Jeter is not immortal

That's just a theory. He hasn't died yet.

Why's the main page so wide?

Jeter is not immortal

That's just a theory. He hasn't died yet.

exactly he has been testing some anti aging products for the last 3 years and wow they really work

I have to agree with the excerpt. Yount was 29 when he moved to the OF. Jeter will be 37 this year. When Yount was 37, he retired.

Even then (per BBRef's reckoning), Yount was -72 runs in the OF, vs. +25 as an infielder.

I suppose they're hoping Jeter will reverse that, having already done -72 as an infielder maybe he can do +25 as an outfielder.

Why's the main page so wide?

Jeter's brawny presence.

Why's the main page so wide?

Works fine on 1280x1024, so I'm going with bad code.

Works fine on 1280x1024, so I'm going with bad code.

He suggests an alternative to our almighty Saviour's presence!

BURN HIM

my wife always calls Jeter "The Tick"

I don't doubt that Jeter would have been a perfectly good CF 10 years ago, but these days I can't imagine he will. No time to learn, he's clearly slower than he used to be, and it would probably be against his will.

With that said, Jeter is not immortal and age is against him.

...unlike Rivera.

Even then (per BBRef's reckoning), Yount was -72 runs in the OF, vs. +25 as an infielder.

Yes ... but he was +7 at age 37! If he'd played another year out there, they'd have given him a GG.

And while Yount was -72, that was as a CF. From ages 32-37, he'd have been about average in a corner. I don't particularly doubt that Jeter would be a decent LF (the competition isn't that high anyway) and he's got a shot at being a decent CF if he switched now ... which obviously he won't be.

Jeter would have a hell of a time hitting enough to justify playing left field every day, though.

What possible argument is there for Jeter being anything other than a horrorshow in CF, other than the ubiquitous "He's great going back on pop-ups?" Remember, being captain of the Yankees doesn't count.

What possible argument is there for Jeter being anything other than a horrorshow in CF, other than the ubiquitous "He's great going back on pop-ups?"

Maybe Gardner could cover the LF gap for him?

Robin's range was fine until around age 33 or so when his first step all but disappeared. He could still run but his reactions weren't there. Toss in his poor arm and the defense suffered.

Strangely enough I first really noticed in his second MVP season. After that it became pretty obvious. He tried to compensate via positioning but that can only do so much.

He tried to compensate via positioning but that can only do so much.

Strangely, that's also what his wife said.

Aside from the paragraph where the author says that Jeter is at his best when the odds are against him, this post is a pretty fair read ... which leads me to believe that someone has kidnapped Mike Silva and is using his byline.

Maybe Gardner could cover the LF gap for him?

That doesn't make Jeter a decent CFer, or even give him a shot to be one. That makes him a sh!tty CFer who's having his inadequacy covered up by another player. If this is the route the Yankees were going to go they should park Jeter in a corner (I'm guessing RF would be better in YS) and put Gardner in CF.

Aside from the paragraph where the author says that Jeter is at his best when the odds are against him, this post is a pretty fair read ... which leads me to believe that someone has kidnapped Mike Silva and is using his byline.

I'm horrible at remembering writers, but I thought Silva was a mostly reasonable writer that I massively disagree with about most things. He posts here pretty frequently I thought.

I don't doubt that Jeter would have been a perfectly good CF 10 years ago, but these days I can't imagine he will. No time to learn, he's clearly slower than he used to be, and it would probably be against his will.

The problem is that even most _good_ CFs are done as real CFs by age 37. I don't see a reasonable argument that Jeter could be passable there, having never played the position.

And I don't really see a benefit to suffering through a terrible CF as opposed to a terrible SS. Unless you trade for Hanley Ramirez or something.

As this team is constructed, Jeter _only_ makes sense at SS. There's nowhere in the infield for him to move to. Not 2B, since Cano is there. Not 3B, since ARod is there and you don't want to make ARod a DH with years to go on that contract if you can help it. Not 1B, since Teixeira is there and Jeter's bat probably can't play at the position. Not DH, since Jeter's bat probably can't play there. They could easier find a spot for him in the OF, but they're better off with him at SS.

(And I _do_ doubt that he'd have been a "perfectly good" CF 10 years ago. It _may_ have happened. There was a plausible chance for it. But I still think odds were against it.)

For the success of Robin Yount there are other athletes that tried to move from the infield to the outfield with poor results. Juan Samuel and Howard Johnson are two examples locally of players that could not adjust to the demands of centerfield.

The Mutts were desperate, they had two perfectly adequate CFs (defensively) and then had none,
Samuel was horrible at 2b (Al Soriano bad) and horrible in CF, HoJo in Cf was a bad joke- not as bad as Samuel
The Mutts also moved another 2b, Keith Miller, to CF- that looked like it was working, but- Miller's offense was iffy for an OF (even a CF) and he kept getting hurt.

Jeter ain't going to be playing no center field. That all came out of some throwaway sound bite Cashman provided to dodge the question of how much longer Jeter's going to play shortstop.

Nobody involved with the Yankees, probably not even Jeter himself, is dumb enough to think a 38-year-old ex-bad-shortstop can play center field at any level above disastrous.

Two years of high-impact aging down the line, though, I can't imagine the Yankees are going to be able to live with Rodriguez and Jeter's gloves side-by-side in the infield anymore. And the DH slot may not be available, so one of them is going to left field.

Biggio seems to have done ok moving to CF at age 37 in 2003, according to WAR (Rfield of -2 his first year, though he slipped to -14 his second year there).

Knoblauch did okay (defensively, anyway) moving to LF at age 32, according to WAR.

Jeter will probably eventually move to 3B, with Rodriguez to 1B and Teixeira to DH.

Jeter would have a hell of a time hitting enough to justify playing left field every day, though.

Sure but if he's gonna be getting 500 PA per year in his late 30s, they've got to come somewhere.

Not 3B, since ARod is there and you don't want to make ARod a DH with years to go on that contract if you can help it.
Jeter will probably eventually move to 3B, with Rodriguez to 1B and Teixeira to DH.

Why in the world do people want to keep AROD in the field? A move to DH will help him stay healthier, making that contract less of a risk.

Post-integration, only 4 guys have played 400+ games at 3B from ages 35-37 and we'll give Schmidt honorary membership (this was the Rick Schu era!). That's compared to 15 who did so ages 32-34, only 2 of whom are on both lists (Schmidt & Robinson). And AROD's on the "didn't play 400+ games at 3B ages 32-34 list."

Want to cut it back to 350 games? OK 31 from ages 32-34; 6 from 35-37. 300 games? 41 to 11.

AROD of course will still have the bat for 3B which, all else equal, "improves" his chances of staying at 3B. But I can't see why you'd risk that much money when you're paying him to hit.

Why in the world do people want to keep AROD in the field? A move to DH will help him stay healthier, making that contract less of a risk.

Same reason you want to keep Chase Utley on the field. He has more value there.

I know you know that, Walt, but how are you so sure that ARod-at-DH would be more value than ARod-at-3B, once injury and effectiveness are taken into account? The presumption should be that ARod-at-3B has the most value, until it's shown that he can't stay healthy at the position. (And I don't really see any evidence that a player's bat improves -- i.e., from less wear and tear -- going to DH.) Thus, you want to try to keep him at 3B as long as possible.

AROD of course will still have the bat for 3B which, all else equal, "improves" his chances of staying at 3B.

Right. How many 3B weren't at third because their bat could no longer handle the position? ARod has a HOF bat, so I don't see why we'd compare him with any certainty to "ordinary" 3B.

But I can't see why you'd risk that much money when you're paying him to hit.

Because they're not "paying him to hit." They're "paying him" to provide value. He provides the most value if he can stick at third.

This is like when people say about Player X's offense, "they're paying him to drive in runs." As if, e.g., getting on base is not important. No, they're not paying anyone "to drive in runs." They're paying them to provide value on offense. To extend the analogy to ARod, they're paying him to provide as much value as possible, considering offense *and* defense.

In the past four years, six players who were at least 37 had a season of least 90 RBIs, but none more than 96.

The Yankeezz are doo00med!11!

The Yankees will just let him play short field, like in girls softball. He'll be such a feeb by then that no one will complain that they are playing with 10 men. After the final year of his contract, the dementia will be advanced enough that they'll just tell him he plays ss for the Yanks, and have his nurse wheel him out of the clubhouse and feed him his oatmeal during the games.