2021-2022 Off Season Thread

[False1]

Yankees bring back Brantly on a minor league deal.

Brantley probably hoping for universal DH, trade of Sanchez, moves up the depth chart one spot. I kinda always liked his left handed swing. But seems like a butcher defensively, at a position where I'd prioritize defense much higher than offense.

[newhampfan]

Brantley probably hoping for universal DH, trade of Sanchez, moves up the depth chart one spot. I kinda always liked his left handed swing. But seems like a butcher defensively, at a position where I'd prioritize defense much higher than offense.

We (aka Cashman) should've gone after the real "Brantley" last winter--the OF who hit (again) .over .300 in a season when our 38 yr. old Yankee OF hit .223, and even that mostly thanks to the ball that got juiced up after the AS break. And who on our team w/ similar at bats hit .300? The Michael Brantley then would have cost less than any OF Cashman might now hire (unless, as expected, he re-signs his love child instead).

[Obnoxio]

Football has generally figured out how to fill the down time. They can run multiple replays between downs. You just don’t see the down time.

[bucky]

Brantley probably hoping for universal DH, trade of Sanchez, moves up the depth chart one spot. I kinda always liked his left handed swing. But seems like a butcher defensively, at a position where I'd prioritize defense much higher than offense.

??? Confused Rob Brantly not Brantley. Finally something (MIL doing something) and I am happy it's a catcher. But I think this is right. We dropped him off the 40 man so he became a FA, put Sands on 40 man only to trade him, and then sign Brantley to a minor league contract. Planned. I was posting about the prospect who had a great AS game in AFL (Wells not so good, not ready) and another poster about a catcher who was going to be available (the club had 3 catchers he was right because I checked). It was a great post. (Rule 5) I wanted a catcher last year (there were 2 available) and this guy. I can't understand the Sanchez situation. But Rob Brantly is our best insurance. LHB 0.150 but never got the opportunity even when Boone could have used him.

Sorry I don't know who the Poster was to give him credit. The bottom line is we need more insurance than Brantly. We need a starting catcher.

[HelloNewman]

I've been on the ban-the-shift train for years. Perhaps a compromise would be to do something similar to mound visits where there is a limit on instances per game? Maybe each team gets one or two exemptions per game, so to your point they can try to get creative defensively in a key situation, versus shifting every single at bat?

I'm worried about the Law of Unintended Consequences with a shift ban. While it would have the apparently salutary effect of raising batting averages, I'm not sure it would do anything to curb the "three-outcome" mentality that prevails these days, in fact could it even reinforce it by rewarding the "pull-happiness" we're seeing now? It would raise scores but is a lack of scoring really the prime aesthetic issue with today's baseball? I suspect you'd just have games lasting even longer but with no real change in hitting behavior.

I think the reforms aeromac proposed, which would increase the value of speed and the ability to hit to all fields, would have the practical effect of making the shift obsolete in the majority of (albeit not all) situations.

[HelloNewman]

We (aka Cashman) should've gone after the real "Brantley" last winter--the OF who hit (again) .over .300 in a season when our 38 yr. old Yankee OF hit .223, and even that mostly thanks to the ball that got juiced up after the AS break. And who on our team w/ similar at bats hit .300? The Michael Brantley then would have cost less than any OF Cashman might now hire (unless, as expected, he re-signs his love child instead).

Yep, Brantley would have been a good get -- unfortunately Cashman painted himself into a corner by giving Glass Hicks 7/$70M, so now he feels he needs to hedge against Hicks' glassiness by having another "true centerfielder" on the roster, and Brantley can't play CF anymore.

More bad roster planning by everybody's favorite rappelling elf.

[False1]

I'm worried about the Law of Unintended Consequences with a shift ban. While it would have the apparently salutary effect of raising batting averages, I'm not sure it would do anything to curb the "three-outcome" mentality that prevails these days, in fact could it even reinforce it by rewarding the "pull-happiness" we're seeing now? It would raise scores but is a lack of scoring really the prime aesthetic issue with today's baseball? I suspect you'd just have games lasting even longer but with no real change in hitting behavior.

I think the reforms aeromac proposed, which would increase the value of speed and the ability to hit to all fields, would have the practical effect of making the shift obsolete in the majority of (albeit not all) situations.

Just my two cents... but I don't hate the "three-outcome" approach. I mean, home runs are exciting. Strikeouts can make you jump out of your chair or disappear into it depending on whether it's the top half or bottom half of an inning. Walks aren't really boring as they put runners in play and sometimes stem from exciting duels with pitchers. For me it's less about "style of play" than it is just sheer entertainment value.

What I find exciting in terms of offense is a balanced dynamic when hitters put the ball in play, especially if the contact is good contact. I don't want to see a ball with a 30% or 40%probability of being a hit based on contact of quality become a routine out 90% of the time. For two reasons... one, it creates suspense around whether a ball is going to find a hole, get in the gap, get over a traditional defense's head, etc. Second, it creates some drama and excitement around whether a defender can make an elite defensive play. The simplest way for me to frame up my perspective is... do you find it entertaining when a hitter makes strong contact and puts the ball in play and a shortstop has to range far out of their position, scoop the ball on the run, throw across their body to get the runner by a half step? Me too. That same ball hit into the teeth of the shift, where third infielder/outfielder on the right side easily scoops an atom ball and makes a lazy toss to first to record the out? Not so much.

So yes, it might raise scores and batting averages that's not the point. It raises excitement. Even when the outcome is good for the Yankees, I've not once jumped off my couch cheering wildly for whichever analyst called the infield positioning to get a routine out. I don't have a Fishman jersey. I want to see elite athletes put on elite athletic performances, both at bat and in the field.

[sjb23]

Just my two cents... but I don't hate the "three-outcome" approach. I mean, home runs are exciting. Strikeouts can make you jump out of your chair or disappear into it depending on whether it's the top half or bottom half of an inning. Walks aren't really boring as they put runners in play and sometimes stem from exciting duels with pitchers. For me it's less about "style of play" than it is just sheer entertainment value.

What I find exciting in terms of offense is a balanced dynamic when hitters put the ball in play, especially if the contact is good contact. I don't want to see a ball with a 30% or 40%probability of being a hit based on contact of quality become a routine out 90% of the time. For two reasons... one, it creates suspense around whether a ball is going to find a hole, get in the gap, get over a traditional defense's head, etc. Second, it creates some drama and excitement around whether a defender can make an elite defensive play. The simplest way for me to frame up my perspective is... do you find it entertaining when a hitter makes strong contact and puts the ball in play and a shortstop has to range far out of their position, scoop the ball on the run, throw across their body to get the runner by a half step? Me too. That same ball hit into the teeth of the shift, where third infielder/outfielder on the right side easily scoops an atom ball and makes a lazy toss to first to record the out? Not so much.

So yes, it might raise scores and batting averages that's not the point. It raises excitement. Even when the outcome is good for the Yankees, I've not once jumped off my couch cheering wildly for whichever analyst called the infield positioning to get a routine out. I don't have a Fishman jersey. I want to see elite athletes put on elite athletic performances, both at bat and in the field.

This is a well-thought-out, fine post ^^^ I agree 100%. You should partner up with Theo and re-write the rulebook.

I'd say working on defensive positioning is just as important as adopting a universal DH, abolishing 7-inning DH games, and slightly shorter seasons with expanded playoffs. I'm also into lowering the mound slightly and pushing the rubber back 6 inches.

I want to see more close, high-scoring games, like 7-5, 8-6, 9-8 etc.

Screw ERA.

[sjb23]

Yankees bring back Brantly on a minor league deal.

Could the Yankees possibly be considering a Higashioka-Brantly platoon because they've already found a trading partner for Sanchez?

It could be a sign that the universal DH is coming and Gary's value will increase.

I guess we can only hope lol.

More than likely, though, this is more about depth at this point, and 1 more 40-man roster spot available (for now).

[jnewmark]

Could the Yankees possibly be considering a Higashioka-Brantly platoon because they've already found a trading partner for Sanchez?

It could be a sign that the universal DH is coming and Gary's value will increase.

I guess we can only hope lol.

More than likely, though, this is more about depth at this point, and 1 more 40-man roster spot available (for now).

I think the DH is coming to the NL. Whether or not they can trade Sanchez to an NL team is another matter. I think they would have more luck trading Voit in that regard.

[sjb23]

I think the DH is coming to the NL. Whether or not they can trade Sanchez to an NL team is another matter. I think they would have more luck trading Voit in that regard.

I could live without both of them if they can be part of moves that can overall:

1 -- add a TOR guy
2 -- cut down on the team's strikeouts per AB
3 -- add lineup spots for 2 LH batters
4 -- improves the defense

I think as Yankee fans we tend to undervalue guys that we're ready to give up on. There's an old expression (that I've reversed to help make my point lol):

One man's floor is another man's ceiling

[Strategerie]

I could live without both of them if they can be part of moves that can overall:

1 -- add a TOR guy
2 -- cut down on the team's strikeouts per AB
3 -- add lineup spots for 2 LH batters
4 -- improves the defense

I think as Yankee fans we tend to undervalue guys that we're ready to give up on. There's an old expression (that I've reversed to help make my point lol):

One man's floor is another man's ceiling

My thoughts:

1. TOR starters are so important. However, there aren't that many pitchers who obviously qualify. I don't trust Scherzer's arm and health on a go forward basis. I don't trust that Ray is a TOR starter based on his track record.

DeGrom is the ultimate TOR starter if he can get healthy - I wouldn't mind using our dollars to extend a few people this year (increases their AAV in the short term) and preserving the room to get Degrom in a year as a free agent (might take 50M AAV for him).

I think our current starting rotation is a huge strength (but there's no shame in improving it). I think Cole is a TOR starter going forward (I think his late struggles were injury related). Sevy has been a true TOR starter when healthy (but that was 2 to 3 years ago and he carries injury risk). Both Monty and Taillon had a long stretch of starts with a sub 2.5 ERA (I trust Monty more than Taillon). Cortes pitched to a 3 ERA over meaningful innings last year (I don't think that's sustainable but I do think he is quite good). We've got German and many prospects as depth (Schmidt, Gil, Wesneski, Waldichuk, Medina, Deivi, ...). For many reasons, it's important to give prospects a chance too.

2. The strikeouts are brutal to watch. However, if we just care about winning, optimizing on OPS is a fine way to go. The problem with Gallo, for example,, was mainly that his overall OPS was much lower than expected (and would have been even lower if not for his proficiency with bunt singles).

3. LH hitters are preferred (and balance helps) but I think the balance issue between lefties and righties is overrated.

4. Our defense issues are mainly at C, SS, and 1B. I'm not as worried about 1B as I'm not sure how much defense matters there (I could be wrong). While Rizzo has historically been great defensively, his perceived defense with us was more hype than substance. It sounds like we will upgrade our SS defense. I fear that catcher defense (inclusive of managing a pitching staff) is much more important than any other position and we likely have a real dud there in Sanchez (I'm disappointed we didn't go after a guy like Pina, who went very cheaply, or a guy like Realmuto the year before).

I agree that many Yankee fans are undervaluing guys who had good track records but poor 2021 results with us (DJ, Gleyber, Urshela, Voit, Gallo, Sanchez, Hicks, Aroldis can all fall in that bucket). I also think Cortes, Monty, and Giancarlo get underrated. That doesn't mean I love all the above players and, of the above, I'd be particularly open to moving Sanchez, Gleyber, and Aroldis (always dependent on what the deal is). I'd also like to see the Yankees either extend or trade Taillon.

[Mixwell]

I sure do disagree with a lot of the above post.

- Scherzer is absolutely a TOR starter. He's the Mets #2 starter and the best one of those in baseball by a wide, wide margin.
- Severino has NEVER proven to be an ace for a full season, and is a much larger health question mark based on his track record than even an "elderly" Scherzer
- in addition to the positions mentioned, there is a major defensive gap in CF. So with 1B, SS and C being also closer to "BAD" than "AVERAGE", it's only the 4 most critical positions on the field defensively
- A balanced lineup is critical to not allowing a pitcher to get comfortably in a zone
- Hicks has no track record to speak of. Urshela is a nice role player in a n otherwise dominant lineup. But overall an average player who is simply more likable than most of the duds on this roster. As a result, he's severely overrated. Voit is a DH and Sanchez is barely a major league caliber player, and definitely not a catcher. Cortez and Monty are admirable roster pieces if they are the #5 starter.

[matt2351]

I sure do disagree with a lot of the above post.

- Scherzer is absolutely a TOR starter. He's the Mets #2 starter and the best one of those in baseball by a wide, wide margin.
- Severino has NEVER proven to be an ace for a full season, and is a much larger health question mark based on his track record than even an "elderly" Scherzer
- in addition to the positions mentioned, there is a major defensive gap in CF. So with 1B, SS and C being also closer to "BAD" than "AVERAGE", it's only the 4 most critical positions on the field defensively
- A balanced lineup is critical to not allowing a pitcher to get comfortably in a zone
- Hicks has no track record to speak of. Urshela is a nice role player in a n otherwise dominant lineup. But overall an average player who is simply more likable than most of the duds on this roster. As a result, he's severely overrated. Voit is a DH and Sanchez is barely a major league caliber player, and definitely not a catcher. Cortez and Monty are admirable roster pieces if they are the #5 starter.

Scherzer had an ERA+ of 166 this season. Severino, even during his best seasons, has never posted an ERA+ this high. His highest was 152 in 2017. Additionally, Severino has pitched a grand total of 18.0 innings since the conclusion of the 2018 season. Scherzer has thrown 419 innings since then. These two pitchers don't belong in the same conversation.

As far as Cortes goes, I want to see another season before I say anything about this player. He had a 6.72 ERA prior to 2021.

[Bauer]

On Gleyber, I guess I fall into the category of people undervaluing Torres--but it's not based on merely last season's production but the pretty poor results of 2020. Yes, a short season, but, after all, not everyone under-produced. Something odd is going on with Torres, and it may go back to that ridiculous HR performance in 2019. Or, I guess, more charitably, perhaps it was owing to his being at a position at which he was unhappy and, at times, almost inept.

Although I agree with much of your analysis of the pitching, I have to confess, aged man that I am, I don't remember what this injury was that got in the way of a TOR performance by Cole. He certainly seemed to decline after the ban on Spider Tack. Re Severino: 2017 and until just before the 2018 ASG, he was great. But the way 2018 ended was pretty bad. If it were owing to an injury, I don't recall (see above, on memory) hearing about one during that period. Wasn't it only after the big contract was signed that a significant injury was mentioned? To me, there are some serious questions about Severino.

---

My thoughts:

1. TOR starters are so important. However, there aren't that many pitchers who obviously qualify. I don't trust Scherzer's arm and health on a go forward basis. I don't trust that Ray is a TOR starter based on his track record.

DeGrom is the ultimate TOR starter if he can get healthy - I wouldn't mind using our dollars to extend a few people this year (increases their AAV in the short term) and preserving the room to get Degrom in a year as a free agent (might take 50M AAV for him).

I think our current starting rotation is a huge strength (but there's no shame in improving it). I think Cole is a TOR starter going forward (I think his late struggles were injury related). Sevy has been a true TOR starter when healthy (but that was 2 to 3 years ago and he carries injury risk). Both Monty and Taillon had a long stretch of starts with a sub 2.5 ERA (I trust Monty more than Taillon). Cortes pitched to a 3 ERA over meaningful innings last year (I don't think that's sustainable but I do think he is quite good). We've got German and many prospects as depth (Schmidt, Gil, Wesneski, Waldichuk, Medina, Deivi, ...). For many reasons, it's important to give prospects a chance too.

2. The strikeouts are brutal to watch. However, if we just care about winning, optimizing on OPS is a fine way to go. The problem with Gallo, for example,, was mainly that his overall OPS was much lower than expected (and would have been even lower if not for his proficiency with bunt singles).

3. LH hitters are preferred (and balance helps) but I think the balance issue between lefties and righties is overrated.

4. Our defense issues are mainly at C, SS, and 1B. I'm not as worried about 1B as I'm not sure how much defense matters there (I could be wrong). While Rizzo has historically been great defensively, his perceived defense with us was more hype than substance. It sounds like we will upgrade our SS defense. I fear that catcher defense (inclusive of managing a pitching staff) is much more important than any other position and we likely have a real dud there in Sanchez (I'm disappointed we didn't go after a guy like Pina, who went very cheaply, or a guy like Realmuto the year before).

I agree that many Yankee fans are undervaluing guys who had good track records but poor 2021 results with us (DJ, Gleyber, Urshela, Voit, Gallo, Sanchez, Hicks, Aroldis can all fall in that bucket). I also think Cortes, Monty, and Giancarlo get underrated. That doesn't mean I love all the above players and, of the above, I'd be particularly open to moving Sanchez, Gleyber, and Aroldis (always dependent on what the deal is). I'd also like to see the Yankees either extend or trade Taillon.