The New-Look Yankees?
by bobbymcnally on Dec 5, 2007 8:51 PM EST
30 comments
In old times (well, in the 80s and early 90s, and back again only from 1998-2005), the Yankees traded away prospects to get big-time players who either didn't pan out or didn't help much in the long run. In the mean time, good and great talents such as Fred McGriff, Mike Lowell, and Jake Westbrook have passed through the Yankees system before getting traded. Now, with a young and revitalized owner in Hank Steinbrenner seemingly thought of re-starting an era so carefully started and protected by GM Brian Cashman that has produced many productive drafts and international signings.
Successes both in the minors as prospects and in the majors in the draft include Phil Hughes,(though in 2004), Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy, Austin Jackson, Alan Horne, David Robertson, Mark Melancon, Dellin Betances, and others in the draft. There are also potential late-round finds (that is, relative to being drafted in the lower rounds) in players such as Seth Fortenberry, Justin Snyder, and Mitch Hilligoss the last two years, not to mention 2007 draftees who have high ceilings but have yet to play (Carmen Angelini, Brad Suttle, Andrew Brackman). In the international market, the Yankees have made several great signings in the last years as well, including Melky Cabrera, Robinson Cano (both pre-2005, though), Jose Tabata, Jesus Montero, Juan Miranda, Jairo Heredia, Francisco Cervelli, and, to a certain extent, an up-and-coming Angel Reyes. Like in the draft, there are a couple of players who have yet to play pro ball, including Kevin DeLeon and Eduardo Sosa. I must note that in both of these cases, the Yankees used their financial ability to either take a high-pick talent at a lower pick or round, or to sign a pricey international FA. This isn't to mention the trade market, where oldies Randy Johnson and Gary Sheffield fetched Ross Ohlendorf, Kevin Whelan, Alberto Gonzalez, Humberto Sanchez, and the up-and-coming Anthony Claggett.
Do you see the Hank Steinbrenner regime as undoing this to acquire players such as a Johan Santana? Speaking of Santana, Steinbrenner and Stick Michael were convinced by Brian Cashman not to make this deal, but is this good-will for prospects going to last? Of course, not every prospect will pan out, especially not to their fullest potential, but is this team sure enough with these prospects to rebuild, "repent" for earlier mistakes, and continue with these new and young faces to win championships for the decade to come. This good work is proven, as Arizona and Colorado in the NL West succeeded with this approach.
I have a hard time believing that Hank will be able to contain within himself for a long while. Yes, he didn't go through on Santana, but that is after convincing Cashman to do the deal-breaker and deal Hughes, then having to be convinced a long way by Cashman not to deal Hughes or give big money and years to an almost-30 player coming off a bad year for his standards. While Cashman is intent on bringing up the farm and maintaining fiscal responsibility, Hank seems to have obsessions with players (while also being a quote machine). He is like his father in many ways, and, though it may be a bit early, I am afraid this may be one of them.
0 recs |
30 comments
Email
Print
Comments
My take:
On the other hand...
it takes 15 minutes and a trigger happy owner to trade away years of work.
by ufoboy90 on Dec 5, 2007 8:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Built or bought the farm?
I don't know what this means for the future, but I have to imagine the Yankees will keep up this strategy and reap the benefits of paying guys other teams won't.
by kschellenger on Dec 5, 2007 9:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
agreed
so it takes some skill in talent evaluating, though
by bobbymcnally on Dec 5, 2007 9:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Salary Cap?
by FishHead on Dec 5, 2007 9:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
No chance
by hallofamer2000 on Dec 5, 2007 9:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what I dont get either
Teams just dont like uncertainty, you are basically spending hte money to get as many guys as possible since the success rate is low. Owners want their money to impact the big league team right away so they avoid the draft. Spending big in the draft should be what ALL small market teams do.
Every year dont sign the Geoff Jenkins of the world and instead use a AAA player and there you have an additional 10 million for the draft.
I hate when people say only the rich teams can afford to pay in the draft.
by Kanst42 on Dec 6, 2007 8:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
by doublestix on Dec 5, 2007 10:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jealousy?
by dlpme77 on Dec 5, 2007 9:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Because....
Didn't the same thing happen last year and they not do any trades?
by hallofamer2000 on Dec 5, 2007 10:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No however...
If Cashman has any power (and we don't know if he does) there will most likely be alot of pressure to deal for the now. Especially if the pitching staff falls apart.
by dlpme77 on Dec 5, 2007 10:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not exactly sure I agree
Lowell has been a very good player, made a few all star teams, but if you look at the numbers for his career hes really just mediocre.
If over almost 3 decades you can count the number of prospects a team traded away and actually panned out on one hand, I think its hard to criticize them.
The internet age has been a wonderful thing because of the ease of access to information. However it has led to many issues that didn't exist before it. Fans have almost as much access to information on players as do professional scouts or members of the media.
90% of the debates we have most of us have never actually seen the players play. We are basing a ton of information on 2nd, 3rd hand information, on guys who have seen a guy play at most a handful of times.
( I understand this isn't always the case, but i think we can agree it is most of the time)
Anyway my point is that in todays internet age fans are getting more excited about players they haven't seen because they can IMAGINE them to be anything they want them to be. Every pitcher can be the next Johan or the next Sandy Koufax etc. and every hitter can be the next Arod or the next Pujols or the next mays, the next Rickey Henderson.
The fact remains that a teeny tiny percentage of even the top prospects will ever even come close to becoming as good as "they have the potential to be."
People talk about the yankees strategy of signing veterans at large contracts, spending big in free agency, trading what it takes to get a player as though they are collusal failures, yet the yankees consistently make the playoffs every year.
If you go back and look at the 1996 yankees there were 5 homegrown guys on that team. Jeter, Mariano as a setup man, Bernie Williams who had been up for a few years already. Ramiro Mendoza a swing man 6th starter long reliever, and Andy Pettitte a solid lefty starter.
The yankees traded for cecil fielder at the deadline who was a big help to there run. Their biggest stars Tino Martinez and Paul O'niel were aquired via trade. David cone signed as a free agent, David Wells, Free agent signing. John Wetteland aquired from expos.
Prospects are a resource. You use some of them to trade for things you need or cant find elsewhere. Some of them you keep and hold onto and hope they turn into stars or at the very least useful contributors to your team (like Mendoza). But lets remember that prospects are prospects for a reason and veterans are veterans for a reason. There is a difference between trading 3 top kids for a guy like Johan Santana and trading 3 top kids for a 40 year old star pitcher who could break down at any time.
Don't make the mistake of assuming that every prospect (even our favorite ones) will definitely become, actually even have a good chance at becoming what we think they can.
The key is be smart with your moves, use the resources as wisely as you can.
by jbluestone on Dec 5, 2007 10:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Lowell
What? His career numbers don't bear that out at all.
A CAREER 110 OPS+ plus good defense from third is far better than mediocre.
His peak has gone 110,105,116,127,,77,104,124.
Except for that one disaster year in Miami that has been a very good career. Far from mediocre
by nms on Dec 6, 2007 12:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
by sdtribefan on Dec 6, 2007 7:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
see my point about lowell below
Its a completely seperate debate. I said a lot of stuff in there, why do people insist on trying to find something they can disagree with and then pick on it.
Reading that long post of mine, what is the main point of the post. Lets discuss that.
If you think that mike lowell being better than i said in the post completely affects that argument then fine discuss it in that way, but dont tell me his 110 ops+ with really good defense makes him better than mediocre just because. Lets talk about the actual theme of the post please.
This is how stupid arguments and debates occur. Someone posts something, people find anything they disagree with in it and pick on that point, next thing you know its a completely different discussion having almost nothing to do with the point of the post.
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 7:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If its not the main point
by nms on Dec 9, 2007 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here
Fred McGriff (better than Tino, lifetime)
Nick Johnson (better than Giambi)
Mike Lowell (better than Boone or Brosius)
Ted Lilly (better than Vazquez)
Juan Rivera (was the starting RF! and good!)
Jim Mecir (solid reliever)
Jake Westbrook (better than Mussina)
Willy Mo Pena (better than Ruben Sierra [2000s] and Shelley)
Damaso Marte (better than Enrique Wilson whom he was traded for, and is def. better than Felix Heredia or Ron Villone)
Yhency Brazoban (if he would have been handled right)
Check this piece out about this:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3280
by bobbymcnally on Dec 6, 2007 7:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Really reaching on that list
So if you wanted to wait 5 years for him then fine(and in this case the yanks should have given they got Dale Murray and Tom Dodd back (Ick).
Nick Johnson has been injury prone and certainly not better than giambi, and again one was not traded for the other.
Ted Lilly is not better than Vazquez, Ted lilly had one good year this year in the NL central. And again, how long do you want to wait. Lilly was traded in 2002 to oakland, he was then traded to toronto and then signed with the cubs in 2007.
Claiming that Jake Westbrook is better then mike mussina.. i think we both know thats a mistake...
I could keep doing this, but players weren't traded for the ones you are talking about, some are years apart.
Over the course of almost 30 years, there are 11 players almost all of who are either mediocre, or part time players, injured. With only lowell as even remotely arguable for a better player.
And speaking of which.
Career .280/.344/.468 with a 110 OPS+ A 100 ops+ is league avg. So he is slightly above avg.
Other players who have a career 110 ops Jose Vidro, Sean Casey, Melvin Mora, Frank Catalanto.
Some players just above 110, Trot Nixon, Corey Koskie, Tony Clark.
There are plenty of "good names" mixed in as well, but OPS+ is not always as accurate as people think, its a nice little stat for quick glances.
But when comparing OPS to league avg, you have to realize that league avg, isn't as good as one thinks it is.
by jbluestone on Dec 6, 2007 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My point was
Through his career, isn't McGriff better than Martinez?
Ted Lilly actually pitched in a real stadium. It ain't hard to pitch where 6000 people were in Montreal, like Vazquez. Besides Lilly's being a lefty gives him some extra value, and besides, he is not as homerprone as Vazquez.
Jake Westbrook, now, is better than Mike Mussina, now, though I admit I wouldn't have said this in, say, 2002
Nick Johnson, when healthy, has been better than Giambi because, although he has been injury prone (more in Montreal/Washington, though), he has been improving his AVG (from Giambi range to .280-ish). He might have well hit 30HRs in his break-out season of 2006 before the injury. and Johnson certainly provides a better glove than Giambi, while at the same time not clogging the bases and not needing two or three guys on the roster to supplement him.
Juan Rivera is certainly not as good as Sheff with the Yankees, but, please admit, that he is relatively younger and has nice power production if he ever gets an opportunity, right?
I understand what you think of Jim Mecir, but he's had some pretty nice seasons in there, too, if you look.
Willy Mo Pena hasn't been given an opportunity. He was the big piece in the Bronson Arroyo trade for Boston, and everyone said that he could build on his 30HRs in 2005 by playing in Boston and hopefully learning how to hit for a higher average. If the Yankees weren't FA-crazy in the times they had him, they could certainly have used him when they had Raul Mondesi, yes?
Damaso Marte--part of World Champion White Sox--and better than Ron Villone and the Viz? The Yankees want him back, too. I rest my case.
Yhency Brazoban wasn't handled correctly. An outfielder-turned-pitcher, he threw only 30 innings in his first year in the bigs, but his innings total needs to go up less than the 40-50 innings for a normal pitcher because of his not having pitched for as long as someone who pitched in high school. He then went on to pitch 70 innings in 2005, and since, has never been the same in terms of injury. See the correlation?
by bobbymcnally on Dec 7, 2007 8:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, i will play along.
Couple of things.. Mcgriff was a rookie in 1986, im pretty sure the yankees had a 1st baseman named Don Mattingly at that time... pretty sure he was a perenial MVP candidate around then as well, and young himself since his rookie year was 1983.
Also, Tino Martinez was acquired in 1996, the year after mattingly retired. McGriff was 32,33 by then.Ted Lilly actually pitched in a real stadium. It ain't hard to pitch where 6000 people were in Montreal, like Vazquez. Besides Lilly's being a lefty gives him some extra value, and besides, he is not as homerprone as Vazquez.
And what happened to Vazquez last year? I think this is a bit of excuse making. Look at the skill set. Vazquez's skill set is vastly superior when looking at k/9 bb/9 k/bb ratio, general career. Lilly pitched over 200 innings for the first time last year and avg's 1.4 hr/9, Vazquez avg's 1.2 HR/9 so that is not a correct statement. Vazquez has pitcher 200 innings or more (198 in 2004) for 8 straight years.Jake Westbrook, now, is better than Mike Mussina, now, though I admit I wouldn't have said this in, say, 2002
I really dont see the evidence here for this. And westbrook was traded for Dave Justice who was the MVP of our 2000 season even though he only played half a year, he carried the team and was one of the reasons they won the world series. Justice batted .305 with 20 hr and 60 rbis for the yankees in 78 games. Nick Johnson is a good player, but the yankees already had Giambi on the payroll when they traded him, nick johnson finally put together a very good year in 2006 before injuring himself, in 2006 he had an OPS .948 meanwhile Giambi that year had an OPS .971. 2005 wasnt even close between them. neither was 2003 and 2004 they were nearly identical and giambi had cancer. There is of course the whole steroid thing, but i have no idea how to quantify that. Juan Rivera is a platoon player, who had a very good year in 2006 as a part time player with 450 abs. I think hes good, but he is nothing special, and certainly not better then sheffield/abreu the yankee RFers.
I understand what you think of Jim Mecir, but he's had some pretty nice seasons in there, too, if you look.
Mecir is a bit of a contradiction since he came to NY with tino martinez in that trade. Mecir i think is a pretty negligible player.Willy Mo Pena hasn't been given an opportunity. He was the big piece in the Bronson Arroyo trade for Boston, and everyone said that he could build on his 30HRs in 2005 by playing in Boston and hopefully learning how to hit for a higher average. If the Yankees weren't FA-crazy in the times they had him, they could certainly have used him when they had Raul Mondesi, yes?
Again, your placing an assumption that IF Willy Mo was playing full time he would play to a level you expect. There is a reason hes never been given that chance. We traded him to cincy in 2001, he didnt start playing a decent platoon level until 2006. Again your assuming a player is playig at a certain level immediatley. Go back and look it takes these players a long time, and even then Willy Mo pena couldnt play full time on the nationals. Why? Because he strikes out close to 100 times in less then 300 ABs and only takes about 20 walks.Damaso Marte--part of World Champion White Sox--and better than Ron Villone and the Viz? The Yankees want him back, too. I rest my case.
Marte is a solid relief pitcher we traded him in 2001, and went to the 9th inning of game 7 of the world series with the lead that year. In 2003 the yankees went to game 6 of the world series. I dont feel strongly about him at all, the yankees signed him as a free agent in nov of 2000 and he couldnt make the team, he was traded in 2001 as a 26 year old Middle reliever. Hard to call this catastrophic, and Enrique Wilson played a pretty good role for the yankees in the early 2000's. Brazoban has been horrible and injury prone, you cant assume that the yankess would've gotten him to be something hes never been able to do.by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i have to admit
until last year, vazquez gave up a lot of HRs--hes given up 31 in '98, and then 28 in both '01-'02, and then 33 in '04 before 35 in '05 before giving up only 23 in '06. His WHIP was league-AVG until this year, and '07 was his first year pitching to a sub-4 ERA since '03. Mind you, he played three of these four years at Chase Field and at Comiskey, neither of which are bandboxes.
lilly, on the other hand, pitched in the highly competitive AL East until this year. Lilly finally figured things out at age 26, in 2002. He did well with the Yankees before getting traded to Oakland in the Jeff Weaver trade. (Lilly > Weaver, n'est pas?) He posted sub-4.5 ERAs in every year until his injury-filled 2005. I must note that I don't think that either Vazquez or Lilly are very good.
The more I think about it, though, you are largely right. Westbrook, however has posted very healthy GB rates, though his K's are Wang-esque. His ERAs are all sub-4.50 (though he had a 4.49 ERA in his struggle-full 2005), and discounting 2005, he had a sub-4.35 ERA in each of his full seasons from 2003-7. Mussina had bad years in 2004, 2005 (like Westbrook) and 2007. In these years, his strike-out rates were also low, compared to his healthy 2003 and 2006 seasons.
Nick Johnson was a well-recognized prospect already when Giambi was signed in the 2001 offseason. Giamibi, then age 31, was signed to a stupid 7 year deal. He was already a bad body guy, and his decline was expected to be preciptuous when it came. And it was. Notice the difference in batting AVGs btwn 2002 and 2003--.314 v. .250. He posted 41-HR seasons, but he required two other roster spots just for him--a pinch-runner and a good-glove 1B. This isn't even mentioning the lost 2004 and 2007, the horrible April-May in 2005, and the steroid baggage. Johnson, on the other hand, had a nice glove and showed good power potential and plate discipline (though he struck out a lot as well) in his first full season, 2002. He hit for a great AVG in in 2003, .284, and hit 14 HRs and 47 RBIs in only 96 games. Picture that through a whole season. He was also largely injured in 2004, but still, when you look, had a better year than Giambi (who started hot but declined every month). In 2005 Johnson had another nice year for Washington, hitting 15 HRs but also hitting .289 with 74 RBIs. Johnson doesn't require two extra personal roster spots, and is under team control for less money, and is a better 1B solution than the 2006 and 2007 combos.
Regarding Pena, I think he has a lot of potential, but really wasn't given an opportunity. he isn't all that different than adam dunn--strikeouts, glove, etc..
by bobbymcnally on Dec 7, 2007 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
commisky and chase field arent bandboxes?
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If your gonna argue that
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think
Johan Santana wasn't Johan Santana last year. His homers went up, as did his ERA and wild pitches (the latter a side note). His BB/9 jumped up some, and he is already 28 years old. Granted, he was great 2002-2006, but 2007 was down. Talk to me about the differences of A-Rod's 2006 and 2007, but hitters have more of an opportunity to adjust and show adjustments than pitchers. Santana has great stuff, but the Yankees are implementing a policy of fiscal responsibility, especially now paying A-Rod's record contract along with almost single-handedly paying for a new stadium. Moreover, it isn't very good for the clubhouse to have the two highest paid players in baseball while the rest make comparative peanuts. It would also reverse the trend of a home-grown team. Santana also struggled against the AL East, and the whole point of Santana is to a) keep him from the Sox or b) beat the Sox. Though Hughes might not be "Santana-level" for at least three years, he is under team control for an almost-nothing contract, and, at this point, will last longer for the Yankees than Santana will. If you are talking to me about a healthy Liriano, I would reconsider.
by bobbymcnally on Dec 7, 2007 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you basing too much of your
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you basing too much of your
But first, Johan has a down year by his standards, fine... he on a bad team won 15 games pitched 219 innings had 235 ks to 52 bbs, a 3.33 era and a 1.07 era.
So lets look at his stats.
Year W era Whip baa K/9 BB/9 K/B HR/FB
2004 20 2.61 .92 .192 10.5 2.1 4.9 10%
2005 16 2.88 .97 .210 9.3 1.8 5.3 8%
2006 19 2.77 1.00 .216 9.4 1.8 5.2 10%
2007 15 3.33 1.07 .225 9.7 2.1 4.5 14%
Its clear that his base skills K/9/ bb/9 and k/b are pretty well with in his career norms.
Lets adjust his whip era and batting avg for that 4% unlucky HR.
He gave up 242 fly balls so thats about 24 homers which would line up with his normal # of homers.
Assumeing that every homer is a solo shot. thats 33-24= 9 less earned runs. that gives him 72 earned runs in 219 ip which translates to a 2.96 era. His adjust WHIP would be 1.03. His adjust BAA would be .213
So now lets look at his numbers
Year W era Whip baa K/9 BB/9 K/B HR/FB
2004 20 2.61 .92 .192 10.5 2.1 4.9 10%
2005 16 2.88 .97 .210 9.3 1.8 5.3 8%
2006 19 2.77 1.00 .216 9.4 1.8 5.2 10%
2007 15 2.95 1.03 .213 9.7 2.1 4.5 10%
Do you see why you cant just look at things like ERA and assume something happened. Avoiding homers is about avoiding fly-balls. about 10% of fly-balls go out of the ball park for homers.
Last year MLB hit 4950 homers, they also hit 49290 fly-balls. which is 10.04%.
In 2006 MLB hit 5400 homers, they also hit 49410 fly-balls. 10.92%
In 2005 MLB hit 5010 homers, they also hit 49080 which is 10.2%
As far as the yankee stadium, it practically is paying for itself. There are tons of articles on it, but basically with the tax loopholes and the fact they wont have to pay revenue sharing for a while, increased with the new revenue, etc. The new stadium is promoting more spending.
by jbluestone on Dec 7, 2007 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I really wouldn't be bragging about..
"Ross Ohlendorf, Kevin Whelan, Alberto Gonzalez, Humberto Sanchez, and the up-and-coming Anthony Claggett."
by nms on Dec 6, 2007 12:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
oh please
by 'future HOFers', are you referring to the 44-year-old RJ who missed most of 07 and came off a 5+ era year? and the 37-year old Sheffield who also missed most of 07? just checking.
considering the Yanks won 94 games but lost in the first rd, it doesnt differ much from the years with Sheff and RJ.
ANYWAY, instead of a salary cap, there should be a salary minimum. that the Marlins pocket most of their revenue is sickening. even when they do get a good team, it's dismantled immediately.
by Travis G on Dec 6, 2007 1:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
