2010 Brett Gardner Performance Thread [Archive] - Page 2

CommerceComet

04-15-10, 08:19 AM

I've said this before and been laughed off of these boards, but where's the mandate that says the Yankees MUST have an All-Star at every position? Sure, you'd like to see your corner outfielders have a bit more power...but when you're sending up a guy that's going to hit north of .270 w/ an OBP of more than likely north of .350 that's going to steal bases, set the table for the top of the lineup, and 7play his position exceptionally, that's quite a contribution. Shop that player to 85-90% of the other M.L. teams and see who signs up.I don't think anyone really believes that we have to have an All-Star at every position but what's wrong with trying to improve every position on the team?

Nothing is wrong with the Brett Gardner you've described except that we haven't seen that Brett Gardner for any extended period of time. The problem with young players is that not all of them meet the expectations set out for them. If they always met expectations, we wouldn't have a LF problem as it would probably be patrolled by Ricky Ledee who would be winding down his border-line HOF career.

stazsanity

04-15-10, 08:24 AM

I don't think anyone really believes that we have to have an All-Star at every position but what's wrong with trying to improve every position on the team?

Nothing is wrong with the Brett Gardner you've described except that we haven't seen that Brett Gardner for any extended period of time. The problem with young players is that not all of them meet the expectations set out for them. If they always met expectations, we wouldn't have a LF problem as it would probably be patrolled by Ricky Ledee who would be winding down his border-line HOF career.

I was horrendously murdered in the 2009 Gardner thread for making the same point you just made... my main argument is that he should be given said extended period of time to prove himself...I don't think there's anyone out there that wouldn't argue prior to breaking his thumb last year, he was really hitting his stride...I value the dimension he adds to this team and it's just my opinion that the major reason for the overwhelming criticism that's surrounded him has been his lack of filling up a box score, when his true value will never be full realized by baseball traditionalists that simply rely on AVG/HR/RBI to determine "who is good" and "who is no good." And again, just my opinion, but I think that given the opportunity (which the Yankees appear willing to do this year) he can make his impact with the aforementioned characteristics.

R.V.47

04-15-10, 08:26 AM

OPS will never be an accuraete tool to evaluate Brett Gardner's value to this team... his game has nothing to do with slugging percentage... as long as he keeps his OBP north of .350 (hence, getting on base 1/3 of the time) he's doing his job. With his speed and ability to run the bases, combined with a 12.7 and 7.2 UZR in his first two seasons in the majors respectively, he'll be more than adequate as a 9 hole hitter and above average defender. After all, his chief responsibility to this team is finding a way on base and setting the table for the top of the lineup.

I've said this before and been laughed off of these boards, but where's the mandate that says the Yankees MUST have an All-Star at every position? Sure, you'd like to see your corner outfielders have a bit more power...but when you're sending up a guy that's going to hit north of .270 w/ an OBP of more than likely north of .350 that's going to steal bases, set the table for the top of the lineup, and 7play his position exceptionally, that's quite a contribution. Shop that player to 85-90% of the other M.L. teams and see who signs up.

I agree with you totally that Gardner is more than serviceable in LF considering the kind of offense we have in the rest of the lineup, and he can hold his own at the plate. However, the yankees are always looking to get the best out of every position so I wouldnt be surprised at all if we see Gardner replaced either by mid season or next season.

JavyVazquezIsSick

04-15-10, 08:42 AM

I couldn't care less as to whether he SLGs or not.

OldYankeeFan

04-15-10, 09:05 AM

This is misleading. OPS undervalues Gardner. He has a career 93 wRC+. This means for his career, he's been 7% below average. That's fine for an elite defender.I agree, especially given the fact his wRC+ his first year up was 69 and he improved on that significantly with a wRC+ of 107 last year. In addition, stats really don't measure the chaos he creates when on base. Like when was wearing Papelbon down physically and mentally just by being on base, inducing a pitchout (giving Jeter a free ball) that eventually led to a full count walk, got Papelnon out of the game as he went on to score an important insurance run giving Mo a 2 run lead.

As long as Gardner is cost controlled and giving us anywhere around a wRC+ of 100 he's not going anywhere.

Alan Slocum

04-15-10, 10:24 AM

something tells me stats won't rule the day for gardner, meaning i think he'll have to hit with a little more consistency and punch if he wants to stick 7/31.

if you saw him hit yesterday, what was your non-statistical impression ??
My impression is the boy is in trouble. His approach sucks. What happened to all that work he did over the winter on his bunting? How many bunt hits does he have so far? How many attempts? If he has less than ten attempts at this point, Mr Long needs to get involved. I know he is real busy with Tex right now, but Gardi needs a clue.

THEBOSS84

04-15-10, 10:30 AM

Alan Slocum

04-15-10, 10:43 AM

Gardner started 6 games. You think he should have 10 bunt attempts at this point?
If he worked on it all winter, why not? With his wheels, if he can lay down any kind of decent bunt, he will beat out half of them. Once he is on base, that is where he yields his greatest value to the team. They will have to start playing the infield in to defense it, and that won't hurt him any when he does hit away. I don't care if the guy hits an HR the entire year, but I want those bunt singles.

OldYankeeFan

04-15-10, 10:48 AM

My impression is the boy is in trouble. An elite defender who was better than league average offensively last year with a wRC+ of 107 and he is in trouble after starting 6 games? And Gardner needs a clue?

I too would like to see some bunts but he is NOT in trouble.

stazsanity

04-15-10, 10:54 AM

My impression is the boy is in trouble. His approach sucks. What happened to all that work he did over the winter on his bunting? How many bunt hits does he have so far? How many attempts? If he has less than ten attempts at this point, Mr Long needs to get involved. I know he is real busy with Tex right now, but Gardi needs a clue.

Through 7 games, Brett Gardner has registered 27 total plate appearances....you wanting him to have attempted bunts in over a third of them may be one of the more absurd notions I've read this year...

Needless to say part of a "bunt for base hit's success" at the M.L. level is going to be the element of surprise; provided the fact that most M.L. teams have advanced scouting representatives that know very well Brett's key asset is his speed, I'll go as far as to say regardless of situation or circumstance, every time he comes to the plate, Brett can bet on seeing the 3rd and 1st basemen in on the grassline.

Having said that, an attempt or two would have been nice to see at this point if, in fact, he did spend as much time working on his bunting as he claims that he has...but let's be realistic. Just because it works in your video game does not mean it's going to work in actual M.L. games.

Alan Slocum

04-15-10, 11:05 AM

An elite defender who was better than league average offensively last year with a wRC+ of 107 and he is in trouble after starting 6 games? And Gardner needs a clue?
I like Gardi and want him to be the LF full-time, but where did the elite defender notion come from? I suppose there may be stats to support it, but he gun is average at best. He does cover ground really well.:D

Unfortunately, Gardi will not have a long leash. Its not just the results, but the approach. He needs to get it going before Girardi replaces him.

Yankee Tripper

04-15-10, 11:17 AM

I still hope he becomes Brett Butler v 2.0. There are a lot of similarities in thier game, including decent walk rates for guys w/o power. Butler was a far superior bunter to Gardner but Gardner is a better base stealer. Butler laid down a bunt in roughly 5% of his PA to Garnders ~4% but Butler was also a .485 hitter when he laid one down (185/381) and was also excellent at the sac bunt (103). Garnder is just 2/9 on bunt attempts with 9 sacs. Still a small sample. But to suggest Gardner should be laying one or two down every game is nutty.

Willie Teveras is a bad comp for Gardner both because he is right handed and he rarely if ever walks but it is interesting to note that the only time he ever hit over .291 was the season where he hit .320 and was when he was an amazing 37/52 on bunts (.712!) with 7 sacs. His 59 PAs bunting were 14.4% of his PA or once every 6.9 PAs. He basically tried to put a bunt down every other game.

False1

04-15-10, 11:22 AM

I like Gardi and want him to be the LF full-time, but where did the elite defender notion come from? I suppose there may be stats to support it, but he gun is average at best. He does cover ground really well.:D

Unfortunately, Gardi will not have a long leash. Its not just the results, but the approach. He needs to get it going before Girardi replaces him.Do LFers register more outs with their glove or with their arm? His arm is more than adequate for LF. His range is SICK.

JSG

04-15-10, 11:29 AM

Unfortunately, Gardi will not have a long leash. Its not just the results, but the approach. He needs to get it going before Girardi replaces him.

i think he will have a reasonably long leash, if only because we don't have better options. thames' D isn't great, isn't a full-timer in any case, and winn looks worse than gardner at the plate. my guess would be, if he doesn't hit better, they'll just platoon more and keep an eye open for 7/31.

stazsanity

04-15-10, 11:31 AM

CommerceComet

04-15-10, 11:37 AM

I was horrendously murdered in the 2009 Gardner thread for making the same point you just made... my main argument is that he should be given said extended period of time to prove himself...I don't think there's anyone out there that wouldn't argue prior to breaking his thumb last year, he was really hitting his stride...I value the dimension he adds to this team and it's just my opinion that the major reason for the overwhelming criticism that's surrounded him has been his lack of filling up a box score, when his true value will never be full realized by baseball traditionalists that simply rely on AVG/HR/RBI to determine "who is good" and "who is no good." And again, just my opinion, but I think that given the opportunity (which the Yankees appear willing to do this year) he can make his impact with the aforementioned characteristics."Horribly murdered" and "laughed off the boards"? Maybe you are a little too-thin-skinned for this forum? I enjoy hearing what people are saying but a lot of times, I don't give a crap what they think. We're all probably frustrated GM-wannabees whose opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.

Gardner was becoming quite productive before he broke his thumb but I've seen enough "can't miss" players miss that I'm careful reading too much into a hot few weeks. Gardner is going to get his chance now but the Yankees won't be real patient with him (because they seldom are). If Gardner projected into the next Mickey Mantle, the Yankees would exhibit a lot of patience but not for someone who has as a low ceiling as Gardner.

flymick24

04-15-10, 11:52 AM

without looking at any splits whatsoever and just going on my memory, i'm pretty sure gardner has been brutal against kazmir in the past (like almost all K's in all his ABs), so expect to see thames tonight

stazsanity

04-15-10, 11:56 AM

"Horribly murdered" and "laughed off the boards"? Maybe you are a little too-thin-skinned for this forum? I enjoy hearing what people are saying but a lot of times, I don't give a crap what they think. We're all probably frustrated GM-wannabees whose opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.

Gardner was becoming quite productive before he broke his thumb but I've seen enough "can't miss" players miss that I'm careful reading too much into a hot few weeks. Gardner is going to get his chance now but the Yankees won't be real patient with him (because they seldom are). If Gardner projected into the next Mickey Mantle, the Yankees would exhibit a lot of patience but not for someone who has as a low ceiling as Gardner.

around this time last year, while the Yankees were off to their sluggish start and everyone was trying on their "gm caps," I continued to show support for Gardner which was typically greeted by abuse; each time I'd post in favor, I was typically greeted by 4, 5, 6+ responses of people who figured in order to start in LF or CF for the New York Yankees, you must come from a certain pedigree/be cut from a certain mold. I was simply stating that I agree with you and that what Gardner brings to the table is a very valuable set of assets...but that he'll never be the 20+ Hr 100+ RBI guy, that's all.

OldYankeeFan

04-15-10, 12:12 PM

Gardner is going to get his chance now but the Yankees won't be real patient with him (because they seldom are). In a ST interview with Long about Gardner he said it's time to give him the "year" to see what he does.

There is just no way making only 500K and after posting a 107 wRC+ last year (higher than Melky ever had in his career) that the Yankees wont be patient with him this year. I just can't believe there are those who think he is in trouble because after 6 starts Gardner has a .333 OBP.

BTW, he posted a .254 OBP last April (the whole month) and followed that up with a ..417 and .439 OBP for May and June.

THEBOSS84

04-15-10, 12:16 PM

CommerceComet

04-15-10, 12:28 PM

around this time last year, while the Yankees were off to their sluggish start and everyone was trying on their "gm caps," I continued to show support for Gardner which was typically greeted by abuse; each time I'd post in favor, I was typically greeted by 4, 5, 6+ responses of people who figured in order to start in LF or CF for the New York Yankees, you must come from a certain pedigree/be cut from a certain mold. I was simply stating that I agree with you and that what Gardner brings to the table is a very valuable set of assets...but that he'll never be the 20+ Hr 100+ RBI guy, that's all.I might have been one of those people who criticized the idea of Gardner as a full-time player. I'm still very skeptical of it but I'm willing to wait and see.

I've made no secret of the fact that I don't like the light-hitting speedster model of OF. I think their value is greatly overrated. In the 45+ years I have been following baseball, I seen maybe a handful of these guys who I would want on my team (Willie McGee, Vince Coleman, Willie Wilson, Richie Ashburn, Mickey Rivers, a few others....) but all those guys had more power than Gardner. All the pitchers in the league knew that these guys could sit down on a pitch and drive it at times. Until Gardner shows that ability, I'm not confident that he can be a successful big-league hitter in the long-run. Gardner has a chance to convince me about his merits and perhaps reassess my opinion on that style of outfielder.

OldYankeeFan

04-15-10, 01:01 PM

I might have been one of those people who criticized the idea of Gardner as a full-time player. I'm still very skeptical of it but I'm willing to wait and see.

I've made no secret of the fact that I don't like the light-hitting speedster model of OF. I think their value is greatly overrated. In the 45+ years I have been following baseball, I seen maybe a handful of these guys who I would want on my team (Willie McGee, Vince Coleman, Willie Wilson, Richie Ashburn, Mickey Rivers, a few others....) but all those guys had more power than Gardner.

Which of the below has the better career start?

McGee's first two full seasons as starter...
OBP.... .316
SLG ... .381
OPS+... 93

Vince Coleman's first two full seasons as starter
OBP.... .311
SLG ... .308
OPS+... 73

Gardner last year ...
OBP.... .346
SLG..... .379
OPS+.... 93

Obviously Gardner has the better start. But Gardner in his first 6 starts of the 2010 season has only a .333 OBP...bench him NOW!

flymick24

04-15-10, 01:22 PM

1-6 with 3 k's.

not bad... thought it was more like 0-12 with like 7 K's

grizy

04-15-10, 01:26 PM

Gardner has been somewhat unlucky with some balls he's put in play as well. Given his speed, it's highly unlikely his true talent level BABIP is in the .250 range.

Blazer

04-15-10, 01:59 PM

JSG

04-15-10, 04:03 PM

In a ST interview with Long about Gardner he said it's time to give him the "year" to see what he does.

the NYY may have a "tax year" that ends 7/31 !!!

delv

04-15-10, 04:24 PM

Gardner has been somewhat unlucky with some balls he's put in play as well. Given his speed, it's highly unlikely his true talent level BABIP is in the .250 range.

he really hasn't. i've watched just about every single PA. When you watch all the games, it's clear that luck plays no role. Many of his outs have GB to the right side, which almost no one will be able to beat out. There's been one play you might attribute to bad luck: one LD that he hit to the left side that was caught, but that just means that it was ill-placed or the SS was well-positioned based on scouting reports (all of his hits or almost all have been grounders or low liners to the left side, so it makes sense that teams would keep an eye out for this).

If I hit 100 extremely weak soft rollers to the right side where the 2B man can get me out w/o an effort and I end up making 100 outs, does that really mean that I'm unlucky? Rather, it sounds like my swing is craptastic and I need to stop hitting slow grounders to the right side. The line of reasoning behind this "the hitter was unlucky" kind of thinking is so poor it disgusts me.

delv

04-15-10, 04:26 PM

Seriously, it's so effing piss poor.

CommerceComet

04-15-10, 04:51 PM

Which of the below has the better career start? Obviously Gardner has the better start. But Gardner in his first 6 starts of the 2010 season has only a .333 OBP...bench him NOW!This seems to be pretty selective use of statistics. McGee was 23 and 24 in his first two seasons, had over 1,000 ABs, was an AS, won a GG, and was third in ROY. Vince Coleman was also 23 and 24 in those seasons, had almost 1,400 ABs, won a ROY, was 11th in MVP voting, and stole 227 bases. Gardner turned 26 last season, had only 248 ABs, and couldn't decisively win the starting job from Melky Cabrera. I noticed that you conveniently ignored his 2008 statistics while including the rookie seasons of the others. Besides, Coleman and McGee broke in at a time when offensive statistics were more modest than today.

I never said to bench Gardner. I said I remain skeptical that he will prove to be a big-league hitter but I'm willing to give him some time.

themgmt

04-15-10, 04:58 PM

Gardner's OBP is solid right now. .333 with a .217 average, and should have walked on both of those check swings, meaning his OBP would be .407. Small sample but nothing to really look at so far. I like what I see.

grizy

04-15-10, 05:23 PM

You give that single line drive a 50% chance to convert to a single (actually for the league it's more like 73%) and and his numbers would be .239BA with .351OBP.

Still low, but Gardner is really not stinking up the joint right now.

Small sample size still and Gardner is performing within acceptable ranges with reasons for optimism, namely his LD% and BB/PA are both higher than the past two years.

delv

04-15-10, 11:00 PM

*vomits*

CommerceComet

04-16-10, 11:10 AM

and should have walked on both of those check swings, meaning his OBP would be .407. I'm not much of a sabremetrician but would that be his s/bOBP? ;) I have a hard time keeping track of all these new statistics.

Alan Slocum

04-16-10, 01:05 PM

I'm not much of a sabremetrician but would that be his s/bOBP? ;) I have a hard time keeping track of all these new statistics.
I am with you!:D Good thing the game is played with humans, and guts, heart and brains still alter the outcome of most games, all stats aside.

If Gardi can change some, just some of those right side grounders into bunts down either base line, with his speed he will beat out half of them. That might, just might, allow the Yankees to pencil him in as our every day LF. It will save them the boatload of money they will otherwise have to spend on Crawford.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 01:17 PM

I am with you!:D Good thing the game is played with humans, and guts, heart and brains still alter the outcome of most games, all stats aside.

If Gardi can change some, just some of those right side grounders into bunts down either base line, with his speed he will beat out half of them. That might, just might, allow the Yankees to pencil him in as our every day LF. It will save them the boatload of money they will otherwise have to spend on Crawford.
The race may not go to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.

He's been a terrible bunter so far in the big so bunting more may not be the best idea.

I do agree, I'd love to see him succeed enough where they they don't go after Crawford whom I do not really want.

Alan Slocum

04-16-10, 01:28 PM

The race may not go to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.

He's been a terrible bunter so far in the big so bunting more may not be the best idea.

I do agree, I'd love to see him succeed enough where they they don't go after Crawford whom I do not really want.
Yea, his bunting has been bad in the past, but that was supposed to be the cornerstone of his off-season workouts. Perhaps he was working out with Tex? If I were Girardi, he would be bunting at least once a game and would be showing bunt in a couple other at-bats sufficient to get that infield moving. Then maybe some of those ground outs would have a chance of getting thru.:D

grizy

04-16-10, 01:30 PM

Alan Slocum

04-16-10, 01:39 PM

Truth be told, I think bunting for Gardner is of limited usefulness at best with slow runners in front of him and Jeter, who's prone to GDIPs, behind him.

That and Gardner can beat out a lot of infield singles, bunt or not.
How about we have Jeter take a pitch or two after Gardi's bunt singles? Give Gardi a chance to make it into a bunt double?:D

yarosh25

04-16-10, 01:39 PM

Gardner is too left field slap-happy right now, at least try to pull the ball early and up in the count.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 01:51 PM

Truth be told, I think bunting for Gardner is of limited usefulness at best with slow runners in front of him and Jeter, who's prone to GDIPs, behind him.

That and Gardner can beat out a lot of infield singles, bunt or not.
Totatlly disagree. If can make the bunt enough of his game that pulls in the 3B it opens up the 3B/SS hole for him to slap it through.

Also how is getting on ever bad? I mean seriously you don't want him on first because Jeter might hit into a DP? That's just idiotic especially since his offenive value is almost 100% tied to his ability to get on base since his his slugging is likely to never be anything to write home about.

delv

04-16-10, 02:02 PM

grizy

04-16-10, 02:43 PM

Totatlly disagree. If can make the bunt enough of his game that pulls in the 3B it opens up the 3B/SS hole for him to slap it through.

Also how is getting on ever bad? I mean seriously you don't want him on first because Jeter might hit into a DP? That's just idiotic especially since his offenive value is almost 100% tied to his ability to get on base since his his slugging is likely to never be anything to write home about.

I just think his OBP will be more related to his ability to hit into left field gap than bunting for singles.

If he can't hit over IFs' heads, then he'll have a really hard time bunting for singles, no matter how perfectly placed the bunts are.

I am not asking him to hit jacks or screaming line drives to the walls. Just need him to get those bloopy line drives to the OF.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 02:51 PM

I just think his OBP will be more related to his ability to hit into left field gap than bunting for singles.

If he can't hit over IFs' heads, then he'll have a really hard time bunting for singles, no matter how perfectly placed the bunts are.

I am not asking him to hit jacks or screaming line drives to the walls. Just need him to get those bloopy line drives to the OF.But if can draw the 3B in to the edge of the grass with the threat of a bunt those bloops have an easier time reaching the OF grass and those slappy hits to the left side might go through instead of being cut off by the 3B.

I'm not saying he should "bunt all the time" as some posters suggested, but just make it enough a part of his game that teams have to think about the possibility.

grizy

04-16-10, 02:55 PM

But if can draw the 3B in to the edge of the grass with the threat of a bunt those bloops have an easier time reaching the OF grass and those slappy hits to the left side might go through instead of being cut off by the 3B.

I'm not saying he should "bunt all the time" as some posters suggested, but just make it enough a part of his game that teams have to think about the possibility.

We probably don't disagree much. I think Gardner should try to bunt for hits 1 out of 10~15ABs or so (even if he's actually good at bunting now, which I am not sure of), basically every other game. More than that is going to be really tough even with his speed. Also bunting more than that would hurt his ability to get infield hits which he'll have to rely on.

I really think SLG a bit is key for him because even marginal improvements in that area would have immensely positive effects on the core parts of his game: infield hits and OBP.

Alan Slocum

04-16-10, 03:01 PM

But if can draw the 3B in to the edge of the grass with the threat of a bunt those bloops have an easier time reaching the OF grass and those slappy hits to the left side might go through instead of being cut off by the 3B.

I'm not saying he should "bunt all the time" as some posters suggested, but just make it enough a part of his game that teams have to think about the possibility.
I agree with you, but if he worked on it all off-season like he claims, where are the bunts? If he starts bunting twice a game and gets a bunt single per game, wouldn't you tell him to keep doing it? Once he gets on base, he creates one heck of a distraction.

If he can't hit 250, he is not going to stay in the lineup regularly. This is his time. He either establishes himself as an everyday OF this year, or he will be the fourth outfielder/PR next year and for the rest of his Yankee career.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 03:22 PM

We probably don't disagree much. I think Gardner should try to bunt for hits 1 out of 10~15ABs or so (even if he's actually good at bunting now, which I am not sure of), basically every other game. More than that is going to be really tough even with his speed. Also bunting more than that would hurt his ability to get infield hits which he'll have to rely on.

I really think SLG a bit is key for him because even marginal improvements in that area would have immensely positive effects on the core parts of his game: infield hits and OBP.
Even every 10 - 15 ABs is too much. Roughly 1 in 20 would be fine with me.

grizy

04-16-10, 03:29 PM

I am okay with that. But if he's bunting that little then SLG (BA rather, in Gardner's case) should be very important to you because that would be the bulk of his OBP.

Figure he walks 10% of the time, bunts for hit like 5% of the time and fails at bunting another 2~4% of the time, he still needs to hit like .250 for the rest of his ABs to get .350~.370 OBP.

So yes, I really think he needs to be able to hit the "normal" way. For him, I am thinking more Ichiro!esque LDs that just barely make it out of the IF.

OldYankeeFan

04-16-10, 03:30 PM

This is his time. He either establishes himself as an everyday OF this year, or he will be the fourth outfielder/PR next year and for the rest of his Yankee career. I don't believe he will stay with the Yankees as a 4th OF. His real value is as a CF and if he isn't an everyday player for us then I think we trade him to a team with a CF need. We can get something much greater in return than the value of a 4th OFer.

False1

04-16-10, 03:58 PM

OK, so Gardner won't be evaluated by his slg in spite of the fact he's playing a position usually occupied by a slugger. He's got a career .325 OBP. That's a bit below average for a MLB LF. Outside of one game against the Mets he's a .318 OBP guy.

He's not bad as an interim player because of his salary, speed, and the Yankee lineup. However, I can't see the Yanks continuing to start a 4th OF beyond this year. That's if he even makes it past July 31 in that role.

Again, I hope he proves me wrong, but that swing makes me writhe in discomfort each time I see it.This thinking is somewhat flawed. While he certainly has more value independantly as a CF, this means nothing in terms of what he brings to this offense.

Many would have preferred Gardner start in CF and Granderson start in LF. Granderson certainly is above average offensively for LF, and Gardner would be above average for CF. If you flipped them that wouldn't equate to any incremental production out of this offense, but it would counter your argument would it not?

If the Yankees pass up on a better all around leftfielder after considering offense, defense, baserunning and cost then they certainly would be offsetting some of the enormous advantage Granderson's offense brings to the CF position. I don't think they've committed that sin yet.

delv

04-16-10, 04:30 PM

Gardner not in the lineup. I am crying tears of blood.

Blazer

04-16-10, 04:31 PM

This thinking is somewhat flawed. While he certainly has more value independantly as a CF, this means nothing in terms of what he brings to this offense.

Many would have preferred Gardner start in CF and Granderson start in LF. Granderson certainly is above average offensively for LF, and Gardner would be above average for CF. If you flipped them that wouldn't equate to any incremental production out of this offense, but it would counter your argument would it not?

If the Yankees pass up on a better all around leftfielder after considering offense, defense, baserunning and cost then they certainly would be offsetting some of the enormous advantage Granderson's offense brings to the CF position. I don't think they've committed that sin yet.

Gardner is the Yankee LF so I'm not going to compare him to other CF. What he brings to the Yankee offense is below average for a position that know for offense. There are at least a few LF who are both better and obtainable this year or next. By putting Gardner in a spot where he's relatively easy to replace the Yanks have as much as admitted he's not a part of their long term plans.

CommerceComet

04-16-10, 05:02 PM

I don't believe he will stay with the Yankees as a 4th OF. His real value is as a CF and if he isn't an everyday player for us then I think we trade him to a team with a CF need. We can get something much greater in return than the value of a 4th OFer.I'm not sure that I see the logic in this. If Gardner fails to become a regular for the Yankees, it will be because of offensive woes. If the Yankees with our offensive firepower can't justify keeping Gardner in the lineup because of his weak offensive, who else can? I suspect that any trading partner will see Gardner as a 4th OF in that situation. Being only 4 months from his 27th birthday, Gardner is getting pretty long in the tooth to be considered a prospect.

If Gardner fails in this attempt to win a starting position, I don't see him having a lot of value in the trade market. I think the Yankees hold on to him as a 4th OF because his defensive prowess and speed give Gardner a lot of value as a 4th OF.

OldYankeeFan

04-16-10, 05:13 PM

There are at least a few LF who are both better and obtainable this year or next. But at what cost? Gardner + a 12M pitcher is definately more valuable than a guy like Crawford.

By putting Gardner in a spot where he's relatively easy to replace the Yanks have as much as admitted he's not a part of their long term plans.I tend to agree. Once Granderson was obtained Gardner is just holding down that spot until Jeter or Montero (RF, Swish to LF) possibly need it. Then he's traded to someone who really needs a CF.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:13 PM

I'm not sure that I see the logic in this. If Gardner fails to become a regular for the Yankees, it will be because of offensive woes. If the Yankees with our offensive firepower can't justify keeping Gardner in the lineup because of his weak offensive, who else can? I suspect that any trading partner will see Gardner as a 4th OF in that situation. Being only 4 months from his 27th birthday, Gardner is getting pretty long in the tooth to be considered a prospect.

If Gardner fails in this attempt to win a starting position, I don't see him having a lot of value in the trade market. I think the Yankees hold on to him as a 4th OF because his defensive prowess and speed give Gardner a lot of value as a 4th OF.
With the improvement SEA showed last year upgradeing defense some teams might be willing to put up with sub-par offense to get above avergae CF defense. Especially of OAK shows that upgrading defense can provide similar results this year as Seattle and Texas did last year.

We shall see.

OldYankeeFan

04-16-10, 05:21 PM

I'm not sure that I see the logic in this. If Gardner fails to become a regular for the Yankees, it will be because of offensive woes. But judged as a LF not a CF.

A CF with great range that had a wRC+ 107 in his first full season, and is currently paid 500K is much more valuable than most here give credit for.

grizy

04-16-10, 05:23 PM

The problem here is good defense is boring to watch, especially to the casual fans.

Blazer

04-16-10, 05:23 PM

With the improvement SEA showed last year upgradeing defense some teams might be willing to put up with sub-par offense to get above avergae CF defense. Especially of OAK shows that upgrading defense can provide similar results this year as Seattle and Texas did last year.

We shall see.

I think GM's are defensive oriented this year because it's cheaper. No one is going to copy a team (the Mariners) who used replacement level LF'ers last year. Even they replaced their replacement level LF.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:26 PM

But judged as a LF not a CF.

A CF with great range that had a wRC+ 107 in his first full season, and is currently paid 500K is much more valuable than most here give credit for.
He does that over 500+ PAs for the Yankees this year, there won't be any talk of moving him in the off season.

The question is what is his true MLB talent level? He had one very good 8 week stretch in 2009 surrounded by some pretty poor offensive showings the rest of his time in the bigs.

grizy

04-16-10, 05:27 PM

Ichiro! is paid to get his 200+ hits. His excellent defense in RF accounts for a small part of his salary.

If Gardner pushes anything over wRC100 he's going to be a very very valuable piece with 1 more year of minimum and 3 years of arbitration.

Valuable enough we would require some top shelf talents in return.

Still small sample and there are also bad signs. But in the stats that matter for him, OBP and LD%, he's improved over past two years. With his long history of improvements at every level, I feel confident that he will get better this year given the chance and time.

Basically this kid's bottom is the 4th defensive outfielder and a great pinch runner off the bench and there are good reasons to expect that he can be better than an average offensive player.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:29 PM

I think GM's are defensive oriented this year because it's cheaper. No one is going to copy a team (the Mariners) who used replacement level LF'ers last year. Even they replaced their replacement level LF.
IDK it was more than just Endy Chavez in LF for the Mariners - and he blew out his knee. And while they lost something on defense with Beltre, all the guys they brought in - Bradley, Byrnes, Figgans, Kotchman (Wilson mid-year) are for the most part above average to very good defenders.

And this year, yes primarily $ related, the A's follwed that model adding Crisp & Kuzmanoff mostly on the strength of their defense. I'm curious to see how that plays out.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:30 PM

Ichiro! is paid to ...
...to hit .325+ - Gradner does that and he'll be paid some serious coin too.

Blazer

04-16-10, 05:31 PM

But at what cost? Gardner + a 12M pitcher is definately more valuable than a guy like Crawford.

Maybe, but it doesn't have to take $12 mil to upgrade in LF. David DeJesus, a significant upgrade over Gardner, comes to mind and he's due $10.75 through 2011.

On the other hand Pettitte is making about $12 mil. Is Andy + Gardner > Joba + *Crawford (who I don't care for).

* just using him because he was named in your post though I realize $12 mil won't land him as a FA.

Blazer

04-16-10, 05:32 PM

...to hit .325+ - Gradner does that and he'll be paid some serious coin too.

Ichiro also generates $8-10 mil in Japanese advertising revenue.

ThePinStripes

04-16-10, 05:34 PM

Well have to sign/resign 2 pitchers at the minimum. Upgrading an elite defender with a league average bat comes way after that on the priorities list.

grizy

04-16-10, 05:35 PM

...to hit .325+ - Gradner does that and he'll be paid some serious coin too.

Right, I was responding to the comment that defense was cheap last year.

It was pretty much a snide comment on how defense has always been cheap.

And Crawford will cost more than 12AAV. More like 15~16, cheaper than Holliday but not by much.

yankee82093

04-16-10, 05:35 PM

Gardner is the Yankee LF so I'm not going to compare him to other CF. What he brings to the Yankee offense is below average for a position that know for offense. There are at least a few LF who are both better and obtainable this year or next. By putting Gardner in a spot where he's relatively easy to replace the Yanks have as much as admitted he's not a part of their long term plans.

I'm not sure about this logic. The Yankees placed Phil Hughes in the fifth starter spot, which is very easy to find pitchers for. Does this mean that Hughes is not a part of their future plans? No.

And I hope you acknowledge that Gardner was a league average offensive player last year. This is not really debatable.

What is debatable is whether or not he will perform in the future.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:35 PM

Ichiro also generates $8-10 mil in Japanese advertising revenue.
And puts up a +5ish WAR each season like clockwork.

yankee82093

04-16-10, 05:36 PM

And puts up a +5ish WAR each season like clockwork.

Coming around to WAR are we?

Blazer

04-16-10, 05:38 PM

I'm not sure about this logic. The Yankees placed Phil Hughes in the fifth starter spot, which is very easy to find pitchers for. Does this mean that Hughes is not a part of their future plans? No.

And I hope you acknowledge that Gardner was a league average offensive player last year. This is not really debatable.

What is debatable is whether or not he will perform in the future.

Your points about Gardner are valid. However, the part about Phil isn't. The Yanks have future plans for him which I'm sure you're aware of.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:47 PM

Coming around to WAR are we?
:lol: touche. I've always liked WAR but think it has it limitations as any stat does.

OldYankeeFan

04-16-10, 05:48 PM

Well have to sign/resign 2 pitchers at the minimum. Upgrading an elite defender with a league average bat comes way after that on the priorities list.Exactly. And I'd much rather have Gardner and a 10M pitcher over DeJesus.

Yankee Tripper

04-16-10, 05:52 PM

Exactly. And I'd much rather have Gardner and a 10M pitcher over DeJesus.I don't know about that Oliver Perez or Davis DeJesus? I know which one I'm taking.

CommerceComet

04-16-10, 06:08 PM

A CF with great range that had a wRC+ 107 in his first full season, and is currently paid 500K is much more valuable than most here give credit for.Since when does 248 ABs constitute a full season?

Do you have some information that Girardi doesn't? Joe made it clear when he put Granderson in CF that Gardner hadn't proven himself as an "everyday player."

CommerceComet

04-16-10, 06:19 PM

Exactly. And I'd much rather have Gardner and a 10M pitcher over DeJesus.Actually, it would be Gardner and a $5 million per year pitcher versus DeJesus. DeJesus is owed about $11 million for 2010 AND 2011.

Blazer

04-16-10, 06:25 PM

Actually, it would be Gardner and a $5 million per year pitcher versus DeJesus. DeJesus is owed about $11 million for 2010 AND 2011.

Correct, which means Gardner and someone like Washburn.

yankee82093

04-16-10, 06:25 PM

Your points about Gardner are valid. However, the part about Phil isn't. The Yanks have future plans for him which I'm sure you're aware of.

Though you made the assertion that:

A) The Yankees probably do not have plans for Gardner in the future in mind because B) he is in an easily replaceable spot.

Now, you could make an a solid argument for A. But as long as assertion A rests on B, the logic I used still applies (because I showed that even if a player is put in an easily replaceable position, the team may still have them heavily incorporated into future plans).

I would still agree with you though that Hughes' position with respect to the Yankees is fundamentally different from Gardner's, mainly because the Yankees have shown a commitment to Phil's development in the past.

Blazer

04-16-10, 06:32 PM

One day you're going to be a fabulous attorney.

yankee82093

04-16-10, 06:38 PM

One day you're going to be a fabulous attorney.

I've come to expect comments like this to be sarcastic. It was, right?

Blazer

04-16-10, 06:39 PM

I've come to expect comments like this to be sarcastic. It was, right?

half and half

yankee82093

04-16-10, 06:40 PM

half and half

Meh, fair enough.

jesterno2

04-16-10, 06:55 PM

did you ever think that if gardner is above average offensively for a cf, that granderson is so far above average offensively for a cf (and even a lf for that matter) that it doesn't matter which plays which position cause we still get the production at the plate? the only thing that would really change would be the lettering next to their names on the lineup card. since both are good defenders it doesnt really matter which spot in the OF they jog out to every inning.

essentially this negates the argument about brett's value being tied to the LF position. joe thought it better to not have to move granderson back and forth or have to use winn/thames in cf if he wanted to have a different look in the lineup. and having granderson's way above average production at cf, as well as at almost every other position on the diamond for that matter, means that we don't have to worry about gardner's perceived below average production in LF.

OldYankeeFan

04-17-10, 09:56 AM

Since when does 248 ABs constitute a full season? It was his first full season in MLB. That means he didn't start the year in MiLB or spend any time at all there. But you really missed the point, So .....
...A CF with great range that had a wRC+ 107 in his first full season(with 248 ABs due to a broken wrist and competing for his position) and is currently paid 500K, is much more valuable than most here give credit for.

Joe made it clear when he put Granderson in CF that Gardner hadn't proven himself as an "everyday player." No, it means since he's playing LF (and not CF where he would be an "everyday player" on many teams) he will give way to a batter that just crushes only LH pitching to a career .851 OPS.

Randy Winn is a 4th OF who is paid 1.1M who you would cringe at the thought of having to take over in CF. Gardner is a legitimate plus defensive CF who is currently at least the equal to Winn offensively. In a trading scenario, at 500M, a cost controlled Gardner is worth much more than a 4th OF.

delv

04-17-10, 10:00 AM

This season, Gardner looks waaaaaaaaaaaay better stealing bases. A lot more polished and studied as to pitcher moves. He put on a clinic last night, albeit in one attempt.

CommerceComet

04-17-10, 11:13 AM

It was his first full season in MLB. That means he didn't start the year in MiLB or spend any time at all there. But you really missed the point, If you want to use full season in that sense, okay. However, you missed my point as well. No one knows if Gardner can maintain a level of productivity at the big league level for a full season.

No, it means since he's playing LF (and not CF where he would be an "everyday player" on many teams) he will give way to a batter that just crushes only LH pitching to a career .851 OPS.Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Girardi say that Granderson was staying in CF and not moving to LF because Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player. Maybe Gardner would be an everyday player on some teams but Girardi isn't ready to declare him so for the Yankees yet. Certainly, Girardi wasn't ready to make a commitment which could negatively affect Granderson who has more value to the Yankees long-term than Gardner. The Yankees are hedging their bets in case Gardner doesn't prove to be a big-league hitter and the jury is still out.

Randy Winn is a 4th OF who is paid 1.1M who you would cringe at the thought of having to take over in CF. Gardner is a legitimate plus defensive CF who is currently at least the equal to Winn offensively. In a trading scenario, at 500M, a cost controlled Gardner is worth much more than a 4th OF.Frankly, I cringe at the thought that we are paying Winn anything. I don't dispute that Gardner might have more value in a trade than Winn but that doesn't necessarily mean that Gardner would bring a lot in return if he fails to be a starting OF for the Yankees. If Gardner fails to stay in the starting lineup for the Yankees, I believe that almost all teams would view him as a 4th OF.

yankee82093

04-17-10, 11:36 AM

If you want to use full season in that sense, okay. However, you missed my point as well. No one knows if Gardner can maintain a level of productivity at the big league level for a full season.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Girardi say that Granderson was staying in CF and not moving to LF because Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player. Maybe Gardner would be an everyday player on some teams but Girardi isn't ready to declare him so for the Yankees yet. Certainly, Girardi wasn't ready to make a commitment which could negatively affect Granderson who has more value to the Yankees long-term than Gardner. The Yankees are hedging their bets in case Gardner doesn't prove to be a big-league hitter and the jury is still out.

Frankly, I cringe at the thought that we are paying Winn anything. I don't dispute that Gardner might have more value in a trade than Winn but that doesn't necessarily mean that Gardner would bring a lot in return if he fails to be a starting OF for the Yankees. If Gardner fails to stay in the starting lineup for the Yankees, I believe that almost all teams would view him as a 4th OF.

I don't think that's true. Multiple teams in the offseason tried to trade for Gardner. Maybe he's not a starter for other contending teams, but there are definitely multiple teams with at least one starting outfielder worse than Gardner.

OldYankeeFan

04-17-10, 01:14 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Girardi say that Granderson was staying in CF and not moving to LF because Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player. .Wrong as far as I know. I never heard him say "Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player" and if I missed it please provide the link.

Bottom line is that Gardner's value is as a starting CF, which he would definately be on some other teams, including those who tried to trade for him over the winter. He just happens to be on a team with a better starting CF. So in a trade I would absolutely expect to get more value back than that eaqual to a 4th OF. Apparently you and perhaps others here don't agree. Hence my opinion that he is undervalued by many here.

JohnnyEllis

04-17-10, 01:30 PM

Neither rally happens without him beating out two grounders today.

Shane_Spencer

04-17-10, 01:33 PM

Neither rally happens without him beating out two grounders today.
Exactly. Everyone should stop whining. We have as close to a perfect team as possible, and I'm glad Cashman wanted to keep one of our own, a kid who hustles out everything and tries his hardest, instead of getting a superstar. We should be thankful we have Brett instead of whining about his deficiencies.

False1

04-17-10, 01:55 PM

Neither rally happens without him beating out two grounders today.These are the days that you have to enjoy watching Gardner play. On base twice, scores twice. 2 out RBI infield hit that he beat out by a good two steps. On the first pitch to Jeter, takes off for second putting pressure on the defense and enabling Granderson to score.

themgmt

04-17-10, 02:27 PM

3 infield singles and now he's hitting .308 with a .400 OBP.

Small samples.

Blazer

04-17-10, 03:20 PM

I don't think that's true. Multiple teams in the offseason tried to trade for Gardner. Maybe he's not a starter for other contending teams, but there are definitely multiple teams with at least one starting outfielder worse than Gardner.

Good point. The Royals are starting Podsednik in LF and paying him $1.75 mil ($2 mil option for 2011). The A's will use the $6 million man Coco Crisp in CF once he's healthy ($8 mil option for 2011).

At league minimum Gardner must be more attractive than those 2.

edit: Podsednik is the Royals LF not CF.

roblyo33

04-17-10, 04:01 PM

Good point. The Royals are starting Podsednik in LF and paying him $1.75 mil ($2 mil option for 2011). The A's will use the $6 million man Coco Crisp in CF once he's healthy ($8 mil option for 2011).

At league minimum Gardner must be more attractive than those 2.

edit: Podsednik is the Royals LF not CF.

Is Posednik still leading the league in hitting??

yankee82093

04-17-10, 04:13 PM

Is Posednik still leading the league in hitting??

No. Martin Prado has the highest BA at .463.

THEBOSS84

04-17-10, 04:38 PM

They don't play in the same league. Podsednik is currently leading his league in hitting with a BA of .436

yankee82093

04-17-10, 04:40 PM

They don't play in the same league. Podsednik is currently leading his league in hitting with a BA of .436

Yea. My bad.

sweet_lou_14

04-17-10, 05:05 PM

This season, Gardner looks waaaaaaaaaaaay better stealing bases. A lot more polished and studied as to pitcher moves. He put on a clinic last night, albeit in one attempt.

I'm glad you said this.

A few weeks ago I had posted something about how, as fast as Gardner is, I hadn't been very impressed with his approach as a base stealer coming into this season. For what my opinion is worth, he's looked better to me so far this season. Maybe he's worked on it.

Yankee Tripper

04-17-10, 05:08 PM

Maybe he's worked on it.
:eek: He was over 80% last year and over 85% for his MilB career. He's an excellent base stealer. He'll look more comfortable as he sees more MLB pitchers moves. It's called experience.

grizy

04-17-10, 05:11 PM

Brett Gardner:

BA/SLG: .296
OBP: .387
OPS: .683
R: 8 (assuming 500PAs, he's on pace for 129Rs)
SB: 5 (assuming 500PAs, on pace for 80.6SBs)

JfromJersey

04-17-10, 05:18 PM

roblyo33

04-17-10, 06:03 PM

Yea. My bad.

Don't let stats get in your way.

parkerstrong

04-17-10, 06:10 PM

Having Gardner at the bottom of this lineup makes it a very well balanced lineup. Granderson and Gardner give this whole Yankee Offense a multi dimensionality it has rarely had in the past..a nice blend of average, power, patience, and speed. We can manufacture runs, drive you crazy on the bases, or clear the bases with round trippers. It's early, but I really like what I'm seeing so far.

With both of them in the bottom of the lineup, it gives opponents a different style to score. Top of the lineup is power/OBP and the bottom is speed. He can steal 50-60 bases this year. Even if his OPS is under .800, he would still be very effective.

His OPS is under .700 right now and I've been happy with his play

sweet_lou_14

04-17-10, 07:29 PM

:eek: He was over 80% last year and over 85% for his MilB career. He's an excellent base stealer. He'll look more comfortable as he sees more MLB pitchers moves. It's called experience.

Is that what it's called?

Do tell.

THEBOSS84

04-17-10, 08:20 PM

Ron Washington called Gardner "another Ichiro". I'd be happier with that comparison if he wasn't on crack.

kan_t

04-17-10, 08:23 PM

Ron Washington called Gardner "another Ichiro". I'd be happier with that comparison if he wasn't on crack.
Ron Washington is thinking too much.

In Mo I Trust

04-17-10, 08:32 PM

Ron Washington called Gardner "another Ichiro". I'd be happier with that comparison if he wasn't on crack.

Coke, not crack.

mr.roy

04-17-10, 09:09 PM

Brett Gardner:

BA/SLG: .296
OBP: .387
OPS: .683
R: 8 (assuming 500PAs, he's on pace for 129Rs)
SB: 5 (assuming 500PAs, on pace for 80.6SBs)

He'll have to fall flat on his face not to get 500 PA this year. Winn is clearly a D-replacement, PR, last gasp PH.
Thames will get the other 50-100 PA out of LF.

JBursch23

04-17-10, 09:34 PM

I'm real happy with Gardner. He's gotten some key 2 out RBIs and he's been a nice guy to have at the bottom of the lineup.

89FoxBody

04-17-10, 11:59 PM

Gardner is not likely to post a really respectable OPS cause of his slugging, but he can still get on base enough and get his extra bases that way.

ajra21

04-18-10, 03:59 AM

With both of them in the bottom of the lineup, it gives opponents a different style to score. Top of the lineup is power/OBP and the bottom is speed. He can steal 50-60 bases this year. Even if his OPS is under .800, he would still be very effective.

His OPS is under .700 right now and I've been happy with his play

i keep saying it: if brett gets 500 ABs, he'll steal 50 bases. curtis looks like he's gonna break his own personal best of 26 as well.

OldYankeeFan

04-18-10, 09:27 AM

Even if his OPS is under .800, he would still be very effective.

His OPS is under .700 right now and I've been happy with his play

OPS and OPS+ are not fair measuring stats for guys like Gardner because they don't take into consideration speed skills. Much better stats are wOBA and wRC+, and last year Gardner posted a wRC+ of (an above average) 107. For those not totally familiar with it here's an excellent article.

http://www.pinstripealley.com/2010/1/19/1259189/ops+-vs-wrc+-or-the-battle-of-the

Finally, we come to the second finalist in our battle of the statistics: wRC+, or Weighted Runs Created Plus. For those of you who are good with analogies, wRC+ : wOBA :: OPS+ : OPS. Put simply, wRC+ takes wOBA, adjusts it for park factors, and then normalizes it so that league average in any given year is a wRC+ of 100. As you can see, wRC+ comes out looking just like OPS+, but it is based on the far more accurate wOBA. It also includes more information, like stealing bases.

While wRC+ might not be absolutely perfect, it is by far the best statistic we have to judge overall offensive production right now. You can find wRC+ on www.fangraphs.com (http://www.fangraphs.com) under the "advanced" tab for hitters. With the advent of wOBA and wRC+, there is really no reason to ever use OPS or OPS+ ever again

GordonGecko

04-18-10, 09:44 AM

Gardner on WFAN right now

MLB007

04-18-10, 10:50 AM

This is misleading. OPS undervalues Gardner. He has a career 93 wRC+. This means for his career, he's been 7% below average. That's fine for an elite defender.

I have NO idea WTH you guys are talking about. :D

MLB007

04-18-10, 10:53 AM

Gardner started 6 games. You think he should have 10 bunt attempts at this point?

+1 ;)

MLB007

04-18-10, 10:57 AM

If he worked on it all winter, why not? With his wheels, if he can lay down any kind of decent bunt, he will beat out half of them. Once he is on base, that is where he yields his greatest value to the team. They will have to start playing the infield in to defense it, and that won't hurt him any when he does hit away. I don't care if the guy hits an HR the entire year, but I want those bunt singles.

The idea is good, but TWICE a GAME!!??? It's still 90' to first base, the pitcher is less than 57' away after coming off the rubber. If he's bunting twice a game, the 3 baseman is going to be 75' away and charging.
these ARE big leaguers.
If they know it's coming, he next to never gets a hit.
I want to see it too, but's it's got to be a surprise, or it doesn't work.

MLB007

04-18-10, 11:03 AM

Through 7 games, Brett Gardner has registered 27 total plate appearances....you wanting him to have attempted bunts in over a third of them may be one of the more absurd notions I've read this year...

Needless to say part of a "bunt for base hit's success" at the M.L. level is going to be the element of surprise; provided the fact that most M.L. teams have advanced scouting representatives that know very well Brett's key asset is his speed, I'll go as far as to say regardless of situation or circumstance, every time he comes to the plate, Brett can bet on seeing the 3rd and 1st basemen in on the grassline.

Having said that, an attempt or two would have been nice to see at this point if, in fact, he did spend as much time working on his bunting as he claims that he has...but let's be realistic. Just because it works in your video game does not mean it's going to work in actual M.L. games.

Every time I've seen him this year (not a lot), they've been in tight on him. I'd venture that everyone heard about his bunting threat if not just the speed factor causing it.
I'm sure that's why it hasn't happened yet. And how many at bats have had OTHER factors that removed bunting for a hit from his arsenal?
I'm hoping that the first time we see a 1st or 3d baseman playing him at normal depth that the bunt is on the ground. If not, THEN we'll have something to complain about. (if he doesn't get a normal hit) ;)

stazsanity

04-18-10, 12:53 PM

Every time I've seen him this year (not a lot), they've been in tight on him. I'd venture that everyone heard about his bunting threat if not just the speed factor causing it.
I'm sure that's why it hasn't happened yet. And how many at bats have had OTHER factors that removed bunting for a hit from his arsenal?
I'm hoping that the first time we see a 1st or 3d baseman playing him at normal depth that the bunt is on the ground. If not, THEN we'll have something to complain about. (if he doesn't get a normal hit) ;)

the point i was trying to make all week is that with his speed, "slapping" the ball to the left side is going to have the same overall effect as a bunt for base hit attempt... it's goign to put the ball on the ground, give him an opportunity to use his greatest asset, and put a ton of pressure on a defense to field the ball properly and make a perfect throw- even the slightest bobble or mis-throw will result in him on first- as seen yesterday.

grizy

04-18-10, 01:10 PM

Brett Gardner:

BA/SLG: .296
OBP: .387
OPS: .683
R: 8 (assuming 500PAs, he's on pace for 129Rs)
SB: 5 (assuming 500PAs, on pace for 80.6SBs)

Fangraphs just updated. With last night's performance, Gardner's WRC+ is now 125 (higher than NJ's 120 and Swisher's 122, from our no. 9 hitter.)

Meanwhile, he's seeing 4.12P/PA, which is very very good.

delv

04-18-10, 02:08 PM

OPS and OPS+ are not fair measuring stats for guys like Gardner because they don't take into consideration speed skills. Much better stats are wOBA and wRC+, and last year Gardner posted a wRC+ of (an above average) 107. For those not totally familiar with it here's an excellent article.

http://www.pinstripealley.com/2010/1/19/1259189/ops+-vs-wrc+-or-the-battle-of-the

wOBA includes base stealing, but not baserunning, if I understand correctly. Also, even that stuff doesn't take into account the effect of excessive pitch outs and throws-over.

Brooklyn Yankee Fan

04-18-10, 02:15 PM

http://i40.tinypic.com/x4q2p4.jpg

Just sayin'....

grizy

04-18-10, 02:15 PM

grizy

04-18-10, 04:28 PM

Brett Gardner's line:
.333BA/SLG
.444OBP
.778OPS
9R (on pace for 125, assuming 500PAs)
6SB (on pace for 83)
1CS (on pace for 14)

the CS is going to hurt his wRC+ but with going 2-3 with a BB and HBP should still net him an uptick.

And yes, Gardner has higher OBP than OBP Jesus himself.

Probably can't keep it up for the course of the season but this kid is really showing something. Kevin Long just might be right yet.

“I think this is a kid you just throw in there every day, pencil him in the lineup, hit him down ninth and see at the end of the year if he’s at .270, .280, if he doesn’t steal 65-70 bases, if he doesn’t score 100 runs hitting in the nine-hole.”

(http://www.zimbio.com/Brett+Gardner/articles/KChk2gh-TwZ/Long+Gardner+can+another+Lofton)

SSS and all other normal caveats. But it's very rare to see a player literally develop in front of our eyes.

The only other person as exciting right now is Hughes, and we get to see him less than once every 5 days.

OldYankeeFan

04-18-10, 04:52 PM

wOBA includes base stealing, but not baserunning, if I understand correctly. Also, even that stuff doesn't take into account the effect of excessive pitch outs and throws-over.That's my understanding also...it will account for stolen bases and CS but does not account for having to make pitchers work to keep him close (the papelbon AB comes to mind) while disrupting their concentration. It also doesn't account for him taking an extra base on a hit and perhaps staying out of DP's as a baserunner but is much better for comparing his offensive contributions to players with a different skill set like SLG than any other stat.

The actual formula for wOBA...

((0.72 x NIBB) + (0.75 x HBP) + (0.90 x 1B) + (0.92 x RBOE) + (1.24 x 2B) + (1.56 x 3B) + (1.95 x HR) + (.25 x SB) - (.50 x CS)) / PA...then

wRC+ takes wOBA, adjusts it for park factors, and then normalizes it so that league average in any given year is a wRC+ of 100. As you can see, wRC+ comes out looking just like OPS+, but it is based on the far more accurate wOBA.

PirateChief

04-18-10, 05:08 PM

False1

04-18-10, 05:19 PM

It's true that wOBA and wRC+ won't credit Gardner for distracting the pitcher, but luckily that effect is not totally lost-- we will see it in the hitter's wOBA/wRC+. Pitcher is distracted, pitches crappilly, gives up a hit, and there you go. If you have a large enough sample, you can compare the effect of Gardner on base before a batter and with no Gardner. I don't know of any other way to measure that.He's exciting to watch when he's on base. I love the crouch he gets into with the arm cocked, ready to roll. Some people try to lull the pitcher to sleep, sneak a step in while the pitchers is in the stretch... Gardner's basically holding up a sign saying "second base is mine, beyotch"

ThePinStripes

04-18-10, 07:13 PM

http://i40.tinypic.com/x4q2p4.jpg

Just sayin'....

:lol:

BUT OMG! We don't have a slugging LF!

flymick24

04-18-10, 10:05 PM

gardner's not clutch like melky though

I Said It

04-18-10, 10:58 PM

gardner's not clutch like melky though

I still like Gardner over him. Upgrade in the outfield and should be exciting on the basepaths. His stolen base success rate is roughly 90%:eek:

GordonGecko

04-18-10, 11:04 PM

gardner's not clutch like melky though
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu273/areacode212/melky.jpg

flymick24

04-18-10, 11:19 PM

jcarey

04-18-10, 11:35 PM

How do people still take flymick literally?

GordonGecko

04-18-10, 11:36 PM

numbers are pretty irrelevant when you can see with your own two eyes that melky was more clutch than brett last year... more game winning hits and more energy... plus, he was best friends with cano

i mean, melky even hit for the cycle last year
With friends like this, who needs enemies. Cano is destroying American league pitchers since he left. Just sayin...

flymick24

04-18-10, 11:37 PM

melky also had a lot of unique handshakes and dances with his teammates... i don't see any such creativity from gardner

False1

04-19-10, 12:14 AM

melky also had a lot of unique handshakes and dances with his teammates... i don't see any such creativity from gardnerLooking at that picture above, Melky also has a double chin. It's where he stores all his clutchiness. Brett is too selfish to pack away some clutchfat.

BennyTheJetRodriguez

04-19-10, 05:13 AM

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 07:11 AM

melky also had a lot of unique handshakes and dances with his teammates... i don't see any such creativity from gardnerExactly, and the Melky jump was part of every win so he has to be team MVP.

mbn007

04-19-10, 07:15 AM

JSG

04-19-10, 07:22 AM

Bottom line:

Gardner brings something to teh Yankee lineup that they do not have otherwise. Pure speed, and the ability to know how to use it. He is no Ichiro (sorry Ron Washington), but he adds a dimension to the Yankees that they can use, especially when teh bats are otherwise quiet.

agreed. on that topic >>

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/yankees/bombs_burners_Taw5nVk9DhZfFUmWbFiqJN

PS as brett said himself, he still needs to get his swing together, IE more line drives, less slap-happy (he himself said he was not happy with his swing on one of the postgame shows). that said, he's coming off a great series and has been a solid contributor so far. he's gotta play LF all 3 games in oakland, pleeeeeeeeeaaaaase !!

BRNXBMRS

04-19-10, 07:41 AM

Needs to be in the lineup, creates havoc on the bases. Thames sits till further notice.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 07:59 AM

Brett up to a way above average 152 wRC+ (with a .444 OBP). I guess him at least duplicating last years wRC+ of 107 over 500 AB's doesn't seem so far fetched.

Although Brett himself isn't satisfied with his swing yet (and neither am I), the biggest difference I've seen from him so far is that his off season work to hit less balls in the air and K less has paid off big time. He has gone from a GB/FB ratio last year of 1.00 to 2.86 and his K rate is down to 10% from 16% so far this year.

I suspect we wont be hearing any talk about him being no more than a 4th OF for a while.

JSG

04-19-10, 08:05 AM

Needs to be in the lineup, creates havoc on the bases. Thames sits till further notice.

i might sit nick and DH thames vs one of the LHPs in oakland, but brett in LF for sure.

delv

04-19-10, 08:33 AM

Holy crap you can see energy?

e = mc^2, yo

GordonGecko

04-19-10, 09:21 AM

e = mc^2, yo
so the fatter you are, the more energy you have

LazyEyeLou

04-19-10, 10:05 AM

Wow, a big thank you to this thread for introducing me to wOBA. That stat is amazing. I've been a little pissed off at various points that some of the sabermetrics people seem to scoff at speed and stolen bases and such, when it seemed clear to me that they were valuable. I'm glad there's something out there that takes these into account.

Don't get me wrong, I'd still take Melky in a heartbeat for his fun handshakes, but this is good stuff.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 10:21 AM

Wow, a big thank you to this thread for introducing me to wOBA. You're welcome. But don't forget about wRC+. It takes wOBA and then adjusts it for ballparks and league and then standardizes it to 100 for the average offensive player...it's just like what OPS+ does for OPS.

2PhonesMaccabee

04-19-10, 10:26 AM

Looking at that picture above, Melky also has a double chin. It's where he stores all his clutchiness. Brett is too selfish to pack away some clutchfat.I think that's Montero.

BennyTheJetRodriguez

04-19-10, 10:35 AM

I wonder if it takes more energy to do a leaping high five or steal home. Probably the high five...

CommerceComet

04-19-10, 10:53 AM

\I suspect we wont be hearing any talk about him being no more than a 4th OF for a while.You know that is not true. A few of bad games and the questioning begins again.

I like what I saw in Gardner the last two days but am I convinced that he's turned the corner? No. I wasn't convinced last year when Melky shot out of the gate and was putting up great numbers. It's going to take more than two hot games to remove my skepticism or a few bad games to confirm my skepticism. (Even you stated that you were disappointed with his swing. That's my biggest concern. I don't have a lot of confidence in his long-term success with that swing.) I figure that I'll re-assess Gardner around the first of June.

Wrong as far as I know. I never heard him say "Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player" and if I missed it please provide the link.
"We look at Curtis as an everyday player, and you want to have consistency for that guy," Girardi said. "I still believe that Gardy has a chance to be an everyday player and is going to hit." http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Grandy-is-center-of-attentionYanks-give-him-the-nod-Gardner-gets-job-in-LF-99279421 (There are several other news reports around the same time that make the exact same inference that I did: "has a chance" = "has not yet proven.")

TEPLimey

04-19-10, 11:05 AM

You know that is not true. A few of bad games and the questioning begins again.

I like what I saw in Gardner the last two days but am I convinced that he's turned the corner? No. I wasn't convinced last year when Melky shot out of the gate and was putting up great numbers. It's going to take more than two hot games to remove my skepticism or a few bad games to confirm my skepticism. (Even you stated that you were disappointed with his swing. That's my biggest concern. I don't have a lot of confidence in his long-term success with that swing.) I figure that I'll re-assess Gardner around the first of June.

My thoughts exactly.

Hellsing

04-19-10, 11:06 AM

IDK how anyone can complain about Brett's performance thus far.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 11:29 AM

You know that is not true. A few of bad games and the questioning begins again. What I find most humerous is that the anti Gardner people will be the first to jump up and down and declare that his last years wRC+ of 107 is irrelevant because it was only in 284 PA, yet they would use the stats of only a few bad games that might bring his OBP down to a dreadful .400 to prove their point that he is merely a 4th OF.

Other than hate or pigheadedness, is there really ANY other reason why this makes sense?

Yankees13

04-19-10, 11:34 AM

Love him wreaking havoc at the bottom of the lineup. It takes this lineup to another level of absurdity.

SLURPEE

04-19-10, 11:39 AM

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 11:42 AM

Love him wreaking havoc at the bottom of the lineup. It takes this lineup to another level of absurdity.We currently have the most circular lineup I have ever witnessed.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 11:43 AM

We currently have the most circular lineup I have ever witnessed.

And you're...old...right?

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 11:52 AM

Since he lead off when Jeter sat, could this be an indicator that when inter-league comes (in NL parks) he'll be batting second? or will it be Granderson?

too far off to tell but if I had to guess right now swisher would bat 2 in interleague with Gardner 8th.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 11:54 AM

And you're...old...right?Haha. Old enough to be familiar with the best of the DH lineups... aren't you?

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 11:55 AM

too far off to tell but if I had to guess right now swisher would bat 2 in interleague with Gardner 8th.That's my guess too.

Tyler Durden

04-19-10, 11:57 AM

Since he lead off when Jeter sat, could this be an indicator that when inter-league comes (in NL parks) he'll be batting second? or will it be Granderson?

ss jeter
lf gardner
1b teixeira
3b rodriguez
2b cano
c posada
cf granderson
rf swisher
p ******

Gardner's SB ability with the pitcher batting could be a major factor in NL games, so I like him batting 8th in that situation. Maybe something like this:

ss Jeter
cf Granderson
1b Teixeira
3b Rodriguez
2b Cano
c Posada
rf Swisher
lf Gardner
p ******

JSG

04-19-10, 11:58 AM

too far off to tell but if I had to guess right now swisher would bat 2 in interleague with Gardner 8th.

that's probably it, but if brett is percolating i could see him leadoff w jeter #2.

grizy

04-19-10, 12:19 PM

that's probably it, but if brett is percolating i could see him leadoff w jeter #2.

If Gardy keeps it at at his current level of production, he's going to hit leadoff come inter-league yeah.

Actually if he stays at his current level, he won't be batting 8th/9th for much longer.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 12:30 PM

If Gardy keeps it at at his current level of production, he's going to hit leadoff come inter-league yeah.

Actually if he stays at his current level, he won't be batting 8th/9th for much longer.
Brosious drove in a 100 runs hitting 9th in 1998. Gardner will be batting 9th all seson unless god forbid Jeter gets hurt.

CommerceComet

04-19-10, 12:53 PM

What I find most humerous is that the anti Gardner people will be the first to jump up and down and declare that his last years wRC+ of 107 is irrelevant because it was only in 284 PA, yet they would use the stats of only a few bad games that might bring his OBP down to a dreadful .400 to prove their point that he is merely a 4th OF. Since I was the one who raised that concern, I assume this post is directed at me. You're welcome to review my posts on this thread (or any other) and last year's Gardner-Melky threads and find where I have ever done this. I've followed baseball long enough to have a healthy skepticism about young players and to know that a few good or bad games are not a good basis to form an overall evalution of a player. I found a long time ago that is a good way to make bad decisions.

Other than hate or pigheadedness, is there really ANY other reason why this makes sense?I don't know. Ask someone who does what you are complaining about. Just because someone is not as impressed as you are, doesn't mean some sort of agenda. You might want to review the community standards. Questioning someone's motives is just an indirect way of saying he or she must be too dumb to understand the argument which is why it is generally prohibited on forums.

I am impressed by Gardner's performance this season but I am just not sure this is the "real" Brett Gardner. If he performs well, I don't have an issue with Gardner starting. Why would I? I'm a Yankee fan first and an individual player fan second.

grizy

04-19-10, 12:56 PM

Brosious drove in a 100 runs hitting 9th in 1998. Gardner will be batting 9th all seson unless god forbid Jeter gets hurt.

I was thinking more along the lines of someone slumping or NJ twisting something while walking.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 12:59 PM

Since I was the one who raised that concern, I assume this post is directed at me. You're welcome to review my posts on this thread (or any other) and last year's Gardner-Melky threads and find where I have ever done this. I've followed baseball long enough to have a healthy skepticism about young players and to know that a few good or bad games are not a good basis to form an overall evalution of a player. I found a long time ago that is a good way to make bad decisions.
I don't know. Ask someone who does what you are complaining about. Just because someone is not as impressed as you are, doesn't mean some sort of agenda. You might want to review the community standards. Questioning someone's motives is just an indirect way of saying he or she must be too dumb to understand the argument which is why it is generally prohibited on forums.

I am impressed by Gardner's performance this season but I am just not sure this is the "real" Brett Gardner. If he performs well, I don't have an issue with Gardner starting. Why would I? I'm a Yankee fan first and an individual player fan second.

Good post - you've been very consistant on Gardner. I too share your skeptisim on him as players with his skill set (speed as primary asset with distinct lack of power) have often struggled at the MLB level.

I, like you, also hope he suceedes but he'll always be view with a healthy does of skeptisim until he's proven himself for at least a year or two at the big league level.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 01:39 PM

Questioning someone's motives is just an indirect way of saying he or she must be too dumb to understand the argument which is why it is generally prohibited on forums.

But I wasn't questioning "your" motives at all. I was responding to those that YOU referred to who will "talk about him being no more than a 4th OF " if he has a few bad games.

I was merely trying to point out that is hightly unlikely that they would do that after only a couple of bad games, because all of those skeptical of Gardner call his 2009 season a SSS so how could they then, after just a few bad games, use those few games to prove their point? And IF they did, then yes I would with good cause question their motives.

I've followed baseball long enough to have a healthy skepticism about young players and to know that a few good or bad games are not a good basis to form an overall evalution of a player. I found a long time ago that is a good way to make bad decisions. I know that and agree with you. So again, I was NOT questioning you but rather questioning the hypocracy of anyone who would first dismiss last year's 284 PA's as not a good indicator due to it being a SSS and then turn around and use just a couple of games to prove their point.

I'm sorry if I offended, that was not my intent.

Blazer

04-19-10, 02:13 PM

Good post - you've been very consistant on Gardner. I too share your skeptisim on him as players with his skill set (speed as primary asset with distinct lack of power) have often struggled at the MLB level.

I, like you, also hope he suceedes but he'll always be view with a healthy does of skeptisim until he's proven himself for at least a year or two at the big league level.

I agree with this. Make no mistake I'm very happy about Gardner's hot streak and what he's contributed, yet I'm also not sold on a player whose skill is speed and little else. However, he does appear to be more patient at the plate than most of his ilk.

CommerceComet

04-19-10, 02:36 PM

I know that and agree with you. So again, I was NOT questioning you but rather questioning the hypocracy of anyone who would first dismiss last year's 284 PA's as not a good indicator due to it being a SSS and then turn around and use just a couple of games to prove their point.

I'm sorry if I offended, that was not my intent.I apologize for taking that statement more personally than I should have. (I just spent a long time on the phone (mostly on hold) with an IRS agent this morning trying to clear up some tax issues for a charity I do volunteer work for. It put me in a pretty cranky mood. :) )

For the sake of the Yankees, I hope that you are right about Gardner and I am wrong. You''ll have to be patient with me until my natural conservatism about young players is overcome.

GordonGecko

04-19-10, 02:55 PM

... yet I'm also not sold on a player whose skill is speed and little else...
You say little else because you hate him

Blazer

04-19-10, 03:00 PM

You say little else because you hate him

strange

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 03:14 PM

I apologize for taking that statement more personally than I should have. (I just spent a long time on the phone (mostly on hold) with an IRS agent this morning trying to clear up some tax issues for a charity I do volunteer work for. It put me in a pretty cranky mood. :) )

For the sake of the Yankees, I hope that you are right about Gardner and I am wrong. You''ll have to be patient with me until my natural conservatism about young players is overcome.No problem and I hope evrything went as well as could be expected with the IRS.

As for Gardner, I understand how his fugly swing (which while improving still has a lot more room to go) can get in the way of true love, but early signs show another very possible progression as his GB/FB ratio of 1.00 last year is 2.86 so far this season, while his K% is down to 10% from 16%. If he keeps those up, believe me you will eventually become a fan regardless of what he looks like.

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:26 PM

But at what cost? Gardner + a 12M pitcher is definately more valuable than a guy like Crawford.

I tend to agree. Once Granderson was obtained Gardner is just holding down that spot until Jeter or Montero (RF, Swish to LF) possibly need it. Then he's traded to someone who really needs a CF.

You are REALLY thinking OLD Yankees for sure. These Yanks DO value defense. It's a big part of not keeing Damon and Matsui.
We were getting old and very slow. Getting Granderson and putting Gardner in left is not an accident because they couldn't sign anyone better. Swisher in left? WHY??

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:28 PM

The problem here is good defense is boring to watch, especially to the casual fans.

That's just silly. Maybe to uneducated fans. Great defense is breathtaking to watch.
No part of the game I enjoy more. :)

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:29 PM

He does that over 500+ PAs for the Yankees this year, there won't be any talk of moving him in the off season.

The question is what is his true MLB talent level? He had one very good 8 week stretch in 2009 surrounded by some pretty poor offensive showings the rest of his time in the bigs.

OR He finally settled down and was in a VERY GOOD groove when he broke his damn finger.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 03:32 PM

You are REALLY thinking OLD Yankees for sure. These Yanks DO value defense. It's a big part of not keeing Damon and Matsui.
We were getting old and very slow. Getting Granderson and putting Gardner in left is not an accident because they couldn't sign anyone better. Swisher in left? WHY??

They didn't re-sign their DH because they valued defense? You don't say!

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 03:37 PM

We were getting old and very slow. Getting Granderson and putting Gardner in left is not an accident because they couldn't sign anyone better. Haha. You like preaching to the choir much?

JSG

04-19-10, 03:38 PM

These Yanks DO value defense. It's a big part of not keeing Damon and Matsui.We were getting old and very slow. Getting Granderson and putting Gardner in left is not an accident because they couldn't sign anyone better.

CHECK. i think brett will get his chance to stick. IMO he's been pretty solid so far, but to pencil him in longer term he'll have to show he can get the ball out of the IF on a consistent basis. he doesn't need to be a power guy at all. with this monster lineup, and his excellent speed, baserunning and D, i think he just has to show some consistency at the plate.

PS re damon, i think cashman was perfect throughout, tho i was surprised they lowballed so much at the end, 1/6 half deferred for a yr no interest !! i'm still not sure if that was A/ hal saying a budget is a budget, B/ cashman saying boras eat hot lead, or C/ cashman saying ya know, we have DH covered now and w gardner in the fold damon in LF is not worth more than that.

PS 2 scintillating hypo for the day: 7/31, tigers are well behind the twinks in the central and well behind the rays for the WC. tigers offer up damon for circa $3.5MM. who's our LFer 8/1 ??

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:39 PM

Wrong as far as I know. I never heard him say "Gardner hasn't proven himself to be an everyday player" and if I missed it please provide the link.

Bottom line is that Gardner's value is as a starting CF, which he would definately be on some other teams, including those who tried to trade for him over the winter. He just happens to be on a team with a better starting CF. So in a trade I would absolutely expect to get more value back than that eaqual to a 4th OF. Apparently you and perhaps others here don't agree. Hence my opinion that he is undervalued by many here.

Do YOU think Granderson is a better CF? I don't. He's very good, but so is Gardner. I keep seeing him freeze on those balls right at him. Tough chances for sure, but I think Gardy gets a better jump. If he's AS fast, he's getting to more balls.
Personally, I think the Yankees want nothing more than for Gardner to succeed. That they value the small ball ability he brings FAR more than anyone here. And that they've stuck him in LF to keep him on the down low. Out of the center light of playing center field in Yankee stadium WHILE trying to establish himself offensively.
I think they are doing everything possible to keep the pressure off him. To let him develop naturally.
I think if he hits .275+ and steals 50+ bases and scores 100+ runs out of the NINE hole (!!) that he's OUR center fielder long term as is Curtis in Left.
And the money for Crawford can go ELSEWHERE. ;)

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:42 PM

Having Gardner at the bottom of this lineup makes it a very well balanced lineup. Granderson and Gardner give this whole Yankee Offense a multi dimensionality it has rarely had in the past..a nice blend of average, power, patience, and speed. We can manufacture runs, drive you crazy on the bases, or clear the bases with round trippers. It's early, but I really like what I'm seeing so far.

Abso-bleepin-lutely.

I've been sick to death of our lack of speed before this year. Boring to sit around and wait on home runs all the time.

The Angels have been killing us with their speed.
Now we can match them. (since Figgins is gone too)

Me likey :D

JSG

04-19-10, 03:44 PM

.........And that they've stuck him in LF to keep him on the down low. Out of the center light of playing center field in Yankee stadium WHILE trying to establish himself offensively. I think they are doing everything possible to keep the pressure off him.......

not sure i buy this part. i think curtis is in CF both because he's the all star and it's a marquee position, and also because they're not sure brett is gonna be an everyday player at this point. i think this is more about not wanting to move granderson around if brett is platooned, rather than wanting brett to bloom away from the spotlight, so to speak.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 03:46 PM

If Gardner can keep an OPS above .700 while maintaining his excellent defense, there won't be more than a handful of LF's in the entire MLB who will be more valuable than him.

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:47 PM

i keep saying it: if brett gets 500 ABs, he'll steal 50 bases. curtis looks like he's gonna break his own personal best of 26 as well.

Not only does it have to be inspiring to Curtis to see Brett on base in front of him, but don't you already see a "top this" mentality developing between them on the basepaths? Curtis looks much more aggressive than what (limited) times I saw him for the Tigers. Of course he was expected to be a slugger there, while here he's more a speed guy with great all around game. (God I love both these kids!)
After seeing us sign aging, all stars offensively, usually with limited defense for SO long, this year is a joy to me.

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:52 PM

We currently have the most circular lineup I have ever witnessed.

I like that.
I've never heard it, but it instantly is understandable.
And accurate. :clap:

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:55 PM

They didn't re-sign their DH because they valued defense? You don't say!

Yes, I DO say. ANY Yankee fans knows that they let matsui go because they just didn't think he could play outfield at ALL anymore. Thus, he REALLY was a DH ONLY and that didn't fit this team as structured. They got Granderson (DEFENSE) and put Gardner in left.
See?

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 03:56 PM

OR He finally settled down and was in a VERY GOOD groove when he broke his damn finger.
I could be that. And if it was I'm sure than Brett will be a Yankee regular OF for years to come.

If it was just a nice hot streak that many players have from time to time then the Yanks will be looking for a new OF next year.

I hope Brett keeps this up and makes all the Carl Crawford speculation moot but only time will tell.

MLB007

04-19-10, 03:56 PM

Haha. You like preaching to the choir much?

Sorry, new here. Don't know who's who or how you think. Give me time. ;)

GordonGecko

04-19-10, 03:56 PM

Yes, I DO say. ANY Yankee fans knows that they let matsui go because they just didn't think he could play outfield at ALL anymore. Thus, he REALLY was a DH ONLY and that didn't fit this team as structured. They got Granderson (DEFENSE) and put Gardner in left.
See?
How's Nick Johnson working out in the outfield

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 03:57 PM

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 03:59 PM

Do YOU think Granderson is a better CF? I don't. He's very good, but so is Gardner. I keep seeing him freeze on those balls right at him. Tough chances for sure, but I think Gardy gets a better jump. If he's AS fast, he's getting to more balls.
Personally, I think the Yankees want nothing more than for Gardner to succeed. That they value the small ball ability he brings FAR more than anyone here. And that they've stuck him in LF to keep him on the down low. Out of the center light of playing center field in Yankee stadium WHILE trying to establish himself offensively.
I think they are doing everything possible to keep the pressure off him. To let him develop naturally.
I think if he hits .275+ and steals 50+ bases and scores 100+ runs out of the NINE hole (!!) that he's OUR center fielder long term as is Curtis in Left.
And the money for Crawford can go ELSEWHERE. ;)

As an all around player? Without question. Defensively? They are close enough where I don't believe it matters much who plays left. And that being the case keeping Granderson in CF where he'd be most comfortable starting the season on a new team I have no problem with. Long term it will be an interesting problem to have if Gardner keeps progressing.

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:01 PM

not sure i buy this part. i think curtis is in CF both because he's the all star and it's a marquee position, and also because they're not sure brett is gonna be an everyday player at this point. i think this is more about not wanting to move granderson around if brett is platooned, rather than wanting brett to bloom away from the spotlight, so to speak.

Agreed, if Gardner is a platoon player you don't want him in CF.
But i think there's a very thin line between them not being sure that Gardy is an everyday'er (valid) AND wanting to keep as much pressure off him so that he has the ultimate chance to succeed. They are copacetic.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:01 PM

How's Nick Johnson working out in the outfield

Thanks :)

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:03 PM

How's Nick Johnson working out in the outfield

???? There was never any plans to play him in the OF. He'll occasionally play 1st. (anyone else remember him as an excellent defensive 1st baseman when he was a kid?)
Not sure what point you're trying to make?

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:05 PM

We currently have the most circular lineup I have ever witnessed.

Does OLD = Senile :P Just kidding but you sure do have a short memory. I'm not knocking this squad at all and I do love the depth 1-9 and the pressure they can put on opposing teams with power and speed but...

Just last year the team put up a team OPS+ of 122 with 8 of 9 regulars posting 126 or better and as recently as 2007 the Yanks scored 968 runs and had 8 of 9 regulars post an OPS+ of 106 or better with a team OPS+ of 116.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:06 PM

Does OLD = Senile :P Just kidding but you sure do have a short memory. I'm not knocking this squad at all and I do love the depth 1-9 and the pressure they can put on opposing teams with power and speed but...

Just last year the team put up a team OPS+ of 122 with 8 of 9 regulars posting 126 or better and as recently as 2007 the Yanks scored 968 runs and had 8 of 9 regulars post an OPS+ of 106 or better with a team OPS+ of 116.

Go check out our current team OPS+, even with Tex and the Nick brothers doing squat. SSS be damned.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:06 PM

???? There was never any plans to play him in the OF. He'll occasionally play 1st. (anyone else remember him as an excellent defensive 1st baseman when he was a kid?)
Not sure what point you're trying to make?So are you saying Tex sits in interleague for Nick Johnson? If not Matsui's inability to play the OF is irrelevent since Swish can easily play 1B.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:07 PM

So are you saying Tex sits in interleague for Nick Johnson? If not Matsui's inability to play the OF is irrelevent since Swish can easily play 1B.

I was hoping this didn't need to be spelled out.

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:07 PM

I think if they knew Matusi would accept a 1-year $8M offer he'd be Yankee right now, bad knees and all.

I don't know, it would be nice to know but we never will. How many times could he barely hobble around the bases? Tremendous hitter but they weren't sure he was going to be able to stay healthy just DH'ing.......
They replaced him with a guy for a lot less money, so they weren't that concerned about making up his offensive numbers. (IMO)
I think Granderson in CF is enough of an upgrade to offset completely anything we lost by Matsui leaving.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:07 PM

Go check out our current team OPS+, even with Tex and the Nick brothers doing squat. SSS be damned.But with the Tex and the Nick brothers doing squat that's 3 sorta* black holes in the supposed "circular lineup", argument.

*OK some of them are still drawing BBs

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:08 PM

As an all around player? Without question. Defensively? They are close enough where I don't believe it matters much who plays left. And that being the case keeping Granderson in CF where he'd be most comfortable starting the season on a new team I have no problem with. Long term it will be an interesting problem to have if Gardner keeps progressing.

Strictly defensively. And I agree, the long term will be interesting.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:09 PM

But with the Tex and the Nick brothers doing squat that's 3 sorta* black holes in the supposed "circular lineup", argument.

*OK some of them are still drawing BBs

Nice, "The Nick brothers" has stuck. The point is, those 3 will produce at a .800+ OPS clip (considerably higher) so, if our team OPS+ is 138 now, imagine what it'll be like in a month.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:12 PM

I don't know, it would be nice to know but we never will. How many times could he barely hobble around the bases? Tremendous hitter but they weren't sure he was going to be able to stay healthy just DH'ing.......
They replaced him with a guy for a lot less money, so they weren't that concerned about making up his offensive numbers. (IMO)
I think Granderson in CF is enough of an upgrade to offset completely anything we lost by Matsui leaving.

$2M difference ($1.5 if they buyout Nick's "mutual") option isn't "a lot less money". And I seem to recall Godzilla "hobbling around the bases" 28 times last year and 4 more in the post season. And seeing as he's hobbling around with 3 HRs and a 1.000+ OPS so far this season seems like he might have something left in the tank.

I don't blame Matsui for presenting and quickly signing an offer with LAA based on what the market for DHs looked like but I still think if he'd have offered the same deal to NYY Cashman would have taken it.

OH and BTW I'm a big supporter of the Granderson deal and the Johnson signing once Matsui was off the board but I'd have prefered Matsui to Johnson.

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:13 PM

$2M difference ($1.5 if they buyout Nick's "mutual") option isn't "a lot less money". And I seem to recall Godzilla "hobbling around the bases" 28 times last year and 4 more in the post season. And seeing as he's hobbling around with 3 HRs and a 1.000+ OPS so far this season seems like he might have something left in the tank.

I don't blame Matsui for presenting and quickly signing an offer with LAA based on what the market for DHs looked like but I still think if he'd have offered the same deal to NYY Cashman would have taken it.

OH and BTW I'm a big supporter of the Granderson deal and the Johnson signing once Matsui was off the board but I'd have prefered Matsui to Johnson.

Likewise.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:16 PM

Nice, "The Nick brothers" has stuck. The point is, those 3 will produce at a .800+ OPS clip (considerably higher) so, if our team OPS+ is 138 now, imagine what it'll be like in a month.Still the 122 team OPS the Yanks put up was something like 3rd best in team history IIRC. Would love this year's squad to best that mark but let's see it happen over 100+ games instead of 12 before we crown this TGOE v 2.0 since the Tigers a few years ago have that title trade marked.

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:17 PM

So are you saying Tex sits in interleague for Nick Johnson? If not Matsui's inability to play the OF is irrelevent since Swish can easily play 1B.

Why would Tex sit for Nick Johnson?????

Would Matsui's inability to walk be relevent? Cuz they weren't always sure about that last year.
Still not sure what you point is.
We didn't sign Johnson OVER Matsui anyway. He makes a lot less money that went to sign a center fielder that makes a HUGE defensive upgrade on this team.
Johnson is a cheaper alternative that hopefully isn't as gimpy as Matsui ended up being. Much as we loved him.
He has a fabulous OBP that works in the 2 hole that opened when we didn't keep Damon. (also for $ AND defensive reasons)
This isn't really all that complicated. ;)

THEBOSS84

04-19-10, 04:17 PM

Still the 122 team OPS the Yanks put up was something like 3rd best in team history IIRC. Would love this year's squad to best that mark but let's see it happen over 100+ games instead of 12 before we crowd this TGOE v 2.0 since the Tigers a few years ago have that title trade marked.

Barring an injury to a main player, I don't see how this offense won't top last year's version. They're too good. It's scary.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:20 PM

Why would Tex sit for Nick Johnson?????

Would Matsui's inability to walk be relevent? Cuz they weren't always sure about that last year.
Still not sure what you point is.
We didn't sign Johnson OVER Matsui anyway. He makes a lot less money that went to sign a center fielder that makes a HUGE defensive upgrade on this team.
Johnson is a cheaper alternative that hopefully isn't as gimpy as Matsui ended up being. Much as we loved him.
He has a fabulous OBP that works in the 2 hole that opened when we didn't keep Damon. (also for $ AND defensive reasons)
This isn't really all that complicated. ;)
Are you always going to be this obtuse or only your first month here?

JSG

04-19-10, 04:20 PM

....... so, if our team OPS+ is 138 now, imagine what it'll be like in a month.

this is simply brain-exploding.

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:22 PM

OH and BTW I'm a big supporter of the Granderson deal and the Johnson signing once Matsui was off the board but I'd have prefered Matsui to Johnson.

100% agreement.
Nobody (that I've seen) chose Nick OVER Hideki. Best alternative once Matsui was gone is exactly correct.
And I don't think anyone on the Yankees or this forum thinks Matsui was washed up. Fabulous hitter.
But THEY saw him every day. THEY know what went on the lockerroom for him just to be able to DH! I think I've got to trust their judgement on this because they knew better than anyone what they were letting go offensively.

MLB007

04-19-10, 04:23 PM

Are you always going to be this obtuse or only your first month here?

You'll have to explain what I'm being obtuse about first before I can answer that. ;)

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 04:34 PM

Just last year the team put up a team OPS+ of 122 with 8 of 9 regulars posting 126 or better and as recently as 2007 the Yanks scored 968 runs and had 8 of 9 regulars post an OPS+ of 106 or better with a team OPS+ of 116. Hey, just my opinion, but "currently" I'll take our 139 OPS+ team with our 120 OPS+ #9 hitter (which for me helps make it the most circular I've seen). The number of runs scored is TOTALLY irrelevant. There is a difference between most circular and most potent.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 04:38 PM

Hey, just my opinion, but "currently" I'll take our 139 OPS+ team with our 120 OPS+ #9 hitter (which for me helps make it the most circular I've seen). The number of runs scored is TOTALLY irrelevant. There is a difference between most circular and most potent.
12 games is all I'm saying. This team clearly has a lot of offensive potential and is going to see a lot of middle relief as they drive up starters pitch counts but I think its a bit early to be making sweeping judgments after just 4 series.

Though I must admit it is impressive that they have come against BOS, LAA, TB & TEX and not say BAL, KC, CLE & TOR

flymick24

04-19-10, 05:10 PM

this is simply brain-exploding.

not really, because you figure that while some currently ice-cold players like teixeira, arod, and johnson start to heat up, the production from the some of the currently hot yankees (like jeter, posada, and cano) will considerably taper off.

i think this year's team will end up doing about just the same as last year's, with maybe an over/under of 8 on the OPS+ side

JSG

04-19-10, 05:20 PM

not really, because you figure that while some currently ice-cold players like teixeira, arod, and johnson start to heat up, the production from the some of the currently hot yankees (like jeter, posada, and cano) will considerably taper off.

i think this year's team will end up doing about just the same as last year's, with maybe an over/under of 8 on the OPS+ side

makes sense, but alas ........ i'm afraid you're too late ...........

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lr62Of7X53w/SxV68V1rvtI/AAAAAAAAFV0/0xPc0moFoas/s1600/exploding+head+300dpi.jpg

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 05:29 PM

... but I think its a bit early to be making sweeping judgments after just 4 series Geez, way to blow a simple statement out of proportion. It was really how the bottom of the order has started that promped my "most circular" thought that was prefaced with the use of "currently".

The bottom of any lineup is what makes it so circular, NOT how many runs the lineup in total scores. And after you decided to take issue with a simple opinion, I took a look and our 7,8,9 hitters have a combined average of 127 OPS+. So yes, without making any sweeping judgements, and not trying to project at all that this will be the case for the entire season, and with my short term memory fully intact, it is my opinion that "currently" THIS is the most circular lineup i have ever witnessed".

False1

04-19-10, 05:34 PM

I think that's Montero.Nope - referring to the Melky pic in post 378.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 05:39 PM

... it is my opinion that "currently" THIS is the most circular lineup i have ever witnessed".
They have a 3 hitter with a 41 OPS+ right now. Not excatly what you want in a "circular lineup". Look I realize Tex is probably going to finish the season with and OPS+ quite a bit higher than what Gardner has right now but let's not lose site of the fact that a few days ago, before Gardner got a whole bunch of infield singles this weekend - our 9 hitter was being questioned about weather he belonged in an MLB lineup by some. I'll be thrilled if Gardner keeps this pace but I'm willing to bet good money he finshes the season with an OPS+ less than his current 120. Interested in that bet?

themgmt

04-19-10, 05:46 PM

OldYankeeFan is correct, this lineup is better than last years.

themgmt

04-19-10, 05:47 PM

They have a 3 hitter with a 41 OPS+ right now. Not excatly what you want in a "circular lineup". Look I realize Tex is probably going to finish the season with and OPS+ quite a bit higher than what Gardner has right now but let's not lose site of the fact that a few days ago, before Gardner got a whole bunch of infield singles this weekend - our 9 hitter was being questioned about weather he belonged in an MLB lineup by some. I'll be thrilled if Gardner keeps this pace but I'm willing to bet good money he finshes the season with an OPS+ less than his current 120. Interested in that bet?

Gardner had a .400 OBP, then it went down to .333 (league average) now back up to .444. From the 9 hole.

The entire lineup could have an OBP over .360

JL25and3

04-19-10, 06:04 PM

Tremendous hitter but they weren't sure he was going to be able to stay healthy just DH'ing.......So instead, they sign Nick "The Iron Horse" Johnson?

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 06:13 PM

Gardner had a .400 OBP, then it went down to .333 (league average) now back up to .444. From the 9 hole.

The entire lineup could have an OBP over .360

They could. If they do this will be a better team than last year offensively. And that's a scary thought. I do like this team a lot and think it can be better than last year but I still think it is way to early to say it is better for sure.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 06:25 PM

I'll be thrilled if Gardner keeps this pace but I'm willing to bet good money he finshes the season with an OPS+ less than his current 120. Interested in that bet?Haha. The fact is that OPS+ is not IMO relevant to measuring Gardners individual offensive performance. However, I'll be happy to bet he will have a wRC+ of 100 or higher this year (that of an average offensive MLB player). As an anti Gardner poster who believes he is only a 4th OF, therefore projecting him to be well below average offensively, betting that he isn't =/> the average player should be a no-brainer for you. So interested in that bet?

False1

04-19-10, 06:47 PM

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 06:56 PM

Haha. The fact is that OPS+ is not IMO relevant to measuring Gardners individual offensive performance. However, I'll be happy to bet he will have a wRC+ of 100 or higher this year (that of an average offensive MLB player). As an anti Gardner poster who believes he is only a 4th OF, therefore projecting him to be well below average offensively, betting that he isn't =/> the average player should be a no-brainer for you. So interested in that bet?I think it is quite possible he can be an average MLB player offensively so no, not interested in it.

I could be wrong but I though it was you who were touting "our 9 hitter with his 120 OPS+".

And yes when he came up I did think he was a 4th OF and he may still be but he keeps hitting and running like this and he'll be much more than a 4th OF. But honestly his minor league numbers scremed 4th OF. The biggest thing in his favor is his reduced K-rate. He keeps this low K rate and he can reach the Brett Butler ceiling comp that I've been talking about since he was called up in 2008 and aviod the fate of the Willie Tevares and Corey Patterson of the MLB encyclopedia

delv

04-19-10, 07:02 PM

IMO, Patterson and Tavaras were never good comps to begin with, 'cause they never took walks in the minors or the majors.

Brett Butler is a good comp on the positive side, as Butler OBP'd above .400 in the minors.

On the negative side we have Reggie Willits, who has also had .400+ OBP numbers in the minors, but has yet to/never turned into a full-time major league player. He's become a useful 4th OF for LAA.

That is basically the spectrum across which Gardner may fall. It's huge, but it's clearer than anything else.

OldYankeeFan

04-19-10, 07:48 PM

I could be wrong but I though it was you who were touting "our 9 hitter with his 120 OPS+".No, I merely made an innocent comment that "currently" our lineup was the most circular I have witnessed, based primarily on the start of our 7,8,9 hitters who for me, is the group who is most responsible for making a lineup circular. You're the one to take that opinion and attach to it things I did not say or mean. Go back through my Gardner posts and you'll see I have no use for OPS+ when it comes to Gardner. OBP, wOBA and wRC+ are the only stats that matter to me when talking Gardner.

I think it is quite possible he can be an average MLB player offensively so no, not interested in it.... And yes when he came up I did think he was a 4th OF Nice to see you starting to come around.

The biggest thing in his favor is his reduced K-rate. I mentioned this earlier today (going from 16% last year to 10% so far this year) along with his GB/FB ratio going from 1.00 last year to 2.86 so far this season, as a very good sign that he once again he is making a progression from his previous season.

Where will he end up? No one really knows but all I ever wanted when it came to Gardner was for him to be given an opportunity so we can find out. So I'm just happy that Melky was dealt with idea of giving Gardner that chance.

wileedog

04-19-10, 08:15 PM

So instead, they sign Nick "The Iron Horse" Johnson?

Cashman has said several times they were surprised they got the production they did from Matsui given how bad his knees were, and they clearly didn't think it was a good gamble to try and squeeze blood from a stone one more year. Its nice that Matsui is mashing in April, lets see where he is in August when those knees have been drained 4 or 5 times.

Nick has an injury history, but a series of really bad breaks is not the same as a chronic condition, especially when the guy is 5 years younger and they are taking him out of fielding duties.

JSG

04-19-10, 09:02 PM

Cashman has said several times they were surprised they got the production they did from Matsui given how bad his knees were, and they clearly didn't think it was a good gamble to try and squeeze blood from a stone one more year. Its nice that Matsui is mashing in April, lets see where he is in August when those knees have been drained 4 or 5 times.

Nick has an injury history, but a series of really bad breaks is not the same as a chronic condition, especially when the guy is 5 years younger and they are taking him out of fielding duties.

bada bing. bada boom.

Yankee Tripper

04-19-10, 09:40 PM

Where will he end up? No one really knows but all I ever wanted when it came to Gardner was for him to be given an opportunity so we can find out. So I'm just happy that Melky was dealt with idea of giving Gardner that chance.
Well Winn looks toast and I like Thanes as a lefty masher but don't want him getting more than 40ish or so starts this year so I'm pretty sure ell have a good idea what Gardner can or can't do come August.

I hope he keeps up this pace but I'll be very happy if puts up a .280/.350 line with an 80%+ SB success rate. That would fantastic as far as I'm concerned, anything better would be just gravy.

False1

04-19-10, 10:09 PM

OldYankeeFan

04-20-10, 07:35 AM

I hope he keeps up this pace but I'll be very happy if puts up a .280/.350 line with an 80%+ SB success rate. That would fantastic as far as I'm concerned, anything better would be just gravy.I agree as that's pretty much what I projected him to do this year. However I probably have a greater ceiling for him this year than most here as I am a believer in Gardners ability for decent progressions from one year to the next. So far this year his progressions appears to be in K% and GB/FB ratio. Even if he ends up with just 1/2 of the progression he has shown so far in those areas, he could end up with around a .380 OBP, which would have put him 3rd among all of last years CF. Gravy indeed.

stazsanity

04-20-10, 07:48 AM

Looking at that picture above, Melky also has a double chin. It's where he stores all his clutchiness. Brett is too selfish to pack away some clutchfat.

intriguing as well as histerical.

Haha. The fact is that OPS+ is not IMO relevant to measuring Gardners individual offensive performance. However, I'll be happy to bet he will have a wRC+ of 100 or higher this year (that of an average offensive MLB player). As an anti Gardner poster who believes he is only a 4th OF, therefore projecting him to be well below average offensively, betting that he isn't =/> the average player should be a no-brainer for you. So interested in that bet?

i've made this argument for some time now and agree with you whole-heartedly...OPS+ will never be an accurate measurement of Gardner's value- his ability to get on base (and that alone) will be the measure.

grizy

04-20-10, 10:52 AM

Interesting stat.

Brett Gardner (and Jorge Posada) made contact with 100% of the strikes he swung at.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=30&type=5&season=2010&month=0

His overall contact% is also 8th highest at 93.5% for batters with a minimum of 30PAs.

Pretty good sign that he's not getting overpowered anymore IMO.

delv

04-20-10, 11:06 AM

he mentioned that Long's adjustments sped up his swing, so, given with his good eye, he can afford to let the ball travel more (thus the oppo-hits)

OldYankeeFan

04-20-10, 11:48 AM

he mentioned that Long's adjustments sped up his swing, so, given with his good eye, he can afford to let the ball travel more (thus the oppo-hits)Exactly, and it also helps also account for his better K% and better BB% as he is seeing the ball longer before comitting to a swing. He also seems to be staying on the ball longer, keeping the bat level, for a longer time through the impact zone which I think is responsible for his much better GB/FB ratio. These look to be significant progressions. Whether or not he can sustain them and to what degree is yet to be seen, but at a mimimum I have to believe some of it will stick resullting another season in which he improved himelf and his value to this team.

Slowly but surely Brett has made improvements to his swing. It's still not a thing of beauty but I don't think there are many left who would kick it out of bed.

Curmudgeon

04-20-10, 12:26 PM

I like Gardner. He's a slap hitter, but with him, a high, slow chopper that gets past the pitcher is a double, because he'll beat it out and then steal second. He really puts pressure on the defense.

I would have no problem with moving Gardner to lead off and batting Jeter in the two hole, although that would likely cost Jeter some points off his batting average (but increase his RBI total).

I just wish Gardner would learn how to drag bunt.

GordonGecko

04-20-10, 01:01 PM

ajra21

04-20-10, 02:22 PM

Curmudgeon

04-20-10, 02:31 PM

in one off games, fine but brett needs to stay in the 9 spot.

Why not? He's getting on base at a good clip and stealing bases. With Nick Johnson struggling they would score more runs with Gardner leading off.

And why does Jeter have to lead off? Jeter has hit in the 2 hole before. He's batted third, too. With his ability to go the other way, Jeter is an excellent #2 hitter.

Jeter is just a good hitter period. Doesn't matter where you put him, so long as it is near the top of the order to maximize his plate appearances.

jesterno2

04-20-10, 02:37 PM

jeter was the best 2-hole hitter on the planet from '96-about '05, but since then he started grounding into way too many double plays. i actually prefer having him in the leadoff spot cause he gets so many hits to start the game. the only thing i wish he would do is take a few more pitches to allow the batters behind him to see how the pitcher's stuff is that day, but i guess having nick "go for 10 pitches/ab" johnson behind him takes care of that. that was one good thing damon did as a leadoff hitter, take a lot of pitches. if jeter took 5-6 pitches most leadoff ab's and then the pitcher had to try to strike out or walk NJ (since that's all he is doing these days) i think we would go through pitchers even faster.

all in all i cant complain though since jeter hits the ball. i think eventually gardner could be a great leadoff man, he reminds me of juan pierre in his heyday but with a better steal %, but i agree that #2 is leading off til he takes himself out of that spot for the betterment of the team (not any time soon).

GordonGecko

04-20-10, 02:40 PM

IMO Nick Johnson should be #9 he's pretty useless at #2

jesterno2

04-20-10, 02:45 PM

IMO Nick Johnson should be #9 he's pretty useless at #2

he could certainly do fine there, but a guy that has a .409 obp with .158 average, second in the league in P/PA at 4.59 and leads the league in BB isn't exactly "useless" in the #2 hole. hell, the guy has only 6 hits, but has 5 rbi's.

if people are going to give tex a pass and are just waiting for him to hit the ball, why don't you give NJ a chance to do the same. if he keeps up this P/PA and BB rate and actually starts swinging and hitting the ball the guy might actually lead the league in OBP this year.

plus if he is still on base cause of the walks and tex and arod start hitting bombs he is going to score a hell of a lot of runs.

JSG

04-20-10, 02:52 PM

IMO Nick Johnson should be #9 he's pretty useless at #2

hey, is tex useless @ 3# ?? i think they just need to give it time. your best OBP guy at the end is somewhat aaaaahhhhhs-bk-wards. let's see how nick hits over the next month before we get too bent out of shape. also, gardner has played nicely but I'd like to see him do this over a larger stretch and also let him get his swing worked out (by his own admission) as well.

GordonGecko

04-20-10, 03:02 PM

hey, is tex useless @ 3# ?? i think they just need to give it time. your best OBP guy at the end is somewhat aaaaahhhhhs-bk-wards. let's see how nick hits over the next month before we get too bent out of shape. also, gardner has played nicely but I'd like to see him do this over a larger stretch and also let him get his swing worked out (by his own admission) as well.
Sorry but I hate Nick Johnson, kind of like you guys that hate Gardner which is very ironic :D

jesterno2

04-20-10, 03:05 PM

Sorry but I hate Nick Johnson, kind of like you guys that hate Gardner which is very ironic :D

lol, i don't hate gardner, i've been one of his biggest fans since he was in the minors, i always thought he would be a great piece for this team. i'm really glad to see that he is starting to put everything together. i always thought he would even end up being a better player than ellsbury but i guess we'll have to see after another couple seasons.

i think NJ is getting a little too much flack, especially since the guy isn't off to a hot start but is still producing.

Curmudgeon

04-20-10, 03:28 PM

pleasepassthesoup

04-20-10, 03:35 PM

R.V.47

04-20-10, 03:35 PM

It's really not a question of like or dislike of either player. It's about scoring more runs. Until Johnson starts hitting, I like Gardner leading off. Ride the hot hand. I'm not a big fan of set lineups anyway.

I wouldnt exactly call Gardner hot. He used his speed and took advantage of some shotty fielding in that Texas series. He hasnt exactly been scolding the ball but he is getting on base. Still wouldnt move him out of the 9 spot though especially with Jeter hitting well behind him.

Yankee Fan in Boston

04-20-10, 03:36 PM

he could certainly do fine there, but a guy that has a .409 obp with .158 average, second in the league in P/PA at 4.59 and leads the league in BB isn't exactly "useless" in the #2 hole. hell, the guy has only 6 hits, but has 5 rbi's.

if people are going to give tex a pass and are just waiting for him to hit the ball, why don't you give NJ a chance to do the same. if he keeps up this P/PA and BB rate and actually starts swinging and hitting the ball the guy might actually lead the league in OBP this year.

plus if he is still on base cause of the walks and tex and arod start hitting bombs he is going to score a hell of a lot of runs.

This makes a whole lot of sense to me. I don't understand how a guy who is getting on base more than 40% of the time is hurting us, especially the way he makes the pitcher work.