The Bronx View

I’m proud to announce that this is the one millionth post on the internet about Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes!  In honor of this occasion, we’re having ribs.

But seriously… I do some driving throughout the day.  Not a lot.  I’m not a salesman or taxi driver.  But I spend some time in my car.

Because of this, I usually wind up listening to sports talk radio. I’ve given up on the FM dial, especially in New York where the radio is flooded with pop music, classic rock and little else. For someone who likes sports and hates popular music, there is little choice.

It’s not easy, though.  It’s darn near impossible to be an objective baseball fan while gathering your news from the New York media. News in general is so slanted toward the negative while the pundits make their ratings by expressing what they believe to be the contrary opinion. This usually has the reverse effect when those that actually do gather their news from these sources repeat these contrary opinions at the water cooler the next day.

It’s no wonder why so many people on 660 WFAN in New York call up with so many crazy ideas.

I firmly believe that this rampant contrarian point of view is part of the reason why the baseball writing establishment has had such a difficult time accepting the concept of sabermetrics. It’s not that sabermetrics represents anything bad.  Even the most uninformed statistical person would have to concede that the intentions of the people creating some of these new statistics are pure and can therefore assume that they’re not insidiously hiding negative factors into WAR and Win Shares just to stick it to Murray Chase.

In fact, it’s not so much what sabermetrics does that is threatening to the baseball writing establishment, but what it encourages: objective analysis.

Some of the newer statistics can bend your mind a little bit.  I won’t deny that.  But there has also been an effort to make reading these statistics easier by basing them against the league average.  The higher you are above zero or one hundred (depending on your statistic), the better the player has performed. This makes looking at certain numbers pretty easy.

Most writers in the mainstream baseball media don’t care about such things, though.  The average Yankee fan isn’t going to call up Mike Francesa at WFAN and and talk about Derek Jeter’s steadily improving UZR over the last few seasons. It’s too much work for Joe Baseballfan and way too much work for Mike Francesa to either store that information in his brain or type fast enough to load FanGraphs and speak confidently on the numbers themselves.

More importantly, it’s difficult to be contrarian when presenting actual evidence. It’s much easier to create a false argument based on hyperbole than it is one rooted in fact.  With little actual fact to back up the argument, Joe Baseballfan will get agitated because he disagrees and has a different hyperbolic, unquantifiable reason why, say…  Robinson Cano can’t seem to hit in the clutch.  In it’s own way, it benefits the mainstream media to be lazy and vague because presenting good evidence would curb discussion that drives ratings and what few newspaper sale there are left.

Rarely has this dysfunctional form of communication ignited a story more than the ongoing saga of Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes.

The Yankees entered spring training saying all the right things: nobody has the fifth starter job locked up; everyone has a chance, regardless of their role last year; this is a competition and may the best man win.

That’s all fine.  Baseball is a sport, after all, and if nothing else sport is rooted in competition. It should be competition that theoretically brings out the best in an athlete’s performance.  The need to work hard and excel at one’s craft should go a long way toward improving that person’s skills and ability.

So yeah, I get why the Yankees have entered the spring with that as their mantra both in the fifth starter’s slot and in left field. The thing is, when it comes to the rotation, I have a hard time believing it.

The Yankees have spent the last two seasons nurturing Joba Chamberlain’s young arm in preparation for a hopefully injury-free career as a starting pitcher.  They did this for one reason: they believe Joba has the ability to be a good or, dare I say great, starting pitcher.

Joba’s performance to this point has been a bit confusing.  In 2008, after leaving the bullpen to join the rotation, Joba posted an impressive 2.76 ERA in an injury shortened season. In 2009 as a starter, he posted a more pedestrian and below league average 4.78 ERA.

Which is the real Joba?  One would hope he’s somewhere in between.  Considering the Joba was only 23 last season, we have every reason to believe that he will steadily improve for a couple of seasons barring any type of permanent or lingering arm damage.  That’s a reasonable expectation given what we know about how starting pitchers develop.

The Yankees are aware of this, too, which makes the current competition for the fifth starter’s spot a little strange. Surely, the Yankees can’t base the future of both Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain on a bunch of starts in spring training.  We do have a track record of what both pitchers have done in the majors so far which is much more indicative of their abilities than 22 innings in Tampa.  Joba’s ability to start without limitation this season compared to Hughes’ limited innings would seem to be the deciding factor, especially given the Yankees acquisition of Javier Vazquez in an effort to secure more innings out of their starters.

It would also seem that if Joba were to fail in spring training on such a level as to force his way out of the rotation, it would be questionable whether he could be trusted in the bullpen.  He only needs to be good, not great, to get the fifth starters spot.  If he can’t be trusted there, he probably can’t be trusted anywhere.

Consider Joba and Hughes’ career numbers in the majors:

(the bold columns are only there to make it easier to read)

Joba has more innings and also a better overall performance but his trend has been upward a bit.  Hughes, meanwhile, dealt with a leg injury in 2008 that severely limited his innings and went to the bullpen last season to get more major league experience.  Both men are decent pitchers for their ages which means their success in the bullpen should not be a surprise.  Both have also exhibited the same pattern, which is pitching very well out of the pen and having more difficulty in the rotation.

That’s to be expected for a young pitcher.  The Yankees are not an organization that typically allows a starting pitcher, never mind two, to develop on the major league roster.  That makes it difficult to plan a full season of work for both men in 2010.

But there will likely be opportunities for a sixth starter to make a major contribution in 2010.  In 2009, five starters outside of the main four combined for 32 starts.  In 2008, the Yankees spread 33 starts amongst 7 starters who weren’t considered part of the rotation while Joba,  Sidney Ponson and Chien-Ming Wang split 42 starts in the fifth spot.  In 2007, the also split 29 starts between eight different starters.

The moral of the story?  More likely than not, there will be opportunities for Phil Hughes to pitch in the rotation at the major league level, making this little competition with Joba somewhat unnecessary.

The remaining question: where do you put Hughes in the meantime that he can be stretched out and ready for the rotation when/if that opportunity arises?  They can keep him in the pen and try and get him longer outings so that stretching him out could be a relatively quick and painless process.  They can make him a long man, possibly as a caddy to Joba should he struggle, but the expected innings would be a gamble.  Or, they can send him to the minors and let him start there until needed.

The minors is probably a waste of his arm and the long man option is a minefield of missed opportunities.  The best thing is probably for Hughes to start in the pen, hopefully throwing 2+ inning outings as much as he can.  If the rotation opened up, he could either make a few short starts with a long reliever as a caddy or go to AAA Scranton for three starts and get himself up to five innings if the need is long term.

Today, Mark McGwire admitted to having used steroids during his playing career.

For anyone with even a passing interest in baseball, this won’t be surprising.

What’s surprising to me is how sad I find this whole situation.

“I’m not here to talk about the past,” McGwire so infamously stated during a 2005 Congressional hearing ostensibly called to determine just how pervasive steroid use was in Major League Baseball.  I say ostensibly because while that may be how the hearing was portrayed to the public, in actuality it was little more than a cynical witch hunt designed to put a few of our more, shall we say, ambitious Congressmen in front of a national television audience.

They wanted to appear tough to their constituency.  They wanted to act as guardians of our nation’s great pastime.  They wanted blood.

March 16th, 2005 certainly wasn’t one of Major League Baseball’s greatest days.  We saw Rafael Palmeiro, one of his generation’s very greatest baseball talents, state with conviction, “I have never used steroids, period”.  This statement  began to live in infamy when, in August of that same year, Palmeiro tested positive for a banned substance and was suspended for 10 games.

Baseball fans watched intently in July of 2005 as Palmeiro became 1 of only 4 players in the game’s great history to collect 3000 hits and 500 home runs.  Just one month later, the man had to wear cotton balls in his ears to drown out of the chorus of boos and cat calls he was receiving on a nightly basis at visiting ballparks.

Just like that, in the blink of an eye or the prick of a needle, Rafael Palmeiro was transformed from finger-wagging, steroid-denying braggadocio to lowly, sad, broken former superstar.   His reputation will never fully recover.  He has slipped from a shoo-in first ballot Hall of Famer to now occupying the same purgatory as McGwire, whose testimony at that same Congressional hearing was so disastrous, so shockingly unconvincing, that for 5 years it has been looked upon as a covert confession.

Or at least until today.  McGwire, with languishing support for his Hall of Fame candidacy and a new job as the St. Louis Cardinals’ hitting coach, felt today was the right time to admit to everything everyone has suspected him of doing long since.

Think about it – what has changed in this nation’s consciousness between 1998 and 2010 to make us all so cynical when it comes to big guys putting up big numbers?  In 1998, we watched in anticipation as McGwire and Sammy Sosa both embarked on a chase to shatter one of baseball’s oldest and most hallowed records – Roger Maris’ 61 homeruns, set in the year 1961.  McGwire finished the 1998 season with 70 homeruns, Sosa with 66. In 1998, baseball fans could look upon those numbers and smile.  Nowadays, we look upon them and frown.

We collectively made these guys into folk heros just 12 years ago.  Now, there’s a constant campaign to denigrate them with nasty rumors, with vicious innuendo.  McGwire has been routinely mocked for his Congressional performance, his reluctance to discuss the past morphing into a national punchline.  He’s been portrayed as a hermit, a liar, a fraud, a bad person.  Sosa, meanwhile, is a particular kind of punching bag.  He’s been mocked for his shaky English during the 2005 hearing, was mocked for making a comeback attempt in 2007, and more recently, was mocked for appearing ‘too white’ at a public event.

When it was all happening, it was so exciting.  Baseball took a hit following the 1994 strike, but during the 1998 season, as McGwire and Sosa slugged their way into the history books, fans began to crawl back to the game they used to passionately love.  These were big guys with big personalities, hitting baseballs a very long way, and the country was enthralled.  I’ll never forget watching McGwire’s record breaking homerun quickly disappear just over the left field wall in St. Louis, and the joyous celebration that followed.  Everyone was in the big guy’s corner.

Four years later, he followed some bad legal advice and kept his mouth shut at a Congressional hearing that felt a lot like baseball’s own version of a witch hunt.  His eyes filled with tears.  It hurt him to be there, clearly, and the barrage of questions from our nation’s concerned Congressmen made it difficult to stick to the script.  He was drowning up there, and it was sad.  A lot of people thought it was funny.

The truth is a lot more complex than simply saying “Mark McGwire broke the rules”.  Yes, of course, he did break the rules; he used steroids, and steroids were not legal in baseball despite the absence of what one could term an MLB steroids ‘policy’.  That didn’t occur until 2003, and even then was only used as a survey to determine how serious it all was.  Turns out, it was pretty serious.

But a larger part of the truth is that taking steroids helped keep McGwire on the field, doing the things that he earned millions of dollars for doing – and that earned him the adulation of millions of people.  It’s not so black and white as “he cheated”.  Yes, he cheated, but there was an culture of cheating in baseball at the time, a culture that the public and particularly the baseball press chose actively to ignore.  McGwire could have sat idly by as countless peers used steroids to extend their careers, to improve their offensive output, to get stronger, faster, better.  He could have taken the high road – of course he could have – but what’s the likelihood that you, or I, or anyone in that particular climate would have chosen peace of mind over millions of dollars in salary and endorsements and the chance to break some storied records and to be admired?

Everyone enjoyed the ride 12 years ago.  We thought baseball was entering another Golden Age.  Now, people want to look at the the numbers compiled during this era and demolish them, strike them from the books as though they never happened.

They did happen.  And you probably loved it.  Baseball owners loved it.  Fans loved it.  The press loved it.

I’m not saying what McGwire did is right.  But he’s one of many, and he’s only human.  To single him out, to ridicule him and denigrate his character seems unfair.  My takeaway from all this is not to tear down those that did use, but to have a heightened respect for those whose character was strong enough to abstain.  McGwire was only going along for the ride, giving the people what they wanted, doing the thing he most loved to do, quite possibly the only thing he could do.

Were you not entertained?

The Bronx View has a special section called The Bullpen which features writers who may not contribute on a daily or weekly basis but have a great perspective on the New York Yankees and Major League Baseball.

This week, Tom K. contributes his thoughts about left field.

Since I was so “accurate” with my pitching options entry, I have now decided to breakdown some of the options for left field in 2010.

I intentionally decided to withhold typing this up until after Jason Bay and Matt Holliday signed; as it seemed that a strong percentage of Yankees fans wanted one or the other very badly.  I am not one of those fans; while Holliday would have given this team a shot at legendary offense status, the fact is that you don’t need to be a legendary offense to win.

So, let’s run down the candidates – internally and those who are available on the market.

Brett Gardner (26 years old; .270/.345/.379; 26-for-31 stolen bases) – Back when he was a prospect in the Yankees’ system, a lot of people commented on the unique qualities of Gardner.  He wasn’t exactly a unique prospect; but he was a unique Yankees prospect in that his power had no projection whatsoever, but his speed/defense/plate discipline were all above average attributes.  Thus far, Gardner hasn’t done a great job taking walks at the major league level (34 in 425 career plate appearances), but his minor league history suggests that there could be improvement on the horizon.  The benefits of Gardner taking walks are obvious:  He can steal plenty of bases, and he doesn’t have much power anyway.  If you have a choice between a walk and a single, take the walk – the defense can make a play on a potential single, after all.

Reed Johnson (33 years old; .255/.330/.412) – Reed isn’t as much competition for Gardner as he would be a complement to Gardner.   Johnson has a history of injury issues, especially to his back, but also has a history of hitting very well vs. left-handed pitching (.313/.378/.463 in his career; and he has maintained this throughout his career).    He’s also, according to UZR, a very solid left fielder who can probably also spell Nick Swisher in right.     The injuries are a valid concern, however – so the Yankees would have to determine whether or not he can hold up even as a platoon player.   Injury issues do not tend to get better for baseball players approaching their mid-30s.     Overall, he’d likely be quite cheap – and if you can get lucky with his health, he’ll be productive in a 4th outfielder/platoon role.

Johnny Damon (36 years old; .282/.365/.489) – Someone in the front office was paying good attention when they recommended that the Yankees sign Johnny Damon.   It could have just been a lucky guess, but I doubt Brian Cashman takes very many lucky guesses when he looks to sign a player to a 4-year contract.   Damon produced his 2nd and 3rd best slugging percentage seasons while with the Yankees, all while being beyond his prime.    His defense has definitely tumbled through the years (something tells me that the Yankees thought he’d still be an adequate left fielder even as his contract winded down; but it didn’t work out that way), but overall, Damon was one very solid investment for the franchise.    So, what do they do now?  By most accounts, Damon has cost himself money on the free agent market; the Yankees were much more willing to give him a decent contract a month or so ago than they are now.   Now, they want him back at a bargain price and nothing else.      Something to ponder:   Despite a BABIP of .314 in September, Damon still stumbled to a .247/.350/.315 finish; random data noise or the beginning of an offensive decline?    That could be one reason why the Yankees would probably refuse now to go beyond one year.

Rick Ankiel (30 years old; .231/.285/.387) – Talk about UGLY.   Ankiel was flat out brutal at the plate in 2009; the Cardinals insisted on throwing him out there as often as possible (404 plate appearances), but the Cardinals at the end of the day would have been better off plucking some kid off of a high school diamond and inserting him into their starting lineup.    However, it should be noted that Ankiel did slug .417 off of right-handed pitching, and has slugged .462 off of them in his major league career.    This is not to say we should ignore his 2009 totals (afterall, his batting average & OBP vs. righties were brutal), but it could give a glimmer of hope to the Yankees if they feel his swing is made for the ballpark.   The ultimate low-risk, high-reward player if you can get him at a bargain bin price, and he may just have to take such a deal at this point.  There’s plenty of corner outfield fish in the sea, and not many fishermen are going to want to catch a guy coming off of this type of season.    The Yankees, however, have a hole to fill and a ballpark that may make Ankiel more intriguing to them than most other teams.

Xavier Nady (31 years old; barely played in 2009) – We obviously all know about Nady, a corner position player who put up a solid though not spectacular 2008 season that lead the Yankees to dealing for him midway through that campaign.   Nady has a .792 career OPS, and 108 OPS+ putting him right on the borderline as a corner outfielder.   He doesn’t really bring any one great attribute to the plate; not a big home run hitter, not someone who takes a lot of walks, not someone who is going to hit for a big average, and not someone who will steal much when he does get on.    However, he does just enough at the plate to make him a useful major league contributor and hits left-handed pitching very well (and is good enough vs. right-handed pitching where you feel comfortable giving him playing time to keep him sharp).    If reports are accurate, Nady’s price tag is too steep currently for the Yankees.  That does seem a bit odd to me, given he is coming off of an injury.  My thinking would be that Nady will gladly accept a one-year deal loaded with incentives in an attempt to reestablish his market value for 2011, but if he doesn’t feel the same way, then he is no great loss obviously.

Jamie Hoffman (25 years old; 4-for-22 in 2009 cup of coffee) – From the sounds of things, the Yankees are very intrigued by Hoffman.   So much so that they traded Brian Bruney for the mere rights to draft him in the Rule 5 draft, with no guarantees that they’ll be able to keep him.   From minor league reports, it appears that Hoffman is a gifted defensive outfielder without much power.  He has good speed, but has yet to translate that into a high stolen base percentage and is supposedly good versus left-handed pitching.    This is not the type of player you hand the keys to in spring training for a starting job, but if the Yankees feel there is potential here, they could use him as the 25th man on the roster.      I would rather have Gardner, though so his best chance to make the team in my opinion is if Gardner is handed the left-field job, leaving an additional opening on the bench.

Marcus Thames (33 years old; .252/.323/.453) – Thames’ claim to fame was hitting a home run off of Randy Johnson in his major league debut.   Some may even think that is his only claim to fame, but Thames has become a very useful major league power hitter.    One comparison I like to make is GlenAllen Hill; Thames can’t play defense very well, he’ll strike out a ton, and he won’t take a huge amount of walks.   But when he does connect, the balls jump out of the ballpark.  He has hit 101 home runs in 1,549 career plate appearances and boasts a .491 career slugging percentage despite having a .243 career batting average.   The Yankees are obviously not lacking for power, but Thames can definitely fill a role on the bench as a right-handed bat for Girardi to go to to give Nick Johnson, Brett Gardner, or Nick Swisher a night off.    He’s used to playing a reduced role, which is also helpful.      The biggest drawback of course is the defense.     Given that one role for Thames would be that of pinch-hitting for Gardner late in a game, you’d probably want another OF on the bench to go into the game once he is done hitting.  Perhaps that is where a Hoffman could come into play.

Fernando Tatis (35 years old; .282/.339/.438) – Hey, I like to make fun of Omar Minaya & the Mets as much as anyone.   But whether it was by dumb lack or not, Tatis turned into a very wise two-year investment by the Mets’ franchise.    Tatis was worth 1.6 wins over replacement in 2008, and followed that up with a 1.5 WAR in 2009.   These aren’t numbers that legends are made of, but for a part-time player, you can’t help but notice that he has been useful.     In a very small sample size of 178 innings in 2009, Tatis posted a 17.1 UZR in left field.   (In 2008, his number was -5.2 in 284 innings; though his overall outfield number was -0.8).   I am not advocating the signing of Tatis, but if it is a right-handed bench bat that the Yankees are after, they could do worse…even if he would be sloppy seconds.

Rocco Baldelli (28 years old; .253/.311/.433) – We’ve all heard about Baldelli’s illness; and whether or not he has the severe case or the not-so-severe case, the bottom line is that it will always affect his ability to play major league baseball.   The mere fact that he can actually play baseball is a testament to his will and his athletic ability.    He has plenty of limitations in that you won’t be able to play him everyday; and there may be a period of several days where he’ll have trouble getting onto the field.   But Baldelli is still a solid contributor when he does put on the uniform.  He played a poor right field for the 2009 Red Sox, but has been generally a solid outfielder throughout his career.     However, the bottom line is that Cashman probably wants to bring in someone who gives Girardi flexibility, and Baldelli doesn’t really offer that as you don’t know if he’ll be able to play until he comes to the ballpark every day. It’s no fault of Baldelli’s of course; but it is a tough way for a major league manager to operate.

Gary Sheffield (41…)  OK, I am only kidding.   Relax.

As for the trade market, you can probably always find a team or two dangling a corner outfielder in front of you.  In some cases, it’s a high-salaried player they just want to dump.  In other cases, it’s just the mere fact that there is no big shortage of corner outfielders & corner outfield prospects, making more players expendable.    I just don’t personally see anyone out there who the Yankees would be looking to acquire at this point.  For one thing, they have dealt away a decent chunk of their middling prospects over the past few seasons, thinning out the “middle layer” of their farm system a bit.    For another, they don’t want to take on someone else’s salary problem at this point and they probably feel that the free agents on the market are just as useful as anyone they could trade for.

A name you may hear, however:

David DeJesus (.281/.347/.434) – DeJesus is a decent enough hitter who was a terrible defensive center fielder in 2008.   (Though it should be noted that he has been generally solid in center field in his career).   However, he played a majority of his time in left field in 2009 and came out smelling like a rose, putting up a 15.7 UZR.   Over the course of his career, DeJesus is an 18.8 in left field in 2,263 innings.  In other words, if you want to sure up the defense with a bat that is a bit more of a sure thing than Gardner, than DeJesus could be your man.    However, the Royals probably overvalue him (they are the Royals, after all) and although I would personally see him as an upgrade over Gardner, it’s not by much.  Definitely not by enough for me to give up much of value to get him.   Chone has him at 2.5 WAR in 2010; Gardner is a projected 2.2.

Who would I choose?  I would personally go with Brett Gardner while adding Marcus Thames for some pop off of the bench from the right-side of the plate.  In an ideal world, the Yankees would have a “jack of every trades” in the #25 spot on the roster (a Jerry Hairston type) who can fill in everywhere and go in for defense on those nights you use Thames to pinch hit for Gardner late in the game.    The Yankees supposedly wanted to see if Ramiro Pena can be that type of player, and the jury is still way out there on whether or not he can do it.

Uh….  what?

Pujols is talking a good game with the Cardinals. But can he really ignore the 10-year, $27.5 million-per-year deal that Alex Rodriguez got from the Yankees two years ago, when he was older than Pujols will be when his contract ends after the 2011 season? The difficulties tying up Fielder and Gonzalez with the Brewers and Padres are self-evident.

Nothing happens in a vacuum, including the relative lack of spending by the Yankees and Red Sox this offseason. Executives with other clubs believe baseball’s two biggest spenders are sitting out the Matt Holliday sweepstakes because they want as much flexibility as possible to land one of baseball’s four horsemen at some point in the next two years.

The Red Sox have been pursuing a Gonzalez trade. Given Kevin Youkilis’ ability to play either infield corner and their holding a club option on David Ortiz’s contract for 2011, they would be a fit for any of the four.

The Yankees are keeping the DH spot clear, for the time being, as a potential way to accommodate Pujols, Fielder or even Gonzalez playing alongside Mark Teixeira. They have advanced catching prospects ( Jesus Montero and Austin Romine) to offer if the Twins reach a choking point with Mauer, which Mauer will dictate more than the club.

That’s Phil Rogers at the Chicago Tribune and this discussion is fairly ridiculous.

I agree that the Yankees have been holding off signing another large contract this winter for a reason.  Maybe even two reasons.

One of those reasons is that Matt Holliday is not worth the money or years that he is going to get.  Ditto John Lackey.

Another reason is that there is a fairly good free agent class next year, one that probably addresses the Yankees needs more than the current one.

The Yankees unwillingness to drop a large sum on players this offseason is a matter of practicality.  Most people don’t go out and overpay for things they don’t really want or need and neither does Brian Cashman.

Rogers is taking this idea a bit too far.  I’m sure the Yankees would have some interest in Pujols.  Who wouldn’t?  He’s one of the most well-rounded players to come around in some time.

Is it really reasonable to think that the Yankees have Pujols in mind for designated hitter though?  The guy is one of the best defensive first baseman in the game, arguably much better than Teixeira.  It makes little sense for the Yankees to try and take his glove away and even less sense for Pujols to willingly give it up.

Prince Fielder is a DH in waiting but that doesn’t mean he’ll just give up first base either.  He hasn’t been an average first baseman defensively, but he actually has improved in each of the last three years, giving him little motivation to devalue himself at DH.  Same goes for Adrian Gonzales.

Joe Mauer is a whole ‘nother story.   Mauer is the rare player who excels offensively and defensively at a typically weak position like catcher, making the the cost of acquiring him the biggest stumbling block.  Cashman didn’t give up the farm for Johan Santana because there was a free agent waiting in the wings named CC Sabathia.  There was no need to lose prospects and money when just money would get the job done.  The Yankees are flush with catching talent which doesn’t guarantee a future All Star catcher but it does raise the odds.  Trading a batch of grade A prospects and paying Mauer’s $20 mill/year salary is a lot more costly than having Romine or Montero succeed at the major league level with minimum salaries along the way.

There is precedent, though.  The Austin Jackson/Curtis Granderson trade taught us that a prospect is tradable if the player you get in return matches that prospects ceiling.  Nobody knew what to expect from Austin Jackson, but if he turned into Curtis Granderson, everyone would be happy.  Therefore, swapping AJax’s potential for Granderson’s resume makes sense and lessens the gamble of the prospect not working out.

In all of this discussion, we have to remember that we’re talking about the catcher position.  Catchers in the AL last season held a .724 OPS, the 2nd worst position ranking in the league (shortstop was worst at .719).  Having a catcher like Mauer in his prime (27 years old  in 2010) is a rare and valuable thing.  A league average left fielder last season had a .780 OPS, .803 in right field.  Paying premium for top shelf talent at catcher is a significant upgrade over the average character and creates a deeper lineup.

If Mauer became available this coming July, would the Yankees give up the farm for him?  Probably.  Posada wouldn’t like it and is signed through 2011, but he could be the backup catcher and DH going through the end of his contract.  Jesus Montero and Austin Romine would have good trade value whether in acquiring Mauer or through other trades.  It would be a win-win for the Yankees as their catching depth in the minors would play very well in acquiring other pieces such as corner outfielders or starting pitching.

Then there’s also the possibility Mauer decides to become a free agent.  If that happens, all bets are off.

It’s the day after the Yankees traded for Javier Vazquez and the fans are split.  I’ve heard and read a lot of different opinions over the last two days about this trade and thought it was worth addressing a few of them.

1. Melky Cabrera. A lot of people are treating Melky Cabrera like the centerpiece of this trade.  Not so.  In fact, Melky will most likely be a fourth outfielder for the Braves.  Not many fourth outfielders are the centerpiece of trades for a pitcher who received Cy Young votes.

I get that people are sad to see Melky go.  He came up with the organization, giving some the feeling that they’ve watched him grow up.

What he has grown to, though, is an average ballplayer at best.  Remember, the Yankees went into 2009 with Melky on the bench and Brett Gardner starting in centerfield.  Gardner got off to a slow start and Melky showed some life off the bench and the roles were reversed.

Neither player is suited well for left field from on offensive point of view.  Gardner plays the superior defense which meant he was probably going to get more playing time (that and his higher OBP).

In short, the Yankees didn’t look at Melky as being an everyday player.  Being arbitration eligible this season meant he would be making more than they thought he was worth while Gardner is still under salary control.  As we’ll discuss in a moment, get used to this type of thinking from Brian Cashman.

2. “Vazquez stunk in 2004.“  He stunk the second half.  He was an All Star the first half until shoulder problems wore him down, possibly the result of a heavy workload in Montreal.

We all remember the collapse in the 2004 ALCS which seemed to be finalized on Johnny Damon’s grand slam off of Javier Vazquez.  In some ways, fans seem to be pinning the entire collapse directly on Vazquez which isn’t really fair.  He’s been a good to great pitcher since then and the Yankees didn”t acquire him to be an ace.  He’s a fourth starter with the potential to put up great numbers.  If he pitches like a fourth starter and gives the Yankees 200 innings, mission accomplished.

That’s the problem with how people are judging this trade.  They hear Vazquez and hear about Cy Young votes and think the Yankees are acquiring him to be C.C. Sabathia part two.  Melky Cabrera, a reliever prospect, and a 19 year old kid who hasn’t hit A ball yet will not get you an ace, not even in this baseball economy.  But Vazquez is a very capable pitcher who figures to be a solid back of the rotation guy.

A lot of people will tell you that Vazquez has no guts because he’s failed in the big game.  Vazquez has started in two postseason games, one for the Yankees while injured and one for the White Sox in 2008.  Not much to go on.  People also told you that C.C. Sabathia couldn’t pitch in big games before coming to the Yankees.  How did that work out?

Fans place a lot of credence in the concept of “guts,” but what does that really mean?  Kenny Rogers used to have no guts.  From ages 31 through 34, Rogers was not a good postseason pitcher.  Yankee fans remember how terrible he was in the 1996 playoffs, which the Yankees somehow won out despite Rogers giving up five runs early in game four of the World Series.  At age 41, Rogers lead the Tigers to the World Series with a stellar postseason.

What happened in those seven years that gave Rogers “guts?”  Was he now and even more grizzled veteran that wasn’t afraid of the postseason?  Maybe he was just pitching well at the time.

We watch players go through streaks all year.  Look at Mark Teixeira this season.  At points, you couldn’t get him out.  At other points, he couldn’t hit a lick.  Was it pressure?  Was it guts?  Or was it just how things even out?

.300 hitters don’t hit exactly .300 from April 1st to October 31st.  Their average goes up and down just like the rest of us.  We all have our good weeks and bad weeks.  Sometimes, your good week falls at the right time.  Sometimes it doesn’t.

It’s difficult to think that a player could make it all the way to the major leagues and not be able to handle pressure.  The amount of pressure just to get yourself to the majors must be intense.  Every day in the minor leagues, you’re playing to show what you could be in the future with every day having an influence on whether you will continue in the league.  That’s pressure.

If the Yankees make the postseason with Javier Vazquez next season, there is every reason to believe Javy will perform at the same level he has all season.  Hopefully that level will prove to be pretty good.

3. Cashman is changing the rules. We saw this start when Cash refused to give in for Johan Santana.  Cashman held onto his chips, waited for Sabathia, and the Yankees won a World Series.  The Yankees could easily afford Matt Holliday for left field, but he’s not the guy they want.  The Yankees think the 2010 free agent class has better long term options.

Options are what Brian Cashman is all about right now.  There are a few reasons why the Yankees decided to trade for a starting pitcher rather than go after John Lackey, Randy Wolf, or a gamble like Ben Sheets: they didn’t like the pitchers for the money.  John Lackey is a nice pitcher but the Red Sox probably overpaid him in years and in dollars.  They had to because they needed another quality starter.

The Yankees won 103 games last year with a rotation that was unchanged before they acquired Javier Vazquez.  Any adjustments to that rotation would have to fill certain needs, specifically a strike out pitcher to minimize reliance on the defense and throw 200+ innings to help spell the overworked rotation from 2009.  Vazquez fits both those descriptions.

If Cashman thought he could get that from a free agent pitcher, he would have gone that direction.  Cashman is treating free agency differently these days.  Despite having signed Sabathia and Teixeira to long term contracts, Cashman has been steadily avoiding signing older veterans to longer term deals.

A few seasons ago, Johnny Damon might have gotten three years from the Yankees coming off his 2009 season.  Not this year.  Cashman is avoiding the collection of “old farts” on this team in favor of flexibility, signing older veterans to one year deal to fill holes in hopes of improving those positions later in the season or the following winter.  In the case of Sabathia and Teixeira, both players were still young and in their prime and filled the Yankees exact needs.  Teixeira also came with a good defensive reputation, a characteristic Cashman is giving more and more attention.

The Yankees would have settled for Johnny Damon for two years at $7 million per season.  That’s the money they had ear-marked for a designated hitter and, at this stage, that’s all Damon really is.  When Nick Johnson materialized at a cheaper cost and some defensive flexibility at first base, Damon was no longer needed.

Cold-hearted?  Maybe.  But definitely realistic.  There is no glory to be found in over-paying players, not even in the Yankees budget.  Cashman has been treading water, waiting for the contracts of Hideki Matsui, Johnny Damon, Bobby Abreu, and Jason Giambi to come off the books.  Now that he is finally clear of those contracts, he’s able to shape the team based on the type of player he wants rather than the best player available.  Sometimes that will mean leaving Brett Gardner or a cheap one year replacement in left field until a Carl Crawford type becomes available.  Sometimes it will also mean cutting loose a guy like Melky Cabrera who’s salary will start to outweigh his value on the field.

There will be exceptions.  I’ll bet Cashman is cursing the four year deal he gave Jorge Posada before the 2008 season.  No one doubts that Jorge can hit, but his catching days are dwindling.  Guys like Posada, Mariano Rivera, and soon Derek Jeter are going to get overpaid because of their service time to the organization and what they mean to the team.  I don’t buy into the second half of that statement as much as most do, but it goes without saying that seeing Posada, Rivera, or Jeter in another uniform would be a bad day for the Yankees.

Cashman is running the Yankees like a business.  If it were your money, you’d be kissing his feet.  In Cash You Should Trust.

Ian: When the Red Sox improved their rotation last week, acquiring the services of arguably the best starting pitcher on the free agent market in John Lackey, Yankee fans fretted.  Suddenly the Sox boasted a rotation brimming with three number-one starter types in Jon Lester, Josh Beckett, and Lackey.  They had solid depth as well, with a presumably healthy Daisuke Matsuzaka, steadily improving Clay Buchholz, and the ageless Tim Wakefield.  Beyond those six are young guys like Junichi Tazawa, Michael Bowden, and the rapidly ascending Casey Kelly.

Naturally, we all waited for the Yankees to fire a return salvo.  Tuesday morning, they did just that in trading Melky Cabrera, Mike Dunn, and highly-regarded prospect Arodys Vizcaino to Atlanta for Javier Vazquez and Boone Logan.

Yankee fans still have a bad taste in their mouth when it comes to Vazquez.  Acquired before the 2004 season from the Expos for Nick Johnson, Juan Rivera, and Randy Choate, Yankees’ GM Brian Cashman expected that the Yankees had bolstered their rotation for the present and the future.  Just 27 years old, Vazquez had a world of promise, coming off a 2003 season in which he posted a 3.24 ERA and struck out 241 batters in 230.1 IP.  A young, durable power pitcher was exactly what the Yankees rotation needed.  Javy started strong, posting a  3.56 ERA and a 2.97 K/BB ratio in the first half en route to his first and only All Star appearance.

Then the bottom fell out.  In the second half, Vazquez put up a 6.92 ERA, his walk to strikeout ratio plummeting to 1.96.  His strikeouts per 9 IP fell from 7.2 to 6.2.  By season’s end, Joe Torre had all but lost faith in Javy, giving him just one postseason start in which he was shelled by the Twins.  Things didn’t go much better in 2 ALCS relief appearances against the Red Sox, culminating in the first-pitch grand slam he gave up to Johnny Damon in Game 7, a blow that essentially put the final nail in the Yankees’ coffin.

Vazquez was traded in the offseason for the rotting corpse of Randy Johnson and struggled to deliver on his initial promise despite retaining his strikeout stuff.  Javy is and always has been a very strange pitcher, with the stuff and peripherals of a number one starter, but only the fleeting season or two in which he’s delivered the numbers to back it up.  He has a career K/9 ratio of 8.1 while walking just 2.3 batters per 9 – a terrific 3.4 K/BB ratio.  He’s one of only two pitchers to rack up 2000 strikeouts this decade (Randy Johnson is the other).  He’s always been incredibly durable.

Yet his career is pock-marked with ERAs that just don’t fit the profile of a true number one.  From 2004-2006, he was a below average pitcher, putting up an ERA+ of 97 (100 is average) despite a healthy K/9 rate of 7.7 and K/BB rate of 3.25.  He has a career 3.83 FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching; learn how it’s calculated here), but a career ERA of 4.19.  Vazquez does give up a ton of HRs – 1.2 per 9IP career – and that’s something to worry about as he moves to New Yankee Stadium.

Last season in Atlanta, Vazquez enjoyed an improbable return to form, with an ERA of 2.87 and 238 K in 219.1 IP.  By ERA+, it was the best season of his career (143).  Hitters had a batting average on balls in play (BABIP) of .297, below his career mark of .309 but not exceptionally so.  And while he was toiling in the NL for the first time since 2005, 33 of his 219 IP came against the Phillies – the most IP he had against any opponent. In those 33 IP, he posted a 3.00 ERA and nearly a strikeout per inning.  Against the top 3 offenses in the NL last season, Vazquez put up a 2.83 ERA in 51 IP, recording 52 Ks.  He was not merely a product of pitching in the weaker league.

So who is Javy Vazquez?  Is he the guy we saw in the first half of 2004?  The second half of 2004?  The dominant 2009 version?  The answer is probably something in between.  Let’s base our expectations not on one or two seasons, but on the whole body of work.  His yearly averages are a 4.19 ERA over 219 IP.  Would you take that from your #3 or #4 starter in the AL East?  Absolutely.  Expectations will always be high for Javy because he has the pure stuff and command of an ace.  This go round in New York, he doesn’t have to be one.  Maybe that’s for the best.  He’s signed for one more year at $11.5 million, then is likely to walk away and let the Yankees collect some high draft picks based on his Type-A status.  For 2010, he gives the Yankees a pretty fearsome foursome that can at least compete with Boston’s.

As for what the Yankees gave up – we all know about Melky Cabrera.  An incredibly streaky hitter prone to extreme slumps, Cabrera offers little upside over what we’ve already seen.  He is what he is – an average defensive CF with a strong but intermittently accurate arm and a slightly below average bat.  He needs to stay in CF to stick as a regular since offensively, he profiles poorly as a corner outfielder.  A move to the NL could boost his numbers, but not significantly enough to make him a star or even an above-average regular.  With Jason Heyward, arguably the best prospect in baseball, almost ready to take over in CF for the Braves, Melky’s time as a starter may be brief.  We should take some time to reflect on the energy and enthusiasm Melky brought to the Yankees though – as replaceable as he may be as a player, he had a strong personality and it was fun to watch him play.  He had several big hits for the Yankees this past season and seemed genuinely well-liked by his teammates.  He deserves thanks for his contribution to a World Championship team.  He earned his ring.

Mike Dunn projected to be one of two left-handed setup men for the Yankees this coming season, and reportedly was a sticking point in the Granderson trade negotiations – Cashman seemingly felt more comfortable parting with Phil Coke.  As a general rule, I don’t get too upset over relievers being dealt; unless they profile as a closer, they pretty much grow on trees.  Still, Dunn has mid-90’s velocity, rare for a lefty, and could have been a nice matchup guy in NY.  His control was always going to be an issue, but I imagine he’ll have good success against left-handed hitters in the majors.

It’s the loss of Arodys Vizcaino that hurts.  Just 19, Arodys has dominated the low minors in his two years as a pro, with more than a strikeout per inning and an ERA under 2.  Baseball America rated him as the Yankees #3 prospect and listed him as having the best curveball in the entire minor league system.  Baseball Prospectus had him ranked as the Yankees’ #2 prospect.  Obviously, a 19 year-old with power stuff comes with the usual caveats – TINSTAAPP and all that – but it’s tough to lose a guy with the upside to pitch in the top half of the rotation.  Still, Vizcaino has yet to throw even a single pitch in a full-season league and is at least 3-4 years away from contributing in the Majors if his development continues on a steady path.

Overall, I like this trade for the Yankees.  They walked a tightrope in October with just 3 reliable starters on their roster; Cashman has shown the ability to recognize that even a World Series champion can stand to improve themselves.  The deal leaves some holes in the Yankee roster, but these issues will be sorted out in due time.  I rate this deal a solid B+.

Scott: It’s been awhile since we’ve seen a trade as divisive as this one, at least in YankeeLand.  There’s still a lot of fans left with a bitter taste in their mouths over Javy Vazquez.

I like the trade for one simple reason:  innings.  The Yankees had the opportunity to get someone for the back half of the rotation that could reliably throw 200 innings this year, a major upgrade over the three-headed Mitre/Gaudin/Aceves monster they played with last season.  A strong number four pitcher means less reliance on Sabathia, Burnett, and Pettitte to go deep into games to protect an over-worked bullpen.  As an added bonus, you’re running a guy out there who would give a modest offense a chance to win every fifth day; put the Yankees behind him and Vazquez could have a very good year.

Vazquez probably won’t duplicate his numbers from 2009.  The shift to the AL alone probably ensures that before he even throws a pitch.  But he will be an effective starter who has averaged eight strikeouts per nine innings over his career.

Of course, the flipside of a trade is what you give up.  In the big picture, the Yankees gave up very little.  The addition of Curtis Granderson made Melky Cabrera or Brett Gardner an expendable part with neither player profiling very well as a left-fielder.  I’ve argued previously that Melky should be the candidate to go so I’m not exactly broken-hearted to see this deal happen.

Ian profiled Vizcaino and Dunn above and I can’t really add much to the discussion.  Dunn was an expendable part and Vizcaino still has to make the long trek to the big leagues by maturing, improving, and staying healthy.  Those three things are harder to obtain than you think.  Look at Joba Chamberlain as exhibit A, two year ago the next sure thing and now, most fans would trade him.

It’s hard to fault Cashman for giving up the package he did.  None of these three players would have had a major impact on the 2010 Yankees.  Maybe Melky could have put up slightly better numbers but he still would have been below average offensively in left field.

There are two little secrets at the back end of this deal.  The first is that Vazquez could turn into a first round pick and a sandwich pick if the Yankees offer him arbitration after the 2010 season and he walks.  The second is that Boone Logan actually has a fourth option according to Joel Sherman, which means even though he is arbitration eligible, he has to make the team coming out of spring training.  That gives the Yankees a little bit of financial flexibility if they’re not happy with what they see.

This is a great trade for the Yankees and a head-scratcher for the Atlanta Braves.  The Braves must figure they’re not wholly in contention this year and wanted to assemble parts for the future.  Where Melky Cabrera fits into that plan is anyone’s guess.

And for those people crying over spilled Melk, be honest about who Cabrera is as a baseball player.  He is an average hitter at best with a weak OBP who hasn’t been able to put it together at the major league level.  He’s had some fine moments but then so did Luis Sojo.  Melky was going to see even less playing time this season with the addition of Curtis Granderson.  Maybe he’ll get a chance to prove something in Atlanta.  And he was due probably $3 to $3.5 million in arbitration, making the choice to stick with Gardner that much easier.

It remains to be seen whether the Yankees will actually go with Gardner or Jamie Hoffmann in left.  Cashman has been crying poor today, not so different from similar pleads before signing Mark Teixeira last season.  It wouldn’t kill the Yankees to keep left field as it is since the defense would be fantastic.  Another bat and decent defense would probably be better.  As it is, they have little depth for the outfield and could use either a more prolific starter or more depth.

Since we’re grading, I also give this trade a B+.

Looks like the only thing left bringing DH/1B Nick Johnson back to New York is the dotting of the I’s.  The $5.5 million price tag has left many wondering why the accident prone Johnson and not the gimpy-legged Matsui?

Jason over at IIATMS led the charge:

Nick Johnson has the potential to thrive hitting in the #2 spot behind Jeter, ahead of Teixeira and ARod. Sure, he’s not gonna run, but then again, Damon batted #2 in 2009 and stole only 12 bases. Was that because of Damon or because Girardi didn’t want to run himself out of an inning with the horses up behind Damon?

Johnson, assuming he can remain healthy, will be a nice fit for this team.  He doesn’t have to play every game.  Will he quickly adjust to playing only half the game, and after that, only 4-5 times a week instead of 6-7?

Like I said up top: I like Nick. I like what he could bring this team.  I just don’t get why, if Cashman wanted a “pure” DH, he didn’t re-sign the one he had for the last seven years, the consummate professional, the one who is the reigning World Series MVP.

Jason and I tweeted back and forth a bit about this last night and our opinions are actually closer on the subject than they’re about to appear.

There’s a few X factors here that we are not aware of, the biggest being Matsui’s desire to play the outfield at least part time.  The Los Angeles California Angels of Anaheim California rather unwisely think that they may be better off if Matsui could play the outfield a few days a week:

Matsui played all 142 of his games last season at designated hitter, and though Scioscia would prefer to rotate his other three outfielders — Torii Hunter, Bobby Abreu and Juan Rivera — through the DH spot and give Matsui an occasional start in left field, he will not force the issue.

“It’s much more important for us to have him in the lineup swinging the bat every day rather than forcing him to play the outfield,” Scioscia said. “That being said, it would make us deeper if he could play the outfield two or three times a week.”

Some sources have said that “logic” was part of the reason Matsui jumped at the Angels offer.  Brian Cashman may have been considering Matsui but, given the fact that Matsui never touched a glove in 2009, it was pretty apparent his only role would be that of designated hitter.

Given the Yankees needs and Matsui’s wants, the Yankees may not have been a match to re-sign Hideki at this stage.

Comparing Matsui and Nick Johnson head to head, we find these numbers:

And their career splits:

The big question mark with both players is health.  The Yankees had to drain Matsui’s knees a few times last year even though he never played the field.  Nick the Stick has been an injury magnet for most of his career, the zenith being a broken leg at the end of the 2006 season that forced him to sit out 2007.

If I were a gambling man, I’d have to bet on the guy who is five years younger when it comes to health risk.  The Yankees have been closer to Matsui than anybody since he entered the majors and know more about the day to day pain and treatment his ailing legs needed.  They obviously have some doubts about whether Matsui could sustain his 2009 performance for another season.

Likewise, Matsui broke 140+ games for only the second time in four years in 2009, most likely due to the fact that he wasn’t playing the field.  The Yankees must hope that the same tactic as applied to Nick Johnson will improve his durability over the course of the season.

Looking at the numbers above, the big discrepancies between the two players lay in on-base percentage and slugging percentage.  Nick has always been an on-base machine.  Matsui has put up good OBP numbers while slugging much better than Johnson.

Again, we look at these numbers through the health microscope.  If Matsui does take a sharp decline in 2010, his power will go right along with it.  Johnson is 31 this year and figures to have at least a couple of effective seasons left in him.  Chances are, his OBP will maintain.  His SLG has never been great and could see a boost from the new Yankee Stadium.  If it stays where it is, the Yankees will still be happy to collect his walks.

Of the two players, then, Johnson is probably the lower risk.  The five year age difference alone is a big sticking point, one that could lead Matsui to other health issues besides just his knees.

The question remains: where does Johnson fit on this team?

There has been a lot of talk about Johnson being the #2 hitter behind Jeter.  That’s a possibility.  His OBP certainly makes him a guy you would like hitting in from of Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez.  That would push newly acquired Curtis Granderson toward the back of the lineup, possibly dropping into the two spot when Johnson isn’t playing.  Chances are, the Yankees aren’t looking at Johnson to play 145 games this year as they want to get more rest for Jorge Posada and others while keeping their bats in the lineup.

The reaction to these moves, picking up Granderson and Johnson, has left some Yankee fans a little befuddled, thinking their team has taken a step backwards.

Well, I think the case can be made that Johnson proves a better risk for this season than Matsui and possibly shows a bit of upside if the new stadium helps his swing.  What about the trade-off of Damon for Granderson?

Another chart, this one Damon and Grandersons last three years:

It’s worth noting that Granderson put up these numbers as a centerfielder with above average UZR numbers over three years while Damon posted average to bad UZR numbers in left field.*

* Damon’s 2007 and 2008 seasons showed positive UZR ratings in left but only covered a combined 119 games over the two seasons.  His first full season in left, 2009, Damon posted a -9.2 UZR and -12.1 UZR/150.

With these two moves, the Yankees have improved their lineup but they’ve also improved their defense, a concept that has been lost in some of the talk.  Last season, the Yankees didn’t feature the greatest outfield with Nick Swisher in right, Melky Cabrera in center, nad Johnny Damon in left.  Melky and Swish are both adequate, but Damon was horrible.  By shifting Melky and Gardner to left and depositing Granderson in center, their defense should benefit greatly which only adds to the upgrade in offense.

Everyone says this is the end of Johnny Damon in New York and that’s probably true.  It isn’t out of the realm of possibility that Damon could still return under the right terms.  I don’t understand speculation that Matt Holliday and Jason Bay are still possibilities and not Damon.  I find Damon to be a much better risk at two years around $20 million than four years for Bay or possibly six for Holliday.  Holliday is a very good player with very good defense, but his stats while playing at Coors Field were greatly inflated.

Here’s Holliday’s home and road splits during his tenure in Colorado:

Holliday’s road numbers steadily improved towards the end of his stay in Colorado, but look at that BAbip!  That type of consistency goes a bit beyond luck and seems to indicate that Holliday hits the ball hard. Can that type of high BAbip continue?  It has to this point but if it dropped anywhere close to .300, his numbers would take a steep hit.  I don’t know that Holliday warrants the supposed six years he’s hoping to get.

Could the Yankees benefit from Matt Holliday?  Of course they could.  But right now, the Yankees have built a lineup that is probably better than last year’s while improving their outfield defense.  That team scored 915 runs, took the AL East by 8 games and won the World Series.  Adding Holliday is probably not necessary and a bit greedy.

The Boston Herald reports on the Red Sox two-year pact with Mike Cameron, while mentioning that Yanks have apparently been in touch with Jason Bay:

The Red Sox last night agreed to terms with Cameron on a two-year deal, according to a source with knowledge of the negotiations. Multiple reports pegged the deal at roughly $15.5 million…

…Bay expects to make a final decision in the next couple of days, with the Mets, Angels and Mariners the front-runners for his services. However, lurking in the weeds are Yankees, who have reached out to Bay’s representatives to express their interest, the source said.
The Yankees are not believed to have made an offer, and it was unclear last night exactly how strong their interest is, but it goes without saying that in matters of free agency, they never can be discounted.

First, on the Cameron signing – it’s a nice move.  But the Red Sox have yet to (publicly) commit to playing Cameron in center field, and the general belief is that he’ll slide over to left field so Jacoby Ellsbury can remain in center.  What’s the difference between Cameron in center and Cameron in left?  Night and day.

In the past two seasons, Cameron has posted UZR numbers of 11.3 and 10 for the Brewers.  UZR came into fashion in 2002, and since then, Cameron has consistently been among the Major League leaders in that category, including 3rd in the Majors last year – barely behind BJ Upton, but well behind Franklin Gutierrez, who appears to be a once-in-a-generation defensive outfielder.  Compare this to Tacoby Bellsbury, whose UZR last year was a Major League-worst -18.6, and it would be utterly mind-boggling to see Cameron switch positions to accommodate such a horrific fielder.  If the Sox decision makers are smart – and they are – they’ll take a look at the numbers and do the right thing.  But should they somehow fail to do so, and decide to stick with the kid in center, they would severely damage Cameron’s value to the team.

Cameron has posted an OBP over .360 once – that was in 2000 – and has never slugged over .500 despite averaging 23 HR per season.  While he posts terrific offensive slash lines for a CF, particularly one with his defensive gifts (career .250/.340/.448), he doesn’t hit like a corner outfielder.  If the Sox were chasing offense, there were much better players to be had on the FA market or available through trade.

On to the Bay/Yankees rumors – I don’t buy it.  The Yankees are routinely tied to any and all free agents because of their financial clout, but to me, Bay isn’t a great buy for the Yankees because he doesn’t fit Cashman’s recent MO. He isn’t particularly young (31) and he isn’t particularly athletic or solid defensively.  I think Cashman is instead taking the chance that Carl Crawford will become a free agent following the 2010 season.  It’s the same gamble he took in not trading for Johan Santana and instead waiting for CC Sabathia.  The Yanks overwhelmed CC with cash last offseason and he became the team’s true ace en route to a World Championship.  A similar scenario could unfold next offseason with Crawford, who would become, along with Cano, Granderson, Teixeira, and Sabathia, a long-term franchise cornerstone with the speed, defense, youth, and athleticism the Yankees crave.   I don’t see Cashman wanting to commit to the (likely) 5 years it would take to land Jason Bay, particularly since he’s viewed as a defensive liability – the type of player the Yankees already have in spades.

Another possibility is that the Yankees view Jesus Montero as a left fielder in the long term.  Montero isn’t too far away from being ML-ready.  Maybe the Yankees are willing to absorb a year of Melky Cabrera in left field if they think Montero will be ready to take over in a year.  Granted, Jesus has never played anywhere but C, and the Yankees are loathe to move him off the position despite the fact that most scouts agree he can’t play it well.  But the fact remains that the Yankees have some future options in left field, and signing an older, big money FA to fill the spot for 5 years seems opposed to the type of team that Cashman hopes to build in the Bronx.