And you thought today's MVP voters were bad!

Last night before I went to bed I took a look at Lou Gehrig's stats on Baseball Reference. That's the kind of guy I am. I've been obsessed with baseball history since I was about 5. Every now and then I like to take a look at some of the old-time greats, mostly to see how dominant they were. In Gehrig's case, last night I saw something that would have made Ken Tremendous explode if the internet and FireJoeMorgan existed in 1934.

Baseball Reference highlights a player's stat from a given year if that player led his league, or both, in the statistics. 1934 jumped out at me because Gehrig led all of baseball in BA, OBP and Slugging, with a .363/.465/.706 line, good for an OPS+ of 208. (Before I go any further I feel I should mention that I'll turn into a puddle of warm goo if any one of the 2010 Yankees puts up an OPS+ of 208.) The reason this jumped out at me, aside from the fact that Lou was an absolute beast, is also because he came in 5th in the MVP voting in 1934.

Anyone who followed the MVP hunt this year knows how hard it is to lead baseball in all three batting slash stats. Harder still is leading baseball in those stats and not winning the MVP, or coming in some place in the voting that says you weren't even on writers minds, like, say, 5th, which is exactly what happened to Gehrig in 1934. Needless to say I took a closer look at his stats.

Please recall that I did this at about 1am, so I didn't notice two other stats from that season that Baseball Reference had highlighted: home runs and RBI. Gehrig led all of baseball in both in 1934 with 49 home runs and 165 RBI. I don't know how closely you're reading this post, but late last night my mind made the following calculation: "BA, home runs, + RBI ... Wait, the dude won the triple crown!"

And therein lies the hilarity. In 1934 Gehrig didn't walk, but stomped his way to the triple crown, leading all of baseball in home runs, RBI, BA, OBP and Slugging, and came in 5th in the MVP voting. If that happened this year a mob of angry bloggers would move from home to home tarring and feathering bad sports writers, whether they'd voted for Gehrig or not.

These are the results from the 1934 MVP voting:

1. Mickey Cochrane, Tigers - C - .320/.428/.412, 2 HR, 76 RBI, 437 AB

2. Charlie Gehringer, Tigers - 2B - .356/.450/.517, 11 HR, 127 RBI, 601 AB

3. Lefty Gomez, Yankees - P - 26 W, 5 L, 2.33 ERA, 1.133 WHIP

4. Schoolboy Rowe, Tigers - P - 24 W, 8 L, 3.45 ERA, 1.278 WHIP

5. Lou Gehrig, Yankees - 1B - .363/.465/.706, 49 HR, 165 RBI, 579 AB

6. Hank Greenberg, Tigers -1B - .339/.404/.600, 26 HR, 139 RBI, 593 AB

Guess who came in first and second place in the AL that year? Correct! The Indians followed by the Athletics! No, seriously it was the Tigers then the Yankees. Numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 on this list are all in the Hall of Fame. But none of this, and I mean none of it, justifies Gehrig coming in 5th. Here's how the voting should have looked:

1. Gehrig - All of the votes minus one

2. Greenberg - 1 vote (I love that the 2nd best player on the list came in 6th, by the way.)

I'm sure that I needed to have been alive in 1934 to appreciate just how much the defensively important Cochrane and Gehringer meant to that pennant winning Tigers squad. Without their intangibles, and Cochrane's hefty .412 slugging, Detroit may not have finished in 1st. Gehrig only led the Yankees to 94 wins in a 154 win season. Although his tangibles won him the triple crown and led baseball in OBP and Slugging along the way, he was lucky to have finished in 5th (FIFTH!) in the MVP voting because his poor baserunning that year (9 SB, 5 CS) easily cost the Yankees 11 wins.

I will leave you now with a list of all the players who have ever won the triple crown in a single season:

AL

Nap Lajoie

Ty Cobb

Jimmie Foxx

Lou Gehrig

Ted Williams (twice; number of times he won MVP those seasons: zero. You can't make this stuff up.)

Mickey Mantle

Frank Robinson

Carl Yastrzemski

NL

Hugh Duffy

Rogers Hornsby

Chuck Klein

Joe Medwick

Absent notables: Joe DiMaggio, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, ... you get the idea.

Anybody but the guy with the career .414 wOBA in pinstripes

In Joe's piece on A-Rod's press conference he points out that Anthony DiComo's article for MLB.com -- despite an epic postseason redemption -- still manages to undersell A-Rod, which is somewhat remarkable for a story titled "Much has changed for A-Rod in a year."

It seems that even when trying to write something positive about Alex Rodriguez the media just can't help but still take a dig at any opportunity. I hate to waste virtual ink on this -- especially as I've probably spent more time defending A-Rod in the last six years than just about any other Yankee-related topic -- but it still irks the hell out of me that these are the types of high-profile opinions, much as we wish this they weren't, that shape the public narrative and perception of A-Rod's career for those who cant be bothered to think for themselves or objectively evaluate his contributions.

The following bit in particular left me shaking my head in disgust:

"Pressure. Right. Remember that word? Pressure's the thing they wouldn't stop talking about back in the day -- not so long ago, before all the home runs and the helmet tosses and the pies in the face. A different A-Rod -- the old A-Rod -- might have crumbled beneath the pressure of last October, beneath the old Yankees expectations of victory. He might have cemented his legacy entirely the wrong way."

As we all recall, the postseason failures of 2004 through 2007 were obviously all A-Rod's fault (yes, I am being sarcastic). It was that damn pressure, and clearly had nothing to do with mediocre pitching staffs and historically bad defense.

Yes Anthony, "Old" A-Rod -- he of the .321/.421/.610 line and .438 wOBA in 2005 and .314/.422/.645 and career-high .449 wOBA in 2007, not to mention a .414 wOBA over his six-year Yankee career -- was the epitome of unclutch and the last person you could possibly want batting in a key situation in the playoffs. Additionally, despite being one of the best players in baseball during the last 14 years, the 2009 Yankees could never have won with the old, horrible, selfish, lousy, no-good stat-padding A-Rod on the team.

Thank goodness "New" A-Rod beat "Old" A-Rod to death with a clutch shovel, enabling the Ghost of Small Sample Sizes Past to show A-Rod how grim a Championship-less future would be for New York and infusing him with superhuman October baseball-playing ability the likes of which only David Ortiz was previously capable of.

And the bullpen, non-Mariano edition?

Offseason discussion this year has focused on hitting and starting pitching, which is as it should be. What's new, however, is that until the Yankees signed Chan-Ho Park virtually no attention had been paid to the bullpen. As recently as 2007 the team was so desperate for a reliable reliever that Joba Chamberlain was called up to the Majors early to stop the bleeding. This season the fanbase seems to take a solid bullpen as a given.

It's difficult not to credit Joe Girardi for the change. While Joe Torre was notorious for picking one or two relievers and then ruining their careers, Girardi prefers precisely the opposite. As a casual fan I first began noticing that he was rotating through all his relievers in mid-2008, right before Kyle Farnsworth was traded for Pudge Rodriguez. Mid-season Michael Kay began explaining that Farnsworth and Edwar Ramirez had both gone the equivalent of 9 innings without giving up a hit, and had therefore pitched no-hitters. Two things stood out to me about this. First, I noted that Michael Kay is a moron. Second, statistically he was right. I credited Girardi's commitment to keeping his relievers fresh, and giving everyone a chance to prove himself. But do the data play that out?

Here's the Yankee bullpen, from 2007, non-Mariano edition:

Luis Vizcaino - 4.30 ERA, 71.1 IP
Kyle Farnsworth - 4.80 ERA, 60.0 IP
Scott Proctor - 3.81 ERA, 54.1 IP
Brian Bruney - 4.68 ERA, 50.0 IP
Ron Villone - 4.25 ERA, 42.1 IP
Mike Myers - 2.66 ERA, 40.2 IP

40 innings pitched is an arbitrary cut-off, but it proves the point. Torre also got 70+ innings out of Mo that season. His bullpen therefore fell disproportionately on Mariano and Vizcaino, with some preference for Farnsworth, Proctor and Bruney (it's a wonder we clinched the Wild Card), but they definitely appear to be second choices. After Myers the workload on an individual reliever falls off considerably.

Now, let's look at the the Yankee bullpen from 2008, non-Mariano edition:

Jose Veras - 3.59 ERA, 57.2 IP
Edwar Ramirez - 3.90 ERA, 55.1 IP
Kyle Farnsworth - 3.65 ERA, 44.1 IP
Dan Giese - 3.53 ERA, 43.1 IP
LaTroy Hawkins - 5.71 ERA, 41.0 IP
Ross Ohlendorf - 6.52 ERA, 40.0 IP

The first thing that jumps out at me is that these guys suck. Only Ramirez is still in the Yankee system. The second thing that stands out is not entirely on screen. The workload is evenly distributed. Girardi preferred Veras and Ramirez (never good) but didn't overwork anyone. Unlike in 2007, in 2008 there was a steady diet of additional relievers who almost saw 40 innings: 6 with 30 innings pitched or more, in fact. In '07 Sean Henn saw 36 innings and Torre gave no one else the ball for 30 all season.

The difference in distribution is incredible. Girardi gave the ball to 12 different pitchers for at least 30 innings to get to Mo over the 2008 season. Torre gave it to 7 different pitchers for at least 30 innings. The Yankees had roughly the same aggregated innings and pitchers in '07 and '08. The team had 28 different pitchers in 2007 (Colter Bean anyone?) for 1,450.2 innings. In 2008 the team used 27 different pitchers for 1,441.2 innings. Therefore, Torre did in fact over use his preferred pitchers, relative to Girardi. There are roughly 150 innings that Girardi gave to five different arms that Torre more or less dumped on his top 7.

That difference alone may not explain the improved bullpen performance, but the numbers indicate that Girardi got better returns from the 'pen. With the exception of Ramirez, Girardi's top 4 guys outperformed Torre's across the board.

Girardi actually used the bullpen differently in 2009:

Phil Hughes - 3.03 ERA, 86.0 IP
Alfredo Aceves - 3.54 ERA, 84.0 IP
Phil Coke - 4.50 ERA, 60 IP
Sergio Mitre - 6.79 ERA, 51.2 IP
David Robertson - 3.30 ERA, 43.2 IP
Chien-Ming Wang - 9.64 ERA, 42.0 IP
Chad Gaudin - 3.43 ERA, 42.0 IP
Brian Bruney - 3.92 ERA, 39.0 IP

Including Bruney admittedly breaks the rule, but it was arbitrary and 39 innings is very close to 40. The pattern breaks a bit because the Yankees became spoiled for potential starters at the end of 2009. Hughes, Aceves, Mitre, Wang and Gaudin each made both relief and starting appearances. I'm too lazy to find a website that breaks out the numbers.

As a result, while Girardi continued to give the ball to a wide variety of relievers, that distribution was not as even as it was in 2008. Furthermore, Hughes established himself as a bridge to Mo with a starter's durability and Aceves earned the long-relief job. It's one thing to rely too much on a few relievers. It's another thing to have established jobs for outstanding performers and give them more innings so long as they're not being exhausted. I give Girardi the benefit of the doubt that he did the latter.

The 2009 list is pretty much the bullpen the team will have in 2010, minus Bruney, Coke (good riddance!) and Wang (good luck in D.C.) plus Park, whose AL relief value is an unknown. That's a list of guys who put up fine-looking numbers in 2009, and Sergio Mitre, who must have compromising pictures of someone in the Yankee organization.

The team is banking on repeat performances, particularly from Hughes, Aceves and Robertson. That same logic backfired last season. Veras and Ramirez started the season with high expectations and were run out of the Bronx. That fluctuation may explain, in part, why the team went after Park. If a solid bullpen couldn't keep it together from '08 to '09 why should it change its tendencies from '09 to '10?

For my part, I have faith in some but not all of our middle relievers. Hughes is the real deal, and I believe he'll be an excellent starter in a year or two. Robertson and Gaudin are young, and show real potential, particularly Robertson if his shoulder issues are ancient history. After that, I'm not convinced. I would not be surprised if Aceves, as much as I like him, turns out to be this year's Jose Veras and fails to recapture last season's magic. My opinion on Mitre is established and while I don't believe it would have been wiser to burn the $1.2 million rather than giving it to Chan-Ho Park ... you get the idea.

I'm therefore not convinced that the bullpen will look the same in April and July. Fortunately, over the smallest of samples, Girardi has already demonstrated that he can to find adequate relievers midseason.

What kind of contract can Carl Crawford realistically expect to get?

During the last few days we've heard some rumblings about the Yankees' apparent lust for free-agent-to-be Carl Crawford, hence why the team might not be that keen on a hypothetical Curtis Granderson/Brett Gardner flip-flop in the outfield, despite the fact that both offensively and defensively Curtis in left and Grit in center probably represents the most effective deployment of resources.

This got me thinking what kind of contract Carl Crawford might realistically expect on the open market next year. Is he a $10-$15 million/year player? A few years ago the answer might have been a resounding yes, but given teams' clear willingness to scale back on player salaries during the last two offseasons, one would hope his expectations might be somewhat tempered.

Additionally, how many teams aside from the Yankees are even going to be bidding on Crawford? The Red Sox won't need a new left fielder next year, and the Rays have seemingly already waved the white flag on resigning Crawford.

Let's take a quick look at Carl's OPS+, wOBA, UZR and FanGraphs dollar values since 2003, his first full season:










Crawford's certainly been a very productive left fielder in nearly every season of his career, and rebounded quite nicely last season after a rough, injury-riddled 2008 campaign. Also, according to UZR, Carl's defense is the tits.

Here's what the various projection systems have Carl wOBAing (probably not a legitimate conjugation, but whatever) in 2010:




Every system projects a regression from his near-career high .367 in 2009 -- which strikes me as a tad bearish for someone entering their Age 30 season -- but three of the four at least have Crawford bettering his career average. SG's CAIRO projection -- which tends to project slightly more favorable numbers than some of the others -- really surprised me here. SG just uploaded his latest projections, so perhaps there's a change in the methodology that I'm not seeing, but I'd think a lot would have to go wrong for Crawford to post a wOBA .09 points lower than his career average.

In any event, per FanGraphs Crawford has been worth well above $10 million annually in nearly every season of his career, not to mention nearly $25 million in 2009. Even if Crawford merely matches his career wOBA, the combination of his defense and speed will almost surely trigger an asking price of around $15 million/year if not more.

Is Crawford a $15 million/year player? I'm not so sure about that, but if you're the Yankees and you can get Crawford on a four-year deal for $15 million per, you probably have to do that. This is of course assuming he continues to produce at similar levels -- if he falls off a cliff this year then obviously this all gets thrown out the window.

Crawford will almost certainly want more than four, but teams don't seem to be interested in signing anyone other than the elite guys (Tex, Holliday, etc.) to significantly lengthy pacts, and I don't see the Yankees wanting to commit to any more than four years to a position player that's not one of the two best players at his position in the game.

Informed opinions on the 2010 Yankees

The bulk of my recent posts have criticized Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA projections for the 2010 season. In short, I don't agree. But, to paraphrase my sister, anyone can hate but it takes a real (stupid?) man to put it on the line. So, I'm putting my money where my mouth is and putting my personal projections for the 2010 Yankees on your screen.

Except, I'm stopping short of making precise predictions. I won't actually give exact number estimates of where I think a player will perform. Hence the title of this post, which took me a while to settle on.

There are many risks to making exact projections for anything, let alone baseball. Two come to mind quickly. First, it's pointless. If I say Derek Jeter will hit .325 and he hits .315 odds are come this November I'll brag that I nailed the projection, which brings me to the second risk. I would be correct in my assertion that because projections are never precise they are actually based on ranges. Statistics produce these ranges by design. PECOTA itself uses them. On the subscription portion of its site BP posts a full range of performance projections for a player and the corresponding probability they'll put up that level of performance.

I'm taking a low-tech approach to these numerically informed opinions on what to expect from the 2010 Yankees. Three things are used to make these projections: 1) A player's career performance, which is the best set of data anyone has to project a player's future performance. 2) A player's performance in the most recent season, which is the best indicator of whether a player is trending up or down. 3) Gut, which isn't so dangerous if numbers 1 and 2 are given the weight they deserve.

Without further ado ...

C
Jorge Posada

Rumors of Jorge's demise have been greatly exaggerated over the years. Is he old? You bet he is. Does he play a physically demanding position? Not well, but yes, technically he does play that position badly 130 games a year or so. Has he shown any signs of slowing down? No, he hasn't.

Jorge has posted the following OPS+'s in 2007 and 2009, his last full seasons: 153 and 133. Jorge did come down to Earth in 2008, but he was injured, played in only 51 games and still managed a .340 wOBA. Someday, perhaps soon, Jorge won't be able to catch for the Yankees, but next season is not the year. Posada has shown no reason to believe he is due for a precipitous drop off in 2010.

I expect Jorge to post plus or minus 5% of the following line in 2010: .277/.363/.480. This is a conservative projection. Those are his career batting average and slugging (each of which is lower than what he produced in 2009) and his 2009 OBP, which is lower than his career OBP.

1B
Mark Teixeira

Tex is going to have a monster year. Much has been made of the monster year Mark had in 2009. That's usually what happens when you lead the league in home runs (sorry, Carlos) and RBI. But a funny thing happened on the way to 39 bombs and 122 runners knocked in: Tex had his worst season since 2006.

A lot of this is splitting hairs. Tex has posted the following wOBAs in 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively: .406, .410, .402. I'll take any one of those seasons, and his drop off in '09 is statistical noise at worst. But it happened. Tex exceeded all expectations in 2009 but still posted his lowest BA, OBP and slugging of his last three seasons.

Based on that information I'm willing to suggest that Mark will improve on the .292/.383/.565 he posted in 2009. I'll stop short of trying to estimate the exact performance level, but I do believe he'll approach a .300 BA and a .400 OBP. He'll have a year in the Bronx under his belt, an entire season of A-Rod batting behind him and the pressure of winning a World Series lifted from his shoulders. If that's not worth 17 OBP points then what is?

2B
Robinson Cano

I don't believe Robbie will be as good in 2010 as he was in 2009. These are his seasonal wOBAs, in order: .337, .377, .358, .307 (yuck), .370.

Until 2009, Cano had gotten progressively worse each season since 2006, when he hit .342. I like Robinson, but I can't argue for the use of statistical trends when I feel a player on the Yankees is being sold short and then turn around and ignore those same arguments myself when they suggest a player on the Yankees will decline.

Here's what we know about Robbie: He has the sweetest swing on the bombers. He does not like playing in the cold and is possibly the slowest starter in baseball. He turns it on every year in the second half. His aggregate splits pre- and post-All Star break from '07-'09 are .276/.314/.426 and .329/.367/.534. Its like he's two different players, and only one of them is any good.

Until Robbie proves that he won't have a slow start to the season we have to assume he will. So long as he does have such volatility during the season he hurts his value and makes it difficult to project his performance. I'm comfortable arguing that he'll post somewhere between his career line of .306/.339/.480 and 5% below it, which is still excellent. Anything better is gravy.

3B
Alex Rodriguez

A-Rod's projections on other sites are all strong, but his injuries in '08 and '09 appear to influence them negatively. Prior to 2008 he had played in at least 148 games every season since 2000. He missed games in both '08 and '09 with leg injuries. Now that his hip is healed I'm willing to suggest that A-Rod will be back to his durable old self in 2010.

But I'm actually going to go one further and say that A-Rod will be superhuman again in 2010. The numbers suggest it. He seems to alternate bad (for him -- bad for him) to amazing season by season with the Yankees. In '04 his wOBA was .385 and in '05 it was .438. In '06 it was .391 and in '07 it was .449. If the trend had continued A-Rod would have competed for the MVP in '09, except he got hurt (and was still impressive). Over a full season in 2010 I believe he'll compete with Mauer for the MVP.

Numbers aren't the only reason I believe this. From watching A-Rod play I've come to believe that he DOES respond poorly to pressure. His 500th homer is an excellent example. The only time he went into a slump in '07 was when he was trying to get a hold of that one. Once it was in the rearview mirror he took off again.

The results are still amazing, but I do believe the pressure was diminishing his output. That pressure is gone. A-Rod has achieved the following:

1) He's proven he's clutch.
2) He's finally won the admiration of the New York fans (something he should have always had, but hey).
3) The steroids issue is out in the open and seemingly behind him.
4) He's dating A-listers and can hang with Jeter.
5) He won a ring.

Now that A-Rod doesn't have anything to worry about I'm predicting something along the lines of his 2005 campaign: 45+ homers, a ton of RBI, and a line around .315/.410/.625. You read it here first.

SS
Derek Jeter

Derek is another player on the Yankees whose demise has been incorrectly forecast, again and again. BP, for example, projects Derek to post a .298/.373/.432 on its website (it has published something different in its book), which would be better than 2008, but among his worst seasons ever.

I know many people who feel that Derek is going to put on another clinic in 2010 because it's a contract year. I actually don't believe this. For another player, sure, but not Jeter. He's one of the few athletes who I genuinely believe is motivated every season by his legacy and championships. The money is a lesser way to keep score, and not something he needs.

With that in mind, I'll take his career line of .317/.388/.459. He is a year older and unlikely to repeat his stellar 2009, but other projections seem to completely ignore the fact that other than 2008 he has hit at least .309 each season since 2005 and was injured in 2008. He's showed no signs of slowing down when he's healthy and could easily put up numbers that are better than his career averages.

LF
Brett Gardner

No 9th hitter has received more attention in the history of baseball. If this were any other team in any other situation everyone would shrug and move on. But it's the Yankees and Gardner is replacing Johnny Damon after Damon posted his best season in pinstripes.

No one knows what Gardner is going to do next season. He could hit .200. He could hit .300. This is his first full season as a starter. When Gardner did play last season he exceeded expectations, posting .270/.345/.379 and using his incredible speed to make up for his lack of power.

I happen to feel that Gardner will do just fine. For him, it's all about OBP. I predict a range of .325 on the low end to .365 if he really excels. Until there is more data I'm sticking with the broad range.

CF
Curtis Granderson

Here's one that BP gets right, although forecasting a comeback for Curtis Granderson in his first season in the Bronx is hardly going out on a limb. Here's what BP says in its book, according to RAB: .268/.351/.491 with 28 bombs. In his career he's averaged .272/.344/.484, so BP is doing something I hope they'd do more often: paying attention to what a player has done throughout his career.

RF
Nick Swisher

Swisher has played five full seasons in MLB, and posted the following wOBAs, in order: .331, .368, .361, .325, .375. There are two ways to look at these data. One way is to argue that in two of the 5 seasons he hasn't been very good. A better way to look at the data would be to argue that since his first season he's been consistent, with the exception of 2008, when his BABIP fell from .301 to .249, before bouncing back to .272 last year.

Although Swisher may not hit 29 homers again, he still figures to be solid in 2010. I think he'll post something between his career line of .245/.351/.460 and his 2009 line of .249/.371/.498. Along with Nick Johnson he'll infuriate pitchers, driving up their counts, knocking one out on a regular basis, and always playing his heart out.

DH
Nick Johnson

I'm far from the first prognosticator to say this, but the real question isn't whether or not Johnson will perform back in the Boogie Down but how long he will be able to perform. When he's healthy he's a perennial threat to post a .400 OBP. If he can get into at least 125 games I think we can expect his career line of .273/.402/.447, with more upside potential if he can adequately use the short porch in right. Hopefully the team keeps him healthy.

In the case of Johnson I also want to throw up a recommendation he hit 2nd. RAB did this far more justice than I ever could here, but in short they explain that Johnson annihilates fastballs, and the number 2 hitter in the lineup projects to see a lot of them. I want to put this in print because there may be an inclination to bat Granderson 2nd, since he has a similar game to Johnny Damon. Batting Curtis behind Jeter isn't a bad idea, but it's not as good an idea as putting Johnson there. He'll get better looks and his high OBP will give Tex and A-Rod many RBI opportunities. You don't bat a .400 OBP lower than 5th, and that's that.

SP

CC Sabathia

CC's season reminded me of Tex's. Was it great? You bet it was. Was it also his worst season in the past few years? Well, yeah. Since 2006, CC posted the following ERA+'s: 139, 141, 157, 127. I'll take any one of those four, but I'd still take them in an order and his 2009 127 ERA+ is my least favorite.

As with Tex, I believe CC is due for a monster year. First, he got off to a slow start in 2009, and has claimed he took a while to adjust to New York. That is over now, and in the 2nd half he was an absolute, unstoppable, MVP- (not Cy Young, MVP) caliber monster: 11-2, 2.74 ERA, .232 BAA.

I'll stop short of projecting that the slow-starting CC will put up that line for the whole season, but I do believe he'll put up something between an ERA of 3.00 and 3.25, with a WHIP around 1.10, both an improvement on 2009. And I'm also willing to argue that he could surprise on the upside. There's a lot of gut there, but he's saying all the right things.

SP

A.J. Burnett

BP is projecting a poor season from A.J., which is a big reason why the system projects the Yankees to fare so badly. But the poor projection is baseless. By now you may have realized that what BP published in its book is not what is currently on its website (I'll get to that) but this is what the website says A.J.'s ERA will be in 2010: 4.53. And from its book: 4.57.

The number of seasons that A.J. has posted an ERA above 4.50 and also started more than 15 games? Zero. A.J.'s 2009 ERA? 4.04. BP will probably argue that comparable players to A.J. have shown that kind of decline after pitching as many innings as he did in 2009. My counter is that A.J. has never -- read that word again, N E V E R -- been that bad and no player compares better to A.J. than A.J.

I think what we see with Burnett is what we get. Unhittable when he's on, regrettable when he's off, and difficult to predict, I anticipate A.J. will give us a repeat of his 2009, with an ERA around 4, many competitive performances, and the occasional nightmare.

SP

Andy Pettitte

BP doesn't like poor old Andy. From the website: 5.07 ERA. From the book: 4.70 ERA. Here's what Andy has done, each season, since 2006: 4.20, 4.05, 4.54, 4.16. He's been consistent, with only a slight decline in 2008. And he's been durable. He pitched his fewest innings over that stretch in 2009, putting up 194 during the regular season.

One argument for why Andy may post such a dramatic decline in 2010 is because his innings jumped to over 225 with the postseason. But Andy has had that kind of workload before. As recently as 2007 he pitched 215 innings, and pitched 214 in 2006. He did pitch more in 2009 through the World Series, but this wasn't some crazy increase on his old arm. BP is selling low on a durable, consistent pitcher, who continues to get batters out despite losing some velocity.

Andy is getting old, so it's reasonable to project that he'll get worse in 2010, but I find it hard to imagine worse means an ERA much higher than 4.30 for the season, with a repeat of 2009's 4.16 ERA very well possible.

SP

Javier Vazquez

Here's what Javier Vazquez has done while he's pitched in the AL:

2004 - 4.91 ERA

2006 - 4.84 ERA

2007 - 3.74 ERA

2008 - 4.67 ERA

2009 was his best season in the majors, but it looks like an outlier and happened in the NL. I don't think the Yankees wanted Vazquez because he's outstanding at keeping runs off the board.

Here's why they got him:

2000 - 217 IP

2001 - 223 IP

2002 - 230 IP

2003 - 230 IP

2004 - 198 IP

2005 - 215 IP

2006 - 202 IP

2007 - 216 IP

2008 - 208 IP

2009 - 219 IP

Those are CC numbers. The Yankees hurt their chances of repeating considerably if they don't have a reliable 4th starter who can be as much of a work horse as the big three were last season. Vazquez can do that, and he can do it well. I don't forecast an ERA under 3, or 4 for that matter. The numbers just aren't there, but I do believe an ERA of 4.15 is the high end of what to expect, while 220 IP is certainly possible. I could easily see him being more dominant, something to the tune of a 3.75 ERA. I'll give up Melky for that.

SP

Joba Chamberlain

Perhaps my real prediction is that Joba will win the 5th spot in the rotation. Frankly, I don't think it will be close, not because Joba is the best available pitcher, but because the Yankees will need starters who can put up innings more than anything else (particularly with their offense) and Phil Hughes isn't allowed to do that yet.

Joba was better before the All Star break than after it last year. In 89 pre-All Star innings Joba posted an ERA of 4.25, but a BAA of .282. In 68.1 IP after the break his ERA swelled by a run to 5.40 but his BAA actually fell to .263. Looking closer at the numbers, Joba had great months and awful months. He was great in April, June and July, posting ERAs of 3.13, 3.79 and 2.73, respectively. He was flat-out terrible in May, August and September, posting ERAs of 4.84, 8.22 and 7.15, respectively.

Did he get tired as the season wore on? Did yo-yoing his innings mess with his head as much as was reported? Is he just not cut out to start? No one knows, not even the Yankees, but for my part I believe that Joba tired as much as anything else, but still has what it takes as a starter. I think he'll demonstrate that in 2010, but mostly by being average. I predict an ERA of around 4.50 for the season, which should be good enough to keep that 5th spot.

RP

Phil Hughes

Normally I only dissect closers when I run these kinds of posts, but BP has been particularly hard on Phil, usually predicting an ERA above 4. We all know that he was considerably better than that in 2009, and I am positive he will be better than that in 2010, his problems in the postseason aside.

I think Phil will find himself in the majors (where he belongs), but in the bullpen due to his innings limit where his performance will be so outstanding that ill-informed fans will demand he stay in the 'pen when he clearly has starter's stuff. As the bridge to Mo I foresee Phil posting something like an ERA of 2.00.

CL

Mariano Rivera

BP is predicting that Mo will have his worst season ever. That, and I'm the next President of the United States because the data bear that one out just about as much as they demonstrate that Mo will have an ERA above 3.30, which BP has been projecting. Mo has posted an ERA under 2 for six of the last 7 years. He's shown some signs of declining velocity, but that hasn't translated into a worse performance. Despite this, BP is forecasting what their site refers to as a collapse, which in performs terms is precisely what it sounds like.

The argument would be that Mo is old and old pitchers ... collapse. The counter is that no one in the history of baseball has been better at getting a single better out (true fact), the numbers reflect it, and it's dangerous to predict a collapse without at least some kind of decline preceding it. Hasn't happened yet, and I'm going to say that it won't happen next season.

I believe Mo will be his traditional, unhittable self. I predict an ERA between 1.50 and 2.50, which is the range he's shown for his entire career. A few bad games could easily drive his ERA above 2, even though it has happened so rarely during his career. I certainly hope it doesn't, because then PECOTA will predict Mo to be Brad Lidge-esque in 2011.

In total, I forecast a super-strong offense from the Yankees. I truly believe they will have a stronger offense than last year's, resting mostly on improved performances from Tex and A-Rod. This, I believe, should drive them to 1st place, particularly because I'm not sold on the Red Sox offense.

I'm less enamored of our pitching. CC will be outstanding again, I'm certain, but after that I'm forecasting us to throw up a steady diet of solid but not spectacular pitchers. Notice that I don't forecast any of the other starters to have an ERA below 4.00. But I also don't think anyone will have an ERA much higher than 4.50 either, which is more than enough to get this offense where it needs to go.

A final note on BP: On February 20th BP updated its PECOTA projections again, forecasting the Yankees to win only 89 games and miss the playoffs. This is bothersome because it is, by my count, the 4th time they've updated their projections, but also because their projections now differ from what RAB is reporting they published in their book, here and here.

If I had purchased Baseball Prospectus 2010 I would be furious. The reason BP can get away with charging for this service is because it is meant to be accurate. However, updating it at least four times means that it is not accurate and BP knows it. Furthermore, the projections that go in the published book have to be the ones you go to war with. Now that BP has updated the site to no longer match its book I doubt it will mail an update to those who paid good money for the published projections, even though BP no longer stands by those projections.

Recalculating its projections again and again is sloppy, since it would not take much to put in the extra effort and hide the initial run-throughs from BP's readership. That BP recalculated the projections again after selling its book is inexcusable. Its no different than selling someone a novel, and then changing the ending later in the online version.

Yanks add Chan Ho Park to bullpen for some reason

I'd read the rumors last week about the Yankees' interest in Chan Ho Park, though I didn't think they'd actually bother to sign him. I'm not entirely sure what attracted the Yankees to Park, whose last stint in the AL was both half a decade ago and terrible.

Park seems to have reinvented himself as a somewhat serviceable reliever, posting an FIP of 3.49 for the Phillies last season, but I'm not sure Park brings anything to the table that the Yankees couldn't have gotten from an internal candidate.

Not that this has anything to do with anything, but Park pitched reasonably well against the Yanks in the 2009 World Series, notching three strikeouts in 3 1/3 scoreless innings over four appearances. I guess given the nominal amount of money ($1.3 million) and general volatility of relievers the Yanks hope they luck into a helpful bullpen piece.

The Hiroshima Carp are my favorite squadron

While perusing MLBTR, I came across a mention of Japanese baseball club The Hiroshima Carp. Eager to find out more, I promptly Googled the Carp to see if they had a sweet- and or crazy-ass logo a la many a minor league team, but instead came across this gem of a team information page. Truly, this has to be the most honest description of a professional baseball franchise on the Internet.

To wit:

"Partly owned by the City of Hiroshima and Toyo, a car manufacturing company, the Carp may be one of the poorest ball clubs in Japan. Because the team reportedly has a low salary benchmark above which it refuses to go, the Carp tend to rarely negotiate with free agents or sign high-priced foreign players."

So the Carp are the Japanese Pittsburgh Pirates.

"Bored with pitchers' duels? Enjoy watching a lot of action and home runs? If so, the Hiroshima Carp are your team. Hiroshima's sluggers take advantage of their home ballpark's shallow outfield walls."

Everyone knows baseball fans hate pitchers duels. "Who wants to see me hit some dingers?"

"The shallow outfield fences make this the best park for fans seeking to catch a home run ball. This is a cozy old-fashioned ballpark for you to enjoy...but bring your own food, there's not much to select from at the park."

Could you imagine a Major League Baseball team imploring you to bring your own food to the game? Why would the Carp's ownership deliberately implement poor concession stands? I guess the Japanese don't care to eat their faces off at baseball games, unlike their American counterparts.

"Why the team picked a Philadelphia Phillie Phanatic-clone instead of a carp for a mascot remains a mystery. But fans don't seem to care. Filling Hiroshima Stadium, Carp fans come in one flavor: rabid. Possibly the most energetic in Japan, Hiroshima's cheering section repeats one hypnotic cheer for all their players. It's fun to watch and even more fun to join."

This is my favorite. Not only is the team named for a type of fish, but no one knows -- not even the team's rabidly insane fans -- why the team chose a mascot that, in addition to having absolutely nothing to do with carp, is eerily similar to the Philly Fanatic of all things. Amazing.

Johnny Damon signs with Detroit

The Tigers and Johnny Damon have agreed to a one-year $8 million deal. By most accounts Damon has signed for more money than the Yankees ever offered him for a single season, although he was originally looking for a longer contract.

Damon comes away from this looking like the typical modern professional athlete. He wanted as much money as he could get and got it, although it probably cost him a spot on a World Series contender in the process.

On the other hand, if you were as bad at your job as Tigers' GM Dave Dombrowski you would be fired. He had Curtis Granderson, a power hitting, left handed outfielder who is young and makes $5.5 million next year. He traded him for pennies on the dollar (thank you, by the way) so he could sign Johnny Damon, a power hitting, left handed outfielder who is old and will make $8 million next year. I'd rather have the money.

Tigers make an offer to Johnny Damon

Although it's not reporting the terms of the offer, ESPN.com is reporting that the Tigers have made an offer to Johnny Damon. In the same article it is also reported that the Atlanta Braves remain interested in Damon, but no further details are provided so the latter may only be speculation.

Yankee fans will be paying close attention to the size of any deal Damon signs. If Damon signs with the Tigers then Detroit GM Dave Dombrowski will be making an early push for being the Not GM of the Year. Dombrowski had young, affordable left-handed Curtis Granderson earlier this offseason. Now he may be about to replace him with old, greedy left-handed Johnny Damon.

A little insight into Posada's game-calling

Pardon me while I retch, as I can't say I ever thought I'd be using the word "insight" to refer to anything carrying Jon Heyman's byline, but I couldn't help but notice an interesting tidbit in his column on the state of the Yankees yesterday:

"There was a lot of chatter last year about some of the pitchers preferring to throw to a more defensive-oriented backup than Posada. But they've now won our World Series titles with Posada. The defensively adept Francisco Cervelli takes over the main backup spot for Jose Molina. My suggestion to A.J. Burnett in particular is to try to be like Sabathia: get over it and accept Posada's minor quirks (which allegedly are that he doesn't frame pitches as well as some and isn't quite as fast in adjusting to game-calling changes when there are runners at second)."

We've certainly heard plenty about Burnett's disinterest in throwing to Posada, but I'm not sure I've ever actually read what the specific reasons were behind this seemingly petty feud. As it turns out, it appears that Burnett does have somewhat valid concerns as far as Posada's defensive abilities. While no one's ever mistaken Jorge for a defensive whiz behind the plate -- and the framing pitch complaint does seem fairly silly -- an inability to adjust game-calling when there are runners in scoring position is pretty indefensible.

I love Jorge Posada and what he's meant to the Yankees during his entire career, but hopefully he can take responsibility for his perceived shortcomings this spring. Given how successful the Yankees have been in spite of Posada's apparent defensive ineptitude, it's scary to think how much better the team could be if he and Burnett can finally get on the same page.

You can't be serious

Readers of this site know that not too long ago Baseball Prospectus released its PECOTA projections for the 2010 end-of-season standings. While the CAIRO and CHONE projections had the Yankees finishing as the top team in all of baseball, BP originally forecast the Bombers to miss the playoffs entirely.

The Yankee blogosphere didn't let this slide even for one second, and SG from RLYW immediately found a flaw in BP's methodology and wrote about it. Over here at Yankeeist, we poured through BP's numbers and explained the flaws we saw here, here and here. (Many other blogs would have found this to be an onerous use of resources, but Yankeeist employs a crack team of statisticians.)

BP responded to the criticism and called mulligan, updating PECOTA not once, but twice. On the first update the Yankees wound up tied with the Red Sox atop the AL East. On the second update BP got with the program and put our boys back on top -- until recently.

It went by with little fanfare, but PECOTA has been updated for a 4th time! (FOURTH! We haven't even played a game or made a trade!) And, as if you couldn't see this coming, the Red Sox are now predicted to finish two games ahead of the Yankees, who are seen just squeaking by the Rays.

The BP projections bother me because no games are being played yet. As the season draws closer I'm becoming more anxious to see actual baseball, but I'm also becoming more and more hungry for a 1998-style defense of the 2009 title. BP is raining on my parade.

That's why I took a fine-tooth comb to their projections earlier. (For those who don't know, my first-ever post on Yankeeist took BP to task for missing badly on its projection of the 2009 Yankee offense.) Nevermind that it smells like a rat anytime a single projection system projects something different from all the others. I want to be supremely confident that the Yankees are going to win 120 games this season, at least until we go 14-17 in April. BP is a chink in my psychological armor.

BP's new standings can be found here, and with a subscription you can see their forecasts for the Yankees here. My biggest criticism with the projections at this point is that they've been updated 4 times. Which prediction is correct? Why so many updates?

Beyond that, perusing the numbers quickly, my previous comments stand. BP is bad at predicting superstars and aging players, and the Yankees have both. As a result, even though the 2009 team scored 915 runs BP projects the 2010 team to score 821 runs, nearly 100 fewer. That number seems low, but PECOTA is conservative (bad?) when it comes to offensive projections.

The real difference between the Yankees and Red Sox projections are their pitching staffs. PECOTA simply does not like some of our pitchers. Mariano Rivera is now projected to have a decent season (earlier projections have Mo putting up his worst ever numbers), but PECOTA is down on Andy Pettitte, A.J. Burnett and Phil Hughes. All three are projected to regress from last season; Pettitte is seen posting a 4.71 ERA. Joba Chamberlain, meanwhile, is seen having a solid season, but only pitching 138 innings. Javier Vazquez, on the other hand, is projected to be nearly as dominant as CC.

For my part, I believe the CHONE, CAIRO and MARCEL projections. Not only do I find BP's general status as an outlier hard to believe, but I also don't buy the level of regression they are predicting for so many Yankees. They forecast such regressions last year and got it wrong. When they get it right this team is pretty much over because the entire core four will have lost all its value. I'm not there yet. That said, all of this is just posturing until they start playing the games.

I'd make a joke about denial and Egyptian rivers but I'm afraid David Wright would take it too literally

Super-earnest, reality-shunning third baseman David Wright really, really believes in his lovable ragtag band of underachieving (and $150 million) misfits, also known as the 2010 New York Mets.

Despite the fact that their 2009 season was an unmitigated disaster. Despite the fact that they have no reliable pitching after Johan Santana, even though there were several opportunities to go out and upgrade the rotation this winter (where were the Mets on John Lackey, Rich Harden, Ben Sheets or even Chien-Ming Wang?) Despite the fact that they inexplicably resigned Alex (career .291 wOBA) Cora . Despite that they have no catcher and once again played pining, unrequited lovelorn geek to Bengie Molina's moderately attractive blonde cheerleader. Despite the fact that the players don't trust the front office with regards to injury treatment and rehabilitation. Despite the fact that the GM's continual employment lends further credence to the idea that anyone can be a general manager in Major League Baseball. Despite the fact that ownership built a cavernous new ballpark that helped contribute to the Majors' lowest home run total last year (the Mets managed to hit less than 100 home runs in 2009!)

Despite all of this, David Wright told reporters at Port St. Lucie yesterday that he feels pretty damn great about his team:

"Maybe from the outside looking in, there are some different expectations on us. But we feel like we're going to go out there and win the National League East and go deep in the playoffs and win the World Series."

Now obviously I wouldn't expect anyone -- except perhaps a Pirate or a Royal -- to proclaim their upcoming season a lost cause on the very first day of Spring Training. But predicting a World Series victory? After your archrivals just won the National League pennant and traded for the best pitcher in baseball? After nearly every team in your division went out and improved themselves over the winter, even the Nationals? After you mostly stood pat during the winter save throwing a boatload of money at a reluctant and defensively-challenged Jason Bay, who won't post anywhere near the numbers he did while playing in the Boston bandbox?

Frankly, I hope part of Wright's prediction comes true. I would love to see the 2010 Mets somehow turn up as the 2010 Yankees' opponent in a Subway Series rematch this October.

Let the (spring training) games begin

As far as I'm concerned this is the actual first day of 2010. My new year doesn't begin until the baseball season begins. In the past I've ignored spring training, but I'm more excited for this season to begin than I've ever been before, so any real baseball is good baseball as far as I'm concerned. Defending the World Championship obviously contributes to that feeling, as well as the Yankees' slew of excellent offseason moves adding to the anticipation.

2010 also promises to be what 2009 wasn't. Along with 1996 and 1998, 2009 will go down as one of the three best Yankee seasons of my lifetime to date (Ed. note: Me too) but the season took the road less traveled to get to its goal. After the Bombers missed the postseason in 2008, 2009 began shaping up as a season of immediate promise. When the Yankees signed Mark Teixeira, stunning the baseball universe, 2009 became my most anticipated baseball season. I couldn't wait for the games to begin.

Then, disaster struck, twice. Nothing has ever taken the wind out of my sails as much as learning of A-Rod's steroids scandal. I don't actually care much if a player takes steroids or not, so long as he isn't caught, but 2009 was meant to be a pure tour-de-force of baseball dominance. I knew that A-Rod's saga would bring unwanted attention to a team that had to perform. After all that money had been spent, only a division crown and at least a six-game ALCS would do. Learning that Alex would miss the start of the season just poured salt on an open wound.

Suddenly 2009 had gone from being the baseball season I'd anticipated most to something that looked like the next chapter in an ongoing saga of Yankee dysfunction. And, while it's easy to overlook now, the Bombers responded in kind. Mark Teixiera and CC Sabathia got off to slow starts and the team was below .500 through May, and then A-Rod finally returned.

The rest, of course, is history. Rodriguez did come back. Tex and CC found their strides (and then some!) and the team played nearly as dominantly as any baseball team ever has in the second half of the season. The Yankees won their 27th title, certainly exceeding my expectations.

But for me, something was lost. (Right now a Kansas City Royals fan is reading this, stunned to learn that this Yankee fan wanted something more from the 2009 season, and furiously trying to figure out where I live.) I wouldn't change a thing about 2009, but I had expected it to be a season of out-and-out dominance. It wasn't, at least not in the first half. The Yankees gave us a bit of a roller coaster ride. In addition to the A-Rod soap opera, the team also gave us such gems as losing two of 3 to the Nationals and their first eight against the Red Sox.

2010 has replaced 2009 as the Yankee season that I hope will bring me the dominance of old. 2009 restored the Yankees to the top of baseball, and set the stage for what could be a new dynasty, but fell just short of owning the rest of baseball outright. 2010, on the other hand, opens with no drama (yet ... I'm frantically knocking on wood right now), and quite a bit of excitement, including new players, a battle for the fifth spot in the rotation, and the potential to be a juggernaut squad.

What I love most is that I get to have a front row seat. The Yankees could once again play .450 ball in April and shatter my illusion, but right now anything is possible and the fun is only just beginning.

If the Orioles' entire schedule consisted of games against Boston they would go 0-162

Since it came up in the comments of this morning's post, I thought it'd be fun to take a look at just how awful Baltimore has been against Boston since the unbalanced schedule was introduced in 2001:














Two-and-sixteen last season. That is absolutely and utterly shameful.

Additionally, the Orioles have had exactly one winning campaign against the Red Sox in the last nine years, and even during that year they still lost to Boston nine times. I wonder if any other team in Major League Baseball sports a winning percentage against another team over the past nine seasons that is worse than .353?

Basically, if you are the Red Sox you can pretty much expect that Baltimore will contribute to more than 10% of your season victory total in any given year (and 17% last year!). Thank you, Orioles.

Stories like these warm the cockles of my cold, cold heart

We're still one day away from the official start of Spring Training, and already reports of Yankees showing up to camp early are coming in. And thank goodness, because another morning of Goddamn snow in New York today is about a million percent not what the doctor ordered.

According to AM New York -- which doesn't appear to post its sports stories online because they are mostly an amalgamation of (behind the pay wall) Newsday pieces, and so I don't have a link -- Curtis Granderson, A.J. Burnett, Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Alfredo Aceves, Boone Logan and Chad Gaudin are already in camp.

Burnett really sticks out to me more than anyone here. Everyone else in that group of pitchers is young and has no guarantees, each hoping to establish themselves in a particular role with the team. Burnett is the owner of an $82.5 million contract as well as the #2 slot in the rotation, not to mention a newly minted World Champion. Yet he's already down in Tampa working out.

For better or for worse, I've long been a Burnett fan, and was more than on board with his signing last year, as divisive as it was. As Yankee fans in 2009 we all witnessed his enigmatic mixture of struggles and outright dominance, perhaps best underscored in a postseason in which he ranged from pretty good to horrible to flat-out brilliant.

I think Burnett is poised for a breakout year in pinstripes. While it's somewhat hard to quibble with a 106 ERA+, I can argue with a 4.33 FIP. I expect more from our #2 starter, and Burnett has the stuff to be a better pitcher than that. Burnett's always had difficulty harnessing his electric repertoire, but given that he already has a year in New York under his belt -- a year in which he won the World Series -- I expect very good things from A.J. this season. I don't think a sub-4.00 FIP is out of the question.

Eliminating All-Star Games

I've felt this way for sometime, but let me now state for whatever posterity exists online that the All-Star Game in every American sport needs to be eliminated. These exhibition games are a waste of time.

The NBA All-Star Game hits this home the hardest. This is meant to be the NBA's flagship annual event, so much so that this year's game is being played in front of the largest audience in NBA history. If that's the case then the NBA's dire financial situation should come as a surprise to no sports fan. It's a big enough problem as it is when your largest showcase is something other than your league's championship, but you're throwing gasoline on the fire when that event is boring, and last night's game was boring ... like really boring.

Some readers may argue that last night's game wasn't boring because it was close. I counter that it was boring because - and this is only one of three possible examples - Deron Williams cared so little about the game in which he was playing, for the first time in his career, that he LOST TRACK OF THE SCORE and put Dwyane Wade on the line with a tie game winding down. The players care so little that Williams' foul wasn't even the only stupid play that took place at the end of the game.

And that's the major problem with All Star games. No one cares. The fans don't care. I consider myself to be as big a sports fan as you'll find anywhere. I care so little about these exhibitions that I would rather they not be played. I'll wager that most serious sports fans are at best indifferent to All Star games and at worst willing to join me in circulating a petition to end them. The owners probably don't care, and certainly don't want their investments getting hurt. That leaves the players, and they positively do not care because, and I'll go out on a limb here, Deron Williams has never forgotten the score in the last thirty seconds of a tie game that counted in the standings.

It's the same in all the major sports I follow (it's possible that the NHL All-Star Game is the single greatest event in all of human sport but I wouldn't know, and frankly I don't want to know). The games are boring because they are not consequential. Baseball now becomes the worst offender because granting home field advantage in the World Series to the All-Star Game's winner has not added consequence to the All Star game, and instead has sparked controversy.

If the leagues want to give their players some time off in the middle of their seasons then they should do that. If they also want to recognize the players who are having the best seasons at the halfway point, then do that too. But, for the love of god, stop subjecting sports fans to half-hearted exhibition games that feature NO DEFENSE AT ALL and a bunch of hung-over multi-millionaires. If they must be played then give all the All Stars on the winning team a million dollars each. Deron Williams would know the score then.

One of the busiest men in the business just got busier

And thankfully, it's to our collective benefit. For you see, as if routinely spilling thousands of words educating us in on the intricacies of advanced statistics, discovering that Derek Jeter has more power to right than the best player in baseball and the most comprehensive analysis of Phil Hughes' pitching arsenal I've ever seen (not to mention authoring my favorite post of the offseason) wasn't enough, RAB's tireless Joe Pawlikowski is now writing for FanGraphs.

Take a moment to not only read his inaugural post, but enjoy the fact that one of the top Yankee analysts in the game has joined the top baseball analysis site on the web. And just in time for Valentine's Day, to boot!

Different players, different outcomes

Former Yankees Chien-Ming Wang and Johnny Damon have been making contract news lately, but in different directions. Damon is still unemployed, and while it's rumored that the Braves have sent him an offer and that he's been coveting the Tigers, it is also said that he continues to hold out for a two-year deal that may never come. Wang, on the other hand, may have a team shortly, probably landing with the Nationals, but also perhaps the Dodgers. The details of Wang's pending deal are not being discussed (as far as I'm aware) but I'll go out on a limb and project that it will be for one year, and not a lot of money.

It's amusing to see that Wang, not Damon, is close to having a new home. At season's end, the day after the World Series, any Yankee fan would have predicted the opposite. Damon had completed a 126 OPS+ season (his best ever) and broke out of a slump in the ALDS to become a major contributor in the World Series. Wang, on the other hand ... well he was just awful. He started the season posting numbers so bad they belonged in a comic book (I was at that 22-4 game! Editor's note: Me too.) before going back on the DL. Just when he was regaining his form, he hurt his shoulder, an injury that scares many teams away from young pitchers.

Wang can be an amazing pitcher when he's healthy, which is probably a large part of why he is attracting interest. Teams can always use another pitcher (except the Yankees, who have like nine possible starters), so Wang is a logical gamble. If he regains even some of his 2008 and earlier form then any team that signs Wang wins big.

The way these two players have comported themselves are also factors in the way their offseasons are playing out. Johnny Damon was supposed to remain in pinstripes. The team wanted him. He wanted them. But greed is not good, no matter what Michael Douglas says. Fans may instinctively blame Damon's agent, Dracula ... sorry, Scott Boras, but Johnny's a big boy. It's his responsibility to know when his agent understands what's best for him, or not. Damon wanted another dumptruck full of money. His ego and greed are the reason he's still unsigned. Damon is too good of a player to remain out of baseball in 2010, but Yankee fans everywhere are curious to see what deal the outfielder eventually signs.

Wang, on the other hand, announced he was just going to go about his business. He didn't make a fuss when the Yankees parted ways with him. He didn't rush to try to get another contract. Instead, he said he was going to focus on his rehab, and wait and see. As a result, teams seem to be coming to him. Wanting to play professional baseball, and not greed, appears to motivate him. I'll be rooting for him to regain his form in the NL.

My money's on Mitre

I know the Yankees don't want either of their young stud pitchers resting on their laurels or assuming they are being handed a rotation spot, but why even bother telling people the 5th slot in the rotation is an open competition between Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Chad Gaudin, Sergio Mitre and Alfredo Aceves?

Every single person in America knows the spot is Joba's or Phil's to lose, and frankly if somehow Mitre came away from Spring Training the winner of this particular contest the Yankees would have a serious problem on their hands.

The dark days didn't used to be this way

The passing of the Super Bowl is like Groundhog Day for me. You know that glorified rat isn't going to bring warm weather, no matter what he sees. We're stuck in the middle of February no matter how you slice it. In the case of the Super Bowl, it's the last distraction before coming to terms with having no baseball until April. Consider this my sports purgatory.

In case the fact that I spend much of my time posting on a Yankees blog wasn't confession enough already, allow me to admit happily that I am a first-degree baseball junkie. During the regular season I watch or listen to at least part of every single Yankee game - loving each minute.

For example, this is an actual exchange that I had with a girl I'd been seeing for a couple of months this past summer, during the June 14th shellacking the bombers gave the Mets:

Her: Is this game really that much more interesting than our conversation?

Me: Yes.

Did I mention I believe my passion for baseball may have something to do with my current status as single?

Watching football from November through January isn't as much fun for me as watching baseball, but it helps soothe the absence I feel. I enjoy the sport. I would enjoy it more if they played every day and didn't have a clock determine who won so many of the games -- you know, if it were more like baseball -- but I do enjoy it.

Once the football season ends I'm left with nothing, except free time to contemplate the life decisions I've made that turned me into the kind of person who tells a beautiful woman she's not as interesting as a 15-0 ball game in June. (In my defense, she wasn't very interesting, and we were lighting up Johan Santana.)

The worst part, though, is that my life didn't used to be this way. There was a time when my sports schedule was perfect. In November, just when the Yankees were ending, the Knicks were beginning. (And in April, just when the Knicks were choking away their season, the Yankees were beginning.) It may seem like a long, long ... long time ago, but the Knicks were good once, and people cared about the outcomes of their games.

My love of the Knicks, although a distant second to my love of the Yankees, was more than enough to get me through the dark months of winter. They never had the Yankees' history, and the team always had a penchant for losing in the most gut-wrenching fashion possible, but they had heart, and a cast of lovable characters to follow. Sure, the Knicks always played the part of the Red Sox in their feud with the Bulls, but the team was relevant, and it gave me something to enjoy watching every second or third night of the week in March.

Today I struggle to watch basketball at all. I need a team to follow or I rapidly lose interest in a sport. It's not just that the Knicks are awful, or that they are one of a handful of criminally run sports franchises, it's also that they have systematically avoided drafting or signing a single interesting player in a decade. My respect for basketball makes it impossible for me to be excited about David Lee or Danilo Gallinari, while my loyalty to my team forces me to remain a Knicks fan, just interested enough to know what's going on with the team, but not wanting to punish myself into watching their games on a regular basis.

Once upon a time I had a perfect sports schedule: the Yankees in the summer, Knicks in the winter, and the Giants on Sundays (after November, of course). Today, now that the football season is over I can only wait, and hate the man responsible.

What's next, a trade for Juan Rivera?

It appears we've misread Brian Cashman's intentions all along. Apparently the Yankee GM's goal for this offseason hasn't just been to improve the 2009 champs, but to reacquire every twentysomething that played for the team in 2003-2004. Any chance you can undo the Jeff Weaver deal while you're at, Cash?

Kidding aside, I like the signing of former Yankee farmhand Marcus Thames to a minor league deal. I mean, what's not to like about it? It's a pittance for the hope that perhaps Thames can regain some of the form that made him a .370 wOBA player for the 2006 Tigers in 348 at-bats. That may be a lot to ask for a part-time player with a career .306 OBP, but given that all the Yanks need is for Thames to be a viable bat off the bench, it's a fine gamble. I certainly like this move better than the signing of the bastard lovechild of Alvaro Espinoza and Wil Nieves.

Additionally, as The Fowl Balls notes, Yankee fans now get to re-experience the untold pleasures of having Michael Kay and John Sterling remind us that Thames hit a home run off Randy Johnson on the very first Major League pitch he saw every single time Thames comes to the plate in 2010. So there's that, too.

I don't know whether to be elated or terrified

With yet another major projection system not only predicting the Yankees to repeat as AL East champs, but essentially eviscerating the competition in doing so -- at least, as much as one can eviscerate a division featuring three potential 90-plus game winners -- it's easy to be optimistic about the team's fortunes in 2010. Of course, as with any projection system pretty much everything would have to fall right for the retooled, reloaded and presumably upgraded Yankees to blow past 95 wins. Still, better this than being predicted to finish in third place and out of the playoffs.

In other random baseball news, Bill Madden might be the only person in America who doesn't know that Kenny Williams is one of the most dreadful GMs in the game, inexplicably giving the man who traded Nick Swisher for Wilson Betemit props this offseason for his acquisition of Mark Teahen and awful Juan Pierre.

Matt and EJ at The Yankee U had an interesting back-and-forth about what the Yankees should do with Phil Hughes in 2010.

Fack Youk posted an analysis of the roles John Lackey and Javier Vazquez will be playing for the Red Sox and Yankees this season.

And obviously I don't need to sell anyone who reads this site on the awesomeness of RAB, but Ben, Joe and Mike just continue to bring it day in and day out during an excruciatingly long offseason, with high-level micro analysis on just about any and every aspect of the Yankees you can think of. One of my favorite pieces from last week was Mike's look at Nick Johnson and his creamoloshing of fastballs, and how he should be seeing a ton of 'em from the two-hole.

Don't look now but here come the Twinkies

Several folks far more talented than me have already pointed this out, but on the heels of the Orlando Hudson signing suddenly the 2010 Twins are starting to look very good.

I greatly enjoyed breaking the Twins down for the 2009 ALDS, but time we'll do a quick-and-dirty look at what I assume is a potential lineup using wOBA (though I have no idea who'll they use at 3B; I'm just going to use Brendan Harris because he seemed to get a hit against the Yankees every time in the DS, therefore he must be awesome):













They may not quite be the 2010 Yankees (whose Bill James average wOBA for the starting nine is .372), but that's a pretty potent lineup, even if it does fall off some in the bottom third. And considering Hardy posted a .355 wOBA in 2008 and is only 27, he seems like a reasonable bet to top a projection of .325. If only the Twins could land themselves a real third baseman, they could really lay waste to the AL Central.

Additionally, the rotation is rounding into form rather well. If Francisco Liriano can recover some of the form that made him one of 2006's nastiest pitchers, they'll have a pretty solid 1-5 (I can't believe I'm including Carl Pavano in that statement). Here are your FIPs:









Speaking of good starting pitching, the Mariners could have the scariest front three in the league if Erik Bedard comes anywhere close to regaining his Baltimore form:






The James projections seem a bit harsh on the King and Lee -- Lee in particular seems highly unlikely to gain 0.61 points of FIP. I wouldn't be surprised if all three of those guys wound up with FIPs under 3.50 at the end of the year, which is absurd.