A few weeks ago, EJ advocated flipping Brett Gardner, the presumptive left fielder, with center fielder Curtis Granderson, so as to maximize the defensive value that the Yankees can extract from both players. Matt ran the defensive numbers and confirmed EJ’s belief that Gardner in center provided the most value, and Steve noticed comments from Brian Cashman that suggested that the move may be made.
All empirical data seems to point to this switch being an obvious move, one that can help the Yankees squeeze as much as possible from the talent on hand. However, over the weekend, NoMaas.org asked ESPN’s Rob Neyer about this point, and he raised a number of interesting issues that might give the Yankees pause:
I think it’s a fine idea, in a vacuum. But the Yankees don’t play in a vacuum. For one thing, a lot of people would wonder why they traded for — and why they’ll spend at least $26 million on — a left fielder who doesn’t hit a ton.
But I think it’s more than that. If you do move Granderson, you’re essentially announcing to the world that Granderson’s not good enough to play center field. Which is fine …until you decide that Brett Gardner’s not good enough to play every day (or two-thirds of the days), either.
Keeping Granderson in center field today might cost the Yankees a few runs over the course of the season, but it also leaves the Yankees’ options wide open. Down the road — this summer, next year, whenever — if the Yankees want to pick up a center fielder, they can do that and move Granderson. But if they want to pick up a left fielder, they can do that, too.
I disagree with Neyer’s first two points, in that they are concerns that should not impact the decision making process. The club should not make personnel decisions based upon public perception, and should not be worried that they have “announced to the world” that Granderson cannot play CF. All they are actually saying is that Gardner is better than Granderson, which does not preclude Curtis from being an excellent centerfielder himself. Furthermore, “announcing” something to the world does not change the talent level of the players, such that Granderson should not be impacted defensively by the fact that the Yankees have conceded that Gardner is better than him.
His last point, however, holds some merit. Unless the Yankees believe that Gardner is their long term answer in centerfield, it makes sense to leave Granderson where he is. Put simply, moving Granderson to another position for a full year can do nothing but erode his skills as a center fielder and make him uncomfortable with the position should they choose to move him back there at a later date. Furthermore, it is significantly more difficult to find a productive CF’er than LF’er, such that making Granderson a left fielder can result in an immense loss of value should he be unable to transition back. That is a risk that may not be worth the projected .25 WAR that the Yankees would likely gain if they did put Gardner in center and Granderson in left.
What do you think they should do?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
20 Responses to Neyer On Flipping Gardner and Granderson
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
So, I agree with the theoretical basis of Neyer’s question – if switching Granderson from CF to LF erodes Granderson’s defensive skills, then he should not be switched.
The example of this that comes to mind is Alex Rodriguez. The switch from short to third allowed Arod to get bigger, which prevents him from ever moving back to short. Now, Alex Rodriguez probably can owe a lot of his offensive progress (when he’s been healthy, he has for the most part been better than his park-adjusted numbers at short in Texas) to this, but he’d still be more valuable as a shortstop.
I don’t see this happening with the switch from CF to LF. He’ll still be running all over the place, and he’ll still have a pretty wide area to patrol. Its like not he is going to DH or play 1st or something.
I thought about that, which is why I can go either way on this. I do think this is a factor that needs to be considered, however, such that they need to put the question to Granderson. Furthermore, I would have them put Granderson in CF and Winn in LF whenever they decide to play Winn. That way, even if he isnt playing CF every day, he is still getting regular playing time out there in order to make a transition back seamless.
CF & (LF @ YS) does not equal the difference in 3B & SS
Plus Arod was also quitting roids on his transition to 3B. He was noticeably chubbier that summer probably because of the reduced work load/ slower growing muscles.
First of all who is Rob Neyer? And what makes him an expert? Because he works for ESPN? Secondly, He didn’t raise any interesting issues. They traded for a Leftfieder who could hit between 30 and 40 homeruns, steal 20 bases, and play superior defense to Johnny Damon. Moshe, Moshe, come on man. Moving Granderson to leftfield would NOT be announcing to the world that he cannot play Centerfield, It would be announcing to the world that as GOOD as Curtis is in CF they have a centerfielder who’s even better in BRETT GARDNER. Finally, Brett may be the Yankees long term answer in Centerfield.
Rob Neyer is a respected sabermatrician who would generally go by the numbers in this type of situation. The fact that he is not going with the numbers suggests that there might be more here than the numbers suggest.
That’s exactly what I said.
However, you failed to address the primary point that I wanted to draw out of this: if Gardner is not the answer, and Granderson’s defensive skill will diminish even a little by playing left, does it still make sense to make this move, when all you are gaining is 3-5 runs over an entire season.
Rob Neyer can have my children.
He can have mine too but I doubt he wants to pay the tuition.
What ever is best for the team THIS YEAR is the main objective of any switch. Next year will take care of itself. As EJ pointed out, making the move is not a big deal, let’s face it, as a CF hitter Brett’s numbers are better looking then as a corner OF…for those that are concerned about that stat.
Actually, I figure…Brett’s AB numbers are the same where ever he plays, so why worry about if they don’t match up to the league avg,. at a COF’er as to a CF’d. Never could figure that one out, numbers are what they are, no mater where one plays.
If the difference is tiny this year, and could make a huge difference long-term, then you need to be cautious. Now if EJ is right and it will not substantially alter Curtis defensively, then it should be done.
I should point out that I really believe this to be the judgment call that can only really be evaluated from a coach’s perspective. I am very pleased to read that the Yankees are strongly considering it, but also seem to understand the potential negative ramifications. I’m not sure if anyone is truly in a position to comment on the answer to the question, “Will this move hurt Granderson’s long term defense in center?” besides the coaching staff. So assuming they are on the right page with the logic (Gardner over Granderson as long as it doesn’t hurt Granderson’s long term position), I won’t complain about whatever they decide.
Agree with everything you said here.
Two honest questions which aren’t intended to stir the pot:
1) If the Yanks view Gardner as the superior canddiate for CF then why did they trade for Granderson when Cameron was available in free agency? If Gradnerson’s declining defense in CF gives them so much pause, wouldn’t Cameron have been the better fit since he hits above average for a CF and plays some of the best defensive CF in the game?
2) Further to #1, if the response is that Granderson represents the concept of Cashman’s desire to get “younger/more athletic” and Winn’s signing is merely a temporary bridge between today and tomorrow (presumably for a younger/more athletic player taking Winn’s place), wouldn’t Cameron have been the ideal candidate in that regard? He’s better than Winn, no worse than Granderson, and could’ve been had on a short-term deal so as to be the bridge to the future that Cashman envisions.
Granderson is here and I’m fine with that but every time I see a discussion about moving him to LF I wonder why the Yanks traded assets for a guy that, as Neyer points out, could be perceived as “announcing to the world that Granderson’s not good enough to play center field.”
I can only imagine that they preferred Granderson to Cameron due to age issues- they think Cameron is a good bet to decline. As such, they wanted Granderson. Once they filled all other holes, they had no money left for Cameron as well, so they went with Winn (who is more likely to decline, but isnt as important as Cameron would have been bc they already have Granderson).
Also, it may be that they expected Damon back, in which case Granderson would play CF. Since it did not work out, they may just want to maximize what they get from Gardner.
All that said, if Granderson becomes a fulltime left fielder going forward for this club (ie never moves back to CF), I agree that I’m not sure why they made the trade, even absent signing Cameron instead.
Perhaps it comes down to throwing arms. They’re both great at catching up with the ball. Gardner’s arm is underrated and Granderson’s is in decline. (I think! Don’t jump all over me.)
“Put simply, moving Granderson to another position for a full year can do nothing but erode his skills as a center fielder and make him uncomfortable with the position should they choose to move him back there at a later date.”
Have to respectfully disagree with this comment.One need only look to Mike Cameron who played right field for the NY Mets in 2005 before returning to to play a Gold Glove caliber center field the very next year with the Padres to see that gifted outfielders can moved from center to a corner outfield position and back again without a diminishing of fielding skills in CF. As a further example, I believe the Red Sox currently intend to move Ellsbury back to CF once Cameron’s effectiveness in the outfield has expired .
Good examples, and in retrospect, that was a poorly worded thought. It is possible that it could hurt him, but saying “it could do nothing but” was a little strong.
Nice. Slight vindication from an ealier post (which I followed up on by referencing this interview). It will be much easier to find a superior hitting LF to replace Gardner than a CF who can hit like Granderson. That’s where Grandy’s value lies. He’s not an elite LF, but def an elite CF. This is his FIRST year in Yankee Stadium, let him get a feel for it since I highly doubt Gardner is going to be the long-term answer
If we’re doing whats best for the team, how about moving Cano to 3rd, Arod to short, Jeter to LF, Nick Johnson to first and Tex to DH? I can’t think of any other players to screw w/ right now…
Granderson is the best CF the Yanks have had since Bernie. You can’t be the best CF since Bernie if you’re playing LF.
Of course I disagree with a lot of the posts.
Having two OF players learning a new position at the same time is not the best thing in the world. CG would need to learn CF (in Yankee stadium) and Brett (who has almost no experience other then CF) would have to learn LF…not good!
As pointed out above, one can play LF then come back the next year and play CF…no harm. Besides, there will be times they want CG in CF giving Brett a rest etc. They also could have them both work on LF and CF during ST, just in case they decide Brett would be trade bait for someone they want…who knows?
[...] the idea that the Yankees should run the team based on fan reaction is not a very good one which Moshe Mandel of TYU brought up on his blog. He did bring up another point though, that having Granderson play in left [...]