Yankees sign Mark Teixeira; Billy Beane Rejoices
Maybe the Yankees read Beyond the Boxscore after all.
In the space we have been lamenting the Yanks’ seeming lack of interest in Mark Teixeira, a player who would immediately improve their offense and defense and is likely to age gracefully. And today comes word that Teixeira will sign an 8-year contract with the Yankees. As such, it’s now fair to say that this has been a good offseason for Brian Cashman.
With Teixeira in tow, the Yankees offense becomes formidable once again, rather than league average. Teixeira instantly improves their infield defense, and allows Nick Swisher to move to the outfield, thus improving the outfield defense too (assuming he’s not in center). The Yankees now can rotate Swisher, Hideki Matsui, Xavier Nady and Johnny Damon between DH and the two corner outfield spots, leaving Melky Cabrera (or Mike Cameron) in center, and thus improving the defense even further.
This is perfect for the Yankees: Nady is best deployed in part-time action, against all lefties and maybe a few righties. Matsui can avoid lefties (not that he’s particularly bad against them anyway), and both he and Damon are significant injury risks. Swisher should rebound from an awful 2008 and can man any outfield position.
The situation gets a bit murkier if it turns out that Jorge Posada can’t be a full-time catcher, but even if that’s the case, Posada can DH some of the time, benching someone like Matsui. The Yankees can try to trade any of these players, but they have no pressing needs and may better off keeping them in case of injury.
While it appears that the Yankees stole Teixeira from the clutches of the Red Sox, the big losers in this situation are the Angels.

While losing Francisco Rodriguez is of relatively little importance to them, losing Teixeira is a huge blow. Their offense was below-average last year and lacks upside once again in 2009, and downgrading from Teixeira to Kendry Morales would be a huge loss. There is still time for the Angels to improve their team, but simply signing Brian Fuentes isn’t the answer. We’re talking about an Angels team whose third-order Pythagorean record was 84-78, and who just lost Mark Teixeira and Francisco Rodriguez. Somewhere, Billy Beane (and Jon Daniels) is smiling.
This is, of course, a big upgrade for the Yankees, but it doesn’t guarantee anything. Last season, the Yankees finished with 91 third-order wins, behind the Blue Jays (92), Rays (97) and Red Sox (102). While the Yankees have undoubtedly improved themselves, they can’t be assured of a playoff spot, let alone a division title. The Rays and Red Sox should once again be very competitive, and while the Yankees signings may have closed the gap it also probably hasn’t created much of a gap between the Yanks and their competitors, either.
The AL East should once again be a dogfight – it’s very possible that this division will contain the three best teams in baseball. The Yankees may be the slight favorites, but at this point the division is way too close to call. Should make for a fun season.
Comments
Don't forget
Angels also (probably) lost Jon Garland and Garret Anderson, neither of whom was exceptional but between them worth something like 6 or 7 WARP.
Saving countless runs with my defense.
by Sam Miller OCR on
Dec 23, 2008 6:48 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
No way they mattered that much.
If you’re referencing BPro’s WARP, they set the replacement-level WAY low. Real replacement-level players are in the 2 to 2.5 WARP range, meaning they really only lost 2-3 wins from those guys.
On a REAL scale, Anderson is a .5 to 1 WAR player and Garland’s in the 1 to 1.5 range.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 23, 2008 6:52 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Anderson
You mean -0.5 to -1 WAR player, right? :)
Webmaster of Driveline Mechanics
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An Unconventional Look at Scouting
by Kyle Boddy on
Dec 23, 2008 7:29 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pardon the question
but how is a replacement level player in the 2-2.5 “Wins Above Replacement Player” range? Wouldn’t they by definition of 0.0?
by Adam Peterson on
Dec 23, 2008 7:54 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
They SHOULD be.
That’s the problem with the stat – they’ve defined replacement level too low.
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
by jhmoore on
Dec 23, 2008 8:28 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yup.
WARP’s replacement-level team wins something like 15% of its games (don’t quote me on that exact number), or something like 25 wins. That’s WAY worse than you’ll ever see any MLB team, because the quality of players on a 25 win true talent team really belong on a mediocre to bad AAA team. Guys who are actually replacement-level (minimum wage veteran free agents and high-end AAA non-prospects) would rate at about 2 WARP. It’s one big mistake of WARP to set the replacement-level so low (it’s actually caused by assuming replacement-level players are both crappy hitters AND crappy fielders while in reality they are league-average fielders). The other is not using a decent fielding metric. BPro has plans to fix both issues.
A better estimate of a replacement-level team is a 30% winning percentage or 48 wins.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 24, 2008 8:24 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So you’re saying that Garland was a low-K, high flyball pitcher who greatly benefited from the defense behind him and Anderson was a marginal player because his defense was bad?
I think not… makes too much sense
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all.
by baetown415 on
Dec 23, 2008 9:04 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The love for GA surprises me more than Garland, who has decent value over a really crappy starter.
But GA had a .325 OBP last year with a .433 SLG. That’s league-average. But he plays a corner outfield spot (easy to do) and he does it poorly. 2008 wasn’t a fluke, either. He had remarkably similar offensive years in 2006 and 2005. 2007 was slightly better, mostly due to a .490 SLG. He’ll be 37 next year.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 24, 2008 8:28 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Forget Teixeira, Morales is really replacing Kotchman
The Angels’ offense will hinge on production from unproven, high-potential kids. Kendry Morales, Brandon Wood, and Erick Aybar should be capable ML-caliber players to start the season…whether they can go from .650 to .800 OPS’s probably determines the fate of the season.
As you might recall, the Angels were just fine with Casey Kotchman at first base before they signed Teixeira. Expect the same in ’09.
http://inplaynoouts.blogspot.com/ - A blog about teams I like, written by me.
by Carl Johnson on
Dec 23, 2008 8:39 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
The problem with that is that they were lucky to be fine before Tex arrived.
Their clutch hitting is unsustainable and will eventually catch up to them.
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
by jhmoore on
Dec 23, 2008 10:30 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Their hitting has been unsustainable for years now.
They beat out their pythag every season. Nothing leads me to believe they’re not going to continue doing that. Scioscia loves one-run games.
http://inplaynoouts.blogspot.com/ - A blog about teams I like, written by me.
by Carl Johnson on
Dec 23, 2008 10:34 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As I wrote about
here, the Angels clutch hitting is not consistent. They were exceptionally clutch this year, yes, but in 2007 they were 28th in baseball in OPS with men on base. In 2006 they were 5th, in 2005 they were 24th.
Almost like it randomly fluctuates year to year.
by Peter Bendix on
Dec 23, 2008 11:11 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Baseball players aren't coins, Peter.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 24, 2008 8:29 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Or Bret Saberhagen is somehow involved.
I guess it would be reverse Saberhagen though, right?
by Dan Turkenkopf on
Dec 25, 2008 3:57 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The big reason for that is their baserunning.
Another is a top-heavy bullpen, more top-heavy than most teams.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 24, 2008 8:29 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
baserunning
gotta wonder if we’re missing out on it.
by Daniel Berlyn on
Dec 24, 2008 1:54 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Do you mean we're not paying enough attention to it?
If so, I totally agree. It’s only really a +/-5 runs effect at max, but it adds up for teams. BPro has a really good baserunning metric. I knew it existed, but didn’t know it was available in their stat reports until recently. Expect some posts on it soon.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on
Dec 24, 2008 8:13 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs












BtB on Facebook
BtB_Sky on Twitter




