I think that’s really impressive this early in the off-season.  Single move probably not, but maybe a few small moves together.  E.g. bringing back Andruw and maybe trading for Danks (or similar), plus another bullpen piece.  Adding Wilson again makes a lot of sense, if the $$‘s are reasonable.

AJ Burnett is so awful. At least Pavano was considerate enough to get injured.

Immediate reaction while reading these:

-Cano too low
-Teix too high
-Everything else looks right

[3] Maybe, but right now I’d definitely take the “over” on Montero being a .9 WAR player in 2012.

changed the underlying assumptions and components

I’m guessing this means upping the value of HR’s (which are known to hurt offensive rhythm by killing ralies and momentum) and RBI (which are overrated unless they come from a SAC), discounting SB, and completely ignoring adorable scruffiness.

[3] Maybe, but right now I’d definitely take the “over” on Montero being a .9 WAR player in 2012.

He’s being treated as a pure DH here.  For every 100 PA as a catcher he picks up about 0.5 WAR.

This team needs more RBI singles.

Also, FWIW I’m ignoring reliever leverage for their WAR.  So factoring that in maybe adds a win or two.

Couldn’t swamp turkey get killed in a hunting accident in time for Thursday?

What is Freddy Garcia’s projected WAR?  Even if you just add Fettucine Alfredo Garcia, Android Jones, and factor reliever leverage, we inch up to 95 wins, do we not?

Call me crazy, but this seems like just the type of season to let those AAA guys fight it out and see if we end up with a usable asset at the end of the season.  Project90 win team, maybe 92-93 wins if Rodriguez and Teixiera rediscover themselves, and maybe even 94 if we get more out of Burnett and Hughes. And no other ridiculous front runner in the AL East.

[11] You’re crazy.

What is Freddy Garcia’s projected WAR?  Even if you just add Fettucine Alfredo Garcia, Android Jones, and factor reliever leverage, we inch up to 95 wins, do we not?

150 innings of Garcia projects as around 2.2 WAR. So that’s 92 wins.  250 PA of Jones is worth about 0.6 WAR, so you’re in the neighborhood of 93 wins.  Give Mo and Robertson a leverage index of around 1.5 (which is probably low since they were at 2.19 and 1.68 respectively in 2011) and that’s another two wins.

So yeah, figure 95 or so.

FWIW, 150 innings of Bartolo Colon instead is about 1.6 WAR.  He probably has more upside than Garcia if he can maintain the velocity he had at the start of the year longer, but he’s also probably a bigger risk of breaking down and giving you nothing.

[11] So rotation is CC, Nova, AJ, Hughes, AAA pitcher?  I could go for that, because I do indeed want to give the AAA guys a chance to shine.  I’d much rather CC/Nova/Wilson/Hughes/AAA though.  Sounds like the only way that will happen is if AJ is traded (or has an appendix problem) though.

But yeah, the only way you’ll be able to grow a rotation from within is to get the pitchers innings in the majors.  Maybe Phelps or Warren (or Noesi) can prove they are a competent starter.  Or key bullpen piece ala Ramiro Mendoza.  Those guys then either become part of the long-term plan, OR will get more trade value for when the ManBan’s of the world are ready.

[6] I think I’d take the over on Montero having a .326 wOBA.  Anything under .526 is simply unacceptable!  But seriously, something more in the .350 range seems likely.  I understand why CAIRO gives him what it does.  I just think he’s more likely to end up on the high side.

FWIW, ZiPS is about four runs/500 PA more bullish than CAIRO for Montero (.271/.333/.486 vs. .267/.327/.470).  Either that or we can use Montero’s 80% forecast (.288/.361/.536) as a minimum expectation.

Sounds like the only way that will happen is if AJ is traded (or has an appendix problem) though.

I harped on this last offseason, but the Yankees have used an average of ten different starting pitchers per year since 2000.  There will be chances for anyone who shows they’ve earned it.

[17] A quick glance at BR tells me that post 2008 has been a fairly different story. I counted 8 in 2009, 8 in 2010 and and 9 in 2011. Those numbers are even a little deceiving, as 2010 was the only year where you had a couple of guys get a bunch of starts, i.e. in 2009 Aceves got 1 start, in 2011 Gordon got 2 and Betances got 1.

Concur on starting pitching depth and I think I’d rather see what Burnett can do rather than what he can fetch in trade. But I would really like to see Hector Noesi get 15 starts.

You know “appendix problem” is pretty nebulous. A knife in the appendix is a problem…

[0] “the Yankees can add a win for every WAR they add to the rotation”

1.24 per pythag.

A.J is so bad that he even downgrades Martin’s defensive projection.

[18] I think the Yankees should look into trading AJ after the season starts. If he’s pitching badly, well I can’t imagine he can drop his value much furtther. If he’s pitching well, the Yankees can flip him or keep him, depending on how the AAA bunch is performing.

The rumor mill has been too quiet where the Yankees are concerned.

Brauny Paper Towels wins the MVP? I thought Kemp was a slam dunk. Almost won the triple crown.

[17] Sure, getting lots of depth is great.  But how many kids got starts this year, despite all the injuries?  Really the only one that got a long look was Nova…who started the season on the team.  And that’s the best way that a young starter will get a REAL look.  Also the best way that more than one guy will get a real look.

Yankees potentially have 5 guys who could be #4 starters or better slated to start in AAA/bullpen this year - Phelps, Noesi, Warren, Betances, Banuelos.  That’s plenty of depth, thanks.

Now, would I rather have AJ in the bullpen to have even more depth?  Sure.  But really, last year is evidence that having too much depth is a bad thing, IMHO, if you want to develop a rotation from within.  Because maybe if Colon isn’t on the team, they still win the division, but we’ve got Warren or Phelps (or Noesi) penned in to be a starter in 2012, because they’ve proven they can handle it.  Or maybe not.  But we’ll never know, and instead we’re worried about bringing Colon back again.

Either that or we can use Montero’s 80% forecast (.288/.361/.536) as a minimum expectation.

For the MSM anything less than that would be considered a failure…heck, OPS isn’t even over .900!

This team can be pretty great next season. Wish we could fast-forward through stupid winter… oh look, it’s almost four! ‘Bout to be pitch black out! #occupywinter

Hey SG,

I realize it’s possible I goofed somewhere, but according to CAIRO last year you had Cano projected at .306/.355/.511, good for a .372 wOBA.

This year you have him at .303/.352/.504, or a .352 wOBA. Am I missing something? I can’t imagine .003 less OBP and .007 less SLG would result in .020 less wOBA, unless the spreadsheet I’m looking at for last year’s projections (CAIRO_2011_v0.6) is league/park/hitting environment adjusted and this year’s projections aren’t yet.

Thanks

Any thought on how the new CBA rules affect the Yankees?

[28] Maybe the better question is this: since Cano basically slightly exceeded that projection (slightly lower BA, slightly lower OBP, about 30 points more SLG), why would his next years projection be that much lower? He’s entering his age 29 season.

[30] That too, although after spending a lot of time reviewing projection systems over the last few seasons, for whatever reason Cano seems to be underprojected annually, and so I was a bit less surprised by the projection itself than how the numbers were arrived at.

[31] Well, Cano was underprojected for a while because of his terrible 2008. But that should barely matter now. Why his projection is so negative this year, compared to his last 2-3 years of production is a bit of a mystery.

Any thought on how the new CBA rules affect the Yankees?

I’m cautiously pleased about it. For instance, the new restrictions on what free agents require you to give up draft picks if you sign them can only benefit the Yankees. Someone like Grant Balfour would have made sense last year, except he was a Type A free agent so he did not make sense. Sadly, I think the current rule is something like “X amount of top free agents are Type A plus anyone who gets a new contract for at least $12 million a year,” so Soriano still would have resulted in the Yankees giving up a pick.

As for the draft slotting rules, it sounds like the sort of problem that the Yankees can spend themselves out of. The new rule is you are taxed at between 75-100 percent of what you go over slot. Most teams cannot afford to pay that tax. The Yankees, however, presumably can.

This year you have him at .303/.352/.504, or a .352 wOBA. Am I missing something? I can’t imagine .003 less OBP and .007 less SLG would result in .020 less wOBA, unless the spreadsheet I’m looking at for last year’s projections (CAIRO_2011_v0.6) is league/park/hitting environment adjusted and this year’s projections aren’t yet.

Looks like operator error.  wOBA in 2012 is wrong.  Cano’s wOBA should be .368.  I’ve uploaded a new version of 0.2 with the correct wOBAs at the same link.

[28] Maybe the better question is this: since Cano basically slightly exceeded that projection (slightly lower BA, slightly lower OBP, about 30 points more SLG), why would his next years projection be that much lower? He’s entering his age 29 season.

I don’t think it’s a lower projection.  It’s a slightly less favorable run environment.  Cano’s 2012 projection compared to the 2009-2011 AL is probably at least as good as his 2011 projection was compared to the 2008-2010 AL.

Those damn changing run environments. Get me everytime.

[33] Per RAB,

There is no hard slotting, but teams are given a “draft pool” by MLB that they aren’t supposed to exceed. Teams that do exceed their pool by 5% will be taxed at 75%. Spending in excess of 5-10% will result in a 75% tax and a loss of the next year’s first round pick. Spending in excess of 10-15% results in a 100% tax and and loss of first and second round picks. Spending in excess of 15% results in a 100% tax and the loss of two first round picks.

Holy crap, that’s insane.

So yeah, that hurts the Yankees a lot.

What’s interesting is if there was, say, a Stasberg out there. Would it make sense to let him know that if he made it to the Yankees, they would pay him five times as much as anyone else (and just lose the picks)? So perhaps he would tell everyone else that he would not sign with them? Just trying to think of a way that the Yankees could still concievably buy their way out of this problem.

Does/did the players union need to consent.  If Selig is behind the rules by definition they are intended to hurt us.  Isn’t there something on foreign signings thats a negative also?

In some ways I really like the changes, but the punishments seems far to high. It’s pretty ridiculous to punish in both monetary form and draft-pick form. I have a feeling that there will be a decent number of players that choose not to sign if they are drafted low.

eh, it’s a self limiting problem. The Yankees never get high enough draft picks to be worth signing, anyway.

It’s not like we’re gonna be able to develop the drafted players within our system, anyway.

So I guess the wild card playoff is official. It will be almost like the drama of this past year, every year. Except MLB will be able to sell the TV rights in the spring.

Someone somewhere noted that this really hurts the two-sports stars, since baseball’s only real way of competing used to be throwing money at them. Now they will almost all certainly go to college to play college football. Carl Crawford, for instance, never would have signed with the Rays if it were not for the money.

[42] Maybe, but mediocre baseball players make way more money than mediocre football players, and generally have longer less injury complicated careers.

I don’t know. Can anyone envision a situation where a guy like Strasburg or Bryce Harper is in the draft and wants 3x slot and no one pays it, but Boras knows the Yankees will so he makes it known that his player won’t sign. The guy still falls in the draft, the Yankees pay 3x slot, the tax, and lose the picks and still walk away happy.

Does/did the players union need to consent.

Did.  That’s why they call it a collective bargaining agreement.  It means the parties agreed.  See? 

But seriously, why wouldn’t the union agree to reduce the amount of money that goes to people who aren’t yet union members?  Especially if they got something that benefits current members in exchange?  The only reason that the union has anything to say about the draft is that it’s involved in FA compensation.  If the owners had been willing to do away with compensation completely, they could have put in hard slots/caps without bargaining for it.

[36] So what we have, is a NPB-styled system wherein the Yankees pay a posting fee to the rest of the league for any player they draft ?

Sweet.

[44] Seems like a pretty big gamble.  A team that drafts a guy in the first round and fails to sign him will still get that pick back the next year, right?  But the kid loses a year (or two or three, depending).

(47) I agree not plausible, but possible. Also, does slot = bonus or total contract size? Maybe there is still a way for us to flex some wallet muscle.

Can anyone envision a situation where a guy like Strasburg or Bryce Harper is in the draft and wants 3x slot and no one pays it, but Boras knows the Yankees will so he makes it known that his player won’t sign. The guy still falls in the draft, the Yankees pay 3x slot, the tax, and lose the picks and still walk away happy.

I can definitely envision it. Like in comment #37.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2McNDVXKso Sorry lads. Some of you will enjoy this.

[50] That’s what the jailer said while raising his truncheon.

Does this make sense to anyone?

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/did-a-steinbrenner-write-the-new-cba/

It seems to me that we have all agreed that the new CBA will hurt the Yanks and Fangraphs is saying the opposite, but Cameron’s argument seems pretty specious to me.

I was just thinking this CBA never would have happened were George alive and well.

dannux/52 - In recent years several small market teams have spent big money in the draft. As teams started to realize that young talent was more efficient than throwing money at free agents who are mostly past their prime, teams have exploited the compensatory system that MLB has had. The Rays and teams like them rely on young, cheap talent to be contenders. Without the ability to accrue multiple early round picks, or the ability to spend a lot of money, these teams lose the one way in which they can contend with large market teams.

The closer a team is to contention the more likely it is to invest a few extra million in a reliever or a bench player to solidify its roster. They’re more likely to save a few million bucks for the trade deadline. The small market teams (non-contenders) would instead invest a few million in amateur talent rather than a bench player. They’re more likely to throw a few million more into the draft rather than save some money for the deadline.

With the new CBA, the large market teams remain the contenders. They continue to throw a few million more into the MLB team here and there that the small market teams can’t afford to do. The small market teams are no longer able to save that money and invest it in amateur talent. Instead, the owner either pockets that money or they’re paying market rate for the player they acquire.

Any time you take opportunities away from small market teams to spend less on significant talent the benefit favors the teams who can spend more at the MLB level.

I’m a Cubs fan and although they haven’t spent money too wisely in recent years, I really like this CBA. There are some things I’m not too fond of, but in terms of advantages and disadvantages for small or large market teams, it’s clearly advantageous to be a large market team.

Again, via RAB:

Something called the “Competitive Balance Lottery” gives extra picks to the small-market and low-revenue clubs. Six draft picks immediately after the first round will be given to the ten teams with the ten lowest revenues via a lottery system. A team’s odds of winning the lottery will be based on its winning percentage the prior season. There will be another lottery with six additional picks after the second round for the clubs that miss out on the first set of picks. These Competitive Balance Lottery picks can be traded, but other picks can not.

These Competitive Balance Lottery picks can be traded, but other picks can not.

And they will be, along with veterans whose salaries are being dumped, by the Pirates, etc.

[52] The draft slotting does hurt the Yankees, but I think the point Cameron is making is that it hurts smaller market teams more, since they no longer are able to invest money in the draft, which had been giving a significantly higher rate of return than free agency but has practical limits on how much an individual team can invest. The only teams helped (from a baseball perspective—everyone is going to save a ton of money) are the teams too dumb to realize that the draft is a good investment.

Yeah, Keith Law had a great piece yesterday about how staggering it was that the owners are freaking out about the money spent on the draft when the money spent on the draft was the best investment that these teams were making!

He also made an interesting point about how the money is being diverted away from the drafted players (who tend to be on the poorer side of things) to the billionaire owners of the team. Which, when you think about it, IS pretty fucked up.

[49] Damn. I am totall not in midseason form.

[57] I don’t get it - doesn’t this stifle competition, driving down prices, to the benefit of those with few resources to spare?  Now most good prospects can’t provoke signability concerns to drop to rich contenders and get paid.

[60] yeah, the added value that teams could get out of the draft was always at the expense of teams who did not spend above their draft slots, and as more teams were spending more, the value was going down, so in the long run this is just a cost saving measure by MLB on behalf of the teams. One exception perhaps being high school players who would otherwise go to college if it were not for the extra few hundred thousand offered for coming straight to the minor leagues.

[54 & 57] I think this goes down as a “not sure” if it hurts them.  I think the way these “pools” work, the higher you are in the draft, the more money you have available to you.  So if say the Pirates get the #1 pick in each round, they get $4M to spend in the draft.  The Yankees at #30 (hopefully) only get $1.5M.  So the Pirates can still spend almost 3x as much as the Yankees on the draft.  Also, since there is no a hard cap of roughtly $60-70M (I think the average was a little more than $2M per team), you won’t have players holding out to the 4th or later rounds to still get a $3M deal.  So in theory, the Pirates now have 1/15th of the entire draft budget for them, where maybe in the past they only had 1/20th (would need to check).

I’m not a fan of the changes.  But I think Dave Cameron’s arguments for how this benefits the rich teams are reactionary, rather than reasoned.