Archive for Pitching
The 2012 Oliver Projections: Yankee Offense and Pitching
Posted by: | Comments
(Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty)
Our latest swing through projection-land brings us to The Hardball Times’ Oliver, the fourth of the six major offseason projection systems and perhaps also the angriest. Now obviously projection systems are devoid of emotion, but this being my third straight offseason of sifting through projection data I can safely say that Oliver dislikes the Yankees more than any other system, so as always, take these projections with a grain of salt.
For previous posts on the 2012 ZiPS, Bill James and CAIRO projections, click here, here and here. This time around, instead of taking you through the entire Yankee starting nine and projected rotation, I’m just going to touch on some of the more interesting/outlandish projections, saving us all some time in the process.
Part of the reason Oliver is hard on the Yankees is because it, like ZiPS, applies aging factors. Now I’m pretty sure some if not all of the other systems also do this to a degree, but Oliver and ZiPS seem to be the hardest on older players, and as we know, the Yankees have a fair amount of those, hence some of the aggressive projections. While in some cases the projections seem crazy — Oliver somehow had Curtis Granderson, no one’s idea of an old man, putting up a comical .336 wOBA in 2011 (his worst projection by far) and it also had Robinson Cano at .350 last year — in others the seemingly laughable projections were right on the money.
I remember thinking the system was near-worthless after it spat out a .244/.326/.401 (.321 wOBA) line for Jorge Posada in 2011, and Posada managed to underperform that, finishing the season at .235/.315/.398, .309 wOBA. The only other Yankee it more or less hit the nail on the head on? Alex Rodriguez, who Oliver had at .271/.356/.491, .365 wOBA for 2011, while Alex’s actual line was .276/.362/.461, .361 wOBA. That’s not exactly good news, as we saw in last week’s post about A-Rod’s contract.
The flip side of this, however, is that Oliver seems to really like younger players. Last offseason it projected a 3.71 ERA for Phil Hughes in 185 innings. Can you imagine how excited we’d all be if that had happened? Despite Phil’s poor 2011 campaign, Oliver still has a man crush on Phil, projecting a 4.08 ERA over 150 innings and getting his K/9 back over 7.00. Talk about carrying a torch.
Oliver also really liked it some Ivan Nova last offseason despite the fact that Nova had all of 42 Major League innings under his belt, projecting the righty to throw 145 innings of 4.25 ERA ball, which seemed crazy at the time. Nova of course wildly exceeded expectations, though Oliver isn’t fooled, and has Nova regressing to a still-respectable-for-the-back-end-of-the-rotation 4.33 ERA in 185 innings.
This year the role of Ivan Nova seems like it’ll be played by Hector Noesi, who Oliver projected a 2011 MLE line of 65 innings of 4.25 ERA ball with 7.1 K/9, 1.8 BB/9 and 1.2 HR/9 despite zero Major League track record. Following a solid 2011 debut, Oliver again likes Noesi for a 4.25 ERA, only this time in 102 innings, with a 6.2 K/9, 2.3 BB/9 and 0.9 HR/9 — numbers we’d all happily sign up for.
You’re no doubt curious about Jesus Montero. Last offseason Oliver forecasted a .284/.337/.497, .357 wOBA line in 152 PAs. This year, Oliver is projecting a .284/.339/.502, .360 wOBA line in 554 PAs. That’s the second-highest Oliver-projected wOBA among Yankee starters after Robinson Cano’s .363.
As for the Yankees’ one-time big guns, Oliver sees A-Rod falling to a .266/.348/.471, .355 wOBA line, which would represent a lower OBP but slightly more power than in 2011; while Mark Teixeira took the biggest hit by far, falling from a team-high .381 projected wOBA last offseason to .358 this winter.
As for the kids, Manny Banuelos is forecasted for 60 innings of 4.92 ERA ball with a 7.1 K/9, 4.7 BB/9 and 0.9 HR/9; Dellin Betances at 75 innings of 4.96 ERA ball with a 7.8 K/9, 5.4 BB/9 and 1.1 HR/9; while Adam Warren, David Phelps and D.J. Mitchell have MLB equivalencies of 140 IP/4.63 ERA, 143 IP/4.59 ERA and 144 IP/4.91 ERA, respectively.
For those wondering about Yu Darvish and what might have been, Oliver forecasts a 2012 MLE line of 207 IP, 2.46 ERA, 9.9 K/9, 1.9 BB/9 and 0.4 HR/9, good for an astonishing 6.8 WAR. I think it’s fairly safe to say this won’t happen.
If you plug the starting nine’s 2012 Oliver-projected numbers into Dave Pinto’s Lineup Analysis, we get a starting lineup that projects to score 5.2 runs per game, the lowest projected rate we’ve seen thus far. As a point of comparison, the 2011 team as a whole averaged 5.35 runs per game. The “best” iteration of the Oliver lineup scores 5.209 runs per game and features Nick Swisher at leadoff.
The 2012 ZiPS-projected lineup averaged 5.3 runs per game, the James edition a hearty 5.7, and CAIRO’s spit out 5.6 runs per game. So again, it’s not terribly outlandish to claim that Oliver is not the Yankees’ biggest fan.
If the Yankees do nothing more this offseason, Oliver currently has them projected to finish tied for first place in the AL East with a 92-70 record, with the best record in the American League and third-best in baseball. Last offseason when I looked at the Oliver projections in January, the Yankees were projected to finish at 87-75 and 2nd place in the ALE. All things considered, that’s a pretty nice projection for a team that could still probably use a starting pitcher.
Reasons to be optimistic about Phil Hughes
Posted by: | CommentsYou don’t have to wait one month and eight days for pitchers and catchers report to hear about Phil Hughes. It’s pretty obvious what he’ll say: “I’m in the best shape of my life.” After a disappointing 2011 season, in which he got hurt and showed diminished stuff when healthy, Hughes took a head-first dive into his off-season training regimen. He has worked out at Athlete’s Performance, the same place he spent the 2009-2010 off-season. That will help him avoid what the Yankees term fat camp in spring training, but will it bring actual results?
We’ve seen plenty of players report to camp in phenomenal shape and then fail to deliver. Why, then, should we think that Hughes will miraculously return to form? On Sunday Moshe tempered expectations for Hughes, but I’m a bit more optimistic. There are a few reasons to think that he can hold down a middle of the rotation spot in 2012.
His 2010 workload
It’s easy to cite Hughes’s 2010 workload as one reason he failed in 2011. His previous innings high was 146 innings, and that came in 2006 — at A and AA, no less. But really, innings aren’t the greatest gauge here. Minor league games simply aren’t as intense as major league ones. In addition, Hughes had a relatively easy time finishing those 146 innings. He faced 558 batters that year, or 3.82 per inning. During his 2010 campaign he faced 730 batters in 176.1 innings, or 4.14 per inning. That’s quite a bit of added stress, especially for a guy who hadn’t faced that many batters in four years.
Then we get to the postseason. Not only did Hughes add another 15.2 innings to his ledger, but he struggled in those innings. While he did dispose of the Twins with relative ease, he faltered against the Rangers. All told he faced 71 batters in the postseason, or 4.53 per inning. The stressors add up.
His 2010 recovery period
Not only did Hughes throw far more innings in 2010 than he ever had previously, but he pitched deeper into the season as well. While he did pitch in the Arizona Fall League in 2008, that came after a long layoff during the season, in which he threw only 70 innings between the majors and the minors. The stress wasn’t nearly as great as it was in 2010, when he had already far surpassed his previous workload limits.
The baseball season takes a toll on every player. Pitchers abuse their entire bodies all season, repeatedly throwing a baseball with maximum effort with an unnatural motion. After the season players need rest. Some vets might be able to get by with just a few weeks on the shelf, but younger players unaccustomed to these workloads, might need more. Again, Hughes put his body through considerably more stress in 2010 than he ever had previously in his life. And then he had a short off-season to recover and recondition.
Just look at Cole Hamels. In 2007 he threw 183.1 innings, facing 743 batters. In 2008 he threw 227.1 innings and faced 914 batters in the regular season, and then upped that total to 252.1 innings and 1,045 batters with his postseason performance. That’s 302 more batters faced than ever before in his career — or 41 percent of his previous innings high. In 2009 he saw a drop-off in his performance. It wasn’t to Hughes’s degree, but different bodies respond in different ways. Yet Hamels rebounded for his best year yet in 2010, and then topped that in 2011.
His curveball
From the 2007 Baseball America scouting report on Hughes, when they rated him the No. 4 prospect in the game:
Hughes’ greatest accomplishment as a pro has been to forsake his slider in favor of a knockout curveball, which is more of a strikeout pitch and produces less stress on his arm. It’s a true power breaking ball that sits in the low 80s with 1-to-7 break. Club officials call it the best in the system because Hughes can throw it for quality strikes or bury it out of the zone, and because he uses the same arm slot and release point he uses for his fastball.
Yet by 2009 he was working more with a spike curve, a la Mike Mussina and A.J. Burnett. The problem is that it didn’t fit with his repertoire. He didn’t throw it particularly hard like Burnett, and he didn’t have many, if any, other pitches to keep hitters off balance, like Mussina. He has since changed back to the straight curve that earned him so much praise. It’s no surprise that it didn’t make much of a difference last season, since he implemented it mid-season. But with an off-season and spring training to work on it, perhaps he can use it to his advantage.
Baby steps
Hughes wasn’t exactly good after returning from the DL, pitching to a 4.67 ERA in 61.2 innings over 11 starts. He didn’t miss many bats either, striking out just 42. But he did do a few things well. For instance, he limited opponents to just five home runs, or 0.73 per nine. He also kept the Yankees in many of those games; six of those 11 starts were considered quality starts. Again, the Yankees don’t need Hughes to be an ace or a No. 2. They need him to be a serviceable middle of the rotation arm. Piling up the quality starts is an easy way to accomplish that.
To expect Hughes will return to form in 2012 is foolish. Little in his last 18 months of work suggests he’ll ever approach his ceiling. But we can still look at the situation and see some optimism. The problem, as Moshe related on Sunday, is that the optimism is for a mid-rotation starter rather than an elite one. But at this point, we’d take it from Hughes. If a few things break right for him, we just might see that in 2012.
Rolling the dice with Adam Miller
Posted by: | Comments
(AP Photo | John Raoux)
Now that the calendar has flipped over to January, teams will start to load up on players via minor league contracts. Most of the big free agents are off the board and most of the big trades have already taken place, so depth becomes the focus. The Yankees have signed a number of players to minor league pacts already, including former big leaguers Dewayne Wise, Hideki Okajima, Matt Daley, and Jayson Nix, but the most intriguing addition came yesterday: 27-year-old right-hander Adam Miller.
Miller, the 31st overall pick in the 2003 draft, is a classic Texas fireballer standing 6-foot-4, 200 lbs., and he’s ridden the career roller coaster over the last eight years. He dominated in 2004 — 10.2 K/9 (28.0 K%) and 2.7 BB/9 (7.4 BB%) in 134.1 IP split between the two Single-A levels — and was ranked as the fourth best pitching prospect in the game by Baseball America after the season. That’s when the injuries started to set in. Miller missed the first half of 2005 with an elbow strain, then dominated again in 2006 — 9.2 K/9 (24.5 K%) and 2.6 BB/9 (7.1 BB%) in 158.1 IP at mostly Double-A — before elbow and finger problems hampered him in 2007.
Click to embiggen. (Photo via TheClevelandFan.com)
Those finger problems almost ended Miller’s career. Damage to the pulley system and ligaments in his right middle finger required four surgeries and limited him to just 94 innings from 2007-2010, zero from 2009-2010. Replacement ligaments from his calf and wrist now hold together a finger with a tip that is bent at a 45-degree angle and slightly to the right (see right). The digit conveniently wraps right around a baseball now.
Miller returned to the mound this past April, pitching exclusively in relief and rarely more than two innings at a time. He did strike out 39 in 44 IP (8.0 K/9 and 19.5 K%), but he also walked 21 (4.3 BB/9 and 10.5 BB%) and plunked six batters. Rust probably accounts for some of the control problems, but he also had trouble taming his once lethal slider with the rebuilt finger. His fastball was still pushing 95-96 after sitting 95-97 with some 100′s back in the day, encouraging but not super surprising since he hasn’t had any shoulder problems. He also has a solid changeup, but the high-octane fastball and knockout slider were what gave him that top of the rotation potential.
The injuries have basically ended any chance Miller had of remaining a starter, but obviously the Yankees feel he still might have something to offer in relief, where he can go to town with his two best pitches. He has a lower arm slot than most (here’s video of him from camp last year), which when combined with his fastball-slider combo leads me to believe he might wind up having a platoon split. Sure enough, he handled righties better than lefties both last year and throughout his career. That doesn’t mean he’s destined to become a righty specialist, lots of great relievers have platoon splits. It’s just something to be aware of.
Chances are Miller won’t ever help the Yankees just because that’s usually how these minor league contract fliers on former top prospects tend to go. We know the Yankees have emphasized strong makeup in recent years, and I think Miller’s prolonged battle with his health shows that he’s a tough, resilient guy. I don’t think spending a few months in Triple-A and traveling all over the place will discourage him all that much. Think of him as this season’s Mark Prior, just younger and with a sound shoulder. If he stays healthy in the first half and shows some effectiveness, he’s got a chance to help the big league team at some point during the season.
Splitting Burnett
Posted by: | Comments
(Photo by Patrick McDermott/Getty)
Back in November I took a deep dive into the numbers to see whether there were any positives to be gleaned from A.J. Burnett‘s lousy 2011 season and whether we could expect at least a slightly better performance from the enigmatic righty in 2012 (assuming the Yankees don’t eat his deal and decide to make him someone else’s problem). What I found was that Burnett’s season was utterly compromised by a brutal nine-start stretch he put together during July and August — which was in large part due to the fact that he lost nearly two inches of vertical break on his curveball — and that if you removed those performances from his ledger he actually threw to a 4.11 ERA over 135.2 innings. We all know baseball doesn’t work that way, but that would seem to indicate that there’s still a somewhat useful pitcher in there somewhere.
Today I wanted to examine a few key splits, in the hopes that there are some underlying trends that could bode well for A.J. going forward. For the masochists in the audience, feel free to download the spreadsheet I created which has the tOPS+ and sOPS+ data on pretty much every split you could want during the course of A.J.’s Yankee career. For the purposes of this post, we’ll focus on sOPS+, as in the case of a pitcher like Burnett I think we’ll get a better sense of just how effective/ineffective he’s been comparing his performances in various splits against the league instead of compared to himself.
Over the last two years, leadoff hitters, cleanup hitters and 5th-slot hitters have really given it to A.J. but good. For some reason, A.J. fared best against #2 hitters last season, and also handled them relatively well last year. While his performance against 1-2 hitters slightly worsened in 2011, his sOPS+ against 3-6 hitters was flat year-over-year and his numbers against 7-9 hitters actually improved over 2010 (although in the case of the latter, he was still only 3% better than league average). Still, none of this data is terribly optimistic.
Last year, Burnett was curiously effective with a runner on 3rd and less than two outs (53 sOPS+). He also fared well with runners on first and third (72 sOPS+). Though one would think that Burnett’s propensity for wild pitches — something that wouldn’t show up in the opposition’s cumulative OPS – likely aided the opposing team’s opportunities with runners on third. Burnett has been atrocious with a runner on 2nd these last two seasons, posting a 143 sOPS+ last year and 152 this past season. Nothing to see here.
This past season A.J. appeared to save his best pitching for when the team was trailing, with an 80 sOPS+. However, as driven painfully home by the August 3 game against the White Sox, he was inexplicably terrible when pitching with a big lead, posting an sOPS+ of 195(!) when ahead by four-plus runs.
In 2011, A.J. saved his worst pitching for the middle innings collectively, although his worst performances came in the 2nd inning of games (154 sOPS+). Burnett was great in the 3rd inning (43 sOPS+), but that was one only three innings he was better than league average in, and one of those innings — the eighth — was one he rarely even saw.
Unfortunately there doesn’t appear to be anything in the underlying data that might portend a brighter future for Allan James Burnett in 2012. I’ve been hoping against hope that A.J. can return to a level of effectiveness that he last evinced in 2009, and while I’ll continue to perhaps foolishly expect better from A.J., no matter which way you slice ‘em the numbers tell a very different story.
Yankee relief pitching over the years: A graphical look
Posted by: | CommentsIn the comments of my graphical look at Yankee starters’ ERAs over the last several years, reader Mike Myers asked if I could do a headshot graph for the Yankee relievers or bench players. Well, in the spirit of the holiday, ask and ye shall receive, and as a follow up to our graphical look at the Yankee benches from earlier this week, today comes a graphical look at the primary players the Yankees have employed as members of their bullpens since the 2003 season.
However, before we get to the headshots, here’s an updated chart showing how the Yankee relief corps have fared since the advent of divisional play:
With a 3.12 ERA, the 2011 relief corps was the best the Yankees have fielded in at least a decade, and represented the 8th-lowest lowest bullpen ERA a Yankee team has put up since 1969. The lowest? The strike-shortened 1981 team’s absurd 2.26, though that was of course compiled in only 107 games. The lowest full-season relief ERA since 1969 was the 1970 team’s 2.34 mark. However, this is extremely weird when you consider that the very next season the Yankees recorded both their worst ERA- and FIP- of all 43 teams surveyed here. I don’t know if they either blew the bullpen up following 1970 or all of the holdovers simply forgot how to pitch come 1971, but that is a pretty crazy one-year increase.
The next-best relief corps of the last 20 Yankee seasons was the 2001 ‘pen, which put up a 3.42 ERA, and they don’t check in until 18th on the list, which really drives home just how great the 2011 Yankee bullpen was. In terms of ERA relative to the league, the 2011 team checked in tied for 5th, with a 74 ERA-, with the 1981 and 1970 teams again at the top. In terms of FIP, the 2011 team fared a bit less impressively, with its 3.65 mark coming in at 18th-best (1972 led this list with a 2.85 FIP, which further begs the question what on earth was going on with the Yankee bullpens from 1970 through 1972? One year they’re incredible, the following year atrocious, then back to incredible), though its FIP relative to the league (88 FIP-) was tied for 10th-best, with 1982 topping the list with a 76 FIP-.
Now on to the individuals who comprised recent Yankee bullpens. In order to define who made the cut, seeing as how the Yankees can go through up to 30 pitchers (or more) over the course of the season between cuts, trades and September call-ups, I initially used 30 innings pitched as a benchmark. While I mostly stuck to that parameter, I did end up getting a bit lenient so that I could include some memorable names that perhaps didn’t quite reach that threshold, but came close enough. I did not end up using anyone below 20 IPs, so this should at least be a fairly representative sample of the primary players the Yankees utilized in relief during their respective seasons.
As for how I graded them out, I decided to go with FIP-, as neither ERA nor WAR are particularly great at telling us how effective relievers were. Focusing solely on what the pitcher was responsible for and comparing it against the league seemed like the most intuitive way to show just how good (or bad) the Yankee relief corps have been over the years.
(click to enlarge)
A few observations:
- The Yankees, like every team in baseball, have had a lot of crappy relievers.
- My primary memory of Juan Acevedo was of him botching one of Roger Clemens’ 8,000 attempts at getting his 300th win in a blown save against the Cubs on June 7, 2003.
- Remember Felix “Run Fairy” Heredia, Felix Rodriguez and Luis Vizcaino?
- I still hate Phil Coke, even though the 38 FIP- he put up in 14.2 innings in 2008 tops the list. Even though his ’08 season didn’t make the 30-IP innings cutoff, his 2009 season obviously did, and I wanted to show how bad he actually was in comparison.
- The Yankees had a lot of crappy relievers in the middle of the aughts. Between bad pitching and awful defense, it still amazes me that the 2004-2007 teams still made the playoffs every year.
- If you lower the innings cutoff to 20, Joba Chamberlain‘s 42 FIP- in 2007 is the second-best FIP- on this chart after Phil Hughes‘ 41 in 2009. In fact, those two are the third- and second-best relief seasons in all of Yankee history (going all the way back to 1871) in terms of FIP-. The best? Why, Mariano Rivera‘s 1996, in which he put up a 40 FIP- in 107.2 innings.
- David Robertson‘s 2011 FIP- was the 5th-best relief season in all of Yankee history on the aforementioned list of 258 relief seasons of 20 innings pitched or more.
The remaining pitching market
Posted by: | CommentsIf the Yankees don’t make a move for a pitcher this off-season, it won’t be for lack of options. To this point we’ve seen two free agent signings, an NPB posting, and two trades involving pitchers who would represent an upgrade to the Yankees. Perhaps they think that the prices to acquire these pitchers does not match the upgrade they’d receive, but the opportunities are there nonetheless. Brian Cashman figures to have a few more chances to upgrade later this winter, as there are a number of actually or reportedly available pitchers.
In terms of pure results, he’s the best available arm. His 3.31 ERA since 2009 ranks 23rd among all qualified starters. Even better, he’s reportedly seeking a one-year contract at a reasonable $12 or $13 million. The Yankees have been frequently connected to Kuroda, and it stands to reason that they’ll remain involved until he does sign somewhere.
While he does have the top results, there are some downsides to Kuroda. For instance, the hitters on the Rays, Orioles, Red Sox, and Blue Jays are better than those on the Padres, Rockies, Giants, and Diamondbacks. The AL East also features more hitter-friendly parks than the NL West. Then there’s Kuroda’s age, 37. A one-year deal helps limit some of that risk, but if he shows decline in 2012 he might not present much of an upgrade.
Wandy Rodriguez
Not far behind Kuroda in terms of results is Wandy Rodriguez. The Astros shopped him at last year’s trade deadline, but the Yankees weren’t interested unless Houston paid a significant portion of his remaining salary. He’s owed $36 million for the next three years, because his 2014 option becomes a player option if traded. That makes him much less attractive, meaning Houston will have to kick in some cash if they want to trade him. While they showed reluctance earlier in the off-season, they now appear willing to make that trade-off.
Not only does the NL Central have a number of top-flight hitters, but none of them actually play for the Astros. That is, Rodriguez has the burden of facing all of these elite hitters. The closest they ever had was Hunter Pence, but he wasn’t even a top-five hitter in the division. That does make him look a bit more attractive. He also has fewer pitchers’ parks in the division. Yet the Yankees appear not at all interested. That’s probably because of the commitment length. Were Rodriguez signed only through 2013 they might be more on board. But three years to a pitcher you’re not totally sold on? While Rodriguez might help, it’s understandable why the Yankees are shying away.
Roy Oswalt
In the last three years, despite multiple bouts with lower back injuries, Oswalt has accumulated a 3.46 ERA in 531 innings. All told that’s a pretty solid accomplishment. Since we just discussed Oswalt yesterday there’s no need to elaborate further. He remains a tantalizing yet risky option.
Gio Gonzalez
There has been no shortage of Gio Gonzalez news this winter. The A’s seem pretty intent on trading him, and judging by how slowly they’re moving they’re also trying to extract every last drop of value from another team. This makes complete sense. Gonzalez ranks 39th in ERA among all starters from 2009-2011, despite his horrible 2009 showing. He’s been among the best in terms of results the last two seasons. Even when you look at only his away stats, he still fares pretty well: 3.96 ERA in 238.2 innings since 2009. That takes away some of the concern that he’s the product of a large ballpark.
The Nationals were rumored to be pushing hard for Gonzalez, offering up a four-for-one trade that will involve prospects Brad Peacock and Derek Norris, among others. Still, four-for-one deals can get complicated, since they typically lack top-end quality. Today on ESPN.com, Jim Bowden suggested a few trades for Gonzalez (subscription required). For the Yankees he suggests Dellin Betances, David Phelps, and Austin Romine. Since Gonzalez has four years remaining of team control, this could work out for the Yankees. The only catch: Oakland might find a better package, and one that fits their needs better, elsewhere.
Matt Garza
Garza represents an interesting option, if only because he’s experienced success in the AL East. But the Cubs are apparently asking for a lot. Would the Yankees be willing to trade Banuelos and at least one other top-five prospect (Gary Sanchez or Mason Williams), plus other pieces, to get the last two years of Garza’s pre-free agency years? It seems unlikely. While he’s been good, he might be a bit more expensive than other pitchers. If he costs more than Gonzalez, he certainly isn’t worth it.
John Danks
You can check out our large and growing John Danks archive for various takes on the 27-year-old left-hander. He’s an enticing option for a few reasons. He’s been solid for the last four years, he has AL experience and in a hitters’ park no less, and he is conceivably someone the Yanks could sign long-term after the 2012 season. The issue, as with Garza, is that the White Sox are asking the moon for him. It’s simply not worth a top-five prospect for a player who will reach free agency after this season. At a price more commensurate with his overall value, Danks could be the best target on the board.
Edwin Jackson
A free agent, Jackson requires just one resource to acquire: money. The Yankees have that in abundance, though they’re seemingly not throwing it around this off-season. They might also be reluctant to sign Jackson for four years. As with Oswalt, we covered Edwin Jackson recently, so there’s no need to dive any deeper into his case. He’s there for the taking and could represent an upgrade in the Yanks rotation.
That brings us to a dozen candidates who could have upgraded, or still might upgrade, the Yanks rotation in 2012. All of the candidates, save for Darvish, have sported ERAs under 4.00 since 2009. They’ve all thrown a good number of innings, and everyone on the list, save for Oswalt and maybe Latos, has been relatively healthy. If the Yankees are serious about upgrading their rotation, they’ll connect on one of these 12 options, even though there are just seven remaining.
Add Roy Oswalt to possible Yankee targets
Posted by: | Comments
AP Photo
Years ago he might have topped the list of Yankee targets. Today he’s having trouble getting a multiyear offer from any team. Roy Oswalt’s first foray into the free agent market couldn’t have come at a worse time. The market for pitching is relatively thin, yet he’s coming off a season during which he missed 53 team games with lower back injuries. Making matters worse, two years ago he was diagnosed with two degenerative discs in his back. That makes it difficult for any team to justify a multiyear offer. Now it appears that Oswalt is ready to face reality.
This morning ESPN.com’s Jerry Crasnick reported that Oswalt wants only a one-year deal. The idea: show his back is healthy so that he can reenter the market next year and hopefully score the multiyear deal he sought this off-season. Apparently six teams are in conversation with him, and while we don’t know the Yankees level of interest it’s difficult to see them standing on the sidelines. In some ways Oswalt fits their needs.
Despite his recent history of lower back issues — he has missed almost 100 games since 2008 with lower back injuries — Oswalt has rarely suffered in terms of performance. In 2009, when the issues really started to crop up, he produced a career worst ERA, but even then it was 4.12. He then bounced back in 2010 to start 32 games, pitch 211 innings, and finish the season with a 2.76 ERA, his best in any season since a 2.73 ERA in 141 innings in 2001. Of course, he followed that with only 139 innings in 23 starts last season, though he did still manage a 3.69 ERA and 3.44 FIP. In 2012, his age-34 season, we can still expect a certain level of effectiveness when he’s on the mound.
Even on a one-year deal, Oswalt’s back issues present a problem. We heard earlier in the off-season that the Yankees were concerned about Oswalt’s back. That matters more in terms of a multi-year deal, but it also plays a part in a one-year arrangement. The Yankees would still rely on Oswalt to make 30 starts, so if he comes up short due to the same back issues they’ll have to rely more heavily on Plan B — and then Plan C, and Plan D, and so on. That is, if the Yankees are truly concerned about the state of Oswalt’s back, they should probably stay away regardless of contract term.
Still, of all the remaining pitchers on the market Oswalt has the highest ceiling. He might be a career National Leaguer, but he’s passed through a number of tests along the way. He pitched in the hitters’ park known as Minute Maid Park, and then graduated to another hitters’ park, Citizen Bank Ballpark. He’s appeared in the postseason four times, pitching to a 3.73 ERA in 72.1 innings. He also has about a season’s worth of interleague starts, pitching to a 3.70 ERA in 199.1 innings (30 starts). His impeccable control, 2.09 BB/9 for his career, could also help him manage the transition between leagues.
One major question regarding Oswalt: why would he want to rebuild his value in New York? This isn’t an end-of-career deal, where he’s just looking to catch on with a strong contender for one last hurrah. This is a player seeking to rebuild his value and get a multiyear contract next off-season, at age 35. While it might not behoove him to hide out in a known pitchers’ haven, such as San Diego, facing the AL East offenses frequently might not be the best idea, either. He wouldn’t have to face the Yanks offense, a major plus, but he’d have a number of starts against other above-average offenses. He might prefer to remain in the NL for this reason — or, if he’d like to prove he’s not just an NL guy, he could seek a rotation spot in the much less vicious AL Central.
At the same time, Oswalt could view New York as the perfect place to rebuild his value. Remember, he did talk about retirement last year while his back ailed him. Perhaps he wants to go all-in with this last attempt. If he succeeds, he extends his career by a few years. If he fails, he rides into retirement. In that case, the Yankees could be a good fit. He’d have a chance to be the No. 2 on a sure contender. Furthermore, a solid performance on the Yankees could turn a lot of heads. It could even entice the Yankees themselves to offer him a contract after the season. Even a slightly above average performance for the Yankees could be more attractive next off-season than a well above average performance elsewhere.
Oswalt’s newfound availability puts him in the same league as Hiroki Kuroda: risky, but with plenty of upside. Oswalt has a higher ceiling, but also has the greater risk of giving you nothing. Kuroda is the better bet to give you 30 starts, but his ceiling is lower than Oswalt’s. His age is also a concern; any decline will greatly affect his performance for the Yankees. The Yankees might not end up with either, but they’d do just fine by signing either to a one-year deal.
Resizing the market for Danks and Gonzalez
Posted by: | CommentsAs the Yankees scour the market for upgrades to the starting rotation, two names appear more frequently than the rest: John Danks and Gio Gonzalez. Both are reportedly available, and both fit well into the Yankees rotation. The major obstacle, as is the case in all trade negotiations, is the price. The White Sox reportedly want Jesus Montero and Manny Banuelos for Danks, and the A’s want young, high-end outfielders for Gonzalez. The Yankees don’t want to surrender one of Montero and Banuelos for Danks, and they don’t have young, high-end outfielders to trade for Gonzalez. This might seemingly rule them out on both, but a recent trade might have changed the market a bit.
This weekend the A’s moved one pitcher out of their rotation, sending Trevor Cahill to the Diamondbacks. In return they received prospects Jarrod Parker, Collin Cowgill, and Ryan Cook. Despite the void Cahill leaves in the A’s rotation, it’s reported that they’ll continue listening to offers for Gonzalez. The equation has changed a bit, given the return they got for Cahill. While that in some ways might benefit the Yankees’ pursuit of Gonzalez, or even Danks, it hurts it in other ways.
The A’s Needs
As Mike mentioned last week, the A’s desire for young, high-end outfielders complicates things for the Yanks from the get-go. They really have none in the high levels of the system. If the A’s wouldn’t settle for other high-end prospects, the Yankees would need a third team to facilitate a trade. That adds another level of complexity, which decreases the chances of a deal happening. That is, the more moving parts the harder it is to find a match that works for everyone.
The A’s did acquire an outfielder in the Cahill deal, but he’s not exactly high-end or even that young. Cowgill turns 26 in May, and his minor league track record isn’t overly impressive. He did hit .354/.430/.554 last season, but that was as a 25-year-old in the hitters’ haven known as the Pacific Coast League. My favorite example to put the PCL in perspective: Bubba Crosby hit .361/.410/.635 in the PCL before the Yankees acquired him in 2003. That is, he’s more of a throw-in than anything. That leaves the A’s still seeking outfielders, which continues to hurt the Yankees’ chances of acquiring Gonzalez.
Comparing Cahill and Gonzalez
Even though the the Yankees, as far as we know, were never in on Cahill, we can still look to this deal as a guide. First, let’s take a look at Gonzalez and Cahill. Both have over 500 major league innings, and they have nearly identical ERAs in that span (3.93 for Gonzalez, 3.91 for Cahill). Yet this is where their similarities end. They’re quite different pitchers in style, in age, and in contract.
Cahill is more of a ground ball guy, with a 53.3 percent career ground ball rate. He doesn’t strike out many, though he did in the minors and his numbers are rising. There’s still some projectability with Cahill, since he’ll turn just 24 years old in March. At the same time, he’s already locked up through 2015 at least, for a total of $30.5 million. That includes his first year of free agency eligibility for $12 million, and then two options, for $13 and $13.5 million, after that. That gets him through his age-29 season for $56.2 million, with the option to cut it short at $30.5 million if he gets hurt. It is, in other words, an incredibly team-friendly deal.
Gonzalez is more of a strikeout guy, fanning 8.59 per nine in his major league career. He also generates a decent number of ground balls, a 47.5 percent career rate. Yet when it comes to age and contract he’s a bit less valuable than Cahill. He just turned 26, and is a Super Two this off-season, meaning he’ll go through the arbitration process four times. While that can be a blessing in some cases, for a team acquiring him it can be a burden. MLB Trade Rumors estimates Gonzalez’s first-year arbitration number at $3.6 million, which is right in line with Cahill’s salary. But unlike Cahill’s salary, Gonzalez’s is not controlled. With quality performance she could perhaps beat the numbers on Cahill for the following three years: $5.5, $7.7, and $12 million.
To a team such as the Yankees this might not matter, but to other teams it does. That is to say that Cahill is quite a bit more valuable than Gonzalez. The cost-controlled aspect helps, as does Cahill’s age. For $56.2 million a team potentially gets him for his best seasons. Look at it this way, then. On Saturday Mike looked at a comparable Yankees package for Cahill. It included Manny Banuelos, Brandon Laird, and George Kontos. If that’s what the A’s got for Cahill, more or less, then they can’t really expect that for Gonzalez. Perhaps, then, there is a deal to be made here after all.
(Though, again, the A’s desire for, and the Yankees lack of, outfield prospects could mean there’s no match between them.)
Back to Danks
With the A’s needs hindering their chances of trading Gonzalez to the Yankees, our attention turns back to Danks. In his most recent update, CBS’s Jon Heyman notes an amended asking price: two of Banuelos, Montero, and Dellin Betances. Of course, this hardly changes things from before. It merely allows the Yankees to swap Betances for one of Montero or Banuelos. As before, there is zero doubt that the Yankees have rejected this idea out of hand. But that doesn’t mean the price will always remain this high.
The Cahill trade does give us some idea of the trade market, though it isn’t a precise barometer. That is, the White Sox aren’t necessarily influenced by Oakland’s return for Cahill. It does, however, set a bit of precedent. The White Sox asking price for Danks is surely better than what the A’s got for Cahill. If the Yankees wanted to add a starter and were willing to pay that price, why wouldn’t they have just turned to Oakland and their younger, more valuable starter?
As mentioned last week, the Yankees won’t give up Montero or Banuelos in a trade for Danks. The Cahill trade just reinforces that. The A’s got one blue chip pitching prospect back for their proven, young, and cheap starter. The White Sox cannot expect anything remotely comparable for their relatively expensive starter who hits free agency after the 2012 season. Even Betances might seem a stretch. After all, he was just 10 spots behind Parker in the 2011 Baseball America Top 100, and they had comparable seasons (both ending in the bigs).
Where this leaves the Yankees
This is where Brian Cashman‘s discretion comes into play. He talks about how the rotation doesn’t need help, or only needs help at the back end. While it’s nice to speak so highly of his players, to stick with the current guys is a difficult proposition. It assumes a rebound from Phil Hughes and that Freddy Garcia can continue fooling opponents with an array of junk. The Yankees would certainly do well to add a starter by any means possible.
Chances are, however, that not much will happen this week. Bids on Yu Darvish are due on Wednesday, and we won’t learn the winner until Sunday or Monday. The Yankees likely won’t make a move until they know where they stand on Darvish. After that, they’ll likely refocus on Hiroki Kuroda, who is reportedly seeking a one-year deal for $12 or $13 million. After that, Danks and Gonzalez become possibilities again. But given their current asking prices, it’s not hard to understand why they might have moved down the priority list for the moment.
The 2012 CAIRO Projections: Yankee Offense and Pitching
Posted by: | CommentsThus far this offseason we’ve taken a look at Dan Szymborksi’s 2012 ZiPS projections for the Yankees, which projects a Yankee starting lineup averaging 5.3 runs per game, and last month we reviewed the 2012 Bill James projections, which, as usual, were a bit more bullish, giving us a Yankee starting nine projected to pump out 5.7 runs per game.
Today we’re looking at SG’s 2012 CAIRO projections, version 0.2. The usual caveats apply, best summed up by SG himself: “Projections are inherently limited, so remember to take these for what they are. They are rough estimates of a player’s current talent level. They are not predictions for what a player is going to do in 2012, and they are not playing time predictions either.”
The other important reminder in reviewing these numbers is that SG doesn’t include baserunning in his wOBA calculation for CAIRO. (Edited, Monday, 12/12/11 at 8:45 a.m.): I was curious as to how exactly one might quantify the impact of stolen bases on an elite baserunner’s wOBA, and so according to an e-mail exchange I had with SG, “For 2011, Gardner’s 49 SB and 13 CS would add about .012 to his wOBA, so figure a range of .010 to .015. League average is probably more in the .000-.005 range depending on percentage. If you want to add SB/CS into my wOBA calculation, just use this formula:
.72 x BB + .75 x HBP + .9 x 1B + 1.24 x 2B + 1.56 x 3B + 1.95 x HR + .253 x SB – .437 x CS, divided by PA.”
So if one would like to, one could probably upwardly adjust CAIRO’s .324 wOBA projection for Brett Gardner to around .335, which, while still a bit lower than one would ideally like from Gardner, seems a bit more line with expectations.
Lineup
2011 CAIRO projection: .290/.360/.406, .342 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .297/.355/.388, .332 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .286/.345/.384, .325 wOBA
CAIRO really liked a bounceback for Derek last year, though he didn’t quite hit his projected line, even with his lightning-hot second half. And now in spite of said second half, CAIRO forecasts a return back to something approximating the 2010 version of Jeter.
2011 CAIRO projection: .252/.335/.462, .346 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .262/.364/.552, .394 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .263/.351/.502, .366 wOBA
CAIRO, like everyone else, underprojected Granderson last year, and also, like everyone else thus far this offseason, acknowledges Curtis’ big year but doesn’t see him coming close to hitting that well again. It’s important to keep in mind that CAIRO only has 19 players in all of MLB exceeding a .500 SLG (the only other Yankee being Robinson Cano), whereas 29 accomplished the feat in 2011. Knowing that, I would be surprised if Curtis only managed a .502 SLG.
Robinson Cano
2011 CAIRO projection: .306/.355/.511, .372 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .302/.349/.533, .375 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .303/.352/.504, .368 wOBA
CAIRO basically expects Cano to keep right on doing what he’s doing, which is of course great news for Yankee fans.
2011 CAIRO projection: .281/.372/.526, .384 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .276/.362/.461, .361 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .273/.363/.474, .365 wOBA
After dual .384 wOBA projections from CAIRO in 2011 — the two highest marks on the team — A-Rod‘s and Tex’s down 2011 seasons have resulted in considerably lower 2012 projections, though CAIRO thinks both can improve on their 2011 campaigns. Alec’s CAIRO projection is ostensibly what he did in 2011 with a little more power, which would of course be most welcome. For what it’s worth, ZiPS has him at only .264/.350/.474, which a healthy Alex should have no problem besting.
2011 CAIRO projection: .276/.377/.515, .384 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .248/.341/.494, .361 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .263/.359/.493, .368 wOBA
The good news is that CAIRO sees a significant spike in Tex’s OBP over 2011, although the bad news is that that .359 projection is still well below his .374 career mark. Tex is perhaps both the biggest question mark as well as the key to how well the Yankee offense will fare in 2012.
2011 CAIRO projection: .260/.354/.470, .357 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .260/.374/.449, .358 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .259/.356/.455, .354 wOBA
CAIRO, like Bill James, sees a drop in OBP for Swish in 2012, but slightly more power. I see Swish getting back to the .370 wOBA level.
2011 CAIRO projection: .261/.326/.446, .337 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .328/.406/.590, .421 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .267/.322/.470, .341 wOBA
With all of 69 career PAs to his name, Montero will likely be the Yankee with the widest range of projections. Bill James thinks Montero can hit for a .371 wOBA; CAIRO sees a lower but still more-than-respectable-for-a-21-year-old .341 mark.
2011 CAIRO projection: .263/.362/.380, .336 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .237/.324/.408, .325 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .253/.347/.383, .329 wOBA
CAIRO thinks Martin will gain some OBP but lose some power, ostensibly replicating his 2011 season. I think we’d all be fine with it, although it’d be great to see Martin check in closer to a .355/.430 OBP/SLG if possible.
Brett Gardner
2011 CAIRO projection: .270/.358/.372, .329 wOBA
2011 actual numbers: .259/.345/.369, .330 wOBA
2012 CAIRO projection: .262/.347/.371, .324 wOBA
CAIRO sees more of the same for Gardy, which is good and bad. The current iteration of Brett Gardner is obviously very valuable, but he could be downright deadly and a legitimate leadoff option if he can get his OBP back up to his 2010 level.
If you plug the starting nine’s 2012 CAIRO-projected numbers into Dave Pinto’s Lineup Analysis, we get a starting lineup that projects to score 5.6 runs per game. The 2011 team as a whole averaged 5.35 runs per game. Obviously the R/PG figure on the 2011 season is comprised of more than just nine players, but this provides something of a general vicinity for what one could reasonably expect out of the 2012 Yankee offense, if everything goes right. The “best” iteration of the lineup scores 5.708 runs per game and features Mark Teixeira at leadoff.
Starting Pitching
And here’s the pitching staff.
2011 CAIRO projection: 219.0 IP, 3.54 ERA, 3.68 FIP, 7.2 K/9, 2.5 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 237.1 IP, 3.00 ERA, 2.88 FIP, 8.7 K/9, 2.3 BB/9, 0.6 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 227.0 IP, 3.25 ERA, 3.23 FIP, 8.0 K/9, 2.7 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
No commentary required.
2011 CAIRO projection: 116.0 IP, 5.24 ERA, 5.03 FIP, 7.8 K/9, 5.3 BB/9, 1.6 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 165.1 IP, 3.70 ERA, 4.01 FIP, 5.3 K/9, 3.1 BB/9, 0.7 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 168.0 IP, 4.48 ERA, 4.52 FIP, 5.6 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
CAIRO thought little of Nova last year; his strong first full season has resulted in a considerably improved 2012 projection, though not one that Yankee fans can get terribly excited about. CAIRO sees regression for Nova across the board, although CAIRO also doesn’t know about Nova’s improved slider, which is probably the key to whether he can perform at a #2/#3-starter-type level going forward.
2011 CAIRO projection: 172.0 IP, 4.22 ERA, 4.17 FIP, 7.7 K/9, 3.0 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 74.2 IP, 5.79 ERA, 4.58 FIP, 5.7 K/9, 3.3 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 95.0 IP, 4.72 ERA, 4.26 FIP, 7.0 K/9, 3.1 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
No one knows what to expect out of Hughes in 2012, though they won’t stop us from endlessly speculating about him. For the record, I feel bizarrely optimistic about Hughes in 2012, but it could also be the fanboy in me just refusing to die. The 2012 CAIRO projection seems eminently reasonable in the aftermath of what Hughes did in 2011, although a 4.72 ERA would still be massively disappointing.
2011 CAIRO projection: 187.0 IP, 4.66 ERA, 4.50 FIP, 7.5 K/9, 3.6 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 190.1 IP, 5.15 ERA, 4.77 FIP, 8.2 K/9, 3.9 BB/9, 1.5 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 190.0 IP, 4.88 ERA, 4.52 FIP, 7.8 K/9, 3.8 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9
Burnett is of course the other massive question mark in the Yankee rotation. Similar to the way I feel about Hughes, I am also cautiously optimistic on Burnett, although after the last two seasons it’s tough to expect much of anything out of A.J. One thing that may have escaped notice is that, despite his second straight awful year, A.J. still provided value (1.5 fWAR) due primarily to the fact that he still gave 190 innings and outpitched his ERA. While a 4.88 ERA would still suck, 190 innings of a 4.52 FIP would probably make Burnett close to a 2.0 fWAR pitcher, which, while not great, is better than nothing.
2011 CAIRO projection: 31.0 IP, 4.86 ERA, 4.90 FIP, 6.4 K/9, 3.5 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 146.2 IP, 3.62 ERA, 4.12 FIP, 5.9 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 102.0 IP, 4.28 ERA, 4.28 FIP, 5.6 K/9, 2.9 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
Freddy’s strong 2011 led to a significantly upgraded 2012 CAIRO projection, and one that is also probably a bit more realistic than Freddy’s actual 2011 results. Assuming Garcia is the 5th starter, there’s little to quibble with in his CAIRO projection.
2011 CAIRO projection: 80.0 IP, 5.08 ERA, 4.91 FIP, 6.4 K/9, 3.0 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
2011 actual numbers: 56.1 IP, 4.47 ERA, 4.09 FIP, 7.2 K/9, 3.5 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
2012 CAIRO projection: 79.0 IP, 5.44 ERA, 4.80 FIP, 6.0 K/9, 3.2 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9
Despite putting up solid numbers in relief in 2o11, CAIRO doesn’t think much of Noesi, and his projection has barely changed from a year ago before he had any experience at the MLB level. While it’s safe to say no one really knows what Noesi could do if he ends up getting a chance to start as a Yankee in 2012, I’m pretty sure he’ll be better than a 5.44 ERA/4.80 FIP pitcher, especially if he really is throwing 98mph.
Cliff Lee, Mark Buehrle and the hunt for pitching
Posted by: | CommentsEvery now and then, I think back to July 9 and 10 of 2010. That weekend, the Yankees were on the West Coast, visiting the Mariners, and as Saturday dawned, it appeared as though the Yanks would leave Seattle with Cliff Lee in tow. In exchange, they would have to give up Jesus Montero and a middle infield prospect named Eduardo Nunez, but the spoils would be tremendous.
We know how that story ended for the Yankees. The Mariners wouldn’t accept David Adams who was dealing with an ankle injury and played in just 12 games this season, and the Yanks weren’t, for some reason, too keen on giving up Nunez. In fact, according to some stories, Nunez was more of a deal-breaker than Montero. Lee escaped their grip that July, and he went on to beat the Yanks as a member of the eventual AL Champion Rangers.
A few months later — nearly a year ago — the Yanks were attempting to lure Lee to the Bronx again. They didn’t quite put on the full court press, but all indications were that the Yanks offered Lee six years at $22 million with a seventh year player option for $16 million. For reasons of dollars and comfort, Lee went to the Phillies instead. Maybe the Rangers led to Lee’s decision; maybe he just wanted to go back to Philadelphia. Either way, neither team escaped their respective Division Series match-ups this year, and the Yanks are still struggling to find another starting pitcher.
For the Yankees, losing out on Cliff Lee seemed to indicate a sea change within the organization. Lee was, by all accounts, the best pitcher available either by trade or free agency, since CC Sabathia, and unless Cole Hamels hits the open market next season, it’s tough to find a comparative starter. The Yankees were willing to give up the farm, extend their budget to land Lee or both. But for the first time since Greg Maddux spurned a rebuilding Yankee team in the early 1990s to head to Atlanta, the Bombers were left empty-handed.
This year, the pitcher is kinda sorta out there. In 2011, after Lee left them empty-handed and Andy Pettitte retired, the Yanks somehow made it through the year with CC, A.J. Burnett, Phil Hughes, Freddy Garcia, Bartolo Colon and Ivan Nova. As things stand now, they’re gearing up to do to the same for 2012. I always thought they had another move in them last year, but they never found the right trade partner for a pitching upgrade. This winter, things are shaping up similarly.
The pitching is almost out there. Roy Oswalt, who hasn’t popped up in any rumors, is available. C.J. Wilson, another Texas ace, is looking for job security. Mark Buehrle recently landed with the Yankees South Miami Marlins. Maybe a few young pitchers such as Gio Gonzalez or John Danks could be had on the trade market. But none of these guys are that exciting. They’re supporting cast members, not aces, who carry a price tag that often exceeds their value.
Buehrle, in particular, strikes me as a guy the Yanks would consider. He signed a four-year deal worth $58 million with the Marlins, and the Yanks had only “early conversations” with Buehrle’s representatives. Yet, they passed even though he’s an innings eater with some AL success. Sure, his strike out numbers are down, but he’s thrived by keeping the bill in the park and on the ground. He might fall off a cliff, but he’s just as likely to continue to excel despite saber skepticism over his peripherals.
But the Yankees passed. They want a Cliff Lee type, a difference-maker, not an overpaid cog. They think they can approximate Buehrle’s 2012 production for $10 million less by using Freddy Garcia, and they have their eye on some elusive starter who might become available as they try to usher Manny Banuelos through their organization. Once, the Yanks overpaid for A.J. Burnett because they needed a pitcher. Now, they’re willing to wait and wait and wait for the next must-have Cliff Lee type. It might be a prudent move, but for a fan base used to getting what they want (and need), it makes for a slow wait. I almost miss those Yankees who dove right in. Almost.
Just 6 days 'til pitchers and catchers report.
