New York Yankees

Two long seasons. That’s a general impression that most fans have, since the New York Yankees are the team that wins the World Series every year. But a World Series title hasn’t actually happened since October 26, 2000. What has happened to this once proud dynasty that has now lost five of the last six post-season games that it has played?

That last sentence was a joke; obviously this is still one of the top teams in baseball, but things have been a little different the last two Octobers.

Nothing really bad has changed in terms of the quality of the team. The Yankees last year were every bit as good as the 1999 team that swept the Braves and went 11-1 in the postseason, probably a little bit better. The 2000 and 2001 teams are comparable. The difference was that in 2000 things broke right and they beat a much better team, and in 2001, things didn’t fall as well and they lost to a slightly better team. Take a look at the chart below that shows the Bombers park-adjusted runs for and allowed, as well as their Pythagorean record:

So aside from luck, why has there been a steady decline in the post-season record? First the competition has been tougher. Comparing the Yankees post-season winning percentage to the average record of their opponents, you get a -.49 correlation, a fairly strong inverse correlation between the quality of their competition and how far they advanced. In 2000 when they had their worst team since 1993, they won the World Series in part because the best team they played only won 94 games. In 2001 they were a little better, but their opponents were much better, and they lost a close Series in the end.

Running the same correlation with the Yankees’ own record gives just a .08 correlation (Pythagorean record shows just a .12), showing their regular season record has had very little to do with predicting how well they play in the postseason.

So really the question of whether the Yankees can again climb atop the mountain is two-fold: first, will they be better, but nearly as importantly, how good will their post-season competition be? Although this preview is designed to answer the first question, don’t forget that the second question remains lurking in the background.

Another thing to note is that this team has outperformed its Pythagorean record each of the last five years, by an average of a little more than four games per season. That’s pretty significant; the team continues to add up to more than the sum of its parts and that’s something that needs to be taken into account when forecasting the future.

Observing the chart above, it’s easy to notice the pitching suffered a big hit from 1998 to 1999, and (along with luck) was the main reason for the drop from 114 to 97 wins. The pitchers were basically the same; the only major difference was Roger Clemens replacing David Wells in the rotation, which should have been a positive, not a negative. Yet, the team lost 84 runs relative to the league. They picked 18 of those runs back up in 2000, have been basically the same since, but haven’t approached the level of 1998. Was it the pitching that dropped off? Or was it the fielding? We said the pitchers were basically the same, right? In recent years it seems the pitching has gotten even better, with a still-in-his-prime Mike Mussina replacing an aging David Cone in the rotation for 2001.

Were the same pitchers aging and having bad years, or did their fielding support falter? I’ve heard several analysts who are also Yankee fans complain about the decline of the fielding, but I’m not so sure. Let’s look at the Diamond Mind ratings of the team’s core defenders since 1998:

From 1998 to 1999, the fielding did drop a little bit, but a slight decline at catcher and third base did not cost the team a total of 84 runs. In 1999 Clemens actually pitched considerably worse than Wells did in 1998. Orlando Hernandez and Hideki Irabu slipped also, and Andy Pettitte had an off year. Most of the decline can be attributed to the fact that the pitching declined, not the defense.

In 2000, the team picked up 18 runs defensively, but the offense fell off a cliff (more on that later). The pitching was a little better. Taking the park (which played as an extreme pitcher’s park in 1999, but a slight hitter’s park in 2000) into account, Clemens was much better. Pettitte bounced back significantly. In 1999, Rivera and Jason Grimsley were the only relievers with significant time and ERAs under 4.00; in 2000 Jeff Nelson was great. Jorge Posada had a very good year behind the plate, but that was offset by Brosius’ declining range. Most of the pitching gains mentioned above were offset by the fact that Cone and Denny Neagle (44 combined starts) were awful, but the team did gain 18 runs.

I mentioned that the offense fell off a cliff. The league average was 849 runs in 1999, 853 in 2000, offensive levels were essentially the same; and the Yanks got a breakout year from Jorge Posada. Yet, the team lost 165 runs relative to the league, and dropped 10 ½ games in the standings. I’m not sure if it was the weather, but in 1999 Yankee Stadium played as an extreme pitchers park, and in 2000 it played as a fairly good hitters’ park. So while Tino Martinez looked like he only slipped a little, from .263/.341/.458 to .258/.328/.422, it was actually a massive drop. Paul O’Neill fell from .285/.353/.459 to .283/.336/.424, another huge drop. Brosius had a similar drop, and Jeter, who played like an MVP in 1999, was merely a very good hitter in 2000.

In 2001, the fielding slipped considerably. Jeter’s defensive shortcomings grew to the point of being a problem. O’Neill’s range also became problematic. Posada wasn’t throwing nearly as well. Yet, the team gained seven runs relative to the league on the defensive side. The reason for this is obvious: Mike Mussina replaced Cone in the rotation, and was arguably the best pitcher in the American League; despite finishing fifth in the AL Cy Young Award balloting. Clemens improved again, winning the Cy Young Award. Pettitte had a good year too. Yet, the decline of the fielding offset much of the gains from the pitching staff.

Offensively, the team bounced back somewhat, gaining 37 runs relative to 2000. Martinez, Brosius and O’Neill all bounced back in their last hurrahs, but management realized the offense was in need of an overhaul, which leads us to the team’s composition in 2002.

Jason Giambi replaced Martinez. Robin Ventura replaced Brosius. Alfonso Soriano developed into the second best offensive second baseman in the game. The team gained 119 runs relative to the league and finished with the best offense in baseball.

Still, you could hear the grumblings from the Bronx about how the pitching had fallen off. Mussina wasn’t having a good year (His K/BF were down 13%, his HR/BF were up 36%, and his BB/BF were up 17%). Clemens was hurt and didn’t pitch at a high level when he wasn’t. But Pettitte was excellent when he was healthy, as was Hernandez. David Wells joined the rotation and pitched pretty well. Yet, the team lost six runs relative to the league.

Here’s where I’ll differ from the typical stathead hypothesis about the Yankee defense slipping even more in 2002. Ventura replaced Brosius who had gone from excellent to average during 1998-2001. Ventura was outstanding defensively. Soriano made too many errors, but his range improved. An alarming note is that the team turned 32 fewer double plays than in 2001. Context wasn’t an issue either, the Yankees had 1736 non-HR baserunners allowed in 2001, 1701 in 2002. The team received 557 1/3 innings from lefties in 2001, 552 in 2002. The team struck out 131 more batters in 2001 as well. Those 32 double plays probably cost the team 15 runs.

Rondell White was outstanding defensively in LF, his arm isn’t very good, but his range is outstanding, and in leftfield, I’ll take the range. The only position with a significant dropoff was at 1B, the least important offensive position. Tino was very good; Giambi and Nick Johnson were average. I know statheads (and others) complain about Bernie Williams’ range in CF, but according to Diamond Mind, he’s been an average centerfielder almost every year of his career, including last year, so any slippage hasn’t showed up in their system yet, at least not enough to drop him a notch, though his arm is pretty bad at this point. I’d move him to left field, but I don’t think a centerfielder with average range and a bad arm is going to make a defense awful.

I don’t think the fielding was great in 2002, but it was probably about equal with 2001 (it would have been better if all of those double plays weren’t lost), and probably about league average, maybe just a little below. Don’t get me wrong, the fielding could be improved if some major changes were implemented, but other than switching Hideki Matsui and Williams, I don’t see how that could happen without a major shakeup on offense. As bad as Jeter’s defense is, he’s still a hell of a hitter for a shortstop, and until they can find a shortstop that hits as well as Juan Rivera (who should be in rightfield), Matsui or Williams (one of whose bat would have to come out of the lineup to move Jeter to the outfield), <i>and</i> is better than Jeter with the glove; I’ll take my chances with Jeter at shortstop. The declines of Mussina and Clemens basically offset the improvement from the other pitchers and the defense. So what does all of this mean for the future? Let’s look at the lineup:

Offense: Giambi is one of the best hitters in baseball, but his offensive winning percentage (OWP) was down to .765 last year; he was .820 during his 2000-01. He’s still better than his breakout year of 1999, but he’s not the player he was two seasons ago, and at age 32, a return to that 2000-01 level isn’t likely. He’s still deservedly one of the most feared hitters in the game, but he’s a little closer to the mortals at this point than he was at his very best.

Johnson has been getting most of the time at first base vs. RHP early in the season. This is a big year for him. To some he was mildly disappointing last year, but .347/.402 is pretty good for a 23-year old coming off a major wrist injury. I think he’ll gradually improve, similar to the career path of Derrek Lee, although he might not have quite the breakout that Lee did at age 24 because it looks like he’s not going to play very much vs. LHP. I think that’s a mistake developmentally. Johnson was terrible against them last year (.175/.316/.302), but if he’s going to be the regular first baseman, he needs to learn how to hit them, and he’s not going to get that experience on the bench. I realize the Yankees are trying to win the World Series, but the team needs to think long-term as well.

Trammell will be the DH vs. LHP and I imagine he’ll see some time in the OF as the season progresses. He hammered LHP last year (.387/.534) and is .375/.485 against over the last 3 years, so if you must platoon Johnson, Trammell is the guy to platoon him with.

Defense: Giambi is underrated. He’s considered average by Diamond-Mind; I doubt many feel he’s that good. Johnson is overrated; he’s considered average and most probably think he’s better than that. I imagine this year or next, their reputations will catch up; as Giambi ages he’ll get worse, and Johnson should get better with more experience.

Trammell isn’t that good defensively as an outfielder; he has a decent arm, but doesn’t get to many fly balls. He’s perfectly cast on this team as a DH and pinch-hitter vs. LHP. In Yankee Stadium, the Yankees will see lots of LHP; considering they picked up a pretty good lefty pitching prospect in Mark Phillips, I really like the deal from a Yankee perspective. I say this despite the fact that White also hits lefties very well and is an outstanding defensive left fielder, despite his weak arm. White is injury prone, and that becomes a bigger concern for a team with a very old pitching staff and roster. A solid young prospect like Phillips is a nice acquisition.

Offense: His breakout year might be a little overrated. I’m not saying he wasn’t great last year, but it’s not all positive. He created 124 runs, but he also made 516 outs. Jeff Kent created eight fewer runs, but also used 64 fewer outs and played in a park that reduced offense by about 17% (his overall offense by 9%). Yankee Stadium reduced offense by a little less than 4% (overall offense for Soriano understated by 2%). So in the same context, Kent would have created about the same number of runs and used 64 fewer outs, which is worth an extra 11 runs or so.

Don’t take this is as a knock on Soriano, he’s 25 this year, and he has to be included in the discussion as the best offensive second baseman in the game. I’d say the future is pretty bright. We’re talking about a truly unique player; he’s a second baseman that has Jim Thome as his third most similar player (at a very low score of 925). Because there just aren’t many players with this skill set, Thome isn’t truly similar at all. I think the worst case scenario is Juan Samuel; the ceiling is pretty wide open at this point. I think he’ll slip a little bit this year, but he’ll still be one of the best second basemen in the game.

Defense: Getting better. His range is improving, but he made a couple of more errors too. I don’t see him as ever being a Gold Glove candidate, but he’s adequate with the glove. If you can hit like he did last year, there won’t be many complaints, though the team’s dropoff in double plays last year is alarming.

Offense: This could be trouble. I heard the gasp from the Bronx all the way in Virginia last Monday night. Jeter is going to miss at least six weeks, maybe more, but it looks like season ending surgery will be avoided. If the injury requires surgery and he’s out for the year drop all estimates for Yankee wins this year by about 4 or 5 (figure about a game a month). Basically, Jeter has stabilized since his career year in 1999. His offensive winning percentages (OWPs) the last 3 years are .628, .632, .603; that’s outstanding for a shortstop.

Almonte did not have a good year in 2002. We’re talking about a player who hit .235 with a .282 OBP in 221 AB at AAA Columbus last year. In Norwich (AA) he was better, a .342 OBP, but he still hit .241. He does have some pop, hitting 17 HR in 408 AB combined. But his MLE for 2002 was .219/.284/.382. The one positive is the isolated power (.163), which is very good for a shortstop. So there is power potential, and if the hits fall in and he raises his average 60 points, a season like the one that Toronto’s Chris Woodward had last year would result. He hit .271 at Norwich in 2000 and .287 at Columbus in 2001, so that is not out of the realm of possibility. He could have been battling an injury that I don’t know about last year (I don’t believe there was any injury, but I’ve read that his attitude became a problem, resulting in his demotion to Double-A) or he could’ve just had a bad year. If he’s up for the whole season, I’d say he’s going to hit about .250 with 12-18 HR, 45-50 BB. Let’s Figure .250/.320/.420.

Defense: Jeter is pretty sure-handed, with just 14 errors in 2002, but his range is slipping; he’s definitely below average. I think he would be better off on the Robin Yount career path, moving to center field. He’s got a great arm, but we wouldn’t know for sure that he could play the outfield until someone let him shag flies for awhile. Third base is also an option, especially if Drew Henson ends up flopping. Again, this change can wait until the Yankees find another shortstop that can hit, but I think it’s time to start looking.

Almonte has major league range and arm strength, but is error prone (26 in 114 games last year), which could frustrate Yankee fans - and management.

Offense: Robin Ventura has pretty quietly had an outstanding career. Last year was nothing different, Ventura hit just .247, but with 90 walks and 27 HR he ended up with a .368 OBP and .458 SLG. He had trouble with left-handers, hitting just .218, so sitting him vs. the occasional LHP would be a good idea; adding Todd Zeile fits nicely to that end, as Zeile still hits left-handed pitchers fairly well.

Defense: Ventura is one of the best defensive third basemen in the American League, his range and arm are outstanding, although he did make 23 errors in 2002. If Zeile gets 20 starts vs. LHP, he’s not a very good defender at this point, but he does hit LHP pretty well, so you can live with that and bring Ventura in for the last 3 innings when you have a lead. Ventura will be 35 this season, so it’s likely his range will start to slip, but he’s got quite a bit of room to spare.

Offense: The best player in Japan was signed by the Yankees in the off-season. Matsui, should be one of the best left fielders in the AL, his MLE (thanks Rob Neyer) shows him as about a .410/.530 hitter in the majors. Since my scouting trip to Japan was hampered by the fact that I do this for free and have a job and a finite supply of dollars, I’ll take Rob’s word for it and call this a great signing for the Yankees.

Defense: All reports are good, that he’d actually be capable of playing in center field, so I’ll assume he can handle left field. In Yankee Stadium there’s more ground to cover in left field anyway and while Raul Mondesi has become pretty deficient in terms of range, his arm is still great, so if Bernie Williams is keeping the center field job, left field makes sense for Matsui.

Offense: Williams hit .333 last year, posting the 3rd highest OBP and average of his career. It’s easy to forget that he is going to be 35 this September, since he’s one of the surest things in the game. He was probably the most consistent offensive player in the AL from 1996-2001. His average was between .305-.342, his OBP .391-.435 and his SLG .522-.575. In 2002 his average and OBP stayed in within the range, but his SLG dipped to .493, and he hit only 19 HR, lowest since 18 in 1995. Expect another year around .300-.310, with 75-80 BB, 33-38 2B. Who knows if he’ll hit 15 or 25 HR; that will decide whether or not he’s just good or one of the best offensive outfielders in the AL.

Defense: Statheads tend to think Bernie’s defense is pretty overrated and he should be moved to left field. Like I said earlier, I trust the people at Diamond Mind more than anyone when it comes to defense, and they’ve rated his range average as a center fielder (they rate each outfield position separately) every single year of his career, except for 1992, when he was very good and 1995, when he was excellent. The problem is his throwing arm, which has gone from consistently fair to poor last year. For that reason, I think it’s time to move him over to left field, where he’d have outstanding range (an average center fielder is usually a very good left fielder) and his arm would do the least damage. Matsui should be in center field.

Simply a terrible, stupid trade last year. No other words can describe it. A rumor that I’ve heard says that Brian Cashman was left out of the decision, so don’t blame it on him. This was George’s doing.

Juan Rivera is a better player right now, let alone the fact that he is eight years younger and would play for the minimum. Mondesi hit .232/.308/.432 last year. Combined Rivera’s MLE at Columbus and his 83 AB in the majors were .294/.328/.448. His 2002 projects to 41 2B and 15 HR if you give 600 PA (he missed about two months with a knee injury). Did I mention the fact that he’s eight years younger? In 2001, Rivera hit .322 with 29 2B and 28 HR between Norwich and Columbus, so it wasn’t a fluke season; if anything it was a consolidation season that proved he is for real.

Marcus Thames would even be an arguably better option than Mondesi. Sure he had a terrible year in Columbus (MLE .192/.274/.355). But he still drew walks and hit for power, his MLE secondary average was .269. In 2001 he tore up Norwich, though he was a little old for the league. It’s quite possible the singles just didn’t fall last year for whatever reason, but I still think he’ll be a good player.

Defense: Mondesi was awful in RF last year. He has a great arm, but he just doesn’t get to anything out there. In 2000, Diamond Mind rated him as very good, but in 2001 it slipped to fair and in 2002 he was poor, so it wasn’t just a bad year; he’s lost something out there. It’s strange too, because he had elbow surgery in 2000, yet the arm has stayed great, but the range is gone.

Among the youngsters, Thames is a pretty good outfielder and Rivera would at least be league average.

Offense: Posada has taken a step back from his career year in 2000 (even after adjusting for declining offensive levels around baseball) but has settled in nicely as a .365/.470 hitter, which makes him one of the best 2 or 3 offensive catchers in baseball, depending on whether Ivan Rodriguez stays healthy. Posada will be 32 in August, so how much longer this lasts is open to debate. I think there’s maybe another year or two of this left, but I’ll be shocked if Posada is still catching and hitting this well by 2005. Something will have to give, unless he turns out to be a freak of nature like Carlton Fisk.

Defense: Posada is adequate behind the plate, he’s about average throwing, but nothing special in terms of mobility. I always hear people complaining about the way that he blocks the plate, but last year he really improved, allowing just 7 passed balls (17, 11, 18 from 1999-2001). He’s nothing special back there, but he gives perfectly acceptable defense when you consider the bat.

We’ve already touched on Zeile and Trammell, let’s discuss the rest of the bench.

Flaherty is a pretty bad player. He’s average defensively and useless with the bat. Widger is just as average defensively, though his reputation isn’t as good with pitchers. Honestly though, the most important part about a catcher’s defense is being <i>there</i>, which allows another good bat into the lineup somewhere else. I’ll take the catcher that throws out 20% of runners and can hit over the one that throws 35% of the runners and can’t hit any time, especially in this era where stolen bases are down. Widger can hit lefties pretty well; I would’ve kept him, it would be nice to have another capable pinch-hitter on the bench.

Wilson is not a good utility infielder, but neither was Luis Sojo. Wilson isn’t really any good anywhere defensively, and he’s a zero as a hitter. He hit .283 from 1997 through 2000 (676 AB, with 43 2B, 9 HR and 47 BB), but the last two years he’s hit just .201, with just 10 2B and 4 HR in 333 AB (17 BB). He’s going to be 30 in July; I wouldn’t be willing to wait for a turnaround, that’s why they have teams like Milwaukee and Baltimore.

I like Latham as the fifth outfielder. He’s good enough defensively to play anywhere in a pinch, and he’s a switch-hitter, so there’s flexibility there. If they aren’t going to start Rivera or Thames, they should be playing everyday in Columbus, but Latham will be 30 in May, so there aren’t any long-term development issues there-he is what he is.

Roger Clemens was hurt tremendously by the Yankees’ defense last year, perhaps more than any other New York pitcher.

Despite striking out 9.6 batters per nine innings (the fourth highest rate of his 19-year career) and giving up only 18 homers in 180 innings, Clemens had a 4.35 ERA and opponents hit .250 off of him.

Clemens gave up a hit on 30.7% of his balls in play in 2002, meaning the defense gave up a hit 69.3% of the time, which is an awful percentage. In comparison, the worst BIP-out % of any team defense in baseball last year was 69.1%, by Cleveland, and 27 of the 30 teams converted over 70% of BIP into outs. Basically, Clemens had defensive support that was equivalent to the worst defense in all of baseball last year.

Clemens’ actual ERA was 4.35 - 1.01 worse than his DIPS ERA of 3.34. Among pitchers with 170+ innings last year, that ranks as the biggest increase in actual ERA over DIPS ERA in baseball. Now, the Yankees’ D hasn’t really improved a whole lot since last year, but it is still unlikely that Clemens will give up a hit on more than 30% of his BIP in 2003.

The outstanding K rate shows that "The Rocket" can still get it done. His 2002 K rate was his highest since his days in Toronto, when he won back-to-back Cy Young awards in 1997 and 1998. I really think that, if Clemens wanted to, he could easily be an effective starting pitcher for another 3-4 seasons, much like Nolan Ryan. The main key for longevity and effectiveness in a pitcher is his strikeout rate and Clemens shows absolutely no signs of slowing down in that department.

If he had a better defense behind him, Clemens might put together another sub-3.00 ERA season, but he’ll have to make due with what he’s got and will probably end up somewhere around 3.50-4.00.

Who is the greatest right-handed pitcher in the history of baseball?

a) Roger Clemens
b) Walter Johnson
c) Pedro Martinez
d) Cy Young
e) Greg Maddux

Whatever your opinion is (and I left out some good names too), it is absolutely amazing that we have three of the top handful of all-time pitching right now (and that big left-handed guy in Arizona isn’t bad either).

For the first time in his career, Andy Pettitte did not pitch over 175 innings in a season. He did have a very nice year when he was healthy though, going 13-5 with a 3.28 ERA (his lowest since 1997) in 22 starts.

As Pettitte has aged, he has become less and less of a ground ball pitcher. From 1997-1999 he posted GB/FB ratios of 2.11, 2.22 and 2.08, meaning he had twice as many grounders as fly balls. He had a 1.34 ratio last year, the third straight year of a significant move towards more fly balls.

As he has become more fly ball-prone, his control has improved and his strikeout rate has risen slightly. After posting K/BB ratios of 1.68, 1.36 and 1.56 from 1998-2000, he had a K/BB rate of 4.00 in 2001 and 3.03 last year.

Andy Pettitte is officially on the wrong side of 30, but he is getting better with age and I would expect him to have a very good 2003 season. He’s the type of pitcher (in the Tommy John mold - lefty, ground balls, good control, controls the running game) that can have success for a long time, even if his K rate declines a little bit.

Fun Stat: In 1,584 career innings, Andy Pettitte has allowed 91 stolen bases, or one every 17.4 innings. In 1,569 career innings, Hideo Nomo has allowed 258 stolen bases, or one every six innings.

Mike Mussina struggled throughout the majority of last season before putting together a great September to finish with a 4.05 ERA, his highest since 1996.

His struggles can be traced to two things: homers and strikeouts. His K rate dropped almost one strikeout per nine innings from 2001 and his homer rate was awful for much of the season.

Mussina gave up seven homers in 34 April innings, seven more in 35 June innings and a total of 18 in the first half of the season (115 innings or one every 6.4 innings). As a result, he had a 4.54 ERA at the All-Star break.

He turned it around in the second half, particularly in the season’s final month. He pitched 43 innings in September, allowing only one homer, striking out 46 batters and posting a 1.48 ERA. Overall in the second half, he gave up a homer every 11.2 innings, almost half as many per nine innings as he allowed in the first half.

I am not exactly sure why Mussina suddenly stopped striking as many people out and got so homer-prone for part of last season. There was some talk at the time that he was tipping his pitches, which is certainly possible. Whatever it was, he definitely showed that he had the problem solved with that outstanding September and I would expect him to be good for 200+ innings and a sub-4.00 ERA in 2003.

Reason #1,245,875 why a pitcher’s W/L record is deceiving and incredibly dependent on his offensive support:

Mussina 1st half: 12-3, 4.54 ERA
Mussina 2nd half: 6-7, 3.49 ERA

Luckily for the Yankees, Boomer Wells still pitches better than he writes (or at least his "ghost-writer" writes).

Wells has talked about being a "New York Guy" and about how much he loves pitching for the Yankees. I look at his run support and W/L record with New York and I understand why.

In his three seasons with the Yankees, Wells has a 53-21 record (.716 winning %) and a 3.82 ERA-two things that don’t exactly go together, typically. Maybe you want to believe that stuff about a pitcher "knowing how to win" or you think his teammates like him and perform better when he’s on the mound or maybe you think he’s a good pitcher that has been lucky and has had a lot of good offense behind him - whatever it is, Wells has it and has had it for a while.

He has a career ERA of 4.05 and a career ERA+ of 111, yet he has a career record of 185-121, which comes out to a .605 winning percentage.

In fact, since 1910, only two pitchers have pitched at least 2,500 innings with winning percentages of .600 or better with a worse ERA (compared to league-average) than David Wells: Dave McNally (3.24 compared to the league’s 3.49) and Doc Gooden (3.51 compared to the league’s 3.96).

With another great offense providing him with runs this year, he’ll definitely get more of that great run-support that he’s become accustomed to and, assuming his back doesn’t act up again, he’s a good bet to give the Yankees 180-200 innings and a better than league-average ERA - which, knowing Wells, will probably be good for about 18 wins. And whether he’s on the mound, writing books or making 911 calls, he is always very entertaining.

(Thanks to Lee Sinins’ Sabermetric Encyclopedia for the Wells statistics)

Jeff Weaver got traded from Detroit to the Yankees at mid-season and opposing batters immediately started making him look like Jose Lima. Okay, maybe that is going a bit too far. Weaver gave up a homer every 30.5 innings with Detroit, which is phenomenal, and then gave up a homer every 6.5 innings with New York, which is...well, not so phenomenal.

If you look a little deeper into his time with the Yanks, the majority of the homers came in his first three starts, when he gave up eight long balls in only 20 innings of work. After that, he allowed only four more in 58 innings, which is more like his "normal" rate for the rest of his career.

Weaver has never had a great K rate, so he’ll be hurt by the defense behind him. That said, he has shown the ability to keep the ball in the ballpark for about 775 of his 792 career innings and he has improved his control quite a bit of late. He’s another guy that should be good for 200 innings and a sub-4.00 ERA.

There aren’t really any reliable stats to look at here. No minor league numbers, no MLEs, no K rates and none of that other good stuff, so what I’m going by is simply what I’ve heard, read and seen so far of Jose Contreras.

Most everyone seems to think he has great stuff and is definitely a top-of-the-rotation starter. He’ll spend at least the first part of his rookie season in the bullpen, although I’d bet he gets at least a dozen starts this year.

Contreras had a rough spring training (6.97 ERA in 21 innings) and his first two appearances in the regular season were pretty bad, but I think he’ll prove himself to be a valuable pitcher and give the Yankees yet another guy capable of giving them a solid ERA in bulk innings.

Will he become a dominant starter? If the recent history of Cuban pitchers is any indication, probably not.

Here’s a list of Cuban pitchers that have pitched in the majors recently and their career ERA+s:

Rene Arocha - 98
Rolando Arrojo - 108
Danys Baez - 114
Osvaldo Fernandez - 88
Adrian Hernandez - 82
Livan Hernandez - 92
Orlando Hernandez - 114
Hansel Izquierdo - 88
Vladimir Nunez - 97
Eddie Oropesa - 55
Ariel Prieto - 95
Michael Tejera - 84

There are some good pitchers on that list, but it’s an awful lot of middle-of-the-rotation guys and relievers. Of course, Contreras is supposed to be the best pitcher from Cuba, so maybe he’s a step above all those guys. I think if he can perform as well as El Duque did while in New York, the Yankees will be pretty happy.

As of this writing, Mariano Rivera is on the disabled list with a groin injury and is not expected back until late April, at the earliest.

Because of the uncertainty of when he will play and whether or not the injury will affect his pitching, I didn’t think it would make much sense to try to predict how or how much he’ll play in 2003 and it would be more interesting to take a look at Rivera’s career, as it stands now.

In looking at his career stats, the one thing that really stands out to me is the inconsistency of his strikeout rate.

Here are Rivera’s year-by-year K rates:

1996 = 10.9
1997 = 8.5
1998 = 5.3
1999 = 6.8
2000 = 6.9
2001 = 9.3
2002 = 8.0

Now, he typically has pitched 60 or 70 innings a year, so there is room for "sample size" variances, but those K rates really are all over the place.

It is amazing that he was able to have such an incredible 1998 season (1.91 ERA, 36 saves) despite striking out only 5.3 batters per game. I wanted to see exactly how great that was, so I booted up Lee Sinins’ Sabermetric Encyclopedia once again and looked up the best ERAs (compared to league-average) ever by a pitcher with 60+ innings and a sub-5.5/9 K rate.

The winner? (Drumroll please...) Mariano Rivera in 1998! Rivera’s 1.91 ERA was 2.75 better than league-average, which puts him 0.10 ahead of Mark Eichorn’s 1994 season.

As amazing as that is, what is more amazing is this: Of all the pitchers in baseball history with at least 500 innings pitched in their careers, Mariano Rivera has the best ERA (compared to league-average) of anyone. Better than Pedro, better than Lefty Grove, better than Dan Quisenberry. Better than everyone.

For all the talk there is about how a "closer" is overrated (and rightfully so), if there ever was a true closer, it is Mariano Rivera.

The Yankees signed Steve Karsay after his tremendous 2001 season split between Cleveland and Atlanta and, presumably, the plan was for him to form a great 1-2 setup-closer combo with Mariano Rivera. While the duo was very good in 2002, they were not great. Rivera got hurt and pitched only 46 innings, and Karsay saw his K rate fall about 25% and his ERA jump up about a run per game.

And now, like Rivera, Karsay is on the disabled list to start the season. Unlike Rivera, it’s because of a shoulder injury. If healthy, Karsay gives the Yankees one of the best setup men in the league and a nice guy to sub for Rivera as closer.

Chris Hammond’s story is sort of like "The Rookie," Jim Morris, except it’s not quite as cute and Hammond actually pitched well in the major leagues.

Hammond was completely out of baseball after the 1998 season, in which he had a 6.82 ERA with the Marlins. He came back in 2001 and pitched in Triple-A for the Indians and the Braves. And then last year, he had a 0.95 ERA in 76 innings for Atlanta.

You add in a little story about him coaching a high school team and maybe make him a social studies teacher or something and I think you have yourselves a $100 million dollar movie.

I’d suggest they make the movie pretty quickly, because Hammond has absolutely no chance of coming anywhere near a 0.95 ERA this year. He may be a good reliever in 2003, but he’s not going to give up only one homer in 76 innings again, his BIP-out% of 76.0 last year is just obscene and the Yankees probably couldn’t approach that if MLB allowed them to play 11 fielders with butterfly nets.

Antonio Osuna came over to the Yankees in the Bartolo Colon deal and gives them another solid setup guy and possible closer-substitute. Of course, he is also on the wrong side of 30 (I think he just turned 30, so you might want to re-phrase this) and incredibly injury-prone, so he’ll fit right in.

I am starting to sense a pattern in Osuna’s workload...

1999 = 4 innings
2000 = 67 innings
2001 = 4 innings
2002 = 67 innings

So that means he’ll make about one or two more appearances in 2003 and call it a season. The good news is that, after he’s done recovering from whatever injury he’s got, he will be good for 67 innings in 2004, which should help the New York bullpen quite a bit.

Here’s another quality setup man and possible closer-sub on this New York roster.

Juan Acevedo has quietly had a very nice career as a reliever. He has been tried as a starter at various times throughout his career, but if you ignore the two seasons in which he started 10+ games, his ERA+s have been 113, 164, 118, 114 and 158 (last year). That’s pretty good.

Acevedo is 33 and the big drop in K rate isn’t promising, but he should be able to give the Yankees 60 or 70 quality innings out of the pen this year.

I realize I am not alone on this point, but I just don’t understand why the Yankees a) traded for Sterling Hitchcock in 2001 and b) signed him to a contract extension last off-season.

The lowest ERA Hitchcock has ever had is 3.81. In his 11 year career, he has exactly two seasons with an ERA+ of 100 or better. His career ERA is 4.77, which works out to a nifty 91 ERA+. Plus, he has shown himself to be very injury-prone and was already 30 years old when New York dealt for him.

Brian Cashman has made a lot of nice moves as New York’s GM, but this is one of the worst.

Quite frankly, Jason Anderson is just around until the rest of the bullpen gets healthy and he may not even last that long.

Anderson has had some success in the minors and looks like he can be a good reliever, but he’ll likely be holding down the Randy Choate/Todd Erdos "everybody’s healthy, so we need you to go back down to Columbus" spot in the bullpen, and probably won’t get more than 30 or 40 innings this year.

This is going to be one of the best teams in baseball. You’ve got the best offense in baseball returning. You’ve got a very good (though aging) pitching staff. The defense is adequate, and will even get a boost while Jeter is out. There are some things that I would do differently. I would move Bernie Williams to left field, and I’d start Matsui in CF. I would start Juan Rivera in RF and eat Raul Mondesi’s contract (recognizing the principle of sunk costs). I imagine JP Ricciardi’s knees buckled when he got the call last year that got him out of that deal. I’d find a different backup catcher and middle infielder.

But overall this team is very well constructed, there aren’t many holes, and the strengths of players like Zeile and Trammell cover the weaknesses of others. Whether or not this team wins the World Series will probably (once again) depend on how good their competition is. If it turns out to be a year like 2000, where the best team they play only wins 94 games, I really like their chances. If the A’s or Red Sox (or Astros or Giants in the NL) go out and win 100 games then it’s going to be a much tougher road. I predicted the Yankees for 95 wins before Jeter’s injury (that was in the Primer prediction contest, not necessarily something I worked out in terms of serious analysis). I’d adjust my base prediction to 98 wins allowing for the team outperforming their Pythagorean record by about 3 games. If he’s out for just 6 weeks, that would only adjust down to 97. If he’s out for the year, I’d have the Yankees at 92-93 wins, which would put them right around where I have Boston (91 wins) and (I think) a little bit ahead of a wild card race with Seattle, Anaheim and the loser of Chicago/Minnesota in the Central. I think the Yankees are going to make the postseason either way, but losing Jeter could affect their shot at home field in the LCS.

Assuming Jeter comes back healthy, I think this team has another World Series in it. The players are still hungry, the older veterans-Mussina, Giambi, and Ventura-came here looking for a ring and still haven’t found it. I don’t think they will win it all, but assuming Jeter returns in 6-8 weeks, I do believe they’ll be playing in the final game of the season. I think it will be a Game Six loss on October 25 against either the Houston Astros or the San Francisco Giants.

2003 ZiPS Projections - Click for info

PO Player      G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB  SO SB CS   BA  OBP  SLG
C  Posada    145 510  73 139 37  1 22  92  83 142  1  3 .273 .380 .478
1B Giambi    154 539 109 173 39  1 38 118 120 100  2  1 .321 .456 .609
2B Soriano   157 659 114 199 41  3 33  93  27 139 40 12 .302 .336 .524
3B Ventura   140 455  63 106 25  0 22  76  83  99  2  5 .233 .353 .433
SS Jeter     155 636 118 198 30  1 19  74  70 106 26  4 .311 .387 .451
LF Matsui    140 471  87 135 21  1 33  75  95 107  2  1 .287 .411 .546
CF Williams  148 568  94 177 44  2 20  94  77  86  7  7 .312 .398 .502
RF Mondesi   140 544  81 130 29  2 28  77  60 107 16 12 .239 .320 .454
DH Johnson   128 396  76 110 17  1 18  63  75  99  4  3 .278 .404 .462
c  Flaherty   85 297  24  72 23  0  5  30  14  48  1  2 .242 .278 .370
if Wilson     80 197  20  48  8  1  3  19  12  28  1  4 .244 .287 .340
3b Zeile     145 504  52 120 33  1 14  62  65  94  1  2 .238 .328 .391
3b Henson    110 401  57  95 20  2 17  53  27 133  1  1 .237 .292 .424
ss Almonte   119 413  55 105 15  2 17  59  40 119  7  3 .254 .326 .424
of Trammell  134 422  60 111 19  2 22  74  50  71  1  3 .263 .346 .474
of Latham    121 380  61  89 22  5  9  44  58 112 13 12 .234 .341 .389
of Rivera    115 435  70 132 20  2 17  71  24  66  5  5 .303 .347 .476

PO Player      W  L  ERA  G GS  IP   H ER HR BB  SO
SP Clemens    11  8 3.86 31 31 203 177 87 20 73 195
SP Mussina    17 11 3.69 34 34 227 213 93 27 46 194
SP Pettitte   11  7 3.65 28 28 185 178 75 12 49 131
SP Wells      15 11 3.91 30 30 198 203 86 21 35 127
SP Weaver     12 10 4.13 32 29 207 211 95 22 52 142
SP Hernandez   5  8 5.57 23 22 118 120 73 20 60  94
RP Anderson    4  4 4.33 42  0  52  50 25  6 17  42
RP Choate      3  2 4.15 47  0  52  47 24  2 27  43
RP Karsay      6  4 3.71 75  0  85  79 35  6 26  68
RP Hitchcock   1  2 4.57 14  9  63  65 32  8 20  43
RP Hammond     6  3 3.45 63  0  73  65 28  1 29  56
RP Osuna       6  4 3.76 53  0  67  57 28  4 29  63
RP Acevedo     3  3 4.69 63  0  71  74 37  8 26  45
CL Rivera      4  1 3.09 62  0  67  57 23  4 16  62
ZiPS is not a playing time predictor and should not be added for team totals.