Hank Speaks About Johan

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:10 am

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/01/hank-speaks-abo.html#comments

Yesterday it seemed that the Yankees' talks for Johan Santana were pretty much dead, with his contract extension presenting an issue. But Hank Steinbrenner weighed in with Anthony McCarron, and the Yankees seem squarely in the mix. Key points of the article:

* The implication is that the Yankees' best offer - Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera, Jeff Marquez, and a fourth player - is still on the table.
* Hank says point blank the Yankees are best-equipped to handle Santana's contract demands. Yesterday Gordon Edes said Santana's agent implied a seven-year, $140MM deal would be necessary and the Red Sox were willing to pay it.
* Despite just "minor dialogue" between the Yanks and Twins lately, Steinbrenner seems unwilling to let the situation linger more than another two weeks.
* McCarron says the Mets remain in the mix as well. Matthew Cerrone believes the Yankees, Mets, and Red Sox "have essentially made their final offers."

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:11 am

sunny615 January 3rd, 2008 at 9:15 am

SANTANA UPDATE:

Not to hijack this post - but the Daily News reports that Hank says we’re still in the Santana race. And after two weeks, they’ll decide one way or another to maintain pursuit or call it quits. McCarron reports that the Sox, Yanks and Mets basically have their best offers on the table and now it’s up to the Twins. Carfardo of the Boston Globe says Santana wants a 7 yr $140 mil contract and the Sox are willing to meet that. McCarron thinks the Yankees final package is Hughes, Melky, Marquez and a 4th prospect (lower level - Hiligoss?).

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:12 am

Back to Santana: if Hughes is on the table, no matter who else the Yankees are throwing in, the Twins have to pull the trigger. Why wait for a 2nd or 3rd top prospect? What are the odds of ALL of them panning out anyway?

Do they expect the Yankees to give them Hughes AND Kennedy along with Cabrera? And if so, do the Twins honestly think those two are going to be their 1/2 for the next decade?

When you have someone as good as Hughes on the table, you make the deal and forget the secondary because the chances are pretty good that the secondary stinks anyway.

And that's really why the Yankees and Red Sox have the upper hand. We can offer them quantity but what's in it for them? They already have a better farm system than us. Why do they just want to take on a bunch of prospects that they already basically have? THAT is why they're looking for someone like Reyes who is young and reasonably controlled, as much as his talent would fit them.

They need a star to plug in. Hughes is. Pelfrey AND Humber AND Mulvey aren't. They may be a better long-term package but they can't give the Twins what Hughes will now.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:14 am

I agree, it does seem like both the Sox and Yanks are playing this as a game of high stakes chicken, hoping the other blinks first. If that happens, the team that doesn't get Johan can save face with their fan base and say "see, we were willing to give up plenty". I also have no doubt that both team would rather wait on Johan to get him by only paying once, not twice. I still think it's A LOT to give up (for either team) for just one year even though part of that price includes the a) exclusive negotiating stance and b) keeping him out of the other team's lockerroom.

As a lifelong Yanks fan, I would love to see the Yanks keep the kids and try to retrench with some youthful exuberance. That's what helped the team so greatly last year. It's what made the 90's Yanks so likable and fun to watch. The 2000's Yanks have morphed into the 80's Yanks: overpriced, soulless mercenaries. Or at least that's the way it feels. (Judging by the way Posada and Mo demaned a hometown "bonus", they are really no different, I know.)

That's my rambling for now.

"even though part of that price includes the a) exclusive negotiating stance "

Thats the thing though, it isnt like the Twins are making it out to be. I keep hearing say whoever gets him will have the exclusive OPPURTUNITY to extend him. Wrong. They have the obligation of giving him the biggest contract ever for a pitcher over 7 years. That is a huge difference. That hurts the deal for Minnesota imo, doesnt help it. Thats why I still say Minnesota would make out the best by just signing him.

I don't think there is a snowball's chance in hell that Santana makes it to free agency next winter. This whole process lingering on for a month like this has permanently tarnished any chance we had of opening the season with Santana on the Twins roster, let alone making it through the whole season with him.

The Twins will trade Santana. I applaud Smith for being patient. There is no way all three teams pull out and leave us with no option but to keep him. If nobody ups their offer, we'll take the best one out there. We'll see who blinks first.

I'm just tired of all the posturing by the Yankees. Everyone else has kept it professional and pleaded the fifth on Santana negotiations. Why does Hank get to talk about it all he wants -- that's textbook tampering, right?

Yeah Hank really needs to keep his mouth shut, he is just getting obnoxious at this point. You'd think Selig of Fehr would tell him so much...

The funniest comment of the entire riveting interview is when Hank says that the Yankees have the best pitching BY FAR!

What a joke...Red Sox, Tigers, Twins, Padres, Dodgers, Arizona, Cleveland, Atlanta and Toronto all have better pitching

New year, new deadline.I hate Hank as much as anyone else, but at least quote him correctly. He said "We're going to have the best pitching by far in baseball in two or three years." We have no idea how accurate that statement will end up being until these kids get some more experience.

One thing about Hank, and believe me, I am certainly NO apologist: He answers every call from the press. And every credentialed press calls him looking for anything. Anything he says, they publish.

I just wish he'd adopt a "less is more" approach.

If thats true I'm going to call Hank as a writer for the Cheyenne Daily and tell him to shut his friggin mouth.

I'm a Yankee fan and I'm already sick of this tool.
Am I the only one who thinks 7/140 is insanely LOW? If Barry Zito can get 7/126 to pitch his age 29-35 seasons, it seems crazy that the starting number for Johan, the best pitcher in all of baseball for the last 5+ years, is only 7/140 to pitch his age 30-36 seasons.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:15 am

Senior vice president Hank Steinbrenner said Wednesday that he believes the Yankees have made the best offer for Johan Santana, adding that the Twins "are not going to trade him before checking with us one last time."
The New York Daily News speculates that the Yankees' offer includes Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera, Jeff Marquez and "another prospect" that isn't Ian Kennedy. "We're not desperate, so we're not going to chase anything," Steinbrenner said. "In the next two weeks, we're going to have to get everything done."
Source: New York Daily News

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:19 am

Jeter's overrated on playing Defense but not on his offense.

Michael Young,Jose Reyes, How many championships did they won?

Michael Young was supposed to be a utility player when you read scouting report back then.. Texas Rangers coach helped him become a better player.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:24 am

" I just dont see the Yanks pulling the trigger on this deal.......they arent too excited about giving up Hughes and more importantly, they dont want to sign a pitcher to such a long term deal......way to risky "

I don't want them to give the Twinkies Hughes either. Unlike some here, I am willing to be patient and allow these 3 kids to develop , even if that takes until 2010 and we either don't make the playoffs or have to get in through the wild card for the next 2 seasons. Let the Blosox be called the "Evil Empire " for a while. Like the phoenix, The Yankees will rise from the ashes and dominate baseball again. Give them some time

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:25 am

if the redsox jump in and overpay for santana in players and money now, hank looks like a genius for putting pressure on them. lets all just let it play out and quit bashing hank.

i'm not positive, but i'm pretty sure the yankees have a guy on the payroll telling hank the things he can and cant say to the media and what is beneficial. and i'm sure hank knows it as well.

maybe comments like this let twins fans know that the yankees have a real strong offer out there so in case the twins try and hamstring us and take the sox offer for less, their fans will know what they did.

maybe hank is an id iot. i just want the whole thing to end already. i dont want hughes traded, but if hughes goes for santana, and we win 3 world series with santana, and hughes never develops further then a 3-4 guy, then hank is a genius. if santana comes in and is a bust and hughes turns into an ace, hank is an id iot.

it could go either way, imo hughes is the safer and better bet. i dont like the idea of giving santana a 7 year total deal, 6 year extension. to much can go wrong, just look at barry zito. vedi vedi scary.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:32 am

That was Fat Teletubby Abraham who speculated that Yankees are out Johan Santana sweepstakes not Hank....He's Redsox Fan and Pats Fan. He hates Yankees and doesn't want Yankees to get better. NY Daily News Anthony Mccarron called Hank about Johan trade and Hank answers all questions made by Mccarron.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:36 am

Well, it is starting to sound like this saga whould be wrapping up soon. Either they just keep him, or take one of the offers.

The Mets at least need to move in another direction sooner rather than later if Johan isn’t coming to Shea. Hopefully Omar is having other discussions already (of course with the intent to circle back to the Twins before doing anything else). But at some point, a valid deal will be on the table that he has to move on.

Still wouldn’t surprise me to see an Omar “out of left field” deal come down. Someone that you weren’t expecting (possibly going back too). No idea who of course. Snell? Cliff Lee? Who knows.

The odd thing about Santana is that he effectively is a luxury for all 3 teams said to be in the race. While they all have 1-2 young guys slotted in, the Mets, Sox and Stanks do have full rotations now, so Johan would be an upgrade, not filling an empty spot. So each team could just go to ST with what they have on hand and see what happens.

For some reason, I do think he ends up on the Mets for a relatively modest 4 man package (Gomez/Mulvey + 1 more P and a position prospect). martinez and pelfrey remain on the Mets, and hopefully Guerra.

If not, Omar brings in someone unexpected

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:38 am

Gotwins

Do individuals win championships now? How many championships did Tony Gwynn ever win? Does that make him a bad player? How about Ernie Banks?

Jeter is anually one of the worst defensive SS in the AL. His clutch hitting is also an urban legend. He has had a couple of big hits but look at his statistics as a whole in the postseason and especially lately and you will see that you are only remembering the good things and not the bad.

Jeter was a good player but he was never great. He is certainly not a top 5 SS right now.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:40 am

the only team that knows who has the best offer is the twins bec. they know all the offers made to them and they know what they wants. Unless hank knows all the real offers and if he did know then all these teams should investigate their personnel for mole.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:42 am

So Hank, who once said that the Yanks were completely out of the Santana sweepstakes, has once again changed his mind. In fact, he seems to feel that the offer the Yanks reportedly didn’t have on the table anymore is the best one out there. Don’t worry; I’m as confused as you are.

Meanwhile, Steinbrenner spouted off a few other contradictions. First, he noted that “a majority of fans don’t want to lose Hughes,” and then he said that the Yanks are content to “stay the way we are. We’re going to have the best pitching by far in baseball in two or three years and we’ll be tough this year.”

So what’s it going to be, Hank? Do you trade the guy projected to front what you just called the best pitching in baseball? Or do you trade him along with a few other players for one year of Johan Santana and a window to negotiate a contract extension? You all know where we stand. Hopefully, the Yanks’ brass realize what’s best for the team.

Comments 5 Comments »

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:43 am

1.
Jen Hughes says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:26 am (Reply)

Let’s just keep Hughes. Even if Hughes tops out as a #3 starter - 5 years of him as a #3 (which he may very well be better than that) at his current salary is much better value than the cost of players to obtain Santana, the cost of Santana’s extension, and the risk the Yankees take on with Santana’s extension. The latter 2 reasons can be dealt with by a team like the Yankees, especially given the contracts coming up at the end of this upcoming season, but when you combine that with the loss of talent to trade for Santana I think the trade becomes a lot shakier. Add the risk onto the shakey trade and it’s a recipe for disaster. Don’t do the trade!!!
1.
zack says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:33 am (Reply)

In no way is 5 years of a #3 starter more or equal to the value of 5 years of #1 starter.Even with the rest of the package. Strictly monetarily speaking, its a different issue, but since when have baseball contracts actually been representative of actual value?
2.
Royhan85 says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:39 am (Reply)

OMG, Hank truly never shuts up.
..I wish Hank would just shut the hell up and let Cashman run this team…
Does he have to answer every phone call ?
3.
Jeff says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:40 am (Reply)

I’ve been saying it all along… I like Hughes but not at the cost of missing out on the best pitcher in Baseball. Someone is going to get Santana. I’d much prefer it is us. If some of you guys on this site got your wish and we kept Hughes while Santana goes to the Sox - would that really sit well? I just don’t get your logic.
4.
TurnTwo says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:41 am (Reply)

i dont think its as simple as just asking “whats best for the team”… best for the team for the immediate future, or long term future?

personally, i think its in the best interest of the team, considering the depth we have in the system, to move Hughes or IPK for Johan.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:47 am

Redsox Fan says Jeter's overrated but He defend Julio Lugo

http://yanksfansoxfan.typepad.com/ysfs/2008/01/fun-with-stats.html#more

Fun With Stats: Hardball Times/Julio Lugo Edition

A bit of talk in recent days and weeks around here has been centering around the defense of our respective teams. A happy coincidence, then, that The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2008 focuses several analysis chapters to the subject of defense.

Perhaps the most interesting is Tom Tango's look at shortstop defense over the past 15 years.

The article focuses on every Red Sox fan's favorite whipping boy -- Derek Jeter. I won't go too much into the Jeter analysis, which I admit I did enjoy. It pretty clearly shows that Jeter isn't just overrated on defense -- he's criminally overrated. Even arguments that he's good at coming in on balls or leaping for line drives fall flat as Tango shows that Jeter makes fewer plays than almost every shortstop in the game when compared by the pitcher on the mound, batter at the plate, baserunner on first, or ballpark.

We'll look a little at that, but what he doesn't mention -- and I was surprised to see -- was how well this look at defense flatters Julio Lugo (Red Sox fans' second-favorite whipping boy).

First, the method.

For example, based on pitcher on the mound, Tango found the play-made percentage for Jeter while, say, Roger Clemens was on the mound, then did the same for all the other shortstops behind Clemens when was on the mound (John Valentin and Adam Everett were the two major ones). He then did the same for every pitcher Jeter ever played with (and was on the field with), and calculated all those pitchers' non-Jeter totals. So, in the end, you get a Jeter percentage and an "all others" percentage with the exact same pitchers on the mound, or with the exact same hitters at the plate, or with the exact same runner on first, or in the same ballpark.

Finally, he does the same for every shortstop who started a significant number of games since 1993. In each case, you get a SS percentage, an "all-others" percentage and a difference between the two, which Tango calculates per 4,000 chances (roughly a season's worth). Whew! Got all that?

Needless to say, Jeter finishes in the bottom five in every category but ballpark, which seems to indicate he's not helped by Yankee Stadium, as he's "just" ninth from the bottom in that category, but otherwise indicates that regardless of the type of ball hit to him, he just makes -- and has made -- fewer plays overall than nearly everyone else who has played shortstop over the past 15 years (ranging, depending on the situation, from between 10 plays to 38 plays below the rest).

I don't think this comes as a surprise for many of us. What did surprise me was that these numbers seem to show Julio Lugo in a much more positive light than the Plus/Minus numbers that run on these same principles. Lugo is below average in Plus/Minus and just about average in other defensive metrics.

By pitcher, Rey Sanches and Adam Everett are the top two, 59 and 57 plays above average, respectively. Other names in the top 10 are not surprising -- Orlando Cabrera, Mark Grudzielanek, Cezar Izturis. But Julio Lugo ranks eighth -- 26 plays better per 4,000 chances than average. He made plays on 12.8 percent of the balls hit into his zone (as determined by UZR), while other shortstops behind the same pitchers made 12.1 percent of the plays. That's better than Alex Gonzalez (12.3%, 12.1%, +11), Cal Ripken (12.2 %, 11.9%, +10) and Omar Vizquel (12.4%, 12.4%, +2).

By batter, it's the same story. Lugo of course made plays on 12.8 percent of the balls hit into his zone (obviously, that wouldn't change, as we're discussing every single play possible). With the same batters at the plate, other shortstops made 12.2 percent of the plays. That's good for 22 plays made above average -- ninth among all shortstops since 1993 (Everett and Sanchez rank 1-2 again).

By runner? That's a bit different. Lugo only made plays 12 percent of the time with a runner on first. With the same runners on first, other shortstops made 12.3 percent of their plays. Lugo was four plays per 1,300 chances lower than average (the 1,300 chances reflects the lower number of plays that occur with a runner on first). Why the difference? I don't know. Everett is still No. 1, Sanchez is No. 5, Jeter is still second-to-last (45th).

By ballpark, Lugo returns to the top half of the rankings -- other shortstops made 12.4 percent of their plays while in the same ballparks as Lugo (remember he's at 12.8 percent). The 15 plays above average per season is good for 12th. Sanchez and Everett are again 1-2, by the way.

Compare these results with PMR, which placed Lugo sixth from the bottom in 2007 (but sixth from the top in 2006 and similarly in 2005). RZR? Lugo ranked fifth in the AL (just behind Orlando Cabrera) in '07. OOZ? Fourth. He had eight throwing errors in 2007, but that's eighth out of 14 shortstops in the AL with at least 750 innings in the field and far better than his terrible 2006 or bottom-three performance in 2005.

It seems Lugo has been consistently underrated as a shortstop -- he received no votes in Fielding Bible voting this year, while even Jeter received four -- even though there seems to be a growing statistical consensus that he is in fact quite good, or at least above average. Defensive metrices remain incomplete and tend to vary widely, but these numbers are not unconvincing.

Lugo's rankings in Tango's study are consistently ahead of Nomar Garciaparra, Orlando Cabrera (the only one who's remotely close), Alex Gonzalez and Edgar Renteria. Is it truly possible that in the revolving door of shortstops the Sox have had since 2004 the defensive star may actually be the one currently on the roster? It seems that may actually be the case.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:56 am

http://yanksfansoxfan.typepad.com/ysfs/2008/01/fun-with-stats.html#more

Are we really comparing Julio Lugo to Derek Jeter? Honestly, we're all better -- and smarter -- than that.

Jeter is a first-ballot Hall of Famer whose offense at a usually weak offensive position more than makes up for his defensive flaws. Lugo is an offensively weak player (or he was last year, at any rate) whose poor bat seems to have been largely mitigated by his better-than-credited defense.

Any Red Sox fan who says he'd rather have Lugo than Jeter on his team is kidding himself.

Now that I've said all that, I'll return to the point. I think it is easier to accept Lugo's bad season (really, just a horrific first half) when you look at studies like this, and I think Nick is right that the Sox perhaps feel Lugo is some sort of secret defensive weapon and are just happy for everyone to keep underrating him like they have been...

It's interesting to note that the two So players most derided by fans for being "black holes" on offense both may have evened the score on defense. That's a new way of thinking in the Boston organization from the old days, for sure.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:57 am

[[[ sound of Yankee fans' heads exploding ]]]

Posted by: Hudson | Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 10:29 PM

Good one Hudson. Most of us yankee fans realize exactly what Jeter's shortcomings are but would still prefer to have him than Lugo any day of the week.

Posted by: sam-YF | Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 10:39 PM

Sure, Sam, and Alex Rodriguez is by any measure vastly superior to Mike Lowell at 3rd, too.

And yet Lowell and Lugo brought another 21st Century set of rings and trophies back to Boston in 2007, while A-Rod and Captain intangibles went home early again.

Funny how those preferences work out.

Posted by: Hudson | Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 11:04 PM

Please, please please. I beg of everyone. Let us not invoke the rings. It always starts, works, and ends badly.

Posted by: attackgerbil | Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 11:57 PM

So your argument is since the Red Sox won the won the world series, Yankees fans are unable to compare any yankees players favorably against a sox player. Whats the point of this site then?

You sound like the type of yankee fan that I always hated when my team was winning. Answering everything with "oh yeah well we won" that makes for a great discourse. My point was simply that Jeter has many benefits to the team to make up for his defensive liabilities. Incidentally, Jeter is the one of the worst players to make take this tact with, considering he has still won more times than anyone on the sox team. If winning is the be all and end all he has clearly been successful.

Also, I hate to break it to you but it was the yankees pitching that let us down against the tribe not the left side of our infield.

Posted by: sam-YF | Wednesday, January 02, 2008 at 11:58 PM

Derek Jeter is a Hall-of-Famer.

Does anyone disagree with this statement?

Yeah, he's a flawed defensive player and some in the mainstream (less and less these days) think he's a spectacular fielder. And yet ironically, his offensive game is, in many ways, underrated, especially since he doesn't put up big power numbers. He was robbed of the MVP last season because mainstream writers didn't correctly value his offensive game last season. He was probably robbed of an MVP in 1999 (he or Pedro should have won then!). Overrated on defense. Well yes! But overall is he overrated? Hardly.

I've suspected for the last couple of years that Theo and Company use some pretty secret and advanced defensive metrics and scouting reports, and that Lugo has consistently scored high on these reports. The Sox have lusted after Lugo since 2005, and while he has been a decent offensive player at times, I think the main reason was his defense.

Posted by: Nick-YF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 12:45 AM

Wow, Hudson. I wonder how you feel about every Boston player from 1919 to 2003? Ted Williams, what a bum. Clearly, even Luis Sojo is superior, having 'brought home' several more 20th century trophies than that so-called 'Hall Of Famer' ever did.

[[[ sound of Hudson's argument pathetically deflating ]]]

Posted by: Andrew | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 01:36 AM

And here I spent most of last season trying to get people to just watch Lugo on defense, and realize that he gets to balls that many other SS's (including the past Sox SS's that Paul named) simply don't get to. He also gets to balls on his feet that others dive for, and thus have to rush or throw the ball off-balance.

Sure, he makes his share of errors, but some of those he's turning into outs that other SS's allow either through lack of effort or lack of talent to get into LF.

Nick - interesting theory, though I have to think some of it also had to do with his #'s against us (aka the Wes Welker Phenomenon, 123 OPS+) and his #'s at Fenway (116 OPS+)

Posted by: QuoSF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 02:15 AM

I would say the lower numbers with a runner on first for Lugo would have to do with positioning for double plays (playing too far up the middle as compared to other SS perhaps?), or maybe he cheats a little and breaks to the bag on a hit and run earlier than other shortstops. Anyone noticed any thing like that in Lugos play?

Posted by: Dan | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 06:00 AM

Are we really comparing Julio Lugo to Derek Jeter? Honestly, we're all better -- and smarter -- than that.

Jeter is a first-ballot Hall of Famer whose offense at a usually weak offensive position more than makes up for his defensive flaws. Lugo is an offensively weak player (or he was last year, at any rate) whose poor bat seems to have been largely mitigated by his better-than-credited defense.

Any Red Sox fan who says he'd rather have Lugo than Jeter on his team is kidding himself.

Now that I've said all that, I'll return to the point. I think it is easier to accept Lugo's bad season (really, just a horrific first half) when you look at studies like this, and I think Nick is right that the Sox perhaps feel Lugo is some sort of secret defensive weapon and are just happy for everyone to keep underrating him like they have been...

It's interesting to note that the two So players most derided by fans for being "black holes" on offense both may have evened the score on defense. That's a new way of thinking in the Boston organization from the old days, for sure.

Posted by: Paul SF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 09:00 AM

I think it's fair to say that Hudson is an army of one at this site with that line of argument...

As for the "robbed MVP", Nick, perhaps the voters got it right: if Jeter's defense is so hideous all that gaudy offensive stuff may just be balancing out the lack of value in the field. I don't say this to start a war, but the common idea of "value" clearly underestimates the importance of defense, and therefore the MVP typically goes to someone with big power numbers. Maybe the voters actually get it w/r/t Jeter?!

(Personally I don't think so, those voters are knuckleheadish..)

Posted by: SF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 09:17 AM

"Is it truly possible that in the revolving door of shortstops the Sox have had since 2004 the defensive star may actually be the one currently on the roster?"

No.

Posted by: Mike YF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 09:35 AM

"Maybe the voters actually get it w/r/t Jeter?!"

The problem with this idea is, as far as I know, Jeter wasn't defensively hideous last season. I recall that a few defensive systems actually rated him as average or slightly below average.

Posted by: Nick-YF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 09:57 AM

"defense is so hideous all that gaudy offensive stuff may just be balancing out the lack of value in the field."

David Ortiz, anyone?

Posted by: The Sheriff (Andrews) | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:19 AM

SF your point about defense vs offense considerations for the MVP is a good one. However, for the 2006 MVP it doesnt really work. Morneau is a bottom of the pack defender at 1b as well. He "hurts" his team there as much as Jeter may at SS. I understand of course that SS is a more important defensive position but the difference between these two guys is negligible.

As far as Jeter goes, I think its understood that he is a below average defender but I think we can only push him down so far. His range is what really kills him but he does have some value out there in the field. Regardless, as I posted earlier, I think YFs are very glad to have him out there just as SFs are with a guy like Manny.

Posted by: sam-YF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:24 AM

I can't remember where I read it, but it seems that defensive metrics might be the current equivalent of what OBP was for Billy Beane back in the beginning of his "Money Ball" philosophy.

That is, it's considered by some sabermetric-savvy front offices as a player skillset that is undervalued by many teams.

As I understand it, Beane's emphasis on OBP was a way to take advantage of a "market inefficiency" by acquiring useful (and cheap) players from teams that didn't realize the importance of on-base percentage. Now, however, most teams recognized the significance of OBP.

Maybe "Theo and his minions" are trying to stay ahead of the curve with a new inefficiency.

Posted by: SoxFan | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:25 AM

Nick, Jeter was second-worst in MLB in PMR, fourth-worst in RZR, and as I recall (don't have the book with me), second-worst in Plus/Minus. He's just not very good, and considering his age, I think it makes sense that he's on the decline from the Gold Glove days when he was closer to average.

Posted by: Paul SF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:27 AM

Paul, are you talking about 2007 or 2006?

Posted by: Nick-YF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:32 AM

That is, it's considered by some sabermetric-savvy front offices as a player skillset that is undervalued by many teams.

As I understand it, Beane's emphasis on OBP was a way to take advantage of a "market inefficiency" by acquiring useful (and cheap) players from teams that didn't realize the importance of on-base percentage. Now, however, most teams recognized the significance of OBP.

Maybe "Theo and his minions" are trying to stay ahead of the curve with a new inefficiency.

Yeah, except that by all reports they offered Julio Lugo more money than he would have gotten from anyone else. Same with Drew. Where's the inefficiency?!

Posted by: SF | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Granted, Jeter has defensive shortcomings, but rating him one of the worst SS's in MLB seems a bit absurd. Am I alone in thinking this? Something must be out of kilter with Tango's calculations.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:59 am

Asked Wednesday about Roger Clemens potentially returning to the Yankees in 2008, senior vice president Hank Steinbrenner said: "I'm not signing Clemens."
"I don't think Roger is going to come back anyway," Steinbrenner said. Of course, given how Hank's previous proclamations have played out, Clemens will probably sign a 10-year deal with the Yankees by the end of the week.
Source: New York Daily News

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:01 am

That was Fat Teletubby Abraham who speculated that Yankees are out Johan Santana sweepstakes not Hank....He's Redsox Fan and Pats Fan. He hates Yankees and doesn't want Yankees to get better. NY Daily News Anthony Mccarron called Hank about Johan trade and Hank answers all questions made by Mccarron.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:09 am

Jeter's consistently hit 200 every year and .300 batting avg in his 12 career.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:11 am

Here's another has opinion on Jeter

BC Beneke says:
http://nc.startribune.com/blogs/neal/?p=303

Please realize the best SS in baseball is playing 3rd Base for the Yankees. He was a better hitter, more power, as good of a base stealer, and the 2nd best fielding SS in baseball before going to the Yankees.

And Michael Young said he credits AROD for teaching him how to hit better. If you look at their swing… as odd as it sounds it’s a very similar batting stance. Young just isn’t Arod, but for a copycat… that’s not a bad copier.

I think Jeter’s terribly overrated. He gets credit for all those WS’s but I don’t go around thinking Dan Gladden isn’t a terrible broadcaster or a lousy LF’r because he has 2 WS rings.

Jeter was the beneficiary of a great line up of veterans that took all the pressure of him being a kid in NY and a Golden Child, and let him run with it.

Paul O’Neill - 4 rings No Paul O’Neill… No Rings. Coincidence? BS!

Bernie Williams was the heart and soul of those WS teams along with O’Neill, and they built TEAMS back then… it wasn’t about the highest paid player or best stats. Jeter was awesome on those teams because he wasn’t the captain. You made him the captain, and that team hasn’t won a WS since.

So yes he’s a hall of famer, and yes he’s a great ball player, but he’s nowhere near the GOD that New York has made him into, anymore than AROD is the Antichrist that the media has made him out to be in NY.

Jeter should not go down on the same page as Mantle, Ruth, DiMaggio, Berra, Ford, and even Reggie Jackson.

I don’t even want to put him on par with Mattingly, but it’s hard not to 4 rings to no rings… but to me Donnie was baseball. He was everything that was great about baseball in the 80’s… and when he got hurt I remember I actually cried like a family member got hurt. Sad but true.

Now the Yankees don’t play team baseball like they did back then, and I don’t think Girardi is getting enough attention as to how he is going to step in for the greatest manager in team history with a veteran team, and a ton of rookie prospects. Joe is in for a RUDE awakening… kind of like being the prettiest altar boy in a Monistary kind of rude awakening from the NY Media…

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:16 am

Comments

Can't they just really frontload his contract so they don't take such a hit in later years? If they're getting the big tax break for the new stadium in that first year, as I've heard, can't they just pay him a huge sum of money in that year, and smaller amounts thereafter? I seems that if they gave him the larger part of what he was owed (say forty million or so) during the second year, and split it up evenly for every year after that, the money saved on luxury tax would offset that one time salary hit?
Maybe I'm wrong.

Posted by: Brad | Thursday, January 03, 2008 at 11:06 AM

Gardner and Damon split time in CF. I know it's hard to see Garner in a big role, but his OBP (.380 career in the minors) and speed (85% stolen base ratio) make it possible. He can reach base and then pester the pitchers with a swipe of second and/or third. When's the last time the Yankees had a guy like that? With their lineup, he'd be a great #9 for when the lineup turns over.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:18 am

Here's another who has opinion on Jeter

BC Beneke says:
http://nc.startribune.com/blogs/neal/?p=303

Please realize the best SS in baseball is playing 3rd Base for the Yankees. He was a better hitter, more power, as good of a base stealer, and the 2nd best fielding SS in baseball before going to the Yankees.

And Michael Young said he credits AROD for teaching him how to hit better. If you look at their swing… as odd as it sounds it’s a very similar batting stance. Young just isn’t Arod, but for a copycat… that’s not a bad copier.

I think Jeter’s terribly overrated. He gets credit for all those WS’s but I don’t go around thinking Dan Gladden isn’t a terrible broadcaster or a lousy LF’r because he has 2 WS rings.

Jeter was the beneficiary of a great line up of veterans that took all the pressure of him being a kid in NY and a Golden Child, and let him run with it.

Paul O’Neill - 4 rings No Paul O’Neill… No Rings. Coincidence? BS!

Bernie Williams was the heart and soul of those WS teams along with O’Neill, and they built TEAMS back then… it wasn’t about the highest paid player or best stats. Jeter was awesome on those teams because he wasn’t the captain. You made him the captain, and that team hasn’t won a WS since.

So yes he’s a hall of famer, and yes he’s a great ball player, but he’s nowhere near the GOD that New York has made him into, anymore than AROD is the Antichrist that the media has made him out to be in NY.

Jeter should not go down on the same page as Mantle, Ruth, DiMaggio, Berra, Ford, and even Reggie Jackson.

I don’t even want to put him on par with Mattingly, but it’s hard not to 4 rings to no rings… but to me Donnie was baseball. He was everything that was great about baseball in the 80’s… and when he got hurt I remember I actually cried like a family member got hurt. Sad but true.

Now the Yankees don’t play team baseball like they did back then, and I don’t think Girardi is getting enough attention as to how he is going to step in for the greatest manager in team history with a veteran team, and a ton of rookie prospects. Joe is in for a RUDE awakening… kind of like being the prettiest altar boy in a Monistary kind of rude awakening from the NY Media…

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:20 am

The rest? LMAO! In every category except Ring Total and performance in the clutch and on the big stage. When these, so called, greater talents perform to Jeter's level, give us a call.

RedMagma Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:23 am

How is a guy that has a lifetime average of .317 who is bound to hit over 3000 hits and 2000 runs scored, overrated?

I don't even think he's overrated defensively either.

Again, how is Derek Jeter overrated? If anything Lugo is a platoon infielder at best. "

what do you expect from a Blosox fan? It is called jealousy. It does not seem to matter to these idiotic Blosox fans that Jeter has the respect of his peers. Also the fact is , when asked which one of the Yankee players they would choose to be on their team , the Sox players and coaches all said "Derek Jeter ". Francona has always said that Jeter is a great player..

So who gives a rat's behind what the Blosox fans think ? Lugo could not carry Jeter's jock strap. LOL

Sponsored content

Hank Speaks About Johan

Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan

Re: Hank Speaks About Johan