Hey, everybody. Before I get started, let me “introduce” myself. For those of you who don’t recognize my name, I’m Matt Imbrogno and I wrote for Bronx Baseball Daily for the last few months. Anyway, thanks to Moshe for bringing me on here and I look forward to writing for the audiences here at TYU. On to the writing…
In a recent article, Bryan Hoch suggested both Mark DeRosa and Jermaine Dye as possible left field options if the Yankees stick to their guns and determine that Johnny Damon is too pricey. There are a few reasons to dislike both players. Let’s roll with DeRosa to start.
First, Buster Olney tweeted today that DeRosa is leaning towards accepting an offer from the Giants for two years and $12MM. It’s doubtful that the Yankees would want to match, let alone exceed that offer. It’s arguable that one year of DeRosa is too much, especially at $6MM. Second, I think DeRosa loses a good amount of his value as a full-time LF. There is some value in his versatility, but would he ever really be getting time anywhere but left field? He can’t play shortstop well, and even if he could, Derek Jeter barely takes days off. While he could take some days at third for Alex Rodriguez, how often will he? It’s possible that Rodriguez does not need as much time off as he did last year. Robinson Cano doesn’t take many days off at second, either, and DH Nick Johnson and his sterling defensive reputation would spell Mark Teixeira at first base. Bottom line: even if DeRosa is available, he’s likely not a good fit for the Yankees. If the price was very right, meaning $3MM or less, then sure. However, he’s not going to take that little money to play for the Yankees.
Onto Jermaine Dye. Dye is just simply not an option for left field. At all. First off, he hasn’t played left field since 2003 with the A’s. Even then, it was just one game and he’s played only 27 games there in his entire career. In right field, Jermaine Dye’s been a straight-up horror show for the last four years. His highest UZR/150 since 2006 was -21.4. Let that sink in. That was his HIGHEST UZR/150. Jermaine Dye simply cannot play the outfield anymore. Whatever value he brings with the bat, he instantly gives back with the glove. Dye’s bat may have been acceptable at DH, but even that is unlikely. As a right handed batter, he likely would not have been helped by Yankee Stadium like a left-handed hitter would be.
While it’s relatively obvious, Brian Cashman and the Yankees should steer clear of Jermaine Dye. While he may outproduce current-left-fielder-by-default Brett Gardner, his value would be sapped by his bad defense and Gardner would cost less. Brett may be close to his ceiling offensively, but his good defense and low salary could prove quite valuable to the Yankees as a stop-gap.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
15 Responses to I'd Rather Not Dye
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
I wouldnt touch Dye. He is an epic disaster in the outfield, and isnt even that good a hitter anymore. He’s just a terrible fit.
Welcome aboard, Matt.
I wouldn’t go near Dye. Anyway, I think Gardner should get the job (CF or LF, although I’d prefer he play CF). If he can become a pure slap hitter, his speed will serve him well. Really though, let him have the job IMO and if it doesn’t work out…go out and trade for an OF, certainly there will be plenty of teams out of contention by June/July.
Good to have you Matt.
I’d rather have Nick Johnson pretend to play left field than Dye. He’s awful.
Agreed. How do you feel about Nady? I think he’s the best option.
I’d have no problem with Nady, but who knows how Nady feels about returning to NY.
Welcome Matt…good article. Not many great choices for LF.. My choice is Rick Ankiel..on days he is not playing LF, Joe Girardi could put him in the bullpen and see if he can get any of his pitches near home plate and use him in relief in blow-out games.
Eh, Ankiel had one good year with the bat. I would pass.
Re: Ankiel: His power’s declining, he has no on-base skills, and his age leaves little room for upside. He also can’t stay healthy.
(H)is age leaves little room for upside. ”
Ordinarily I would agree that one would anticipate little room for improvement from someone of Ankiel’s age(30). However, Ankiel only started hitting full-time in 2005 after a star- crossed career as a pitcher prior to that. Additionally, he missed the entire 2006 season due to injury and was hampered in 2009 as a resullt of slamming into a wall in early May.In his short time in the majors prior to the latest injury, he compiled a slugging percentage greater than .500 and an OPS+ ~120. Because of his late start as a hitter, I think Ankiel is a unique case with plenty of remaining upside as a batter he has yet to tap into.I think a one year incentive laden contact with a vesting option is a worthwhile low risk- high reward option for someone who has demonstrated power capability to be a major force at the tail end of the lineup
Great to have you on board, Matt. If the Yankees sign Dye, it would be an awful end to what has been an excellent offseason for Brian Cashman.
I think Nady’s only a good option if he’s gonna be a platoon player. If he’s ready/healthy, Nady could be a good LF vs. LHP caddy for Brett Gardner. The same goes for Reed Johnson, too.
That works for me. Nady can play for Gardner v. lefties, spell Granderson and Swisher occasionally, DH when Tex takes a day off, and be the first bat off the bench.
I have a hard time seeing Nady taking that job. He’s definitely looking for a full time gig.
I was just kidding on Rick Ankiel, guys. If there was a happy face I could have placed after my comment, I would have. It was a little kidding of how on the current budget maybe Ankiel could do two functions. It looks like it’s going to be Reed Johnson for the small piece left.
Let this be a lesson to Mo that I know talent when I see it, dammit!
Seriously, welcome aboard Matt. You were the first person I thought of when Mo was looking around. Always been a fan of your posts @ BBD and comments over at RAB.