Good luck.

seriously. the point of this article should have been: "melky, grab some pine!"

there's just no reason to not call up gardner and give him his shot. the defense is by all accounts a wash, but gardner at least promises some OBP improvement. i've had about enough of melky hacking at 1st pitches and 3rd strikes at his eyes.

There's a place for outfielders with good arms and average range. It's called right field.

and a switch-hitter who has almost no offensive value against left-handed pitchers.

As a LHB: .277/.337/.401, 105 OPS+
As a RHB: .257/.329/.341, 87 OPS+

Yeah, he really sucks, by cracky!

Kennedy, Hughes, and Cabrera to Seattle for Ichiro?

Gardner's MLE this year (per minorleaguesplits.com):

.247/.347/.357
.269/.347/.331 (2008 ZIPS)

versus Cabrera:

.254/.312/.371
.286/.354/.419 (2008 ZIPS)

The question is really "who is more likely to be productive at the major league level in the second half of 2008?" My money would be on Cabrera.

Furthermore, what could you really expect to get for Cabrera?

I think Melky's range is above average. UZR has him on pace for +24 (small sample size of course) and ZR has had him pretty high this year and last.

To the naked eye he gets decent jumps out there, sometimes takes bad routes but that's happening less often.

I'm really not sure what to think of Gardner. I'm still leaning to 4th OFer, especially with those K rates from a guy with such little power.

I think he'd be close enough to Melky overall that I wouldn't hesitate if anyone offers something remotely interesting for Cabrera, but that really says more about Melky than Gardner.

Hopefully Jackson gets here soon.

As a LHB: .277/.337/.401, 105 OPS+
As a RHB: .257/.329/.341, 87 OPS+

Melky's splits are inflated by his seemingly out of context April stats.

That said, moving him now would likely be an example of selling low.

why? he's a perfect 4th OF for the yankees. got the range and arm to play any of the 3 OF positions.

besides, .286/.354/.419 ain't what we're getting: .254/.312/.371 is.

and, having watched him almost EVERY single game, that's about the line he's earned.

i'm not expecting rickey henderson from gardner, just something better than melky going forward ... because that's NOT that hard.

I think Melky's range is above average

i think melky's a good fielder, no more. range is good, routes and reads are shitty. arm is excellent.

nothing irreplaceable.

Geez. How the mighty melky has fallen...

quiet, you ...

i'm totally rocking out to pre-perry Journey! Don't make me come over there, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry!!!

Sorry. Haven't been watching many Yankees games lately, work and all. Didn't realize Melky's been scuffling
You know he's in a bad spot when Goldman pulls out a Miguel Cairo obituary and scribbles Melky's name instead

it's alright levski. as long as your boys play inigo to prince humperdink, i'm fine with being miracle max.

tonite was a good start.

This was posted on RAB:

Ellsbury @ AAA

87 games, .298 avg, .360 obp, .380 slg, .740 ops, 33 sb, 19% xbh, .26 runs produced per ab,

Gardner @ AAA

73 games, .292 avg, .408 obp, .436 slg, .844 ops, 29 sb, 29% xbh, .32 runs produced per ab

There's a place for outfielders with good arms and average range. It's called right field.

How terrible is that batting line from a corner outfield spot?

This was posted on RAB:

... which ignores that Ellsbury's numbers came when he was a year younger.

... which ignores that Ellsbury's numbers came when he was a year younger.

And that Gardner strikes out quite a bit more often, which makes his numbers less likely to translate.

It also ignores Ellsbury's time in AA and the majors last year, and I believe Ellsbury has never been in AAA before while Gardner got around 200 PA there last year.

The point isn't that the projection of Gardner's career is necessarily on all fours with that of Ellsbury; that is probably unlikely. It is that Gardner has shown more than enough to be given the opportunity to at least compete with Melky on the ML level.

There are many teams hoping to play into October, and a few who won’t, who could use the small assurance that Cabrera would provide. The Yankees, who will likely need more pitching to continue their current run of strong showings against weaker ball clubs, not to mention survive the first round of the playoffs should they actually pull off their third amazing return from the dead in the last four seasons, might be able to leverage Cabrera as part of a package for the extra arm they need.

That's just an odd couple of sentences. No contending team is going to (intentionally) give up anything of value for this season to get Cabrera. The second part of Cabrera to a non-contender as part of a package for a pitcher makes some sense but it's not clear what the "leverage" would be -- Cabrera is, at best, a nice throw-in for a top starter.

But which one? Not Sabathia as the Indians have Sizemore. Possibly Bedard. Possibly Lowe if the Dodgers are out of it and completely ready to jump ship on both Jones and Pierre.

But let's be clear. Cabrera's last 3 seasons are OPS+ of 95, 89, 84. He's a 4th OF or a bad starting CF. I can't imagine anyone thinks of him as a "prospect" any more. And he'll be arb-eligible next year (not sure if as a super-2 or a full 3) and, given he's got 2+ years as a starter, likely to pull down something like $2.5 M. The Yankees may be more likely to be deciding whether to non-tender him than who to trade him for.

I can't imagine anyone thinks of him as a "prospect" any more.

Seriously?
You need to keep in mind that this guy still is still just 23. I mean I can understand being bit skeptical because of his lack of development over the last few years but to say you can't imagine anyone thinking of him as a prospect is absurd. I don't see why it would surprise anyone if this guy ends up being an above average player for a good while.

The point isn't that the projection of Gardner's career is necessarily on all fours with that of Ellsbury; that is probably unlikely. It is that Gardner has shown more than enough to be given the opportunity to at least compete with Melky on the ML level.

But it doesn't show that at all, because it's a ludicrously dishonest comparison.

Basically, they took the worst few months of Jacoby Ellsbury's professional career and compared them to the best few months of Brett Gardner's career. Give me any two players, and I could cherry-pick a similar comparison. It's worthless.

Brett Gardner may be a good player. Cherry-picking isn't going to make that case for you.

"You need to keep in mind that this guy still is still just 23. I mean I can understand being bit skeptical because of his lack of development over the last few years but to say you can't imagine anyone thinking of him as a prospect is absurd."

I've never thought of him as much of a prospect. Yes, he's young, but:

*He's never hit for much power.
*He puts everything on the ground, and as such is unlikely to develop much more power.
*He doesn't draw many walks.
*He's got a thick body, and as such isn't likely to retain much of his speed.

Where's the forward projection there? I could see him having a long Jay Payton-type career as a 4th OF/below-average starter, but that's not really something that'll bring back a lot in trade. Especially now that he's used up all his pre-arb years.

I don't think Gardner is likely to be a good CFer, but he might be a useful 4th OFer. I'm down on him relative to other Yankee fans mostly because of the Ks, although his speed should keep his BABIP high, he's supposed to be an excellent bunter for hits.

I do think Melky could benefit from some time in AAA to get his confidence back and help get his head on straight again, he looks overwhelmed at the plate right now and I think he could use a minor league breather. If the Yanks were willing to do this, I would advocate bringing up Gardner and sending Melky down. I don't think the roster has a use for 5 OFers right now.

But it doesn't show that at all, because it's a ludicrously dishonest comparison.

Basically, they took the worst few months of Jacoby Ellsbury's professional career and compared them to the best few months of Brett Gardner's career. Give me any two players, and I could cherry-pick a similar comparison. It's worthless.

Brett Gardner may be a good player. Cherry-picking isn't going to make that case for you.

Heh. That is a comical overstatement.

It would only be dishonest if I drew a conclusion based the stats I posted. But...wait for it...I didn't. I merely posted them without comment.

It would only be dishonest if I drew a conclusion based the stats I posted. But...wait for it...I didn't. I merely posted them without comment.

Oh, come on. You were inviting the comparison.

Oh, come on. You were inviting the comparison.

As I mentioned in my third post, my intent wasn't to argue that Gardner projects to have a similar career to Ellsbury. The only comparison I was inviting is that one player, at least until this season, has been viewed as a 4th OFer, while the other has been viewed as an untouchable prospect. So to that extent, I think Gardner may have a considerably better career than a lot of people (including myself) once thought, and the stats I posted provide a jumping off point to make that case. But that doesn't mean that he will be as good as Ellsbury.

Don't feed the troll.

Don't feed the troll.

You are so full of #### and haven't been able to defend one point that you have ever made, so go #### yourself. You're a pathetic clown.

Go ahead, dude, provide some facts to support the idea that Gardner is merely a 4th OFer.

If anyone dares to diss a Sox player, you emerge from the woodwork. You are the living embodiment of a troll.

You must have me confused with someone else.

The Yankees, who will likely need more pitching to continue their current run of strong showings against weaker ball clubs, not to mention survive the first round of the playoffs should they actually pull off their third amazing return from the dead in the last four seasons, might be able to leverage Cabrera as part of a package for the extra arm they need.

Quite a sentence there. Edit much?

How does one think of a team with the Yanks' sort of lineup and payroll as 'returning from the dead' every year instead of 'spending a lot of the season with their collective heads up their ###'?' Just asking.

And, oh yeah, trading Melky, even with others tossed in, for a pitcher of impact? Good luck with that.

It's funny to read a number of the people who have been arguing Melky has a ton of upside and a future star-caliber player now recognizing that, in fact, what he truly is is what several people have been saying all along: a guy whose value is primarily that he is cost-controlled and can play a decent CF.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course, and most teams would be happy to have him. But the same wild-eyed optimism that had many overvaluing him as more than that the last couple years appears to be driving some (not all) of the Gardner commentary here now.

It's funny to read a number of the people who have been arguing Melky has a ton of upside and a future star-caliber player now recognizing that

As someone who led the pro-Melky banner for a while, I'm pretty sure no one ever said Melky had a ton of upside. It was always understood by everyone here that he'd never hit enough to play in a corner.

Edit: I could be misunderstanding you, I thought at one point he could hit like Kenny Lofton did (without the steals obviously), or like Jeter in 02 or something, maybe that's what you mean. I didn't see .370/.420 (he hit .360/.390 as a 21 year old!) as being out of his reach, I do now.

The yankees seem like a team that could really benefit from having their bench players / 4th outfielders specialize in defense (more so than the average team). Going forward, I would guess that the Yankees continue to get overpriced veterans a little past their primes. These are the types of players that are going to be good offensively, but a little slower, a little banged up, etc etc. As a yankee fan, i'd be very happy with Melky as a career 4th outfielder giving all 3 OF spots the occasional day off and as a late inning defensive replacement. He fits in perfectly.

I am not a Yankees fan, but I, like many, said during the winter that I thought the Yankees should have pulled the trigger on the Hughes/Kennedy/Cabrera for Santana deal.

Of course, it may well still be shown that Cashman was correct in not doing so, but I don't think it was the "No way!" type-scenario that some suggested at the time.

Of course, it may well still be shown that Cashman was correct in not doing so, but I don't think it was the "No way!" type-scenario that some suggested at the time.

I still think it's a "No way!" thing, because I don't really see the Yankees as better off at the moment with that deal. That puts Damon in CF full-time, and Matsui in left, where his knee is already breaking down from inter-league action. It also forces the Yankees to open the season with a Santana, Wang, Pettitte, Mussina...? rotation. Rasner looks fine so far (and so does Giese for that matter) but that ...? could've been anyone as they got settled.

Of course, it may well still be shown that Cashman was correct in not doing so, but I don't think it was the "No way!" type-scenario that some suggested at the time.

Well, it took way less to get Santana, so I think that's got to be a point in favor of those who thought it was too much to pay for him.

That puts Damon in CF full-time

I actually advocated using Gardner and/or signing Mike Cameron to a one-year deal, leaving Damon in LF. Cameron of course has not done so hot in MIL.

Really, it simply depends on how Hughes and Kennedy develop, which is obviously still unknown. But my reasoning was that:

I'd just as soon have Santana for the next five years as Hughes assuming they can absorb the salaries.
They have other prospects as good or better than Kennedy.
Cabrera is OK but not a great loss.

Sanatana/Wang up top would have looked pretty good.

No point talking about it now, really, but with Goldman now saying they should move Cabrera in a deal for a pitcher, I thought it was worth revisiting.

Where's the forward projection there? I could see him having a long Jay Payton-type career as a 4th OF/below-average starter

As the article correctly points out he's had several extended periods where he has been very good at the major league level at a very young age. So for an example of the kind of player he could develop into look to those streaks. He's also had extended periods of sucking at the major league level, but also at a very young age. The main point, if you can't tell, is his age. He has been an average to slightly below average major league starter for years and is just now an age where most top prospects are just getting their first chance in the majors, and even they are expected to have some growing pains. His lack of development at the major league level thus far IS disconcerting but is it that surprising that a player rushed to the majors at 20, on a championship caliber team, in the media capital of the world no less, has had his development stall? What's surprising IMO is that he's managed to stick and not get sent back down in such circumstances.
I'm not saying he's a great prospect but to just write him off at 23 as a non-prospect career 4th outfielder who peaked at age 20 is almost ludicrously harsh and short-sighted imo. He IS Jay Payton right now perhaps, but Jay Payton wasn't a regular until he was 27. How about we split the difference and at least give him until 25 to prove if he can be the better player?

FWIW, Kevin Goldstein over at Bpro seems to think Gardner is ready to come and help the Yanks right now.

I'd just as soon have Santana for the next five years as Hughes assuming they can absorb the salaries.

The problem is, there is no such thing as "absorb" the salary. Spending $25M on Santana means you can't spend it on someone else. The issue is not Santana vs. Hughes (that's always been a no brainer). It's Santana vs. Hughes + Sabbathia, or Hughes +Texeira, or whatever other FA you can sign with $25M. The myth of the infinite Yankee payroll is nonsense.

Go ahead, dude, provide some facts to support the idea that Gardner is merely a 4th OFer.

24 years old, career .290/.387/.387 hitter in the minors... hitting .295/.411/.444 right now in the IL (SLG inflated by triples...)

Looks like a slightly better version of Jason Tyner to me...

I used to see that exact argument applied to Jose Castillo by Pirate fans.

Look, yes, I know that Cabrera is young. Youth-relative-to-level is good but it is not, in and of itself, enough. A player needs to have an exploitable base of skills, something from which you can extrapolate future improvement. I mean, my cousin Zach in Little League is young for his level, too, but I wouldn't go ahead and engrave his HOF plaque just yet. Similarly, there's no compelling reason to take Cabrera's playing record and throw away all the bad bits. Everybody is going to have periods of boom and bust in their line, just by virtue of normal variation.

I'd be a lot more charitable toward his skill growth if he'd showed signs of growth in his minor league career, but he really didn't have much development there, either.

24 years old, career .290/.387/.387 hitter in the minors... hitting .295/.411/.444 right now in the IL (SLG inflated by triples...)

Seriously, this is a guy with a .247/.347/.357 MLE (good luck keeping those walks in MLB, too) in the best few hundred PA of his career. I know Melky is struggling, but he's only 23 and if he's going to turn it around, you're probably going to have to roll with him while he works it out. Brett Gardner might be a decent 4th OF someday; he's not good enough to start for the New York Yankees, even if the other option is a struggling Melky. This is silly.

"Looks like a slightly better version of Jason Tyner to me..."

Personally, he reminds me a lot of Chris Duffy. Both lefty-hitting college CFs with the same physical dimensions and body type. Gardner has a little more plate discipline and is a little younger, but Duffy had a little more average and power.

Looks like a slightly better version of Jason Tyner to me...

Well, Tyner never had the kind of success at AAA that Gardner is having this year. Was Tyner a good defensive OFer?

I ask because apparently Gardner's defense has taken a step forward this year, and his range is now in line with his speed (Goldstein's Future Shock article yesterday).

I don't know what Gardner's fielding is like, but Endy Chavez works, too. Gabe Kapler destroyed AA pitching at 22 to the tune of 322/395/583. I'd be surprised if Brandon Moss became much more than a 4th OF, and he's outhit Gardner at every level.

I am not buying stock in Gardner inc.

Neither am I, sj. ellsbury, I agree with your general point, but Moss/Kapler are not good comps because Gardner has 80 speed. He scored from 2nd on a groundout last night.

Was Tyner a good defensive OFer?

yes

He hit .324/.374/.400 one year in AAA, .329/.379/.405 another and .321/.378/.349 another, his career minor league line is .303/.365/.357- and his career MLB line is: .275/.314/.323

he also struck out a lot LESS than Gardner.

Gardner still looks like a slightly better version of Tyner, same basic skill set, Tyner was a little better at contact - Gardner has more power (Tyner has/had NONE)- but really Garnder has so little it hardly matters, whee Tyner hit .275/.314/.323, Garder might hit .265/.333/.345

big whoop-
he's gonna have to show a lot more sustained improvement to be a viable MLB regular. If his .295/.411/.444 line right now is his "true talent" level (in AAA) and not just a random peak, maybe he can post a .270/.360/.390 MLB line, maybe, but as someone else said- with his lack of power, good luck keeping those walks.

ZiPS does not like the fortunes of a guy with no power who's striking out nearly a quarter of the time in AAA.


ZiPS Future Projection - Brett Gardner
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB BA OBP SLG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year-to-Date* 261 44 66 8 5 3 21 40 72 22 .253 .354 .356
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rest 2008 241 41 63 8 3 1 17 31 56 18 .261 .348 .332
2009 505 86 130 16 6 5 57 66 117 43 .257 .344 .343
2010 502 86 129 16 5 4 56 64 102 38 .257 .342 .333
2011 535 89 134 17 5 5 58 68 110 39 .250 .336 .329
2012 507 85 127 16 5 4 54 63 112 37 .250 .334 .325
2013 495 84 123 16 4 5 55 64 109 33 .248 .335 .327
2014 502 84 122 16 4 6 56 63 115 30 .243 .328 .327
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* - Contains Minor League Translation
</PRE>

he's gonna have to show a lot more sustained improvement to be a viable MLB regular.

Since you're responding to me, I'm going to point out that this was my evaluation of Gardner:

he might be a useful 4th OFer.

I just think the Tyner comp is selling him a little short. .333/.345 is useful off the bench out of a guy who can fly in the OF, bunt and steal.

The problem with Melky, it seems to me, is that he's not developing. He held his own in the majors at age 21 in 2006, which was a very good sign. Then he essentially repeated that in 2007, at age 22. Ok, that's fine. But now he's repeating it again -- actually, he's edging slightly backwards -- at age 23. He's not taking a step forward.

BP, to take an objective source, projected him to be slightly above league average (50th percentile projection = .265 EqA) as a hitter this year. He's not doing that.

.253 .354 .356

Of course, that's not much. And I'd rather see Melky out there. But the case can be made that if you're going to have an OPS around .700 in the line-up, the Yankees would benefit from it being an OBP-heavy .700, espcially for someone batting ninth.

Someone that fast is a decent enough guy to have on your bench, especially when you don't have a lot of guys that platoon.

I mean, they carried Charlie Gipson for 3 months.

the Yankees would benefit from it being an OBP-heavy .700, espcially for someone batting ninth.

The Yanks could also use a legit burner coming off the bench who can steal a bag and take extra bases on singles. If the guy is never going to turn into anything (and he's not) this might be the time to use him, before Jackson gets here.

Isn't Gary Pettis the usual Gardner comp?

"Isn't Gary Pettis the usual Gardner comp?"

Is that allowed? I mean, Pettis is black...

As someone who led the pro-Melky banner for a while, I'm pretty sure no one ever said Melky had a ton of upside. It was always understood by everyone here that he'd never hit enough to play in a corner.

I do remember the Markakis-Melky comparisons from a few years ago, where Steven Goldman, among others, was willing to throw out minor league performance and scouting pedigree to declare Melky the better player because they had similar stats:

"Cabrera's 10 months younger, is a switch hitter, and plays in the tougher park. Markakis is the more celebrated prospect, but make mine Melky. "

"Cabrera's 10 months younger, is a switch hitter, and plays in the tougher park. Markakis is the more celebrated prospect, but make mine Melky. "

Ouch.

Christian got called up today, so it looks like the Yanks aren't interested in giving Gardner a shot yet.

As someone who led the pro-Melky banner for a while, I'm pretty sure no one ever said Melky had a ton of upside. It was always understood by everyone here that he'd never hit enough to play in a corner.

Your recollection of your past position is simply incorrect, and not for the first time. Accuracy is a lot more impressive than failed snark, imo.

Well, it took way less to get Santana, so I think that's got to be a point in favor of those who thought it was too much to pay for him.

Not sure this stands up to scrutiny, really, as things have played out.

Not sure this stands up to scrutiny, really, as things have played out.

How's that? For Santana, the Twins got Gomez, Humber, Mulvey and Guerra. Humber is just a mess these days, his ERA is north of five and a half. Mulvey is pitching decently well in Triple-A while Guerra is pitching not-so-great in High-A but he's so young who the hell knows.

Melky and Gomez are pretty much a wash (see, for instance, here, or their VORP rankings). So what scrutiny doesn't it stand up to, given that Twins would have, in addition to Gomez, probably Hughes and Kennedy who have to be--at the least--considered the equal of the trio of arms they got from the Mets.

I don't think it matters at all what any AL team would have given, Santana wanted to go to the NL to hit. Badly. His chances of ending up on an AL team were approximately zero.