Author Archive
Coaching staff remains unsettled for 2010
Posted by: | CommentsJohnny Damon, Andy Pettitte, and Hideki Matsui have dominated headlines over the past two weeks, but they’re not the only Yankee free agents. The Yankees face decisions on most of their 2009 coaching staff, and according to Brian Cashman, the team is “nowhere” in those talks. Manager Joe Girardi and hitting coach Kevin Long are under contract for 2010, but the contracts of all other coaches have expired.
Cashman did add that the team “would love to have all of them back under the proper circumstances,” which likely mean one-year contracts with a salaries similar their 2009 figures. The coaches include pitching coach Dave Eiland, bench coach Tony Pena, third base coach Rob Thomson, first base coach Mick Kelleher, and bullpen coach Mike Harkey.
What Went Right: Injury Bouncebacks
Posted by: | CommentsOver the next week or so, we’ll again break down what went wrong and what went right for the 2009 Yankees. The series this year will be much more enjoyable than the last.
At this time last year, the Yankees roster was anything but set. They had a huge offer out to CC Sabathia, and planned to pursue at least one other starting pitcher. That would help shore up the rotation, but clearly there were no guarantees. On top of that, the Yankees powerhouse offense went out with a whimper in 2008. Not only did the Yankees need another bat to enhance the offense, but they’d need contributions from players who underperformed in 2008.
With the acquisition of Nick Swisher, the Yankees had four players who underperformed in 2008. Jorge Posada and Hideki Matsui missed much of the season with injuries, and Robinson Cano and Nick Swisher had poor seasons at the plate. Even with the potential addition of Mark Teixeira, the Yankees had a lot to worry about. Without contributions from at least two of those four, the Yankees offense wouldn’t have been nearly as formidable.
Two of four didn’t seem like asking a lot. Two of the players in question were proven veterans coming off injuries, and other two were players in their primes who each had a bad season. But as it turned out, all four bounced back. That turned out to be a key to the 2009 season. It meant the Yankees had above average contributors in eight out of nine lineup slots, with the final filled by an average player. How many other teams can boast of such a powerhouse?
Here’s how the Yankees in question performed in 2008, and how they bounced back in 2009. All stats are from FanGraphs, at risk of Jeremy Greenhouse calling me out.
| Player | 08 wOBA | 08 WAR | 09 wOBA | 09 WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jorge Posada | .340 | 0.8 | .378 | 4.0 |
| Hideki Matsui | .348 | 0.8 | .378 | 2.4 |
| Nick Swisher | .325 | 1.0 | .375 | 3.5 |
| Robinson Cano | .307 | 0.5 | .370 | 4.4 |
Both Swisher and Cano both returned to their pre-2008 forms, which brought a huge boost to the offense. As you can see from the table, these were not insignificant improvements. Not only did they increase rate production over 2008, but they stayed healthy and therefore added that value over the course of the season. WAR favors Cano over Swisher by almost a full run, but that’s mostly because of the positional adjustment. Both had phenomenal seasons, especially compared to 2008.
Posada and Matsui contributed in two ways. First, they improved their net production over 2008. Even when healthy, Posada and Matsui weren’t quite where they had been in years past. Their wOBA numbers weren’t bad in 2008, but the Yankees have seen them perform much better. There was certainly fear that age had caught up with them, but they answered that charge by coming back to produce in 2009. That leads to the second part of their improvement, remaining healthy. Even with their production in 2008, they didn’t help the team as much because they were hurt for much of the season. In 2008 both stayed healthy enough to add a ton of value to the team, as evidenced by their WAR figures.
All four players certainly had the potential to bounce back after poor 2008 campaigns. Cano and Swisher were guys in their primes who had bad years, and Matsui and Posada were two veterans who faced injury struggles. During the 2008-2009 off-season, it would have been wildly optimistic to predict that all four would bounce back. The Yankees got lucky in that regard. All four contributed to the 103-win season, which set up the team’s run through the playoffs. The 2009 Yankees might have made the playoffs if only two of those four bounced back, but they wouldn’t have been nearly as dominant. While the improved pitching staff was a big part of the story this season, we shouldn’t overlook Posada, Matsui, Cano, and Swisher. Their contribution was a big part of making this season as special as it was.
The case for CC Sabathia as SI’s Sportsman of the Year
Posted by: | CommentsEvery December, Sports Illustrated announces its Sportsman of the Year. Among the nominees this year is New York’s own Carsten Charles Sabathia, a good choice for the award for many reasons. Ben Reiter takes up CC’s case, writing about why our favorite big man should be the choice. It’s a great read on a great guy, both on and off the field. Takeaway quote on Reiter’s advocacy of Sabathia: “But Sabathia is also my Sportsman of the Year because he showed us, in this money-fueled era of pro sports, that cash doesn’t always change athletes, or corrupt them, and that the idea of a ‘contract year’ can sometimes represent nothing more than a matter of timing.” We’ll find out soon that Sabathia didn’t win the Cy Young, but I think he’d be happy to take home SI’s Sportsman of the Year.
Yankees off-season behavior will change with the year
Posted by: | CommentsA year ago Saturday, the Yankees opened the free agent signing period by offering CC Sabathia six years and $140 million. It was an aggressive offer from a team that promised to be active in the free agent market. The Yankees had many holes, and as luck had it the free agent class featured a number of players who could fill them. Sabathia was the center piece, but it was known that the Yankees wouldn’t end with just one acquisition. Brian Cashman himself said he was bringing home two pitchers.
It was the perfect time for the Yankees. The free agent class was strong, with a few elite and otherwise high quality players. Because a few contracts had just expired, the team had money to spend. Other teams helped too, but restricting spending at a time when the Yankees freed up resources. It all came together, and the Yankees struck. That doesn’t happen all the time, and given the Yankees current situation and the strength of the market, it doesn’t appear that the Yankees will make a similar play this year.
Cashman recently commented on the free agent situation, saying that, “You won’t see offers right out of the gate.” It signals that the Yankees will be a bit more patient with this class, knowing that adding any of the top players means yet another long-term, high-salary commitment. Over the last two off-seasons the team has added four contracts of five years or longer. I’m not sure the team is ready to add another.
This means that the Yankees probably won’t sign Matt Holliday. On his newly minted Twitter account, ESPN’s Buster Olney says that the Yankees “are not interested in signing Holliday.” In a different year, maybe the Yankees make a play for Holliday. But the Yankees already have $92.912 million committed to their 2013 roster. That does not include Derek Jeter, whose contract is up after next season and who will presumably sign a new, lucrative deal that will cover 2013. Adding Holliday (and Jeter) would put the 2013 figure close to $130 million.
Last year the Yankees took advantage of a robust free agent market. They had the money, and the players were right. Neither is true this year. The Yankees have some money coming off the books, but they also have holes to fill. While it’s nice to think of Holliday roaming left field in 2010, it means he’d also play there in 2013 and beyond. That doesn’t appear to interest the Yankees this off-season.
Market looks bare for free agent setup men
Posted by: | CommentsOn his Touching Base blog, the Daily News’s Jesse Spector takes a look at the free agent class of setup men. With the possibility that both Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes start the season in the rotation, the Yanks are going to need someone to pitch the late innings. Judging by Spector’s list, which goes into the arbitration status of each player, the Yanks will probably favor internal candidates. There aren’t any truly elite setup men in the class (or else they’d probably market themselves as closer), but their 2009 salaries were a bit more than you’d want to pay for a middle reliever.
Spector lists five players among those whose teams will likely offer them arbitration. Those include Type A’s Darren Oliver, Rafael Betancourt, and John Grabow. Of them, only Betancourt seems remotely worth the money, and his value is likely overrated now because of his stellar second half in Colorado. He’s had great seasons beofre, but he’s also turned in clunkers — most recently in 2008, when he posted a 5.07 ERA over 71 innings. With the contract he’ll want, plus the first-round pick he’ll cost, I think the Yanks will stay away.
Among the players who will likely not cost a compensation pick (i.e., their teams will not offer them arbitration in all likelihood), there still aren’t any standout names. Octavio Dotel and LaTroy Hawkins top the list, and we all know how each of their stints in pinstripes went. Otherwise, none of the listed pitchers will be worth the salary, especially when there are comparable options in the system.
Given the dearth of relief pitching on the market, and given the volatile nature of relieving in general, I think the Yanks will do best to stick with the options in the system. This might mean that Phil Hughes or Joba Chamberlain pitches out of the bullpen for a portion of 2010. Readers know that I don’t favor such a solution, but I’d rather do that for a year than sign a free agent to set up. Obviously, the ideal solution is for the guys already on the roster — mostly Robertson, but also Melancon and Bruney — to step up and take the late innings. They’re the Yanks best shot.
When all of the Yanks hits were home runs
Posted by: | CommentsThe Yankees hit a lot of home runs. They led the league this year, and have been near the top of the league for most of this decade. Some have even said that they’re too reliant on the home run, and that it doesn’t compensate for a lack of hitting with RISP. Even so, it’s tough to argue against the home run, the single best outcome of any at bat.
At the Baseball Reference Blog, Andy takes a look at games wherein all of a team’s hits were home runs. There are 39 such incidences, though the parameters are set so the minimum number of hits/home runs is two. The Yankees, as you might imagine, inhabit a few spots near the top of the list. The top is Cleveland, beating Texas 7-3 on the power of six hits. The Yankees show up directly afterward.
On July 15, 2004, the Yankees beat the Tigers 5-1, smashing five solo home runs. Alex Rodriguez hit two of them, and was supported by Derek Jeter, Hideki Matsui, and Kenny Lofton. Four of the five came off Tigers starter Jeremy Bonderman, who pitched seven innings. That seems odd for a guy who gave up four home runs, but remember that they were the only four hits he surrendered, and they were all solo homers. Jose Contreras started that game for the Yankees, pitching eight innings and allowing one run on four hits, striking out eight.
(The Yanks would trade Contreras 16 days later.He pitched well in his next start, on July 20, but bot bombed in his two after that. I wonder if he hadn’t gotten killed by Boston and Baltimore if the Yanks would have traded him at all.)
The only other time the Yankees did this was on July 3, 1975, when Bobby Bonds hit two home runs off Cleveland’s Don Hood in a 3-2 loss. It has also happened three times to the Yankees, in 2001, 1987, and 2002. The Yanks won only one of those games.
Does Scioscia know that his team has two key free agents?
Posted by: | CommentsThe Angels made a valiant effort in the ALCS, but they fell short against a superior team. I think that much was clear. Yes, I’m a biased Yankees fan, but I think that when you look at the whole picture, the Yankees were the better team and won in the end. Not that the Angels are a bad team. Far from it. Some people have argued that they were the second best team in the majors this year, ahead of any NL team, and while I don’t necessarily agree, I’m definitely receptive to that argument.
While their success in 2009 is undisputed, the Angels are a team in transition heading into 2010. They locked up Bobby Abreu, which fills a need, but they also have looming decisions on two key free agents, John Lackey and Chone Figgins. The Angels would suffer a big setback if they lost both their ace pitcher and leadoff hitter. They might be able to replace Figgins, though he’s definitely the best third baseman on the market, but they can’t replace Lackey with a free agent. So, it stands to reason that if the Angels don’t bring back their two guys, they could be a bit weaker in 2010.
Mike Scioscia is hearing none of that. At a fundraiser last night, reporters couldn’t help from asking the Angels’ skipper questions about the team’s future. Among them was a question about the Yankees “buying” another World Series title. Scioscia took the bait.
“I don’t care if the Yankees go out and spend $350 million next year, we’re going to beat them because we have the team,” Scioscia said.
Setting aside the near impossibility of spending $350 million on a baseball team, Scioscia might be speaking a bit too soon here. The Angels have some serious work to do this off-season. That’s not to say that they can’t field a strong team in 2010. Rather, it’s to say that if they don’t move to improve their starting pitching, they could be in for some trouble. Their rotation will consist of Jered Weaver, Scott Kazmir, Joe Saunders, and Ervin Santana. That’s just not going to cut it, not with the Rangers and Mariners improving.
Sure, managers have to stand by the strength of their team, but Scioscia went out of his way to make a statement about his. That’s fine, but in criticism of his statement, I don’t think the Angels are anywhere close to set for next season. Losing Figgins would hurt, as it would be difficult to replace him at third base and atop the order. But losing Lackey could hurt most of all, because it will be even more difficult to replace him atop the rotation. So no, as it stands, the Angels do not have the team. We’ll see what measures they make to build that team in the next few months.
Why does Robinson Cano passively watch the first pitch?
Posted by: | CommentsBefore he digs into the batter’s box for the first time, Robinson Cano playfully taps the opposing catcher’s shin guards with his bat. He then starts to settle in, adjusting his uniform and waving his bat in front of him like a pendulum. Then, as the pitcher readies, Cano gets into his stance, slightly open. The bat waggling behind his head seemingly dictates the movement of the rest of his body. It’s as if he and the bat are one, rocking back and forth in unison, waiting for the perfect moment to turn loose and strike the pitched ball.
If the ball is near the strike zone, I expect Robbie to swing. He’s never been known as a disciplined hitter — he’s been in the bottom five in the AL in pitches per plate appearances four out of five seasons, and in the other, 2007, he was in the bottom 10. Yet even though I understand the virtue of seeing more pitches, I want Robbie to swing. Not at a pitch in the dirt or at his eyes, of course, but if it’s reasonably close to the zone I think swinging is probably the proper decision. (Cano, for his part, made contact with 77.5 percent of pitches outside the strike zone in 2009, and 75.3 percent in 2008.)
This season, I noticed many times that Cano would stand and passively watch the first pitch go by, no matter its type or location. Unfortunately, a statistic does not exist which can quantify this situation. All we have is the number of times he swung at the first pitch, 230 out of his 674 plate appearances, or 34 percent overall. That is actually up from 2008, when he swung at the first pitch 32 percent of the time. In previous years, Cano swung at the first pitch more often. But while we know that Cano swings at the first pitch often enough, we don’t know how many of those first pitch situations he’s eschewing because of this passive tactic.
Presumably, this is to help correct for his poor discipline. Again, Cano routinely sees among the fewest pitches per plate appearance in the league, so the idea might be that if he takes the first pitch, he might get a better read on the pitcher. I’m not sure if this first-pitch passive approach is an instruction from Kevin Long, or an initiative of Cano’s own undertaking. What I do know is that while that tactic can sometimes lead to a 1-0 count, oftentimes Cano watches a perfectly good pitch go right by, a pitch that he can put in play. That’s Cano’s strength, putting balls in play, and I don’t like seeing him take good pitches — or even close pitches — without even thinking about swinging.
Just how good is Cano when he swings at the first pitch? He did it 118 times in 2009, and he picked up 51 hits, good for a .432 batting average. Of those 51 hits, seven were home runs, 11 were doubles, and one was a triple, for a .720 slugging percentage. He also picked up 21 of his 85 RBI by first-pitch swinging. Though his 2009 performance on the first pitch probably isn’t repeatable, Cano has fared well throughout his career in that situation, posting a .374 batting average and .578 slugging percentage over 544 plate appearances.
Hitters who see a lot of pitches provide value to the team. Nick Swisher makes fewer outs than other players because he’s willing to wait for the pitch he wants. If the pitcher doesn’t give him something he can hit, he’ll take his walk (or, as the case may be, he’ll strike out looking). The Yankees have always coveted patience at the plate, and it seems like they sometimes go out of their way to acquire this type of player. It stands in contrast to Cano, a free swinger. Even as he watched balls pass by, having no intention of swinging, he still ranked fourth to last in the AL in pitches per plate appearance in 2009.
Cano saw an 0-1 count 303 times in 2009. We might not learn from his numbers in that situation, because we don’t know how he got the strike. It could have been a passive look, an active look, a foul ball, or a swing and miss (though that only happened about 230 times all season). In any case, he hit .288/.294/.482 over 303 plate appearances. That’s pretty close to his career mark of .285/.299/.422 over 1,334 plate appearances. He is much better with a 1-0 count, .305/.383/.464 over 253 PA in 2009 and .298/.368/.476 over 1,158 PA in his career. Still, not as good as his first pitch numbers.
This is not to say that Cano should swing at every first pitch. That would be preposterous. It is to say that he’s not doing himself any favors by passively resting the bat on his shoulders. Maybe I’m falling victim to an observation bias and he doesn’t do this nearly as frequently as I think. I wish I had a way to measure it, other than watching the archive of all his 674 plate appearances. But that would just annoy me. That’s why I wrote this post, really. Because Robinson Cano annoys me when he nonchalantly watches a good pitch go by.
Open Thread: Ooh, I scored a touchdown
Posted by: | CommentsIf you watch this and don’t laugh, I’ll be disappointed.
It’s been all around the Internet today, but I’ll thank commenter pat for being the first to tip me off. For those who want to read a bit more about the Ellis experience, Snopes has a lengthy look.
While Ellis didn’t play for the Yankees in my lifetime, he did play for them when my dad was my age, so I’ve heard plenty about him and about that era in general. That led me to read up a lot about it. I always thought it was a shame that Dock didn’t win a World Series with the Yanks. They acquired him from the Pirates for the 1976 season, when they lost to the Reds in the World Series. You know who else came over in that trade? Willie Randolph. Then, in the spring of ‘77, the Yanks traded Ellis for Mike Torrez, who pitched well in the championship season. Bonus: Torrez became a free agent after the season and signed with Boston. Oops.
That takes care of that, so have at it with the open thread. Bicker, quarrel, and do what you will, but when you do, just remember that your trade proposal sucks.
Yanks won’t rework Girardi’s deal this off-season
Posted by: | CommentsAs the Yankees moved through the playoffs, many of us wondered whether a World Series win would mean a contract extension for Joe Girardi. They got the win, but it appears the team is content to let Girardi manage 2010 as a lame duck. Joel Sherman has the details, which are few. Instead of rewarding Girardi for a job well done, the Yanks will take their normal tack of letting a contract expire before negotiating a new one. It seems like a reasonable enough stance.
Brian Cashman has made it clear that this is how the Yankees will operate. Before the 2007 season he had a chance to rework deals for Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada, but declined to do so until after the season. While that decision might have cost the team several million dollars — both Posada and Rivera played hardball after having great seasons — it appears they’ll continue to apply the policy across the board.
While football teams prefer to avoid having a lame duck coach, baseball teams don’t seem to averse to it. Joe Torre signed four contracts after his first one with the Yankees, and two of them came after the old deal expired. In other words, the Yankees had two lame duck seasons under Torre, 1999 and 2001. His teams did just fine those seasons. He signed extensions for the 1997 and 2004 seasons, a year before his contract was to expire, and the teams did just fine then, too (though both seasons ended on sour notes).
After winning the World Series in his second season at the helm, it seems that missing the playoffs in 2010 is the only result that could lead to a new manager in 2011. Even then, with the World Series championship under his belt, perhaps the Yankees will be a bit more forgiving with Girardi if his team fails to make the playoffs next year. In any case, they’re leaving that option open, no matter what the team does. Even so, save for some unforeseen event unrelated to the team’s play (e.g., Girardi insulting the owner, as he did in Florida), I don’t see anyone else managing the Yankees for the next few years.
Joe Girardi has his good points and his bad, and although many of us were puzzled by some of his moves, I still think he’s a good manager. While we as fans tend to focus on the manager’s tactical moves, a manager is responsible for more than just that. He must hold together a team of 25 personalities over a six-month season and month-long playoff process. From all appearances, Girardi has done that well. As Alex Rodriguez said after the team won the World Series, “You have 25 guys who bought into Joe Girardi’s system.”
