• Yankees Sign Chan Ho Park

    Posted by on February 22nd, 2010 · Comments (35)

    Via mlb.com

    Right-hander Chan Ho Park, who pitched for the National League champion Phillies in 2009, announced early Monday that he has reached a one-year agreement with the World Series champion Yankees, according to Korea’s Yonhap News Agency.

    Park, 36, a native of Korea, made the announcement at Park 61, a fitness center he opened in Seoul after last season, when he went 3-3 with a 4.43 ERA in 45 games, including seven starts, for the Phillies.

    The press conference occurred after 1 a.m. ET. The Yankees have not made a formal announcement. The contract is reported to be for $1.2 million, with incentives that could net an extra $300,000, provided Park passes a physical.

    MLB Network analyst Jon Heyman had reported that the Cubs, Rays and Yankees were possible destinations for Park.

    Park is expected to pitch out of the Yankees’ bullpen.

    Park will be 37-years old this season and has been a below league average pitcher in 7 of the last 8 seasons. How and why the Yankees found room for this signing within their “budget” is beyond me. Really, I’m speechless on this one. The only thing I can guess is…that they couldn’t talk Rich Monteleone into coming out of retirement and this was their next best move?

    Comments on Yankees Sign Chan Ho Park

    1. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 9:56 am

      Let’s not overreact here. CHOP was an effective reliever last year, compiling a 3.25 K/BB and holding opposing hitters to a .231/.296/.280 line. He throws hard out of the pen, sitting in the mid-90s IIRC, and pitches very well against righties.
      Yeah he’s 37 but this isn’t that much money, and if he sucks he’s gone and easily replaceable.

    2. clintfsu813
      February 22nd, 2010 | 9:59 am

      @ YankCrank:
      Same thought here. Dont see much risk in this.

    3. clintfsu813
      February 22nd, 2010 | 9:59 am

      I like CHOP by the way. Gonna use that one this year. Chop it up!

    4. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:05 am

      clintfsu813 wrote:

      I like CHOP by the way. Gonna use that one this year. Chop it up!

      Haha wish I could say I came up with it, but I did not. I usually call him Chan Park Ho, because a friend of mine I often play fantasy baseball with could never get his name right and constantly screwed up his name, calling him Chan Park Ho.

    5. Corey Italiano
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:06 am

      Hughes will start the year in AAA, calling that now.

    6. February 22nd, 2010 | 10:10 am

      @ Corey Italiano: Either that, or, maybe they’re concerned with Robertson holding up all year?

    7. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:14 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      and has been a below league average pitcher in 7 of the last 8 seasons.

      Not as a reliever. You should dig a little deeper than his ERA+ on his BR page.

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      How and why the Yankees found room for this signing within their “budget” is beyond me.

      I’ll explain it: Mitre’s contract is for $0.8M, Gaudin’s is for $2.5M (or something around there.) The 40 man roster is full. Park’s contract is for $1.25M + $0.3M in incentives. Stand by for a corresponding move. I’m betting on Gaudin going to a team like Oakland, San Diego, or Cleveland.

    8. clintfsu813
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:19 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ Corey Italiano: Either that, or, maybe they’re concerned with Robertson holding up all year?

      I was thinking this too. With so many young relievers having great years last year..im thinking they signed CHOP for insurance and depth

    9. #15
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:31 am

      Yawn.

    10. February 22nd, 2010 | 10:31 am

      @ jay: That’s the thing that’s vexing me on this one. If you have Gaudin, why do you need Park? Six of one, half dozen…

      …or, as they say in the ‘hood: Same difference.

    11. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:41 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ jay: That’s the thing that’s vexing me on this one. If you have Gaudin, why do you need Park? Six of one, half dozen…
      …or, as they say in the ‘hood: Same difference.

      First, you should look at Park’s xFIP as a reliever. His peripherals are substantially better than Gaudin’s. xFIP is substantially better at predicting future success than ERA.

      Second, Gaudin makes twice as much Park will make and is 10 years younger. If you import Park to do the same job (only a bit better), for half the cost, and can net some organizational filler prospects in return (instead of an 8th starter), what’s not to like about this?

      If I can be blunt, in light of your recent survey results where several people claimed you were overly pessimistic, your analysis here might benefit from some time to digest. If you look at this closely, you’ll see that the Yankees are likely positioning themselves to cut $1M+ from their payroll *and* net (at least) some minor league filler while not losing any performance at the major league level.

    12. February 22nd, 2010 | 10:46 am

      @ jay: Thanks for including the word “likely” – because you are just guessing/assuming here. Or, wishful thinking?

      Me? I’m more of a “Expect nothing, but be prepared for anything” guy when it comes to the Yankees front office. Of course, your mileage may vary…and that’s fine.

    13. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:55 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      @ jay: Thanks for including the word “likely” – because you are just guessing/assuming here. Or, wishful thinking?

      Well, in the end, it’s all ‘likely.’ If you could absolutely predict the future performance of a baseball player, you’d be a pretty hot commodity.

      The point of my third paragraph was that, while, yes it is all based on the assessments we make using the tools we have, this conversation *should* be about the merits of the acquired player and his cost vs. the player he would be replacing and his (net) cost. Yet your reaction was “Really, I’m speechless on this one. The only thing I can guess is…that they couldn’t talk Rich Monteleone into coming out of retirement and this was their next best move?” which reeks of bias, is not analytical at all, and is consistent with some of your (very) recently posted reader comments.

      I’m trying very hard to show you that while I disagree with you, (1) I am not making a personal attack against you (which I think you understand) and (2) the criticism of your predisposition is very valid.

    14. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 10:58 am

      @ jay:
      You make some good points, didn’t really think of a corresponding deal when I first heard of Park.
      It makes sense, seeing as Gaudin can be far more valuable to a team that “truly” has an audition for their 5th starter. I see Gaudin being a rather expensive bullpen piece at this point, so you may be correct in the Yanks thinking of dealing him.

    15. February 22nd, 2010 | 11:14 am

      @ jay:

      I hear what you’re saying about my posting style. But, by definition, a blog is a website that allows a writer/owner to reflect, share opinions, and discuss various topics in the form of an online journal while readers may comment on posts.

      And, that’s what I’m doing here: reflecting, sharing my opinions, and discuss various Yankees-related things.

      The minute I start forcing things because I think they’re “happy” thoughts and/or because I’m trying to please a reader (giving them what they want to hear as opposed to sharing my personal opinion/perspective on topics), then I’m a phony.

      Again, these are my true and personal reflections, thoughts, opinions and reactions. That’s what a blog should be – by definition.

      I’m not trying to sell a product here or please a particular audience. It is what it is, and, if you like it, great, if not…then, so be it.

    16. February 22nd, 2010 | 11:17 am

      Just an add on to the Park/Gaudin angle. In general, it’s better to have a 27 year old pitcher than a 37 year old one – when they’re close in skill – because the 27 year old is less likely to breakdown or quickly lose his skill.

    17. butchie22
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:22 am

      jay wrote:

      Steve Lombardi wrote:@ jay: That’s the thing that’s vexing me on this one. If you have Gaudin, why do you need Park? Six of one, half dozen…
      …or, as they say in the ‘hood: Same difference. First, you should look at Park’s xFIP as a reliever. His peripherals are substantially better than Gaudin’s. xFIP is substantially better at predicting future success than ERA.Second, Gaudin makes twice as much Park will make and is 10 years younger. If you import Park to do the same job (only a bit better), for half the cost, and can net some organizational filler prospects in return (instead of an 8th starter), what’s not to like about this?If I can be blunt, in light of your recent survey results where several people claimed you were overly pessimistic, your analysis here might benefit from some time to digest. If you look at this closely, you’ll see that the Yankees are likely positioning themselves to cut $1M+ from their payroll *and* net (at least) some minor league filler while not losing any performance at the major league level.

      Even still The Chopper is still a bewildering signing. More apropos for a team like the NY Mess rather than a contenders like The Bombers. If you must compare Gaudin to Park, that tells us how pennywise and pound foolish Cash Man has been. It also proves my consistent point about sabremetrics and viewing them from a certain angle to make a middling player much better than he is. I don’t value Chad the Cad Gaudin highly to begin with so that analogy versus the Korean Chopper doesn’t hold much weight. Cad is a long man/spot/ 6th starter on this team. Ultimately, I share Steve’s intial reaction. I was agast at this signing.Do they need another has been/never was like Chad the Cad, Sergio Valente Mitre or The Chopper? I think not……

      Now that the YankCrankees ( shout out to the Cranker!) have brought in another Asian Sensation, where is the Japanese connection? Why not bring up Igawa san…HAHAHAHAHA! Isn’t he the winningest pitcher in the history of Scranton-Wilkes Barres? I’d love to se someone bring up his peripherals vs the Cad/Valente/ Chopper crowd. As loathsome as the Japanese Sunglass Man is ,he will still have some stat head that will make him look good.

    18. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:27 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      I’ll consolidate my response into one post. Re: your first post, that’s fine, man. I’m just pointing out what I’m reading and how I’m interpreting it. You need to be true to yourself. If that’s what you feel, then that’s fine. I think what was bothering me a few weeks ago (which seems to have ebbed) is that you were way too quick to claim a disagreement was a personal attack. It’s not. If you’re going to speak your mind, you should be prepared to have others speak theirs, and many times it won’t be in agreement with you. But, hey, that’s what makes talking about sports (or anything) fun.

      Just an add on to the Park/Gaudin angle. In general, it’s better to have a 27 year old pitcher than a 37 year old one – when they’re close in skill – because the 27 year old is less likely to breakdown or quickly lose his skill.

      Yes, a 27 year old will be a better bet to match his project. But you don’t need to stop the analysis there. Gaudin’s 2010 projection has some size error bar associated with it, and so does Park’s. Gaudin’s is likely smaller because of his age. If we go with my expectation for what they’ll do, is that smaller error bar worth $1M plus a minor leaguer? It depends – we’ll have to see what, if anything, they do. It’s really about a transfer function – you put all the pieces on the table in the same language (apples or oranges, depending on your preference), and you compare them.

    19. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:33 am

      butchie22 wrote:

      jay wrote:

      I’ll save virtual trees and not paste your response to my post, but I will respond since you addressed me.

      I don’t really understand a word of what you said. You view Park as something, yet none of the facts support what claim you seem to make. Signing Park is not bewildering. It took me all of 5 minutes to determine that Park and Gaudin, in terms of expected performance, are quite similar, and in terms of cost, are about $1M apart. While you (and Steve) are supremely free to have your opinions, whether not you personally value Chad Gaudin, Sergio Mitre, Chan Ho Park, or any other player is completely irrelevant. The fact remains that these players have a certain value tied to their expected performance, and a cost explicitly stated in their contract. A comparison of the two is not very hard to do.

    20. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:34 am

      Steve Lombardi wrote:

      Just an add on to the Park/Gaudin angle. In general, it’s better to have a 27 year old pitcher than a 37 year old one – when they’re close in skill – because the 27 year old is less likely to breakdown or quickly lose his skill.

      If all things were equal, yes. But Gaudin is still a 27-year-old arm who will be making $2.5 million to clean up a mess in a blowout or spot start if needed. Mitre can do the same thing, and will be making far less. (I think we can all agree with Joba and Hughes, these two have no realisitc shot of winning the 5th starter spot out of spring training).
      Park is a guy who has proven he can be a successful reliever and will make less money, and put in the fact he may yield any form of an organizational depth piece (like jay commented on), and this makes it a win-win for the Yanks.

    21. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:36 am

      YankCrank wrote:

      Park is a guy who has proven he can be a successful reliever and will make less money, and put in the fact he may yield any form of an organizational depth piece (like jay commented on), and this makes it a win-win for the Yanks.

      Sorry, by “he” I meant Gaudin may yield an organizational piece. Obviously nothing of great value, but still something.

    22. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:41 am

      butchie22 wrote:

      Now that the YankCrankees ( shout out to the Cranker!)

      Haha, thanks for the shout-out, butch!

    23. Corey Italiano
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:57 am

      MY biggest problem is that they have this money spent with guys like Mitre, Gaudin, and now Park. Why couldn’t we just take this money and re-sign Wang? I’d rather them try to convert Wang into a reliever then have to watch either of these three pitch in pinstripes, again.

      Yes, I realize Wang won’t be ready to start the year…I’m gonna miss him, he was my favorite contemporary Yankee.

    24. antone
      February 22nd, 2010 | 11:59 am

      When I saw this signing I immediately thought of this Fan Graphs post:

      http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/breaking-news-chan-ho-park-is-good

      Interesting read for sure.

    25. Jake1
      February 22nd, 2010 | 12:36 pm

      nothing wrong with adding options out there.

      real issue is the whole budget thing which apparently was BS. why cant he just tell the truth and say he didnt want damon?

    26. Jake1
      February 22nd, 2010 | 12:37 pm

      @ Corey Italiano:
      i guess someone didnt watch wang pitch last yr. and whos to say he would want to be a reliever. starters make a lil bit more $

    27. Corey Italiano
      February 22nd, 2010 | 12:39 pm

      Jake1 wrote:

      @ Corey Italiano:
      i guess someone didnt watch wang pitch last yr. and whos to say he would want to be a reliever. starters make a lil bit more $

      lol. Out of all people, I can easily say I saw every pitch last year. How about you?

      Or what about the fact that you have no idea what your talking about with regard to Wang’s pay?

    28. Corey Italiano
      February 22nd, 2010 | 12:41 pm

      @ Corey Italiano:
      OR what about the fact that this discussion involves Gaudin and Mitre, both of whom ARE STARTERS.

    29. YankCrank
      February 22nd, 2010 | 1:04 pm

      @ Jake1:

      The verdict isn’t in on whether or not the Yankees stick to their budget, but if they trade Gaudin as a result of this deal, they wind up saving money. Let’s wait and see.

    30. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 2:10 pm

      Jake1 wrote:

      nothing wrong with adding options out there.
      real issue is the whole budget thing which apparently was BS. why cant he just tell the truth and say he didnt want damon?

      Hardly. Someone on the roster has to go, because the 40 man roster is full. If it’s Mitre or Gaudin, it’ll either be a net payroll increase or decrease.

      Corey Italiano wrote:

      @ Corey Italiano:
      OR what about the fact that this discussion involves Gaudin and Mitre, both of whom ARE STARTERS.

      What’s your point about Mitre and Gaudin being starters? I’ve got news for you: if Mitre and/or Gaudin are on the 25 man roster (which they have to be without clearing waivers), then they’re not going to be starters, unless something goes very wrong.

    31. Corey Italiano
      February 22nd, 2010 | 2:27 pm

      jay wrote:

      What’s your point about Mitre and Gaudin being starters? I’ve got news for you: if Mitre and/or Gaudin are on the 25 man roster (which they have to be without clearing waivers), then they’re not going to be starters, unless something goes very wrong.

      My point is that he was telling me that we can’t have Wang out of the ‘pen because he is a starter. Well, I had to point out that both Mitre and Gaudin are starters since we were talking about them.

      And, what makes you think that Gaudin or Mitre will be off the 40 man and not Edwar Ramirez? Or Garcia for that matter?

      Is it just me or are people getting a bit snippy for some reason today?

    32. Jeteupthemiddle Allie
      February 22nd, 2010 | 5:14 pm

      I like the idea I’ve seen tossed around at various blogs about the Yankees possibly trading Mitre to the Dodgers for Hoffman’s rights so that the Yankees could send the outfielder to AAA if he doesn’t make it on the 25.

      As for this signing, I think it is a low risk/decent reward type of thing.

    33. jay
      February 22nd, 2010 | 6:32 pm

      Corey Italiano wrote:

      And, what makes you think that Gaudin or Mitre will be off the 40 man and not Edwar Ramirez? Or Garcia for that matter?

      The issue is not the 40 man roster, it’s the 25 man roster.

      Here’s how I figure the first 23 spots on the 25 man roster:

      Johnson (1)
      Cervelli, Posada (2)
      Teixiera, Cano, Jeter, Rodriguez, Pena (5)
      Swisher, Granderson, Gardner, Hoffmann, Winn (5)
      Sabathia, Burnett, Pettitte, Vazquez, Chamberlain (5)
      Rivera, Marte, Hughes, Robertson, Aceves (5)

      Add Park and you’re up to 24. I’m assuming that they’re at least going to give Hoffmann a shot because they went to the trouble of trading for him.

      So you’re down to one spot for two players (Mitre or Gaudin).

      Some outside the box ideas include optioning Gardner, Hughes, Chamberlain or Aceves (all of whom have options), but then you’re talking about choosing Mitre or Gaudin over your starting LF, your primary long man from last year, or one of your 5th or 6th best starting pitchers.

      So, yeah, that’s why I think it’ll be one of Mitre or Gaudin. It’s because Park will eventually end up on the 25 man. Since that’s the case, why would (using your suggestions) you try to pass Edwar Ramirez through waivers (he’s out of options) or burn an option on Chris Garcia, who was just added for Rule 5 protection and will have to be protected again for the 2010 Rule 5 draft? That doesn’t make any sense.

    34. Joseph M
      February 22nd, 2010 | 9:11 pm

      Now it’s official Cashman is 0 for the postseason. Maybe this gets fixed during the season but a lot of bad things have happened since the parade.

    35. clintfsu813
      February 23rd, 2010 | 10:08 am

      Has anyone else seen that both Andy and CC have homered off of CHOP in the past? LOL.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.