The LoHud Yankees Blog

A New York Yankees blog by Chad Jennings and the staff of The Journal News


Looking back with no regrets

Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Jan 31, 2012 Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Post Email This Post

There’s no way to spin it: A.J. Burnett’s contract is a problem. He’s spent the past two seasons struggling to keep pace as anything other than a high-dollar innings eater, and although the potential for dominance exists — and shows itself from time to time — his 5.20 ERA since 2010 paints a pretty accurate picture of his overall impact. That’s two years of sub-par performance, with two more years remaining.

Would the Yankees like a do-over? Of course they would, but looking back forces us to consider two things: Burnett’s outstanding performance in Game 2 of the 2009 World Series, and the possibility of each alternative. As Brock pointed out in this morning’s Pinch Hitter post, passing on Burnett might very well have opened the door to Derek Lowe or John Lackey in pinstripes. Let’s not pretend Burnett is the only highly paid pitcher struggling to live up to his contract these days.

Otherwise, the Yankees have little reason to regret either of those other two free agent deals from 2008. CC Sabathia’s deal has been an unquestionable plus, and Mark Teixeira has remained productive even through back-to-back down seasons. There’s obviously some cause for concern there — he hasn’t been the same all-around hitter the Yankees were expecting — but if the past two years were Teixeira’s low point, the Yankees will surely be pleased with that deal in the end.

In reality, the least regrettable part of that wild winter of 2008 wasn’t Teixeira, and it wasn’t even Sabathia.

Before making any of those signings, the Yankees bought low on Nick Swisher, making one of the most lopsided trades of the Brian Cashman era. With Swisher coming off a down year, the Yankees traded away three forgettable players: Wilson Betemit, Jeff Marquez and Jhonny Nunez. Betemit has remained a solid but easily replaceable player, while Marquez and Nunez have barely tasted the big leagues.

Swisher, on the other hand, has hit .267/.368/.486 with 81 home runs and 256 RBI since coming to the Yankees. Given some of the corner outfield alternatives, Swisher’s contract has been reasonably affordable without much long-term risk.

Even if you’re not a big Swisher fan — if you don’t like the over-the-top personality or the lower-than-you-might-expect batting average — it’s hard to argue that the trade was anything but a massive win for the Yankees. It’s an overlooked part of an overwhelming winter.

Associated Press photo

Comments

comments

 

Advertisement

157 Responses to “Looking back with no regrets”

  1. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    Who would have thought that the Braves (at least to this point) would be more willing to eat a terrible contract than the Yankees?

  2. Erin January 31st, 2012 at 12:02 pm

    , passing on Burnett might very well have opened the door to Derek Lowe or John Lackey in pinstripes.

    *******************

    Ick. Runs away screaming (mostly at Lackey) ;)

  3. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    I don’t think Lackey would have become a Yankee because they were determined to load up in the 2008 offseason for the new stadium.

  4. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    but if the past two years were Teixeira’s low point, the Yankees will surely be pleased with that deal in the end.

    ——————-

    Tex has 5 years left on his contract.

    I have a really hard time expecting years 2 and 3 will be the low point.

  5. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:04 pm

    “You really think every playoff series is a 50-50 proposition?”

    lgy

    the yankees play the field the same way tiger woods used to play the field when he was at his peak.

    one guy each week out of 100 or lesser golfers would get hot and give him a run.

    7 other teams in baseball are the field. one of them will likely get hot.

    that’s just the way it is.

  6. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    “the yankees play the field the same way tiger woods used to play the field when he was at his peak.”

    I think the analogy falls because there are so many more component parts to a baseball team that have to go right in order for there to be a “hotness” effect, which makes it less likely to happen.

  7. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    All signs pointed to them signing Lowe if they missed out on AJ. Lowe was pretty bad in the 2009 regular season but he does have a habit in his career of stepping up in the playoffs.

    He also had a 1.37 ERA in 19.2 innings vs the Phillies in 2009, so there’s that.

  8. austinmac January 31st, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    Randy,

    I agree with your 12:04.

  9. lounge lizard January 31st, 2012 at 12:11 pm

    Swisher was a salary dump of a questionable long term contract, not a player value trade. Any team in the league could have had him by offering anything of marginal value and taking the contract. The team won in 2009 despite the 4-36 stretch in the playoffs that got him temporarily benched in favor of Jerry Hairston. He’s been adequate but he’s not “toolsy” and he’s not as good as a number of other directions the Yanks could have gone in filling RF.

    As for Burnett, at the time he was on the market, there was a reader poll here as to the direction the Yanks should go. The choices were Burnett, Lowe and Ben Sheets. The readers’ choice, by a significant margin, was Sheets; Lowe was second. For all his faults, Burnett was probably the best choice of the three and could not have been obtained at fewer contract years.

  10. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    “Burnett was probably the best choice of the three and could not have been obtained at fewer contract years.”

    Which is why I would have passed.

  11. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    austin mac-

    and the yankees advantage of being deeper in pitching than most other teams is taken away by having so many off days in the playoffs too.

  12. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    2009-2011

    AJ Burnett: 584 IP, 4.79 ERA, 1.99 SO/BB, 93 ERA+

    Derek Lowe: 575 IP, 4.57 ERA, 1.98 SO/BB, 86 ERA+

    Contract

    AJ: 5/82.5
    Lowe: 4/60

    Who do you take with the benefit of hindsight?

  13. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:14 pm

    Lowe, more dumpable.

  14. Wave Your Hat January 31st, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    Over 162 games last year the Yanks were one game better than the Rangers, and two games better than the Tigers. Spread that over a 5 or 7 game series and that’s a mighty small advantage. Even the 6 game spread over the Rays, in the context of a 162 game season, is basically nothing – 1 win every 27 games – when viewed from the perspective of a 5 or 7 game series.

    Which is why the new playoff format has basically devalued the wild card by 50%. If the format doesn’t change over time I think that will have a big impact on tough divisions like the AL East because money spent to compete in those divisions just won’t have the return it used to have.

  15. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    randy

    Pitching depth hasn’t been the issue with the Yankees, pitching quality has been. They have lacked it, and they have played very tight since blowing the 2004 ALCS except for 2009.

  16. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    “I think the analogy falls because there are so many more component parts to a baseball team that have to go right in order for there to be a “hotness” effect, which makes it less likely to happen.”

    rich in nj-

    if the yankees played any team in the american for 50 games with regular season rest between games , they would have beaten anyone last year.

    same with tiger at his peak . if he played enough rounds against anyone he’d end up winning. the key for mlb or pga in beating the yankees or tiger is to make the test a small sample or to have the field make a run against the yankees or tiger.

  17. MaineYankee January 31st, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    austinmac January 31st, 2012 at 12:07 pm
    Randy,

    I agree with your 12:04.

    ———————————————————

    Be carefull not to agree with him too much.

    He might start to think what he types isn’t just BS to stir the pot.

  18. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    “Who do you take with the benefit of hindsight?”

    What would Lowe’s numbers look like in the AL east if they were that bad with the Braves?

  19. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    rich in nj-

    if teams played 7 straight games in the playoffs ,the yankees depth through 5 starters would give them a huge advantage.

  20. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    “This level of thinking implies that every individual 3 game set of the season is just a toss up.”

    No, of course it doesn’t. That’s a vast overreaction.

    But consider how different the regular season would in fact be if EVERY team had the talent level of 89-plus win teams, as most of the 8 teams in the DS generally have?

    The margins to try to made predictions would be greatly dulled. It’s a different thing to predict the outcome a 3 game series between the Yankees and the Rays rather than the Yankees and the Orioles.

    “Come on stuckey. You really think every playoff series is a 50-50 proposition?”

    Nope, more like 55-45 ish. Being the better regular season team has some marginal value. Home field has some marginal value. I’ve tried my best to read up on his subject. I’ve yet to see any analysis that suggests there is a way to build a team that give you an advantage in the PS. In fact, every study I’ve come across debunks this theory.

    Being the best team during the 162 game season is about the only significant thing you can do to prepare for the MLB postseason tournament, which in most cases in going to give you a 55-57% chance to move on, which I don’t consider statistically significant over a small time period.

    But again, I’ll always consider data in opposition to this conclusion.

  21. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    randy

    How do we distinguish between the Detroit Tigers (or some other team) being hot and the Yankees being cold?

    During any 50 game stretch, for example, Tex, Swisher, A-Rod would all likely have hit much better. Is that on the opposition or is that on them?

  22. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Is it your turn?

  23. JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    The options were…

    Sheets – Alot of people on here wanted him, he would have been hurt all year and they don’t win in 2009

    Lowe – Just as bad a contract, and he was a disaster his last year in the AL when he was much younger

    Burnett – Atlanta offered him the exact same deal too before they signed Lowe

    LGY,

    Lowe’s era would have been burnett like in the AL East or worse since he doesn’t miss bats.

  24. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    I included ERA+ in the post to try to account for them pitching in different leagues and ballparks.

  25. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    “The options were…”

    How do we know that there weren’t any Garcia/Colon circa 2011 options that may have been better?

  26. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    “If you believe it’s 55-45 then why do you always refer to it as a roll of the die or a toss up?”

    Because 55-45 requires 100 rolls. Gimme me a 100 games series, and I’d agree, 5 times outta 100, the better team will win.

    You tell me how statistically relevant 55-45 is when the rolling ends as soon as someone gets to 3?

  27. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Id probably have signed AJ instead of Lowe even with hindsight knowledge

  28. Wave Your Hat January 31st, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    55-45 is way overstating it.

  29. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:27 pm

    “He might start to think what he types isn’t just BS to stir the pot.”

    maine yankee-

    i’m just trying to keep the mass wisdom of the blog from sticking on the bottom of the pan.

    when too many posters ideas clump together they tend to settle on the bottom.

    someone has to stir it.

  30. JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:27 pm

    LGY,

    The AL East has 2 turf stadiums, 3 hr friendly parks, 1 doubles crazy park, better offenses & DH. I don’t believe in ERA+ when it comes to NL pitchers moving into the AL east.

  31. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:28 pm

    Give me a second to try to pull up quality of opponents on my phone for AJ and Lowe.

  32. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    “During any 50 game stretch, for example, Tex, Swisher, A-Rod would all likely have hit much better. Is that on the opposition or is that on them?”

    rich in nj-

    that seems just small sample to me.

    but chances are that some other team’s players are going to get hot when there are enough other teams in the crapshoot.

    the more teams the more the crap shoot.

  33. JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    The real problem was Wang getting hurt. If that doesn’t happen, they could have avoided Burnett or had a significant trade chip.

  34. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:02 pm

    Well yes but Martin’s not nearly the offensive player Swisher is in the regular season.

    I mean by that logic you could also say Francisco Cervelli and Ramiro Pena are going to be bad hitters in the post season too – I assume that bad regular season hitters aren’t going to get better against top competition in the post season.
    __

    No, you can’t because they don’t count on Pena or Cervelli. For some reason they over rely on Martin.
    ————-

    How do you figure they over rely on Martin? He’s the 8th place hitter in a very good lineup. They know what he is – a good defensive catcher who isn’t going to hit a lot but might run into a few homeruns.

    It’s the fans who have expectations of Martin that are unrealistic that are disappointed, not the team.

  35. Best To Ever Do It January 31st, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    The real problem was Wang getting hurt. If that doesn’t happen, they could have avoided Burnett or had a significant trade chip.

    ———————————

    Wang’s injury had a ripple effect on so many things.

  36. MaineYankee January 31st, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    randy

    You do a good job.

    I’m waiting for the Yankees to sign your boy Livan for MiL depth.

  37. m January 31st, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    Tiger Woods’ run was incredible because the odds of him vs the field aren’t good at all. Even if you account for his superior abilities.

    I think another pitcher could have given us better production over the contract. But AJ has pitched well for stretches particularly early in seasons to help us build a cushion, which is really important in the east. And he has pitched some gems in the postseason. And has stayed healthy and given innings.

  38. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    LGY, further, I was asked a week or so ago, why the Yankees have had “trouble” getting to the WS since 2004.

    Now, even if we forget what 55% odds buys you advantage wise in a 5 game series, lets for sake of discussion, say the Yankees have a 55% chance of winning every PS series they play in.

    That still requires 100 PS series to maximize their odds.

    The amount of PS series they’ve played since 2004 isn’t nearly enough show anything of statistical value (whether they are under or overperforming). No more than 12 rolls outta 100 will tell you anything about predictive about the final 100.

    The margins we’re talking about just don’t mean much over short series and over a short period of time.

    I think the late 90′s was a string of good luck, and the last few years of string of worse luck.

    I realize for some it scratches an itch to blame of lack of Championship trophies on a bogeyman like Brian Cashman or to consider it some failure of the clutchiness of certain newer players (I mean this generally, not directed to you per se), but the part of me that has a rudimentary understanding of basic probability just tells me while that’s emotionally more satisfying, it probably isn’t fair.

  39. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:36 pm

    2009

    Lowe: 792
    Burnett: 789

    2010

    Lowe: 764
    Burnett: 757

    2011:

    Lowe: 748
    Burnett: 755

  40. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    It wasn’t just the Wang injury

    Mussina retired
    Andy was terrible in the 2nd half
    Hughes and Kennedy were both flops
    Ponson and Rasner had combined for 40 starts

  41. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    randy

    You used a 50 game sample. Choose any size you like.

    Again, I think chance plays a role, but I think you can construct a team that is more likely to succeed in the postseason, thereby affecting the odds.

  42. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    “How do you figure they over rely on Martin? He’s the 8th place hitter in a very good lineup. They know what he is – a good defensive catcher who isn’t going to hit a lot but might run into a few homeruns.”

    Chip, two ways:

    1) By not pinch hitting for him in a big spot even though he looked lost at that plate.
    2) Part of the reason for this franchise’s success since 1996 was a circular lineup. He negates that.

    “It’s the fans who have expectations of Martin that are unrealistic that are disappointed, not the team.”

    I have very low expectations.

  43. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Can Derek Lowe throw pies?

  44. JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    Best To Ever Do It,

    Maybe Burnett never gets signed
    They also make the playoffs in 2008
    Joba never gets transitioned mid season out of desperation and maybe doesn’t have that injury that he’s never recovered from.

  45. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Rich -

    Out of curiosity what is the difference in the construct of a team that is geared towards winning in the post season vs. one geared towards winning in the regular season?

  46. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    “I think the late 90?s was a string of good luck, and the last few years of string of worse luck.”

    The late ’90s were more a function of the lack of parity fostered by then existing CBA than luck. Similarly, parity-inducing subsequent CBA have had more impact than bad luck.

  47. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    Stuckey

    I posted two links in the last thread you might be interested in.

  48. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 12:43 pm

    stuckey – That still requires 100 PS series to maximize their odds.

    This is not true. Very simply put, every game you increase the sample by increases the accuracy of the sample.

    It doesn’t magically become relevant at 100. It’s also not completely irrelevant at 3.

    Game thoery is way more difficult that you guys are giving it credit for… you can’t just throw around probabilities like you are doing.

  49. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    Chip

    This is my opinion, not based on any study: I think what the Yankees have lacked recently are contact hitters (Damon, for example, at least the younger version), who try to put the ball in play with RISP and less than two outs, rather than swinging from their heels.

  50. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    “How do you figure they over rely on Martin? He’s the 8th place hitter in a very good lineup. They know what he is – a good defensive catcher who isn’t going to hit a lot but might run into a few homeruns.”

    Chip, two ways:

    1) By not pinch hitting for him in a big spot even though he looked lost at that plate.
    2) Part of the reason for this franchise’s success since 1996 was a circular lineup. He negates that.

    “It’s the fans who have expectations of Martin that are unrealistic that are disappointed, not the team.”

    I have very low expectations.
    ——————————

    The Yankees got better production out of Martin last year than they did out of Scott Brosius in either 99 or 2000.

  51. JK January 31st, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    Chip,

    The 90s teams had dominant pitching that missed bats. They also had a 2-4 in the lineup that were opposite field, high obp, high batting average, low strike out hitters.

  52. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    “The Yankees got better production out of Martin last year than they did out of Scott Brosius in either 99 or 2000.”

    That’s a really low bar. I wanted them to cut ties with Brosius after 1998 and keep Loweel.

  53. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    Ahhh… the myth of the clutch hitter.

    Your example here… Damon… has a .367OBP with RISP for his career…

    Swisher’s is higher.
    Teixeira’s is higher.

  54. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    “This is not true. Very simply put, every game you increase the sample by increases the accuracy of the sample.”

    It’s very true when you assume I meant “maximize” literally, which I did.

    Of course I agree the better team has better odds in any series, 3, 5 or 7.

    But those odds are just too marginal to make a strong case they Yankees underperformed last season.

    “It doesn’t magically become relevant at 100. It’s also not completely irrelevant at 3.”

    No argument. The degree of relevancy is without question the matter at hand.

  55. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:50 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    Chip

    This is my opinion, not based on any study: I think what the Yankees have lacked recently are contact hitters (Damon, for example, at least the younger version), who try to put the ball in play with RISP and less than two outs, rather than swinging from their heels.
    ————————-

    My argument against that would be that the team that has represented the AL in the last two World Series doesn’t feature that kind of player either. They featured high potency sluggers like Hamilton, Cruz, Beltre, Napoli, Vlad.

    I think what Cashman has done is put together a team that can hit with any of the top offenses in the game and is now putting together a rotation that is designed to neutralize the best hitters in the game.

  56. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:51 pm

    I don’t think you can necessarily build a “postseason team”…..however there are some things you can aquire that tend to play well in the postseason……power pitching, good bullpens, and well rounded hitters. Batting average plays well against good pitching……much moreso IMO than the walk/homer combo guys that you see.

  57. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:51 pm

    “2) Part of the reason for this franchise’s success since 1996 was a circular lineup. He negates that.”

    I’d like to see some/any statistical support for that assumption.

  58. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    “Ahhh… the myth of the clutch hitter.

    Your example here… Damon… has a .367OBP with RISP for his career…”

    I didn’t use the word clutch.

  59. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    “I’d like to see some/any statistical support for that assumption.”

    Me too.

  60. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    “I don’t think you can necessarily build a “postseason team”…..however there are some things you can aquire that tend to play well in the postseason……power pitching, good bullpens, and well rounded hitters. Batting average plays well against good pitching……much moreso IMO than the walk/homer combo guys that you see.”

    I’m willing to consider that.

    Let’s see the data that support this?

  61. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:53 pm

    Swisher and Tex are both eaten alive against good RHP…….

  62. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    “My argument against that would be that the team that has represented the AL in the last two World Series doesn’t feature that kind of player either. They featured high potency sluggers like Hamilton, Cruz, Beltre, Napoli, Vlad.”

    Again, was Texas hot or were the Yankees cold.

    Maybe blake expressed it better than I did, but this is my point:

    “Batting average plays well against good pitching……much moreso IMO than the walk/homer combo guys that you see.”

  63. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    blake – That’s why you have 9 guys in your lineup, not 2?

  64. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    “Let’s see the data that support this?”

    My eyes are all the data I need ;)

  65. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    “The Yankees got better production out of Martin last year than they did out of Scott Brosius in either 99 or 2000.”

    That’s a really low bar. I wanted them to cut ties with Brosius after 1998 and keep Loweel.
    ————-

    Yeah but the point is that the circular lineup that you talked about in 1996 had Joe Girardi (less productive than Martin) and the 1998, 1999, 2000 Yankees had Scott Brosius (also less productive than Martin except in 1998 – that team’s black hole was Chad Curtis) so I don’t see how Russ Martin is the guy holding the Yankees back.

  66. blake January 31st, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    “blake – That’s why you have 9 guys in your lineup, not 2?”

    Well that’s fine if the other 7 guys are well balanced……

  67. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    OK, you got me, Chip, but Martin should still be replaced.

  68. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    the yankees play the field the same way tiger woods used to play the field when he was at his peak.

    ===============================

    1998-2001 Yankees were more like Tiger Woods in his salad days. They had an intimidating presence and they KNEW they were going to win…..and so did their opponents. Since then, the Yankees have almost always had as much or more talent than their opposition, but as a group they no longer have that presence IMO. They’ve been very, very good, at times great, but not intimidating.

  69. DONNYBROOK January 31st, 2012 at 1:00 pm

    I think you guys are far to rough on Martin. Just what do you expect outta the C in the 8 Slot? Ideally, all I expect outta my catcher is good D, call a good game, and situational hitting. Basically, give me a Bob Boone.

  70. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:00 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    OK, you got me, Chip, but Martin should still be replaced.
    ———————

    And I’m sure that as soon as the Yankees find someone who they think is a better fit he will be…as is the way with all ball players.

  71. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:00 pm

    blake – The team as a whole should be balanced, not necessarily the individual parts. Obviously that would be ideal… but not realistic.

    Any time a baseball game comes down to being worried about a person getting a hit with 2 outs, you’ve already missed how many other opportunities to score? And you’ve already made 2 outs that inning…

    Placing the blame on the “hinge” breaking because the door is too heavy is kinda silly.

  72. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    “I think you guys are far to rough on Martin. Just what do you expect outta the C in the 8 Slot?”

    Do we really need to discuss Montero yet again? I think not.

  73. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    Rich – No we don’t, because Montero is not a catcher.

  74. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:03 pm

    ID

    Neither was Piazza.

  75. DONNYBROOK January 31st, 2012 at 1:04 pm

    Piazza did not hit outta the 8 Slot.

  76. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:04 pm

    Rich – How many rings does Piazza have?

  77. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    ID

    *slaps head*

  78. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    If you look at the recent Yankee teams it’s not the teams with the best offenses that won – it was the teams with the best pitching.

    Compare – for example the 07 and 09 teams. You can’t tell me that the offense was better in 09 than it was in 07

  79. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    ID,

    Im talking about ideal scenarios…..I realize that’s not always realistic

  80. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    “OK, you got me, Chip, but Martin should still be replaced.”

    Why is the arguments leading up to your conclusion unrelated to the substance of your conclusion?

    You just acknowledged your argument was effectively debunked, but that your conclusion remains the same.

    Doesn’t this render intelligent discourse utterly purposeless?

  81. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    Rich – Don’t hurt yourself. It was a joke.

    Kinda…

  82. Trigeminal Neuralgia Yank January 31st, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    Jim Hendry to Yank front office??

  83. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    “Compare – for example the 07 and 09 teams. You can’t tell me that the offense was better in 09 than it was in 07″

    Id call it close to even…..the 2009 didn’t play any really good teams that year either until the WS …and that certainly helped.

  84. Crawdaddy January 31st, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    Cashman hiring another former GM as a special assistant. Hendry had a good reputation as a scout before he became the Cubs GM.

    http://espn.go.com/new-york/ml.....jim-hendry

  85. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    Compare – for example the 07 and 09 teams. You can’t tell me that the offense was better in 09 than it was in 07

    =================================

    Not better, but pretty close. ’07 team had an OPS+ of 116. ’09 team was 114.

  86. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    “You just acknowledged your argument was effectively debunked, but that your conclusion remains the same.

    Doesn’t this render intelligent discourse utterly purposeless?”

    stuckey

    You post so much nonsense, it’s impossible to keep track of. So the irony in this post is so pungent I can smell it off of my screen.

  87. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    dogface – The 2009 teams SLG was much higher, that’s why OPS and OPS+ are not the sole indicators of offensive performance.

    The 2009 offense was better, slightly.

  88. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:14 pm

    stuckey

    You post so much nonsense, it’s impossible to keep track of. So the irony in this post is so pungent I can smell it off of my screen.

    bahahaha don’t trip while you are backpedalling rich.

    You just can’t argue dishonestly like that. If you can’t explain how you proved your conclusion to be true in the face of evidence, you have to alter your conclusion.

  89. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:15 pm

    Intelligence is the capacity to receive, decode and transmit information efficiently. Stupidity is blockage of this process at any point. Bigotry, ideologies etc. block the ability to receive; robotic reality-tunnels block the ability to decode or integrate new signals; censorship blocks transmission.

    - Robert Anton Wilson

    If you are not willing to admit you may be wrong, you already are.

  90. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    Jim Hendry to Yank front office??

    =========================

    Just don’t let him negotiate any contracts.

  91. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    “bahahaha don’t trip while you are backpedalling rich.

    You just can’t argue dishonestly like that. If you can’t explain how you proved your conclusion to be true in the face of evidence, you have to alter your conclusion.”

    Who’s backpedalling? I admitted I was wrong about the Yankees having a circular lineup in the later years of the run..

  92. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    “You post so much nonsense, it’s impossible to keep track of. So the irony in this post is so pungent I can smell it off of my screen.”

    That’s not an answer to a fair and simple question.

    You acknowledged your argument was rendered invalid yet your conclusion remains unchanged.

    What’s the point of making an argument then?

  93. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    “What’s the point of making an argument then?”

    You’re a funny guy.

  94. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    “Who’s backpedalling? I admitted I was wrong about the Yankees having a circular lineup in the later years of the run..”

    Okay then, what’s the NEW reason Martin needs to be replaced?

  95. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    rich in NJ – OK, you got me, Chip, but Martin should still be replaced

    That’s a pretty sideways attempt at doing so.

  96. Crawdaddy January 31st, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Rich,

    What do you think about Hendry coming to the Yankees and working for Cashman probably as a special scout similar to Towers.

  97. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    “Okay then, what’s the NEW reason Martin needs to be replaced?”

    Because historically, as I have post ad nauseum, the Yankees have won with offensive catchers and they should not depart from that model of proven success.

  98. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    Craw

    I don’t know enough about their drafting to have an opinion.

  99. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    “That’s a pretty sideways attempt at doing so.”

    ID

    Do you flesh out your reasons for every though in every post? I don’t.

    I’ll repost my subsequent clarification:

    Because historically, as I have post ad nauseum, the Yankees have won with offensive catchers and they should not depart from that model of proven success.

  100. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    Towers has done a phenomenal job in Arizona

  101. DONNYBROOK January 31st, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    Lotta things went right for the Yanks in the “09″ Playoffs. That foul call on Mauer’s ball down the line, the give-away game error by the Angel infielder in that frigid game, Damon’s Dash, A-Rod with the late game heroics. Many times, numbers have nothing to do with who wins in the Playoffs and who doesn’t. Over 162, it’s a different story.

  102. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:23 pm

    Rich in NJ – Is that actually a true statement? 2009 Posada wasn’t great, and they got to the postseason on the back of cervelli/molina…

    99, 98, 97, 96 Posada was still part time with Girardi’s monster bat in the lineups…

    2000 is about the only one I will give you without going back 30 years.

  103. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    “I think you guys are far to rough on Martin. Just what do you expect outta the C in the 8 Slot?”

    Do we really need to discuss Montero yet again? I think not.
    ———————–

    again proving my earlier point – it’s fans who are unhappy with what Martin does – the Yankees are fine with it. So fine with it that they re-signed him and traded away a potential catcher for something they felt they needed more.

  104. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    OPS+ / ERA+

    1996: 100 / 108
    1997: 108 / 117
    1998: 116 / 116

    1999: 110 / 114
    2000: 103 / 102
    2001: 100 / 112

    2002: 114 / 114
    2003: 114 / 110
    2004: 111 / 96

    2005: 115 / 94
    2006: 111 / 103
    2007: 116 / 101

    2008: 101 / 104
    2009: 114 / 108
    2010: 108 / 107
    2011: 106 / 119

  105. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    rich in NJ – ID
    Do you flesh out your reasons for every though in every post? I don’t.

    Yes, I do. Or at least try to.

    So should you, otherwise what is the point of discussing things with you?

    Why are you trying to influence other people’s opinions around here by posting if you don’t want to back up your opinions with reasons that you could use to actually convince someone you are right?

  106. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    “Lotta things went right for the Yanks in the “09? Playoffs.”

    Yup….the 2009 team was very good…..however I don’t think they were dramatically better than the 2010 or 2011 teams. The 2011 Yanks had the best run differential they’ve had since 1998.

    Nobody talks about it….but the 2009 team didn’t play a team anywhere close to as good as Detroit or Texas were last year…….

  107. Bronx Jeers January 31st, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    Because historically, as I have post ad nauseum, the Yankees have won with offensive catchers and they should not depart from that model of proven success.

    ————————————————

    ” Remember 96′ !! ” – Girardi’s war cry.

  108. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    “Okay then, what’s the NEW reason Martin needs to be replaced?”

    Because historically, as I have post ad nauseum, the Yankees have won with offensive catchers and they should not depart from that model of proven success.
    ——————————-

    You’re oversimplifying:

    Yes, Yogi and Posada won a lot of championships, but the Yankees didn’t just win because of good offensive catchers behind the plate. They won because they had good teams, great teams in fact, from top to bottom.

    The Yankees have also lost with good offensive catchers like Stanley back there – and there were plenty of years that they went without a title with Posada behind the plate.

  109. DONNYBROOK January 31st, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    NOT everyone posts in order to influence someone’s opinion. Kinda like saying, “Man it’s hot”, and then YOU demand a thermometer be produced immediately. Expressing an opinion should not be the grounds for being subjected to the rack.

  110. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    ID

    In 2009, Posada’s OPS+ was 125. That isn’t great for a catcher?

    Posada’s OPS was over 100 in every season you referenced except ’99 and even then it was the same as Martin’s.

    The absence of a good offensive catcher in one season (1996) proves what?

  111. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    donnybrook – There is a HUGE difference between expressing an opinion, and arguing your’s against someone else’s.

    Basically no one here ever purely “expresses an opinion”.

  112. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:34 pm

    Joba :shock:

    http://blog.timesunion.com/spo...../9/#2756-3

  113. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 1:34 pm

    The 2009 offense was better, slightly.

    ==========================

    Yeah, I was taking a few points away from ’09 for thumping more in the cozy new confines (.490 in ’09, to .474 in ’07), but then noticed there was a similar difference on the road too.

  114. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:35 pm

    “Why are you trying to influence other people’s opinions around here by posting if you don’t want to back up your opinions with reasons that you could use to actually convince someone you are right?”

    I’m trying to influence opinions? Nah.

    So again, tell me why Posada’s 125 OPS+ in 2009 means that:

    “2009 Posada wasn’t great, and they got to the postseason on the back of cervelli/molina…”

    I know you wouldn’t leave something out.

  115. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:34 pm

    Joba :shock:

    http://blog.timesunion.com/spo…../9/#2756-3
    —————–

    I don’t see Joba – is he behind that really fat guy?

  116. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    “You’re oversimplifying:

    Yes, Yogi and Posada won a lot of championships, but the Yankees didn’t just win because of good offensive catchers behind the plate. They won because they had good teams, great teams in fact, from top to bottom.”

    I’m not simplifying. I am presenting what has characterized historic Yankee teams.

    Of course, they had good teams; you can’t win otherwise in baseball, but having an offensive advantage at the catching position has provided them with a huge advantage over other teams.

    “The Yankees have also lost with good offensive catchers like Stanley back there – and there were plenty of years that they went without a title with Posada behind the plate.”

    They had Don Slaught and Matt Nokes too, but the rest of the team wasn’t good enough.

  117. DONNYBROOK January 31st, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    Opinions are expressed here numerous times daily, and the Blog Cops immediately burn the individual at the stake.

  118. Ys Guy January 31st, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    “Expressing an opinion should not be the grounds for being subjected to the rack.”

    nobody expects the spanish inquisition! our main weapon is fear, fear and surprise, oh, darn…our two main weapons are fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency…no…our three main weaponsare fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope……amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope…and our nice red uniforms…

  119. Bronx Jeers January 31st, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    Joba’s looking a little like a beardless Peter Jackson in that photo.

  120. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Blue Jays, Mariners Talked Pineda For Lawrie Swap

    By Ben Nicholson-Smith [January 31 at 11:14am CST]

    Alex Anthopoulos hinted last night that some young Blue Jays drew trade interest this offseason, and Jeff Blair of the Globe and Mail has the details on some talks that never materialized. The Blue Jays and Mariners discussed Michael Pineda, but the Blue Jays balked when the Mariners wanted Brett Lawrie in return for the right-hander, according to Blair’s sources.

    Instead, the Yankees obtained Pineda for Jesus Montero last month and the Blue Jays held onto Lawrie. The 22-year-old British Columbia native made his MLB debut in 2011, posting a .293/.373/.580 line in 171 plate appearances. Mariners GM Jack Zduriencik selected Lawrie in the first round of the 2008 draft when he was Milwaukee’s scouting director. Meanwhile, Pineda posted a 3.74 ERA with 9.1 K/9 and 2.9 BB/9 in 171 innings as a rookie last year.

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com

    Apologies if this has already been posted.

  121. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    “Because historically, as I have post ad nauseum, the Yankees have won with offensive catchers and they should not depart from that model of proven success.”

    And in all this time you’e posted this ad nauseum, have you ever bothered to fact check it?

    I’m going to assume you’re aware of 1996.

    Are you aware Joe Girardi had 23 PA in 1998 compated to Posada’s 29.

    Are you aware Girardi had 21 PA in 1999 to Posada’s 23, a PS in which his OPS was .626?

    You know when he finally became the everyday PS catcher in 2000, his OPS was .645?

    Now, explain to me again (ad nauseum if you like) the correlation between the the Yankees postseason success and offensive production from their catchers?

  122. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    I wouldn’t trade Lawrie for Pineda either.

  123. Erin January 31st, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:34 pm
    Joba

    http://blog.timesunion.com/spo…../9/#2756-3

    *********************

    Joba rockin’ the glasses.

    The Teammates of the Travelling Glasses continues! ;)

  124. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    RAB has an interesting post about Montero…..Miguel Montero.

  125. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    “And in all this time you’e posted this ad nauseum, have you ever bothered to fact check it?”

    Yup.

    “Are you aware Joe Girardi had 23 PA in 1998 compated to Posada’s 29.

    Are you aware Girardi had 21 PA in 1999 to Posada’s 23, a PS in which his OPS was .626?”

    “Now, explain to me again (ad nauseum if you like) the correlation between the the Yankees postseason success and offensive production from their catchers?”

    I’m looking at the regular season.

    As for the postseason, I made a general point about approach:

    “This is my opinion, not based on any study:”

    So thanks for distorting what I said.

  126. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 1:47 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    “You’re oversimplifying:

    Yes, Yogi and Posada won a lot of championships, but the Yankees didn’t just win because of good offensive catchers behind the plate. They won because they had good teams, great teams in fact, from top to bottom.”

    I’m not simplifying. I am presenting what has characterized historic Yankee teams.

    Of course, they had good teams; you can’t win otherwise in baseball, but having an offensive advantage at the catching position has provided them with a huge advantage over other teams.

    “The Yankees have also lost with good offensive catchers like Stanley back there – and there were plenty of years that they went without a title with Posada behind the plate.”

    They had Don Slaught and Matt Nokes too, but the rest of the team wasn’t good enough.
    ——————————

    You’re trying to make a direct correlation between the offensive production behind the plate and championship winning teams and it’s not that simple to do. It’s like saying that all tigers are cats therefore all cats must be tigers.

    Yes the Yankees have won with good offensive players behind the plate but that doesn’t mean they need good offensive catchers to win.

    As I said earlier the 1996, 1998, 1999 and 2000 Yankee teams all had at least one bad offensive player in the lineup (Girardi, Curtis, Brosius and Brosius) so would I be right to say that the Yankees need to have one bad offensive player in the lineup to win a world series? No, of course not. Does it help to get offense from all 9 spots in the order – of course it does. But do you need a good offensive catcher to be a championship team – absolutely not.

  127. Joe from Long Island January 31st, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    Ys Guy – very good. very, very good.

  128. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    Rich – So again, tell me why Posada’s 125 OPS+ in 2009 means that:

    “2009 Posada wasn’t great, and they got to the postseason on the back of cervelli/molina…”

    I know you wouldn’t leave something out.

    Maybe because 2009 Posada played 111 games, and only caught 88 of them… yes, his OPS+ was high that year, having turned in his 3rd highest SLG in his career at age 37 which not a single person on the planet expected… simply quoting his OPS+ isn’t good enough. Since you are looking “at the regular season” now, even though your original statement was about the yankees winning world series because they had “hitting catchers”.

  129. spidanyc January 31st, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Lawrie and Ricky Romero for King Felix, who hangs up first?

  130. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Speaking of Miguel Montero…

    @Rotoworld_BB
    Montero to cut off extension talks Mar. 20 dlvr.it/18Lc2r

  131. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Rich in NJ – You just whiffed on the followup to realizing that the Yankee lineup didn’t need to be circular. This didn’t have to go this far.

    Having a hitting catcher, (or a monster DH) is no guarantee to success or indicator of previous success.

    You have to come up with a better reason for wanting to get rid of Martin, because “they won a world series that one time” isn’t a good one.

  132. Trigeminal Neuralgia Yank January 31st, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Lgy
    Yikes joba looks a little bulky there.

  133. blake January 31st, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    I coukd get down with fake Montero……fake Montero is a lot better than a fake Molina

  134. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    “You’re trying to make a direct correlation between the offensive production behind the plate and championship winning teams and it’s not that simple to do. It’s like saying that all tigers are cats therefore all cats must be tigers.”

    No, I am making an historical observation.

    “Yes the Yankees have won with good offensive players behind the plate but that doesn’t mean they need good offensive catchers to win.”

    It makes it more likely. Isn’t that enough of a reason to follow a model that proved to be successful?

    “As I said earlier the 1996, 1998, 1999 and 2000 Yankee teams all had at least one bad offensive player in the lineup (Girardi, Curtis, Brosius and Brosius) so would I be right to say that the Yankees need to have one bad offensive player in the lineup to win a world series? No, of course not. Does it help to get offense from all 9 spots in the order – of course it does. But do you need a good offensive catcher to be a championship team – absolutely not.”

    Isn’t the point of sports to find positional advantages over other teams?

    In the ’90-early ’00s, they got corner OF production from Bernie in CF. They often got corner OF from Jeter at SS, and they got corner OF production from Posada at C.

    What other team came close to that?

    Historically, they were able to exploit a positional advantage at C because of the illustrious names we all know.

    They had a chance to have that again, but traded it away.

    So viewing the Yankees in that context, I think it’s completely reasonable to want to replace Martin with a better offensive catcher.

  135. LGY January 31st, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    How about Rich wants to get rid of Martin because he isn’t a particularly good MLB player?

    (Plus he’s Canadian)

  136. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    Lawrie and Ricky Romero for King Felix, who hangs up first?

    ========================

    Jays. More bang for buck out Lawrie/Romero

  137. randy l. January 31st, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    “I wouldn’t trade Lawrie for Pineda either.”

    which pineda?

    the one with a plus change

    or the one with a mediocre change?

    they are really two different guys aren’t they?

  138. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:56 pm

    “You just whiffed on the followup to realizing that the Yankee lineup didn’t need to be circular. This didn’t have to go this far”

    ID

    I admitted it. Do you want blood too?

    Now, admit that you were wrong about Posada in 2009.

    “Since you are looking “at the regular season” now, even though your original statement was about the yankees winning world series because they had “hitting catchers”.”

    Not now, always.

    “Having a hitting catcher, (or a monster DH) is no guarantee to success or indicator of previous success.”

    See my 1:54 post

  139. trisha - true pinstriped blue January 31st, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    Haven’t really read the posts but just in passing through saw something about expressing an opinion and checked out to see what the post was.

    Again, without knowing any of the context (and whether there was widespread agreement or disagreement) I agree with Donnybrook that not everyone who posts an opinion here is trying to influence others to think the same way.

    That said, it’s natural I guess for people who disagree to respond to the post and voice their disagreement.

    I think one is only subjected to the rack (I like that) when another poster is so diametrically opposed to the opinion being stated that he or she can’t wait to pounce all over it.

    I know when I post opinions here I don’t particuarly care whether anyone agrees with them. I will always read the disagreeeing posts though, and I actually have modified a position or two based on what others have written.

    I always do my research though and can always back up my opinions. Whether or not people agree with my research, well that’s another story.

    :)

  140. stuckey January 31st, 2012 at 1:59 pm

    “I’m looking at the regular season.”

    Did you look at LAST regular season, when the Russell Martin-catching Yankees have their best regular season run differential since 1998, and the best record in the AL?

    I’m failing to see the elements of a solid conclusion here. You’ve neglected to rebut “offensive catching” being an element of the Yankees postseason success, and last regular season provided no data to argue Russell Martin was or will be a negative factor on their regular season success, and in fact, all data suggests the opposite.

    The circular line-up has already been debunked.

    So can you try again to explain exactly what your reasoning for Russell Martin needs to be replaced?

    If it’s pure, subjective, personal whim, that’s entirely valid, but you could just say that as opposed to pretending you have a fact-based argument on the matter…

    Or you can just respond by saying something nasty about me again, pretending that’s somehow relevant…

  141. Bronx Jeers January 31st, 2012 at 2:00 pm

    Joba rockin’ the glasses.

    The Teammates of the Travelling Glasses continues!

    ——————————————————-

    He needs a serious fashion intervention. I’m no mr GQ but what’s goin on with that hair?

  142. dogface January 31st, 2012 at 2:00 pm

    RAB has an interesting post about Montero…..Miguel Montero

    ================================

    1) I predict he won’t sign extension with the Snakes because…
    2) the teams who will be pursuing his services are the heaviest financial hitters in the game, thus…
    3) He will likely be overpaid by either the Yankees or Red Sox.

  143. blake January 31st, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    Miguel Montero had a .904 OPS vs RHP last year.

  144. Tom in N.J. January 31st, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Miguel Montero?

    I like that idea!

  145. trisha - true pinstriped blue January 31st, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    I am of the opinion that AJ still has something left to offer to the Yankees.

    Here is my back up. He still has flashes of brilliance. If ever those can be harnassed, he might actually put in a good season.

    I don’t expect a lot of agreement. I fully understand those who do not agree. However since I am not convinced that he is all through, I maintain my opinion until proven wrong by the only one who can prove me wrong. AJ. (If he is still around the prove me wrong.)

  146. Best To Ever Do It January 31st, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    Trigeminal Neuralgia Yank January 31st, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Lgy
    Yikes joba looks a little bulky there.

    ———————-

    He’ll be fine

  147. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    “Did you look at LAST regular season, when the Russell Martin-catching Yankees have their best regular season run differential since 1998, and the best record in the AL?”

    So you’re saying that if Montero would have been called up earlier they could have been even better?

    “I’m failing to see the elements of a solid conclusion here. You’ve neglected to rebut “offensive catching” being an element of the Yankees postseason success, and last regular season provided no data to argue Russell Martin was or will be a negative factor on their regular season success, and in fact, all data suggests the opposite.”

    I don’t have to because historically, the thing speaks for itself: res ipsa…

    Wait, you said earlier that the postseason is a toss up. Which is it?

    Did you watch last year’s ALDS. SSS caveats, he sucked.

    “So can you try again to explain exactly what your reasoning for Russell Martin needs to be replaced?”

    Because as LGY said: “How about Rich wants to get rid of Martin because he isn’t a particularly good MLB player?”

    “If it’s pure, subjective, personal whim, that’s entirely valid, but you could just say that as opposed to pretending you have a fact-based argument on the matter…”

    Would a fact-based argument be like you claiming that Bautista was an example of trading an impact player at the time he was traded?

    “Or you can just respond by saying something nasty about me again, pretending that’s somehow relevant…”

    Oh, the guy who called me a Chubby Chaser is the arbitor of nastiness.

    Rinse. Repeat.

  148. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    Finally Rich, you are getting yourself somewhere.

    They had a chance to have that again, but traded it away.

    So viewing the Yankees in that context, I think it’s completely reasonable to want to replace Martin with a better offensive catcher.

    These 2 statements are not related, though.

    You can wish that Montero was going to be a catcher until you are blue in the face, that will not make it so. If they thought he would have been a Piazza-type catcher they probably would not have traded him. They probably would not have called up Romine last year to hide Montero either. You simply can’t assume any projected level of defense for him right now. It would behoove you to stop relying on this point in your arguments for at least until we see how long he sticks as a catcher.

    You can want the Yankees to replace Martin with a better all around catcher, but you can’t simply replace one that catches with one that hits and expect things to go smoothly. Your reason can not be “They won with Yogi, Thurman and Posada” because… those are 3 of the best all-around catchers to ever play this game. Right now they are clearly more worried about how Martin handles the staff and his defense than his stick.

    Instead of the C advantage, the Yankees have the 2B advantage right now, and things come in stages and are ever evolving.

    You can’t ignore the past, but you can’t simply attempt to repeat it either. You always have to deal with your current situation and currently they don’t seem to care how many baseballs Martin hits.

  149. Chip January 31st, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    They had a chance to have that again, but traded it away.

    So viewing the Yankees in that context, I think it’s completely reasonable to want to replace Martin with a better offensive catcher.
    ——————————

    Two issues with this:

    1. Yogi and even Posada at their peaks were still better defensive catchers than Montero projected to be.

    2. No it isn’t reasonable. Where were the monster offensive players on the Cardinals – Pujols and who else? How about on the Giants the year before? Texas was clearly the better offensive team both years but got beaten. Philly was clearly the superior offensive team to either of those eventual champions too but got beaten.

    Offense matters, pitching matters, defense matters. The Yankees believe that Martin’s ability to help in two of those three categories outweigh his deficiencies as a hitter.

    The Yankees didn’t lose to Detroit because of Russ Martin any more than they lost to the Red Sox in 04 because of Alex Rodriguez.

    The Yankees lost because Sabathia didn’t pitch effectively and because multiple guys in the lineup didn’t hit, Tex, Alex, Swisher, and yes – Martin.

  150. austinmac January 31st, 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Many on this board have said the Yankees should spend on scouting and development if not on players. Hendry is an effort in that regard.

    I thought Joba was supposed to be in great shape. Instead, he has a large shape. Cashman’s fault?

  151. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 2:21 pm

    ID

    You are assuming facts that aren’t in evidence. So yeah, it’s possible that he will not be at least an 80 game catcher for the next five years (sports is too unpredictable to go beyond that), but he is thought by scouts (like Frankie Piliere, who at least puts his name to it) and people like Mark Newman (even after the trade) to have a chance to stick.

    You say they wouldn’t have traded him. I say they had a manager who wouldn’t play him enough to finish off his development.

    At worst, our opinions hold equal weight.

    The rationale behind the citing of historical NYY catchers is to emphasize how much that positional advantage has benefited the Yankees, and that underscores why I think they needed to see that Montero couldn’t catch before trading him, iow, not a projection. If that meant firing Girardi, then there would be an extra benefit.

  152. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    “1. Yogi and even Posada at their peaks were still better defensive catchers than Montero projected to be.”

    Even if that’s true, and I’m not sure it is given the grief Posada received, I don’t think it matters. I think it’s a solely matter of sufficiency.

    “2. No it isn’t reasonable. Where were the monster offensive players on the Cardinals – Pujols and who else? How about on the Giants the year before? Texas was clearly the better offensive team both years but got beaten. Philly was clearly the superior offensive team to either of those eventual champions too but got beaten.”

    As I have said, balance wins. The danger to their balance over the next 2-3 years is from the offense.

  153. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    Rich – RE: 2009 Posada. His OPS that year for the games he played was a boon to the team, yes… but his regular season production was largely limited to 2 months, and he missed all of May. Cervelli/Molina caught 74 games in the regular season, and Posada really only showed up in the playoffs against the Twins… and that was 11 at bats. His bat disappeared as the playoffs went on.

    If you are so deadset that 2009 Posada was a “great Yankee catcher” then… fine… you can have it.

    Not now, always.
    Except earlier when you said that they needed a circular lineup like the teams that won world series? There is a lot of flip-clopping going on here. I don’t consider losing in the playoffs failed seasons, so it’s hard for me to have this discussion about past catchers that won world series.

    You are assuming facts that aren’t in evidence.
    I think there is a lot more behind closed doors to trading away Montero that just the things we argue about every day.

    What I know is that they called up Romine when Montero should have easily been able to catch those same games.

    I know that the overall production they got out of Martin last year was 1 out of 25 parts that got the Yankees the most wins in the AL and the highest run differential in the league last year. I know that 2011 Yankee team had just as good a chance of winning the world series last year as the other 7.

    I know they didn’t lose because of Martin.

    I know I would roll the dice with that same team against detroit last year… who knows what happens if game 1 doesn’t get rained out?

    I also know I hope Pineda or Campos is good :p

  154. Rich in NJ January 31st, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    ID

    Posada still had 438 PA in 2009.

    Great, very good…Either way, a rare catching asset.

    “Except earlier when you said that they needed a circular lineup like the teams that won world series?”

    I was referring to roster construction in general.

    “There is a lot of flip-clopping going on here”

    By you on Posada?

    “I don’t consider losing in the playoffs failed season”

    The Yankees do.

    “I think there is a lot more behind closed doors to trading away Montero that just the things we argue about every day.”

    It’s unknowable, so why speculate?

    “What I know is that they called up Romine when Montero should have easily been able to catch those same games.”

    That supports my point about Girardi.

    “I know they didn’t lose because of Martin.”

    So a big hit in the postseason couldn’t have changed the outcome of the ALDS?

  155. Irreverent Discourse January 31st, 2012 at 3:02 pm

    The Yankees do.

    No, they say they do. it makes great press clippings.

    That supports my point about Girardi.

    Girardi doesn’t get final say on calling up a AA catcher to catch him over your super stud prospect during a pennant race. That call came from way over Girardi’s head, that’s obvious.

  156. Duh Innings January 31st, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    And what pray tell would’ve been wrong with trading Burnett for Lowe?

    1. The Yanks would’ve cleared Burnett’s remaining $33M through 2013 – Lowe’s $15M for 2012 only = $18M.

    2. Even if the Yanks had to kick in as much as say $8M for Lowe for $23M total to get rid of Burnett ($8M kicked in + $15M for Lowe), that $23M would’ve been off the books after one year and the Yanks still would’ve cleared $10M in the trade, more the less the Yanks kick in.

    3. Lowe isn’t Burnett i.e. he’s not a headcase like Burnett.

    4. Lowe could’ve been traded like he ultimately was.

    Bottom line is Cashman screwed up because he could’ve traded Burnett for Lowe then traded Lowe because the Braves ultimately did. It could’ve either been two trades or a three-way deal.

    The Yanks should offer Burnett and $8M to Houston for Carlos Lee and see if Houston bites.

    Burnett’s $33M through 2013 – Lee’s $18.5M for 2012 only = $14.5M – 8M kicked in = $6.5M the Yanks clear.

    Yes, Lee would cost the Yanks $25M total, but I’d rather pay $25M for a year of Lee than $33M of two more years of Burnett and shed $25M after 2012 than be stuck with paying $16.5M for 2012 and the same for 2013 for a headcase with a 5+ ERA the past two seasons.

    Lee posted 18 HR and 94 RBI for a 106-loss team last year. I would be thrilled if he did that or slightly better than that (say 20 HR 100 RBI, so 2 more HR and 6 more RBI) and anyone with half a brain would, too, especially if he did it from the #8 slot. He is better than Ibanez, Damon, Matsui, Vasquez, and Jones.

    Trading Burnett would create the following:

    1. Hughes vs. Garcia for the fifth starter job

    2. Okajima, Cabral, and Delcarmen battle for the final slot in the bullpen assuming Wade and either Hughes or Garcia are in the pen.

    3. The Yanks could just go with Hughes to start 2012 and see if he could keep his job and if he can’t, Garcia takes it.

    4. A lineup where as many as SIX everyday players could smack 25 or more HR (Cano, Rodriguez, Teixiera, Granderson, Swisher, Lee) and SEVEN could hit 15 or more HR (assuming Martin hits at least 15 HR) for at least 165 HR from 7 everyday players. If the Yanks got that, Jeter smacked 8, Gardner 7, that’s 15 more for 180 HR from the starting nine. ‘Figure Jones is good for at least 10 and whoever else is good for another 10 HR for 200 HR total.

    Name me a team besides the Yanks who c/would take on Lee’s $18.5M for 2012 or even half that, I can’t.

    Houston would acquire a veteran starter at a cost of $25M ($33M they take on – $8M the Yanks kick in) across two years who is capable of giving them 400 innings. A new team with no pressure to win, media or fan scrutiny, or DH or difficult bottom of the order to face – a change of scenery – might be just what Burnett needs.

  157. Duh Innings January 31st, 2012 at 5:33 pm

    Correction: $26.5M for Lee (his $18.5M + $8M kicked in.)

    I’d rather the Yanks pay $26.5M for a year of Lee than $16.5M per year for Burnett.

Leave a comment below


Sponsored by:
 

Search

    Advertisement

    Follow

    Mobile

    Read The LoHud Yankees Blog on the go by navigating to the blog on your smartphone or mobile device's browser. No apps or downloads are required.

Advertisement

Place an ad

Call (914) 694-3581