The Curse of Jerry Hairston, Jr./Eric Hinske:
 

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

MLB Trade Rumors: Yankees Willing To Listen To Offers For Granderson

The Yankees are open to trade scenarios involving Curtis Granderson, according to ESPN’s Buster Olney (Twitter link). Olney notes that moving Granderson’s $15MM salary would give general manager Brian Cashman more flexibility this offseason.

I like Granderson and would have no problems with him being on the team in 2013, but this makes lots of sense.  It makes so much sense that I’m shocked the Yankees are doing it. 

I’m not sure what his value is right now as CAIRO projects him to be worth about 2.4 wins above a replacement level CF offensively and that probably comes down to about 2 wins once you factor in defense, so he’s actually probably making more than he’s worth in the abstract.  Still, if a team is on the periphery of contention and has a gaping hole in the OF Granderson could be the piece that puts them right into the mix for contention.

I’m not sure what teams fit that description, and I’m not sure that they’d give up.  They probably wouldn’t trade away pieces that would weaken them at the MLB level, so it may be a case of trading a prospect and taking on Granderson’s salary.  That does give Cashman some flexibility to sign some players, but that flexibility is severely curtailed by their requirement that they will only sign players for one year.  They can move Brett Gardner to CF, but then they’ll add a hole in LF to their holes at catcher and RF and 3B.

--Posted at 8:24 am by SG / 48 Comments | - (0)

Comments

Page 1 of 1 pages:

OK, so if the Yankees can just trade *everyone*, they’ll only have ~$75 million in guaranteed payroll obligations for 2014. That’s actually not that bad, the Dodgers have ~$90 million locked up through 2017(!!). Can we rebuild a team by 2014 with $114 million AAV in scratch to spare?

[0] by their requirement that they will only sign players for one year.

Are we sure this is true? I’m not so sure. If they only sign players for 1 year, they’d have this 25 man going into 2014 (I’m taking some leaps with some of the injured/underachieving guys and ):

SP: (5) Sabathia, Nova, Phelps, Pineda, Banuelos
RP: (1) Robertson, Montgomery, Rapada,

C: (2) Cervelli, Romine
IF: (5) Teixeira, Cano, Jeter, Rodriguez, Nunez, Adams/Joseph
OF: (2) Gardner, Dickerson

That 25 man roster needs 10 players, including a DH (or someone to replace a player who has moved to DH), C, RF, LF, and likely two starting pitchers who are closer to the front of the rotation than the back of the rotation.  Granted, names like Austin, Heathcott, Sanchez and Williams can help ease this situation and I didn’t include any of them in here.

The $189M payroll requirement is an AAV requirement, so, getting a player that you think can be productive on, say, a 2/$20M deal for 13-14 is better than having to get someone on a 1/$11M deal in 14, even though you’ve spent $9M less.

Are we sure this is true?

The fact that they wouldn’t match Pittsburgh on Martin makes me think it’s more true than not.

[2] Good point. Obviously someone will have to play for the Yankees in 2014, 189 or no 189, and it would be exceedingly tough to put together an entirely new team in just one offseason. Makes sense to try to sign some reasonable 2-year deals going into 2013.

[3] The fact that they wouldn’t match Pittsburgh on Martin makes me think it’s more true than not.

Fair enough. My interpretation of what happened with Martin was that, they valued him about at 2 WAR for each of 2013 and 2014, and at about $4M/WAR, the 2/$17M deal that he got was about market rate.  They’re not going to lessen payroll by paying players market rate, and I can certainly understand not wanting to pay market rate for a 2 WAR player (I can, though, understand paying market rate for a much better player.) I saw it as Cashman figuring he could get some portion of Martin’s value out of Cervelli (I said 85%, Mike K. disagreed, so let’s call it 50-60%) at 1/8 of the cost.

Martin was worth 2/$17M, but that’s not an efficient deal, and I figure that they’re looking for efficient deals.

EDIT: Just noticed a bunch of typos in 2 that I can’t edit. Looks like the bullpen should have a (3) and not a (1), so it’s more like we need ~8 players in 2014, but I think the point remains.

I am entering the acceptance stage of grief with respect to 2013 and 2014.  So we don ‘t have ownership anymore willing to open its wallet for a premium player at every position, luxury tax be damned.  But it seems reasonable that we can still put together a competitive 90-win team likely to make the playoffs for the next couple years.  The rest of the AL East has its issues too.  The Sox are rebuilding.  The Jays, it appears, have concluded that now is the time to spend, but they’re not as good as us yet.  The Rays are perpetually hamstrung by limited funds.  The Orioles are getting better, but they were also lucky last year and are also still not as the Yankees.

Does this seem a fair assessment?  I need therapy.

SP: (5) Sabathia, Nova, Phelps, Pineda, Banuelos
RP: (1) Robertson, Montgomery, Rapada,

C: (2) Cervelli, Romine
IF: (5) Teixeira, Cano, Jeter, Rodriguez, Nunez, Adams/Joseph
OF: (2) Gardner, Dickerson

Well, the 40 man roster has a lot more pitchers that would be under team control in 2014 that could fill out the SP/RP.  Some combination of Betances, Cabral, Eppley, Logan, Jim Miller, Pineda, Jose Ramirez, Francisco Rondon (who?), Josh Spence, Nik Turley and Adam Warren).

Stewart would still be under team control if needed.  They can also add Mustelier to the roster.  They have outfielders on the 40 man roster too, although none of them look like they are players you want starting right now, people like Zoilo Almonte, Ramon Flores and Melky Mesa.

So we could see a pitching staff like:

SP: (5) Sabathia, Nova, Phelps, Pineda, Banuelos
RP: (7) Robertson, Montgomery, Rapada, Cabral, Eppley, Warren, Marshall

And that leaves position players looking like:

C: (2) Cervelli, Romine
IF: (6) Teixeira, Cano, Jeter, Rodriguez, Nunez, Adams/Joseph, Mustelier
OF: (5) Gardner, Dickerson, Almonte, Mesa, Flores

Obviously you hope they can get a better OF than that, but maybe Heathcott or Williams or Tyler Austin force their way into the mix.

That team probably has a payroll of around $100M and is also probably a 70 win team, but when I get home tonight I can run it through 100 seasons against 2013 MLB and see how it looks.

[6] You know, what’s weird here is that if the plan was to not give out big contracts to fading stars because it’s a more disciplined approach to building a perennial World Series contender, I think we would all be really supportive of that. When we shed all those contracts after 2008, the general feeling was that we thought Cashman realized to hold on to young players and only pay for premium talent free agents, in terms of both age and performance.  Sabathia fit that bill and Teixeira, IMO, did as well (although some disagree.)  The head scratcher was Burnett - my thought was Cashman recognized his poor defensive team and went for the high K/9 pitchers.

Anyway, back to the plan. From what I can tell, it’s not a shift to a more disciplined approach, but purely a cost cutting measure. So, for what? More money for the owners? Is beer going to be cheaper? Tickets cheaper? Probably not. And that’s really not cool. We pay the same for a worse product.

[7] I’ll eat my hat if Betances throws another pitch for the Yankees ML club.

Then again, I’d rather watch a projected 80-85 win team that has a lot of kids and hope than a projected 85-90 win team that relies on a bunch of geriatrics staving off Father Time for one more season in the sun.

Maybe it’s just me.

Then again, I’d rather watch a projected 80-85 win team that has a lot of kids and hope than a projected 85-90 win team that relies on a bunch of geriatrics staving off Father Time for one more season in the sun.

I think the question is how much hope the Yankees would have given how few prospects they have banging on the door right now.  Obviously a good year for the farm with three outfielders and a catcher putting themselves in the mix for the 2014 roster and things will look a lot better but I don’t think we can bank on that.

But I do wonder what would happen if they let Cano walk after this year, platoon Joseph and Adams at 2B and just go young wherever they can.  I do think it’d be a lot more interesting of a team to watch, even if they win 20 fewer games.

[10] I’d be down with that. But ticket prices need to come way down, right? You can’t expect people to pay thousands for those field seats to watch the SWB Railroad ties (or whatever they’re called.)

[9]

So, for what? More money for the owners?

Technically? Yes. 

However, I do think that the major thrust in avoiding the higher luxury tax rate is just so that they can continue to spend north of $150 million without too much of an impact to the bottom line. 

But the Yankees already make an obscene amount of money and will continue to do so unless The Brothers Stein go the way of Frank McCourt and trash the franchise (and then sell it for $3 billion to Murdoch or Dolan).

The 2016 CBA will be interesting. I expect the luxury tax threshold to increase pretty dramatically. Baseball is flush with money from the new TV contracts, There are now a good number of teams that could consistently opperate at 200MM+ payrolls.

[13] yeah, but how many of the owners will decide they want to go along with raising the cap when it means they would need to spend more to stay as competitive as they currently are? I have no faith in the union’s ability to force the issue, unless it becomes absurdly obvious that the caps are suppressing salaries.

Trading Granderson for prospects and cheaper, younger players makes sense.  But, it shows the long-term cost of the prior Granderson trade. Today, could we get a team to give us 3 players of the caliber of Phil Coke, Ian Kennedy and Austin Jackson AND take on Granderson’s full salary? I don’t think so.

[14] I think the next few years of mid level and top tier FA contracts will make a difference too. Players and their agents know that there is more money available and are asking for it. If the cost of a win is around 5 million dollars now, I would not be surprised to see it eclipse 6 before the new CBA. That’s a pretty big chunk of change.

[15] Well, you’re leaving out the 3 additional years of team control of Granderson the Yankees got in that deal. Trading him today obviously won’t bring back the same return. And you have to judge it based on what those guys were then, not now. They all had serious flaws and chances were low that they’d all wind up being solid contributors.

[15] Just because you bring home all the ingredients to make a cake doesn’t mean when you’re done you’ll have anything but a hockey puck. The Yankees are incapable of developing talent into stars. We have to outsource that work.

Actually, the above is mostly the meme. The truth is that they choose not to take the risk and accept the learning curve on the ML field. Deciding to be a perpetual playoff team and WS favorite has a cost. And it works, which is why the rest of the league has to collude to create a so-called “level playing field” which really is targetted at one team.

[16] Another reason I am less than optimistic is that the $189 cap is flat throughout the agreement. It’s going to need to increase to about $217 after 2016 just to keep up with inflation (as measured by the Yankees apparent 30 year tv deal).

Somebody decided that $189 was high enough that they didn’t need inflation adjustments.

[3] I’m with J.  I don’t think Martin proves they aren’t willing to go multiple years.  Just that they weren’t willing to go into 2014 for Martin, at that salary.

I’m not sure what teams fit that description, and I’m not sure that they’d give up.

Well, probably not many teams until the OF swituation shakes out.  But I think the only two OF still on the market that would affect this are Hamilton and Swisher.  Once those guys sign, we’ll know what teams need an OF like Granderson.  Also, when more teams sign other FA as well, could give a better idea which teams are close enough to contention that they may want to acquire Granderson.  Texas and the M’s come to mind immediately.  Texas if they lose out on Hamilton and don’t sign Swisher, have a big offensive hole to fill.  M’s, Jack Z is under pressure to have a winning team, and may feel they’re close enough that Granderson puts them into the 85 win range, which makes them competitive.

IDK what they’d give up.  Mike Olt from Texas?  Think Granderson could fetch him?  People at sites like FG seem mixed on him…if they could get Olt for Granderson I think that would be great.  Many don’t think Olt is a 3B long term, makes more sense in RF.  However, he’d be great for 3B if/until ARod is healthy, then shift to RF later in 2013, and 2014.  Rangers get their offensive force for 2013, Yankees get short-term solution for 3rd, long term solution for RF (and maybe eventually 1B).

Just that they weren’t willing to go into 2014 for Martin, at that salary.

Which could mean that the Yankees think Romine or Murphy will be able to hold down C in 2014.

I don’t think the Yankees can get Granderson for Olt straight up, but if they throw in a B/C prospect they could probably make some sort of deal.

[12] - I don’t want to kill the family too much.  They did personally finance a billion dollar stadium for the fans.  I know some like the old stadium better but it couldn’t last forever.  So they want to get the maximum benefit of the write off and STILL spend more than every other team (except maybe the new Dodgers owners)?  It’s not that bad, there are just going to be some growing pains while some of the more expensive contracts work through.

But a lot of the problem is the new CBA and Dodger sale.  There are a lot more teams throwing around money and thus a lot fewer free agents to buy continuous success.

I don’t think the Yankees can get Granderson for Olt straight up, but if they throw in a B/C prospect they could probably make some sort of deal

IDK, Olt is 24 and will be a rookie, and potentially a corner OF or 1B.  Not sure how much value that has.  Quite possibly he’s only a B+ prospect.  Maybe he’s an A.  Not sure.  If he’s a B+ it shouldn’t take a B in addition to Granderson.  There’s also the issue of Granderson’s value.  If the Rangers look at him as a -10 defender in CF, he’s worth a lot less than if they think he’s a +5.  I think on the high end they could do Olt for Granderson straight.  Low end…maybe Granderson plus Adams?  I think I’d do that.

Of course, there’s still the issue of finding another corner OF (now two), at least for first half of year until ARod recovers and Olt moves to RF permanently.  So this probably isn’t much more of a lateral move for at least the first half of 2013.  But pays long-term dividends for Yankees, so I would do it.

[23] Granderson + Adams seems about right to me. Of course if the Yankees think Adams can handle 3B, would it be worth it to make that trade?

There are a lot more teams throwing around money and thus a lot fewer free agents to buy continuous success.

Even before some of the money was available, a lot of the high-end players it would formerly have made sense to throw money at were signing long-term deals before they hit FA.  This time last year, I think we were talking about saving money to make runs at Hamels and Weaver (in addition to Grienke).  They both signed early.  Lots of young high-end talent that in the past would be hitting FA in the 28-32 range, have signed on basically for life with their current team, before hitting FA.  Including Kemp, Longoria, Tulowitski, Braun, Wright, Votto.

I think it makes perfect sense for the Yankees to look more at building the team from within - and that DOES mean they also need to leave some openings for players to get a chance - instead of concentrating on the FA market.  And also, saving their $$‘s to lock up some of their own players long-term.  Whether that means signing Cano (and potentially Hughes) to extensions before the season starts, or holding out for the next wave (potentially Gardner if he comes back 100% healthy, DRob, Phelps, or the AA or lower players).

[20] I spent some time looking at Pittsburgh’s roster and seeing if there was a match. Pedro Alvarez, Garrett Jones, and Travis Snyder all caught my eye.  All solid players, of course, and clearly Pittsburgh isn’t chomping at the bit to give us their young, cost controlled position players for free.

But the Pirates need pitching, and I’m sure they’d be interested in Nova or Phelps. Snyder had hype that hasn’t been realized (although he was useful for Toronto and Pittsburgh last year), Jones is a super 2 going into arbitration and likely will be expensive, and Alvarez is just plainly a stud. Pittsburgh clearly needs starting pitching.

So you go in at different levels. Alvarez is the risky, blockbuster trade. Snyder is the below the radar move where you’re swapping similarly valued players who play differnet positions.  Jones is somewhere in the middle.

Granderson replaces Jones or Alvarez’s offense almost 1 for 1.  In both case, he’s likely an upgrade overall because he’d play a corner OF position well, where as Alvarez and Jones don’t do much defensively - Alvarez keeps his head barely above water and Jones is a bat in search of a defensive position.

Would you go Granderson and Phelps for Alvarez? I would.

I’d trade Granderson and a more marginal, but not trivial, piece for Jones. Maybe Nunez? Pittsburgh ran Clint Barmes out there last year. Nunez seems a little much, so maybe Pittsburgh adds something to tip the scales back the other way.

I’d try to get my claws into Travis Snider either way. Potentially big bat that is undervalued right now.

[24]  Yes, I think it is.  For one, in 2013 Olt is probably close to equal Granderson in value.  So, can they find an equivalent to Adams for a scrub OF for 2-4 months?  Not definitely, but probably.  So 2013 is probably close to a wash; though possibly the money saved from Granderson will allow them to go bonkers on a 1 year deal for another corner OF, or a UIF (e.g. Scutaro).

But, in 2014 and beyond…Olt solves a corner OF problem, and they’ll have him cheap for years, through most of his prime.  Maybe all of it for fairly cheap if they get aggressive after 2013 and sign him to a 7 or 8 year deal.  That kind of savings on a (likely) above average corner OF may also allow them to resign Cano, solving 2B.  Or 3B if they move him there if ARod can’t play, and CoJo is okay at 2B.

Of course, if they think Adams is ready to be a 2+ win player at 2B in 2014 and beyond, and Cojo is at best 1 WAR, it’s robbing Peter to pay Paul.  But…I think it’s worth it.  Lateral move in 2013, greatly improves 2014 and beyond.

[27] Bringing CoJo into the equation. I’d prefer to see him be traded than Adams, but that’s just a personal preference.

Overall, yeah I aggree with you, the Yankees should be at least exploring an Olt/Granderson swap.

[25] Whether that means signing Cano (and potentially Hughes)

Have they gone through 2013 contracts for the arb guys yet? I’m willing to bet they offer Hughes something that’s akin to an extension.  His 2013 plus some new money that pushes it out to 3/$30M or 4/$40M would really be a great way to stabilize the rotation.

[23] Granderson + Adams seems about right to me. Of course if the Yankees think Adams can handle 3B, would it be worth it to make that trade?

I’m not sure.  CAIRO projects Olt (as a Yankee) at .235/.325/.424, .330 wOBA and Adams at .256/.324/.390, .317 wOBA.  Olt’s a year younger, but as far as I know can’t play 2B. 

Texas doesn’t need 2B either, they are going to probably play Profar there and if not they don’t have to move Kinsler who’s a solid defender.

[30] Good point on the Texas needs. Unfortunately, the Yankees aren’t exactly deep in MLB ready OF prospects to make this hypothetical trade work.

[26] IDK if I’d call Alvarez a stud.  Solid yes, but his 3 years in the majors he hasn’t really progressed.  He just finished his age 25 season, so he could be in line for a breakout of course.  But also he’s been in majors for 3 years, and is going to start costing money soon.  Also (also) he’s not a 3B, even if he’s playing there.  I saw him in AAA, and wrote on him then.  He’s big, but not in a good way.  And, IIRC, he had skinny legs.  Skinny legs aren’t bad on a 180lb middle IF.  But on a 235lb corner IF yes, they are.  I also don’t know if he moves well enough for OF.  So he’s a 1B.  Probably sooner rather than later.  If he’s an average 1B, he’s still down to a 1.5-2 win player, unless his offense breaks out.

Jones I think the Yankees tried to get last year.  And I don’t think is even a lateral move if they’re trading Granderson.  He’s more a stop-gap RF, or a 4th OF.  Snyder…yeah I’d look to get him.  But I wouldn’t give up Granderson for him.  He’s only going to be in his age 25 season, and there’s definitely a chance he lives up to the minor league track record.  But for 2013, there’s a great chance he’s ALSO only a 90 wRC+ guy, and an average-ish defender in a corner OF.  Big step back for Yankees.  I think maybe you do a Warren for Snyder trade.  Maybe even Nova.

Actually, if I had my druthers now, do Warren (or Nova) for Snyder and put him in LF, do Granderson+Adams for Olt put him at 3B to start year and RF when ARod comes back.  Cross fingers that Snyder turns into hitter Jays thought he could be.

From what I can tell, it’s not a shift to a more disciplined approach, but purely a cost cutting measure. So, for what? More money for the owners? Is beer going to be cheaper? Tickets cheaper? Probably not. And that’s really not cool. We pay the same for a worse product.

This is where the Yankees need to tread very carefully, at least with me.  The owners got their new, tax-payer-subsidized, multi-billion dollar stadium, they’ve got a hugely successful regional sports network, and they charge ridiculously expensive prices for seats.  And there’s all kinds of new money flowing into MLB, as evidenced by the spending of seemingly every team but the Yankees in the past year or so.  On top of this, part of the reason they’re so hamstrung with payroll is the ownership’s self-inflicted stupidity with the ARod contract.

Still, using the 2014 payroll limit as a sort of line in the sand to start a new era of greater efficiency in its spending makes sense.  But it will be far more difficult to stomach if the austerity is just an effort to avoid paying a luxury tax.  I’m not sure where it is, but I’m trying to find the line between efficient, which the Yankees have every right to be, and cheap, which they have no right to be.

[32] IDK. I’d say a 117 OPS+ from a 25 year old putting up average-ish defensive numbers at a corner IF spot a ‘stud’ in the context of a trade, even if he has skinny legs. Maybe what I was more keying on was the fact that he’s not arb eligible until 2014, and it looks like the first contract they got Alvarez on has a $700k team option for that arb year. That’s really cheap. So, ‘stud’ in the sense that he’s a relatively highly valued asset.

Jones is the next tier down for me.  Cost controlled, but limited defensively. I think he could hold down a corner OF spot for 2 years. If not, that’s your DH spot, but at least it’s a productive hitter making on the order of a few million through arbitration.

Snider for Gradnerson, no thanks. I just meant they should look into Snider. I can’t imagine him costing much. Toronto traded him for Brad Lincoln, who is fairly fungible. In fact, looking at that trade, it looks like Toronto and Pittsburgh thought that maybe the other team could do better with their 1st round pick from 2006 and swapped them.

RE: trades, I feel like Granderson for Olt sounds too-good-to-be-true as a Yankee fan, but maybe I’m overrating Olt.  But even if the deal makes sense on a value-for-value basis, it seems like the Rangers would be more likely to package Olt with some other prospects in order to go after Justin Upton or Dickey or some other higher profile trade target.  Maybe once the dust clears with free agency and any big trades, Granderson for Olt could be a fall-back, but that seems a ways off.

[33] In their defense, only the parking garages were really publicly financed, which is far better than most stadiums. The parking garages themselves apparently were a disaster, late to open, which probably trained people to use the new metro north station which opened in 2009, and they ended up with more space than was needed.

[34] Obviously, “stud” is a very subjective term.  And some of my feelings on him are purely subjective as well, based on what I observed of him when I saw him in person.  IDK where you’re getting the 117 wRC+...he was 112 last year, his high in the majors is 114, and career is 101.  His wRC+ in AAA in 2011 was 117.  I think of a “stud” as at least a guy you look to be a perennial All Star.  Alvarez…I have doubts he’ll ever be a (deserving) All Star.  I think he’s destined for 1B/DH sooner rather than later, and I don’t think his wRC+ will ever get much above 120, which for those positions is “meh”.  He’s also already K’ing 30% of his PA’s.  I mean, I’d be fine looking into acquiring him.  But I don’t think if they lose Granderson for 2013 that Alvarez helps much, and his impact long-term will be minimal.

Jones…again, not for Granderson.  In 2013 if you move Granderson to a corner OF, at best it’s lateral trade, probably a downgrade.  Saves some money, but in 2013 that money doesn’t help *that* much.  And in 2014, Jones may not be worth what they’re paying him, if they’re cost-conscious.

I misunderstood you on Snider.  If they can get him for a bullpen arm, or a lower-tier pitcher who has a chance at being a starter but not necessarily a good one…sure.  Snider has some upside.

I think Olt may make the most sense, IF Texas has a need in the OF.  I’m sure there are others out there as well.

[35]  As Snuggles said, not straight up no.  Whether Texas trades him or just puts him in a corner OF probably depends on how much they feel the need to go for it this year.  Whether they package him for a better OF (like Upton) depends on factors like what else they need to package him with.  Definitely this is something that won’t happen until January, or later.  But I think it’s possible.

From what I’ve read, defensive liabilities knock Olt into the 2nd tier of prospects.

I’m not sure where it is, but I’m trying to find the line between efficient, which the Yankees have every right to be, and cheap, which they have no right to be.

Agreed.  One of the issues is going to be, we may only be able to determine which it is (or if they’re successful) in hindsight.  For example, if they make playoffs in 2013 but miss in 2014 by not being willing to go over threshold, we may be yelling that they’re cheap, not caring about fans, etc.  And then in 2015 if a team fronted by Austin, Williams, Sanchez, Heathcott, Montgomery, Phelps, Turley, etc wins the WS, they were actually efficient.  If a team with those guys and some cheap replacements while Cano is winning MVP’s in California and other potential FA are being skipped wins 70 games, they’re probably cheap.

[33] Well put, SAS.  This post expresses my sentiments as well.  Ownership has the legal right to spend what it wants on payroll, but I don’t have to like it, in light of the considerations SAS identifies.  I don’t think George would have imposed a budget cap, not that he would necessarily have been smart about spending either.

[40] Agreed. I think a lot of the frustration is coming from how clumsily and suddenly the Yankees have approached this.

[28-30] Missed these earlier…

I like CoJo better than Adams, at this point.  Joseph is 2 baseball years (17 months) younger than Adams, had more AAA PA in 2012 than Adams had AA PA (386 to 383, not to mention 102 AA PA’s), not to mention hit (slightly) better at each level.  He walks more and has more power, Adams just better at BA.  Oh and also Adams has the injury history.  To me, at this point, the ONLY thing Adams has over Joseph is defense, and at 2B at least, it may not be much.  For a UIF, Adams is the better bet.  For a potential starting 2B, Joseph is the better bet.  Now, that should also make him worth more in a trade potentially.

For trading Granderson for Olt, that’s the trade.  Adams I used to give a name for the value of what I think should be going back.  What else could they use?  Warren?  Is Whitley too much (Montgomery is)?  Basically, Texas gets Granderson to go for it NOW, and *something* of value that isn’t a Yankees top-10 prospect.  Yankees get Olt, which fills a need long term, but doesn’t kill chances in 2013.

Mike, how much of a butcher in the field is Cojo?

[37] 117 wRC+...

117 OPS+.

[37] 117 wRC+...

117 OPS+.

[43] Have not yet seen him.  I’ve heard reports anywhere from “horrible” to “competent”.  Of course we have to remember that at one point Cano was awful, so…Joseph should hit enough to still be worth playing.  I think the only way to know for sure how he is, is to get him on the field.

[44] Ah.  Still, not THAT impressive.  Not for a below average (or worse) defender.

[45] See above.

[46] Regardless, I think he’s worth Granderson and more.

Ah.  Still, not THAT impressive.  Not for a below average (or worse) defender

Player J (for Jumbo) OPS+: 114

Page 1 of 1 pages:

NY Times: Against Blue Jays, Derek Jeter and Yankees Show Signs of Life
(22 Comments - 9/19/2014 3:51:44 pm)

Blue Jays (77-74) @ Yankees (77-74), Thursday, September 18, 2014, 7:05pm
(25 Comments - 9/19/2014 9:14:56 am)

NJ.com: Derek Jeter breaks his slump
(19 Comments - 9/18/2014 6:36:21 pm)

Yankees (76-74) @ Rays (74-78), Wednesday, September 17, 2014, 7:10pm
(38 Comments - 9/18/2014 10:13:41 am)

Yankees.com: Rays open floodgates on Yanks after close call
(21 Comments - 9/17/2014 3:22:32 pm)

Yankees (76-73) @ Rays (73-78), Tuesday, September 16, 2014, 7:10pm
(37 Comments - 9/16/2014 11:10:30 pm)

NY Post: Yankees eliminated from East, wild-card hopes all but over
(42 Comments - 9/16/2014 4:50:39 pm)

Yankees (76-72) @ Rays (72-78), Monday, September 15, 2014, 7:10pm
(34 Comments - 9/16/2014 3:55:59 pm)

NY Times: Yankees Grab Lead in the Ninth, but Then It Slips Through Their Hands
(10 Comments - 9/15/2014 3:45:15 pm)

Yankees (76-71) @ Orioles (88-60), Sunday, September 14, 2014, 8:00pm
(55 Comments - 9/15/2014 2:55:10 am)