@ clintfsu813:
since when is a dh supposed to hit .280 or .300. if your looking for that you’ll find exactly 2 players who was a regular dh and hit over .280. adam lind and jason kubel each hitting .305 and .300 respectively. a dh is supposed to be ur typical power hitter guy who hits hrs and drives in runs. so good luck and have fun finding ur .300 hitting dh out there.

man i really started a hell of an arguement bringing upo cust. i actually suggested signing nick johnsons or having posada dh and cervelli catch before i would sign cust. to me cust would be more of a backup plan. i agree with corey in that ur only using him to, number 1, DH and number 2, only when ur not using that spot for some like jete or arod or posada or tex. wouldnt be a catostrophic signing i dont think.

@ Evan3457:
No, the guy they sign to DH must be a high average hitter (.280 or better, preferably more like .300 or better) without a very high K rate.

Other than Damon, who would fit this mold? Nick Johnson?

Evan3457 wrote:

Cust might be productive, but…he’s older than Swisher (believe it or not), he has huge negative defensive value, and should not be played in the field, meaning the team will have to keep 4 or 5 outfielders besides him

Is that not the plan anyway?
Evan3457 wrote:

Worst of all, he’ll tie up the DH slot, which was the point of not re-signing Matsui.

You’re not reading what I’m saying.

And if you’ve listened to me in the past, I’ve heavily advocated Matsui re-signing.

77yankees wrote:

With Juan Pierre off to play in Chicago with the White Sox, one potential trading option for Gardner is gone.

Guess Cashman is hoping Gardner will turn into a .330, 70 SB guy like he’s hoping Kei Igawa will finally blossom into a 20 game winner.

What’s wrong with keeping Gardner as a defensive replacement/pinch runner/part-time OF while his service time is low, and his salary is cheap? Unless the Yanks get offered something of value, I don’t see the need to just dump him.

================================
I would say, at this point, NO to Cust.

Having one Nick Swisher in the lineup is fine. A Swisher and a Granderson, OK, because Granderson can play some defense, and has hit better than .249 in the past. But one more “three true outcomes” hitter in the lineup tips the balance. Too many all or nothing hitters. No, the guy they sign to DH must be a high average hitter (.280 or better, preferably more like .300 or better) without a very high K rate. I would’ve opposed signing Cameron for the same reason, albeit at a lower level than Cust. Preferably, the guy they sign should also draw BB. He need not be a big HR hitter, but he must be productive. Ideally, it’s Damon for $10 million or less for no longer than 1 year with a team option.

Cust might be productive, but…he’s older than Swisher (believe it or not), he has huge negative defensive value, and should not be played in the field, meaning the team will have to keep 4 or 5 outfielders besides him, and he’s more extreme in K’s than Swisher. He’ll hit a few more HRs, far fewer doubles, and his BAVG will be as bad or worse. Worst of all, he’ll tie up the DH slot, which was the point of not re-signing Matsui.

If the Yanks are going to sign Cust (or Vlad, for that matter), then they should’ve signed Matsui, and let it go at that.

With Juan Pierre off to play in Chicago with the White Sox, one potential trading option for Gardner is gone.

Guess Cashman is hoping Gardner will turn into a .330, 70 SB guy like he’s hoping Kei Igawa will finally blossom into a 20 game winner.

@ Corey:
Curb the sarcasm. Over the past three years, in one of which he played only 124 games, he’s averaged 182 strike-outs per year. And inthe year when he played in 124 games — which seems to be what you have in mind when the older regulars rest — he still managed to whiff 164 times. Over that time, his OBP has trended steadily downward. As I said in my first comment, I’ll pass on Jack Cust. You are certainly entitled to differ.

And although I mentioned it already, I’ll do it again. I’m not talking about 162 games of Cust at the DH spot. I’m talking about when no regulars are DHing, he is the one who DHs. Otherwise he rides pine and pinch hits. I mean…this WAS their plan, no?

Scout wrote:

Cust struck out 185 times last year, about 40 more Ks than Swisher; Cust had an OBP of .348, while Swisher was.371. Among Yankee regulars and semi-regulars, only Cabrera and Gardener had a lower OBP than Cust. He’s a black hole in the line-up, sucking in any rally unfortunate enough to wander into his gravitational sphere. No thanks, I’ll pass on him.

Ya, you’re right. Let’s disregard career numbers completely, and go only based on last year. Since he had a bad 2008, I guess you’d say Swisher is an even bigger black hole. I mean, OMG he had only a .332 OBP!!!

@ Steve Lombardi:
PED stuff…I had forgotten about that, honestly. That doesn’t really affect me on a 1 year deal. He probably would get an extremely low base salary having been non-tendered by the A’s. So if he breaks down, let him go. Worst case scenario is your plan, which I could live with if a risk doesn’t pan out.

As for points 1 and 3..1,. Yea. Do we need a guy that can play the field? He’d be the 25th man on the roster. Sure, it’d be nice. But the 25th man on the roster shouldn’t be getting all that much playing time, anyway.

3 I am well aware of, that’s why I made the Nick Swisher comparison. If Swisher’s walk rate didn’t drop, I don’t see why Cust’s would. My line-up with Cust:

1)Jeter
2)Cano
3)Tex
4)A-Rod
5)Granderson
6)Posada
7)Swisher
8)Cust
9)Melky