Cashman: Yanks Have No Obvious Needs Now
Via Tim Bontemps -
Brian Cashman would not discuss trading for Blue Jays ace Roy Halladay today, citing Major League Baseball tampering policy.
“I’m not really allowed by baseball rules to comment on other team’s players — so I just would have to pass on that,” the Yankees GM said at the Double-A All-Star Game in Trenton when asked about Halladay’s availability.
Cashman did say the Yankees do not “have an obvious need right now.”
“We try to look from within first to see if we don’t have the answer right in front of us before we aggressively go outside,” Cashman said. “We’re always keeping our eyes and ears open. And we’re engaged with the other clubs.
“But I can’t say that we have an obvious need right now.”
Cashman said Sergio Mitre was a potential in-house option to fill the rotation spot of injured Chien-Ming Wang.
O.K.,…let us check some up-to-date 2009 Yankees stats via the Complete Baseball Encyclopedia:
BATTERS RCAA PA OWP Mark Teixeira 20 389 .655 Derek Jeter 17 387 .633 Alex Rodriguez 17 253 .695 Johnny Damon 15 357 .631 Hideki Matsui 13 275 .646 Jorge Posada 8 225 .609 Nick Swisher 5 335 .554 Eric Hinske 3 14 .874 Robinson Cano 3 378 .527 Brett Gardner 1 215 .509 Melky Cabrera 0 277 .506 Jose Molina -1 54 .411 Xavier Nady -1 29 .347 Kevin Cash -2 28 .203 Angel Berroa -3 24 .072 Ramiro Pena -4 92 .347 Fran. Cervelli -5 85 .257 Cody Ransom -7 73 .129
PITCHERS RSAA IP BR/9 IP Alfredo Aceves 10 43.1 9.35 C.C. Sabathia 9 128.1 10.80 Mariano Rivera 9 37.0 8.03 A.J. Burnett 9 107.1 13.00 Phil Hughes 4 53.0 11.72 J. Chamberlain 3 89.0 14.97 Phil Coke 2 38.1 9.39 David Robertson 2 22.2 12.71 J. Albaladejo -1 25.0 14.40 Edwar Ramirez -1 17.1 17.13 Brian Bruney -1 16.2 11.88 Mark Melancon -1 5.2 17.47 Brett Tomko -2 20.2 11.32 Andy Pettitte -4 107.2 14.04 Jose Veras -4 25.2 14.38 Damaso Marte -6 5.1 21.94 A. Claggett -7 1.2 59.40 C.M. Wang -24 42.0 18.64
I dunno…if you ask me, these numbers say that the Yankees have players at second, center and right who are just about league average with the sticks and they have only two starting pitchers who are fairly above average. Seems to me that the Yankees could use a bigger bat in right field and at least one more solid, reliable, starting pitcher. Heck, while we’re at it, another quality arm in the bullpen wouldn’t hurt too.
What do you think?
A bigger bat in right? That’s an obvious need? Now you are just letting your Swisher hatred blind you. He has been very solid, and that is certainly not an area where they obviously need an upgrade. I agree on the starter.
You realize that, despite a small number of boneheaded players, said right-fielder is also playing above average defense? As for starting pitching, I think the Yankees see how Mitre does, how healthy Wang gets, and if Joba shows any improvement in his next start or two (most important in the short run is how Mitre does.)
So there are needs, yes. But there are always needs on a baseball team. I agree that we don’t need a bigger bat in right, at least not more than we need a SP, bullpen arm, or, even, centerfielder.
theres not one team in baseball that doesnt have some kind “need” on their team. swisher has been doin just fine in right. dude works pitchers real well and always seems to find a way tog et on base. starting pitcher could be a need but u dont need to go out and get a halladay or even a cliff lee type pitcher. all u need is someone that will get a few wins and pitch 6 or 7 innings. dont need a big arm
Doesn’t the fact that you had to go do some research support the claim that our needs, while existent, aren’t obvious?
Doesn’t appear that Swisher is going anywhere for the time being. Hinske and Cabrera are there to back him up.
In house options to that starter are available in Hughes, Aceves and Mitre. This isn’t to say that a starter won’t be picked up. Same goes for the bullpen. Personally, I’d swap out Albaladejo for Tomko
The outfield is not a disgrace but it’s also not something to get all puffed up about. Production has been acceptable but defense is a bit of an adventure. I would love to see the team get someone out there who could shore up the whole unit the way Teixeira has shored up the infield, not only playing dependably well but helping the rest of the outfield to play their best.
The rotation is still a work in progress this year in spite of two fine acquisitions in the off-season. Getting Halladay seems unlikely. The rest of the stuff on the market does not necessarily take us much higher than the in-house options, so it looks like we might as well go with them.
But if the answer for the rotation comes from our bull-pen, then we’ll need to make up for weakening it, probably by acquiring reliable help from the outside.
BOHAN wrote:
Exactly.
In the post- (enter your favorite drug here) era, the most valuable players are young and athletic. Outfielders need to run and have a good arm. Shortstops are reverting to good field/no hit model. And to repeat, youth is key. (No greenies to help with the day game after night game.)
Having said that, I do not want a 32 yo pitcher with a big money multiyear contract (Halliday). I do not want an aging bat with average or worse fielding ability (by example: Giambi, Sheffield).
This team as is can win it all. No trade/acquisition can guarantee anything. Keep the young players and see how they develop.
having league average bats at a few positions is hardly a need. the yankees have 9 players with an ops+ better than 100, and gardner is just shy of making it a 10th (and he was above that just before the break). that’s silly depth. the yankees lead baseball in most offensive categories thanks to their star power + this depth, so there really are no needs on that side of the ball.
focus on getting another starter (be it in-house or on the trade market).
I’ll disagree with a new stick in RF. Swish’s OBP of .360 and a SLG of .464. comes out to an OPS+ of 115, which is pretty good. He’s also 3.5 runs above average in RF with a UZR/150 of +1.8, and having Hinske and Melky mixed in is coming out to be a rather nice outfield rotation. I really like what Cashman has done with our outfield, honestly.
If anything, we could look to an arm for the pen or rotation.
If Halladay became available to the Yankees at a reasonable cost I would be in favor. Granted we’d only be sure of having him for a year and a half, but given his age that might be a plus, not a minus.
When I say ‘reasonable’, I have to say I am becoming more willing to consider Joba a reasonable cost in getting an elite starter.
hughes + cano + jackson = doc
doc= WS
that’s how i’d fix it.
Corey wrote:
Don’t the Jays already have an all star second baseman? Why would they want Cano?
Corey wrote:
That’s the formula that will keep us in the same “rut” of the last few years.
Hughes has become an irreplaceable part in the bullpen. Could also be a low cost front of the rotation starter in the next couple of years. Who replaces him?
Cano has his issues but is better than most care to realize (just don’t compare him to Pee Wee Herman up North). And who replaces him?
Jackson is potentially valuable to the major league club.
How does Halliday respond to the media spotlight? (The “6th tool” as Cashman says.) What about the outcry after a couple of bad starts? Who knows how he will perform in October?
Look at the history of big name pitchers the Yanks have acquired by trade or FA the last 10 or so years. There is no sure thing.
@ bfriley76:
because their all star 2nd basemen has been a SS his entire life, up until the past few years
@ Corey:
I know, but it seems to me they’d be better served, and more inclined to go after an actual SS prospect who’s younger and cheaper than Cano.
@ ken:
so your telling me, you wouldn’t trade a reliever, a 2nd basemen, and a prospect outfielder with no pop for the best pitcher in the game? Hughes the starter (and frankly hughes in general) is still an unknown. Hallady in a known.. sure you can look at the history , but we never got the best pitcher in baseball in the prime(ish) of his career before. We’ve only gotten young pitchers with tons of upside (weaver, vasquez) or pitchers who were once the best pitcher in the league but were closer to their 40s then to 35. Haladay is neither of these things. Halladay is the same age as burnett.
@ bfriley76:
i think they’ll go for the best package they can get, and deal those chips for what they need. At least, thats what i’d do.
The Yankees clearly have a pitching need, for these reasons:
1. The bullpen has thrown more innings than every team outside of Cleveland, Baltimore and Oakland (iirc – the point being, only the worst teams have used their bullpen more).
1. Joba and Andy are not pitching well at present, and is anyone confident that Wang will be effective if he returns or that Mitre is really likely to pitch effectively?
Furthermore, how will point number 2 effect point number 1? For that matter, how significant is that first point? Obviously there are good arms in the bullpen but how often does a championship team rank so close to the bottom in number of innings thrown by the starters?
Now, if Joba and Andy pick it up in the second half, the problems aren’t as significant and you can probably skate by with Mitre. But if things don’t change, I think its possible that overuse of the bullpen seriously damages the team.
@ Corey:
Halladay is from Colorado. He has pitched his career with an MLB backwater franchise. If he has a bad game, and yes, it does happen, no one really cares. If he comes to the Yanks, he will experience enormous pressure of a nature that he never imagined.
At 32yo he is leaving his prime.
The mistake everyone is making is to assume that you take his stats and just transplant them onto this team. It is not that simple.
And Hughes is not just ‘a reliever’. He is the _only_ reliable 8th inning guy we have right now and he could very well be Mariano’s replacement in two years.
ken wrote:
hense the “ish”. Do you think the Burnett signing was a mistake? Cause they are the same age, and Burnett is signed longer. And sure, Toronto may not be good, but they are still playing the other teams in the AL east (aka the class of baseball with serious lineups). Growing up in Colorado has nothing to do with that (or anything else for that matter).
=======
And Hughes is not just ‘a reliever’. He is the _only_ reliable 8th inning guy we have right now and he could very well be Mariano’s replacement in two years.
======
and then we come back to the argument that sp is more valuable then relievers. What side of that fence are you on?
Cashman’s words are just that — words. They are intended for the consumption of other baseball organizations. Translated, he said, “We are not desperate. We will not make trades because we believe we cannot win without certain missing pieces. Don’t expect us to be suckers who overpay.”
Corey wrote:
If that’s how you view the players we would send (as a reliever, a 2nd baseman, and a prospect OF), do you REALLY think that’s enough to get, arguably, the best pitcher in the game? MAYBE it would be if we took on Wells contract too, but I don’t know…
Corey wrote:
No. We have been lacking true front of the rotation pitchers for years. Haven’t had one since David Cone. (Unless you count Clemens but his big game record was not great.)
Look at who were considered our various #1 starters the past few years: Wang, Pettitte, Mussina. None are classic aces.
CC and AJ were available last off-season and fit the bill. Now we have them so the analysis is different.
I’m not saying that Halladay would not work out. Just that it is not a sure thing. And the price you pay for a mistake costs you for years to come. We are just now getting out from under the burden of too many of those deals in the early 2000′s.
bfriley76 wrote:
not everyone, clearly, shares my opinion…i’m hoping JP thinks like you
Plus that package, i think, is better then some of the others i’ve seen floating around.
I think we’re all overlooking one big part of the possible Halladay deal.
Why, if Cashman didn’t do this for Santana, would he do it for another guy with the “best pitcher in the game” status who happens to be three years older than Santana?
We can propose all of the deals we think would work and argue all day about whether it’s a good deal or not until we’re blue in the face…but none of us are Brian Cashman. If he refused to do this before, why would he do it now?
For those who are happy with Swisher’s production, so far, I offer the following 2009 (to date) stats:
RCAA * PA * Batter
5 * 335 * Nick Swisher
4 * 340 * Mark Teahen
3 * 343 * Denard Span
3 * 317 * Franklin Gutierrez
3 * 327 * Alberto Callaspo
Yes, with that bat, Nick Swisher is just a little bit better than Alberto Callaspo, who plays 2B in KC.
If you’re happy with having a RF who hits like the 2B in KC, this year, then good for you. Me? I want more from the RF of the New York Yankees.
YankCrank wrote:
1 move doesn’t always have to cause another. We are not in the same position as we were with the possible santana trade. When we were going to trade for santana, he was going to become our ace but our rotation was far from set otherwise. Here, getting halladay, we have a set playoff calibur rotation even before him and he’s just icing.
@ Steve Lombardi:
and this also proves my point that a serviceable replacement at 2b for cano is easy to find
@ Corey:
You honestly believe we have a playoff caliber rotation?
Come on Steve, that is so disingenuous. First of all, RCAA is not the only stat out there, and the cherry-picking is transparent. Secondly, why not compare him to the others at his position? He is above average for a RF in OPS, wOBA, adjusted OPS, and UZR.
1 move doesn’t always have to cause another. We are not in the same position as we were with the possible santana trade. When we were going to trade for santana, he was going to become our ace but our rotation was far from set otherwise. Here, getting halladay, we have a set playoff calibur rotation even before him and he’s just icing.
—–
I don’t think our “position” has anything to do with Cashman’s decision. Cashman decided not to trade for Santana because he’d be trading away top prospects for one year of Santana, then have to give him a mega deal of $20+ million a year through his decline years. That’s exactly what we’d be doing for Halladay, only Halladay is already 3 years older.
As for the position, if you decide you want to trade for a top pitcher, i don’t see how it either being to acquire him as our “ace” or our “icing” is really a decision whether to do it or not. You acquire him because he’s nasty, and because you can. But in this situation, if Cash decided not to bleed his top prospects and hand out another huge mega-contract for Santana, why would he do it for Halladay?
2 Things I pass on…Grass and Halladay. That is all.
Also, just as an aside, Callaspo is having a very good season for 2b-man.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
When it comes to measuring a player’s offense worth, my point is that once you step into the batter’s box, you’re a hitter, and you should not be given extra credit (or lose something) because of the position you play in the field when you are not batting.
Giving someone “extra” or an “adjusted” offensive value is his relative batting results because of his position in the field implies that just playing that position in the field provides a batting benefit to his team.
This, in my opinion, is a mistake. No team in baseball history has ever had a run produced because they merely had a guy who played SS. Being a guy who plays SS doesn’t add to your run total.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
How far above? I would guess that it’s closer to “slightly above” than it is “above.”
clintfsu813 wrote:
Absolutely yes. Even without Halladay. All you need is two hot pitchers in Oct. Doesn’t matter what they do in July. Fans tend to be overly critical of own team and overly admiring of everyone else.
Steve Lombardi wrote:
Here is the problem with that. You want to discuss replacing Swisher. He would be replaced by someone else who plays his position. Therefore, it is irrelevant to this discussion how he hits relative to everyone. All that matters is how he hits relative to those who would be candidates to replace him. The answer is slightly above average, as you noted. If having an above average right fielder is a problem in your eyes, you are never going to be happy, because you are not going to have an All-Star at every position.
@ ken:
Exactly. What makes this Yankee team any different than last season’s Phillies, for example? They actually have a better top of the rotation than Philly did, and both led the league in offense.
@ yagottagotomo1:
The Phillies didnt have to go through possibly LAA and/ or Boston to get there, as we most likely would. We gotta show we can beat those guys.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
An All-Star would give you 1 RCAA (or more) Per Every 4 Games.
Yes, you cannot expect that from all 9 slots of your order.
At his current rate, Swisher is producing around 1 RCAA Per Every 16 Games. Again, for me, the Yankees should be able to do better than that, given their resources to collect and maintain talent.
Ideally, for me, I want to see someone who can produce 1 RCAA Per Every 8 or 9 Games – in place of Swisher’s production. But, again, that’s my opinion – and if you’re happy with someone that provides Swisher’s level, then, hey, good for you.
@ clintfsu813:
That’s fair, at least in regard to Boston. the Yankees went 2-4 against LA, not a huge deal. But I get your overall point.
clintfsu813 wrote:
You mean the way the Angels beat the Red Sox during the regular season last year?
Touche’ Ken. But Boston has handled the Angels in the postseason, and lately The Angels handle us. Bottom line, when October comes around we gotta show we can beat LAA and/ or Boston then.
You are entitled to your opnion Steve. Mine is that he needs to be compared to other RF’s, and RCAA is not the only relevant numbers. A look at plenty of other stats will tell you that he is above average for a RF, and is reasonably priced, such that we should not be looking to replace him.
clintfsu813 wrote:
Agreed. I couldn’t resist the effort at sarcasm.
Its all good..I love the sarcasm. Even if it is hard to convey on a blog, lol. Maybe we should write in italics when being sarcastic.
Regarding the other sub-thread in this discussion: Nady was the anticipated starting RF. He is injured and out for the year. Unless you find a replacement every day RF then you make do with what you have.
What we have left in the OF, Swish, Melky, GGBG (see Pete Abe) and Damon are good enough if all the other parts do their jobs.
Side note..I’ve pretty much stopped referring to him as Brett Gardner. I say to myself..Way to hit Gritty Gutty! Nice catch Gritty Gutty. Best.Nickname.Ever.
my question would be, if we accept that the yankees have league average bats in center, right, and at second, why do we only need a right fielder with a bigger bat? don’t we need a second baseman and a CF too? cue right field is traditionally a more offensive-minded position argument. respond, the yankees are getting insane production from two traditionally non-offensive minded positions (short and catcher).
at the end of the day, players tossing up 115 and 116 ops+ like swisher and cano, while perhaps not ideal for some, could never, under any circumstance, be qualified as a “need”. you can want better, but you can’t need better. those would be a lot of teams’ second or third best players.
a need is when you have an injured starter (wang), an inconsistent youngster (joba), and an inconsistent vet (pettitte), comprising 60% of the optimal rotation, and none of whom can be relied on in the second half. that’s a need.
Damn good post, Pat.
FWIW, I suggested an upgrade in RF over CF because Gardner at least has potential to get better whereas we know what Swisher is going to do at the major league level. Plus, on the defensive side, Gardner has value.
Guys who can field a decent RF can be found easily. Plus, RF in Yankee Stadium is not that tough to play. Guys who can play an outstanding CF are hard to find.
Why not a better producing 2B? Hey, no fight here. Why not? If possible, it wouldn’t bother me.
As far as “you can want better, but you can’t need better,” that’s an opinion thing. If you’re OK and live with someone who is just a few ticks abouve average, then, yes, you don’t need more. But, if you’re someone who believes that you should never be satisified with “just OK” or “around average,” then, well, you do “need” better.
For me, being “OK” with “near average” should be the mindset of a Mets fan. On the other hand, “Yankees” should want excellence or near excellence – as that’s the Yankees standard…per their management team and mission statement.
don’t we need a second baseman and a CF too?
======
the prob with CF is that there aren’t many premier CFers in the league anymore. We were spoiled with Bernie, and now that he’s gone we can see that. We passed on the best CF in the leagues a few years ago and hes on the DL across town. The reason, I think, Steve is sayin we need an upgrade in RF is because the corner outfield spot are traditionally an all bat-less glove type of position, and those types are much much much easier to find than a premier CF.
Steve Lombardi wrote:
Be that as it may, Cal Ripken, Alex Rodriguez, Nomah, Miguel Tejada & Derek Jeter added value to their teams because they brought exceptional offense to a position where it wasn’t the norm.
Steve Lombardi wrote:
Yet, when the Yankees had the opportunity to add Manny Ramirez after the 2000 season, they passed
Swisher is 10th among everyday RF in WAR. He has been the 10th most valuable everyday RF’er in baseball. If you really demand excellence at every position, you will have a payroll of 300 million dollars. A top 10 RF’er is good enough for me. Yankees fans demand the team as a whole be excellent. I do no think anyone expects to have a top 5 player at every position, except for Steve Lombardi.
at risk of this comments section deteriorating into a discussion on what is and is not an opinion, i don’t think what is a “need” and what isn’t has much room for interpretation. a little, sure. but a need is generally something that is a glaring weakness that needs to be filled. it has a definition, and by definition a need is something that is or at least near essential. i’m not “OK” with average at each position, but i also realize that demanding excellence at each position is neither reasonable nor essential (look at some of the bats at corner spots in our most recent championships). certainly, having a few league average bats on the team is not a weakness that needs to be corrected. would it be nice to “upgrade”? sure. but at the end of the day, cashman didn’t say “we have no places we can upgrade at this point.” he said the yankees don’t have any needs, ie. glaring weakness, and that was the purpose of this thread. by definition, having slightly above average bats (i’d argue 115 and 116 ops+ are not slightly above average, pedroia won the mvp last year with a 122, but i digress), at 3 positions is not something that is a glaring weakness that “needs” to be fixed or else.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
Again, in my opinion, who cares what position the guy plays? A batter is a batter is a batter – regardless of the position he plays….
Swisher is the “10th most valuable everyday RF?” Does that mean anything without knowing how many other eveyrday RFers there are? Is he #10 out of 20? 30? That’s a big difference. And, is he #10 because his numbers are very close to the top 9 guys? Or, is he #10 because numbers 11 thru 30 suck? Again, that’s a big difference.
Raf wrote:
Because of age, price and baggage. Not because of the bat.
Steve, now I think you are pulling my leg. As I’ve said a number of times, the position makes a difference because those are the guys you are going to replace him with. You are not going to get a second baseman and stick him out there. Thus far this season, there are 9 guys who play his position who you would replace him with, and 20 teams playing with a worse answer in right. I cannot say it any clearer than that.
have to agree with yagotta…I just don’t see how you compare a RF to a 2b if the intent is meant to replace that position, in this case RF
Steve Lombardi wrote:
There are about 75 games left in the season, the difference between 1 run per 16 games and 1 run per 8 games over that span is 4-5 runs.
That’s what you’re clamoring the Yankees to trade for, Steve.
Now, me, I’m greedy. I want those 4-5 runs too. But if you’re thinking or trading for Mr. 10 RCAA (hmmm….we need to call Mr. RCAA a name…well, if the Yanks traded for one, we’d all celebrate, so let’s call him Mr. Holliday…)
As I was saying, just what are you willing to trade to have a Holliday celebration in right field?
Now account for the Beane Factor, and multiply the value of that package by 3.
Now, ask yourself if that package is actually worth 5 runs over the last 75 games. You will get a much nicer BAVG to look at, of course.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
I’d be willing to buy that if we were talking about a C or a SS – where there are special skills required to play that position. But, RF?!?!?! Really? Pull-ease.
Why only compare Swisher to all the other RF? What not compare him to all RF, CF and most LF – since they have the skills to also play RF? Where does Swisher rank compared to all other OF?
Because Steve, while they may have the skills, this is not a video game- when a GM replaces a RF, they do so with a RF’er. I am not in front of a computer, but I see no reason to assume that he would be outside the top 3rd if you included all everyday outfielders.
Gotta call bull on that yagotta.
For example, when the Red Sox replaced LF Troy O’Leary, they acquired Manny Ramirez, who was a RF for years before that, to replace him,
Further, last season, the great Nick Swisher played 71 games at 1B, 70 games at CF, 18 games in LF and 18 games in RF. And, now he’s playing RF for the Yankees.
You don’t have to always replace a LF with a LF, and a RF with a RF, etc. Many, many, times you can replace a RF with an OF – or even an OF/IB type.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
Per my CBE, all OF in 2009 with at least 70 games played, ranked by RCAA
Rank RCAA
1 Ryan Braun 29
2 Ichiro Suzuki 26
3 Adam Dunn 25
T4 Adam Lind 24
T4 Shin-Soo Choo 24
T4 Luke Scott 24
T7 Matt Kemp 23
T7 Josh Willingham 23
9 Brad Hawpe 22
10 Torii Hunter 21
11 Jason Bay 20
12 Jermaine Dye 19
13 Justin Upton 18
14 Bobby Abreu 17
T15 Shane Victorino 16
T15 Jayson Werth 16
T17 Johnny Damon 15
T17 Jason Kubel 15
19 Carl Crawford 13
T20 Mike Cameron 12
T20 Nate McLouth 12
T20 Juan Rivera 12
T23 Michael Bourn 11
T23 Gary Sheffield 11
T23 Adam Jones 11
T26 Carlos Lee 10
T26 J.D. Drew 10
T26 Juan Pierre 10
T26 Seth Smith 10
T30 Ryan Ludwick 9
T30 Hunter Pence 9
32 Matt Holliday 8
33 Nelson Cruz 7
T34 Michael Cuddyer 6
T34 Curtis Granderson 6
T36 Colby Rasmus 5
T36 Willie Harris 5
T36 Nick Swisher 5
T36 Nick Markakis 5
T40 Cody Ross 4
T40 Aaron Rowand 4
T42 Andre Ethier 3
T42 Franklin Gutierrez 3
T42 Denard Span 3
T45 David Murphy 2
T45 Jacoby Ellsbury 2
T45 Kosuke Fukudome 2
48 Brett Gardner 1
T49 Melky Cabrera 0
T49 Chris Dickerson 0
T49 Milton Bradley 0
T52 Ken Griffey Jr. -1
T52 Grady Sizemore -1
T52 Marlon Byrd -1
T55 Nate Schierholtz -2
T55 Jeremy Hermida -2
T55 Laynce Nix -2
T58 Corey Hart -3
T58 Jack Cust -3
T58 Ryan Spilborghs -3
T58 Jeremy Reed -3
T58 Dexter Fowler -3
63 Vernon Wells -4
T64 Ben Francisco -5
T64 Fred Lewis -5
T64 Chris Duncan -5
T67 Garret Anderson -6
T67 Brandon Moss -6
T67 Ryan Church -6
T67 Randy Winn -6
T67 Nyjer Morgan -6
T72 Alex Rios -7
T72 B.J. Upton -7
T74 Alfonso Soriano -8
T74 Josh Anderson -8
T74 Chase Headley -8
T77 Carlos Gomez -9
T77 Darin Erstad -9
T77 David DeJesus -9
T80 Jose Guillen -11
T80 Rick Ankiel -11
T80 Ryan Sweeney -11
T80 Austin Kearns -11
84 Magglio Ordonez -12
T85 Chris Young -13
T85 Jay Bruce -13
87 Jeff Francoeur -14
88 Willy Taveras -20
Swisher is 36th out of 88
Pretty much middle of the pack – or, AVERAGE…as I have said all along
Just out of curiosity, because I am not terribly familiar with RCAA, is it adjusted for position, does it include defense, or is it simply a hitting stat?
Oh, and I think 36 out of 88 would qualify as slightly above average, as I said all along.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
Runs Created Above Average [RCAA]
This is a Lee Sinins creation. It’s the difference between a player’s runs created total and the total for an average player who used the same amount of his team’s outs. A negative RCAA indicates a below average player in this category.
Further, via
http://blog.kir.com/archives/Stros%20stats%20glossary.pdf
The following hitting stats are park adjusted–RCAA, RCAP, OWP. The stats are park adjusted since they are an attempt to compare the player’s performance to the average player in his environment. The player’s environment is not just the league and year in which he played, but also what park he played in. While stadiums affect players’ performances, in most cases, the effects are very small and shouldn’t change our evaluations of the players. But, extreme parks have big effects on player stats, and those extreme effects are reflected in the calculations for those stats. To show how most park
adjustments do not have noticeable effects on the results, I can provide the following figures for the 2000 season. I calculated RCAA & RSAA, both with and without park facts. 80% of all RCAA either remained the same or changed
by no more than +/- 2, while the same could be said about 85% of RSAA.
yagottagotomo1 wrote:
36/88 = 41% – this means Swisher is just outside the top 40%, offensively, of all full-time OFers. And, to me, such performance is not stellar, and not even very good – and could/should be upgraded. Which, was my original point made in this entry.
And, with this, I’ll stand my my opinion and leave it at that…
And I will stick by my point that by most metrics I have looked at, Swish is in the top 3rd at his position, and that is good enough for me.
Steve Lombardi wrote:
At what cost, Steve? How much are you willing to give for an upgrade in right?
Of the guys above Swisher, here’s the list of those that are available (unless you want to “overwhelm” the teams owning the others):
Dunn (basically a hyper-Swisher, and even worse defensively, with even more K’s, oh, and more expensive, to boot), Luke Scott (for whom McPhail will overprice preposterously, if the Yanks come calling), Josh Willingham, Jermaine Dye (another overpay situation, as the ChiSox are in the battle for AL Central title), Kubel, maybe Carlos Lee (Astros are still in the NL Wild Card battle, and well in the NL Central race), Seth Smith (platoon player, doesn’t play vs. lefties), Cuddyer (same situation as Kubel), and that’s basically it for players above Swisher on the list.
Players below Swisher on the list who are nevertheless clearly better (based on past performance), and who might be available are: Milton Bradley, Alex Rios, and Vernon Wells, and each of those players carry their own very, very heavy baggage.
So, as I say, how much are you willing to give up for an upgrade? How big an upgrade will it be? Is it worth the price short-term; that is, is it likely to have any significant impact this season? What about long-term? Is that positive impact remotely equivalent to the long-term loss in talented prospects that might be necessary?
we still haven’t addressed the fact that “upgrade” and “need” have the pacific ocean between them! you can want to upgrade without having a need. further, this conversation is now bordering on the absurd! as evan pointed out, the difference between what swisher provides and what an elite RF provides is not massive. hence, even “upgrading” in RF is just not going to be the difference for the yankees this year, especially considering you don’t get elite RF’s for free (again as evan pointed out, doing a stellar job in this thread). the yankees have the best offense in baseball. there is more than enough to go around. it’s not even remotely a concern for this club. anything they lose by having average bats at offensive-minded positions (traditionally) they make up for by having way above average at non-offensive minded positions (traditionally). what this team needs to worry about is a third consistent starter behind sabathia and burnett (be it joba, pettitte, wang, hughes, or someone from outside the organization).
Steve Lombardi wrote:
Age? He was only 29. Younger than O’Neill, Justice, Glenallen Hill & Canseco
Price? They were already tops in payroll, and would wind up re-signing O’Neill and adding Moose.
Baggage? They already had Canseco, Polonia and Gooden on the team.
i mean, the question you have to ask yourself is, how many teams have #8 hitters that have 14 home runs, 47 RBI, and 52 walks at the all-star break? the answer is most likely positively zero outside of the one we all root for. are these the only stats that matter? no. but everybody understands that these particular stats have incredible value, especially when you consider that he bats 8th. when you are getting any kind of serious value out of your #8 hitter, even if it isn’t perfect, this is a big deal. could it be upgraded? of course, you can always upgrade until you have the best 9 players in baseball in the same lineup. is it a need? not even close. and if it is, wow, the yankees are in phenomenal shape.