to play like the ’07 Granderson (which I would love to have).

        • Jamal G. says:

          2007 Curtis Granderson was a seven-plus WAR player and a legitimate MVP candidate, and he should not be looked upon as a failure, or anything of the sort, for not approaching those levels ever again his career.

          • Keanu Reeves says:

            I’m not trying to say he needs to perform like that every year. You’re right, that’s a ridiculous standard. I’m just saying if this trade goes down, I hope the Yanks are getting a player that performs more like 2007 Granderson and less like 2009 Granderson.

            Fair enough?

          • The Artist says:

            Thank you. Everyone who doesn’t like Granderson is over weighting last year, and forgetting how good he was the two previous seasons.

            You’re buying low on him. If a bad season freaks you out you’ll never buy low on anyone.

    • Omar says:

      You honestly think that Ian Patrick Kennedy and Austin Jackson have a better chance at providing more value to the Yankees over the next four years than Curtis Granderson over the next three years? I mean, I love the farm…but right now Brian Cashman’s goal isn’t trying to build a team to compete in 2012, his goal is to successfully defend the World Series. Austin Jackson at best profiles as Torii Hunter, a more realistic, yet positive, peak projection of him would be .290/.360/.470 with good defense, which is fantastic for a cost controlled CF…but in a down year Curtis Granderson put up basically that line in a pitcher’s haven. I realize Granderson has his problems (LHP, declining defensive numbers, etc) but he’s an all-star talent that would fit in excellently with the Yankees, to get him for a mid-shelf prospect, a AAAA pitcher, and depth chart players is a steal.

  16. Hey ZZ says:

    Potentially leaked by the Yankees to use leverage against Damon?

    • T-Dubs says:

      Or leveraging the Blue Jays to lower their demand for Doc, or else A-Jax wont be around to trade for.

    • Nick-YF says:

      Certainly doesn’t hurt, but I think the Yanks have liked Granderson for a while now. There’s no hard evidence of that I can cite, except for an interview on WFAN a couple of years ago in which Stick Michael made a passing glowing reference to him.

      I’m curious about his fielding. One of the reasons he was viewed as on the verge of being an elite player a couple of years ago was because in 2007, in addition to his excellent offensive performance, his fielding was superb (at least according UZR per Fangraphs). In 2007, when you combine it all Fangraphs has him as a 7 WAR player. The most recent seasons has shown an offensive decline and a marked fielding one. I wonder what’s happening. Has he slowed down due to injury or bulking up, or are the metrics misleading?

      In any case, Granderson is still a very good cf and would provide the Yanks with the most value out of that position since Bernie during the good years. He’s an exciting player and one of my favorites. I’d love for the Yanks to do this in tandem with a 1-year Cameron signing, so that those days that Granderson takes off against lefties (and he basically needs to do this), the Yanks have a great CF righty bat to make up for the loss.

      • If Cameron’s on the Yankees, in any way, he needs to be starting. IF it’s both Granderson and Cameron, you put Cammy in left and Grandy in CF, with Swisher in right and presumably Melky as the fourth OF. Damon could DH? Matsui could DH? Another FA?

        • Nick-YF says:

          right, I wasn’t implying he wouldn’t start in left. I meant that he’d move over to CF when Granderson sat.

          and then you need a righty corner bat off the bench in left. hmm, my plan has holes.

        • Rose says:

          One thing I agree with John Kruk on…is that if you’re going to get just a DH…and you have to pick between Damon and Matsui…you pick Matsui.

  17. leokitty says:

    My brain says yes and no because I think it’s good value but I can’t get past the platoon split Granderson has. It’s just so bad I form a block.

    I wouldn’t be upset at all if it happened just a little nervous about that.

    • Salty Buggah says:

      Let’s not forget his defense, which was great in 07, horrible in 08, and slightly above average this year.

    • Nick-YF says:

      I think a smart organization can make such an extreme platoon split work for them if they add the right personnel. I wrote it above, but I think if the Yanks get Granderson, the next move should be to go hard for Cameron.

      • leokitty says:

        It’s not that easy–the first issue is that a team like the Yankees really shouldn’t be utilizing platoons unless both players are super fantastico. Granderson vs RHB fits that, but who against LHP?

        You should also take into account that acquiring Granderson means they would look to move Melky. He costs more than Gardner, and his team control doesn’t extend that much longer. Gardner in against LHP isn’t very appealing. If Cameron is signed here, there is very clearly still a major platoon hole. I don’t normally really care about splits but Granderon’s really is THAT terrible.

        Then the next issue is with Jackson gone Cameron as a stop-gap isn’t as appealing. They would be forcing themselves into signing Crawford or hoping that something awesome pops up.

        (In this scenario Holliday doesn’t exist, I don’t think Cameron would join just to platoon anyway).

        • Nick-YF says:

          So I was envisioning Cameron being signed as a LF who spelled Granderson in center when a lefty starter was on the mound (not always because the Yanks should give Granderson a shot to see if he can figure out lefties). When Cameron shifted to center, you’re right to wonder about what to do in left since Gardner is not the most attractive option against lefties. In that case, maybe there is a righty bat who can play a passable left field that can be gotten on the cheap. Xavier Nady comes to mind, although I suppose he wouldn’t be too excited about such a role.

          here’s a non-sequitur: I’m irrationally excited about the idea of Jim Thome as a cheap DH because I think he might be the first Yankee to hit the old Stadium with a homer.

        • JMK aka The Overshare says:

          +1 to Gardner. I’d worry about him against fast-pitch softball. Gardner, under no circumstance, can be part of the equation but a reserve outfielder. As for the rest, yeah, it certainly restricts flexibility, but I think he still offers a lot more value than people admit (not that you’re doing that—his splits are very concerning, as are the flexibility issues).

          They’re only “stuck” with Granderson for three years, and really, for what he produces, he’s not really overpaid.

  18. Those prospects from the D-Backs better be pretty good. Losing the only position player who’s even close to major league ready in the system is a big hit. Sure, you could argue Kevin Russo is, but his upside is pretty limited.

  19. Free Mike Vick says:

    I’d do it and sleep like a baby.

    at best Ajax becomes what Granderson is with less pop and IPK’s time here seems to have run its course. (i don’t give a rats ass about Coke and Dunn.)

  20. Mike bk says:

    Any chance the prospects could be a PTBNL like Matt Davidson or Ryan Wheeler? If that is the case then i would do it.

  21. Tony says:

    Too much for Granderson.

  22. Joey H says:

    Eh. Having reviewed this. I’d probably do it. I am one of those who aren’t all that high on A-Jax. It just at face value seems like they are giving up a lot for a guy like Granderson. Maybe some ML ready talent in return would help. Hell, I’d even thrown in a better piece than Coke/Dunn if they are willing to part with someone more valuable than an “unnamed prospect.”

  23. If we throw in Wordekemper, I bet we could get J-Up. DO. IT. CASHMAN.

  24. john Adams says:

    A-jax = Curtis Granderson with less power thats how i see it.
    Also too fill in Curtis Granderson has had years in the majors and proven himself unlike A-jax.
    Id Do the trade pretty curious on who the D-backs give up also.

  25. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    I would do this and I’m not a big Granderson fan. I think his value is much better than we give credit for; he’s perhaps the most polarizing figure on this site.

    I think we overvalue AJAX. I like AJAX but am very alarmed that he hasn’t improved noticeably in two years, has very high k totals and declining power. He’s probably not going to be able to contribute until 2011 and even then, is likely to struggle. So the first two years are almost a lock as an advantage to Granderson. It’s not often you find a strong defensive CF with 30+ power potential. That said, his splits still worry me a fair bit. You can’t give up that much if you need to platoon him. The Yankees must be confident he can be a very, very good defensive CFer, at least put up a fighting chance against lefties, and hit 25+ homers. If they think he can, you absolutely make that trade. If not, well, no.

    IPK hurts a bit, but we still have Nova, Z-Mac and the first pick in the Rule V draft, which may very well be Yohan Pino, a guy likely to be someone you can use in a swingman, spot-starter role. There are a few other good options in Rule V, as well, including starter-depth. I posted a few ideas further up in the thread. Coke and Dunn are ok, but I wouldn’t lose sleep over it. Dunn is frickin’ wild and Coke is WAY homer-prone. Both lefties, so there’s some loss.

    Melancon, Bleich, the possible Rule V pick and WDLR may be able to step into the ‘pen and replace Coke and IPK. Plus, there may be prospects from Arizona. Granderson would be a big upgrade over Melky in CF, and also gives them leverage over a LF FA.

    I wouldn’t be thrilled if this happened, but I’d be pretty content with it.

    • Joey H says:

      Every team over-values their own prospects. Hopefully they can net a decent pitching prospect from the ‘Backs. I agree though, I wouldn’t be going nuts but I’d take it.

      • I wouldn’t want a pitching prospect, I’d want a close-to-ML-ready position player. The Yankees have plenty of pitching prospects but w/o Jackson, The Jesus is the only possible impact player who’s even sorta close.

        • Scratch that–give me one of each!

        • Joey H says:

          So you are really holding high hopes for the Nova’s and Mcallister’s of the world to replace that void/depth left open with the departure of IPK?

          • I have more faith in McAllister than I do in Nova.

            • Joey H says:

              That wasn’t the question. Kennedy, despite having struggles that we all know about is basically the next guy on the chain in terms of MiL SP depth. But I guess with another year under their belts comes improvement.

              • Well, Kennedy is a much, much better option than McAllister or Nova. He’s got ML experience and, though it was shaky, it means something. Kennedy could easily contribute to the big team in ’10, whereas I wouldn’t expect that from Z-Mac. Nova might now that he’s on the 40 man, but I wouldn’t expect too much. This time next year, I think we’ll be talking about McAllister possibly being the 5th starter.

                • Joey H says:

                  Yep. My point exactly. Give us a pitching prospect!

                • So the fact that McAllister could be the 5th starter next year, which you agree with (?) means you still want one?

                  Don’t forget, Noesi’s on the 40 man now, too, so they’ve probably got hopes for him and he could move quickly. The same quick-moving thing could also go for Banuelos. While they’re not high up int he minors (yet), the Yankees have a good deal of pitching prospects who could make an impact in the next two to three years.

                  What they need is an outfielder to take over when the possible short term deals of this offseason are over.

                • Joey H says:

                  No I agree with the first part of what you said about having more faith in Kennedy at this point in time based on ML experience.

                • JMK aka The Overshare says:

                  The problem is Arizona doesn’t have an OF prospect outside of Gerardo Parra, and no way are they giving him up. I can’t imagine Detroit has much to offer outside of Wilkin Ramirez, and he’d have to fit into their plans if they’re going to trade Granderson. They won’t give up Matt Joyce either, right?

                  Say they get Melky too for Joyce? Probably not. Just throwing ideas out.

                • Matt Joyce is with the Rays now, JMK. He went there when Jackson went to Detroit.

    • Even if we don’t wildlu overvalue AJax, I think it’s still a trade worth making. Basically you’re getting a guy very capable of putting up big offensive numbers, giving you above average defense, who’s locked up for 3 years of his prime below market value and is still on the south side of 30. AJax may turn into a very good outfielder, but so far as swapping AJax for Granderson, you have to make that move.

  26. JT says:

    According to Sherman the Tigers were “never fully satisfied with Proposal in 3-way talks”

  27. A.D. says:

    Doubt we’ve heard the last of a Granderson trade.

  28. Mike Axisa says:

    Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. This thing isn’t going away anytime soon.

  29. A.D. says:

    Apparently the Tigers weren’t happy:

  30. Jmarr says:

    This is a great deal for the yankees if….. They retain Damon to play left and continue to hit at the top of the lineup, put Granderson in center which would be a nice up grade over melky and would really lengthen our lineup, sign a dh type on the cheap. There will be someone that can protect Arod who can be our main dh once we get late into the hot stove season. There are too many dh types for how many jobs are available. Think Vlad, Delgao, Matsui. Something like that. If Granderson is a replacement for Damon its not such a great deal. I dont want someone who cant hit lefties a lick batting in the top of the lineup. Granderson should hit 6th or 7th for a yankee team

  31. Will in NJ says:

    I am against this. The D-backs farm is barren, so don’t expect anything from them. Parker had TJ and no way they’re giving up Schlereth. Granderson is clearly on the decline, his splits were horrendous, he strikes out far more than swisher does and walks less as well, and he has trouble reading the ball off the bat in CF. And austin jackson is the only position player in the farm that is relatively close to the majors.

  32. Kevin G. says:

    My proposed trade:

    Yankees get: Curtis Granderson
    Tigers get: Humberto Sanchez, Kevin Whelan, and Anthony Claggett

  33. Mike HC says:

    I would not do that. I can see thinking about it for an extra minute or two, but I would not pull the trigger on it.

    Trading for Granderson would be akin to a free agent signing. One for 3 years and about 25 million depending on the option. Everybody mentions the prospects and the money when it comes to Halladay, but with these Granderson talks, everyone is ignoring the money aspect. While the deal is on a smaller scale than Halladay in terms of prospects and money, the philosophy should stay the same. Keep your cost controlled youngsters and fill in with free agent signings. Don’t panic and trade away your top prospects for what amounts to a free agent signing. You can get those guys for free, or for only a late round first round pick in the Yanks case.

    • Joey H says:

      “Everybody mentions the prospects and the money when it comes to Halladay, but with these Granderson talks, everyone is ignoring the money aspect.”

      Mostly because we aren’t giving up Hughes or Joba, two young pitchers who they expect to be staples in the rotation for years to come and who have at points shown flashes of brilliance. A-Jax has no ML experience. I can go on and on but these are two totally different situations.

      • Mike bk says:

        not to mention 3/25 for a 28yr old cf is much different than 3 years to a damon or 6 for holliday or bay and the money is much less than roy who will basically take granderson’s money in 1 year if he gets extended.

      • Mike HC says:

        And we are not getting back the best pitcher in baseball. The prospects to player value is equal in my opinion for the proposed Granderson and Halladay deals. Jackson, IPK, Dunn and Coke is too much in my opinion, just as Joba, AJax and others is too much for halladay

        • Joey H says:

          Well everyone is entitled to their opinion. I just happen to see it very differently. I’ve already presented my argument.

          • Mike HC says:

            Very true. I’m not saying it is obvious or a no brainer. If the Yanks did it, I would get it. Just personally, I stay away. If the Yanks have this 200 million salary max, I would prefer to spend the 25 million over three years we would have to pay Granderson differently, and I could keep Jackson and IPK. Just me I guess.

        • What about that return is too high?

          • Mike HC says:

            He has been an average defender for the past two years, and Melky and Gardner have both been better defensive centerfielders for the past two years. So there will not be a defensive upgrade. We would be paying for the offensive upgrade only, and the Yanks have plenty of that. I would rather keep the prospects, and use the Granderson money on a starter. Use it toward Lackey, or Sheets, or Harden etc …

    • Well there’s 2 major differences:

      1. Joba, Hughes, and Montero aren’t under discussion. I like AJax fine, but any time you’re talking about him as the main piece in a trade for an All-Star caliber player in his prime, it’s worth giving real thought to.

      2. Trading for Granderson isn’t exactly like signing him as a free agent, because he’s under contract for below market value. There’s no way you could sign a CF’er like him for $25MM over 3 years on the open market.

      • BklynJT says:

        from cots
        10:$5.5M, 11:$8.25M, 12:$10M, 13:$13M club option ($2M buyout)

        • “In my opinion, it is at about market value. Maybe slightly less, but nothing substantial.”

          With all due respect, based on what? According to Fangraphs, his value over the last 4 seasons has been $14.3 million, $30.2M, $17M, and $15.2M. And he’s under contract for an average of $8.5M over the next 3 years. So what is it that makes you think fangrahs is so wildly overestimating his value?

          • Mike HC says:

            I agree that it is a good deal. I don’t think fangraphs WAR money value or whatever equals market value. It is a good deal though. I don’t disagree there.

      • Mike HC says:

        In my opinion, it is at about market value. Maybe slightly less, but nothing substantial. I see it as a free agent signing. No need to give up prospects unless you have completely no faith in AJax or IPK. If they can be meaningful contributors on the Yanks the next years while making very little money, I would not do it.

        I would rather spend the 25 million on someone else, either this or next offseason, and give up nobody.

  34. BklynJT says:

    Too bad grandersons numbers are completely horse shit against lefties… It was nice having lefties that we didn’t have to switch out of the lineup when facing a lefty starter.

    • Stryker says:

      600 AB’s against lefties — the equivalent to a full season. would you be willing to give up on an all star caliber player after a full season at the plate?

      • BklynJt says:

        I didn’t say I don’t want granderson, just sayin too bad he can’t hit lefties for shit. And I do not believe that trend will change. Yes it’s equivalent to 1 season of at bats, but it’s spread across 4 years. I’m much more inclined to believe that he just can’t pick up the ball well against lefties, something that won’t likely change.

  35. Crazy Eyes Killa says:

    too bad this deal as is, is not going down, wonder how much more it would take to get the Tigers to give

  36. Slugger27 says:

    im shocked by this post… when i saw this on mlbtr i figured this site would be celebrating the potential move like the swisher trade last year… heres grandersons war values:
    06: 3.9
    07: 7.4
    08: 3.8
    09: 3.4

    AAAAAAND, here are his future salaries:
    10: 5.5
    11: 8.25
    12: 10
    13: 13

    i really cant envision a scenario in which granderson doesnt easily outproduce his salary for every year of the contract, not to mention, HES JUST NOW ENTERING HIS PEAK YEARS… and all we have to give up(not montero, hughes, or joba mind u) is IPK, ajax, and some middle relievers?????

    i cant see how anyone is opposed to this deal

    • Salty Buggah says:

      To be fair, he is IN his peak years. He’s almost 29 and will start to decline soon. Thankfully for us, that probably will start after this current contract is over.

      • Slugger27 says:

        i think ppl have become a little outlandish when discussing players’ “decline years”

        im no scientist, but i just dont believe position players truly decline until age 33-34ish, if that….. maybe a 32 year old pitcher with thousands of innings on his arm, but a 29 year old (currently 28) in excellent physical shape with only 4 full-time major league seasons under his belt??

        i just think its incredibly unfair to say granderson “will start to decline soon” … i dont buy that for a second

        • Keanu Reeves says:

          It may be unfair, but it’s not unwarranted. Although, as JMK pointed out, he has been playing in Comerica (huge), his defense has fallen off a bit.

          Also, his flyball rates have gone up, and his OPS and SLG have declined the past two years.

          I’m not saying that these things alone are enough to say with conviction that Granderson is nearing decline. However, it is fair to question whether he will continue this trend.

        • Salty Buggah says:

          Well, his contract runs out after age 31 season. He will decline after that as I said. Speed plays a part in his game so that will decline. My point was he is already in his prime, not really entering it (as that is usually around age 27) and his next stage is declining. I never said it will happen soon.

    • Keanu Reeves says:

      People have given their reasons on multiple occasions. You just have to read them.

      • Slugger27 says:

        i typed this post before reading the 90 comments or whatever, but your point is taken

        however, it seems the only thing ppl can come up with is “he doesnt hit lefties well”…. i mean yes he has bad splits, but the upgrade when facing a RHP and on the basepaths is substantial

        and i dont buy the “defensive decline” theory either, as thats really the only other complaint ive read… the guys a better CF than melky, and its not really debatable

        • Keanu Reeves says:

          i mean yes he has bad splits, but the upgrade when facing a RHP and on the basepaths is substantial

          Fair enough. But I’d feel a lot better about the idea if was at least an average hitter against LHP’s

          and i dont buy the “defensive decline” theory either, as thats really the only other complaint ive read… the guys a better CF than melky, and its not really debatable

          Yes, he’s a better CF than Melky. But how much is that saying? I don’t want to trade away Jackson if Granderson is just better than Melky.

          The point is, while Granderson is a good player and you may think he’s a slam dunk, it’s perfectly reasonable for some of us to have our doubts.

          • Slugger27 says:

            all fair points. we agree that the splits are dramatic, but i think our argument is that u think those splits could be the reason the deal doesnt get done

            i have the approach of “yes his splits are bad but so what? hes a lock to be a 3.5 WAR player (and thats his worst year in his career), hes just now entering his prime (and will be in his prime the life of the contract), and hes substantially underpaid”

            i guess our disagreement is that u think the splits problem is enough to offset all of that and i dont

            we can agree to disagree on that matter, but one thing i definitely am with u on, those splits are really bad

            • Keanu Reeves says:

              Actually for me the splits aren’t the focal point of my concern. I wish they were better, but if you want an example of someone who struggled against lefties and came to the Bronx only to prove the doubters wrong, see one Paul O’Neill.

              My main concerns are defense and the declining OPS. I think playing in the slightly cozier YS3 could help the defense and I think his pull rates (50.6% in ’09 http://www.detroittigersweblog.....randerson/) would fit nicely as a Yankee.

            • Mike HC says:

              Damon’s WAR last year was 3.0 and 3.6 the year before that.

              Camerons WAR for the past two years has been 4.0 and 4.3.

              Those are just the first two most obvious names, and both could be had for about equal money per year, and gotten for nothing.

              • Jordan says:

                Exactly. Damon and Cameron cost $18 mil next year.

                Granderson $8 mil + AJAX and IPK

                AJAX and IPK are worth more than $10 mil.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        True. And Salty is correct as well. That said, for what’s given up, if you think his defensive issues were an outlier, and you can work with his approach and maybe have him hit a lefty once in a blue moon, you absolutely take that deal.

    • Curtis-Wrong says:

      You’re not trying very hard then. A rebound is never guaranteed, so just maybe he continues his downward trend.

      Or like every player signed to a multi-year deal he becomes an injury concern. He could blow out a knee in year 1 and never be the same player again and now your paying him 25M to occasionally limp around in LF to spell the high priced FA you had to sign because you traded away the only viable outfield prospect you had in the upper minors. Doesn’t seems that hard to envision does it?

      And it’s not clear given the uncertainty discount you have to include when deteriming a “market rate” that Granderson’s 3 yr/25M contract is actually below market. 8M/yr can get some pretty decent players in this market.

  37. darthdavid says:

    Granderson was ranked ahead of Josh Johnson, Joba chamerlain, Dustin Pedroia as far as trade value goes..

    • JMK aka The Overshare says:

      + defense at a premium position with good power. Not surprising. I don’t agree with it, but it isn’t surprising. JJ easily has more value.

  38. darthdavid says:

    I think that he makes alot of sense for the team right now. He gives them another cheap productive Outfielder. They could sign Cameron. And run out an OF defense that had Curtis in LF Gardner in CF CAM in RF. That is simply filthy.

  39. BigBlueAL says:

    No hesitation at all. I would do this deal in a heartbeat.

  40. Gavin says:

    With the way Granderson [fails to] hit lefties, it would be wise to bench him in favor of players as brutal as Wilson Betemit/Cody Ransom (for comparison’s sake) when facing lefty pitching.

    Heck, even Freddy Guzman’s career overall OPS is greater than what Granderson put up against lefties this year.

    That’s likely the key as to why the Yankees were not inclined to do the deal.

    • Joey H says:

      You say all of this now, but when they do get him you’re going to be asking where you can get your Majestic’s Curtis Granderson Yankee tee-shirt. Ok sarcasm aside. Sure he doesn’t hit lefties right now as it stands but as I said in a previous comment:

      “There is nothing that a new look can’t change. A new hitting coach and some good defensive alignments can solve his problems.”

      • Gavin says:

        I’m not so sure about that. He’s been in the league for 4+ years already and not only did he not improve, but he even went from terrible to absolutely alarming this year.

        I’m not saying the guy sucks either, but when you take a good look at his splits, it’s very worrying. That’s just my opinion as to why the Yanks balked at pulling the trigger on the deal.

        The Yankees would have to be reasonably certain that he isn’t just an amazing platoon player versus righty pitching in order to go for it.

        • Slugger27 says:

          but even with his LH splits, isnt austin jacksons ceiling basically granderson? i mean if that. im thinking if everything goes right and falls perfectly into place for jackson, hes basically what granderson ALREADY IS.

          i mean i think we’d be ecstatic if ajax turned into a 3.5-4 win player, and thats what granderson is

          and its not like granderson makes a ton of money… his salaries are incredibly low for his performance

      • BklynJt says:

        Every girl thinks they can change a cheating man.

        /Enil Woods

    • Slugger27 says:

      i realize youre trying to make a point… the same re-hashed point being brought up by everybody, that despite grandersons notable superiority in every way to melky, that he struggles against LHP

      i get all that, just dont bring up freddy guzman… for one thing guzman is a switch hitter, so splits dont apply to him… for another he has 27 abs total… and most importantly, you mentioning him in the same sentence is an insult to both granderson and everyone reading your post

      • Gavin says:

        You’re totally missing the point I was trying to make, despite the fact that you said you get that I’m just trying to make a point.

        I’m trying to show you just how bad Granderson is against lefty pitching. It’s even worse than the Freddy Guzman/Cody Ransom type of players.

        That’s pretty darn alarming in my book.

        • Slugger27 says:

          lol no i got your point man, i was just simply saying that a guy with 27 career abs and is a switch hitter anyway isnt a good way to make it

          all that aside, youre right, the splits are bad… just not nearly bad enough to not make the deal


  41. Joey H says:

    Time for a spill over. This took 15 years to load.

  42. Kevin G. says:

    One thing I’m going to remember this whole offseason:

    In Cash we Trust

  43. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    Ok, how about this: Granderson, Joyce and a prospect to Yanks. We give up Ajax, IPK, Melky, Dunn/Coke. Diamondbacks seem to be all “yeah, whatever” anyway.

  44. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    What’s the most you guys would give up to get Granderson + a B-level prospect?

    • Keanu Reeves says:

      This is where I’m no good. If you lay out a deal for me, I can think it over in my head and decide whether it makes sense to me or not.

      But ask me to come up with a trade proposal and I’m useless. It makes me have a lot more respect for all the front office people in baseball.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        OK. How about this:

        Yankees get Granderson, Conor Jackson, B-level prospect, B-/C+ prospect
        Tigers get Ajax, Scherzer, Dunn, one of Betances/DeLeon/Russo
        D-Backs get Edwin Jackson, IPK, Miranda, Coke

        Which team says, “Are you fucking crazy?”

        • Keanu Reeves says:

          I think Cashman hangs up first.

          • JMK aka The Overshare says:

            I think you’re right, even though I like both Granderson and especially Conor Jackson, who, in limited samples, put together a pretty good UZR at LF and is a solid 1B. He has always been a high OBP guy and would look great in the 2 hole. He had Valley Fever or something like that. He should recover from that.

            Still, what’s proposed is likely just giving up too much. Say you take out Coke going to the D-Backs. Granderson, Conor, two prospects for Ajax, IPK, Dunn, Miranda, upside guy.

            One could argue Ajax, IPK and Coke is too much, let alone including Miranda, Dunn and a high-upside guy.

            The way I reasoned it was Granderson is worth IPK, Ajax. Conor Jackson is worth Coke, Miranda. Two above-average prospects was worth Dunn, upside player.

            I also hadn’t factored having the first pick of Rule V to compensate for one of Dunn, IPK, Coke.


        • Stryker says:

          i’d also say the d-backs would be getting fleeced as well. they give up scherzer and jackson but really get only e.jackson back .. they get nothing in return that would sweeten the pot and the tigers get wayyyyyy too much in return for the two guys.

    • Mike HC says:

      I would trade from an area of surplus. Giving up our top outfield prospect and probably most major league ready outfield prospect when the Yanks have a dearth of good outfielders in the organization is not optimal.

      I would trade maybe IPK, Robertson and one of our lower level catchers not named Montero or even Romine. Either the guy we drafted or the international guy we signed this year. I’m not saying the Tigers would accept that, but that is my offer.

  45. BklynJt says:

    What I like so much about Jackson is that he has come so far for some one who is relatively new to baseball. I would really love to see his skills mature as a Yankee. I think all the shots about his high SO rates can be attributed to his inexperience with the game. He’s still learning pitch recognition and I can imagine his potential in a few years.

    • Keanu Reeves says:

      This is generally how I feel about Jackson. He’s a great athlete.

    • Tony says:

      I don’t know when it became cool to hate AJax, but I’m not down with that ish. His development has been remarkable, and he’s everything they need right now.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        No one hates Ajax. But he’s not without flaws or a ceiling. If an attractive deal comes along, it’s worth looking at. He’s not untouchable.

        • Tony says:

          No one is without flaws. However, I definitely have a problem with the people here that look at him as a finished product. You would think he spent half of last year in the Bronx hitting .180. Not only is he not a finished product, not only did he not have a bad season, but quite the opposite on both accounts. Have some effing patience. Losing? Trade everyone. Winning? Trade everyone.

          • JMK aka The Overshare says:

            You’re painting with a very broad brush. Most of the regular commenters here (myself included) would prefer to not trade our young, cost-controlled players with value for costlier, established veterans. That doesn’t mean you keep players at all costs if a good deal comes around.

            Granderson is a very polarizing player; maybe moreso than anyone else we talk about. Some feel (and with good reason) that his splits, contract and declining defense are things to steer clear of, especially for a young, talented CFer like Ajax. Others think a guy with possible plus-defense with 30 home runs in his prime at a reasonable contract is a good deal.

            Now, having said all that, Ajax is not a finished product. No doubt. But he was aided by an abnormally high, unsustainable Babip, has way too many Ks and declining power. He’s a good, exciting player and I think he could be a guy regularly putting up .290/.350/.470. Who wouldn’t love that? But don’t let that cloud the issue—he’s not Montero or untouchable. He’s not a top-25 prospect in baseball by most measures. There’s no guarantee he ever develops power or a good eye. Even if he does, when does it show? 2012, 2013? That’s why you trade players. You don’t know. At least with Granderson you have a good idea of what you’re getting on the major league level. He likely helps you now and in three years, more than Ajax does.

            I’m not necessarily debating Ajax for Granderson here. What I’m saying is you’re misappropriating what’s being said here.

            • Januz says:

              The trade makes no sense from a Yankee perspective. If I am getting BOTH Granderson and Edwin Jackson for that package, then I would do it (The Yankees can also use a pitcher). However, unless the team is overvaluing Jackson, then you might as well save him for a Halliday trade. A much better guy to trade than Montero, Romine, or WORST of all Hughes. (Joba could be dealt as an alternative, you worry about him blowing up, and about his attitude).

  46. Spaceman.Spiff says:



  47. pollo says:

    Your thoughts sum this up perfectly for me.

    I’m on the fence and the win is blowing in both directions.
    Maybe if the Diamondbacks give us Zapata + a batting prospect in their system I do it. Only if.

  48. Nick says:

    I gotta think this trade is BS. Mainly for the inclusion of IPK. He just came off of a serious arm injury, and I can’t see anyone wanting to trade for him. I could be wrong, but that is my main complaint about the rumor, its lack of believability.

  49. mustang says:

    I think its a bit too much from the Yankees side but then again I don’t know what “one or two prospects” the Yanks are getting from the Diamondbacks.” I say if the Diamondbacks want this swing those “one or two prospects” to the Tigers to make them happy and give the Yanks Conor Jackson. If the Yanks are going to give up Austin Jackson I want the outfield situation solved.

    PS- Conor Jackson had valley fever so his 2009 season was shot but he is currently hitting .425 average and 2 home runs in the Domican League.

    • mustang says:

      Despite their interest, the Braves are unlikely to acquire first baseman Conor Jackson from the Diamondbacks, according to

      In fact, they are not even among the recent teams to inquire about the 27-year-old first baseman. Arizona would only move Jackson in return for A YOUNG PITCHER, a price too steep for Atlanta. After missing most of the season with Valley Fever, Jackson is tearing up the Dominican Winter League, batting .425/.561/.589 in 94 plate appearances.


      So there you go they would be getting both IPK and Edwin Jackson in the deal what more do they want.

  50. V says:

    Only way I deal AJax plus others for Granderson is if I’m getting Scherzer instead of the Tigers.

  51. Mac says:

    I’ve got serious concerns about Grandy, but I have as many about A-Jax and he’s really the centerpiece of the deal. I do that deal all day long, especially if it keeps Cameron off the team.

  52. Chip says:

    For those of you looking at last season’s stats, check out his insane home/road splits.

    If you take his road stats and double them you’d get a line of

    .267/.345/.516 with 20 homers, 24 doubles, 8 triples and 26 SB’s

    That’s the mark of a guy who needs a change of scenery if I’ve ever seen it. And just if you’re wondering his career line is

    .261/.334/.451 at home and
    .284/.353/.516 away

  53. Mac says:

    Just like a lot of you are. I’m on the fence. Typically when this many people are on the fence then its not a terrible move.

    But since I thoroughly enjoy watching young talent such as A-Jax and IPK get a chance in the bigs I would lean towards not making the deal. It may not make the team better this year, but if they sign Damon and give A-Jax a shot, I think we will be in fine shape without locking up even more money long term and keeping some cheap young depth at starting pitcher.

  54. PaaakmaaaN says:

    I wouldn’t do this trade, why are the Yankees giving up so much compared to the other two teams i think in this situation the D-backs get thebest deal here

    • Chip says:

      We haven’t seen what prospects the D-backs send to the Yankees though. If they’re really motivated, they could get it done. I wouldn’t mind seeing Connor Jackson in pinstripes and signing Damon to DH. Essentially, our offseason could be done with that and the probably signing of Pettite

  55. Doug says:

    If the deal is essentially Granderson for AJax, you have to pull the trigger on that. You’re getting an above average up-the-middle player right in his prime, for less than $9M per over the next 3 years. And you’re giving up a toolsy CF prospect who strikes out too much and doesn’t hit for power (and, yes, those 2 things can improve; but, they also might not)

    • Chip says:

      I’m not sure anyone would disagree. But the deal is for a recent MiLB pitcher of the year and two bullpen pieces. I’d love to know who the D-backs were thinking of sending to the Yankees

      • Doug says:

        no offense to him, but we have a dozen “kennedys” in our system right now. and the two bullpen pieces are replaceable. heck, coke wasn’t even pitching in the postseason, that’s how much confidence girardi had in him.

        but, yes, you’d have to see what prospects would be coming back.

        • Mac says:

          a dozen kennedys?

          IPK is still a top 10 prospect in the Yanks organization and has put up a 1.95 ERA in 4 seasons. We certainly don’t have a dozen of him.

          • Will says:

            IPK is going to be 25 next season with little major league experience. He is teetering on the brink as far as his prospect status is concerned. His minor league numbers are not really that impressive when you consider he has always been “older” at every level he has played.

            • V says:

              Pitchers who average an ERA under 2.00 are impressive no matter how old they are. 25 is hardly zOMG OLD when it comes to a pitcher who lost a season to injury. Many teams would LOVE to have an IPK in AAA (and would have already called him up).

              You don’t just add him as a ‘tack on’ unless you’re getting value in return.

          • Doug says:

            well, guess we have difference of opinion on how good kennedy really is. think he’s a #5 at best for the yanks. and, yes, believe we have a bunch of those types in the organization right now. maybe not as major league ready as kennedy is, but within a year or 2.

        • Chip says:

          I get your point but I’m still pretty high on IPK. I mean he’s only 24 and has a career 10 K/9 in the minors despite walking less than 3 per nine. On top of that, his WHIP is below 1. I realize we have a lot of pitching depth in the minors but those are video game numbers. If he can figure it out at the big league level he could be a very solid number 3 starter.

          • Will says:

            Reiterating my point above, you have to take most of Kennedy’s numbers with a grain of salt. He has always been advanced compared to the competition. After pitching in a big college program, he was 21-22 in single-A and then 23-24 in AAA. In other words, even if he was only marginal prospect, you’d expect his numbers to be very good.

      • Mac1 says:

        > But the deal is for a recent MiLB pitcher of the year <


  56. Will says:

    The only real red flag for me on Granderson his is inability to hit left handed pitchers. Having said that, his acquisition would be an upgrade if it is part of a “grander” plan. Granderson alone might not replace Damon’s or Matsui’s bat, but if the Yankees were to sign Holliday as well, it makes incredible sense. At $6mn in 2010, the Yankees could give Holliday as much as $20mn and still not go above the amount paid to Damon and Matsui. Not only would the Yankees be getting much younger with the tradeoff, but they’d be seriously upgrading the defense, especially if you move Melky to RF and Swisher to DH. The Yankees would then have 6 position players at 30 or younger, which would mitigate the loss of Jackson (whose upside might only be Granderson anyway).

    • Mac says:

      Yanks have stated they are trying to cut payroll a little. Not add another 20 million onto last year.

      Trading for Granderson and signing Holliday would lock up 130million + a year through 2013 to only 6 players.

      • Will says:

        1)Matsui, Damon and Nady made about $32mn last year. If they sign Holliday for $20mn per year (and it might be less), he and Granderson would cost about $29mn. So, they would not only be able to cut payroll in 2010 (When Granderson only costs $6mn), but also on average for the next three years (assuming the 5th OF’er is a low salary player, which is likely).

        2)The Yankees have said a lot of things that in retrospect were really smoke screens (i.e., Bubba Crosby would be the CF’er, Tex was too expensive, etc.)

        • Mac says:

          Right. But your forgetting Pettitte is going to be paid more. As well as the following guys:

          Jeter +1million
          CC +9million
          Cano +3million
          Swisher +1million

          After 2010 Tex, Swisher and Cano continue to have increasingly expensive contracts.

          If you add Granderson, Holliday, Pettitte and potentially another starter since IPK would be gone it would increase payroll at least another 10million from last year. It would also reduce a lot of long term payroll flexibility.

          • Will says:

            CC is not getting paid more. He was paid $23mn last season ($14mn salary + $9mn signing bonus). Also, you need to consider the loss of Molina and Wang as well, which totals $7mn and cancels out raises to Jeter, Cano and Swisher.

            As for after 2010, it might reduce long-term flexibility, but the bet is that Holliday and Granderson would be very productive for at least the next three years.

            • Mac says:

              Its not as much more than I originally thought, but that is still a hell of a lot more money then I would want locked up for 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.

              With increasingly expensive contracts and the chance we will need to lock up guys like Joba, Hughes and/or sign someone to replace guys like Mo or Posada.

              • Will says:

                Well, if you need to replace Posada or Mo, you would have their $28mn coming off the books. Also, in 2011, the Arod salary starts coming down and Jeter’s deal ends (and presumably the new one will be cheaper).

                I can see wanting to maintain flexibility, but if you can lock up very good players, what is the value of flexibility?

      • Granderson will make $5.5M in 2010.

        • Mac says:

          10:$5.5M, 11:$8.25M, 12:$10M, 13:$13M club option ($2M buyout)

          2013 option increases to:
          $15M if MVP (1st – 5th) in 2011 or 2012
          $14M if All Star in 2011 or 2012
          $13.5M if All Star selection in 2011 or 2012

          From http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.c.....rs_21.html

          Not a terrible contract, but certainly may deter the Yanks from pursuing Damon or any other LF/DH that costs 10+ million.

    • Mac1 says:

      I think the Yanks don’t want to spend the $ on Halladay. I’d like to see them get Grandy and then offer Damon 2 for 22, if he passes try to sign Matsui as the DH.

      Melky rotates as the 4th ofer (or LFer\Cfer if Grandy can’t overcome last years defensive probs). Yanks can sign Pettitte, maybe a guy like Mike Gonzalez and maybe another starter – whether its a big buck guy like Lackey or taking a flier on any of the guys coming back from injury.

      Figure out if you want to go with Hairston or an upgrade who can play multiple positions and you are done.

      Matsui coming back would make the Yanks much less vulnerable against LHP – and that was huge last year, he also protects A-rod the best.

      Losing Damon creates a void in the 2 spot that could be filled by Swish or Grandy (he had a .365 obp in 08) and probably is a void the Yanks can address better without further moves – plus it gives the Yanks a nice LF\CF D with guys who can throw.

    • MattG says:

      My plan A since Granderson became available:

      Add: Granderson, Cameron, and Murton (or equivalent)
      Say good bye: one of Melky/Gardner, one of Damon/Matsui

      Starting OF: Granderson/Cameron/Swisher
      Bench: Murton, Melky or Gardner
      DH: Damon or Matsui

  57. OldYanksFan says:

    Granderson’s last 3 years against LHP:
    .202 .261 .309 .570
    So against LHP, he is basically sub Molina?
    Is this a concern?

    • MattG says:

      Not to me. The fact that he doesn’t hit lefties is the main reason he’s available.

      Good hitters don’t have big splits their whole careers. Either Granderson is a good hitter, and he will figure out lefties, or he is already in decline and soon to be out of the league (or perhaps a bench player). Although some 28 year olds do decline and disappear, they tend to be the unathletic, immobile right-spectrum types. I’m having a hard time coming up with a player as good as Granderson has been at age 25,26,27, at a left spectrum position, that lost his ability for no discernible reason before his 30th birthday.

      His numbers versus lefties look very much like Paul O’Neill’s, ’91-’93.

    • Will says:

      I think it is, but he hits righties very well and most his ABs will come against them. Also, he is still young (it took O’Neill until about 29-30 to hit lefties well) and did hit lefties decently (ok, less terribly) in 2008.

  58. Mac1 says:

    One other minor thing, all four Yanks mentioned here are on the ML roster – Cash does some housecleaning with this trade (depending on the prospects he gets back which I can’t imaginge would be much or need to be put on the ML Roster)

  59. Stryker says:

    look – plain and simple, i don’t think people are grasping how good granderson is/has been. in 2009 – HIS WORST YEAR – he STILL put up over 3 wins above replacement. he’s GOOD.

  60. Stryker says:

    The splits argument is overrated. You wouldn’t want him because of what he does in 23% of his PA’s? Or that he’s a good baserunner (Add 12.06 runs to his profile from 2006-09 — and I’ve removed the stolen base runs from the baserunning measure on baseball prospectus since Fangraphs’ wOBA already incorporates SB/CS into their formula … so his runs above replacement from 06-09 then becomes 199.26 which becomes 18.97 WAR — basically 19 wins above replacements) even when you take out stolen bases? Essentially the splits argument to me boils down to “I don’t want him because of some matchups that may occur in the 8th inning or later, even though he went 1-3 with an extra base hit in the first 7 innings.”

    I don’t mean this so much as “you” as I do just people in general. He was awful against LHP this year. But if people peep his splits year-by-year, they are as such:

    2006: .671 OPS against LHP
    2007: .494 OPS against LHP
    2008: .739 OPS against LHP
    2009: .484 OPS against LHP

    So where’s the real talents lie? Probably in the .614 OPS against LHP in his career — nearly 200 points better than he did in 2009.

    Besides, splits don’t mean anything. And his batted ball type drastically changed last year to be a fly ball hitter, but even as one, his BABIP was lower than it should’ve been. Expected BABIP predictors, based on batted ball type, had him more around a .290 BABIP I believe, rather than the .275 BABIP he had. What does that mean?

    Well, if we give him a .290 BABIP — just 15 points — you’re adding on 7 hits. We’ll assume they’re all singles. So, he now put up a total hit line of 103 singles, 23 doubles, 8 triples, 30 homers in 2009 rather than just 96 singles.

    What’s that mean in wOBA? his wOBA was .340, if you include just 7 singles, it becomes .349.

    Convert that to runs above average and you get:

    .349-.329 / 1.15 * 710 = 12.13 runs above average offensively. In 2009, he was actually at 6.6.

    So, you’re looking at over half a win in just BABIP adjustment of 15 points with him. That would’ve taken him from being a 3.4 WAR player to a 3.9 WAR player.

    And even without the adjustment, he was a 3.4 WAR player in a “down year” when in 2008 he posted a WAR of 3.8.

    • Stryker says:

      how’s THAT for a sales pitch?

      • You just copied and pasted what Mike at AP said, didn’t you? ;)

      • Rose says:

        Pretty decent sales pitch I must say. Our farm system would probably go instantly from mediocre to terrible though. I’d like to give the kid (Action Jackson) a shot…because I love homegrown style players…but I’m also for whatever makes sense. I keep an open mind.

      • MattG says:

        Excellent, and I’m with you, but to be devil’s advocate…

        Besides math, the splits aren’t an issue because good hitters don’t maintain drastic splits all throughout their careers. To find a good hitter with a OPS difference of 300 points is absurd. There is a simple reason for this: they are good hitters, and eventually they will hit well in all situations.

        This is not to say there aren’t players with dramatic splits their whole careers, though–the not good hitters. Typically, less athletic players with flaws in their swings for which they have learned to compensate.

        So, which one is Granderson? He’s been great, but all his numbers are trending the wrong way. If he were 30-something, you would have no problem saying he is in decline, but at 28, and with his athleticism, that’s hard to believe.

        I expect a rebound, too…but unlike Swisher, Granderson seems to come with a lot more risk.

    • Stryker says:

      i also must say -

      this math and such is not my own. i’m a strong advocate of acquiring granderson and asked mike rogers ( his thoughts on granderson going forward. his response to me was just what i was looking for, so here it is!

  61. Rose says:

    I’m curious. Who’s projected to be better? Austin Jackson or Jose Tabata? And where does Heathcott fall into play?

    Regarding the righty/lefty splits…the rest of our hitters MASH lefties…if we have one guy who doesn’t hit them as well…I don’t think it’s necessarily going to hurt us…if you upgrade in defense and with the bat against right handed hitters…

    If there is a nasty lefty on the mound…throw Melky in there. Though, he probably won’t be all that much better depending on how nasty the guy is. It’s all relative.

    • Heathcott should fall no where right now because he’s so far away. Let’s see him play a full season of ball first and go from there.

    • Mac1 says:

      If the Yanks don’t bring back Matsui, that hurts the lefty mashing – alot.

      Melk and Damon were pretty comparable against LHP last year – about .770 ops. If its Matsui who comes back, Melk is in LF so the Yanks will have to hope Grandy turns it around – although he would probably be hitting bottom of the order in that case.

  62. JohnC says:

    They could be holding onto Jackson to see if they can land Halladay, in which case he would be part of that deal instead.

  63. pat says:

    I don’t understand why the D-Backs would give up Sherzer and a bunch of prospects for Edwin Jackson and IPK? Sherzer is a year younger and only has about a year of service time whereas Jackson is already eligible. I guess maybe they’re very high on IPK?

  64. John says:

    I say Cahsman refused because he believed that in dealing only with the Tigers, he would get Granderson without giving both jackson and kennedy, just jackson plus two lesser prospects.

  65. JobaWockeeZ says:

    8:29am: SI’s Jon Heyman tweets that this one “looks very unlikely.” In his scenario Heyman had Daniel Schlereth, Scherzer, and more going to Detroit. He adds that the Yankees are saying no to the deal, which would’ve cost them the four prospects named below.

    Looks like the Yanks don’t like what they have to give up.

  66. Bo says:

    Well it all comes down to their internal evaliuations of Jackson. Because the pitchers are filler.

  67. Rose says:

    UPDATE – 10:33am: Heyman tweets that this deal is “back with a chance.” Mark Feinsand of the New York Daily News agrees, noting that the Tigers “may be caving” on the price for Granderson. Wouldn’t be the Winter Meetings without three-team trade scenarios and the constant back-and-forth. – MLBTRADERUMORS

  68. [...] is the reported three team trade being discussed by the Diamondbacks, Tigers, and our Yankees. The basics of the deal include the [...]

  69. [...] three-way trade talks from last night have died, and it appears that the Yankees aren’t interested in revisiting [...]

  70. [...] rumor started late last night and developed throughout the day. Now it’s close to official: the Yankees have agreed to [...]

  71. What’s up, I check your blogs like every week. Your
    writing style is witty, keep it up!

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.