Hence, the Yankees should be broken up now, by Brian Cashman, with the veterans sent out of town by August 31 for the best offers available.

Which is going to be what, exactly, for all these players likely to be mediocre in 2009? And who is replacing them that figures to be better in 2009, even granting the weaknesses of guys like Damon and Matui?

This is a profoundly lazy column; it's basically a 1000-word version of the guy sitting in the bleachers yelling "Get rid of these bums! Get rid of 'em!"

This is a profoundly lazy column; it's basically a 1000-word version of the guy sitting in the bleachers yelling "Get rid of these bums! Get rid of 'em!"

Seriously. And considering the team's performance this year, and the likely additions of some free agents and injured players, this column is a year too early anyway.

Goldman is a good writer, but he has been grouchy lately. His column anout the Teixeira trade, in whch he said that it would help the Angels actually be the team they "pretend" to be, was very off-putting.

This column seems like grousing as well. With the path the Yankees chose (and it was not really the wrong one in many respects) they are kind of stuck with these players, most of whom are still pretty good. A tear-down is not IMO a realistic option now. I do think Goldman is right in his oft-stated belief that the key choice made by the post-2004 Yankees was the one not to sign Carlos Beltran. I also suspect the decision not to acquire Santana may go the same way, but it is still early on that one and CC is an FA.

What he writes isn't untrue, but, of course, he doesn't get specific enough about which vets to send off (I can't imagine he thinks it's at all feasible to trade Derek Jeter. The political conditions are less than perfect for that to happen), and who the return will be. Perhaps, there was a word limit for the column? Anyway, say you add CC Sabathia and Teixeria, and pick up either Pettitte or Mussina (but not both). You have a pitching staff of Sabathia, Wang, Pettitte, Joba, and Hughes/IPK/Journeyman. That's a pretty decent 5, although I'd be worried about health issues for the back end of the staff and the further decline of Pettitte. On the other side, if you get Teixeira, that great and all, but team defense still is a nightmare, and the offense is not much better than this season's. So the free agent route doesn't make them real competitors on its own.

Butbutbutbutbut....IT'S NOT OVER! The Daily News told us so this morning! The Yanks will win it all! They're the YANKEES!

26 RINGS, BAY-BEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!!1

Fear of living on
Natives getting restless now
Mutiny in the air
Got some death to do
Mirror stares back hard
kill is such a friendly word
seems the only way
for reaching out again

I stopped reading Goldman's Pinstripped Bible columns about a year ago, because he was writing the same thing over and over again.

I don't agree that the Yankees should be dismantled. Why would you trade away Damon, who's had a good season AND whose contract ends in 2009? Ditto with Matsui. Jeter's also not going anywhere.

Now arguably, Abreu and Giambi (the latter probably) will be toast next year, but that's it.

(Goldman has historically railed against the Yankees having a star at every position, but he's now railing at Nady. Go figure).

As to Robinred's comment about the Santana deal (which admittedly, was made by Robinred and not Goldman), you can't have your cake and eat it, too. If you want to go young (as Goldman has consistently written), you have to trust your young guys. Hughes, IPK and Melky (for whatever reasons) did not do it in 2008.

They may well turn it around (at least to some extent) in 2009.

Yes, the Yanks have been frustrating in 2008. They've also had a ton of injuries, both to position players and pitchers (for God's sake, Ponson is the Yanks No. 3 pitcher right now!!!).

They've also been a maddeningly, flukishly frustrating team with RISP. I don't see Goldman saying that the Yanks should turn into the Angels, who are seen as being more interested in contact than OBP (i.e., OBP is one of the tenets Goldman adheres to, so he's not criticizing that).

On the other side, if you get Teixeira, that great and all, but team defense still is a nightmare

Replacing Giambi and Abreu with Nady and Tex will be a pretty big swing upwards. Jeter figures to be worse, and A-rod does too, but the defense will be better, if still not good.

So the free agent route doesn't make them real competitors on its own.

Well, they'll probably get Moose instead of Pettitte, who kind of sucks. But you're also talking about replacing guys like Rasner, Ponson, Kennedy and Hughes this year with CC (assuming he signs), Wang and Hughes next year. That'll be a huge bump. For a team that will win 85-87 games, that will be pretty close to enough to push them into the playoffs.

and the offense is not much better than this season's.

I don't think the offense has to be much better to get them to the playoffs. With the likely improvements in the rotation, I don't know that it has to be better at all.

The most compelling argument for dismantling this team immediately is that the Rays and the Sox are in the division, and that means, for the next two to three years, it's going to be very difficult to get to the post-season with a good, not great team (as the Yanks did when they won 87 games). If it was just a matter of the Sox being good, then I'd be more at ease with mixing rebuilding with going for it all. But the Rays look to be a perennial contender for the next few years, unless Kazmir gets hurt. Wait! Even if he does, there's Price on the way.

One thing that I wish was better understood about these Sun columns is that there is a strict world limit. When they get posted here and commented on (which I appreciate) a common theme is "He said X but didn't say Y." Unlike my on-line work, in which every aspect of an argument can be explored, the newspaper column has to get in and out really fast. Sometimes it's intended to be a conversation starter, sometimes a conversation finisher, but it's rarely the whole conversation.

JRVJ: You wound me. I'm not railing at Nady. I like Nady and am enjoying the year he's having. All I was trying to say is that at his more typical level of production, he's not a cornerstone offensive player.

robinred: Don't recall saying that the Angels were pretending to be anything. I thought Teixeira was a good move. They needed another bat. I believe I said that Kotchman wasn't as big a problem as some other players in their lineup.

Mr. Goldman,

In re: wounding you, it's not personal. I hold fast to my opinions about your writing, though.

Also, you have not addressed the rest of my post, which you are free not to, but they are valid critiques of your work and point of view.

"(Goldman has historically railed against the Yankees having a star at every position, but he's now railing at Nady. Go figure)."

There's a fair bit of daylight between "star" and "Nady". I'm not trying to pee in the punchbowl, but before this season he would've been a below-average regular in every season of his career. Coming into this year, his season high for OPS+ was 107, and it's not like he's a big-time glove, either.

Vlad, I certainly agree that Nady's not a star. That's precisely the point!!! (he's a cheap - $3.35MM in 2008 - league average OFer who is either (a) Having a fluke season; or (b) Has reached a new level of production).

Why would you trade away Damon, who's had a good season AND whose contract ends in 2009? Ditto with Matsui.

I could see them trading Matsui in a strict salary dump (ie, either pay part of the salary and/or get literally nothing back) kind of way if they could sign a guy like Dunn to be DH/1b/LF for a similar price. Matsui makes 13 mil, Dunn, if the D-Backs don't lock him up, is younger and a better hitter (probably a better defender too) and I don't think will command much more money. They have to find someone to take Matsui though (Cleveland? Detroit? Toronto? Philly? They could all use offense at LF/DH right?)

Edit: Even if Nady never comes close to matching his numbers this year again (likely), he has added these numbers to his record and projects better than he has before. He's a good bet to outperform what he has done in the past, even if he's still not close to what he does this year.

(probably a better defender too)

Like haveing the choice between the plague and cholera...

The difference in opinion here is arising from the fact that Nady wasn't even "average" before this year. He was, at best, a small net negative in the lineup, compared to what the rest of the league was starting. If this year IS a fluke, and he goes back to hitting .280/.330/.450, he's going to be a problem if they've got him peniclled in as a regular.

Personally, I think the idea of moving Matsui to make room for Nady is crazy talk, though that doesn't mean that it won't happen. In Matsui's worst offensive season, his disappointing 2003, he was still a better hitter than Nady was in Nady's best non-2008 season.

Why would you trade away Damon, who's had a good season AND whose contract ends in 2009?

There are a couple of reasons why you trade him, one of them being that he has been good this season and his contract ends after 2009. In other words, his trade value is pretty decent, and if you deem 2008 a lost year (which it seems it is) and 2009 another tough year then trading him now during a pennant stretch, might get you more in return prospects and salary-relief wise.

The Yankees and top-flight defense have been estranged for a long time, with the club currently ranking toward the bottom of the majors (tied for 24th) in turning balls in play into outs. There won’t be a reconciliation next year.

Regardless of the content, I thought this was a fun paragraph in how it was phrased.
EDIT: Unlike how I phrased my comment. :(

Personally, I think the idea of moving Matsui to make room for Nady is crazy talk, though that doesn't mean that it won't happen. In Matsui's worst offensive season, his disappointing 2003, he was still a better hitter than Nady was in Nady's best non-2008 season.

Nady and Matsui can't really be compared. Matsui is a DH at this point. Even if Nady returns to his previous form, he and Nady probably come awfully close to being the same player when you consider what a butcher Matsui is in the field at this point. But, of course, Matsui has trouble staying healthy at DH, let alone trying to send him out to left for 150 games.

So it would be trading out Matsui for Dunn (or someone like him) in the DH/once-in-a-great-while LF role with Nady as the regular LF.

Personally, I think the idea of moving Matsui to make room for Nady is crazy talk, though that doesn't mean that it won't happen.

No one is suggesting that. Matsui cannot play RF, no matter what and that's where Nady will play next year. So even though they are both corner OFers, they are not interchangeable. The idea to move Matsui is that there are better, younger, similarly priced players on the market and everyone single one of them is more versatile defensively than Matsui.

On top of that, Matsui is 34 and coming off a knee injury, he's at least as much of a risk as Nady.

Fear of living on
Natives getting restless now
Mutiny in the air
Got some death to do
Mirror stares back hard
kill is such a friendly word
seems the only way
for reaching out again


New Metallica single is out today Levski, if you were unaware of that.

the Yankees should be broken up now, by Brian Cashman, with the veterans sent out of town by August 31

Three words: No Trade Clause. Every one of the players in question has one. They are not going anywhere.

Three words: No Trade Clause. Every one of the players in question has one. They are not going anywhere.

Matsui and Damon were actually shopped during the off-season and if I recall correctly both were willing to waiver their NTC's.

New Metallica single is out today Levski, if you were unaware of that.

Like a Yankees fan, I prefer living in the past

Like a Yankees fan, I prefer living in the past

Nice.

One thing that I wish was better understood about these Sun columns is that there is a strict world limit. When they get posted here and commented on (which I appreciate) a common theme is "He said X but didn't say Y." Unlike my on-line work, in which every aspect of an argument can be explored, the newspaper column has to get in and out really fast. Sometimes it's intended to be a conversation starter, sometimes a conversation finisher, but it's rarely the whole conversation.

Amen to this! I run into the same exact issue.

They've established themselves as one of the weaker sisters in club history, not a bad team, but not a good one, either.

This Yankee winning percentage of .531 would rank ahead of all but 14 Mets franchise seasons.

The Yankees also have their trio of 34-year-olds who, to paraphrase Casey Stengel, have a good chance of being 35 next year.

What's with the constant writing about Casey Stengel, Goldman? First a biography, and now this!

I feel badly for anyone who doesn't read Steven Goldman every chance he gets.

Matsui and Damon were actually shopped during the off-season and if I recall correctly both were willing to waiver their NTC's.

They were reportedly shopped. That's not the same as actually shopped. I seem to remember Damon making some comments about being open to a trade, but his NTC is limited, so he sort of has to be, especially during the off-season. But at this point, there's a list of ten teams that he can't be traded to, and I suspect that all of the teams that could use him are on it. The "shopping" of Matsui last winter was limited to one team (the Giants) asking about him. It never got close to the point of him being asked to waive his NTC. What you recall is a George King fantasy where Matsui must have been willing to accept a trade because the teams were discussing one. This despite the fact that no one in the Yankees FO would say anything and Arn Tellem's only comment was that no one had contacted him about a possible trade.

But yes, I'm looking forward to the new Metallica album.
I'm cautiously optimistic...

"No one is suggesting that."

Maybe not in this thread, but I've sure as hell seen it floated as an option elsewhere.

I feel badly for anyone who doesn't read Steven Goldman every chance he gets.

Grammar alert! ;-)

I feel badly for anyone who doesn't read Steven Goldman every chance he gets.

While I can understand friends backslapping each other, there are easily a couple of hundred things regarding which I feel bad for others that are ahead of reading the work of a baseball columnist.

While I can understand friends backslapping each other, there are easily a couple of hundred things regarding which I feel bad for others that are ahead of reading the work of a baseball columnist.

No disrespect to Steven, but I wouldn't put this at the top of my list, either.

Thank you, Howard. It's always warming to receive an unsolicited endorsement from a fellow digger in these here mines (the check is in the mail).

JRVJ: I didn't respond to the rest of your post because it didn't seem like a discussion likely to go anywhere. You think I've been repeating myself. I disagree with that, but I figure that kind of goes without saying. My popping up here to say, "No I'm not," would seem, at least to me, kind of pathetically petulant. I'd rather let the work speak for itself. Since you're not reading it, we're at an impasse. I hope others feel differently.

As for the baseball part, you ask why trade Damon or Matsui? Because of their age, because of their fragility, because their trade value, IF they have any, and it's a mighty big if, probably won't be higher in the future. Because the Yankees have few ready position players, or even interesting position players, on the farm (Austin Jackson, Montero further down the ladder) and they need options. Because the difference between a good Damon season and a bad one is very small, and with age he's more likely to have a bad one than a good one. I could go on, but you get the picture.

I look forward to the hand-wringing that will occur this October in New York once the Yankees fail to make the playoffs.

The downside however, will be the domination this winter on the Hot Stove by Yankee talk.

Because the Yankees have few ready position players, or even interesting position players, on the farm (Austin Jackson, Montero further down the ladder)

Do you think Jackson is ready? I came away very impressed when I saw him this year, but the power/patience hasn't been overwhelming at AA, and I wonder if he is a year away. Are you thinking Gardner every day? Or more Melky?

I just wonder, eating much of or all of the salary, how much the Yankees can reasonably expect in trade for either player, particularly Damon. It isn't likely to go up, but if the answer to that question is "a bag of balls", it isn't likely to go down, either- and once you've traded Damon for a bag of balls, the chances you get more for him definitely can't go up.

The time to trade Damon probably has passed. The White Sox got Griffey to help with their outfield situation. Damon probably would have been a good fit, and perhaps would have given the Yanks a decent return. But was the return decent for Griffey? I forget.

I'm up to the final round of the hard level on Guitar Hero III, and man, that Metallica song is a #####. It rocks though.

Darkness imprisoning me
All that I see
Absolute horror
I cannot live
I cannot die
Trapped in myself
Body my holding cell

The downside however, will be the domination this winter on the Hot Stove by Yankee talk.

They'll be almost as much talk about Boston if the Red Sox fail to make the post-season. Although I can't name any big name free agent the Sox are supposedly pursuing in the off-season but one would think they'd want to make at least a medium-sized move to bolster the pitching staff in light of recent developments.

If Pat Burrell really wanders away this off-season, the Phils might be interested in one of those "Damon plus his entire contract for a bag of balls" deals. Surely the presence of world-class cutoff man Pedro Feliz will compensate for his arm's deficiencies.

They'll be almost as much talk about Boston if the Red Sox fail to make the post-season.

The Red Sox missed the playoffs two years ago. They're a lot more used to it than the Yanks are.

The time to trade Damon probably has passed.

I disagree. The Mets, Phillies, Dodgers, Braves, Indians, and Rangers all look to have question marks in LF next year (I don't know the farm teams off all these teams so maybe I'm wrong about one or two) and I think they all consider themselves contenders. There aren't enough Major League LFers to go around this offseason, the Yanks have plenty of options to deal a LFer (which ever one it is) to and a good enough group of teams that will want to upgrade the position that they may get some value out of it. They may not get a great return, but if they're just turning around and buying Burrell or Dunn or even Marlon Byrd (and they have to because they don't have anyone to replace Damon/Matsui's production), they don't have to get a ton of talent to make it a good move.

"There aren't enough Major League LFers to go around this offseason..."

I dunno. Nobody's signed Bonds yet, so they must not think their needs are that dire.

#12 -- sort of a Wally Moon for the Yankees?

As for the baseball part, you ask why trade Damon or Matsui? Because of their age, because of their fragility, because their trade value, IF they have any, and it's a mighty big if, probably won't be higher in the future.

Both players are gone after 2009 and since neither has much trade value (and the Yanks would almost certainly wind up picking up salary), the Yanks will probably get more value just having them play out the string in 2009 and hoping they have decent years. It's a better bet than trading them for a sack of balls while picking up 60% of their salary.

Because the difference between a good Damon season and a bad one is very small, and with age he's more likely to have a bad one than a good one.

This doesn't even make sense. If the difference between good Damon and bad Damon is really that small, then who cares if he has a bad season?

Coming into 2010, the only geriatric starting position players on the Yankees roster should be A-Rod, Jeter and Posada.

I can't name any big name free agent the Sox are supposedly pursuing in the off-season but one would think they'd want to make at least a medium-sized move to bolster the pitching staff in light of recent developments.

I hear Curt Schilling is available.

(Ducks.)

I hear Curt Schilling is available.

Probably from Curt himself.

This doesn't even make sense. If the difference between good Damon and bad Damon is really that small, then who cares if he has a bad season?

I took this to mean that a good Damon season isn't all that good, so it only takes a small dropoff to make it a bad one. It doesn't mean that his downside is small; it just means it's likely.

's that about right, Mr. Goldman?

As for the baseball part, you ask why trade Damon or Matsui? Because of their age, because of their fragility, because their trade value, IF they have any, and it's a mighty big if, probably won't be higher in the future. Because the Yankees have few ready position players, or even interesting position players, on the farm (Austin Jackson, Montero further down the ladder) and they need options. Because the difference between a good Damon season and a bad one is very small, and with age he's more likely to have a bad one than a good one. I could go on, but you get the picture.

Damon and Matsui are almost certainly going to be A level FAs. The Yanks would get picks when they leave after 2009. You didn't mention that (so it's not a question of trade value only with those two).

Look, if (say) Pittsburgh wants to trade Nate McLouth straight up for Matsui, of course the Yankees should do it. But you know as well as I do that this is not going to happen. So the question is if your should do a fire sale for Damon and/or Matsui when they may well both be productive players, AND there's a high likelihood that they'll be A level FAs after 2009.

You did not address that in your column, and not addressing it is (at best) showing just one side of the issue.

Now granted, you have a word limit, but you're the one who writes the columns - it's up to you to choose what theme to pursue.

Although it was not directly addressed at you, you also did not comment on two further things: (a) How the Yankees decided to go young this year, and it hasn't worked (i.e., if you want to break-in young players, you have to accept that not all will work out, because young players are inherently bets on future development);

(b) How the Yankees have been maddeningly, frustratingly bad with RISP, which is especially galling for a high OBP offense. Since I doubt from everything that I've read from you that you espouse that the Yanks turn into the Angels (or the 1985 Cards/Royals), it would at least behoove you to point out that (Gosh darn it), a lot of the Yanks disappointing performance is due to a fluky, unlucky year.

Do you think Jackson is ready?

Oh, to get back to this, no. He looked like he might be before August, but he's not. That said, his numbers look mediocre because of Trenton, which is like pitching heaven, except that it's in Trenton, so it's probably where evil sluggers go after they die.

Are you thinking Gardner every day? Or more Melky?

Gardner has two XBHs since he came up, at which point the Yanks benched him. He had one before and it was a ground ball to the pitcher, these were hit into the OF. So he might not be completely and totally useless, so yeah, I think the two headed monster of Melky and Gardner will probably man CF unless the Yanks get creative (I think I'm just going to post Marlon Byrd's name every time this comes up in the hopes of some one from the NY press seeing it and starting a campaign).

If you want to go young (as Goldman has consistently written), you have to trust your young guys.

If you want to go young, you have to trust your own judgment in sorting out which of the young guys are real prospects, and which aren't. A big budget team like the Yankees or Red Sox should from time to time trade away prospects for high priced veterans. They win and lose by deciding whom to keep and whom to trade. The Braves built their dynasty on a mixture of great player development and a good understanding of which of their prospects would pan out and which wouldn't. Oakland and Minnesota have done more or less the same thing.

"#12 -- sort of a Wally Moon for the Yankees?"

Moon was actually a pretty decent player, with the exception of '58. I was thinking more along the lines of a Casey Blake who couldn't play third. And if Nady goes back to normal, that's probably the right role for him, in an ideal world: Primary backup at 1B, LF, RF, and DH, picking up around 400 AB a year.

I think the Yankees should solve their center field problem by signing Nyjer Morgan and building their entire 2009 marketing campaign around him.

Darkness imprisoning me
All that I see
Absolute horror
I cannot live
I cannot die
Trapped in myself
Body my holding cell

When we were kids, my little brother was absolutely sure it was:

Doctor
impersonating me
All that I see
Absolute horror

I can't imagine that Damon has any value, anywhere. Though I thought the same when the Yankees unloaded Sheff.

Back when I wrote for Blue Jay Way, in one of my columns (written late in the 2001 season, as I recall) I predicted that the Yankees wouldn't win another World Series for ten years. I'm looking pretty good for it so far. It's a shame that they revamped the site and took all my stuff down; I'd like to be able to prove that I predicted that.

I predicted that the Yankees wouldn't win another World Series for ten years.

Did you call the Marlins over the Yanks in 2003?

But yes, I'm looking forward to the new Metallica album.
I'm cautiously optimistic...

Have you heard the song they debuted at Ozzfest, Cyanide? Rockin! Hearkens back to the '80's, but definitely sounds modern (and I mean that in a good way).

A lot of waiver deals don't bring that much talent in return, their primary benefit is moving expensive contracts - not that much of a worry for the Yanks. I'd be surprised if there are any deals out there that would be a significant improvement over keeping the players who are under contract for next year.

If Matsui is mostly the DH in 2009, concerns over his defense aren't a factor. Damon is OK in left and acceptable in center for spot duty, so I don't see the need to show him the door by the end of the month. If Goldman is seriously suggesting the Yankees should make a waiver deal moving Jeter, he's out of touch with reality. There's still a chance for the playoffs, another attendance record is being set, and revenue will increase next year. Waving the white flag is not going to happen.

They'll be almost as much talk about Boston if the Red Sox fail to make the post-season.

The Red Sox missed the playoffs two years ago. They're a lot more used to it than the Yanks are.

But the Bosox and Yanks haven't both spent October on the golf course in a non-strike year since 1993. The Rays' sudden rise completely alters the equation regarding the AL East's dual evil empires.

I will try to sort of defend Goldman's column. I see it as an attempted wake-up call. He skips specifics because the message is: "This is an old, flawed team! You are not one Carl Pavano away from the a postseason berth! You cannot afford to have any sacred cows!" And the message is not, "Hey, I know a single-A first base prospect you might be able to get for Damon." Goldman is not stupid. That fact that he implies Lord Jeter is among the group that is disposable suggests that he is purposely advocating dramatic leaps in the hopes that he will inspire pragmatic steps.

If my interpretation is correct, I am still left underwhelmed by Goldman's "Modest Proposal." I think the mini-youth movement that NYY tried this season with Hughes, IPK, and Joba was dramatic for this franchise. The Yankees' current situation needs a combination of bold strokes (Sabathia and Texeira?) and nuanced little upgrades. And I don't see any evidence that the Yankees organization is blind to this.

I can't name any big name free agent the Sox are supposedly pursuing in the off-season but one would think they'd want to make at least a medium-sized move to bolster the pitching staff in light of recent developments.

True. But if the Sox don't make the playoffs, where can they expect improvement? The fan base is going to see a division champ in Tampa, and the Yankees angling for Sabathia and Tex. Will they settle for watching Tek leave for a moderate upgrade, and waiting on Ellsbury and Buchholz to be the difference?

While it's easy to bash the Yanks for getting old, don't you think we will hear about the Sox aging core of Drew, Papi, Lowell, and Varitek (who I guess will be gone), and whether Youkilis can repeat his 2008? I am in no way saying that they are in a worse position than the Yanks, but come on, this team was built to win now, and I don't think fans will sit back if they fail to make the playoffs and sit on their hands. Last year, Ellsbury and Buchholz for Santana seemed insane (and maybe it still does to some), but if they miss the playoffs by a game or two, won't they feel the heat for missing out on getting him last year?

Nobody expects the Sox to miss the playoffs, including myself. But I think it will be a huge PR disaster for the franchise if it happens.

I will try to sort of defend Goldman's column. I see it as an attempted wake-up call. He skips specifics because the message is: "This is an old, flawed team! You are not one Carl Pavano away from the a postseason berth! You cannot afford to have any sacred cows!"

Just to reiterate what's been said in previous Yankee threads, their record this year is NOT due to old players underperforming. It's due to YOUNGER players underperforming, injuries, and subpar hitting with RISP, in roughly that order.

Going forward, those older players are increasingly likely to underperform/get hurt, so the larger point stands, but Yankees aren't going to miss the playoffs in 2008 because they are old and washed up.

Just to reiterate what's been said in previous Yankee threads, their record this year is NOT due to old players underperforming. It's due to YOUNGER players underperforming, injuries, and subpar hitting with RISP, in roughly that order.

That the young players haven't performed doesn't dovetail with Goldman's (and admittedly, other writers) pet theories.

Now granted, I don't have to write columns for a living. It's probably a bithc to have to think of an angle for every new one.

But that doesn't give you carte blanche to write whatever you want.

BTW - What would REALLY be interesting is if Goldman could write a column with data showing that older hitters suddenly fall off a cliff when it comes to RISP, but not in other situations.

If it can be proven that older players get back at hitting with RISP (but not in other circumstances), Goldman has a great point to buttress his argument that the old timers must go.

How the Yankees have been maddeningly, frustratingly bad with RISP, which is especially galling for a high OBP offense.

I wonder how much of this has to do with who bats with RISP. Is there any way to weight batting numbers with RISP? I would imagine that Melky, Molina, or Cano might have batted with a lot of runners on (following Giambi, A rod).

I know that Arod has been bad this year in this stat.

If it can be proven that older players get back at hitting with RISP (but not in other circumstances), Goldman has a great point to buttress his argument that the old timers must go.

Well, for one data point, Giambi is worse than his OPS+ suggests because late in a game, in a high leverage AB, you just have to bring in a guy who throws hard and he turns into a .600 OPS guy (.600 OPS vs. Power pitchers this year, 43 Ks in 135 ABs). So that's an example of an old guy who can be effectively neutralized with RISP.

Well, for one data point, Giambi is worse than his OPS+ suggests because late in a game, in a high leverage AB, you just have to bring in a guy who throws hard and he turns into a .600 OPS guy (.600 OPS vs. Power pitchers this year, 43 Ks in 135 ABs). So that's an example of an old guy who can be effectively neutralized with RISP.

But that's not specific to being old. That's specific to Giambi, who is almost certainly gone next year.

Just to reiterate what's been said in previous Yankee threads, their record this year is NOT due to old players underperforming. It's due to YOUNGER players underperforming, injuries, and subpar hitting with RISP, in roughly that order.

This comment misses the mark. Goldman is not complaining about why the Yanks haven't cut it this year. He is anticipating the problems of next year:

If baseball teams don't decide when to rebuild, the gods of baseball tend to decide for them. There's a penalty to holding on too long, to having the issue forced: Your team might turn into the Baltimore Orioles (in the Yankees' case, Jeter standing in for the aging Cal Ripken).

Nobody expects the Sox to miss the playoffs, including myself.

I bet there are a few Twins and White Sox fans who do.

I wonder how much of this has to do with who bats with RISP. Is there any way to weight batting numbers with RISP? I would imagine that Melky, Molina, or Cano might have batted with a lot of runners on (following Giambi, A rod).

Melky and Molina are just terrible hitters, at least this year anyway. I'd expect them to hit badly with RISP because hitting badly is the only kind of hitting they're capable of.

I know that Arod has been bad this year in this stat.

A-Rod and Giambi have both been very disappointing with RISP this year. Giambi partially, IMO, due to the reason CP lays out in #65. I'll write A-Rod's troubles off as a fluke since he was a clutch god in 2007 and is still, overall, an outstanding hitter.

He is anticipating problems next year based (partially) on THIS year.

But that's not specific to being old. That's specific to Giambi, who is almost certainly gone next year.

The team as a whole is doing worse against power pitchers than the league average and it kills finesse pitchers. I'm not going to go through and check, but it wouldn't surprise me if the old guys struggle with the heat. Of course Cano is lousy against power pitchers and Abreu is killing them, but I wouldn't be surprised if MOST of the old guys struggle with power pitchers (Damon does, so does Jeter).

True. But if the Sox don't make the playoffs, where can they expect improvement?

The Sox are on pace for 93 wins, and that's with them underplaying expected runs by a good amount. They are not an old team, and they'll likely be replacing terrible production at C and SS with averageish new guys. The Red Sox don't need to improve, because they're really good and not particularly old. The Yankees are older, but more importantly, they're worse. When you're not a playoff team, you need to improve a lot to become one.

The Red Sox are on pace to make the playoffs in a season when the top of the AL is atypically strong. If you win 94 games and don't make the playoffs, that's life, you can't kill yourself for not building a 99-win team. Unless they collapse down the stretch so completely that we have to re-jigger the 2009 projections, or unless some big injuries strike (Beckett and Buchholz?) the Red Sox are in perfectly good shape for next season.

they'll likely be replacing terrible production at C and SS with averageish new guys.

Who is replacing Tek?

An averagish new guy, can't you read?

This comment misses the mark. Goldman is not complaining about why the Yanks haven't cut it this year. He is anticipating the problems of next year:


If baseball teams don't decide when to rebuild, the gods of baseball tend to decide for them. There's a penalty to holding on too long, to having the issue forced: Your team might turn into the Baltimore Orioles (in the Yankees' case, Jeter standing in for the aging Cal Ripken).

But he hasn't addressed the issue of how to fix those problems short of advocating dumping still valuable players who will be gone after 2009 anyway. Giambi and Abreu are old guys who will not be back for 2009. Matsui will be a DH next year and gone by 2010. Damon is a perfectly cromulent LF for one more season. Jeter is untradable as much for his contract as his status as Mr. Yankee.

The Yankees will almost certainly be much younger going into the 2010 season, and there is virtually nothing they can do to get much younger AND better prior to 2010. Trading the old guys will make the team worse in 2009 and probably no better going forward. Especially when you factor in the draft picks they'll get when they leave as free agents.

I generally don't want to engage in "wait 'till next year" discussions in August, but at this point, I wouldn't bet significant money on the Rays in 2009 making the playoffs. Given the resources and core players of both the Yankees and Red Sox, it would be asking a lot for any team to beat at least one and possibly both of them consistently.

An averagish new guy, can't you read?

I bet Tek comes back, averagish catchers aren't that easy to find on the Free Agent market.

No, I realize that. I think Tek is playing for his job right now - he's not coming back if he can't hit better than 650 OPS down the stretch. If he can hit better, we can start to think that 2008 wasn't a cliff dive, maybe the divorce played a part, and project Tek to be better in 2009. Otherwise, I expect Theo will be looking around at trade possibilities. I don't know who, but I think projecting trades is a useless game, and don't see Tek as the starting catcher unless he earns it down the stretch.

An averagish new guy, can't you read?

I think there's going to be a small but significant sentiment in the fans and in the press that the Sox should sign the man to another deal, particularly if he gives them a discount.

I read an article the other day that proclaimed that Varitek is one of the "all-time great Sox", which I still can't think about without shaking my head.

I think he's Don Mattingly.

If Varitek is on the team, I think he'll get the majority of starts. Similar to late-issue Bernie Williams.

"I bet Tek comes back, averagish catchers aren't that easy to find on the Free Agent market."

So they trade for one instead. It's not like they're short on chips.

I think the Bay/Manny trade is good ammunition for the Sox to use against any argument that they're getting older and sliding into obsolescence.

But he hasn't addressed the issue of how to fix those problems short of advocating dumping still valuable players who will be gone after 2009 anyway.

I'm not sure he thinks that the problems can be fixed. He is advocating all-out rebuilding. The gist of it seems to be: the Yanks are going to suck real bad soon, it will ultimately less painful to abandon any pretense of winning now instead of having the issue forced upon you in a year or two when the team is an ugly hulk of veteran crapiness like the '98 Orioles or '02 Mets or '01 Knicks etc etc.

The Red Sox don't need to improve, because they're really good and not particularly old.

When you're not a playoff team, you need to improve a lot to become one.

I don't really understand these two statements. How can the Red Sox stand pat if they are not a playoff team, which by definition needs to improve a lot to become one?

I doubt the Sox win 93 and miss the playoffs. The issue is whether they struggle down the stretch and finish with 89. Then I would take issue with you saying they are really good. They may have underperformed expectations, but they wasted big years from Drew and Youkilis, and no longer have the confidence of having six established starters that they had a year ago. Two of their hottest prospects now have questions about their ceilings, and 3B, SS, CF and C could be concerns next year. I understand why you would trust management, but if they've missed the playoffs two out of three years with this team, others might be concerned.

I'm not sure he thinks that the problems can be fixed. He is advocating all-out rebuilding. The gist of it seems to be: the Yanks are going to suck real bad soon, it will ultimately less painful to abandon any pretense of winning now instead of having the issue forced upon you in a year or two when the team is an ugly hulk of veteran crapiness like the '98 Orioles or '02 Mets or '01 Knicks etc etc.

Let's say the Yanks sign Sabathia and resign Moose and Pettitte. That's a very feasible scenario, and gives you a monster rotation of Sabathia, Moose, Joba, Wang and Pettite with Hughes and IPK as No. 6 and 7 starters.

LEt's say they sign Sabathia and only resign one of Moose or Pettitte. The rotration then is Sabathia, one of Moose/Pettitte, Joba, Wang and Hughes, with IPK and assorted others as No. 6 and 7 starters. That's still a very good rotation.

Since the pen is in pretty good shape (and might be better if Marte stays for a full season, provided he's used properly. Plus Melancon and even Humberto Sanchez should be helping next year), that leaves the offense.

I'm not exactly sure what the Yankees will do on offense, but I do think that Abreu and I-Rod are gone (though both will get arbitration). Giambi is probably gone, though I'm not sure if he gets arbitration.

I'm not fully sold on Teixeira (my pet theory is to teach Matsui to play 1B, and rotate Matsui, Posada and even Damon in 1B), but it's no tragedy if he's signed.

With Teixera, the Yankees look like this

C - Posada/Molina
1B - Teixeira
2B - Cano
SS - Jeter
3B - A-Rod
OF - Damon/Melky - Gardner - some FA OF/Nady.
DH - Matsui/Posada/Damon.

That's not a bad team, with great pitching. Plus Matsui and Damon are gone after 2009.

"How can the Red Sox stand pat if they are not a playoff team, which by definition needs to improve a lot to become one?"

Maybe they're planing on everyone else getting worse?

Maybe they're planing on everyone else getting worse?

Is that a good strategy, with the Yankees following a plan like JRVJ's above, the Rays with a strong system, and with the Orioles and Jays both hovering around .500?

Is that a good strategy, with the Yankees following a plan like JRVJ's above, the Rays with a strong system, and with the Orioles and Jays both hovering around .500?

I'm pretty sure the Sox expect more out of SS, C, CF, DH, Beckett and Buccholz next year. All of that seems reasonable and that should cancel all of the expected decline and then some.

I doubt the Sox win 93 and miss the playoffs. The issue is whether they struggle down the stretch and finish with 89.

Oh. I didn't realize we were playing make-believe. In that case, I'd want the Red Sox to trade for Albert Pujols, Hanley Ramirez, and a humongous bowl of pudding that never runs out of pudding.

An extra point regarding the 2008 Yankees - even though it's been a disappointing year, the team/organization has not turned into a bloodbath.

This is more important than it seems, because to the extent that the Yankees as an organization are still seen as prestigious and stable, they will still be able to leverage their huge financial resources to bring in free agents to the Bronx.

(BTW - I fully support the Yankees improving their farm system, both via the draft, Lat Am signings and trades. But I also don't care what others think about how much the Yankees spend, at least in the sense that I don't have an obsession about getting the Yankee payroll down to $100 to 130MM. The Yanks have tons of money, and they should use it, provided they use it smartly).

JRVJ,

In order for that team to be good, you're counting on a few things. Obviously you have to sign the two marquee free agents (which is something the Yanks have not actually done in years). You're counting on healthy bouncebacks from Posada, Joba, Wang. You're counting on production boosts from Melky, Jeter, Cano. You're counting on Damon and Mussina to keep it up. And, the guys that you're happy to wave bye-bye to (Abreu and Giambi) are two of your most productive hitters, without whom you'd be in firesale mode today.

Goldman is more negative about all this than I am for the Yanks. I don't think disaster is written in stone. But it seems to me that when you have a LONG list of questions about health/ability and you have to basically hope that things break your way, it's a lousy bet. And for the players that are 35+, you're going to get more bad breaks than good breaks.

In non-snark language, I mentioned the possibility that the Red Sox play so badly down the stretch that their 2009 projections drops significantly. I considered it the case in which the Red Sox would have to make changes. (They'd most likely get in on Sabathia or another top pitcher). I also consider it quite unlikely, and I find your dwelling on it to be pretty silly.

I'm not counting on Teixeira. I am counting on Sabathia (I didn't want to speculate TOO much regarding who'd play 1B for the Yanks if not Teixeira).

I am counting on healthy comebacks for Joba and Wang, as there is nothing that makes me think otherwise at this point.

I am a little bit more cautious about Posada, especially since he may not be ready for the start of spring training. Still, I think he'll be back and be somewhere 2006 Posada, which is pretty good (just not 2007 great).

I don't seen any reason why a healthy Damon or Mussina can't keep it up (especially Mussina, who has changed his style of pitching). However, I am also counting on the Yankees having a 6-7 deep rotation (which is why I'd sign Sabathia AND resign BOTH Moose and Pettitte).

Abreu's leaving will be replaced by a healthy Matsui in the line-up (with Nady actually playing RF, and not absolutely sucking defensively. I don't know if you're aware that by some metrics, Abreus is the worst defender in the AL). Teixeira, were he to be signed, replaces Giambi's production (with better defense). If not Teixeira, the Yanks will get someone to play 1B, even if only for 1 or 2 years.

It is also conceivable that Jackson will be ready for a call-up in the 2nd half of 2009.

What I DON'T think the Yankees should do is be stingy in FA this year (though admittedly, I think they'll end up spending LESS money next year, even if they sign C.C. AND Teixeira).

With Teixera, the Yankees look like this

C - Posada/Molina
1B - Teixeira
2B - Cano
SS - Jeter
3B - A-Rod
OF - Damon/Melky - Gardner - some FA OF/Nady.
DH - Matsui/Posada/Damon.

That's not a bad team, with great pitching. Plus Matsui and Damon are gone after 2009.

This. Plus going into 2010 you're probably dropping one or both of Mussina/Pettite, freeing up even more money. Could things go sour? Sure. Kennedy may never get any better, Hughes may never get healthy and Joba could blow out his shoulder. Jeter could enjoy a Ripkenesque decline and Sabathia could collapse into a singularity shortly after signing a $200M deal. Disaster always lurks, but on paper, I see a team in reasonably good position for both the short and long term.

I find your dwelling on it to be pretty silly.

Duly noted. I'll work on finding you that pudding bowl, though.

Let's say my question mark players break 50/50. Half good news, half bad news.

You sign Tex. No Sabathia. So you'll bring back Pettitte and Mussina.

One of Joba/Wang has arm problems such that they really don't contribute anything. Pettitte keeps rolling along at a 4.20 ERA, but Mussina falls back to 4.60. Let's say your rotation now is a very good Joba, a solid Pettitte, a mediocre Mussina, and then two of the original question mark kids behind them. Not monster anymore. Entirely feasible.

Now on offense, if Damon and Nady are back to hitting .280 as per usual, as the stats will no doubt project, the outfield is quickly pathetic. Assume that one of Posada/Matsui is going to give you almost nothing, the other back to his solid self. Assume that one of Jeter/Cano bounces back to .320, and the other does not. You have ARod and Tex rocking out but this isn't a very strong offense overall. And, again, entirely feasible and not particularly pessimistic. Just assuming that some things go well and others go poorly.

Let's say my question mark players break 50/50. Half good news, half bad news.

Every team will look pretty mediocre if you assume they will get nothing from half of their players. Could it happen? Sure. Is it the most likely scenario? No. You go by the most reasonable projections as your baseline and pray things work out. The 2009 Yankees as put together by JRVJ in #84 project pretty well.

You are assuming that the Yankees don't sign Sabathia and they also DON'T sign anybody else. I think that's wrong (I don't think the Yanks are psyched about Sheets - for example - but if he's what's available, he's what's available).

I think that your offensive scenarios are not 50/50 but 25/75 against the Yankees.

This Yankee winning percentage of .531 would rank ahead of all but 14 Mets franchise seasons.

Of course, the Mets have had only 46 franchise seasons, so that puts it right about at the line between "top third" and "middle third".

The most mediocre, average catcher alive, Dave Ross, has been unemployed since he was on the Reds earlier this year. The Phillies are considering signing him. He's definitely better than Varitek right now. Maybe the Red Sox should sign him now and keep him for two or three more year as well.

The most mediocre, average catcher alive, Dave Ross, has been unemployed since he was on the Reds earlier this year.

Wow. Dave Ross is actually useful.