Nady's Trade Value?
With the Yankees having too many corner OFs, 1B, and DH, I would suspect that they will be trying to trade one of them. Damon and Matsui have NTCs and Swisher has a reasonable contract and has three years left, so I think that Nady's short stay in New York is up.
What teams do you think would have interest in Nady and what type of value do you think they can get for him? I would think that they would try to pick up some hitting prospects.
Thanks.
0 recs |
71 comments
Comments
In the eye of the beholder
Now’s the best time to trade him, because maybe you can get someone to pay for the career year he just had, rather than for the pretty marginal player he’s always been.
by aap212 on Dec 24, 2008 6:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think you are asking a serious question.
What is the trade value of an overpaid, defensively challenged corner OF who is over 30 and has a career OPS under 800? Since the Yankees were the only team lame enough to buy him last year and they are out of the equation, I would hazard a guess the answer would be close to nothing in the current market. If you think his stay is short, think about the length of stay and value for Swisher after they Yankees sign Ramirez. With the Yankees, it is better to fantacize about their next big ticket FA than to look for value in their scraps or try to figure out how their prospects will fit into the long term contracts. Just enjoy the money to spend!
by sdtribefan on Dec 24, 2008 6:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
They acquired him for a run at the playoffs
It’s not like the Yankees signed him to a long term FA contract or are paying him to be the centerpiece of their offense. They were within striking distance of the playoffs and lost Matsui to injury, so their acquisition of Nady at the time was fairly justifiable. They paid handsomely by giving up some very useful prospects, but at $3.35M last year he certainly earned his paycheck.
And considering he’s been traded for Mike Cameron and Oliver Perez in the past 3 years, I don’t think the Yankees are the only team “lame” enough to acquire him. He has consistently put up league-average or better OPS+ numbers for the past 4 seasons, so he’s not some albatross that will drag a team down. If another team suffers a corner OF injury in the first half of the season, I can promise you they’ll be calling Cashman about Nady.
by jibs on Dec 24, 2008 7:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, you have your version and I am OK with that.
By my count, the Yankees have 6 OFs under contract, several of whom could be called fourth OFs by the Yankees. That does not count Ramirez or Jackson. Who are they cutting? Or are you carrying 6-8 OFs on the team? Just my thoughts.
by sdtribefan on Dec 25, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is 6 on the 25 man roster
Nady, Matsui, Damon, Swisher, Gardner and Melky. The thing is, given the quality of defense provided by the starters, it probably does make sense to carry both Gardner and Melky for late inning substitutions.
by jibs on Dec 25, 2008 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
6 OFs?
Looks more like 4 DHs and two LFers to me.
by alskor on Dec 26, 2008 2:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gardner is good defensively
Or at least better than everyone else.
by demondeaconsbaseball on Dec 26, 2008 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The bar really isn't very high for Gardner.
I cannot get over the fact that posters really expect them to survive the season with 7 catchers and IFs when their organization cannot produce any backups in case of injury or non-performance. It looks to me like they need to reduce the OF count to 5 and get a serious CF since the team looks very weak defensively up the middle. Nady might make more sense in RF than any other OF named by jibs.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 3:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What?
Swisher is an excellent defensive RF, Damon is very marginal in CF but is still a very good defensive LF.
The reason why you probably carry all those guys, though, is that you usually carry 3 OF, a 1B, a DH, and two backups—one CF and one OF / 1B type. That’s 7 guys, namely, the 6 you named plus Teixeira.
You could get away with carrying just Melky or Gardner if you were committed to either as the answer in CF, and if they find a real CF you could conceivably carry neither as a backup. But I think both outcomes are unlikely.
by emvan on Dec 27, 2008 2:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, you took my breath away
with your first sentence. I think I would be inclined to disagree with your assessment of Swisher and Damon’s defesive ability but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I think the rest of the post makes sense but it is not Yankee style to put that many mediocre players on the field. If you feel they are better than that, then it is just a matter of opinion which is all mine is.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Swisher/Damon/Nady defense
Swisher rated as slightly above average in LF and slightly below average in RF (in only 11 starts) in UZR last year, and was quite a bit above average in RF with Oakland in 2007. Damon was also above average according to UZR in LF in 2008, and playing in LF helps minimize his noodle-arm shortcomings. Nady also rates as exactly league average in RF as per UZR last year.
In CF last, Melky Cabera was exactly league average and Gardner was a bit above average according to UZR, so it wouldn’t be a defensive wasteland with Melky/Gardner in CF and the other 3 in the corners. If Gardner could legitimately get on base at a .350 clip, he actually would be a pretty useful CF.
by jibs on Dec 27, 2008 9:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The terms you used to describe
Swisher, excellent defensive RF, and Damon, very good defensive LF, do not seem to be supported by the statistics you quote. I believe UZR is not of any statistical value. It is just another number for those who cannot analyze player skills. I just watch them play and make my own assessment.
Melky can throw but is lacking in other defensive areas. Regarding Gardner, if pigs grew wings, they could be eagles.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you think UZR is of no value,
then you are, frankly, an imbecile.
Taking it with a grain of salt and comparing it to other inputs is one thing. Refusing on face to pay any attention to it is quite another.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Dec 28, 2008 2:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't you spend a lot of time
Arguing that no defensive stat was of any value?
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 29, 2008 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be called an imbecile
by an ignorant, intellectually deficient poster such as yourself is a badge of honor.
What’s it like in the 5th grade?
by sdtribefan on Dec 29, 2008 8:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gardner's OBP
Considering Gardner put up a .407 OBP in AAA last year and has been projected to post an OBP in the .320 to .360 range by Marcel, CHONE and Bill James, I don’t think a .350 OBP out of him falls into the pig → eagle category.
by jibs on Dec 28, 2008 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
type As
Minor point, but the Yanks can’t sign Ramirez, as they cannot sign any more Type A free agents this offseason.
It seems to me that especially if the Yankees decide to live with poor OF defense and start Swisher in CF, there is plenty of room on the roster for Nady. He may have peaked last year, but he should still be a pretty damn good 4th outfielder going forward.
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on Dec 25, 2008 12:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are absolutely correct in your assessment of
Nady and Swisher, as well as the defense. Are you absolutely sure of the Ramirez Type A point? I don’t happen to think that is as minor as you seem to. Irrespective of that, there seems to be a serious rumor that the yankees have offered Manny 3 years. I am not saying you are wrong but that I hadn’t heard that. Curiously, isn’t Pettite type A?
by sdtribefan on Dec 25, 2008 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Type A
They can re-sign Pettitte as he is their type A, but they cannot sign any more type A from other teams, so Manny will not happen.
The Dodgers won't win a playoff series until the Cool-a-Coo returns.
by mckeeno on Dec 25, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why can't they?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 26, 2008 8:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Three in addition to the type As they lose
It’s three type As from the free agent pool, plus the number of type As they lose. As they are losing Abreu and Mussina (I’m assuming Pettitte resigns), they can sign at least two more guys if they so desired, so, in this example, Ramirez would be able to sign.
by ekh1210 on Dec 27, 2008 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I will be the first to admit that I am
no expert at all when it comes to the CBA. I have read the thing and what you say sounds like what I recall and I am too imbued with the holiday spirit to waste time reading that boring piece of crap again. Thanks for your take.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think you understand the compensation system...
by alskor on Dec 26, 2008 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on Dec 26, 2008 6:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't see more than say
A B- prospect, or maybe a couple C+ types in the best case scenario. I mean … would you trade, say, a Wes Hodges (first name that popped to mind) for an Xavier Nady? I’m not sure I would. That said, my guess is they prefer to hold onto Swisher (it would suck going into 2010 having to replace an entire OF), and that Damon is unlikely to be moved. As such, that leaves Matsui and Nady, and I think they’d probably prefer to dump Nady for whatever they can get and sign Pettite down.
by toonsterwu on Dec 24, 2008 6:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not Wes Hodges but maybe Josh Rodriguez or John Drennen.
Still does not answer the question about Ramirez. Better question is what do the Yankees do with Phil Hughes? He has some value but Swisher and Nady are a couple of cheap parts for the financially challenged after the Yankees pick up payroll. Matsui and Damon cannot be traded. Don’t cry for the Yankees! They have money to burn in this market. At least with Texeira they have one guy who is familiar with defense.
by sdtribefan on Dec 24, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i'll be surprised if they sign manny
i’m assuming that’s the ramirez you are referencing?
anyhow, if it’s simply guys like Rodriguez or Drennen, I think they might keep nady instead and skip pettite. I don’t think they’ll take pure junk for nady, and I don’t think they’ll have to. I think, in this market, someone will prefer the lack of commitment with Nady and take the plunge. Maybe borderline junk, but neither Josh or John feel like guys that will advance past AA.
by toonsterwu on Dec 24, 2008 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It is that Manny.
The Pirates tried to unload Nady for months until the Yankees graciously included Tabata whose stock was falling. You could be right. Why give anything for Nady with a dozen FAs who are better and mean nothing but money? Just my thoughts.
by sdtribefan on Dec 25, 2008 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
just keep him
initially have it Damon CF, Swisher LF, Nady RF, Matsui DH, with a bit of rotation and Gardner/Cabrera/Jackson picking up ABs in the absence of production.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 24, 2008 7:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You wouldnt trade Wes Hodges for Nady?
That’s so rediculous. Hodges isn’t even a sure thing to ever reach the majors and I would say has about a 5% chance of ever being as good as Nady.
by nyy601 on Dec 24, 2008 9:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
actually, in retrospect
that was a poor example in trying to find a random B- prospect. I would trade Hodges for Nady. In general, though, considering that teams believe that the Yankees want to deal and considering that Nady is only signed for 1 year, my point was that I don’t think Nady will net a huge return for the Yankees.
by toonsterwu on Dec 24, 2008 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you mean ridiculous?
You have your opinion and that is fine. I like mine.
by sdtribefan on Dec 25, 2008 2:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For a mid-market team
why would you trade 6 potential years of team controlled Wes Hodges for one year of Xaiver Nady? It’s not like Nady is the missing piece for Cleveland. That’s not good use of resources.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on Dec 27, 2008 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 in a big way.
For a player who had 1/2 of an above average season in 5 years and then reverted to form for the last half when the Yankees got him. Why would you give up any decent prospect? Just because the Yankees discard their prospects for old guys doesn’t mean any other team will do it.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 3:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True
Although it’s worth noting that after reversion, Nady is essentially the definition of replacement level.
Not worth trading anything of value for, but for a live arm and with some salary relief, he could make a decent 4th OF for many teams. Plus, if he did indeed “figure it out” in 1H 09 in Pittsburgh, there’s a lot of upside to be captured.
Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball
by Yakker on Dec 27, 2008 11:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sort of
He’s only under contract for 2009, so if he does put it all together again, all your getting a potentially better chance to overpay for a career year. Best case scenario, you get to spend a lot of money on an above average free agent OF. Depending on the team, that may be a good allocation of resources, others it wouldn’t.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
by gatling on Dec 27, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand what you're saying
I wouldn’t give up a good prospect for Nady. I just don’t think Hodges will ever amount to anything in the majors. I would be pissed if we traded Nady for Hodges.
by nyy601 on Dec 27, 2008 6:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would be equally pissed if
we traded Hodges for Nady.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 11:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not too much
but he could land like 2 B- prospects and 1 or 2 Cs, to put it in those terms.
by METSMETSMETS on Dec 25, 2008 10:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Got a better use of prospects for one year
of an offensively average, defensively mediocre corner OF.
by sdtribefan on Dec 25, 2008 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For example
Say the Braves wanted to pick up Nady, what kind of package would you see as fair?
http://yankeesmtom.blogspot.com/
by hallofamer2000 on Dec 25, 2008 2:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Salary relief
And a borderline pitching prospect or two.
by Dr Orpheus on Dec 26, 2008 9:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Providing salary relief to the Yankees
must be like providing oil to the Saudis
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 26, 2008 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My point was the Yankees would probably be looking for something else
They might very well be willing to pay his salary in exchange for a better prospect or two, for example
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 27, 2008 8:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Angels
Looking at their depth chart, Angels have Rob Quinlan at 1B and Juan Rivera/Terry Evans in left. Nady would represent a sizable upgrade at both positions.
I’d be looking to acquire Quinlan or Evans for the bench and a prospect or two. I like Jeffrey Moore and Andrew Romine.
by J-Gao on Dec 25, 2008 2:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Err, a bit off
Angels currently have Morales at 1b, not Quinlan.
Also, if the angels want a real upgrade at COF/1b, they could just sign Dunn.
The Dodgers won't win a playoff series until the Cool-a-Coo returns.
by mckeeno on Dec 25, 2008 4:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Probably right
I was just looking at the Yahoo! depth chart. Quinlan’s listed a 1B and Morales at DH. But if they started the season, Morales would probably start at 1B. Either way Nady represents an upgrade. After thinking about it, I doubt that this trade happens. Dunn is a far better option hitting-wise (although they might not wish to spend much money and Nady is a cheaper, and shorter term option) and the Angels have shown a consistent reluctance to deal young talent.
by J-Gao on Dec 25, 2008 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
LF
Vlad/Matthews/Hunter/Willits/Rivera/Chone (I can see him getting some OF time to make room for eithr Maicer Izturis/Erick Aybar, no talk of this so far, but I could see it happening as Maicer is capable of playing 3B)
by Navi's_Navy on Dec 25, 2008 8:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chone Figgins and Braves and Orioles
Is he still seen as a valuable player? I dunno, I’ve barely heard of him last season and his stats seem to have dropped off quite a bit.
To reiterate and add to hallofamer2000’s question: Orioles and Braves have been rumored to be suitors for Nady. What would be a reasonable deal for both teams BAL/NYY or ATL/NYY?
by J-Gao on Dec 25, 2008 9:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
More
For ATL is one of their high-ceiling lefties – Locke, Rohrbough or toolsy OF’s Schafer/Gorkys too much?
For BAL – I don’t know enough about their prospects. But maybe Freel for his Figgins-like fielding versatility and base-running (although his leg injury may cause problems – and hitting-wise I don’t how much of an upgrade over Brett Gardner he represents)
Yankees should be looking to acquire a solid bench bat, too.
by J-Gao on Dec 25, 2008 9:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you really have to ask?
Clearly Schafer and Rohrbough would be way too much to give up for a year of Nady. Schafer is a definite top 100 guy that could easily be top 50 if you don’t downgrade him a bunch for the HGH suspension. Rohrbough is a borderline top 100 guy with pretty big potential. 1 year of Nady isn’t going to net you nearly that much. Did you really have to ask about either of those two?
Locke and Hernandez might be possibilities, but I’d certainly be upset if the Braves dealt either one for Nady with far better options left on the FA market. The Braves seem to be pretty high on Locke, refusing to part with him in order to get Peavy, so I’m guessing he’d be off limits in a discussion for a player like Nady. Hernandez might be available, but that’s an awful lot of upside to give up, and I don’t know how well he fits into a system that already has Jackson.
I think if the Braves did make a deal it would likely be for 1-2 of their C+ prospects. Still, I’d probably just prefer a platoon of Diaz and Brandon Jones to Xavier Nady anyway.
by nixa37 on Dec 25, 2008 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: platoon
There’s one thing Nady does well that the Braves as a team absolutely don’t: hit lefties. We could use his bat against lefties, as long as he didn’t cost too much.
http://www.chop-n-change.com
by alexwithclass on Dec 26, 2008 10:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Diaz v. Nady
Career versus LHP Diaz has a line of .328/.361/.508 compared to a line of .308/.383/.470 for Nady. Diaz has also been the better LF defensively over the course of his career. I guess if the Braves were willing to play Nady at 1B against LHP (or God forbid replace Francoeur) then a deal for Nady would make more sense. If not, I don’t see how he really provides an upgrade over a platoon of Jones and Diaz.
by nixa37 on Dec 26, 2008 11:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Diaz been a better defender?
That’s hard to believe…he might seriously be the worst defensive OF i’ve ever seen play (when he was in KC).
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Dec 26, 2008 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was bad with the Royals, but...
that was in a grand total of 147 innings in the OF. Since then he posted UZRs in 2006 and 2007 that placed him 17.2 and 18.8 runs better than average per 150 games in LF. He was below average last season (7.7 runs worse than average per 150 games), but it was a limited sample size (just 33 starts).
Part of the problem in KC is he could apparently barely see out of one eye (like 20/200 vision or something), which really messed up his depth perception. That had to be hell trying to read flyballs. Anyway, since he got a contact for that eye, he’s much improved. He’s also much, much faster than his body type would indicate.
by nixa37 on Dec 26, 2008 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ok yea
I’m not really doubting you…it would be hell trying to get a read out there with a screwed up eye.
but I do have bad memories of him playing the OF. boy was it ugly.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Dec 27, 2008 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Orioles after Nady?
Neither have I seen this rumor nor do I believe it to be realistic. Trading for Nady would add more payroll to a team looking to shred cost and would focus on offense rather than the glaring hole that is their rotation, save Guthrie. Please site this rumor.
With regards to Ryan Freel, I believe he will represent their utility role, the guy that can play all but short, and since they have no other player like this outside of Donnie Murphy and Oscar Salazar, it seems unlikely that they will move him, especially to the Yankees.
As far as an Atlanta deal…that remains to be seen, but does make some sense. They have a hole in left for another year or so and need a run producer. Trading Schafer, Gorkys, Locke, or Rohrbough would be far too much for one year of Nady. There’s very little evidence that he will maintain last years breakthrough numbers.
by Dr Orpheus on Dec 26, 2008 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
Response to 1st Paragraph – Just asking. If I haven’t come across as it already, I’m a Yankee fan, and, naturally pay more attention to our farm system. Nady was acquired (along with Marte) for a package including Tabata. I underestimated Schafer, though, I’d expected more of a downgrade with the suspension. As for Rohrbough, it was a reach, I just like him a lot.
2nd Paragraph – Hernandez would help in case Jackson (just like a million other “top prospects”) didn’t work out – although Hernandez is just as risky, still better two tries than one. As for a Free Agent, I don’t know that the Braves are willing to spend that much cash to acquire an Abreu or Dunn.
3rd Paragraph – Reasonable enough.
by J-Gao on Dec 25, 2008 10:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Yankees, if they’re really interested in trading Nady, should be going after some relief help. Especially someone who could, theoretically take over the closer role in case Rivera is injured in any way or a LOOGY as they’re putting a lot of trust in Marte and Wright.
I mean, unless they’re going to use their young guys in the pen. (i.e. Hughes, Kennedy, etc)
by Dr Orpheus on Dec 26, 2008 9:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Yanks' pen is pretty solid in my opinion
Rivera, Marte, Bruney, Veras, Edwar Ramirez, and David Robertson is a pretty solid core group returning from last year. They’ve Phil Coke as a solid lefty arm they can put in the pen if they so choose, and there are a couple other lefty arms on the 40 man roster with some upside as LOOGY types in Dunn and De La Rosa. Plus Mark Melancon should be ready for big league action in 2009, and Humberto Sanchez is a big wildcard that could be a factor as well. I can’t see Wright doing much more than the sloppiest of mop-up duty.
by jibs on Dec 26, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Coke looked good as the lefty out of the bullpen, and Melancon has me excited to see what he can bring to the table
by MartyMcFly on Dec 26, 2008 11:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't He Their 4th OF?
Damon will miss time in LF, Matsui will miss time at DH, and since Damon and Swisher can both play CF and Swisher can play 1B, he’s backing up 5 positions. There will be plenty of PT for him. He’s not good enough to be an asset as a starter for a good team and has no value to a bad one, but he’s a decent guy to have on the bench. I don’t see why they’d be looking to move him — if they did, they’d just have to replace him.
by emvan on Dec 27, 2008 1:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think right now they keep Nady
The guy has a career .800 OPS in RF and will make $6M. Plus, if he can put up a season close to what he did in 2008 — which should be likely on a career year in a protected lineup — he’s a type A. If you guys are right about the return, he’s more valuable to the Yanks as the everyday RFer with pick(s) in the deeper 2010 draft.
by ekh1210 on Dec 27, 2008 5:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
For that to happen,
Nady would have to be considered Type A, which is remote under the current ranking system, and be offered arbitration. In the unlikely event that happens, what makes you think anybody will offer him a contract? In that case, the yankees would have him for another year. Just out of curiosity, have you noticed a big demand this offseason for corner OFs, especially type As?
I assume you have carefully selected his career RF stats since he is nowhere near .800 OPS for his career.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
.800 OPS
He has a total career .793 OPS (all positions played). I rounded up .007. Also, the reason for the lack of interest this year is the supply and demand. There are a bunch of slugging OFers on the market, and only a few teams looking to buy. Next year will be a different story, as it’s Matt Holliday and…..
He was the last person not to make the type A cut this year for AL 1B/OF/DH, which means he’s in the top 20% of ALL AL 1B/OF/DH based on performance in 2007 and 2008. Also, if he’s signed by a club that signs two type As, he would only cost that team a 2nd rounder. Likewise, if one of the 15 worst clubs sign him, the Yankees would again get the comp pick and the 2nd rounder.
by ekh1210 on Dec 27, 2008 8:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And you really project that all these corner OFs
that are far superior in this years FA market will go unsigned and there will be a market for Nady. If all these teams sign the current players, why would they need Nady?
Not only do you round up but you also give a Type B an A for your purposes. In my world, that is called hoping for the best and making something out of less. There is no reason to believe that a year in the Yankee organization will make him better than what he is. Based upon his performance in the second half of last year versus his performance in the preceeding year and a half in Pittsburgh, one would wonder if that is his typically weaker performance in the second half or a truer basis for his talent projection.
by sdtribefan on Dec 27, 2008 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 









