Archive for Curtis Granderson
Hitting the opposite way a key for Granderson in 2010
Posted by: | Comments
In previewing Curtis Granderson’s season, I noted that his rebound to 2008 levels is essential for the Yankees offense. That would represent a replica of Johnny Damon’s 2009 season, making Granderson the perfect fill-in. How, though, will he return to those levels? Clearly, hitting lefties better is a good start. But what then? Where else was Granderson deficient in 2009?
Throughout his career, Granderson has hit the ball well to left field. In fact, during his first full-season in 2006 he destroyed the ball to the opposite field, hitting .388 with a .320 ISO in 107 balls directed that way. His average to left dipped a bit during his breakout 2007 season, to .265, but he still hit for plenty of power, a .184 ISO. This is the season, though, during which he started to hit for more power to right. HIs ISO when pulling went from .229 in 2006 to .441 in 2007. In 2008 Granderson again hit well to the opposite field, posting a .327 BA and .292 ISO. This was, at least in part, because he hit 25.5 percent of his balls in play that way, similar to his 24.6 percent mark from 2006. He hit 20.5 percent the opposite way in 2007.
In 2009 Granderson got back to his 2007 level distribution, hitting 21.6 percent of his balls in play the opposite way. His numbers on those balls in play dropped greatly, too, a .179 batting average and a .047 ISO. Of course, as in his 2007 season, his numbers when pulling spiked, a .385 BA and .405 ISO. Even better for him, he hit 259 balls that way, far more than at any point of his career, representing 52.3 percent of his balls in play. Yet the net effect was negative, and Granderson posted the worst BA and OBP of his career.
Granderson’s poor contact to the opposite field in 2009 shows in his batted ball splits. He hit a career high 73.6 percent fly balls to left, though it wasn’t terribly higher than his 70.8 percent mark in 2008. The difference, however, showed up in two other places. First, he hit 24.4 percent of those opposite field fly balls to the shortstop or third baseman. That means of the 79 fly balls he hit to left, 19 of them didn’t leave the infield. Even worse, zero of those 60 outfield fly balls left the yard. Granderson never flashed tremendous home run power to left, but he’s always put at least a couple out of the yard. Not in 2009.
Furthermore, Granderson hit a scant few ground balls to the left side, which likely sapped his batting average (since ground balls go for hits more often than fly balls). He hit just 8.5 percent ground balls the opposite way, about half his percentage from 2008. Also, though not as significant, he also posted a three-year low in infield hit percentage to the left side. Since most infield hits go in that direction, he further hurt his average.
While Granderson’s issues against lefties are well-documented and easily accessible, his numbers when hitting the opposite way also present cause for concern. During his run from 2006 through 2008 Granderson generally hit well the opposite way; even in his pull-happy 2007 he still far outperformed his 2009 marks. We’ve often heard that the left field porch at Yankee Stadium could help Granderson, but perhaps it could work against him. If he starts trying to put balls there it could hurt his numbers going the opposite way. As we’ve seen, his inability to hit that way in 2009 played a prominent role in his poor performance.
Photo credit: Gene J. Puskar/AP
2010 Season Preview: Banking on another rebound candidate
Posted by: | Comments
In 2008 the Yankees posted their worst offensive season in recent memory. The unit finished seventh in the AL in runs scored, after finishing in the top five, and usually in the top three, since their playoff ran began. Injuries played a large role in the decline. Hideki Matsui missed the entire second half, as did Jorge Posada. Even Alex Rodriguez spent three weeks on the DL, and many think that Derek Jeter played through a wrist injury. The team also saw diminished production from a couple of its younger players, Robinson Cano and Melky Cabrera. In order to succeed in 2009, the Yankees needed bounce back seasons from more than one of those players.
When Brian Cashman traded for Nick Swisher that November, he placed an even deeper reliance on the team returning to form. Not only did he need rebounds from his own players, but now needed one from an incoming player. He didn’t place a huge bet on Swisher — he cost the team only spare parts, players who wouldn’t have had a role on any future Yankees team. But at the time he was slated to start at first base, leaving the lineup with not only five players who needed to rebound, but also one, Xavier Nady, who almost certainly wouldn’t repeat his 2008 success. It was a pretty big gamble, though mitigated when the Yanks acquired Mark Teixeira later that winter.
Somehow, the plan worked out on all fronts. While Rodriguez missed the first month of the season, Posada missed a couple of weeks, and Matsui couldn’t play the field, the Yankees saw each of their rebound candidates take that step forward. This off-season Cashman cashed in a few of those chips, letting Hideki Matsui leave as a free agent and trading Melky Cabrera in the Javy Vazquez trade. Yet he apparently enjoys picking up players coming off down years, as his first major move this winter was to acquire Curtis Granderson from the Tigers. The case is a bit different than Swisher’s, mainly because the Yankees paid a lot more for Granderson, but the rebound necessity remains.
Granderson’s 2009 offensive season looks more like a follow-up to his 2006 campaign rather than his 2008. In 2006 he put his potential on display as a 25-year-old, hitting .260/.335/.438, good for a .333 wOBA while playing a mean center field. In 2009 he hit .249/.327/.453 while playing a just above average center field. He slightly improve his walk rate from 2006, to 10.1 percent from 9.7, and also increased his ISO from .178 to .204. If he had posted his 2009 line in 2007 we would have thought it completely normal. His defense regressed, but he made improvements in other areas. Even his batting average can be explained by a poor BABIP, .275, down from .333 in 2006.
Of course, 2009 did not come directly after 2006. Instead, Granderson posted an elite season in 2007, hitting .302/.361/.552, a .395 wOBA. He also continued to track down more fly balls than his fellow center fielders. His WAR that season, 7.3, was more than a win better than the next highest center fielder, Aaron Rowand at 6.1. He followed that with a quality 2008 campaign in which he hit .280/.365/.494, a .374 wOBA, though his defense dipped a bit. That dropped him in the WAR rankings, though his offensive component still ranked fifth among his peers. It was good enough, in other words, that his performance in 2009 came as a surprise.
The good news for the Yankees is that even if he repeats his 2009 he’ll still post a more valuable season than Melky Cabrera did. Of course, the Yankees are looking for a bit more than that, since Granderson, along with Nick Johnson, is charged with replacing two of the heavier bats from the 2009 Yankees. A return to his 2008 form seems a feasible expectation, though his 2007 appears to be an outlier in almost every sense. Still, a.374 wOBA, at .280/.365/.494, would essentially replace Damon’s 2009 production.
How do the projection systems see it?
Click for larger
Unsurprisingly, this checks in right around Granderson’s career line of .272/.344/.484. It would represent a modest improvement over his 2009, but when the Yankees traded their No. 2 prospect for him in December they likely expected more. I’m confident Granderson can deliver, too. He clearly has the tools, and now he’s surrounded by much better hitters than in the Detroit lineup. He’ll also face a lot less pressure as he moves from the leadoff spot to the bottom of the order (though I think there are worse ideas than trying him in the five hole).
The gamble on Granderson is clear. Cash in two winning chips, Matsui and Cabrera, and put another one down on the table. Again, because of what theYankees surrendered its a bit bigger gamble than they placed last year, but I think still a winnable one. If it does pay off, the Yankees will reap the benefits not only in 2010, but also over the next few years of Granderson’s contract.
Photo credit: Gene J. Puskar/AP
The whole picture for the No. 2 hitter
Posted by: | CommentsOver the past few days we’ve looked at a few aspects of a quality No. 2 hitter. We want someone who will get on base and set the table for the heart of the order, but who also won’t ground into double plays when the leadoff man reaches. As it turns out, the guy who gets on base more grounds into far more double plays. Will those twin killings hurt the team more than his presence on the base paths helps it?
Since we’re working with the theoretical here I’ll use the Bill James projections, mostly because they assume a greater run environment. We really could have used any system, though, since we need only compare the systems to themselves.
Getting on base for Teixeira
Bill James projects Granderson to reach base in 35.3 percent of his plate appearances, and Johnson to reach in 41.4 percent. To make things easier, we’ll scale this to 600 plate appearances, which lies between each of their projections. That means Johnson would reach 248 times to Granderson’s 212. Beyond the obvious observation that Johnson would reach base 36 more times than Granderson, it also represents some fraction of those 36 where Granderson would end an inning.
That last point, I think, is sometimes overlooked when discussing players reaching base. Clearly, Johnson won’t keep 36 innings going where Granderson would end one. But if that’s true for even a third of them, it’s a dozen innings where Teixeira hits with a man on base rather than starting the next inning with the bases empty. Over his career Teixeira has hit .295/.400/.555 with men on base and .285/.357/.535 with the bases empty. Those dozen situations, then, could lead to a few extra runs over the course of a season.
Keeping Jeter on the base paths
Given the same number of plate appearances, we know Johnson will make fewer outs than Granderson. Unfortunately, sometimes the outs Johnson makes count double. He has come to the plate 594 times in his career facing a double play chance, and has hit into it 72 times, or 12.1 percent of the time. How much, then, does this offset his ability to get on base?
The Bill James projections peg Jeter for 152 singles and 64 walks, or 216 times reaching first base. It also projects him to bat 631 times, so we need to scale down the number to 600 PA, which puts it at 205 times. At a 12.1 percent GIDP rate, Johnson would erase Jeter 26 times. Granderson, however, grounds into a double play just 4.4 percent of the time, so he would erase Jeter only 9 times. That’s 17 additional instances, or 34 additional outs, for Johnson.
We often say that the most important thing a player can do at bat is not make an out. Each team gets only 27 outs per game, and only three before they have to clear the bases and start over, so those outs are the most valuable assets in the game. Using straight OBP in a 600 PA environment, we can expect Johnson to make 352 outs and Granderson 388. Once we add in their twin killings, though, we see that Johnson projects to make 378 outs and Granderson 397 — and that’s just considering Jeter’s instances of reaching first base.
More than one way to think about it
Clearly, the double play situation does not bode well for Johnson. He still projects to make fewer outs than Granderson, but the double plays make that a lot closer. Like all baseball issues, however, there are plenty more ways to look at the comparison.
Yes, Johnson might erase Jeter in 26 of the 205 times he reaches first base. No one wants to see that. But the flip side presents the number of times both Jeter and Johnson will reach base. Scaled to 600 PA, Jeter figures to reach base, but not hit a home run, 237 times. Holding consistent Johnson’s .414 OBP, that means that 98 times Teixeira will come to the plate either with both Jeter and Johnson on base, or otherwise with Johnson on base with Jeter sitting on the bench and a run on the board. With Granderson that figure falls to 84 instances.
Granderson, however, has a bit more power than Johnson right now. Scaled to 600 PA, Granderson projects to hit 51 extra base hits, which represents 8.5 percent of his plate appearances. Then again, Johnson projects to hit 49 extra base hits when scaled to 600 PA, so it might not be that big a difference. The enormous caveat here is that we’re scaling down Granderson’s and scaling up Johnson’s. I know it shouldn’t make a huge difference, but I feel a bit more comfortable with the former.
What about their results once they’ve reached base? According to Baseball Prospectus’s EQBRR, Granderson added 1.9 runs on the base paths. That doesn’t seem like a huge amount, especially for a player with his speed. Then again, his OBP fell to .330, which certainly plays a part. In 2008, when his OBP was .365, Granderson generated 5.8 runs on the base paths. Johnson was worth -2.1 runs on the bases, which doesn’t seem that bad considering his lack of speed. Still, we’re looking at something like a seven-run swing at 600 PA.
So who hits second?
From all indications, it’s Johnson. At this point, with a clean slate, I think that’s the right call. Even when factoring in double plays he makes fewer outs than Granderson, which means more opportunities to hit with men on base for Teixeira and A-Rod. At the outset that should be the No. 1 concern.
Of course, if the DPs become a problem, they could consider a swap. Granderson doesn’t figure to be a black hole in the two hole by any stretch. He can get around the bases, and he won’t erase Jeter too many times. But with the presence of Johnson on the roster, he’s the second best man for the job.
Avoiding the twin killing in the two hole
Posted by: | CommentsIn discussing the merits of a No. 2 hitter, I hit on the value of setting the table. Because Nick Johnson gets on base at a better clip than the other candidates, he’ll create more opportunities for Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez to hit with men on base. But, while getting on base factors prominently into the quality of a No. 2 hitter, other issues can change the situation. For instance, what if the No. 2 hitter, who gets on base at a high clip, also grounds into a lot of double plays? Wouldn’t that sap his value?
About a year ago, while he was working with Team USA, I made a further argument for Derek Jeter the leadoff hitter. Beyond the reasons we’d heard a thousand times — Jeter got on base more than Damon while Damon had more power than Jeter — I thought another factor played prominently. In 2008 Jeter hit into 24 double plays, the highest number of his career. Many times, I’m sure, these double plays came after Damon reached safely. Damon, though, is historically good at avoiding double plays. Flipping the two, then, seemed obvious.
Just a few days after that post, Joe Girardi announced that he would make that very flip. The results, as we saw, reflected the projection. Jeter hit into fewer double plays. Damon hit into more, but that’s going to happen when the guy in front of you gets on base 40 percent of the time. This raises an interesting point. We don’t learn much from raw GIDP numbers, because they’re not placed in any context. What we seek is some kind of rate for GIDP — how many times the player hit into a double play when presented the opportunity. That seems like relevant information for a No.2 hitter.
Thankfully, Baseball Reference does have information about double play opportunities (under More Stats, then Situational Hitting).* So, among Johnson, Curtis Granderson, and Robinson Cano, who has hit into the most double plays per opportunity? We’ll add in Damon for comparison.
*When I originally wrote this article, I had no idea this existed. Thanks to B-R founder Sean Forman for pointing me in the right direction. This table is totally accurate.
| Player | GDP | Opp | Pct. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Johnson | 72 | 594 | 12.1 |
| Granderson | 18 | 410 | 4.4 |
| Cano | 94 | 670 | 14.0 |
| Damon | 84 | 1591 | 5.3 |
Does Johnson’s GIDP propensity offset his better on-base skills? Sound like a good idea for another follow-up article.
Sending Teixeira to bat with men on base
Posted by: | CommentsSimple concepts dictate baseball lineup construction. The top two hitters in the order get in base so that the heavier hitters in the middle of the lineup can drive them in. This is why we typically see the best power bats in the 3-4-5 spots, while the lighter hitting players bat on either side. Teams can run into problems, however, in filling the first two spots.
Again, the primary goal of the first two hitters is to get on base for the power hitters. That gives the heavier bats more opportunities to knock in runs. The problem in filling the first two spots relates back to those power guys. Oftentimes they’re also the best on-base guys on the team. In fact, on-base skills don’t come easy to players who lack power. Among active players, only five have a career OBP over .350 and a career ISO under .120: Luis Castillo, Chone Figgins, Jason Kendall, Mark Loretta, and Ichiro. Raising the ISO to .150 adds only eight names (including Derek Jeter). This is not an easy to find skill, on-base without power.
As a substitute for on-base skill, we often see teams place speedy hitters in the first and second slots. The rationale goes, so I assume, that they can advance more bases, both by stealing and by taking the extra bag on a base hit. The problem, of course, is that they don’t get on base a lot in the first place, so they can’t swipe or take an extra bag very often. Even then, with the heart of the order due up, the most important thing remains having runners on base. I’d far rather have a slow runner on base 40 percent of the time than a fast runner on base 34 percent.
This concept applies to one of the few decisions the Yankees must make in spring training. While Brian Cashman has stated his desire to have Nick Johnson hit second, it doesn’t appear to be a given at this point. It should be, but it’s not. The alternatives include Curtis Granderson and, to a lesser extent, Robinson Cano. Both might be solid No. 2 hitters, but with Johnson on the roster they’re not the best options. WIth Jeter and Johnson setting the table, Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez will come to bat with more men on base.
Photo credit: Eric Gay/AP
To illustrate this point, let’s take an ideal scenario. Jeter and Johnson both hit in front of Teixeira for all of Teixeira’s plate appearances, and they OBP somewhere around their 2009 totals, .400 and .420. Running a quick percentage check, this means that Teixeira would come to bat with both runners on 16.8 percent of the time, and at least one runner on about 65 percent of the time. Given Teixeira’s 707 plate appearances from 2009, that means he’d come to bat with at least one runner on 460 times, and two runners on 119 times.
(This, of course, discounts the double play, but it also discounts the No. 9 hitter getting on. Let’s call it a wash for now, though if someone wants to run the numbers be my guest.)
Last year, with Jeter’s .400 OBP and Damon’s .365, Teixeira had a 14.6 percent chance of coming to the plate with both runners on, or 62 percent with at least one runner on. That gives him a theoretical 438 PA with a runner on base, and 103 with two runners on . His actual number of plate appearances with a runner on base was 371, a bit below the theoretical mark. This is due to double plays — Damon hit into nine last year — instances where Jeter made the last out of the inning, and times when Damon hit a home run. We also can’t expect the numbers to line up exactly.
Assuming an even ratio of theoretical plate appearances with a runner on to the actual number, that would give Teixeira 389 PA this season with at least one runner on, an increase of 18 instances. In other words, that’s 18 more opportunities for a double or home run to plate an extra run. Then there’s the cumulative effect. If Jeter and Johnson getting on base increases Teixeira’s chances of success, that can further increase A-Rod’s chances of success. We can continue passing the buck down the lineup.
If Granderson recovers to his 2008 form, he’s essentially a clone of Damon. While that’s good, and while he’ll be able to take extra bases that Johnson will not, I think that the added plate appearances give the Yankees a bigger advantage. It means more opportunities for Tex and A-Rod. While Granderson might be able to score from second, or even first, in a few more instances than Johnson, he won’t be on base as much and therefore won’t get as many opportunities.
Joe Girardi has many options when filling out his lineup card, especially in the No. 2 spot. The three players who could hit there each bring a different skill to the table. Cano can advance runners with base hits and hit them in with power. Johnson can get on base to set the table and also hits for decent average (hopefully his power recovers a bit). Granderson can clear the bases with power and circle them with speed. Given the number of times he figures to be on base, I think Johnson is the choice here. The thought of Teixeira and A-Rod coming to bat with more runners on base should make any Yankees fan salivate.
Lining a pitch up the middle is not progress
Posted by: | CommentsCurtis Granderson can help a ball club in a number of ways. He can play a solid center field. He can hit for power. He can get on base at an above-average clip, and afterward he can motor around the bases. But as we learned in 2009, the mere ability to do something doesn’t necessarily bring results. Granderson can get on base at an above-average clip, but in 2009 he didn’t. Since he’s done it before, we don’t say that he can’t, but rather that he didn’t. In the same way, just because he hasn’t hit lefties well in the past doesn’t mean he can’t.
Photo credit: Kathy Willens/AP
It appears that questions about Granderson’s ability to hit lefties will surround him this spring. We’ve already heard stories about him working with Kevin Long on ways to better approach lefty pitchers. Those are encouraging, but far from a sign that Granderson will put his woes behind him. Still, that won’t stop certain newspapers from taking one small detail and making a huge deal out of it. Apparently, according to the NY Post, hitting a line drive in batting practice off Kei Igawa represents progress. Oh, the crazy storylines of the spring.
I agree with SG’s statement that Granderson will probably never hit well against lefties, but that he can certainly outperform his career numbers to this point. One aspect of splits that often goes unmentioned is the small sample they provide. Granderson has come to bat 2,896 times in his career, but only 24 percent of those have come against lefties. That leaves his total at 685, or just under a full season’s worth of plate appearances. We don’t judge a player based on a single year of his career, so why would we judge Granderson based on one year’s worth of data?
Because of this small sample against lefties, we need to regress the figures in order to get a better idea of Granderson’s true skill against lefties. Thankfully, Matt Klaassen of FanGraphs already did the calculation, which adds 1,000 plate appearance of league average splits to Granderson’s existing 685 PA. If Granderson hits to his CHONE projected .359 wOBA, we can expect that to be .374 against righties and .311 against lefties. That .311 number is still below average, and it’s even blow the .323 wOBA he posted against lefties in 2008. It is, however, a bit more optimistic than CAIRO, which pegs him at .299 against lefties, and certainly better than his .266 career wOBA split.
Deliberate and focussed practice could help Granderson even further against lefties. Again, echoing SG, we can’t really expect Granderson to make leaps in his split figures, but it’s certainly possible. We saw such a transformation first hand in Paul O’Neill. While in Cincinnati O’Neill hit lefties poorly, routinely posting OPS numbers in the .500 range. Even in his first year with the Yankees he struggled against lefties. But then, at age 31, he came around, posting OPS numbers in the .700 range or better for the next five seasons. We might set ourselves up for disappointment by expecting Granderson to make the same transformation, but we know that it is certainly possible.
The discussion of Granderson’s skills and results against lefties reminds me of what a good all-around player he is. We’re not questioning his defense, his speed, or his ability to get on base. Instead, we’re focussed on his performance in fewer than a quarter of his plate appearances. I think we’ll all be satisfied with his performance in the other 75 percent, and maybe even a bit more satisfied with that 25 percent sample.
Link Dump: Granderson, Hughes, DePaula
Posted by: | CommentsSome stuff worth mentioning, but not worth their own posts…
Curtis Granderson gets contacts
Despite having 20/30 vision, new centerfielder Curtis Granderson will be wearing contacts for the first time in his career this season. “They said, ‘Your vision is 20/30, so let’s see if we can improve it,’” said Granderson. “For most people, they’d let it go, but since we can possibly make me see better to hit, who knows. We’ll see.” They considered Lasik at one point, but I guess they didn’t see the need to go that far just yet. Neither side is using his eyesight as an excuse for Granderson’s struggles against lefties or pop ups or anything like that, they’re just looking to make an improvement wherever they can.
Phil Hughes is throwing changeups
About a week ago, we heard that the Phil Hughes was going to focus on developing his changeup this spring in an effort to boost his repertoire in anticipation of returning to the rotation. Of course, we’ve heard this before. During his bullpen session yesterday, Hughes threw about a dozen changeups (40 pitches total), and he’s going to continue doing so all through the exhibition season. Given his fastball-cutter-curveball trio, Hughes doesn’t need the change to be anything more than a show-me pitch to lefthanders, but if he can develop into something better than that, then great.
Yankees still in on Rafael DePaula
Even though he’s sitting on an offer from the Mariners, the Yankees are still trying to sign Dominican righty Rafael DePaula. The 17-year-old was suspended by MLB for a year because he apparently lied about his age, however his birthdate has since been confirmed and he’s free to sign with any team. DePaula stands 6′-3″ and has reportedly hit 97 in the past, which puts him in line for a seven figure payout. The largest bonus the Yanks have ever given to an amateur pitcher from Latin American is the $800,000 they gave Arodys Vizcaino back in 2007.
A look at the history of stadiums and stadium names
Wezen-Ball put together a great infographic showing each club’s stadium and it’s name, dating back to the 1800’s. I love stuff like this. So much I didn’t know…
Cashman: Granderson is the center fielder
Posted by: | Comments
Braaaaaaaains. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)
The latest motif out of Tampa has been the Yankees’ quiet Spring Training. Without a new manager or A-Rod’s PED revelations to rile up New York’s sports media world, most commentators and reporters don’t know what to do in this new controversy-free post-World Series era in which we live.
Of course, with no big stories to dwell, we simply overanalyze the little ones. This winter, we spent more time than we wish to count pondering who might play left field and what Johnny Damon’s future might hold. Now that this saga has ended, we can move on the next great debate: should Curtis Granderson play left or center field? What about Brett Gardner? In the grand scheme of the Yankees’ 2010 season, it won’t matter too much, but Spring Training is the time to find out.
Yesterday, though, an in appearance on Sirius XM’s MLB Home Plate Jody McDonald and Jim Bowden spoke to Brian Cashman about the Granderson position debate, and the Yanks’ GM virtually ended the discussion before it could drag on throughout March. “He’s our center fielder,” he said. “We traded for him to be our center fielder.” Cashman continued on for some time:
I think that what’s taken place is when you’re asked questions like ‘Is there a possibility of Gardner playing center?’ I’m like, well, if we feel Gardner makes us our best team with Gardner at center because we’re blessed to have two above average center fielders patrolling Yankee Stadium’s outfield out of the three man alignment. So we have [Nick] Swisher in right, Granderson in center and Gardner, assuming he holds it down and wins it, will be in left.
But Granderson’s our center fielder. He’s an above average center fielder and that’s why we acquired him. But to be quite honest if somebody asked, ‘Hey, but is it possible Brett Gardner might be a better center fielder?’ Our defensive metrics on Brett Gardner made him one of the elite center fielders in the game. I’m not saying he’s the top but he’s close to it.
So in fairness we acknowledge that but does that mean it’s the right thing to do to move Curtis Granderson over to left? I’m not saying that but I’m also open minded to say, alright, we’ve got a new player. We’re gonna see how our team fits and we’ll make decisions accordingly as we see things playing out. But Granderson’s our center fielder.”
It seems that the Yankees’ defensive metrics line up nicely with the argument I put forth last week when I suggested that the Yanks use Granderson in left and Gardner in center. Still, the team can’t be faulted for going with the career center fielder instead of the still-young Gardner. The tandem will cover a lot of ground in the outfield, and Granderson’s bat plays well in center.
Cashman’s discussion here also could be read as a tacit admission that Gardner is not a long-term solution to an outfield position on the Yanks. The team has been rumored to be interested in Carl Crawford, and the Yanks would rather not move Granderson from center to left and back to center again over the span of one or two seasons. He has a good enough glove to do it, but teams prefer consistency and predictability over the course of 162 games.
Meanwhile, during the same interview, Cashman cleared up another Spring Training mystery of sorts. He also told Bowden that Nick Johnson would bat second for the Yanks. Sticking a guy with an on-base percentage over .400 in front of Mark Teixeira and A-Rod is a recipe for runs, runs and more runs.
And so here we are, just under 40 days away from Opening Day, and the 2010 Yankees are coming into view. The team features a solid core of athletic players, some top pitchers and some heavy hitters to complement the best closer in all of baseball. Bring on the baseball.
Sticking the new guy in left field
Posted by: | CommentsSpring Training doesn’t officially start until later this week — tomorrow to be exact — but already, most players have descended upon Tampa. The core of the Yankee team is already working out at the team’s minor league complex, and the reporters are starting to settle into their Spring Training routines. Some semblance of order is returning to this crazy time we call the Hot Stove League.
In Tampa, all eyes are on the new guys, and that obsession thrusts Curtis Granderson, who just wants to fit in, into the spotlight. Other than the return of Javier Vazquez to serve as the team’s fourth starter, Granderson is the biggest acquisition, and he’s being asked to replace Johnny Damon in the lineup. Considering Damon’s departure involved stealing two bases on one play and being lauded as a key offensive piece to the Yanks, that’s no small feat.
So after an off-season during which we obsessed over left field and searched for ways the Yanks could fill a left field gap, the reporters asked Curtis Granderson about his take on the corner slot. Maybe he’ll be the one to take it, he said to MLB.com’s Bryan Hoch. “People forget that I came up as a left fielder,” Granderson said yesterday. “In the Minor Leagues all the way up to Double-A, I didn’t start playing center field consistently until my second year in the Minors. Even when I came to the big leagues, I played a few games in left. I have no problem going back over there if that happens to be.”
It seems so simple, but does it make sense for the Yanks? In essence, the team would be shifting Brett Gardner to center field while deploying Curtis Granderson as the left fielder. On days in which the Yanks are facing a lefty and want to rest Gardner, they can slide Granderson to center and use Randy Winn, Marcus Thames or someone else in left. Granderson is versatile enough and comfortable enough to make the move.
The numbers too bear out this alignment. Playing his home games in spacious Comerica Park, Granderson has generally been an above-average center fielder. He put up double-digit UZR totals in 2006 and 2007 before slipping below 0 in 2008. He rebounded last year with a 1.6 mark, and we can assume that he would be as good if not better covering ground in left. Brett Gardner meanwhile has shined as a center fielder. In limited duty, he put up a 9.5 mark in 2008 and a 7.2 mark in 2009.
As for the guys they would be replacing, a duo of Granderson in left and Gardner in center would far outshine Johnny Damon and Melky Cabrera. Damon, after two disastrous years in center with the Yanks, had an above-average full-season showing in 2008 as a left fielder but saw his UZR slip to -9.2 in 2009. Melky, meanwhile, put up a 0.6 mark in center in 2008 and a 1.4 mark in 2009. Even assuming just a duplication of their 2010 numbers, the Gardnerson/Gardner duo would be nearly 9 defensive runs above average while the Cabrera/Damon duo would be just under -8 defensive runs below average.
The wild card in these moves remains Brett Gardner’s offense. The Yankees won’t ask Curtis Granderson to move to left if they don’t believe Gardner can hold down a starting job for long enough, and the team might not ask Granderson to move if their plan includes pursuing Carl Crawford after he hits free agency next winter. After all, they might not want Granderson to be bouncing back and forth between the outfield slots for one year with a more certain solution just around the corner.
With run prevention the next frontier in baseball analysis and team-building, the Yankees are bound to give many outfield permutations a good hard look in Spring Training. When Opening Day rolls around, no one should be surprised if the solution to the Johnny Damon hole had been around since early December after all.
The pursuit of Curtis Granderson
Posted by: | CommentsFor the Yankees, the last log on the hot stove has turned to ash. The team appears completely set as players begin reporting to the Tampa camp. We’ve reflected on the 2009 season, reflected on the moves the Yankees made in an attempt to repeat, and even reflected on the moves they didn’t make. There doesn’t seem much left to do before spring training begins.
Still, we can find some tidbits about the off-season to fill the gap. For instance, when Brian Cashman spoke at the University of New Haven last Thursday he revealed something about his pursuit of Curtis Granderson. The conversations that led to the Yankees acquiring the All-Star center fielder actually began before they won the World Series — began, in fact, just before the first pitch of Game 1. It might sound like odd timing to you and me, but not to Brian Cashman.
“I said, ‘Dave, we set our roster, so there’s nothing left for me to do now except for turning the page and talk about next year.’ That’s when he first mentioned Curtis Granderson might become available.”
At that point, 28 general managers had nothing to worry about except rebuilding their teams for 2010. It’s nice to hear that Cashman started working on the 2010 Yankees once his obligations to the 2009 team ceased. In that type of competitive landscape, he can’t really afford to fall behind.
After the jump, as to hide it from everyone who’s sick of the story, a bit about Damon.
