New York Yankees 2010 offseason thread

[VA Sox Fan]

Yankees Agree To Terms With Randy Winn

 

The New York Yankees have agreed to terms with free agent outfielder Randy Winn on a one-year contract, pending a physical, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney.

 

The contract is worth in the neighborhood of $2 million.

 

The deal, in all likelihood, ends any chance that Johnny Damon will return to the Yankees. The Yankees now seem set with their outfield for the 2010 season.

 

The 35-year-old Winn hit .262 in 149 games last season for San Francisco. He was an All-Star in 2002, when he batted .298 with 14 home runs and 75 RBIs for the Tampa Bay Rays. Winn could put an end to a novel and unwanted distinction now that he's signed with the Yankees: According to Baseball-reference.com, he has played 1,601 career games without a postseason appearance. That's the longest drought by an active major league player. Texas third baseman Michael Young is second among active players with 1,351 games and no postseason appearance.

 

Damon and his agent Scott Boras are trying to engage the Detroit Tigers and Cincinnati Reds as possible alternatives, a baseball source told ESPN.com's Jerry Crasnick.

 

Boras has been successful placing many of his clients in Detroit, and the addition of Damon in left field would allow the Tigers to give Carlos Guillen more at-bats at DH.

 

The Tigers traded leadoff hitter Curtis Granderson to the Yankees in December and lost No. 2 hitter Placido Polanco to the Phillies in free agency, so the top of their batting order is in a state of transition.

 

Cincinnati's outfield alignment currently consists of Jay Bruce in right field, Drew Stubbs in center field and Chris Dickerson in left. The Reds' leadoff hitters also ranked last in the major leagues with a .650 OPS in 2009.

 

The catch is, the Reds and Tigers don't appear to have much money left in the budget. Both clubs have been economizing this offseason, and that might be truer than ever now that Cincinnati has signed Cuban pitcher Aroldis Chapman and Detroit has added closer Jose Valverde. Both teams would probably have to get creative to make a run at Damon.

 

Buster Olney is a senior writer for ESPN The Magazine.

[jacksonianmarch]

I would rather have Brett Gardner play than Winn. Granted, Winn will probably see a bump up in homers from his career low of 2, but he really was a guy whose game was predicated on speed whose legs have slowed up a bit. Sounds like Cashman and Theo are up on the same crackup up theory about defense in LF. At least in NY, you could try to pretend to justify it due to death valley. Regardless, I thought we were headed to a Damon redux with him signed to a 1yr 5mil or so deal. Regardless, my prediction for Winn is that he is on another team come June. He's my least favorite option of the three when you include Damon and Dye.

[jacksonianmarch]

If the intention all along was to give Gardner a season to see what kind of player he can become and Winn is relegated to bench duty, then that changes everything IMO. Winn as a 4th OFer is very solid due to his switch hitting ability and his defense. But if he was signed to compete as a starter, then this is just a bad, bad move.

[Imperial59]

Sounds like Cashman and Theo are up on the same crackup up theory about defense in LF.

 

You spent all offseason mocking the idea that having a good defensive player in left field improves the team, thinking you'd have Damon in left. And then the Yankees go out and sign a left fielder whose best aspect is his defense. The irony is delicious.

[jacksonianmarch]

And hence why I am panning the decision. If Winn is brought in with the intention of starting, then this is a bad, bad move. Gardner has more upside than Winn does at this stage of his career. Gardner is faster and has a better eye. I think Gardner offers better defense and more BA upside right now. Winn will hit more homers, but I think Gardner's worth will be much higher, hence why I think he should start

[Imperial59]

And hence why I am panning the decision. If Winn is brought in with the intention of starting' date=' then this is a bad, bad move. Gardner has more upside than Winn does at this stage of his career. Gardner is faster and has a better eye. I think Gardner offers better defense and more BA upside right now. Winn will hit more homers, but I think Gardner's worth will be much higher, hence why I think he should start[/quote']

 

Isn't Gardner another guy whose value is mostly made up from his defense though?

[jacksonianmarch]

No, he has actual offensive value in his OBP and his speed. If he gets on base 35% of the time or more, especially out of the #9 hole, then he will be a major pest. He stole 26 bases in half a season, so if he played to the level he was playing at prior to fracturing his thumb, then he could be in the 50-60+SB range.

 

If you look at his pre-ASB split, prior to breaking his thumb, he was actually good. .282/.352/.404. Not bad for a guy with 50-60 SB potential. Winn doesnt have that.

[Imperial59]

No, he has actual offensive value in his OBP and his speed. If he gets on base 35% of the time or more, especially out of the #9 hole, then he will be a major pest. He stole 26 bases in half a season, so if he played to the level he was playing at prior to fracturing his thumb, then he could be in the 50-60+SB range.

 

If you look at his pre-ASB split, prior to breaking his thumb, he was actually good. .282/.352/.404. Not bad for a guy with 50-60 SB potential. Winn doesnt have that.

 

The vast majority of his value comes from his defense. Fangraphs says he's been worth -3.0 points of offensive over his career and he's been worth 19.9 points of defense. He's a career .256/.325/.352 hitter and as flashy as stolen bases are, they don't have much value offensively.

[Keeper]

The vast majority of his value comes from his defense. Fangraphs says he's been worth -3.0 points of offensive over his career and he's been worth 19.9 points of defense. He's a career .256/.325/.352 hitter and as flashy as stolen bases are' date=' they don't have much value offensively.[/quote']

 

They have value when players aren't hitting 50 HRs like it's nothing. Stealing bases gets you into scoring position. And for a team like the Sox that doesn't like to bunt runners over, someone like Ellsbury becomes even more important in the offensive scheme.

 

As far as this latest signing of Winn, I don't really get it. The guy is old and clearly on the decline.

[26 to 6]

And hence why I am panning the decision. If Winn is brought in with the intention of starting' date=' then this is a bad, bad move. Gardner has more upside than Winn does at this stage of his career. Gardner is faster and has a better eye. I think Gardner offers better defense and more BA upside right now. Winn will hit more homers, but I think Gardner's worth will be much higher, hence why I think he should start[/quote']

Winn hit 2 homers last year, Gardner hit 3 in 298 less AB's. How do you figure Winn hits more than Gardner?

 

...just sayin.

 

As for who "starts" in left, I think they more or less split it and platoon.

 

What's the Yankees bench look like at this point?

Tell me about it...unfortunately we've reached our "budget," and this is what we're stuck with..

Cervelli

Pena

Gardner/Winn

Hoffman

[jacksonianmarch]

Thing is, Winn isnt much of a platoon mate. His splits over his career have been close to even, but last yr he had the worst L-R split in the game and he's a switch hitter. If Winn ends up on the bench, then the bench isnt too bad since I expect Hoffman to take most of the lefty pitching ABs away from him. Most teams try to get some sort of defensive advantage out of their scrubs, and every single player on the bench is defense minded. Cervelli is probably our best defensive catcher in the entire system. Pena is probably our slickest middle infielder. Winn is a very strong OF defender, and Hoffman was rated our #1 defensive outfielder in the system according to BA. So we at least bring something different to the table when they play. It also allows us to take Swisher out of the game in the late innings so that our OF defense in close games is solid.

 

In terms of Gardner, his rookie season consisted of 120 ABs and multiple late game appearances. Thats like stopping Pedroia after his month of April in his rookie season and saying he sucked. I'd go off last yr since that is more akin to his MiLB production (well, a bit worse) and he actually had consistent playing time.

 

In terms of Winn, he actually hits the ball over the wall. IIRC, 2 of Gardner's homers were inside the parkers. Winn has proven capable of hitting double digit homers in SF, which means he should do it here assuming everything occured in a vacuum. The problem is, how many speed first guys who come off career worst seasons at the age of 35 recover their prowess the following yr. Only Kenny Lofton fits that category, and I dont see Winn fitting the same profile.

 

Overall, if Winn is on the bench, then I like this team. If Winn cracks the starting lineup and performs akin to his most recent season's performance, then we'll be upgrading at the trade deadline. I really, really want to see what Gardner can do over a full season out of the #9 hole while healthy. Cause if he proves to be more of a 4th OFer, then I think we get Crawford after this season. If he proves he can hold his own (.350+OBP) then we might spend that money in other areas, ie Cliff Lee. And with Gardner it is absolutely all about his OBP. I dont care if his BA is .190, if he reaches base 35% of the time, he will be worth his weight in gold out of that #9 spot.

 

Now, I always wondered how you use a SB and a CS to evaluate a player that adds a different dimension to the game like Ells and Gardner. I've always thought you could just add it or subtract it from total bases and calculate a modified SLG, but a double is truly worth more than a single and a SB due to its propensity to drive in runs. Regardless, if you took Gardner's SBs and added them to his total bases last season, his line looks like this...

 

.270/.345/.464. A .799OPS out of a rookie whose last half of the yr sucked due to a broken thumb isnt too bad. Now if you do the same for Ellsbury....

 

.301/.355/.508. A .863OPS is really nice too.

[26 to 6]

I think we get Crawford anyway. Brett Gardner is not, nor will he ever be anything better than a fourth outfielder with good speed who plays good defense. If we pass on Crawford in favor of having Gardner play everyday for the foreseeable future I'm personally writing a letter to Hal Steinbrenner, Randy Levine, and Lonn Trost expressing my displeasure for the job he's doing. Not that it'll be taken seriously, but I will be very disappointed if Crawford doesn't end up in the Bronx. And I've NEVER had a problem with Cashman before, unlike Gom, and have always defended him.

 

As for Winn, whatever, he is what he is. I think it's probably better than 50/50 he doesn't finish the season on the roster anyway.

[26 to 6]

After reading more and more about him I've really changed my mind about the Golson acquisition. He can't hit but he's got a plus arm and great speed, not to mention great makeup. Good depth move. If Randy Winn hits like he did last year I'd rather replace him with Golson, who at least has some upside.

[jacksonianmarch]

Depending on how Gardner does, Golson very well could be the 4th OFer by season's end. Mostly since he can pinch run, and Girardi really liked that luxury in the playoffs. Even though Gardy seemed to get thrown out every time

[riverside sluggers]

I would rather have Brett Gardner play than Winn. Granted' date=' Winn will probably see a bump up in homers from his career low of 2, but he really was a guy whose game was predicated on speed whose legs have slowed up a bit. [b'] Sounds like Cashman and Theo are up on the same crackup up theory about defense in LF.[/b] At least in NY, you could try to pretend to justify it due to death valley. Regardless, I thought we were headed to a Damon redux with him signed to a 1yr 5mil or so deal. Regardless, my prediction for Winn is that he is on another team come June. He's my least favorite option of the three when you include Damon and Dye.

 

But at least Cameron is a good bet to put up a 15-20 HR/75 RBI type season

[diony]

If Gardner can hit as much as jacko expects, Grandy would be the LF by mid-season. His struggles in center are real.

[Imperial59]

If Gardner can hit as much as jacko expects' date=' Grandy would be the LF by mid-season. His struggles in center are real.[/quote']

 

That's a big if though. When has a young Yankees player ever played up to what Jacko claimed he expected of them? He said that he thought Ian Kennedy was a better young pitcher than Jon Lester.

[Keeper]

Kennedy was a stud at USC and advanced very quckly through the Yankees' farm system. I'm sure a lot of people thought he would be better than Lester.

[Imperial59]

Kennedy was a stud at USC and advanced very quckly through the Yankees' farm system. I'm sure a lot of people thought he would be better than Lester.

 

A lot of people, like who?

[Keeper]

Anyone who closely follows college baseball and the Minors.

[Imperial59]

Anyone who closely follows college baseball and the Minors.

 

Like... who?

[Keeper]

Stop being an argumentative douchebag.

[Imperial59]

Stop being an argumentative douchebag.

 

 

You keep saying "a lot of people" or "people who followed college baseball" preferred Ian Kennedy (and his 89 mph fastball). Yet, you can't name anyone. Hmmm...

[Keeper]

You really don't know when to quit. Kennedy dominated in college and early on in A+, AA, and AAA. Lester had some hiccups early on with his command. Kennedy was the more refined pitcher in 2007.

[Imperial59]

You really don't know when to quit. Kennedy dominated in college and early on in A+' date=' AA, and AAA. Lester had some hiccups early on with his command. Kennedy was the more refined pitcher in 2007.[/quote']

 

Who cares what he did in college? Craig Hansen was a dominant pitcher in college too. Kennedy has better stats in the low minors against players that were years younger than him, but anyone who thought his 89 mph fastball and good change made him a better pitcher than Lester's 96 mph fastball and his plus curve and good change (plus a cutter and a 4-seemer) was relying way too much on low minor league stats. A lefty power pitcher with 2 good variations in his fastball is really something special.

 

I think you'd be hard pressed to find many scouts or player development experts who thought Kennedy was better than Lester.

[Keeper]

Who cares what he did in college against metal bats? You can't read everything into college performance, but when your K/9 is 11.0 through 311 innings, scouts take notice. And Kennedy also did well in AA and AAA.

 

Lester has better stuff and a better frame. He's clearly the better pitcher at this point, but you're selling Kennedy short if you don't think scouts were high on him.

[Imperial59]

Who cares what he did in college against metal bats? You can't read everything into college performance, but when your K/9 is 11.0 through 311 innings, scouts take notice. And Kennedy also did well in AA and AAA.

 

Lester has better stuff and a better frame. He's clearly the better pitcher at this point, but you're selling Kennedy short if you don't think scouts were high on him.

 

Oh, I'm sure some scouts were intrigued by his ERA in the low minors. But I'm sure most of them also realized that he was many years older than most of those players and he didn't have very good stuff.

[Keeper]

You keep glossing over what I'm saying. He didn't just have success in the low minors. He was 22 when he first started pitching in AAA. That's not that old.

[Imperial59]

You keep glossing over what I'm saying. He didn't just have success in the low minors. He was 22 when he first started pitching in AAA. That's not that old.

 

In 2006 he was pitching in college, in 2007 he was pitching in the majors. That he was rushed to drastically probably also hurt him. But let's look at the facts. His fastball sits at 89 mph and his only other good pitch is his changeup. He had good numbers in the lower minors, but he was also pitching against players years younger and he had ugly peripherals. In his 2007 season in the minors (his most successful to date) he had a BABIP around .250 and stranded almost 80% of baserunners.

 

When it comes to judging prospects, there's a lot more to it than looking at their ERA in the lower minors.

[Keeper]

I agree they rushed him and that it probably hurt him. But in 2007, he had ugly peripherals? If 5.6 H/9, 0.4 HR/9, 10 K/9, 3.26 K/BB, and a 0.964 WHIP are ugly peripherals, I'd like to see your criteria for good peripherals.

 

You also seem to be under the false impression that Kennedy was significantly older than his competition.