As has been the norm over the past few years, it appears the Yankees will be carrying 13 position players and 12 pitchers on their 25-man roster. In some ways, this is a luxury the Yankees can afford. As we mentioned earlier this week, the Yanks have a bit of roster flexibility on the offensive side, with backups Duncan and Betemit able to play multiple positions if needed.
If the team is going to carry 12 pitchers, some will argue that one of them has to be a lefty. I’m not quite sure I buy into that logic. There are a couple of questions that go along with this, which I’m not sure I’m able to answer.
First, what is the purpose of having a lefty reliever? Well, like having a lefty in the rotation, one purpose is to keep the opposition off balance. However, I’m not sure how much of a difference that makes. Sure, you see lefties less often than righties, but ballplayers surely see enough of them that they’re not going to be overly affected merely by seeing someone throw with their left arm.
It seems that we’ve come to the consensus of late that the purpose of a lefty reliever is to come in and face “tough lefties.” Of course, there is plenty of debate about this as well. To the Yankees, this issue might be a bit more paramount, since they see David Ortiz multiple times per year. There are other big lefties in the AL East, too, including Carl Crawford, Carlos Pena, and Nick Markakis. In addition, Matt Stairs and Brian Roberts have favorable splits vs. righties, and there’s always J.D. Drew, who could go out and have a year like he did in 2004. And then there are the other lefties the Yanks face from time to time, like Jim Thome, Travis Hafner, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau, Jack Cust, Yankee-killer Garrett Anderson, and soon to be Alex Gordon.
So the second question is, does the value of having a better chance of getting these guys out justify a lefty reliever’s place on the 25-man roster, and more specifically, on the 12-man pitching staff? After all, none of these aforementioned lefties hit back-to-back in their respective batting orders. This leaves few options for the deployment of a lefty reliever if there are multiple strong lefties in a lineup. You either have him face one or the other, or you have him pitch to the righty in between. And since these lefties, for the most part, hit at the front or heart of their order, you can bet the righty in the middle is going to be a masher himself.
Clearly, the overriding criteria for a lefty reliever is that he fare well against lefty hitters. Bonus points go to the lefty who can also hold his own against righties. Problem is, pitchers who fit this description are rare. Combined with the general volatility of relief pitchers, it makes the search of an effective lefty arm sometimes grueling.
Two lefty relievers remain on the free agent market: Trever Miller and Jeremy Affeldt. After seeing mediocre colleagues Ron Mahay and J.C. Romero pull down some serious dollars, the remaining two are sure to be holding out for similar deals. And while it may be tempting to pick up one of them, I don’t think either will make much of a difference.
Miller had an off year in 2007 after quite a few above-average years. A quick glance might suggest that he’s a viable bounce-back candidate — I thought the same thing when I pulled up his Baseball Reference page. However, let’s look at the numbers beyond the ERA.
The past two years, he’s struck out about a batter per inning, which is always nice from a reliever. However, this is a recent trend. Before 2006, he had never hit the strikeout-per-inning mark, though he hovered at about seven per nine for most of his career. Also, since 2000 he hasn’t allowed more hits than innings pitched. Ah, but he’s got the blemish: terrible walk rate. Or at least inconsistent. He was able to keep his walks per nine below 3.00 in two seasons — 2004 and 2006 — and he was stellar at those times. The other years, though, he’s been above 4.00. I don’t know about you, but I’ve seen enough of that garbage from our pen.
His splits against lefties in 2004 and 2006, unsurprisingly, were excellent. He even had decent splits last year, when he was pretty much crap. On his “off” years, though, he’s had trouble keeping his OPS below .700 against lefties. And, though it all, one theme remains consistent, even in his “on” years: he gives up WAY too many bombs against lefties. Doubles and bombs. Exactly what you don’t want from a reliever.
If you’re as sick of me of relievers walking everyone, you won’t even look at Affeldt. His BB/9 — even in 2007, when he had a decent year — is consistently over 4.50. He doesn’t strike out a ton of guys, either, which means that he’s allowing a lot of contact. Contact and walks. Not good. This has resulted in him allowing over a hit per inning every year of his career — except his contract year, of course. His splits are all over the place, but on the whole they’re not good against lefties at all.
I’d rather have no lefties in the pen than sign either of these guys. If Miller would accept a one-year deal, then maybe I’d consider, but it’s doubtful he’d do that. That leaves the Yanks with internal options: Sean Henn, Kei Igawa, Chase Wright, and possibly Ben Kozlowski, if they’re able to bring him back on a minor-league deal.
Henn survived the winter cuts and is out of options, so he’s likely to get the first nod. I’m not sure what the team’s plans for Igawa are, but starting him off in Scranton seems the ideal scenario. Chase Wright posted decent lefty/righty splits in AA, so there’s a chance he could serve as a bullpen lefty in the future. But, since he struggled at the AAA level, there’s little chance he breaks camp with the team.
Personally, I’d rather carry an all-righty bullpen than hand the spot to Miller, Affeldt, or Henn. It appears the Yanks are hearing those sentiments on the former two, but not on Henn. He’s probably going to have to fail at the Major League level again before the Yankees sever ties — and who knows how many games he’ll screw up by that point?
The overall idea is, why carry a lefty reliever if you can’t find any such players who can serve the purpose of having a lefty in the pen? It makes no sense to me.
Mark Prior is every baseball fan’s fantasy: A free agent pitcher with a career Major League K/9 IP of 10.37 and a career ERA of 3.51.
Of course, the flip side of that fantasy is Mark Prior’s current nightmare. Since carrying to the Cubs to within one bad play by their short stop of a World Series berth and throwing 235 innings in the process, Mark Prior has never been healthy. Since the end of 2005, he’s thrown just 43.2 innings of baseball, and after shoulder surgery last year, at the age of 27, Prior is trying to prove himself all over again.
For Yankee fans, Mark Prior would be everything Johan Santana, the other object of our dreams, is not. Prior is no sure thing. We don’t know how his arm will hold up or what sort of stuff he’ll have after an extensive rehab period. But he’s also carries a “low risk, very high reward” potential. So why not give him a contract offer and hope that, when he returns in May or June, he can throw four months of solid baseball?
Well, not so fast, says Hank Steinbrenner, the new Voice of the Yankees. In an article that says the Yankees have “an outside chance” at acquiring Johan Santana – is that even news anymore anyway? – Steinbrenner said the Yanks are going to pass on Prior. “We kind of looked into it, but at this point, no,” he said, sounding much like a 16-year-old girl.
I’m not sure why the Yanks are passing on Prior. Perhaps he’s indicated that he doesn’t want to come to New York or pitch in the American League. If that’s the case, I don’t blame him. New York isn’t exactly the city to come to if you carry around the potential of a Mark Prior but need some time to prove your health and ability.
But if the Yanks are passing on Mark Prior for reasons not related to his health, they’re probably making a little bit of a mistake. They’ve got nothing to lose from having Prior around and everything to gain.
Won’t he just shut up?
Roger has denied every allegation brought to the table. So as a fan my thought is that Roger will find a way in short order to organize a legal team to guarantee a retraction of the allegations made, a public apology is made, and his name is completely cleared. If he doesn’t do that then there aren’t many options as a fan for me other than to believe his career 192 wins and 3 Cy Youngs he won prior to 1997 were the end. From that point on the numbers were attained through using PED’s. Just like I stated about Jose, if that is the case with Roger, the 4 Cy Youngs should go to the rightful winners and the numbers should go away if he cannot refute the accusations.
Innocent until proven guilty? Or guilty — based on the testimony of one man — until proven innocent? Think what you will about Roger. Hell, I’ll concede that it’s in a way naive to dismiss the possibility that McNamee’s testimony is the truth. However, the burden is not on Roger. He’s accused without a shred of hard evidence. Any court in the land would throw the case out as it currently stands. Only when we see further evidence of his use should we even begin to consider the idea of him forfeiting his awards.
Even if Roger did assemble a legal team to demand a retraction from McNamee, he in all likelihood wouldn’t get it. Schilling himself explains exactly why:
The two men that fingered multiple players, from my understanding, both testified with immunity, but only if they told the truth. So these guys had every reason in the world to NOT lie.
So if McNamee was to retract his testimony, then he lied. Which means he likely spends time in the slammer. His entire reason for giving up Roger and Andy was to avoid just that. So why would he cave to Roger’s legal team? The outcome would end up being the same as if he didn’t give up any names at all.
There’s been a lot of talk of players’ legal rights in this case, and as a layman, I’m not in tune with much of it. But I have to think that McNamee won’t retract and apologize.
But this is all beyond the point. Roger shouldn’t have to defend himself until he’s presented with evidence that compels him to do so. The testimony of one man — no matter the accuracy of any other aspect of his testimony — is not sufficient evidence. At the very least, he needs a corroborating story. And to date, we’ve seen none.
Yet (yes, there’s more), Schilling tries to equate Clemens with Bonds:
Whatever happens now though, can you separate what Barry is accused of from what Roger is accused of?
Yes. There weren’t dumpsters full of doping schedules for Roger. There was no BALCO lab. There was no Game of Shadows. There is one man and his word. That is all.
I’m sorry. I don’t want to keep talking about steroids, and I really don’t want to talk about Curt Schilling. But this is really about neither. It’s about hearsay, justice, and windbags with an audience spouting off unfounded opinions.
We’re a day or two late on this one, but MLB Trade Rumors linked to this article in the Dominican daily Listin Diario about Melky Cabrera. The Yankees, it seems, have invoked the fatigue clause and have ordered Melky to sit out Winter Ball this year. While the paper in Spanish speculates that this move may be a part of any deal for Johan Santana, the truth is that Melky faded pretty badly down the stretch last year and probably shouldn’t be playing baseball until Spring Training. · (8) ·
Pardon me while I rant about something barely related to the Yankees for a few minutes…
On the same day that the friend-of-free-media and Russian President Vladimir Putin won Time Man of the Year honors, the NCAA released their new Live Blogging Policy. This is such a ridiculous step toward censorship. It’s rather shocking.
As The Big Lead noted, the NCAA will somehow try to enforce rather stringent live blogging rules. For football games, reporters are graciously allowed three updates per quarter and one at halftime; for basketball, it’s five times per half, once at halftime and twice per OT period; and for baseball, it’s just once an inning. The full draconian rules are available at the NCAA’s site as a PDF. This is a sad day for bloggers everywhere.
Ostensibly, the NCAA is worried about blogs somehow replacing live broadcasts of the game. If some blogger is allowed to update their live blog as often as they want, what’s stopping them from giving a text version of the play-by-play?
In reality, that’s a pretty weak argument. No one I know is going to sit a computer refreshing a blog while reading the play-by-play for the BCS Championship game. And if I were the NCAA, I’d be much more concerned with those online who are actively engaging in copyright infringing retransmissions of NCAA telecasts.
Blogs serve a journalistic purpose and provide an outlet for fans to share their common interest. Alienating sports sites and attempting to limit their post frequency during games is not only a form of censorship, but it’s bad business practice as well.
Alex Rodriguez isn’t shy about his association with the Southwest Miami Boys & Girls Club — he has a field there named after him. And now he’ll have the $1.5 million Alex Rodriguez Education Center, which projects to open in April. “It will include a state-of-the-art computer laboratory, an area for Internet use, classrooms for homework study and a huge teen center, where the older kids can meet.” A-Rod himself kicked in a third of the overall costs.
Say what you will about his character and his intentions, but nothing bad can be strewn from this. Helping underprivileged kids is one of the most noble things someone can do, no matter if their intention is to enhance their image, or if it’s true altruism. · (10) ·
Caught this bit on Johan and the Sawks in this morning’s Pioneer Press (not sure if you have to register every time — I did this time around, under the name Abe North). It’s nothing earth-shattering, though it does imply that the Twins are holding out for Lester and Ellsbury, as they damn well should.
Supposedly, Dan Haren set the bar high in a prospects-for-talent exchange. I don’t really buy into that, but it’s not my opinion that matters. The only one who can decide the price for Santana is Bill Smith. Thankfully, he’s not caving at this point, and seemingly won’t trade the lefty to the Sawks unless Ellsbury and Lester are included.
My question: How desperate are the Twins to unload Santana? Are they fronting now, hoping to get the Sox to bid against themselves and dish both players? Or are they asking for the moon because they’d be content to head into the season with Santana at the top of the rotation?
The longer the Red Sox hold out, the better perspective we’ll get on the actual landscape. This is because the Sox are in a position where their need isn’t necessarily to get Santana — their rotation will be one of, if not the tops in the AL with or without him — but rather to keep him away from the Yankees. They’ve got a standing offer that (I think) they’re pretty sure Minnesota won’t accept. But should the Yanks raise the stakes, they could easily improve the offer.
Unfortunately, by naming so many untouchable players, the Yankees aren’t doing themselves any favors. Not that I disagree with what’s going on. Under no scenario would I dish Hughes and Kennedy. But the constant lists of untouchables certainly creates a level of ill will in negotiations. This was brought up, actually, by Jim Callis in an ESPN chat:
Yankees fans and some of the local media seem to have this notion that clubs ask the Yankees for more than they ask for other teams for. But if you talk to some of the teams that try to trade with New York, they’ll tell you that the Yankees declare far too many untouchables.
If the Twins are bluffing, we could see a mad scramble for Santana in January. If not, I don’t see either the Red Sox or Yanks going out of their ways to improve their offers. Both teams, I think, would be content to see him open the season in Minnesota.
I was thinking this morning: Are the Yanks basically done with the off-season? It seems so. With six starting pitchers, a slew of relievers and potential relievers, a decent number of outfielders, and an entire infield save for a definite first baseman. Check it.
1B: Shelley/Betemit/eventually Miranda
That’s only 12 guys (not counting Miranda, who will start the season in AAA). Since we’re not going with 13 pitchers, there’s still room for one more guy on the roster. The Yanks have done plenty fine with one utility infielder for the past few years, so I’d hope they add an outfielder — unless Betemit is getting the bulk of the time at first. In which case having someone like Alberto Gonzalez on the roster would be useful.
That’s six, so six relievers:
And then you have the next three slots for the following players: Jon Albaladejo, Ross Ohlendorf, Chris Britton, Brian Bruney, Edwar Ramirez, Jose Veras, Chase Wright, Sean Henn, Kei Igawa, Jeff Karstens, Darrell Rasner, Scott Patterson, and then the converted starter-types: Alan Horne, Jeff Marquez, Steven “Don’t Call Me” White. Further, we should have access to J.B. Cox and Marc Melancon by late May/early June, as they’ll be ready for Opening Day, and will likely open in Tampa.
So what’s left of the off-season for the Yanks is basically compiling a decent minor-league invite list, though Mark Newman thinks that “[MiL free agents] don’t want to sign with us for obvious reasons.” That being less of a chance for playing time. A minor-league free agent has a far better shot of making, say, Houston’s roster than the Yanks.
Here’s the only question I’m left with: Do you carry all six starters from the beginning, or do you let one of them — presumably IPK — work out in the minors a bit so you can experiment with four relievers at a time, rather than three?