PDA

View Full Version : 2009 Brett Gardner Peformance Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

themgmt
03-01-09, 02:01 PM
Gardner Homers again

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/boxscore.jsp?gid=2009_03_01_nyamlb_cinmlb_1&refresh=30

themgmt
03-01-09, 02:02 PM
Later Melkman.

THEBOSS84
03-01-09, 02:04 PM
I'm so curious to know what kind of numbers Gardner can put up if given 550-600 AB's this season.

themgmt
03-01-09, 02:13 PM
I wouldn't expect more than 4-5 HRs but with the short porch in RF you never know he might hit 6-8 with half of them being wall scrapers down the line. He seems to have his stroke down early but you can pretty much sit fastball this early in spring. Not really part of his game

I seriously think he will hit .275/.340/.390 , maybe 20 2B, 5 3B, 40 SB in his first year. If he adjusts quickly and his minor league OBP translates he could do maybe .280/.360/.400 50 SB this season, which would be awesome. His OBP is the most important factor for me. .340 OBP and he's pulling his weight, I think he can pull it off. His minor league OBP was over .400 last year and near .390 but I don't think that will translate right away but he could eventually be a .360-.380 OBP hitter.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-01-09, 02:14 PM
Sweet.

ThePinStripes
03-01-09, 02:28 PM
I wouldn't expect more than 4-5 HRs but with the short porch in RF you never know he might hit 6-8 with half of them being wall scrapers down the line. He seems to have his stroke down early but you can pretty much sit fastball this early in spring. Not really part of his game

I seriously think he will hit .275/.340/.390 , maybe 20 2B, 5 3B, 40 SB in his first year. If he adjusts quickly and his minor league OBP translates he could do maybe .280/.360/.400 50 SB this season, which would be awesome. His OBP is the most important factor for me. .340 OBP and he's pulling his weight, I think he can pull it off. His minor league OBP was over .400 last year and near .390 but I don't think that will translate right away but he could eventually be a .360-.380 OBP hitter.

I don't care much about his slugging- just his OBP. A single is practically an assured double with his speed on the base paths + the bonus of distracting the pitcher with Damon/Jeter/Arod at the plate. He can swipe 3rd easier than many can swipe 2nd.

To be honest, my biggest concern after he gets on ANY base with the bats Damon, Arod and Teix (and Jeter, kinda) behind him is the speed of the baserunner in front of him :lol:

nyy2389
03-01-09, 02:50 PM
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5301/cqsrwxsk.jpg

Gardner in 09.

delv
03-01-09, 02:52 PM
Daaaaamn!


peace, melky.

Veovis
03-01-09, 02:53 PM
He's so gritty!

teknetic
03-01-09, 02:56 PM
It's really no contest at this point and it shouldn't have been.

THEBOSS84
03-01-09, 02:57 PM
It's really no contest at this point and it shouldn't have been.

That's only through 5 games though. There are around 30 games left. You never know what can happen.

ThePinStripes
03-01-09, 02:57 PM
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5301/cqsrwxsk.jpg

Gardner in 09.

Hard to tell from a picture, but it looks like his legs and upper body aren't in sync. Obviously, he's showing power though. Anyone watching him care to comment?

teknetic
03-01-09, 02:59 PM
That's only through 5 games though. There are around 30 games left. You never know what can happen.

Doesn't really matter IMO. I would have gone with Gardner even if he didn't play all Spring. Melky offers nothing.

Mr. Smith
03-01-09, 03:02 PM
Great! Here come the PED rumors.

Why couldn't you just stick to bunting and stealing bases, Brett?

4bronxbombers
03-01-09, 03:04 PM
I like his speed!

http://tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:0D4nvdLUeKVc8M:http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/upload/2006/07/RoadRunner.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/upload/2006/07/RoadRunner.jpg&imgrefurl=http://jalopnik.com/cars/custom-cars%25252fhot-rods/you-are-there-hot-rod-night-at-heavenly-donuts-derby-connecticut-189793.php&usg=__n5rK9vbx-i82RQrMAqWgUm9d52Q=&h=300&w=400&sz=44&hl=en&start=19&um=1&tbnid=0D4nvdLUeKVc8M:&tbnh=93&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Droad%2Brunner%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN)

YanksFan1992
03-01-09, 03:08 PM
Awesome.

Hopefully he keeps his production up and can be a semi-decent center fielder for us this year (sorry Melky).

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-01-09, 03:26 PM
That's only through 5 games though. There are around 30 games left. You never know what can happen.

Your right, the Yankees should give Melky some more time.

In Mo I Trust
03-01-09, 03:31 PM
That's only through 5 games though. There are around 30 games left. You never know what can happen.

Spring training stats mean nothing, Melky has proven that he is a terrible baseball player.

Yankees Pride
03-01-09, 03:36 PM
Spring training stats mean nothing, Melky has proven that he is a terrible baseball player.
In terms of hitting he's terrible. And if that's what you're going on, so is Gardner.

JeffWeaverFan
03-01-09, 03:42 PM
If I was to bet, and the over/under on Gardner's OBP was .340, I'd probably bet on the under, but I surely hope I'm wrong.

nnysiny
03-01-09, 03:49 PM
If I was to bet, and the over/under on Gardner's OBP was .340, I'd probably bet on the under, but I surely hope I'm wrong.
its a tough choice. .340 is his magic number though. anything under that and we're talking about an OPS+ around 85 or lower

OldYankeeFan
03-01-09, 03:51 PM
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5301/cqsrwxsk.jpg


Hard to tell from a picture, but it looks like his legs and upper body aren't in sync. Obviously, he's showing power though. Anyone watching him care to comment?
You're right, it's hard to tell from a pic but as soon as I saw it I was pleased to see his lower body (hips) turning and his hands are still back, so at that point in the swing everything looks like it is where it should be.

I saw just two of his AB's on TV so far as was pleased with his swing in both of them. I had been hoping that Gardner would be working hard over the winter doing alot of Tee work getting his disjointed upper body swing into a coordinated upper/lower body swing and so far I have only seen good swings. If he does in fact have that better swing committed to muscle memory, Gardner could bat .300 and be our future leadoff hitter.

delv
03-01-09, 04:13 PM
^that's the real upside of gardner. damon is done w/ us after this year and it would be ideal if gardner could take that spot.

grizy
03-01-09, 04:23 PM
I wouldn't expect more than 4-5 HRs but with the short porch in RF you never know he might hit 6-8 with half of them being wall scrapers down the line. He seems to have his stroke down early but you can pretty much sit fastball this early in spring. Not really part of his game

I seriously think he will hit .275/.340/.390 , maybe 20 2B, 5 3B, 40 SB in his first year. If he adjusts quickly and his minor league OBP translates he could do maybe .280/.360/.400 50 SB this season, which would be awesome. His OBP is the most important factor for me. .340 OBP and he's pulling his weight, I think he can pull it off. His minor league OBP was over .400 last year and near .390 but I don't think that will translate right away but he could eventually be a .360-.380 OBP hitter.

If he does get this far, unless AJax gets better than projected, we might need to move AJax, either in a trade or to a position not CF.

I am definitely on board with a 275/340 ~ 280/360 line though. It's just a big jump from what he posted last year. Fingers crossed and hopefully he gets out the gate hot.

I agree with most other posters... under 340 OBP and we should be better off with Swisher and Damon in CF. In some games (namely where Molina starts) even with 340 we might be better off with Damon/Swisher in center.

Random and sort of related news... Matt Holliday is probably overrated and we're first in line to overpay for him.

cyhughes22
03-01-09, 04:36 PM
For me, it shouldn't matter what Melky does this spring, Brett should be given the shot. Melky has had 3 years to prove that he's something more than a 4th outfielder who can do more than make the occasional nice catch or throw. He hasn't even come close to doing that. Instead he spends more time swaggering around like he's done something and jumping up and down with Cano like a moron. If that weren't bad enough he knows nothing about situational hitting and his OBP is pretty putrid. Gardner is faster, more accurate with is arm, is going to steal more bases, knows how to take a walk, takes better routes to the ball, isn't an idiot, doesn't distract Cano, doesn't have a stupid name, and is a better baseball player and fit for this club. It's really as simple as that.

ThePinStripes
03-01-09, 04:38 PM
For me, it shouldn't matter what Melky does this spring, Brett should be given the shot. Melky has had 3 years to prove that he's something more than a 4th outfielder who can do more than make the occasional nice catch or throw. He hasn't even come close to doing that. Instead he spends more time swaggering around like he's done something and jumping up and down with Cano like a moron. If that weren't bad enough he knows nothing about situational hitting and his OBP is pretty putrid. Gardner is faster, more accurate with is arm, is going to steal more bases, knows how to take a walk, takes better routes to the ball, isn't an idiot, doesn't distract Cano, doesn't have a stupid name, and is a better baseball player and fit for this club. It's really as simple as that.

......

cyhughes22
03-01-09, 04:42 PM
......

Well that was a joke. But the rest of it is true. He's a god awful baseball player and a clown.

Lumen
03-01-09, 04:44 PM
......
Thanks for fleshing that out.

ThePinStripes
03-01-09, 05:31 PM
Well that was a joke. But the rest of it is true. He's a god awful baseball player and a clown.

He gets along with other players. As far as "fit" goes- he's fine. There are a lot of things to complain about when it comes to Melky from his offense to his approach to the way he was handled (~200 AB's in AAA and he's out of options before age 23). His name and the way he fits in the clubhouse are hardly issues with him. With the solemn old guard (Jeter, Pettitte, Posada, Mo) + Arod, joking around is something I'd like to see more of.

Fabien Brandy
03-01-09, 05:32 PM
I think Gardner will have a line of: .280/.336/.397

with 22 doubles, 7 triples and 9 HRs, go 50/11 in SBs and draw 41 BBs to 80 Ks.

Which will be a nice year for him.

ThePinStripes
03-01-09, 05:40 PM
I hope Gardner develops a "Giambi-eye." Like I said, once he's on base, the only limiting factor is the base runner in front of him. I don't give a damn how he gets on base- just get on and it's like a guaranteed double and potential triple.

nyy2389
03-01-09, 05:43 PM
I think Gardner will have a line of: .280/.336/.397

with 22 doubles, 7 triples and 9 HRs, go 50/11 in SBs and draw 41 BBs to 80 Ks.

Which will be a nice year for him.

Think that is a little too much to expect but I like Gardner and I like where your head is.

Bob420
03-01-09, 05:44 PM
I think Gardner will have a line of: .280/.336/.397

with 22 doubles, 7 triples and 9 HRs, go 50/11 in SBs and draw 41 BBs to 80 Ks.

Which will be a nice year for him.

I think his OBP will be in .350 range if he hits .280 but don't think he will come close to 9 HR.

Stache Fan
03-01-09, 05:50 PM
I think Gardner will have a line of: .280/.336/.397

with 22 doubles, 7 triples and 9 HRs, go 50/11 in SBs and draw 41 BBs to 80 Ks.

Which will be a nice year for him.

Wow...I just can't see that power in him. As for the SB, 35 seems more reasonable.

gold23
03-01-09, 06:07 PM
Listen....if Melky doesn't have a good eye (and he doesn't) I really don't see a competition. If Melky hit .290 and Gardner .250....I still think Gardner gets on base AT LEAST as much as Melky, plays a little bit better D (with more range, which is big with not much coverage in the corners on this team), and is a much more dangerous player on base. He's actually a weapon on base.

If Melky hits .270, Gardner could hit .245 and still be a better option. And this is all assuming Melky has a better year than last.

Huktonfonix
03-01-09, 07:12 PM
Didn't Gardner show very uncharacteristic power last spring too? A fairly ridiculous SLG for the first month or two of the MiLB season?

JeffWeaverFan
03-01-09, 07:12 PM
I think his OBP will be in .350 range if he hits .280 but don't think he will come close to 9 HR.
I disagree. I think he won't walk as much in the majors given that pitchers will always challenge him and will try their hardest to never walk him. In his second stint with the team last year, he hit .293/.333/.412. FWIW, PECOTA's line for Gardner is .253/.339/.351.

YankeePride1967
03-01-09, 08:31 PM
Not posting this to criticize him, just a funny gaffe. Anyone see his base-running gaffe today? He reached second on a hit and either the 2B or SS had the ball standing right behind him. Brett didn't know where the ball was and for some reason started for third and of course was tagged out.

themgmt
03-01-09, 10:46 PM
I think .340 OBP is a safe projection, That isn't to say I'd be surprised if it was .325... or .355 either.

primetime714
03-01-09, 11:05 PM
I hope Gardner develops a "Giambi-eye." Like I said, once he's on base, the only limiting factor is the base runner in front of him. I don't give a damn how he gets on base- just get on and it's like a guaranteed double and potential triple.

Gardner can have an eye like Giambi but he won't get the respect from pitchers that Giambi gets because pitchers don't have to be careful with Gardner. More than likely Gardner isn't going to hit more than a single anyway. His eye is already great and he'll work some walks when the opposing pitchers simply can't throw enough strikes, but the real question with him is how much he'll hit and if he can earn a little more respect from opposing pitchers to get those extra walks.

Bob420
03-01-09, 11:26 PM
I disagree. I think he won't walk as much in the majors given that pitchers will always challenge him and will try their hardest to never walk him. In his second stint with the team last year, he hit .293/.333/.412. FWIW, PECOTA's line for Gardner is .253/.339/.351.

I think if he is hitting .280, pitchers will realize that they have to make pitches to get him out. Pecota actually has him with a bigger spread between avg and OBP. I hope he hits .280 but I don't think he will. I see a .265 avg .335-.340 OBP.

surge511
03-01-09, 11:41 PM
I think .280-.290 might be his ceiling, as opposed to what we should expect this year. I think he could hit .250 with a .320 OPB this season, and 40 SB's. From the #9 spot in the lineup that's not too bad. Frankly, considering what Melky did last season, I still think Gardner is more valuable to the team then Melky. I have a feeling Gardner wins this battle.

False1
03-02-09, 12:36 AM
Wow...I just can't see that power in him. As for the SB, 35 seems more reasonable.Well, if he gets on at the .336 OBP in the post you quoted and gets > 600 plate appearances, he's reaching first over 200 times. I think Girardi would have him stealing at will and trying to distract the defense and to open up holes in the infield for Damon and Jeter to pound hits through. I'd bet the farm on > 35 SB. I bet he'd net twice that.

I agree though that 9 HR is a long shot.


I think .280-.290 might be his ceiling, as opposed to what we should expect this year. I think he could hit .250 with a .320 OPB this season, and 40 SB's. From the #9 spot in the lineup that's not too bad. Frankly, considering what Melky did last season, I still think Gardner is more valuable to the team then Melky. I have a feeling Gardner wins this battle.Again, I'd say up the SB. A .320 would have him reaching base over 190 times (assuming he was the regular CF) and I think Girardi would give him the perma-green light.

AndThenThereWasTino
03-02-09, 12:37 AM
In terms of hitting he's terrible. And if that's what you're going on, so is Gardner.

Melky has had the chance to play a few seasons and had the chance to show us what he had. Gardner has not yet had that chance. The only reason Melky would get the nod right now is because he (I believe) is out of options. If they are both bad at the plate, I would still give the nod to Gardner offensively because once he gets on base he can take second.

Fabien Brandy
03-02-09, 06:42 AM
Remember, people - those 9 HRs I projected includes inside-the-park homeruns!

gold23
03-02-09, 12:39 PM
I disagree. I think he won't walk as much in the majors given that pitchers will always challenge him and will try their hardest to never walk him. In his second stint with the team last year, he hit .293/.333/.412. FWIW, PECOTA's line for Gardner is .253/.339/.351.

Agree with the approach. Though if he is a talented hitter (and we prob won't know that for a little while), this type of pitching approach stops once the batters start spraying line drives around the yard.

ajra21
03-03-09, 01:32 PM
I hope Gardner develops a "Giambi-eye." Like I said, once he's on base, the only limiting factor is the base runner in front of him. I don't give a damn how he gets on base- just get on and it's like a guaranteed double and potential triple.

i'm not sure hoping for PED side-effects is a good thing for a yankee fan to be asking for right now.

themgmt
03-03-09, 02:30 PM
3-3, 2b, Sb, R

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-03-09, 02:46 PM
Amazingness

CallOfTheCrow
03-03-09, 02:49 PM
Goodbye Melky.

Yankees Pride
03-03-09, 02:51 PM
Melky has had the chance to play a few seasons and had the chance to show us what he had. Gardner has not yet had that chance. The only reason Melky would get the nod right now is because he (I believe) is out of options. If they are both bad at the plate, I would still give the nod to Gardner offensively because once he gets on base he can take second.
I would choose Gardner as well based on what this team needs but my point was that if you say Melky is a horrible baseball player it has to be based at the plate. If that is what you're using to measure, Gardner has proven no better. Both have strengths in different aspects of their games. Is that correct?

YanksFanTillDeath
03-03-09, 03:01 PM
Melky is 6ft under...

Retire21
03-03-09, 04:08 PM
Melky's biggest game as a Yankee was G2 of the 2007 ALDS: the HR that should have been the game winner in a 1-0 Andy Pettitte masterpiece. He also unleashed a bullet to nail a guy at the plate in the same game.

Sadly, it has been downhill since then..............................

False1
03-03-09, 04:31 PM
3-3, 2b, Sb, RHas he made an out yet in spring training? I mean we're just a couple games in and you have to temper any enthusiasm but I don't think the kid has made an out yet (outside of the baserunning gaffe).

Blazer
03-03-09, 04:46 PM
Gardner should be able to have a BB% of 10% or better. Maybe not right away, but eventually he could be similar to Chone Figgins offensively and a GG type CF.

diehardyankeefan
03-03-09, 04:57 PM
Melky's biggest game as a Yankee was G2 of the 2007 ALDS: the HR that should have been the game winner in a 1-0 Andy Pettitte masterpiece. He also unleashed a bullet to nail a guy at the plate in the same game.

Sadly, it has been downhill since then..............................
Too bad Melky's good game will never be remembered because of the midges in the 8th inning.

ZIM 2002
03-03-09, 05:53 PM
I wonder how Gardner will do once the pitchers are throwing more than mainly fastballs, tho. But I do like his approach.

themgmt
03-03-09, 06:47 PM
Well you know he certainly won't hit .615 with a 2.000 OPS.

He's showing that he can hit the ball with authority, has his timing down, and knows his strike zone, that's about all you can tell from ST.

YanksFan1992
03-03-09, 08:32 PM
Say hello to your new starting center fielder.

grizy
03-03-09, 08:43 PM
Well, I said this a few tiems already...

But Gardner's only issue has always been his lack of power so his little show of power in ST is incredibly encouraging.

A cursory comparison between his current swing and last year's also shows he's putting more of his body behind the bat instead of just slapping the ball with his wrists and arms so I am quite hopeful that he will bat to something like Damon Jr. (which would be nice, especially since Damon was semi-coaching him last year too.)

PJMPirate
03-04-09, 11:39 AM
Well, I said this a few tiems already...

But Gardner's only issue has always been his lack of power so his little show of power in ST is incredibly encouraging.

A cursory comparison between his current swing and last year's also shows he's putting more of his body behind the bat instead of just slapping the ball with his wrists and arms so I am quite hopeful that he will bat to something like Damon Jr. (which would be nice, especially since Damon was semi-coaching him last year too.)

I disagree. His value to the Yankees has nothing to do with his lack of power, so I wouldn't call that his "only issue." What we need out of Gardner is OBP and speed. We know he can run - what we need to see now is for him to develop a decent eye and hit for a decent average. If he can get on base at a reasonable clip and play defense, that's all we need.

freebubba
03-04-09, 02:29 PM
Stay healthy Brett, stay healthy. I want Brett in CF in 2009, but I also want Melky to hit in ST so we can deal him for more than a bag of balls.

kan_t
03-04-09, 03:06 PM
Stay healthy Brett, stay healthy. I want Brett in CF in 2009, but I also want Melky to hit in ST so we can deal him for more than a bag of balls.
If Melky hits in ST he will be the CF, I don't want to take this risk.

Yankee Fan in Boston
03-04-09, 03:08 PM
Stay healthy Brett, stay healthy. I want Brett in CF in 2009, but I also want Melky to hit in ST so we can deal him for more than a bag of balls.

I don't think a good ST for Melky is going to mean more than his performance over the past couple of seasons.

ajra21
03-04-09, 04:44 PM
Stay healthy Brett, stay healthy. I want Brett in CF in 2009, but I also want Melky to hit in ST so we can deal him for more than a bag of balls.

i kinda expect brett to win the job.

grizy
03-04-09, 06:34 PM
I disagree. His value to the Yankees has nothing to do with his lack of power, so I wouldn't call that his "only issue." What we need out of Gardner is OBP and speed. We know he can run - what we need to see now is for him to develop a decent eye and hit for a decent average. If he can get on base at a reasonable clip and play defense, that's all we need.

He needs some power to drive the ball to get any kind of decent OBP. The way he was hitting he was just getting overpowered by low 90s fastballs.

I am not interested in seeing anything more than a couple fluke HRs from him a year... but I do need him to hit the ball hard enough to get some line drive singles.

yankee82093
03-04-09, 07:15 PM
All Gardner needs to do is post at least a 345 wOBP, then he should be fine. That's a big if, though

2JAY
03-04-09, 11:39 PM
Gardner really looks like a different hitter so far. And yet it's only ST so who knows if that will translate into a solid 09 season. Though it looks like teams will try to run on his arm whenever they can.

JDPNYY
03-04-09, 11:41 PM
Gardner really looks like a different hitter so far. And yet it's only ST so who knows if that will translate into a solid 09 season. Though it looks like teams will try to run on his arm whenever they can.

How did he do last year at Spring Training?

Mark19
03-05-09, 12:12 AM
How did he do last year at Spring Training?

He did well in ST 2008 and in AAA.

The only major blemish on his service record was his 17 games of awfulness from June 30 to July 25. He went 9 for 56 with 17 Ks and only one XBH.

His second time around, August 15 to September 28, he went 20 for 68 with 13 Ks and 6 XBH.

If you limit his exposure to lefties, his overall effectiveness increases further.

His speed means that he only really needs to go .280/.345/.380 to justify getting most starts in CF.

mm1956
03-05-09, 11:27 PM
You gotta go with Gardner and see what he can do. With his speed, as long as he has .350 OBP - he's a plus. When Arod is out I would lead off with Damon, bat Garnder 2nd and then Jeter, Tex etc.

TEPLimey
03-06-09, 08:42 AM
I am surprised by the number of people who are contemplating giving our worst hitter more at bats than Jeter, Teixiera, Matsui, etc.

Gardner might be having a good spring, but please lets not forget this guy was pathetic last season, lacks power, and is battling Melky freakin' Cabrera to start. Unless Posada has the game off, this guy should not be batting anything but 9th.

Stolen bases and speed are completely overrated.

R.V.47
03-06-09, 08:51 AM
If A-Rod is out we cant afford to have Gardner in the lineup while a guy who could help replace a slice of A-Rods production is sitting on the bench in Nick Swisher.

teknetic
03-06-09, 09:34 AM
I am surprised by the number of people who are contemplating giving our worst hitter more at bats than Jeter, Teixiera, Matsui, etc.

Gardner might be having a good spring, but please lets not forget this guy was pathetic last season, lacks power, and is battling Melky freakin' Cabrera to start. Unless Posada has the game off, this guy should not be batting anything but 8th.

Stolen bases and speed are completely overrated.

When the only other option is Melky Cabrera, who exactly do you want people to contemplate giving the at-bats to?

TEPLimey
03-06-09, 09:45 AM
When the only other option is Melky Cabrera, who exactly do you want people to contemplate giving the at-bats to?
1. Swisher
2. If you play Gardner, he should be hitting 9th, thus giving more at bats to every other starter.

Lets Win Again
03-06-09, 10:01 AM
Our OF in 2010-2011:

LF - Matt Holliday
CF - Austin Jackson
RF - Brett Gardner (who improves, becomes a .300 leadoff hitter, and a beast in the field)

That's the best case scenario.

As for '09? I think Joe should give Gardner the nod, Melky already had his chance.

primetime714
03-06-09, 10:18 AM
Our OF in 2010-2011:

LF - Matt Holliday
CF - Austin Jackson
RF - Brett Gardner (who improves, becomes a .300 leadoff hitter, and a beast in the field)

That's the best case scenario.

As for '09? I think Joe should give Gardner the nod, Melky already had his chance.

Gardner is no RF and defensively is probably at least a tad bit better than Jackson in CF, so if both are in our OF expect Gardner to be the CF. If Gardner does well this year expect a battle with Jackson next year for CF. Swisher will in all likelihood be our RF after this year. If both Gardner and Jackson look to be starting OF's we may forgo signing Holliday especially since there is always the possibility that Jeter moves to the OF, but I do think that Holliday will be one of our top targets in the offseason and that Jackson and Gardner will have to split time in CF unless one of them struggles or Jackson really comes into his own this year forcing Gardner out of the starting lineup.

teknetic
03-06-09, 10:24 AM
1. Swisher
2. If you play Gardner, he should be hitting 9th, thus giving more at bats to every other starter.

I would have gone with Swish, but he apparently hated playing CF and wasn't very good at it either. I don't think anyone expected Gardner to hit anywhere, but 9th.

False1
03-06-09, 12:00 PM
I am surprised by the number of people who are contemplating giving our worst hitter more at bats than Jeter, Teixiera, Matsui, etc.

Gardner might be having a good spring, but please lets not forget this guy was pathetic last season, lacks power, and is battling Melky freakin' Cabrera to start. Unless Posada has the game off, this guy should not be batting anything but 9th.I agree 100%.


Stolen bases and speed are completely overrated.Conditionally disagree. If combined with a solid OBP, elite speed is not at all overrated - particularly in a lineup like the one we'd field if A-Rod and Posada can play. Getting himself into scoring position for Damon/Jeter/A-Rod/Tex with his wheels and distracting the defense while those guys are on base would be valuable at the bottom of the lineup. If he get his OBP up around .340+, he'll score a material number of runs for us. And we haven't had that from CF in quite a while. If he can't get the OBP up, then he quickly needs to be moved to 4th OF/pinch runner and we need to acquire a true CFer.

keg411
03-06-09, 12:39 PM
Whichever of Gardner/Melky makes the team will hit ninth. I'm pretty sure the only reason they are higher in the order now is to maximize their AB's in Spring Training.

YankeeStripes
03-06-09, 12:59 PM
Is gardner better than Juan Pierre? He could be had for NOTHING right now, and the dodgers would probably eat some of his contract.

He hit .283 last season with 40 sb in 119 games. The year before he batted .293 with 64 sb.

I think we should try and get him if the dodgers will eat 14 million of his remaining 28 mil over 3 years. And if we could get him for Melky.

effdamets
03-06-09, 01:22 PM
Is gardner better than Juan Pierre? He could be had for NOTHING right now, and the dodgers would probably eat some of his contract.

He hit .283 last season with 40 sb in 119 games. The year before he batted .293 with 64 sb.

I think we should try and get him if the dodgers will eat 14 million of his remaining 28 mil over 3 years. And if we could get him for Melky.
Ooooohhhhh boy...

:D

YankeesAce4Life
03-06-09, 01:26 PM
Is gardner better than Juan Pierre? He could be had for NOTHING right now, and the dodgers would probably eat some of his contract.

He hit .283 last season with 40 sb in 119 games. The year before he batted .293 with 64 sb.

I think we should try and get him if the dodgers will eat 14 million of his remaining 28 mil over 3 years. And if we could get him for Melky.

Gardner, please!

TEPLimey
03-06-09, 01:41 PM
Is gardner better than Juan Pierre?
In a word, yes.

TheDynasty26
03-06-09, 01:47 PM
In a word, yes.

in two words, HELL YES

kongull
03-06-09, 02:26 PM
if stolen bases and steals were overrated, the angels wouldn't have owned the yankees the past 12 years.

teknetic
03-06-09, 02:30 PM
I agree 100%.

Conditionally disagree. If combined with a solid OBP, elite speed is not at all overrated - particularly in a lineup like the one we'd field if A-Rod and Posada can play. Getting himself into scoring position for Damon/Jeter/A-Rod/Tex with his wheels and distracting the defense while those guys are on base would be valuable at the bottom of the lineup. If he get his OBP up around .340+, he'll score a material number of runs for us. And we haven't had that from CF in quite a while. If he can't get the OBP up, then he quickly needs to be moved to 4th OF/pinch runner and we need to acquire a true CFer.

Elite speed even from the bench is a pretty good weapon to have. The guy is essentially giving your team an extra base almost at will.

grizy
03-06-09, 03:39 PM
if stolen bases and steals were overrated, the angels wouldn't have owned the yankees the past 12 years.

Angels got on base... Gardner doesn't, yet.

kongull
03-06-09, 04:54 PM
Angels got on base... Gardner doesn't, yet.

Careful.

ajra21
03-07-09, 03:56 AM
Our OF in 2010-2011:

LF - Matt Holliday
CF - Austin Jackson
RF - Brett Gardner (who improves, becomes a .300 leadoff hitter, and a beast in the field)

That's the best case scenario.

As for '09? I think Joe should give Gardner the nod, Melky already had his chance.

i don't expect us to sign holliday. i don't expect to see jackson as a starter in 2010. seeing gardner as a starting right fielder is immensely optimistic (and i really like brett).

delv
03-07-09, 12:01 PM
you'd put Brett in left given the size of the LF and Holliday in right... But what's A-Jax's arm like? I think LF is gonna be saved for #2.

yankee82093
03-07-09, 01:14 PM
you'd put Brett in left given the size of the LF and Holliday in right... But what's A-Jax's arm like? I think LF is gonna be saved for #2.

You'd keep Holliday in left, and shift A-jax to right field. Gardner plays such a good centerfield and is so fast that I have a hard time thinking A-jax could be any better. Besides A-jax is supposed to have a strong arm, so he's better suited to right. Gardner doesn't really have that good of an arm.

CommerceComet
03-07-09, 09:26 PM
we need to acquire a true CFer.Since the last out of the 2008 season, I've been saying this has to be done. Let's not get all in a tizzy over ST performances: our CF position is still manned by a hope and a prayer. I'd feel a lot better if we had one proven CF on our roster. I have the same uneasy feeling about this situation that I had last season with our starting rotation being comprised of three major question marks.

I agree with TEPLimey about weak-hitting speedsters. Their value is overrated. Notice that I said (as did Limey) "overrated", not "without value." As a 4th OF and pinch-runner, Brett Gardner could be a very valuable asset. As an everyday CF, I just don't see it.

ajra21
03-08-09, 09:06 AM
brett only has value if you play him in centre.

grizy
03-08-09, 11:36 AM
Neither Gardner nor AJax have enough of a bat to justify a corner field spot. AJax maybe if he reaches something close to his 280/370/440 type of ceiling but Gardner has no business in left or right.

ajra21
03-08-09, 01:20 PM
Neither Gardner nor AJax have enough of a bat to justify a corner field spot. AJax maybe if he reaches something close to his 280/370/440 type of ceiling but Gardner has no business in left or right.

totally. everything i hear about jackson is that he'll be a solid player who will be a good asset and player for a number of years. he'll make the odd all-star appearance and flirt occasionally with .300 and/or 20 plus HRs.

surge511
03-08-09, 03:46 PM
I agree about AJax. With his good defense in centerfield, he will have very solid offense out of that spot. However, I think we are going to want a little more power out of our corner OF spots.

As far as Gardner and Melky go, I do not see either of them as a long-term, 10-year option. They are fine for now as we wait for something else to develop, but I have my doubts about either of them sticking in our outfield as a starter down the line.

Rocketbooster
03-08-09, 03:49 PM
totally. everything i hear about jackson is that he'll be a solid player who will be a good asset and player for a number of years. he'll make the odd all-star appearance and flirt occasionally with .300 and/or 20 plus HRs.

I would kill for that.........and apparently, he's just one heck of a kid - his teammates love him.

ajra21
03-08-09, 04:31 PM
I would kill for that.........and apparently, he's just one heck of a kid - his teammates love him.

baseball america recently discussed him during one of their podcast. they weren't over the top about him but all liked him.

Rocketbooster
03-08-09, 04:35 PM
baseball america recently discussed him during one of their podcast. they weren't over the top about him but all liked him.

That's ok - we'll just have to wait and see how Jax develops as young players have a tendency to improve from year to year.......If he just ends up as a fine ML player, I'm happy.

grizy
03-08-09, 04:39 PM
At this point AJax projects to be an average, maybe slightly above average, CF. He'd be be below average for the bat in corner field positions.

If Gardner manages to hit 350+ OBP he'd be a better option than AJax till maybe '11 or '12.

ajra21
03-08-09, 04:46 PM
That's ok - we'll just have to wait and see how Jax develops as young players have a tendency to improve from year to year.......If he just ends up as a fine ML player, I'm happy.

me too.

ajra21
03-08-09, 04:50 PM
At this point AJax projects to be an average, maybe slightly above average, CF. He'd be be below average for the bat in corner field positions.

If Gardner manages to hit 350+ OBP he'd be a better option than AJax till maybe '11 or '12.

that's pretyy much what BA said about about jackson.

if gardner puts that sort of OBP and steals the bags his speed should allow him to, we'll be laughing.

grizy
03-08-09, 05:43 PM
that's pretyy much what BA said about about jackson.

if gardner puts that sort of OBP and steals the bags his speed should allow him to, we'll be drunk.

fixed.

Honestly though, of all the people I've watched play in ST, Gardner was most visibly different to my eyes.

His legs waist are both in motion as he swings the bat now. That should allow him to drive the ball much better and get more hits, OBP, and possibly slugging up from an unseemly 250 or whatever he had. Not saying that he will (or even should) hit more than 5 fluke HRs a year, but the ability to get line drives is so key to getting a high BA/OBP.

Ichiro Suzuki would be a great prototype for Gardner to emulate IMO.

teknetic
03-08-09, 06:00 PM
Trying to imitate Ichiro is gonna get you nowhere.

delv
03-08-09, 07:51 PM
Trying to imitate Ichiro is gonna get you nowhere.

I cosign this powerful post.

Ynkcpt23
03-08-09, 08:20 PM
fixed.

Honestly though, of all the people I've watched play in ST, Gardner was most visibly different to my eyes.

His legs waist are both in motion as he swings the bat now. That should allow him to drive the ball much better and get more hits, OBP, and possibly slugging up from an unseemly 250 or whatever he had. Not saying that he will (or even should) hit more than 5 fluke HRs a year, but the ability to get line drives is so key to getting a high BA/OBP.

Ichiro Suzuki would be a great prototype for Gardner to emulate IMO.

Nobody can really replicate what Ichiro is able to do--but I understand your point. If Gardner can put the ball in play more often he'll be much more successful. He's looked good thus far, which is a terrific surprise for me. My previous posts have been negative because of his SSS.

grizy
03-08-09, 10:54 PM
Nobody can really replicate what Ichiro is able to do--but I understand your point. If Gardner can put the ball in play more often he'll be much more successful. He's looked good thus far, which is a terrific surprise for me. My previous posts have been negative because of his SSS.

Yeah, that's what I meant to say. Ichiro is undoubtedly unique but Gardner should try to put the more in play with more consistency with some minimal amount of power. He just won't succeed without some ability to drive the ball for hits. Bunting and bloopers will only get you so far in terms of BA and OBP.

Yankees1962
03-09-09, 02:23 PM
Spring stats should be taken with a large grain of salt, but with that being said, Gardner hit a two run homer today which is his third in spring training.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-09-09, 02:23 PM
Another HR for Brett. The fact he is driving the ball is just a fantastic sign.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 02:29 PM
Another HR for Brett. The fact he is driving the ball is just a fantastic sign.

Clean-up slot :confused:

Mark19
03-09-09, 02:30 PM
Another HR for Brett. The fact he is driving the ball is just a fantastic sign.

and he hit it off a lefty

flymick24
03-09-09, 02:33 PM
farewell, my sweet melk-prince

YanksFanTillDeath
03-09-09, 02:34 PM
he is making his case....

JohnnyEllis
03-09-09, 02:46 PM
Give it up for Gritty, Gutty Gardner.

YESSIR!
03-09-09, 02:49 PM
The guy with the least power on the team has the most HRs in ST thus far. Wild.

Gusto
03-09-09, 03:14 PM
The guy with the least power on the team has the most HRs in ST thus far. Wild.

... and Berroa is second :eek:

astarlist
03-09-09, 03:21 PM
... Which is good reason to not take spring traning all too seriously.

teknetic
03-09-09, 03:22 PM
The guy with the least power on the team has the most HRs in ST thus far. Wild.

Pudge led the majors in homers last ST.

But yea, apparently he's altered his swing to allow him to drive the ball, I haven't seen him bat, but its a good sign. He can still be an asset to this club regardless if he's starting or not.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 03:46 PM
The guy with the least power on the team has the most HRs in ST thus far. Wild.
Trade him for Puljos!

RI Dawg
03-09-09, 04:00 PM
Pudge led the majors in homers last ST.

Off-topic, but I couldnt help but notice that Pudge went 4-4 with 2 hrs in his first WBC game -- still a FA too...

rajah
03-09-09, 04:10 PM
Pudge led the majors in homers last ST.

But yea, apparently he's altered his swing to allow him to drive the ball, I haven't seen him bat, but its a good sign. He can still be an asset to this club regardless if he's starting or not.

I assume that you mean Gardner has altered his swing and can be an asset, not Pudge.

Gardner, barring some injury, I think, is obviously going to be getting a chance to start at the outset of the season. As Yankee fans, we can only hope that he continues to drive the ball, whether or not its over the fence, because if he does and gets the respect of pitchers to work counts and draw walks, the Y's are going to have a great, great weapon in the 9 hole this year, and perhaps even leading off in 2010. This would be a great boost to the team if it happens, as well as being wonderful for fans like me who love to watch speed in the OF and on the bases.

I don't know what Gardner is going to be of course, but I have to disagree respectfully with anyone, like Q Bomb, who says at this point that Melky has more potential.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 04:17 PM
Pudge led the majors in homers last ST.

But yea, apparently he's altered his swing to allow him to drive the ball, I haven't seen him bat, but its a good sign. He can still be an asset to this club regardless if he's starting or not.

If Gardner bats .276 and posts a .319 OBP like 2008 Pudge, I'd be more than content.

NewEraYanks2527
03-09-09, 04:19 PM
If Gardner bats .276 and posts a .319 OBP like 2008 Pudge, I'd be more than content. Those numbers would sure put him on the base paths a good amount and hitting 9th and stealing in front of Damon, Jeter and so on that would be a good thing.

bmxstreetrider86
03-09-09, 05:12 PM
really? those numbers are pretty terrible, especially given gardner's lack of power.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-09-09, 05:14 PM
A .319 OBP would be terrible, I think Brett will do a lot better.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 05:42 PM
really? those numbers are pretty terrible, especially given gardner's lack of power.

For a rookie, 3.5 th out fielder, #9 hitter that won't see continuous regular play? I expect him to go through hot and cold streaks and end up somewhere around there. He's going to facing most of these pitchers for the first time as well. Next year, he can build off that, develop better plate discipline and etc.

We're not talking about our veteran cleanup man here. This is a guy taking over for Melky who had an OPS+ of 54 last year. I hope he does better, but realistically, I'm not expecting him to win any batting titles.

MaximMan121
03-09-09, 05:47 PM
For a rookie, 3.5 th out fielder, #9 hitter that won't see continuous regular play? I expect him to go through hot and cold streaks and end up somewhere around there. He's going to facing most of these pitchers for the first time as well. Next year, he can build off that, develop better plate discipline and etc.

We're not talking about our veteran cleanup man here. This is a guy taking over for Melky who had an OPS+ of 54 last year. I hope he does better, but realistically, I'm not expecting him to win any batting titles.


....again, he has a .389 OBP over 1450 minor league at bats.

Why on earth would you expect him to put up a .319 OBP in the majors? I'd say .340 is a fairly conservative, defensible number where we'd hope (and expect) to surprise to the upside.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 05:51 PM
You're debating over a difference of about 12 walks + hits over a full season here. That's literally getting on base one more time every 13.5 games.

It's fine if you want to disagree, but I don't see why you would. It's a spring training prediction of a player with 120x plate appearances in the majors.

bmxstreetrider86
03-09-09, 05:54 PM
For a rookie, 3.5 th out fielder, #9 hitter that won't see continuous regular play? I expect him to go through hot and cold streaks and end up somewhere around there. He's going to facing most of these pitchers for the first time as well. Next year, he can build off that, develop better plate discipline and etc.

We're not talking about our veteran cleanup man here. This is a guy taking over for Melky who had an OPS+ of 54 last year. I hope he does better, but realistically, I'm not expecting him to win any batting titles.



well that batting line would be significantly worse than the average AL CFer last year, something that we really cant afford

if you use his minor league isoP numbers that would give him a line of .276/.319/.370 and a 689 OPS. better than melky last year, sure, but still pretty terrible. i would hope with his batting eye if he hit .276 he would be able to post an isoD higher than .43. a .340/.370 line would be much easier to live with



edit: nice prediction maxim, i was writing this before you posted

MaximMan121
03-09-09, 05:55 PM
You're debating over a difference of about 12 walks + hits over a full season here. That's literally getting on base one more time every 13.5 games.

It's fine if you want to disagree, but I don't see why you would. It's a spring training prediction of a player with 120x plate appearances in the majors.

It's the difference between him actively costing us wins, and actively contributing them.

Seems a pretty big chasm to me.

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 05:57 PM
well that batting line would be significantly worse than the average AL CFer last year, something that we really cant afford

if you use his minor league isoP numbers that would give him a line of .276/.319/.370 and a 689 OPS. better than melky last year, sure, but still pretty terrible. i would hope with his batting eye if he hit .276 he would be able to post an isoD higher than .43. a .340/.370 line would be much easier to live with



edit: nice prediction maxim lol
:confused: Have you seen the rest of our offense? And our starting pitching?
A-rod missing the 15 games isn't the end of the universe as we know it- everyone take a deep breath.

I think Gardner would be the only player with an OPS+ below 110, less Molina's outings (which is when Damon or Swisher should be in CF).

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 06:01 PM
It's the difference between him actively costing us wins, and actively contributing them.

Seems a pretty big chasm to me.

1% worse than average vs. 1% better than average, is that a big chasm because it's contributing to wins rather than losses? Any different than 50% worse than average vs. 52% worse than average? or 20% better than average and 22% better than average?

It's a spring training prediction of a guy we have a very SSS of in MLB, and it's really not that far off your prediction. Calm yourself.

bmxstreetrider86
03-09-09, 06:11 PM
:confused: Have you seen the rest of our offense? And our starting pitching?
A-rod missing the 15 games isn't the end of the universe as we know it- everyone take a deep breath.

I think Gardner would be the only player with an OPS+ below 110, less Molina's outings (which is when Damon or Swisher should be in CF).


im not expecting gardner to be great, or even above average really, but a .319 OBP doesnt cut it no matter how you look at it. even his pecota projections give him a .340 OBP

ThePinStripes
03-09-09, 06:13 PM
Hope you're right.
I'm more conservative with my "prospect predictions," in general.

grizy
03-09-09, 06:42 PM
If Gardner can't get at least 340obp I think he should be defensive replacement off the bench and give up CF duties to Damon/Swisher.

BRNXBMRS
03-10-09, 08:53 AM
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/03/10/gal_backpage_0310.jpg


He's hitting .381, and what you really had to like Monday was that he followed his home run by dropping a bunt single down the third-base line in his next at-bat, using his blazing speed to beat out a hit. Just in case anyone was worried that the home runs were going to his head.


"I know one thing," he said. "There are 29 other teams that would love to have him."

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2009/03/09/2009-03-09_brett_gardner_is_now_center_of_attention-1.html?page=0

It doesnt mean anything till the final 2 wks of ST, buts its nice to see another story besides the A-rod garbage everyday.

MaximMan121
03-10-09, 09:19 AM
1% worse than average vs. 1% better than average, is that a big chasm because it's contributing to wins rather than losses? Any different than 50% worse than average vs. 52% worse than average? or 20% better than average and 22% better than average?

It's a spring training prediction of a guy we have a very SSS of in MLB, and it's really not that far off your prediction. Calm yourself.

If he has an OBP of .340, he will have an OPS in the mid 90s (average or slightly above average for a CF), and an adjusted OPS (adding steals with a percentage kicker to his total bases) above 100.

If he has an OBP of .318, he'll be in the 80s to 70s, and the adjust on his adjusted OPS won't be as great, as he won't be getting nearly as many stealing opportunities.

I am the one, of the two of us, being conservative in my expectations for Brett Gardner. Conservative doesn't mean bad. It means closer to past averages. I'm not expecting him to deviate from his previous performances nearly so much as you are.

grizy
03-10-09, 10:11 AM
Still tiny sample vs. essentially AAA pitching, but Gardner's homeruns are starting to look less fluky.

THEBOSS84
03-10-09, 10:15 AM
Still tiny sample vs. essentially AAA pitching, but Gardner's homeruns are starting to look less fluky.

His homers are the current definition of fluke.

grizy
03-10-09, 10:19 AM
His homers are the current definition of fluke.

I don't know. I still think Cody Ransom's '08 is the reigning champ.

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 10:19 AM
If he has an OBP of .340, he will have an OPS in the mid 90s (average or slightly above average for a CF), and an adjusted OPS (adding steals with a percentage kicker to his total bases) above 100.

If he has an OBP of .318, he'll be in the 80s to 70s, and the adjust on his adjusted OPS won't be as great, as he won't be getting nearly as many stealing opportunities.

I am the one, of the two of us, being conservative in my expectations for Brett Gardner. Conservative doesn't mean bad. It means closer to past averages. I'm not expecting him to deviate from his previous performances nearly so much as you are.


Gardner with a 100 OPS+ is conservative? I hope you're right?

and how the heck did you take OBP (and stolen bases :lol: )alone and calculate OPS+?

Snatch Catch
03-10-09, 10:20 AM
"I know one thing," he said. "There are 29 other teams that would love to have him."

Nice. Lets get something for him while he's hot.

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 10:39 AM
"I know one thing," he said. "There are 29 other teams that would love to have him."

Nice. Lets get something for him while he's hot.


:lol: :-rofl-:

delv
03-10-09, 10:42 AM
"I know one thing," he said. "There are 29 other teams that would love to have him."

Nice. Lets get something for him while he's hot.


Like what? And before you say 3rd baseman, realize we need a CF for the whole yr and a 3b for 2 months at most.

Snatch Catch
03-10-09, 10:48 AM
Like what? And before you say 3rd baseman, realize we need a CF for the whole yr and a 3b for 2 months at most.

Put together a package for a better CF prospect. Package Gardner and an arm or two for something better than Gardner.

grizy
03-10-09, 10:50 AM
Put together a package for a better CF prospect. Package Gardner and an arm or two for something better than Gardner.

Teams just don't move prospects better than AJax or Gardner without something sick in return that we do not have.

OldYankeeFan
03-10-09, 10:58 AM
His homers are the current definition of fluke.

You're probably right, but...

I've only seen one replay of his swing so far this spring, the first HR. In that swing he used his lower body and it was well coordinated with his upper body. If he committed that swing to muscle memory over the winter and doesn't regress to his old swing under pressure, then it might not be such a fluke.

I'd be interest to hear from others (that have had a chance to see more of his AB's) if he is using his lower half consistently.

MaximMan121
03-10-09, 11:00 AM
Gardner with a 100 OPS+ is conservative? I hope you're right?

and how the heck did you take OBP (and stolen bases :lol: )alone and calculate OPS+?

Anyone with a grounding in statistics has a pretty good grip on what I was getting at. You don't seem to. Quite clearly, it's expected that Gardner isn't going to hit home runs. His slugging isn't ever going to be particularly high. I don't feel like going further into this.

Step 1: Getting to the underlying statistics in OPS+, before it's normalized, you've got OBP and SLG.

Step 2: SLG is total bases over AB.

Step 3: OBP is (H+BB+HBP+IBB)/PA.

So, if you want to accurately include the value of his SBs into OPS+ to get a more precise valuation of his contributions, you need to add additional bases taken due to stolen bases, while removing bases lost due to getting thrown out, in the SLG component. You also need to subtract some of the numerator in OBP based on the times he gets thrown out. If he's got a very good stolen base percentage (83% in the minors and over 90% this spring are both phenomenal) the underlying OPS numbers will rise. If it's the other way around, they fall.

We're clearly seeing that a portion of Brett's game is his speed. I don't expect him to put up an OPS+ of 100. However, when taking his stolen bases into account, I expect him to contribute more than someone with a 100 OPS+ would. Thus pointing to the adjusted statistic.

delv
03-10-09, 11:02 AM
Since we're here gushing over BG, it's worth it to note that the minimum ABs for a rookie are 130, so he would be eligible in 2009 for roy.

Sixty one
03-10-09, 11:09 AM
I hope the Yanks give Gardner a chance to be the sparkplug they need in that lineup. Who knows maybe this great early spring start will be for real once the season begins and he is the real deal.;)

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 11:09 AM
Anyone with a grounding in statistics has a pretty good grip on what I was getting at. You don't seem to. Quite clearly, it's expected that Gardner isn't going to hit home runs. His slugging isn't ever going to be particularly high. I don't feel like going further into this.

Step 1: Getting to the underlying statistics in OPS+, before it's normalized, you've got OBP and SLG.

Step 2: SLG is total bases over AB.

Step 3: OBP is (H+BB+HBP+IBB)/PA.

So, if you want to accurately include the value of his SBs into OPS+ to get a more precise valuation of his contributions, you need to add additional bases taken due to stolen bases, while removing bases lost due to getting thrown out, in the SLG component. You also need to subtract some of the numerator in OBP based on the times he gets thrown out. If he's got a very good stolen base percentage (83% in the minors and over 90% this spring are both phenomenal) the underlying OPS numbers will rise. If it's the other way around, they fall.

We're clearly seeing that a portion of Brett's game is his speed. I don't expect him to put up an OPS+ of 100. However, when taking his stolen bases into account, I expect him to contribute more than someone with a 100 OPS+ would. Thus pointing to the adjusted statistic.
Just what I thought- assumptions, number inflating and general pulling it out of your rear.

I have a wonderful grasp on stats, and I've got an undergraduate transcript loaded math classes and solid grades to prove it. If you had a firm grasp on statistics, you wouldn't be adding stolen bases to his OPS+.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-10-09, 11:23 AM
Can you scan your grades and post?

MaximMan121
03-10-09, 11:48 AM
Just what I thought- assumptions, number inflating and general pulling it out of your rear.

I have a wonderful grasp on stats, and I've got an undergraduate transcript loaded math classes and solid grades to prove it. If you had a firm grasp on statistics, you wouldn't be adding stolen bases to his OPS+.

And your credibility falls further. Did you simply not grasp the idea there? Adding total bases into the OPS+ equation to more accurately show his contributions is a simple task.

If you really want to argue that this doesn't help us understand Gardner's contributions, go for it. Bring out that math transcript and show us why there's an issue there. If you want to write a pithy post about how I don't have a firm grasp on statistics, and then cop out, that's fine too.

Given that I earn my living analyzing hedge fund performance statistically, your transcript means precisely dick to me, unless you actually start using it to formulate an argument.

themgmt
03-10-09, 12:03 PM
Pinstripes.......... nevermind, losing battle.



Anyway, that Gardner hit the HR off a lefty definitely proves he's staying down, keeping his shoulder tucked, and exploding in a more synchronous motion. Also, he's hitting .381 but don't forget he went 3 for 3 vs Team USA, which isn't included. He's crushing the ball, but don't expect those HRs to translate. Though with the short porch at Yankee Stadium, he could definitely get a few extra throughout the year.

Line Drives and ground balls should still be his primary goal. Any ground ball fielded up the middle or in the 3b/SS hole will be close.

themgmt
03-10-09, 12:23 PM
Melky isn't doing terribly either by the way, but he doesn't look to be doing anything to improve. I'm sure some teams would have interest in him because he has definitely gotten better at tracking down fly balls and has always had a cannon. If his power ever develops and/or he's a little more patient he could be serviceable starting on some team. Otherwise he's a 4th OF, nothing wrong with that.

delv
03-10-09, 01:42 PM
Given that I earn my living analyzing hedge fund performance statistically, your transcript means precisely dick to me, unless you actually start using it to formulate an argument.

http://www.omgpwned.net/media/owned/owned_pwmed.gif

grizy
03-10-09, 01:50 PM
I can fly on an Excel spreadsheet as well as anyone on Wall Street, does that count?

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-10-09, 02:45 PM
Adam (NY, NY): I know it's spring, but Brett Gardner has seemed to make a lot of adjustments and looks great at the plate. Beyond helping the Yanks, he could become a sleeper in fantasy drafts. If he plays 130 games he will get 40 SBs...thoughts??

Rob Neyer: Yeah, he will ... But he has to play Gold Glove defense to balance his lack of power ... Can he do that? I hope so, because I think the game is more interesting when there's a place for guys like him.
......

TEPLimey
03-10-09, 02:49 PM
......
Interesting = Other teams might have a chance to keep pace with the Yankees

Rastven
03-10-09, 03:14 PM
Given that I earn my living analyzing hedge fund performance statistically

Is that really helping to win an argument these days.......

kongull
03-10-09, 03:25 PM
Is that really helping to win an argument these days.......

Especially since MaximMan rated Bernie's Funds as super-duper safe!

Just kidding maximman, just saw an opportunity.

MaximMan121
03-10-09, 03:33 PM
Is that really helping to win an argument these days.......

Dude questioned my statistical knowledge based on his transcript and solid grades. In this fight, he's got a pea shooter, and I have a BFG (gold star to people in my generation who get the reference).

Snatch Catch
03-10-09, 03:36 PM
Is that really helping to win an argument these days.......

Nope. It looks really, really silly.


He should have just relied on being right.

TheDynasty26
03-10-09, 03:48 PM
Dude questioned my statistical knowledge based on his transcript and solid grades. In this fight, he's got a pea shooter, and I have a BFG (gold star to people in my generation who get the reference).

Big Friendly Giant?
Ball-Four Giambi?





Big F'in Gun.

bmxstreetrider86
03-10-09, 03:48 PM
in all fairness he was responding to a post questioning his knowledge of statistics from someone with a undergrad transcript full of solid math grades




doom references FTW

MaximMan121
03-10-09, 03:54 PM
in all fairness he was responding to a post questioning his knowledge of statistics from someone with a undergrad transcript full of solid math grades




doom references FTW

Gold star goes to BMX.

And thanks for the backup.

CWitt
03-10-09, 04:45 PM
I think it's funny, I found a blog article two days ago about Surprise Player for the Yankees (http://bareknucks.com/new-york-yankees-2009-season-preview). Of course, it was Brett Gardner and he ended up hitting a homer the next day. This guy is an absolute stud.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-10-09, 04:49 PM
BGs current ST line:

.381 BA, .435 OBP, .905 SLG, 1340 OPS

bmxstreetrider86
03-10-09, 04:53 PM
BGs current ST line:

.381 BA, .435 OBP, .905 SLG, 1340 OPS


AWHO?

Panamaniac42
03-10-09, 04:55 PM
I have a wonderful grasp on stats, and I've got an undergraduate transcript loaded math classes and solid grades to prove it.


Given that I earn my living analyzing hedge fund performance statistically, your transcript means precisely dick to me, unless you actually start using it to formulate an argument.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WS37EuiZLV8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WS37EuiZLV8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

teknetic
03-10-09, 05:05 PM
Interesting = Other teams might have a chance to keep pace with the Yankees

You can tell us how you really feel.

Young Steinbrenner
03-10-09, 05:48 PM
Gardner will be a very good player for the Yankees (I'm not saying that because of his good spring training)

I knew it since last year, even though his stats were bad, he had good at-bats consistently. Plus he can fly around the bases.

I think he's Johnny Damon's replacement in future seasons.

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 05:53 PM
And your credibility falls further. Did you simply not grasp the idea there? Adding total bases into the OPS+ equation to more accurately show his contributions is a simple task.
Not when it's a normalized stat and you're not adding it for everyone else ;)


If you really want to argue that this doesn't help us understand Gardner's contributions, go for it. Bring out that math transcript and show us why there's an issue there. If you want to write a pithy post about how I don't have a firm grasp on statistics, and then cop out, that's fine too.

I never said "stolen bases don't contribute to the team." I said that stolen bases don't factor into OPS+. Guess what- they don't. That's a fact. It's not an opinion question.


Given that I earn my living analyzing hedge fund performance statistically, Is that something to brag about???? Because hedge funds are just doing sooo well? I guess we should really put a lot of faith in the analysts back there. All those firms are just killing it right now! Real pat on the back. Good one!
How is that working for you, by the way? Last hedge fund report I received started with something along the lines of "Optimists are buying gold, pessimists are buying ammo."


your transcript means precisely dick to me, unless you actually start using it to formulate an argument.
And your job means dick to me, unless you actually start using it to formulate an argument.
You don't know his slugging, which is half the equation.
You're adding stolen bases into a OPS+, which is wholly incorrect.
The fact that stolen bases help the team doesn't mean they should be factored into OPS+
"Maxim adjusted OPS+" is random bull you made up- and only added to your stats to pad them. (How wall-street of you!)
"Maxim adjusted OPS+": Additional points added or subtracted from your estimate to prove your point.


And just to see where you're getting your numbers from, I took a quick look:
A 318 OBP should put him somewhere around a 680 OPS, give or take.
A 340 OBP should put him somewhere around a 720 OPS, give or take.

That translates to an ~81 OPS+ vs. ~86/87ish OPS+

It's incredible that you ended up with a few points low on mine and ~10 high on your projection, then ADDED several more points for stolen bases to yours (and not mine- because he'd only steal bases in your scenario?).

How the hell you got an OPS+ in the mid 90's is beyond me. That's a 750ish OPS.. which means he is going to slug 410 with 340 OBP? Yeah right.

And lets entertain your dilusion- if his slg goes as high as 410 with his 340 OBP, it should be somewhere around... 385-390ish with a .318 OBP. That gives him an OPS+ of about 87. Again, NOWHERE NEAR your prediction.

So let recap:
According to you if he has a .318 OBP:
His slugging will be about 355 and he wont steal bases.

If he has a .340 OBP:
His slugging will be about 410 and he will steal bases.

Regardless of what he does (and I'm pulling for him to have a +1000 OPS), your numbers are completely lopsided, tweaked and unfair. It wasn't like we both came up high or low (ie: I get 80/90 and you get 85/95)- no, you were estimating high for your numbers and low for mine when you figured this out. This wasn't a difference in methodology- you flat out tweaked the numbers and cut/padded them where it was beneficial to get the numbers you wanted: 318 OBP--> 70/80 OPS and 340OBP --> 100OPS+.

If you assume he's going to have more power, you apply that to BOTH scenarios- not just yours. You assumed he'd be hitting higher average and power and stealing more bases when figuring your numbers and he'd be hitting for a lower average and less power and stealing less bases when figuring out my prediction. Yeah, when you do that, there is going to be a big difference- surprise. If anything, the lower OBP would correlate with a MORE power, not less, closing the gap even further.

btw: Even if we go with your "hits for average, hits for power, 340" vs "doesn't hit for average, lower powerf he hits for more power- wouldn't he be stealing LESS bases? since, you know, he's hitting 2B, 3B & HRs instead of singles? Yet you only add stolen bases to your number. You didn't factor that into your analysis when "adjusting" his numbers. Interesting! He'll be on base about 204 vs 291 times over a season with a 340OBP vs. a 318 OBP. Difference of 13 times. If he starts hitting for power like you claim he will, he be on 2B, 3B (or HR and no base) instead of 1B. So that 13 additional steals opportunity dwindles damn quick- probably to about 6 or 7 (guessing). 6 or 7 steal opportunities for Gardner is like adding 5 OPS+ points?

He gets on base 13 more times with a .340 OBP vs. .318 OBP. If he successfully stole a base every one of those 13 times (and it's more like 30%), that adds a mighty .02 to his "Maxim adjusted slugging." Wow, he goes from .380 SLG to .382! That is roughly 0 additional OPS+ points. I like how you added about FIVE. If you use a quasi-realistic number like 33% (and never thrown out), it's additional .007 to his slg and ops... or ZERO to his OPS+.


Gee- look at that everyone. Some dude on wall street proclaimed himself to be an expert, got numbers to say what he wanted them to, then padded them!

I'm not really interested in debating this further- especially with someone like you that can't put forth anything resembling legit numbers. It's going to be nothing more than me running through your numbers to find out where you're unreasonably adding/subtracting. I'll leave that game to your accountant and the IRS.

gold23
03-10-09, 06:07 PM
I like Gardner a ton. I'm a huge defensive guy for CF- I think it is imperative you have an above average glove out there with wheels. I also like him offensively....if you have a bit of patience with the kid, I beleive you would see a .270ish average with pretty decent discipline. Pop? I think you will see enough 2B and 3B, and even though it is ST the fact that he has the ability to poke the ball a little still exists. 6-10 HR a year wouldn't seem to be a stretch. I'd take a .270 avg, mid 3's obp (Garnder is one guy whose OPS is a little less important, since his speed is so blazing that he will make up for that 30-50 times a season with SB's), and excellent defense.

kongull
03-10-09, 06:09 PM
Pulling up chair...Grabbing popcorn.

What a show!

grizy
03-10-09, 06:10 PM
I got some pretzel dogs instead.

JL25and3
03-10-09, 06:14 PM
I got some pretzel dogs instead.Are those anything like hot dobs?

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 06:15 PM
Sorry to let you guys down- I'm bowing out of this one.

OldYankeeFan
03-10-09, 06:26 PM
Has anyone seen multiple AB's for him?

I've only seen one replay of his swing so far this spring, the first HR. In that swing he used his lower body and it was well coordinated with his upper body. If he committed that swing to muscle memory over the winter and doesn't regress to his old swing under pressure, then his power surge might not be entirely a fluke.

I'd be interest to hear from others (that have had a chance to see more of his AB's) if he is using his lower half consistently. Thanks.<!-- / message --><!-- Sig Was Here -->

gold23
03-10-09, 06:29 PM
Has anyone seen multiple AB's for him?

I've only seen one replay of his swing so far this spring, the first HR. In that swing he used his lower body and it was well coordinated with his upper body. If he committed that swing to muscle memory over the winter and doesn't regress to his old swing under pressure, then his power surge might not be entirely a fluke.

I'd be interest to hear from others (that have had a chance to see more of his AB's) if he is using his lower half consistently. Thanks.<!-- / message --><!-- Sig Was Here -->

I've seen a bunch on some other broadcasts....too little to tell, and unless you are sitting behind him it's often tough to see how he reacts to the pitches. He does seem to have a different swing than last year, where his hands were doing most of the work and he was slapping at the ball. Does seem like he is swinging through the pitches much more consistently. Who knows?

Gardner has shown the propensity to struggle for a while at every new level....maybe he is slowly getting there at the majors? One thing, though- is that many of his ab's in the spring are coming against marginal ML pitching, unlike last year.

NYYIronHorse
03-10-09, 06:30 PM
Has anyone seen multiple AB's for him?

I've only seen one replay of his swing so far this spring, the first HR. In that swing he used his lower body and it was well coordinated with his upper body. If he committed that swing to muscle memory over the winter and doesn't regress to his old swing under pressure, then his power surge might not be entirely a fluke.

I'd be interest to hear from others (that have had a chance to see more of his AB's) if he is using his lower half consistently. Thanks.<!-- / message --><!-- Sig Was Here -->

I haven't seen much of him this spring. I'm hoping he's in the lineup tonight.

roblyo33
03-10-09, 06:41 PM
I haven't seen much of him this spring. I'm hoping he's in the lineup tonight.

He is leading off.

NYYIronHorse
03-10-09, 06:59 PM
He is leading off.

Great. Thanks.

grizy
03-10-09, 07:11 PM
I've seen a bunch on some other broadcasts....too little to tell, and unless you are sitting behind him it's often tough to see how he reacts to the pitches. He does seem to have a different swing than last year, where his hands were doing most of the work and he was slapping at the ball. Does seem like he is swinging through the pitches much more consistently. Who knows?

Gardner has shown the propensity to struggle for a while at every new level....maybe he is slowly getting there at the majors? One thing, though- is that many of his ab's in the spring are coming against marginal ML pitching, unlike last year.

His swing definitely looks different.

You're right though. He's basically hitting AAAA pitching. Still, what he's showing is encouraging.

DaSh 1s
03-10-09, 07:25 PM
bye bye melky

AndThenThereWasTino
03-10-09, 07:27 PM
This kid is tearing it up. Another base hit.

dadrumma
03-10-09, 07:58 PM
RBI single but got thrown out trying to stretch it into a double, none the less, another hit and another RBI. he better get the gig, it would be a crying shame if he didnt

themgmt
03-10-09, 07:58 PM
Uh yeah, Melky's done, Gardner was all over that huge curveball.

aknnav
03-10-09, 08:03 PM
Uh yeah, Melky's done, Gardner was all over that huge curveball.

What in the world is happening with Gardner? Granted its ST, and he's hitting low grade pitchers, but he is on fire. I hope he can take 2/3rds of his ST performance and carry it through the season.

themgmt
03-10-09, 08:06 PM
Masset is a pretty decent pitcher and that curveball had great break and it wasn't over the middle. Just a good piece of hitting.

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 08:10 PM
What in the world is happening with Gardner? Granted its ST, and he's hitting low grade pitchers, but he is on fire. I hope he can take 2/3rds of his ST performance and carry it through the season.

Boy has been teating his wheaties this winter!

Rocketbooster
03-10-09, 08:15 PM
I see folks on another board freaking out because Brett failed to lay down a bunt. It happens - I'm sure he is working on his bunting technique. I don't see how anyone can expect 100% success.......

OldYankeeFan
03-10-09, 08:17 PM
Uh yeah, Melky's done, Gardner was all over that huge curveball.
Wow! That's the pitch I was waiting for to find out if his swing would revert back to last year's upper body swing or if he has in fact incorporated his legs into his swing, while keeping his hands back on an offspeed pitch. He did exactly that on a decent curve and put the ball on a line into the RC gap. Great swing!

If Gardner was able to hit above .250 with the "crap" of a swing he had last year, Gardner could easily be a .300 hitter with his "new" swing, a swing I NEVER saw last year but felt he was capable of producing, with some off-season work. Excellent work during the winter by Brett .

yankee82093
03-10-09, 09:03 PM
I've never seen anyone try and go for a double on a line drive that was cut off so easily. Pretty stupid idea by Gardner, probably just trying to show off his speed, in which case he should of just taken the single and stole second. Either way, I liked the effort, the grit

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 09:07 PM
I've never seen anyone try and go for a double on a line drive that was cut off so easily. Pretty stupid idea by Gardner, probably just trying to show off his speed, in which case he should of just taken the single and stole second. Either way, I liked the effort, the grit

I don't think he'd do that if it in the regular season.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-10-09, 09:09 PM
I think he was safe on that play.

teknetic
03-10-09, 09:17 PM
Anyone have Melky's "stats?"

False1
03-10-09, 09:27 PM
Anyone with a grounding in statistics has a pretty good grip on what I was getting at. You don't seem to. Quite clearly, it's expected that Gardner isn't going to hit home runs. His slugging isn't ever going to be particularly high. I don't feel like going further into this.

Step 1: Getting to the underlying statistics in OPS+, before it's normalized, you've got OBP and SLG.

Step 2: SLG is total bases over AB.

Step 3: OBP is (H+BB+HBP+IBB)/PA.

So, if you want to accurately include the value of his SBs into OPS+ to get a more precise valuation of his contributions, you need to add additional bases taken due to stolen bases, while removing bases lost due to getting thrown out, in the SLG component. You also need to subtract some of the numerator in OBP based on the times he gets thrown out. If he's got a very good stolen base percentage (83% in the minors and over 90% this spring are both phenomenal) the underlying OPS numbers will rise. If it's the other way around, they fall.

We're clearly seeing that a portion of Brett's game is his speed. I don't expect him to put up an OPS+ of 100. However, when taking his stolen bases into account, I expect him to contribute more than someone with a 100 OPS+ would. Thus pointing to the adjusted statistic.Not to mention the additional bases he takes by going first to third, second to home, or even first to home on hits where other runners couldn't take those extra bases. Nor the pressure he puts on the defense when he's on base.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-10-09, 09:34 PM
Anyone have Melky's "stats?"

http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/stats/sortable_player_stats.jsp?c_id=nyy

roblyo33
03-10-09, 09:36 PM
Boy has been teating his wheaties this winter!

I didn't think you could eat Wheaties through a nipple.

effdamets
03-10-09, 09:40 PM
I didn't think you could eat Wheaties through a nipple.
Maybe if they get soggy enough....

ThePinStripes
03-10-09, 09:47 PM
I see folks on another board freaking out because Brett failed to lay down a bunt. It happens - I'm sure he is working on his bunting technique. I don't see how anyone can expect 100% success.......

So did Pedrioa in the WBC in Venezuela

Rocketbooster
03-10-09, 11:20 PM
So did Pedrioa in the WBC in Venezuela

Cut him.......what a joke of a player he is, lol.

I agree with those posters who think Brett needs to increasingly incorporate the bunt into his repertoire - they seem to think he just as bad technique and should be better than he is. Is this true?

grizy
03-11-09, 12:44 AM
Gardner carries even 75% of his ST numbers over to the regular season he won't be asked to bunt.

themgmt
03-11-09, 01:22 AM
75% of his numbers and he's still Ted Williams.

delv
03-11-09, 01:44 AM
ya know, melky is actually playing well. he just looks like garbage compared to BG's current performance.

278 / 381 / 389

i suppose, though, melky's biggest plus over gardner was power and that slugging of .008 points over his obp doesnt look good compared to babe ruth gardner's performance.

grizy
03-11-09, 01:50 AM
60% good?

Jasbro
03-11-09, 02:02 AM
I'm waiting to see how he hits against big league pitching before I get on the bandwagon.

NYYRules#1
03-11-09, 02:08 AM
You can't help but love when a guy competing for a job in ST comes out and plays like this. Sure, he won't be nearly this good in the regular season, but there isn't a single Yankee fan out there that can't be loving what he's doing right now.

He's gone out and earned this job. Hope Melky likes the bench.

CJTaKoZ26
03-11-09, 02:55 AM
If Gardner can maintain at least a .320 or .330 OBP he's gonna be a huge asset to this team.

JL25and3
03-11-09, 06:30 AM
If Gardner can maintain at least a .320 or .330 OBP he's gonna be a huge asset to this team.At .320-.330 he's hardly a "huge asset."

nnysiny
03-11-09, 06:59 AM
If Gardner can maintain at least a .320 or .330 OBP he's gonna be a huge asset to this team.
that would be terrible. he must have an above average OBP at the least

In Mo I Trust
03-11-09, 07:21 AM
that would be terrible. he must have an above average OBP at the least

League average OBP last year was .336.

BRNXBMRS
03-11-09, 08:47 AM
Gardner looked great last night, sans trying to stretch the single into a double. Melky who?

Yankees1962
03-11-09, 08:50 AM
Gardner looked great last night, sans trying to stretch the single into a double. Melky who?
Everybody makes mistakes, but he screwed up that ball over his head that he should have caught too. It appears he lost it in the lights or simply misjudged it.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-11-09, 08:51 AM
Gardner looked great last night, sans trying to stretch the single into a double. Melky who?

I still think he was safe on that play.

BRNXBMRS
03-11-09, 08:55 AM
Everybody makes mistakes, but he screwed up that ball over his head that he should have caught too. It appears he lost it in the lights or simply misjudged it.

I love the way he plays, he has the dirtiest uniform and is fast as hell. No problem with trying to stretch a single to a double, he wants to impress Joe and I think he is doing an excellent job so far.

BRNXBMRS
03-11-09, 08:56 AM
I still think he was safe on that play.

Closer than I expected.

rmel76
03-11-09, 08:58 AM
I think I can safely say that if Gardner plays most of the season, stats like:
.275 BA 10-12 HR's 50-55 RBI's .335 OBP 40- 45 SB is not out of the question

R.V.47
03-11-09, 08:59 AM
I think I can safely say that if Gardner plays most of the season, stats like:
.275 BA 10-12 HR's 50-55 RBI's .335 OBP 40- 45 SB is not out of the question

10-12 homers? Im not to sure about that.

Yankees1962
03-11-09, 09:00 AM
I think I can safely say that if Gardner plays most of the season, stats like:
.275 BA 10-12 HR's 50-55 RBI's .335 OBP 40- 45 SB is not out of the question
The OBP is too low and I don't know about 10-12 hrs. He needs to be at least .350 to be really an effective weapon.

themgmt
03-11-09, 09:13 AM
Jose Reyes has a career .336 OBP... his career high was .358 last year. I think Gardner is safe at .340 for now.

ieddyi
03-11-09, 09:18 AM
Everybody makes mistakes, but he screwed up that ball over his head that he should have caught too. It appears he lost it in the lights or simply misjudged it.

Yeah, he did take a bad route. The good news is that he's so fast that he still almost caught it

Yankee Fan in Boston
03-11-09, 09:25 AM
I think I can safely say that if Gardner plays most of the season, stats like:
.275 BA 10-12 HR's 50-55 RBI's .335 OBP 40- 45 SB is not out of the question

Safely? The guy has nearly 1,500 hundred at-bats in the minor leagues and hit 9 home runs. I agree that if he can have a .340 OBP, he an be a very effective player for us.

JL25and3
03-11-09, 10:01 AM
Jose Reyes has a career .336 OBP... his career high was .358 last year. I think Gardner is safe at .340 for now.Reyes has been over .350 for the last three years. Before that, he was a bad offensive player.

nnysiny
03-11-09, 10:20 AM
Jose Reyes has a career .336 OBP... his career high was .358 last year. I think Gardner is safe at .340 for now.
youre comparing two totally different types of hitters

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 10:48 AM
Safely? The guy has nearly 1,500 hundred at-bats in the minor leagues and hit 9 home runs. I agree that if he can have a .340 OBP, he an be a very effective player for us.The 9 HR he hit in the minors along with the lack of power to the gaps resulted from that terrible "slap at the ball" upper body, all arms swing he showed us last year. I have NOT seen that swing once this spring. Brett is using his legs, keeping his hands back and driving the ball.

I was worried if he might revert back to his old swing especially on a slow curve from a left hander. Well he passed that test with flying colors as he in fact used his legs/hips and kept his hands back on a 2 strike, good curve from a left hander that he laced into right center. That proved to me that he has committed to muscle memory his much improved swing.

As a result I believe he will be a .300 hitter with a .360 OBP while hitting more gaps and HR than ever before.

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 10:55 AM
youre comparing two totally different types of hittersThat may have been true last year and prior, but with Bretts much improved swing he is IMO much more similar a hitter to Reyes than he is to his pre-2009 self.

TEPLimey
03-11-09, 10:57 AM
The 9 HR he hit in the minors along with the lack of power to the gaps resulted from that terrible "slap at the ball" upper body, all arms swing he showed us last year. I have NOT seen that swing once this spring. Brett is using his legs, keeping his hands back and driving the ball.

I was worried if he might revert back to his old swing especially on a slow curve from a left hander. Well he passed that test with flying colors as he in fact used his legs/hips and kept his hands back on a 2 strike, good curve from a left hander that he laced into right center. That proved to me that he has committed to muscle memory his much improved swing.

As a result I believe he will be a .300 hitter with a .360 OBP while hitting more gaps and HR than ever before.
You are drawing a great deal of conclusions for having seen >100 ABs against ST pitching compared to the rest of his career.

kongull
03-11-09, 11:05 AM
You are drawing a great deal of conclusions for having seen >100 ABs against ST pitching compared to the rest of his career.

I dont think BG has gotten >100 ABs this spring.

JL25and3
03-11-09, 11:09 AM
I dont think BG has gotten >100 ABs this spring.I suspect he meant to type <100 AB, just hit the wrong key.

I think it's way too early to decide that he's turned around his entire career.

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 11:16 AM
You are drawing a great deal of conclusions for having seen >100 ABs against ST pitching compared to the rest of his career.
Haha. You're being generous. I'm drawing that conclusion having seen far less than that. However, that's not what I'm basing my prediction on. We were penciling him in to hit around .260 or so with a really "poor" swing, so my prediction is that he has to be able to add at least 40 pts to his average with a "good" swing.

And last night's AB where he put a "great" swing on a good curve ball from a LH pitcher proved to me he doesn't have to think about his new swing mechanics, that he has over the winter committed the new mechanics to muscle memory. He would have been flailing at that pitch with all arms last year.

So my conclusions are more based on Bretts career stats and then adding to them based on the fact that his swing has improved so dramatically. The fact that he is hitting so well in a SSS ST only helps to confirm it for me.

MaximMan121
03-11-09, 12:11 PM
Sorry to let you guys down- I'm bowing out of this one.

Frankly, the vitriol came from me over your open crack about adjusting OPS to include steals as a large portion of his productivity, and justifying your "statistical background" with a transcript and grades. A crack at my employment with a broad shot at Wall Street isn't particularly effective either, as my firm, and my funds, are doing phenomenally.

I'm in an unfortunate position, not having a ton of time at work, and having a virus laden computer at home, so I'm stuck replying to you here (where I simply can't take the time to dig into every point you've made).

If you'd even begun to dig into the math, as you did effectively with your latest post, you wouldn't have seen anything like my last post to you. In fact, my response would have been more along the lines of "You're right, I didn't dig far enough into the numbers when formulating my response earlier."

Those were off the top of my head numbers. When I post from work I'm not going to take the time to spreadsheet out my responses--I value employment in this environment a lot more than your approval.

That said, some responses in what little time I have:
I didn't say that steals should factor into OPS. That's a separate statistic. However, in dealing with a speedster like Brett Gardner, looking at what OPS is supposed to accomplish, you think a significant number of extra total bases ignored (so that you could compare him to Melky Cabrera on a single statistic) is particularly advantageous? My point was that if you want to compare the two (which you were doing, using just OPS...), you need to find a way to include the steals.

I'm not advocating a change in OPS. I'm saying that it's a fairly shortsighted analyst who tries to analyze Brett Gardner versus Melky Cabrera without taking his significant production on the basepaths into account. Your point about the "high low" being skewed is correct--again, I have to point to these being back of the envelope computations at best.

The biggest issue with my responses can indeed be tied to the sizing of the slugging percentage. However, in response to your posit that adding the bases won't have an effect on his slugging (.007 was your guess?) my math comes out like this:

600 at bats at his career level .385 slugging gives him a total of 231 total bases. Tacking on 13 extra bases (again, I agree with your suggestion that he's not going to steal one every time--but t take your scenario) jumps his "slugging" to .407. That's a significant change.

The actual math. If you want to compare Melky and Gardner using this suggested revised version of OPS, to take total bases into account, we get the following numbers:

This positing that Gardner has a .340 OBP, and a .385 SLG, and steals 35 bases at an 80% clip (both conservative assumptions, I think you'd agree. He stole more than that in limited time in the minors last year, and his career SB% is slightly above 80%.)

That's a .725 OPS, which translates roughly to an 86/87 OPS, as you've noted.

The adjustment of this says that OBP's numerator loses 8 (caught 7.75 times) but the total bases increase somewhere between 27-35 (depending on how many steals come off of walks, and how many come off of hits. This is a drawback of this method, I'll split the difference 50/50. So, 31.) The ding to OBP depends on his batting average, which gets a bit tricky to model out, and I haven't the time at the moment, for reasons noted previously.

This is an assumption--so you can ding it if you want but it appears, at least to me, to be a reasonable one. I'd suggest that taking Gardner's stolen bases into account in the revised OPS number tacks on 31 to slugging (pushing his adjusted slugging to .435: 261/600) and his OBP drops 8 (.326) which would have a net effect on his OPS (adjusted) of +.36. This pushes his OPS (adjusted) to .761, which, as you note, is mid 90s OPS (adjusted).

Melky, for the record, would get a slight boost from this too, as he's had a reasonable CS%.

This has gotten a bit off topic, I suppose. In the end, the more important (most, even) of our disagreement comes on our ability to translate minor league statistics to major league ones. I simply suggest that the 1450 minor league at bats mean a lot more than his 120 major league ones, at this point.

If you want to carry on this fairly interesting conversation without all the anger, I'm happy to have the discussion.

M121

TEPLimey
03-11-09, 12:12 PM
I suspect he meant to type <100 AB, just hit the wrong key.

I think it's way too early to decide that he's turned around his entire career.
Precisely right. Pre-coffee posting = disastrous consequences.

Bub
03-11-09, 12:24 PM
The OBP is too low and I don't know about 10-12 hrs. He needs to be at least .350 to be really an effective weapon.Agreed, and that .350+ will be much more effective out of the leadoff spot than it will if he's hitting 9th. If he can't keep it at least .330 I'm not sure he does the offense much good since it's too low for leadoff and won't provide enough slugging and/or basestealing out of the No. 9 spot. We'll have to see if he gets a shot and how long Girardi gives him to find his groove.

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 12:36 PM
Precisely right. Pre-coffee posting = disastrous consequences.So you don't see Brett's vastly improved swing or do you not think a vastly improved swing will lead to better results?

Exactly how does believing an improved swing will lead to better results = disasterous consequenses?

JfromJersey
03-11-09, 01:06 PM
Brett gives the Yankees a dimension they haven't had in a long time. Blazing speed. Also, if you look at him, he's not a skinny guy. He looks pretty well put together to me, so maybe this power surge is not a total fluke. He still needs to learn the intricacies of bunting to maximize his offensive talent, and his judgement of fly balls has to improve to maximize his defensive talent, but I thing his ceiling is pretty damn high. He can learn those things and with experience he will, but right now he has something you can't teach and I want to see that something a lot on the 2009 Yankees.

oneill96
03-11-09, 01:18 PM
I have to apologize to Gardner, although he still has to prove he can produce all around in the Majors. May have never been more wrong about a Yankee prospect. If he can make keep making contact with his speed, wow, will show the Yankees farm system is definitely back on track!!

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 01:25 PM
Brett gives the Yankees a dimension they haven't had in a long time. Blazing speed. Also, if you look at him, he's not a skinny guy. He looks pretty well put together to me, so maybe this power surge is not a total fluke. He still needs to learn the intricacies of bunting to maximize his offensive talent, and his judgement of fly balls has to improve to maximize his defensive talent, but I thing his ceiling is pretty damn high. He can learn those things and with experience he will, but right now he has something you can't teach and I want to see that something a lot on the 2009 Yankees.
I agree with everything you said, and that he has that innate desire to improve that will enable him to continually improve on the intricacies of the game. I also think that his ceiling just rose dramatically with him showing the vast improvement of his swing.

teknetic
03-11-09, 01:27 PM
Exactly how does believing an improved swing will lead to better results = disasterous consequenses?

He was referring to his typo.

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 01:34 PM
He was referring to his typo.
Haha. You're right, thanks. I was looking at the last sentence before his reply. My apologies TEP.

R.V.47
03-11-09, 01:48 PM
Brett gives the Yankees a dimension they haven't had in a long time. Blazing speed. Also, if you look at him, he's not a skinny guy. He looks pretty well put together to me, so maybe this power surge is not a total fluke. He still needs to learn the intricacies of bunting to maximize his offensive talent, and his judgement of fly balls has to improve to maximize his defensive talent, but I thing his ceiling is pretty damn high. He can learn those things and with experience he will, but right now he has something you can't teach and I want to see that something a lot on the 2009 Yankees.

Could you possibly be referring to grittiness? Finally we have someone scrappy enough to rival Dustin Pedroia.

ThePinStripes
03-11-09, 02:15 PM
Could you possibly be referring to grittiness? Finally we have someone scrappy enough to rival Dustin Pedroia.

Nothing is scrappier than biting ankles.

JL25and3
03-11-09, 04:27 PM
So you don't see Brett's vastly improved swing or do you not think a vastly improved swing will lead to better results?I don't know how much better the results will or won't be. It looks nicer, but I really don't know how it'll translate - especially once pitchers start pitching for real. If he is doing better, pitchers will make adjustments, then we'll see how he adjusts.

We just don't know enough.

JavyVazquezIsSick
03-11-09, 04:36 PM
I'm going optimistic and saying he puts up an OBP of .360-.370

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 05:00 PM
I don't know how much better the results will or won't be. It looks nicer, but I really don't know how it'll translate.

I totally disagree. It "looks nicer" because for the first time we see what a "proper coordinated swing" looks like from Brett, as it is a huge improvement from his prior slap hitting/arms only swing that now enables him to much more consistently put the barrel of the bat on the ball. I have NEVER seen that translate into anything execpt a MUCH improved hitter. The only question is how much of an improvement will it make. I believe with his much improved swing (confirmed by his SSS ST), that Gardner's ceiling for me has gone up to a possible .330 ML hitter.

OldYankeeFan
03-11-09, 05:04 PM
I'm going optimistic and saying he puts up an OBP of .360-.370I'm a buyer.

Veovis
03-11-09, 05:04 PM
The big question is, can Gardner out Ellsbury, Ellsbury? Stay tuned... ;)

JfromJersey
03-11-09, 06:47 PM
Could you possibly be referring to grittiness? Finally we have someone scrappy enough to rival Dustin Pedroia.

I was referring to his speed..something you certainly can't learn. As for being gritty/feisty like Pedroia, I haven't seen enough of Brett to make that determination. Did he have that rep in the minors?