Vazquez Trade Reactions

We posted our initial take on the deal earlier this morning, but here is a collection of what else is being said around these here internets about the acquisition of Javier Vazquez:

Will from IIATMS looks at what this might mean for the Yankees' defense. Aaron Gleeman from Circling the Bases asks a similar question.

Ben from River Ave. Blues revisits Vazquez's last time in the Bronx.

Craig Calcaterra correctly guessed that it was Vazquez this morning, posted a quick reaction to the deal and as a Braves fan, explained why the deal wasn't so bad.

Joel Sherman was the first to name Vazquez as the target this morning and has an in-depth breakdown of the trade. He also explained that the Yankees valued a starting pitcher over a left fielder and are still looking to keep their payroll under $200M, meaning LF will likely be filled on the cheap. They are also planning to deal either Chad Gaudin or Sergio Mitre before spring training.

There are over 200 comments on the BBTF trade dedicated to the trade as well.

And some quick quotes, taken completely out of context:

Dave Cameron, FanGraphs: "The reaction to this deal on Twitter has not been kind to Atlanta, with most people concluding that the Yankees got Vazquez for peanuts. I’m not so sure."

Joe Posnanski: Sigh. The Yankees traded for Vazquez to be their NUMBER FOUR starter. And the Royals signed Jason Kendall to be their starting catcher.

Keith Law: "At this point, the Yankees now have a rotation close to that of the Red Sox, and they could very well enter 2010 a better team on paper than they were at the same time before 2009.

Peter Abraham, Boston Globe: "You knew this was coming. Once the Red Sox signed John Lackey, there was no way the Yankees would go into next season with a rotation of CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Andy Pettitte and two question marks."

Jonah Keri, via Twitter: "To be fair to the #Braves, any time you can acquire dryer lint for one of the best SP in baseball, you gotta do it.

Tyler Kepner, via Twitter: "Yanks use 6 prospects to get Granderson and Vazquez, yet keep Hughes, Joba, Montero, Melancon, Romine, McAllister. Not bad."

Ben Kabak, River Ave. Blues: "As much as it strengthens the team’s rotation, it also weakens their outfield. The leftfield situation currently looks like a Brett Gardner/Jamie Hoffmann platoon, which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence."

Rob Iracane, Walkoff Walk: "Let it be known that this guy (points to self) would rather have dismissed Nick Swisher, who cannot field his position, run the bases, or dress like a grown-up. But hey, Vazquez strikes out batters like it's his job (note: it is his job) so as a Yankees fan, I am pleased."

Satchel Price, Beyond the Box Score: "Considering what the Phillies landed for one year of Cliff Lee, arguably a superior pitcher, at a cheaper salary, I think that Atlanta got a pretty solid return for Vazquez, even if it doesn't include the impact bat that Atlanta sorely needs."

Kevin Kaduk, Big League Stew: "It's often been said that Vazquez is a pitcher that throws best when the expectations are low and his stats do back that up. "

Josh, Jorge Says No!: "Make no mistake about it though, if Vazquez can give the Yankees 200 IP with 190+ K's, and a 3.75 ERA, then there is no reason why he won't be able to win 15+ games with the Yankees the way this team is constructed."

All Granderson, All The Time

Good morning Fackers. My gut reaction to the Curtis Granderson trade was indifference. Or confusion maybe. As best as I can describe, I don't think it's a bad trade, I'm just not sure it was a necessary trade. Perhaps this stems from some bias on my part, as from the start, I thought the Granderson-to-the-Yankees rumors were just unfounded rumors.

People far smarter than me (Keith Law, Rob Neyer, Dave Cameron, etc.) have labeled this a steal of a deal for the Yankees. I can understand that point of view and I can't come up with a solid counterargument against it. But my knee jerk reaction is that the Yankees had an average to just-above average centerfield platoon in 2009. Curtis Granderson is without a doubt an improvement upon that platoon, but outside of his outstanding 2007, he's been just very good rather than excellent over the past four years. I suppose that's still worth the price paid since Austin Jackson's ceiling is apparently to become Curtis Granderson, but it stings a bit to lose three guys that we've followed through the system over the past several years. I suppose any good trade has a price to pay, and the fact that I don't want to give up the likes of AJax, IPK, and Coke but that I'm not heartbroken over it means that it was a decent trade.

That said, the more I think about the deal, the more questions I come up with. In no specific order here are some thoughts and questions, some of which probably echo the multitude of thoughts already expressed on this deal:

• Where does Granderson play? At present the Yankees don't have a left fielder, but as above, they have a decent CF platoon. Does Granderson play left? A lot of Granderson's value comes from his ability to produce as he can as a centerfielder.


• Related to that, where does this leave Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui? There's virtually no chance they both return now, if not because of roster spots then certainly because of payroll. Does either return?


• Granderson can't hit lefties. Gardner's a lefty, Melky's a switch hitter who can't really hit lefties either. Granderson likely needs a platoon partner. Does this mean Reed Johnson, as suggested by Keith Law and a host of others? If so, does that not leave room for Melky or Gardner? Or do we ignore Granderson's numbers against lefties and chalk it up to insufficient sample size, or assume that he can turn it around like Paul O'Neill before him?


• Brian Cashman was quoted this week as saying the Yankees priorities are "pitching, pitching, pitching and then leftfield". I assumed that to mean they were going to acquire pitching, or at least firm up pitching. Well, they have a left fielder, potentially, but all they've done so far is subtract pitching. Don't get me wrong, no one is going to cry over Brian Bruney, Ian Kennedy, and Phil Coke. But in them you have three guys who have proven themselves capable of pitching at the Major League level in various capacities. Now all three are gone without another pitcher to show for it. It may not have a major impact on the overall talent level, but does impact the depth.


• So much for keeping payroll down, or even reducing it. Granderson has a manageable deal for the next three to four years, but he's guaranteed $23.75M over the next three years, including $5.5M this year, with a $13M option or $2M buyout for 2013. Again, manageable, but more than what the Yankees would have been playing for the likely CF alternatives during that time.


• The Granderson deal should all but prevent the Yankees from dealing for Roy Halladay. All Halladay rumors started with Joba or Hughes combined with AJax or Montero. While 3 of those 4 guys are still available, making such a trade would leave the Yankees nearly completely devoid of young talent at the Big League level and the top levels of the farm system. Losing AJax and IPK may not be the worse thing in the world, but I think it does make it more important to keep the likes of Hughes, Chamberlain, and Montero.


• The Yankees have lost two relief pitchers over the last two days. Again, no big loss. But, Damaso Marte has been consistently inconsistent in the last two years and may be in the mix to be "The Eighth Inning Guy (TM)". Joe Girardi loves to match up. With Coke gone, I have to figure that barring a trade, Mike Dunn will be in the Yankee pen next year. In fact, given that the Yankees insisted he be pulled from the initially proposed deal, I imagine they have plans for him. Dunn's K rates are very appealing, but his BB rates scare me. A lot. He may be left handed Bruney. in fact he may make Bruney look like Greg Maddux by comparison.


• Granderson appears to be another high character acquisition for the Yankees. Obviously his talent is what precipitated the deal, but given the number of talented "character guys" the Yankees have brought in over the past year following years of malcontents, I can't help but wonder if the organization is targeting players who contribute both on the field and in the clubhouse.

Anyway, those were the first things that came to mind. This one's been dissected a thousand different ways throughout the Yankee blogosphere already. I'm sure we'll have more to say over the next several days.

Waiting For The Hot Stove To Cook

Good morning Fackers. Well the long holiday weekend is behind us and we're back at the daily grind. While we slowed things down over the weekend the Hot Stove rumor mill kept a churning. The Roy Halladay machine kept rolling: he'll accept a trade to the Yankees, The Red Sox don't want to lose him to the Yankees, the Jays want a Major League ready arm and bat, and on and on and on.

Oh yeah, we also heard that the Blue Jays like Jesus Montero. Well, no kidding. You know who else likes Jesus Montero? The other 28 clubs in Major League Baseball. That's some ground breaking journalism there Heyman. Oh yes, the Blue Jays might be interested in Baseball America's number three overall prospect if they were to trade their ace pitcher. Surprise, surprise.

Meanwhile, an entirely different Hot Stove rumor broke, ramped up, and flamed out, all before the turkey carcass was picked clean. On the heels of his failure to reach a contract extension with the Marlins came the rumors that Josh Johnson was on the market. On Friday, ESPN's Keith Law speculated as to what the Marlins could get in exchange for Johnson (a lot) and things just snowballed from there. Next came word that the Marlins were "very willing" to move him for the right package. Almost immediately, contrary reports came out. Amazingly, it was chief rumor-mongerer Ken Rosenthal who broke what as of now is the going story: that the Marlins have no intention of moving Johnson prior to Opening Day.

I have to admit, I was intrigued by the possibility of Josh Johnson. Not that Roy Halladay isn't an outstanding pitcher, but as RAB's Mike Axisa pointed out last week, opportunities to acquire young, talented pitchers like Johnson are rare.

I hate to keep striking the same chord that we've been strumming all off-season thus far, but there's rarely any merit to these rumors. At this stage in the off-season, virtually everyone is up for grabs. Teams float weather balloons to see what the market is for a particular player or a particular type of player. But the truth of the matter is that this is dead time right now, and the national baseball writers have to write about something until the real moving and shaking starts happening.

The good news is that it's about to start happening. Today is the final day of November. Teams have until tomorrow to offer arbitration to their free agents. Once that's done, teams will know who amongst the Type A free agents carry draft pick compensation. Armed with the knowledge, the real free agent courting process will begin in earnest, leading into the Winter Meetings December 7th through 10th. Once the top free agents sign, market value will be established, the lesser free agents will fall in, and in some ways, the trade market will be determined as well. It's only a matter of days before the Hot Stove really starts cooking. Until then, I'm filing everything away as near baseless rumors.

Counterpoint: Who Cares?

In the six months I've been writing here, rarely have Jay and I disagreed on any major points. We disagreed about a hypothetical recall of Austin Jackson in the wake of a potential Melky Cabrera injury, and we differ as to how the Yankees should approach Hideki Matsui this off-season. But in instances like these, I think we both can understand, if not agree with, the other viewpoint.

Today though, I think we may have an instance of us being distinctly on opposite sides of the coin. This morning, Jay parsed the AL MVP results and had some valid criticisms of the order of finish as well as some of the more obscure individual votes. Moshe Mandel at The Yankee Universe had something similar yesterday, and I've seen traces of the same sentiment elsewhere in the blogosphere. To which I say: who cares?

Perhaps this is hypocritical of me. Just last week I put up a post here essentially criticizing the "stats based community" for not calling out Tyler Kepner, Zack Greinke, and Brian Bannister for their misuse and misunderstanding of advanced metrics in the wake of Greinke's Cy Young Award victory. Though perhaps I didn't make the point as clearly as I wanted, my issue wasn't so much with the misuse and misunderstanding as it was that everyone was so happy that Greinke both won and acknowledged FIP in the process, that they withheld the usual cantankerousness and I'm-smarter-than-you responses that normally follow such a slip up. Now, when the reaction is a bit truer to character, once again it's me who's complaining about the complaining, just as last week I complained about the lack of complaining.

That said, I still think this is really, really unnecessary. Yes, by any worthy metric Derek Jeter was more valuable than Mark Teixeira. Yes, Ben Zobrist probably finished much lower than he deserved. Yes, there were several players who received individual votes that were higher than they deserved or not deserved at all. Yes, I'm surprised/disappointed that Jason Bartlett didn't receive a single vote. Yes, a first place vote for Miguel Cabrera is so patently stupid that it's probably a waste of energy to even explain why.

But still, do we really need to break down all the grave injustices that happened behind Joe Mauer's cavernous margin of victory? Should we even care what happened beyond Mauer taking the hardware? Isn't the whole point to get the winner right, not whoever comes after him? Don't we often preach about sample size, and isn't the point of casting 28 ballots with 10 slots each for a pool of over 400 players that the "most valuable" player will rise to the top? Sure there will be some oddball votes in there, but the right guy won, and he came within one vote and five points of doing so unanimously. Does any of the rest matter?

Please don't take for me anti-statistic. If you read here with any degree of regularity during the season you know that I often sigthed OPS+, wOBA, UZR, WAR, FIP, etc. That isn't the point. The point is how much is enough? We've seen the deservedly-maligned BBWAA get all four major awards "right", and three of the votes weren't particularly close. In doing so they've eschewed traditional biases that would have favored less deserving candidates in years past. Shouldn't this be enough to keep us content for now? Remember, this round of off-season awards represents the Battle of Saratoga, not the Treaty of Paris.

At their core, the MVP, the Cy Young Award, and even the Hall of Fame for that matter are subjective, loosely-defined awards that have little value beyond whatever worth we assign to them. I have a hard time understanding the utter outrage year after year as the awards season comes and goes. While we'd all like to believe that "objective journalists" are the stewards of these institutions, the fact of the matter is we're not talking about Edward R. Murrow or Walter Kronkite here. These are sportswriters. And while many may still exhibit signs of homerism or may be hopelessly clinging to archaic and ineffective means of measuring performance, I still think they're in a much better state today than they were in the days of Grantland Rice, or Ford C. Frick, or Jimmy Cannon. We're not seeing even the likes of Barry Bonds getting jobbed out of a deserved MVP because he's an asshole to the writers. Ask Ted Williams' frozen detached skull what he thinks about that.

So, with a plethora of better methods to assess value at our disposal, why do we even care who wins these things anymore, let alone who finishes second through tenth? If we want to know who is truly valuable, then why not just pull up the WAR leaderboard, or whichever future metric proves to be the most accurate means of assessing performance? Why do we care which pitcher is given an award named after the all-time wins leader, when we know wins are a misleading indicator of true performance, and we know that Cy Young was an inferior pitcher when compared to contemporaries like Christy Mathewson and Walter Johnson? Do we even need the BBWAA to give the awards to the "right" players to validate what the metrics have already told us?

As Joe at RAB pointed out in the wake of the Cy Young voting, this isn't a culture war anymore. This is the true state of baseball these days, and it's an amalgamation of what were once two distinct schools of thought. As much as some seem to define themselves by it, this is no longer us vs. them, Moneyball vs. old-school, stats vs. scouts, RBI vs. WAR. The game - or more specifically how we look at the game - has changed, is changing, will continue to change, and will do so across the board. It's no longer just Bill James, a few forward thinking executives, a handful of enlightened websites. It's widespread; it's prevalent.

Few if any of GMs are traditional "baseball men"; nearly all have a business background in addition to their baseball experience. Every front office has some sort of statistical analysis taking place. Bill James, Voros McCracken, Tom Tango and others were or are employed by, or are consultants to, Major League clubs. David Cone's routinely referencing Fangraphs on Yankee telecasts. Keith Law, Will Carroll, and other Baseball Prospectus folks were given votes in the post-season awards process. High-profile national sportswriters like Rob Neyer and Joe Posnanski are at the forefront of the "statistical revolution", and if their work wasn't enough to force their colleagues to learn about advanced metrics it was at least enough to create a palpable buzz about the truly worthy candidates.

The times they are a changing folks. And while we might not yet be living in a sabermetric utopia, we've seen great strides made this past week. As we approach Thanksgiving and presumably stop to reflect upon what we are thankful for, shouldn't we at least be satisfied, if not grateful, that the most deserving candidates won both MVPs and both Cy Young Awards rather than griping about the idiot who voted Jason Kubel seventh? I think we should; what about you?

More On Chapman

In a post yesterday I advocated against signing Aroldis Chapman mainly based on historical reasons and a risk vs. reward point of view. I didn't offer anything in the way of evaluating Chapman's skill set, mainly because very little is known about it - at least very little that is reliable.

Over at Baseball-Intellect, they have an outstanding, in depth look at Chapman. Maybe it's confirmation bias on my part, but I don't see anything in there that makes me more open to the prospect of inking Chapman to the type of deal he will command. He has control problems, has one good pitch and a couple so-so ones, and has a tendency to tip his pitches via arm slot.

At The Yankee Universe, they also have an open post on whether the Yankees should pursue Chapman. Most people weighing in are in favor of it, with the exception of one annoying commentor.

Lastly, via MLBTradeRumors, comes a few tidbits from Keith Law's Top 50 Free Agents. Law ranks another Cuban lefty, Noel Arguelles, as the tenth best option on the market. Arguelles is two years younger than Chapman, and Law speculates he could be had for around $8M. That's a risk I'd be far, far more inclined to assume.

That's it for me this week Fackers. College Football Saturday will be up in the morning.

Final Pre-World Series News And Notes

T-Minus five hours and counting, folks.

Predictions for the World Series abound. Keith Law thinks Joe Girardi's moves could make the different and goes with the Yanks in six. Walkoff Walk collected 9 guesses and six went with the Phillies. Here's the data from RAB's poll. The Star-Ledger staff offers some "outlandish" ones.

Joe from River Ave. Blues wonders if Girardi will use David Robertson in high leverage situations.

Matthew Pouliot from Circling the Bases weights in with a full-on preivew. As does David Pinto from Baseball Musings. And Dave Cameron from FanGraphs. And Cliff from Bronx Banter.

Jason and his crew have a position by position breakdown of the two teams.

A graphical comparison of the two offenses using wOBA from Beyond the Boxscore.

Want to know the real reason Jay-Z isn't playing before Game 1 tonight? He was scheduled to perform in Colombus, Ohio.

How can you not enjoy the quality GIF work of LSUFreek?

PeteAbe had some observations on yesterday's media circus.

An Indians fan gives some (angry) Midwestern perspective on the match up between CC Sabathia and Cliff Lee.

Tim Marchman thinks Joe Girardi is too smart for his own good. Moshe Mandel at The Yankee Universe thinks Marchman contradicts himself and laments the fact that picking Joe Girardi has suddenly become the cool thing to do.

Joel Sherman's World Series chat is starting right about... now. Jay Jaffe's at Baseball Prospectus probably just wrapped up.

And finally, Jon Lewin at Subway Squawkers offers some alternative viewing for Mets fans tonight.

Pitching From The Pyrenees

This one isn't Yankee-related just yet, but it's pretty interesting nonetheless.

Cuban prospect Aroldis Champan has taken one step along the road to becoming a Major Leaguer. The 21 year old flame-throwing lefty defected from the Cuban National Team in the Netherlands back on July 1st and has now established residency in the principality of Andorra:

“Andorra is a beautiful country and has provided an ideal setting for me to prepare myself for professional baseball without distractions,” Chapman said in a statement. “I look forward to becoming a proud advocate for my adopted country.”

As you can see in the picture to the right, Andorra is a beautiful country, indeed. Nestled in the Pyrenees Mountains between France and Spain, it's fairly temperate but due to it's higher elevation, it receives more snow and is slightly chillier than the countries it borders. At 181 square miles, it's roughly the size of seven CC Sabathia jerseys sewn together.

The country was formed in 1278, and is the last remaining sovereignty created by King Charlemagne of France to keep the Islamic Moors of Spain from entering his country. With such beauty and history, how could Chapman not move there?

Oh, minor detail: Andorra has no income tax, so the massive signing bonus he figures to get from an MLB team will be his to keep.

The bonus has been universally assumed to be higher than $32M given to Jose Contreras by the Yanks. It would seem to be a virtual lock because that was 7 years ago, Chapman is 10 years younger than Contreras was, and he's a left hander who has been clocked at over 100MPH. Even if he was 26, like some sources have suggested, he still represents significantly more upside than El Titan de Bronze.

Chapman hasn't been especially successful in either Cuban or International play, but his age and skills are obviously quite tantalizing. Keith Law even suggested that the Cuban team was forcing him to pitch mostly fastballs to limit his appeal to MLB clubs. Here is some more analysis from FanGraphs.

Is anyone intrigued by this guy? There is a lot of risk and uncertainty but also a lot of undeniable talent and potential. I think it's safe to say that neither Kei Igawa nor Contreras gave the Yanks anywhere the value they were looking for, but the $6.6M they signed El Duque for is certainly a different story. The problem is Chapman might cost 10 times that much.

The prospect of a young lefty with that kind of heat is captivating, and all 30 teams are said to have some level of interest, but I would be reticent to commit that kind of money to an international signing. Dice-K has been hot and cold for the Red Sox, at times looking like he was a good deal and at others like a total bust. There is a huge chance that Chapman ends up not living up to the contract and a relatively small one that he exceeds the value given. I say let someone else take the risk.

(Sidenote: What is stopping U.S. prospects (i.e. Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper) from taking up residence in a country tax shelter such as Andorra or the Cayman Islands and avoiding the draft as well? I love America as much as the next guy, but for the difference between what the top tier guys get for signing bonuses and what they would get on the open market, I think I could officially reside somewhere else.)

Draft Signings Update

Today is the last day that teams have to come to an agreement with the players they selected in the Amateur Draft back on June 10th & 11th. After signing their fifth round pick, Caleb Cotham, a right handed pitcher from Vanderbuilt for $675,000, nearly 4 times above slot, the only Yankees top 8 picks left unsigned were their first and second rounders.

Slade Heathcott, the lefty-hitting outfielder who we've talked about around here pretty extensively has now finalized his deal with the Yanks. His bonus is reported to be $2.2M, which is roughly double the $1.1M that recommended for the 29th overall pick. After losing Geritt Cole, their first round choice last year, the Yankees were obviously reluctant to see the same thing happen again lest they not be compensated with an additional pick next year, and saddled up with some serious loot for the young man from Texarkana.

Their second round pick, number 76 overall, was J.R. Murphy, a high school catcher from Bradenton, Florida. Keith Law and Lane Meyer (via RAB) have both confirmed the signing but no dollar amount has been announced. $478,000 is the recommended bonus for that slot, but Mike from RAB guesstimates that he'll receive upwards of twice that much.

Given that the Yanks have signed their 14 highest draft picks, with the exception of 9th rounder Tyler Lyons, this draft can be a successful one as of now. We won't know for quite some time how good it really was, though.

I'll Show You Overpaid...

I'm going to single Joel Sherman out here, but he is just stating a general sentiment that I've heard in several other places the most unequivocally (emphasis mine):

But, at this moment, Peavy has a foot injury and Rios is one of the most overpaid players in the majors. The risk is huge -- and fascinating.

"At this moment"? Alex Rios is making $5.9M in salary in 2009, which pro-rated for 112 games equates to $4.3M, and has already been worth $4.9 to the Blue Jays. He's actually slightly overpaid. And in general, saying a player who makes $6M is "one of the most overpaid players in the majors" is like ripping someone for driving a Jeep for getting bad gas mileage. Is it great? No, but let's look at the supercharged H1 Hummer parked directly next door.

Even if you are talking about Rios' value going forward, you could do a lot worse than paying a guy capable of playing a strong center field with a career OPS of .786 who steals about 20 bases per year an average of $11.75M over the next 5 seasons. For instance you could be giving $18M to Vernon Wells who can't play center and is putting up a .717 OPS to Rios' .744 this year, under the exact same circumstances.

It's not Rios' fault that the Blue Jays left him in right field because Wells and his reprehensible contract were blocking him in center, where he could have created the most value. Wells, by the way has been worth negative $3.6M to the Blue Jays this year according to FanGraphs, while making $18M.

Using this methodology, I've compiled a short, non-comprehensive list of MLB position players who, like Wells and unlike Rios actually are overpaid:

[values are extrapolated to a full season to match annual salaries,

all #'s via Cot's MLB Contracts and FanGraphs are in millions]

The guys with negative value get screwed by the extrapolation, because it multiplies their negative value, but you get the idea. Vernon Wells is the most overpaid position player in the MLB and it's only close because Jose Guillen (who actually apologized for sucking so badly) is even worse. Apparently the stank of his contract is rubbing off on the man to his left on defense.

This isn't to say that the Blue Jays handled Rios' contract well, even if he is currently appropriately valued. As Keith Law points out, they made a mistake with Alex Rios, whether it was overpaying for him initally or giving him away for free yesterday.

Afternoon Link Round Up

The All-Star break is a lonely time for baseball news. Here are a few links for the afternoon:

Joe Posnanski isn't done lamenting the Royals trade for Yuniesky Betancourt.

Rany Jazayerli weighs in as well. As you might imagine, it's not pretty.

Not surprisingly, Keith Law also thinks this was a bad, bad deal (ESPN Insider required)

We've talked a lot about Joba's attitude, approach, and performance of late. Here's some input from Rob Neyer, Mark Feinsand, and Tyler Kepner.

On Friday, the Giants' Jonathan Sanchez threw a no-hitter against the Pads. He fell a Juan Uribe error short of a perfect game. He K'd 11, and they say Sanchez' stuff was downright dirty.

As was first rumored when the Nats visited the Yankees last month, Manny Acta was finally canned as Washington's manager. Jim Riggleman takes over as interim manager just as he did in Seattle last year. Acta didn't do too well as the Nats skipper, but I think that's just as much a reflection of the ineptitude of Washington's Front Ofice as it is Acta's managerial skills. I still say Acta will be managing the Mets no later than Opening Day next year.

Former Yankee Tony Clark has been released by the D-Backs.

The Future's Game in St. Louis had a four hour rain delay yesterday. Jesus Montero went 0 for 2 with an RBI. Manny Banuelos did not pitch.

Checking In On AJax

Chad Jennings of the most excellent Scranton Wilkes-Barre Yankees blog has a story on and a Q&A with Austin Jackson.

The story leads in with a quote from Keith Law in an ESPN.com chat in response to a question about Slade Heathcott, that was rather unflattering towards Jackson:

"He'll sign," Law wrote. "Five-tool guy, chance to be the player that Austin Jackson ... well, that Jackson probably isn't going to be now."

Jennings went around to various members of the organization including teammates and coaches who of course were more than happy to sing Jackson's praises.

Funny that Law would pick this year, when Jackson is hitting .320/.385/.421 in International League play to give such a lukewarm forecast. The reasons for the sentiment behind Law's statement are that Jackson hasn't hit for power, he strikes out too much and his BABIP indicates he's gotten lucky with the placement of his hits.

True, Jackson is averaging more than a strikeout per game, and has only two home runs on the season. Sure, his BABIP is .433, but that isn't quite as high as it seems, since his career average is .366. Furthermore, the increase in strikeouts decreases the denominator in the BABIP equation and the absence of home runs not only inflates the numerator, but also means that his hardest hit balls are landing in play. So perhaps that number isn't as inflated as it seems.

His line drive rate is also quite high at 24% and perhaps some of those balls that are hit hard enough to be home runs are falling into the gaps for doubles. Jackson also has four triples and is 12 for 12 on stolen base attempts.

Jackson made the leap to triple A this year and responded by increasing each of his slash statistics to this point, even if the home runs aren't coming. That would be impressive, even if he weren't just 22 years old.

It seems the Yankees are going to be patient with Jackson and give him time to develop, or so says Joel Sherman:

Interestingly (to me at least), the Yanks are in no rush to bring Austin Jackson to the majors in 2009. They feel he needs the full season of Triple-A experience and might even need some more minor league seasoning next year.

Matt and I had a discussion about whether or not to bring Jackson up to the big leagues if Melky Cabrera needed to spend time on the DL after he ran into the wall in Texas. Matt though he should stay down in Scranton and it appears that is the Yankees' plan, at least for the time being. It's commendable that the Yanks are taking the patient approach, but I think a large part of it is due to the fact that he is essentially the same type of player as Brett Gardner. He's fast, can get on base but has hardly any power. There are clearly some parts of his game that still need to come together, and it seems like Jackson is well aware of that:

Q (Jennings): On the whole, we're about halfway through the year, how do you think it's gone so far?

A (Jackson): I'm happy with how it's been so far. I'm not satisfied. I still think there's always room for improvement and I feel like I could always be doing better.