PDA

View Full Version : Whither Womack?



yankees76
11-24-05, 08:37 PM
We still have Tony Woe signed for $2.0 million for '06. Do we keep him as an expensive pinch runner/back-up 2B? If so, then Joe will give him semi-regular ABs during the season in order to keep him "sharp," much to our dismay. Should we try to package him in a trade? If so, how/to whom?

27IsNext
11-24-05, 08:39 PM
If he's not dealt (likely, as I can't see why anyone will want him), I expect him to be cut.

yankees76
11-24-05, 08:42 PM
If he's not dealt (likely, as I can't see why anyone will want him), I expect him to be cut.

Wow. I wish someone would cut me for $2.0 million.

njdhockey
11-24-05, 08:42 PM
I doubt he will stay with the team or get traded, probably just cut.

AMYanks
11-24-05, 08:44 PM
He won't be back. Actually, allow me to rephrase that -- he better not be back.

YankeePride1967
11-24-05, 08:46 PM
He won't be back. Actually, allow me to rephrase that -- he better not be back.

Why, we need speed. Look how Podsednik solely led the White Sox to the World Series title. That's why the Yanks didn't win, we didn't respect the Woe! :P

38Special
11-24-05, 08:50 PM
I have no problem with him being back. He can play both middle infield positions, fill in the outfield if specifically needed, and can be useful as a pinch runner. I'm not concerned about the money, it's not mine :)

Irabu's Son
11-24-05, 08:58 PM
I'd keep him too... he'd be a serviceable utilityman if used right.

Allan
11-24-05, 09:17 PM
I have no problem with him being back. He can play both middle infield positions, fill in the outfield if specifically needed, and can be useful as a pinch runner. I'm not concerned about the money, it's not mine :)
Makes sense. I just don't want to see him too too often. Last year he had in excess of 340 plate appearances.... about 200 too many.

38Special
11-24-05, 09:20 PM
Makes sense. I just don't want to see him too too often. Last year he had in excess of 340 plate appearances.... about 200 too many.
He did spend the first half of the season as a starter, at 2nd and CF.

sundstrom
11-24-05, 09:21 PM
I'd keep him too... he'd be a serviceable utilityman if used right.


this is exactly right and could be a useful role. as stated, he can play 2B, SS, CF, and LF and has speed. 100-150 PA this year is not out of the question and could certainly be useful.

ring403
11-24-05, 09:23 PM
I have no problem with him being back. He can play both middle infield positions, fill in the outfield if specifically needed, and can be useful as a pinch runner. I'm not concerned about the money, it's not mine :)
He'd be okay as a role player, but the question is whether or not he'd be content to do that. Last season he was not happy about being moved from 2B, and then to the bench. He may rather be traded or released than be a bench player again in 2006.

Yankeeah
11-24-05, 09:46 PM
He'd be okay as a role player, but the question is whether or not he'd be content to do that. Last season he was not happy about being moved from 2B, and then to the bench. He may rather be traded or released than be a bench player again in 2006.

Exactly. If he isn't happy being a backup/role player, then he probably won't do to well in it, so why put him there?
He probably doesn't want to come back, and we don't really want him back.

Yankees1962
11-24-05, 09:50 PM
Exactly. If he isn't happy being a backup/role player, then he probably won't do to well in it, so why put him there?
He probably doesn't want to come back, and we don't really want him back.
A lot can happen between now and April 1st, but I'm against cutting him. Let him earn his 2M either sitting on the bench or Torre utilizing whatever skills he has left.

27IsNext
11-24-05, 10:00 PM
Does anyone remember how much money combined the Yankees ate cutting Quantrill and Stanton?

Johnny O
11-24-05, 10:15 PM
A lot can happen between now and April 1st, but I'm against cutting him. Let him earn his 2M either sitting on the bench or Torre utilizing whatever skills he has left.

I like you're thinking here, unless we have a better option, cutting Womack because he stunk last year makes little sense. If the roster is properly constructed he could have value as a utility/bench player. If he's unhappy with that he should talk to Leiter who moved to the 'pen last year just to stay in MLB, otherwise he can just go.

Evil Empire
11-24-05, 10:19 PM
I actually like Womack. If he's used properly, he can do well on this team.

enterthesandman
11-25-05, 12:07 AM
Keep him for the bench. Good pinch runner & backup emergency IF.

yankees76
11-25-05, 01:09 AM
Does anyone remember how much money combined the Yankees ate cutting Quantrill and Stanton?

$3.84 million on Stanton, $1.5 million on Quantrill.

I Love Wang
11-25-05, 01:14 AM
He'd be okay as a role player, but the question is whether or not he'd be content to do that. Last season he was not happy about being moved from 2B, and then to the bench. He may rather be traded or released than be a bench player again in 2006.

Should we care? If Womack doesn't want to be a bench player, he should try sucking a little less ass. He's going to get $2 million dollars next year, which is WAY more than his skills warrant, and he's going to be asked to offer some spot duty at 2B/SS and in the outfield, while being a regular pinch-runner. We should all be so lucky.

miko
11-25-05, 01:29 AM
I don't mind keeping him on the bench for '06. I think with Cash having more say on player movements the days of paying people to go away are over. As long as Womack isn't a distraction in the clubhouse one more year shouldn't be a problem. If Cashman were really counting his pennies as he lets on, it would look a tad foolish if he were to cut Womack and payout his $2 Mil contract as he would still have to sign someone to at least the league minimum to replace him.

On the plus side Womack could be used as a pinch runner or as insurance in case someone gets injured or he could also be useful in double switch situations during interleague games in NL parks.

yankees76
11-25-05, 01:30 AM
Wish I were that lucky. Hey, Tony, I can't hit the breaking ball, either.

yankees76
11-25-05, 01:32 AM
I don't mind keeping him on the bench for '06. I think with Cash having more say on player movements the days of paying people to go away are over. As long as Womack isn't a distraction in the clubhouse one more year shouldn't be a problem. If Cashman were really counting his pennies as he lets on, it would look a tad foolish if he were to cut Womack and payout his $2 Mil contract as he would still have to sign someone to at least the league minimum to replace him.

On the plus side Womack could be used as a pinch runner or as insurance in case someone gets injured or he could also be useful in double switch situations during interleague games in NL parks.

My only concern is that Joe is a "player's manager" and that, if Womack is on the team, Joe might give him a few starts (which is a few too many), just to keep him fresh. That's the only reason that I don't want Cash to bring Bernie back. I love Bernie, but I am worried that if he is on the team, Joe might use him too regularly.

miko
11-25-05, 01:38 AM
My only concern is that Joe is a "player's manager" and that, if Womack is on the team, Joe might give him a few starts (which is a few too many), just to keep him fresh. That's the only reason that I don't want Cash to bring Bernie back. I love Bernie, but I am worried that if he is on the team, Joe might use him too regularly.
I have the same fear. It would be hard for him to not send Bernie out there a few times a week if Bubba was our opening day CF.

Yankees1962
11-25-05, 03:55 AM
My only concern is that Joe is a "player's manager" and that, if Womack is on the team, Joe might give him a few starts (which is a few too many), just to keep him fresh. That's the only reason that I don't want Cash to bring Bernie back. I love Bernie, but I am worried that if he is on the team, Joe might use him too regularly.
There is nothing wrong with giving him some starts during the season under the right circumstances. Furthermore, Womack doesn't have any close ties with Torre and he kept Cano in the lineup even when the rookie was struggling and many of us were calling for him to be pulled last season.

Yankees1962
11-25-05, 04:06 AM
I have the same fear. It would be hard for him to not send Bernie out there a few times a week if Bubba was our opening day CF.
I'm going to say something that I don't have any proof of happening so let me preface my comments by saying they are strictly speculation on my part. I'm willing to bet that when Bernie's name came up during the organizational meetings in New York and when Torre was asked about him, he probably stated his opinion that Bernie is done as a contributing player. If, Bernie isn't signed this off-season even as a pinch-hitter then I'm pretty confident that Torre gave an honest evaluation of Bernie's declining skills. Again, we shouldn't read more into Torre's positive comments about Bernie to the NY media this off-season than what they were. Torre is such a savvy guy with the media that he wasn't about to say anything publicly negative about a player that gave him his all for 10 years. It's simply not Torre's way.

ring403
11-25-05, 05:12 AM
Should we care? If Womack doesn't want to be a bench player, he should try sucking a little less ass. He's going to get $2 million dollars next year, which is WAY more than his skills warrant, and he's going to be asked to offer some spot duty at 2B/SS and in the outfield, while being a regular pinch-runner. We should all be so lucky.True, but generally, when a player is unhappy and requests a trade, most teams try to comply just to avoid any potential negative clubhouse issues with him. In Womack's case, he isn't a siginficant cog, so it's not too hard to replace him.

yankeebot
11-25-05, 05:28 AM
Does anyone remember how much money combined the Yankees ate cutting Quantrill and Stanton?
Yep. The Yankees are willing to cut away dead weight. In addition to the 5 million for those 2 they DFA'd Karsay and his 6 million. As for Womack, if he is not packaged in a trade I imagine he will be given the opportunity to earn a roster spot at ST but that it is far from a sure thing.

Stupid Flanders
11-25-05, 08:48 AM
I don't understand why anyone would want to cut Womack. He is an extremely valuable bench player. The problem was giving him ABs from offensive positions at which he provided less than adequate defense. I would like to see Tony play in 100+ games with less than 100 ABs on the year

27IsNext
11-25-05, 09:46 AM
I don't understand why anyone would want to cut Womack. He is an extremely valuable bench player. The problem was giving him ABs from offensive positions at which he provided less than adequate defense. I would like to see Tony play in 100+ games with less than 100 ABs on the year

He doesn't want to be a bench player, and is too expensive for a bench player.

longtimeyankeefan
11-25-05, 10:03 AM
I don't understand why anyone would want to cut Womack. He is an extremely valuable bench player. The problem was giving him ABs from offensive positions at which he provided less than adequate defense. I would like to see Tony play in 100+ games with less than 100 ABs on the year

This comment makes no sense, unless you are strickly talking about Tony Womack now appearing as Herb Washington.

You state that Womack provides less than adequate defense at the positions that he can play, suggest he can play in 100+ games, yet average less than 1AB per game. Such a scenario means that he would be a defensive replacement - which makes no sense when he provides less than adequate defense.

Either that, or I have no comprehension of you thought process.

hardrain
11-25-05, 10:05 AM
The miserable Womack experiment, and its testiment to the incompetence of Damon Oppenheimer, must be eradicated once and for all.

mbn007
11-25-05, 10:10 AM
this is exactly right and could be a useful role. as stated, he can play 2B, SS, CF, and LF and has speed. 100-150 PA this year is not out of the question and could certainly be useful.
He would be that 25th guy on the roster. pinch runner, p/t of, p/t backup at 2B & SS.

Better to have him do this, rather then cutting him. But if he's not happy, try to deal him, as this can be bad news in the clubhouse.

Irabu's Son
11-25-05, 10:23 AM
I think it'd be fun getting to play a bunch of different positions (I think he can play five.. 2B/SS/LF/CF/RF) as well as pinch running and getting to steal a bunch of bases and score some runs... for the NEW YORK YANKEES no less, the team everyone wants to play for as a kid... to bring home a 2 million dollar paycheck would be the cherry on top. Womack's a grown man, he can handle not starting. Besides, who in the hell would give him a starting job? His stats are so horrendous it's comical.

ryanthe13th
11-25-05, 10:31 AM
I remember when Cano was called up, I was pretty confused. Womack wasn't doing horrible at the time, he was hitting like .280 or something akin. It all worked out for the best though.

Womack should be kept as a guy that can lay down a bunt, pinch run, play 2B in blow out games. He's extremely valuable in that situation and who would want to trade anything valuable for him?

Sierra Mist
11-25-05, 10:33 AM
Womack is gone

BJG
11-25-05, 10:38 AM
Womack should be kept as a guy that can lay down a bunt, pinch run, play 2B in blow out games. He's extremely valuable in that situation and who would want to trade anything valuable for him?

He isn't all that valuable because his only real skill off the bench is pinch running. Beyond that, he's a middle infielder who doesn't play ss well enough to justify carrying him without carrying a second middle infielder...so basically, having to take up 2 bench spots to do one job.

ryanthe13th
11-25-05, 10:41 AM
He isn't all that valuable because his only real skill off the bench is pinch running. Beyond that, he's a middle infielder who doesn't play ss well enough to justify carrying him without carrying a second middle infielder...so basically, having to take up 2 bench spots to do one job.

Well as I said, I'd only want Womack in the field in a blow out type situation or if it was absolutely neccesary to give someone a day off. There is no sense in risking Cano or Jeter getting hurt, so having Womack play 2B or SS for a few games won't kill us.

BJG
11-25-05, 10:54 AM
Well as I said, I'd only want Womack in the field in a blow out type situation or if it was absolutely neccesary to give someone a day off. There is no sense in risking Cano or Jeter getting hurt, so having Womack play 2B or SS for a few games won't kill us.

You can't build a bench where you only want the guy to play in blowouts or other low leverage situations. You do need to build a bench that can address the high leverage scenarios. The low leverage ones are then easily covered.

There's only really room for one middle infielder on the bench. He should be able to play both middle infield spots well enough that, in a close game, you would feel comfortable pinch hitting for Cano and then putting him out there or you would feel comfortable starting him for a couple of games in a row if Jeter got hurt.

In addition, because of Cano's platoon split, he should be right handed so as to optimize the days off you give Cano.

Womack just doesn't fit on the Yankees.

ryanthe13th
11-25-05, 01:17 PM
Womack just doesn't fit on the Yankees.

Yeah, I guess since Womack isn't launching home runs he doesn't fit as a bench player. You don't cut a guy who stole 27 bases for you. It doesn't make any sense. I truly think Womack can perform in high level situations, but he won't be in many since he'd be on the team as a bench player.

Who would you rather have on the bench than Womack?

BJG
11-25-05, 02:26 PM
Yeah, I guess since Womack isn't launching home runs he doesn't fit as a bench player. You don't cut a guy who stole 27 bases for you. It doesn't make any sense. I truly think Womack can perform in high level situations, but he won't be in many since he'd be on the team as a bench player.

Who would you rather have on the bench than Womack?

Someone who can hit lefties so that I can sit Cano against good ones. Someone who can play ss as well as 2b. I'm not sure how that got equated into having a middle infield bench player who either a) couldn't run or b) had to hit homeruns. I would just like somewone who actually fits the needs of the team.

gdn
11-25-05, 02:32 PM
Who will take him, though? If the Yankees are trying to cut payroll, will they cut him and eat the salary?

MattUNC2003
11-25-05, 02:38 PM
Who would you rather have on the bench than Womack?

Miguel Cairo.
He did his job very well in 2004.

I am really neutral on what to do with Womack. I love the idea of having a guy that can come in late in a game and steal a base when it is absolutely necessary (Dave Roberts, anyone?). What I don't like is the idea of paying that guy $2 million, especially if he had a grand total of 9 XBH's the previous season.

If there ARE any takers for Womack, I'd say the Yanks should see what they can get for him. But, if he remains a bench player/utility guy, I'll be cool with that.

MisterNovember
11-25-05, 03:15 PM
Womack is the perfect "supersub" guy on this team. Sure, he's drastically overpaid, but as long as he's kept in a pinch running role he can be very useful. Most of the Yankee starters aren't exactly fleet of foot, so in a close game he's a great asset. When you consider that he plays several defensive positions as well, I can't think of a better bench guy to have than Womack.

That being said, if Joe Torre ever plans on starting him, he should be fired.

AMYanks
11-25-05, 03:19 PM
Womack is the perfect "supersub" guy on this team. Sure, he's drastically overpaid, but as long as he's kept in a pinch running role he can be very useful. Most of the Yankee starters aren't exactly fleet of foot, so in a close game he's a great asset. When you consider that he plays several defensive positions as well, I can't think of a better bench guy to have than Womack.

That being said, if Joe Torre ever plans on starting him, he should be fired.

The problem is, if Womack is on the team, Torre WILL want to occasionally start him, and get him some ABs.

Because of this, we should look to acquire a player with similar speed, but one that has a better bat (Dave Roberts comes to mind, however I wouldn't want to give up anything of real value for him).

I Love Wang
11-25-05, 03:33 PM
By the end of the year, Womack had been reduced to a bench role. I don't remember the last time he got a start. Torre wasn't inclined to overplay him.

hellonewman
11-25-05, 08:41 PM
My only concern is that Joe is a "player's manager" and that, if Womack is on the team, Joe might give him a few starts (which is a few too many), just to keep him fresh.This is a bad thing? If a guy is worth a roster spot, he should get an occasional start for just that reason, to keep him fresh. If he's such a bad player that you can't risk giving him a start ever, he shouldn't be on the team in the first place. It's a waste of a roster spot.