Mark Carig made an interesting point this morning about Melky Cabrera and Brett Gardner by comparing their credentials with those of a young Bernie WIlliams:
What if Bernie Williams (the 1992 version) were involved in the Yankees’ current position battle in center field? How would he stack up competing against Gardner and Cabrera? Would he go on to earn a chance to play enough to develop into the steady star that he became?
Gardner isn’t in the same offensive universe as the other two, though his speed and glove in center might help offset some of the difference, though certainly not all of it. Melky and Bernie appear more comparable, with one big difference. Cabrera has already had chances to prove himself, thus exposing a limited upside. This was not the case with Bernie, who didn’t log his first full season until he was 24.
Anyway, I’ve pulled out two -year chunks during somewhat similar times in their respective careers. Using this year’s CHONE projections to forecast the 2009 season for Cabrera and Gardner, here are the comparisons:
BERNIE WILLIAMS
1992: Age 23, 62 games, 261 at-bats, .280/.354/.406
1993: Age 24, 139 games, 567 at-bats, .268/.333/.400MELKY CABRERA
2008: Age 23, 129 games, 414 at-bats, .249/.301/.341
2009: Age 24, 146 games, 515 at-bats, .280/.345/.402BRETT GARDNER
2008: Age 24, 42 games, 127 at-bats, .228/.283/.299
2009: Age 25, 119 games, 446 at-bats, .258/.371/.360
Melky compares favorably to Bernie, while Gardner needs to point to his speed and defense to justify being included in the conversation. Does this mean that Melky is going to turn into Bernie Williams? Certainly not. However, it does caution against giving up on young players who have struggled in the majors at a very young age. Melky’s 2006 was very strong for a player at his age, and his regression since then does not mean that all of his potential has dissipated.
I agree with the choice of Brett Gardner as the starting center fielder, and I have suggested that the Yankees should try to trade Melky. However, I would not be entirely shocked if Melky develops into a decent player in the coming years. I do not think he will ever be good enough to start on a championship caliber team, but he could fashion a starting career on some weaker teams.
What do you think about Melky’s potential? Is the comparison to Bernie useful or distinguishable?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
9 Responses to Comparing Bernie, Melky, and Gardner
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
As I stated last spring; Brett is the CF of this team for 2009. Will he be in CF next year…depends on how well A-Jax/Brett preform this year!? If he does as well as I project (which means nothing), I think he will still be somewhere in the OF (LF or CF).
Ok, I am one for one (Brett made it), now let’s get greedy and try for another.
I like Cervelli and have since 2007/2008. I watched him play a lot (when not injured), he has the stuff right now to play…athleticism, arm, footwork, pitch selection, etc. He needs a few months in AA/AAA to show his hitting skills (not much power) good Avg./OBP. Almost all his stats are small samples but, they show the same numbers, year after year.
Until Monterro/Romine are ready, Cervelli should be the back-up next year and called up in Sept., along with A-Jax and Pena.
He used numbers from two seasons that didn’t even happen. That doesn’t immediately cast 100% doubt on them, but it does mean that they must be taken with a large grain of salt. Especially considering it is impossible for both of them to reach those number of at bats.
That being said Bernie at age 23 was way better than either of them. Gardner was still in the minors and bernie OPS’d .150 points better than Melky did. Plus Bernie’s range in center was way better than Melky’s.
I don’t think you can say either of them compare to Bernie.
But Melky’s age 21 was way ahead of Bernie’s.
Moshe,
You are finally getting it. That was the reason for the blog posts yesterday. Gardner is hitting .240 ish the last 11 games of ST. Melky is hitting .380 ish over the same period. (includes tonight.) Pitching gets better deeper into ST. Who knows but the trend is not good. Gardner has to step up big to justify the starting job. Speed only kills if he can get on base.
As you recall, I questioned your statement that Gardner “clearly” had the better spring. You wrote: “I think a look at the numbers suggests that it is clear. Gardner’s also been consistently good, and has gotten plenty of hits off MLB caliber pitchers.” NOT EXACTLY TRUE.
A couple of us wrote that Melky had better experience including two good MLB seasons at an early age. You wrote: “You dont go with bad experience. Melky was awful last year, and he lost the job, so they came into spring on equal footing, and Gardner showed a skillset unique to the club while Melky was just good all around.”
Tonight you read an article by Craig and are transformed.
I think you are reading a lot into my words. I still think Gardner earned the spot by his better spring, because Melky was awful in the last two seasons. In this post, I am just saying that just because I think Gardner deserves the job does not mean that I believe Melky is a failure and will never turn into anything.
He was aweful last season not the one before. But anyway let’s move on.
Hey if Melky and Brett don’t work out, we can still get Bernie :-)
On a serious note, I wonder how long Brett will be allowed to struggle before he is replaced by Melky? I supposed that depends on how well the team is doing.
The Yankees seem impressed with the progress Melky made. I think you may be right- if they struggle, Gardner may only get about 6 weeks. Maybe when A-Rod comes back, they would make a change in CF as well if Gardner is playing poorly.